Posted on 11/07/2012 8:14:01 AM PST by Marketfly1
According to one Tea Party leader, the reason for Mitt Romneys loss to President Barack Obama is that he was not conservative enough and was weak-kneed and a throwback to Bob Dole and John McCain. The President Bushs were not named, however.
In a press statement, entitled Tea Party Vows "No Retreat" and a subtitle Promise to search out candidates with clear conservative records; no more Dole-McCain-Romney nominees, the group leaders said the following:
(Excerpt) Read more at bayoubuzz.com ...
I can compromise at times but some issues are beyond compromise as for as I am concerned. If the Republicans want my vote in the future then give me a more palatable candidate that I can feel comfortable with. Romney has been and still is an unprincipled perennial loser in my book. He ranks right down there with Ford, Dole, McCain and maybe even "W". As it appears to me the "R" party is over as of this election, finished. Next election there will be ever more federal tax-dollar tit suckers (welfare and the etc.) draining the life out of our economy.
But the “experts” told us that this made him look “Presidential”. How can so many political experts, many of them on payroll, be so damn stupid?
Do you really think acting more liberal is a winning strategy. There is a truth in elections that liberals masquerading as conservatives always lose to the real thing.
ummm...no. I was asking an honest question. Would being more conservative help?
How can they SEE something work and then do the opposite? His “experts” were idiots.
Blacks know about abortion but don't care.
No immigration reform short of open borders will please Mexicans.
It's just wasted energy.
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.