Skip to comments.Conservatives that can't vote for Romney VANITY
Posted on 11/02/2012 11:06:00 AM PDT by birdsman
I know that some freepers are reluctant to vote for Romney because he's not conservative enough. Few of us wanted him to be the Republican nominee, and for good reason. This is why I'm voting Libertarian this year. I know the mantra, a vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for Obama, but that's not true in deep blue states like mine (New York). I propose that conservatives in deep blue states agree to vote 3rd party. In return, conservatives in toss up states can hold their noses while voting for Romney.
“However we DO NOT want a nightmare scenario where Obama gets the popular vote”
A single vote never matters, since no race will ever be decided by a one-vote margin. It doesn’t matter in a “battleground” state, much less in a deep blue state, and less of all for the popular vote. It’s incomprehensible to me why you’d even bother with the popular argument. If his vote is a drop in Superior in New York it’s a drop in the Atlantic nationally.
Well said. Indeed.
Right! The incumbent is the first President who actually hates every thing that traditional Americans believe in. (Who else could have sat in a pew for 20 years, while his Pastor "damned" America?)
William Flax [Romney/Ryan]
I voted early for Goode (Constitution Party). Just changed my tagline to indicate that. But Romney will win my state easily.
Sorry, I believe it’s simpler than that ~ religious freedom grows out of the barrel of a gun ~ that’s what my Huguenot ancestors believed and today modern Catholics agree with that doctrine.
Look, I used to despise Romney too, and thought that maybe just for cathartic purposes or something, kind of like a medieval bloodletting for health, we should reelect O. But that would be confirmation of O’s socialist pro-gay pro-illegal policies, all for a small brownie point that conservatives stuck to their purity and didn’t deign to vote for RR.
A couple things have changed in my view of Romney. One, his debate #1 performance, I thought it was unabashed conservative. I really didn’t see any waffling toward the middle, as MSNBC tried to portray.
And on the key issue of immigration, in debate 2, though RR has been low key on the issue, he confirmed that he isn’t going to do amnesty, and ROMNEY IS GOING TO INSTITUTE E-VERIFY! That will be critical to stemming illegal immigration and the illegals to leave, and O is not going to do it, and sop with O the next thing we know the electorate will be overwhelmed by illegals that vote Dem & socialist.
No, conservatives, vote Romney, not Obama.
Digital logic...are you a computer guy?
Back in the nineties I used to self-identify as a Libertarian. That was until I attended some meetings and found out that the party is really all about legalizing pot. It was the only issue anyone was passionate about. So I left and never looked back. Some friends of mine still on the "inside" tell me that nowadays they are all in the tank for Gay Marriage, too. How nice.
bird, by the time this thread is over ... your vote will be the most important vote in America ... the entire country lobbying birdman for his vote on the NYS electors.
Good job, buddy! What about my vote!!
Do I vote for Linda McMahon?
Do I put my Linda McMahon yard sign up? If I do not, is it immoral?
Do I hafta campaign for Linda, too? ( I need a philosopher today)
If there are not massive TEA Party rallies between a Romney victory and Jan 20th, and beyond, then the only people to blame for no change will be ourselves.
Romeny will govern to the right of center, IF, we, through Congress and out raised voices, continually remind him why he was elected, and by whom.
re: “I’m done voting for evil.”
The problem with this is that all of us are evil and sinners. No candidate is going to be all that we want. No candidate, aside from Jesus, and He isn’t on the ticket, is going to be free from evil.
The truth is you are ALWAYS voting for the man/woman who represents LESS EVIL. The candidates you like have the least evil (as far as you perceive it) as opposed to the ones who appear to have the MOST evil.
You are either voting for less evil or more evil - there are no other choices.
Look at it this way - you have to decide which candidate represents more of what you support, and, vote against the candidate who represents the least of what you support.
If Candidate A is 50% of what you want, and Candidate B is 40% of what you want - which one do you vote for?
Now, of course you will say, “What about Candidate C?” He/she is 90% of what you want but has a snowballs chance in Hades to be elected.
If you vote your “conscience”, you feel good because you voted for the one you thought was best, yet the kicker is, you divided the opposition against the WORST candidate, thus, helping the WORST one to win.
It’s simple math. It is absolutely certain that dividing the vote helps one of two main party candidates - not the third party candidate.
If you want better main party candidates, you have to get involved in that party - i.e. join the party, attend local precinct meetings, volunteer for stuff, help in campaigns, etc. In other words, the more involved you are in the day to day workings of your local party, the more you can influence which candidates make it to the top tier for consideration.
If all you do is wait for “other” people in the party to choose who the candidates will be, but you’ve had no involvment and therefore no influence - why be surprised that you always wind up with having to choose among candidates you don’t like very much. Involvment is the key to influencing local, state, and ultimately national candidates.
But, as I said, you will always be choosing between the lesser of two, or three, or four evils. But, the worst candidate is usually the one who benefits the most from dividing the opposition against him.
So, Oberon - choose to vote for LESS evil. Yes, it stinks but that’s just the way it is.
“Digital logic...are you a computer guy?”
I’m a common sense guy, trying to explain it in a way that can reach people.
It is the second time for me - The first being when I was too sick to get to the polls and missed voting all together...
I am thinking I will write in Tom Hoefling (FR's EternalVigilance), even though I don't think it is a valid write-in in MT.
yer vote is trivial civic nonsense.
someday, get somebody elected by actually campaigning for him.
“Yes. And voting for either of the two leading candidates is a vote for the status quo.”
I’m sorry, but this is politically moronic.
SCOTUS appointees alone from Obama should make your soul shudder.
Romney was far from my first choice, but he is oceans away from being a neo-socialist and statist like Obozo.
I’m not here to argue it, it’s beyond obvious if you can’t see it then god, devil or sun help you. I will never forgive or forget those that abandon our nation in it’s deepest moment of need to correct course. Never.
I respect your decision. This is the last nose holder for me.
Exactly, he is the classic so called fiscal conservative which he isn’t and a social liberal. Only wimps follow that semi-conservative mantra so they aren’t stuck standing up for the killing of babies.
How can you have a fiscal program when you believe anything goes? More atheistic communism for everybody but balance the budget, right.
Pray for America
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.