Posted on 06/18/2011 8:00:35 AM PDT by rabscuttle385
He isn’t Ronald Reagan, that’s for sure. He does seem to me to be more to the right of Romney, but so are most Republicans.
Trust me, he’s not my ideal candidate. My point is if the Tea Party weren’t a serious threat, Perry wouldn’t be considering a run at the urging of the Party establishment.
If Rick Perry is representative of what the Tea Party is, it won’t amount to a hill of beans.
Your thoughts regarding the tea party have a substantial evidence to back you up. The appointed whoredom media have set about to demonize the tea party movement, because it is THE major threat to the globalists plans of hope and change, from a We The People Republic to a federal oligarchy answering to the elite banking families, ultimately.
As I (and others) see it, the Party Establishment is worried about the Tea party. They have been on a shopping trip attempting to find a better candidate to market to the Conservative base and/or the Tea Party. It appears they will push Perry and may bail on Romney.
I think you and I are on the same side on this (maybe I'm wrong). I'm not saying the Tea Party will love Perry. I'm not sure Perry will even be liked. All I'm saying is the Establishment thinks Perry is their answer.
They see the Third Party threat which is why they're taking actions, failed as they may be. They appear to be getting ready to back another horse.
It's all noise anyway as I still think another Conservative candidate will declare in the near future.
You contradict yourself. How very double minded. Step aside and get out of the way. You’re playing both sides of the issues, uttering on the one hand that if we the people don’t line up and vote for whatever the RNC bastards give us then we are looking at a second term for barry the bastard. Yet you on the other hand tell us that there is sufficient trouble in the today that you don’t look into what lies several months out. Quite telling that! Chaos and confusion like you’re trying to spin serve ‘the other side’.
Thanks for the clarification.
Indeed, the GOP establishment is delusional.
It’s time for the RINO’s to have to hold their noses and vote for a real conservative... We had to do it last time - holding our noses and voting for McCain. It’s their turn.
Ross Perot in 1992 should be an example for us all. For one thing it showed how difficult it is to start and third party in all fifty states. Each has different rules and requirements and the process is expensive. That is why Perot, just a stalking horse for Clinton with the promise that his company, Perot Systems, would be the one to administer Hillary Care, refused to spend his own money on the project, instead insisting that the “volunteers” do it. It is a difficult and expensive process and probably could not be done before the coming election. If you want to play with those ideas do it after this election.
Many fell for the Perot scheme and look what that got us.
The best route is to take over the Republican Party. We are closer to it than some seem to think. You site the 2008 and the 2010 elections as the effectiveness of the Tea Party Movement, a movement not a party, yet you immediately cast that aside like it didn’t happen. That all happened WITHIN the Republican Party.
Now, even before the Republican Primary race and before all candidates are even in the race, you are threatening this that and the other if you don’t get your way. That is why I say I fear some of my fellow freepers are either useful idiots or Marxist moles. You certainly aren’t thinking this through for the benefit of conservatives.
Bullhockey. I’m not threatening anything. I’m simply saying what I’ve been saying for the last couple of years: I will no longer offer any support to candidates for any office in the land who can’t even understand the basic non-negotiables of American self-government.
And so far, the formerly grand old party is not offering such leadership. Zippo.
By the way, Perot was a Planned Parenthood-supporting liberal.
You'll have about of much luck as the guy in New Jersey the other day who stopped to help the rattlesnake cross the road. I think they had to Life Flight him to the hospital.
Ross Perot is not an example, and least not a credible one, versus the Tea party in 2012.
I’ll cite you a few examples; Gerald Ford, Bob Dole, George Herbert Walker Bush and John McCain, all “Moderate” Republicans who lost the general election.
Ideology aside, a Liberal Republican cannot beat a Liberal Democrat, at least for the past 45+ years.
While I agree that taking control of the Republican Party is the best route, we have to be aware, given the power of an establishment driven Media, we may not acquire control for 2012. If we do, great!
Conventional wisdom isn’t logical. A majority of the Country calls themselves Conservative. Further, according to Doug Shoen, 1/3 of the Tea Party supported Barrack Obama in 2008. If ever there were a year for a successful Third Party, given the choices of a Liberal versus a Liberal, this would be it.
This is not me getting my way (realizing your reply wasn’t necessarily pointed directly at me). This is a majority of the Country getting it’s way, the way it should be.
I think it is the perfect example. Perot supporters were conservative Republicans, I doubt any Democrats supported him, who were not happy with GHW Bush, primarily for his going back on his "Read My Lips" pledge. They wanted new blood who would get things done and they thought Perot was it. He had a reputation as a super patriot and a no nonsense straight shooter. His supporters were very much like today's grass roots voters who ralley under the Tea Party banner.
I’ll cite you a few examples; Gerald Ford, Bob Dole, George Herbert Walker Bush and John McCain, all “Moderate” Republicans who lost the general election.
Ideology aside, a Liberal Republican cannot beat a Liberal Democrat, at least for the past 45+ years.
That is why I am very much against most political consultants. The consultant's job, so they think, is to feel the pulse of the voters and position their candidate accordingly. In any poll there is going to be a bunch of "undecideds" who simple can't make a decision about whether to stand to pee or to sit. Generally Democrats and Republicans are equally split, or nearly so, with the undecideds being the ones who will supposedly make the difference. Therefore, the Democrats move right and the Republicans move left leaving a twiddle dee-twiddle dum choice between the two. With the media, the unions, and massive voter fraud on the Democrat side, aided by numerous lies by them and the media, they naturally always win. That is a no brainer.
The missing link in your list is Ronald Wilson Reagan. He stayed on message and his message was an optimistic conservative message. He stomped the liberals with two landslides. He was a Republican. That is why I, like you and the others, want a conservative who will stay on message and not start the political weasel talk. All but Romney are like that. If Gerald Ford had at least the personality of a fire hydrant he would have beaten Carter, but alas, he didn't. The Republican Party in 1976 made the mistake we are discussing now, they selected the Guy who was a faithful party member and whose time had come, just as you complain. That elected Carter.
Conventional wisdom isn’t logical. A majority of the Country calls themselves Conservative. Further, according to Doug Shoen, 1/3 of the Tea Party supported Barrack Obama in 2008. If ever there were a year for a successful Third Party, given the choices of a Liberal versus a Liberal, this would be it.
Conventual wisdom is logical, when allowed to come into play. Not only do I think a majority of the country is conservative I also think that many who think they are liberal are really conservative. They have been unduly influenced by the media and the education system, which translates into their peer group. It is more acceptable to be a "caring liberal" than a "mean spirited" Republican. That is the picture the Democrats, the media, and the labor unions have painted for them.
That is also why polls are unreliable. Most polls are media driven. The media will stay on the liberal talking point of the time, and repeat and repeat the same story over and over. Then they will take a poll and guess what? The people, mostly the unthinking moderates, will repeat back to them the story they have been telling. We also know that certain polls, usually sponsored by CNN, WoPo or the NYTimes, are purposely slanted either through the questions they ask or the group they choose to poll. Doug Shoen, just like Dick Morris, are hired guns. They work for who pays them. I learned long ago through personal experience that well known consulting companies, like McKinsey, etc., have a tendency to give back the results they think is wanted to those they are working for. Pollsters are likely the same. I also don't know how Shoen could reliable determine who Tea Partyers were in 2008. We are such a diverse group and so loosely formed that his saying that 1/3 of us voted for Obama is suspect to me. Of course, it was billed as an historic election and that anyone not voting for Obama was racist so maybe he did get some conservatives to succumb to white guilt and vote for him.
The crux of this discussion is nominating a "true" conservative to represent the Republican Party. As we know, no matter who you name right now they will not be "true" enough for others. Many of the comments we see here are from people who prefer one over the others and they immediately start bashing anyone else. They are campaigning here on FR.
Personally, I think we have a wealth of talent from which to select. Any of them could beat Obama despite the other things mentioned which are working against any Republican. To be threatening retaliation or a suicide run if our personal choice is not chosen is foolish. Keep in mind that the Democrats try to select our nominee for us in the early open primary states and by reregistering as Republicans and voting in our primaries in those states which are not open. In fact, since the Democrat nominee is already chosen, we may see massive party swapping through out our primaries. They may actually select our candidate again. They seem to prefer Romney and they may give him an early lead. We must not let our candidates quit because they are advised by consultants that it is all over. It is not all over at all at that stage.
However, that is where organization comes in. With so many good candidates a lessor candidate with better organization can win a number of states, enough to win. That is what Haley Barbour was warning us about.
The big thing though is knowing the enemy. The Democrats are Marxists. This regime is radical Marxism. We may not even have an election if they think they will lose it. That is how serious it is and you can bet your boots that, just as I said, there are moles on FR stirring up dissension among us. We still have time to unite as this all develops. It is foolish to fragment now. Talking third party and staying at home makes me suspicious of motives as those are sure losers. As I said, if that is something of interest, do it after this election.
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.