Posted on 06/15/2014 5:10:43 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
Yes, Obama has to go.
I was trying to make a point about electing somebody as president who work with patriots to force the unconstitutionally big federal government to work within in its constitutionally limited powers, particularly Section 8 of Article I.
But that's like trying to find a unicorn imo.
That may be true, all that you said, however, it took Ronald Reagan 3 times at the bat to hit the home run. Three times, for whatever reasons. So, it can be done, by anyone.
I was basically referring to Nixon's election losses for POTUS in 60 and Cali gov in 62 and coming back to win in 68.
The miserable RAT Mitt Romney, the backstabbing,
RomneyCARE-imposing, gay-marriage-imposing, exposed FRAUD,
who ruined the Mass economy (and lied about it like
everything else) .... is no Ronald Reagan.
Heck, RAT Romney needed his wife to defend him in 2012
because like a RAT he could not.
/johnny
lol
Babies, purists, whatever. I’ll wear the labels gladly, because I will not vote for another leftist, no matter what letter follows his name.
“Our base is not big enough to win national elections and we have to reach out to new people, and that means African-Americans, Hispanics, young people, single women,” Paul told The Washington Post.”
Bullcrap!!!! If any Republican candidate acted like Palin or Cruz, they would get 100% of the base and that would be enough to get over the hump. In addition, since many are values voters, the squish lose voters because they stand for nothing.
Conservatives stand for something and that’s why independents and blue collar Democrats vote for them. The Reagan Democrats re alive and well. We just need the right candidate to get to them.
AND IT ISN’T ROMNEY OR ANYONE ELSE IN THE GOPe.
It is rather interesting that on the day we lost the Iraq war officially, all the GOP sycophants come out in force pushing more liberalism.
Do it for my kids, do not even try it, please, pretty please.
I just got a break between kids and family life to check FR and I have to read this? LOL!
But hey, it’s always nice to start with something funny.
“I correctly stated early on in the primaries in 2012 that Mitt Romney was the least likely GOP candidate to win in the General Election; I can safely say, that the same thing and know that this time, it is even more true.”
you are certainly correct for 2016. Hillary will be the next president, unless the MSM gives up on supporting her sorry excuse for a candidacy based on her “experience,” “qualifications,” and support for women’s rights. the only women’s right she has ever really supported is one with the last name of Clinton.
I voted for him last time because I thought he was the best choice, and I’ll do it again. Mitt Romney has my support—again—in 2016.
No, it can’t be done “by anyone”.
How can you compare Reagan to “anyone”?
In 1968 he ran against a sitting republican president, in 1976 he ran against a sitting republican president and almost beat him.
Romney has won a single election that he won with less than 50%, in his more than 20 year career, and he served that single term as a failure and had to give up his goal of reelection, leaving office with 34% approval and turning the seat over to the democrats.
Romney ran against nobodies for 2008 and lost to two guys with no money or organization after he broke spending records and spent 50 million dollars of his own money, then in 2012 he squeaked it out as America kept desperately rotating among his nobody challengers for someone besides Mitt, then he lost the election against Jimmy Carter’s second term, an election that was almost impossible to lose, and it wasn’t even close.
Are you at the right web site?
Exactly what about Democrat Romney interests you?
His wanting to give RomneyCARE to Hezbollah?
His use of criminal illegals and lying about it?
His penchant to be above the Law like Obama?
His endless defense of Obama?
Pure insanity. Not a f*ing chance.
And I'm holding back.
Man, give the new poster a break.
I was pointing out that Nixon and Romney were two totally different situations, Nixon had two losses but was incredibly successful in politics.
Romney is a disaster in politics, and has a single under 50% victory to show for his entire career, and he couldn’t even win reelection in that.
Wavy_Wally
Since May 23, 2014
So?
“Mitt is a sugar donut.”
And ‘O’ is a wad of thrice used TP.
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.