Ensuring Romney's Defeat

The time has come for all of those who are serious about 1) defeating Mitt Romney, and 2) defeating Barack Obama to get down to business.

Within the Free Republic echo chamber, we will have a limited impact on this election. However, Jim Robinson has done us the favor of making FR a nearly Romney-Free environment, so we can be fairly well assured that those here now are of like mind in the goal of nominating a legitimate conservative as the GOP standard bearer in 2012.

I am proposing that a few motivated and well-informed activists, using FR as an information nexus, can have a disproportionate impact on the coming primaries. Mitt Romney's record is a target-rich environment but unfortunately, many if not most conservative voters have no idea how bad he is. Since the liberal media certainly won't tell them until Romney is the nominee, and the so-called conservative media have shown themselves to be paid shills for the GOP establishment, the task falls to us. Fortunately, we have the tools at our disposal to do the job.

I propose the following strategy:

Step 1: Spread the word about Liberal Mitt to every conservative we know via social media.
We need to do this to counteract the bombardment of "Romney is the inevitable nominee" stories that are coming. Also, it is important to drive Romney's poll numbers down as low as possible immediately prior to the primaries when voters will begin to become seriously engaged.

To accomplish this, we need to use social media. Sure, you can use email lists to do this, but in my experience, fewer and fewer people pay attention to FWD emails. They are not a terribly effective way of spreading news and information these days. Social media, on the other hand, is much more personal and has the potential to reach millions of people with your message. If you are on Facebook and Twitter, you are already aware of how to do this. But here are some additional tips.

1.) Seek out places where conservatives congregate on Face Book. Here are a few:

• Positively Republican (.5 million followers)
• Freedom Works (1 million+ followers)
• For America (1.5 million followers)
• Rush Limbaugh on Facebook (1 million followers)

There are dozens and dozens of others as well, but this is just a sampling. "Like" these orgs and then immediately begin posting comments stating your disgust with Romney and links to articles and videos which smoke him out as the liberal he is. Again, this is nothing more than getting information out to people who may be bandwagoners and who may be flipped once they learn how bad Romney really is. It's amazing how many eyes you can open just by posting an article on Romney's pro-abortion, anti-2A, pro-illegal, or anti-family stands.

2.) Post articles on your Facebook wall that the your circle of friends can see that discuss certain specific aspects of Romney's record that will make him objectionable to conservatives. Rather than the catch-all "Romney is a RINO" articles, find ones that address specific issues. These aren't hard to find--the Free Republic Romney Truth File is loaded with them. This way, you can post an article per day during the run-up to the primary, culminating with a summary judgment that Romney must not be the Republican nominee.

3.) Post comments that say that you WILL NOT vote for Romney if he is the GOP nominee. This is very important because the Republican establishment is counting on the herd falling into line after they force Romney through the primaries. If many vocal conservatives say they will not vote for Liberal Mitt under any circumstances, the front-running sheeple will start to lose that sense that Romney can actually win. We know that he can't win, but THEY are still operating under the media-led belief that he can. That notion must be exploded.

Step 2: After the first primaries, conservatives must coalesce around one candidate.
I am currently a Santorum supporter. However, if Rick finishes outside the top three any of the first three primaries, I will transfer my support to the most formidable non-Romney Republican. It is important that many people agree to do this and then be VERY vocal about it. The only way Romney can win this is if the conservative vote remains split for too long. If we unite, he can't win. Period.

I don't want to end up with John McCain, part II, running against Obama in 2012. The best way to avoid that is to make sure we knock Romney out early. He's got the money to last a long time in the primaries and drain the other candidates coffers, so it is very important that we demonstrate the futility of his continuing as soon as possible. I have already pledged that I will not vote for Mitt Romney under any circumstances and I mean to keep that pledge. However, I would much rather be working for a conservative Republican candidate in 2012 than plugging a 3rd party.

Let's work now to make sure the media doesn't get to pick the Republican candidate in 2012. Otherwise, we may be looking at a situation where Obama wins with 40% of the vote. That is a nightmare scenario that we can avoid if we do what we have to do to get people informed.

3.) Post comments that say that you WILL NOT vote for Romney if he is the GOP nominee. This is very important because the Republican establishment is counting on the herd falling into line after they force Romney through the primaries. If many vocal conservatives say they will not vote for Liberal Mitt under any circumstances, the front-running sheeple will start to lose that sense that Romney can actually win. We know that he can't win, but THEY are still operating under the media-led belief that he can. That notion must be exploded.

I will never support this kind of short-sighted, immature approach to political discourse. Personally, I like Mitt Romney. The accusations that you and others have made are silly in most cases. In other cases, your alternative candidates have lost so much credibility that continued support for them shows that you aren't serious about winning next year. Even so, I will support the GOP nominee.

From my perspective, the unelectable, toxic candidate is Ron Paul. His stance on foreign policy is dangerous. His premises are simply wrong. On domestic policy, he has some good ideas, but the idea that the Fed is the root of our problems is also wrong. If the country were made of responsible citizens who worked for their own needs and raised their own children well, the Fed would be a small problem if at all. Eliminating the Fed will accomplish nothing if too many citizens continue to be irresponsible in their personal lives. Even so, if Ron Paul is the nominee, I will vote for him over Obama.

People who refuse to vote for Mitt Romney over Obama in the general election are not patriots. They are blowhards putting their own vanity over the good of the country. Their threatening to vote third party is putting childish ranting ahead of intelligent discourse.

Besides Ron Paul, there are other GOP candidates that I could never support actively in the general election. I will not make phone calls for them. I will not knock on doors for them. I will not give money to them. However, I will not threaten to vote against them in the general election. If one of them is nominated, I will focus my volunteer efforts on candidates for lower office.

Of course, many of you who rant about how you'll never support Mr. Romney are people who have never done anything beyond sitting behind a keyboard and posturing. You've never done the hard work of knocking on doors to be opened by people who resent you disturbing them about our country's future. You've never made the phone calls. You've never served as poll watchers. Some of you have probably never given money. You can sit behind your keyboard and rant all day long, but you've never actually done a thing to get Republicans elected. Your real worth to any campaign is as trivial as your egos are gigantic.

Those of you who hate Mr. Romney so much that you can never support him need to show that you put your country ahead of your overinflated egos. Instead of ranting about how you'll never vote for Mr. Romney, simply say that you'll give him a vote but concentrate all of your activism on Republican candidates for other offices.

You'll probably want to keep that sort of rhetoric away from the guy running this site.

Of course, many of you who rant about how you'll never support Mr. Romney are people who have never done anything beyond sitting behind a keyboard and posturing. You've never done the hard work of knocking on doors to be opened by people who resent you disturbing them about our country's future. You've never made the phone calls. You've never served as poll watchers. Some of you have probably never given money. You can sit behind your keyboard and rant all day long, but you've never actually done a thing to get Republicans elected. Your real worth to any campaign is as trivial as your egos are gigantic.

That's the second time one of you guys has accused me of this. Yet, you have no idea who I am or what I've done.

I don't look down my nose at politically active conservatives, no matter how they deign to spend their valuable time. If you prefer to reach 100 people per day knocking on doors (which I have done), more power to you. If you prefer to send direct mail to 100,000 people which I have also done, again, good for you. If you prefer to use social media which has the potential to reach millions of people at once, which I am now working on, God bless you.

Not everyone who's a keyboard commando lives in their mother's basement, you know. And I maintain that social media activists CAN have a major impact on this race with the right strategy.

Thank you for posting this thread.

I find it to be fascinating because it might be a microcosm of the 2012 WH Campaign.

If the winner of the White House is a true believer in expansion of the ENTITLEMENT PLANTATION, otherwise known as the US Federal Welfare System, then he will be blocked by riled-RINOs-in-the-House, and hopefully the Senate also.

In other words, the Obamanation Recession will continue for another 4 years.

You can vote for tweedle-dumb or tweedle-dumber, as it will make little difference.

In Romney’s defense, I think that he would make an excellent ATTNY. Gen. to Cain or Newt. Romney is squeaky-clean, religious, intelligent, and eager to do good in America.

There is no defense for Coward-in-Chief Obama, as EVERYTHING that he has touched bears the imprint of his Federal Fecal Finger.

It would be useful for the supporters of Romney to list things that Romney has conserved, accomplished or managed that has reduced the tax burden on the TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY taxpayers. If the list is long enough he might be good as the Secretary of Statements, you know, Hilly’s present job.

If Mr. Robinson chooses to ban me for my opinions, that's his choice. If I'm going to bother to come here, I'm going to express my opinions. I'll try to be as respectful as I can, but I'll also be honest. I can remember a time when the average Freeper relished the opportunity to engage in intelligent dialogue with those who disagreed. Now, every time I say something that doesn't match what even you admit is the echo chamber mentality of Free Republic, people rush to ping Mr. Robinson or a moderator. That kind of cowardice is sad to see in a once great website.

If someone truly cannot vote for Mr. Romney based on real convictions, I accept that choice. On the other hand, the comments that come from so many Romney haters make clear that they are not motivated by convictions but instead by vanity. Their egos will be hurt if the rest of the party doesn't go along with their hatred, and they would rather put their egos ahead of their country. If that shoe doesn't fit you, don't wear it. If that shoe fits you, you should wear it with shame.

Advocating the use of that kind of threat as a tactic is likewise childish and cowardly. No one is happy to see his nominee defeated, but the "I'll hold my breath, stomp my feet, take my ball, and go home if I don't get my way" argument only makes you look immature. The Founding Fathers created a government for mature, patriotic citizens. Without those kinds of citizens, this country doesn't work no matter who is elected. Your words suggest that you aren't up to the task of being that kind of citizen.

Many of Mr. Romney's supporters are as passionately dedicated to him as his haters are passionately dedicated against him. If you and those like you "on principle" sabotage his campaign to deny him the nomination, many of them may likewise sit out this election "on principle." For you, the "principle" is that Mr. Romney was once liberal on too many positions and you refuse to believe that he changed. You worry that his nomination and election would take the party in the wrong direction. For them, one "principle" will be that choosing any nominee just to spite another candidate causes as much long-term harm for the party and conservative movement as choosing someone who doesn't seem pure enough on conservative issues. The other "principle" will be that denying someone the nomination based on religious bigotry will also do more long-term harm to the party than allowing Obama to win a second term. You will insist that your interpretation of Mr. Romney is the only right one and that religious bigotry has nothing to do with the issue. They will point out different interpretations of Mr. Romney's record and cite the hundreds of anti-Mormon threads on Free Republic and other places over the past four years. Your use of this kind of "poison pill" politics may end up being just another way of ensuring that Obama gets four more years.

I agree that social media could have a powerful impact on an election. However, that impact depends on someone using that media to broadcast ideas that are different and intelligent. Your "if we don't get our way, we'll pitch a fit and stay home" message is neither new nor different nor intelligent. You can use social media within your own little echo chamber to think that this idea has merit, but outside your own little circle of keyboard warriors, this message just makes you one more keyboard warrior posturing within his echo chamber.

Only so many viable candidates can be groomed for any election cycle. Three candidates with a social conservative resume better than that of Mr. Romney looked good about eight years ago. Mark Sanford had the right experience in private enterprise and as a governor. If he hadn't thrown away his public image with an affair, he'd have been a perfect choice for the 2012 nomination. George Allen didn't have as good a resume outside of government, but he had a solid record as a governor and a senator. If he hadn't used an ethnic slur in the 2006 campaign and lost to Jim Webb, he'd have been a strong contender this year. (He likely would have won the nomination in 2008 except for that incident.) Tim Pawlenty had as good a pro-life record as governor as any politician in this country. He didn't have the style that many conservatives want, but he had the right record. Social conservatives rejected him over his style. Any of those candidates could have united the party and done well enough among independents to win. Two of them eliminated themselves with their own actions and one was eliminated by shallowness among the GOP primary voters. You need to stop blaming the rest of us because you don't have a legitimate candidate to win the nomination. The rest of the candidates being considered simply don't have the right stuff at this time. That's no excuse for playing "poison pill" politics.

I'm not here to advocate that you vote for Mr. Romney in the primary. I know that you will never support him. I suspect that only a few percent of active Freepers will vote for him in the primaries. If Free Republic and those with similar perspective can rally around another candidate and win the nomination through intelligent advocacy of some other candidate, I'm happy that the system is working properly. I'll be happy to vote for that candidate. If the candidate is any good, I may even give money or time to that candidate. Otherwise, I'll work for good candidates at other levels.

I will advocate that people put the country above their egos. As I said in my first post, I see Ron Paul as the toxic candidate because his views on national security are so bad. I'd still vote for him over Obama. I see Rick Perry as a clod. He's been dishonest about Gardasil and liberal about immigration. He'll be a disaster, but I'll vote for him if he wins the nomination. If we have to have a nominee who cheated on his wife, I'd rather go back and nominate Mark Sanford instead of Newt Gingrich. At least Mark Sanford has successful executive experience. Even so, I'd vote for Newt Gingrich. We all like Herman Cain, but he's not prepared to be president. I'll vote for him if he's nominated because I still like the guy. Michele Bachmann has no executive experience, is gaffe prone, and has high negatives outside the echo chamber. I'd still vote for her if she won the nomination. She just can't win the general election. Rick Santorum is a serious, knowledgeable statesman. He also comes across as a religious authoritarian, and Americans don't want a religious authoritarian in our highest office. He can't win, but I might as well vote for him if he's nominated. Many of us will vote for these candidates, but allowing people to sabotage a candidate like Mitt Romney by poison pill politics will harm the party and the country. I'm saddened to see Free Republic become a headquarters for that kind of thinking.

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.