Posted on 01/05/2012 11:23:02 AM PST by Jim Robinson
Tea party favorite and pro-life conservative Sarah Palin and her family were viciously attacked to the point she chose not to run.
Congressional Tea Party Caucus leader and constitutional pro-life conservative Michele Bachmann had early promise, but I guess came across as too "shrill" and consequently her numbers driven down to the point she exited.
Successful pro-life conservative Texas Governor Perry hit the race at the top but due to missteps and less than stellar debate performances soon fizzled and is now all but gone.
Pro-life conservative businessman Cain and his famous 9-9-9 plan had promise, but was driven out due to indefensible allegations.
Pro-life Reagan Revolution conservative Newt Gingrich reinvigorated his campaign and soared to the top of the national polls, but was unacceptable to the establishment and apparently also unacceptable to the "true conservatives" among us and his numbers are now plummeting
You'd think "unquestionably" pro-life, pro-family conservative Rick Santorum whose recent surge took him to a tie in Iowa and who's now surging in the national polls might be good enough to stand against Romney for the base, but looks like there are "true conservatives" now attacking HIM as not good enough.
Well, drive them all out and who's left?
Huntsman? Who? Moonbat Paul?
Ideas anyone? Should we all continue attacking the conservatives we don't like until we drive them all out?
Personally, I could easily have lived with Palin, Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Newt or Santorum and would be proud to enthusiastically support any of them, warts and all. Any one of them is infinitely better than Obama or Romney.
But if we don't land on one soon and raise him up over Romney, guess who we're going to be stuck with? And it ain't going to be pretty. And if abortionist/statist/progressive Romney (or moonbat Paul) is the one, might as well get used to four more years of Obama. I won't vote for or support either one of those two.
I'd suggest that we all stop trying to tear down the other conservative candidates in the race and instead concentrate on trying to build up our own personal favorites. Who knows? May even discover an acceptable conservative (if not a great conservative) in the bunch. We've never had a perfect conservative yet. Not even the magnificent Ronald Reagan. We and they all have warts.
But we do want to have a candidate with at least an actual CONSERVATIVE record and not an out and out liberal progressive RINO. So let's compare their records and their actual conservative accomplishments but not try to destroy them personally.
God bless and may the best CONSERVATIVE be our nominee.
Couldn't agree more. We need a fearless, patriotic fighter to represent us now. Look at what we're up against. This country has never seen anything like Obama before.
It's going to take someone who puts on his war paint every morning to galvanize the base and defeat him.
Proof positive that Hannity is a complete moron. He just said on his radio show (while talking to Donald Trump) that he likes Romney.
I think Newt will go full bore on Mitt. After NH, it should all be downhill for the Socialist Mitt.
If by some fluke Mitt takes S.C. then you will see a "pissed off" Sarah make moves to shake up the race -- either by an endorsement or the "other thing." Mitt will be stopped.
I don’t just “want to win”...I want to win with a CONSERVATIVE AGENDA...a candidate that promises to dismantle the failed big goobermint policies of the past. We should have a STRONG CONSERVATIVE in the White House, not a big goobermint progressive.
The primaries are for supporting the MOST CONSERVATIVE candidates in order to eliminate the RINOs, progressive and LIEberal Republicans. If there ever was a need for a strong conservative, the time is certainly now so that the next generation has something left to share with future generations instead of a country in ruin after years of DUmmycrat rule.
Agree 100%. Including the part about not supporting or voting for Romney. I think 0bama would stomp Slick willard in the general. But, if Myth wins we’ll be in the same if not worse position than if 0bama had won. The House would go back to the dims in ‘14 and Romney would make Arnold’s 2nd term as gov look like the heyday of conservatism by comparison. I will not vote for Romney in the general.
I’m staying on the Gingrich wagon until the nom. is decided. In the end, though, I’ll vote for whomever wears an (R) on their chest, and hang my hopes on taking the Senate and keeping the House, in order to reign in a RINO(R)POTUS. If not, and we get 0 again, we’ll have another four more years to unwind and repair from when it’s all said and done, some years later.
This is my observation from what I read on this site on a daily basis.
The problem Conservatives have Jim is that we expect our nominees to live up to every standard of conservatism. We want them to be able to hold the moral, logical and philosophical high ground when debating with liberals. They should be brilliant with the ability to explain every minute detail of any policy with ease. Their policies should check down the entire line of everything a conservative believes in. Small government. Strong military. Pro life. Pro gun. Strong morals which they have lived by their entire life without waver. Knowledgeable about business. Willing and able to work within Washington to pare down the size of the massive State. etc.. etc...etc...
As soon as a tidbit of information which doesn’t follow that checklist comes to light, they are discounted, pilloried and destroyed.
The problem we have as Conservatives is that, on the whole, we do not accept that they all have flaws. We expect them to be perfect citizens, perfect conservatives, perfectly moral etc...but they are still human beings.
We need to accept their flaws and understand that 95% of the time people like Santorum, Cain, Palin, Bachmann, Perry will be on our side. Expecting 100% compliance is unreasonable, imo.
So you can’t come up with anything?
Does this look like it? (politico)
After Iowa caucuses, GOP elites seek ‘consensus’ candidate
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71077.html
A group of movement conservatives has called an emergency meeting in Texas next weekend to find a “consensus” Republican presidential hopeful, POLITICO has learned.
“You and your spouse are cordially invited to a private meeting with national conservative leaders of faith at the ranch of Paul and Nancy Pressler near Brenham, Texas, with the purpose of attempting to unite and to come to a consensus on which Republican presidential candidate or candidates to support, or which not to support,” read an invitation that is making its way into in-boxes Wednesday morning.
Kudos to you for speaking the common-sense truth:
“I’d suggest that we all stop trying to tear down the other conservative candidates in the race and instead concentrate on trying to build up our own personal favorites. Who knows? May even discover an acceptable conservative (if not a great conservative) in the bunch. We’ve never had a perfect conservative yet. Not even the magnificent Ronald Reagan. We and they all have warts.”
Thank-you for your commentary.
I can live with Perry, Newt or Santorum. I can’t get enthusiastic.....but any one of those three will get my vote.
Well said, but I fear we are victims of a biased media who is largely responsible for fomenting personal attacks on the candidates rather than focus on issues — their candidate’s weakness.
Think about it, we know more about Santorum, Cain, Perry, and others in this race than we know about Obama. Perry’s college grades were released. Where’s Obama’s? Cain may have had a few flings. Did Obama? We hear about Newt’s writings and positions in the past, where are Obama’s writings from the Harvard Review?
I am optimistic that the American people have had enough of Obama, and will vote him out regardless who we nominate. That said:
Gingrich - Santorum 2012
Also, his fund raising - unlike Romney's, from small individual donations is phenomenal. He's at $13M for Q4... far above most of the other candidates, with the exception of Establishment boy Romney.
Also just take a look at the online discussion forums of the candidates. I'm not saying that's proof because obviously not everyone regularly uses the internet, but if you compare Mitt Romney's forums (I see 2 users online there right now) or any of the other candidates, to Ron Paul's forums, it's like night and day. No contest.
I like Santorum. We all know what Romney is and Newt is not a conservative as much as this site likes to try and shove it down our throats that he is.
I used to think that I would pull the R lever no matter what, but not for Romney. We in CA know how much damage a full-blown RINO can do. A president Romney would destroy the GOP and conservatism along with the country.
If Romney wins the presidency:
1. The establishment will think that conservatives are their beyotch and never take us seriously again.
2. Since the Party in the WH usually loses seats in the mid-terms, expect the House to go back to the dims.
3. The midterm losses will cause Romney to triangulate and oppose conservatives in an attempt to be re-elected.
4. Chances are that Romney’s veep will NOT succeed him. That means no other GOPer will be prez for 12-16 years.
5.When Romney proves no better than 0bama, people will turn on the GOP in general and say if ‘I’m going to get a big gov’t/big spender, I might as well vote for the dems, and not be stigmatized.’
No Romney. Not Now. Not in November.
What he said.
Santorum, for me.
I’m sending campaign contributions.
It took just two years for the mushy middle to come to its senses. For those of us who study such things, the 2010 Sweep was historically more phenomenogically amazing than The Perfect Storm of '08.
In 2010, white males abandoned the Democrats (and their titular head, Bobo) as in nothing-ever-seen in electoral history. >38% support is a five-fold negative standard deviation mind-screw.
Eventually this will project as a high-water mark, but the receding tidal shift will not be as rapid as the rise of the white male from '08-->'10 (and make no mistake, the MSM knows the subtext but dares not discuss it), because the impetus is still in place in da House.
Which means, Bobo can't win.
But the Moneyocracy follows the path of least resistance. And Mittens was already proven cheap at the price. Next thing you know, GoldmanSux is shoving money last year into Mittens warchest in a 3:1 ratio over Obama -- not unironically the exact ratio they went for Bobo in '08.
Add in the previous posts I've made about Sen.-elect [VP-select] Rubio naming three top Romney operatives to his staff before he had even moved into the Hart Sen. Off. Bldg., and the whole thing has been scripted since Nov. 2, 2010.
The only real Conservative chance (with Perry's implosion in the rear-view mirror) was for Palin to come in and disrupt the whole thing, sand in the gears, go Thatcherite on Bobo, build a massive war chest, and take the hill. For two million rea$ons, didn't happen -- and more power to her cashing the check life wrote her on the spot.
Now, realpolitik dictates that we, as Conservatives, extract everything possible out of Mittens, as he still thinks he can lose. He can't, but that's not the point. We have a lot of levers to pull, starting with 'How badly do you want a 2nd term' (and believe it, he wants the full 8) viz Supreme replacements, which dovetails nicely with the Senate about to go GOP for at least 2/3rds of his probable 8-year term.
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.