Posted on 04/05/2012 12:24:03 PM PDT by Mad Dawgg
OK, I've thought about it. I've read over and over here on Free Republic that if I don't vote for Romney. I am by default voting for Obama.
Now some of you are reading this and saying, wait-a-minute, Romney hasn't clinched it yet. Well its time to face facts, he is gonna be the G.O.P. nominee. The fat lady hasn't sung yet for the other Republican hopefuls Santorum and Gingrich. But if you listen closely you can hear her just off-stage doing some warmup scales.
So I guess if I must vote for Romney or forever be condemned as a FReeper who helped Obama to a second term. But I must tell ya, it feels like I am selling out. So since it feels that way I might as well go all-in.
That is why I have decided to run for office locally. Which means I need campaign cash. So all of you folks here on FR who are of the mind that a vote for anyone but Romney (when he becomes the G.O.P. nominee) is a vote for Obama think of me as a member of Congress and you are lobbying for my vote. And since we all know how lobbying works I will setup a campaign fund where you can deposit funds to help with my campaign and I will see what I can do about your concerns over who I am voting for in 2012.
Bottom line selling-out has become the American Way and since all you Vote-Romney-or-you-vote-for-Obama people condone such activity I asking you to put YOUR money where my vote is.
We can use this thread as a pledge drive. You post and pledge the amount you wish to deposit in my campaign fund and a "suggestion" of who I should vote for or for those of you who are against selling-out I am willing to listen to your reasoning as well.
It is? How could you tell?
Ross Perot (no fan of Republicans, to be sure) ran against George H.W. Bush in 1992, effectively depriving him of a second term, and putting in an occupant of the Oval Office that ran rough-shod all over the US Constitution for his first two years in office, even going so far as to try to pass the first draft of Obamacare in that time period. The upshot was the retaking of both the Senate and the House of Representatives by the Republicans for the first time in DECADES, but by then Billy Jeff was well entrenched. With an assist from Perot again in 1996, Clinton snagged a second term, only to face some serious charges relating to his personal character, and was eventually impeached, but NOT removed from office. One suspects there were some additional and much more serious charges, that were covered up in both the House and Senate committees, but never aired because of really serious breaches of national security, and WOULD have resulted in removal from office and serious penalties, up to and including life imprisonment for who is now the Former Occupant (1993-2001).
The Establishment GOP, as much as anybody, was complicit in that cover-up, because they thought that someday, this kind of precedent could be used against THEIR guy, and more than anything, they never wanted to open that Pandora’s box.
As it turned out, a tactical mistake for the good of America. But a most fortuitous action for the Establishment GOP.
"Beam me up, Scotty."
I've got the "vanity detector" app on my sparky new cell phone...[/s]
Maybe I need to rethink this. If I am going to sell-out I feel a goodly amount of cash needs to be involved. If no one is willing to "lobby" for my vote maybe I just need to vote my conscious,
It's a matter of perspective:
Romney was my 5th choice (Bachman, Cain, Santorum, Gingrich), so in that sense, it's a little disappointing.
However, I'd vote for Jerry Sandusky to get The 0ne out of the W/H.
I'll have reservations about Mitt, but at the end of the day ABO!!!
1 You are not getting a republican Congress if Obama is reelected.
2 If you believe you will get more conservative Supreme Court Justices from Obama ... Oy
Let me know the mechanism by which Obama will be made to nominate a conservative Justice.
People say voting for Romney is like voting for Obama. They are wrong.
Voting for Mao or Stalin would be like voting for Obama.
I see to a vote for Romney is a vote for Stalin.
I would gather you are very motivated to lobby for my vote.
I'll Put you down for 500 bucks make the check payable to the Mad Dawgg 2013 election committee.
Remember Romney is the Father of Obamacare.
“People say voting for Romney is like voting for Obama. They are wrong. Voting for Mao or Stalin would be like voting for Obama.”
Really? Obama has had John Holdren as an advisor. Look him up.
Mittens has had Holdren as an advisor.
Obama is a strong supporter of the sodomite agenda. So is Mittens.
Obama loves socialized healthcare. So does Mittens.
Obama calls himself a “progressive”. That’s what Mittens calls himself when he isn’t trying to swindle his way into the R nomination.
I could continue in this vein, but you tell me why we should support Mittens. Is it because he tells us lies that we want to hear? I already know what he has done.
Throwing RINOs out of Congress and fighting Obama would be better than letting the R Establishment prevail again.
You nailed it. I am astounded at Freepers who say "we need to think of the S.C. and choose Mitt." I just ask them to read in depth various articles that have researched Mitt's judicial picks and judicial philosophy. Mitt's picks are his actual record. Mitt picks judicial picks are atrocious.
I sincerely believe Mitt would go out of his way to pick far left appointees just to rub it in the eye of Conservatives. His picks would fly through with the liberal RATs and the gutless RINOs.
Uh-oh, now you’ve gone and upset the Slick Willardbots.
Yeah because Romney is not the nominee, but all this talk and vanities and questioning who will vote for Romney is nothing more than planting the idea in the heads of people.
Propaganda.
Looks like that post went over like a lead balloon.
'nuff said.
Stupid comments really. As you well know Romney is calling for the repeal of Obamacare.
For those who are so fanatical they can’t envision this simple scenario, here is how Romney will appoint a conservative justice.
Romney, being a republican president, having run as a conservative and having pledged to appoint conservative justices, and having a republican senate with many new conservatives who will counsel and expect him to name conservative justices, will in fact name conservative justices. As you know, George Bush followed exactly that path and when he named a questionable one, he had to withdraw her nomination (Harriet Meyers).
That is why we got from George Bush only conservative justices and from B Obama only liberal justices.
That is likely, possible and conceivable.
Now let me answer the second question because you refused to. There is no way on God’s green earth that a reelected Barack Obama is going to name a moderate or conservative to that court. He won’t do it, his party won’t support it, and even if republicans block him no power on earth can make him name a conservative.
And when you talk about looking at people’s records, where were you hiding when Barack Obama created a crystal clear record with his first 2 Supreme Court nominations?
Railing against them.
You have a problem friend. I am not trying to convince you Obama won't do liberal things like appointing liberal judges.
However you are trying to convince me Mittens will do something Conservative. Can you give us an example of him doing such? Actual deeds not telling us how he will be real Conservative after he is elected.
let's start with Obamacare one (A.K.A. Romneycare) can you show me what was Conservative about that? He signed it into law with a big old smile on his face.
Ball is in your court buddy.
If Romney's record is irrelevant then 0baMao's record is irrelevant.
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.