Presidential Election Poll 10-2-2012

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vangaurdian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
rlg94086 said:
Actually, Goldman Sachs has given $891k to Romney for this election. They were Obama’s second biggest contributor in 2008 at a little more than $1M (University of California was #1 in 2008 and 2012…I wonder why tuition is so expensive…).

opensecrets.org/pres12/index.php

The third party candidates would like to get that sort of money, but they won’t because people don’t contribute to candidates they know will lose. Connect the dots.
Click to expand...
Thank you for reiterating my point. Goldman Sachs has both candidates in their pocket. This farce of an election is a win-win for baby butchers at planned parenthood.
 
Semper_Zelare said:
To play devil’s advocate though… you have no reason to vote FOR Romney. All you are doing is voting against Obama.

And that’s all the Romney people every say on this forum. All they do is give reasons to not vote for Obama. Well, I’m not voting for Obama, I’m voting for Virgil Goode. What are some reasons to vote FOR Romney?

And I don’t care about this on a personal level. When you extrapolate that nationally, there’s just no way Romney’s going to win. All of the people that would be activists aren’t actively campaigning for Romney right now. They’re not excited about him. They’ve settled on him because “he can win”.

Now Mitt Romney’s campaign is reduced to “I’m the Republican that can win”, and “Obama is evil”. If that’s the message that his supporters give time and time and time again (which clearly is, those are the only points I EVER see about Romney)… then I’m going to be a realist and say that sorry folks… if you think that’s going to convince the independents… think again. It ain’t gonna happen.

And I’d prefer Romney to win. But he’s just not going to if his supporters don’t have reasons to vote for him

The Tea Party (of which I am a member) should’ve influenced the nomination. It’s unbelievable to me that we had the Tea Party and even then couldn’t nominate a conservative. We deserved Newt Gingrich. We deserved Rick Santorum. If only all the conservatives had dropped out except for one, so that the anti-Romney vote would consolidate (which was the majority). The majority of the GOP was anti-Romney.

And now I’m supposed to get behind him just because he’s our nominee? No, that’s not how it works. I voted for Rick Santorum in the primary. Now I’m voting for Virgil Goode… his views are MUCH closer to Santorums than are Romney’s.
Click to expand...
Romney is against abortion.

Romney is against gay marriage and for the preservation of the family as one man and one woman.

mittromney.com/coalitions/catholics-for-romney

I have zero political party affiliation. I will vote to limit the evil.

politicalresponsibility.com/votingstatement.htm

I don’t donate money to any political group or organization.

Peace,
Ed
 
Vanguardian,
You say you’re against evil.

Here’s some evil for you:

**"The exemption is only for a “religious employer,” defined as “one that (1) Has the inculcation of religious values as its purpose; (2) primarily employs persons who share its religious tenets; (3) primarily serves persons who share its religious tenets; and (4) is a non-profit organization under section 6033(a)(1) and section 6033(a)(3)(A)(i) or (iii) of the [Internal Revenue] Code.” HHS notes that these provisions of the Code refer to “churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches, as well as to the exclusively religious activities of any religious order.”

"Plans offered by a great many Church-affiliated organizations, including Catholic colleges and universities, as well as hospitals and charitable institutions that serve the general public, would be ineligible under the terms of this exemption. "**

Do you know what this is?
 
Oh, and for the lurkers who believe Vanguardian’s nonsense, the health care law Romney signed into law said nothing about abortion. Do your own research and check out the facts.
 
Vangaurdian said:
Thank you for reiterating my point. Goldman Sachs has both candidates in their pocket. This farce of an election is a win-win for baby butchers at planned parenthood.
Click to expand...
Again, the completely unelectable candidates that run third party would take Goldman Sachs money in a heartbeat. They won’t get any, because people don’t donate to losers.
 
Fine for non-compliance, which means offering insurance, but not offering abortion coverage: $100 per day per employee.
[That’s $36,500 per employee per year just in penalties for this one thing.]

Fine for avoidance, which means dropping insurance completely and offering a bonus for employees to go find their own: $2000 per employee per year, plus other penalties on the bonus so that the employee is also punished.

How’s that for evil?
 
iloveangels said:
Fine for non-compliance, which means offering insurance, but not offering abortion coverage: $100 per day per employee.
[That’s $36,500 per employee per year just in penalties for this one thing.]

Fine for avoidance, which means dropping insurance completely and offering a bonus for employees to go find their own: $2000 per employee per year, plus other penalties on the bonus so that the employee is also punished.

How’s that for evil?
Click to expand...
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek::eek: :eek::eek: :eek:
 
iloveangels said:
Fine for non-compliance, which means offering insurance, but not offering abortion coverage: $100 per day per employee.
[That’s $36,500 per employee per year just in penalties for this one thing.]

Fine for avoidance, which means dropping insurance completely and offering a bonus for employees to go find their own: $2000 per employee per year, plus other penalties on the bonus so that the employee is also punished.

How’s that for evil?
Click to expand...
How is this even LEGAL to FORCE people to do this? Please…VOTE OBAMA OUT!
 
Tampa_Dave said:
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek::eek: :eek::eek: :eek:
Click to expand...
Obamacare Fines Religious Institutions $100 a Day Per Employee For Failing to Provide Contraception
lifesitenews.com/news/obamacare-fine-religious-institutions-100-a-day-per-employee-for-failing-to/

‘ObamaCare Catch-22′: Crushing Fines for Religious Entities in Mandate
pjmedia.com/blog/obamacare-catch-22-crushing-fines-for-religious-institutions-under-mandate/

Catholic Ethicists: Immoral for Catholic Business Owners to Obey Obamacare
cnsnews.com/news/article/catholic-ethicists-immoral-catholic-business-owners-obey-obamacare

Cardinal George, Catholic Hospitals Will Be Gone in Two Lents (and one has already passed)
cnsnews.com/news/article/cardinal-george-catholic-hospitals-will-be-gone-two-lents-under-obamacare-regulation
 
jediliz said:
How is this even LEGAL to FORCE people to do this? Please…VOTE OBAMA OUT!
Click to expand...
It’s legal. And if we don’t vote Obama out, this is what’s going to happen.

Obama admin: Bible publisher isn’t religious enough for HHS mandate exemption
prolifeblogs.com/articles/archives/2012/10/obama_admin_bib.php

This is Tyndale. You think it won’t happen to Ave Maria Books and Aquinas Press? Think again.

[And while you’re at it throw in Franciscan Resources and Bonaventure University and Franciscan University and Solanus Casey Soup Kitchen in Detroit, the CFRs in Brooklyn unless they decide to stay indoors and keep quiet which they won’t, and on and on. The list goes on and on…They’re all going to be crushed.]

Read the requirements for an exemption slowly and carefully. All 4 must be met. Pay attention to what it says. They are NOT KIDDING.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9856002&postcount=84

Is that enough evil for you?
 
white_sheep said:
Please scroll to the top of the page and count the number of names on the list.
Click to expand...
Q: Your mission is that you have precisely one person to get out of office to avoid damage to the Catholic Church. You have a number of choices to accomplish the mission. Which choice is the one most likely to accomplish the mission?

A: ?

NOTE: There is only 1 right answer. This is a pass-fail test.

If you don’t realize the consequences of failing the test yet, please see post #91 which should make it clear.
 
Catholic Bishops on Obamacare Reg: ‘Unprecedented Attack on Religious Liberty,’ Even Jesus Wouldn’t Qualify as ‘Religious’

cnsnews.com/news/article/catholic-bishops-obamacare-reg-unprecedented-attack-religious-liberty-even-jesus

It’s true. He preached to non-Jews. That’s a violation of rule #3. And he wasn’t tax exempt in the Roman world. That’s a violation of rule #4. For that matter, he healed peoples’ illnesses, which is a violation of rule #1. Jesus wouldn’t even qualify for a religious exemption to Obamacare.
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
There is no one on this board, I daresay, who is more conservative than me;)

I am telling you that, while in a perfect world I would have prefered Newt,Santorum or Cain, that Mitt Romney is absolutely a conservative.

Put another way, Reagan was a pretty average governor, and actually passed the (at it’s time) most pro-abortion law in the country. And look how that turned out.

Put yet another way, show me one issue where the current Romney is not a conservative. You may find a couple, but not many.
Click to expand...
You’re the most conservative person on this board and you say Romney is a conservative?

Well, it depends what type of conservative you are, and you are saying Romney is.

Mitt Romney is a neoconservative. I am a paleoconservative. The Constitution Party runs ideology more in line with paleoconservative thought. Not even Ronald Reagan was a paleoconservative (thought I wouldn’t call him a neo-con either).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism

Look at this wikipedia page. Do a “control F” search of the word “Catholic”. Enjoy.

And in my post I don’t even bring Romney’s conservatism into question anyways. But now I have because you asked me to. Romney attacked the Catholic Church in Massachusetts. Romney supports abortion in some cases. And he supports the provision of contraception, which is exactly why he didn’t listen to his own health department which told him that he could still fight for a religious exemption for Catholic hospitals.

He didn’t do that. Instead he said all hospitals have to provide contraception, and then he gave his personal opinion. This was 6 months after his veto during implementation. The Church hospitals were still fighting for an exemption, and the Governor turned a deaf ear/ blind eye to them.

Election 2012: Anti-Catholic vs. Anti-Catholic…

vs. Virgil Goode vs. Gary Johnson vs. Anti-Catholic (Jill Stein).

Nominate an anti Catholic and I won’t vote for them.

I’ll quote myself from 7 months ago:

Semper Zelare said:
“If the Democrats and Republicans BOTH nominate people who forced the Catholic Church to provide contraception, my message to them with my vote is:** I don’t vote for people that have had Bishops denounce their policies”**
Click to expand...
 
Semper_Zelare said:
You’re the most conservative person on this board and you say Romney is a conservative?

Well, it depends what type of conservative you are, and you are saying Romney is.

Mitt Romney is a neoconservative. I am a paleoconservative. The Constitution Party runs ideology more in line with paleoconservative thought. Not even Ronald Reagan was a paleoconservative (thought I wouldn’t call him a neo-con either).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism

Look at this wikipedia page. Do a “control F” search of the word “Catholic”. Enjoy.

And in my post I don’t even bring Romney’s conservatism into question anyways. But now I have because you asked me to. Romney attacked the Catholic Church in Massachusetts. Romney supports abortion in some cases. And he supports the provision of contraception, which is exactly why he didn’t listen to his own health department which told him that he could still fight for a religious exemption for Catholic hospitals.

He didn’t do that. Instead he said all hospitals have to provide contraception, and then he gave his personal opinion. This was 6 months after his veto during implementation. The Church hospitals were still fighting for an exemption, and the Governor turned a deaf ear/ blind eye to them.

Election 2012: Anti-Catholic vs. Anti-Catholic…

vs. Virgil Goode vs. Gary Johnson vs. Anti-Catholic (Jill Stein).

Nominate an anti Catholic and I won’t vote for them.

I’ll quote myself from 7 months ago:
Click to expand...
Semper Zelare - you are consistent - I’ll give you that. Some questions and points for anyone reading your posts to remember:
  1. Would an anti-Catholic president choose a devout Catholic to be his running mate? Of course not. Romney isn’t “anti-Catholic.”
  2. The issue in question is which president will help overturn Roe V Wade? Let’s see… Obama supports partial birth abortion and is in the pocket of NARAL. Romney wants to overturn it - and he has Robert Bork advising him on judicial picks to that end.
  3. I would remind any Catholic voter interested in advancing the cause of the sanctity of life in our laws vote that the only pro-life ticket that has a chance of winning is Romney/Ryan.
  4. I believe we have a moral obligation as Catholics to stop the anti-Catholic, pro-abortion rights policies of Obama. There is too much at stake in this election to indulge in a counter-effective fit of misguided scrupulousness.
Ishii
 
ishii said:
Semper Zelare - you are consistent - I’ll give you that. Some questions and points for anyone reading your posts to remember:
  1. Would an anti-Catholic president choose a devout Catholic to be his running mate? Of course not. Romney isn’t “anti-Catholic.”
  2. The issue in question is which president will help overturn Roe V Wade? Let’s see… Obama supports partial birth abortion and is in the pocket of NARAL. Romney wants to overturn it - and he has Robert Bork advising him on judicial picks to that end.
  3. I would remind any Catholic voter interested in advancing the cause of the sanctity of life in our laws vote that the only pro-life ticket that has a chance of winning is Romney/Ryan.
  4. I believe we have a moral obligation as Catholics to stop the anti-Catholic, pro-abortion rights policies of Obama. There is too much at stake in this election to indulge in a counter-effective fit of misguided scrupulousness.
Ishii
Click to expand...
How seriously are any of you taking the Obamacare issue? AKA what do you think it will do to Catholic institutions? How many will pay fines and will they be able to afford fines, etc???

Feedback please.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top