Dear "Conservatives"....

[Meister]

I love it when conservatives have to settle.

You would. And the process has indeed given us a poor set of choices.

But there is still a pronounced difference between the two candidates. And that difference is more than sufficient to justify a vote for Mitt over the Bumbler in Chief.

Yeah, and the difference in Romney is going to be enough that people decide to just stick with what they have. Dude is seriously a turnoff to average working class people.

Your opinion would be wrong...unless your talking about unions.
Too many unemployed, debt is too high, out of control spending, and a weak economy
is what the "working class people" will be voting on.

 

[dblack]

Go ahead and vote for Obama again...it's your choice.
Me? I don't like the path Obama has taken us and where he wants to take us, so there is the difference in choice for me.

You know I'm not voting for Obama. You're trying to suggest that not voting Romney is the same as voting for Obama and it's just not. I won't pb voting for either of the corporatists on the ballot.

Let's see how far your vote gets you with your choice. Like I said, I don't like the path that Obama is taking us.

What I'm hoping my choice gets us is a Republican defeat. And with that a real reason for the party to take libertarian values seriously in the future - or else drop the phony rhetoric from their sales pitch. They simply don't come through.

 

[The T]

I love it when conservatives have to settle.

You would. And the process has indeed given us a poor set of choices.

But there is still a pronounced difference between the two candidates. And that difference is more than sufficient to justify a vote for Mitt over the Bumbler in Chief.

Yeah, and the difference in Romney is going to be enough that people decide to just stick with what they have. Dude is seriously a turnoff to average working class people.

Just can't gather strength to get past the class warfare nonsense, can you? Individuality I take it matters NOT in the lexicon of your thinking, does it?

 

[Liability]

I love it when conservatives have to settle.

You would. And the process has indeed given us a poor set of choices.

But there is still a pronounced difference between the two candidates. And that difference is more than sufficient to justify a vote for Mitt over the Bumbler in Chief.

Yeah, and the difference in Romney is going to be enough that people decide to just stick with what they have. Dude is seriously a turnoff to average working class people.

I sense you dire concern that Mitt might get President Obama re-elected.

 

[Meister]

You know I'm not voting for Obama. You're trying to suggest that not voting Romney is the same as voting for Obama and it's just not. I won't pb voting for either of the corporatists on the ballot.

Let's see how far your vote gets you with your choice. Like I said, I don't like the path that Obama is taking us.

What I'm hoping my choice gets us is a Republican defeat. And with that a real reason for the party to take libertarian values seriously in the future - or else drop the phony rhetoric from their sales pitch. They simply don't come through.

So YOU want Obama for a second term....being a libertarian? Too funny, dblack.
When Obama gets done with us there won't be enough self reliant people off of the government teet to get to your "so-called" objective.

 

[Liability]

In other words? Parties mean squat.

I don't think it means quite that much. But at the very least it shows recent academic support for the proposition (contrary to greenbeard's empty flatulence) that the American Electorate is effectively center-right.

My comment was based upon another poster's assertion that "Republican means Conservative" which is utter nonsense. But I do gather the gist of your post none the less.

Ok. I agree with you that Republican does not "mean" conservative.

On the other hand, I do believe that Democrat = liberal. So, by comparison, GOP does more or less leave conservative as the default value.

 

[dblack]

Go ahead and vote for Obama again...it's your choice.
Me? I don't like the path Obama has taken us and where he wants to take us, so there is the difference in choice for me.

You know I'm not voting for Obama. You're trying to suggest that not voting Romney is the same as voting for Obama and it's just not. I won't pb voting for either of the corporatists on the ballot.

well, actually yes it is..

Nonsense. You could equally claim that not voting for Obama is the same as voting for Romney. I've been accused of both.

 

[The T]

I don't think it means quite that much. But at the very least it shows recent academic support for the proposition (contrary to greenbeard's empty flatulence) that the American Electorate is effectively center-right.

My comment was based upon another poster's assertion that "Republican means Conservative" which is utter nonsense. But I do gather the gist of your post none the less.

Ok. I agree with you that Republican does not "mean" conservative.

On the other hand, I do believe that Democrat = liberal. So, by comparison, GOP does more or less leave conservative as the default value.

Or Right of Left?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Romney's lined up Bork to help him pick the next supreme court justice.

That alone should send shivers up and down people's spine.

It is indeed a frightening prospect, placing our very civil liberties in jeopardy.

Some of you still believe Obama is a liberal?

Even after seeing him sign both the ACA and NDAA, you still think Obama is a liberal? Even after keeping GITMO open?

Which doesn’t take into consideration the fact that Obama has appointed justices to the Supreme Court who would follow the Constitution and its case law and vote in favor of someone petitioning for release from illegal detention, thus striking down the NDAA as un-Constitutional. And Obama would continue to make such appointments in the future.

Romney/Bork would not make such appointments.

So is the point here that "real" conservatives won't vote for Romney, either they'll vote Libertarian or not vote at all?

Or perhaps there is no such thing as a ‘conservative’ to begin with, there are only partisan republicans.

 

[dblack]

Let's see how far your vote gets you with your choice. Like I said, I don't like the path that Obama is taking us.

What I'm hoping my choice gets us is a Republican defeat. And with that a real reason for the party to take libertarian values seriously in the future - or else drop the phony rhetoric from their sales pitch. They simply don't come through.

So YOU want Obama for a second term....being a libertarian? Too funny, dblack.
When Obama gets done with us there won't be enough self reliant people off of the government teet to get to your "so-called" objective.

A Romney victory would BE a second term for Obama - with the potential of a third.

Listen, clearly you believe there is a significant difference between Obama and Romney. But from a libertarian perspective, there isn't. Whatever mildly more conservative leanings Romney may possess are offset by the fact that he'd have a more compliant Congress to work with. He'd be pushing most of the same policies of Obama - and actually passing them. The one thing I'll give props to the Republicans on is they're a damned good opposition party. The Democrats suck in that role.

So ultimately, it's a wash. And I certainly won't waste an opportunity to support a real libertarian alternative on a wash.

 

[Foxfyre]

I wonder how many who claim they won't vote for Romney really do want Barack Obama to be re-elected? The Paul supporters have to know that a vote for a third party candidate is effectively a vote for Obama. Could they just be too ashamed to admit that is the game plan to punish those who won't support Ron Paul?

 

[The T]

I wonder how many who claim they won't vote for Romney really do want Barack Obama to be re-elected? The Paul supporters have to know that a vote for a third party candidate is effectively a vote for Obama. Could they just be too ashamed to admit that is the game plan to punish those who won't support Ron Paul?

And take us down as I'm sure Dr. Paul wouldn't want out of some mission of vendetta...? [Get EVEN with 'em? I'll Show YOU]?

Boggles the mind the motivation. Take down the Republic, ruin millions of lives in the process, because someone didn't get thier way by being nominated?

 

[WillowTree]

You know I'm not voting for Obama. You're trying to suggest that not voting Romney is the same as voting for Obama and it's just not. I won't pb voting for either of the corporatists on the ballot.

Let's see how far your vote gets you with your choice. Like I said, I don't like the path that Obama is taking us.

What I'm hoping my choice gets us is a Republican defeat. And with that a real reason for the party to take libertarian values seriously in the future - or else drop the phony rhetoric from their sales pitch. They simply don't come through.

so you want a Republican defeat but yet you say you're not for obama? you're so full of shit.

 

[WillowTree]

You know I'm not voting for Obama. You're trying to suggest that not voting Romney is the same as voting for Obama and it's just not. I won't pb voting for either of the corporatists on the ballot.

well, actually yes it is..

Nonsense. You could equally claim that not voting for Obama is the same as voting for Romney. I've been accused of both.

not nonsense. this is a two man race. You have to pick either Romney or Obama.. a vote cast for anyone other than Romney will be a vote for obama. anyone with a hint of gray matter would understand how that works.

 

[sfcalifornia]

I wonder how many who claim they won't vote for Romney really do want Barack Obama to be re-elected? The Paul supporters have to know that a vote for a third party candidate is effectively a vote for Obama. Could they just be too ashamed to admit that is the game plan to punish those who won't support Ron Paul?

And take us down as I'm sure Dr. Paul wouldn't want out of some mission of vendetta...? [Get EVEN with 'em? I'll Show YOU]?

Boggles the mind the motivation. Take down the Republic, ruin millions of lives in the process, because someone didn't get thier way by being nominated?

You mean, the Republicans were willing to throw the entire country into financial chaos over a symbolic debt ceiling limit last year simply because they didn't get their way and it's only just now your mind is boggled?

You weren't boggled when the Republicans refused to extend payroll tax cuts for the poor and middle class because they weren't getting their way over a completely unrelated issue attached to the bill, right up to the last minute?

Paul's vendetta, if there is one, shouldn't come as a surprise...... Even Gingrich held out far beyond a reasonable length of time, racking up debt and taxpayer's expense.....

 

[Taylee]

LOL! I support ANYBODY BUT Obama! And yeah, that would even include that loon Paul, if necessary.

Now....stop trying to insult your fellow cons and prepare yourself to vote against Obie this November.

 

[Taylee]

He's a ""tough"" Democrat. Only....

there ain't no such thing.....lol.

 

[Foxfyre]

I wonder how many who claim they won't vote for Romney really do want Barack Obama to be re-elected? The Paul supporters have to know that a vote for a third party candidate is effectively a vote for Obama. Could they just be too ashamed to admit that is the game plan to punish those who won't support Ron Paul?

And take us down as I'm sure Dr. Paul wouldn't want out of some mission of vendetta...? [Get EVEN with 'em? I'll Show YOU]?

Boggles the mind the motivation. Take down the Republic, ruin millions of lives in the process, because someone didn't get thier way by being nominated?

I am waiting for Ron Paul to do the right thing and pledge support for Romney once Romney clinches the nomination. If Gingrich and Santorum fail to do so, it will be a clear message that neither of them were honest about much of anything.

I have a great deal of respect for Congressman Paul and have admired his tenaciousness in what he believes and have appreciated some excellent ideas he has put out there to reform the economy. CG can testify that she and I have had numerous private discussions re Romney whom she has supported for some time and who was not at all my first choice to be the nomineel. But no way am I willing to have a hissy fit and throw the country under the bus just because my preferred candidate(s) did not win the nomination.

I don't have any serious deal breaking issues with Romney and, as previously posted, given his proven record and accomplishments, he is heads and shoulders above a Barack Obama or any other leftist who aspires to high office. On his worst day, and in a most profound liberal lapse, he is still right of Obama.

So if Ron Paul throws his support to Romney, will his admirers follow suit?

 

[WillowTree]

I wonder how many who claim they won't vote for Romney really do want Barack Obama to be re-elected? The Paul supporters have to know that a vote for a third party candidate is effectively a vote for Obama. Could they just be too ashamed to admit that is the game plan to punish those who won't support Ron Paul?

And take us down as I'm sure Dr. Paul wouldn't want out of some mission of vendetta...? [Get EVEN with 'em? I'll Show YOU]?

Boggles the mind the motivation. Take down the Republic, ruin millions of lives in the process, because someone didn't get thier way by being nominated?

You mean, the Republicans were willing to throw the entire country into financial chaos over a symbolic debt ceiling limit last year simply because they didn't get their way and it's only just now your mind is boggled?

You weren't boggled when the Republicans refused to extend payroll tax cuts for the poor and middle class because they weren't getting their way over a completely unrelated issue attached to the bill, right up to the last minute?

Paul's vendetta, if there is one, shouldn't come as a surprise...... Even Gingrich held out far beyond a reasonable length of time, racking up debt and taxpayer's expense.....

listen dumb little sister,, you got your payroll tax cuts,, it's going to deplete your social security funds later down the road.. you're too stupid to know it now but the democrats cut your throat with that one, and you're just dumb enough to call them heroes.

 

[WillowTree]

LOL! I support ANYBODY BUT Obama! And yeah, that would even include that loon Paul, if necessary.

Now....stop trying to insult your fellow cons and prepare yourself to vote against Obie this November.

Thankfully, we'll be spared that humiliation.