Posted on 11/22/2012 8:33:27 AM PST by rhema
Seriously, you’ve done enough damage in the past, quit campaigning for Mitt Romney, change your ways and help conservatives prevent another rino disaster from becoming the nominee in 2016, and in the 2014 elections.
That 2012 election is over, the choice now is, ‘is the mistake of Mitt, a thing of the past to learn from, or to duplicate’?
So far your 2016 politics look just like your 2012 politics.
Drew68: “Yep! Social conservatives sure taught America a lesson. Let’s reject the guy who’s 75% conservative for the guy who’s 0% conservative.”
First off, Romney wasn’t even close to being 75% conservative. Secondly, millions of conservatives voted for him in spite of that.
What the moderates don’t seem to understand is it’s not enough to be better than the other guy. I even agree with you that a 75% conservative is better than Obama. So what? Millions more people sat the election out because we didn’t give them something to enthusiastically support. You don’t inspire people to vote by saying the other guy sucks. I guess a lot of people just didn’t find Mitt to be much of an alternative.
IMHO...
The Democratic Party is the party that first began to institutionally oppose the morality given in Scripture. This began in earnest most notably in the 1960’s, as it’s liberal coalition began to accept 1960’s radicals. One of the Democratic Party core values, arising from their foundation on secular humanist moral relativism, is their advocacy for any and all sorts of sexual immorality, including fornication, to be viewed simply as legal recreation.
Support for fornication as a so-called right is why the Democratic Party finds itself also to be the party of abortion. Without rampant fornication, abortion is not popular, since few would then have reason to even consider it.
The Republican party can’t supplant this “branding”, since the Democratic party claimed it first. The Republican party, as the Democratic party slid into that immoral morass over the last few decades, never before tried to follow it.
The more the Republican party tries to embrace immorality, the less relevant they will become, appearing to the voter as the “me too” party of decadence trying to emulate the “original” party of decadence.
This is why, IMHO, I think it’s wisest for conservatives to spend their efforts working on spreading the Gospel - which will incidentally provide a conservative tailwind - than on supporting so-called moderate Republicans.
It will be interesting to see who they put up this time, they did make Christie the key-note speaker at the convention while shutting out Palin entirely.
I think they are well on their way in shaping 2016.
The sorts of things you’d expect to see if there were millions of social conservatives rejecting RINOS simply don’t appear in the vote totals.
There you go again. Bringing inconvenient facts into the discussion.
Wednesday, 07 Nov 2012
Evangelical voters reached a record high in Tuesday’s election, with 78 percent of white evangelicals supporting Republican Mitt Romney, a national survey has found.
The survey of 800 voters commissioned by the Faith and Freedom Coalition found that a record 27 percent of those who voted in the presidential election were evangelicals.
Romney’s 78 percent showing among white evangelicals was 10 points higher than Arizona Sen. John McCain’s in 2008.
“Evangelicals turned out in record numbers and voted as heavily for Mitt Romney yesterday as they did for George W. Bush in 2004,” said Ralph Reed, chairman of TK-based Faith and Freedom Coalition. “That is an astonishing outcome that few would have predicted even a few months ago.
http://www.newsmax.com/US/romney-evangelical-vote-obama/2012/11/07/id/463268
But, to be fair, you are in fact principled.
Oh, wow. The Establishment put up a socialist, a lifetime abortion sympathizer, a Morman bishop whose only conservative cred was doing nice things for other Mormans, who annually tithed his four million, brought redistribution by way of health care to Massachusetts, and you get all warm and fuzzy over the Supreme Court affect on abortion, as your last arguement to blame real prolifers for not buying Romney’s schlick?
LOL!
You people drug a lot of us into the ballot box for this loser with the insults and the “sky is falling” mime.
Never again.
Done with the pubbies here, that’s for sure.
You will lose next time too if there is anyone who gets even near the nomination who isn’t conservative and owns a record to prove it.
I so agree that some of us got the heavenly sign this election. Two non-Christians as candidates was a hint, and then we see a political victory go to the proud Marxist, which was more than a hint. I got the message. With the Gospel, the good nominees will come. Without re-evangelizing th US, we will never see good nominees again.
How did Romney manage to attract record evangelical support?
I don’t know what to believe with polls anymore, but many of us caved in finally for Romney, given the slim chance the socialist on a Republican ticket could beat the Marxist, (after having been beaten about the head and shoulders for weeks) so, yes I suppose the so-called evangelical vote was fairly substantial. In a post Christian era, we see clearly that’s no longer enough, in the US.
I’m forced to look elsewhere, including at the Libertarians who have figured out that the social issues need to go back to the states. I am not opposed to that.
Life must be the Litmus Test. Without it you have nothing else.
a lifetime abortion sympathizer, and you get all warm and fuzzy over the Supreme Court affect on abortion, as your last arguement to blame real prolifers for not buying Romney’s schlick?
LOL!
//////////////
exACTLEEEEE
No top of the list contender has done that since, even though the hopeychangey guy has bamboozled people into thinking he has a plan (but you gotta pass it to know what's in it).
Reagan had one more advantage: The mediots didn't really want to take him on, because his following from previous careers was too large.
Exactly what progress did they make toward ending legal abortions? Please be specific.
If all you require is that the candidate make appropriate sounding pro-life noises, rest assured that such persons will continue to be available.
>> If the GOP wants
Must not be a conditional.
Agreed 100%. The slogan “If it feels good, do it!” is not a motto for civilized men and women. It was a motto of the early Baby Boomer generation to which I belong and now we get to pay the price. God bless you and yours! See also EV’s #37 and its link, wisdom as always.
Among Reagan's accomplishments:
**He supported legislation that would allow for a challenge of Roe vs. Wade. He adopted the "Mexico City Policy" halting federal aid to private groups promoting abortions abroad.
** His administration cut off funding to the United Nations Fund for Population Activities because the global agency violated U.S. law by participating in China's mandatory abortion program.
** His administration adopted regulations prohibiting federally funded "family planning clinics" from promoting abortion as birth control.
** The Reagan White House blocked use of federal money for research using the tissue of aborted babies.
** It helped win approval of the "Danforth Amendment," which said federally funded educational institutions could not be guilty of "sex discrimination" for refusing to pay for abortions.
** Reagan himself introduced the issue of fetal pain into the public debate over abortion.
**His administration was key in enactment of laws protecting the right to life of handicapped newborns.
** Reagan designated a National Sanctity of Human Life Day, to recognize the value of life at all stages.
** Reagan wrote Abortion and the Conscience of Nation
On the 10th anniversary of the Supreme Court's controversial 1973 decision legalizing abortion, President Ronald Reagan wrote a treatise celebrating life and challenging the nation to examine its soul regarding the procedure. It was a book that, had his advisers gotten their way, would never have been written.
William P. Clark, a national security adviser and secretary of the Interior Department under Reagan, told CNSNews.com the 40th president insisted that the publication of "Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation," a tome that began as an essay, was essential.
"He said, 'No, it's the truth, and we're going to go with it," said Clark, who wrote the book's foreword.
The book was a first in many ways. For one, it was the first book ever published by a sitting president. For another, it was a bold step politically. At the time of its publication, Reagan and his vice president, George H.W. Bush, were struggling to rebuild the nation's slumping economy and set to launch a re-election effort. Polls showed about half the nation backed abortion.
It is surreal what is passing for wisdom and truth today among Republicans. Rubio, for example can’t seem to decide whether to declare as a Catholic or a Protestant. My bet he will opt for Catholic in order to work the Hispanic vote and appear as an embattled Catholic fighting against the HHS mandate. Everything is leverage.
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.