Posted on 07/24/2012 6:28:39 PM PDT by xzins
While many on the right fear that Constitution Party presidential candidate Virgil Goode might just draw enough votes in his native Virginia to tip the Old Dominion’s 14 electoral votes from Mitt Romney to Barack Obama, the former six-term congressman made it clear he doesn’t care.
Goode, in fact, feels that “in many ways, for conservatives, it might be better to have Obama as president next year rather than Romney.”
The 65-year-old Goode spoke to Human Events last week as he and his supporters were in the process of gathering the 10,000 signatures they need to submit before the Aug. 24 deadline to qualify for Virginia’s November ballot. Founded by Conservative Caucus chairman and venerable conservative leader Howard Phillips, the Constitution Party is so far on the ballot in 17 states. Right now, Goode told us, the party is making attempts to secure ballot positions in other key states such as Arkansas, Alabama, Iowa, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania — the home state of the Constitution Party’s vice presidential nominee Jim Clymer.
But what has clearly set off alarm bells among conservatives lately is the scenario of Goode making the ballot in Virginia — where he won the 5th District U.S. House seat as a Democrat, Independent, and Republican from 1996 until his narrow defeat in 2008. Polls show the state, which Obama narrowly carried over John McCain in 2008, seesawing between the president and his Republican opponent in 2012. A just-completed Quinnipiac Poll showed Obama and Romney tied among likely Virginia voters, with each getting 44 percent — down from Obama’s 47 to 42 percent edge in the same poll in June.
Of particular concern to Republicans is Goode’s strength in his home turf: the Danville-Charlottesville area that he represented in Congress and previously as state senator. Four years after he lost the closest House race, the former congressman remains popular in his former turf. In addition, his hard-line stance on immigration, strong emphasis on limited government and focus on following the U.S. Constitution seems more likely to woo Virginians who would otherwise vote for Romney than those inclined to Obama.
“If I’m on the ballot in Virginia, I could cost Obama a lot of votes — possibly as much as or even more than Romney,” Goode told us, repeating a line that many third party contenders have taken over the years. “There are a lot of life-long Democrats (in the Fifth District) who say they’ll hold their nose and vote for Obama. But as the fellow in the filling station up the road told me, ‘I’m a Democrat, but if you’re on the ballot, Virgil, I’m voting for you.’”
We recalled how much as it was widely interpreted that Obama’s victory by a plurality over John McCain in North Carolina in 2008 was due to votes for Libertarian Bob Barr. We then pointed out to Goode that, regardless of his interpretation, pundits and political analysts would almost certainly interpret a narrow Obama win in Virginia to a strong Goode showing and asked how he would feel then.
“In many ways, for conservatives, it might be better to have Obama as president next year rather than Romney,” replied Goode, explaining that “it would be tougher to get through Congress some bad things under Obama than it would under Romney.”
“Take one for the team? Not me brother!”
Recalling how the president announced earlier this year his order not to pursue deportation of illegal aliens who complete high school or join the military, Goode noted that “Romney wouldn’t come out against the short-term amnesty. He was just going with the wind. If Obama were president, Republicans in Congress would oppose him on things like this on principle and almost unanimously. But if Romney were president, he would probably get it through (Congress).
“Remember how (Republican presidential candidate Rick) Santorum explained his vote for the No Child Left Behind (federal education program under George W. Bush) by saying: ‘Sometimes you’ve got take one for the team.’ That’s the argument Romney would use with Republicans to get them to pass things they normally wouldn’t oppose.”
As a Democrat in Congress in the 1990s, Goode pointed out that he voted a strong right-to-life line despite the fact that the Democratic leadership was in the other camp on the abortion issue. As a Republican from 2002-08, he said, “I was urged to ‘take one for the team’ and vote for CAFTA (a free trade agreement). I didn’t think it was good for the country and I opposed it. Sometimes you have to show some backbone.”
As a Democrat, Goode in the House scored unusually high ratings of 84 percent and 83 pe cent with the American Conservative Union; as an independent and later a Republican, his ratings went higher and his lifetime ACU average in 96 percent.
In carrying the banner of the Constitution Party, Virgil Goode is again not “taking one for the team.” Whether he qualifies for the Virginia ballot Aug. 24 and how well he does in his home state will surely be watched there, as well as by Republicans nationwide.
Thanks for the material to bolster arguments against the dangers posed by Romney.
I know this will not register for many. They are so desparate to choose someone other than Obama, that they will gladly back the GOP’s candidate who is a dangerous Trojan horse. The threat inherent in legitimizing Mormonism cannot be overstated. Mormonism and Islam are very similar. But whereas the west would be reluctant to accept many aspects of Islam, Mormonism stands poised to be mainlined given its pioneering past and social conservatism. These mask the age old lie of spiritual Babylon.
It does not matter one whit how high the stakes seem to people who only look at the short term. These groups see the things that made America worth preserving as being every bit as lost with Romney as they are with Obama - for one group due to Romney's record and for the other due to Romney's religion.
If you want their vote, you have to have a candidate that offers an America they believe in, and Romney does not.
In a situation where they perceive themselves to lose regardless, they will go with their principles. The tattered shreds that might go away slower with Romney (wealth) do not rate very with social conservatives.
Its a bit late in the game for you to be panicking. You should have panicked earlier and worked harder to derail Romney, if you think he needs the socon vote or the religious Christian vote.
As Christians see it, hard times bring people to the end of themselves and they may come to Christ.
As social conservatives see it, civil war may be needed to preserve our freedoms and whatever wake up call it takes is worth it.
Your fears are necessary fires to the groups Goode is getting votes from. You have zip to offer with Romney.
Bingo on all counts!
Romney is the RINOs' way of ensuring that future GoP voters get stripped of all key identity-voting issues other than the "R" they are sewing on voters' clothing...
Pro-abort? (The new Romneyites conclude, "Who cares? I've jettisoned the pre-born.")
And the GoP, which is already down to a record-low Major party % of just 29% of all registered voters, will scatter to the wind once Romney is nominated. There won't be a GoP "base" left after this election.
I know I'm leaving the GoP (for either Constitution Party or Independent status) once Romney is officially nominated...and I will advocate that others follow that exodus...
That will leave just two liberal parties trying to outliberal each other...just like we have two liberal candidates duking it out for the liberal & independent votes...while the conservatives get taken for a ride with two spiritually-drunk drivers at the wheel!
“Because he sees Romney as the THREAT to America, not Obama ..”
Romney and Obama are two side of the same coin...what’s pitifully left of the dollar.
The biggest threat to these United States is the two -party illusion the media continue to try to cram down the throats of We the People....7th century diaperheads wrapped with a fanbelt not-withstanding.
The consequences of bipartisan collusion to strip out the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the freedoms free men and free markets require to be productive are not solved with a Romney presidency. All a Romney presidency accomplishes is a kick of the can down the road a block farther than another , weakened Obama presidency can accomplish. That’s it. Period.
I appreciate your discernment; your wisdom; and your feedback.
Arrogance, fear, and insults. The whole Romney Republican package. By necessity, of course. It's all you've got.
Also...at least as far as FREEPERs go...if you subtract 100% of FREEPER votes (& give them to Virgil Goode) in the conservative states noted in the chart below, Romney would still win those states. Your pro-Romney vote -- unlike what Moonshot has said -- won't matter...in those states. The most that Romney moonbeam utilitarian arguments could even count is within swing states listed below: [ROMNEY STATES] Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, West Virginia, Indiana, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Arizona, Alaska, Georgia, South Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee."
Lady, you're an idiot. But I don't mind taking you to the woodshed again and again ... Goode is not on the ballot in even half of those 23 states. Not even one-third...
Firebrand, I have done nothing except politely disagree with you.
I have not questioned your integrity or your loyalty to our nation. I believe you see yourself between a rock and a hard place, and you think you have chosen the correct direction.
Instead, I would like to recruit you to a different direction and a different viewpoint.
Yeah, but they're fun to play with once in a while...
Thank you, EV.
The strongest case for Romney is the Supreme Court. With Romney, we might get good judges nominated and confirmed. With Obama, it is a guarantee we’ll get more terrible justices like Sotomayor and Kagan. Even if the GOP were to take the Senate, we have no reason to expect they’d vote down an Obama nominee.
If Obama wins and gets to replace Ginsburg or Breyer, that would be bad enough as he will have replaced the entire liberal bloc on the Sup Court, depriving us of a chance to really right the Court. If he gets to replace Scalia or Kennedy, then it’s over for any hope of a return to Constitutional jurisprudence.
The Second Amendment, for example, will be gutted of any meaning should Obama get to replace Scalia or Kennedy, both of whom voted the right way in the Heller and McDonald cases.
Has Goode challenged Obama to a presidential debate yet?
Not taking his calls?
We have no reason to believe that, certainly not from his legacy as a governor where less than one-third of his judicial appointees were Republican and a couple were even homosexual activists. If you haven't done so already, please Google the search terms "Romney" and "judicial appointments."
Would he be willing to show his good faith by identifying now who he will commit to appointing to the Supreme Court? Probably not.
Would he be willing to show his good faith by making a commitment now to appoint to the Supreme Court only men or women who have committed themselves to overturning Roe v. Wade? Probably not.
What commitments would he be willing to make now? Given his demonstrated flexibility through time, would any kind of commitment from him mean anything?
Did you know that he has said that he would appoint judges like Chief Justice Roberts?
Goode’s just another Democrat for Obama. Came a bit too late in life to “awaken” to the corruption in liberalism, if you ask me.
After the election, he will "have more flexibility" as he said to the Russians.
Goode had 3 and a half years to mount a credible campaign. Can’t even manage to get on the ballot in all 50 states.
He will not win the election.
Say all you want about the (D) and (R) candidates, they are both in the running.
Goode will not place in the top 2.
I even listed for you (see post #35) which states Goode is on the ballot...You mentioned those 23 conservative states -- that Goode "is...Not even" on "one-third" of those states...Last time I looked at math, 8 is OVER one-third of 23!
Those 8 conservative states? Tennessee, South Dakota, South Carolina, Mississippi, Missouri, Idaho, Wyoming, and Utah.
Stupid is as stupid does. (And you go 'round calling others an "idiot?")
Per the July 24, 2012 Roanoke Times: Former U.S. Rep. Virgil Goode, seeking the presidency as the Constitution Party nominee, on Monday turned in petitions at the North Carolina State Board of Elections. Goode will be a certified write-in candidate and votes for him will count in North Carolina if more than 500 petition signatures of qualified voters are confirmed. In his home state of Virginia, meanwhile, Goode said he already has submitted 14,375 signatures and aims to collect a few thousand more before the Aug. 24 deadline to get on the fall ballot. Virginia requires signatures of at least 10,000 qualified voters, including at least 400 from each of its 11 congressional districts. Goode said he's qualified for the ballot in 17 states but is aiming to win access in at least 40.
Virgil Goode says he's made it on 17 state ballots
So...let's "review," shall we?
1. Goode will easily get on the ballot in his home state of VA...making Virginia the 18th state (BTW, the one state I left off in post #35 is New Mexico, which became the 17th state for Goode to be on its ballot). The Goode Web site cited an in-state July poll which said his in-state numbers have jumped from 5% to 9%.
2. After VA becomes state #18, Goode plans on adding 22 more states to qualify for those state ballots = 40.
3. Per the Roanoke Times, even a state where he won't be on the ballot -- North Carolina -- he will still be a "certified write-in candidate" in that state.
4. If you live in Oregon, BOTH Goode and Romney will be on THAT ballot. Romney won't do any better than Goode in collecting Oregon electoral votes. If you tell people in OR not to vote for Goode 'cause he can't win, you might as well be consistent & say the same thing for Romney in that state...'cause neither will win there. Oregon voters, vote for Virgil Goode and send a message to those RINOs!!!!
5. Once Goode reaches the Aug. 24 deadline to get on the Virginia ballot, that'll place him on the ballot in 8 (count 'em 8) swing states (Ohio, Florida, Colorado, Virginia, Michigan, Wisconsin, New Mexico, and Nevada)...with more to come...Virgil Goode will be a force to reckon with for Romney...
6. Even in conservative states expected to go "Romney," when you look @ the high Evangelical voter base in those states where Goode already is on that ballot...Mississippi, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, etc. ... there could be a few surprises...FREEPERs: If you live in those states -- and if 100% of you FREEPERs voted for Goode, Obama still won't win those states! So vote for Goode!!!
so delusional....
Tom, are you on any other states???
I see your VP nominee is from Tennessee. Will you get on there?
With two REAL conservatives on the Florida ballot (Virgil Goode & Tom Hoefling), that will make the Florida race quite interesting!!!!
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.