[Bratch]

What is more, it’s some observers believe that, lacking a solid philosophical core, once ensconced at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, President Romney might just do what seems most likely to win him a second term. If he believes success would more likely come through compromise and cutting deals, you had best believe that’s what he’ll do. (Every president does). A compromising Republican presidency might end up being worse than no presidency.

[NoLibZone]

This will be a bigger thread than 4 time DUI illegal immigrant kills New Mexico baby.

[jyro]

It could be no worse than a second term of Obama.

[major-pelham]

Hogwash - the Village is burning and there will be little left.

[Gaffer]

This is absolutely no way that anyone can convince me things could get better for 2016 IF Romney loses. What kind of dope are you guys smoking? You give Obama four more years and it might as well be decades.

[InterceptPoint]

A Mitt Romney loss wouldn’t necessarily be a disaster

Of course not. But an Obama win would be. The Tea Party movement is not crazy about Romney. But I predict they will turn out in record numbers to defeat Obama.

[donozark]

If we keep on electing Tea Party types, we won’t have no stinkin’ compromising!

[NoLibZone]

I stand with : Sarah Palin ,Michelle Bachmann,Rick Santorum, Herman Cain,Dick Cheney,George W, Rush.

I trust their judgment.

Those that don’t are RINOs trying to occupy the GOP and make it a 3rd party.

ie= l a z y .

[mouse_35]

We are almost certainly about to go into Syria and possibly tangle with Iran. I DO NOT want our troops to have to do that AND have to have the dims in charge of writing ROEs that do not allow our troops to do their jobs.

[nascarnation]

Well the Supreme Court doesn’t have a handicapped transsexual muslim member yet, so there’s another groundbreaking opportunity for Baraq term 2.

[Responsibility2nd]

A loss for Mitt Romney would not necessarily spell long lasting disaster for Republicans, nor would it be the death-knell to conservatism

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

But on the other hand -  A WIN for Romney would indeed be a huge set-back for conservatism.

[montag813]

NONSENSE! Obama wins and it is over. Period. Don’t believe this crap.

[DTogo]

A Mitt Romney loss wouldn’t necessarily be a disaster...

... only economic/social collapse and the Second American Revolution and/or Civil War.

[tet68]

Eight years of Obama would only be twice as bad
as four years? Count me out. Even were Romney
to be a mediocre president he could still be
removed after four years with out a vast amount
of damage done, EIGHT years of Obama would be
three times the damage done in his first four.
So the choice is a simple one. NOBAMA, once was
enough.

[Responsibility2nd]

All throughout this article I keep reading things like...

This is not to say Republicans should concede the election, but conservatives should keep November in proper perspective..

Which leads me to wonder if the author knows the two are NOT mutually inclusive.

[Salvey]

Given four more years, obama will complete the job of cobbling together his voter coalition of gays, welfare queens, blacks, OWS, public employee union members, abortion lovers, illegal aliens, etc. By 2016, they will have reached critical mass and will constitute a clear voting majority until the country collapses ala the European Union.

[cardinal4]

The level of absurdity on FR is astounding anymore. How could anyone do anything that might get Obama re-elected? There are posters on this forum who I believe want Obama to win. I would vote for a lichen before I would vote for Obama. A liberal GOP-e like Romney would be 10 times better than Obama at his best. I’m not happy with Romney either, I was a Cain supporter, but I’d stick my hand in an unflushed toilet before I would do ANYTHING that might keep Hussein in the White House..

*shakes head* Flame away, I don’t care, it is INSANITY to even consider re-electing this criminal freaking marxist..

[pcottraux]

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.

The problem is, there won't be any point to a "Republican Party" or "conservative movement" anymore.

At the end of a second Obama term, there won't be a country LEFT.

[WHBates]

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.

I'm not worried about the Republicans or Conservatives I worried about the Republic. Obama, the administration and Democrat control of Congress has to go. If you don't understand that, you have bigger problems than I can begin to address.

[RIghtwardHo]

I could NOT agree more. The biggest disaster for Conservatism will be Romney, NOT Obama. We will never, ever be able to fight Romney. The Tea Party will be completely marginalized. Romney will tack hard left and NO one will stop him whereas the House and Senate stop Obama.

Romney will be a DISASTER of epic proportions.

[exnavy]

The title is so stupid I will not read the article.