He says he's not running so focus on something that's positive..........
Ever consider why the democrats never appear to have this infighting? That's because they're laughing at us............
Welcome to the Republican party.....
Posted on 08/27/2014 4:30:53 AM PDT by servo1969
Excellent example; I would add that a vote for the Democrat is to endorse the the “greatest enemy to press freedom in a generation.”
I would much rather have a far left wing liberal running to the left of Hillary as an independent or third-party candidate. Bill Clinton got elected both times because of Perot. This time I want the liberals to split their votes.
We have to win the long game if we are going to have a chance of saving this country. That means (1) taking over the Senate in 2014, (2) electing a conservative President and holding on to the House and Senate in 2016, and (3) replacing RINOs with conservatives in 2018. If we cannot accomplish both (1) and (2) then the country will be destroyed before we can accomplish (3).
Bill Clinton got elected because the liberal republican raised taxes and banned scary guns.
And the liberal republicans want to blame anyone and anything for that loss besides their liberalism.
That's what liberals do.
I hope the liberal republicans don't get control of the Senate in 2014. The damage they do is bad enough as the minority.
Remember, if it wasn't for the liberal republican leadership in the senate ensuring Reid got his critical cloture votes, the liberal agenda would be stalled.
/johnny
You are being warned before 2016: Run Romney and you will lose.
Period.
Wake up and smell the coffee.
/johnny
/johnny
JRF: Bill Clinton got elected because the liberal republican raised taxes and banned scary guns.
Bubba, JRF is exactly correct.
However, Bubba, Bill Clinton got denied a mandate both times because of Perot. Say that, and you also will be exactly correct.
If Clinton had ever won with a majority of Americans behind him, the Republican Revolution may never have happened and Hillary might well be more powerful now. But because of Perot, the WORLD KNOWS that really, most Americans rejected Clinton at the ballot box BOTH TIMES.
Can you believe all the people who actually believe in the fantasy of voting "against"?
It just boggles the mind. The Democrat party isn't the only one with LIVs.
/johnny
You aren't voting "for a pro-abortion, pro-amnesty, gun-control, socialized medicine, big government liberal," you're voting AGAINST a Democrat pro-abortion, pro-amnesty, gun-control, socialized medicine, big government liberal!!!
Why can't you get that through your thick head??? You're thinking in terms of what you're voting for, when what you SHOULD be doing is thinking in terms of what you're actually voting against!!!
Of course you get harassed! You're obviously not willing to vote against Obama or Hillary or any of them!!! *ducking*
He says he's not running so focus on something that's positive..........
Ever consider why the democrats never appear to have this infighting? That's because they're laughing at us............
Welcome to the Republican party.....
I despise liberals. Especially liberal republicans.
I'm not a republican. I'm a conservative.
/johnny
Frightened sheeple being manipulated by their fears into voting for leftism, the very tyrant they fear. They voluntarily hand power to tyranny because their fear has made them stupid. Thank GOD enough Americans were too smart to fall for it in 2012. I hope even more are that smart in 2016, although clearly many here have not figured it out yet.
You think I'm a liberal republican? Why?
I just hope I come across as equally despising all liberal republicans. Because I do.
/johnny
FUMR
Go home, sit down, and SHUT UP.
I didn’t run Romney. By the time I finally got to vote in the primary in Texas he already had the nomination. My only choice was Romney or the Obamanation.
Given a choice between a Mormon RINO and a Muslim Marxist Socialist I picked the Mormon RINO. We would be a hellova lot better off right now if he had been elected.
He did about as well as your liberal choice.
We would be in the same place on abortion if Romney had won. No difference. Worse on amnesty, because the liberal republicans would have used Romney for cover to do the amnesty that they crave. Same thing with socialized medicine, liberal pubs would have used Romney as cover to enable the liberal agenda.
Things would be the same on gun-control. And Romney would have grown government without even a token fight from the pubs on the debt limit.
/johnny
There were plenty of other names on the primary ballot and I voted for one of them, but by the time we finally had our primary at the end of May Romney already had the nomination locked.
In the general election one of only two candidates is going to get elected, either the Democrat or the Republican. That is the reality of the situation. Hopefully it will not be a choice between the lesser of two evils but it may very well be. If so, I will vote for the lesser evil rather than simply give up and hope for a better choice in four years.
You passed on Mitt and you gave us Hussein. How does that responsibility taste?
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.