[tantiboh]

~”It’s all in his record. Look it up.”~

I’ve seen the record, I’ve studied it here for months. There’s plenty of grounds on which to criticize Romney. He is not my first pick. But, frankly, to paint him in the harsh way that FR has painted him is histrionics - and most of it was generated in an effort to advance Thompson. Well, it didn’t work. Now what?

~”Every poll we’ve run on FR shows FReepers supporting Thompson/Hunter by huge majorities.”~

That’s true, but FR draws a particular kind of conservative - perhaps even the best ones. But to extrapolate that to the Republican base as a whole is a mistake - FR participants are not a representative sample. It’s cold reality, and it means that we will not be nominating a perfect conservative. The time for advocating Hunter, Thompson, etc. has passed. At this time, I’m advocating that we take what we can get when we can get it. That means compromising our choice. Not our principles - we can fight for the rest of them another day. But we’ll have a whole lot less heartburn over our principles with Romney than we will with Giuliani, McCain, Huckabee, or a Democrat.

~”We advocate for conservatism and for conservative candidates.”~

Well and good. But how effective is that advocacy if you don’t win?

[greyfoxx39]

Well and good. But how effective is that advocacy if you don’t win?

To hell with principle, winning is everything, eh, Tant? Winning with Mitt is losing for the country.

[Jim Robinson]

Uh, this is Free Republic. We advocate for conservatives/conservatism not RINOS/liberalism. We will continue to advocate for life, family, liberty, national security, individual freedom, limited government, low taxes, originalist judges and the constitution, etc, regardless of who wins the current election. You can shove your dose of RINO reality where the sun don’t shine. I’m sure it’ll do wonders for you.

[Elsie]

Well and good. But how effective is that advocacy if you don’t win?

HMMmmm...

So ya gonna WIN first; eh?