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

To: TomGuy

Yes.

I agree. We had our chance to elect Romney last time. He won the primary. He was ready to go ... and what?

What?

He folded. We do not need someone who folds that way. We do not need someone all fired up to win the nomination, but then who doesn’t appear to give a flying frog whether they win the election.

Same thing happened in 2008.

McCain picked Palin which was the only smart thing he did.

Otherwise he was useless. And he didn’t try to win. He tried like heck to win the nomination, but then it was “blah”.

The GOP needs a candidate who will WIN.

Win. Not just win our party. We need someone who will win the election.

Someone to be the next President.

Not Romney. Not another Bush.

No.


41 posted on 03/10/2014 7:32:53 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network ( http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html#2013)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: Cringing Negativism Network
"Winning" is what Charlie Sheen does.

Dismantling and permanently crippling the federal apparatchik must be the primary mission of the next right wing POTUS.

44 posted on 03/10/2014 7:37:05 PM PDT by Rome2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

Four leftists were picked to moderate the debates in 2012. Romney should have taken a stand and refused to debate with such a stacked deck. Instead, he folded.


58 posted on 03/10/2014 7:58:29 PM PDT by Richard from IL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

I agree. We had our chance to elect Romney last time. He won the primary. He was ready to go ... and what?

What?

He folded. We do not need someone who folds that way. We do not need someone all fired up to win the nomination, but then who doesn’t appear to give a flying frog whether they win the election.


Romney and Mitch McConnell are very much alike. Both ran/run slash and burn take-no-prisoner campaigns against their primary opponents, (Fellow Republicans), and then are pussy-cats wanting to be stroked and petted when running against the Democrats.

The lesson I take from that is simple. They really aren’t Republicans-in-name-only they are democrats-hiding-in-plain-sight, DHIPS.


81 posted on 03/11/2014 3:53:09 AM PDT by The Working Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
McCain picked Palin which was the only smart thing he did. Otherwise he was useless. And he didn’t try to win. He tried like heck to win the nomination, but then it was “blah

IMO he picked Palin because he thought that she would HELP him lose and then it wouldn't be his fault in public view. Watching him campaign there was little doubt in my mind that he planned to lose.

There is still a certain segment of people who don't want a woman. I was surprised at how many people I know (who aren't stupid) told me that a woman can't win. Of course, now we all know that Her Heiness is a shoo-in.

I think it took McCain and his advisors totally by surprise that Palin excited so many people and she almost dragged that rat (kicking and screaming) over the finish line.

95 posted on 03/11/2014 8:22:58 AM PDT by Sal (The scandals are real. The "president" is a phony.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

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