Posted on 04/10/2012 9:55:58 AM PDT by xzins
The basic reason Romney should be opposed by conservatives is that Romney is not a conservative. More specifically, Romney is the author of the $50 abortion, the originator of the gay marriage license, and the founder of big government-forced health care.
Those 3 are a mix of social and fiscal issues. The conclusion is that Romney is neither a fiscal conservative nor a social conservative. His tenure as governor of Massachusetts proves that point.
Now, as Romney is touted as the “etch-a-sketch” candidate who will shortly begin his tack to the left, principled conservatives will do well to begin listing their reasons for not ever supporting Mitt Romney for anything other than Citizen Mitt.
1. Abortion: Romney is the author of the $50 abortion.
2. Gay Marriage: Romney signed legislation requiring the issuing of gay marriage licenses. Romney has tried to “moderate” his position by becoming pro-gay union....big deal. He once told gay operatives that he was the gay lobby's best hope for getting their agenda into the republican party. (Look at that, too, in terms of abortion and judicial selections.)
3. RomneyCare: Sadly, Mitt thinks it's just fine to have state governments force you to buy health insurance. I suppose he finds the power to do that in the US Constitution. Oh...I remember...the place where the Constitution says “states can force the people to buy things they don't want to buy and enter into contracts they don't want to enter into.”
4. Give notice to the GOP-Establishment: It probably is very wise to shove down their throat what they are trying to shove down ours. They are not the masters of the conservative universe. Allowing them to think they are will simply encourage more of the same in the future. I'm sure the romney-bots and the romney-enablers will want their say about Romney opponents handing the election to Obama, but the manipulation by the GOP-E is what will lead to that.
5. Romney's “Scorched Earth” Campaign: Romney has divided conservatives and seriously weakened voter turnout. His strategy, liberal that he is, was to run ads via his SuperPac pigeonholing the conservative purity of his opponents. That kind of outrageous hypocrisy deserves punishment and not reward.
6. Conservative Resignation to supporting Romney appears to be surrender of conservative principle. The results of that could be far-reaching. It could mean that the republican movement is totally abandoned to the liberal establishment.
7. Judicial Appointments: "Liberty Counsel Action Vice President Matt Barber said Romney’s appointments were constitutional “living document” poster children.
“Many of Romney’s appointments were not only liberal, not only Democrats, but were radical counter-constitutionalists. How on earth can we expect that, as president, he would be any different?” Barber asked rhetorically."
8. Other reasons "Conservatives Should Continue to Oppose Romney after the Nomination" are welcome. Please post them below.
With all due respect, this is a guarantee to reelect Obummer. I will vote for whomever runs against him.
I refuse to cut off my nose to spite my face.
mcromney is a white fubo with an r after his name... the destruction will be the same, and if it is going to hell in a handbasket, let it be with a guy that has a d after his name....
wanna save the country? It is easy. Just say NO to socialism, in all it’s forms, regardless of the letter that follows the name.
This is not suicide. This is not a wasted vote. It is direct ACTION against socialism. PERIOD.
wanna make up crap and call names, fine. Go ahead. My tagline says everything.
Make a stand!!!! Let the socialists know that you will not sign off on their agenda!!!! This is EXACTLY what the forefathers of this country did. It will be painful, bit it is necessary.
If you support mcromney for any reason, you are a socialist, period.If you support santorum, you are a socialist, period.
I am NOT a socialist, my name will not be counted among those that vote for and/or support socialism. What say you?
If Romney wins, IT WILL BE A LIBERAL VICTORY too. Only this time, the liberal will have an R behind his name.
If Romney wins, IT WILL BE A LIBERAL VICTORY too. Only this time, the liberal will have an R behind his name.
Basically, to keep divided government we need to maintain about 43-45 republicans in the Senate, given the rules of the Senate. If Romney gets non-supported, it will serve notice that conservatives aren’t messing around, and those senators will pretty much toe the line.
In terms of the House, maintaining control of the house would ensure divided government.
It’s done brother, get over it.
Xzins, my advice to you is that asking to have a serious talk with Free Republic's top leadership team would be a very good idea. I have no idea what they will say as far as practical plans, but I do think Free Republic can play a huge role in a post-nomination campaign against Mitt Romney.
For now my focus is on trying to defeat Romney. I believe in miracles and I understand it will take one to defeat him at this point. I also know that hope is not a strategy, and have outlined some viable (if long shot) strategies elsewhere to do that.
What if Romney wins the nomination? Well, it looks like Jim Robinson has been very clear he won't support Romney even then. Free Republic is probably the largest conservative media operation (and yes, it is media) to take that position so far.
Others may be willing to do so — Rush Limbaugh and David Limbaugh are examples — but so far Free Republic is the only prominent organization to take that stance.
Seeing Mitt Romney's money machine unleashed against Free Republic will not be pretty, but I don't think even Romney is powerful enough to take on Limbaugh — and if he does, he's virtually guaranteeing a loss in November. I think any strategy of opposing Mitt Romney from the right after the nomination has to rely on the use of talk media and the internet, and has to be prepared to suffer some devastating attacks not only from the Democrats and RINOs but also from conservative Republicans furious that fellow conservatives are “helping re-elect Obama.”
As for me, I am not prepared to sign onto any “Plan B” today and want to stay focused on trying to defeat Romney so we don't have to face a “Plan B.” I don't want to think about what I may have to do if Romney is the Republican nominee.
Even Santorum or Paul.
We cannot allow Obama to serve another term.
And while I am offended by those who accuse me sometimes of de facto voting for Obama when I threaten to vote 3rd party...I'm offended because of the truth of the accusation.
A vote for anyone besides the GOP is, in fact, a vote for Obama.
Then how do we break this cycle of an RNC-approved Conservative Lite being shoved down our throats every 4 years? I don’t want to go 3rd party either but it seems like every 4 years we enable this.
Thanks, and you’re right. Romney WON’T win - even if every last FReeper suddenly threw away all pretense at principles and voted for him. The simple fact of the matter is that known “centrist,” liberal Republicans do not win national elections, nor do they win statewide elections in the majority of the states. Someone like Romney might be able to win a statewide race in a state like California or Massachusetts, especially when facing a weak Democrat opponent, but at the national level of the Presidency, this is moot, since Obama WILL TAKE all of the states where Romney is what you could remotely call “popular.”
The evidence for this is manifold - Ford, Bush I in 1992, Dole, McCain. In 2016, we’ll be able to make the same argument and add Romney’s name to the list.
The reason for this is simple - liberal Republicans are weak. They project weakness, and they do not inspire voters to vote for them. Liberal Democrats at least lead their party from their principles, no matter how twisted and disgusting those principles may be. Liberal Republicans, however, are what they are because they *necessarily* are compromisers, deal-cutters, sell-outs, and wishy-washy schmoes. The average voter looks at someone like Romney and thinks, “Nah. If I want a liberal, I’ll just vote for the Democrat.” People like Romney really have nothing to offer to people, leadership and principle-wise.
Reagan won as widely as he did in 1980 and 1984 not so much because of the popularity of his political positions, but because he projected an air of leadership, principle, and strength. He won people over because of the strength of his charactre and principle. Someone like Mitt Romney simply does not have these things, and therefore cannot replicate what Reagan did. A solid conservative who is able to articulate conservative principles, and who can show that they will lead from the front, could do so, winning over even people who only agree with them 50% of the time (i.e. the middle).
Actually, I’d rather have neither Obama or Romney.
I will too. It just won't be Romney.
Thanks for pointing this out. Obama will crush Romney, so the point is moot if Santorum is not nominated. But those on this thread who actually think it will make a difference can fight three times as hard to support Romney in order to make up for those on this thread who are unwilling to go this route, if it means that much to them.
Whoever wins the nomination fair and square is the only option. We conservatives did not play out our options smartly by splitting our votes on two conservatives over the first half of this primary season. It is counter-productive to fight this thing beyond the primary battle, if our goal is to defeat Obama. If one’s goal is to make a point over defeating Obama, then that’s a priority that is not in tune with mine.
Maybe if Obama didn't consider himself king that would work. He's been doing whatever he wants via executive orders and directives, so there really isn't any containing him.
Conversely, Romney would probably be easily contained just like we did Bush.
"Also, for the long term GOP direction, the party bosses need to learn that they cant win elections with a RINO."
If they didn't get it with McCain, they never will. The GOPe insistence on Romney is further proof. Sorry to say it, but the only solution here is 3rd party. They see a mass exodus and they'll start making with the red carpet again like 2010 when the Tea Party kicked so much booty.
I’m not happy at all he’s the choice but this not support him campaign is only going to get us 4 more years. We can get through 4 years of a liberal Republican but not 4 years of a man intent on remaking the nation in his image.
I’d be hard pressed to name a person i would not support over Obama.
Hardly. A vote for Obama is a vote for Obama. A vote for Romney is a vote for Romney. A vote for an alternative candidate is a vote for that candidate.
In America voters are still allowed to vote their principles.
Anyone who votes their principles gets a commendation from me. At least they’re not wishy-washy or dishonest.
This is stupid, if you go the route of opposing Romney (who I didn’t vote for but will support against Obama) you need to keep your mouth shut the next four years if Obama is elected. It will be bad choices like this that will cause it. Dump your Republican affiliation and go Independent but vote for Romney because if you don’t your as responsible for his supporters for getting him elected.
The real question is “What are you doing here?”
—
I’m not here advocating national suicide, like you.
You should be ashamed of yourself. Like I said, if you think we can survive four more years of Obama, you are truly an idiot.
Get lost.
Exactly. Also, I hope everyone remembers that the fight is not over, and Romney is not the Republican nominee--despite what one may hear on the Today Show or Fox News.
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.