Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Frank discussion re our loss to Obama/Romney and the future direction of FR and tea party movement
Click here to pledge your support! ^ | May 4, 2012 | Jim Robinson

Posted on 05/04/2012 6:31:27 AM PDT by Jim Robinson

My FRiends, we might as well face the reality that we the combined pro-life conservative movement and tea party coalition have lost this round (the presidential election) in the larger battle to reclaim our constitution and our inalienable rights. Rove, Romney and the GOP-e have successfully destroyed and driven off each and every pro-life conservative tea party candidate from the race and all have surrendered to the Romney camp. It is no secret that Romney is not one of us. There is absolutely no doubt that he has never accomplished a single conservative thing in his entire political career (one term as liberal governor of liberal Massachusetts and six years campaigning for president). In Massachusetts, he undeniably championed abortion, gay rights, global warming, gun control, big government statist mandated/socialized health care programs, liberal judges, TARP, bailouts, stimulus spending, debt limit increases, etc, and even though he's recently claimed a complete reversal in political beliefs and no longer despises pro-life conservatives or the time of Reagan-Bush, I still don't trust him. He still stubbornly holds on to some of his statist beliefs, like global warming, gays in the military, RomneyCare, stimulus spending, etc, so there is no way I can vote for him or join Cain, Perry, Bachmann, Newt or any others who are endorsing him. But I will not act on my prior promises that I would actively campaign against him if he wins the nomination. Our combined movement is already torn and splintered and is going to have to be mended if we're going to have any impact whatsoever against the liberal/progressives and statists after the election. To that end I propose a TRUCE among our conservative forces during the remainder of this election cycle.

We conservatives have already lost the presidency to either the Dems or the GOP-e, and if we tear the tea party apart, if we tear the pro-life movement apart, if we tear FR apart then we lose it all. It's far more important that we re-unite and live to fight another day. Even if we can't vote for a true conservative for the presidency, it's doubly important that we all turn out on election day or sooner and drag our friends, neighbors, relatives, co-workers, etc, to the polls to vote straight conservative for every slot on our ballots. The only way we can win our freedom back is to vote out the liberal progressives and vote in as many liberty loving conservatives as is humanly possible into every elected office at every level of government all across this great land. To prevent a total loss to the dems or GOP-e, we must continue the tea party rebellion into November and beyond. Whatever else you may do, you must turn out and vote straight tea party conservative down ticket!!

We must continue expanding our inroads into the state houses and into every elective office in the land. We must continue building on our majority in the house and we must retake the senate!! We must help the conservative governors and state legislatures to fully restore the ninth and tenth amendments and reclaim the real political power away from the federal usurpers and return it to the states and the people per the constitution!! This way, regardless of who wins the presidency, we can cut his unconstitutional expansionist movements off at the knees. And if any executive, civil officer or judge dares commit impeachable offenses, we must hold the majorities so we can impeach and remove them from office!!

And we must salvage and rebuild and continue strengthening our conservative pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, pro-borders, pro-constitution, pro-small government, pro-defense, pro-liberty movements and our tea party coalition. And we must stop ripping each other apart!!

Therefore I hereby propose a general truce among our conservative forces!!

The Republic we save may be our own!!

As far as FR's finances go, we're in the same boat as the rest of the economy and will have to make do with what we can raise. Fortunately, the big debts we ran up a couple years ago have been paid off. We borrowed approx $20,000 a few years ago from two FReepers to fund our national convention, plus we ran up another $20,000 in legal fees during the last couple of years fighting off Righthaven. But those are now behind us and paid off. We also did quite a bit of traveling each year for the last three years on cross country tea party tours, but I think we can now cut that back and remove it from our budget requirements. If we're fortunate enough to not incur any additional legal costs or equipment costs (other than what we've already planned), and cut the travel and a few other areas, we should be able to tighten our belts enough to weather the storm even if we fail to reach our short term fundraising goals.

Whatever the outcome of the elections, we are prepared to roar into 2013 with the tea party chewing up liberal/progressives and RINOs and raising hell in our never ending fight for liberty!!

We are the resistance!!

Let's take the enemy head-on instead of fighting each other!!

Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead!!

TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Breaking News; Free Republic; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; adminlectureseries; bachmann; cain; elections; freepathon; freerepublic; freerepublichistory; gingrich; gop; gope; jimrobinson; newt; obama; perry; prayer; romney; santorum; teaparty; truce
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,361-1,3801,381-1,4001,401-1,420 ... 1,521-1,525 next last
To: texasblondie

No, it isn’t. Not voting is not voting. Only voting for Obama is a vote for obama. Votes are what they are - nothing more.

1,381 posted on 05/06/2012 7:11:06 AM PDT by arderkrag ("WAAHH WAAAHHH SCOTUS" is no excuse to vote for Romney. LOOKING FOR ROLEPLAYERS. Check Profile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1343 | View Replies]

To: xzins; All
I would favor a system wherein each congressional district elected a respected, elector, him or herself presidential caliber, and then all the electors would gather in a "presidential conference" and they would then caucus and vote to determine the party's nominee from their midst or from some stellar nominee not in their midst upon whom they agree.

That's a decent idea. You're correct in your assessment that the problem are the primaries.

I'm not sure a plurality, much less a commanding majority would be reached in that system however; I foresee many voting for themselves for the nomination, thus having the "winner" having at most maybe 1-5% of the total vote, which is not exactly a mandate of the GOP as a whole, thus weakening such a candidate considerably in the general election. After all, the Dems would love to hem and haw all day in the general how their GOP opponent only had 5% of the total GOP behind him, especially since their system of selection is so different.

Maybe I'm too cynical, but really, given the last two primaries, I think I have reason to be cynical as far as the GOP is concerned.

I suppose there could be a rule where one couldn't vote for oneself, but then to enforce that rule, open voting would have to be enforced, which would result in voter intimidation, based on back room deals of the "elite".

Really the central "problem" faced in the primaries, to be blunt, is the fact that the majority of the states that vote first, and thus set the tone or momentum of the eventual winner, are not filled with conservatives. See the table labeled "Early State Primaries" here (forgive the Wikipedia reference, but the timeline of primaries is not exactly controversial, at least as a now historical fact, so Wikipedia is a reliable source here).

Note that except for SC, the rest of the states are, at best, mixtures of "moderates to conservatives", with the "moderates" outnumbering the conservatives. I mean, we know that is a fact, I don't think I have to prove that here.

So therein lies the problem. In those states that set the tone, that give the early winner "momentum", there aren't enough conservatives to truly dictate who is actually conservative, to give that person momentum. This is why I said long ago, when all the Palin fans were giving her a pass for not having entered the race when, for example, Romney had, that if she intended to enter the race, she was being foolish, because this is when the real race is decided.

What I've stated is simply realistic, pragmatic fact. We can argue all day about how "the reason the momentum is set so early is because the media hypes it up", but it's pointless to, as the famous song says, "p*** into the wind". So, that is the problem that must be solved, not the media's hype, because we can't do anything about that, but the fact that the GOP has decided, for whatever reason (wink wink) that these states should go first.

So, what I would propose is a change in the way the state's order would be decided. We have the technology now to be able to make this happen. Every registered GOP voter should be given an opportunity to decide which STATE goes first in the primary, then which is second, and so on. It is my belief that there are enough true conservatives in the GOP that care enough about their country to vote appropriately. For example, I live in MD, but I have no fairyland dream that to vote for MD to go first would truly help a true conservative nominee.

That is the only way I can see to truly solve the issue of having moderates rammed down our throat every nomination cycle. That, and/or of course true conservatives (like Palin) actually getting in the race very early, to gain momentum through the old way. (The problem with the latter of course is that the establishment funds the moderate nominees enough that they can sustain early and long campaigns; to that end, we will have to become another "establishment", encouraging true conservatives to get in early, and funding them, if my idea above is unpalatable.)

These are the only two ways I can see of curtailing the establishment we have now, IMO.

1,382 posted on 05/06/2012 7:37:09 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1351 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven

For some strange reason, my link to Wikipedia didn’t work.,_2012

1,383 posted on 05/06/2012 7:39:47 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1382 | View Replies]

To: dmartin

Congratulations and thank you for your service.

Thank you for the congrats!

The service - well 10 generations (12 including my son and oldest grandson) of army brats does tend to set your life goals!

1,384 posted on 05/06/2012 7:57:09 AM PDT by EnglishCon (When life gets too much to stand - kneel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1288 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts
I respect your thoughts,but where will the pressure come from? Do you think the Democrats will run a candidate who is to the right of an incumbent Romney in 2016.

Pressure will come from Republican voters who oppose RINO priorities like tax increases and amnesty.

Bush backed down on Harriet Miers because of conservative pressure and Bush was a thousand times more stubborn than old Etch-o-sketch will be.

1,385 posted on 05/06/2012 8:37:38 AM PDT by MaxFlint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 829 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I was going to give again anyhow, but any excuse is a good excuse when the wife is monitoring the bank account.

1,386 posted on 05/06/2012 8:45:41 AM PDT by pallis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; SierraWasp; tubebender; Ernest_at_the_Beach; All

Gov Conan wasn’t the greatest or probably even a fairly good conservative.

However, he set records re the number of his vetoes which prevente the rape and sacking of Californicator land by our rat legislature:

I don’t think that Moonbeam has vetoed a single bill, including many of Arnold’s vetoed bills that were resurrected by the socialist California legislature after they and Moonbeam took over.

Elect Romney and as many republicans as we can in the $inate and House and hold their feet to the fires of public outrage when they act like democrats.

This country can’t stand 4 more years of Obozo and his thugs.

If he is re elected, Obozo will stack the Supreme Court and do an FDR with terms until he passes on due to old age.

Thanks, Jim for this stand.

I had considered taking a sabatical re posting and my monthly donations until the election is over. Now that is not necessary.

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

If you ever do go on sabbatical take me with you
I need a vacation

1,388 posted on 05/06/2012 9:01:19 AM PDT by woofie (It takes three villages and a forest of woodland creatures to raise a child in Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1387 | View Replies]

To: fml
Nope, if not for a spoiler Clinton would have likely lost. A Republican Revolution may have been a matter of course

If you think that would have been the case in the Bush v Clinton malaise regardless of the winner's percentage, then in honestly, you MUST admit a striking possibility of the same in this Obama v Romney malaise. {^) Come on, FRiend!! [^) "If not for a spoiler, Clinton would likely have lost." Really? I think if not for the spoiler, it's entirely up in the air as to who would have lost, as I think it's entirely up in the air which would win now, O or R.

And had Clinton WON with a majority, you really expect me to believe that you believe Republicans would have had the same momentum? Really??? Or do you know that the Republican "establishment" would have had the upper ground to warn conservative Republicans that they were a miniority? Just as they would if, God forbid, Romney wins? UNDERSTAND, FRiend, that Romney's people will be snuffing out every conservative uprising they see with the same contempt they have consistently exhibited toward conservatives, and you had BETTER RECOGNIZE NOW that a vote for Romney means a vote for a guy in office whose power elite will constantly remind Republican conservatives that the only reason the party has the White House at all is because of "moderates" like Romney, so conservatives had better sit down and behave themselves like good children, instead of raising a fuss like bad children.


Obama is hugely loathed, regretted, and even hated, including by a lot of folks who voted for him last time. If he wins again, then, another conservative Republican revolution may be "a matter of course" EXACTLY the same as you think it "may have been" with Clinton.

The TRUTH is that political support, being able to call a certain percentage of voters your "mandate," matters. An Obama elected by a splintered plurality would be put in a weakened and defensive position. I really hope there's a viable third party, and that's not its usual oymoron. "Viable" need only be good enough to make the winner enter office with a majority of the popular vote against him -- 66% would be nice, as in the "winner" takes office with 34% "confidence" of the people becaue the remaining 66% rejected that candidate.

1,389 posted on 05/06/2012 9:18:44 AM PDT by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent * By the way, Ted, voting for Romney is voting stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1337 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson


We have got to figure out a way to take the presidency.

Twenty years ago, I would have agreed that our true battlefields were local and state elections.

However, the problem is that the executive branch of government has been allowed to grab too much power. In my opinion this all started with Nixon.

Personally, I think it is time for a conservative third party.

1,390 posted on 05/06/2012 9:24:27 AM PDT by James Mott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Here is a bit of reality about politicians....all politicians.
Their job is to get elected ...once elected they are running scared and they respond to pressure.
to get elected they will morph into whatever appeals to the constituency.
Had Romney been Gov of Texas and not Mass he would have morphed into a conservative.

At least Romney will respond to pressure from the right (unlike Obama)
The job of the right is to get him elected and start building bonfires under his feet....and keep them burning.

this would apply to Newt, Caine, or anyone who tried to get the nomination

1,391 posted on 05/06/2012 9:29:13 AM PDT by woofie (It takes three villages and a forest of woodland creatures to raise a child in Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1387 | View Replies]

The important thing here is that Obama will be unleashed in his second term to do everything he can to cement a ‘legacy’ which will disregard us, the voters, the constitution, etc. Obama’s victory will mean socialized medicine, high spending and high tax rates in USA forever.

That's the worst-case scenario, it attributes God-like powers to Obama, and wholesale cowardice to every other corner of government.

WOSG, you are a wonderful conservative with many great observations and ideas. However, back in 07-08, you preferred Romney over the other nominees. I've done a bit of in-forum reviewing, which is how I've come to admit and admire much of your thinking. But here's the truth: Romney was as bad then as he is now, and he LOST then, was REJECTED then, as he SHOULD be now. Don't you Party Standard people ever learn? I used to be a Party Standard person (hey, I dutifully voted for Schwarzenegger), and I learned! I know that I'm no smarter or better than you are. When are you going to smell the coffee???????

Frankly, I think we have a much better chance of successfully fighting off socialized medicine and higher taxes with Obama in office by a plurality fluke and a clear, documented majority opposed, than we have of fighting the same (which we would ABSOLUTELY ASSUREDLY GET) with a Republican in office pushing for his own legacy with all the key issues in alignment with Obama's, including socialized medicine and global warming ecotyranny.

Remember, WOSG, you more than most know in your heart that what I am saying is correct: Romney in office means a Republican power elite telling conservative Republicans: "Look, the only reason the GOP even has the White House is because of us 'moderates,' so sit down and shut up."

There comes a point -- and we have reached that point -- where voting "pragmatically" is voting against our own moral and finiancial self-interest.

1,392 posted on 05/06/2012 9:33:28 AM PDT by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent * By the way, Ted, voting for Romney is voting stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1338 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Does anyone know how many primaries are left and which states? How many votes does each have?

1,393 posted on 05/06/2012 9:34:51 AM PDT by Wisconsinlady ( - To find the truth of what Gov. Walker is doing for Wisconsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James Mott
Personally, I think it is time for a conservative third party.

United we stand, divided we fall.

A third party would split the anti-Obama vote.

1,394 posted on 05/06/2012 10:25:13 AM PDT by OldNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1390 | View Replies]

To: daisy mae for the usa

Thank you so much for expressing what has been on my heart for some time. When those who proclaim themselves Christians can support the most godless ideas and behaviors because they want to “win,” because they fear some man — any man, it is obvious they no longer fear God nor do they trust Him.

God cleans His own house first. Unless we turn back to Him quickly, I’m afraid something terrible is coming.

1,395 posted on 05/06/2012 10:39:04 AM PDT by Waryone (Remember your ABCS (anybody but commie socialists) = ABM (anybody but Mitt), ABO (anybody but Obama))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1369 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
"But if that extremely unlikely event should occur, I don't think any of the contenders would be a good choice. Has to be someone else that hasn't been tarred by other Republicans. He/she will get tarred enough by the media."

Romney has been tarred by other Republicans.

The media will tar anyone the Republicans nominate.

Gingrich would be tarred with exceptional venom by the media, but he has the advantage of having had every possible misstep and fault already exposed ad nauseam and of having learned to game the system with expertise.

"But, if Romney is the candidate, and loses, the Republican party will likely go the way of the Whigs. But it might not matter, since a long dark age will likely descend on the Republic.. and the world."

Whether or not Romney be the candidate is beside the point. It makes no difference who the Republican candidate is, the dark scenario you describe still holds.

When I spoke of a long dark age, I was fully aware of its terrible meaning. Intentionally I left the words long and dark unmodified.

1,396 posted on 05/06/2012 10:43:59 AM PDT by Savage Beast ("You can, in fact must, shout fire in a crowded theatre. It just has to be the truth. " J. Goldberg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1362 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
Vide supra. This is why I insist that full support must be given to whoever the Republican candidate is, including Romney.
1,397 posted on 05/06/2012 10:46:35 AM PDT by Savage Beast ("You can, in fact must, shout fire in a crowded theatre. It just has to be the truth. " J. Goldberg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1362 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut

Hmmmmmmmmmmm, let’s try this comparison:

The goons show up on your doorstep one day and demand to thoroughly search your premises for firearms and ammo.

They find your stash and summarily (a) confiscate ALL your firearms and ammo and (b) execute you with one well placed shot to the head. They leave the rest of your possessions and memebers of your family intact.

They find your stash and (a)force you to watch while they proceed to leisurely rape and kill all the female members of your family and torture, (b) dismember and kill all the male members of your family, (c) confiscate ALL of your worldly possessions and then (d) maybe or maybe not kill you slowly as well.

I think it’s safe to say that both are evil acts.

I think most folks would also agree that #1 is the lesser of the two evils.

1,398 posted on 05/06/2012 11:33:27 AM PDT by CanuckYank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 484 | View Replies]

To: Persevero

I’m talking about the RNC, who are absolutely terrified of Sarah because she’d generate enough public pressure to get the Republicans holding public office to get off their asses and do something. They’d rather sit in lame-duck status with nothing to do but fly around the country, golf, and stay in hotel suites at govt. expense. “Sorry, can’t draft any legislation with a Demo as president, he’ll just veto it.” The current status quo is the perfect excuse to sit and do nothing, which they are happily doing.

She chose not to run because the fix was in for Romney ever since he stepped aside for McCain in ‘08. Running as an independent is a victory for Obama.

1,399 posted on 05/06/2012 11:58:53 AM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (Liberalism is a social disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1116 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Thanks Jim. I knew that ultimately you would head off the “meltdown” predicted by the trolls, and regather the troops for the next battle.

F U B O !

1,400 posted on 05/06/2012 12:09:43 PM PDT by editor-surveyor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,361-1,3801,381-1,4001,401-1,420 ... 1,521-1,525 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson