Posted on 08/03/2012 1:26:47 PM PDT by Bratch
Don’t buy the doom and gloom pronouncements from conservatives telling you, “this is the most important election in history.” A loss for Mitt Romney would not necessarily spell long lasting disaster for Republicans, nor would it be the death-knell to conservatism. In fact, it’s possible a 2012 loss could lay the groundwork for a stronger Republican party and conservative movement.
Elections are almost always seen as urgent and morally imperative. But sometimes major victories can only come in the aftermath of what appear to be devastating defeats. John Kerry‘s loss in 2004 laid the groundwork for a Democratic takeover in 2006 and 2008, and Jimmy Carter‘s defeat of Gerald Ford in 1976 paved the way for the Ronald Reagan in 1980. In other words, it is a mistake to assume losing a presidential election is a permanent defeat.
“This should be the most important election since 1980, but so far it is not,” says Reagan biographer Craig Shirley. “Scottish historian Thomas Carlyle postulated the ‘great man’ theory of history, and indeed this was true with Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, TR, FDR and Reagan. But history has not summoned forth great men in 2012 and in fact our history today is small.”
This is not to say Republicans should concede the election, but conservatives should keep November in proper perspective.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
I expect to be on the ballot in CA.
That’s what this series of three debates is about: who will obtain the valuable American Independent Party California presidential ballot line.
/johnny
LOL, I did say to flame away! Fair enough. But then you called me a rump ranger and involved JR. I have to admit that threw me for a loop. My pre-teen kids don’t run and tattle like you have done to three others on this thread! Nor do they assume that people who disagree with them are gay, either.
So, help me out, who should my family and I support this November?
To be completely honest, I am voting out of fear.
***If you were not voting out of fear, what would your vote be? Spreading fear and being motivated by it is simple cowardice. It is no way to make decisions. Instead, embrace courage and spread courage — do what you would do if you were not afraid.
If I wasn’t afraid that 4 more years of zer0bama meant the end of our republic (which it does not, that gives him entirely too much credit) I would vote for who I think the future should look like. Someone like Tome Hoefling or Sarah Palin.
If the candidate has not signed and filed the appropriate forms, and provided a slate of electors, and met all of the other requirements, write in votes for them are not counted in most of the states.
Personally, I don’t believe in voting for folks who haven’t agreed to serve if elected, unless there is absolutely no acceptable choice available. Then it hardly matters.
Good Lord your an idiot. I guess you voted for Obama 4 years ago. Are all of you people in a boiler room in Chicago. Vote for who you want, I will, while we still have the ability.
***Obama thanks you for the fear and discord you have sown among conservatives today.
Please, people, don’t lose sight of the big picture.
***The big picture is that this is a conservative website, not a republican website.
The only goal right now is to beat the enemy, not obtain ideological purity.
***How do you beat a statist by voting for a statist? How do you defeat a babykiller by voting for a babykiller. The big picture is that no matter who wins, conservatism loses. So go and convert some 0bots into mittbots. We can all agree that such a thing is the right course of action. Separating conservatives from their conservative beliefs on a conservative website (this is NOT a republican website) is not conservative. That is the big picture.
Good. Repeat that ten thousand times and you will win this election single-handedly, without sowing an ounce of discord among conservatives.
FREEPERS FOR OBAMA!!!!!!!!
“Instead, embrace courage and spread courage — do what you would do if you were not afraid.”
That wins every time, in the long run. Plus, you sleep like a baby.
It's one thing Democrats and Republicans agree on. Gotta limit ballot access to the 2 parties, and put up hurdles for any 3rd party to jump over.
It's a lot like organized crime. ;)
/johnny
I don't think you really know what we are up against. It would be the end of the republic.
So you’re voting for Obama - is that it?
***No. And yet you idiotic republican romney rump rangers keep trying that tactic, as if it was some kind of magnificent triumph of classic reasoning. Why do you persist in sowing discord among conservatives?
Right now there are apparently folks on DU who are trying to convince their counterparts that a vote for a third party is effectively a vote for Romney. And there are the republitards like you who are telling us that a vote for a third party is effectively a vote for Obama. That means, using such math, that a vote for a third party counts for 2 votes.
Why do you persist in sowing discord among conservatives? Obama thanks you for your efforts.
I've heard that same tired thing EVERY single election cycle. Every one.
It doesn't work any more. Try something new, like running a conservative. Or shutting up Rove when he attacks conservatives, or shutting down the dirty tricks (Florida, Virginia).
/johnny
What is it about “NO personal attacks” do you not understand?
***What about what you wrote with your first sentence? Normally a liberal idiot with nothing to contribute but insults will out themselves within the first two sentences. I’m so glad you didn’t disappoint us.
I will pray for you.
He's the only liberal I know. ;)
/johnny
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.