# Romney or Gingrich? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 21, 2012, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178 "2012-01-21T00:00:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/61 "2012-01-26T14:18:07Z")
> [@IntelliQ](#): > > The _mother_ is starving her kids. > > Im appalled anyone would support a mother who spends her welfare money on drugs then blame other people for her kids not eating. It doesn’t matter that the mother did it. The point is that you are okay with the kids dying in order to punish the mother. Morality is not about who to blame for evil, but actually trying to stop it. Blaming the mom doesn’t change the fact that the mother dies because you decided not funding someone’s drug habit was more important than those children’s lives. The guy who allows the world to be blown up because he couldn’t bring himself to kill the guy who was doing it is not the moral person, even if he consoles himself that it’s the other guy’s fault. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/62 "2012-01-26T14:24:09Z")
> [@Typo\_Knig](#): > > Space is expensive. Really expensive. We know – the question is, can space be **profitable?** ---
**Author:** ![IntelliQ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e99b99/32.png) [@IntelliQ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IntelliQ)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/63 "2012-01-26T14:40:42Z")
> [@Algorithm](#): > > You know, it is possible to smoke pot (or use other drugs) once a week and still have enough welfare money left over to feed your kids. Such parents aren’t harming their children any more than parents who have a few glasses of wine on the weekends, and refusing those families financial support will harm the children more than their parents’ occasional drinking or drug use. You are saying the mother absolutely has to do drugs, she has no choice, it’s out of her control. No matter what she just can’t control herself. It’s beyond her ability to choose her kids before doing drugs. Is that a person who is rational enough to care for children? ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/64 "2012-01-26T15:05:53Z")
> [@IntelliQ](#): > > You are saying the mother absolutely has to do drugs, she has no choice, it’s out of her control. No matter what she just can’t control herself. It’s beyond her ability to choose her kids before doing drugs. > > Is that a person who is rational enough to care for children? So your proposal is that when she fails the drug test we take her kids away or just let them go hungry? If we take them away, where do we put them? How much does that cost? ---
**Author:** ![IntelliQ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e99b99/32.png) [@IntelliQ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IntelliQ)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/65 "2012-01-26T15:19:16Z")
> [@Jas09](#): > > So your proposal is that when she fails the drug test we take her kids away or just let them go hungry? If we take them away, where do we put them? How much does that cost? People here are painting the picture of a drug addict. Someone who cant control their own behavior and puts illegal substances above their own children eating is either nuts or an addict. Anyway, no point going on an on about this, I see where you people stand. It’s sad too, because I see there is no chance in hell of ever getting the country on sound economic footing (or fixing cultural decay with inner cities crime, etc.) when crap like this is defended. The more complex issues dont stand a chance if we can’t even agree on the easy stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/66 "2012-01-26T15:24:22Z")
It’s only “easy stuff” to you because you’re dodging the hard part: what happens to the kids if you take away welfare payments or put them in foster care. You might as well say that fixing the debt problem is easy stuff, because all you have to do is stop spending money on things. ---
**Author:** ![C3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/c3/32/3108_2.png) [@C3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C3)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/67 "2012-01-26T15:28:53Z")
So, you’ve got Option 1: Spend a bunch of money providing food stamps and people are fed vs. Option 2: Spend even more money on drug testing than you would on the benefits and people don’t get fed. And **IntelliQ** thinks Option 2 is more fiscally responsible? ---
**Author:** ![IntelliQ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e99b99/32.png) [@IntelliQ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IntelliQ)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/68 "2012-01-26T15:32:51Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It’s only “easy stuff” to you because you’re dodging the hard part: what happens to the kids if you take away welfare payments or put them in foster care. You might as well say that fixing the debt problem is easy stuff, because all you have to do is stop spending money on things. Right now, drug addicts who starve their kids get their kids taken away. Non-drug addicts would have nothing to worry about since they will not put drugs ahead of their children. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/69 "2012-01-26T15:34:58Z")
What about the people who fall somewhere between the two groups (ie., the vast majority)? ---
**Author:** ![IntelliQ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e99b99/32.png) [@IntelliQ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IntelliQ)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/70 "2012-01-26T16:06:15Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > What about the people who fall somewhere between the two groups (ie., the vast majority)? I’d be willing to let pot slide. It’s inexpensive and actually less dangerous than liquor. (Im one of those wacky conservatives who support legalizing it, at least in test cases first.) Those who are not addicted but still abuse the system, only do it because\* they can\*- it’s on whim and for kicks. That’s just an obvious point I shouldnt have to make. Given the ultimatum they will choose not to do drugs, and this my friends I know. I personally know women who smoked crack by trading their LINK cards for cash to buy it. Wreckless idiotic women who screwed up because they could get away with it and nothing more. I heard with my own two ears these woman talk about this very issue about a year ago, and their view is “aww shit, well that’ll suck, guess I wont be partyin’ anymore if they pass this shit”. I lived in NW Indiana bordering the infamous town of Gary. I’ve seen this stuff my whole life so I do know the majority of non-addicts party on the taxpayer dime simply because they can - and it’s actually feeding into the potential to become addicts. Addicts are screwed anyway, their kids get taken by the state. Anyway the thread has become too narrow in scope now, my apologies. Umm as far as Romney or Gingrich, …doesnt seem like a great choice either way to me. I do like listening to Newt though, at least when he speaks I dont feel like Im listening to a pull string doll. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/71 "2012-01-26T16:54:51Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > This is a perfect example of the difference between being a smart person and saying things that sound vaguely smart as long as you don’t think about them. Are you suggesting that the diploma the Wizard gave Newt is fake, or something? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/72 "2012-01-26T16:59:12Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > What about the people who fall somewhere between the two groups (ie., the vast majority)? Are you suggesting the majority of Americans are non-addicted casual drug users? If that were the case, I doubt that pot-decrim ballot measure would have failed in California, of all places. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/73 "2012-01-26T17:24:03Z")
The vast majority of welfare recipients who use drugs. ---
**Author:** ![punch\_line\_loser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8e7dd6/32.png) [@punch\_line\_loser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/punch_line_loser)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/74 "2012-01-26T19:26:07Z")
I wouldn’t vote for either of them, but Romney is the more sensible choice to me. Most of my issues with Gingrich have already been brought up in this thread. I will say that mandatory drug testing for financial aid eligibility will do nothing but limit access to education even further at a cost to the system, which doesn’t help anybody. Besides, what kind of blowhard claims you can predict Obama’s actions according to his “Kenyan, anti-colonial behaviors?” How much more provincial can you get? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/75 "2012-01-26T19:46:37Z")
> [@mr.jp](#): > > I am not an American. But Romney seems like a good candidate to me. …Of course his social policies are bad from a European perspective, but so are those of every republican candidate. It would seem that you would peg any successful businessman as a good Presidential candidate. Do you think Silvio Berlusconi was a good Italian leader? Romney isn’t exactyl a bootstrap millionaire. Hes bright and did more with what life gave him than others who started with teh same advantages but life started him off with a LOT of advantages. > [@IntelliQ](#): > > Mommy shouldnt be doing drugs with taxpayer money, silly. And you want to drug test all the mommies to make sure she isn’t doing drugs? And then what? Take away the money or take away the kids? Remember after welfare reform, mommy can only get 5 years worth of discretionary income from welfare. Unless the local drug dealer takes foodstamps and WIC checks, mommy can only use the money the fed gives her for specific things after 5 years and frankly the payments during those 5 years are not exactly enough to support a crack habit. > [@IntelliQ](#): > > The _mother_ Im appalled anyone would support a mother who spends her welfare money on drugs then blame other people for her kids not eating. I think people are supporting the kids not the mom. If the mom is neglecting or abusing the kids, thats one thing (but social workers are already supposed to look out for that sort of thign (and frankly you don’t need to eb adrug addict to be a horrible parent)). > [@IntelliQ](#): > > You are saying the mother absolutely has to do drugs, she has no choice, it’s out of her control. No matter what she just can’t control herself. It’s beyond her ability to choose her kids before doing drugs? No, I thought you were the one making that claim. That we must take away the money because they WILL spend it on drugs. > [@IntelliQ](#): > > People here are painting the picture of a drug addict. Someone who cant control their own behavior and puts illegal substances above their own children eating is either nuts or an addict. Once again it seem that you are the one doing that. I don’t think that you have a lot of mothers on crack. here’s why. Welfare doesn’t pay enough to support a crack habit so they steal and kite checks and they end up in jail and their kids get taken away. The system has other ways of detcting drug abuse. You say you don’t have a problem with light recreational drug use and yet that is the only type of drug abuse that will be picked up by drug testing all welfare recipients because any of the3 hard core users get picked up in other ways. > [@](#): > > Anyway, no point going on an on about this, I see where you people stand. It’s sad too, because I see there is no chance in hell of ever getting the country on sound economic footing (or fixing cultural decay with inner cities crime, etc.) when crap like this is defended. You think urban decay is the result of everyone being addicted to drugs? You do realize that urban decay existed before crack and continues to exist after crack use has dropped signifiantly, perhaps tehre are other causes for urban decay than welfare queens doing crack with their baby’s money. > [@](#): > > The more complex issues dont stand a chance if we can’t even agree on the easy stuff. It might help is you didn’t live in a world that only exists in the minds of conservatives. First we should agree on what the reality is. > [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > The vast majority of welfare recipients who use drugs. cite. ---
**Author:** ![mr.jp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/48db29/32.png) [@mr.jp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mr.jp)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/76 "2012-01-26T19:58:25Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > It would seem that you would peg any successful businessman as a good Presidential candidate. Do you think Silvio Berlusconi was a good Italian leader? No, obviously. You could do that with any trait you are looking at. If you mention a trait, I can find a leader who has that trait, and was a bad leader. Doesn’t mean that the trait itself is not good. In Berslusconi’s case the major problem is that he is corrupt. He was most probably also corrupt in his business life. There is no sign that Romney is. > [@](#): > > Romney isn’t exactyl a bootstrap millionaire. Hes bright and did more with what life gave him than others who started with teh same advantages but life started him off with a LOT of advantages. Yes, sure. What I’m arguing for is not exactly that what he did was impressive. It was more that he showed skill at exactly the thing that would be useful for a leader. ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/77 "2012-01-26T20:03:34Z")
Here’s a question: Which one do y’all think Obama’s campaign people want to win the Republican nomination? Conventional wisdom is that Romney is the bigger threat because he skews more moderate than most of the Republican candidate field. However, as much as I loathe the man, Gingrich is very good in debates. He knows how to turn things completely on their head, as he did in South Carolina when asked about his ex-wife’s interview. Would Obama be able to parry Gingrich’s “sound bite” style? ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/78 "2012-01-26T20:11:19Z")
There is zero doubt in my mind that Obama’s people pray nightly to run against Newt Gingrich. The man is radioactive. Romney is a significantly better candidate and two debates, even if they are drubbings, is not enough to compensate. Just look at Gingrich’s poll numbers and tell me which one _you_ would rather face. ---
**Author:** ![Enlightening\_Meditation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ecc23a/32.png) [@Enlightening\_Meditation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enlightening_Meditation)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/79 "2012-01-26T21:05:50Z")
Romney or Gingrich Between the two choices, I would prefer Romney as President of the USA. Between the two choices, I would prefer Gingrich as the GOP nominee for the entertainment of the spectacle. Between the two choices, I think Romney is more likely to be nominee. Rick “Man on Dog” Santorum is sitting below them in the polls mostly dodging attacks for now, so I can’t rule him out. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Raven\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@The\_Raven\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Raven_1)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2012, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178/80 "2012-01-26T21:27:30Z")
Hmmm… Gingrich has a Second Life avatar. Romney _is_ a Second Life Avatar. Gingrich is the Scarecrow. Romney is the Tin Man. Romney has the usual cast of characters (Rove, et al.) in his corner. Gingrich’s crew - other than Sheldon Adelson, I honestly don’t know. Romney is a reasonably competent, proven administrator. Gingrich is a bomb thrower, and I have no confidence in his leadership ability, or even his stability. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-or-gingrich/610178.md?page=5)