Posted on 11/27/2014 6:42:56 AM PST by Cheerio
If you run Jeb or Cristy, expect 8 years of Hillary!. And you will own it.
That is reality.
People won't vote for your liberal republican presidential candidate.
/johnny
“If you run Jeb or Cristy, expect 8 years of Hillary!. And you will own it.”
Nope. I don’t ‘own it’. The ones who vote for them in the primary own it. Good grief.
What you are doing is blaming the voter because they don't want to vote for your liberal candidate that you insist they vote for.
/johnny
I let you guys ‘own’ this thread for a while, but now it’s time for common sense.
“What you are doing is blaming the voter because they don’t want to vote for your liberal candidate that you insist they vote for.”
Well, let’s put it this way, if anyone owns this mess, it is the people who failed to vote for a conservative during the primary. The runners-up were the ones who didn’t vote against Obama.
I want liberal Republicans to be thrown out of the party.
And open primaries would be a thing of the past. But the GOP doesn't want that.
You can't vote 'against' anything. You can only vote for. And people weren't going to vote for a liberal candidate. Not Obama, not Romney.
Your time would be better spent fixing your party, instead of defending liberal republicans that have already lost.
That is common sense.
/johnny
And nobody ever won anything by voting "against" because THERE IS NO SUCH THING. When well-meaning Republicans voted "against" Obama by voting for Romney, they necessarily voted for the Republican Party to philosophically embrace the Democrat agenda on FIVE major fronts: government run health care, homosexual "rights," activist judges, the environmentalist agenda, and on-demand subsidized abortion. Romney's record CONFIRMS his functional Democrat status on those issues.
That is plain, simple truth that many Romney voters are unwilling/unable to accept. But it is a simple truth just the same. To compare Romney with the "imperfect allies" that helped Reagan win the Cold War, is extreme and deceitful rationalization.
I’d rather be in the frying pan than the fire.
McRomney is pretty rotten, I’ll give the non-voters that. We were correct in trying to find the ‘anti-Romney’.
But he would have been just as bad as Obama, right? /sarc
“You don’t think that people really get to vote for the candidate they want in the primary do you?”
This isn’t a new problem. Buckley once said that finding someone at random in the phone book would work better.
“But the GOP doesn’t want that.”
I’ve been calling for primary reform for a long time now.
“You can’t vote ‘against’ anything. You can only vote for.”
I vote against bad ideas all the time in life. Don’t you?
Diplomatically speaking, when Reagan voted against communism, he took what allies he could get. And it worked. It might not have been perfect, but that’s how nations survive.
“And people weren’t going to vote for a liberal candidate. Not Obama, not Romney.”
Unfortunately, people have bolted for far too long. That’s why were in our current mess. Eight years of Clinton thanks to Perot, and eight years of Obama thanks to you guys. That’s 16 years of tyranny.
“Your time would be better spent fixing your party, instead of defending liberal republicans that have already lost.”
It’s not my party any more than Afghanistan was Reagan’s nation.
That is common sense.
“And nobody ever won anything by voting “against” because THERE IS NO SUCH THING”
And Perot voters gave us Clinton. Got to hand it to you guys, you sure know how to lose.
I am ashamed to admit that I voted for Perot, by the way. At least I’m willing to admit my mistake.
Show me on a ballot where you can vote 'against'. You can't. You can only vote for.
People that didn't vote for your preferred candidate aren't to blame. You are, for allowing those unelectable candidates on the ticket.
You keep supporting liberal republican losers and attacking conservatives that won't vote for those liberals.
/johnny
Philosophically, what's the difference? How is being burnt in a sizzling frying pan any better than being burnt in open flame?
If one is going to use the pan-to-fire analogy, then it should be recognized that under the circumstances, it's best to turn the flame down if one can, and the ONLY way to do that if the flame is leftist tyranny, is to DEPRIVE leftists in either party of votes. When I voted third party in 2012, my vote served to WEAKEN the mandate of whichever leftist happened to win, Obama or Romney.
It was the only sensible option for a freedom-loving moral American who has a duty to vote. I have a DUTY to vote, so I cast my vote the ONLY WAY I COULD -- to weaken whichever leftist statist bastard, Romney or Obama, won.
I voted to decrease the fire and the heat under the pan. Folks who voted "against" Obama by voting for Romney, voted to keep the fire hot and leftist.
Rand Paul's immigration speech...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]
Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.
Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.
Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.
If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...
This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.
Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.
Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reformLatinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers...[Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie]
[but he's not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
“Show me on a ballot where you can vote ‘against’.”
You are mesmerized by your own sophistry. I said ‘ideas’. I vote against “bad ideas” every day. Should I buy beer today? I vote ‘No.’ And I don’t ‘hang out’ with drunks either. I vote against being their buddy and vote ‘for’ things that keep me away from them.
We diplomatically vote ‘for’ Thailand. That nation is evil BTW. But I wholeheartedly support Thailand as being an ally because communism is so much worse.
To be intellectually honest, how can you support Thailand being an ally? Would you rather ‘vote for’ change in Thailand even if the consequences of your demands would cause Vietnam to gobble them up as a result?
Too divided, we are also in danger of being gobbled up. We are in a position of strength and can campaign against Speaker Bonehead for being so lame. That’s much better than being controlled by a radical minority party. That’s what happened in Germany — too many anti-NAZIS were divided into ‘third parties’. And the same with Russian Rebels. Leninism was a radical minority with divided opposition too. Reagan said to negotiate from strength, not weakness. There’s no strength in a political group that loses.
Incidentally, McStain and McRomney both divided conservatives during the primaries. Both were ‘minority’ leaders which drove a wedge between us, causing us to squabble among ourselves. That’s how they ‘won’. And reforming the primary process is a genuine solution.
Lashing out at people for voting against Obama is part of the problem, not part of the solution. It’s harder to oppose human nature than it is to work as part of a team.
One thing’s for certain. McRomney sure kicked a hornet’s nest. He might as well forget running again.
Like I told sunkenciv, McRomney sure ‘blanked’ the pooch on this. Look at all of these posts! Stick a fork in him, he’s ‘done’.
He’ll pull in votes from slightly left wackadoodles who liked the idea of some of Zero’s policies, until the actual implementation.
Art, you may as well talk to a tree stump as people like that.
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.