Posted on 09/26/2014 3:51:06 AM PDT by markomalley
With the mid-term elections weeks away, many conservatives are confronting a difficult choice. Assuming there are no solid conservatives on the ballot, do we vote for establishment candidates? Or not vote at all?
The reasons why some conservatives are on the fence or planning not to vote are well known. (And Democrats are loving every minute of it!)
I share these frustrations.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
“You nor any other person will NEVER CHANGE ANYTHING BY NOT VOTING, PERIOD.”
Actually nothing will ever change if we keep letting the RINO establishment under cut the Conservative base, yet support their guy any way. They’ll just keep it up cycle after cycle.
I actually plugged my nose and voted for Romney in 2012; but he was the last RINO. The party establishments open warfare on the Tea Party has soured me to the point where I won’t support them. Mississippi was the last straw for me; the GOP has to earn my vote back.
Well, you get points for imaginative blaming, I suppose. Perhaps there will be a plague of locusts if the R doesn’t win in 2016? Or is that reserved for if the GOP fails to take the senate?
I’m a bit surprised that you make the “lesser of two evils” argument in the same paragraph with proclaiming God’s judgment for all those that don’t vote Republican. As if God has in any way said that the supporting lesser of two evils is a righteous position.
It is now officially humorous.
None of those comments deserve an answer due to the incoherent thoughts that created them.
It’s too late to change the Republican candidates or the nation’s plunge into the NWO. So wallow in your arguments and whining....you have missed the boat.
Vote for the candidates you think are conservative and skip the races with the RINO’s is the best thing we can do
“None of those comments deserve an answer due to the incoherent thoughts that created them.”
Yet you responded anyway.
It is starting to sound like the Monty Python Spam skit.
W convinced me that voting for a statist is almost always a bad idea. Perhaps if Senate leadership were conservative I might be tempted to vote for a statist R, but Senate leadership is quite progressive. So forget about it.
That is exactly right - What you vote *FOR* is what you will get.Until we ALL stop voting for statists, statists will remain. And since both parties are statist, there is no opposition to statism, which is why it grows. It is unopposed.
http://patriotupdate.com/2014/09/isis-using-weapons-obama-gave-syrian-rebels/
Please spend time trying to promote an answer and quit picking fights....that’s more productive.
“Please spend time trying to promote an answer and quit picking fights....that’s more productive.”
I’ve been promoting an answer... try to comprehend. If you want to be an establishment tool; that’s your problem.
As for picking a fight...I’m not the condemning people to hell for how they did or did not vote in a particular election. Your sanctimony is wearing thin now.
“MY people perish for lack of knowledge” quote from Bible.
Have a nice day.
“MY people perish for lack of knowledge” quote from Bible.
Have a nice day.
It isn’t as simple as that. We have to gain control of the Senate, even if Thad Cochran is one of them. We can’t do it all at once. We’ll get one this time, one next time. I have to make an effort to defeat the Democrats. They are worse than the Mississippi RINOs., Karl Rove, and McConnell.
Gosh, it is difficult but it has to be done.
You see this thing very differently from me. I see traitors as the larger threat. Far worse than an enemy, who can be consistently counted on to behave like an enemy.
When your so called "Allies" stab you in the back, the damage is generally worse than that from an enemy.
I have far more animosity towards traitors than I do enemies. Allowing traitors to remain in your midst unharmed and unaccountable is the height of folly in my opinion.
Furthermore, I see little evidence that they would run the Senate any differently from the Democrats.
I think our disagreement on difference of opinions has run its course.
You have a nice day also.
“Have you not been noticing that the Republicans are pushing Amnesty as hard if not harder than the Democrats?”
Glass half empty.
Republicans in House repeatedly block amnesty.
Glass half full.
“Pardon? BLOCKED? Sorry, they tabled the discussion so they could bring it up over and over until it passes (aka biding their time).”
Glass half empty. Since the leaders failed to lead the GOP, I should sabotage the GOP? What signal would that be? Obama gets elected twice and gets away with it. Wow. What a ‘stern’ message.
I’m defending men like Gomert. When Gomert says to sit it out, or when Cruz says to sit it out, then I’ll consider the validity of rebelling.
“The Republicans stopped none of this. Clinton had a Democratic House and Senate for his first two years ...”
First off, Dick Morris had to convince Clinton that it was pointless to push for more spending, that he might as well join the winning side and steal credit.
... Secondly ....
... Prior to the Newt Revolution ....
Bluedog democrats helped republicans, and Clinton either drove the blue dogs into the GOP our out of politics. That’s neither here nor there. It was republican pressure that drove the spending restraints.
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.