Posted on 02/20/2018 5:02:05 AM PST by C19fan
Even blue states you vote for the most non globalist, pro America first candidate non RINO as possible in the primaries. But in red states like UTAH RINOs are totally unacceptable in primaries. It send the correct message. If you vote for RINOS you get more RINOs.
Better a RINO than a Democrat-Progressive!
Your posts confirm that you are a moral relativist.
You helped open borders Bush win? Assault weapons ban Bush? And you think that looks good on a resume? LOL!
Why are you responding? I thought you were ignoring
RUSH: I think now, based on the way the campaign has shaken out, that there probably is a candidate on our side who does embody all three legs of the conservative stool, and that’s Romney. The three stools or the three legs of the stool are national security/foreign policy, the social conservatives, and the fiscal conservatives. The social conservatives are the cultural people. The fiscal conservatives are the economic crowd: low taxes, smaller government, get out of the way.
Of course, the foreign policy crowd is obviously what it is. I don’t think there’s anybody on our side who doesn’t care about national security, which is why I found it amazing that McCain gets the bulk of those, because the idea that Romney or Huckabee are going to punt national security? In Huckabee’s case, you might just say the things he’s saying about it represent an ignorance born of inexperience in the subject. I don’t think Huckabee has any deleterious intentions about the country. When it comes to the fiscal side, you cannot say — you just cannot say — that John McCain is interested. He’s even admitted he’s not interested in the social side. He’s not interested in the economic side. He said this, and when he has spoken up about it, he sides more often with liberal Democrats on fiscal issues than he does with his own side. That’s problematic. This is why I think — and why I have said — that the Republican Party, not conservatism, but the Republican Party is in big trouble if it is empowered and gets elected by attracting people who also hold liberal Democrat views simply because they like McCain because of his character, his honor, his prisoner of war story, and they don’t like Hillary or Obama.
The mistaken concept of ensuring we nominate the most conservative candidate, disregarding their electability, is why Christine O’Donnell, Sharon Angle, of course, Roy Moore are today serving as Republicans in the Senate, from states that should be Republican.
…. Or, remind me, were they defeated by weak Dems in the general elections we should have won easily had we gone with the electable Republican candidates O’Donnell, Angle and Moore defeated in the primary?
Don’t remember O’Donnell and Angle?
No one else does either, and they cost us two easy Senate seats.
Let me ask a serious question.
What good does it do to elect a candidate in the primaries, any candidate, if they are destined to lose in the General election?
Here is three realities of Realpolitik elections.
#1, We Conservatives do not decide the outcome. Neither do the Lib-Dems. In any contested election, about 44% of the voters are going to vote for the Dem, about 44% for the Republican. That’s 88% already gone before the campaign starts.
That means the two candidates are fighting for the very few, 12%, of the voters who could go one way or another. Of course, the very conservative candidate can win that 44%, but if he or she does not win more than half of that 12%, they lose.
History proves that far right candidates can win primaries, but if the data shows they will lose the General, they will. Forget about rallying everyone to the Conservative cause to swing that 12%. It doesn’t happen. Angle, O’Donnell and others are prof.
#2. Losing an election is like death. It is permanent. Other than someone buying you a drink for the next few weeks, it has no benefit. ALL IT DOES IS ENSURE THE LIB-DEM IS ELECTED.
#3. Elections have consequences. When elected, Lib-Dems enact laws and policies we all have to suffer under. That is the end result of nominating a unelectable candidate.
We may not like it, but like gravity, it’s reality, and we ignore it at our peril.
So you admit you wanted Gore to win!!!!!
Busted!!!!!
Where is Bannon, we need him?
Hopefully back on his meds.
Romney is a menace. hated by the demorats for being a religious nutjob and the GOP for being a traitor to the causes, one would think he has nowhere to go. But, then there is Utah. Lovely place; sensible people? Not so much.
And he would be a Republican vote in the Senate, as opposed to the Dem, who would be a Dem vote.
Reality 101.
Who is the dem that would win Utah?
Nope.
In hindsight, I wanted neither. Bush was a disaster.
But this is about you bragging about your resume. Let’s recap: you criticize folks here for wanting conservative nominees, and also your career has at least one very high profile instance of helping a liberal, open-borders, anti-gun globalist win the Presidency. And you think FReepers should listen to anything you have to say about Republican candidates?
No
I want conservative nominees, who can win general elections, as opposed to the O’Donnell, Angle, Moore crowd who handed Republican seats to Democrats.... and those Dems we handed our seats to now vote with Chuckie Schummer every time.
BTW, that’s why Gillibrand is there too. R’s ran a Bozo against her.
Regarding my support for Bush 43. When it came down to the Florida vote, to decide of Mr. Bush or Al Gore would be president, your hate for Mr. Bush is so overwhelming, you wanted Gore as president!
Too bad they don’t make medicine for that problem you have.
Dem in Utah. Probably not, but Alabama and the recent other elections prove that anything is possible.
I’d certainly like a more Conservative candidate than Mitt, but we’re not going to get one. In 2012, he took 93% in the Primary and 72% in the General in Utah.
He could shoot Santa Claus on Christmas Eve and still get elected.
Hey, I think he did shoot Santa Claus.
Opportunistic, self serving, chameleon....
The question is silly. Any candidate can win. It is more important to me to defeat RINOs in the primary than to be 100% sure of a general election victory. As a matter of fact I hate moderate passionless globalist RINOs like you more than Democrats. I hope all RINOs lose in the general election. I want to destroy the GOP brand or make them bend to the will of the people. A RINO victory is a defeat to me. Your hate speech can stop, it is falling patriotic ears which means I reject everything you stand for, which is very little apparently.
Anton,
strac6 exemplifies the “problem”.
Central va
So, find a more conservative candidate than Romney, get him to run, get him to win, and your problem is solved.
Otherwise, all you are doing is cursing the wind
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.