Posted on 05/31/2012 11:40:44 PM PDT by Peter ODonnell
Just wondering ...
Do you plan to support Mitt Romney, hold out for a Ron Paul candidacy, or is there a third alternative that attracts you?
I am not an American resident or voter, but I share your concerns about Obama's potential for enhanced trouble-making in a second term. Romney has obvious "RINO" or "CINO" flaws, but could be as much as a considerable improvement on Obama, at least almost guaranteed to be a less dangerous president. Or is it worse to have a so-called conservative running a globalist administration?
Now with Ron Paul, I feel you could expect better economic management than either of the above, but many have questions about the realism or even the safety of Ron Paul's foreign policy and attitudes towards global security issues. Personally, I think he might do okay since his first term for sure would be overwhelmed by economic issues.
I don't think there is any other realistic alternative but maybe people have some ideas about that.
Well, basically just wondering how people are viewing this as we move inexorably closer to the moments of decision.
Hope and pray that it works out as this world would be a much worse place with a weakened or damaged America (as is already evident). Romney at least talks a good game on the subject of restoring American greatness, but I think that is a task that will take a lot more than cheerleading from a president at this point. Not to say that the U.S.A. appears fatally weakened but there are some disturbing trends.
Keep the faith ...
If I were in a swing state, I would probably hold my nose and vote for Romney. Obama must be defeated by any means.
But I’m in California, so it’s not something I have to worry about. I have the luxury of not having to vote for the schmuck.
If I get the sense that Romney could carry CA, perhaps I will then toss him my support just to see Obama humiliated, but the chances of that happening are very slim.
As for Ron Paul, some things I like, some things I don’t. He’s not presidential material in my book.
I don’t expect you will find many favorable opinions on either Paul or Romney here on FR.
“If I were in a swing state, I would probably hold my nose and vote for Romney. Obama must be defeated by any means.”
_____________________________________
That is also my sentiment.
In my case, I do not need to worry about voting from overseas, as I am from Tennessee.
There is no way in H that Obozo could take Tennessee.
Even homeboy Gore lost his own state.
I am, however, worried about the pompous FReepers who will refuse to vote Romney, even if it means an Obama victory.
That is just downright treasonous.
As much as I dislike Romney, I would take any non Communist
over Obumbo.
Not enthused about Romney. I am pragmatic enough to pull the lever for Romney in November. ABO. This November will not be the time to squander my vote on some third party candidate as a form of Protest.
I agree on the favorable opinions of Romney on FR. If anyone expressed one, they got zotted, didn't they?
Willard and Zero are 100% unacceptable to serve. Barring the former being dumped at the GOP Convention for a Conservative who possesses character, principles, morality and integrity, for which he has none of, I will vote (Virgil) Goode over the two evils.
Basically, for those Conservatives, you must simply vote your conscience. Ask if replacing one abomination for another who could inflict more damage to the GOP as a vehicle for Conservatism for the long run is truly worth it. A Pyrrhic victory.
BTW,
I don’t think Romney hates America. I was reading about Romney’s father..
I didn’t really know that much about him..thought he was a wealthy person all his life..I was surprised to find how many jobs he had, starting out as a carpenter, and basically taking different jobs, and moving to different places in an effort to support his family, and give them a better life.
In defense of my ignorance of George Romney, it’s not something that I was that familiar with..I guess I am Texascentric.
Since he has the Delegates, he has the nomination. Why would anyone vote for Virgil Goode? Brings to mind the name Ross Perot.
I might want to drive a Toyota Tundra, but if my realistic options are keeping a bicycle with a broken chain that I fear could endanger me, or going with a motorbike, I will take the motorbike.
Because he's a Conservative. Why would a Conservative vote for a Socialist like Willard ?
The President thanks you for your support.
Basically, for those Conservatives, you must simply vote your conscience.
Only children vote their conscience. Adults cast their vote in such a way as to promote the most favorable result!
Because some conservatives can tell the difference between reality and wishful thinking?
Get some new material.
"Only children vote their conscience."
I wasn't aware children had the right to vote. Adults, whom do have the right to vote, had better do precisely that -- to vote their conscience or they have no room to complain when the country goes in a predictably immoral and unethical direction.
"Adults cast their vote in such a way as to promote the most favorable result!"
Which is why I will never cast a vote for either Zero or his vanilla twin Willard. No favorable result comes of voting for either abomination.
You are a good man Charlie Brown! Your thinking is logical, practical, rational & intelligent versus as you say the “pompous” & “I am more pure than you” folks who live in a dream world.
If Paul runs as an independent, he will be handing the election to Obama. It is time for the Ron Paul crowd to accept reality that this man will never be president, regardless of how well-liked he may be among Libertarians. He simply does not have enough support. If he runs, then he is demonstrating nothing but selfishness, as he will hand the election to Obama just to make a point.
Millions will NOT vote for Bishop Romney, the author
of RomneyCARE, but will in its stead write in the
name: Gov. Palin.
Does Virgil Goode has a chance to win in November 2012?
If yes, vote for him by all means. If not, he is irrelevant.
Note that losers in elections have zero power to change anything towards conservative agenda. Examples: Hoffman in NY-23, Angle in Nevada, O’Donnell in DE. All excellent conservatives, I even sent some of them campaign donations, but all have now become ineffective & irrelevant.
Was’nt it Reagan who said I will vote for the most conservative candidate who can get elected? So your thinking seems the right approach to me.
I have watched Ron Paul throughout all the debates. No sale.
Virgil Goode is too late, to get a solid foothold, since he was not mentioned by anyone on this forum, until AFTER the debates. I would choose Herman Cain, but he is not on the ballot.
The idea is to remove Obama from office, through the election process, in November. Period.
All these ‘other guys’ might be really good, in their own rights, yet since it is either Romney and Freedom, or Obama and Communism, I did NOT serve in the U.S. military, to hand my country over to my Cold War enemy!
We have a candidate, while not the one we hoped for, is by far, better than the POTUS we have.
Should Oblunder retain the WH and some portion of Congress, this nation as we know it will cease to exist. Either by fiat or Executive Order, Oblunder will complete the destruction of the USA.
That's what you have to choose.
Choose wisely.
Because this is not my first rodeo and have lived thru JFK, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Clinton and all in between, I will vote Romney. Will not argue the semantics anymore. I am a conservative and will not allow BO to continue to
take this country down. I have my principals as well and watching this destruction is killing me on a daily basis. Any speed bump that we can throw is
better than this IMHO. I live in a swing state. Enough said.
I'm not in a swing state but amen to all you say...and I've lived through Roosevelt, Truman. voted for Eisenhower 2nd term..(my first vote).
If forced to choose between 4 years of socialism (romney) or 4 years of isolationism (paul) I can deal with the isolationism, but never the socialism.
I will NEVER vote for that bastard and I said it in 2008 and almost daily gave that statement here on FR... right up until today. Many warned the gop/e. They are NOT our friends nor are they a Conservative party. Many leaders of the gop and many elected officials are already saying that mitt's "no new taxes and cutting spending" pledge is just a negotiating tactic. They are already working with rats behind the scenes to RAISE TAXES and crush CAPITALISM. Remember the secret deal that killed Cut, Cap and Balance? Don't doubt me... Rush and Levin have played the audio of many gop movers and shakers saying just that... issakson, cantor, cornyn... the hatch challenger, lindsey graham etc etc etc. To believe that mitt will do the right thing is to believe in a fairy tail. LISTEN TO THE PARTY LEADERS... LISTEN TO WHAT THY ARE SAYING THAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO! The truth is... it is almost too late to do anything about it. At least I can stand tall and state that I never had anything to do with electing the second worse president this Republic will have endured. Carter may slip to number three if mitt wins. I am not here to be part of a republican team... I am not here to promote the party line... I am here to promote and discuss and implement CONSERVATIVE IDEOLOGY. I will continue to do so until I am banned for doing it.
LLS
Right on.
You spelled “hundreds” wrong.
I plan on voting for the candidate with the highest odds of unseating obama. Currently, that appears to be the GOP candidate (Romney, barring a miracle at the convention).
But, like I said: I'll vote for the candidate with the highest odds of unseating obama. Give me an alternative with higher odds than Romney and I'll vote for that alternative.
"Lead", "follow" or "get out of the way". Pick one.
Perhaps, but I haven't noticed it. What I *have* noticed is a crap-ton of folks who like Paul out of hopes for legal weed.
I would support him for Sec-Treasury though.
The answer depends on whether you just want to make a statement or you want to defeat Obama. To me, the time for statement making is during the primaries.
I refuse to cast my vote, my only vote, for an unacceptable candidate. I recognize that some folks are so paralyzed by fear that they can be herded into the Romney corral constructed by Karl Rove. I want no part of Romney or all that he represents.
Reject Obama. Reject Romney. Reject evil.
Fear not. Trust God.
Hey, this is America and you can vote for your dog if you like! At least you'll be able to feel good about *yourself* and that is what's most important, right?
Won’t be voting for that lying, left-wing, Progressive Liberal Mitt Romney under any set of circumstances.
I’ll either write in Sarah Palin or vote for an actual conservative that is running like Virgil Goode.
Ron Paul is not going to run, that’s 100%. The reason, his son is a Republican Senator who he wants to have a future. In fact the hope of the Paul movement is being put into Rand Paul. He showed the ability to get regular conservative votes in his 2010 Senate primary. He’s a longshot VP for Romney and a possible 2016 (his Senate seat is up that year) candidate if Romney loses or 2020 candidate if he wins.
Your post seems to suggest you believe Paul could win a three-way race which is impossible, he couldn’t win a 2 way race. If he were the GOP nominee Obama would hand him his a$$ over the racist stuff from the Paul newsletters in the early 90’s (he didn’t write them but it doesn’t matter, his name is on it) and more his out of the mainstream views like legalizing all drugs so we can have more wacked out people trying to eat homeless guys faces.
A recent poll showed Ron Paul taking as much from Obama as from Romney so it wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing if it happened but it’s not gonna as I said. If you aren’t aware most Freepers have as much regard for Paul as they do Romney, which is to say they hate his guts. Yet for most people here backed his son Rand in the Senate primary anyway.
Most Freepers who can’t bring themselves to support Romney are backing Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party, who’s vote comes entirely out of Romney’s hide plus people that would otherwise stay home of course. Goode is obviously more conservative than Romney but I don’t care for him either myself. Former pawn of the tobacco industry, former democrat who enabled democrat control of the VA Senate back in the day and endorsed Doug Wilder around the time we think Romney was backing Dukakis. And his response to the 2010 landslide was to abandon the party instead of staying and trying to improve it. That kind of ‘tude makes him part of the problem, as a Canadian you know what happens when the right divides into 2 parties. If conservatives were united and had someone better than the flawed Rick Santorum we wouldn’t be having this conversion cause Romney’s a** would have been grass in the primaries.
One guy here is an advocate of the smaller “America’s Party” which will get on few if any ballots and receive an infinitesimal number of votes. But if I was gonna “waste” a vote it would be for their guy over Goode.
Paulbots will be voting for the Libertarian Gary Johnson former GOP Governor of New Mexico, who is similar to Paul except he’s more socially liberal and is not suffering from age related dementia. Since he’s pro-abortion, pro-gay, pro-drugs, and pro-illegals few (none that I know of) are on his bandwagon around here even though he’d be swell on the economy and government regulation. Johnson will hopefully take votes from Obama too (Potheads + ANTI-WAR) but may guarantee Barack wins New Mexico (which Romney doesn’t need and will probably gobama anyway).
Many people are saying they’d vote Romney in a swing state but they live in democrat state Obama can’t lose or a safe Republican state so they won’t bother.
That’s getting into philosophical territory I’d rather not bother with, voting your conscience for a third party being supposedly morally better but mathematically the same thing as not voting at all or writing in “Dick Nixon” as I did once for an unopposed city office. 1 individual vote is extremely unlikely to make the difference in ANY race in any state but if the millions of people who don’t vote in part because of that reason did it would have a huge effect.
I’m keeping it simple. I want Osama to lose because I can’t stand to see him anymore or hear his snooty voice. The only place I want to see his face in the future is on a whack-a-mole game. I want his slobbering idiot supporters to suffer the dejection they deserve and be reminded that WE the decent sensible people are the majority. I want to ensure that he, the worst President ever, isn’t validated historically by being reelected. And if 1 Conservative Supreme Court Justice dies in the next 4 years and is replaced by Obama were are seriously screwed as a nation.
I respect others who feel differently because they think Romney will destroy the country too and the GOP along with it. I think he’ll be a little worse than Bush, who was bad, but hopefully he’d avoid the same blunders. If he doesn’t he’ll be a 1 termer.
Either way I love stupid analogies, Obama is trying to burn down my house and has be to stopped, he’s standing there pouring gas on it. Glove Romney as the Republican nominee is the only guy with a hose and pair of handcuffs to get rid of him. But Romney is a pyro-maniac himself and maybe (or say probably instead of maybe, or even say certainly) he’s gonna start his own fire before long. That will be dealt with when it happens. Obama wins and my house is a pile of ash tomorrow.
I’m not making a pitch for Romney I hate the guy but to make a much better analogy stolen from another freeper it’s like helping Stalin beat Hitler in WW2.
Everyone will make their own choice, I used to be on the no more RINO Presidents period train myself so I get that and I hate our RINO Presidents Bush 2, Bush 1, Ford, Nixon, Hoover, (I’ll be charitable and give Ike a pass) I hate their damn worthless guts and every one of them enabled the democrat slime that followed. Last Republican Prez that was followed by an elected Republican Prez, Reagan, before that, Coolidge. (plus Ike was middling and 1960 was a tie). That is not a coincidence.
It’s a vicious cycle. Romney’s slogan should be out of the fire and back in the frying pan.
Sorry for the long post.
WHO ????
Romney will be a disaster. Obama is already a nightmare. Ron Paul isn't running, and he never was serious anyway.
vote??
I like Scott Walker but he couldnt run this cycle.
” I like Scott Walker but he couldnt run this cycle. “
BUMP
Which is more socialism with either mitt of the fraud.. Soros thanks you for your vote.
You may as well just use the ballot for toilet paper. Would anyone even notice the smell? ;d
We vote electronic here.
Obama will win Maryland just like Romney (as McCain before him) won the Maryland primary. There is little or NO chance that anything can change those certainties.
I have no vote in that election even if I had any hope.
By analogy, pop LOTS of popcorn, settle into that comfy chair and watch Myth and Obozo slug it out. One will lose. One will win. We can briefly celebrate the loss of either one, having voted for Tom Hoefling (our own Eternal Vigilance as I will) or Virgil Goode for POTUS. Then we move in to finish off in a political Superbowl the winner of the Socialist, Baby-Killer, Marriage-Destroying, Gun Grabbing, Envirowhacko, Church Persecuting Parties' League Championship. We should nominate and elect as many brutally antiEstablishment GOP candidates to the Senate, House and governorships and state legislative seats as possible as OUR spring training and let the RESISTANCE to the Socialist, etc., League Champion hit the ground running on election night.
That ruins my joke.
Over/under 60% for Obama you think? I'm not sure. I expect a swing against Obama in every or almost every state but I think Maryland might be less Republican than it was 4 years so even if Black turnout is down as it should be I don't know if Romney can do much better than McCain's 36.5%. Hawaii, Vermont, Rhode Island, and Maryland are the only states I can see Obama maintaining over 60%.
These losers re-elected O’Mally in a landslide after him raising THEIR taxes and close to admitting that he lied about keeping electric prices down to get elected. This state is more liberal than ever. Obama polls high here.
Like Northern VA voters here are on the gravy train, VA will be a challenge too for Romney for the same reason,
Credit goes to Professor Schweikart.
I have always thought we would have been better off not choosing sides between Hitler and Stalin but that we should have popped a LOT of popcorn, settled into comfy chairs and witnessed the result of "Let's let Hitler and Stalin fight." After their respective forces had annihilated one another and only one was left barely standing, send in Patton and finish off the surviving forces. No more Nazi Germany. No more Soviet Union. No Warsaw Pact. No European Axis. No Cold War (after WE have won). Spring training for our military would have been finishing off Imperial Japan while waiting for the preliminary result in Europe to determine whom we would be annihilating there.
There's an idea. I haven't looked at it that way. But might Hilter have kicked their butt without having to deal with us on the Western Front and then been in a stronger position? Imagine if he had stay allied with Soviets in the first place, ouch. (This is more interesting than the awful election.)
In other words, it was just as likely that we would have faced a vastly stronger Nazified Europe, with ALL the troops swung our way, armed with rockets, jets, and nukes. And STILL at war with Japan. Not a good scenario. No, you don't play "maybe" when your survival is at stake. You ally with the lesser of evils and worry about that one later.
I like your WWII analogy, except for the fact that Britain would have fallen to Hitler, had we not joined the fight when we did. I think the scenario you proposed would have played out just like that, had our forces stopped at the Rhine.
Simply securing France, Belgium, and the Low Countries would probably have been sufficient to secure ours and our real allies interests. The Reds could have then taken over the rest of the fight, and Hitler and Stalin would have beaten each other to smithereens.
It’s interesting to war game out what might have been. I’m kind of turning your analogy over in my mind right now to see what lessons I can draw from it.
“Either way I love stupid analogies, Obama is trying to burn down my house and has be to stopped, he’s standing there pouring gas on it. Glove Romney as the Republican nominee is the only guy with a hose and pair of handcuffs to get rid of him. But Romney is a pyro-maniac himself and maybe (or say probably instead of maybe, or even say certainly) he’s gonna start his own fire before long. That will be dealt with when it happens. Obama wins and my house is a pile of ash tomorrow.”
Very well-put. Romney sucks, but voting for him is the only way to stop Obama.
It would, of course, have been useful to have our forces nearby. If we put them in England, I don’t think the Germans would have invaded England to get at them snd they might have thought twice about the wisdom of running the risk of tangling with American forces in France, Belgium and the Low Countries. I am guessing that Hitler would have tangled with the soviets on the Eastern Front if it seemed that we would stay put in England or Western Europe. He was certainly a nutcase but why would he fight a two-front war if he thought it possible that he might fight only Stalin. We could have propagandized that our troops were in England only because of our old special relationship with the Brits. We could also have communicated that V-2s and buzz bombs were not welcome against our forces and might lead to quite lethal consequences for the nazi regime if indulged.
Hitler was not terribly rational, He made grave errors in his war against the soviets. At first, when he sent only the Sturm Abteilung (young blonde, blue-eyed Aryans) into Russia's Western precincts, they were welcomed by the long-suffering soviet citizenry. Within weeks, he sent in the SchutzStaffel to round up the Jews. Backfired BIG TIME. Stalin had been forced to allow his people to march behind ikons of the Blessed Virgin and invoking not the Comintern but "Mother Russia." OTOH, neither the nazi ideologues nor the soviet ideologues were likely to yield to one another once blood had been shed. It would have been an epic battle with monstrous casualties, and then we would have been in an excellent position to, ummm, pragmatically capitalize on the situation.
A dog would not do nearly the damage those two execrable leftist frauds have and will continue to inflict.
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.