Don't ban me --serious Romney question!

Me

[fieldmarshaldj]

Slick Willard is a light-skinned Zero.

[Beowulf9]

He’s got my vote but I wish Ann Colter would run.

[tirednvirginia]

You guys resigned to taking Mitt? I thought Cain was going after Romney tonight. It was a Drudge headline.

Somehow I missed seeing that tonight.

[unkus]

At all costs, we must not allow Mitt to be the GOP nominee.

---

I only see Cain as one who can make a difference.

The New World Order is being implemented as we speak and there’s nothing we can do to stop it. It’s extremely sad.

[Yosemitest]

There's no way in hell I can compromise my values.

Jack Kerwick wrote an article on May 24, 2011 titled The Tea Partier versus The Republican and he expressed some important issues that I agree with.

Thus far, the field of GOP presidential contenders, actual and potential, isn’t looking too terribly promising.

This, though, isn’t meant to suggest that any of the candidates, all things being equal, lack what it takes to insure
that Barack Obama never sees the light of a second term; nor is it the case that I find none of the candidates appealing.
Rather, I simply mean that at this juncture, the party faithful is far from unanimously energized over any of them.

It is true that it was the rapidity and aggressiveness with which President Obama proceeded to impose his perilous designs upon the country
that proved to be the final spark to ignite the Tea Party movement.
But the chain of events that lead to its emergence began long before Obama was elected.
That is, it was actually the disenchantment with the Republican Party under our “compassionate conservative” president, George W. Bush,
which overcame legions of conservatives that was the initial inspiration that gave rise to the Tea Party.

It is this frustration with the GOP’s betrayal of the values that it affirms that accounts for why the overwhelming majority
of those who associate with or otherwise sympathize with the Tea Party movement
refuse to explicitly or formally identify with the Republican Party.
And it is this frustration that informs the Tea Partiers’ threat to create a third party
in the event that the GOP continues business as usual.

If and when those conservatives and libertarians who compose the bulk of the Tea Party, decided that the Republican establishment
has yet to learn the lessons of ’06 and ’08, choose to follow through with their promise,
they will invariably be met by Republicans with two distinct by interrelated objections.

First,
they will be told that they are utopian, “purists” foolishly holding out for an “ideal” candidate.

Second, because virtually all members of the Tea Party would have otherwise voted Republican if not for this new third party,
they will be castigated for essentially giving elections away to Democrats.



Both of these criticisms are, at best, misplaced; at worst, they are just disingenuous.
At any rate, they are easily answerable.

Let’s begin with the argument against “purism.” To this line, two replies are in the coming.


No one, as far as I have ever been able to determine, refuses to vote for anyone who isn’t an ideal candidate.
Ideal candidates, by definition, don’t exist.
This, after all, is what makes them ideal.
This counter-objection alone suffices to expose the argument of the Anti-Purist as so much counterfeit.
But there is another consideration that militates decisively against it.

A Tea Partier who refrains from voting for a Republican candidate who shares few if any of his beliefs
can no more be accused of holding out for an ideal candidate
than can someone who refuses to marry a person with whom he has little to anything in common
be accused of holding out for an ideal spouse.
In other words, the object of the argument against purism is the most glaring of straw men:
“I will not vote for a thoroughly flawed candidate” is one thing;
“I will only vote for a perfect candidate” is something else entirely.



As for the second objection against the Tea Partier’s rejection of those Republican candidates who eschew his values and convictions,
it can be dispensed with just as effortlessly as the first.

Every election season—and at no time more so than this past season—Republicans pledge to “reform Washington,” “trim down” the federal government, and so forth.
Once, however, they get elected and they conduct themselves with none of the confidence and enthusiasm with which they expressed themselves on the campaign trail,
those who placed them in office are treated to one lecture after the other on the need for “compromise” and “patience.”

Well, when the Tea Partier’s impatience with establishment Republican candidates intimates a Democratic victory,
he can use this same line of reasoning against his Republican critics.
My dislike for the Democratic Party is second to none, he can insist.
But in order to advance in the long run my conservative or Constitutionalist values, it may be necessary to compromise some in the short term.

For example,

as Glenn Beck once correctly noted in an interview with Katie Couric,
had John McCain been elected in 2008, it is not at all improbable that, in the final analysis,
the country would have been worse off than it is under a President Obama.
McCain would have furthered the country’s leftward drift,
but because this movement would have been slower,
and because McCain is a Republican, it is not likely that the apparent awakening that occurred under Obama would have occurred under McCain.


It may be worth it, the Tea Partier can tell Republicans, for the GOP to lose some elections if it means that conservatives—and the country—will ultimately win.

If he didn’t know it before, the Tea Partier now knows that accepting short-term loss in exchange for long-term gain is the essence of compromise, the essence of politics.

Ironically, he can thank the Republican for impressing this so indelibly upon him.

I'm fresh out of "patience", and I'm not in the mood for "compromise".
"COMPROMISE" to me is a dirty word.
Let the RINO's compromise their values, with the conservatives, for a change.

The "Establishment Republicans" can go to hell!
I'm not voting for Romney, Perry, or any other RINO. NEVER!!!

[MacMattico]

Right now I'm on the Cain Train, too, but if primary voters choose Mittens I just can't take 4 more years of the socialist Obama running this country! Read the list of people Obama meets with at the white house— under any other President if they showed up they'd be hauled off as crazed protesters or terrorists!

[JennysCool]

I’ve read a few of the responses here where they say they would hold their nose and vote for Romney if it came to that, but I think — from a marketing guy viewpoint — that Mitt should, for the sake of the country, withdraw and let someone like Cain carry the GOP banner. Romney’s people will never tell him, but his slick looks and affectations make him seem like a characature of a presidential candidate — and that is NOT what will beat Obama. Someone like Cain who doesn’t look like a generic “conservative candidate” might win the day. “Slick” will, most definitely, not.

[tirednvirginia]

Why didnt your guy go after as promised?

[Apogee]

Thank you for putting it succinctly and well.

Obama without the Democratic (and a few gangs of x) majority in the Legislature we could have survived a lot better - a wise latina notwithstanding.

Focus on that branch if we can’t get a decent executive pick.

[Nachum]

How Many Doles And Bushs and McCains and Romneys is one too many?

Would the country survive another 4 more years of Obama?

[AnotherUnixGeek]

If Romney wins the GOP nomination I will not vote for him and will seek third party alternatives. I’m sick of settling for the “lesser of two evils” types the GOP establishment keeps foisting on us. Bush I, Bob Dole, Bush II, McCain and now Romney? No, thanks. It’s time the Tea Party became a real political party alternative to Big Government Party A and Big Government Party B.

[Ronin]

If Romney wins the nomination, we’re screwed, blued and tattooed. He can’t win the general. It will be McCain all over again.

Just as soon as he is confirmed the nominee, the MSM will gleefully unveil all the daggers they have been carefully sharpening and putting aside and commence chopping him to pieces. Every flip-flop, every nuanced statement, every mealy-mouthed RINOism, will be smeared over every available surface, 24-7, all the way to election day.

Then there is his Mormonism. I like Mormons, in fact I lived in Mormon foster homes between the ages of seven and 16 so I know quite a bit about the Church. I also know that to many mainstream Christian sects, Mormons are considered weirder than snake suspenders.

If Romney is the nominee, the media is going to engage in full contact proctoscopy on every controversy in the history of the LDS Church, spinning them in the worst possible light, and there ARE controversial aspects of the Church’s history that are unpleasant, to say the least.

It doesn’t matter if Reid is a Mormon, or that there has been a significant number of Mormon Senators, Representatives and Governors — this is the Presidency. Reid might not like the way they portray the Church, but he’ll sit still for it in public, thinking the damage will not be long lasting and besides, it’s worth it to keep the Republicans out of office.

[Persevero]

“VPs don’t do nothing, “

Disagree, I think Cheney was a huge positive in Bush (W’s) administration.

[Revolting cat!]

I read you. You have one vote, I have one vote: 1 + 1 = 2 = diddly squat!

[sklar]

And it is this frustration that informs the Tea Partiers’ threat to create a third party in the event that the GOP continues business as usual.

What could be more GOP business as usual than Nominee Mitt Romney?

As far as Tea Party as Third Party... aren't we kind of at that point, guys? Does anyone here really think the Tea Party can "take over" the GOP as we once hoped?

[andyk]

Sorry, not voting for Romney if it comes down to that.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

I read you. You have one vote, I have one vote: 1 + 1 = 2 = diddly squat!

I don't care. I will not vote for Romney. In some ways he's even more dangerous than Obama - at least Obama mobilizes Republican opposition in Congress. Romney will implement cap-and-trade, ratify ObamaCare under another name, and continue the financial destruction of our nation with the GOP refusing to oppose "our" guy. No more for me, I'm done with this charade the two parties put on every four years.

[Yosemitest]

It will take a few elections, but if we keep pushing and don't give in to their constant beating of the drum that we must compromise, we'll eventually overtake them and throw them out.
Yes, we CAN take over the GOP.

[Berlin_Freeper]

There are happy people who don’t care about politics and never vote.

[sand88]

I only see Cain as one who can make a difference. The New World Order is being implemented as we speak and there’s nothing we can do to stop it. It’s extremely sad.

I agree. It seems the GOP and the evil left are determined to transform our Republic. At times it seems maddening.

We are sliding towards something destructive and it seems there is nothing that can be done to prevent it. Very dark days lie ahead.....