Posted on 09/05/2012 2:47:19 AM PDT by MacMattico
We are caught in the rapids and rapidly approaching the falls.....Romney is the rock in the middle......holding onto the rock doesn’t mean we’re rescued, but it does give us a chance to be rescued, eventually. Don’t grab the rock, and we go over the falls.
Any vote NOT for Romney, any NONE vote is a vote for nobama, whether the paulnut types want to admit it or not.
The law of unintended consequences is very powerful.
Never forget the blue dress PEROT gave us!
I missed that thread. Literally Thank the Lord that Jim has come around to the view that America cannot survive another term by the great Muslim communist destroyer. I hate the RINOs myself and think there is no salvaging the GOP. The only hope lies in ALL Conservatives doing an end run around the GOP with a 3rd party.
But we have to face the imminent threat, and that is the destruction of our American institutions and way of life if Obama has a 2nd term, freed with not having to run for another election.
Good words, Mac. At this point, anyone on this board who will not vote for Romney is simply biting off his nose to spite his face. The leftist bastards (with the complicity of the spongy left wing of the Republican party) have been destroying our country for 100 years. It won’t turn around in one election cycle. Romney, however, can be the fellow it starts with.
I sympathize with the hold your nose voters, been there done that for most elections in the last 55 years. I have come to the conclusion that it is the same as giving the liberals the thumbs up sign. I refuse to do so this time not only because we have been given an extreme liberal but because I no longer fall for the Chicken Little crisis. Electing a man that started the negative attacks on Sarah Palin, so he could run in 4 years is not an option for me. I don’t expect to change any minds but only giving something to think about.
If Romney wins big, he and his people will interpret it as a mandate for his policies and feel free to desert conservatives. Romney will then be free to follow his political instincts and we all know where that will go despite Mitt's supposed "conversions" on some issues. It would be nice to think that Tea Party Conservatives in Congress will reign in Romney but given the lack of fight by the RINOs in Congress against Obama, it is unlikely that Congress is going to lead Romney, particularly with Republican leadership pressuring Rs to support "our guy". Do you really think that Mitt Romney is investing this much time and money in order to implement someone else's agenda? Romney will adopt a conservative agenda only if it is forced on him.
So how do conservatives pressure Romney? By making it clear to him and his people that conservatives aren't voting for him but voting against Obama. The best way to do that is to see Tea Party people down the ballot winning big and Romney getting smaller vote totals across the board. Then Romney will know that he needs conservatives.
With all due respect, why sell out your conservative principles and vote for a guy who is the most liberal Republican to ever run for President when it makes no difference in your state? Conservatives who live in purple states have a real dilemma in this election. If they decide that they need to vote for Romney, I can understand that. However, such an action should not be presented as a principled stand when it is nothing but pragmatism. (Pragmatism isn't always bad.) IMO, any conservative in a solid red or blue state who is voting for Romney is either a CINO or isn't thinking clearly.
Remember Clinton? This is the same argument I heard when he was president. The country is much stronger and the people of the country are much smarter than most folks supporting Romney give them credit for.
As far as the SC picks are concerned even if a conservative justice were to die or become incapacitated Obama would have a very hard time getting a liberal justice appointed whereas Romney would have the support of both the GOP and many democrats. Again remember all those justices Clinton got to appoint in his second term? He appointed none nada..
The nomination SC justices is something I would never trust Romney with. Obama can be held in check Romney is free to appoint liberal justices as he did in Massachusetts
You must post on multiple forums. Romney might agree 85% with the "us" on some RINO-infested forum but not on Free Republic. Standing alone and not in comparison with Obama, you'd probably have a hard time finding a handful of people on this forum who find Romney even marginally acceptable.
Your feverish daily campaigning for a candidate like 0 who is 100% opposed to everything you claim to be for is the behavior of petulant stupid children, not rational adults.
Sounds fair, warm and fuzzy until you realize who gets to decide what you need...
You need to read more carefully. I'm opposed to both Obama and Romney. I'll not take one deliberate step to help either liberal.
By Ronald Reagan in his autobiography An American Life
“When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn’t like it. “Compromise” was a dirty word to them and they wouldn’t face the fact that we couldn’t get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don’t get it all, some said, don’t take anything. I’d learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: ‘I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.’ If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that’s what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.
Haha! You “worry about my children’s future” and yet remain so incredibly STUPID? I worry for them too. Maybe their Dad has a brain.
If Ronaldus Magnus would have said 5-10% of what you want, then the quote might have applied to Romney.
As far as being a "dogmatic 100%er", I have only be able to vote with enthusiasm for the Republican Presidential candidate three times going back to the 1976 election: Reagan, both times and George W., the first time. I did, however, vote for the Republican candidates in the other elections, just without much enthusiasm.
How could I vote for Dole and McCain but not hold my nose and vote for Romney? Dole and McCain drifted left later in their careers, Romney has always been there. I could remember the days when Bob Dole and John McCain were loyal foot soldiers in the Reagan Revolution. Where was Mitt? By his own admission, he was opposing the Reagan Revolution (at least, that's what he told the voters in Massachusetts - and I guess we all know how much you can trust his word.) Romney opposition to conservatism is nothing new - his father opposed both the Goldwater and Reagan Revolutions and his mother ran as a pro-choice Republican congressional candidate.
You sort of conservative is the useful idiot of the Democrat propaganda machine
Behavior of petulant stupid children? You mean like name-calling?
Lie to yourself all you want. The rest of us are smart enough to know political cowardice when we see it.
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.