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

To: Mariner

If we can’t nominate a conservative this year, then what year will we ever be able to? I get the feeling that the GOP is happy Obama is so far left, because they feel they can move their own party to the left, which is what they’ve always wanted to do. They don’t need to be very conservative in order to distinguish themselves from the Democrat now. A vote for Mitt is not so much a vote against Obama, it’s a vote to move the Republican party to the left, in about as permanent a way as possible.

On the other hand, it doesn’t appear there are enough conservatives even in the Republican party to make a conservative nominee possible. It’s hard to imagine a conservative party would do much better with voters. So if we’re looking at many years before we could even hope to change the public’s perception, if ever, short of a Greek-style collapse, we may choose to go with the lesser of two evils if the alternative is essentially a permanent Democrat government. Depends if you think Romney is really a lesser evil, but on at least a couple items he is at least on record in the campaign as saying he’d do things differently from Obama, such as the Keystone Pipeline. Hard to know if he’ll flip-flop though.

In addition, there is a possibility that people like George Will have wanted Romney all along because they don’t want to win. They may see a disastrous collapse coming for this country that is at this point irreversible, and would rather it happen under a Democrat president so that party could be blamed.


112 posted on 03/04/2012 11:51:17 AM PST by JediJones (The Divided States of Obama's Declaration of Dependence: Death, Taxes and the Pursuit of Crappiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: JediJones; All
"On the other hand, it doesn’t appear there are enough conservatives even in the Republican party to make a conservative nominee possible."

I don't believe that to be true.

The problem has been the quality of the conservative candidates. Cain, Bachman and Perry are out for a reason that has very little to do with their positions on the issues.

Gingrich and Santorum remain but there is a sizable anti crowd for both. One due to being perceived as holier-than-thou (which even some social conservatives find offensive) and the other due to being perceived as a sleazy womanizer/adulterer.

Either a Reagan or Goldwater could have taken the drivers' seat by now.

Folks, rarely is a national candidate chosen based principally on their position on the issues. Maybe never.

Gingrich could have won this mantle except his personal history. There are millions of people that will not vote for him over this.

123 posted on 03/04/2012 12:02:21 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | 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