Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

I've been saying this will hurt the Romney campaign. Maybe I'm wrong. What does everyone think?
1 posted on 06/15/2007 6:48:31 AM PDT by Andy'smom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Andy'smom
What do we think?

First of all, it's pretty clear we shouldn't let any Massachusetts politicians near the children. After that, best they stay in their own neighborhoods ~ and that's not here.

2 posted on 06/15/2007 6:50:52 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Andy'smom

The 49 sane states should quarantine MA so this AIDS-promoting virus doesn’t affect the rest of the body politic.


3 posted on 06/15/2007 6:52:52 AM PDT by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Andy'smom
I don’t think it will hurt Romney. Other than letting Atty Gen Riley handle the case before their version of the state supreme court, Romney didn’t do anything.

Afterward, he tried to get the same court to stop it, then sued the Senate in the same court to force them to vote. Ineffective and symbolic, but at least it looks like he tried.

The funny thing is how Democrats will go to any extreme to stifle democracy.

4 posted on 06/15/2007 6:54:43 AM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Andy'smom
This will actually help Romney’s campaign. He did all he could to put this question on the ballot and was staunchly against the Supreme Court of MA making law. It also further bolsters his case for making fun of MA and distancing himself from the state.

I was in Houston a few weeks ago and the discussion of Romney came up. The locals thought that there were 2 M’s he had to overcome. The Mormon factor he could overcome but the bigger obstacle was “Massachusetts”. That is Romney’s biggest problem and he has to distance himself from this communist state. If he loses the nomination I am convinced it will because of the MA tag. MA makes even California look moderate, it is essentially a 1 party tyranny with no hope for a Republican ever winning state wide office ever again.

5 posted on 06/15/2007 6:56:27 AM PDT by Maneesh (A non-hyphenated American.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Andy'smom

Not unlike the situation in Congress on the Immigration fiasco: Americans don’t want it, but Congress will pass the legislation in spite of U.S. Citizens’ wishes....people don’t matter anymore; the politicians live for contributions from corporate interests, and get re-elected anyway.


6 posted on 06/15/2007 6:56:30 AM PDT by traditional1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Andy'smom
I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

Any Republican who is acceptable to a majority of Massachusetts' voters cannot possibly be good for our country.

9 posted on 06/15/2007 7:29:43 AM PDT by Constitutionalist Conservative (Global Warming Heretic -- http://agw-heretic.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Andy'smom

When Mitt was Governer, he took *some* steps towards helping the process along, but not enough, IMO.

I heard Gov Patrick on WBZ this morning. He said that this issue “distracted us from real issues like job creation, affordable housing and health care.” Ugh. Then he said that the issue has been losing steam and that the voters don’t care about it as much now as they used to. I hope he’s really happy with himself — bought and sold by the pink hand like the cheap political whore that he is.


15 posted on 06/15/2007 7:56:10 AM PDT by Disturbin (Goverment is not the solution to any problem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Andy'smom

“Same-sex marriage will be the law of the land.”

No it won’t.


16 posted on 06/15/2007 7:57:33 AM PDT by Disturbin (Goverment is not the solution to any problem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Andy'smom

“Prager wasn’t sure he’d heard me right. Are you telling me, he asked in disbelief, that fewer than one in four Massachusetts legislators thinks marriage should be defined as the union of a man and a woman? Yes, I told him; the vote to kill the amendment was 151 to 45. ‘’Incredible,’’ said Prager.”

One in four *legislators* not registered voters.

FFS, Nancy Pelosi was calling MA stage legislators asking them to kill this proposed amendment.


18 posted on 06/15/2007 8:02:03 AM PDT by Disturbin (Goverment is not the solution to any problem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Andy'smom


Romney has been a supporter of the gay agenda for some time.

In fact, if you look at the candidacy of Rudy McRomney, the media appointed Republican nominee, you'll find that he's generally weak on abortion, strong on the gay agenda, and no friend to conservatism in general.

What a coincidence, eh?
19 posted on 06/15/2007 8:02:03 AM PDT by Old_Mil (Duncan Hunter in 2008! A Veteran, A Patriot, A Reagan Republican... http://www.gohunter08.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Andy'smom
I've been saying this will hurt the Romney campaign. Maybe I'm wrong. What does everyone think?

Clearly, it's hurting the Romney campaign for the nomination. But I don't think it will hurt him in a general election.

While the vast majority of liberals in the US would never vote for Romney anyway, they're not important in the end game. Conservatives would swallow hard and vote for Romney (except those who are hardcore deadset against him) so the election comes down, like it always does, to the mushy middle.

Folks in that mushy middle who are uncomfortable with gay marriage, and might tend to hold Mitt responsible for it (believe me, he's already written speeches needed to calm most of them down) will probably take a it-can't-happen-here attitude. That will be a direct result of the spate of state Constitutional amendments that have defined marriage as one man, one woman.

As Jacoby points out, only a Federal amendment can keep this from happening. With a Democrat controlled Congress, that will never happen. With any more than a quarter of the states being "blue" states that would never ratify such an amendment, the chances of even a Republican Congress making such an amendment law is also pretty much nonexistant.

20 posted on 06/15/2007 8:12:52 AM PDT by hunter112 (Change will happen when very good men are forced to do very bad things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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