Skip to comments.Conservatives lambast Romney, vow to take over Republican Party
Posted on 11/07/2012 5:56:55 PM PST by Libloather
Conservatives lambast Romney, vow to take over Republican Party
By Erik Wasson - 11/07/12 02:43 PM ET
Conservative leaders on Wednesday lashed out at Mitt Romney, saying his attempts to paint himself as a centrist and hide his principles cost him the presidency.
They vowed to wage a war to put the Tea Party in charge of the Republican Party by the time it nominates its next presidential candidate.
The battle to take over the Republican Party begins today and the failed Republican leadership should resign, said Richard Viguerie, a top activist and chairman of ConservativeHQ.com.
He said the lesson on Romneys loss to President Obama on Tuesday is that the GOP must never again nominate a a big government established conservative for president.
Jenny Beth Martin of Tea Party Patriots said Romney failed to make the kind of strong case for conservatism that would have won the election.
She described Romney as a weak, moderate candidate hand-picked by the country club elite Republican establishment.
They didnt see a clear distinction so they went with what they know, she said of voters.
It should have been a landslide if Romney had run as a true conservative, said Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center.
Romney took all the right stances, no question. The problem was not communicating them on the national stage with President Obama, said Marjorie Dannenfelser, the head of the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List.
Martin argued that there was no repudiation of the Tea Party by the electorate because Tea Party values were not firmly articulated.
This is not the death of the Tea Party, Martin said.
Tea Partiers will take over the Republican party in the next four years, Viguerie said.
In the meantime, conservatives will work to ensure that congressional Republicans do not compromise their principles in fiscal talks with Obama, he said.
Conservatives and Tea Partiers are just sick and tired of Republican leaders compromising on the state and national level with Democrats that grow the size of government, Viguerie said. We are going to hold their feet to the fire.
Bozell said conservative groups need to up their financial pressure on GOP lawmakers unless they agree to a series of demands, including again vowing to approve of no tax increases for anyone.
“I was really hoping we wouldn’t have to listen to the usual screeching post-moderate-candidate-loss recriminations this time.”
Then stop running moderate losers.
“He said the lesson on Romneys loss to President Obama on Tuesday is that the GOP must never again nominate a a big government established conservative for president.
That lesson should have been taken to heart after the big government debacle that was the Dubya Administration.
While Romney was a very bad choice, he still came closer to winning than the two ham fisted recto cranial idiots akin and mourdock.
Anyone abstaining from voting for Romney this time needs to carry the water for their very own hugo barry chavez obama.
“had the republicans nominated Romney the first time around, he would be serving his second term right now. Its hard to beat an incumbant”
No, because he’d still be Richie Rich during a financial collapse after Bush vs historic first black president.
I proudly voted for Romney and would do so again. I think he was the very best candidate we had, bar none. What he did accomplish was near miraculous given the times in which we live. Virtually all the mass media were in Obama’s camp; ditto, academia and ninety nine percent of the popular culture. Today’s youth are the most impressionable in human history. Obama has always tapped into this pipeline of inept mediocrity, each being the natural manure of the other. In fact, these morons are actually intoxicated in his presence. It’s really remarkable how irrational they are. I don’t see how the Republicans can win short of trying to promise and deliver more freebies than the Dems. That would require us to sell our souls. We can’t do that. Obama is a man of the times, for the times, and that says it all. Basically, our country has changed forever. I don’t necessarily see a catastrophe around the corner but like it or not there will be a day of reckoning.
If he ran such a good campaign how come he couldn't beat McCain's numbers and beat Obama with the communist giving him a 10 million vote spread?
Right now yes, everyone is an expert. Things will calm down soon enough though.
Are you kidding I had to quit a forum I joined in 2003 because all of the Christian bashing from the libertarians after the election.
Tell the RNC.
because all you flipping purists sat on your asses whining at home while the wolf waltzed in the door. there’s a wide continuum and only one middle, but yeah, you and your ilk, the evangelicals, stayed home pouting
Yep, goodbye RINO’s. Good luck with your next election.
Reading the posts on threads like this proves that Mitt’s liberalism was just right for some of our more liberal freepers, they really do support the anti-conservative wing of the GOP and Mitt’s lifelong agenda of taking down conservatism.
So.....after reading all the replies (so far)in this thread, it just served to piss me off.
Romney had his chances. I was FURIOUS after watching the third debate, watching him let opportunity after opportunity go by to eviscerate Obama, and was very vocal about it here on FR (for which I was almost universally chastised).
I think Mitt’s a good man, an honest man. I’d do business with him in a heartbeat, and on a handshake.
He was still a weak candidate against a raving, Muslim, Socialist lunatic like Obama.
I’m 30 years in high tech sales and marketing, so I freakin’ well know a little about positioning and differentiation, thank you VERY much.
The original article above, and the quotes therein, is dead on. We needed a true Conservative, or one willing to adopt and espouse true Conservative principles and values....sans the MSM hype and bullshit....to draw a CLEAR distinction between voting R or D.
Romney, nice and good guy that he is, failed to do that.
Add to that the obvious: a MSM hell-bent on getting their fellow traveler elected yet again. Wouldn’t do to let the messiah they helped create cast to the dustbin of history after one term, right? Besides, these sick f**ks actually agree with him.
Face reality, boys and girls. We’re now a country dominated by takers. They actually have the right to vote, although not a damned one of ‘em who doesn’t pay FEDERAL income taxes should be allowed to.
We need to take over the RNC and turn it into what it should have been for the last 30+ years, and the Tea Party is probably just the right structure to do so.
They’re being realists. Throw rocks all you want.
I've sucked it up every election following Reagan and have been a good 'team player' just like the GOPe asked. Only to have some limpd*ck moderate republican blame me and my kind for the loss afterwards.
It gets tiresome -
“Are you kidding I had to quit a forum I joined in 2003 because all of the Christian bashing from the libertarians after the election.”
Well, they also stayed home because Romney was too religious for them. Social Conservative stayed home because he wasn’t 100% this, secular fiscal cons stayed home because he wasn’t 100% that, Obama promises free $$$ and wins. That’s the problem.
Are they going to have a “reset” button for his next inauguration since he is inheriting a sh!tload of messes from the first Obama term?
Wow, your “theory” isn’t really born out by the empirical evidence. Where is your evidence that a bunch of conservatives stayed home? This election had record turnout.
Maybe you’re just ticked because like a poster above said, the same people that told you running Moderate Mitt was a bad idea are now telling you again after your boy got creamed, and it kind of sucks, huh?
He got his message out. It was all about debt, spending, and the economy... just what we asked for. He articulated it well and with competence. He won the debates. There were no gaffes by Romney or Ryan. The voters made their decisions. What would you have had him do differently?
I voted for Mourdock in the primary.
He had been elected Treasurer in the state, so I figured he was ready for prime time.
We traded an 80% Republican (old Lugie) for a 97% Baraqqi.
Romney was our nominee, we had no choice. Well, I guess we did, but if we had a chance to oust zero, he was the hand dealt to us. Now, I’m not under the illusion that he would go after obama like he did conservatives, because I believe that many of McCain’s handlers were working behind the scenes.
I’m going to be honest, I wasn’t crazy about any of the candidates during the primary. I really wanted Sarah, but they ruined her. From what I heard, the Romney team was somewhat behind taking her out of the race. If so, then I’ll have to go with the Bible- whatsoever a man sows, that shall he reap.
I would have been ok with Mitt as president. At least I wouldn’t have been awake all night last night worrying about this country. He loves America - unlike the imposter who just won re-election. God, I hate saying that.
So did the Romney campaign point out with the HARD FACTS of gun running to Mexico by the OBAMA administration?
So did the Romney campaign hammer the OBAMA presidency on the Libya debacle?
So did Romney hammer home the FACT that we are in DEEP, DEEP, DEEP, financial trouble....if OBAMA stays in power?
I'm going to say....Nope, nope, and nope.
Prove me wrong.
Neither could Scott Brown. He lost to a faux-Indian for God’s sake. I think the people in MA are nuts. I really do!
I think we need to part ways with the RINO’s
I would have been aok with Mitt as president, but he is not.
Time to move forward. Sarah Palin that means you.
I would characterize him as being -100% on the issues of most importance to me (not going by his talking the talk recently, but we he did in his elected capacity in the past).
I think we have arrived at a parting of the ways
I hope and pray this comes to fruition!
There are ways of measuring elected officials and Lugar barely measured over 50% on Constitutional issues. That may not matter to you but at 81 years old, don't you think there was no one in the entire state of Indiana that measures up to Lugar?
and Indiana, who voted for Obama in 2008, voted for Romney in 2012. What does that tell you?
AND ya know what, I don’t care if he was a 10% conservative, he was one R closer to a senate majority that we now don’t have.
“I would characterize him as being -100% on the issues of most importance to me (not going by his talking the talk recently, but we he did in his elected capacity in the past).”
He was 100% on the most important issue for me and that is taking out Obama. I guess that wasn’t important enough for many conservatives.
Whatever. They gave the same speech four years ago. Didn’t stop romney’s nomination. The establishment will make an alternative good choice toxic or the grassroots will either pick someone toxic or divide between several candidates. End result the establishment will get their choice and then conservatives will fall in line, well some of them anyway, like they always do and we’ll be told the survival of the republic depends on us holding our nose...again. And as for “Tea Party” candidates holding the line...LOL Get back to me when they stage a coup against Boehner. Until then it’s all talk.
Yeah, I’m cynical. Used to be passionate and optimistic. the GOP destroyed that and quite honestly so did conservatives. Just as many conservatives have sold out as the GOP operatives. Four blasted years, or 8 if we go back to Bush, and conservatives still are screwing around and can’t select a credible conservative alternative to unite around? It’s all about petty bickering and one’s pet issues with no regard to the wishes of as many conservative coalitions as possible
Just substituting one personality disorder for another.
Obamacare is what really got people fired up for the 2010 midterms. Unfortunately, Romneycare made it impossible for our candidate to exploit that dissatisfaction.
It shows how important it is for Republicans to control the state legislature when the time to redistrict comes around. It's a shame the rats were able to screw West with their redistricting.
Your ilk, eh? Perhaps you should stop attacking Conservatives and go back and read FR's mission statement:
As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America.
Now that you have done that, you squishy party-first moderates can't say that you were not warned about what would happen with a GOP-E engineered Romney nomination. By screwing over TEA party delegates and Paul supporters at the RNC love fest in Tampa, and banishing Sarah Palin, the GOP-E secured the result with which it was perhaps most comfortable.
Now it reap the whirlwind.
Mourdock ran 10 percentage points behind Romney and 4 percentage points behind Pence (gov winner)
According to another thread posted to FR, Zero was elected with significantly fewer votes than '08. If more Repubs had turned out to vote for Mitt, he'd be President-elect today. But their single-minded ideological purity that told them there was no difference between Romney and Zero, so they stayed home and we now have four more years of a dying economy and job losses to look forward to.
The media was in on this, too. They were waiting for Mitt to go Obama on Obama (mean mud-slinger) and would've pounced on him like a cat on a mouse if he had, wailing about how low the campaign had gone (forgetting, of course, that Obama ran a low, dirty campaign from day one). Notice how everyone was astounded by the Romney they saw at the first debate. Everyone saying how Mitt had changed things around, but he hadn't. People were finally seeing Mitt as he really was and not as the media reported him. Romney had to fight Obama, the media, and the unaccepting ideologically "Republican" purists. All three proved too much.
Apparently Rainstorm Sandy filled your head with sh*t. Fact is, Obama got about nine million fewer votes than he did in 2008. Ronmey got over two million fewer votes tham McCain did in 2008. The margin of victory in 2012 was provided to Obama by the republicans who stayed home instead of coming out for Romney. Lot of religious bigots in that crowd.
And just how many were those? Care to give us some numbers since you're making the statement?
What conservatives sat out the election? How many of them do you know, because I sure haven't met any that did that? All the conservatives I know got out and voted.
That's an understatement.
It was a close race and had a conservative ran and energized the base i.e. conservatives, conservative turnout and 3rd party voters would've been more than enough to win.
Liberalism did this, not conservatism.
Really? Who did you vote for, bigshot, texan panty-waist?
I don’t know how Obama got elected, to paraphrase Pauline Kael (I think), I don’t know anyone who voted for him!
Mitts pro CHOICE record.
I thought Romney was supposed to attract all those moderates
and independents from both parties. That’s why u didn’t need the conservative vote. That is why the GOPe’s
wanted him. What did all you moderates and independents do on
Cause you moderates, and independents on both sides didn’t show up.