Posted on 08/03/2012 11:48:50 AM PDT by rightjb
In my recent post, Our Odds of Beating Obama Are Better By Dumping Mitt in a Brokered Convention, I simply shared the historical statistical odds of a GOP nominee winning in November from a brokered convention versus a presumptive nominee like the Mittster. And it seems panties were twisted from Pautuckett to Tempe. Here was a typical comment:
Despite two admissions that A) the risk of Obama winning IS more important than the risk of a Romney presidency and, B) that I understood many of the factors that contributed to these statics have changed in a modern media age, I somehow have attracted opinionated readers who suffer from some rare form of reading comprehension affliction.
I suspected as much might happen, and rather than address every one of these comments individually – I’d do that all in one fell swoop. I don’t know Kyle specifically (he’s seems like an intelligent guy), but he will be my foil for this repartee.
Here are 7 points you might not be considering in your initial response.
First, if you have followed my articles at all – you would know that I am the one who has been arguing that the “purists” back away from a “No Romney No Way.” IF he makes it out of the convention, it is critical we back him to stop the destruction of America by the anti-colonial communist of which his father could only dream. But I have a right to do everything possible to save the GOP from making a bigger mistake now than it made in 1976 and 1996.
Full article continued at: Is iIt Wrong to Rag on Romney?
(Excerpt) Read more at rantpolitical.com ...
Is it wrong for you to pimp your blog here in order to get hits?
/johnny
The public voted for the more Conervative candidate in 1960 ~ and Nixon went down. By 1968 he had it figured out and won, as he did in 1972!
No one can demonstrate that the Democrats are abandoning their boy, and unless they do we ain't winning.
They will change if and only if our candidate is better ~ which this one isn't.
Experience has taught me that those who think its wrong to rag on them before the nomination will forever feel that its wrong to rag on them.
Once a scumbag, always a scumbag.
Nobody cares but you HG
This time last year it was entirely appropriate to rag on Romney. I did it myself.
I still don’t like him, but this election is NOT ABOUT ME.
For the good of the country and our society, it’s time to put “me” aside and pull together to rid ourselves of the abominable administration that will end freedom if left in office.
Shame on anyone who puts obstacles in the way of removing Obama, and also on those who sit smugly at home hiding behind selfish “principle.”
But I care so deeply.. so much that it makes up for the ignorant few who do not.
You vote your principles, I'll vote mine.
/johnny
Fine. We live, at least for now, in a free country. You have a choice to wimp out.
Waste your vote, then:
— watch your freedoms go down the drain in the second Obama term
or,
— if you’re lucky, silently thank those of us who kept it from happening while you sat on your so-called principles.
I'll stick with my principles. Killing babies is wrong. People that support or enable killing babies do not deserve my vote.
The GOP-E might want to think about that next time they badmouth conservatives (Rove) and play their dirty tricks. (Florida, Virginia)
/johnny
I've heard that same hyperbolic crap every election since forever. We're still here. The fear thing has been overplayed by the GOP-E, and allowed the GOP to move further and further left.
Sorry, not playing that game anymore.
/johnny
It’s not wrong to rag on him before, during, or after the convention. Regardless of when we are in relation to the convention he’s still a socialist, and it’s always open season on socialists.
Only God is above being criticized. Romney is merely a politician, and I’ll criticize him if I please, because the Creator gave me the right to do so.
Then shame on Romney. He’s putting some big obstacles in the way of our removing Obama. Best thing he can do is step aside and let a winner in.
"Same as it ever was..."
Great pic, pretty much sums it up.
Maybe I’ll vote for Romney eventually, maybe not, but every patronizing RINO that tells me I’m an Obama supporter because I don’t like Romney or because I criticize him makes that possibility more remote. If they want our votes, then they are going to have to listen to our complaints. They can’t get one without the other.
We should rag on romney whenever we want. Free Speech and Chick Fil A means I can voice my opinion despite the supposed consensus to which it might run counter.
Romney needs to have his liberal feet held to the fire before, during, and after the convention. There should be no let up. He should never forget that he’s getting ABO votes and not “I love Mitt” votes.
Neither Obama nor Romney will get my vote, but that doesn’t mean the ABOs should violate their pledge to keep Romney to the right with what tools that they have.
They should be a sore that never stops aggravating.
I’ll do the same from the outside looking in.
False.
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.