Posted on 01/14/2012 2:37:06 PM PST by xzins
correction: (sp) disingenuous.
sorry
So I guess “non statist” like yourself support this guy below who is quoted below in and don’t condemn his post by Graybeard58
“I’m Baptist and would have no problem whatsoever voting for a Catholic/Catholic ticket but will never vote for a ticket that Romney is on in any capacity.
Catholics worship the same Jesus I do, the One that is the only begotten Son of God.”
So you have a bigot in graybeard who is predujice against a mans religion. Wow!
I could understand Romney care etc...etc...but to be flat out racist, bigoted etc...and all are silent on this forum.
Levin, Rush, no one would support this type of this bigoted view. NO ONE HERE CONDEMS HIM FOR THIS. Wow!!! Is there no descent people here? You sound like DU who say wouldn’t vote for Christian right. WOW! No one stands up to this hate.
That poll is so bogus it doesn’t deserve to be mentioned on FR. Complete garbage.
He's a LIAR on every major issue that is important to conservatives!
With the exception of Paul, I think any of the Republican candidates can beat Obama in the general election. With the exception of a big campaign war chest, Obama has more liabilties than Haley Barbour has pardons.ABO
>> “Unless we end up with Jerry Sandusky as our nominee, we’re going to win going away.” <<
.
There’s no way that’s true.
I can guarantee that if Romney is our nominee, we lose the general.
>> “Out of curiousity who is a General election winner in your opinion?” <<
.
Anyone but Romney.
Right off all of our conservative voters will stay home, and the mediots will have a field day with his mormon freemasonry, its just plain bizzare.
>> “Aside from Newt never winning a statewide race Mitt has.” <<
.
Yes, in the country’s wackeyest, most leftist, tax craziest state.
Fail!
Like it or not, he is TOAST, Obama.
>> “So you have a bigot in graybeard who is predujice against a mans religion. Wow!
I could understand Romney care etc...etc...but to be flat out racist, bigoted etc...and all are silent on this forum.” <<
.
You may not have noticed, but you’ve stumbled onto a Christian forum.
Christ is the only way, and upholding his gospel is not bigotry, its wisdom.
Mormonism is not Christian, it is Freemasonry, plain and simple. One more illuminist freemason in the white house will sink this country permanently.
But he can’t win anyway, so what is your angle here in promoting him?
Yep, just like former Senator Harry Reid (D-NV).
I stand by my words. He cannot run on his record, Obama. That is just the facts.
Thank you for sharing your insights, dear brother in Christ!
“He can’t even register in a Republican primary.”:
If you’re talking about Va. then you’ll have to say that none of the other candidates, besides Newt, made it either. Both Romney and Paul were granfathered in because they were on the 2008 ballot.
“
...... You really think “Newt” can win a general.”
All Republicans will face an uphill battle against the Dem/MSM. That said, the answer to your question is yes. I believe that Newt is the only candidate that can effectively counter the MSM/DNC and counter Obama’s Chicago smear machine thereby winning the general election.
Most Republicans, less the stay at home pouters/sore losers, will, in the end, vote against Obama and for the Republican nominee, no matter who he is. I have a hard time believing that the Independants will ralley around Mitt in sufficient numbers to drag him across the line.
I believe that Newt’s communication skills will convince those unaffliated voters to vote for him in much, much greater numbers than any other candidate, and at the same time effectively dismantle Obama’s narrative of “great accomplishment......”
” Aside from Newt never winning a statewide race Mitt has.”
Newt won a national election in 1994/5 when he was elected as Speaker of the House....a position I believe is 3rd in line of succession to the Presidency.....
Even though the future is one of the most difficult things there is to predict, in this case it’s not that hard. Santorum and Gingrich, though we love them both most of the time—nearly all the time—couldn’t beat Obama in the general election, and won’t get the chance. Romney has a 50-50 chance. It’s true that the Obama machine hasn’t gone to bear on him, but we haven’t really gone negative on Obama like we will next summer.
Romney is the only chance we have this time. And even though the negative points in this piece are true, there are some fairly strong counterbalancing positives. He has given some brilliant responses in the debates. (As well as a few lame ones.) And he has lots of good people—like Judge Bork—working on his team. That is a huge positive.
The more you needlessly tear down Romney at this point, the more you are playing the Dem’s game. It’s that simple.
Gingrich and Santorum need to unite. That’s what McCain and Huckabee did in 2008 and Romney lost SC and Florida.
No, that's an opinion. That 0bama and his minions will attack any Republican nominee is not an opinion. It's a fact. Just like Senator Reid's approval ratings several months before the election. Look, I don't want to spread optimism here. At the same time, I grow weary of attitudes like yours. That's what resulted in Reid's reelection. And I've seen too many elections where the incumbent had very low approval ratings only to come back and won their re-election. Convincing yourself that 0bama has already lost many months before the election is nothing but wishful thinking.
Forget their shared religion, the last thing you would want is a VP with baggage (Newt). “First do no harm” is the golden rule of VP selection.
There are numerous VP choices and any one of them could probably destroy that drunk loser Biden.
It’s rare for the nominee to chose a defeated nomination opponent as VP. The last 2 democrats have done it but for a Republican you have to go back to Reagan-Bush. And that was the biggest mistake Reagan ever made. (Biden and Edwards were also horrible choices). To paraphrase then avowed Liberal Republican Mitt Romney “I don’t want to return to Reagan Bush”. Reagan/Laxalt would have been more like it.
And it’s almost unheard of for a running mate to be chosen during the primary campaign.
The last (and only?) time was when Reagan in 1976 chose RINO PA Senator Richard Schweiker as his running mate. It was an unnecessary and foolish move that only hurt the Reagan campaign and he went on to lose to President Ford.
“....lose to President Ford”. I could type that a hundred times and it would still look strange. ;)
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.