Last ditch appeal to Libertarians and Constitution voters:

11/1/2004 | agitate

[Agitate]

Is your protest vote worth 4 years of John Kerry? Are you willing to risk appeasing terrorists, sellout to the UN and the EU, more taxes, less for the military, homosexual marriage and activist judges who will be there long after the president is gone, your for vote today?

Sometimes you have to lose a battle to win the final war. Is a vote for a candidate who will not win worth 4 years of Kerry’s extreme liberalism? I hope not.

[NATIVEDAUGHTER]

Your post reminds me of the old joke that was told about the 1964 election...somebody was quoting a voter who said "they told me that if I voted for Goldwater in '64,there would be 500,000 troops in Vietnam and rioting in the streets...damned if they weren't right!!"Bush is NO conservative....He has NOT earned re-election and even if Kerry wins, there is no reason why a SUPPOSEDLY "conservative" GOP who controls the house and senate could not keep him at bay...The Republican Party will NEVER learn to be conservative unless it is punished into doing so....

[NATIVEDAUGHTER]

And exactly what are you going to do about it?...Invade suburbia looking for us Constitution and Libertarian Party members? After all, you invaded Iraq for no reason....

[sinkspur]

And exactly what are you going to do about it?...Invade suburbia looking for us Constitution and Libertarian Party members? After all, you invaded Iraq for no reason....

I'm going to harrass the hell out of the "true believers" who voted for these nudniks. You included.

Your comment about Iraq is brain-dead.

[Designer]

Just like the Republican Kool-aide drinkers to call for "unity", now that the R. candidate needs our vote. Where was the "unity" when the time came to nominate a conservative? Or for that matter, adopt a conservative platform, or reign in activist judges, or produce a Constitutionally-ballanced budget, or get us the hell out of the United Nations? Hhhmmmm???

I remember vividly the attacks on conservatives by the main-stream Republicans before Primary time, and at party conventions. Trying to get a conservative nominated or a conservative platform amendment passed was like getting flamed and Zotted on Free Republic.

No, the time for "compromise" and "unity" was a long time ago. Some of us will just have to try to protect and defend the Constitution as best we can without your help, and I suggest you make your appeal for support to the "undecideds" - the ignoramuses who haven't a clue.

[inquest]

I never did understand why someone would only vote for a candidate if they agreed with the candidate 100% of the time.

That's not the issue. The problem is that he's wrong on so very many issues, and that domestic spending has grown faster on his watch than even on Clinton's. The problem is fundamental, not superficial.

[inquest]

The country can not become more conservative with a liberal as President.

When Clinton was President, the Republicans regained control of Congress for the first time in six decades, and Fox News and conservative talk radio became major forces to contend with. The mistake was when Republicans went with Bush in the primary, thinking that a "moderate" would appeal to more voters. All it did was make them more cynical about conservatives, and it very nearly cost Bush the election. The fact that Bush was nominated in 2000, in other words, was not evidence that the country had grown more liberal, but rather evidence that Republicans had misunderstood the views of the public. They assumed that media opinion=public opinion. Reagan proved otherwise.

[rmmcdaniell]

So you're taking your ball and going home. Not a viable game plan for winning the game. No doubt you will taunt your own team when the opposition wins that they shouldn't have made you mad.

I'm not taking my ball home at all. I'm making a tactical decision to prevent a Hillary presidency, which I believe is in the best interest of the country.

The fact that a liberal, peacenik, Massachusetts senator is even this close after 9-11 is indicative of Bush’s ineptness at leadership. I fully believe that Bush’s liberalism will proceed in full earnest after his re-election. The consequences of this will be disastrous in the 2006 and 2008 elections. I will not be happy regardless of who wins tomorrow.

[KoRn]

FOR SURE!!! I'm more Libertarian than Republican, and I'm backing W 110%. There's no other choice in this election. Vote for Bush or vote for retreat, that's what it boils down to.

[Dog Gone]

I'm making a tactical decision to prevent a Hillary presidency,

You're preventing nothing with your puny protest vote. Quit kidding yourself. Nader, the Greens, the Libertarians, and the CP might get 1% of the vote tomorrow combined.

If being irrelevant gives you a sense of honor, go for it, but don't try to convince us that you're making any kind of meaningful tactical decision. That's nonsense.

[Agitate]

No, the time for "compromise" and "unity" was a long time ago. Some of us will just have to try to protect and defend the Constitution as best we can without your help, and I suggest you make your appeal for support to the "undecideds" - the ignoramuses who haven't a clue.

try to protect and defend the Constitution as best we can without your help,

Why the inflamatory statement? You sound like you're taking some moral high ground here. I'll take the position you didn't mean it that way.

The time to keep Kerry out of office is now. I am not an evangelist for republicans, but if you think a protest vote is more important than keeping Kerry out that helps no one. If you care about activists judges, a constitutionally ballanced budget or not being under the grip of the UN and the EU, Kerry should be your worst enemy, and you should want him out for the good of us all. What do you think Kerry's judicial nominees will do to the constitution?

As for undecideds, I made many pleas, face to face this weekend. Those people are clueless sheep who live on soundbites. I'd bet some don't know who the VP nominees are. I hope I at least got some of them to think about not voting for Kerry.

[rmmcdaniell]

You're preventing nothing with your puny protest vote. Quit kidding yourself. Nader, the Greens, the Libertarians, and the CP might get 1% of the vote tomorrow combined.

If being irrelevant gives you a sense of honor, go for it, but don't try to convince us that you're making any kind of meaningful tactical decision. That's nonsense.

If my vote is so insignificant then you have nothing to worry about tomorrow right? So why are you wasting your time on a thread topically oriented to convincing third-party voters to support Bush? Get a life.

[Dog Gone]

You pinged me to your post. Get a life indeed.

[Agitate]

Your post reminds me of the old joke that was told about the 1964 election...somebody was quoting a voter who said "they told me that if I voted for Goldwater in '64,there would be 500,000 troops in Vietnam and rioting in the streets...damned if they weren't right!!"Bush is NO conservative....He has NOT earned re-election and even if Kerry wins, there is no reason why a SUPPOSEDLY "conservative" GOP who controls the house and senate could not keep him at bay...The Republican Party will NEVER learn to be conservative unless it is punished into doing so....

If Kerry wins, I hope you are right about congress keeping him at bay. I still think Kerry is to dangerous for everyone to be allowed as president, and I hope a Bush loss wouldn't push conservatives further left.

[Agitate]

Should have said push REPUBLICANS further left

[rmmcdaniell]

You pinged me to your post. Get a life indeed.

I did not ping you, I posted a general reply to all those who commented on my post #6. Get a Brain too.

[nopardons]

That enormous list has been posted again and again and AGAIN to FR,for at least the past two years;being updated periodically. So my question to you is:

WHERE THE BLOODY HELL HAVE YOU BEEN?

[j_tull]

This fromer Bush voter drew the line with "Free" Prescription Drugs and Amnesty.

So please, bless us with your pronouncement of who should be the leader of the free world.

[Hank Rearden]

What, specifically, has Bush committed to do in a second term to undo the damage caused during the first?

I refer specifically to the assault on the First Amendment via the CFR, the incredibly insane growth of Big Government and Big Government spending, and his cozying up to Ted Kennedy and other leftists, resulting in more government pork?

Will he squash Bud Shuster-types in Congress and their grandiose schemes?

Has he promised to do anything that Republicans used to be committed to doing?

[Dog Gone]

You are so retarded. You put my name in a reply, inviting me to come read your brilliant comment. That is a ping.

Please never do it again.

[j_tull]

This former Perot voter says "DON'T DO IT!"