Skip to comments.Jim Robinson: Taking stock of our dwindling conservative inventory
Posted on 01/05/2012 11:23:02 AM PST by Jim Robinson
click here to read article
If there is hope, it lies with the proles.
Yes, “AntiRomney” should be part of the meme to be, how should this be phrased for the most punch?
You got one of five correct...Do not lecture me about Romney in Massachusetts..you try changing things in this madhouse..first step is to get elected..as a usurper he had the whole of the state apparatus against him..it remains to his credit that he managed to get some of the most corrupt of the entrenched thieves to fade away..for that alone there are many of us here who thank him. Is he a perfect pick for conservatives..no. Is he better than Bill Ayer’s pal...absolutely.
You said it, Brother FReeper.
Ok, you do speak English. Maybe you just have comprehension issues. And if what I said isn't bothering you, why are you still whining to me about our little tiff?
For the third time. I'll go my way, and you go yours.
Have a good evening.
Take your center-left, moderate bullshit to some RINO forum.
Romney violated every conservative tenet we know of, not only to get elected in Massachusetts, but even AFTER he won election.
If the man had a shred of core values, he would have stood for something (preferably conservative values) and taken the risk of losing the gubernatorial election to the Democrat - but no, he BECAME a Democrat to win the office, and REMAINED a liberal, big government statist the whole time he served, all the while PRETENDING to be a Republican.
Take your Romney liberalism and shove it where the sun don't shine!
I would gladly vote for any of them, except for Newt. My main problem being that he is twice divorced, I know I will be accused for being old fashioned and quaint, but that is simply not acceptable. I am sure that he will be great on the economy and foreign policy, but he will not be able to even open his mouth about the sanctity of marriage without being greeted with a torrent of laughter and mockery.
I know its a dead horse, but Palin not running was a sad loss for us and the nation.
I live conservatism as opposed to mouthing it. And i am practical when times demand it. Also just came back from spending Christmas with my family in Texas. Do not judge me if you do not know me.
Everything you say, you say you didn't say.
That's just mealy-mouth bs. Either you've got core convictions, or you don't. You stand for something, or you don't.
When is it practical to abandon your principles? When you're trying to win an election? When you're trying to smooth down the feathers of the other side in the legislature? When you're trying to ensure favorable treatment for your business interests after you leave office? When you're trying to be all things to all people? When?
Mitt Romney is a worthless, spineless flip-flopping liberal, who has broken faith with us and everything we stand for. He can go straight to hell, and you can tag along if you're trying to apologize for his transgressions on Free Republic.
Since you speak for FR I feel compelled to bow down before you. And perhaps some day we can laugh about all this after we have turned this nightmare around.
From a man you do not know, but damn well need..
Yeah, I’ll go along with Newt. I think he could talk rings around Obama in a debate.
Agreed. Give Obama a teleprompter and Newt would still talk circles around him in a debate.
I might have missed this if it was already posted - If so, apologies, but there is video in a few speeches Newt made seriously saying he’s spot him the Teleprompter for the debates.Said “Wouldn’t you want one if you had to defend Obamacare?” ;)
We’re in a bad spot, all right. I pray that it’s not irreversible.
What concerns me is the so-called TEA Party Republicans who are throwing their collective weight behind Romney.
Don’t get me wrong...I think there are those in the House who are doing all that they can to stop this insanity. But, the elitists are killing us. Just look what McConnell did to Boehner just before Christmas.
And, now...Obama wants a year extension to the payroll amnesty, and just who tried to get that through before now? The House did. Shame on somebody for letting the narrative become so distorted.
Not to mention the total destruction by those in our party of the conservatives who are in the race.
It’s a total shame.
But didn’t Newtie say he liked FDR? Newt’s a progressive smooth talker. Hopefully he continues to implode and a real conservative can get a chance... like Rick Perry.
“I know its a dead horse, but Palin not running was a sad loss for us and the nation.”
Amen to that. If things get bad enough, and the nomination process fails us, maybe she still will.
It's all up to us whether Obama is re-elected.
The media will DESTROY all the others until all that's left is Romney, and then they, and we conservatives will DESTROY him and VOILA! we have Obama again.....is that what we want?? I don't think so.
Not building the fence cedes sovereignty. A few acres of land for a secure border is well worth it, but then I not a illegal coddler and am completely heartless especially by Texas standards. Texas ‘bidness’ men want an open border with plenty of cheap Mexican labor and ‘free’ trade initiatives so handsomely reward those politicians who keep the border unsecured.
Only Newt can match Romney and beat Obama.
Why give so much power to the liberal media if you have done research and due diligence on all of the candidates and know where Huntsman stands on the issues ? Jon is hugely more conservative than Newt but having crossover appeal because Independent voters like your style is why Gingrich will never beat Obama and Huntsman would cream him in a general election.
Utah was #1 in job growth while Mass. was #47. Romney didn’t run for re-election and left office as one of the most unpopular governors in the country. Huntsman was re-elected in a landslide and had an 80+% approval rating. Huntsman got health care reform w/o a mandate. He expanded school choice. He eliminated loopholes. He was, like Romney, CEO of a Fortune 500 company. But, Huntsman has foreign policy experience and a lot of it.
Correct! And I agree with all that you said when it comes down to the time any GOP candidate faces Obama. When the debates take place between Obama and whoever is the Republican selected our guy better be able to hold his own. That is what will count to most Americans who don't really follow politics, or have don't any serious interest in a candidates background.
One of Obama's main traits that gave him the election was that he was able to win over voters mostly because of his sharp tongue, his quick quips - basically, his ridicule tactics. In the debates he made people laugh at McCain, who looked like the slow, dull, old guy who couldn't think on his feet. Obama is not that smart, and he is lazy, and he had no experience...but he was and is an arrogant flame-thrower who then and now appeals to his base by being continually critical and caustic with an air of superiority and a snide, sickening smile and chuckle.
The GOP candidate HAS to be able to fend off/put down those sarcastic comments Obama makes and will make against any opponent. Unfortunately, with the type of supporters Obama appeals to, all that is important to them is seeing Obama "bi*ch slap" an opponent, like some hyped-up, gang member on a street corner.
Our country is being run by someone who is not good at anything except being good at ridicule (which is so typical of a narcissistic person who has no capabilities of his own). He can only make himself look good by making others the target of his zingers. For those who vote based on that type of performance there is only one - Newt Gingrich - who can match Obama in a debate.
We all know that Gingrich is far superior to Obama in leadership skills, knowledge of world affairs, business and commerce, and an understanding of our Republic and American principles. But when those debates are televised if the GOP candidate can't return and deflect Obama's quips and make a clever comment and sound bite that will resonate with people who want entertainment...then we are lost, and those people on the fence will vote for Obama again. I don't see anyone capable of sparring with and scarring the Obama image except Newt. Unfortunately , no matter how well qualified our candidate is, what will impress most of the public who don't do any research and who cast their votes based mainly on the face-to-face sparring of the debates will be the deciding factor.
Newt has the only ability to quickly and cleverly respond to the sharp tongued wisecracks and tactics of the kid in the White House who only knows how to perform for audiences. Obama debates and campaigns like a street-fighter. He is the bully who picks on anyone more intelligent and qualified than himself in order to deflect anyone's thoughts that he is really a shallow, absolute con-artist who would have made a better commedian or clown than a politician and, certainly, a president.
The man is supremely unlikeable, nasty, arrogant, on top of being a sore loser, smarty-pants elitist, and that will come out in the debates, should he be nominated. Game over. Americans might have serious concerns about Obama’s leadership potential but they need to like their presidents and despite the policies, remain loyal to the president as a good guy on a personal level. Newt ... This is a fool’s game.
Which is why it would be very difficult for Obama to criticize Huntsman in the way that some may see as necessary or argue that he will not lead the country in the right direction since it was Obama himself who appointed him to perhaps the most important diplomatic position in US foreign policy. It neutralizes his preferred campaign tactic of negative character assassination like nothing else. Obama’s team knew the danger Huntsman could bring to a second term and clearly wanted him otherwise occupied.
So I still don’t know how you get around Huntsman as the best candidate. He is conservative but doesn’t turn off independent voters. He has the right proposals, policy, record and temperament to be president. Hopefully voters in these early starts are starting to take a hard look at what they are about to do.
Well, I’ll give him another look. I grew up in People’s Republic of Massatwochits and over the years I learned that the Globe only supports liberal politicians. Maybe the Globe is playing the psychological bait-and-switch, but I just don’t like the idea of the Globe endorsing him, of WH officials “anonymously” telling conservative media that Huntsman scares them...
I’m not saying it is his biggest selling point, but perhaps the Globe is ready to ditch Obama with a candidate that gives them that loving feeling of 2008 and none of the downside. Huntsman has also been endorsed by more New Hampshire papers than any candidate. Reporters are only working off shared information in the public domain and his actual governing record is 90% free of liberal, or even moderate, programs and causes.
So you're saying Romney is a 50% conservative? The man has a record confirming that he is FOR: government-controlled health care, onerous regulation on individuals and industry to "save the planet" in the name of global warming, activist judges, the gay "rights" agenda, cheap and easy tax-payer-funded abortions, and using government to "solve" any and every kind of problem.
Personally, I think a REPUBLICAN who advances all that crap is more dangerous than a Democrat who advances all that crap; the only thing WORSE about the whole situation is that God only knows how many conservatives, in the biggest coup liberalism and statism has ever taken on Americans, are on the verge of voting FOR all the things they stand against.
Your thinking that Romney is a "50% candidate" is bad logic.
In spite of your preferences and bias against Romney, IMHO there are a lot of us lurkers who are convinced that Romney is the only one who can beat Obama. Huntsman acts like a Democrat, Paul is senile and left of Obama, Newt has way too much baggage, Perry can’t remember what he’s doing, and Rick has no executive experience. We already tried that with Obama and look what that got us.
I think you black listed the wrong candidate, and you wonder why your numbers are dropping? Obama must be replaced, and everything he stands for.
What an ugly generalization to make about Texans, which includes me. I don’t want to be pinged by someone who believes something like that about me. So please remove me from your preparedness ping list.
Well said. Bravo.
*Finny raises hand*
Um ... because you're short-sighted?
Gingrich - Santorum
Gingrich - Cain
Windflier responds: Interesting. Does his record in office comport with those campaign promises? Bet it doesn't. Matter of fact, I know it doesn't.
ATTA BOY, WINDFLIER! Hit 'em where they ain't! You're exactly CORRECT! Romney is positioned to pull the biggest liberal coup ever: to get "true conservatives" to vote for an anti-conservative agenda simply because the candidate has an "R" after his name.
Gritty, if America couldn't survive one more term of Obama (I believe there's a pretty decent chance it could), America would be equally doomed under Romney BECAUSE of the very support and acquiescence you mention above. Any "reprieve" provided by Romney would be false, fake, an illusion -- and it is guaran-damn-teed that liberalism and statism would grow more powerful in both parties.
Again, if America couldn't survive another Obama term, then it's already too late and Romney would simply be putting Republican icing on the Democrats' poison cake.
Romney needs to LOSE -- America has a better chance of survival fighting Obama than it would by relying on a toxic, poisonous, fraudulent Romney "reprive." Obama can be fought and defeated, wherease Romney would disarm conservatives altogether.
I don’t wonder anything, pal. I just zot every damn one of you abortionist/statist loving bastards that pop up. It’s like Zot-a troll-e.
I’m not going to vote for that abortionist/statist bastard Myth Romney. Don’t like it leave. If you start pushing for him on this pro-life conservative site you’ll be shown the door. Don’t ask me again.
Romney who ran for Senate as a liberal, Governor as a moderate now President as a conservative, who has been on every side of every issue he has ever considered ? And according to you the candidate that acts like a Democrat is HUNTSMAN who has been 99% more consistently conservative than Mitt and Newt combined ?
First governor to oppose the No Child Left Behind. Lifetime record of cutting taxes, decreasing burdensome regulation, and responsible debt management with no accounting gimmicks in his budgets, passionately pro-life and pro 2nd amendment, best managed state in the country, best jobs record in the country, executive experience, deep knowledge of foreign policy, articulate, hugely intelligent and most of all with a record of trust and real world results to back it up. If that is the mark of a liberal, please let me vote for it !
I was for John Bolton in 2008, and I continue to think that he is a top choice, but he has not followed thru positively on his announced plans for an exploratory effort. Others here on FR agree with me, but there is no "groundswell" of support for him, and because of that, he might not perform any better than Fred Thompson in a bid, which I assume would have to be third party now. I would just as soon go that route, because I don't see any future success for Santorum in the Primary, and an epic landslide for Obama if we nominate Mutt. Kill the idiot Republican Party, and start all over with a Conservative Party. And it's too late to do that now. Say Hello to another four years of total disaster.
Can you say Romney would do this? If so, then dont vote for him; if not, then do.
Certainly I can say that Romney would lie to the American public, and the most pathetic thing is that he may not even knows that's what he's doing.
He wants so badly to be a peacemaker, a Good Daddy to America, and in the doing would -- as he has always done -- roll over to liberalism and statism and embrace it in the doing, because it's so peaceful and reassuring.
Romney plays for the OTHER TEAM. He's wearing our Repblican uniform, but he's playing for the other team.
As for the other items on the list, the word "impeachable" is key. Romney would squelch any such sentiment or spirit in the Republican party as "unseemly." Romney would make statism and liberalism more powerful in both parties.
Can you say Obama would do this?
So good it needs repeating.
It adds ZERO constructive input, but stinks everything up like old dead fish. It wouldn't matter who you supported. Your egocentric small mindedness just reflects on your candidate.
You might reconsider your impact: If Perry supporters bicker and snip at fellow conservatives and get bitchy like third-grade girls rehashing silly, empty old crap ... it's reasonable to suspect Perry's a loser because he's got such loser-types rooting for him.
I'm also not the person who has caused a lot of long time FReepers, and monthly donors, to be zotted or to voluntarily leave FR and took their donations with them.
I'm not on the ping list of the people who've caused most of the trouble...the unintended consequences they are only beginning to see.
You are barking up the wrong tree so take it somewhere else.
DEAD WRONG on two counts:
1. It would take more courage than I've ever had to muster in an election booth to refuse to pull the "R" lever if the race is Romney vs. Obama. The EASIEST thing would be to vote for Romney. To reject it because I have come to the conclusion that there is a greater chance that he'd HURT American more than Obama would, would take real COURAGE.
2. You are the one who would see it as suicide, falling on one's sword, sepuku. I see it as a warrior offensive stance, an aggressive move to launch a battle on OUR terms. Going "offense" means fighting -- with my vote, in this case -- to see that Romney loses, because it is sure-fire certain that Romney in the White House would make liberalism and statism in both parties more powerful than ever. If you ask me, getting Republicans and conservatives to vote FOR all the things they stand against, would be an act of political sepuku not just for conservatism, but for America.
We can fight Obama. Romney, with his "Republican" administration, would disarm political conservatives in the Republican party and dilute to the point of feebleness the political forces that can fight for limited government. Obama would make those crucial political forces more determined and more powerful.
Romney needs to lose.
Yeah, and I'd like a pony for Christmas.
Amen. Well said. I think Newt presents a pretty good chance of starting to help American regain its course toward limited government, the very best enabler of both social and fiscal conservatism.
You might reconsider your impact: If NEWT supporters bicker and snip at fellow conservatives and get bitchy like third-grade girls rehashing silly, empty old crap ... it's reasonable to suspect NEWT's a loser because he's got such loser-types rooting for him.
*********************************************** Monday, January 02, 2012 9:04:02 PM · 37 of 46
Finny to TomServo
I hope lurkers do an "in forum" search of your posting history. :^)
And you're STILL a jackass!
It's OK for you to call people "Jackass?" And you preach to others?! Do as you say and not as you dO?
Well said! Bravo! *standing on chair whistling and cheering*
Some people's kids.
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.