Replies

Actually, the last time the Republicans ran a Romney type against an Obama type was in 1972, and Nixon won 60% of the vote, 49 states and 520 electoral votes. And just like Romney, Nixon was despised by most of those that voted for him, I still remember my dad saying that Nixon was the biggest asshole ever, but Mcgovern would destroy the country if elected. Now I know the country has changed a lot since then, but the conditions this election season seem to be the same. Do I like Romney, hell no, but just like my dad in 1972, I will do my duty, I owe it to his memory.

Actually, that was pre-internet which means conservatives and conservative activists are much more informed about the record of that lying, left-wing, Progressive Liberal Mitt Romney, it was pre-Obama, a crypto-Communist with a no holds barred approach to destroying his opponents and lying about anything, basically a much worse type of Democrat than what Nixon had to face.

It was also Pre-Reagan, we had not won for many cycles, we had not experienced what a real conservative was like, and any Republican would actually do.

I also, correct me if I am wrong, believe that there is no comparision between the scorched-earth, dirty-rotten tricks and out and out lying that Romney did to destroy his opponents in the GOP primary and whatever Nixon may have done.

Nixon was very moderate, almost liberal in a lot of his views.

Romney's record IS lying, left-wing, and Progessive Liberal.

There is only a passing resemblence between the two campaigns, that is between Romney and Nixon.

I agree with most of what you say, although I’m not sure that Romney was anymore liberal than Nixon. Nixon was a huge government type of guy, and as for his social views, we do know that just as Romney had a state Supreme Court jam gay marriage down his throat, Nixon had the Supreme Court of the US jam abortion down his throat, and did nothing about it. In fact, apparently from what can be found about his views, he thought that abortion should have been legal for rape, incest, etc. The problem with Reagan is that a whole generation of voters has now grown up not knowing the truth about him, and the last two GOP presidents were horrible at explaining conservatism, either because they were embarrassed by it, or just didn’t care enough to explain it to uninformed voters that now get their political views from the NEA and John Stewart. In the short term we are screwed as conservatives, unless we get a Palin or West as VP, who can spend their terms teaching the country the truth. So as you can see, I don’t know the solution to our problems, but all people have been doing on FR and everywhere else for the last year is firing friendly fire at each other, and until that stops we can’t find any solutions, can we?

If you really want to read something interesting, read about the Republican primaries in 1968. Ronald Reagan won the popular vote 1,696,632 (37.93%)to Nixons 1,679,443 (37.54%) but Nixon had more delegates at the convention and won the nomination. Just imagine if Freerepublic had existed then, it would have made this year look like a picnic.

Also, McGovern wasn’t an incumbent, and his ethnicity wasn’t a factor. Two big differences between that race and this one. This race is more of a 1984 Reagan/Mondale race. On the winning side you have a candidate who is passionately loved by his base and on the other side you have an uncharismatic bore who isn’t liked by his base, independents or his opposition. In both cases you also have an incumbent who inherited a bad economy so he can always argue that the other party handed it to him and he needs more time to fix it up.