Posted on 07/17/2012 5:11:59 AM PDT by xzins
Without going to great lengths to establish that there is continuing dissatisfaction with Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee for the presidency, let us play the game of "What If". What if the convention were to somehow become open? Who would you want to be the Republican nominee?
If we were to point out that Romney did not win the support of two-thirds of the primary voters, the reply would be that the process is engineered that way. When there are more than two candidates, one shouldn't be surprised to see a candidate polling much more than a third. That is reasonable. However, it doesn't mitigate the fact that most were not Romney supporters.
We will balance this out in the game of "What If" by placing any of the candidates who ran against Mitt marginally off limits. Participants in the game should not pick Pawlenty, Bachman, Johnson, Huntsman, Paul, Gingrich, Cain, Perry, or Santorum. They have all already lost. We will leave the option open, though, because many believe Romney was aided by the GOP-E, by a complicit media in the tank for him, and by an enormous financial advantage. So, if you absolutely must write-in Bachman's name, then go ahead and do it. (We couldn't really stop you, anyway.)
My criteria for a candidate would be that they be a real conservative. This is the complaint most heard about Romney, that he is a lifelong liberal who governed as a liberal. There is good reason for seeing Romney in this light since just weeks ago he came out in favor of gay couples. Moreover, he announced that at the state level those gay couples should be allowed to adopt children. This is not ancient history. This is recent. Folks might say that Romney has changed here or there, that he's converted to this or that, but the gay couple and gay adoption thing is brand new.
It underscore for those of us who don't support the man that he truly is a radical liberal, and that it's liberalism that's in his bloodstream and not anything that is severely conservative.
So, who would you support if the convention were to open up? If you were a delegate and if Romney announced he was stepping down, to which leader would you turn?
For me, it would have to first be a pro-life candidate. Life is a right and not an issue. Life shouldn't be taken except by due process of law, and that only after one has committed a violation that warrants the death penalty. A pre-born child could never commit such a crime, so no due process could ever make it right to take the life of a pre-born child.
Other minimal requirements would be: pro-God, anti-homosexualism, pro-gun, pro-small government, and pro-American exceptionalism. I could add other qualifications to this list, but we'll just shorten it for the sake of this article.
Who?
Let's just offer a few names that have been brought up as possible Vice Presidential nominees (alphabetically): Tom Corbett, Mitch Daniels, Jim DeMint, Susana Martinez, Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, Rob Portman, Condi Rice, Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan, Rick Snyder, and Alan West. Some of these might or might not fit the requirements I've listed above, but they are a starting list. I'm sure there are others who should be considered. Feel free to add other names.
So, vote now. If the Republican Convention were to suddenly open up, if we suddenly found ourselves rid of Mitt, for whom would you vote to be the nominee of the Republican Party?
Would you prefer to be terminated by drones and/or Obama’s SS troops?
Romney is going to be the nominee, he is the guy that is going to be put up as the alternative to Obama, and no amount of intellectual gymnastics is going to change that.
For all the supposed Constitutional conservatives on this site, no one seems to realize we have divided govt, that Congress passes the laws, and that we have primaries. It will take hard work and not talk to get a conservative supermajority.
I’d like a Gingrich/West ticket. While Newt has had moments of liberalism in the past, that should be enough of a compromise to get the GOP-E crowd on board (and a waaay better deal than they are offering the conservatives now). West called some of his fellow congressmen communists- that makes him an ok guy in my book.
Of those ONLY 3 were lifelong Conservative Republicans.
Most of the others had been Democrats, major Democrat donors, Democrat campaign workers or members of other parties, and sometimes had even been public office holders under the Democrat banner.
So, there were 3 of ours, and 21 of theirs ~ which necessarily includes Romney.
Their purpose was quite simple ~ to peel off disaffected Conservatives (like the Mitbots) and to show lower vote totals so that Mitt's 20% totals wouldn't look so bad.
It worked.
The solution next time is to run a couple of dozen lifelong Conservative Republicans in all the primaries so that some of them can pick off disaffected GOP-e voters while, at the same time, making the main line Conservative vote totals look really good!
We need to give the impression we own the party since it's pretty obvious that simply owning it isn't enough ~
The big question is, who would be the Attorney General? It would have to be someone committed to the Constitution, to the Rule of Law, and who would be vigilant about prosecuting all the treasonous activity that has occurred.
No, there’s a huge difference. The difference is that if we keep going with Obama, you’re going to have a boot on your neck and a bullet in your head, and you and all your family are going to be dumped in a ditch to rot. This guy is a full blown, old school fascist/marxist and he is going to morph this country into his little ideological utopia.
Wake up and pull your head out.
“The big question is, who would be the Attorney General?”
Perhaps Alan Gura?
There’s still no perceptible difference between the two. We need a pro-American candidate.
———The solution next time ———
I would argue the solution for next time is to choose the conservative before the Republican primary. That is, conservatives should have a secondary. In conventions or caucus or what ever, votes would be held and the conservative coalition candidate would be determined and then put forward for the Republican Primary.
So you are supporting Romney why?
SS troops, drones........?
Divided government?
Where have you been the last months?
Yes, we have primaries and it is evident that from the primaries Romney will do what ever he can to destroy conservatives, so I will again ask you.....do you really beleive Romney will work with conservatives as president given his history with conservatives?
I am saying, he will not.
Palin or Gingrich
However, it was a cage match among Freepers in fighting over which 3 were the lifelong Conservative Republicans. My point exactly.
Go dig up the lists yourself ~ evaluate each and every candidate.
100% NOT kook paul.
Har. We had full-contact karate over whether Bachmann, Perry, Santorum, Gingrich, Cain were the true conservatives. Blood all over the ring.
Palin!
These threads are a distraction and pointless.
The MSM lurks here to report on conservative dissention.
Trolls create other threads like this to marginalize and distract from the real race of who will run Congress.
Romeny is the one we have.
Obama is the opposition we have.
the end.
We just have to break the Romney country club rino staffers of their “Dare to be Decaf” mind set.
Well, using that strict standard, we never should have nominated Reagan in 1980.
I am concerned about a candidate's history of, say, the last 20 years. Their veracity. Their personal adherence to principles coupled with an understanding of politics - not an easy combination to achieve.
But first and foremost, we have to improve the process of getting a front-runner, and realize the enemy is not in our midst on FR - other than the occasional clear troll - but instead is the GOP-E and the Dems - the two flavors of socialism.
Romney is a Fabian socialist intent on obtaining the same utopia Obama wants. Look at how fast he tanked Massachusetts as the governor.
The progressives that control both parties are chortling behind their hands and telling each other “we picked two winners, it doesn’t matter which one suckers the voters better, either way we win” while we voters are becoming aware that it doesn’t make any difference which loser wins, we are screwed
Perry, in fact, had served in public office as an elected Democrat!
I am certain she is ‘larger’ than that role.
I still respect her status in Conservative politics and I think that she has been more sinned against than sinning.
She has not to date, compromised herself or her ‘brand’ ... which is a great deal more than most Conservatives can claim of themselves.
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.