Skip to comments.Voting for Romney? Where is your line in the sand? (Vanity)
Posted on 04/26/2012 9:18:03 AM PDT by Student0165
I want to ask those who consider themselves conservatives, and are going to vote for Romney because he happens to have an (R) instead of a (D) behind his name on the ballot sheet, where do you draw your personal line in the sand and say "No more"? For stupid people reading this (liberals and DHS type workers), I don't mean violence - I mean not voting for "the lesser of two evils".
It's more than just running a non-crazy candidate. You have to have someone of real stature. The electorate needs to be very, very angry. There could be a Conservative party victory and permanent replacement of the Republican party but I think without these things it ain't gonna happen.
Skimmed through the first 100 posts, and as usual not one, not one confirmed policy change Mandate-Mitt in any post, not one.
Federal Bloc. dream candidate. Mandate-Mitt, the most unknown mandate dangerous Federal Takeover candidate ever. No wonder they want the Undocumented Coffee Server out.
Some of them would be posting or lurking on Free Republic trying to figure out what to do.
From Wiki: A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.
Nobody here has argued that the GOP will automatically receive conservatives’ votes.
Nope. It's already been tried. It didn't work. Face it - as much as you want to believe otherwise, the GOP simply is not a place for conservatives anymore.
Once Palin decided not to run, I could have held my nose and voted for Gingrich.
Both of these have sizable and vocal opposition here. The problem is closer to home than blaming the party, IMHO.
Start a third party and I believe you will have the same problems, the same arguments, the same disunity. Until this is overcome, nothing really changes.
And I bet you donated a kidney to a homeless vet. What a load.
A) I spent two decades trying to fix the GOP. Like I told you, it’s a pipe dream. And with the impending nomination of Romney, the situation just got infinitely worse.
B) I’ve spent four years building a new party, and we’re doing just fine, with a minimum of “arguments and fights.” And we’re doing it on a completely principled basis.
Poll results 6 months before elections aren't particularly relevant.
I voted for Perot. It was a dumb mistake. Lesson learned.
I don’t vote for Socialists, whether Republican or Democrat.
Mitt 0bamney is therefore disqualified from the possibility of receiving my vote.
That was an utterly stupid and worthless reply. You made a claim that you cannot possibly know to be true and I called you on your b.s.
I watched it and worked in and for it when it did work during the Reagan years.
The party is not a separate monolithic entity - it is comprised of people. It's not exactly the same from one month to the next, one election to the next.
Politics is messy and a long hard continuous slog, from the bottom to the top. The work and results are the same within the GOP as they would be in a new party, except you'd have much greater obstacles to overcome in a new party.
“A non-crazy conservative...”
Leftists, Romneybots, and several recent posters on Free Republic would say that’s an oxymoron even if not talking about Ross Perot.
I have to agree with this. I know many Freepers are blaming the GOPe for giving us Romney, but my view is that we did not have a strong slate to begin with. I really wanted Palin to run and then went for Cain until it dawned on me that Newt was the smartest man on the stage. Now, I am going to do everything I can to keep the Kenyan from having a second term. NO ONE is more evil than him and his minions.
What we need to ask ourselves is why didn't a really STRONG conservative throw his/her hat in the ring? Didn't we have someone other than Palin?
Good grief, you *are* naive, aren't you?
Replaced by whom, another state chair whose jib is cut the exact same way. State party politics are almost always driven by personality more than ideology, except in very rare circumstances where a determined ideological minority raises enough of a ruckus that the rank and file wakes up for a moment and gets mad enough to turn out in force at county conventions.
Most of the time, however, when one state chair (or other top official) is replaced, it has to do with factional politics - one guy's circle of followers was able to finagle a way to get the other guy thrown out.
What line is it you speak of? I choose between the choices that have qualified to be on the ballot based on what is the best for America.That always means not voting democrat.
as long as America is still a free country, I will vote in every election. I will vote for Romney, since not voting is not an option for me. I won’t vote for a Marxist, and not voting is a vote for the Marxist.
One reason it would kill the Whig party for certain.
I’m not insinuating a third party like some harridans on this thread (who do not know me) are contending. I don’t believe a third party will work with our election system. I am, however, fed up with fear voting and I asked a simple question about where conservatives draw their voting line in the sand when it comes to the same old Dole/McCain/Romney - and even Bush candidates.
Thank you for your sane replies.
Enjoy the next 4 years of Obama then.Hope he doesn’t end your jobs in those 4 years.