Posted on 01/10/2008 1:11:53 AM PST by Kevmo
I don’t think most Fred Followers agree with you. They would feel as betrayed as the Tancredo followers did after his endorsement.
...by electing those self same marxists into greater numbers in the opposing party- You know the party that is supposed to stand against the marxists.
I cannot see the logic in your thinking.
Floriduh voter posted info on one of the debates. Check out post #15 here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1951255/posts?page=14#14
That’s a valid point, I felt betrayed by Tancredo as well.
But I expect Tanc to endorse Duncan or Fred. Mitt isn’t even on the same page with Tanc. While McCain isn’t either, Fred won’t get out until after S.C. and if Duncan is still at 1% I don’t seem Fred endorsing him then. But I wouldn’t vote for McCain if Ronald came to me in a dream and told me to vote for him.
It’s not the same poll. The methodology for polling a Democrat primary election in a state is not the same as that for a Republican one.
In the general election, the ballot doesn't have anything on it about which Republican candidate I'd prefer. It just has a choice of the Republican or the Democrat. In this particular election, of 2008, I already know enough to see that whomever will be the Democrat candidate (Hillary, Obama or Edwards) will be worse than any of the Republican candidates. So I know I will vote Republican in the general election.
In the general election in particular, I always vote as if the election were so close that it happened to be my vote that decided it. I'd have trouble sleeping at night if it ever turned out that Hillary gained the office of President because I was busy making some "statement" that the other guy was an unacceptable RINO .. for any of the RINO's, liars, and fools currently on the Republican ballot. Some of those so called Republicans suck pretty bad, but none nearly as bad as Hillary or Obama.
Pretty straight forward logic, don't you think?
It's not always this way; if say we put up McCain on the Republican ticket, against Joe Lieberman or Zell Miller on the Democrat ticket, I'd have to give serious consideration to voting Democrat. Better an honest liberal of stable temperment than a lying liberal with a rage issue.
I'll pick the .22, thank-you. I might live.
No, but fortunately enough Conservatives will boycott a RINO Republican nominee that your vote, and those of your fellows will make no difference.
there is no benefit in strengthening the ranks of the Rinos in their folly. They need to be taken from power.
The enemy within is far worse than the enemy beyond the gate, as the immigration flap should prove on it's face. Or the stripping of eminent domain, or the selling of our ports to foreign governments, or the limiting of our sovereignty as in the LOST at sea treaty... etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. Al these and more pushed upon us by Republicans
I'll choose attacking the traitorous bastard behind me with the .22... If I am gonna die anyway, I'd rather take the chance and arm myself to defend against the .45, which will soon be at my head anyway, should I live.
Maybe that's just me.
I think you are right. No reasoning will sway him.
I am not interested in getting into a pissing match.
This election is of utmost importance (I’m sure that’s been said many a time).
If the democrats get elected, we face nationalized health care. After that the socialization of america will be complete. ANY RIGHT MINDED CONSERVATIVE SHOULD UNDERSTAND THIS AND RESIST ACCORDINGLY! Accordingly doesn’t mean sitting out any election. It means fighting tooth and nail. It doesn’t mean sitting out to prove a point, or to teach those blue blood republicans a lesson. It means sucking it up, and doing what is right.
Do I want Guiliani to be the nominee? NO!
Do I want any of the other pseudo-conservative to win the nomination? HELL NO!
But I will do what I must...does this really make me a RHINO? NO IT DOESN’T!
My first few posts on this thread were happily contributing to the pissing match here. Since then, I've been using this thread as inspiration to refine my statement of my views. I entirely agree with your observation that he won't be swayed. May he find his own path.
Or, in the case of this election, deciding to take some down with you is a choice I can respect. I'm figuring we can survive a McCain presidency, so would risk that, if the alternative was Hillary. But I can appreciate that reasonable people could figure that a McCain presidency poises as much risk to our freedom as a Hillary presidency, and choose to go out in style.
The methodology for polling a Democrat primary election in a state is not the same as that for a Republican one.
***Pure, unadulterated, 100% Bull Shiite.
In the general election in particular, I always vote as if the election were so close that it happened to be my vote that decided it.
***Then you should vote that way in the primaries as well.
I’d have trouble sleeping at night if it ever turned out that Hillary gained the office of President because I was busy making some “statement” that the other guy was an unacceptable RINO .. for any of the RINO’s, liars, and fools currently on the Republican ballot.
***Then welcome to insomnia-land. Your actions on this thread are being mirrored and replicated throughout the political discourse in the GOP today. Thousands of RINOs like you are discouraging prolife, evangelical staunch conservatives. If a RINO gets nominated, millions will feel disenfranchised. All because guys like you were making their own “statement” about electability, and as a result, they lost the election.
Some of those so called Republicans suck pretty bad, but none nearly as bad as Hillary or Obama.
***I’d rather fight the enemy in front of me rather than get stabbed in the back by a pretender friend.
Pretty straight forward logic, don’t you think?
***I agree, if you want to lose an election and make a “statement”. As Smokin’ Joe said, “Nice to have the votes, but if they aren’t that picky, then let us have a Conservative, for once, as a candidate. Why? because it doesn’t matter how pretty or slick they are, to Conservatives, the issues matter. There are some things we just won’t vote for, and if there is nothing to vote against (I.E. no difference between the candidates on the issues) we just might go fishing.” So you do the math, Mr. Realist, and figure out what kind of candidate brings in the most votes: a conservative. That’s why so many RINOs run for the presidency and climb all over themselves trying to look like the most conservative.
Not that it will happen. Anyone other than Hunter, and maybe Thompson, doesn't stand a chance in the general. the Conservatives will walk away from the rest, and w/o th Conservatives there is no chance of a Republican win.
The only enemy we face that seriously threatens us is our own Left.
However ... it's still an open issue, in my view, whether 'tis better, in a general election between a hardcore Marxist and a derranged Marxist, to vote the later, or to vote neither. I'll vote the derranged Marxist, and hope we can muddle through. We've survived (more or less) 4 years of Carter and 8 years of B.J.Clinton in recent years; the good men who constituted our federal government did a remarkably fine job.
Really, I figure we have a better shot at continuing this grand experiment in freedom if we keep the Presidency out of the hands of someone [Hillary] who is actually, personally, with the focus of a lifetime, dedicated to destroying our freedom.
Our odds are better if the Presidency in the hands of a raging nut case who [McCain] has not been a consistent Marxist his entire life.
In any case, let's do what we can now to see that we have a better choice this November.
Better an honest liberal of stable temperment than a lying liberal with a rage issue.
***This last statement kinda negates everything else you say.
There’s one other thing going on here. Social Conservatives know that they bring a large contingent and if they’re disenfranchised, they’ll speak with their fishing poles. What’s going on now in the GOP is a tug of war over evangelicals. Look at how well Huckster’s doing. It’s because of Evies. But there is outright hostility towards evangelicals from some factions in the GOP. So when these socialLiberal FiscalConservative types claim that they’d support the social conservative, in reality they merely begrudgingly accept them and in several underhanded fashions they are actively against socons. The pretenders act like the socon branch of the GOP is okay with them, but if they’re honest, they basically admit they’d rather not have them and wish the party could do without them. That’s the tootyfruityrudy support right there. But by being fake, underhanded and lying about their conservatism, they create the tension that exists in this party where the claim is to be conservative but the actions are liberal. I simply don’t care about republicans like this because by lying to us, they betray their own “principles” and their “principles” are weak. For socons to vote for a solib, they must betray their principles. For a solib fiscon to vote for a socon, supposedly there’s no betrayal of principle, because they have no real principles. For instance, what is the operating principle behind globalism other than exploitation? Give me good, solid, godly, conservative American values every day over that nonsense.
It’s a false dilemma when there’s a pea shooter and a BB gun on the table as options.
No reasoning will sway him.
***And no reasoning will sway RINOs like you, either.
You compromise during the PRIMARY season. Just think how bad things will get during the ELECTION season, and beyond.
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.