Posted on 06/09/2010 8:57:15 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
Carly Fiorina wasn't the first choice among many conservatives. She is not as conservative as DeVore and if Campbell hadn't been in the race, then supporting DeVore would have been a no-brainer. I respect DeVore and his service. I never attacked him personally, (unlike those who attacked Carly and ridiculed her as a "dyke" even though she just had breast cancer and lost her hair) and I wish him the best of luck in his future endeavors. He now has name recognition and a platform of support to challenge Diane Feinstein in 2012, for example, and if he does he'll receive my wholehearted support.
But the important thing is, Carly was more conservative than Campbell, who was the ultimate turn-coat RINO and who would have done nothing to advance the conservative agenda. She has millions to compete with Boxer and being a female and cancer survivor also neutralizes whatever attacks Boxer will throw at her. Remember that Boxer completely destroyed two staunch male conservatives before. It's time to unseat her using a different tactic.
Unfortunately, there are FReepers, who are bitter and angry from the DeVore loss, who have stated that it would be better for Boxer to win than to rally behind Carly. This is completely childish and pathetic. First of all, Carly is not a RINO because she has no public office experience to make a RINO assessment on. We're not talking about holding your nose for a Mark Kirk or Mike Castle-type liberal Republican. We're talking about someone who is reasonably conservative on the main issues and who will slow the Obama agenda. With Palin's endorsement, there's less of a chance for her to go Olympia Snowe on us. I trust Palin, and I doubt that Fiorina would be the West Coast version of Snowe.
Second of all Carly has business experience and while FReepers will laugh at her six years at HP the fact of the matter is she still has experience. Prior to becoming HP CEO Carly was vice-president of AT & T, so obviously HP saw something in her. She worked her way up from being a receptionist to leading a major corporation. What did Boxer do, besides live on the government hog most of her life?
Boxer will whine and say that Carly outsourced jobs but Carly can easily counter and say that conditions created by the government (high corporate taxes and regulations) brought about the need to cut jobs.
My point is that Carly won the primary decisively and exit polls showed she attracted both independents and conservatives. She ran a strong center-right campaign and there's no doubt that will carry over into the general election against Boxer. While she's not pure as the driven snow conservative, she is sufficiently conservative to stop the Obama agenda and promote big-picture issues like reining in spending and lowering taxes. So to quote Sheppard Smith: Don't be a hater.
They don’t listen. All you get out of them is lip service. Like I said, a sucker’s game.
Reagan lied about his wedding vows? That’s a new one.
If I had a hundred bucks for every time I've seen a RINO or a political hack pushing RINOs on FR try to tear down Reagan to try and make their candidate not look so bad, I'd be as rich as Mitt Romney.
If you had $2 buck for every attack on Reagan, you’d be as rich as Meg Whitman
Sorry, won’t vote for Carly under any circumstances. Would rather have the predictable Boxer than Carly. Is she conservative? Maybe. I have relatives who worked for HP heard her speeches and saw her actions there. Her actions do not match her words. She is not worthy of trust. I am no tgoing to hold my nose and cast a ballot for her so we can win. The price of that victory is too high for me.
Principles, EV, principles. You’ve either got them or you don’t, right?
If you want to encourage divorce, then tell the world it’s good by everything you do. That’s a principle, right?
Frankly, “principles” shouldn’t keep someone from voting for the better person out of the likely two you will be forced to have represent you. In your perverse world, it says you choose to vote for a perfect person who has a zero chance of winning because you know you are the only person you can really trust to do things right, right?
It’s strange how those protest votes don’t seem to ever get people elected that make any difference in the world.
“Principles,” after all...
*ka-ching*
That was posted a week or so ago. Strangely, the cheerleaders were absent.
Many expressed concern and were attacked. Others used the thread to trash DeVore.
Remind you of any prior elections?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2525776/posts
Fiorina, al-Mansour and the World Economic Forum (Whoa Nelly)
Mine isn’t a “protest vote.” You give far too much credit to what passes for politicians in both major parties today.
Mine is a vote for America’s core principles, the ones upon which my country’s survival, and my posterity’s liberty, depend.
That’s all I vote for.
What’s so hard to understand about that?
My vote is a sacred trust, and I no longer give it to the political bookies. Kapiche?
If everyone did what you suggest, we’d have exactly what we have now. A corrupt, unprincipled political class who could care less about the Constitution of the United States or their sworn duty to uphold and defend it.
If everyone did what I’m doing, the country would be restored to its principled constitutional base.
Good night.
Buenas Nachos
Help us get it back there, step-by-step, because we can’t get anything done with a protest vote. No one knows why you protested, just that you did. For that matter, the protest vote is no different than staying home and not voting, which is the easiest protest vote to make of all.
Unfortunately, such a protest vote can’t be discerned from someone who chose not to vote because they are an idiot or too lazy.
You’re not listening. My vote is not a negative “protest” vote as you keep trying to characterize it. My vote is a positive vote, for the core principles that make America America, and that support true republican self-government and liberty.
The negative vote is the one that is cast for those who destroy those indispensable principles upon which our liberty is premised and the future of our children and grandchildren is secured.
You’re playing a loser’s game, one in which your own liberty is being wiped out, and your posterity is being robbed.
Don’t you ever get tired of the tail wagging the dog?
I’ve done something different I never really did before 0bama got in office—I’ve been donating to all sorts of races to help swing things to the most conservative person possible, across the country. I never used to care about races that I couldn’t ever expect to vote in before.
In Arizona, we’ve got McLame and JD. Neither are that great, but JD is better. I believe we should give money to JD to help him, even though he’s not nearly as conservative or as trustworthy as I would like. Is this a wrong thing to do because he doesn’t represent the values I believe America should best stand for? No.
We need to be incrementally helping the more conservative person in every election, everywhere. No one person will be able to do anything to help our liberty, but many moving that way can most definitely do so. In Mass., we donated to Scott Brown even though we don’t live there. He was the best of the available options there and he’s already helped in some ways to block some spending. Sure, he’s voted with the Dems on other things, but he’s a help anyway and was worth the money—and I live half a country away.
If I see an opportunity to, with a little bit of help, swing even RINOs into taking over for classic Democrat seats, I see that as an incremental win. I won’t help him in the primary next time he’s in one, but if the general looks really close, I might help him again. It’s all about pushing toward the conservative goal, because there’s basically no one who has ever made it to my “perfection list” to support.
I encourage others to see it the same way and see it as a marathon, not a sprint. This battle to move us back toward true conservatism will be life-long and will need to be fought be others long after I’m gone. However, in the meantime, whether in the primary or the general, a race I can vote in or one I’ll never be able to, I see the need to push the conservative envelope everywhere.
We need to encourage a culture shift. That takes time and that takes, unfortunately, supporting a ton of people who aren’t really meeting your ideals. No one today meets those with me, but I won’t let that stop my incremental support for better any longer.
Gosh. The way you talk one might think you have limitless resources.
But you’re mistaken if you think empowering liberals helps conservatism.
What if you had taken those resources and given them to true conservatives instead of to pro-baby-killing, pro-homosexual socialists like Scott Brown?
This conversation will have to continue tomorrow. I’m going to bed. Good night.
Goodnight. Until later.
From Rasmussen regarding Carly Fiorina(poll taken election night):
1)78% of GOP primary voters have a FAVORABLE opinion of Fiorina while just over 50% had of Campbell and DeVore.
2)43% of GOP primary voters considered themselves as Tea Partiers and Fiorina earned 62% of their votes.
3)90% OF GOP PRIMARY VOTERS SAY THEY’RE LIKELY TO VOTE FOR FIORINA IN THE GENERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN AGAINST BOXER.
Counterintuitive info to digest.
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.