Romney is a gun grabber so you can call that a preemptive straw-man.
Posted on 01/20/2008 1:18:25 AM PST by TexasMatty
As a Conservative I am lost. I will not, under any circumstances vote for John Mclame. He has sold Conservatives out. Nor will I vote for Jesus' favorite candidate Schmuckabee. I believe the most Conservative candidate is Thompson and can't help but wonder who is voting in these things. If Mclame or Schmuckabee is the nominee I can't vote. It will pain me deeply to not vote, but either of those clowns are no different from the lefty. Me question to my FRiends is.. WHAT THE HELL DO WE DO??? The situation seems rather desperate.
I will hold my nose and vote for the nominee because to do otherwise is, objectively, a vote for marxism, abortion and anti americanism.
Yes, I know, but if nothing else...”it’s the Judges” which will far outlast any term of any of the candidates now running.
The media started this with Fred and Hunter from day one. The people have to see and get to know the candidates in order to vote for them. This is the way they control our elections.
-————Hillary is at the top of the ticket...we have to defeat the commie moles.—————
You don’t beat liberals by electing liberals. I’m sorry, that just doesn’t make logical sense.
-—————Are you aware of what this all means before you vote Dem?——————
Yes. I’m aware.
McCain will pass many of the same kinds of things that they would pass. And even though most americans have been talked into believing these kinds of things, the results will force them to revolt. If anybody(like McCain) is allowed to be the one passing such laws, that’s the end of conservatism as we know it because the media will make sure to run it into the ground that it was a conservative who forced global warming legislation down our throats and killed us.
If we’re going to be destroyed, I want a clearly known liberal to do it. Hillary. Obama. Edwards.
McCain isn’t our guy. But we can’t beat the media yet.
Yes, I know what I’m doing.
The media is bad, I’ll grant you that, but they don’t have the power to keep a Ronald Reagan (for example) down.
Fred did it to himself with his very bad decision (which I supported at the time) to do things his own way on his own timetable.
Turns out, Fred, when you’re dealing with a group activity, such as an election, it’s the group who makes the rules.
If we blame Fred’s defeat on the media, we are doing what the RATS do when they don’t get their way: crying like babies.
Fred screwed up. Face it like the men and women we are. I’m sure Fred is.
I continue to support Fred and urge him to go all the way to the convention where he will hopefully have some influence.
Rush Limbaugh has no problem with Mitt. Why should you?
Romney is a gun grabber so you can call that a preemptive straw-man.
My brother-in-law, who owns a business that employs 200 and who’s specialty makes his operation #3 nationally, lives in a ritzy part of town, owns 3 homes, 6 cars and thinks nothing of handing over cash for his wife who spends money like it’s going out of style...told me yesterday that he’s voting for Obama. He voted twice for Bush.
When I told him he’s the very group of people that Obama would target for income distribution, he blew me off and boasted how the whole neighborhood had Obama signs on their lawns. His neighborhood is one of high-income professionals who nonetheless, are riddled with liberal ideology.
When I asked him why he wouldn’t vote Republican, he started mouthing the “Change” mantra, not looking at the fact that part of the “change” would be coming out of his pockets and sent to D.C.
If Romney is the nominee, imagine the debate with Hillary.
On abortion:
Hillary: I am pro-choice and in fact my opponent was also at one time.
On taxes:
Hillary: I opposed the Bush tax cuts for the rich, and in fact, my opponent was also against them at one time.
On healthcare for all:
Hillary: I support and will fight for healthcare for all, just like my opponent did in Massachusetts.
In fact, he said the biggest difference between his plan and mine is that his became law!
I welcome his support for my plan.
On gays serving openly in the military:
Hillary: It is time to end ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’
In fact, you Mr. Romney, were all for ending that plan even before me and my husband.
You were ahead of the curve and supported gays being allowed to serve openly way back in 1994.
On a huge stimulus package:
Hillary: I want to spend 100 billion in an effort to bring the economy back from this recession!
My opponent wants to spend 100 billion over 5 years just on the automobile industry, so my plan is, in fact, a lot more fiscally responsible than his!
Perhaps. But I was looking for a straight, one name answer.
So........ if I ask again..........
Romney or McCain?
Stupid question.
I respect your devotion to your principles.
But please help me understand better.
Let’s say there are two candidates in November.
I’m exaggerating to make my point, but assume
both are pro-choice,
both support gay marriage,
both will raise taxes...
[ ] fill in domestic issues.
BUT:
One candidate believes national security is the most important issue and will govern accordingly.
The other candidate relies on domestic issues to hold his/her base together and tells us security threats are “overstated” and based on fear.
What would you do?
____________________________________________
Me? Domestic issues are important as hell, but I would still vote for the first guy. We can’t be naive and act as though our enemies will sleep-walk through a Dem presidency. They won’t. I have to go with the candidate who’s serious about national security.
In the meantime, the rest of us in the Republican party, as imperfect as you all point out ad nauseum, will be fighting to end the Clinton era.
Not to mention that if the economy is #1 in voters minds, and security in 2nd, then Romney walks away with the nomination.
Mitt knows how to make money, Hillary knows only how to spend it.
With an across the board media bias...yes they do. The Dem side is being controlled by a combo of media blackout and super delegates so if you think it's any better on their side you haven't been watching.
FR is all for complaining about media bias. That's what we do...that's why we are here for the most part.
And your point is......?
Four years will be to late. By then there could be more than 40 million illegals and if McCain gets in they will legalized and voting. What do you think things will be like then. If the republican party allows McCain to get the nomination, people will leave in mass. I know I will. May be good for a third party though. Say what you want about Thompson, Huckabee, and Romney, but at least they have said or pledged to do something that limits illegal immigration other than amnesty.
McCain can’t beat any of the democrats. That’s why they, and the MSM, pimp him at every opportunity. He polarizes the Republicans and they will stay home.
If you’re really looking to beat the Clintons find another candidate because it’s not McCain.
I don't think so.
For some of us it is game over.
Pardon me for agreeing with your comment.
My bad.
McCain...because I’d rather have an American liberal moonbat scr@wing with my country than a cold calculating commie.
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.