Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rove: Romney's Roads to the White House (path to get 270 EVs)
Wall Street Journal ^ | May 23, 2012 | Karl Rove

Posted on 05/25/2012 4:44:56 PM PDT by Innovative

On Tuesday, Gallup's seven-day tracking poll had Barack Obama and Mitt Romney tied at 46%. With the incumbent stuck below 50% on the ballot and Mr. Romney's favorability rising, the Republican challenger has a good shot at winning.

To take the White House, Mr. Romney needs 270 votes in the Electoral College. A "3-2-1" strategy will get him there.

Mr. Obama long ago lost his chance to duplicate his 2008 performance. A record of failure will do that. He's now forced to fight for states he easily won in 2008. The odds now narrowly favor a Romney win.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: elections; obama; obamasupportersonfr; romney; romney4romney; romney4sharia; romney4tarp; romneycare; romneycare4all; romneycare4ever; romneycare4u; rove; vulturecorporatism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last
Good news!

Everyone here should want to see Obama pack and get out of the White House and out of our lives.

1 posted on 05/25/2012 4:45:01 PM PDT by Innovative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Innovative

Romneybot alert.

Obama losing means no chance for a conservative president until 2020 at the earliest. More likely 2024 or 2028 after Romney trashes the GOP among the public (again).


2 posted on 05/25/2012 4:47:47 PM PDT by delapaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative
Everyone here should want to see Obama pack and get out of the White House and out of our lives.Most everyone does.

We have the wrong man to do the job and most know this however some won't admit it.

3 posted on 05/25/2012 4:49:35 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

Mr. RomneyCARE for POTUS?

He is not even eligible.


4 posted on 05/25/2012 4:52:27 PM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative
Romney is despicable.

He's not the candidate yet. The Rinos and Rats under Jorge Soros want you to think he's "inevitable" though.

It's a long way to November just yet.

5 posted on 05/25/2012 4:56:55 PM PDT by Caipirabob (I say we take off and Newt the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative
Tokyo Rove and Backstabber Romney are precisely
the reason the Undocumented Tyrant is in power.


Has Rove apologized? Has Milt?

Late in October, The American Spectator's The Prowler revealed:
"Former Mitt Romney presidential campaign staffers…
have been involved in spreading anti-Palin spin to reporters, seeking to diminish her standing after the election.
'Sarah Palin is a lightweight, she won't be the first, not even the third, person people will think of when it comes to 2012,'
says one former Romney aide…
'The only serious candidate ready to challenge to lead the Republican Party is Mitt Romney.
"Some former Romney aides were behind the recent leaks to media, including CNN, that Governor Sarah Palin was a 'diva' and was going off message intentionally."


The Palmetto Scoop reported: "One of the first stories to hit the national airwaves was
the claim of a major internal strife between close McCain aides and the folks handling his running mate Sarah Palin."
"I’m told by very good sources that this was indeed the case and that a rift had developed, but it was between Palin’s people and the staffers brought on from the failed presidential campaign of former Gov. Mitt Romney, not McCain aides."
"The sources said nearly 80 percent of Romney’s former staff was absorbed by McCain and these individuals were responsible for what amounts to a premeditated, last-minute sabotage of Palin."
… aides loyal to Romney inside the McCain campaign, said The Scoop, reportedly saw
that Palin would be a serious contender for the Republican nomination in 2012 or 2016, which made her a threat to another presidential quest by Romney.


"These staffers are now out trying to finish her off ….hoping it would ingratiate themselves with Mitt Romney."


"Who's the Palin Leaker from the McCain Campaign?
National Review Online The publication of a Vanity Fair profile of Sarah Palin
appears to have opened old wounds in the McCain campaign.
... the source of the “Diva” leak was Nicolle Wallace’s husband."


"Peeking Out From the McCain Wreckage: Mitt Romney"

"Someone's got to say it: IS MITT ROMNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMA'S VICTORY?"

"Vanity: Team Romney Sabotaged Palin and Continuing to Do So?"

"Romney Supporters Trashing Palin"

"Romney advisors sniping at Palin?"



6 posted on 05/25/2012 4:59:39 PM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: delapaz
Obama losing means no chance for a conservative president until 2020 at the earliest. More likely 2024 or 2028 after Romney trashes the GOP among the public (again).

If Obama wins there likely won't be any elections in 2020. Obama will have selected every member of the supreme court and a majority of the federal judges. The United States will be hopelessly bankrupt and in receivership administered by the United Nations.

7 posted on 05/25/2012 5:10:10 PM PDT by oldbrowser (They are marxists, don't call them democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

DUMP WILLARD FOR WALKER 2012 !


8 posted on 05/25/2012 5:12:06 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (If you like lying Socialist dirtbags, you'll love Slick Willard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: delapaz

“Obama losing means no chance for a conservative president until 2020 at the earliest. “

Not necessarily. I am not a Romney fan by any means, but it is likely that the economic situation will get worse under Romney (Not as bad as it would under Obama, mind you, just worse than it is now). Everything is on the brink globally. Let Greece default, as they probably will, because of France’s decision to screw austerity, let Spain follow suit, let China pop, let the Euro go down, and even Reagan couldn’t save the global economy. Once the scramble begins, and it is every country for itself, the debt will stop flowing, and we will be hit hard. That will be horrible for the incumbant.

It is not impossible Romney will get LBJ’d in 2016, maybe by a real Conservative.

We’ve got a crappy situation. But Romney could at least be a place holder until 2016, and even though he’s pretty much a total RINO, he would be better than Obama on SC nominations.


9 posted on 05/25/2012 5:17:47 PM PDT by AnonymousConservative (Why did Liberals evolve within our species? www.anonymousconservative.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser
If Obama wins there likely won't be any elections in 2020.

Oh brother [rolls eyes]. Like we haven't heard THAT canard in a while. Perhaps JimRob can give an award of some kind to the MittWitt who's posted that for the one millionth time on FR.

10 posted on 05/25/2012 5:20:46 PM PDT by COBOL2Java (FUMR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AnonymousConservative
Romney CANNOT BE TRUSTED.


“The Massachusetts Republican Party died last Tuesday.
The cause of death: failed leadership.

The party is survived by a few leftover legislators
and a handful of county officials and grassroots activists
who have been ignored for years.
Services will be public and a mass exodus of taxpayers will follow.
In lieu of flowers, send messages to Republican voters
warning them about a certain presidential candidate named Romney.”

- Boston Herald, 11/12/2006


"In 2006, while Romney was chairman of the National Republican
Governors Association - a group dedicated to electing more
Republican governors - his own hand-picked Republican successor
as governor lost badly to the Democrat, despite the fact that Republicans
have held the governorship in Massachusetts since 1990. Romney largely
ignored the Massachusetts elections and spent most of the time
during the campaign out of state building his presidential campaign.
He came back and publicly campaigned for the Republican candidate
the day before the general election!
“Locally, this is a rebuke to Mitt Romney and checking out within six months
after being elected and having accomplished almost nothing,”

[Jim] Rappaport [former chairman of the state Republican Party]."
- Boston Globe, 11/8/2006


"Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans,
has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced
,
instead tapping registered Democrats or independents -- including two gay lawyers who
have supported expanded same-sex rights, a Globe review of the nominations has found.
Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats
or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians
or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show.
In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters,
and 14 registered Democrats."
- Boston Globe 7/25/2005


Romney Rewards one of the State's Leading Anti-Marriage Attorneys by Making him a Judge
Romney told the U.S. Senate on June 22, 2004, that the "real threat to the States is not the
constitutional amendment process, in which the states participate,
but activist judges who disregard the law and redefine marriage . . ."
Romney sounds tough but yet he had no qualms advancing the legal career of one
of the leading anti-marriage attorneys.
He nominated Stephen Abany to a District Court.
Abany has been a key player in the Massachusetts Lesbian and Gay Bar Association which,
in its own words, is "dedicated to ensuring that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision
on marriage equality is upheld, and that any anti-gay amendment or legislation is defeated."
- U.S. Senate testimony by Gov. Mitt Romney, 6/22/2004 P>


"Romney announces he won't fill judicial vacancies before term ends
Despite his rhetoric about judicial activism, Romney announced that
he won't fill all the remaining vacancies during his term - but instead
leave them for his liberal Democrat successor!

Governor Mitt Romney pledged yesterday not to make a flurry of lame-duck
judicial appointments in the final days of his administration . . . David Yas,
editor of Lawyers Weekly, said Romney is "bucking tradition" by resisting the urge to
fill all remaining judgeships. "It is a tradition for governors to use that power to appoint judges
aggressively in the waning moments of their administration," Yas said.
He added that Romney has been criticized for failing to make judicial appointments.
"The legal community has consistently criticized him for not filling open seats quickly enough
and being a little too painstaking in the process and being dismissive of the input of the
Judicial Nominating Commission," Yas said.
- Boston Globe 11/2/2006

11 posted on 05/25/2012 5:23:29 PM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

Yep. I don’t support Romney but I’d prefer just about anyone take over that job from Hussein - even Hillary would be an improvement.


12 posted on 05/25/2012 6:02:57 PM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnonymousConservative

The only person Willard ever served as a placeholder for is his Marxist successor as Governor of MA, Deval Patrick. He is a fiasco of epic proportions.


13 posted on 05/25/2012 6:21:53 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (If you like lying Socialist dirtbags, you'll love Slick Willard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: delapaz

aw gee and it might also mean that capitalism survives,,,,its terrible I tell ya


14 posted on 05/25/2012 6:26:36 PM PDT by woofie (It takes three villages and a forest of woodland creatures to raise a child in Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: delapaz
Obama losing means no chance for a conservative president until 2020 at the earliest.

I thought Obama winning in 2008 was supposed to usher in the next Reagan akin to Carter's term? Last time I checked, 'hoping for things unseen' was only the territory of God, not politicians. Time do deal with the reality of what is in front of us and not hope for change.

15 posted on 05/25/2012 6:27:40 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AnonymousConservative

So your theory is that the same party fathers who would not let us choose a conservative to run in 2008 or 2012, during open primaries will not only let us run one in 2016, but they’ll let an INCUMBENT SITTING president step aside so it can happen.

Pull the other finger.

No. First we save the GOP, then we can save the country. The mittbots have it all backwards. The GOP must be taught a lesson.


16 posted on 05/25/2012 6:49:05 PM PDT by delapaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: delapaz

Look, everyone declaring Romeny isn’t conservative (enough) has had yet enough of the DNC Obama Kool Aid as I take it. Sour grapes. Get busy at the grass roots level and quite whinning. Ron Paul has grass roots and the TEA party as well. Join a group that has a long term goal to re-establish the GOP as conservative, or possibly join a group the puts the DNC centered on what we cherish as Americans rather than a Socialist world order. Social justice alone should make you go running to Romeny.


17 posted on 05/25/2012 7:02:00 PM PDT by Jumper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AnonymousConservative
It is not impossible Romney will get LBJ’d in 2016, maybe by a real Conservative.

If the economy isn't better by 2016 the White House might well revert back to the Democrats. With Romney controlling the party apparatus from the beginning of the primary cycle and reluctance to primary a sitting President, we're stlil talking 2020 before we get a conservative.

18 posted on 05/25/2012 7:23:26 PM PDT by Colonel_Flagg (Obama vs. Romney: Zero x Zero = Zero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: delapaz; fieldmarshaldj; Diogenesis

For the record, I loathe Romney. I am NRA to the core, and know full well what he is on every issue, including guns. I don’t expect him to be Conservative, I just expect something a little less bad than Obama.

If you know of any way to throw this to the convention, and get another nominee, I’ll help enthusiastically

But if it is a choice between Romney and Obama, I look at the Supreme Court, and wonder, if a roaring ball of fire like Breitbart (God rest his soul), can pass on at his age, what if we lose a Conservative Justice (God forbid), in the next four years?

Romney sucks, but he will likely be better than Obama on that, and that is what I see.

I’m not rooting for Romney. I’m not even sure I will actually vote for him. I can’t say he won’t be worse than Obama legislatively, since he will be able to pass Liberal stuff Obama probably couldn’t. If he loses, I actually won’t feel all that bad, given how the establishment will lose too, and the risk he poses. And I loathe Liberals, so that is saying something.

But, by the same token, the Supremes even things out for me, and I won’t get in his way, if he ends up the nominee.

No doubt, we have a choice between two big risks to our Republic, and I am not absolutely sure mine is the right one to take. But it looks that way to me, so I’m going with it, tentatively. I respect your positions though, and can’t criticize you or point out errors in your logic.

I just hope we get enough traction in Congress to mitigate the damage either way.


19 posted on 05/25/2012 7:38:01 PM PDT by AnonymousConservative (Why did Liberals evolve within our species? www.anonymousconservative.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Colonel_Flagg

Tough to say. Romney got the nomination this time around (just barely) on the strength of his economic background, and a perception he could win. If the economy stinks by the next election, he won’t have that.

But five years out, we are in uncharted waters with the establishment controlling things, so you could be right.


20 posted on 05/25/2012 7:41:18 PM PDT by AnonymousConservative (Why did Liberals evolve within our species? www.anonymousconservative.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: AnonymousConservative

There are those on this site (many of whom I agree with) who think the combination of the liberal Romney and a Republican Congress might be a deadly combination since they will be eager to help Romney advance his agenda.

In that case, there’s no way Romney gets primaried. With a Republican Congress, the Romney DOP-E will do anything needed to run the entire slate for re-election.

We have a peck of trouble on our hands.


21 posted on 05/25/2012 7:44:12 PM PDT by Colonel_Flagg (Obama vs. Romney: Zero x Zero = Zero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: AnonymousConservative

I suggest taking a look at the quality of people Willard appointed to the bench in MA. Left-wingers. Exactly the people he wanted in office. In one instance, it had deadly consequences. Brian and Beverly Mauck are the ones whose blood Willard has on his hands.


22 posted on 05/25/2012 7:56:48 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (If you like lying Socialist dirtbags, you'll love Slick Willard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

“If you like lying Socialist dirtbags, you’ll love Slick Willard”

So you prefer a marxist, communist dirtbag like Obama, I take it?

Time to wake up and smell reality: the primaries are OVER — it’s going to be Romney or Obama. Pick one. Attacking Romney gets you Obama.

Time to start a “conservatives for Obama” group.


23 posted on 05/25/2012 9:00:35 PM PDT by Innovative (None are so blind that will not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Innovative; EternalVigilance; Diogenesis; BlackElk

You can spare me the Slick Willardbot talking points. I’m not supporting the bipartisan leftist establishment cabal set of false choices. You may get a thrill up your leg every time Willard comes on tv, but those of us who are actually Conservatives recognize precisely what he is... a complete and total fraud who is viscerally opposed to the Conservative agenda. I don’t vote for Socialists and I don’t vote for renowned liars. Screw Willard AND his tanner brother Zero.


24 posted on 05/25/2012 9:19:33 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (If you like lying Socialist dirtbags, you'll love Slick Willard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

When you and RomneyCARE attacked Gov. Palin and her
children, you gave America the Undocumented one.

Now? RomneyCARE is NOT the candidate, yet.

And Milt the Backstabber is NO CONSERVATIVE’s candidate.


25 posted on 05/26/2012 3:53:10 AM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: delapaz
Romneybot alert. Obama losing means no chance for a conservative president until 2020 at the earliest. More likely 2024 or 2028 after Romney trashes the GOP among the public (again).

Any idea of what damage Obama can do with another 4 years? Some of what's already in place will take years if not decades to correct. "Just give me some space until after my election...I'll have more flexibility..." We'd be better off with conservatives running the House and Senate and someone not nearly as bad as Obama in the WH.

26 posted on 05/26/2012 4:29:12 AM PDT by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

Yeah, I can’t argue with you. I’m hoping he’ll be better than zero for four years, but I can’t make a strong case for it. Turth be told, I’m not sure I can really make a case, beyond Mitt being a windsock, and doing whatever he feels he needs to for himself. If he could become a “lifetime” member of the NRA, maybe he can appoint a Conservative SC Justice?

Nor can I argue with the idea that the Republican party would probably better off if he lost.

Then again, I hate Liberals, and want them to see their messiah go down in flames, ala Jimmy Carter, badly, so I’m not really commited either way too strongly, though I lean towards seeing Obama defeated.

Truth be told, I’m astonished an election against 0bama could leave Conservatives so conflicted. I just hope we put in a strongly Conservative Congress.


27 posted on 05/26/2012 8:43:28 AM PDT by AnonymousConservative (Why did Liberals evolve within our species? www.anonymousconservative.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

“When you and RomneyCARE attacked Gov. Palin and her
children, you gave America the Undocumented one.”

Being misguided is one thing, LYING is entirely different. Your above statement is an OUTRAGEOUS LIE.

That only shows you lost the argument and that’s why you resort to outrageous lies.


28 posted on 05/26/2012 9:25:42 AM PDT by Innovative (None are so blind that will not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon; delapaz

delapaz: “Obama losing means no chance for a conservative president until 2020 at the earliest. “

delpaz — so you are an enthusiastic Obama supporter, I see.

Agamemnon, Another Obama supporter — for your collection.


29 posted on 05/26/2012 9:32:16 AM PDT by Innovative (None are so blind that will not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: delapaz

With another four years of Obama, there won’t be a country left to save. He will implement programs that can’t be gotten rid of and will pull the US down to a third world status. Look what his first term is like, when he still has to worry about reelection — wait until he is totally unconstrained in his second term.


30 posted on 05/26/2012 9:35:23 AM PDT by Innovative (None are so blind that will not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Innovative; delapaz
Agamemnon, Another Obama supporter — for your collection.

delpaz = another internally self-contradicting Obama lacky and surrender monkey. I see that. The guy is such a cartoon of himself.

I have the scalps of so many Obama-bots on my belt at this point, it is getting hard to keep track of all of them.

But, as always, we remain aware of the liberal dissemblers in our midst and dispatch them with the contempt they so richly deserve!

Well done, Innovative!

FReegards!


31 posted on 05/26/2012 11:16:12 AM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: trebb
Any idea of what damage Obama can do with another 4 years? Some of what's already in place will take years if not decades to correct. "Just give me some space until after my election...I'll have more flexibility..." We'd be better off with conservatives running the House and Senate and someone not nearly as bad as Obama in the WH.

Yes, in fact I do, and I also realize that the damage will be only slightly more than what Romney will do, with the saving grace that he will be term-limited.

32 posted on 05/26/2012 11:22:07 AM PDT by delapaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon

I don’t know what “scalp” you are talking about. My posting privileges are apparently not suspended yet. Although I expect that to happen sometime over the next few months as JimRob completes his surrender to the Romney agenda due to his Obama hatred.

So far I applaud his stance on allowing the conservatives who have been “left” behind when the GOP turned liberal to speak their minds.

Obama is a disaster, but the country is in such a wreck that we could bring Reagan back from the dead and we’d stillc rash. We are past the tipping point, therefore fearmongering tactics will not work with us.

And yes, there will be elections in 2016 and 2020.


33 posted on 05/26/2012 11:27:51 AM PDT by delapaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; delapaz; Innovative; unkus; altura; netmilsmom
I don’t know what “scalp” you are talking about. My posting privileges are apparently not suspended yet. Although I expect that to happen sometime over the next few months as JimRob completes his surrender to the Romney agenda due to his Obama hatred.

I wasn't aware that Jim Robinson "surrendered" to the Romney agenda, as the poster, "delapaz," asserts here.

No one is particularly enthusiastic about Romney being at the top of the ticket, but it appears from his posting here that "delapaz" doesn't hate the thought of an Obama re-election quite enough yet, as he is actually endorsing Obama's re-election.

Seems from what he has written here he is even goading the Board to ban him for his support of Obama.

It is of course up to the discretion of the Board to determine what is the posting longevity of a typical Obama supporter.

Since you, delapaz, are a confessed Obama supporter, if you still have a philosophical "scalp," left, as it has been with other Obama-flaks, yours too, will be mine some day soon, as well.

FReegards!


34 posted on 05/26/2012 12:02:59 PM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: delapaz
Although I expect that to happen sometime over the next few months as JimRob completes his surrender to the Romney agenda due to his Obama hatred.

Obama hatred? Give us a good reason to do anything BUT loathe Obama.

35 posted on 05/26/2012 12:09:22 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: delapaz; Agamemnon

“delapaz: “Obama losing means no chance for a conservative president until 2020 at the earliest. “

Agamemnon is talking about you having outed yourself as an avowed Obama supporter. You clearly expressed you are rooting for Obama to win.

Some are Obama supporters, but they are careful to not openly admit it, but you did openly admit it, that you are “so conservative” that you are openly want an avowed Marxist, socialist, anti-American Obama to get another four years to complete his agenda of destroying the US, as we know it.


36 posted on 05/26/2012 12:11:11 PM PDT by Innovative (None are so blind that will not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon; delapaz; Innovative; unkus; altura; netmilsmom

Surrender to Romney? NUTS!!

I’ll never vote for or support that abortionist/homosexualist statist!!

I want every God-fearing, liberty-loving American to go to the polls and vote their conscience. I want a turnout greater than 2010. I want the tea party rebellion of 2010 to explode and go viral in 2012. I want grassroots tea party conservatives to be voted into as many offices at every level of government that is humanly possible.

And if it is in accordance to God’s will then I pray that the new moral majority will drive out the godless abortionists, the homosexualists, the militant feminists, the whacko environmentalists, the statists, the socialists, the Marxists, the communists, the activist and internationalist “Rulers in black robes,” and all the corrupt crony capitalists, the evil doers and assorted enemies of God and Liberty from our government at every level and from all of our government and public institutions. I pray that we restore God and Liberty and sovereignty and freedom and self-rule and sanity to our great nation!!...

Vote ‘em OUT!! Recall them!! Impeach them!! Overturn them!! Repeal them!! Throw out the anti-liberty, un-American, unconstitutional evil doers and their corruption, depravity and filth!! Restore freedom and Liberty!!

We do not surrender, we reload!! And fight like hell!!


37 posted on 05/26/2012 12:47:37 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

And you clearly have reading comprehension failures.

There are two, TWO big government statists that I can vote for, one of which will win.

As of now, yes, I am strategically voting for Obama, because of the two, he gives us a chance to get a conservative in 2016. Romney does not.

I could also consider voting constitution party, and if enough freepers got on board enough to move the needle of CP enough for everyone to take notice I would throw my weight in with them.

Voting for Romney is definitely counterproductive to the conservative agenda.

For the record I live in Ohio, and I do plan on voting for Josh Mandel.

JimRob told me to vote my conscience. Romney is a homosexual loving abortionist who will destroy the GOP. He is as unacceptable a candidate to me as Ron Paul. But he is getting the nod anyway. So be it.


38 posted on 05/26/2012 2:50:32 PM PDT by delapaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon; jimrob
I wasn't aware that Jim Robinson "surrendered" to the Romney agenda, as the poster, "delapaz," asserts here.

In my opinion, JimRob's unilateral truce on Romney is tantamount to a surrender. For this reason: Romney got a significant concession, a ceasefire, while giving up exactly NOTHING to get it. NO promises of conservative appointments, nothing on the conservative agenda, etc.

Result: what FReepers think doesn't matter to Romney, he can give them nothing and they will get what he wants. Attacks on Obama, implicit support for the GOP ticket, all the ticket.

BTW I am not disagreeing with Jim's ethics, principles, ideals or direction, I simply disagree on negotiating strategy.

Oh and by the way I hate Obama AND Romney and all they represent with the heat of a thousand burning suns.

39 posted on 05/26/2012 2:59:27 PM PDT by delapaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: delapaz; Jim Robinson

If there is a top level concern with Mitt, surpassing all other concerns, it would be this:

Does the LDS expect Mitt to keep on getting their personal okay for what he does in the White House?

And based on what? News from the White House? Or personal briefings?

At some point national security issues are going to come into play. It isn’t nearly so much about Mitt leaning to LDS philosophy (if there is such a thing — it seems to me like a melange of garbage), as about his possibly having to ask “mother may I” to live LDS philosophers/prophets who can NOT keep secrets themselves.

THAT could not be tolerated from a President Mitt, though to be fair it is likely Obama is the puppet of puppeteers we don’t even know about (Mitt’s would have a known address in Salt Lake City).


40 posted on 05/26/2012 3:06:35 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Let me ABOs run loose Lou ... ???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

On the list of reasons that Romney is unacceptable, being a Mormon is way, way down the list for me. I actually don’t understand how he could take those liberal positions as MA Gov and remain in good standing with the LDS. Therefore I don’t think they have much of a hold on him.


41 posted on 05/26/2012 3:25:14 PM PDT by delapaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: delapaz

Ah, Del, this is where the personal intrigue comes in.

Oh, for someone who had been AT THAT LEVEL in the LDS, and then walked out. It could provide immense sunshine on either the risks or the lack thereof. Some folks like our reaganaut have seen it from ground level in the form of official policy, but not seen it as it actually played out.

If Mitt follows a philosophy however muddled, or is just looking for political attaboys, that’s one thing.

But if his church ties him to the spiritual oversight of a particular man with the post of prophet, and that man happens to be as looie liberal as Harry Reid — well a genius is not needed to anticipate all hell breaking loose.


42 posted on 05/26/2012 3:30:48 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Let me ABOs run loose Lou ... ???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: AnonymousConservative

All I can tell you is to vote your conscience. I’ve voted Republican in every Presidential election going back 20 years, and the last time was bad enough with McCain, whom I loathed (but justified voting for him for 2 reasons, #1 being Palin, and #2, hoping the stress of the job would cause him to keel over and she’d succeed him). This time, barring a replacement of Willard, will be the first time I will not vote for the GOP nominee. Having known Willard for 18 years going back to his Senate run against Ted Kennedy, there’s nothing under the sun that would convince me to cast a vote for him. He simply does not possess the character to hold ANY office of trust. He is about the most dishonest person I’ve ever come across who has dared to run for office as a Republican. Even being asked to vote for him is personally, viscerally, offensive, right down to my core. “ABO” is not a reason. That’s a cop-out.

Defeating Zero is what we want to do, BUT not replacing with someone of equally odious character, or lack thereof. Zero must be replaced by someone WITH character and with the bedrock Conservative principles to turn this country around. Willard is NOT that person. He’s a Socialist running in the wrong party. Nothing that comes out of his mouth can be trusted. He’ll say anything to get elected. He’s a sociopath, a megalomaniac... someone raised with a grandiose sense of entitlement. His father, a Presidential aspirant, was scarcely different. These folks were at war with the Conservative wing and wanted to run out/purge people like Ronald Reagan. It is unimaginable that any Conservative could support such a fraud. I haven’t spent years on this website warning people about this individual to simply turn around and blindly support him. I won’t do it. It would be like selling my soul.


43 posted on 05/26/2012 4:41:05 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (If you like lying Socialist dirtbags, you'll love Slick Willard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

Well said. This conservative will not carry water or help in any way the son of George Romney.


44 posted on 05/26/2012 5:25:02 PM PDT by delapaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

This conservative believes that the goals you describe will be better served by getting rid of Barack Hussein Obama.

I trust this doesn’t disqualify me from participating in my beloved forum, but it’s what I believe.


45 posted on 05/26/2012 7:15:42 PM PDT by altura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

This conservative believes that the goals you describe will be better served by getting rid of Barack Hussein Obama.

I trust this doesn’t disqualify me from participating in my beloved forum, but it’s what I believe.


46 posted on 05/26/2012 7:16:39 PM PDT by altura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser

Yes...finally, you are one who sees and thinks with clarity rather than fanaticism!


47 posted on 05/26/2012 8:30:30 PM PDT by citizen (Obama blames:Arab Spring,Banks,Big Oil,Bush,Ceos,Coal,Euro Zone,FNC,Jpn Tsunami,T Party,Wall St,You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser

Yes...finally, you are one who sees and thinks with clarity rather than fanaticism!


48 posted on 05/26/2012 8:31:53 PM PDT by citizen (Obama blames:Arab Spring,Banks,Big Oil,Bush,Ceos,Coal,Euro Zone,FNC,Jpn Tsunami,T Party,Wall St,You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser

Yes...finally, you are one who sees and thinks with clarity rather than fanaticism!


49 posted on 05/26/2012 8:33:24 PM PDT by citizen (Obama blames:Arab Spring,Banks,Big Oil,Bush,Ceos,Coal,Euro Zone,FNC,Jpn Tsunami,T Party,Wall St,You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser

Yes...finally, you are one who sees and thinks with clarity rather than fanaticism!


50 posted on 05/26/2012 8:40:51 PM PDT by citizen (Obama blames:Arab Spring,Banks,Big Oil,Bush,Ceos,Coal,Euro Zone,FNC,Jpn Tsunami,T Party,Wall St,You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson