[JRandomFreeper]

There are still those here on FR that support and defend Mitt Romney because he was somehow 'less liberal' or something.

/johnny

[Sirius Lee]

There are still those here on FR that support and defend Mitt Romney because he was somehow 'less liberal' or something.

Because the worst liberal Republicans, for example, romney, are still better than the best dem. One of rove's trolls on FR even said so, so it must be true.

You never see Republicans stab their base in the back, ever. Not a smidgen.

[TomGuy]

There are still those here on FR that support and defend Mitt Romney because he was somehow 'less liberal' or something.

And there are those who think voting Republican will solve everything. The ole 'voting for the same and expecting a different result' syndrome.

They still think the Republican party can be saved from the 'progressive' GOP-elites. The major difference between the 2 major parties is that the GOP moves leftward at a bit slower pace than the Dems.

[Walkingfeather]

Not swallowing not spitting, we are going Lauraine Bobbit on your capitulation. Brace yourself... this may pinch a little...

[wagglebee]

There are still those here on FR that support and defend Mitt Romney because he was somehow 'less liberal' or something.

Of course they've never managed to explain a single issue he was "less liberal" on.

[GingisK]

If he runs for President he will not get my vote. The GOP seems to be Democrats-Lite.

[antonico]

Is there a count anywhere of how mane offices Mitt Romney has run for, and his win-loss record from his attempts?

[Chuckster]

The old “$h!t sandwich”. The more bread you have the easier it is to swallow. And Mittens has plenty of bread.

[Monorprise]

The man is an insane loser i see that now. Its probably a good thing in retrospect that he managed to steal defeat from the jaws of victory 2 years ago.

[Uncle Miltie]

See tagline.

[campaignPete R-CT]

There are still those here on FR that support and defend Mitt Romney because he was somehow 'less liberal' or something.

There are still those here on FR that did little to defeat Mitt Romney in the '08 primaries and '12 primaries because they were somehow 'less interested' or something.

[GraceG]

[ There are still those here on FR that support and defend Mitt Romney because he was somehow ‘less liberal’ or something.

/johnny ]

I voted for that dumb sum’bitch in 2012, but I sure as hell don’t support of defend the lousy POS. I was voting against the other guy who was worse by an order of magnitude.

[Robert DeLong]

Nope, less evil and would have been less destructive. Plus it would have been easier to control Mitt whenever he started to wander down the liberal path. You always have to determine who is the better person to lead the country, even if that person is only slightly better. In most cases the candidate I wanted was unable to win the primaries causing me heartache to say the least. I then had to set aside my heartache and vote what was best for my country.

So are you honestly saying that Obama has been better than Mitt may have been? I disagree. But it is all water under the bridge and a moot point now.

Does that mean I agree with Mitt on this subject, not in the least I will gladly voice my opposition to his opinion regarding amnesty. Matter of fact I voiced my opposition to Reagan's amnesty. Did Reagan's amnesty make him a bad choice for President? In my opinion, no. Was he perfect, no, but then who is. I have never met the perfect man or woman. I have lived long enough now to realize I will never meet anyone who is perfect, but I certainly can spot the better from the less better.

[OddLane]

Romney would have been a disaster, just like McCain.

[Garfunkel Oates]

I've been a long time lurker and remember when this place was Romney election headquarters. Any criticism of him was quickly squashed, so it's funny to see so many freepers flip-flop back to sanity.

The problem with voting for the lesser evil is that it emboldens them. If Romney would of lost by a landslide, that would of been a clear message, but since he lost by so little, it makes rinos think that they can try the same thing again.

[servantboy777]

>>Mitt Romney believes Republicans should “swallow hard” and pass a permanent amnesty bill<<

Why not just bend over Mitt? This is why ya lost you RINO POS.

[sport]

And they will be quick to tell you that if you don’t vote for Romney, or the RINO of the month, you voted for Obama.

[DannyTN]

"There are still those here on FR that support and defend Mitt Romney because he was somehow 'less liberal' or something. /johnny"

So true. Next Romney will be saying allow gays in the Boy Scouts or put them on the judiciary. /dejavu mode off

[MSF BU]

Well, it looks as though all of those conservatives who didn’t show up to vote for Romney might have had a point.

[GrandJediMasterYoda]

Not me that's for damn sure. I've been saying for years we're a one party country. We got the Democrat A party and the Democrats B party who make pretend they are against the Democrat As but aren't because it's the same exact party, and Mitt RINOmney is just one more example. What we need ASAP is a completely independent party because the Democrat B party sure as hell ain't going to pick a conservative but another Democrat B candidate like Pig Christie or Hillary worshipper Jeb Bush. Remember when he gave Hillary the "Liberty medal" on the one year anniversary of Benghazi?? Anybody in their right mind thinks this jackass is Republican needs their head examined. He is the epitome of a Democrat B.