Posted on 11/11/2012 11:27:31 AM PST by pabianice
Kinda like Tom Cruise does his from his acting: wouldn't you agree?
No; you are wasting your time going allow with the MORMONs posting on FR who constantly TRY do deflect abhorance the facts of their chosen religion, onto the individuals who are deceived by it.
Too bad you and countless other did not heed 'the wisdom of the CHRISTIANs' when you where told LONG ago that in would be harder for a MORMON to be elected in a Christian founded country than that old camel and needle story.
...going ALONG...
Ya go to war with the weapons ya got.
If the prove to be inadequate to win; you'd better get better weapons next time.
"Es un pobre obrero que culpa a sus herramientas."
bttt
Some analyst (I forget who) figured out that GOP voters in some large states -- CA and upstate NY, for example-- were not aggressively pursued by the Romney campaign, due to its focus on electoral vote-rich swing states like Ohio and Florida.
In other words, the popular vote total was viewed as less critical than the electoral vote total. Which is undeniably true.
Was this a smart strategy? I have to say that even though Romney lost, I don't see a flaw in the reasoning here.
Why? Because the GOP is never going to get the electoral votes of CA and NY, unless those states were to change their election laws and begin to award electoral votes proportionally. Which is not going to happen.
One more time slowly and distinctly in the hope it will penetrate .
I was no fan of Romney during the nomination process.
Once he was te nominee, AND HENCE THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE to 4 more years of a Obama, it was the duty of everyone who opposed the POS to vote for Romney. The fools like you ignored the wisdom of Reagan, and W F Buckley. Until people like you learn to grow up and vote like adults we will see nothing but more Obamas and Pelosis in power.
Enjoy the next 4 years, don’t bitch, you earned what’s coming.
Such scolding!
What MORE do you want? I voted straight Republican but for one guy.
You’ll accept a non-perfect candidate, but not a non-perfect voter.
Oh well; see you in four years.
Perhaps the powers that be will run a better candidate for president.
I didn’t want the last one.
Sorry that displeases you so much.
It's not that simple. Who stayed home? Who didn't vote for the top of the ticket or senator too?
Romney was not a drag on the Republican party. The Republican party was a drag on him. Aaron Blake pointed out in the Washington Post that Romney ran ahead of most of the Republican Senate candidates: He did better than Connie Mack in Florida, George Allen in Virginia, Tommy Thompson in Wisconsin, Denny Rehberg in Montana, Jeff Flake in Arizona, Pete Hoekstra in Michigan, Deb Fischer in Nebraska, Rick Berg in North Dakota, Josh Mandel in Ohio, and of course Todd Akin in Missouri and Richard Mourdock in Indiana. In some cases Romney did a lot better. (He also did slightly better than Ted Cruz in Texas, a race Blake for some reason ignored.)None of those candidates were as rich as Romney, and almost all of them had more consistently conservative records than he did. It didn’t help them win more votes. The only Republican Senate candidates who ran significantly ahead of Romney were people running well to his left in blue states, and they lost too.
This isn't bad as an analysis of the GOP, but I'm still waiting for a better analysis of the results.
I have come to the point of despising "principle" voters. My principles tell me to ALWAYS do everything possible to stop ALL evil Democrats but evidently there are not enough of us and now it may be too late.
I am soured on the whole process and it's just as much because of the "principled" Republicans as Democrats. I see them on the same side. Flame away, I don't care but your way is responsible for this mess from which there is no hope.
Thanks and great job. I just stumble onto your post and it is excellent. We live in a world of lost knowledge and misquotes abound in which the context is lost.
Well done.
Thank you. It appears Stalin was right. No one seems to care that there was obviously massive fraud, only that there actually was an election.
Better to worry about stopping evil Republicans - Else there is no ground at all to stand upon. Voting *FOR* liberalism in the Republican party will end in a liberal Republican party (it already has). How does that help Conservatives? There is a reason that more Conservatives are now outside the Republican party than in it. You should ponder that.
The lesser of two evils is still evil, and is nothing to be voted for.
I am not one of the ones who stayed home, but it would be nice if the ‘Pubbies learned they can win without Conservatives and that we DO have an option - staying home.
I guess that is too much to hope. More likely they’re going to keep trying to “Hispanic votes” away from Santa Claus or something else stupid.
I fear we are already doomed. I have come to accept that and I see the attitude of people like you being partially responsible for killing our once great nation.
There is no way to save it. We can't even agree on how to get out of this mess. RATS do not have that problem--they hang together and they have prevailed.
Our nation is DEAD and if you didn't vote for Romney, you helped kill it.
Which is why I am no longer a Republican (after more than 25 years), along with many (most) of my fellows.
I fear we are already doomed. I have come to accept that and I see the attitude of people like you being partially responsible for killing our once great nation.
To the contrary - It is people like me who preserve it. Doom came to England despite those who appeased the Nazis. It is precisely when England STOPPED appeasing that it began it's road to spiritual recovery, however short-lived it was. It is the very same thing here and now.
There is no way to save it.
No, there is only one way to save it... And that is not by appeasement, pragmatism, and settling for liberalism. How does voting *for* a Republican socialist 'save the nation'? To the contrary, that would hasten it's demise even more, as BOTH parties would then be socialist (which is nearly true, even now). Socialism makes gains here not by it's own merit - It makes it's gains because it has no opposition.
Our nation is DEAD and if you didn't vote for Romney, you helped kill it.
If that is all it takes to kill this nation, then it was dead long ago... And I will never vote *for* a socialist. That all y'all expect me to is the problem.
Do you vote at all? How can you find anyone worthy of your vote?
I am being perfectly realistic. Voting for socialism within the Republican party is why the Republicans keep moving to the left. What party is now even nominally right-of-center?
So you're too good to be a Republican so how is it working out for you?
Just dandy.
How much progress are you making toward making this a better country?
Well, I am active in Conservative causes... primarily social conservatism outside of the political sphere... and I support individual candidates according to my means and according to their merit. My health has forced me out of business, but prior to that, I provided jobs to a handful of Americans.
Do you vote at all?
Yes. But I vote according to the merit of the candidate, without any interest in any party.
How can you find anyone worthy of your vote?
My voting criteria is whether the candidate provides support for all Conservative principles - That is what it takes to garner my interest. Thereafter issues regarding general character, and thereafter things of lesser value assignment (things which I can compromise upon).
I was able to vote for most offices on the ballot this year - leaving two blank, because I didn't know the candidates... and I wrote in Hoefling/Ellis at the top of the ticket.
The key to understanding the 2012 election is simple: A huge slice of the electorate stayed home.
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.