Posted on 01/24/2008 9:46:42 AM PST by davidlachnicht
I want to speak to every one of you who supported Fred Thompson:
I have long ago combed the websites of the candidates, read the threads that chided or extolled their records,
and tried to gage their character even though filtered and massaged by their supporters and the MSM.
With Fred's withdrawl, and now left without a candidate for the upcoming primary,
I have re-reviewed the GOP hopefuls, and dismayed that I am satisfied with none.
When I go to the polls, I will still be voting for Fred Thompson, and the more I've thought about it, the more I urge Fred-Heads to do the same.
If you believe as I do, that Mr. Thompson was the only Conservative
(that is, the only Conservative who wouldn't allow us to be pushed around by International concensus-ism or slaughtered by radical Islam),
then vote to continue to have convention delegates "promised" to Fred.
IF YOU WANT TO SEND A MESSAGE,
ONE THAT CANNOT HELP BUT BE HIGHLY VISIBLE
TO THE GOP AND THE MSM, VOTE FRED.
None of the above.
I strongly disagree with tactical voting, especially in a primary; that’s how RINOs worm their way in.
Just vote for the most conservative candidate, and let the chips fall where they may.
Actually, I’d advocate a position midway between the stick with Fred even though he’s ‘out’ and the vote for the least of evils position:
If your vote for a candidate actively in won’t take delegates away from someone you find intolerable, vote for Fred. If it will help stop someone you find intolerable (for me McCain and Huckabee are intolerable, some may have other lists of two or three), vote for the active candidate of your (reluctant) choice.
For Floridians, I think this comes down to voting for Romney. In other states symbolic votes for Fred may still be in order. Watch the polls in your state, know the way delegates are actually selected there, gauge your local caucus if that’s what matters, then decide between a strategic vote for the least evil RINO, and a protest vote for Fred.
“Well, I know it’s not possible, but I’m hoping they all lose. :)”
Oh, it’s possible. By the time the general election is over they will have all lost.
I for one was not enamored with Hunter either before his endorsement, and especially now after his endorsement. To answer your question, I would prefer a "lifelong social conservative," but he already dropped out of the race. Huckabee however is not a social conservative; he is a social liberal believing the government should support his view of the social gospel. Other than abortion, his social views are not my views.
For that matter McCain and Romney are both pro-life; McCain for as long as I know, and at least Romney for the last couple of years, so they are at least as conservative on social issues as Huckabee, and as far as I can tell more conservative on social issues. So if your question is reworded "of Huckabee, McCain, and Romney who do you trust more on all social issues," I would put Huckabee at the end of my list.
You should really check with your Secretary of State before doing something stupid. I believe in my state they do not even count the votes of any candidate that has dropped out. They may count them on some obscure SOS website somewhere, but they are not released for public consumption, so you would be sending no message at all!
That's what I did in 2000 and 2004, but I've repented since then. Never again will I give my support to an enemy of the U.S. Constitution.
I’ve been saying this since he annouced he was bowing out. I plan to vote for him in the Missouri Primary. Why not? Doesn’t hurt and makes me feel like I flipped off the MSM and the RNC all at once!
You’re STILL voting For Fred Thompson because you don’t want to face facts. Sounds like a Democrat to me, living in if-only land. Fred faced facts and got out before he bled to death.
You can certainly DEPEND on Romney, Giuliani, McCain, Huckabee, Hillary, or Obama to make your life WORSE. I refuse to identify my political identity with the destruction of freedom in this nation, and hence support NONE of the Republican candidates for they none of them deserve my support, and the Republican party has deserted me. All of your shouting and stamping and insisting and rationale that you call "pragmatism" don't change the fact that the four Republican candidates are nanny-state liberals with Rs behind their names, and they are more harmful than Democrats to the future of this nation. I for one have finally learned my lesson from Arnold Schwarzenegger. A Liberal Republican is the greater of two evils when his opponent is a Liberal Democrat.
>Why I’m STILL voting For Fred Thompson
Because you didn’t get the word?
Ignore the sheeple.
I will voting for Fred Thompson, as well.
I have considered similar action. I planned to sit out the primary or vote write in. Now I realized I’m so pissed with the gop I may do something I once considered impossible. Vote for McCain.
I reason that I have been backstabbed by the gop so why not give this bunch of turncoats what it deserves? A party destroying candidate. At least once the slash and burn of the gop is complete REAL conservatives might have a chance of picking up the pieces and making something that looks a lot less like the “almost democrat” party.
That’s how I see my vote actually accomplishing something. It won’t with any of the other RINOs.
Fred’s on my ballot and I’ll be voting for him. (Probably my last vote as a Republican. I’m tired of belonging to the party or cowards and closet liberals.)
Karl Rove has your number -— what did Karl say? Oh yeah (paraprhase) “F@@@ the conseravatives, where will they go?”
Well, we’re going “away.” A RINO tax-and-spend liberal is little different from the Dims. Indeed, possibly worse.
It takes a motivated base to win, and, well, they’re not going to get one.
Instead, they will get a sabotage base.
Mitt turns my stomach not because I think he’s immoral or dishonest (I don’t), but because he’s got a dictator’s heart. I do, and have from the very start, long before Thompson declared, recoiled from him on gut instinct because I know an honest and upright con-man when I see one, and I know moderate poor-winner Republicans like Hugh Hewitt when I see them. The bad grace and emotional sapism of Romney supporters is indicative of their candidate. Romney is BAD NEWS and deserves to LOSE. He presumes to be a Daddy to insecure Republicans with his “grown-up” religious righteousness and bossiness; many women and emotion-based men find comfort in the Daddy’s Home safeness of Romney’s image; I think Romney in his way is worse than any of the other Republican candidates. Short term thinkers will squeal that this is bad for America; long term thinkers grasp that Romney is BAD, WORSE, for America.
“Never again will I give my support to an enemy of the U.S. Constitution.”
No shouting and stamping from me. I will vote for my choice, and you will be irrelevant.
See tagline.
Sorry, we are Conservatives.
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.