Newt or Mitt if you had to decide.

[.45 Dave]

This question is mostly for the Ron Paul supporters here and it is not meant as an endorsement of any candidate. But if Ron Paul dropped out, and you were left with only Mitt or Newt, which would you support and why. Just curious.

 

[dhnorris]

I'd go for mitt because slimy business types are less dangerous than bosnian warlord types.

 

[hornadylnl]

I'd stay home.

 

[femurphy77]

Neither, I'd grab a bottle of wine, the girlfriend and head for the hottub. (Of course I'll probably do that anyway!)

But no, I've made up my mind, if my candidate isn't on the ballot then I'll be one of the whiny ones who voted for none of the above. And yes I will still have just as much right to ***** as those that compromised their vote or voted for the one they thought would win because they didn't want to "waste" their vote.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Who is more likely to trample on the Constitution - 1) a centrist business type - who is likely to cave to the "logic" of the left or 2) an idealogue that might reflect some things I would like, but has no problem with trampling on the Constitution to get there. ???

_Given those two choices, and those alone_... I would opt for Romney - I'd bet that he will do less damage to the Constitution by accident and accommodation than Newt would do by design. And the same would go for Santorum were he in the hypothetical mix.

Oh - and for the "I'd stay home" types - in the immortal words of Neil Peart - "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."

Granted, this IS a hypothetical - albeit an interesting one. And yeah, I'd be worried about either one.

I think that either one would be far better than what an Obama second term would do to the Constitution and the Republic.

 

[NYFelon]

Yoda - as a write-in

 

[Donnelly]

I will not vote for either Newt or Romney. If those are the two choices I have, I will abstain from voting for president this year.

I am tired of compromising.

 

[KLB]

Who is more likely to trample on the Constitution - 1) a centrist business type - who is likely to cave to the "logic" of the left or 2) an idealogue that might reflect some things I would like, but has no problem with trampling on the Constitution to get there. ???

_Given those two choices, and those alone_... I would opt for Romney - I'd bet that he will do less damage to the Constitution by accident and accommodation than Newt would do by design. And the same would go for Santorum were he in the hypothetical mix.

Agreed.

I don't think Paul will drop out. The question will probably become which of those two would you prefer to see win. Hopefully he can get more of his message included and start steering this country onto a course closer to Liberty and smaller government.

 

[cburnworth]

Newt lost my support when he was speaker of the house. The more I hear about him the happier I am with my choice. As far as Mitt, there are definitely things I don't like about him either.
And now for Paul, I have read some things about him that I don't care for either. Since I can't get my wish of all politicians being rounded up & sent to an island. I am not sure who I will vote for.

 

[9lock]

I will not vote for either Newt or Romney. If those are the two choices I have, I will abstain from voting for president this year.

I am tired of compromising.

Same here! That "debate circus series" fit right in with the rest of the carrot/blinders "programing". you do not realise how obvious it is until you shut down your cable or satellite service like I did five years ago.

 

[CampingJosh]

I would choose Romney over Newt. It's sort of like asking "which testicle do you want kicked in?" though.

 

[J_Wales]

It depends who they chose for VP and how thick the geese population is expected to be around airports over the next few years.

 

[Phil502]

Mitt.

 

[sepe]

Neither. Couldn't pay me to vote for either of them.

 

[GLOCKMAN23C]

Isn't not voting or casting a vote for a third candidate, like a vote for Obama?

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

Someone once said "bacon." I think Bacon would do much better than either

 

[edporch]

If I was FORCED to decide between ONLY these two, I'd hold my nose and select Gingrich.
But I still don't trust him...

 

[GLOCKMAN23C]

If I was FORCED to decide between ONLY these two, I'd hold my nose and select Gingrich.
But I still don't trust him...

Agreed.

 

[Destro]

Isn't not voting or casting a vote for a third candidate, like a vote for Obama?

I was kinda thinking the same thing....now stand by for a lecture about "liberty"

 

[GLOCKMAN23C]

I was kinda thinking the same thing....now stand by for a lecture about "liberty"

This is the problem with a two party system. A third party will effectivly split the conservative vote. This is also why it is important to vote in the primary races. I think that the primaries need to be standardized like the national election, all on the same day.