The "RINO" Thread

[Si modo]

And that's why the GOP won't go for another moderate. 2016 could be like 2008 in reverse.

The GOP can't even get Republicans to vote for a strict conservative. How do they expect to get all of America to vote for them?

Here in Wisconsin democrats can vote in republican primaries. Not sure how many other states are like that but, there's your answer.

Prohibit democrats from voting in republican primaries.

In Michigan, they can, too. But each state decides how they will handle their primary elections.

 

[FJO]

As soon as the RNC picked Romney to be their candidate; I knew Obama would win the election.

What the Republicans need is a Reaganesque type of individual who is a real conservative.

And who is a true leader and flag bearer of conservative views and values.

As soon as I saw the inordinately high number of insanely and thoroughly egotistical and delusional Republican "contenders" I knew Obama would win.

A bruising and cruel primary was in the offing, while Obama and Axelrod snickered and enjoyed it in the background.

All those "contenders" should have gone in a large room, somewhere, toss dice, play elimination chess/scrabble/boxing match, draw cards, or choose any other legal method to arrive with ONE contender, thereby saving millions of dollars on primaries and untold electoral damage by screwing each other.

And as it turned out, THEMSELVES.

November 6th, 2012 might have turned out differently.

 

[Gadawg73]

Do we want the moral police or fiscal conservatives leading the party.
Boils down to that and nothing else.

 

[Gadawg73]

As soon as the RNC picked Romney to be their candidate; I knew Obama would win the election.

What the Republicans need is a Reaganesque type of individual who is a real conservative.

And who is a true leader and flag bearer of conservative views and values.

As soon as I saw the inordinately high number of insanely and thoroughly egotistical and delusional Republican "contenders" I knew Obama would win.

A bruising and cruel primary was in the offing, while Obama and Axelrod snickered and enjoyed it in the background.

All those "contenders" should have gone in a large room, somewhere, toss dice, play elimination chess/scrabble/boxing match, draw cards, or choose any other legal method to arrive with ONE contender, thereby saving millions of dollars on primaries and untold electoral damage by screwing each other.

And as it turned out, THEMSELVES.

November 6th, 2012 might have turned out differently.

Obama was the incumbent with NO opposition.
Mickey Mouse could have received more votes than Obama with his 4 year record of nothing if Obama was not the incumbent.
Obama ran on nothing because he could.

 

[Si modo]

Do we want the moral police or fiscal conservatives leading the party.
Boils down to that and nothing else.

^^^ That.

 

[Missourian]

Gay marriage? Who cares as it affects no one?
Abortion? Laws never stopped it and women were never prosecuted when it was illegal.
Those 2 issues alone bring in another 5% gain.

And lose 40%...

This math is not going well.

 

[Darkwind]

My brother is a "conservative". We have decided to avoid discussing politics at family gatherings in order to keep things pleasant. He struggles with this, however.

Yesterday, my daughter.....who is his favoriite niece, was talking about a freind of hers who recently passed away after a half-year fight with cancer. She told him that she heard that we would probably find a cure for cancer before long.....expressing hope for the future.

Well, he exclaimed, " I hope not".

My daughter was rocked. She asked him why he felt that way. Her voice trembled.

He said that we don't have enough money to support our population as it is and we can't afford to have cancer cured.

Not sure things will ever be the same between them.

I say you are full of shit and your little story is just that. A made up story.

There is NO Conservative value system in which it is okay to kill or allow people to die because we have to many people, regardless of the means of death.

This is just more examples of the social rot that infects this country. People like you, using either made up lies, or tragedy of others, to foster a personal ideology.

A decent person who made these remarks wouldn't be able to look their loved ones in the eye.

 

[Toro]

Romney WAS a moderate.

This fact tumbles the RINO house of cards...and should steer the conversation in an entirely different direction.

Romney ran on

- cutting taxes
- cutting spending
- increasing defense spending
- closer ties with Israel and a more hard line on Iran
- repeal Obamacare

He also picked as his running mate the guy whose signature item is a radical restructuring of Medicare designed to limit spending on healthcare.

What was moderate about that? That may look moderate to the far right but it looks conservative to everyone else.

You define yourself as moderate, and you believe in these things, do you not?

So this proves nothing.

Romney was a moderate.

To deny it is foolishness.

And the to say? "Well we picked this guy, but it the social conservatives ...who didn't want him in the first place... it's their fault moderates didn't vote for him in the general election..." is total and complete hogwash.

This was YOUR candidate.

Fiscally conservative, and not socially conservative.

He was a pro-choice governor. "On a personal basis, I don't favor abortion. However, as governor of the commonwealth, I will protect a woman's right to choose under the laws of the country and the commonwealth. That's the same position I've had for many years."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governorship_of_Mitt_Romney#cite_note-i2000-a-142

He stated in 2002 "All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of their sexual orientation. While he does not support gay marriage, Mitt Romney believes domestic partnership status should be recognized in a way that includes the potential for health benefits and rights of survivorship."

He signed an Assault weapons ban into law...and voiced support for reinstating the federal ban.

And those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Now, deny it.

Let's hear it.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governorship_of_Mitt_Romney#cite_note-108

I'm sorry. I thought this was 2012 not 1994. My mistake.

Now, if you want to talk about 2012 and the 2012 election and the platform he ran on, feel free.

There was a reason why both sides barely made a peep about Romney's time as governor. You know that, right?

 

[FJO]

I voted for Romney.
Unfortunately the Republican right wing have turned into cry baby mama's boys that stay home if they do not get their way on EVERY issue.

I kind of agree. God will punish those fundamentalists who stayed at home because they just could not support and vote for a Mormon.

They figured a closet Muslim was better.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Romney USED to be a moderate. But the far right required a 6 year period of genuflection before considering him for the nomination. (Same deal with McCain).

In 2008 and again in 2012 they took candidates who had a real chance of winning and forced them so far right that they no longer stood a chance. Not only do most people not like the far right influence but it also cost these candidates credibility. No one could say what the heck they really stood for anymore.

Pretending that the reason they lost was because they were "too moderate" is self delusion at it's absolute worst.

 

[Missourian]

Do we want the moral police or fiscal conservatives leading the party.
Boils down to that and nothing else.

^^^ That.

That's fine.

Say goodbye to the south.

You can just add "North Dakota" to "Grand Old Party"...as that will be the only Red state on the map come election day.

 

[Freewill]

The truth is what Romney said, he was exactly right, it has gotten to the point where the Democrats have convinced the working poor that they need to vote for them or else. How can anyone defend against such ingrained BS? So the democrats start out with a 47 percent lead in all the elections.

Now, the question is how does the Republican party counter that impression? I think it is impossible as witnessed by the last election. What did Obama run on? It wasn't his vision cause I never heard his vision, except forward. Forward to where? It could not possibly be on his record, 6 trillion in debt is not something to brag about. Of course he did brag about how bad things would have been but that is idiotic people should see how things are, not how Obama tells us how bad they COULD have been.

So what he ran on is deriding the very people he is the 1 percenters. It started out by making fun of Mrs. Romney and MS. IT was the nastiest and most dishonest campaign I can remember. The democrats count on an uniformed electorate. It is my opinion Romney and the Republicans didn't tell the story that needed told that is why they lost.

It certainly will be hard for Republicans to win when the MSM has become the propaganda ministry of the Democrat party.

Since Carter Republicans have won 5 presidential elections and the democrats 4 so I don't see that as being lobe sided. This BS of the demise of the Republican party is just another Propaganda storyline from the DNC. What the Republicans better not do is become Democrats, if they do we are certainly done as a nation.

 

[Gadawg73]

Gay marriage? Who cares as it affects no one?
Abortion? Laws never stopped it and women were never prosecuted when it was illegal.
Those 2 issues alone bring in another 5% gain.

And lose 40%...

This math is not going well.

40% of the party do not mix religious beliefs with politics.
If it is then we should lose as the other 60% will leave anyway.
And for good reason as religion has no place in politics be it Republican or Democrat.
Those 40% need to leave and form their own party if that is the case.
Because with them, and I believe it to be more like 15-20% if that, we lose every time.
Why?
The Founders understood why.

 

[ba1614]

Romney ran on

- cutting taxes
- cutting spending
- increasing defense spending
- closer ties with Israel and a more hard line on Iran
- repeal Obamacare

He also picked as his running mate the guy whose signature item is a radical restructuring of Medicare designed to limit spending on healthcare.

What was moderate about that? That may look moderate to the far right but it looks conservative to everyone else.

That's it? That's how low you set the bar?

It's not where I set the bar that matters, Frank.

Off topic but although your Canadian boys spanked Germany today, they better play better to get into the gold medal game.
And why did they send the best of the 3 goalies home? That Suban fella has looked awful shaky against Finland, and he didn't look to steady today either.

 

[Missourian]

Romney ran on

- cutting taxes
- cutting spending
- increasing defense spending
- closer ties with Israel and a more hard line on Iran
- repeal Obamacare

He also picked as his running mate the guy whose signature item is a radical restructuring of Medicare designed to limit spending on healthcare.

What was moderate about that? That may look moderate to the far right but it looks conservative to everyone else.

You define yourself as moderate, and you believe in these things, do you not?

So this proves nothing.

Romney was a moderate.

To deny it is foolishness.

And the to say? "Well we picked this guy, but it the social conservatives ...who didn't want him in the first place... it's their fault moderates didn't vote for him in the general election..." is total and complete hogwash.

This was YOUR candidate.

Fiscally conservative, and not socially conservative.

He was a pro-choice governor. "On a personal basis, I don't favor abortion. However, as governor of the commonwealth, I will protect a woman's right to choose under the laws of the country and the commonwealth. That's the same position I've had for many years."

He stated in 2002 "All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of their sexual orientation. While he does not support gay marriage, Mitt Romney believes domestic partnership status should be recognized in a way that includes the potential for health benefits and rights of survivorship."

He signed an Assault weapons ban into law...and voiced support for reinstating the federal ban.

And those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Now, deny it.

Let's hear it.

I'm sorry. I thought this was 2012 not 1994. My mistake.

Now, if you want to talk about 2012 and the 2012 election and the platform he ran on, feel free.

There was a reason why both sides barely made a peep about Romney's time as governor. You know that, right?

I man isn't what he says...he is what he does...whether it's 1622 or 2040.

You're tap dancing around the issue.

Romney was a moderate.

He was much closer to your political philosophy than he was mine.

I supported him anyway, as I believed...and still believe he was a better choice that Obama.

Would you have done the same if a candidate won the primary that was closer to my political philosophy than yours?

 

[Gadawg73]

Believe me, in Georgia we had to run off the Pat Robertson lunatic cry baby "my way or the highway" KOOKS back when Bush I won the primary here and they insisted we cheat and make Robertson the winner here in delegates.
Thank Bob Barr for sending those Bible thumping cheats home crying.
But we had to send 2 different delegations to NO for the convention and were the laughing stocks of the GOP.
Bush received the most votes in Georgia for that primary but the "God wants Robertson" 20% or 40% or whatever % would not bow, election results or not.
The majority of the voters be damned they claimed, God wanted Robertson.
I am sick of these know it all higher than thou crazies.
This is the mentality of the Christian Coalition as the leader of that mob and Robertson campaign chairman back then was a convicted felon that could not even vote in Georgia to begin with.
Time we run them all off and quit courting their baby asses each election.
Barry Goldwater predicted this a long time ago as he despised them.

 

[Si modo]

Do we want the moral police or fiscal conservatives leading the party.
Boils down to that and nothing else.

^^^ That.

That's fine.

Say goodbye to the south.

You can just add "North Dakota" to "Grand Old Party"...as that will be the only Red state on the map come election day.

"The South", meaning the religious right, should go back to the Democratic Party....they're the true authoritarians.

 

[Missourian]

Gay marriage? Who cares as it affects no one?
Abortion? Laws never stopped it and women were never prosecuted when it was illegal.
Those 2 issues alone bring in another 5% gain.

And lose 40%...

This math is not going well.

40% of the party do not mix religious beliefs with politics.
If it is then we should lose as the other 60% will leave anyway.
And for good reason as religion has no place in politics be it Republican or Democrat.
Those 40% need to leave and form their own party if that is the case.
Because with them, and I believe it to be more like 15-20% if that, we lose every time.
Why?
The Founders understood why.

You live in Georgia...how many voters would stay home in Georgia rather than vote for a pro-choice, pro gay marriage, pro-gun control candidate?

Be honest.

 

[Missourian]

^^^ That.

That's fine.

Say goodbye to the south.

You can just add "North Dakota" to "Grand Old Party"...as that will be the only Red state on the map come election day.

"The South", meaning the religious right, should go back to the Democratic Party....they're the true authoritarians.

But we're the ones pushing the moderates out.

Oops.

 

[Toro]

You define yourself as moderate, and you believe in these things, do you not?

So this proves nothing.

Romney was a moderate.

To deny it is foolishness.

And the to say? "Well we picked this guy, but it the social conservatives ...who didn't want him in the first place... it's their fault moderates didn't vote for him in the general election..." is total and complete hogwash.

This was YOUR candidate.

Fiscally conservative, and not socially conservative.

He was a pro-choice governor. "On a personal basis, I don't favor abortion. However, as governor of the commonwealth, I will protect a woman's right to choose under the laws of the country and the commonwealth. That's the same position I've had for many years."

He stated in 2002 "All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of their sexual orientation. While he does not support gay marriage, Mitt Romney believes domestic partnership status should be recognized in a way that includes the potential for health benefits and rights of survivorship."

He signed an Assault weapons ban into law...and voiced support for reinstating the federal ban.

And those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Now, deny it.

Let's hear it.

I'm sorry. I thought this was 2012 not 1994. My mistake.

Now, if you want to talk about 2012 and the 2012 election and the platform he ran on, feel free.

There was a reason why both sides barely made a peep about Romney's time as governor. You know that, right?

I man isn't what he says...he is what he does...whether it's 1622 or 2040.

You're tap dancing around the issue.

Romney was a moderate.

He was much closer to your political philosophy than he was mine.

I supported him anyway, as I believed...and still believe he was a better choice that Obama.

Would you have done the same if a candidate won the primary that was closer to my political philosophy than yours?

Romney's platform was a conservative platform. That the far right sees him as a moderate does not mean that the rest of the country did. Of course, there were many reasons why he lost, but the fact that he was hammered by Obama amongst the moderates suggests that he and the Republican Party were too far right.

I wouldn't have supported Gingrich or Santorum. I might have supported Cain and probably would have voted for Daniels had he run.

edit - and I might have voted for Ron Paul