[Garfunkel Oates]

I've been a long time lurker and remember when this place was Romney election headquarters. Any criticism of him was quickly squashed, so it's funny to see so many freepers flip-flop back to sanity.

The problem with voting for the lesser evil is that it emboldens them. If Romney would of lost by a landslide, that would of been a clear message, but since he lost by so little, it makes rinos think that they can try the same thing again.

[Clint N. Suhks]

this place was Romney election headquarters.

Did you bump your head before you wrote that?

[Robert DeLong]

this place was Romney election headquarters

More like Defeat Obama Headquarters. I didn't like McCain or Romney, though Romney was better than McCain (in my opinion). I refuse to send the Republican Party (that included McCain & Romney) any money, and have ignored their pleas for donations for a long time now. But I will always vote for the lesser of two evils. Someone who votes for a 3rd party candidate can pat themselves on the back and proclaim they voted their principles, but in reality they did nothing, because no 3rd party candidate for President has ever been elected. Thus they aided the greater of two evils if it prevails. Evil can only survive when good men do nothing.

I always vote too, as that is my responsibility as an American. So when I don't vote for the lesser of two evils the likelihood that I get the greater of two evils becomes more of a possibility, and the greater of two evils then absolutely becomes emboldened.

The lesser of two evils also is easier to control.

The same reasoning, defeat Obama, was most likely the case for a majority of those who voted for Romney and post on this board, though I cannot be sure that is the case. Because during the primaries there were groups supporting each of the various different candidates. After the primaries there was a slow migration to Mitt.

I think it is safe to say that the country would be better off today had Obama been defeated. Would it be where I would like to see it be? Odds on favorite is most likely not. With Obama at the helm it is definitely not.

I strongly disagree with Mitt on this issue as I did with Reagan in 1986. Whenever you reward or ignore bad or illegal behavior more of it rises to the surface. That's a truism that has stood the test of time.

[ansel12]

I've been a long time lurker and remember when this place was Romney election headquarters. Any criticism of him was quickly squashed,

No you don't, because it never was, and it never happened.