To: COUNTrecount
That third party scheme will appeal to the many Kamikaze Conservatives on this forum. They view all Republicans with disdain because few can pass all 17 purity tests.
Just a bunch of RINO's in their view and it's better to throw the election to a Liberal this time to once again teach the Republicans some sort of lesson. Better to be right than win elections!
And the beat goes on ..............
9 posted on
11/15/2014 6:41:37 AM PST by
Buffalo Head
(Illigitimi non carborundum)
To: Buffalo Head
Better to be right than win elections!
13 posted on
11/15/2014 6:48:03 AM PST by
TBP
(Obama lies, Granny dies.)
To: Buffalo Head
It’s how we got Claire McCackle.
Jim Talent wasn’t “pure” enough for SW Missouri.
To: Buffalo Head
Bingo! Hillary’s plan will go over HUGH with a lot of FReepers.
21 posted on
11/15/2014 6:59:19 AM PST by
randita
("Is a nation without borders a nation?"...Noonan)
To: Buffalo Head
“That third party scheme will appeal to the many Kamikaze Conservatives on this forum.”
It really doesn’t matter, does it. Another McCain/Romney, and the base sits home and doesn’t vote (yet again). Another McCain/Romney along with a conservative Third Party candidate, and the base votes Third Party.
Bottom line - no impact on the election outcome either way, and we simply CANNOT WIN by running a moderate.
It’s not simply a litmus test, it’s a FACT OF LIFE and it extends well beyond the conservatives on this forum.
30 posted on
11/15/2014 7:13:28 AM PST by
BobL
(Don't forget - Today's Russians learn math WITHOUT calculators.)
To: Buffalo Head
only 17? Feels more like 170 at times.
31 posted on
11/15/2014 7:14:30 AM PST by
wiggen
(The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
To: Buffalo Head
That third party scheme will appeal to the many Kamikaze Conservatives on this forum. They view all Republicans with disdain because few can pass all 17 purity tests.
Just a bunch of RINO's in their view and it's better to throw the election to a Liberal this time to once again teach the Republicans some sort of lesson. Better to be right than win elections!
Could you go over to the folks at the Weekly Standard and NR and let them know if they don't oppose another Romney type nomination, that this would happen? Since they don't want HRC in, they should get a heads up.
41 posted on
11/15/2014 7:38:06 AM PST by
Dr. Sivana
("If you're litigating against nuns, you've probably done something wrong."-Ted Cruz)
To: Buffalo Head
Better to be right than win elections!That would be the perfect description of your beloved Establishment RINOs.
59 posted on
11/15/2014 8:13:33 AM PST by
TBP
(Obama lies, Granny dies.)
To: Buffalo Head
We don’t need a “progressive” of either party. Not Clinton, Warren, Biden, Sanders, or Cuomo. Not Bush, Romney, Christie, or their ilk either.
It’s not about some “purity test”, as you and your ilk well know. It’s about moving the ball in our direction, beginning the journey to restoring constitutional government, not just running Big Government for a while with marginally different ends than the Dhimmicraps.
I’m really tired of Republibots.
60 posted on
11/15/2014 8:16:01 AM PST by
TBP
(Obama lies, Granny dies.)
To: Buffalo Head
You are so right, the we can never win contingent has a perpetual domesday mindset., sky is falling even when we make a small bit of conservative progress..
74 posted on
11/15/2014 9:01:54 AM PST by
JSDude1
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson