Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Contentious Topic (VANITY)
Self | 11-23-11 | Self

Posted on 11/23/2011 7:42:45 AM PST by CincyRichieRich

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last
To: Cringing Negativism Network

I’m afraid you’re right...the shrugging has begun.


21 posted on 11/23/2011 8:01:08 AM PST by Night Hides Not (My dream ticket for 2012 is John Galt & Dagny Taggart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich
I gotta agree with you, for one reason only.

Judges. I'd much rather have Romney appointing federal judges than Obama.

I could never work for Romney, nor could I bring myself to donate to his campaign. But I won't stay home if it's a Romney-Obama election.

I'm tired of fascist/socialist judges. I don't want anymore of those.

22 posted on 11/23/2011 8:01:24 AM PST by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern? you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich

Principled surrender or sumthin’.......


23 posted on 11/23/2011 8:01:43 AM PST by OB1kNOb (The prudent see danger and take refuge, but the simple keep going and pay the penalty. - Prov 22:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich
Again, there is no salient argument for not voting against Obama if Romney is the nominee.

At this point, I am not entertaining that thought. We have a few viable anti Mittens candidates left and he is flat in the low 20's, poll wise. Now if we get to next Oct and I have a gun held to my head, I a sure I will probably vote against Obummer no matter what. My deep seeded hatred of that POS is on many levels and knows no bounds.

FUBO

24 posted on 11/23/2011 8:06:19 AM PST by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich

Your attitude is exactly what the a-holes that are trying to ram mittens down our throat are counting on.

I wouldn’t vote for mittens if you put a gun to my head.


25 posted on 11/23/2011 8:07:04 AM PST by Spruce (I will never vote for Mitt Romney. And nothing will change that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Night Hides Not

Ayn Rand most certainly was not referring to the Peoples Republic of China, when she so brilliantly imagined Galts Gulch.

It is sacrelige, for those who have committed this dastardly export of American strength to have done so hiding behind such dishonest anti-American treachery.


26 posted on 11/23/2011 8:07:29 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network (Evict the unsanitary, violent occupiers. Now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich
There are some good reasons not to vote for Romney, should he become the nominee.

1. A vote for Romney will legitimize liberalism (again).

2. Romney cannot win the general election, and another Obama win will demoralize the country.

3. My own conscience will not allow it. I couldn't live with myself, nor sleep in peace if I had done that.

4. No matter who he would pick as his running mate will not haul his candidacy out of the gutter.

And apparently I am much more conservative than you, so you simply would not understand.

27 posted on 11/23/2011 8:13:31 AM PST by Designer (Nit-pickin' and chagrinin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich
I hate this every 4 years. The Republican Party rips itself apart trying to find a "perfect" candidate to beat the Dem. Every primary we sulk, cuss, worry, and pace, trying to find someone who's farts don't stink. Every single one of them has some sort of problem. What you have to rely on is the Congress having the ability to stop stupid crap. Remember Bush Amnesty? Remember Obama Carbon tax? We just have to get the best we can get and fight for the rest.

I'm going to vote for Newt, but I have no illusions that he has no warts. Bush had warts, but would you really rather have had Gore?

Pick your candidate, vote on the day, and then back whoever wins. The prize is to remove Obama. Then we can get on to other topics. To act like the world ends if you don't get your guy is just childish. I read every day that people will never vote for Newt because he has been divorced. Really? Is Obama better because he stays with his wookie?

28 posted on 11/23/2011 8:14:14 AM PST by chuckles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

Check out Gingrich treatment of wayward judges. I like that enough to vote for him. No one else is thinking like Newt on liberal judges.


29 posted on 11/23/2011 8:16:14 AM PST by chuckles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich
My thoughts on voting for Romney are still no.

I see a large gain by Republicans for both the House and Senate in 2012.

I will expect them to fight against most of the liberal policies Obama would try to push. I also expect they would cave in to the liberal policies Romney would try to push.

30 posted on 11/23/2011 8:17:17 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lets Roll NOW; All; onyx
Your attitude is exactly what the Rino’s in the GOP leadship are banking on. Conservatives have no place to go so they will have to vote for Romney.

The Tea Party people will not stand for it
Shouting your quote from the rooftops!
31 posted on 11/23/2011 8:22:25 AM PST by Syncro (Sarah Palin, the unofficial Tea Party candidate for president--Virtual Jerusalem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich

Whatever people may say here, you are far from rare.

I suspect most people here have my philosophy:

Vote conservative in the primary.

Vote Republican in the general.

We’ve never had what I would call a truly conservative candidate for president in my lifetime. Even Reagan, who was as close as one can get.

Others can dress up their childish snits and their self-importance as they wish.

Adults realize that if you don’t vote, you’re NEVER sending ‘them’ the message you are trying to send—’they’ always get the message they WANT to get. In this case, the RNC would think “Well, we didn’t spend enough” or “The candidate wasn’t likable”—whatever.

Elections NEVER send the message you’re trying to send if they are about a specific candidate because the party sees each election as about THAT CANDIDATE.

The only way to get a truly conservative candidate to win in a primary is to find one likable enough to win the primary. HERE is a flamebait comment for you—the reason Romney is winning isn’t because of some evil conspiracy, but because someone who was truly conservative AND likable didn’t run.

Getting more conservative candidates to run will get a conservative nominee, not a temper tantrum. Adults know you have to make do with what IS, not what you WISH you had.

Conservative in the primary, Republican—or anti-Obama—in the general. Simple as that.


32 posted on 11/23/2011 8:24:15 AM PST by Darkwolf377 (Obama: The stupid person`s idea of a smart person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Syncro; Lets Roll NOW; CincyRichieRich; All

Buck-Up!

Not one primary vote has been cast!

TEA Party will decide!


33 posted on 11/23/2011 8:34:31 AM PST by onyx (PLEASE SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC BY DONATING NOW! Sarah's New Ping List - tell me if you want on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich
Again, there is no salient argument for not voting against Obama if Romney is the nominee.

A vote for someone other than zero is still a vote against Obama, and you get the added benifit of sticking to your principals. If o wins you did your duty and voted so you can complain about everything he does. If you vote for mitt and he wins, you still get a socialist and you do not even get to complain.

34 posted on 11/23/2011 8:42:07 AM PST by Ratman83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
At this point, the collapse of both parties is inevitable.

What you said.

Burn, baby, burn!

35 posted on 11/23/2011 8:44:09 AM PST by Jim Noble (To live peacefully with credit-based consumption and fiat money, men would have to be angels.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

While many of us get distracted by trying to find what we consider to be the perfect candidate, we may sometimes lose sight of the fact that the objective here is to eliminate Bark Obama from America’s future.
Once a new administration is in place we will have the greatest effect on the individual issues that we value by applying our influence on the congress. A president is not always as influential in the scheme of domestic policy as we would like to think. But, the Barney Franks, Harry Reids and Didk Durbins are capable of doing great harm to us while the Marco Rubios, Mike Lees and Michele Bachmans can be great weapons in our defense of America’s heritage. We need to elect more of the latter.


Agreed. Not giving up; there was a key word the “gotta be right tea or nothingists” missed...”IF”.


36 posted on 11/23/2011 8:46:10 AM PST by CincyRichieRich (Keep your head up and keep moving forward!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

actually you are wrong, there is a reason besides pride to not vote for Romney, and here’s why:
A RINO can actually do far more damage than a liberal when Republicans control one or both houses of congress. The reason this is so is because there are a certain number of what I call partisans who will vote for (anything) if the president has a matching letter to theirs after their name, while the exact same people would fight to the death if they exact same thing had been proposed by someone with a different letter than them after their name.


BS to be blunt. If Obama wins, then you are making an invalid assumption that we’ll win the senate and hold the house. If Obama wins, that means the country has likely been brainwashed enough and the MSM has done their job for Obama and I’d say we’d lose these both under these circumstances.


37 posted on 11/23/2011 8:51:03 AM PST by CincyRichieRich (Keep your head up and keep moving forward!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: In Maryland; onyx; All

“I think our time and energy is better spent rebelling against the media who are trying to pick the republican nominee by, one by one, calling each candidate (except, so far, Romney) the front runner and then proceeding to smear them. Looks like Ron Paul is up now.

After the hysterical accusations about Cain - “Where’s the beef?” The best they could come up with is a serial harassment accusser and a uncredible bimbo with more holes in her story than a wheel of swiss cheese? The accuser who got a settlement has been released from her confidentiality by the National Restaurant Association - why haven’t we heard the details? Perhaps, because there is no “there” there? Her handlers obviously think she gets more mileage out of vague allegations than presenting EVIDENCE, probably because her story would make 3/4 of America go “Give me a break!”

If and when Romney is the nominee, we will have several months to debate which is the lesser of two evils. Until then, I prefer to worry about getting a decent nominee. “

I think a closer look at Gingrich will = less support, as it did with Perry.

Just another politician.

I was glad to see that Herman Cain was able to work into the debate, that he has been a ballistics analyst and a computer scientist early in his career, when discussing the threat of cyber attacks at the end of the debate.

If the Tea Party rallies around Mr. Cain, we may be able to save our republic.


38 posted on 11/23/2011 9:02:07 AM PST by redinIllinois (Pro-life, accountant, gun-totin' grandma - multi issue voter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: CincyRichieRich
If Romney wins/steals/usurps/fools us to winning the nomination, I will vote for him.

IBTZ, just like yesterday when another Romney supporter said the same thing.

My guess is that you are not long for this board. Jim Robinson has zotted a lot of Romney supporters lately.

39 posted on 11/23/2011 9:05:44 AM PST by backwoods-engineer (Any politician who holds that the state accords rights is an oathbreaker and an "enemy... domestic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backwoods-engineer

If Romney wins/steals/usurps/fools us to winning the nomination, I will vote for him.
IBTZ, just like yesterday when another Romney supporter said the same thing.

My guess is that you are not long for this board. Jim Robinson has zotted a lot of Romney supporters lately.


Look me up, smartie; likely been here longer than you. This is the kind of hate that causes us to lose elections.


40 posted on 11/23/2011 9:09:58 AM PST by CincyRichieRich (Keep your head up and keep moving forward!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson