« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

I will vote for the Republican nominee in the 2012 Presidential Election. Will you?

By: Finrod (Diary)  |  November 4th, 2011 at 12:14 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I will vote for Rick Perry in the general election if he is the Republican nominee for President.

I will vote for Newt Gingrich in the general election if he is the Republican nominee for President.

I will vote for Mitt Romney in the general election if he is the Republican nominee for President.

I will of course vote for Herman Cain in the general election if he is the Republican nominee for President.

I will even vote for Ron Paul in the general election if he is the Republican nominee for President, unless we have the extremely unlikely scenario where there is a 3rd party candidate that’s more conservative than Ron Paul and also getting more support, like with Doug Hoffman vs Dede Scozzfava.

Can you say the same?

In my opinion, if you can’t, then your opinion of who should be the Republican nominee should be completely ignored. If you’re not willing to support the party nominee, then you shouldn’t be involved in picking the party nominee. That’s the stakes of the game.

Who’s with me?

Tags: , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • heraklios

    That being said, I just feel like that if America gets to the point where we’ll elect someone the caliber of Mitt Romney as our President then probably all is already lost anyway. While our values, morality and sense of honor and duty have declined precipitously over the past 50 years, we still haven’t sunk to Mitt Romney’s level (I hope)

    I know I will have a clean conscience the morning after an Obama-Romney election; others will have to pray and discern and follow where their conscience leads them.

    • Xasteius

      we’ll need people at the local level to handle the small stuff.

      • heraklios

        I always vote, participate in the local GOP meetings, and otherwise promote our candidates in any way I can.

        • Xasteius

          traveling along, singing a song.

          • mikeymike143

            neither one is conservative. fortunately neither one has any chance whatsoever of winning the nomination. but yes, i will vote for whoever wins the nomination.

            by the way finrod, good diary. : )

          • wearethevigilant

            First, Ron Paul is pro-life
            Second, he is pro-traditional marriage
            Third, he wants sound money
            Fourth, he believes in balanced budgets
            Fifth, he supports our military (has the most campaign contributions of active duty servicemen)
            Sixth, he believes education should be handled by the state and local governments with input from the faith communities and families not the Federal government
            Seventh, he’s the only candidate for president in the past two GOP presidential primaries who has been endorsed for anything political by Ronald Reagan

            He’s a conservative. He stands a good chance of being the nominee.

            Huntsman, I’d tend to agree with you

          • gekster

            from:
            http://caffeinatedthoughts.com/2011/07/ronald-reagan-did-not-endorse-ron-paul-run-for-president-paul-disses-the-gipper

            a few excerpts:

            Back in March, Gregory Hilton exposed the back and forth view of Reagan that has been expressed by Ron Paul. Paul apparently uses an endorsement from 1978 that reads as follows:
            ?Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first.?

            It should be noted that Reagan was likely to support any Republican, including liberals Lowell Weicker and Arlen Specter, as Hilton points out.

            But after that Paul said this about Reagan:
            The American people have never reached this point of disgust with politicians before. I want to totally disassociate myself from the Reagan Administration.?

            Even a poster at Ron Paul forums admits this (and his libertarian run) are problems:
            I liked the wording ?they did it to Reagan?. It moves him closer to Reagan. We?d want to use the 2 Rons pix somewhere, use the endorsement. But we have the ?I want to totally disassociate myself from the Reagan Administration? to deal with in the best manner possible. And then the libertarian run.

          • mikeymike143

            If he were alive today, Ronald Reagan would STRONGLY OPPOSE Ron Paul. Reagan believed in spending generously on our national defense and certainly had an interventionist foreign policy. And according to the Ron ?the nutjob? Paul?s playbook, that would make the greatest president of my era ?a neocon?. Their policies and beliefs are totally and completely different. Naturally Ron Paul?s followers will attempt to hide that fact by showing you an old video of Ronald Reagan praising Ron Paul as a candidate and using that as proof that Ronald Reagan would support Ron Paul in 2012. Now watch me dismantle that silly argument!!! Does anyone remember Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania? Arlen was the senator that everyone on tea party and conservative sites called a liberal RINO. He was challenged by a tea party backed conservative in the primary named Pat Toomey and when Specter saw how opposed conservatives were to his candidacy he changed parties to Democrat. He voted for TARP, Obama?s socialized health care plan, and was pro affirmative action and amnesty. Yet, Reagan praised him as a true conservative back in the 1980?s and even cut a campaign ad for him. But go ask a Pennsylvania tea partier what they think of Specter today. LOL. If you were a House or Senate member, and of course running as a Republican, Ronald Reagan would praise you as a candidate for office. That?s part of what a sitting president does for members of his party.

            But rather than look at a 30 year old video let?s look at Ron Paul has to say about Ronald Reagan. In 1987, Ron Paul wrote a letter to Frank Fahrenkopf, chairman of the Republican National Committee, stating that he wanted to totally publically disassociate himself with the policies of Ronald Reagan(funny but he yet to publically disassociate with the 9-11 truther movement or Code Pink). He later told the Dallas Morning News that the presidency of Ronald Reagan was a ?dramatic failure?. OK, let?s take a look at the political success of both politicians and decide if that is true. In 2008 Ron Paul ran in the Republican primary for president. He got 5% of the vote. In other words, 95% OF THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY VOTERS REJECTED RON PAUL IN THE LAST ELECTION!!!! In 1984, Ronald Reagan was reelected as the president of the United States in a landslide, winning 49 out of 50 states, and his 525 electoral votes were the the most of any candidate in American history. Hmmm, I think we have to score this one for the Gipper.

            http://www.redstate.com/mikeymike143/2011/09/08/why-ronald-reagan-would-strongly-oppose-the-candidacy-of-ron-paul/

    • themamabear

      if Romney is the nominee, it is pretty much like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. He will “tweak” here and there but not accomplish much to get the country back on track. It will, however, give me more time to stockpile food and ammo, compared to an Obama presidency, so he will of course have my vote!

    • jdw4america

      barry’s the guy to focus on.

      I am almost paralyzed with fear at the thought of another four years of unbridled socialism spreading in ever expanding circles out from the White House. If he cannot get it passed the elected representatives of the people, he simply enacts it through executive fiat. He seems himself as our ruler, and he believes he is entitled to bend us to his vision. He will doubtless be facing a Republican majority in both houses, since the people are living with high unemployment and inflation. His pathological narcissism will make him more angry, touchy and petty – it will also make him double down on his power grabs.

      I do not like the idea of voting for Romney. No one who signs something as irresponsible as his signature healthcare law should be at the top of the Republican Party ticket. I’m not sure he can convince most of us here to support him in a primary, much less the independents and the democrats who are unhappy with the trajectory of their party.

      I will vote for him, if he is nominated, however. I am truly frightened for our country as I never imagined I would be. Our nation, the greatest republic in the history of the world is on the brink of being destroyed forever. That’s not hysteria – that is an indisputable fact.

      What will our national debt be in four years if this warped, delusional little man is re-elected? What will our unemployment rate be? Will millions be without power or heat in the winter because we will have used up our carbon credits for the year? Will the right-to-work be the right to work where the union goons permit? Will Christianity, the single most efficacious force for the advancement of the rights of mankind, be silenced in the public life of our people? Will we still be free to post our concerns online or will it be subject his imperial approval? Will it be labelled “hate speech” to even ask?

      Mitt Romney is no prize, and I hope and pray and pray that somehow, someway, we find a true leader for our cause and our people, but I do not see that happening. I do not know what Perry’s performance problems are due to, but if he cannot stand up to the primary field, barry will eat him alive during the actual campaign. (Primarily because the teleprompter will be rolling and the MSM will cover for him.) Cain is a very pleasant seeming man, but is that all there is? Newt? Seriously, Newt? Smart, sure. Fast on his feet? Absolutely. BUT. Baggage baggage baggage. The MSM will be on him like flies on poop every hour every day. Nobody else has a chance. That’s not a criticism, just an observation.

      The left knows it’s time is running out. They will pull out all they have to stop the right from winning in 2012. We must win. We must win because 2016 will be too late to recover from this nightmare. WE MUST WIN.

      If we don’t, we lose all we have, all our parents left to us, and all we hope for our children. If Romney’s the guy, we have to win.

  • donnybrooke

    I admit that the idea of a MItt Romney presidency leaves me cold, but I am hopeful that we will have a Republican Congress to kick his a$$ when he falters.

    Forget the presidency, it’ a Republican majority in both chambers of the Congress that I am hoping for, and a conservative one!

    Who’s with ME?

    • avgjo

      (a) expanded government precipitously under Bush?

      (b) is bending over and grabbing their ankles for Obama/Reid/Pelosi every chance they get?

      (c) that won’t even repeal the light bulb ban, which one of its own members is largely responsible (same idiots also put him on the ‘super committee’)

      (d) abdicated its Constitutional duty to a ‘super committee’ with raving leftist nuts on one side, and squishy RINOs on the other?

      Forgive me if I don’t share your hope.

      • runner12

        NT

      • westbrook348

        nt

      • donnybrooke

        (a) a Democrat Congress that expanded it beyond belief? Did we have a Republican Congress under Bush? I don’t remember that.
        Must have been Bush’s fault. ;-)

        (b) one that kisses the ground he is ABOUT to walk on? Obamacare II anyone?

        (c) the light bulb ban that probably won’t mean anything to the American people after all the power plants are shut down? That one?

        (d) The Democratic Congress that decided to forego any semblance of ‘democracy’ to ram legislation down the American people’s throats?

        Forgive me, but do you think ANY Republican president would do better with the Congress we now have? Or is it you want a Democrat Congress and Mitt?

        • westbrook348

          a Congress and President who balance the budget and protect/defend/uphold the constitution

        • avgjo

          (a) Yeah, we did for 6 years. Get a history book.

          (b) makes no sense.

          (c)So republican statism is cool as long as we have power plants running?

          (d)so two wrongs make a right?

          This method of ‘argument’, i.e., of non-responding to the sins of our side by citing those of the other is getting very tiresome. THIS is a perfect example of why the number of independents is growing in this country. It reeks of partisan hackery.

          • donnybrooke

            Actually, I thought the same about YOUR reply, so responded in kind.

            I think your colors are showing. Will you vote for ANY Republicans in 2012? Besides Ron Paul? :)

          • avgjo

            The difference is that I actually listed reasons (which are obviously such) why your post is incoherent. You have not.

            And now that you’ve demonstrated further the degeneracy of your logical/critical apparatus. I’ll explain slowly, in small words, so you understand:

            I reminded you that the GOP screwed us this year after we handed them a big win. I listed clearly examples of how they did this. You went into an irrational, ‘two wrongs make a right’ mode and started spewing irrelevant things to ‘answer’ my charges. I responded again, pointing out these things out to you. And now you floor me with a brilliant response that boils down to ‘no, YOU suck and you must be a Ron Paul supporter, if you’re really a republican at all.’

            Please explain to me how it follows from anything I’ve written that

            (a)I’m not voting for a GOP candidate;

            (b) that my post is incoherent

            (c) that I’m a Ron Paul supporter?

            I’m beginning to think the problem is that you’re a partisan hack who sees no wrong on the part of the GOP. If anyone (like me) thinks for themselves and dares to criticize the GOP, you accuse them of being a Ron Paul supporter or a non-republican, and you make yourself look ridiculous in the process. You’re like Hannity, only not famous.

            I vote Republican, I have my entire voting life and I probably will the rest of my life. But I will not let ANYONE tell me that I can’t criticize them.

            This stupidity is exactly why the GOP continues to force RINOs on us; they know most will fall into line, unquestioning. Its also this sort of intellectual/moral/ethical morbidity that is causing the destruction of this country.

    • uncommonsense

      It seems to me that in the early years of W we had a Republican Congress and we still lost ground. If we don’t have a “radical” change back to following the Constitution and Bill of Rights along with a limited government, what will be accomplished?

      It’s now or never!

  • sadams

    if he is the Republican nominee? Interesting. Do you agree with him on national defense issues? If so, your position makes sense. If not, I think you have some explaining to do…

    • Bill S

      Even Ron Paul would be far, far better overall than Barack Obama.

      Repeat after me:

      THERE IS NO PERFECT CANDIDATE

      Now repeat it every few minutes until November, 2012.

      • acat

        I will instead vote for the Green candidate for President, and vote GOP for the rest of the ballot.

        I cannot, in good conscience, vote for that .. person.

        Otherwise, I will support whoever the GOP nominates.

        Mew

        • Bill S

          If you are a Republican, you implicitly support the party’s selection for President.

          • acat

            While I’m registered Republican and will be voting in the GOP primary – whenever Illinois gets around to holding one, that is – I will not support the nominee if his name is Ron Paul.

            I refuse.

            Mew

          • westbrook348

            the GOP is not guaranteed to get my vote either. There are certain candidates that are just so bad, I refuse to vote for them.

          • federalfarmer1

            And fools like you are why roe v wade is still good law in the united states and thousands of babies are murdered every year. You probably voted for perot.

          • acat

            Roe v. Wade is not “good law”, never was. It is the law of the land and, as with prohibition and slavery, it will not change until enough States have their own anti-abortion measures on the books.

            Thousands is a lowball estimate. We’ve lost millions of unique individuals since Roe v. Wade, largely because conservatives insisted that it should be fought on the ground of the liberals’ choosing. Ever look at a baseball player or a gifted singer or a work by an artist and think “That guy is one in a million” ? We’ve lost ten of “that guy”. Think about it.

            I did not vote for Perot, and I tried to talk Perot supporters out of their folly.

            Your ability to construct an intelligent argument is abysmal. The immediate jump to name-calling says quite a bit about you – none of it flattering. Go ahead, call me a fool again.

            Mew

      • sadams

        He says he might vote for a “more conservative” third party candidate if Paul is the nominee. That is essentially a vote for Obama, so Finrod prefers Obama over Paul, but wants to disclaim responsibility for the outcome.

      • Finrod

        .

    • Finrod

      Ron Paul’s positions on national defense are pretty much the same as candidate Obama’s in 2008, and certainly not really any worse. Given that Paul would be better on everything else than Obama, it follows that we’d be better off with Paul as President than we would Obama.

  • chbroussard

    if I have to do something as simple as putting a clothespin on my nose or, depending on the candidate, go to the polls in a full-fledged HAZMAT suit.
    Getting rid of Obama is much too important for me to get my nose out of joint if my guy isn’t the last man standing. No way I’ll sit this election out.

  • boonerdan

    ABSOLUTELY NOT! There are several candidates that I will NEVER vote for, and I have made that perfectly clear since the beginning of this campaign.

    McCain was the last “party line” vote the GOP will ever get out of me.

    • westbrook348

      and I know we’re not the only ones.

      • jakeofalltrades

        I can make a real killer argument for not voting for a liberal Republican, let me tell you, but there’s no way I’m making that argument on a site this size while Obama is sitting in the White House.

        • jakeofalltrades

          Obama is establishing a new normal the longer he is in. He is poison to the nation and must be stopped.

          If it were merely Satan (i.e., Hillary), I would focus more on preserving the conservative Republican brand. It’s not. It’s Obama. He’s worse than anything I imagined, and I imagined horrible things.

          • westbrook348

            Or is he just forcing his poll numbers ever lower, empowering the conservative movement once it takes over? Sure, every day the Marxist is in office, the borrowing and moneyprinting proceeds, and the economy continues to tank. But we also gain more anti-Obama voters and more enthusiasm for conservatism, the free market, and limited government.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I voted for Dole.
    I voted for GHW Bush (twice).

    I can vote for any of these clowns.

    • westbrook348

      And it doesn’t seem to be working for us. Perhaps it’s time to try something new.

      • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

        Because any of them would be better than what the other side brings.

  • Melody Warbington (a/k/a rwm52)

    And not only will I vote for the GOP nominee, I’ll work to make sure that as many people as I can convince vote the same.

  • daveoconnor

    and you then had to be 21 to vote so I couldn’t vote for Barry Goldwater who was damn near a perfect conservative. And he got killed. The GOP lost in places they hadn’t lost since Lincoln’s funeral.
    In 1980 I happily voted for Reagan. Reagan was not nearly as conservative as Goldwater but he was a nearly perfect candidate. He won. I will never forget when he stood up to PATCO and fired any air controllers who remained on strike. He hastened the demise of the USSR which ended the Cold War.
    So electability is important to me. We get nothing if we don’t have the office holders. GW was a disappointment but at the very least we have two quite conservative Supreme Court justices, one of them the chief. Imagine Gore or Kerry instead of Bush.
    I will vote for any of the current Republican field. If Obama should win and the GOP loses the congress in 2012, unlikely, or 2014 those who didn’t support the GOP will be like those who ignore a tooth ache. Never a good idea. For what it’s worth I would much prefer Huntsman to Romney. Huntsman is not a flipper and overall is quite a bit more conservative. He also would mop the floor with 44 in any debate.

  • jrmax13

    If Perry win the nomination – I would write-in Ryan. Other than that I could support any of the others.

    • nathanalbright

      You could support Romney and Huntsman but not Perry? I don’t even hate Texans that much. Without much enthusiasm I voted twice for GWB (I turned 18 in 1999), once in California no less (which got me on the cover of my university’s newspaper) and nearly got lynched in my dorm in a riot of angry liberals when my Republican roommate (slightly prematurely) played “We Are The Champions” when Bush was announced the winner of the Florida before the recount mess. I had to fight more than dozen liberals to keep them from ransacking my dorm room, and did it (thankfully without being arrested!). To dislike an honorable man to such an extent that you wouldn’t vote for him over Romney, Cain, Paul, or Newt is appalling. You should give back your RNC card for that kind of base treachery.

      • jrmax13

        It is only treachery when it involves Perry, right? Actually I forgot about Huntsman… good catch. Can you believe he’s still hanging in? I would vote for Cain, Bachmann, Gingrich, Romney or Paul over Perry. Also, I don’t hate Texans — I live here until March for Heavens sake. This is about Rick Perry and his ineluctability in the general election. That’s all. Perry has some, well a few, admirable qualities. But not enough to overcome his weaknesses in convincing enough Independents votes to beat Obummer in just 52 short weeks from now.

        • nathanalbright

          ….by whose base. Given what I’ve said above, I’m willing to vote Republican on whomever wins the primary. I just don’t believe that Perry should be exempted from a general Republican loyalist perspective. If you can vote for Paul or Romney or Cain, I can’t see why you shouldn’t vote for Perry unless he stole your girlfriend or slashed the tires on your truck or ran over your dog. As Mr. Perry doesn’t seem to have done anything like that, I would not contribute to his “inability to draw in independents” by being faithless to the Republicans when the need of this country to get rid of Obama is so great. I voted GWB twice and McCain in ’08. It would take a horrible candidate for me to either vote third party or not want to vote at all, and Perry is nowhere remotely close to that level of unacceptability.

        • dandolo

          I will not vote ABO. I am sick and tired of hearing the very phrase. We, as a party must be able to to do better than anyone but, it is a negative stance and we owe it the nation to produce a positive one.
          I do not want another four years of the O, but please, we can take another four years of him. It will not be pleasant, but we have survived worse.
          I honestly think Romney (and Cain, for that matter) could be worse in the long run for the country. We need to turn the country around and off the socialist course we are on. We have that opportunity now, with all thanks to the O. Romney would likely further entrench that course (and Cain as well, simply by giving the fed. gov. new sources of revenue.)
          This is the time to stop the train we are on. Until we can stop it we are not safe. Maybe the country needs to see more of O to really get the message, I pray not, but Romney will not stop that train.

      • tngal

        hmmm did I pick the wrong the college? Thankfully you had that common sense roommate to watch your six :)

        I use to play We are the Champions whenever I had a good outcome on something like a football game or an election. Now I just go for Hair of the Dog, from Nazareth. (Now you’re messin’ with a sob)

        It really torques the neighbors.

        • nathanalbright

          I was a civil engineering student (minor in history) at the Southern Cal. And yes, between the partying my neighbors did and the politics, I did often wonder if I had chosen correctly. But fortunately I found some conservative friends in the San Gabriel Valley to spend most of my free time with :B.

      • pttx333

        gone through all of that because you voted Republican is deserving of some sort of big medal. And in California? Boy, that counts for two medals! Good for you that you stood your ground and at such a young age. Keep up the good work!

        I agree with your being incredulous that jrmax could vote for Romney or Huntsman but not Perry. Good grief – there isn’t even any competition, IMHO! Seems pretty straightforward to me …

        • nathanalbright

          I’m not the sort of person who backs down from a challenge. And I don’t appreciate mobs trying to force their ignorant opinions on me. Suffice it to say that they never came to my dorm again, even if I had to endure plenty of jokes about being a Floridian in that climate from others, even if I am a native Pennsylvanian (for which I endured a lot of jokes growing up in Florida).

          • pttx333

            you endured just because you were from another state! That doesn’t even compute, other than for maybe a bunch of 6th graders.

            Good for you for not backing down – that takes a lot of courage. Keep it up and you will do very well for yourself.

  • iidvbii

    If Romney wins the nomination I will right in Dick Cheney….

    • jrmax13

      Hey iidvbii, you are sharper than a tack. How does this Dream Ticket sound ?
      Cheney (Dick or Liz) / Paul Ryan 2012

      • iidvbii

        nt

  • ohiohistorian

    Conservatives seem to need to have a perfect person, while liberals (lieberals) only need someone who other liberals like. Hence we got Obama.

    My suggestion: get out and vote. Vote for the BETTER candidate. After all, Jesus is not running in 2012.

    One last note. In Ohio, vote FOR Issue 2. Tell the firefighters and police that we elect the politicians to decide how many of them to hire, not their union negotiators. Just remember: when seconds count, the police are minutes away.

  • nathanalbright

    I’m currently in Thailand, and may not return to the United States before the Election. That said, if that is the case I’m voting Republican by absentee ballot (I’m a Florida resident), because I think it’s better to accept half a loaf than no loaf at all, and because 4 more years of the People’s Republic of Chicago is unacceptable.

  • MikeG

    However, my level of additional involvement will vary depending on who the candidate is, i.e. Perry and Newt would get more of my time/money than Romney or Cain.

  • tngal

    I just love Cain-isms:)

    If Cain’s out, my enthusiasm would transfer to Newt. Sure I’d pull it for Paul, Huntsman, Perry or Romney, but my heart wouldn’t be in it.

    Got too many Perry people self destructing the GOP. Someone’s got to to save the party.

    • runner12

      pretty good job of destroying the GOP candidates right now. Not because of the allegations, which may turn out to be nothing, but because of his finger-pointing and mismanagement of the whole situation.

      Had Mr. Block not made the media rounds trashing Perry, Cain would not be guilty of hurting the GOP. But as it stands right now, he is.

  • texasroots

    I will never vote for Romney or Cain, no way, no how. Are you kidding, after all the hate spewed by Romney and Cain against Perry? So, best to keep Pres. Obama, at least I know what Obama stands for. Besides, if Romney is the nominee, the GOP establishment is really ushering in Obama’s reelection. Do you think GOP establishment is willing to give up its pork?

    • cajungirl2012

      Romney is a vapid opportunist with no core and a governing record that is laughable. I don’t care how rich he is. As inspiring as John Kerry.

      Cain never had my vote. Aside from being a lightweight, he’s an egomaniac, serial liar with creepy skeletons. Quick to play the despicable race card.

      The way Romney and Cain trash Perry just further demonstrates their lack of integrity. Same for crazy Bachman.

      I could vote for Newt, but come on. No chance. Paul is nuts. Santorum is a decent guy, but couldn’t keep his own senate seat.

      Perry has the experience,proven record, the drive and the heart.

      • texasroots

        Perry is a sharp contrast of a conservative vs. liberal. I remember the John Kerry (who I compare to Romney ) and George Bush debate, Bush was shaky. Bush had a weird look on his face, and it seemed like he was being fed the answers with what appeared to be a box (hump) on his back. Kerry was a much better debater, Bush became president.

        Perry is my only choice.

  • mariagomez

    All of our candidates, including Perry-former Al Gore supporter, have flip flops on their record. But any one of them would be better than Obama.

    • jakeofalltrades

      has become much more persuasive now that we know who he is, especially compared to 2008 when I sat at home and refused to vote for John “What 1st Amendment?” McRino.

    • texasroots

      Come on now. I don’t consider changing parties a flip flop. I was a democrat like Perry . For over 30 years, I voted democrat.,,and now I am an independent. Perry would be the third republican I would cast my vote for.

      Sorry, not any of them would do for me.

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    Because the alternative is 4 more years of the destructive/incompetent combo special of the Obama/Biden ticket (or it’s remnants if the O isn’t impeached/out before then).

    I’m wondering if “generic democrat” will beat Obama in the dem primaries… it’s just a nagging thought that pops up every once in a while with all the coverage of and dissection of the R side of candidates and virtually no coverage of the “other guy”/potential challengers on the dem side… but then again I the meme of the left seems to be keep power at all costs so I’m not that surprised at the lack of coverage to any dem challengers.

  • texasroots

    If Romney is the nominee, I can’t wait for him to be badly defeated by Obama. I want his silly grin wiped off his face. Don’t believe the polls that say Romney will beat Obama, way too early for that. Why do you think Democrats want to run against Romney or Cain for that matter? No match for Obama. Anybody but Cain or Romney.

    • cajungirl2012

      The DNC has video footage of Romney’s flip-flops that make John Kerry look decisive. Plus they intend to paint Mittens as WEIRD, which he is.

      It will be 2004 all over again. And I will enjoy it.

      • texasroots

        Gosh, you would think that Romney would be tired of running for president., same with Paul. Will Romney and Paul ever stop running for president?

      • jakeofalltrades

        as a source of green energy.

  • aggie91

    Unless a superhuman Paul supporting sniper takes out the rest of the field…then. Hummmmm I would have to think about it.

    Face it Paulistas or whatever they are called. Paul will NEVER be the nominee so yeah back to my original statement.

    Yes without reservation

  • Vegas_Rick

    Nt

  • 6eorge Jetson

    I shudder to think what America would look like with an Obama Presidency through 2016.

    I’ll take the RINO that we can hope to contain with intra-party influence over the statist Obama that will be unrestrained by the need to get reelected.

  • lastgopinillinois

    Lets say Romney gets the nomination.
    I believe he will need every vote he can get, even from those who can’t stand him just to beat 0bama. And lets say it is enough to get Romney elected.
    Those visits to the polls in 2012 are also going to vote for more Republican Senators, Representatives and local officials too.
    Lets say that gets us a MAJORITY in the3 Senate.
    Now we can start passing pro-growth, job-creating, freedom-loving bills and send them to Romneys desk to sign into law.
    Whats he gonna do? Do you think he will veto any of those bills?
    I will hold my nose and vote for the man if he is the nominee.

  • dajeeps

    I am prepared to be making any pledges at this point in time, partly because there is a lot that goes into this choice that needs to be considered. Being completely blind to that fact, and falling in line with party loyalty like a lemming means that maybe we have not learned the right lesson from everything we’ve been through the last few years. The huge challenges we face are not ones that came about just because of Obama, and the only way they can be fixed is adherence to solid conservative principles and restoration of constitutional order. I am an American first. Being a Republican is the last order of business as far as I am concerned, and I will vote for what America needs first.

    My hope is that whomever is nominated will at least go a few miles toward what we really need as is. But if that is not the case, whomever it is will have to work for my vote. The candidate will have to be making the pledges in order to do what’s right for the country, not me, because he or she will be seeking the job for that very purpose and will need to convince me that is the reason the power of the executive branch should be vested with them – with my part of the choice.

    Only fools give away whatever power they may have to shape the future by making such pledges before the nominating contest has even begun. And my suggestion is that if you really want to end up making a difference in present order of things, keep your intentions under your vest and make the nominee work for you!

  • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

    It is no fluke. Not only is Romney up by 20+ points but his campaign is knocking on doors and running phone banks. NOBODY ELSE is door knocking or running phone banks in NH. Romney is not taking NH for granted and based on that I going to assume he is not taking any other state for granted either.

    Given Perry’s inability to win debates and Cain’s multiple answers to the sex harassment charges leveled against him, it is looking more like the anti -Romney candidate may not “arrive”.

    Polls won’t matter when the voting starts less than two months from now. There is a segment of the electorate who is looking for the best candidate to beat Obama. Where that vote goes depends on who WINS. If Cain or Perry want to be the viable alternative to Mitt they better get better at debating, not get roped into traps set up by reporters at parade magazine and not handle scandalous media reports by changing their story multiple times. Perry and Cain better have top notch organizations in Iowa. If Romney is better able to get his supporters to the precinct caucuses and wins Iowa, it is over. He will then win NH and use that momentum to carry him to the states that follow.

    • gekster

      Won’t a liberal state go for a liberal Republican.
      I would be suprised if he wasn’t ahead.

      • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

        When the GOP controls 2/3 thirds of the state legislature and all of the Executive Council seats.

        • acat

          And New Hampshire is rather overrun by refugees from The Peoples’ Republic of Massachusetts.

          Mew

        • gekster

          from:
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states

          excerpt:
          The terms red states and blue states came into use in 2000 to refer to those states of the United States whose residents predominantly vote for the Republican Party or Democratic Party presidential candidates, respectively. A blue state tends to vote for the Democratic Party, and a red state tends to vote for the Republican Party.

          I don’t kow how to put up graphs, so this is all I got.

          Red states
          Utah (R + 30.768)
          Idaho (R + 27.018)
          Wyoming (R + 26.132)
          Nebraska (R + 22.606)
          Alaska (R + 20.946)
          Oklahoma (R + 20.567)
          Kansas (R + 16.892)
          North Dakota (R + 16.484)
          Alabama (R + 15.162)
          Texas (R + 12.872)
          Mississippi (R + 12.766)
          South Dakota (R + 11.920)
          South Carolina (R + 11.230)
          Montana (R + 9.668)
          Kentucky (R + 9.408)
          Indiana (R + 9.398)
          Georgia (R + 6.814)
          North Carolina (R + 6.086)
          Tennessee (R + 5.228)
          Arizona (R + 4.990)
          Louisiana (R + 4.824)
          Virginia (R + 3.252)

          Blue states
          Massachusetts (D + 26.032)
          Rhode Island (D + 25.708)
          New York (D+ 22.966)
          Hawaii (D + 21.806)
          Vermont (D + 21.006)
          Maryland (D + 16.996)
          Illinois (D + 15.844)
          Connecticut (D + 14.954)
          California (D + 14.414)
          Delaware (D + 13.814)
          Maine (D + 12.136)
          New Jersey (D + 11.656)
          Washington (D + 10.774)
          Michigan (D + 9.120)
          Minnesota (D + 8.860)
          Oregon (D + 7.798)
          Pennsylvania (D + 7.040)
          New Mexico (D + 6.056)
          Wisconsin (D + 5.838)
          Iowa (D + 5.110)
          New Hampshire (D + 4.176) (This is you, isn’t it)

          Purple states
          Nevada (R + 2.004) – 6 electoral votes
          West Virginia (R + 0.902) – 5 electoral votes
          Arkansas (R + 0.080) – 6 electoral votes
          Colorado (D + 0.238) – 9 electoral votes
          Florida (D + 0.320) – 29 electoral votes
          Missouri (D + 1.156) – 10 electoral votes
          Ohio (D + 1.432) – 18 electoral votes

          So a liberal Republican running is a liberal state would be expected to fair well.

          • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

            I don’t know where you get your data but it doesn’t reflect Republican and Democrat registration numbers.

            Obviously I hit a nerve with you because you don’t like what I am saying because it is the truth. I am not a Romney supporter I am a Republican State Committee member and I personally know the County field organizers in my county for most of the Presidential campaigns.

            Is it my problem or your problem for that matter that your preferred candidate can’t get himself out of a hole? No it is their problem.

            As for me and who I support. I haven’t decided yet. I know I won’t waste my vote on a RINO in the primary.

          • gekster

            The biggest lie is the one you tell your self.
            If you read what I posted, you would know the sourcs. It’s right on top.

            You can swing your state anyway you want, it’s your state.

            And since didn’t mention who I supported, how can you say that my prefered candidate can’t get out of a hole..
            I was mearly pointing out a liberal would do well in a liberal state,
            and provided facts to back up the liberal claim.

            And you hit no nerve. What ever gave you that idea.
            I could say the same about you, but it’s obvious you are in denial about your state.

          • jrmax13

            charlie, thank you for giving your time to your state committee. I aspire to be more like that. Doesn’t Kelly Ayotte represent NH in the Senate now ? She seems great from what I have seen.

          • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

            RINO in the GOP primary last year, but she has proven herself to be the most conservative of NH’s congressional delegation and the most popular too. She is proof that you don’t have to be a squishy moderate to win in NH.

            Kelly Ayotte as Attorney General got the first death penalty conviction in a half a century. I just hope it holds through the appeal process.

          • jrmax13

            She may be a a force to reckon with in the future. Actually, I was a little surprised when I saw the election results. Good on her !

  • sunshinek67

    —

  • thisisme7

    with the political discourse in this country right there: “In my opinion, if you can?t, then your opinion of who should be the Republican nominee should be completely ignored.”

    So, 1st Amendment, out the window. Anyone who disagrees with me, out the window. Fair and representative political process, out the window. One person, one vote, their choice, out the window.

  • griffinelection

    . . . and is intellectually void. My reply:

    http://www.redstate.com/griffinelection/2011/11/08/i-will-not-automatically-vote-for-the-guy-with-an-r-next-to-his-name-in-2012-will-you/

  • lungshot

    NO WAY!!! I’d rather write in Gary Johnson than support the warfare/welfare/police state!

  • noveldog9

    You suggest that I have already said what I just tried to post, which is ball face lie! You have done this before and were lying then as well. Whoever the moderator is needs to be replaced by someone with an at least average intelligence, and who is not addicted to lying!

    • Vaughn Harold

      n/t/

    • pttx333

      But I don’t think you complained about it properly. And it isn’t the moderator – it is a system glitch. Wanna try again? It woud be a good thing to do.

    • acat

      There’s more than one, y’know.

      Mew

  • conservativeparrothead

    I think generally in primaries, people get emotional about candidate and get upset their candidate didnt win the nomination, but like you said, if you arent going to support the party’s choice then who needs you.

    Im sure there will be some in the party who will moan and groan, just like the PUMA camp in 2008 who were Hillary supporters, but they eventually came around, I think there will be some of that, especially if Mitt Romney is not the nominee from his supporters, but overall I think most will support the nominee come November 2012.

  • Xasteius

    not text

  • heraklios

    unless it’s Mitt Romney. Can’t go there.

  • earlgrey

    nt.

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    A much-needed reminder. Any of our losers would be better than a man who wishes our government was more like the one in charge of Red China.

  • George Neitz

    As you said even Luap Nor

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    I will vote by absentee ballot, and, er, mail it back in a day late, or something…

    As a child of Jewish grandparents, I still have a problem with the shadow anti-Semitism of Paul and a shocking number of his supporters.

    But, otherwise I am in complete comportment with your statement. I’d vote for Pee Wee Herman if HE was the nominee against President Obama. I’d vote for my living room sofa over that man…

  • Craigpennsylvania

    The answer is YES.

  • jackdaniels11

    Romney is the only Republican who can beat Obama. Period. But I’ll vote for any Republican next year, even if it’s crazy Ron Paul.

  • runner12

    I am a Perry supporter and I will do everything I can to ensure Mittens is NOT the nominee, but if he is (God help us) I will vote for him.

    Four more years of Obama would be a disaster.

  • westbrook348

    Neither can I. Romney absolutely will not get my vote. I also can’t support Cain (Greenspan loving TARP supporter) and probably would be unwilling to support Perry.

    Republicans can win my vote if they nominate the right guy. I’d really like to get Obama out of office. It shouldn’t be THAT difficult.

    But if the GOP insists on nominating another big government, bailout supporting, nation-building, “compassionate conservative”… then I’ll have to pass. I’d rather the party split apart and completely disappear then continue down the same road any longer.

    And i know a LOT of people who feel the exact same way as me.

  • RealQuiet

    Though I would have to swallow hard with Romney. I think that there would be a few conservatives and evangelicals whom would stay home. If our preferred conservative candidate cannot win in the primary, then we should stand behind the most conservative nominee. I would rather put the fate of this country in the hands of independents who would have to choose between and incumbent, diehard socialist with a diehard conservative rather than a moderate, GOP establishment candidate. The closest to this type of election that we have had in my lifetime would be Carter-Reagan in 1980. Time to put this kind of choice to all Americans this time around.

    Good diary and reminder Finrod about what the main goal of the election should be: Boot out Obama next year.

  • westbrook348

    and ending all foreign aid because we are broke is not anti-Semitic. We are in worse financial shape than Israel, and we actually help them out just by ending all foreign aid. That means no money for any of Israel’s enemies: no aid to Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, or the Palestineans. If we stop all foreign aid, not only does it make a dollar collapse slightly less likely, but it’s a net positive for Israel. They lose some money, but their enemies lose a lot more. Plus, they’re in better financial shape then we are right now; they don’t have a marxist leading their country. It’s not like we have a surplus every year and are wondering to ourselves “hmm what should we do with all this extra money?” We are broke. $15 trillion in debt and borrowing $1.5 trillion per year. Time to end the foreign aid; most of America agrees.

  • jakeofalltrades

    not here, but elsewhere. And I took it all back, once I re-evaluated and realized I would easily vote for Satan over Obama.

  • westbrook348

    because right now, the guys at the top of the polls are not that. Dieheard conservatives do not say, “I supported the bank bailouts but wish they had just been implemented differently.”

  • ntrepid

    The enormity bundled into those five words should keep everyone here awake at night in a cold sweat?even a year out from the election.

    It wasn?t so long ago (2008) that some around here were boldly na?ve enough to throw down ?Never-Cast-My-Vote-for? ultimatums (1) that make good primary fun but, in the end, attitudes must change in the general…and voters must grow up.

    Ntrepid
    Proud Redstate Member since April 2006??

    (1)http://archive.redstate.com/blogs/ntrepid/2008/jan/29/and_i_reject_your_shallow_analysis_of_my_never_cast_my_vote_for_mccain_position

    PS. I still don?t like John McCain.

  • joayn

    nominee in 2012.

    Let me just put this out there for people to think about. If you do not believe there are real lives at stake in this election, then go right ahead and indulge your little protest vote.

    If you do not believe in honoring and supporting the very people who are honoring their oath to defend this country, then by all means go right ahead and indulge in your little protest vote.

    If you do not believe in the results of the American Revolution and honoring the people who gave their lives in defense of tyranny, then go right ahead and indulge yourself in your little protest vote.

    If after saying the Pledge of Allegiance, you still want to indulge yourself in your little protest vote, go right ahead.

    If after listening to the Star Spangled Banner, you still want to indulge yourself in your little protest vote, go right ahead.

    If you do not understand your inherent duty to protect this country from its enemies, both foreign and domestic, then go right ahead and indulge in your little protest vote.

    These are the only reasons that I voted for McCain in 2008. We can all indulge ourselves right now, sitting in a nice comfy room, typing our opinions and thoughts on the candidates and who will win the nomination. Just don’t forget those who died for you to have the freedome to do so, and those that continue to put their lives on the line at this very minute. And I think a lot of people forgot the troops in 2008, sat home in protest or voted for their anti-McCain candidate, and allowed tyranny to win over freedom.

    So please forgive my rant, but when I read comments like this, “I do not want another four years of the O, but please, we can take another four years of him,” I just want to lock and load.

  • westbrook348

    and I wonder what things would be like today if my friends and I hadn’t settled for the lesser of two evils. If all the people who unethusiastically pulled the lever for McCain instead stayed home, or voted third party, or wrote a conservative’s name in..

    Then I think today the establishment would be a lot more afraid of pushing Romney, fearing another revolt. Instead, they aren’t worried at all. The RINOs in charge of the party have no qualms whatsoever pushing Romney upon us, knowing full well that we’ll vote for him in the general election.

    Except I won’t. McCain was the last time I give the RINOs what they want. They can’t count on me to vote for their big spending stooge, not any longer.

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    And this is just for starters.

    Paul’s own “Campaign for Liberty” website mourned the passing of this vicious, disgusting Jew hater. That’s one anti-Semetic statement…

    And withdrawing foreign aid to our most staunch ally in a region filled with absolute vile hatred of the West seems ill advised, especially since we are talking about millions of dollars in a multi-billion dollar budget shortfalls each month.

    It simply isn’t arguable that far too many of Ron Paul’s supporters are Jew-haters– the are forever conflating the “Zionists” the “Federal Reserve” and the “Rothschild” banking “conspiracies”.

    ..and, I will note there is a reason he attracts a preponderance of such crackpots. Ron Paul IS one…

  • westbrook348

    and if that’s all you got, I’m not worried. I’d never heard of the guy. I’ve never heard Paul mention him, not once. I don’t see a connection between them at all, other than that they’re both anti-Fed. Apparently Mullins even bashed Paul and the gold standard. It is quite a stretch, indeed, to claim that Paul endorses Mullins’ anti-semitic views; they don’t even seem to share the same economic views, other than a mutual dislike of the Fed (which I hope we all share).

    Also, the reason Paul attracts people who love conspiracies about the Fed and bankers MIGHT just be because he is the most anti-Fed, anti-bailout candidate. Just maybe.. Who else are these people going to support? Mitt Romney the TARP loving Wall Street guy? No, they’re not going to support him. Doesn’t make me like Romney any better..

    There will always be kooks. Maybe even kooks who support the same candidate as me. Doesn’t make the candidate a kook or me a kook, and doesn’t mean we agree w/ what they say. I haven’t heard anything anti-semitic from Paul. In fact, Ludwig von Mises (of the Austrian school of economics) was Jewish, and yet somehow he became one of Paul’s most influential thinkers. I also haven’t heard anything about anti-Semitism from Peter Schiff, who was his economic advisor, and.. Schiff is Jewish. And manages to support Ron Paul. Imagine that. And so do I. Paul’s policies would be a lot better for the country in my opinion: ending federal departments, ending the crony capitalism, and cutting $1 trillion in the first year. If any of the other candidates offered that and were serious about it, maybe I’d consider supporting them. But so far, only Paul seems serious about making the major changes to government I want.

  • trapperjohn

    I’m going to vote for the candidate that polls highest in Alaska during our primary that isn’t Romney. And in the general I’m going to vote for whomever is the republican nominee even if it’s Paul…or Romney.

  • jakeofalltrades

    But I lived in California, where all Republicans have the right to vote their heart in the general, since their votes mean nothing.

    I’m in a swing state now, and I can’t eff around.

  • Christine (Trelaina)

    * Obama would have won

    * Obama would have won by “a landslide”

    * The establishment would be exactly, precisely where they are today…they do not listen to us and don’t care what we think. They would have come up with some other lame excuse why McCain lost and proceeded with their crowning of Romney or Newt or whichever guy wins the “it’s my turn” game.

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    If you choose to vote for a man who doesn’t overtly distance himself and his campaign from the likes of folks like Mullins, that is your choice. As for the Jews that take the decision to cozy up to Paul, that, likewise, is their choice. Certain cells of the national Juden Bund supported Adolf Hitler against Schleicher for Reich Chancellor, too. So what?

    As troubling as Paul’s anti-Semetism is, so is his anti-Republicanism. Unlike Sarah Palin, who flatly renounced the possibility of running as a third-party insurgent, based on her correct assessment that this would simply usher in a second (and intolerable) Obama term, Ron Paul has not decisively ruled out a third-party run, saying he would only pledge that he’s not considering it right now– but he went on to (ha, ha) say he has to “vacillate a little bit in my life!!”

    You are correct: Ron Paul is not a kook. He is a menace.

  • westbrook348

    As do many people on this site. The GOP sure does piss me off a lot. Bush did. Boehner and Cantor and McConnell drive me nuts. When the GOP voted down the RSC’s budget last year in favor of Ryan’s, it really was the last straw. After that, I could see the debt ceiling increase coming. Yeah we took the House over in 2010, which slowed the hemorrhaging, thank goodness, but that was always a given. We’re still headed in the wrong direction, and the only breath of fresh air we got from the 2010 elections seems to have been Rand Paul, whom the GOP leadership are satisfied ignoring.

    Personally I consider myself libertarian, fiscally conservative, a constitutionalist, and a federalist. Republican? Eh. I’m registered as such so I can vote in the primary. But liberty and the constitution come before party, and Ron Paul knows this. Hell, even Hannity plays lip service to this by stressing that he’s not a registered Republican, he’s a “registered conservative.” The GOP as an institution does NOT have a lot of fans right now. And quite frankly, I consider the Republican party more of a menace than Ron Paul. At least Paul is proposing $1 trillion in cuts next year, Even the beloved Paul Ryan (who supported TARP, btw) proposed running a deficit for the next decade. Sorry, but if that’s how the Republicans are going to do things going forward, and if they’re going to nominate a RINO like Romney, then yes, I sincerely hope Paul runs 3rd party. Because a party that’s willing to compromise so much doesn’t deserve to exist. Real conservatives and Tea Partiers would be completely fine joining a new party that actually had principles and stood its ground against the Marxists currently in DC. People are annoyed that their voices aren’t being heard; that the politicians in the two political parties are ignoring them because the established power structure allows it.

    But back to what you said about Paul’s anti-Semitism. You said, “As troubling as [it] is,” as if you proved an established fact, when in reality you didn’t provide any real evidence that Paul is anti-Semitic. The connection you made between him and Mullins is so flimsy that I can’t take you seriously. Of course, it’s “your choice” to continue with your baseless ad hominem attacks. But I find it ridiculous. At least attack his policies; that I could respect, if you made a resonable argument. But calling Paul names like “anti-Semite,” without basis in reality, is nothing more than a signal to not take you seriously.

    Unless of course you have more evidence of Paul’s supposed Jew-hating. Something more substantial than the Mullins thing, I hope. Something you can actually tie to Paul himself. I doubt it, but I’ll be anxiously waiting in anticipation, just in case.

  • rkcurtin

    Based upon what?
    The conservative base coming around to him?
    The MSM doing their best to help him?
    His smaller government track record?

    Newt, Perry, and maybe even Cain can beat Obama.

    So many here dwell on the baggage of these guys, but none have anything to carry like Obama’s baggage – his record.

    Give us a break from this Romney is our only savior nonsense.

    I will vote for Romney as my other choice will be Lucifer….

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    Such sentiments are exactly why Ron Paul is such a destructive menace. I could haul out the names of every anti-Semite and neo-Confederate surrounding Representative Paul, give you the quotes from his own pamphleteering in the 1980′s, but none of it would matter: You will vote for Paul, even if he runs a Quixotic, moronic and destructive third-party campaign: “I sincerely hope Paul runs 3rd party”.

    Then you sincerely hope Barack Obama wins a second term.

    Mullins is but one (Murray Rothbard another), and his death was mourned on Paul’s own campaign website. That’s not enough for you, so how would other sources and names convince you? They wouldn’t.

    As a self-identified Libertarian, I suggest you hang around The Southern Avenger, or other such clap-trap websites, rather than a place like Red State, which is dedicated to REPUBLICAN victory.

    After all, the “Republican Party is more of a menace than Ron Paul”,,,,

  • acat

    Has he gotten senile enough to have forgotten not getting a single electoral vote when he ran third party in 1988?

    Seriously, someone with judgement that bad needs to be laughed off the national stage, not rewarded with your loyalty.

    Mew

  • westbrook348

    Rothbard? The guy was Jewish, just like von Mises. They were big time Austrian economists. Paul follows the Austrian school. Perhaps THAT’S why he was mentioned on blogs that support Ron Paul. Was there ANY evidence that Paul supported racist ideas? No. You just make up these illegitimate connections. His pamphleteering? Paul has repeatedly denied he wrote any of it, and you have no evidence that he did. It’s a non-issue at this point. You’re throwing crap at a wall and hoping it sticks.

    Like, what if someone says Cain is a racist because he said “blacks are brainwashed” (if Paul said this, surely you’d demand he drop out of the race). But Cain said it. And perhaps somewhere in his history, 10, 20 years ago, Cain knew a guy who said something else racist. And now all you Cain supporters are racist because you support Cain, who is racist against blacks even though he is black. Cain supporters can’t like him because of his 999 plan, or his lack of politicial experience, or speaking skills. No, if anyone supports Cain, it’s because they are racists who hate blacks and think blacks are brainwashed. So now the whole group is labeled racist and anti-black, using the same methods that you use against Paul. Seriously? You sound like a liberal when you push this guilt by association nonsense.

    Paul is not a racist or anti-semite. You have not proven otherwise. As Paul points out, in order to be racist, you must have a collectivist mindset, which Paul opposes: he promotes individualism every chance he gets. By all means, keep name dropping guys who you think will finally sink Paul. But all it really shows is that that’s the best you’ve got. If you had any real evidence Paul was racist, you would’ve presented it by now.

    Your deceptiveness and willingness to devote yourself to things other than the truth are evidenced, not just in your ad hominem attacks against Paul, but also in how you quoted me. You left off the first half of my sentence. What’s that about? I specifically said IF. IF the Republican party continues to support annual deficits for the next decade or two decades, and IF they insist on nominating a flip flopping, bailout and mandate loving RINO like Romney, then YES, the GOP is not worth supporting any longer and I would hope someone serious about small government runs against it.

    Those are big, important “ifs” that show that I’m not staunchly against the GOP, only the establishment wing that perpetually fails to live up to its principles and ideals. If enough people continually allow the establishment to win and dictate the agenda, then why shouldn’t I look elsewhere for leadership? Tea Party protesters felt the same way. A 3rd party is not the ideal solution; first we are trying to fix the GOP from the inside, and promote politicians who actually support limited government. If that works, then great. But so far, we’ve only had limited success, and in the meantime, the national debt just hit $15 trillion.

    By misquoting me, you took what I said (a mainstream Tea Party, conservative view) and manipulated it into something entirely different. Why should anyone ever trust what you have to say?

  • gekster

    What do you see it as.

  • wearethevigilant

    Many of my fellow supporters of Israel have it sadly mistaken. The rank and file Israeli of any political stripe wants us to not intervene all the time. Ron Paul is not an anti-Semite. Are you aware that when we give in foreign aid we often take from the working class American and give that money to quite a few reprobate dictators. There are other and more respectful ways to support Israel than how we’ve been doing it. Trade agreements for instance. We should eliminate ALL foreign aid .

  • runner12

    You must really love Obama.

  • Xasteius

    to contain the wilder impulses of the flawed president.

  • Matthew Morris

    But if the GOP insists on nominating another big government, bailout supporting, nation-building, ?compassionate conservative?? then I?ll have to pass.

    Newsflash…. you ARE the GOP. Or as much of it as anybody else is. So, get to work.

  • noveldog9

    Now that Trump, Christie, and Palin have indicated that they will not run, and Huckabee refused to even be considered we are left with limited choices. None of them are really outstanding or they would run away with the nomination.

    In the end, I will probably vote for whoever wins the nomination, but really wish we had a better choice. But when all is said and done…..virtually all of them are better than the incumbent who defies everyone while leading us deeper, and deeper into debt. He has to go!

  • acat

    which is just sad, but statistically won’t matter.

    Ron Paul failed to capture a single electoral vote in 1988, the last time he ran third-party. He won’t do any better this time.

    Mew

  • runner12

    I get your frustration, I do. But I think you and those that think like you are under the misconception that one man being elected will “save” us. I want a Republican in because we need to stop the bleeding.

    From there, we will have to work very hard to elect more Senators and House members who are truly for limited government. We did not get here overnight and we won’t fix it overnight. Our fight to restore this country does not end with defeating Obama, it begins

    While I would have to have very good nose plugs to vote for Mittens, I will. But let’s hope that is not a Hobbsian choice we have to face.

  • dixiepassion

    I think the reason Ron Paul had less delegates is because the “party” was keeping them out of the delegate electing process.

    In many states Ron Paul’s people were actually locked out of the building where the nominations were being held. There is much documentation on people not being allowed in to vote who actually paid to be a part of the process.

  • westbrook348

    No bailouts, no crony capitalism, no special loans or subsidies, no tax loopholes, tax reform, no deficit spending, cutting spending, transparency, state’s rights, the constitution, and the free market. In a nutshell.

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    about anti-Jewish thugs on your own campaign website on the occasion of the thug’s death is a pretty close association, so, yes: In this case, the guilt is earned by the association.

    I also understand your desire to walk back some of your stridently anti-Republican remarks; as a devoted supporter of Doctor Paul, you’ve made your intentions quite well known that, should the party nominate someone such as (at least insofar as you’ve mentioned them here in this thread) Romney or Cain, you will vote for Ron Paul as a third party insurgent.

    As I say, this is your prerogative, and I am not here to dissuade you from voting for a man with obvious ties to fringe political thought such as neo-Confederatism, This doesn’t trouble you, so, you find Dr. Paul’s candidacy legitimate, and it comports with your world-view.– All well and good.

    But, in continuing to respond to your thread, I am opening up the thought-process of people such as yourself for others to observe so that they can have a better understanding of what a threatening, menacing, destructive force Ron Paul and his supporters are: Under circumstances (-that are quite realistic), such folks have shown themselves quite willing to blow up the Republican/Conservative movement if Doctor Paul is NOT nominated.

    Good job– especially in a diary entry about support for WHOMEVER is nominated.

  • mariagomez

    Unfortunately, even though all of the candidates have changed positions over the years (Perry, former democrat and Al Gore supporter, plus Newt was for an individual mandate, former global warming believer, bashed Paul Ryan’s plan, etc) many conservatives will never vote for Romney. Yes, Romney has changed positions plenty of times, but so have the others. And I adore Newt and would vote for him in a heartbeat, but Newt has changed positions as many times as Mittens has.

  • Xasteius

    conservative Senate and House candidates.

  • westbrook348

    Criticizing me for my unwillingness to vote for the GOP nominee no matter what, when your initial comment was an admission of refusal to vote for Paul should he win. The only difference is that you’d be willing to mail your ballot in late, completely wasting your vote; at least I’d make a statement by voting for the 3rd party candidate closest to my views of limited government.

    Furthermore, there is a difference between the “conservative movement” and a so-called “Republican movement.” You seem to miss the not-so-subtle nuances separating the two terms. Not all conservatives are Republican and not all Republicans are conservative. I associate much more closely to the GOP than the Democrats, but less so when the politicians on the ballot are RINOS; I am not a Party man, never have been, and never will be. While I would love the GOP to reform itself and get back to its roots, but if it insists on maintaining the status quo of big government, it will blow up on its own, with little help from me. I am much more interested in the survival of the conservative movement than I am the Republican party, and that requires that I do not support GOP candidates who are moderate or liberal, because when they are in office, they give conservatism a bad name.

    But I haven’t had to “walk back” anything. When you misquote me and I point it out, that means that my position hasn’t changed; you are just lying to people. I have been consistent in these views since before I started posting on RedState. The frustration with the Republican establishment goes back years and years, and many people know what I’m talking about. I don’t expect Paul to win anything, but I’d rather vote for him than someone who supports big government or the status quo. I liked Gary Johnson at the start of the race. He was arguably the best Republican governor of the last few decades, especially considering he governed a blue state. But he’s gotten no media attention and been locked out of the debates, while Huntsman/Santorum/Bachmann all get invitations. I have an open mind and I wish I had more candidates to choose from, because the one’s we have now don’t give me a lot of options if I want to support limited government. It certainly doesn’t have to be Paul. But it’s not going to be Romney, or anyone else who supported TARP, I can tell you that much.

  • westbrook348

    But I’m not so sure I agree with point 3. True, if people stay home, it doesn’t send to much of a message. But if the GOP hemorrhages 10-20% of the vote to a more conservative third party candidate, the party bosses have to take notice.

  • westbrook348

    It’s not about one man saving us. It’s about no longer sanctioning the spending, borrowing, moneyprinting behavior of big government Republicans with my vote.

    After watching the GOP sacrifice its principles over the last decade or more, I can’t think of any other way to force them to listen to me. Nothing seems to get through to the establishment. If I continue to play their game and help them elect “moderates,” we will never see real change.

    Stopping the bleeding is not enough. We cannot survive much longer with the status quo. Our society is collapsing. We need leaders willing to FIX our problems and make the difficult, politically unpopular choices.

    I will certainly help to elect congressmen and women who support limited government. I was very excited to see Rand Paul and Mike Lee elected. But the continued incompetency of Boehner, Cantor, and McConnell just reinforces my desire to never help elect a squish again.

  • westbrook348

    Whether it’s Ron Paul or someone else.

    Statistically it will matter. If he ran third party, he’d get 10-20% of the popular vote. So please, do not nominate a RINO, because it will just make a GOP loss more likely. And with Obama’s poll numbers as bad as they are, it would be an absolute waste of an opportunity.

  • acat

    I’m as opposed to nominating a RINO as you, but I don’t see Ron Paul as anything resembling the answer.

    Mew

  • pttx333

    .

  • lizzie

    I never voted Hillary for Senate in 2006, and cast a protest vote for the Green party candidate.

    In 2008, I voted Obama in the NY primary because Idid not want another Clinton to lose Congress again. But then I entered the world of Obama online, and discovered they did not want fiscal conservatives, or anyone over 50, and that the entire campaign website was a con for raising money. ZERO economic team until the O hired a team of Clinton’s Rubins.

    By September 2008, I saw McCain as being closer to my view on foreign policy (it is a Hobbesian world) and had an excellent advisor in Douglas Holz-Eakin.

    First time I ever voted GOP for president since my first vote in 1972.
    I am still a registered and very disillusioned dem whose vote may count because New York does vote GOP when given a real choice (Reagan in 1980 because of the Jewish and Catholic vote)

    So, I am the voter any GOP nominee needs. The dems have exiled all of us fiscal conservatives, and Obama has proved his absence of leadership – he cannot even lead the dems, let alone conduct foreign policy, and is still clueless aboutthe economy.

    I will NOT vote for Romney the Waffle, with the blood of private equity destruction on his hands.
    Nor will I vote for Cain, the know-it-all-who-knows-nothing.

    I WANT to vote for Perry, maybe with Daniels as VP

    I will vote for Gingrich, or Bachmann.

    So, please do not think all you need is to rally behind any nominee.

    You guys need independents and fiscal conservative dems who no longer want abortion to be the issue that divides America.

    America does NOT have four more years to muddle through.

    I no longer want to live in this America, and will not want to live anywhere if there is no sane choice in 2012. If I have to, I shall write in Mike Mullen for president, and then die when my heart breaks into a million pieces.

  • jrmax13

    Lizzie, you are spot-on when saying that America does not have 4 more year to muddle through. I am not familiar with Mike Mullen. I will have to look into him. This GOP primary season is really just heating up and we are already seeing the mean-spirited dirty tricks beginning to surface. Blech.
    Politicians: you can’t live with ‘em & you can’t live with ‘em

  • pttx333

    desperately need all of you who will consider our side. Full disclosure here: I am a long-time Perry supporter and have voted for him every time he ran. I do not believe you would be disappointed in him – what you see is what you get. He is a straight shooter, a good Governor in this state, and I’m very proud of him. Please do some searching around on this site, and you will learn a lot. I’ve been here on RS only a couple of months and have discovered many things that were previously unknown to me. And I consider myself to be a political junkie!

    At any rate, do not despair. We MUST take back our country before it is too late, and the Dems are NOT the answer. They have lost their way, and it began many years ago.

  • noveldog9

    None of these candidates really appeal to me. Sarah Palin was my number one choice with Donald Trump at number two. Michelle Bachmann has some appeal, but then all of the candidates have some appeal.

    Could we just please lop off an arm here, and a leg there, maybe a torso that is not too fat, perhaps a head from over there, and then one with a heart for the people, and end up with one complete body who is a God feraing, honest, patriotic, tender hearted, but firm candidate who will serve the people, not some group of specail interest folks. Could we do that? I guess not?

    Well maybe they will draft one at the convention, I sure so hope so?

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    My initial up-thread response to Finrod’s question is what is known as a “Joke”.

    Although Ron Paul will never, ever, be the Republican nominee, I would, of course, vote for him should he ever be Barack Obama’s opponent.

    As I say, though, such a proposition will never, ever come to pass, so it’s a waste of time to address it. But, nonetheless, I would vote for him in the general election against President Obama.. I would never support his candidacy beyond my vote, but, yes, I would vote for him. As I said, I would vote for Pee Wee Herman against Barack Obama.

    Unless Barack Obama is as weakened an opponent as Jimmy Carter was in 1980 (a definite possibility) by the time the election rolled around (and John Anderson’s “Independent” run was thus a nullity), folks that would support a third-party candidacy of Ron Paul’s are thus as destructive as Obama himself: It will hand the victory to Obama.

    And, for the record: My responses to your statements cannot be taken out of context, or “misquoted” by virtue of the fact that any casual reader can read them in their entirety– they stand or fall on their own. No “lying” has taken place. Readers can judge for themselves the context and the tenor, and I respect their ability to do so.

    As I say, it is all simply illustrative of the general disposition of an average, passionate Ron Paul supporter, and the danger such folks can pose.

  • Change Jar Conservative

    So you’d prefer Obama’s spending to Romney’s spending … interesting call.

  • Joshua Persons

    You realize that almost every state provides most of its delegates to the RNC through a primary election system, right? Using polling places open to the public? And that these primary elections are free? And furthermore, that the results of these primaries were publicly published?

    It wasn’t backroom shenanigans that kept Ron Paul from being a factor. He didn’t get the votes.

  • streiff

    Paul and Cain won’t get my vote or support.

  • steve010

    he needs to win FL, NC, VA, OH and NH. NC not a problem, the majority of the (R)s and independents in FL love the guy, Will anyone bet the house that Barry beats Willard in NH? VA’s map is all red and pretty squishy in the middle and Barry’s upside down there, that leaves OH and they love the Mittster in the Buckeye State. and maybe MI and PA. but I’ll vote for any of the gop and bring in at least 3 other voters that wouldn’t have voted normally.