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

Skip to comments.

If the Republican Convention Could be Opened, Who Would You Replace Romney With?
Freeper Editorial ^ | 17 Jul 12 | Xzins

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?


TOPICS: FReeper Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: elections; no2romney; no2romneycare; no2romneydeathpanels; no2romneyflipflops; romney; romneytruthfile; teaparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 201-215 next last
To: muawiyah
Bachmann and Perry had not been lifelong Conservative Republicans ~ that's pretty clear.

And Reagan had been a Democrat.

121 posted on 07/17/2012 7:16:56 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Reagan had the advantage of having been a Democrat during WWII and serving in the military. But, he never sought elected office as a Democrat, and at some point the Republican party recovered enough from the Civil War AND FDR that they didn't need to run disaffected Democrats for office in the Southern States.

By my standard Ronald Reagan could run for whatever he wanted ~ but by the time his second term had ended it was time to grow up and stick to running Conservative Republicans ~ George probably shouldn't have been run for President ~ turned out all he wanted us to do was look at his buns anyway. Dude is wierd.

122 posted on 07/17/2012 7:18:49 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Bachmann was a Democrat organizer and campaign worker (her own admission). Perry was an elected Democrat.

Reagan was neither.

123 posted on 07/17/2012 7:20:03 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Bachmann and Perry were non-factors by the time primary voting rolled around.


124 posted on 07/17/2012 7:21:55 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Sarah


125 posted on 07/17/2012 7:22:41 AM PDT by Redcloak (Mitt Romney: Puttin' the "Country club" back in "Republican".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Gingrich-Santorum
 
 

126 posted on 07/17/2012 7:23:17 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

I vote for Diogenesis. If we’re gonna let nObama waltz to a second term as maximum leader of the soon-to-be third world nation he wants us to be, let’s make sure we put up a totally unelectable buffoon.


127 posted on 07/17/2012 7:27:12 AM PDT by ssaftler (11/6/2012: Time to repeal our One Bad-Ass Mistake, America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Rick Perry


128 posted on 07/17/2012 7:31:09 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Time for a write-in campaign...Darryl Dixon for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
We just have to break the Romney country club rino staffers of their “Dare to be Decaf” mind set.

Then you should love this thread. This is the kind of response Romney should be seeing. He should be continually reminded that his support is at best one inch deep and that if he steps off the reservation, that you all are gonna walk.

Instead, what I see is a bunch of otherwise good conservatives spinning endlessly for him.

For example, most avoided the threads when he came out a few weeks ago in favor of gay couples and gay adoption.

They should have had wood piled around a stake ready to light and burn. Instead, they stood to the side wringing their hands or being totally, completely mum.....crickets...

That is certainly not holding him accountable, and it certainly is ALLOWING him and his staff to be decaf.

129 posted on 07/17/2012 7:38:38 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: SMARTY

Yeah, but think about it. We would have her for 16 years.


130 posted on 07/17/2012 7:39:18 AM PDT by WakeUpAndVote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: xzins

When the primaries began there were several candidates I was willing to support : Cain, Bachmann, Santorum, Gingrich. I even welcomed Perry to the fray and heard him out. I was certain the conservatives would coalesce around one of them. But I drew the line at Huntsman and Romney. Neither, I felt, were qualified to represent conservatives and were better suited to the Democrat party.

We expected the GOP to thrust Romney upon us. We didn't expect them to succeed. I guess we're still new to the game. But, we are learning quickly.

The names other FReepers have suggested are great. I especially like Scott Walker and Duncan Hunter, which are positively *brilliant* suggestions. But, if I were to choose the candidate for conservatives to coalesce around today, I would choose Virgil Goode as he is already a candidate and gaining ballot access. We would be far more successful supporting him in his efforts than trying to start over so late in the game. (But, make no mistake about it, I would start over in heartbeat before I'd support Romney and permit him to redefine "conservatism" in his liberal image.)


131 posted on 07/17/2012 7:42:21 AM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Palin said last year she " has the fire in the belly" to run for President. She determined the time was not right. .

She has my vote and my prayers.

132 posted on 07/17/2012 7:49:10 AM PDT by geologist (The only answer to the troubles of this life is Jesus. A decision we all must make.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: so_real

I agree with you about Goode, so real. But, it’s threads like this that remind others that Mitt was never one of their choices and that they prefer someone else, that they prefer a conservative.


133 posted on 07/17/2012 8:07:18 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

Hogwash


134 posted on 07/17/2012 8:09:53 AM PDT by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601

I want Palin....Todd Palin.

He has everything that his lovely bride and mother of his children have. But he has something else. He is Union. He ran in Iditarods which celebrates the human condition. He has raised a great family. He is a businessman. And when they vetted Sarah, he was probably vetted also.

And when the left go after his experience, he can say that Obama didn’t know squat and 4 years later proved it.


135 posted on 07/17/2012 8:18:32 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (ABO 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601

Bobby Jindal’s parents were not U.S. Citizens at the time Bobby Jindal was born, consequently Bobby Jindal is not a natural born citizen as required by the U.S. Constitution for eligibility to the Office of the President or Vice President. He may serve in the U.S. Government in other capacities, but not in the two offices specified by the Constitution.


136 posted on 07/17/2012 8:22:20 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

I agree. I, too, like Todd Palin.

One thing I like about him is that when the 2 parties in Alaska became insufferable stooges for big government largesse, it was Todd Palin who became 3rd party. I believe it was the Alaska Independent Party or something like that, and even though he stepped out of it to support his own wife, it was a party that endorsed the Constitution Party candidate once upon a time.

He was willing to dream of an alternative to the one party system that we now have....one party with 2 heads.


137 posted on 07/17/2012 8:24:42 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX; wolfman23601
Both Jindal and Rubio are Natural Born Citizens because of the 14th amendment and because of US v Wong-ark.

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

Neither is the son of an ambassador or the son of a foreigner occupier, neither was born on an indian reservation, both were subject to the jurisdiction of the US. There is nothing in the constititution requiring both parents to be citizens, de Vattel was read by our Founders, but not included.

138 posted on 07/17/2012 8:31:44 AM PDT by Perdogg (Let's leave reading things in the Constitution that aren't there to liberals and Dems)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX; wolfman23601; P-Marlowe

There is not doubt that Bobby Jindal was an anchor baby. His parents were here on student visas, and she was already about 6 months pregnant when they arrived. It had to have been years afterward that they finally received their US citizenship. The clearly could NOT have fulfilled any residency requirement by the time of his birth. Bobby Jindal was born a citizen of the nation of India, the nation to which his parents owed allegiance.

In short, if Bobby Jindal is eligible to the presidency, then so is Anwar al Awlaki’s children who were born anchor babies in the US while he was here studying. I hear he also became a US citizen afer a while. So, is it wise to let Anwar’s kids run for the presidency? How about hypothetically allowing Ahmadinejab of Iran visit the US with one of his wives pregnant and ready to deliver? Should we allow that anchor baby to be eligible for the presidency?

“Natural Born Citizen” MUST mean something different than the phrase preceding it... “citizen”... referring to those who were “citizens” prior to the adoption of the Constitution. After the adoption of the Constitution, “citzen” was no longer acceptable as a standard, and something that had to have been more stringent, “natural born” became the standard.

Jindal is a great governor and probably would be a wonderful senator.


139 posted on 07/17/2012 8:34:51 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

That’s a flat lie, as documented profusely throughout Freerepublic and elsewhere. Even the U.S. Congress and Obama acknowledgeed the two parent requirement when they passed a resolution deeming McCain to be eligible as a natural born citizen with two U.S. Citizen parents. Rubio and Jindal are not natural born citizens by any streetch of the imagination or courtroom pettifogging and obstructions of justice.

Bobby Jindal was born in the United States with natural born citizenship in India, because his parents were citizens of India holding passports from India. Under the laws of India at the time, Bobby Jindal was born with citizenship in India by virtue of jus sanguinis laws of India. Regardless of whether or not Bobby Jindal was born with the right to claim native born U.S. citizenship by jus soli doctrines of U.S. law, he was also born with automatic natural born citizenship in India the Constituttion and its authors disqualified persons born with allegiance to a foreign sovereign. Efforts to falsely pretend anyone born with allegiance to a foreign sovereign is somehow a natural born citizen eligible under the Constituttion to tthe Office of the President and Vice Presideent is subversive of the Constitution and the Republican form of government it mandates.


140 posted on 07/17/2012 8:46:00 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 201-215 next last

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.

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