Posted on 01/22/2008 5:37:11 AM PST by LonesomeHawk
This article was before his poor showing in Sc and who really cares if paul or huck drop out(there just a sideshow anyway)
He is a beautiful man...
“Electile Dysfunction”: the inability to become aroused over any of the leading
contenders for president put forth by either party in the 2008 election year.
Then I hope the GOP is ready to splinter.
“This article was published over two weeks ago.”
The sad part is that it’s still relevant today.
I find it absolutely appalling that anyone on this forum would sit home and pout during such an important election, thus allowing a democRAT (especially Hillary Clinton) to become the next Leader of the Free World...
Bump!
I also wonder if LonesomeHawk is yet another alias for her or just a coworker at the Trib.
So you cannot support your position?
And you misjudge me. I have some concerns with Mitt Romney.
If Republicans were conservative, there’d be no contest and Fred would be on top.
Check yours, and listen ONCE MORE. I’m 50 years old, I’ve voted for a handful of Presidents now. I’ve watched this country go from mostly conservative to mostly liberal in my life.
I’ve watch the two major parties in this country switch values.
My father, a life-long Democrat has exactly the same value system as I do. And yet, we’re both registered in two different parties - and we AGREE on who should be President, and it’s neither Hillary Clinton, nor Huckabee, nor Rudy, nor is it Romney. My father clearly remembers Romney’s father and as I’ve said before, and will say again, Liberal Apples don’t fall far from the tree. Romney is a liberal in disguise.
Fred Thompson is the ONLY conservative left on the list. The rest are pretenders, and any pretender who runs as a Republican is as bad as any Liberal democrat.
I would RATHER SEE a DEMOCRAT in office if the country is going to go to crap, than a PRETENDING Republican that can be blamed later (as in, “It’s all the Republican’s Fault” - whomever he might be - As in “It’s all Romney’s fault and he was a REPUBLICAN”.
Are you getting this yet?
The truth is, folks, this country survived Bill Clinton - but, we’ve lost a lot of credibility in the world. If we let a fake conservative take office and he further destroys America’s credibility then we deserve it. Letting the Clinton further ruin us isn’t going to be any different than say letting McCain or Huckabee in office and watching them ruin things. The DIFFERENCE is, at least it is a “Republican in name only” doing it, it’s a Democrat.
Something that the whole WORLD will be able to see with their own eyes.
No - I don’t want Hillary in either, but I’m not voting for Romney AT ALL.
I heard you the first time.
Mitt has got everyone fooled.
Romeny has my support now......
Being kind, I hope you are right, but the fact is that you are speculating in a big way.
My guess is that he reads his victory as a mandate from the middle, and governs like Lindsay Graham, or worse.
Let’s examine a few arguments from the thread and note the degree to which they cannot be consistent.
“Romney is a panderer and will say anything to get elected and he doesn’t believe in anything.”
“Romney will govern as a liberal, regardless of what he says.”
Note the problem with this? How can someone you feel has no values at all be presumed to govern as a liberal?
Why does anyone run for president? A consuming personal ambition and ego to the exclusion of all else? A consuming personal desire to serve the country’s best interests to the exclusion of all else? A consuming personal desire to drive the country in the philosophical direction personally held to the exclusion of all else?
Or a combination? You see the issue? If it was only 2 of those three possibilities, motivations are easy to analyze and it’s easy to plug someone into a category of admirable or distasteful. A 100 - 0 - 0 mixture could be called distasteful, but because of that final 0 a person would get points for not being overbearing.
So all candidates probably are a mixture of the three in terms of motivation. Remember Hillary’s cry, and how she instinctively babbled words to conceal that the crying was about item 1 and tried to transform it into item 2?
With Romney, and people wanting to claim he has no values, then they also can’t call him a liberal. He’s probably somewhere around 40 - 30 - 30. With the failed Thompson candidacy, the FR presumption is 0 - 50 - 50, which is, of course, profoundly arrogant to be forcing his values onto people. With McCain, the perpetual candidate, we see something like 80 - 10 - 10, with that final 10 being a sort of perverse set of values where he takes great pride in championing liberal causes as a Republican. Huckabee comes to the table at 50 - 0 - 50. A bizarre combo.
Thompson was a non-starter from the get go.
Now’s he’s dead.
Buh - bye.
All of them
I like your rationale, but would hold my nose and vote Republican on the sole issue of terrorism. Any Republic would be stronger on this vital issue. Hillary or Obama would slash the military and downplay any threat, a truly freightening scenario.
“There is no reason for Fred to drop out.”
...other than the fact he doesn’t have a prayer of getting elected.
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.