Voting for Romney? Where is your line in the sand? (Vanity)

[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".

[bkepley]

If Romney doesn’t suffer a decisive defeat in November, he’s young enough to come back in 2016.

Only if conservatives offer up such pathetic alternatives.

[Brookhaven]

I’m having to come to grips with the fact that there is a difference between:

1) voting for Romney in the general election, because 4 more years of Obama is unacceptable

2) supporting Romney

I’m not supporting Romney, but if the only way to get rid of Obama is to cast a vote for Romney then that’s what I’ll have to do (even it if means walking outside and throwing up afterwards).

Don’t mistake my vote for Romney as a vote FOR Romney, it’s a vote against Obama.

[AzSteven]

Wow - a double-tap that ends up six posts after the original intended post? Impressive... :)

[cheee]

Thanks for posting this... some pretty good responses to your question. I’m happy to see that most have realized that one-of-these-two-will-be-the-next-president and we MUST NOT let that be Obama.

Personally, I’ve been stunned by the level of vitriol being thrown at Romney from FReepers. I suppose the DUers are nastier but it’s hard to imagine.

It’s as if most FReepers are going through the various stages of Grief. Hopefully, they will get all the way to acceptance before November 2012.

Here’s an optimistic thought: I’m already looking forward to the Romney second term. The economic recovery, energy renaissance, stock market surge, and lowered unemployment will be fantastic. Then after the Senate supermajority occurs due to the 2014 mid-terms, most entitlements are reformed and the tax code improved.

Think about it...

[Tex-Con-Man]

No vote I've cast in my entire life has ever had an effect on my solid conservative ideology. Nor will this one.

I fear an Obama second term considerably more than I fear a Romney first term.

When you take the emotion out of it, it's a pretty simple math problem. Obama gets more votes, conservatism suffers another setback.

Conservatism needs better House/Senate leadership.

[shreve884]

I am not voting for Romney because he has an (R) in front of this name. I am voting for him BECAUSE of who he is running against. If his opponent was Jim Webb (for example) I might vote for a 3rd party. HOWEVER, he is running against an America Hater we stupidly put in charge of America. This is no normal election. We have a person in the WH who wants to tear this country down. Give me a snake-oil politician any day.

[SoConPubbie]

They have no line.

They are Party over Principle voters.

[buffaloguy]

I voted for Perot and we got Billy Bob Clinton. I will enver vote thirda party again.

I will be voting a straight Republican ticket in order to not only clean out the White House, but to clean out every seat below it of vermin.

The Democratic party has become dangerous to the health of our Republic and it is time we sanitize it of socialist vermin.

[bigfootbob]

Ditto

[NurdlyPeon]

My personal line in the sand is ANYBODY EXCEPT OBAMA.

I hate to say it, but this is probably the most profound statement that I have heard on this particular subject. And I have to agree with it.

[EternalVigilance]

The Republicans have already ceded the election to Obama.

You’re insane if you think you can win an election when the best the candidate’s own supporters have to work with is “yeah, we know he’s a lying socialist chameleon, but...”

[cvq3842]

Agreed.

[rogue yam]

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...

You pretend to want to start a conversation but you begin by flinging a stupid, trivial, cliche insult.

Why wouldn't anyone reading your post simply conclude that you are too close-minded to be worth trying to engage in a discussion?

You have some growing up to do, "student".

[SoConPubbie]

Well, on one of those important issues, Judicial Appointments, you've already lost with Romney.

His record is clear on this matter, he nominates left-wingers:

Out of 36 Judicial appointments, Romney appointed 27 hard-left Democrats.

Legal analysts say candidate Romney is different from Gov. Romney.

Liberty Counsel Action Vice President Matt Barber said Romney’s appointments were constitutional “living document” poster children.

“Many of Romney’s appointments were not only liberal, not only Democrats, but were radical counter-constitutionalists. How on earth can we expect that, as president, he would be any different?” Barber asked rhetorically.

“Actions speak louder than words, and Mitt Romney’s actions as governor scream from the rooftops that he cannot be trusted with this most important of presidential responsibilities.”

Barber cites two specific examples of Romney’s radical appointments.

“As governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney not only failed in this regard, he appointed a number of very liberal, if not radical, ‘living, breathing’-minded judges to the bench,” Barber said.

“Two that come to mind were extreme homosexualists Marianne C. Hinkle and Stephen Abany,” he said. “They both had a long history of pro-gay activism, yet Romney didn’t hesitate to put them on the bench.”

“These are people who outrageously believe the postmodern notion that newfangled ‘gay rights’ trump our constitutionally guaranteed First Amendment rights,” he said.

Baldwin agreed, citing Romney’s statements about the two requirements he actually used when selecting judges.

“Romney did focus on two criteria: their legal experience and whether they would be tough on crime. In other words, the nominee could be a gay activist or a pro-big government, pro-quota, pro-gun control Democrat Party hack who detests every judicial principle treasured by our founding fathers,” Baldwin said. “But if he happens to be tough on crime and have prosecutorial experience, he gets past the Romney filter. Many of Romney’s nominees fit that description.”

Baldwin added that Romney did have some ideological criteria for many of his nominees:

“It was criteria commonly used by the left. For starters, his nominees were mostly pro-abortion. Indeed, while campaigning for governor in 2002, Romney told the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) that his judicial nominees would more likely protect abortion rights than would those of a Democrat Governor, according to notes from a person attending this meeting.”

Another Romney criteria, Baldwin explained, was “diversity.”

“The other criteria consistently emphasized by Gov. Romney in deciding judicial selections was ‘diversity.’ This is the silly notion that judgeships should reflect the population in terms of race and gender and even sexual orientation, regardless of a person’s judicial philosophy,” he said. “Clearly, the use of diversity quotas demonstrates Romney’s lack of a coherent conservative worldview.”

[MHGinTN]

Aside from asking someone to be a victim, I find your analogy to be the most cogent so far.

[cvq3842]

Agreed.

[D-fendr]

Because the primary mission is to remove this regime from power.

Of those who ran in the primary, only Ron Paul would cause me to hesitate.

[EternalVigilance]

you dimwits

Now there's a campaign message that's going to win folks over! /s

[AmusedBystander]

At this point, I'm done. No Romney vote from me. No way, no how. The Republican Party does not own my vote. They have to earn it. They failed.

I know you. We played softball together as kids and when we wouldn't let you pitch, you took your ball and went home.

[Lady Lucky]

Only if conservatives offer up such pathetic alternatives.

And they will! They did it this year. They did it in 2008. They'll keep doing it. There's never enough backlash to dissuade them.

If we ever choose to scratch their eyes out rather than lie back and enjoy the assault, we may get a different result. But that takes fortitude and principles.