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

To: oneprolifewoman
Problem is Reagan would have lost to Obama’s ads.

Regan couldn’t win California now.

And Romney Was a better Debater than Reagan> I seen both of them. Takers have won, the cows are out of the barn and there is no getting it back.

32 posted on 11/11/2012 2:13:58 AM PST by factmart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: factmart

I disagree with you, Reagan would have easily won because his campaign would have been totally different, you forget that being able to communicate his conservative message and inspire, and motivate, was what made Reagan such a winner.

Romney has always been a loser, 20 years of running for office and a single victory and a single term as a failed, liberal governor that couldn’t win reelection and left with 34% approval.

Romney despised Reagan, and now people are trying to hide his being such a loser in politics, by pretending that Reagan was just another Romney and that this would have been the same election regardless of who ran, because Romney is as good as Reagan.

Romney was everything that republicans disagree with, he was the anti-Reagan, he never should have been in republican politics in the first place (he abandoned it when it was the Reagan party) , much less as it’s presidential candidate.


40 posted on 11/11/2012 9:29:54 AM PST by ansel12 (Todd Akin was NOT the tea party candidate, Sarah Steelman was, Brunner had tea party support also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

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