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.
I thought you’d be as interested in this as I was:
http://www.venomdoc.com/LD50/ld50sc.html
and then go to the discussion page:
http://www.venomdoc.com/LD50/LD50men.html
As near as I can figure, the numbers in the chart represent the size of dose that is fatal with a lab mouse. Then they construct the chart.
I went to subcutaneous, because that seems to cover the majority of bites.
Good comment, Kevin...fun research. :>)
Coliform:
OK so it sounds like you want Obama to win, right?
The way things are going, unfortunately it looks like there are ONLY two choices: Obutthole or Mittens.
If you HAD to cast your vote today, which would you choose? Honest answer, please. Abstention is NOT an option.
Yep, you will fit right in there.
They have several there who have bashed me so I have claimed my name there and informed JR of it. I do not post there.
However, I have made it clear in my posts on FR that those who denigrate FR and JR there and still continue to post on FR are hypocrites.
But often escape is not possible, so most snakes hold their ground, ready to defend themselves. A difference between copperheads and the other species appears in the next phase, when they are approached. Most rattlesnakes vibrate their tails and most cottonmouths sit with mouth open when a human comes near. Even some non-venomous snakes vibrate their tails. These displays are merely warnings not to tread on them. They are not aggressive attack measures. The snakes just want us to leave them alone.So far, the dozens of cottonmouths Dr. Gibbons stood beside have made threat displays but have not bitten the researcher's boot. The same has been true for canebrake rattlesnakes although too few have been tested to declare that they are as passive as cottonmouths.
The exciting news (at least for the researchers) is that the copperhead is different from the others. Most copperheads tested have struck out immediately when they felt threatened.
This behavior explains why more people receive legitimate snakebites from copperheads than from any other species of venomous snake in North America. Still to be investigated is another aspect of copperhead bites: many are not serious enough to require more than minor medical treatment. This may be so not only because the venom of a copperhead is significantly less potent than that of rattlesnakes or cottonmouths, but also because they seldom inject much venom.
The copperhead's initial threat display is to strike. It lashes out at an enemy as a warning. If the enemy is close enough, the fangs may penetrate the skin. However, because this is a threat display, not an attempt to kill, the snake injects little venom. A copperhead has no intention of wasting valuable venom if it can scare away the menace with a minor bite.
A question for the Mayor of Realville:
If Obama could really end elections and rule as an unelected dictator, why would he choose to wait until after this November?
If I voted for either romney or obama, i’d face my Lord, my Judge one day who could ask me: “If you sought the protection of those I created in their home the womb, why did you vote for a man who promoted the womb’s invasion?” In mitt’s case, my Lord could also ask me — were I to vote for him — “Since you knew Romney to be one who lusted for power as My rival ‘wannabe god,’ why would you elevate a human idol via your vote?”
Very interesting. Thank you for posting that research. After I made my post, I began to research as well to make sure I was right, but quickly got distracted by something else. I have just always heard that copperheads are less dangerous. Perhaps it’s just that they inject less venom. It’s interesting that the venom chart and the article you posted contradict one another. The chart shows the copperhead as having more potent venom than the rattler while the article says the opposite. Anyway, I’m not happy about our choices either, but I will do whatever is necessary to end the national nightmare that is Barack Obama.
Most of the charts I looked at had the copperhead venom with less lethality than most rattlesnakes.
Some rattlesnakes, though, were pretty high: the green mojave rattlesnake and the eastern diamondback were far higher than the copperhead.
The danger of the copperhead, as opposed to a rattlesnake or a moccasin, is that those two give a warning, a rattle or a white-mouth display, but the copperhead’s warning is an initial strike that’s supposed to use less venom than any subsequent strikes.
If oboma wins in November, he will come down hard on We the People, and he will become dictator for life..we will not longer have choices...up to now, how many freedoms have been taken from us by oboma, how many of his dictates have been shoved down our throats? Look to other communist countries like Korea, China, Cuba...what freedoms do they have..what is the quality of the life that they live? We both know the answer to those questions.
oboma is capable of anything..he follows the Saul Alinsky rules of the road for commies. You never trust a communist/socialist/marxist/revolutionary/sharia law loving thug...you vote them out while you still the the chance. Or the alternative will be deadly for the Constitution, our liberty and freedom, our very lives.
Too bad the stoopid Republicans tried to ram “read my lips” Bush down our throats then. Now it’s Willard. Another loser. When will they learn????
So why are there only two choices? Does your state limit who the voter can choose to two? (Not voting is a choice, by the way.)
-—”If I voted for either romney or obama, i’d face my Lord, my Judge one day who could ask me: “If you sought the protection of those I created in their home the womb, why did you vote for a man who promoted the womb’s invasion?” “
___________________________________
Fair enough, I see your point and thank you for answering in a civil manner.
So I guess your answer is Abstention, which I said is not an option because hard choices must be made.
In reality, either way you look at it there are two choices - Obama vs. Mittens and:
—One candidate is fully pro-abortion and,
—One candidate says he’s pro-life but was pro-abortion in the past.
You are currently assuming Romney is lying about his alleged “pro-life position” — purely based on his historical record 15-20 years ago.
Do you see that Obama as Marxist-in-chief is far less business-friendly than his opponent and that his marxist cronies could destroy our economy.
As you know, a vote for Obama could result in Armageddon for the world as we know it in the next 4 years with collapse of societies, violence, rape, pestilence.
A Romney vote might mean pro-choice, pro-gay politics (we don’t know this for sure, but it’s indeed possible), but at least has a chance of rescuing capitalism and liberty in the world and perhaps could avoid the coming Obamageddon.
Given the foregoing, do you REALLY think the Creator would make a shallow judgment of you for voting for a closet pro-choice candidate if that vote makes the difference between saving the world for humanity??
I believe, that, my friend, is the true argument. There are just too many other things at stake for our world and our society to allow the ruthless Obama Regime to destroy America for 4 more years.
Do you really believe God doesn’t recognize that fact, too?
Or do you just think you would be punished for voting for a LIKELY (not certain, but likely) pro-gay, pro-abortion candidate, irrespective of the fact that that vote could save our economy and our freedom in other regards?
I guess I view God as having a better worldview than that.
Speaking of which, think of the wide difference between Romney and Obeyme on Islamofascism! Obama’s coziness with Islamofascists alone, might bring about the world’s downfall before his Marxist plans do! Romney is clearly not flip-flopping on his dislike for Islamofascism.
I get it. You don’t get it. Some of us have principles and refuse to vote for abortion supporting, gun grabbing socialists. Romney will destroy conservatism and push to the GOP further to the left. That is more dangerous for this country than anything Zero can accomplish while held in check by a GOP congress.
Vote for him...I don’t care. I’m not and neither will most of the conservatives in Ohio.
No, it seems to me that if Obama could and would become a dictator and rule without elections, he wouldn’t have any reason to take a chance on this election. And, it really sounds like the Realville you’re living in will be full of terror for you no matter what happens in this election.
God can relieve you of the crippling fears that unnecessarily plague you. You need only ask for strength and clarity.
Good luck.
Because he's not a Republican. He's a faggot. He belongs in the dem party.
Ah, classy reparté. How can I compete?
Your momma...
You can't. If you could, you'd be out canvassing neighborhoods and getting the word out for Virgil Goode, but instead you've surrendered all frenchfrog-like and now all you have to look forward to is selling your soul to the daisy-chained-duo, ying and ying, mitt and obie.
No, I think “you momma...” is pretty close competitively to “he’s a faggot.”
As for campaigning for Virgil, I believe the primary mission in this election is to remove the Obama regime from power. And, helping Virgil is contrary to this mission.
We disagree. But I don’t cede any high ground - on morals or principles - to those whose actions to the extent they are successful result in Obama’s re-election.
I wouldn’t be as silly as to say you’ve sold your soul, but I wouldn’t grant any religious benefit to it either.
Sorry to be late to the dance. Looks like all the usual folks are here.
Bow to your partner, bow to your own....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIXf1A1erX4
“That’s an idiotic and irresponsible statement. Obama has been a disaster for conservative policies on so many levels, it will decades to clean up what Obama wrought, and I believe in fact that we will never be able to undo some of Obama’s damage from 4 years. 8 years?!?!”
And willard will somehow help conservative policies?
This election is a disaster for conservatives. We lost the election the day Sarah decided not to run, and now we’re debating which left wing candidate would do less harm? It’s a suckers game and I’m done playing it. I’m going to vote for the conservative candidate I agree with. And that just happens to be a 3rd party candidate. All the better that I live in Virginia and will have a good amount of company.
“Hint: 3-4 SC judges.”
David Souter, Sandra O’Connor, and John Roberts? Gee. Those were a real prize for conservatives. So we should vote for a candidate that will give us a few more?
“We can’t survive another 4 years of O. And if Obama is elected again we probably won’t survive another four years!”
Say what? Virginia will still be here, the Federal government will still be broke, the political class will still be ignoring the Constitution, and our liberties will be further eroded. How would that be all that significantly different under willard? Other than we’d have to listen to a bunch of gop hacks tell us it’s raining while they urinate on our backs.
If you assume as I do that The Divorce is probably coming whether we like it or not, then which of these candidates win is not all that important. The real contests of importance will be at the state and local level.
Romney is many things - a liberal, effeminate, metro-sexual but homosexual - nope.
“Goode and anyone planning to cast a vote for him are co-conspirators with Obama.”
Well then using that logic it could also be said that those who are planning to vote for willard are collaborators with abortionists and gun grabbers.
It cuts both ways.
“Moronic. Perot gave Clinton the presidency.”
Actually George HW Bush did.
Awesome. I want Bugs as campaign manager!
-—”There are more than two choices. I am sorry you live in a state that is so limiting in its choices. “
No, given that Romney has the R-nomination in the bag, there really are only TWO REALISTIC choices.
Yes, there are independents, libertarians, green party candidates and communist candidates that we could vote for, but the reality is: A vote for them is wasting an anti-Obama vote.
From your perspective, this should boil down to a lesser of two evils. I see Obama as extremely evil and anti-freedom.
The Romney position recently on abortion is mixed. You’ve got articles like this that don’t support your belief that “Romney is now a supporter of abortion.” At least this is what he says currently:
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/06/29/romney-pounds-pro-life-themes-against-abortion-obama/
“It’s both amazing and appalling over how many former “nose-holders” are now full-throated Romneyites.”
There has always been a sort of twisted co-dependency relationship going on between conservatives and the gop. The gop will screw conservatives over 364 days out of the year. But should you suggest voting for an actual conservative running on a third party ticket, you’ll see the wide eyes and foaming at the mouth rage that is usually only seen in rabid animals.
Nope. Debunked every which way there can be a debunking.
“Yeah, but they’re fun to play with once in a while...”
The “conservative” willard apologists are fun to play with as well.
“Third party candidates: Cutting off your nose to spite your face.”
Major party candidates: selling your soul cheap.
“Yes, prove what a conservative you are by voting for the guy who was a Democrat representative during Clinton’s second term.”
So by your logic, we should never, ever vote for someone who was a former democrat or the head of a labor union.
Someone like...Ronald Reagan perhaps?
-—”The people in those states who waste their Romney votes should discuss whether the consequences of a second [Obama] term can ever be undone by our descendents.”
Well said. I don’t see how else to view it that not-voting is throwing away a vote that could unseat King Obama. Not voting IS A VOTE FOR OBAMA. What’s with these people??
Romney’s not the ideal candidate by any means, but if there are any conservatives who would rather have Obutthole in office for 4 more disastrous years, they must not find Obutthole so objectionable after all.
There’s a certain stubborness I’m seeing where these people obviously aren’t asking themselves some hard questions (e.g. how would they REALLY feel if Obutthole is allowed to ravage this world as we know it.
For me, it’s unthinkable.
Good photoshops....but that one is awesome. Thanks!
Huh?
I live in California I get to vote for anyone one I want, since BHO has already bought this state.
Where do you live that the vote is so close that if you don’t vote for the liberal R over the liberal D the liberal D will win?
“Major party candidates: selling your soul cheap.”
That is not an instance of a Faustian bargain.
So you’re indicating that your vote is meaningless anyway?
In 1992 when I wasn’t paying attention to the reality of Politics, I Voted for Perot.
I will not make the Third Party Candidate mistake again.
Yep. So I could vote for a banna slug it wouldn’t matter, so I will vote or not vote for president.....if I choose to vote for president it will NOT be BHO or Romney.
CA will go for Odumpo. We have to focus on the rest of the ballot and get as many conservatives elected as possible.
-—”Romney is now a supporter of abortion.”
You’ve got the head of the pro-life Susan B Anthony anti-abortion group throwing her support to Romney. From what I gather, he’s NOT a supporter of abortion.
Where do you get your information?
Actually I think Obama is an ignorant stooge. It’s the people he surrounds himself with and puts in charge of major agencies that are even more dangerous. The election is Obama vs Romney and I think Romney will surround himself with much less dangerous people, although Obama is bad enough. A lot of harm can be done in 4 years of an administration that doesn’t have to care about reelection and is filled with a bunch of Communists.
good. then let’s be on the lookout for targets of opportunity. to be effective, we need to unify the conservative vote in blue states for *one* conservative candidate (write-in or official). if anyone knows goode or is in his district maybe they can get his opinion. in the meantime, congressional districts are as good a place to start as anywhere. i’ll forward the idea to the independent, conservative congressional candidate i’ve been working for in ca (chris pareja) and see what he has to say about it.
if you’re going to keep a ping list, please add me to it.
Virgil has been a democrat, independent, republican and latest latest party incarnation. I think he has a good shot at losing three in three different parties, or maybe four in four. As far as I know that would make him the modern record holder...
You lost me there .. your post is beyond confusing.
But there is a simple organizing principle for how to vote in November: cast your vote in such a way as to minimize the probability of a second term for Obama!
That's it. No need for principles. Principles in the voting booth are for children. No need for God (well, except for existence)!
If you think of it that way, you will recognize there is no room for third parties!!!
“That is not an instance of a Faustian bargain.”
You’re right: Faust got something in return.
“The election is Obama vs Romney and I think Romney will surround himself with much less dangerous people, although Obama is bad enough.”
Maybe, maybe not. I expect that willard will surround himself with people who will do as much or more lasting damage, just over a longer time horizon. And ultimately, if you view the future as including some fairly significant structural shifts in how parts of the country are governed, then which of these guys win is of less consequence.
Texas and Arizona are more going to determine the course of things at this point.
He became a Republican in what, 2000? Do you honestly think the Democrat party in the 90’s is similar to the party Reagan belonged to? Yet Virgie couldn’t figure out he was playing for the bad guys? Or was it just politically expedient to be a Democrat until it was politically expedient to be a Republican. Yeah, there’s the pinnacle of virtue you need to waste your vote on. What a joke.
Please be quiet and drink the CP-e Kool-Aid...
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.