Which is why, in my opinion, Gingrich or Romney shouldn't be elected as president. In times of recession and huge debts, they still want to risk billions of dollars by raging wars against foreign countries which will only ensure that their economy will drastically plummet and of course the thousands of casualties that comes with every war they engage in.overseasTOON wrote:I have to say that Romney stands a very good chance of winning this election.5 Goals - Hesakmi wrote:Just between Romney and Obama now!
The battle of who can kiss the feet of the Jewish Lobby the most has well and truly begun!
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... or-israel/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/diplomania ... m-1.454748" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Look back historically at incumbent presidents in times of recession and they are all one-termers.
Back this up with the fact that Romney is a self-made millionaire though his private equity business (purported to have $500 million) and this feat will bode well with voters.
I'd far prefer Obama as he's the better statesman overall (see Romney's European trip to 3 countries where he managed to disgruntle sections in all of them) but the Americans will simply be looking at which candidate will be better for the economy in the short term.
It's not the time for a war (not that there ever is a time for it) and I think Obama and Ron Paul are the only ones to acknowledge it at the moment.
After Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq etc. some people still haven't learned their lesson, unfortunately.