In the last few weeks, I’ve had some online conversations with some people that are conservative — along with some that claim to be conservative or libertarian — that are determined to let Obama win the 2012 election.
Now, to be honest, they didn’t actually say they were planning on letting Obama win. But what they did say … well, the effect of it will be to let Obama win.
And, here’s the thing: some of you are planning on letting Obama win, too. You say you don’t, but that’s what you’re going to do.
Some have decided that “there’s no way in hell” they’d ever vote for Mitt Romney. Or Herman Cain. Or Sarah Palin. Or Jon Huntsman. Or Michele Bachmann. Or RONPAUL!!!1!! Or Newt Gingrich. Or Gary Johnson. Or Tim Pawlenty. Or Rick Santorum. Or … okay, I’ve made my point: some have said they’d vote 3rd party before they’d vote for a particular candidate.
Why? Because that particular candidate is nuts (think RONPAUL!!!1!! or Gary Johnson) or is way too inexperienced (Cain, Bachmann) or not a real conservative (Newt, Romney) or boring (Pawlenty, Huntsman) some undefined reason (Palin, Santorum) or something (pick ’em).
You want examples? You’ll probably see them in the comments of this post by the very ones I’m talking about. And, if you look back at comments on earlier posts, you’ll see a lot of what I’m talking about.
This happened in 2008. I was all gung-ho for Fred Thompson while a friend of mine was all about Huckabee. (Remember, this was 2008.) As the GOP race narrowed, he was complaining about Romney and McCain, saying he’d never vote for either. And, of course, McCain ended up winning the nomination. And losing the election.
So, if you’re one of those that will never vote for MItt Romney/Herman Cain/Sarah Palin/Jon Huntsman/Michele Bachman/RONPAUL!!!1!!/Newt Gingrich/Gary Johnson/Tim Pawlenty/Rick Santorum … and if you hold to it … then Obama wins.
And America loses.
Sure, go ahead. Give me all your excuses.
I’m not going to let the GOP nominate just anybody and automatically get my vote. I’m going to send a message.
What message is that? “I’d rather America go to hell than vote for someone I can’t stand?” That message?
Don’t misunderstand me. You should send the GOP a message. It’s just that the timing is all wrong. November 2012 is not the time to send a message to the GOP. The time is now.
Let me say that again: now.
Get involved. Support the candidate you like. Do get involved. Let the Republicans know that, they way they’ve been doing things, you’re mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. And keep at it.
If, after all that, they still end up nominating another John McCain, I don’t see that I have any choice but to vote for the 2012 version of John McCain. But I’m going to give ’em hell about it.
Because, as bad as I’d hate voting for a candidate I don’t like, I’d hate letting Obama win even more.
It’s called making the hard choices. You’ll learn about that when you grow up.
While my ideology personally would make me support Paul, Johnson, or Cain, I understand that, IMAO, Romney stands a better chance at beating Obama, so I support him. Now is not the time for Weiner-measuring. Conservatives and libertarians need to support who they think can beat Obama, not who sends a tingle up their legs.
When the times comes I will vote republican but I don’t have to like it. Some of those R choices are just a choice for a slow death of MERICA! instead of a fast one. The slow death version, of course, gives us a chance to bring sane people into the mix in the future (like with flying cars).
Bottom line, The current administration is pulling the plug on a healthy breathing patient. That has to be stopped.
Should I have written that IN ALL CAPS or is that reasonable?
It’s all about teamwoork. Like I once said, “Sometime when the crew is up against it and the breaks are beating the boys, tell them to go out there with all they’ve got and win just one for the Zipper. I don’t know where I’ll be then, but I won’t smell too good. That’s for sure.”
I think that, when election day gets here, everyone to the right of Josef Stalin will vote for whoever is not Obama. A few Ronulans may hold out, but we can force them to vote for whoever we what with Dick Cheney’s mind control ray if we could just get that damn tin foil off of their heads
Preface: I told you all I would not try not to debate this further, but my good friend Basil has a way of puttting the fire back in my belly.
I will not vote for any candidate who has acted in such a way or makes statements in such a way to tell me he will act in a way that is contrary to the laws of this land. I will not vote for another man who cannot fulfill the oath in full. Romney, Huntsman, Gingrich, Ron Paul (Because he’s crazy and dangerous), these boneheads and one crazy person may be superior to Barack Obama, but they are still too dumb to respect the rule of law – or keep America safe from foreign invasion and Nazi newsletters in the case of Mr. Paul. Also, the rabbits in my backyard are better than Barack Obama.
I will not hold myself responsible for mistakes of my fellow (boneheaded) citizens. And I will not count a vote for someone other than Barack Obama or a Romney Republican as a vote for the continued growth of leftist cancers because it’s not. Bush did not, in my opinion, uphold the Constitution and I simply will not vote for still another person liable to such a failure.
With all due respect, Basil, it is only through some extended philosophy that a vote for someone else can be counted as a vote for election of Barack Obama. First and foremost, the simply reality is that a vote for someone other than Barack Obama is a vote for someone other than Barack Obama. Thus, for me, it is a vote against Barack Obama.
Ulysses S. Grant confessed to voting for James Buchanan in 1856. His rationalization was that Buchanan could keep the country intact long enough for cooler heads to prevail. I look upon a number of the Republican candidates as modern equivalents of Buchanan – or worse – and I see them as being just as unable to stop the deadly growth.
Lucky for me I’m an optimist at heart. I think the GOP will nominate someone like Pawlenty, who is dreadfully boring but competent.
MarkoMancuso:
Really, I do understand what you’re saying. And it’s true that a vote against Obama is a vote against Obama.
Keep in mind that in 1992 and in 1996, those that voted for Ross Perot let Bill Clinton win. Clinton never won a majority of the vote. He was elected with 43% of the vote, and reelected with less than 50% of the vote. If Bush or Dole had received Perot’s votes, Clinton would have lost each election.
Voting for a 3rd party candidate in 2012 is not a vote for Obama. However, like the title of my post says, it lets Obama win. And if you let Obama win, you must bear the responsibility for your actions. And I say that with all respect. But I also say it with all seriousness.
And, like you, I certainly hope that the GOP will do a good thing. But if they don’t, I will still do what I can to keep Obama from getting a 2nd term.
“You’ll learn about that when you grow up.”
Hehe.
Watch it, Basil, I’m older than you! 🙂
An old friend of mine once said, “Democracy: you pays your money and you takes what you get.”
There’s been a lot of that lately, hasn’t there?
Jimmy:
As one born during Eisenhower’s presidency, I do have a few years behind me. And, like you, I’ve learned a few things over those years.
I still have more to learn. But I have learned that incompetence has no place in the Oval Office. I had thought the US has learned that from 1977-1981, but apparently not. Perhaps they’ve learned it now.
Some of what I call the “(Fill in the blank) is our only hope” crowd will sit on their hands in 2012. But it’s still too early to put all our eggs in anyone’s basket yet. Let’s see the candidates get some actual votes in actual primaries. Then, let the winnowing begin!
Just ask yourself these questions…do I want to see BO nominate another Supreme Court Justice? Do I want to see Janet Napolitano and Eric Holder remain in power? Do I want to see an out of control EPA to continue to run amuck? Do I want unelected czars making policy? For me the answer to these questions is NO…so I don’t care if the Repubs nominate a person who is not anti-abortion, or is not against gay marriage, or who won’t sign some stupid meaningless pledge. Yes, I have my opinions about those issues but to me stopping BO from destroying this country is much more important then those smaller parochial issues. Therefore I don’t care who the Repubs nominate he/she/or it has my vote.
Indeed, Basil. Recall my prediction in early 2008 on this blog about Obama’s incompetency. IMAO had a long, drawn-out discussion of “the worst that could happen if Obama became president.” At the time, I thought that incompetency might be the biggest consequence (with all it’s uncertain ramifications, like foreign policy, etc.) of his presidency. At the time, I really didn’t appreciate just how much of a crooked, destructive, dictatorial, republic-hating, communist-loving, America-hating, self-aggrandizing Muslim ASS that he really was. I thought he was more incompetent than deliberately destructive. And I thought I was being pretty astute about my prediction.
I was wrong. The damage is turning out to be far worse than we all thought.
And you’re right: He HAS to go.
But even more than that? This Congress has to go, too. Because if we don’t halt this debt death spiral, it won’t make much difference; the Republic will be lost.
I honestly don’t see much of a difference between Romney and Obama. SO, yes, I would just let Obama win, maybe save the tax payers a moving expense. Here is why. (yes I’m a huge Ron Paul supporter, and no, not gay, and not a pot head). Obama won by promising some very specific things that resonated with is base, affordable healthcare for all, an end to the war in Iraq, and probably a few hundred programs. We’ll he got very little of what he tried to do. It’s the same thing with Romney, he’s saying stuff simply to get elected. We have no idea what he is or isn’t going to do. Depending on circumstances (ie: Obama came into power during a brutal recession and lacked the knowledge and leadership to deal with it.), they may have to for go some of their campaign promises. And then there is congress, where even if it’s controlled by your own party, may not give you want you want.
I support Ron Paul, cuz as nutty as you might think he is, he has voted the same way for 30 years. Almost flawless promise to voting record, and he bases almost everything on a stricter interpenetration of the constitution. I don’t agree with him on everything, but I don’t get the sense that he’s trying to buy my vote with some ideological BS. So how could he achieve what others couldn’t due the limitations of the presidency? Here is a guy who really studies the inner constitutional workings of our government, and with the power of the presidency to put a country in a direction, we will a very large scale back of what the executive branch does. Probably the first President in US history to seek less power for the position given him. The rest of this crowd are looking for a job promotion or to stay relevant.
Ryan:
You do realize that by saying there’s no difference between Romney and Obama (or, for that matter, any Republican and Obama) plays into the notion that RONPAUL!!!1!! supporters are nuts.
Because saying that there’s no difference between Romney and Obama is nuts.
My father is brillant! He has always voted, but he has never voted for someone. Dad always votes AGAINST the other candidates. There simply isn’t a perfect candidate, if you hold out, you loose big. I will vote for a goldfish if it has an R after its name. Thank God for good dads.
We can fuss and fight right now but when it comes to brass tacks time we vote as a block. When I was on a board we would fight like cats and dogs but when the doors opened we were united it what the majority decided. Fight like crazy but stick together like glue.
Basil, I understand the consequences, but I will do the best I possibly can with my single vote. And no vote of mine is going to any man who supports policies that violate the Constitution or American values in general.
Buchanan, at the least, had some respect for the law.
MarkoMancuso:
I certainly hope that, if push comes to shove, you don’t help let Obama win. You do have to live with your vote. All you can do is to prayerfully consider the options, and go with how you’re lead. You do that and you’re doing the right thing. Even if it’s different than how I’d do it.
In the words of Capt. Jack Aubrey, “Sometimes you have to pick the lesser of two weevils.”
Hey Marko, I do respect your position. I would not tell you how you should vote, nor would I tell you what your values should be. They are sound as is. My only thought is that voting for a Romney is actually the best way to preserve as much of our shrinking Constitution as possible. It may be a matter of shovelling poop against the tide — not very palatable and not very promising.
Not, it’s not saying Ron Paul supporters are nuts. Please look at the history of spending of both parties, and you will come to realized that the only difference is how they run up the debt. Obama did Obama care and that wasted stimulus, Bush did the war in Iraq and TARP.. Romney supported TARP and the war in Iraq (which Obama has continued to pursue).. So no, I see no difference between the two.
Ryan:
I’m fully aware of the spending habits. I’m also fully aware that none of the GOP candidates are as bad as Obama.
Thanks again for proving what I’ve said for a long time: RONPAUL!!!1!! supporters are nuts.
Hold the phone. Is it tingle now and unite under (R) later? Or is it vote against Obama now AND later (i.e. the most likely candidate to beat Obama according to current likely-voter polls)? If so, when do we get to tingle? I thought you were saying the first one, Basil, so I started to tingle but thenut confused me, so I stopped. What’s the plan? I am mostly serious.
Fly:
It’s get involved. And get involved now.
As much as I think Ryan is nuts (he is a RONPAUL!!!1!! supporter, after all) he is doing the right thing: he’s out supporting his candidate. Where’s he’s screwing the pooch is taking the attitude that it’s okay for Obama to win if his guy (or someone who meets his specific criteria) doesn’t get the nomination. But, at least he’s out there fighting for his guy.
You, me, and everybody else should do that. We need to talk up our guy. We need to let the GOP know that we want a responsible and serious conservative as the nominee. And we need to let them know that forcefully. But we need to draw the line at letting the GOP candidate lose — or letting Obama win.
Obama: Communist
Romney: Liberal Republican.
I’d say there some difference there. And I could vote for either Ron Paul or Romney, but prefer neither.
Obama doesn’t deserve my vote; he deserves jail time. At this point, I’ll vote for anyone who doesn’t.
Tingle ON! Thanks, Basil.
Tingle???
Herman CAIN makes me tingle. The guy is smart and unafraid to shoot from the hip. I like the man… the “mensch”…the guy… his principles… his personality… his optimism… his lack of fear… his good-natured ability to laugh at himself… his common sense… his experience… his fairness… his strong belief in our Constitution… And yes, I like that he’s black, not that it makes any difference to me personally, but because all people of color need to hear his philosophy. And blacks are more likely in our culture to listen to blacks. And do we ever need the 90% of blacks who voted for Obama to listen to CAIN!
But then, I like these traits in any candidate.
You and your type are the reason we rarely get true conservatives in Congress, because the Republican Party always plays to the left as they know that most people in the Republican party will blindly vote for whoever they pick.
Sure I might end up letting Obama win by voting for a real conservative, but refuse to vote for a RINO or a moderate because that’s what the Republican’s vomit onto the stage. I will actively contribute to the demise of America. A less rotten apple is still rotten and will destroy the whole barrel sooner or later.
Having said that, I’ll compromise and vote for a lot of conservative candidates which I don’t fully agree with. I love the fact that Frank talks about voting for anyone that isn’t Obama, and then he lampoons one of the candidates (Ron Paul) on a regular basis, and says that “nobody will vote for him”. Which is it? Do we always compromise, or do we have to maintain some standard?
Candidates on the Republican side that I won’t vote for: Huntsman, Romney, Pawlenty, Gingrich, and Santorum. Why? Because they are all not real conservatives (with the debatable exception of Santorum). Santorum because he has shown that he will vote Republican Party above conservative and he also has made many statements to the affect of enforcing his morality on people. Of course that probably doesn’t matter for someone who would vote Thompson or Huckabee last time around…
Shelby:
So, letting Obama win is okay? How’s that workin’ out for ya? ‘Cause I think it sucks.
I’m doing what I can to get conservatives in office. But letting a flaming liberal win isn’t how you accomplish that. Read the last paragraph of my post again. And again. And again. And again until you understand it.
“What message is that?”
The message is that there must be a clear choice between the parties. The choice can’t be between the party that will bankrupt the country in 10 years and the party that will bankrupt the country in 20 years. Sure, there’s a difference; but it leads to the same end result. The Republicans had their chance from 2002-2006 and blew it. They broke every promise to control spending and blurred the lines between the parties. The party can’t survive a blown second chance.
If we elect another liberal who claims to be a conservative the conservative movement will lose all its remaining credibility. Without true conservative leadership this country has no hope. Therefore, it very well may be better in the long run to suffer 4 more years under communist rule and preserve the conservative brand to fight another day than forever destroy the only chance this country has to recover.
Republicans control the House and will control the Senate. Obama can be restrained while we’re waiting for Godot. But a liberal Republican who might raise taxes and increase spending causing the momentum to swing towards the Socialists for the next 50 years? That’s the greater of the two evils.
Now, are there any RINOs that are truly that dangerous in the current field? Maybe Romney or Huntsman, maybe not. I don’t trust them and will be watching them closely.
Yosoff:
Seriously? Letting Obama win would be okay?
Oh, you almost had me there for a minute. Like someone with enough intelligence to compose a comment without a bunch of odd punctuation and misspellings would then think something that crazy.
You almost had me. Good one.
I swore I would never vote for John effin’ McCain then did just that. Yes he sucks, but not as much as O. We simplly cannot let the media and squishy ammongst us pick our candidate for us. We need weed out the most offensive and find someone to get behind. To hell with labels like “unelectable” or “inexperienced.” None of ’em are perfect; all are better than what we’ve got now.
I did not say letting Obama win would be okay. I said it would the lesser of two evils if the other evil is the end of all support for the conservative movement when it gets usurped by a spend crazy liberal Republican.
If Keith Olbermann were to win the Republican nomination would you vote for him, or would you look towards a 3rd party? Reductio ad absurdum of course; point being, there is a line. It’s up to the nominee to prove that they’re on the right side of that line. It’s up to the voter to draw the line for themselves.
I could name 50 Republicans that I would gladly support for President but only a handful that I would not support (mostly from Maine). Of the current field and potential field there’s nobody that I can say I won’t support; but I do have concerns about Romney and Huntsman and can’t guarantee support without more evidence of conservative principles. The rest have my automatic support if they earn the nomination.
There are bad Republicans. Blasphemy, I know. But they exist. Consider this, a Republican president will have an easier road to passing a liberal agenda than a Democrat simply because those that would normally oppose it will be on the same side. The creation of the EPA, the creation of the TSA, the largest expansion of entitlement spending since Roosevelt, amnesty for illegal immigrants, appointment of Justices Stevens, O’Connor, Blackmun (author of Roe v Wade) & Souter – all of things things were done by Republican presidents.
Blindly supporting the Republican nominee regardless of qualifications is a form of fanaticism; which is the epitome of crazy.
I am personally sending notes to any GOP “Bigs” that I can think of that if they nominate Mitt Romney i will not vote for him for POTUS. So, I am doing something now.
The GOP must nominate a Conservative this time around. If they nominate another Democrate lite, what’s the point. The people will just vote for the real thing and Obama wins! RINO’s are to be cast out of the party not elevated to the highest offices within the party!
What have the RINO’s in congress (the House) done since we gave them a majority? Nada, zilch, zip, zero! Where are the Republicans? They should be shouting from the rooftops about how much this guy sucks…nothing…silence!
The boat is sinking and will be submerged in an hour. You have three options available:
Use a paper cup to bail out the boat, which would take several hours; do the same with a bucket that has a hole in it which should bail out the boat in about an hour; or try to repair a broken bilge pump, which, if it worked, would take just half an hour to remove the water — unfortunately, you don’t have the parts needed to fix the pump.
I vote that we use the defective bucket, and maybe we’ll be alive to fix the pump later.
Doubly unfortunately, the allegory makes me sound like Ross Perot.
After the Vietnam War, the Nixon resignation, the Carter depression, Misery Indexes, Gas Lines, bad jumpsuits, clear plastic furniture, and tons of orange shag, I’m going to follow my own conscience with voting. Keeping someone out is not enough. We can and will survive this depression, but no one’s going to learn from it if we just keep voting “against”. That isn’t how Reagan got in. Reagan wasn’t against; he was his own man. And he did the things that we knew would work.
There is no one on the landscape right now (except perhaps Palin) who would be willing to do those things. And no one who COULD do them is willing. I mean Romney could probably get bills passed – but he doesn’t want to change big government. Let Obama keep screwing it up and taking the blame.
You’ll thank us in the end.
OhJessie:
You mean like I’m thanking you for ’08?
Some of these responses are flat out terrifying. Do any of you “if my person doesn’t win the nomination then I’m taking my ball and going home” people see anything larger than your own world?
If Obama wins reelection, he’ll probably bring in a few extra left-wing congresspeople on his coattails. The only reason the death spiral we’re in has even slowed down is that we have control of the House. If we lose that, the next four years would be a nightmare none of us can possibly imagine.
If Obama wins reelection, the liberals will take that as a sign that he’s done a good job. They will tout that on their websites and their media outlets. They will continue to bleed our country dry and tell us we’re living the good life. They will take away our freedoms and tell us we said it was okay when we reelected Obama.
Re-read Basil’s post again, please. He’s not saying you shouldn’t fight for your candidate. You should. You should give the GOP HELL. Make them cry at night at the thought of nominating a RINO. Whatever. The fight though is for the NOMINATION. Fight that battle to the bitter end…which is the CONVENTION, PEOPLE! Once the convention ends, a new battle begins and we have to change our tactics.
If you do not want a RINO, establishment, POS candidate nominated by the GOP, then the date in your mind should not be November 2012. It should be August 27, 2012…the first day of of the GOP convention.
Once we hit September 2012, the game has to change. Maybe you’re not willing to think about that right now, and that’s fine. If so, please don’t post about it either.
Christine:
Thanks for the defense.
I wonder if I had reminded the LOW (Let Obama Win) crew that the president picks members of the Supreme Court, and that there are 4 over 70 years of age, would help them understand the urgency of getting that assclown out off the White House.
Maybe not. Some can’t see that far. I hope there are enough like you who can.
Ya’ know, it’s up to the REPUBLICANS to nominate someone worth voting for. I played the game Basil’s way on the last go ’round, registered for the GOP, voted in the primary, got McCain, and voted for him, having had to take extraordinary measures to vote electronically from Europe to get my vote registered…….look where THAT got us. A Vote for the Republican’s chosen nominee didn’t pay off. Crappy nominee, crappy campaign. Hell, when I lived in Arizona I worked to get McCain recalled as a Senator, and I STILL voted for him over Obama to “save the nation”…..that didn’t work that time, and it’s not going to work this time, and I’m not going to take the responsibility for enabling the craphead RINO, Neo-Con, big spending, war-making idiots in the Republican Party any longer. It’s THEIR responsibility to filed the candidate that can win, not MY job to line up behind them. I’d rather see the nation split up into smaller, secessionist enclaves than simply trade one cancer for another, slightly less virulent form. I’m a libertarian. I’m supporting Gary Johnson. If Johnson doesn’t get the nomination, which he most likely won’t, because the establishment has decided Romney is the “chosen one” this time, I won’t vote Republican ever again unless there’s no other alternative to the Socialists on the ballot. Nominate someone worth voting for Republicans, and I’ll vote for them. Otherwise, after having served a career in the Armed Forces, I don’t owe any of you, or “the country” a damned thing.
WngsFaninNM:
Thank you for your service.
I have four words for people who won’t vote for the Republican nominee for President because he’s not exactly what they want: Sonia Sotomayor. Elena Kagan. That’s some of what we got because people “sent a message” to the Republican party in 2008. I have more words if you want: Kathleen Sebelius, Eric Holder, Timothy Geithner . . . it goes on and on. We can expect Sotomayor and Kagan to be messing with our laws for another twenty-five years, perhaps more.
Keep tryin’ Jim. I voted your way in ’08 and look what we got. You can’t scare me….I served in Submarines. In the end the sovereignty of each of us is in our own hands. To paraphrase: “Governments instituted among men derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.” I withdrew my consent quite a while ago. To continue to play this “vote this way or we’re all going to die!” game is simply legitimizing the political game and giving your continued consent. If you can’t find it within yourself to make a principled stand on what you REALLY believe, then may posterity forget that you were my countryman. If all you can do is post a vote AGAINST someone, then you really don’t know what you stand FOR.
I agree with Wings! I will not vote for another RINO just because the GOP tells me to! If they can’t get their act together, they will continue to lose national elections! And, no we are not all going to perish if Obama is re-elected. Problematic…yes! But the Federal Government has very little influence in my life other than taxes which I have minimized through a Sub S corporation. I’m not going to be a victim of GOP insider politics anymore! Mitt Romney is the nominee…I will not support him! He is a liberal RINO! Sorry!
Couple things. McCain did not lose because Republicans didn’t vote for him. He lost because the Undies didn’t vote for him. He lost because he ran a senatorial “kid gloves” campaign in a presidential election and refused to make a lot out of BO’s obvious socialist past and future intentions. He ran a crappy campaign that didn’t light a fire under the base and he alone is responsible for the campaign he ran. 2008 was so horrid that I deregistered from the Republican Party and haven’t looked back.
That said, I see both sides of this argument (as most do). I’m not a Republican and if there was a candidate that kinda matched my views, it might be RONPAUL!!!* Of course, he’s got some views that I simply can’t sign on to and they’re big picture things. So, I’m not a Ronulan. I’m never going to see “my candidate” and have to vote holding my nose. So be it. I’m used to not getting my way because this nation has always suppressed the votes, ideas and desires of the white, Christian male.
Anyway, I’ve had the displeasure of having to vote for Spectre over Dems. Think I didn’t need to shower after those votes? The alternatives were far worse. You know what happened? Eventually we got Toomey in this state (and that dud, Casey). It wasn’t magic, but it also means that a more conservative candidate can rise in a Blue State to unseat a RINO and win a statewide election. Yeah, he battled some entrenched Republican support. There’s a lot more about that fight to get him into office. My point is that votes for RINOs do not doom you to RINOs forever.
“The only reason the death spiral we’re in has even slowed down is that we have control of the House. If we lose that, the next four years would be a nightmare none of us can possibly imagine.”
You got that right, sister. I have a gut feeling that Romney would toss out Obamacare, even though he signed onto a similar thing in Mass. I get this feeling because, the more that’s known about it, the more wildly unpopular it is. Now, this is not to say that he won’t try to craft some other socialized medicine ploy once Obamacare is tossed. Oh, he would. However:
More folks would read it
The press would be far tougher on the individual points, since it’s a Republican plan
The Republicans would have a say
It will never get passed hastily
It would be years down the road, when the fiscal situation is even more dire
So, yeah, this RONPAUL type would vote for a Romney because the next non-Obama president will give us the best chance to undo Obamacare, nominate some judges (another Kennedy is better than another Ginsberg), restore sanity to our federal agencies, may do something constructive toward illegal immigration, and will be there to sign legislation that a more conservative House will send forward, rather than facing a certain veto from BO.
Basil, as I said in another thread, you may get the votes, but that doesn’t get you the fundraising you need from a fired up base.
.
.
.
* I’m a small gov type, more social libertarian, but won’t give up the war walls.
Uh, not really. When you get past all the lampooning, there is a massive difference between Obama and any of the Republican hopefuls. For example, Romney and Obama many have aligned at one point in time on health care; however, Romney is not a socialist. I cannot stand Romney; however, I know the following:
– He will not appoint Kevin Jennings, Van Jones, Cass Sunstein, John Holdren, Carol Browner as unconfirmed executives. Say what you will about Romney, and again I can’t stand him, but what’s the chance that he’ll appoint a “safe schools czar” who has run seminars about deviant sexual practices and who has also advised a minor to remain in a sexual relationship with a 30 year old?
– He will not appoint neither another Sonia Sotomayor nor Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court.
– He’s will not go to the ends of the earth that Obama has trod to keep the US from mining our own resources.
– He wouldn’t start long term hostilities without consulting Congress. It’s simply not his way.
– He wasn’t raised, literally from birth, by a group of socialists and neo-colonialists.
– I find it unlikely that he would have any ties to terrorists. If he discovered any, I’m sure he would disavow those people.
– Economically and fiscally speaking, Romney is no conservative; however, even if he repeats Obama’s insanity, it will not be anywhere to the degree that Obama did. Remember, Obama’s motivations for the bailout, etc., were to reward friends and build constituencies.
– Romney may possibly bend to the NEA; however, he won’t be owned by them.
– Andy Stern, president of SEIU, will not be the most frequent visitor to the White House.
– He will not set the Justice Department to ignore any cases of voter intimidation that involve white people as victims.
– He is not likely to maintain vendettas against groups, such as media outlets. Again, it’s not likely to be his style.
– He has no over-arching political aims that would cause him to aggressively pursue regulation as a means to promote policy. Note that we only know of the tip of the iceberg with respect to Obama. He is fundamentally transforming the US executive branch.
I could go on; however, most importantly, Romney isn’t a neo-colonialist. Obama is not so much a socialist as he is a neo-colonialist. According the neo-colonialists, what’s wrong in the third world is directly due the economic raping done by the US. The way to fix this is to put the US on a more level playing field with third world nations. (Note the ban on drilling here but funding for Brazil to do the same. Note also climate change treaties that completely leave the third world out, etc.) From your perspective and mine, Obama wants to destroy the US. From his perspective, he thinks he is acting according to higher principles.
In other words, Obama doesn’t think he’s destroying America. He believes that he is restoring it to a rightful and fair global place by spreading US wealth to the third world — just like socialists want to spread the wealth within countries. Now think about it, would such a horrible thought even flit through Romney’s mind?
There is a difference. I’d find it extremely, extremely difficult to argue that the US would look the same after 4 more years of Obama versus 4 years under a squish like Romney.
I don’t see this election as Republican vs. Democrat. I see it as Conservative vs. Liberal. If a conservative gets the nomination then the choice is simple. If the choice is liberal 1 or liberal 2; well, that’s not much of a choice at all, is it?
I’m reminded of the Simpson’s Treehouse of Horrors episode where the aliens Kang and Kodos captured Clinton and Dole and took their forms. When the switch was discovered Kang declared; “voting for a 3rd party candidate would be a wasted vote”. The American people agreed and he went on to win the election. After they enslaved humanity to a life of forced labor, Homer famously said; “Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos”.
It’s not about keeping Obama out of office, it’s about keeping liberals out of office.
I am not voting for a candidate who will not do his utmost to uphold the Constitution of the United States. I cannot do it. If Romney is nominated, it will be 2008 all over again whether we like it or not (Meaning he’ll lose because he’ll run a terrible campaign but some people will blame people like us damn right wingers anyway). And I will cast a meaningless write-in vote for Scalia or Roberts or Alito.
It would take not years but a decade or two for my conscience to be conditioned in such a way that I could vote for another fool whom I know will be lying on the inside when he puts his hand on the Bible.
I will not speak of this again.
I’m not a Republican anymore. I sometimes vote for them when they are conservative enough, but if the Republicans fail to get their act together and put up another Nixon/Dole/Bush/McCain, they will not win my vote. I cannot vote for the lesser of two evils.
This is a critical election, but the primary process is where it will be decided and the primary process is broken. My vote doesn’t matter in the primaries.
Because of their open primaries, New Hampshire Democrats have a more decisive role in selecting the Republican nominee than I did when I was a Republican.
Even in 2008, the only 2 choices I had by the time of the Indiana primary were McCain and Huck who had already conceded.
Burmashave:
You have some excellent points for choosing Romney over Obama. But couldn’t all of those things have also been said about the likes of Arlen Specter, Charlie Crist & my daughter’s pet goldfish Gloopy? Sure Gloopy isn’t as articulate as Romney, but he also would not do all of those things that Romney would not do. Where do you draw the line?
It’s not enough to be “not Obama”, to get my vote they’ll also need to be “not Liberal”. That’s a pretty low bar; but not every Republican can clear it.
I think what frustrates most, if I can make an assessment, is that they’re not really consulted on the choice.
What I mean is that there’s intense pressure by the media to declare a winner the minute “their guy” has a lead. Beltway Republicans, with the steely inards of wet noodles, are all too happy to get the fighting over so they can start the rubber-chicken circuit.
In short, the primaries start in areas that are hardly representative of the Republican base and seem to be over before they reach any type of battle for the soul of the party.
That’s not likely to change. I have no advice or consolation. Just saying that the Republicans, by design of the primary schedule, allow the media to editorialize candidates out of the race who may win in later states.
If anything, Basil, I think that’s where the rally cry should be. DOn’t let the media kill the nomination process until the base has it’s say.
Let me put it this way:
How many of those too pissed to vote for Romney (or whomever) had a chance to vote in a wothwhile primary in the last election? Last three elections?
Let Wyoming go first. Then we will see some decent primary fights.
At a minimum make states with open primaries go last.
Frank – You should rewrite this piece and make it your next PJmedia entry.
Last go around, I folded at the end and voted for The McCainiac despite saying that I wouldn’t. This time around, I shall NOT vote for Mitt Romney. And I swear on a stack of Bibles, I am not going to vote for Mitt Romney EVAR.
I would Vote for a sack of hammers if I thought they had the best chance of beating our current president. I know the sack of hammers would have a better chance of creating Jobs.
paul mitchell,
Did you get a chance to vote in a meaningful primary in 08? 2000? 1996?
But would you vote for an EVIL sack of hammers? A sack of evil hammers capable of making the Olympics make money?
Or vote for pure evil that is mostly contained in a bucket. Pure evil that cant tell the difference between a door and the window? Pure evil that has risen to the top via affirmative action and couldn’t organize a beer summit…
I agree with Rock, et al. This is a false dilemma created by a poor political process. But I do have advice. In fact, I have the solution to everyone’s problems:
Instant Runoff Voting or Condorcet.
Achieve IRV and we can stop this infighting. We’ll no longer have to choose between the lesser of two evils. How thrilling would that be? It’s not all or nothing, it’s better and worse and everyone could vote your conscience.
Let’s mobilize a massive bipartisan effort to achieve IRV, starting here, starting now. On IMAO. Spread the word! Make this the defining issue of the 2012 primary!
If I fail to jump in front of a bullet aimed at another, does that make me a murderer? The “Now’s not the time” argument has been used since the inception of party politics.
@Yosoff: No. You have a choice; you make a choice. Just as I would not slide down the path of moral relativism, I will not go blindly down a path of political relativism. To say that all liberals are equally bad is to say that we should sit out an election that posed Lindsey Graham against Fidel Castro.
This one’s pretty simple unless you want to wish upon a star. Obama has severely harmed America during his three years in office. He has not done this not so much out of incompetence as with forethought. We could choose to believe that during 5 more years in office, he will sit back stop the transformation he has said he is seeking. That would be the wishing upon a star option. Put simply, Obama has done great damage. We’d be the box of hammers to believe he won’t do substantially more, given 5 more years.
On the other hand, we have a group of candidates, none of whom present the same known risk as Obama. With the exception of Paul, none have an overarching radical animus. Your daughter will be 4 years older by then. Would you want her to inherit a country run for four years by Romney, or a country destroyed for four more years by Obama?
Wendell Wilkie was a liberal Republican; however, I would have preferred that he had won over Franklin D. Roosevelt, and I would have voted for Wilkie.
Conservatarian:
I’m not suggesting you take the bullet. I’m asking you help deflect it.
Can the Republican party change the primary process without running afoul of state election laws? That is, abandon the archaic primary system and adopt a system in which party members vote at party headquarters/building. Then, have a top three runoff and re-primary for the nominee.
You’d use party resources, not civic buildings. You can allow for absentee or distance voting, I’m sure. Since it’s a party function, they should be able to have the latitude to determine their nominee(s).
In 1988 Papa Bush won 40 out of 50 states because there were still enough REAGAN DEMOCRATS left over to help him achieve that massive victory! Ron Paul who ran against him (as a Libertarian) got 1/10 of 1% of the vote which is almost ZERO! Ron Paul also won ZERO states!
In 1984 Ronald Reagan won with 49 states and in 1980 he won with 44 states because DEMOCRATS voted for him in such large numbers that a new Political Term had to be created to expalin the STRANGE phenomenouem. THE REAGAN DEMOCRATS.
Richard Nixon won a MASSIVE landslide in 1972 with 49 states. Why? Because DEMOCRATS all over America voted for him!
P.S. The other guy in 1972, George McGovern is praised today by Libertarians. Doesn’t it seem odd that the Libertarians have been on the LOOSING side everytime since the early 1970’s?
Basil:
Understood. As usual, I will likely vote for whoever the Republicans offer up as “our” candidate. I dropped my party affiliation many years ago, thus forfeiting my vote in the primaries. It’s easy to despise the Democrat Party, but I refuse to support the Republican Party by maintaining membership.
What is it in the GOP inner workings that sees to it that they will back not a strong pro-American candidate with backbone? That’s our problem. Time to trash the Republican party working staff and get some folks who, well, are Republican.
To quote Edward Teller speaking of an earlier election ” The differance between Bill Clinton and George Bush is the differance between a first rate arsonist and a second rate fireman.” I believe this applies to our problem now. As much as I detest most of the morons running,they are better than the Kenyan Kommunist.
I will vote for whomever I reasonable believe will throttle Obamacare in it’s crib.
That is, of course, one reason why Romney is way down on my list of platable canidates. He’s not completely off, but I do get tired of: “support Romney, he can wiiiiin”. That’s how we got McCain, and he proved he can’t win. Frankly, I’d rather have Ron Paul, even if he is a lunatic on foreign policy.
I pretty much think its already over. Obama has won!
No election needed. Everybody go home.
But in the end the Republican Party and the activist groups (Paulbots, Palinites, Tea People) will go their seperate ways forever, which is in itself another form of victory. For both sides even.
My vote, if I vote, is basically against Ron Paul and his followers (the real rinos). I will vote for whomever they HATE the most. And I am sure that they hate Romney (aka the rino) but ya never know they might start hating someone else (another so-called rino) even more.
Its funny that every Landslide the Republicans have won was won by someone that was/is hated by the Libertarians. Isn’t that wierd? And today they call those winners (Nixon, Bush 41, Reagan) RINOs when in fact the Libertarians aren’t even Republicans!
Great post, and good discusion too. I absolutely agree with Basil. I think Romney’s a complete phony who bases his policy on what’s polling well; Ron Paul’s isolationism (among many other things) makes him unfit for the Presidency; Huntsman is even more phony and more liberal than Romney; and the only thing I know about Gary Johnson is that he’s a pot head and has very liberal social positions.
I would be disgusted with the Republican party if any of these jokers get the nomination. But I’d still vote for them over Obama! I’d vote for f***ing Hillary Clinton over Obama. I really don’t think you can find a more radical leftist politican than Barack Obama, certainly not anyone of any national prominence.
Basil is absolutely right, we should be raising hell in the primary. Don’t let anyone discourage you from voting for your preferred candidate in the primary. And don’t let the MFM choose our nominee for us again after just the first three states. Keep making noise all the way until the convention.
Once we have a nominee, vote Republican in the general or stfu for the next four years about how bad things suck, cause you had a chance to do something about it, but you didn’t.
Calling people out, but you are absolutely right. I think Ron Paul is nuts, but he is better than Obama. I will vote for whoever is the candidate with the R next to his/her name.
In this election, the media will tell us that whoever the Republican candidate is will not be as smart, cerebral, international, etc. as the Obumbler. Lets accept that and move on. I am not a big Romney fan, and I will support some others first in the primary if they are still in when they hit Virginia, but I will unify behind Romney if need be.
OK, but when can we say that the Democrats aren’t going to destroy the country and that we can not vote for the Republican because he’s not perfect? I’m an arch-libertarian. I think Ron Paul is too statist. But I voted for Bush in 04 because I thought the war on terror was important, and I voted for McCain in 08 because I thought that Palin had some notion of what small-government should be. At some point I’m going to say, “Stop counting on my vote, because you have to earn it by supporting my philosophy.” Just as a radical Christian should be saying, “I’m not voting for you until you agree to re-Christianize the nation.”
As long as the base continues to support the eventual nominee we will continue to get the most liberal candidate in the field. Why, because with the base locked up they’ll become labeled the most “electable”. They have the base and can pull support from a wider swath of Independents and even some Democrats. Ironically, when voters are given the choice between Democrat and Democrat-Lite they go for the real thing and the “electable” candidate ends up losing in the general. The only way to end the cycle is to not guarantee blind support from the base. There should be a perception that the base might stay home or even support a third party.
Putting all of your cards on the table before the primaries and promising that you’ll vote for the nominee no matter what all but guarantees that we’ll end up with the most wishy-washy candidate instead of the best candidate.
The time to rally the troops against Obama is after we have a nominee. Right now is the time to fight for the best nominee we can get. Do that by convincing people that only a true conservative will have the support and voter enthusiasm to stand against Obama.
“There’s a difference between knowing the path and walking the path”.
I wonder what Obama will do when (if) he he has nothing to lose? If he’s this bad when he’s trying to get reselected, just imagine what he’ll do between November and January………
What I really don’t get is why hasn’t some democRAT decided to run against him? (besides the ones that don’t know how to spell it.)
Bill Clinton could win in a heart beat O_O Hilary….maybe but she’s a commie too. It’s pretty sad when he’d be 10,000 times better than what we have now.
Since Romney is the only one who the liberal idiots don’t seem to think is Sarah Palin with a Weiner, he probably has the best chance of winning. It could be that he’s just pretending to be what he appears to be in order to get elected (the way Obama did) and he’ll turn out to be normal but either way, he’s not a communist and nobody can say he is. That’s all that counts at this point.
We can cling to principals in concept and let the worst possible candidate (Obama, in my opinion) continue trampling them in practice, or we can agree as conservatives to use our votes strategically to advance a conservative agenda in practice. As for me, I’ll work to elect the best candidate available to me in every single contest– be it primary or general election. And I’m certain at the end, Barack Obama will not be the best candidate available.
“It’s always between a giant douche and a turd sandwich. Nearly every election since the beginning of time has been between some douche and some turd.” — South Park
Basil, while your point is well taken, I think you’re missing some of the dynamics here. Voters are currently “negotiating” for a candidate. The message “everyone” is sending right now is, “No Huntsman, Romney…McCain II” Many of the voters who emphatically state they will never vote for Romney actually might if that is the candidate. However, it is important that conservatives/Republicans send a strong message of opposition to such a candidate right now, as opposed to broadcasting that, “Well, if you go ahead and nominate another McCain, sure we’ll fall in lock-step and you can count on our vote.”
So are you guys not at all concerned about the federal reserve? The last guy willing to even tiptoe into the FED waters was Kennedy, 50 years ago and we see how that turned out. We’ve got a once-in-a-generation opportunity here to drive a stake through the black, pulsating heart of corruption and people want to play party loyalty games?!?
If it doesn’t work out…then hey, we can always return to the status quo where multi-billion dollar international media conglomerates have full control of our election process. I’m sure Israel will be more than happy to resume collecting her welfare. A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil. Won’t happen this time.
1:30
I still need someone to explain the logic to me.
If you need to hire someone for a job, you determine what you want and start looking. Let’s say you check out 10 candidates and rank them 1-10, then offer candidate #1 the job. Candidate #1 turns you down or can’t be hired, for whatever reason, and they were the only candidate who met all your requirements.
Do you then offer the job to…candidate #10? Some random bum on the street? Do you just hand the decision over to someone else and walk away?
NO. You either go back to looking if you can, or if you can’t, you offer the job to candidate #2 and figure out how to deal with the gap in requirements.
If “my perfect candidate” doesn’t win the nomination, you have every right to bitch and moan about it…but then you need to BE AN ADULT and make the adult decision. Adult decisions tend to factor in more than just one person. Parents, for example, are rarely able to make decisions just based on what they want…they have to consider their children. Business owners have to consider the business, their employees, etc.
This kind of behavior, in my opinion, is part of the reason we are where we are. The founders were right to restrict voting to landowners – to people they knew had to make tough, unselfish decisions every day and consider the bigger picture. I know we’ll never get back to that in this “it’s all about me” / “it has to be fair” world, and that’s a shame.
Christine – you understand the logic perfectly, and see it for what it is: foolishness.
Simply put: VOTE AGAINST OBAMA.
Slight proviso: Voting for a third-party candidate is a vote for Obama (as per Basil’s thesis), so the ONLY ALTERNATIVE is to {{{shudder}}} vote GOP, even if the candidate is choice #2 or worse.
Worse case scenario: A bad GOP president who does absolutely nothing will still be a positive influence since he/she won’t be implimenting the Marxist programs that would comprise BHO’s second term.
People who believe we would be better off turning into multiple nations are (at best) armchair quarterbacks who have no idea the pain and suffering that would cause. With US Federal assets scattered all over the country (think military bases) there would be a civil war just over who gets what in the property settlement.
(Prediction: Texas would win.)
Those who “want to send a message to the GOP” have obviously never tried to communicate with a corpse. They also overestimate the affect of their rouge vote.
Ah, the ever popular wasted vote theory with a twist of age elitism! LOL!
I think I can safely say that my political ideology tracks fairly closely with your own. We do, however, diverge on the subject of the wasted vote. I cast my first presidential vote for Barry Goldwater (notice how I just stole the appeal to age = wisdom high ground), and speaking as an elder, let me point out that that argument only holds water if we elected our president by popular vote.
While it is true that Perot got almost 19% of the popular vote, he won no electoral votes. A post election analysis of Perot voters showed them split 38% for Bush, 38% for Clinton, with 24% saying that would have stayed home had Perot not been in the race. The bottom line: Bush loses, either way.
That election breakdown did reveal, in the makeup of the demographics of Perot voters, what would become the so-called “angry white man vote” that made up the base for the ’94 Republican Revolution.
In ’08, the popular vote total of candidates other than Obama was still insufficient to have elected McCain, even if he had received all those votes. McCain got waxed in the electoral college, period.
We saw the Obama type phenomenon in Virginia when Doug Wilder, the nations first black Governor was elected. The voters got caught up the “being first mindset” and the result was a bad four years, but that’s the reality of politics. People love bright shiny things!
I’ve grown up, grown old, and am now focused on decomposing gracefully. Here’s what I’ve learned during my long stay on the planet: The only thing I really possess in this life is my honor. It can never be taken from me by anyone. I can however, lose it.
To me, it is better that I get shot in the chest by a known enemy, than stabbed in the back by a supposed friend. I’ll cast my vote, as always, according to the dictates of my own conscience, and sleep soundly regardless of the outcome.
I don’t like to hold my nose when voting for someone…Lord knows I did it 3 years ago. But after the shit Президент Обама and the Demo☭rats have done to our country, I will do it again to make sure they don’t.
I WANT MICHELLE BACHMANN!!!!!!!!!!!!!! As a candidate, and *AHEM*…..
While jogging recently Governor Perry allowed his pet labrador to run with him for his daily six miles. While on the jog, he and his pet were accosted by a menacing coyote. After remaining still and waiting to see what the wild coyote would do, the Governor pulled a .380 Ruger and shot the coyote dead, when it had become apparent the coyote was after his pup.
Governor Perry (of Texas) carries a loaded pistol with him when he goes jogging.
Imagine what he’d carry if he was expecting trouble!
Next debate:
Perry: I shot a coyote!
Palin: I shot a caribou!
Cheney: I shot a lawyer!
Perry & Palin: You win!