I wasn’t satisfied with any of the candidates (and certainly not Romney), but among those remaining toward the end, I preferred Gingrich. My position, though — and ideological purity — is of little importance compared with the position of the country. That position is dire, as I think all of us here agree, and will get worse under a lame-duck Obama presidency.
Look at what he’s done already, and imagine what will be in store for us when the restraints of having to fool people until after re-election are no longer there. Even if Romney were as bad as Obama, which I don’t concede, Romney wouldn’t be in that position. “This is a choice between Mitt Romney and the most radical, leftist president in American history.” Of course. That’s the key point. Having a pseudo-conservative Republican as president would present some problems for the conservative movement. I don’t think that would be nearly as bad, though, as having Obama and his cohorts continuing to run the country.
If I vote for Romney, it in no way implies my approval of all his positions or even of him as a person. It simply means I considered that the less harmful alternative.
With all due respect that's right up there as one of the stupidest statements I've read on FR in a long time.
This idea, shared by others here, that voting for someone while at the same time disapproving of his positions and him as a person is idiotic.
Has it occurred to any of you brain surgeons that the reason you have that choice is because each and everyone of you are morally rudderless sheep without principle or conviction who can be manipulated by anyone with a R behind their name..
On second thought don't answer that, I'm sick of unprincipled, idiotic, drivel coming from folks who call themselves conservatives but when push comes to shove cant walk the walk...