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

Skip to comments.

Tea party leader warns Romney: Donít expect us to campaign for you (Iced Tea)
Daily Caller ^ | 4-13-12 | Alex Pappas

Posted on 04/13/2012 6:21:47 AM PDT by Mozilla

The leader of the Tea Party Nation organization has a blunt message for likely Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney: Tea partiers will likely vote for you, but don’t expect them to get energized and campaign for you.

“The tea party is not going to coalesce around Romney,” Judson Phillips told The Daily Caller on Thursday. “Most of us will vote for Romney, but we will not be out there with signs for him or in his campaign.”

Phillips said that surveys conducted on the Tea Party Nation website have shown that about 25 percent of tea party activists say they won’t vote for Romney in the general election.

-snip- Another conservative leader, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, struck a similar note after former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum dropped out of the presidential race this week.

“It’s difficult for us to back a candidate our constituents don’t believe in and aren’t excited about,” Perkins told CNN

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; judsonphillips; rino; romney; teaparty; teapartynation; teapartyrebellion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-142 last
To: CharacterCounts; All
You have to ask that question after seeing what the Romney/GOP hit machine did to those conservative who did enter the race?

Romney and his super-pac buds have run the dirtiest primary advertising, filled with half-truths and falsehoods, I can recall in my lifetime.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
O.K., so what you're saying is that "fear" kept the good Conservatives from running. You're probably right. If Sarah Palin gave any of the prominent male "Conservatives" one of her balls, they'd both have one. One thing about the sleazy Democrats; they have the balls to fight. 95 percent of the Pubbies are sissies. Like the philandering Herman Cain, who istead of standing and fighting, ran and hid behind his wife and God. If you're truly innocent, you stand and fight 'til hell freezes over. Still wonder what he did with all that unspent campaign cash.
101 posted on 04/13/2012 9:05:58 AM PDT by no dems (TED CRUZ: A PROVEN CONSERVATIVE FOR U.S. SENATE FROM TEXAS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

It ain’t over till it’s over. You seem to be calling the Primary a little bit early.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

O.K., JRandomFreeper, listen to me please........ Lay down the crack pipe and walk away................


102 posted on 04/13/2012 9:24:16 AM PDT by no dems (TED CRUZ: A PROVEN CONSERVATIVE FOR U.S. SENATE FROM TEXAS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: sockhead

They prefer conservatives, and they haven’t received any since Reagan.

Now they are mad.

Tell you what, send me $1,000, and I’ll send you a conservative. I can send you my account info, and you can wire it to me.

Sound OK to you?


103 posted on 04/13/2012 9:28:48 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs (Does beheading qualify as 'breaking my back', in the Jeffersonian sense of the expression?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mozilla; Wurlitzer; Revelation 911; Cato in PA; TonyInOhio; HerrBlucher; no dems; Redleg Duke; ...
Let's extend this line of thinking a little more.

Assuming Romney becomes the (R) nominee, he will need to coalesce the base. He must do this convincingly for conservatives and Tea Party to get on board full throttle, not just halfheartedly.

How many of us were enthusiastic about Reagan in 1980 but thought the "Rockefeller Wing" was going to sabotage our chances when he selected GHWBush as his VP? How many of us were somewhat enthusiastic about Quayle, but not so much about GHWBush in 1988? How many of us were enthusiastic about Kemp, not so enthusiastic about Dole in 1996? How many of us were only cautiously supportive of GWBush in 2000, but roared when we learned he'd selected Cheney as his VP?

How does he get us on board? Here's a suggestion:

Run not only with your VP but with your proposed cabinet as well.

Conservatives sometimes have to be reminded that a President is not king. He can't get anything done by dictate. Above all, he must be a quarterback for the team. While a quarterback may sometimes run a ball in to the end zone himself, more often than not he strategically uses the talents of his team mates to move the ball down the field and bring about the win.

Did anyone hear Palin last night (4/12/2012) on Hannity when asked if she'd consider being Sec'y of Energy? Did anyone hear our own FReeper Allen West when interviewed on Hannity (4/11/2012) and asked whether he'd consider being Romney's VP? And BOTH essentially said YES!

Newt has practically conceeded. Are any of these folks any less conservative for facing what are becoming our realities this election cycle?

I have proposed cabinet and administration roles for persons who were Romney's rivals at some point. These are the skill sets we conservatives wanted applied to to the places of government where they'd be most effective. Instead of rivals let's make them team players:

Rick Santorum - Sec'y of HHS

Sarah Palin - Sec'y of Energy + Sec'y of Interior (merge these)

Newt Gingrich - Sec'y of Education

Michelle Bachmann - Attorney General

Herman Cain - Sec'y of Commerce and Head of GSA (merge)

John Bolton - Sec'y of State

John Petraeus - Sec'y of Defense

Ron Paul - Head of Federal Reserve (let the audit begin)

Donald Trump - Head Council of Economic Advisers

Paul Ryan - Head of Office of Management and Budget

Joe Arpaio - Head of FBI, and Homeland Security (merge these)

Dick Cheney - Head of CIA

White House spokesman: Mark Levin

And our own FReeper, Allen West, as VP.

Next: Most of these folks are honed primed and stoked from the recent primary debates. They're all sharp. Nationalize the cabinet selection process as much as the Presidential and Congressional elections.

Release every one of these folks back out onto the the campaign trail with an assignment: tackle in an "in your face" way each of these departments - stage a kick-off news conference in front of each one of them. Challenge the office holders to the equivalent of Lincoln-Douglas style debates allowing each Obama appointed office member to defend their record and their (mis)-management of their public trust.

They won't debate, you say? OK, try some new Rules for Conservative Radicals. Stalk them, dog them with cameras, shame them into the arena, watch the cowards avoid the heat, watch for and exploit their mis-steps, create and run ads based on their failures in office and refusal to be made accountable.

While this is distracting the DNCs resources, Romney can land his own punches on Obama in the same way he's managed to blow away all his opposition in the primaries. Use Romney's well funded strike teams to confound opposition at the grass roots, do what they can to discourage and depress Democratic opposition and their voters.

Face it: if Romney was able to take out his competitors in the primary don't you suppose Obama's hacks could have taken anyone of them out in the general?

Have Romney's boys sew the seeds of hopelessness and dissension in the Obama ranks, emphasise betrayal and failure of Obama to keep 2008 promises. Undermine, destroy and confound the opposition into a confused, ill-directed mass who find themselves fighting on more than one Alinskyized, freeze-the-target Presidential candidate, and instead spending their resources fighting 10+ personalities "running" for cabinet offices.

Who are the "generals" they have to call into a fight like that?

Romney and Netanyahu both began strategic business careers at Boston Consulting Group. Agree with them or disagree with them, but admit that they are patient, long range, strategic thinkers.

One of the things Romney has been able to do in large part is to keep his persona distanced from the decisively well-calculated positioning of opposition to rivals in the primaries. His name-less, face-less cloaked "hit-men" are as effective as any guerrilla force out there, but all that activity is maintained at a plausibly deniable, comfortable, arms-length distance from Romney the candidate. I dare say it puts the likes of Nixon's and Clinton's "opposition research" squads to shame.

I can see that machine going to work on Obama and leaving more than just a few lumps. Let's turn the "talents" of Romney's henchmen on to Obama, keep them disciplined, focused, and this side of doing any thing "Watergate," and let them go for the DNC's juggular.

If he's what we've got to work with this time around let's face that fact head on and let's hold his feet to the fire and make our will known as conservatives. If he's smart he'll seek our trust, and appoint many of our cabinet choices. To secure our trust he's going to have to both earn it and maintain it.

He'll go a long and convincing way to doing that by arming, deputizing, and funding the campaign efforts of his "cabinet-in-waiting."

FReegards!


104 posted on 04/13/2012 9:31:02 AM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
Run not only with your VP but with your proposed cabinet as well.

Not a bad idea but I think it's illegal.IIRC I once read that it's somehow illegal for a Presidential candidate to promise anyone a Federal job *before* said candidate has been elected...or,perhaps,before he/she is sworn in.I'm no Constitutional scholar so someone who knows more than I will hopefully chime in if I'm wrong.

105 posted on 04/13/2012 9:53:42 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Unlike Mrs Obama,I've Been Proud Of This Country My *Entire* Life!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon

I like Allen West, but he will NOT get any of Obama’s Black vote and possibly cannot help carry FL. But, Marco Rubio will get a whole, helluva lot of Obama’s Hispanic Vote and carry FL easily. Whoever wins FL, wins the White House.


106 posted on 04/13/2012 10:08:00 AM PDT by no dems (TED CRUZ: A PROVEN CONSERVATIVE FOR U.S. SENATE FROM TEXAS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts
The GOP elite purposely pushed the most liberal candidate they thought they could win. Now, Mr. Rove's words may come back to haunt him. You got him nominated, now get him elected.

Progressive/Liberal GOPe don't let a crisis go to waste either. Many here predicted exactly what we are witnessing, we never had a voice in this campaign. The ABO screed was really popular here and among our spokespeople, so there was no reason for the GOPe to even consider a real conservative.

We are supposed to warm up to Mittens after he is appointed. They have underestimated the sh#tstorm that the dems are prepared to unleash after that happens.

God help us, for we have no friends in the GOPe.

107 posted on 04/13/2012 10:48:50 AM PDT by itsahoot (I will not vote for Romney period, and by election day you won't like him either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

So you are willing to let the Dems rule until the the conservative education project works?

Do not get me wrong. I am tired of Washington, both Dems and Republicans. I am sick of them playing house with my money, pretending to solve problems. I would like nothing more than to have empty government buildings surrounding DC and the housing market in the same area collapse due to the reduction of government employment.


108 posted on 04/13/2012 10:52:04 AM PDT by dgbrown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: no dems
If we hope to ever make any post-Obama era electoral eligibility hay we can't do Rubio. Here's why.

Quick look at Wikipedia says this: “Marco Antonio Rubio (born May 28, 1971) ... Rubio was born in Miami, Florida, the second son and third child of Mario Rubio (1927–2010) and Oria Garcia (born 1931). His parents were Cubans who had emigrated to the United States in 1956 and were later naturalized as U.S. citizens in 1975.”

Rubio was NOT born to US Citizens in 1971 (although they became so later in 1975), hence he’s not NBC by definition. One would have to do a tortured reading of the Constitution to say he is. Not that I don’t like him. I love him in fact.

His VP-ness would blow our case re: Obama’s NBC status, however. The only exception being that Rubio’s parents became citizens where Obama’s father never did become a US citizen. A technicality though. You need a clean and clearly distinguished pair of candidates from Obama on the NBC question in order to make a post-Obama settling of the score possible.

And with all the investigative apparatus at our disposal, only after Obama leaves office will we ever be able to make this NBC stuff stick.

Fact is if Obama was ever to be declared "illegitimate pretender" we can up-end every piece of legislation he signed and every appointment he ever made -- including Fed judges and USSC appointments. With 3 branches in our control, he'll have no friends left. See where I am going with this?

Don't want to mess that possibility up by running Rubio - he's unable to step into the Presidency of it ever became necessary.

FReegards!


109 posted on 04/13/2012 10:55:01 AM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Mozilla
It doesn't matter. The ruling elites on both coasts and of both parties will have a president they're happy with no matter who wins.

Left out in the cold? Conservatives, Tea Partiers, everyone in fly-over country.
110 posted on 04/13/2012 10:59:11 AM PDT by Antoninus (Sorry, gone rogue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dgbrown
Statists have been in charge and ruling for a while now, if you haven't noticed.

I will vote conservative.

/johnny

111 posted on 04/13/2012 10:59:48 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: reefdiver; Mozilla
Never heard of the guy and I've attended several Tea Party meetings.

Some people aren't as important as they think they are.

112 posted on 04/13/2012 11:04:17 AM PDT by lonestar (It takes a village of idiots to elect a village idiot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
A crap sandwich is still a crap sandwich, regardless of how you dress it up. And guess what.... I'm not voting for Romney. Ever. Period.

/johnny

113 posted on 04/13/2012 11:04:56 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: sockhead

Your comment doesn’t make sense.

Why would someone who thinks Romney is not a conservative think that Obama is a conservative?


114 posted on 04/13/2012 11:07:19 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
promise anyone a Federal job *before*

No law against that. Nominees have to have advise and consent of Senate anyway. Recall Reagan promised to run with (liberal) Richard Schweiker as his VP in 1976 and he wasn't even the nominee yet.

Reagan's doing that in 1976 caused me to favor Phil Crane (R-Illinois) over Reagan in the primaries in 1980, and my heart sunk when he selected GHWBush (Mr. "Supply-side economics = Voodoo economics") over Crane - a natural Reagan ally for VP.

Reagan clearly knew more about what he had to do to win than I did back then.

He was no less conservative for having selected GHWBush than if he'd selected Crane. He just might not have won with Crane. On balance, 1981 - 1988 my brand of conservatism advanced, and at the end, GHWBush could only win by running on Reaganism.

GHWBush lost when he strayed back into his patrician nature and into "Read my HIPS" territory. And the reason GHWBush had to deal with (D) house and Senate is because conservatives got fat and lazy in 1986, when we lost the Senate -- and we were all so content to just leave it all up to Reagan to do the heavy lifting.

Like I said the Presidency is not the office of elected "king." President is Q-back, his cabinet is his team. WE conservatives in the trenches are his foot-soldiers.

Romney's rhetoric has been "24-7 Reagan" in this primary. It's up to us not to sit on our collective conservative asses, buy to continue to hold Romney's feet to the fire.

FReegards!


115 posted on 04/13/2012 11:13:14 AM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Mozilla
The Tea Party will really get out and protest if Romney does not keep his promises like repealing healthcare, etc. Romney will definitely hear from the TP if he goes wobbly on anything.

I have been saving my energy for what happens after election.

116 posted on 04/13/2012 11:18:57 AM PDT by ncpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: no dems

“You have to ask that question after seeing what the Romney/GOP hit machine did to those conservative who did enter the race?

Romney and his super-pac buds have run the dirtiest primary advertising, filled with half-truths and falsehoods, I can recall in my lifetime.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
O.K., so what you’re saying is that “fear” kept the good Conservatives from running. You’re probably right. If Sarah Palin gave any of the prominent male “Conservatives” one of her balls, they’d both have one. One thing about the sleazy Democrats; they have the balls to fight. 95 percent of the Pubbies are sissies. Like the philandering Herman Cain, who istead of standing and fighting, ran and hid behind his wife and God. If you’re truly innocent, you stand and fight ‘til hell freezes over. Still wonder what he did with all that unspent campaign cash.”

If you’re going to bring up Herman Cain, I’ll try to correct you again.

Do you care about the truth?

Or are you trying to help the media spread the lies?

Everybody that had known him and worked with him for decades said they didn’t believe it.

Even Ann Coulter said the accusations were utterly unbelievable.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=47857

And the Former Chairman of Board of NRA tried to get the truth out to the media, but they weren’t interested.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2816755/posts

He said that the woman who claimed that Herman Cain had felt her up, had hit on this guy the very first day he was on the job. [Sharon Bialek] And he said that she had left the company before he even hired Herman Cain.

So there was proof that Herman Cain was innocent, but the media buried the truth.

Remember Herman Cain kept saying he didn’t even know the woman?

Fast forward to the 12:30 min mark on the audio at the link above.


117 posted on 04/13/2012 11:36:58 AM PDT by redinIllinois (Pro-life, accountant, gun-totin' grandma - multi issue voter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

Comment #118 Removed by Moderator

To: redinIllinois

Then why in the hell did he let the old broads drive him from the Race? Can somebody tell me that? If you’re innocent, you stand like a man and say I want to meet everyone of my accusers on National TV with my Attorney and they can bring Gloria Allred and her surgically altered mouth. But, I’m going to confront my accusers and I AM NOT GOING TO LET THEM RUN ME OUT OF THIS PRESIDENTIAL RACE.

Now tell me, where is the left over Campaign money??? Was it paid out in hush money. I guarantee you that if this was Bill Clinton or John Edwards all of you who are defending Herman Cain would be singing another friggin’ tune and you’ll be lying if you deny that. Just like you’re in denial about Herman Cain.

I still say: Where are the true Conservatives who have some balls? Is Sarah Palin the only one?


119 posted on 04/13/2012 11:58:42 AM PDT by no dems (TED CRUZ: A PROVEN CONSERVATIVE FOR U.S. SENATE FROM TEXAS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: redinIllinois

Even Ann Coulter said the accusations were utterly unbelievable.
______________________________________________________________________________________________

Ann Coulter also said she is a “huge Romney supporter” that he is a “great Conservative”. Do you believe that?


120 posted on 04/13/2012 12:03:11 PM PDT by no dems (TED CRUZ: A PROVEN CONSERVATIVE FOR U.S. SENATE FROM TEXAS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
Romney being anointed the (R) apparent guarantees a (D) will win the election.
121 posted on 04/13/2012 12:05:12 PM PDT by Dr.Zoidberg (With (R)epublicans like these, who needs (D)emocrats?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mozilla

Tea Party Nation does not even exists. It is a blog run by a lawyer who is $600,000 in debt and lost his 501C4.

And NO, we won’t even vote for Romney. If we do not take a stand now, then there might as well be only one party and voting will truly be meaningless.


122 posted on 04/13/2012 12:11:23 PM PDT by Waywardson (Carry on! Nothing equals the splendor!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
A crap sandwich is still a crap sandwich, regardless of how you dress it up. And guess what.... I'm not voting for Romney. Ever. Period. /johnny

Seems as though there's one of these on every one of these threads and today you're it:

FReegards!


123 posted on 04/13/2012 12:37:08 PM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
Nope, I'm an optimist. I figure the stupid GOP-e will eventually figure it out, if I don't enable them like you are doing.

I won't vote for Romney. Ever. I'll vote conservative.

Name calling, blaming me for electing Obama, all that crap is just because people are scared to do what their principles tell them to do. Which is vote conservative.

Some folks want a win more than they want a free republic.

A free republic loses with either Romney or Obama at the helm.

/johnny

124 posted on 04/13/2012 12:50:30 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Wurlitzer

I’m sorry if the truth hurts, but if you advocate the support of commie socialist Romney here, you are going against the expressed wishes of the owner of this site. So, report me to the mods if that is your wish.

This is not a republican website for supporting the socialist Romney. This is a conservative website and we are in rebellion trying to save our nation from all communists and socialists democrat or republican.

If you have a complaint about that, take it up with the owner of this site. Don’t get too comfortable though. You might want to take a look at these first.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2871012/posts?page=1

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2871732/posts

I believe he is quite serious. If you want proof, look at this thread below. Pay particular attention to post #58.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2871434/posts

Unlike you, I’m not attempting to be a tattle tale. I am giving you fair warning so that if and when it happens, you aren’t surprised by your zot. People can disagree. They don’t have to be obnoxiously disagreeable. I admit my reaction to your behavior was very strong perhaps even overly so and I apologize for being so crude. But this is not the place to tell conservatives to STFU. Consider that the next time you decide to post. I will also try not to meet your lack of courtesy with equally bad behavior.


125 posted on 04/13/2012 12:51:29 PM PDT by Waryone (Remember your ABCS (anybody but commie socialists) = ABM (anybody but Mitt), ABO (anybody but Obama))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio

Have you found anyone here advocating we stay home or vote for liberals in Congress? Taken as a prediction of how the election might turn out, you might be right, but no one here is advocating that and we can’t control it. Those voting ABO and ABR will still be voting in the Congressional races and not for Obama rubber-stampers. So you’re just preaching to the choir here. If we were saying we were going to go out and run anti-Mitt ads I guess you’d have a point, but we’re talking about promoting conservatives down-ballot.


126 posted on 04/13/2012 2:20:57 PM PDT by JediJones (From the makers of Romney, Bloomberg/Schwarzenegger 2016. Because the GOP can never go too far left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Waryone

You can paint it anyway in your little Saul Alinsky mind but calling me a commie well .... them is fighting words.

You again, because you are dishonest or ignorant still have not been able to understand my post.

It is possible your blind hatred of Mitt (sort of like Bush derangement syndrome) prevents you from seeing how much I am supporting the anti-Mitt feelings BUT MAYBE GET SOMEONE WHO CAN READ THIS FOR YOU.

DON’T GIVE OUR ENEMIES ANY MORE AMMO WHICH WILL NOT ONLY BE USED AGAINST MITT BUT WILL BE USED AGAINST CONSERVATIVES AND THE TEA PARTY.

Is that too difficult for you to understand? If it is then the Conservative movement does not need your help.

I will work with the Conservative & Tea Party in my area to get conservatives elected to every open office. Will you?

And as you wrote: “Consider that the next time you decide to post. I will also try not to meet your lack of courtesy with equally bad behavior.”

Remember it was you telling me to stick it where the sun does not shine so you once again are a dishonest or ignorant person who I have no desire to read anything further. You should look up courtesy and bad behavior as they seem to hallmarks of your sub par debating skills.


127 posted on 04/13/2012 2:27:10 PM PDT by Wurlitzer (Welcome to the new USSA (United Socialist States of Amerika))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
Nope, I'm an optimist.

You lie to yourself.

I figure the stupid GOP-e will eventually figure it out, if I don't enable them like you are doing.

Whether you like it or not they have the power. It is incumbent upon conservatives to get their starry eyed wishful perspectives out of their asses long enough get the gumption and savvy to co-opt that power to make sure their power becomes your power.

Too many of the self-righteous around here haven't figured that out yet. This is how the game is played. A couple of rounds ago these same self-righteous allegedly "principled" voters gave us Clinton twice by voting for Perot.

Your dower, downcast, inwardly turned perspective merely depresses you. Motivationally, you have become your own worst enemy and the DNC laughs at you all the way to polls.

I won't vote for Romney. Ever. I'll vote conservative.

And in a race between Romney and Obama, who might that conservative "messiah" be this time around? You realize of course, who ever it is you choose to vote for is tantamount to voting for whoever becomes the victor in November.

I will always vote for the most conservative candidate available in two-man race. Third candidates are suitable for parliamentary systems, not ours. Inserting themselves into a two-man race merely makes their meaningless candidacy a spoiler for the victor of the two-man race.

Name calling, blaming me for electing Obama, all that crap is just because people are scared to do what their principles tell them to do. Which is vote conservative.

Pretend whatever you like, but if Romney doesn't win, you will have to accept the inescapable blame for contributing to the election of Obama, even as Perot voters have to accept their blame for contributing to the election of Clinton. If in your pride and self-righteousness you chose to sit out 2008, I have you to blame for the fact that Obama is there.

By contrast my conscience is perfectly clear knowing I didn't vote for Perot and have never sat out an election where a (R) candidate was there to vote for against a (D).

You will never be able to vote for perfection until you can vote for Jesus Christ, but since He's not on the ballot and He doesn't need to be, you will have to vote for something less than perfect in the human sense every time.

Some folks want a win more than they want a free republic.

You have to win if you ever hope to have and maintain a free republic. Your perspective requires some significant maturation.

A free republic loses with either Romney or Obama at the helm.

OK since you have resolved to be a loser no matter which way it ends up, why not just put yourself out of your misery now, surrender, get out of the way and let the rest of us who are actually in the fight to win this thing get to work doing so.

FReegards!


128 posted on 04/13/2012 2:28:14 PM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: no dems

When Dem-Lite runs against a Dem....the Dem always wins. Why vote for the Lite version when you can have the real thing.


129 posted on 04/13/2012 3:59:51 PM PDT by dfwgator (Don't wake up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Wurlitzer

Saul Alinsky is your friend dear. You’re the one with the commie Romney love. George Romney was an Alinsky-ite and you want us to be quiet to allow his even more socialist son to drive this nation down the Fabian socialist path.

You don’t want any conservative expressing their opinion about the commies in the republican party. But you don’t have the authority to tell us what to do. You and your GOP-e friends can just go ahead and love all over your little commie socialist candidate somewhere else. Nobody is stopping you.

My enemy is you and anyone else who wants to inflict socialism on our country. Either stand up for what is right or take your pimping of that lying socialist elsewhere.

The phrase, ‘All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing,’ was attributed to Sir Edmund Burke. He also said, “When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.”

Those of us principled conservatives who have not turned tail, who continue to stand and defend this country from socialist take over, have found a place to assemble. It is right here on Free Republic. We stand side by side with Jim Robinson in the fight for our nation. We will not be quiet. We will not surrender. Grab your ankles if you must. But we continue the fight.

You would have us do nothing and let that lying phony Mitt, the commie elitist GOP-e and the Soros socialists succeed in taking over our country without a fight or even a whimper. What you want is wrong. So if you want someone to be quiet, I suggest you lead by example.

And you should remember it was you telling conservatives to, in your words, “STFU,” that started this whole thing. Oh and I was responding to the post of yours that was pulled. Are very proud of it? Perhaps you can explain why. We won’t mention much about that nasty little freepmail you sent me.


130 posted on 04/13/2012 4:25:41 PM PDT by Waryone (Remember your ABCS (anybody but commie socialists) = ABM (anybody but Mitt), ABO (anybody but Obama))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: sockhead

NO to Zero !

NO to Willard !


131 posted on 04/13/2012 7:01:13 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (If you like lying Socialist dirtbags, you'll love Slick Willard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HerrBlucher

A President Romney could pass his socialist programs with bipartisan support. That is why he would be much more dangerous than Obama. Defeating Romney is my first priority.


132 posted on 04/13/2012 7:10:43 PM PDT by Tau Food
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

I see, so in your mind obama is the lesser of two evils. and you will vote for him. ohhhhhhkayyyyyy.


133 posted on 04/13/2012 8:01:59 PM PDT by HerrBlucher (¬ďHe¬ís (Obama) got an enemies list that would make Richard Nixon proud.¬Ē)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Mozilla

134 posted on 04/13/2012 8:04:28 PM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet - Mater tua caligas gerit ;-{)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

So, judging from that remark, I take it you’re voting for Obama. Unbelieveable!!!


135 posted on 04/14/2012 7:27:41 AM PDT by no dems (TED CRUZ: A PROVEN CONSERVATIVE FOR U.S. SENATE FROM TEXAS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: no dems

Got news for you....even if every Freeper votes for Mitt, he still gets slaughtered against Obama.


136 posted on 04/14/2012 7:32:15 AM PDT by dfwgator (Don't wake up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: redinIllinois; All
To redinillinois: You said: Even Ann Coulter said the accusations (against Herman Cain) were utterly unbelievable.

I replied with: Ann Coulter also said she is a “huge Romney supporter” that he is a “great Conservative”. Do you believe that?

I'm still waiting for an answer!!! When you have to substantiate your argument by quoting a RINO turncoat who made millions off her books bought by Conservatives and now is in bed with Chris Christie, Karl Rove and Mitt Romney; you have no credibility my friend.
137 posted on 04/14/2012 7:43:18 AM PDT by no dems (TED CRUZ: A PROVEN CONSERVATIVE FOR U.S. SENATE FROM TEXAS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Wurlitzer
DON’T GIVE OUR ENEMIES ANY MORE AMMO WHICH WILL NOT ONLY BE USED AGAINST MITT BUT WILL BE USED AGAINST CONSERVATIVES AND THE TEA PARTY.

So when will you stop this line of argumentation? If Romney gets elected, the same line of argumentation will be used to squelch any opposition to his policies. I can see all the "vote Romney because he's an R and isn't Obama" people saying we have to support our leader because if we don't we're just putting Hillary or whoever is the 2016 bogey man into office.

Sometimes principles have to trump party loyalty. I'm a conservative first, a Republican second, and Romney is a bridge too far.

138 posted on 04/14/2012 11:10:14 AM PDT by CommerceComet (If Mitt can leave the GOP to protest Reagan, why can't I do the same in protest of Romney?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: no dems
Wow! And those 4 votes will probably seal his defeat.

Why then do you get so upset when a conservative says that he or she is going to act on their conscience and not vote for Romney?

139 posted on 04/14/2012 11:13:29 AM PDT by CommerceComet (If Mitt can leave the GOP to protest Reagan, why can't I do the same in protest of Romney?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
JRandomFreeper wrote: Nope, I'm an optimist. You responded: You lie to yourself.

Actually, I think it is those who are trying to scare conservative voters to Romney who lack optimism for our country. Those of us principled conservatives who are going to withhold our votes from Romney feel that our country has enough inherent strength to withstand four more years of Obama if it occurs.

140 posted on 04/14/2012 11:25:39 AM PDT by CommerceComet (If Mitt can leave the GOP to protest Reagan, why can't I do the same in protest of Romney?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Sorry, I forgot to ping you on post # 140.


141 posted on 04/14/2012 11:29:15 AM PDT by CommerceComet (If Mitt can leave the GOP to protest Reagan, why can't I do the same in protest of Romney?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
I still have a primary to vote it. And I won't be voting for Romney.

Then comes the election in November. And I still won't be voting for Romney.

I will not compromise or be an enabler for the GOP-e. Blame them for 4 more years of Obama.

/johnny

142 posted on 04/14/2012 11:34:00 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-142 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