Posted on 07/27/2012 4:57:07 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
I believe this “event” is also being billed as ‘Toddlers & Tiaras; Political Version’
Hilarious!
And still, the fact remains, y’all are supporting a pro-choice democrat socialist gun-grabber.
these debates have the significance of a mosquito phart.
this is nothing more that useful idiot bait for the weak.
But when the two socialists, Romney and Obama, debate, that will be a big deal, right?
and how many electoral votes will the dead enders gain?
zero.
how much coat tail effect do dead end candidates have?
zero.
How many senator candidates will appear with dead enders?
zero.
Well, if what you say is true, it is only because folks who call themselves “conservative” are supporting liberals.
You’re the focal point of the problem, you see.
And not much of anything is going to change until you, and those who still think like you do, change.
where were they and their supporters during the primaries and BEFORE the primaries.
If you want to take over a party, the work starts LONG before the election. When everyone else is sleeping you should have been organizing.
Sadly delusion is not a strategy to victory. You would be far more credible if you form a coalition/caucus of one or two focus issues and coalesced around that. At that point you can draw from any party and offer votes as a block.
As of right now all these third parties are just useful idiots like the constution party that was paid by the democrat party in 2008 to draw a few hundred sucker votes away from republicans.
The real contest is the congress. The presidential race is a MSM distraction.
The unprincipled leftists who run the formerly grand old party depend completely on you continuing to think exactly that way.
I look foward to them and right now your the only concervative choice in the race. God Speed really show that conservative ideas will win everytime.
I know that there may only be 50 or so people that vote for you (most of which are here), but that's 50 votes that could go to canceling out the presidency of the most socialist (let's call him a Marxist), most anti-American, most pro-muzzie, most pro-death, most anti-free enterprise, most divisive, most destructive, most anti-everything we love president ever.
To those 50 or so who vote for you......
Shame on them, and shame on you.
Shame on them, and shame on you.
I don't know how you define "shame," but I'll be proud of the vote that I cast for Tom. Will you be proud of your vote for Romney? Or, have you just become so crppled by fear that you'll vote for anyone that Karl Rove dishes up for you?
God will relieve you of your fears. You need only ask.
Trust God, not Rove.
I’m supposed to be ashamed because I don’t support candidates who have spent their entire adult lives empowering the destruction of millions of little babies, destroying the institution of marriage, denying the people the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, undermining liberty, and who now lie shamelessly about it to sucker the politically naive, desperate, and fearful?
Sorry, you’ve got things totally backwards.
Romney Republicanism turns reality on its head.
“In an authentic three-way political contest, the number of those who prefer American liberty to anti-American socialism is more than sufficient to defeat, in general election, both wings of the elite faction’s partisan sham.”
— Alan Keyes
That’s a great quote from Dr. Keyes. Of course, Dr. Keyes, whom I supported (with words, money and my vote) when he ran for president *in the GOP primaries* in 2000, got on the 2008 general election ballot in three states, garnering 0.30% in California, 0.13% in Colorado and 0.01% in Texas.
Obama and McCain, the twin exponents of “anti-American socialism” (and there is no doubt that McCain’s economic positions in 2008 are to the left of Romney’s economic positions of today), split 98.47% of the national popular vote, with another 0.71%+ of the vote going to candidates running to the *left* of Obama (Nader, Cynthia McKinney and various avowed Socialists). 0.19% went to write-ins, most of whom were to the left of McCain, so at least 99.30% of the vote went to candidates who were no more conservative than Mitt Romney.
Mitt Romney will be the nominee of the Republican Party. I fought tooth and nail against that, and not only supported Rick Santorum in the primaries (with my words, money and vote), but actually was on the ballot as a delegate for Santorum. The time for conservatives to defeat Romney was back then, but due to mostly to (i) prominent conservatives passing on the race, (ii) infighting among supporters of different conservative candidates and (iii) Romney’s superior fundraising and organization (which allowed him to win key primaries with around 40% of the vote), Romney got the nod. And in a nation with an electoral college, it makes no sense for conservatives to vote for someone with 0% chance of winning—even if they agree with them on 100% of the issues—over someone with 50% chance of winning with whom they agree on 50%-80% of the issues when such candidates defeat will result in the reelection of someone with whom they agree on 0%-10% of the issues.
Romney will get between 90% and 99% of the conservative vote. If it’s closer to 90%, then Obama will be reelected and continue to inflict permanent damage on our nation; if it’s closer to 99%, then Romney will win in a landslide and will be kept in check by the conservatives he knows he’ll need in order to have a chance at renomination and reelection in 2016. I hope that conservatives don’t make the (almost) perfect the enemy of the (relatively) good. We need for Obama to be swept out of office, and Romney is the only person with a working broom.
Tom, the Constitution Party was registered in only 30 states or so in the last presidential election.
How many states is your party registered in?
Well, good luck with your pro-choice democrat socialist gun-banning candidate then.
But I’m going to keep striving to represent pro-life, pro-liberty, pro-Constitution conservatives, no matter how few of us might be left, thanks.
Perhaps one of these days you, and those like you, will remember that American elections are supposed to be about who represents you, who represents the fundamental principles of the republic, not about expedience and political odds-making.
I hope so. Because nothing much is going to change - or at least change for the better - until you do remember.
We’re not generally trying to be recognized by the states.
Our strategy is to try, as much as is humanly possible, not to get sucked into the rigged game.
When you say “we” are going to do this and “our” strategy is that, who is “we”? Who is on your nominating committee? Who are the “insiders” in your party? Who is your running mate?
And what do you mean “we are not trying to be recognized by the states”?
This is how to get on the ballot in the solitary state of California. Do you think you will qualify?
_____________________________
California: Per section 5100 of the California Election Code, ballot access requires one of the two conditions below to be met.[8]
If at the last preceding gubernatorial election there was polled for any one of the party’s candidates for any office voted on throughout the state, at least 2 percent of the entire vote of the state.
If on or before the 135th day before any primary election, it appears to the Secretary of State, as a result of examining and totaling the statement of voters and their political affiliations transmitted to him or her by the county elections officials, that voters equal in number to at least 1 percent of the entire vote of the state at the last preceding gubernatorial election have declared their intention to affiliate with that party.
I expect to be on the ballot in CA, via the American Independent Party line.
meta-
prefix meaning 1. "after, behind," 2. "changed, altered," 3. "higher, beyond," from Gk. meta (prep.) "in the midst of, in common with, by means of, in pursuit or quest of," from PIE *me- "in the middle" (cf. Goth. miþ, O.E. mið "with, together with, among;" seemeta
pref.
Later in time
At a later stage of development
Situated behind
Change; transformation
Beyond; transcending; more comprehensive
At a higher state of development
Having undergone metamorphosis
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.