Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mtbopfuyn
A rash assumption on your part that we actually survive a Hillary Presidency until 2012.

I’d prefer a vote for Romney and a concurrent loss for Hillary who, BTW, probably has the nomination locked up no matter the votes in the Primaries (40% so-called ‘Super Delegates’)

16 posted on 01/20/2008 6:38:56 PM PST by TCats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: TCats; mtbopfuyn
A rash assumption on your part that we actually survive a Hillary Presidency until 2012. I’d prefer a vote for Romney and a concurrent loss for Hillary who, BTW, probably has the nomination locked up no matter the votes in the Primaries (40% so-called ‘Super Delegates’)

A rash assumption on your part to assume Mitt would actually have a chance of getting 40% of the general election vote.

So here's the likely scenario should he get the nod: 50-60% of the GOP voters who were previously against the notion of a Romney presidency would go ahead & vote for Mitt. 40-50% won't.

Those who voted for Mitt would then have on their conscious the precedent that they voted for a RINO. And once you have on your track record that you voted for a RINO, you've already caved & compromised.

19 posted on 01/20/2008 7:22:37 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson