Skip to comments.With Brown out, GOP mulls Romney energy
Posted on 02/02/2013 4:59:15 AM PST by Diogenesis
click here to read article
As if Romney's and Rove's attacks in 2008 against Gov Palin,
and their meek, vapid (except against conservatives)
campaign in 2012, were not enough.:
Mr. RomneyCARE to pet felon:
"Those stupid conservatives will NEVER have a chance. Ever."
So the GOP Liberals are looking for a Romney candidate that will “not really be campaigning” for the open Senate seat?
Why even worry about Mass.. A GOP Liberal is still a liberal
Deep beneath the Commonwealth, the People are getting angry.
There is a thick vein of conservatism that needs to be scratched.
It happened before; it WILL happen again
All “moderates” do is provide cover as the democrats continue their goose stepping march to full on fascism. The GOP has been moderated into a coma.
anddddd...... Romeny returns to his normal RINO self as he got tired of being “severely conservative”
Sen. John Kerry (D) to Don Imus on RomneyCARE:
"I like this health care bill".
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D) on RomneyCARE:
"To come up with a bipartisan plan in this polarized environment is commendable."
"So you say RomneyCARE, and we say ObamaCARE.
What difference does it make?"
Charisma....... Reagan was elected and acceptable because of his likeability and believability. The lesson of 2012 is that being conservative is not only not enough, it is anathema.
There must a charismatic personality with the voice and message to charm. Wonkish recital of conservative virtues will not prevail in a national election.
If such a person threatens, he is destroyed by the press. Herman Cain is the archetype of that person.
With those glasses, Hillary looks like one of the Hanson brothers from the movie “Slap Shot.”
I've been giving this serious thought as I read all these posts on FR and I see that I am out of step with most Freepers as far as strategy is concerned.
I believe we all desire the same things ultimately and the difference is in strategy how to get there.
Then I think can how can I be this far out of synch on strategy with most Freepers. Now, every Freeper must agree that it will take 51 Republican senators to take control of the US Senate from the Democrats. Now, this is the question I have for Freepers; do you think it more noble to allow Democrats to have perpetual control of the Senate, and even increase their numbers, than to elect less than perfect Republicans?
What is your strategy for taking control of the Senate?
I’ll ask you, too, is it more noble to allow Dems to control the US Senate than to accept less than perfect Republicans? In order to wrest control of the US Senate, we must have 51 Republicans.
Do you think a majority is important?
Just yesterday there was a thread about Alabama being the “most conservative state” in the USA.
Now, that scares me. The most conservative state is 50.6% conservative, not even a full notch over one-half. In every other state, self-identifying conservatives are LESS than half the populace.
For every one American getting angry, there are some number of illegals coming in, getting ID, getting stuff, and voting Democrat. Pretty soon they won’t need dead people to win elections for them.
I see no hope. Conservatives are too in love with the law. They are more law-abiding than liberty-loving and certainly more law-abiding than freedom-fighting.
Some few, damn few, exceptions. The rest, they can think what they like and grumble at their keyboards, but they obediently pay their taxes to this evil government, and that is all, ALL that keeps it alive.
Do you have a viable strategy to get to fifty one?
If they aren't destroyed by the press, they're destroyed by fellow Republicans because NO ONE is good enough.
Again with this crap? The letter behind the name no longer means ANYTHING. A lefty is a lefty.
We now have 45 US senators. How many of the current ones would you keep? How are you going to get to the magical number of fifty one?
So your opinion (and flawed advice) is:
“Go with Benedict Arnold because a General is needed?”
Sorry, that is not going to work.
How do we get to fifty one?
A false choice IMO. Mass voters have voted for libertarians many times and that would be a whole lot better than a "big government conservative" like Romney. The main solution to federal overreach is to shrink the federal government. For example the 1/2 billion to Planned Parenthood every year would go away not because some conservatives take on PP, but because it's out of scope and we can't afford it.
But strong conservative views would help a lot PP spent millions to defeat Romney (e.g. running ads here in Va). Romney did not fight against them, but "clarified" his views about them instead. That didn't inspire Virginia conservatives to say the least.
Preach it my brotha! You've got to rise uppah and testify!
We are here. We are p!$$3d. We will be heard. Read my tagline.
NO, I’m asking you for your opinion as to how do we get to fifty one acceptable Republican senators?
It was NOT just the Press that attacked Gov. Palin
on the eve of Election 2008, it was TEAM ROMNEY.
Team Romney are PROVEN backstabbers.
How did the presidential race work out for you, Granny? The only “destruction” that was wreaked was by YOUR BOY ROMNEY against actual conservatives.
Easy. NO MORE RINOs. NEVER. EVER.
They have given NOTHING but betrayal and Obama
and ObamaCARE. So get some coffee, Tagg.
These people refuse to go away. Note to Romneys: “YOU LOST. WE DON’T NEED NO STINKING LOSERS.”
This is going to take strategy and I see a lack of a sane strategy on FR.
Poor sport spoiler Romney doing what he does best:
It no longer matters. Perhaps you missed my declaration that the letter behind the name no longer makes a difference.
There are idolators on FR who tear down every other candidate except their own. You should stop listening to them. There were plenty of adequately conservative candidates like Perry, Gingrich, Cain, etc. Each had various problems, but the key is that people who harped on those problems were doing that because they wanted a different candidate to the point of irrationality. Those people can simply be ignored. Argue for a conservative candidate and why he or she is conservative and leave it at that.
I agree that sometimes conservatives expect a candidate to be with them on every detail, not only of principle but of strategy, and are unwilling to examine the issues in depth and seriously discuss them. There’s way too much slogneering in the GOP right.
However, when we have elected GOPers who are nothing but Dems in disguise, even if we technically have a majority, this hasn’t helped us because the very liberal GOPers often vote with the Dems. Electing “mavericks,” that is, GOPers in very light GOP disguise who then thrill the Dems by siding with them or attacking conservatives, has never worked and never helped us.
I think we need to have candidates who at least are conservative in principle, and I mean on social issues as well, if we’re going to offer an option and even get them elected in the first place.
Increasingly, people have wondered why they should vote for a fake Dem (a RINO candidate) when they could vote for the real thing, a registered Dem, and this has cost us many elections.
So while it’s true that sometimes people hold up themselves and their every opinion and slogan as the standard of purity, to the point that they won’t even discuss the positions of the candidates on issues unless it is 100% their own, there has to be a limit beyond which one is not a Republican and should consider openly running as a Dem.
I think Romney has passed that limit, and that’s one of the reasons people didn’t vote for him last time around.
If the movie "Misery" is ever re-made, she could play the part...you dirty bird
I am telling YOU and other Freepers with this suicidal death wish that because you refuse to recognize that this is not a perfect world, we are going to have to accept some we wish we did not have to accept, if we are ever going to gain any more political power.
We MUST use RINOS--WE MUST. It's either that or stand back and surrender to RATS. That is the reality.
I'm glad you are asking questions because we can point out that you are asking the wrong question. The right question is: how can we get the largest number of conservative Senators?
I am going to call you a LIAR and I am also going to call you stupid because you have NO strategy to get where you want to go and you, and others like you, here on FR don’t even stop to THINK about a strategy to win. You love losing and pointing fingers while you yourself do nothing to improve anything.
Personally, I want to see the Republican party completely crushed and destroyed and consigned to the dustbin of history.
I am not a Republican. I am a conservative.
If a moderate tells me the sky is blue, I’m gonna check it out for myself just to confirm it because they lie that much.
You love losers, betrayers, and liars.
You support Obama, the DNC, and RomneyCARE/ObamaCARE.
Are you sure that you would not be happier at DU?
Fine, what is your strategy to get to fifty one US senators?
Well, that does nothing to address the current issue of how do we get to fifty one senators?
Those aren't the words of a conservative. Those are the words of a liberal trying to push acceptance of liberal GOP-E candidates.
The same problem even going back as far as the Clinton era, is we haven’t put the conservative candidates front and center, but fall prey to the MSM logic that we need a centrist or moderate in the Republican party to succeed at best or compete at worst. This is the cancer that is destroying our chances to regain any kind of majority going forward.
Do you really think that name-calling is a good way to promote your own strategy?
I'll ask you, of the 45 Republican senators we have now, WHO would you keep?
Do you care about getting a majority or are you happy with keeping RATS in control?