Skip to comments.Romney Denialists
Posted on 01/17/2012 8:22:06 AM PST by BuckeyeTexan
Though I have yet to read anything on the Internet that caused me literally to bash my laptop computer into the nearest available hard surface, comments like this, in the comments section of a popular conservative website, come pretty close:
Oh no we won't. The GOP has been forcing us to choose their candidates. No thank you.
As most of you reading this probably have already guessed, the "oh no he won't" the commenter is vowing is that he won't unite behind Mitt Romney should the ex-gov of Mass win the GOP nomination.
Well, let me be the first to break the news to Mr. Oh-No-I-Wouldn't: Oh, yes, you will. You may say you won't, you may even think it. But when the bell tolls midnight on November 5 and the Ghost of America in Decline Future forces you to confront the prospect of four more years of Barack Obama, the nanosecond dawn breaks on the 6th, you will propel yourself from your bed like the proverbial bat out of hell and pull the "R" lever - yes - even if the label next to it says "Romney."
Or maybe I'm wrong and this commenter really, truly will never vote for Mitt Romney, no way, no how. In which case, he's definitely in the right political party. "The Stupid Party" is not an appellation they just give to a political party; it must be earned.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Oh, my. You just gotta read this one, in full. Unbelievable.
Geez, Gene—I can hardly wait for you to say the same thing about Newt, OUR ABR candidate.
That happens in print media ~ you drift and drift and drift and hope nobody ever catches up to what you've done.
The problem with the internet is somebody, anybody for that matter, can jump out of the bushes alongside the band-with and start shouting "Commie, commie, commie" ~ and so they do here!
i've still got some weeds in the tops of my boots too.
Oh, no, I won't, you smarmy SOB!
My comment left at the American Thinker site for this article:
BuckeyeTexan 23 minutes ago
You have got to be kidding me! If you cannot see the near blind allegiance that the conservative “elites” (except Rush and Levin) give to Romney, then you are indeed being led around by the nose. 1 caucus, in which no delegates were actually committed, and 1 primary win for Romney. Whoop-tidee-doo! That doesn’t make him the choice of the grassroots. No candidate can clinch the nomination before mid-April.
Romney hasn’t been vetted at all by the media. They won’t talk about his flip-flops on every single plank of the conservative platform. They don’t talk about his record of liberal judicial appointments. They won’t talk about his role in the MA housing crisis. (Oh but I will, shortly. Stay tuned.) They won’t talk about his big-government record.
The liberals are salivating at the idea of facing Romney in the general. If you want to give Obama 4 more years, go right ahead and support Romney. That’s what you’ll get. But don’t get all bent out of shape while the rest of us, who are awake and paying attention, fight Romney to the bitter end.
Most of us may hold our nose and eventually vote for the dude, but we're not going to have enough enthusiasm to push him over the top. A bad candidate is not going to win this thing, and Willard is pretty darn bad. Bland, uninspiring, flip-flopping, and somewhat plastic looking is not a good combo.
Give us bold colors that one of the three conservatives will bring.
We sheepish conservatives will let ourselves be sheparded to the pols as we did for statist Bush, statist McCain and vote for statist Romney. But no one else will vote for him because he is an incompetant politican and creepy to boot.
Repeat in 4 years with another statist boob.
Hey chump...munch on this!
Apparently, this guy believes that remaining loyal to “the party”, regardless of what “the party” has come to stand for, is THE most important thing a voter can do.
It is clear to me that either 1) he has not followed this ‘philosophy’ through to its logical conclusion, or 2) his head is filled with mush - possibly both.
My problem with this line of thinking is that it’s the pollsters and the MSM who have been trying to choose our candidates for us.
Newt is clearly the people's choice but all we hear is Romney, Romney, Romeny.
As long as people continue to think like this guy, the Powers That Be know they can do what they want no matter what we think. This guy's attitude is EXACTLY why we will be stuck with Mitt.
I will not vote for Romney. What in the world makes people think he is any better than the idiot in office now? They are both liars who say what they need to say on order to get votes. Different shades of suck, IMO.
The author seems to be of the opinion that there isn’t really a GOP elite trying to lead conservatives around by the nose. He seems to think that Romney’s Iowa Caucus win and New Hampshire Primary win make Romney the defacto choice of the conservative grassroots - not the defacto choice of the GOP Elite.
He fails to address the media’s total lack of negative coverage on Romney and seems to equate that lack of negative converage with the GOP elite having considered the facts of this election and having reached a reasonable conclusion that Romney is the grassroots’ chosen candidate according to all national polls thus far.
If anyone is being led around by the nose, it’s the author, not conservatives. We’ve got Romney’s number. We know his game.
Entertaining read but at the end he says “Just do what you feel is right”
They will as soon as he is nominated. The nation will also be "schooled" by the MSM on the evils of mormonism, count on it.
The liberals are salivating at the idea of facing Romney in the general.
Oh No I won’t either if they think they can fool us for a 3rd time (Dole & McCain) then they better think again. I’m tired of the National Republican Party & the Media telling us who we have to vote for regardless if they are a Conservative or not.
Oh no, we will have no choice but to vote for H.W. “Read My Lips” Bush a second time!
Oh no, we will have no choice but to vote for Bob Dole!
Oh no, we will have no choice but to vote for John McCain!
Oh no, we will have no choice but to vote for Romney (what’s his first name, again, is it “Liberal” or “RINO”?)!
PATTERN RECOGNITION, PEOPLE!
The Democrats do not have pattern recognition, and rationalize away making the same bad decisions, over and over again.
Republicans, ESPECIALLY conservatives, are supposed to be better than that! We are supposed to be able to recognize BAD candidates, foisted on us as the ONLY alternative, by liberal Republicans far more respectful of liberal Democrats than to conservative Republicans.
Fool me once, shame on you!
Fool me twice, shame on me!
Fool me three times, slap my bottom and call me “sweetie”!
Fool me four times, and I deserve to be ignored forever.
Well, I’m interested in seeing the first reliable polls (meaning polling a lot of likely Republican voters in a scientific way) after last night’s debates.
Gingrich was stunning. I though Perry equitted himself very well too. I did not think Santorum did as well last night.
I felt Romney, to be honest, also handled himself well...nothing spectacular, but also nothing really damaging. He came across with several very patriotic general statements that got applause...but nothing like the fervor Gingrich generated.
I hope that after South Carolina, which IMHO is lining up to be a Gingrich race and assault on Romeny’s lead (and hoping he climbs at least to within 5% of Romney if not better), that both Santorum and Perry should throw their support behind Newt, which should give Newt the advantage going forward.
This would end up allowing, IMHO, Newt to eventually win, with Romney having a sizable seconbd place finish (including several more wins) and number of delegates, and Paul himself having a 3rd place finish with a surprising number of delegates too...though I do not see him winning any of the contests.
We’ll see how the vote goes. If somehow it was Santorum that assaulted Romney successfully, or Perry, then the other two should line up with that winner...but after last night, I believe if Newt can stay on focus and target, and not get out of hand because of anger and be lured into fighting things and spending money on things that do not really nail Mitt down, then he will most probably be the one in South Carolina.
If Mitt wins South Carolina and the more conservtive candidates fail to unite and continue to split the more conservative vote...then Mitt will probably also take Florida before they come to their senses and unite behind a single conservative alternative. Making it harder and harder to overcome his momentum (ie. the longer they wait to unite).
As for me...I’m now coming down to Newt, Perry, Santorum. However, should Romney win, I will vote for him over Obama.
Despite his past, his current statements, his support, his votes, and the incoming congress will alll be depending upon him and forecing him to keep the very direct statements he has made, meaning:
1) Repeal/reverse Obama Care
2) Secure the border
3) Balance the budget.
4) Cap spending.
5) Cut the heck out of the federal government, eliminating numerous agencies and returning power to the states.
6) Making our military the most powerful force, most advanced and efficient force on earth.
7) Secure the border and then target and resolve the illegals already here...sending them home to get in line.
8) Appoint judges who are constitutional oriniginal intent and overturn Roe v Wade.
9) Lower taxes.
10) Drastically reduce federal regulations.
Obama will do absolutely none of these things and will take every opportunity as he has already shown, to circumvent the house, senate, and the constitution to continue implementing his marxist, fundamental change to America.
... great tag line!
I’m not following you. Where did he write that? (I am riddled with ADHD, so I could have missed it.)
... great tag line!
I’m confused. All the posts here scream that we don’t get a say... that it’s jammed down our throat, etc.
Isn’t a primary an election? Are there not votes being tallied?
Is it possible that conservatives have become a minority?
Was the dude as enthusiastic bashing the so-called GOPers to fall in line when conservatives chose their candidates in the 2010 election?
Show me. Otherwise, the guy had no credit.
My impression of the writer's message was more along the lines of "You might not like Mitt, but I bet on election day you decide he's better than 4 more years of Obama."
In my case, he's right. I honestly don't think America can take another 4 years of The Destroyer.
We have a lively debate/primary season going on. Perhaps Romney would be beat if the conservatives unite. Otherwise, I’m not going to cry foul when it’s over. The primary serves its purpose. So does the general.
I have posted this before but will do so again. This is why I -CANNOT- vote for Romney in any circumstances:
Here is another analogy. A choice is to be made between two men:
One is Ernst Julius Röhm, head of the Sturmabteilung, or Brownshirts. He is a Nazi. He is a personally brutish, squalid and morally depraved street thug. He is a drug abuser and a sexual predator and pervert. He is a chaotic train wreck.
The other is Heinrich Luitpold Himmler, leader of the Schutzstaffel, or SS. Like Röhm, Himmler is a Nazi. Unlike Röhm, Himmler is self controlled. In his personal life Himmler is a teetotaler, a non-smoker, and he is a family man, faithful to his wife and loving towards his daughter. In his professional life Himmler is orderly, diligent, detail oriented and punctilious. He is an effective and honest administrator.
Which is the better man? Which would you vote for, as between the two? In the event, Hitler opted for Himmler on the Night of the Long Knives. Indeed, for his purposes Himmler was the better man.
But say the choice was yours. Which of the men would you advance, if the power was held in your hands? How could you advance either one without aiding and abetting evil?
Romney and Obama have proven, demonstrable track records.
1) Both are responsible for entrenching and enabling abortion at will, and doubtless having effected more of them through their policies, Romney by making it cheaper with money taken in taxes from the general population, and Obama by holding the line as long as he could for post birth infanticide.
2) Both are contemptuous of the Second Amendment rights of Americans, which is to say the natural right of all persons to self defense.
3) Both are willing to compel government health care, which by definition can rightly be called health control. This is not the State in ones bedroom, this is the State in ones very medicine cabinet and ultimately veins - or not. It is, after all, not the individuals decision anymore.
4) Both are economic predators, as seen by their embrace not only of the TARP legislation, but the whole ideology behind TARP. There is a distinction in that Romney is corporatist, and Obama is a syndicalist, but that is as significant as whether one is eaten by hyenas or by jackals.
5) Both have repeatedly demonstrated their commitment to advancing homosexual copulatory arrangements and dignifying those liaisons with the name marriage.
6) Both are brazen deceivers, who have never admitted error, fault, or guilt as far as I know.
I regard neither Romney nor Obama as lesser evils. Both of these sociopaths are such great evils that I cannot push either one to greater power and influence. I will reject and oppose each of these demonstrably vile men with every fiber of my being. I will not participate in this game.
It's a rigged system....
Well he spends so many words trying to convince us to vote for Romney it's easy to give it up before you get to it, it says near the end :
“ The main point I want to make is that while it's a perfectly respectable conservative position to oppose Mitt Romney, it is an equally respectable conservative position to support him, for those of us who are dead set on denying Obama a second term.”
Interpretation : “Don't get mad at me for voting for him and I won't get mad at you for NOT voting for him”
He really doesn't tell us anything useful and he doesn't give a very strong case for voting for Romney in the general, if there is one.
“Slap my bottom and call me ‘sweetie’”? - I don’t know how many times you have to fool people in Las Vegas for this, but it seems they want $100 to go with it.
All the conservative candidates are self destructing. From Perry's poor performances, Newt's attack on capitalism and support of global warming, Cain's obvious issues, Paul being a nut, and Santorum’s lack of charisma, - no one is left standing except Mitt.
Unless the others drop out and let Newt go head to head with Mitt, there is no serious challenge to Mitt. He is better organized, better disciplined and makes few errors. Actually, those should be pretty important to us.
He is also right that if you want Obamacare to be fully entrenched and 2 or 3 more Supreme Court Justices be appointed from the far left, stay home. Obama will waltz in. You will all prove what disciplined conservatives you are.
Second, by having everyone and his brother running for the non-Mitt position, we have solidified his position.
This is the whole reason why the Tea Party exists. The sense of repugnance that big party machine politics gives me is sickening and prevents me from ever becoming a Republican. Mitt Romney is not a bad man, but he is a weak man and panders to whatever force will propel him in the direction that suits his fancy. He has no integrity. That makes him the perfect establishment candidate, because he can be controlled just as predictably as any other addict.
If Romney wins the primary because he is the best man, I will vote for him. But it will be very difficult to convince me of that. If he wins, it will be because he has the support of the party establishment elite with their corporate backers and media lackeys. And I will not be voting for Romney. As unthinkable as it is to vote for Obama, it is not unthinkable or undoable to vote for “John Galt” or some other write-in or third party candidate.
The objective of paramount importance in this election is to take control of the Senate away from Harry Reid and the Democrats. If that happens (and it should), then the person who occupies the White House becomes less important. I am asking myself - which would be more dangerous to our nation; a Republican House and Senate with Obama as president, or a Republican House and Senate with Romney as president? It is possible that some level of gridlock is better than giving the Republican establishment complete control of the nation.
In 2012, I think it is more important to wrest control of the senate from the democrats and retain control of the house than to elect a republican ‘Obama-lite’ to the presidency. “Party loyalty” would allow Mr. Romney to implement more of his crackpot ‘plans’, and take us much further down the socialist precipice than Mr. Obama could ever dream of doing with the opposition party in charge of congress.
Of course, if the republicans who gain control of congress are not fiscally conservative budget hawks then it won't matter which party controls which branch of our government.
“The process...eliminates us. Because of the way the Primaries are set up.”
Perry, Santorum and Gingrich are in it for the long haul. We’ve lost Bachmann and Huntsman.
If people vote for their candidate and donate, why wouldn’t one of them have a chance?
All this fuss and bluster just so Willard can add “Former Presidential candidate” to his resume.
It is his turn so he gets to be the candidate but I do not believe it was ever intended, by the elite ruling class, that he should actually win the presidency. Just as with McCain, he is not supposed to win.
I find the whole thing disgusting beyond words.
Oh no, I won't...and it won't be the first time.
They are the only two ‘republicans’ who will be on the ballot.
In Virginia, write-ins are not allowed during primaries.
I did my time in Rinoland: Bush the elder twice, Dole, Bush the younger twice, and finally McCain only because he chose Palin and I knew what was coming with obama.
I said "never again" after McCain. Your GOP lost me and I'm not coming back.
Your GOP isn't serious about winning or reform or even about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
FU, Gene, and the rino you rode in on.
Newt is still my first choice (even though I think Mitt can get elected in the General easier than Newt, I'd take that chance) - but I don't make that decision; the early states do and it seems that is all but over.
So, from March (when it will probably be over) until November, all the Mitt haters here can have fun trashing Mitt and help Obama win. We'll show them!
McCain got the same treatment...until he was actually nominated, at which point the media turned on him. McCain was stupid enough to believe that the media really loved him, so he never fought back and never really attacked Obama. Face it, the media is about 95% Dem/liberal/radical, and they ALWAYS want the weakest Republican candidate. I think that they cringe in fear of someone like Gingrich, who will not only attack Obama relentlessly, but he'll go out of his way (like last night) to make the Media Shill of the Day look like the damned fool that he or she is.
That said, I will probably vote for Romney if he's the Republican nominee, simply to get rid of Obama. Obama and those around him are dead set on destroying this country as we know it, and he'll never have to face the public again if he wins. At least Romney will have to face the public in 2016, and he'll also (IMHO) be forced to take a pretty conservative person as Veep (DeMint, for example) to have a hope of a large turnout of the base. I won't like that choice at all, and I'll do what I can to see that Gingrich gets the nomination (I don't think that Santorum really has a shot, though I like him a lot). Threatening to take our ball home if we don't like how the game ends up isn't the path to defeating Obama.
Oh, by the way, it looks a lot like Romney did NOT win in Iowa - the recount, still in progress, shows Santorum 80 votes ahead of where he was before. This is NOT a fait accompli, Romney does NOT have to win - and I hope he doesn't.