So you are happier with a liberal anti-gun anti-freedom Democrat than a non-perfect Republican in your eyes. Just wondering which side you were on.
The new Democrat strategy seems to be convincing Republicans to “sit out” the election so they win by default.
The problem is that the liberals want the GOP nominee to be a liberal anti-gun anti-freedom Republican *cough*Romney*cough*. I can put up with a less than perfect conservative but I will not put up with a flaming liberal and I will cast a third party or write in vote in that case, even if it means 0bama winning re-election, because there will be no difference between 0bama and any liberal RINO.
AppyPappy wrote:
So you are happier with a liberal anti-gun anti-freedom Democrat than a non-perfect Republican in your eyes. Just wondering which side you were on.
The new Democrat strategy seems to be convincing Republicans to “sit out” the election so they win by default.
I'm on the side of the United States Constitution. I will not vote for a Socialist who views the Constitution as an impediment to big government "assistance programs." If the Republicans can run a candidate who first and foremost will work to return the United States government to operating within the limites of the United States Constitution, they will have my vote. If they run someone who will propose additional spending on social programs, "saving medicare" in its current form and more of the same that we've been getting from both parties for decades.
Actually, if the choice is "Do you want mustard or mayonaise on your crap sandwich?" I'll take the steak and potatoes platter, please. If the GOP won't offer that, then I'm not voting for a crap sandwich with mustard. Sorry.
indylindy wrote:
Bachmann is as close as you are going to get to a Constitutional Conservative.
You might be correct, and I could support a candidate like Bachman or Cain, in spite of any minor disagreements I might have.
EGPWS wrote:
What does this have to do with Michele Bachmann, a conservative?
My response was more to nachum's advice not to "sit this one out." I don't plan on sitting out, but if the Republican leadership thinks they have my vote for Romney because he's "the next guy in line," they will be sadly disappointed. If the stupid party wants to continue with that strategy, the evil party will wipe the floor in 2012. I hope they don't make that mistake, but it's important that Republican "leaders" realize that the race is theirs to lose. If history is any indication, they will try hard to do just that.
Hi Pappy, I was surprised to find you on the "liberal anti-gun anti-freedom Democrat" Romney side.
Count me amongst those will NOT vote for whichever version of McStain the 'pubbie elite decides to slate up this time. The R- leadership has proven over and over they gutless and unable/unwilling to lead even when handed the reins. While no one is perfect, I will not vote for a another "moderate, compromise, please vote for me 'cuz I'm not as f'd up as 0bummer" Republican. If YOUR party doesn't want another 4 years of the Obamam, they need to realize Romney if far more unelectable than Palin, Bachmann or Cain. With all due respect, I wish your side would quit questioning the loyalty of those of us unwilling to compromise again, and start questioning the loyalty of the Republican party "leadership."