Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mitt Romney: I Won't Run
TruthRevolt.org ^ | 8-26-2014 | Jeff Dunetz

Posted on 08/27/2014 4:30:53 AM PDT by servo1969

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last
To: dfwgator

No, We the People are the Washington Generals. The Two Parties are the Globetrotters.


61 posted on 08/27/2014 6:56:13 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

No, the idea of the Washington Generals is to give the illusion of a competitive basketball game. Just like the Republicans are there to give off the impression that there are really two parties in Washington.


62 posted on 08/27/2014 6:57:55 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Either way, we lose...and they win...Big.


63 posted on 08/27/2014 7:02:59 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: From The Deer Stand

We can start with the worst, and that would be Romney.

At what point do you realize that a guy with more than 20 years in elective politics, with a single win of less than 50% and being driven from that office with 34% approval, and having dominated and destroyed two presidential election cycles, is the man to avoid at all costs, and to drive away from active GOP politics?


64 posted on 08/27/2014 7:03:10 AM PDT by ansel12 (LEGAL immigrants, 30 million 1980-2012, continues to remake the nation's electorate for democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane
because they're not 'pure' enough.

That's a lie spread by GOP-E operatives. Romney didn't even match his own party platform on abortion, amnesty, 2nd amendment, socialized medicine, or big government.

That ain't about purity, that's about Romney being a flat-out liberal.

The liberal republicans must be politically destroyed and never win another election.

/johnny

65 posted on 08/27/2014 7:08:37 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: glorgau

Romney didn’t fight to win the first time. Why would he not fight to lose again. Either the fraud is addressed or we’re boiled like a frog.


66 posted on 08/27/2014 7:46:57 AM PDT by mcshot (Kenya now says 0 or Soebarkah born in U.S..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: servo1969

Be strong, Willard. Tell Ann no this time. You don’t need to get stomped again.


67 posted on 08/27/2014 7:49:02 AM PDT by Tau Food (Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: servo1969

I listened to the interview yesterday, mostly because I don’t have anything better to listen between Rush and Levin. I was upset by how much Hugh was begging, begging him to run. Every time he talks to Romney he has a tingle up his leg like Chris Matthews, but this was by far the worst, least transparent attempt.
I was mad, but then I got absolutely furious this radio idiot blamed anti Mormon bigotry for his losing in 2012. People did not turn out in 2012 because they were channeling Hillary “what difference would it make?” Clinton. We hunger for a clear conservative choice, not a severe conservative.
We are tired of the GOP fighting with rabid abandon against TEA party and conservative candidates during the primary and once that is over running to jump in the lap and lick the face of their real opponents trying desperately to get the press to scratch heir ear just once. I firmly believe people will not be showing up in droves come November to choose between 60% liberal and 95% liberal. Again what difference at this point does it make? Or will it be more anti-Mormon bigotry?

Hugh Hewitt. I’ve been listening since 2003. That was the last time I’m tuning in.


68 posted on 08/27/2014 8:03:46 AM PDT by McCloud-Strife ( USA 1776-2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

This sounds like mittens is going to get behind Perry. Paul Ryan, a mere representative, who can’t sell his book, is a non-starter.


69 posted on 08/27/2014 8:15:01 AM PDT by txhurl (2014: Stunned Voters do Stunning Things!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: servo1969

An extraordinarily sensible decision by the Governor.


70 posted on 08/27/2014 10:25:20 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: servo1969

If Romney actually means this, it’s the best thing he’s done in his career. I’ll be happier when he ages out of the running, but I approve of his patriotic decision.


71 posted on 08/27/2014 10:32:39 AM PDT by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dead
I’m glad he’s not running, but Romney is a good dude.

Romney was close to my last choice for the Republican nomination, but we would be infinitely better off with President Romney than we are with President Obamanation.

For anyone who says that they will refuse to vote if [Insert Name Here] gets the Republican nomination in 2016, keep in mind that in 2016 Justices Scalia and Kennedy will turn 80 and Justice Thomas will turn 68. If Hillary gets to fill any or all of their seats, then far left wing liberals will be ruling from the bench for the next generation.

The Constitution says whatever 5 out of 9 Supreme Court Justices say it says. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

72 posted on 08/27/2014 12:12:27 PM PDT by Bubba_Leroy (The Obamanation Continues)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: glorgau; Patton@Bastogne
Of course, it is Romney saying it, so that could change.

LOLOLOL!!! How very true!

73 posted on 08/27/2014 12:34:32 PM PDT by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
So you preferred Obama?

So Saca, you prefer to vote for surrendering the Republican party to leftism?

Take responsibility for what you're willing to vote FOR. When you try to take responsibility for voting "against," you are taking responsibility for an imaginary action where intent and material results are very different.

Had Romney won and right now Obama was long forgotten and we were seeing a Republican administration advance nationalized health care, the homosexual agenda, the environmentalist agenda, activist judges, abortion, and gun control -- ALL positions Romney has embraced -- would you be here taking responsibility for having voted for it?

Because if you voted "against" Obama by voting for Romney, you voted for all of that.

Take responsibility for what you are willing to vote FOR, please.

74 posted on 08/27/2014 12:42:46 PM PDT by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: logic101.net; All
With only one moderate running that is how we got stuck with Mcain and with Romney.

Well, that, yeah, and also by giving the moderate du jour, whichever dominated in the early primaries, an automatic heavy lead, as the early primaries are decided by left-leaning states. By the time the primary gets to my state, my vote is between two turds. What a charade.

The Republican "brand" is a bad joke in America across informed and LIV territory. It almost doesn't matter who gets the nomination, but most likely, a Democrat Lite Republican will get it.

Republican and Democrat are two brands of one product: heavier government. The GOP tries to craft a prettier brand. Americans are getting restless, although MSM is deaf to it, for a new PRODUCT.

I pray that in the 2016 presidential election, a politically polished and sparkling limited government Christian conservative runs "independent," or so-called "third" party and has at least as good success as Perot. He made it so no matter which liberal candidate won, it would have been on a plurality, meaning liberalism lost. Clinton was weakened because of it. Would the Republican Revolution have happened otherwise?

The Republican party should by rights be the limited government party. The battle of introducing a new party or having the Republican party take the mantle of being the limited government party, will happen in Congress.

In the presidential race, if a Democrat-Lite Republican wins, republicans in Congress will move left. If he loses, limited government Republicans will be just that much stronger in Congress.

75 posted on 08/27/2014 1:10:03 PM PDT by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: steelwheels
The odds of the perfect nominee ...

*shaking head*

The reason for Romney's defeat still eludes you.

Please. Take responsibility for what you vote FOR. I'm not asking for a "perfect" candidate. I'm asking for a candidate who will act to advance my interests in limiting government. Romney's entire track record was to advance government everywhere. And in your mind, I passed on Romney because I would only settle for "perfection."

I passed on Romney because I know that if whatever I vote for WINS, I'll be responsible.

76 posted on 08/27/2014 1:17:40 PM PDT by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane
...they're not 'pure' enough ...

You are blind to reality. The "pure" factor is your own emotional defensiveness in assigning motive.

I will vote for a candidate based on what he says he will do if he WINS.

You will vote for a candidate based on what you fear will happen if he loses.

I refuse to vote for a candidate who has a record of advancing government intrusion on five major levels, moral, material, financial, legal, and medical.

I'm such a purist ... I actually want to vote for something along the lines of ... well, better food, and you are outraged because voting for garbage was "beneath" me I am such a purist!

77 posted on 08/27/2014 1:29:59 PM PDT by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
The liberal republicans must be politically destroyed and never win another election.

Amen.

Pure, hard, cold, truth.

78 posted on 08/27/2014 1:31:52 PM PDT by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Bubba_Leroy
Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Wise advice.

You know, Bubba, it's so much smarter to vote based on what you fear will happen if your guy loses.

I mean, how smart can it be to actually vote based on what will happen if your guy wins? I mean, really, that's no way to vote!

*rolls eyes*

And hey! Did you know that you don't have to vote for leftism, you can vote against it instead, simply by voting Republican! Doesn't matter who the Republican candidate is!

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Of the mirror, Bubba!

79 posted on 08/27/2014 1:43:03 PM PDT by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Finny
In November 2016, you will have 4 choices:

1. Vote for whoever the Democrat is, which is a guaranteed vote for 4 more years of confiscatory taxes and socialist redistribution of assets, 4 more years of socialist regulations killing what is left of the economy, 4 more years of open borders and amnesty for an endless stream of illegal aliens, and 30 more years of far left wing judges ruling from the bench.

2. Vote for whoever the Republican is, which is at least a possible vote for something other than 4 more years of confiscatory taxes and socialist redistribution of assets, 4 more years of socialist regulations killing what is left of the economy, 4 more years of open borders and amnesty for an endless stream of illegal aliens, and 30 more years of far left wing judges ruling from the bench.

3. Vote for one of the third party candidates who have no possibility of getting elected, which is the same as #4 below.

4. Don't vote, so you can complain about whoever gets elected without taking any responsibility for it.

Between Hillary and anyone even slightly to the right of Hillary, I am voting for anyone even slightly to the right of Hillary. I hope and pray that I will have the opportunity to vote for someone far to the right of Hillary (and will do whatever I can during the primaries to have that opportunity), but in the general election you generally have to hold your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils. Or you can simply give up and allow the greater of the two evils to take over.

80 posted on 08/27/2014 2:42:57 PM PDT by Bubba_Leroy (The Obamanation Continues)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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