Posted on 09/01/2012 3:58:59 PM PDT by RightSideNews
You’re very good at posting complaints and polemic. What is your proposed solution, then?
Do you think the fact that five days ago the republican nominee formally announced that he was against the current pro-life party platform on abortion, and that he was personally committed to ‘health of the mother’ meaning abortion on demand, is worthy of conservatives discussing it?
Doesn't the very definition of success in the private sector almost always involve convincing people that your new idea is better than what you've seen before? Yet political consultants seem to assume the public are stuck in these static groups, and all they can do is try to appeal to different segments, but never actually try to change anyone's mind. It's a decidedly timid strategy, and could explain why Rove not only lost 2006 and 2008 to the Democrats, but also lost 2010 to the bold Tea Party candidates who actually offered something new for anyone who couldn't remember the Reagan era.
Not sure if it's analogous. Extramarital group sex is probably still not something a campaign can survive.
“So you are voting for the other guy?”
Yup. Sure am: Virgil Goode 2012.
What. Is. Your. Proposed. Solution?
If you can offer any alternatives to voting Romney or Obama, let’s hear them.
Romney did not get any of the party's financial resources. You're making things up. Or you're very confused. Maybe you just mean he raised more money but that doesn't come from "the party". It comes from people.
Romney got the bulk of the favorable press
First of all the press is not in any way the GOP's "elite" or "establishment" or whatever the word is that you want to use. Nor are they anything else from the GOP. They are not the GOP period. The fact you think they are indicates a deep hallucinatory condition.
In any case your claim that Romney "got the bulk of the favorable press" is something you're making up as well. You probably can't give a single concrete example.
Again anyone who listens to you is a fool.
I think you need to survey Illinois Republican voters (including Conservatives), and see how that plays out. The GOP took away their choice. Their only choice.
You wanna talk abortions? Let’s talk abortions.
There are seven possible outcomes for 2012-2016.
1: Obama elected: Funding for abortions rises and number of abortions goes up.
2: Obama elected: Abortion percentage and funding thereof stays the same.
3: Obama elected: Abortion percentage and funding thereof is reduced.
4: Romney elected: Funding for abortions rises and number of abortions goes up.
5: Romney elected: Abortion percentage and funding thereof stays the same.
6: Romney elected: Abortion percentage and funding thereof is reduced.
7: Jesus returns and it won’t matter at all.
Now, which of these is most likely to happen?
I will laugh in the face of anyone who claims that the funding and number of abortions will go down under an Obama presidency. He is the most radical pro-abortion candidate we have had, EVER. For that matter, if he’s elected, then Obamacare WON’T be repealed and the abortion funding that’s contained within it will be put into effect. Not to mention the many possible executive orders that he’ll send out.
On the other hand, Romney’s promised to repeal Obamacare. Oh, sure, maybe he said repeal and replace, but if he gets into office, there won’t be a Democrat supermajority calling the shots. Even in a worst-case scenario and Obamacare DOESN’T get repealed at all or gets replaced with a Romneycare redux, the worst that will happen is that the number of abortions will stay the same as it would be under Obama.
So if you’re talking strictly about number of children killed under each Presidency? Obama wins on number of dead bodies in dumpsters, hands down.
If you cared about the number of abortions in this country at ALL, you would get behind Romney and then try to force him to a pro-life position. Because at least Romney, as he has shown, is amenable to conservative and pro-life influence, unlike the radical in the White House at the moment. He’s far from perfect, but even if there were only a 5% chance that the life of an unborn child would be saved, I’d vote for him, because we know that child would be murdered if Obama was prez.
YOUR constant kvetching about Romney and attempts to suppress the vote are making it more likely for Obama to win, and for more babies to be murdered if he does. I hope you’re happy with that on your conscience.
But I could be wrong. Please, if there is any position that we could take that would result in fewer murdered babies in which we DON’T have to support Romney for prez, tell me. I’d love to hear it.
Romney was among the 13, and they siphoned enough votes from real Republicans to make Romney's paltry 22% look decent.
It was probably planned to some degree ~ a number of them certainly got nice vacations at Romney's expense.
Back in the old days the Souf' got a few delegates just to keep their interest although the Republicans were usually not winning there. That same formula needs to be reinstated!
There's your pro-abortion crowd ~ in charge ~ so where do you go?
We even find Mittbots like Karl Rove speaking openly of murdering conservative and pro-life politicians.
The first thing we've gotta' do is GET RID OF THE MITTBOTS, THE GOP-e, THE RINOS, and THE DEMOCRATS
Caving into the Mittbots now to get rid of Obama does not advance the pro-life cause.
I think we need to make a big push on Rove and get him arrested, charged, tried and convicted during this election season. Put a little fear into those pukes!
‘Raisin’ Arizona’
Those laws aren't made for just the little people.
And HOW do you propose that we do all that? And what do you propose that we do NOW? Hmmm? Neither of you have offered any solution other than constant complaining and excruciatingly non-specific plans.
One thing I do know is that if Obama is elected, it’s not going to matter because the funding for abortions will skyrocket.
But you would seem perfectly happy to end all those unborn lives in order to get your revenge on Romney and the establishment.
Incrementalism is the name of the game in politics. There’s not going to be any kind of grand turnaround like you seem to desire, no matter how much you do. It took the left moving in increments to get us to this ugly situation; it’s gonna take increments to move it back.
The only thing we can do now is to purge the abortion-loving zealot Obama out of office right now and then lay the pressure on every GOP RINO in office. Primary them, deluge them, force them to be pro-life if they want to stay in office. And in the meantime, vote every time for the best possible candidate that has a chance of winning.
But if you have a better plan, I’d LOVE to hear it.
Incrementalism is the path to perdition ~ sometimes you need some hard core revolution ~ having Karl Rove tried for his crimes against Congressman Akin is a good idea.
Thank you for proving everything that I just said true.
The only thing they understand, or can understand, is brute force. Time to push their face in it. And we start with people who need their feet held to the fire!
Are you trying to tell me that you want a war or something?
If you don’t want a war, then why don’t you tell me your plans to get a pro-life majority going? And be specific. “Drive out the RINOs” isn’t specific. It’s a goal, not a strategy.
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.