Posted on 01/31/2012 7:39:19 AM PST by no dems
“I have a theory that the reason Romney supports gay marriage is because he knows that it is the first sep in re-establishing polygamy.”
I absolutely agree - people don’t realize that Mormons believe that the more wives the better, and being giving permission to take another wife/wives (by the temple elders who give these permissions) look upon it as a step towards their governance of their own planet in the next life. They get to have their wives with them and taking more than one is a sign that you are on your way.
This is NOT religious bigotry - people do not understand what the Mormons actually teach - just as many don’t understand the true Muslim agenda.
“You are right this time”
I’m framing this. LOL
One of these days we’ll agree on something, but I don’t think it’s going to be in this election cycle.
If Obama wins, which I think he does if Romney is nominated...we can add ObamaCare along with Social Security and Medicare to the list of things that will do in this country.
I’m not so sure elections after this one will mean that much. The GOP is in its Death Throes, but more importantly so is our Nation.
We’ve abandoned God and God given Morals...that’s the deeper solution that we ignore.
I deeply fear for our children and grandchildren...for what is about to occur to our country.
The liberal trash mag had it correct:
We Are All Socialists Now
I can’t really deny it any longer if Obama wins...same goes for Romney.
We either accept it or do the unspeakable. I can’t accept it.
CWCT asked:
“On what logical basis do you assert that Santorum voters would switch to Gingrich?”
I already said, “If he (that would be Santorum!) would make common cause with Gingrich - positive, conservative, common cause! - this would be a different race.”
As it stands now, whether you or I like it or not, Rick Santorum is helping Romney secure the nomination. So, get upset all you want. That is the simple truth of the matter. Santorum could, actively, do something about that. He chooses not to.
Romney sent out absentee ballots to all registered voters in Florida along with campaign material.”””
Is that legal?
I thought only ballots sent by the state or counties were legal documents.
I would be ready to sign a petition against Mitt if he did this against laws in Florida. He needs to be sanctioned if he did something this brash & broke the election laws.
Please advise.
Your premise is that Santorum commands the 17% that support him, and by endorsing and working for Gingrich, those 17% would move to Gingrich.
SO why can’t I start with the premise that Gingrich commands the 30% that support him, and that if he dropped out, and endorsed and worked for Santorum, those 30% would move to Santorum?
OK, you can argue that why should the 30% have to move, rather than the 17%? But your problem is that the 17% don’t want to move, and the 30% are the ones arguing that SOMEONE has to drop out for the good of the country.
If your argument is that Gingrich couldn’t get the 30% to support Santorum, then I ask why you think Santorum can get his 17% to support Gingrich?
I would also argue that Gingrich has hit a brick wall at 30%, and is no longer “the cool new thing”. If Gingrich quit and threw support to Santorum, and Santorum jumped from 17 to 32 percent (getting just half of Gingrich;’s support at first, while the other half went uncommitted), Santorum would have “momentum”.
It’s all rampant speculation, but you give no reason why your speculation makes more sense; especially when we accept as a given that there are such things as “ceilings” for candidates, and that some candidates, no matter how well they are polling in multi-candidate races, can never get above 50%.
I’m hardly getting upset. I am arguing, using logic, facts, and informed speculation, that the hypothesis of the “Santorum dropping out” crowd is wrong. If anybody is upset, it’s those who are using the language of anger against Santorum because he hasn’t done what they wish he would do because they imagine it would help.
Oddly enough, some people argue that Santorum is just a big-government RINO establishment candidate. They are entitled to their opinion, of course. But if he is, and if the voters who support him understand that, why would anybody think those voters would jump to Gingrich rather than Romney?
The popular argument is that all conservatives hate Romney, and therefore if there was only one other candidate, and since conservatives are a majority of republicans, that the other candidate would clearly win.
I am saying that the evidence suggests the premise is faulty. I’m not arguing that the premise SHOULD be faulty, just that it appears from polling data and voting outcomes and various statements by various politicians that the premise that all conservative oppose Romney is faulty, and therefore the conclusion that eliminating conservative candidates would hurt Romney is also faulty.
It’s not that I support Santorum. I haven’t chosen who I will vote for yet, although it’s a moot point since I can’t vote for either Santorum or Gingrich, so I really just have to decide if I am going to cast a vote against my own beliefs by voting for Ron Paul, or if I am going to stay home (Virginia).
And it’s not as if I have outright rejected the premise. I understand the argument, and on the surface it seems rational to believe that Santorum supporters would “obviously” vote for Gingrich over Romney.
But I don’t see any evidence for that. And until I do, I think it’s a dangerous game to play, not knowing the outcome, to force out a guy who is close to getting 20% of the vote in a 4-person race.
Every poll in Florida that asked the question seems to say Santorum hurts Romney by being on the ballot, because Santorum voters choose Romney more than Gingrich as their 2nd choice. That may not make any sense to me or you, but what evidence do we have to the contrary?
BTW, it’s not like I am telling any Santorum supporters NOT to vote for Newt — earlier today I praised one who did (and oddly got attacked by a Gingrich supporter and recent stalker of mine for somehow shilling for ROmney by saying people should vote what they think best, even if it isn’t for the candidate they want. And I’ve never told anybody not to vote for Newt. I’ve said why I have my doubts about him, and I’ve defended Santorum against what I see as unfair attacks, and argued against the strategy being pushed.
But I’m not telling anybody who to vote for. Everybody should vote however they want — for their candidate, for principle, for expediency, for strategy. Just don’t call other Freepers, or conservative candidates, evil because they don’t agree with the “accepted wisdom”.
CharlesWayneCT, I well understand your loyalty to Santorum. I will assume that it is based on your basically conservative political view, with which I concur. I want the most conservative possible candidate capable of winning the nomination. What happens in the general election will depend on the message being put forward to the voters of this nation. I am interested in the message far more than the messenger.
One thing I am utterly convinced of is that Romney will not put out the message this country needs for one simple reason: He is not at heart nor ever has been a conservative. For goodness sake if Mitt’s mother, as he himself has said, ran for the Senate in 1970 as a pro-choice candidate, where do you think her son’s heart really is on this issue? At best one could surmise, all over the place.
And while either Gingrich or Santorum could - plausibly, even convincingly, even genuinely! - Santorum does not appear to be the one to do so at this time, by which I mean this election cycle. So, for me, the equation is a simple one. Put the conservative votes (and hearty endorsements of the conservative message!) behind Gingrich and then, after he is elected president - God willing, lean on him to keep the message/promise he delivered in the general election. Rick Santorum could be in a very powerful position to help accomplish this last part ... if he has a mind to.
My guess is he sent out absentee ballot REQUESTS. And given that Florida has early voting, my guess would be that their absentee rules are relatively liberal.
gswilder referred to Mitt as “romeny cod.”
I like it. I think it describes him as well as anything I’ve read or heard. Sometimes typos say it better than anything.
The Romney campaign hasn’t been relying just on the candidate to encourage voters to cast their ballots early. Since mid-December, it has been on an “absentee chase”—aggressively reaching out to a list of more than 400,000 Florida voters who have signed up to receive absentee ballots automatically. Those voters have received mail, phone calls, and in many cases personal visits to persuade them to vote early and to vote for Romney. By late last week, more than 150,000 of them had cast ballots...
I could have sworn it had something about his camp sending them out to everyone.
I’m not really “loyal to Santorum”. I just want to defend him if he is unfairly criticized. I would do the same for Newt Gingrich.
I would have been supporting Gingrich if he had made it onto the ballot in Virginia. I’m not viscerally opposed to Gingrich, I just don’t believe he’ll survive the primary. If he does, and he manages to beat Obama, I’ll be happy. I would have no problem supporting a Gingrich presidency. I think it would be a fine presidency.
I just don’t see Gingrich making it that far. Negatives too high, image too tarnished, says too many odd things, angers even conservatives who support him, is too “smart” for his own good. Those are reasons I wouldn’t vote for him, just reasons I think people will NOT vote for him enough to win. I don’t mind being wrong about this — I certainly don’t HOPE that he can’t win.
I was encouraged when he was first in Florida, and hoped that meant I was wrong, but then things went as I expected they would. I take no pleasure in being right.
I don’t see Santorum winning either, but his approval is much higher than Newt, his negatives much lower, he hasn’t made anybody mad, he is more acceptable to the rank-and-file even if he isn’t the first choice.
Could he beat Obama? I don’t know. The candidate I thought most likely to do that was Rick Perry, and he couldn’t even win a primary.
Well, CharlesWayneCT, I think I understand your position. However, whenever in political history has the more strongly running candidate bowed out in favor of the less strongly running? Cite one example, ever.
I do not think you and I are far apart. However, I think you are simply wrong in your estimation of what is and is not possible at this point in time. To quote Rush, “it is what it is.”
Now, if, because of Ron Paul, we end up having a closely divided situation, with neither Romney nor Gingrich having the necessary number of delegates, then there will be a brokered convention ... not necessarily a good thing. All the more important will it be then that the conservatives have made common cause. And I realize that Santorum cannot command his supporters to do whatever he wants. This is America, and his voters are Americans. But his wishes will have an effect, especially if he can explain his reasoning to them.
My one vote meant nothing to the outcome. She was on the ballot. We will all be confronted with what throwing away our votes means when Obama and Romney are the two major party candidates this fall.
Ridiculous assertion. 100 people feel that way and it CAN have an impact. Absolutely thoughtless when there were viable candidates.
when Obama and Romney are the two major party candidates this fall.
I wouldn't bank on that. And I will NOT vote for Romney. It makes no difference who wins, Obamney or Obamney. Same outcome.
It seems to me a Santorum candidacy makes a brokered convention more likely, and a brokered convention where a majority of the delegates are held by a combination of Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Perry is certainly more likely to pick a conservative than to pick Mitt Romney.
So the question really is whether you truly believe that, if Santorum dropped out today, Gingrich could win a majority of the delegates or not. If I believed that, I wouldn’t argue against the strategy, although I still would be privately disgusted with how the pro-gingrich folks here are attacking Santorum for sacrificing for his country by putting himself up as a conservative candidate for President.
The problem is, I don’t see evidence for it yet. And once you drop out, it’s over. You can’t “undo it” — although I wish you could, because I’d love to see Perry come back and wipe the field (yes, that will never happen).
I am not saying Gingrich should drop out — I’m saying Santorum shouldn’t. My argument is that logically you can’t know which one dropping out is better, although the facts show that right now if either dropped out, Romney would end up with more votes than the opponents would.
Better watch out. If you say that too much, you’ll make Newt lose.
You are an idiot. And a troll.
Two Words:
Thanks. I bet you had help with that one.
My one vote objectively meant nothing to the outcome. It doesn’t matter what 99 others may or may not have done.
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.