A Mitt Romney loss wouldn’t necessarily be a disaster

The Daily Caller ^ | August 3, 2012 | Matt K. Lewis

[Bratch]

Don’t buy the doom and gloom pronouncements from conservatives telling you, “this is the most important election in history.” A loss for Mitt Romney would not necessarily spell long lasting disaster for Republicans, nor would it be the death-knell to conservatism. In fact, it’s possible a 2012 loss could lay the groundwork for a stronger Republican party and conservative movement.

Elections are almost always seen as urgent and morally imperative. But sometimes major victories can only come in the aftermath of what appear to be devastating defeats. John Kerry‘s loss in 2004 laid the groundwork for a Democratic takeover in 2006 and 2008, and Jimmy Carter‘s defeat of Gerald Ford in 1976 paved the way for the Ronald Reagan in 1980. In other words, it is a mistake to assume losing a presidential election is a permanent defeat.

“This should be the most important election since 1980, but so far it is not,” says Reagan biographer Craig Shirley. “Scottish historian Thomas Carlyle postulated the ‘great man’ theory of history, and indeed this was true with Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, TR, FDR and Reagan. But history has not summoned forth great men in 2012 and in fact our history today is small.”

This is not to say Republicans should concede the election, but conservatives should keep November in proper perspective.

[Kevmo]

Calling me a “Romney Rump Ranger” is doing the same thing you are accusing me of. I was disparaging Raising Cain because I believe she is a media plant, and you immediatley jump on me and invoke JR. How is that not taking the low road?
***You said to flame away so I’m flaming away.

[TankerKC]

Why do you persist in thinking that browbeating freepers that have been here longer than you will get them to vote for your candidate?

Longevity here is irrelevant.

[JRandomFreeper]

Why don’t you go and convert obots to mittbots?

I accidentally did that with the neighbor. He's an 84 year old radical democrat that was born in France. When I explained why I was not voting for Mitt, I accidentally convinced him. He didn't want to vote for Obama again.

Mitt was just fine, though.

/johnny

[JRandomFreeper]

this is the first time I have heard that a Freeper was running..

You should get out more. ;)

/johnny

[Hiddigeigei]

I've heard the same over-the-top crap every election cycle since forever. We're still here.

Have you thought about where "here" is?

[Kevmo]

I’m having a real problem understanding why folks claim they will not vote for Romney when he is all we have.
***Then read the RomneyTruthFile right on the front page. Voting for a lying, baby-killing statist is not an option.

To me, that is allowing 4 more years of Obama, and the end of our Republic.
***That’s your fear talking. We see the same bs fears motivating republicans every 4 years. Why should we yield our principles just because a bunch of republicans are fear mongering, basically acting like cowards?

[APatientMan]

I have complete respect for that and it does sway my inclinations. Just so long as we don’t give up. That’s what counts. God Bless, Friend.

[TankerKC]

You're just a noob

You're flirting with a derivative of Godwin's law there.

[JRandomFreeper]

Let me know if you need signatures to qualify for write-in. I can get some for you.

In the general election, I will go with Constitution party (at this time). As I said, nothing personal. I wish you all the best.

/johnny

[bert]

I wasn’t aware Jim will not vote for the only viable candidate other than Obama. In truth, it doesn’t really matter for whom he votes because he lives in California and Obama will win by over whelming margin simply because the numbers of connservative/Republican voters is simply inadequate to prevail against him .

That is a sad but true fact.

I understand the dislike of Romney and would prefer another conservative candidate. The primary is over. The candidate that won is Romney. There may be several pretenders and some will pretend to vote for one of them. To count, to be relevant, If you live outside the solid red states your vote will be irrelevant if not for Romney or Obama.

The two party system was developed, evolved if you will to permit the inclusion of small political groups within a larger group with which they have the most in common. The Senatorial runoff in Texas is proof the process works and that conservatives will actually have a voice in Republican party proceedings

Regardless of how bad Romney seems, his power to do the horrible things coloring doomsday imaginations, will be dampened. He must deal with the Tea Party conservatives in the Congress.

[Kevmo]

Forgoodnesssakes, post a link.

***It’s on the FRONT PAGE of the FORUM. FIRST FReeping PARAgraph. How hard did you look? Forgoodnesssakes, put some effort into it, man.

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/*/index

HOME/ABOUT Prayer SCOTUS ProLife BangList Aliens StatesRights WOT HomosexualAgenda GlobalWarming Corruption Taxes Congress Elections Fraud MediaBias GovtAbuse Tyranny Obama NaturalBornCitizen FastandFurious GunRunner ACORN TalkRadio CopyrightList Rally WalterReed TeaParty TeaPartyExpress TeaPartyRebellion FreeperBookClub RINOFreeAmerica RomneyTruthFile

[JRandomFreeper]

It's relevant to the extent that I've been here long enough to weather this crap every election cycle, and I'm unlikely to change.

/johnny

[Iron Munro]

YOU are the one who hasn’t been paying attention. This is a CONSERVATIVE website, not a republican one. Conservatism has already lost this election, regardless of who wins.

So you're voting for Obama - is that it?

[Kevmo]

Have you made it onto the California ballot?

I’m assuming someone can write you in even if you didn’t.

[JRandomFreeper]

I meant the thread that lead to that.

/johnny

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

In truth, it doesn’t really matter for whom he votes because he lives in California

Would that precisely this same largesse (however grudgingly extended) was likewise offered to we FReepers in similarly ultra-mega-blue environs.

[Kevmo]

I suggest you vote for a freeper, Tom Hoefling, aka Eternal Vigilance.

I have been saying I would write in Sarah or some other social conservative republican, straight republican ticket up & down. So I’m vacillating on voting for Tom, but it won’t be that difficult to make a decision by November.

[garybob]

That’s the problem. You trust their judgment since you have none of your own.

Normally a liberal idiot with nothing to contribute but insults will out themselves within the first two sentences. I'm so glad you didn't disappoint us. What is it about "NO personal attacks" do you not understand?

[JRandomFreeper]

Yep. In some ways it's better than 1978. In some ways worse.

The world isn't going to end either way. We lost most of our freedom back in 1912-1940.

/johnny