Posted on 05/17/2012 8:20:19 AM PDT by not romney
Because I want to defeat Obama. The Romney argument from day one has been 'you have to vote for Romney because he's the only one that can beat Obama'. I won't vote for Romney precisely because I know he will lose to Obama. A few examples as to why he'll lose:
Romney's positive approval rating has been 20 points below even McCain and Dole's who both ended up losing. It will probably start to rise with the end of the primary, however this is before the Obama Nasties open fire with both barrels, and Romney is a very target rich environment.
McCain lost to Obama by five million votes. The retort is 'yes but the luster is off Obama this time', true, but the luster has never been and never will be on Romney. The apathy on the right is every bit as apathetic as the apathy on the left. However in addition to apathy there is almost a disdain on the right for Romney and the GOP. Romney will lose three types of voters. 1. Unmotivated voters who won't bother to turn off 'Dancing with the Stars' to go vote. 2. Voters like myself that know Romney is a liberal and are disgusted with the dishonest corrupt campaign he and the GOP have run. 3. Voters that hate Romney so much that as soon as the word 'Romney' leaves your mouth the conversation is over. So from where is Romney going to get his votes?
(Excerpt) Read more at teapartyorg.ning.com ...
I’d like to go to sleep and wake up on election day, just in time to vote. Then go back to sleep for a week while everyone from both sides runs in circles and screams.
Don't!
I wont vote for a pro abort. Ever. Romney’s history is pro-abort. I won’t vote for someone who pushes socialized medicine. Romney socialized medicine while governor in MA and the kenyanites used his model to do the same to the nation. I won’t vote for someone who will commit the one truly irretrievable sin of appointing more Lefist judges. See Romney’s history in MA. Et cetera. Et al. And so on. And so forth. If I wanted a Communist or a Socialist to be president I would vote for the kenyan. Romney, were he to win, would be a one term president turning off the majority of those center/right voters he would get this year and would turn over a then solidly socialist government to the kenyan’s heir or perhaps to the kenyan himself.
Ain’t that the truth?
For the most part - I ignore these political threads just like I do the Religion hate-fest threads. Or the humblegunner threads. Or the (fill in the blank) threads.
There used to be a time when JR and the mods just locked threads when they became FUBAR. No more replies.
Now they fester on for days and with thousands of replies and hundreds of FReepmails. And when the grumblings and infighting reaches epic proportions and zots go flying everywhere - Jim zots the thread and ~voila~
It never happened.
So you are prepared to have at least 2 or more ultra=liberals put on the SCOTUS under Hussein Obama.
His history is pro abortion. See MA.
By gawd, that’s it! Better our commie than their commie!
Huh?
If you think Romney is a communist then I cannot help you. I suggest perhaps furthering your education.
I support the author (you?) on this 100%. Since the economic collapse is mathematically NOT preventable at this point, we need it to happen on Obama's watch, because HE made it happen. If it gets blamed on a Republican, the Left will get that much more power.
You didn’t read the article, I take? Your question was addressed in whole paragraphs.
Voting for Romney or Obama is a vote for marxism either way.
You lush marxism as you personally are doing and yoj can expect to get called on it from here on out.
For conservatives, if the Republicans switch to runninv liberals they are our enemies as much as the democrats.
This is not a Republican site. It is a conservative site.
Dont stump for your marxist here
Romney did not change his mind on abortion at age 59 in 2005, he merely reversed his political positions to campaign for the GOP presidential nomination.
Remember that Romney was not just pro-choice, Romney was a passionate, dedicated, effective, pro-abortion salesman, delivering public, heart-felt descriptions of what led his family to become pro-abortion since 1963 and how his mother was a hero for having the courage to campaign on it in her 1970 Senate campaign.
Thanks, Mr. Edd, I’ll tell Wilbur!
Uh, yeah, but if people don't vote for him, he will lose.
It's sort of a self-fulfilling prophesy.
“His history is pro abortion. See MA”
He is now pro life. May be for expedient political advantage or he may sincerely believe it. I do not know.What I do know is that Obama has been consistently pro abortion, always was and always will be.So is your argument that you reward the person who is no doubt pro abortion by throwing away your vote on a third party or not voting? Rather than trying to oust the sure thing for abortion on the off chance that the Republican RINO candidate may not retreat from his pro life position after he is elected because of the one flip flap too many rule making it difficult for him to do so.
I should not be replying to this article for a number of reasons but feel compelled to do so anyway.
I must first say a couple of things to prepare readers that may not want to get to the end and think they have wasted their time by reading what I have said.
1. I don’t hate Romney. That being said I might modify that by saying I don’t hate Romney any more than other RINO politicians. The worst quality about Romney after being more liberal than me is that he is a politician. Politicians do ugly things.
2. I don’t hate Mormons and I’m not even afraid of them. I am so unafraid that I married one of them and am less afraid of them now than I was before I married.
3. I never thought either George Bush was conservative. I voted for both of them.
4. I have never been a cry baby who threw a tantrum if I did not get my way.
Now to my comments.
From the article:
____________________________________________________________
Romney’s positive approval rating has been 20 points below even McCain and Dole’s who both ended up losing. It will probably start to rise with the end of the primary, however this is before the Obama Nasties open fire with both barrels, and Romney is a very target rich environment.
___________________________________________________________
This is either old information or a prevarication. I don’t know and I don’t care, Romneys approval rates at least by several polls are three times higher than stated. Still, those polls don’t mean anything, the poll on the first Tuesday in November is all that counts. Right now the RINO Romney is polling higher than the Marxist Obama.
from the article:
______________________________________________________
Romney is so stiff that it makes it almost too painful to watch.
_____________________________________________________
Reagan was stiff as a board but conveyed his ideas well enough.
From the Article:
_______________________________________________________
Both Romney and Obama are desperate to avoid their records, causing them to run a vapid, mud slinging campaign with both candidates trying to bring the other down, rather than building himself up.
________________________________________________________
This is simply not true. Romney talks about his record all the time. I’m not sure that all of what he says is true, after all he is a politician. As far as I’m concerned the definition of liar is “Politician”.
from the article:
______________________________________________________
If Obama wins, the next two Supreme Court justices will alter the makeup of the court. Nonsense. Scalia, Alito, Thomas, Roberts aren’t going anywhere. Kennedy probably isn’t either. If he does, his replacement still has to be confirmed by the Senate. You simply don’t confirm anyone less conservative than Kennedy, next problem.
__________________________________________________________
Nothing could be any more wrong. Kagen & Sotomayor are the most liveral justices ever appointed. Ginsburg is 78 years old. Only 1.8% of our population is older. I would say her chances of outlasting Obama in a 2nd term are something on the order of 2 in a hundred, they aren’t wonderful. Scalia is 75, getting up there too, how many people do you know that are 75 and still working? I expect the next term of president will see at least one Supreme Court change possibly two.
from the article:
______________________________________________________
Not only was Ross Perot a poor candidate but H.W. Bush was not a horrible candidate either. But this time Romney is a horrible candidate. Also Clinton does not even come close to Barak Obama on the socialist meter, so things are very different this time. Can you imagine a true conservative debating these two liberal Bozos, with their socialist medicine legislation hanging around their necks?
_______________________________________________________
Where in the world do you get your information. Clinton and Obama are on the same page, they are identical except they spell their names different. Recall that Clinton tried to get Hillary care passed but it was voted down.
If you think the Media will portray Romney as a liberal you are mistaken. To the media he will be an ultra conservative. George W. Bush had a tough spine but he was liberal except when it comes to the military. My hope is that if Romney wins he will be at least as conservative as W. I know, that isn’t asking for much but is better than the Marxist Obama. If you really think that a third party conservative will do anything but assure Obama gets elected you must be smoking something really good.
We need a conservative. We need a Michelle Bachman but we need to do it in the primaries not the general election as a third party.
Michelle Bachman lost. She didn’t lose because of her ideas and ideals she lost because she got in late. It takes four years of campaigning and scratching backs to win. It takes organization and money. You can’t run for president on a shoe string, you can’t run half a$$ed as Cain did. You have to be all in.
from the article:
______________________________________________________
On the other hand our third party candidate will start with a huge base of disenfranchised conservative voters.
________________________________________________________
What is the meaning of Huge? We on Free Republic consider ourselves Conservative. The rest of the world considers us right wingers, there is a big difference. To the rest of the world George Bush 1 & 2 were conservative. To us they were not. To the rest of the world Romney is a conservative, even he thinks he is conservative. Republican does not mean conservative. I doubt if more than about 20% of the electorate is conservative enough to vote for Palin and that is VERY generous. Actually I think the number is probably way smaller. Palin in many ways, most ways, would be the perfect president but would have a hard time getting more than 1/5th of the vote. So maybe a conservative third party candidate would start out with a huge (20%) base I don’t think they would ever get any further.
from the article:
______________________________________________________
If Obama wins we muddle through for another four, but have another shot in four years for a true conservative.
______________________________________________________
NO! NOT EVEN CLOSE. If Obama wins it’s over. There will be no more conservatives. Obama care is like Social Security, once it starts there is no turning it off. The only thing after Obama care is collapse, what comes after collapse will be Marxism. The whole purpose of Obama Care is to bring down the system. The reason for Occupy Wallstreet is to bring down the system. Obama and his cadre of Marxist in his government have one goal, that is to bring it down.
With any republican, including the RINO’s we MIGHT have a chance to get a conservative that can do something in four year or even eight years. With Obama, it’s over!
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.