Obama Ad: Cheer Up, Wingnuts! Romney Is Severely Conservative

Kind of an advertisement for Romney -- in conservative circles, anyway.

Ramesh Ponuru wrote some time ago that Obama would have a choice of portraying Romney as either a flip-flopper with no principles or an extremist conservative ideologue.

Can't really do both. As you push on the "wishy-washy opportunist narrative," it undermines the "rigid ideologue" one.

Ponuru figured, correctly as it turns out, Obama would go with the "extremist" meme.

There is a way to do both, and Obama will try it: He can claim that Romney has no core but is a mercenary opportunist, and his only chance for power is to be a "severely conservative" extremist, and hence has flip-flopped to the extremist position.

I don't know if you can really grab both of those, though.

Obama's running around the country branding Romney as Barry Goldwater on steroids (if only).

The president, campaigning in the critical swing state, delivered three speeches that sounded some common themes. The main one was that Romney and today's Republican Party have reverted back to the unreconstructed movement conservatism of Goldwater, one in which nothing much else matters but protecting the rich and shrinking government to a size not seen since the Eisenhower era.

Obama tossed back in Romney's face the line that the former Massachusetts governor has been taking during the primary campaign in order to fight the charge--made most effectively by Santorum--that he and the president are too similar: that this is a historic election between candidates with two fundamentally different concepts of government. "There are contrasting visions here," Obama said at one fundraiser event. "And this election will probably have the biggest contrast that we've seen maybe since the Johnson-Goldwater election -- maybe before that."

And a new video strives mightily to convince people that Romney is a conservative's dream.


Will this work?

Let me tell you something I like about Romney: His bite is worse than his bark.

Contrast Romney's over-cautious (to many) style of campaigning, where he refuses to call Obama a "socialist," to Gingrich's statement that Obama is a socialist, and a radical, and captured by "Kenyan colonial" thinking.

Most people do not get into the details of policy. Even we here at The Q do not know (by and large) the fine details of the Ryan Budget. We know the basic parameters, and the basic impulses, but I cannot -- and I expect many of you cannot -- specify the level of subsidization for 65 year olds' purchase of health insurance.

I would guess it's around $8,000, with higher subsidies for older people, averaging out to around $11,000. But this a guess.

Now if you know, why the hell aren't you blogging here?

But I imagine most people don't know.

Most people use tone and persona and broad thematic statements as proxies for actual policy details, which they neither have the time nor inclination to analyze.

Mark Steyn noted of Gingrich that he was the worst of all possible worlds, someone whose policy impulses were actually moderate-ish (not moderate, mind you, he's a conservative all right; but moderately so) but whose rhetoric was hard-charging "extremist."

Now, what does the lazy public gather from this situation? That he's a technocratic future with a lot of policy widgets, many of which are not "conservative" but merely (possibly) better than the current bureaucratic model, who uses sharp language to attack his Democratic opponents?

No. The lazy public only looks at the very surface of things and says "kind of extreme."

Now, Romney is open to this sort of Surface Level Attack, all right, because he did use boneheaded language like "severely conservative."

Nonetheless, he has tried, mostly successfully, to keep his rhetoric moderate-sounding.

His actual policy profile (as he's announced it during the campaign) is solidly right, however.

Whereas Gingrich's bark might have oversold his bite, Romney's bark is less threatening than his bite.

I think that's a good position to be in.

I know people yearn for the guy whose policies are super-duper TrueCon, and whose rhetoric is 100% honest in also being super-duper TrueCon (and aggressively so), and whose rhetorical powers and charisma permit him to profit from such a combination, but honestly, that last one is a high hurdle to, um, hurdle, and you're not going to get many Ronald Reagans in a century. Most candidate's political powers will be far more modest.

So given that we did not have a candidate with a level of charisma and command measured in the gigawatts, it seems to me that it is best, then, that a candidate projects a moderate image and tone while actually committing himself to a solidly-right campaign platform. We get most of the policy choices we prefer, and the independents get someone who doesn't trip their lazy, surface-level "extremist," um, tripwire.

He's not by any means a perfect candidate. But I think he'll do.

Posted by: Ace at 02:16 PM



Comments

1 We need a Zimmerman thread for our knowledgeless premature ranting.

Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 02:18 PM (GTbGH)

2 OT: it would appear they are going to charge Zimmerman in Trayvon Martin's death.

Posted by: Mister Christopher at April 11, 2012 02:19 PM (DQhAB)

3
MSNBC Current headline: "Can Romney Put the Brusing Primary Behond Him?"
A: Not if we here at MFM can help it.

If Mitt can make the case for conservatism like he did after the Wi primary, then he can catch fire. The moderates can be convinced that Obama's government state is not the America that we want.

Posted by: California Red at April 11, 2012 02:19 PM (DXTKe)

4 ROMNEY 2012: I think he'll do.

That would be on my bumpersticker, if I allowed stickers on my bumper.

Posted by: Boulder Toilet Hobo at April 11, 2012 02:19 PM (QTHTd)

5 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable tyrant.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) SMOD 2012 at April 11, 2012 02:20 PM (8y9MW)

6 Good ad. He's got my vote.

Posted by: Come And Take It at April 11, 2012 02:20 PM (8Yc/9)

7 "Kind of an advertisement for Romney -- in conservative circles, anyway."


No...we know what he is...and what he isn't.

Like I said, Romney will now be painted as the new face of Conservatism, the Republican Party will get dragged further to the Left, and if he wins the nomination, so will the country.

Reagan Conservatism is now being painted as "fringe".

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 02:20 PM (vyS+v)

8 There has not been a repub presidential candidate with charisma since Reagan and damn few before that. Sadly, you get what you get.

Posted by: huerfano at April 11, 2012 02:21 PM (bAGA/)

9
this is post # 328328

play that numbah!

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:21 PM (jUytm)

10 Timecheck: 2pm April 10th, 2012
Its on, baby, the race is on

Posted by: Jean at April 11, 2012 02:22 PM (46qC3)

11 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: steevy at April 11, 2012 02:22 PM (6HIQG)

12 Does it matter what Romney is at this point?We know what Obama is.

Posted by: steevy at April 11, 2012 02:23 PM (6HIQG)

13 Sgt York,

I signed up to fight liberalism, not join you in your fight against reality.

Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 02:23 PM (nj1bB)

14 Romney it is, still a nice continuing attack dog as Newt would be good, perhaps not in office but used for His often useful clarity on conservatism.

Posted by: willow at April 11, 2012 02:24 PM (TomZ9)

15 Is that a DNC ad or an RNC ad?

Posted by: huerfano at April 11, 2012 02:24 PM (bAGA/)

16
The attacks from the Left will come from all angles.

Mitt will be too conservative. Too liberal. Too white. Not white enough. Too religious. Too secular.

The Left will throw all kinds of shit at the wall and let Us sort it out.

And we'll take the bait. We will argue and debate every single cockamamie charge about Romney coming from the Left.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:24 PM (jUytm)

17 There is a way to do both, and Obama will try it


********


Correct. Nothing ever stops Liberals from arguing out of both sides of their mouth.

Who is going to check them on it?

The media?

Posted by: The Mole at April 11, 2012 02:24 PM (r2PLg)

18 If you want to play Dungeons and Dragons politics in a fantasy world of your own making (where, for example, there is 70% support for your TrueCon preferences), that's fine. Go find a "Politics Role Playing Game" and stat up your Conservative Elf.

Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 02:24 PM (nj1bB)

19 Romney is the Chupacabra!!!

Posted by: DNC at April 11, 2012 02:25 PM (DQHjw)

20 Ain't gonna work. Not going to move the needle one way or the other.

Posted by: Truman North at April 11, 2012 02:25 PM (I2LwF)

21 It's the early "throw shit at walls, see what sticks" days. When they see what sticks they'll focus obsessively on that. My guess is they'll go with the "Out-of-touch Wall Street guy" schtick, but we'll see.

Posted by: joncelli, a man of gravity at April 11, 2012 02:25 PM (RD7QR)

22 of course Newt would need to be leashed a little when he goes Off. still i don't understand why we aren't supportive of Newt in general if not for President at least for having given us decent legislation back in clinton years.

Posted by: willow at April 11, 2012 02:25 PM (TomZ9)

23 Who was that guy? I like him. He's got my vote.

Posted by: Hedgehog at April 11, 2012 02:25 PM (3jGS1)

24
...and if he wins...

I love this.

Please tell me more scary stories about how awful it would be to oust Obama for Romney.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:25 PM (jUytm)

25 Romney appears to be something that Obama isn't:

Competent. And mere competence cannot be too highly rated.

Posted by: Mikey NTH at April 11, 2012 02:26 PM (hLRSq)

26 Yeah, the marching orders have been sent out: The GOP is extremely extreme!!!

I've already got two lefties on FB with their panties in a wad about Allen West pointing out that some 80 Dems in Congress are communists. *

The extreme label plays into our hands. The biggest knock against Romney is he has failed to ignite the base. While the Dems are doing this to rally their base, it'll do far more to rally the GOP.

* 70 have long been identified as members of the socialist party of America caucus.

Posted by: jimmuy at April 11, 2012 02:27 PM (kSaUf)

27
I'm thinking that Romney's bite may be worse than his bark. .....There have been some clues. ...Like him saying in one of the debates, that he would reign in the excessive government payrolls.

I say this, as a bigtime Perry supporter. ....But I have noticed little clues, that Romney might be hiding some of his conservative views in order to get elected. Which I hope is the case.

Posted by: wheatie at April 11, 2012 02:27 PM (+5U+B)

28
Next week it will be Romney is pro-homo.

The week after that it will be Romney hates gays.

The Left is gonna keep us hopping.

Stay focused.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:27 PM (jUytm)

29 "I signed up to fight liberalism, not join you in your fight against reality."

If you'd actually done that, you wouldn't be endorsing it for president.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 02:27 PM (vyS+v)

30 Barky's really gonna scare the 18-25-year-old voters by comparing Romney to Barry Goldwater - Obama was only 3 YEARS OLD when the man ran for President.

I fully expect Ezra Klein to start hyperventilating about a man who ran for Presidentalmost 50 years ago, don't you? I mean, that's ANCIENT, man!

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at April 11, 2012 02:27 PM (0xqzf)

31 >>>>Romney as Barry Goldwater on steroids

AU YEAH

Posted by: Dr. Varno at April 11, 2012 02:27 PM (pGvwm)

32
Romney is a big spender!
Romney is cut the budget to the bone!

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:28 PM (jUytm)

33 ace,
Last year Ryans subsidy was an average of $12,000 for poor seniors, it was means tested though and they never got as far as saying what income level your subsidy started declining. I don't know what it is this year but I imagine in didn't change.

Romney will do fine, probably better than fine. He is already poking holes in Obamas claims and has vowed to keep doing it. The press will have to cover it ever if it is to give him a True but False rating. By the time you get that far in the weeds Obama has lost the argument.

Posted by: robtr at April 11, 2012 02:28 PM (MtwBb)

34 Mitt Romney is not Barack Obama

Posted by: Come And Take It at April 11, 2012 02:28 PM (8Yc/9)

35
Romney is for Amnesty.
Romney hates immigrants.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:28 PM (jUytm)

36 Competent. And mere competence cannot be too highly rated. Posted by: Mikey NTH


Competence is deeply threatening to some people. I ought to know because I see it everyday.

I work for the Federal government.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 11, 2012 02:28 PM (sbV1u)

37 I'm tired of the childish, self-indulgent bleat that "This shouldn't have happened" or "The country ought not be this way."

Well, it DID happen, and the country IS this way.

Whether this blows a processor or not, Obama DID win 54% of the vote in 2008. He won ten million more votes than John McCain and Sarah Palin.

And in 2012, we have two parties, not three or four. And Obama represents one of these parties. We just had a vote, and Romney will represent the other.

THESE ARE FACTS. THIS HAPPENED. THIS CANNOT BE WISHED AWAY.

I find this flight to fantasy, this preference for alternate worlds, to be immoral.

We live in one world-- the real world. Not hypothetical words we might prefer.

To retreat into dreams is the coward's way.

Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 02:29 PM (nj1bB)

38 Sgt York, see my last comment, directly above.

I wish I could join you in the coward's path but I have more respect for myself.

Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 02:30 PM (nj1bB)

39 "Please tell me more scary stories about how awful it would be to oust Obama for Romney."

I'll let Ace's "reality" do that for me.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 02:30 PM (vyS+v)

40 Wait... I actually get to vote for Zombie Barry Goldwater?

Posted by: wooga at April 11, 2012 02:30 PM (vjyZP)

41 this smells of desperation, and how pathetic do you have to be to be afraid of Mittens?

the Dems got the RINO they wanted, so we know the RNC delivered on the thirty pieces of silver they received. let the race to bottom commence.

i'll be over in the corner drinking heavily.

Posted by: redc1c4 at April 11, 2012 02:30 PM (8MasJ)

42 It's a conservative Dwarf, Fighter/Cleric to be specific.

Posted by: Jean at April 11, 2012 02:30 PM (46qC3)

43 York why don't you just vote against Obama?

Posted by: Come And Take It at April 11, 2012 02:31 PM (8Yc/9)

44

Here's the best case (in one sentence) I can make for Mitt Romney:

If you can you live with another 4 years of Obama, don't vote for Mitt.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:31 PM (jUytm)

45 Remember, this is a replay of Obama's strategy in 2008 where he and the Old Media constantly tried to portray John McCain..........JOHN FRICKEN' MCCAIN.....as a evil arch-Conservative.

I don't think it will fly this time though. Romney won't lie down for it like McCain did.

Posted by: drawandstrike at April 11, 2012 02:32 PM (iGKkt)

46 Romney is the Chupacabra!!!
Posted by: DNC at April 11, 2012 02:25 PM (DQHjw)
*************
No, he's the Jewpacabra!!! And since he's disguised as a Mormon, that means he's even more devious than a normal Joo!!!

Posted by: MSNBC at April 11, 2012 02:32 PM (ggRof)

47
New DNC attack ad in the works, "You know which previous President also abused doggies? LBJ! ... errrrp"

Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars at April 11, 2012 02:32 PM (HmCnI)

48 It's a conservative Dwarf, Fighter/Cleric to be specific.

So, is Barry a Thief/Mage? 'cause, I could see that.

Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 02:32 PM (GTbGH)

49 It's cowardly.

As the band Rush said, "When you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."

But a timid one, one where you seek to avoid making actual decisions. A retreat into unreality.

Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 02:32 PM (nj1bB)

50 If you can you live with another 4 years of Obama, don't vote for Mitt. Posted by: Soothsayer


Careful, sooth. That constitutes an actual argument for the mouth-breathers out there.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 11, 2012 02:33 PM (sbV1u)

51 "Mitt Romney is not Barack Obama"

Just a reflection of him.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 02:33 PM (vyS+v)

52 I find this flight to fantasy, this preference for alternate worlds, to be immoral.

We live in one world-- the real world. Not hypothetical words we might prefer.

To retreat into dreams is the coward's way.
Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 02:29 PM (nj1bB

****************

Someone has to bash them over the head about just how much is on the line.


If ObamaCare is not overturned that fundamentally changes the concept of 'free will'.


Yes, it's that bad, in my opinion.

Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 02:33 PM (r2PLg)

53 the Dems got the RINO they wanted, so we know the
RNC delivered on the thirty pieces of silver they received. let the race
to bottom commence.

i'll be over in the corner drinking heavily.


Posted by: redc1c4 at April 11, 2012 02:30 PM (8MasJ)

Oh come on, what does this even mean?

Posted by: joncelli, a man of gravity at April 11, 2012 02:33 PM (RD7QR)

54 Obama is just so bad i can't comprehend not being energized for any alternative.

Posted by: steevy at April 11, 2012 02:33 PM (6HIQG)

55 ROMNEY 2012: He ain't Obama.

Posted by: Jimbo at April 11, 2012 02:33 PM (O3R/2)

56 The real Sgt. York was a pacifist who accepted reality.

Posted by: Come And Take It at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (8Yc/9)

57 Is that a DNC ad or an RNC ad?
-----------------
No kidding. I would enjoy voting for the man in that ad.

Maybe that's who Romney is. But: I don't care--I know who the JEF is and there is nothing--NOTHING--worse.

You play ads like that from here to election day and I might just be sending money to Romney--as a former Perry guy, no less!

Posted by: jimmuy at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (kSaUf)

58 I further believe that Romney hopes that Obama tries to throw him into the "Extreme" briar patch because it will seem utterly ridiculous to anyone beyond the hard-core 30% of libs who were going to vote Obama anyway. The rest of the country that doesn't obsessively follow politics will hear Obama's rhetoric about Romney and then will hear Romney, and then they will wonder, "who the hell is Obama talking about?"

Which is why Romney will pick a boring, experienced, technocratic, moderate-sounding but conservative-voting, DC insider for VP. It reinforces his own key selling point of reasonable competence and further undermines the inevitable "extremist" rhetoric that Obama will try to use.

Santorum and Gingrich have helped Romney immeasurably by making his own persona and proposals seem so moderate by comparison.

Posted by: trumpetdaddy at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (dcoFe)

59 As a dedicated newly apathetic voter, I'm not going to run to the polling place to excitedly vote for Mitt, now.

I intend to jog and vote calmly.

Posted by: jwb7605 at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (Qxe/p)

60 Sgt. York--

why did you choose that handle?

Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (r2PLg)

61 Go find a "Politics Role Playing Game" and stat up your Conservative Elf.




Well, we certainly failed our savings throw v. "moderate" Republicans.

Posted by: Insomniac at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (v+QvA)

62
And it's not enough to just hold your nose and vote for Mitt.

You need to help Mitt win. Put a sticker on your car. Tell people to vote for Mitt. Just do something to help.

Or, do nothing if you can live with another for years of Barack Uday Qsay Obama.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (jUytm)

63 At least some of these idiots must be trolls.

Posted by: steevy at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (6HIQG)

64 If you want to play Dungeons and Dragons politics in a fantasy world of your own making (where, for example, there is 70% support for your TrueCon preferences), that's fine. Go find a "Politics Role Playing Game" and stat up your Conservative Elf.
Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 02:24 PM (nj1bB)

you make a girl swoon, talking all d and d like this.

Posted by: elizabethe is at stage 5 at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (hCc/i)

65 So, is Barry a Thief/Mage? 'cause, I could see that.
Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 02:32 PM (GTbGH)
*********
He must take some severe penalities for that INT of 3.

Posted by: Pipboy 3000 at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (ggRof)

66 One of the Hot Air 'tard wranglers is sleeping on the job again and let Sgt. York escape.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (SY2Kh)

67 >>>stat up your Conservative Elf.

Unleash the Drow Assassin!

Posted by: Someone who get laid....really! at April 11, 2012 02:35 PM (NF2Bf)

68 So, you're finally going to let Mitt nut in your mouth?

Yeah, I let him too.

Posted by: John P. Squibob at April 11, 2012 02:35 PM (auLmt)

69 It's on. Ace is right. Good, bad, ugly, Romney's it. Do I have confidence in him? No. Was he my choice? No. Will I vote for him. Yeah. Do I hate Obama? With a passion! This country is going straight into the garbage dump of history. We've got to get Obama out of office, then we can try to lead Romney down the straight and narrow.

Posted by: Havedash at April 11, 2012 02:35 PM (F0WNa)

70 I wonder how many "Valuerite Screwdrivers" this baby took..

Romney,Romney Yay!.. (arrrrrg..)

Posted by: catman at April 11, 2012 02:35 PM (NYdB8)

71 i knew Barry Goldwater, and Mittens is no Goldwater.

hell, he's not even a Republican, let alone a conservative.

the Presidential race is now on between to liberal Democrats. granted, one is much more liberal than the other, but there isn't a Republican candidate in the race.

Posted by: redc1c4 at April 11, 2012 02:35 PM (8MasJ)

72 I have always resented this form of question-dodging.

There is a pattern of poor thinking that exhibits itself by ducking hypotheticals. If you give someone a question with two answers, A and B, neither optimal, there are many people who resist the hypothetical and invent an option not on the menu, "C," which is optimal (and invented by the respondent).

If you go back into my archives, you can read me complaining about this pattern of poor thinking from the outset.

There was a movement, for example, to brand this form of question-dodging, decision-avoiding as actually a form of ELEVATED critical thought, because it is often a fault of women. (Feminist legal "scholars" pushed this.)

That's what I mean by a retreat into unreality, an avoidance of decision-making.

There are two options, A and B, and you choose "C."

Well you can clap yourself on the back for having "integrity" or being an "outside the box thinker."

I just look at that as cowardly, as it stubbornly refuses to answer the actual question posed.

Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 02:36 PM (nj1bB)

73 Romney'12: Whatcha gonna do?

Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 02:36 PM (GTbGH)

74 The "Romney is an extremist" narrative will not work. .....Why? One reason is Obamacare-Romneycare. ....They want to paint that as 'extreme'?

Posted by: wheatie at April 11, 2012 02:36 PM (+5U+B)

75
Back off, ace.

I'm the Romneybot around here.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at April 11, 2012 02:36 PM (zacpj)

76 Liars lie.

Posted by: Vic at April 11, 2012 02:36 PM (YdQQY)

77 If Obama were running against LBJ, he'd be comparing LBJ to Goldwater.

Posted by: Michael at April 11, 2012 02:37 PM (Hl5ka)

78 63 At least some of these idiots must be trolls.
Posted by: steevy at April 11, 2012 02:34 PM (6HIQG)


***************


I think so.

The country still polls as majority Conservative and one of the most effective things Liberals can do is suppress the Conservative vote.

Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 02:37 PM (r2PLg)

79 19 Romney is the Chupacabra!!!
Posted by: DNC

Was it wrong that I laughed at that?

Posted by: Say What's Up Doc? at April 11, 2012 02:37 PM (b7L99)

80 >>So given that we did not have a candidate with a level of charisma and
command measured in the gigawatts, it seems to me that it is best, then,
that a candidate projects a moderate image and tone while actually
committing himself to a solidly-right campaign platform.

This.


Posted by: looking closely at April 11, 2012 02:37 PM (6Q9g2)

81 The Resignening has begun. Next up, the Enveepening, and hopefully the Debatening and then,theElectioning.

We're sure not going to have an Enthusiasmening, but that's probably okay, since I doubt the D's will, either. Or, at least, enough crucial factions of the vague association of special interests called (for convenience and propaganda's sake) The Democratic Party.

Either way, I'll enjoy being part of the Overusening.

Posted by: Lance McCormick at April 11, 2012 02:37 PM (zgHLA)

82 There is a pattern of poor thinking that exhibits itself by ducking
hypotheticals. If you give someone a question with two answers, A and
B, neither optimal, there are many people who resist the hypothetical
and invent an option not on the menu, "C," which is optimal (and
invented by the respondent).


Is this where we switch from DD to the Kobayashi Maru metaphors?

Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 11, 2012 02:37 PM (sbV1u)

83 I pegged Romney as our only real option after Perry flamed out.I'm a realist.

Posted by: steevy at April 11, 2012 02:37 PM (6HIQG)

84 Whatever happens, it will be better than the ending for Mass Effect 3.

Posted by: Dave in Fla at April 11, 2012 02:37 PM (9t6jP)

85 There are two options, A and B, and you choose "C."

Wait a minute, I thought this was the James Tiberius Kirk strategy.

Posted by: elizabethe is at stage 5 at April 11, 2012 02:38 PM (hCc/i)

86 the Presidential race is now on between to liberal
Democrats. granted, one is much more liberal than the other, but there
isn't a Republican candidate in the race.



Posted by: redc1c4 at April 11, 2012 02:35 PM (8MasJ)

Whatever. Will you be voting against Obama, which is to say FOR Romney?

Posted by: joncelli, a man of gravity at April 11, 2012 02:38 PM (RD7QR)

87 Is this where we switch from DD to the Kobayashi Maru metaphors?
Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 11, 2012 02:37 PM (sbV1u)

jinx

Posted by: elizabethe is at stage 5 at April 11, 2012 02:38 PM (hCc/i)

88 I used to be of the Sgt York persuasion - that electing a squishy RINO would ultimately drag the GOP further left and destroy any hope for true conservative reform, and thus (thinking loooong term) it was better to elect a leftist now, so the left takes full ownership of the collapse, allowing for the "true con" party to rise from the ashes and enact real reform. This was my position when in 2008 it looked to be pragmatic leftist Clinton v McCain; I figured that at least Clinton would get enough Dem support to win the wars.

However, that went out the window when Obama got the nomination. Obama is a true leftist ideologue who (by SCOTUS picks, among other things), is willing and able to cause lasting, PERMANENT damage to the country. Under Obama, the "let the wookie win" strategy is no longer viable, because the long term dream "true con" will never be able to undo the damage. Thus I will support a RINO now, to get Obama out, and return to "true con only" mode in 2016.

Posted by: wooga at April 11, 2012 02:38 PM (vjyZP)

89 No, he's the Jewpacabra!!! And since he's disguised as a Mormon, that means he's even more devious than a normal Joo!!!
------------------
Ever hear the one about how Mormons believe they get adopted into one of the Twelve Tribes? You're closer to the truth than the conspirators may allow.

Posted by: jimmuy at April 11, 2012 02:38 PM (kSaUf)

90 I don't think that I will be putting a Romney sign in my yard (for fear of backlash).

But I am planning some nighttime raids of Obama signage.

Posted by: Jimbo at April 11, 2012 02:39 PM (O3R/2)

91 Multiple media outlets reporting Zimmerman will be charged today.
Corey presser at 6pm in Jacksonville...

Posted by: Jay at April 11, 2012 02:39 PM (3LaGb)

92
Rocky III

Scene: Rocky and Apollo are on the beach running, racing each other. Rocky gives up.

Rocky: [breathing heavy] "Tomorrow."

Apollo Creed: "There Is No Tomorrow!"

There is no 2016.

2012 is our last stand. After this election, the complexion of the Court changes if Obama wins.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:40 PM (jUytm)

93 Romney'12: Stage5

Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 02:40 PM (GTbGH)

94 >>Just a reflection of him.

Vampires don't have reflections.

Well, the predatory old-school blood-suckers don't. Barry's a gay sparkly, isn't he...

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ at April 11, 2012 02:40 PM (ZKzrr)

95 There are two options, A and B, and you choose "C."

Well you can clap yourself on the back for having "integrity" or being an "outside the box thinker."

I just look at that as cowardly, as it stubbornly refuses to answer the actual question posed.


Exactly right, Ace. It's DEATH or IMBABWE - there is no third choice! It's Helen Thomas or Nan Pelosi - no you don't get to be cute and pick death in that case!

Posted by: BlackOrchid at April 11, 2012 02:40 PM (SB0V2)

96 Romney may appear robotic sometimes, but he still has more facial expressions than Kristen Stewart. As does an actual robot.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 11, 2012 02:40 PM (SY2Kh)

97 i knew Barry Goldwater, and Mittens is no Goldwater.


*******


As *if* Goldwater would sit this out or vote for Obama...


Goldwater's first love was the Air Force and damn if he didn't love the military and Obama moves to obliterate them.

No way in hell we can fund the behemoth ObamaCare and defend the nation as the nation it is or has been effectively if the Liberals get their way.

It's been their plan for decades.

Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 02:40 PM (r2PLg)

98 Of course he'll do.

He'll do for losing, which he will do in grand style, and no one will have to say they're sorry that candidate Romney did anything to make The Won feel bad about himself or what he's done, because Romney thinks he's a good man.

I await the gnashing of teeth an rending of garments in November.

Posted by: cranky-d at April 11, 2012 02:40 PM (4HDqe)

99 Mitt Romeny: 2012, because its better to have someone ineffective, than someone activly trying to destroy you.

Posted by: Romeo13 at April 11, 2012 02:41 PM (lZBBB)

100 one of the few good things i see about living in California, at least from now until November, is that i don't have to psyche myself up into voting for Mittens.

if i lived in a state that was up for grabs, it would be different, but i don't, so it really doesn't matter: between the hard core left, the mulch-generational dependency vote and the illegal alien vote everyone says doesn't exist, there is no doubt the SCOAMF will win the state going away, so my vote doesn't matter at all.


Posted by: redc1c4 at April 11, 2012 02:41 PM (8MasJ)

101 Anyone who votes for the white supremacist Mormon is a bitter clinging racist.

Posted by: Sockwave's Inner Voice at April 11, 2012 02:41 PM (kaOJx)

102 You're closer to the truth than the conspirators may allow.
Posted by: jimmuy at April 11, 2012 02:38 PM (kSaUf)
**********
That would be a first for our network!

Posted by: MSNBC at April 11, 2012 02:41 PM (ggRof)

103 41 i'll be over in the corner drinking heavily.
Posted by: redc1c4


Scooch over, buddy.

Posted by: Say What's Up Doc? at April 11, 2012 02:41 PM (b7L99)

104 You know who's extreme???? Paul Ryan!!!!

oops, he's on our side???

Posted by: Donald Trump at April 11, 2012 02:41 PM (VxqUc)

105 toby, bard/illusionist (if you roll old school)

Posted by: Jean at April 11, 2012 02:42 PM (46qC3)

106 Zimmerman to be charged per Wash Post

Posted by: Dr Spank at April 11, 2012 02:42 PM (Sh42X)

107 >>> Wait a minute, I thought this was the James Tiberius Kirk strategy.

but the point of Wrath of Khan is that Kirk ducked this lesson, and hence was unprepared for the actual no-win scenario.

Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 02:42 PM (nj1bB)

108 Why would the "wishy-washy opportunist narrative,"undermine the "rigid ideologue narrative " in actual practice?Any voter who is still on the fence between SCFOAMT and Romney is a mouthbreathing retard and would easily accept both as true. Expect to see both paths (and more) taken. They'll say absolutely anything.

Posted by: Jaws at April 11, 2012 02:42 PM (4I3Uo)

109 Every vote for Romney will have to have one countervote for Obama to tie, and one more vote to give Obama the "lead".

Ifa voter decides to "sit it out" and not cast a vote for Romney, it will only take 1 vote for Obama to take the"lead".

Regardless of how you may/may not feel about Romney, go and cast your vote for him- the Dems will have to come up with a LOT more votes if we do that.

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at April 11, 2012 02:42 PM (0xqzf)

110 Romney vs. Obama - still a better love story than Twilight.

Posted by: Spends too much time on memebase at April 11, 2012 02:42 PM (ggRof)

111

Death, or bunga bunga?

Choose.

Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 02:42 PM (GTbGH)

112
Ace,
Besides retreating into hypotheticals there's a lot of lack of trying to change anything. Frankly I'm getting sick of the whole "Romney's just a closet lib, I'm not voting" crap.
Fine, you think we failed this one, that's your perrogative, but then you better be out at the next primary or involved in politics trying to change things some way, shape or form. Frankly I think a culture change will be necessary before the extreme right conservative makes any headway at a national level. (And not because of the "establishment." but because we're all over the map as a country on that one.)

(FWIW I was apathetic towards most of the canidates this run out especially after the huge post NH drop. My only conditions were "No Bachmann" and "I don't think americans will vote for another Texan yet.")

Posted by: tsrblke at April 11, 2012 02:43 PM (SYrwI)

113 see, toby I heard that joke as "death or imbabwe" when I hear'n it

Posted by: BlackOrchid at April 11, 2012 02:43 PM (SB0V2)

114 obama is the worse president of a long time but

i cant not vote for romeny becuase who i really wanted to win

president was that 99 pizzas guy he had some pretty good

idea about tax and things but romeny apposed him on some

few ideas so i probally will just vote for the pizzas guy any ways

becuase of my have my own principals about ideas and such

didnt you idiots ever here of having a loyalty to principals

probally not omg

#JusticeForSkillet

Posted by: Jose Canseco's Gristle Encased Head at April 11, 2012 02:43 PM (+lsX1)

115 It was either Clarence Thomas or Thomas Sowell who learned me that not making a choice is still making a choice.

You don't want to choose between Romney or Obama? Fine. But don't lie and pretend you haven't made a choice.

Posted by: jimmuy at April 11, 2012 02:43 PM (kSaUf)

116 By the way, his "solidly right profile" is a bunch of crap about what he says he'll do when what he says is scripted. What he has actually done (if RomneyCare isn't enough for you to reject him as a statist, what is?) is a whole other matter, as are his off the cuff statements.

This country was already screwed, I guess. We can now finish the job, either with Obama or with Romney. It really doesn't matter.

Posted by: cranky-d at April 11, 2012 02:43 PM (4HDqe)

117 100 one of the few good things i see about living in California, at least from now until November, is that i don't have to psyche myself up into voting for Mittens.

if i lived in a state that was up for grabs, it would be different, but i don't, so it really doesn't matter: between the hard core left, the mulch-generational dependency vote and the illegal alien vote everyone says doesn't exist, there is no doubt the SCOAMF will win the state going away, so my vote doesn't matter at all.


Posted by: redc1c4 at April 11, 2012 02:41 PM (8MasJ)

*******

Uou do have to consider the popular vote, and this is another excuse.

Do you really think Goldwater would use that--as an excuse?

Do you really think Goldwater would not be *shocked* at what Obama plans to do to the military?

Or Obama's stances on National Security?


And you say you knew Goldwater.....

Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 02:44 PM (r2PLg)

118 Dear Eeyores:

Get the fuck out. You are tiresome.

No, really--there is the door.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at April 11, 2012 02:44 PM (7utQ2)

119 98
Of course he'll do.

He'll do for losing, which he will do in
grand style, and no one will have to say they're sorry that candidate
Romney did anything to make The Won feel bad about himself or what he's
done, because Romney thinks he's a good man.

I await the gnashing of teeth an rending of garments in November.


Posted by: cranky-d at April 11, 2012 02:40 PM (4HDqe)

Same question for you as for the other guy: does this mean you will be voting against Obama, which is to say FOR Romney?

Posted by: joncelli, a man of gravity at April 11, 2012 02:44 PM (RD7QR)

120 Of course he'll do.

He'll do for losing, which he will do in
grand style, and no one will have to say they're sorry that candidate
Romney did anything to make The Won feel bad about himself or what he's
done, because Romney thinks he's a good man.


Right- because the guy who's been running for President the last 8 years and has been frequently accused of attacking his opponents too harshly will just roll over and play dead when it comes to the general election, because he doesn't really want it that badly.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 11, 2012 02:44 PM (SY2Kh)

121 To be fair, the country polls at 40% conservative. It is only majority conservative if 11% of the 30%ish moderates are really conservative.

Yeah, conservatives are twice the number of liberals, but not enough to form an electoral majority.

Posted by: Dave in Fla at April 11, 2012 02:44 PM (9t6jP)

122 Race riots postponed til after Obama defeat.

Posted by: Dr Spank at April 11, 2012 02:44 PM (Sh42X)

123 Death, or bunga bunga? Choose. Posted by: toby928©

I'll take Bunga Bunga.

Man...I haven't heard that joke since I retired from the Army. Good times...good times.

Well, except for the daily bunga bunga that is.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 11, 2012 02:44 PM (sbV1u)

124
Obama Drudge headline: "I'm not trying to redistribute wealth"
Obama's mouth opens - out pops a lie.
The leftwing vilification machine full throttle.

Posted by: rectal exam at April 11, 2012 02:44 PM (O7ksG)

125 #41 The RNC didn't do any such thing. For goodness sake, quit with the conspiracy theories. Let's review: All of the people who were supposed front-runners (Daniels, Christie, Palin, Ryan, even Trump) decided for whatever reason to NOT run.

That left the field we got. Romney has been methodically planning this run since right after John McCain lost. He went around the country endorsing and donating to local candidates and congressional and governor candidates in 2010. The only other people who declared fairly early were Newt and Pawlenty. Pawlenty dropped out after the Iowa caucuses. The rest, with the exception of Romney, were candidates who either were flawed (Cain, Bachmann) or who had trouble with funding (Newt, Santorum).

The RNC didn't do anything to keep the first group from running, and the second group, who did run, were just not able to cut it in a national race. I had high hopes for Perry, but he demonstrated that you cannot enter a presidential race at the last minute.

Romney is the candidate. The democrats wanted him because they thought he would be a pushover. As it turns out, he is not, so now they are in a panic. I am going to enjoy this quite a bit.

Why anyone thought that a guy who made money by risk-taking and re-tooling companies would be a milquetoast, I do not know. So he doesn't talk tough...easier to slip the stiletto in.

Posted by: Miss Marple at April 11, 2012 02:44 PM (GoIUi)

126 see, toby I heard that joke as "death or imbabwe" when I hear'n it

Oh, sorry to step on your joke then.

Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 02:44 PM (GTbGH)

127 I've said it before, Mitt sucks as a candidate and a conservative. I've got a Rick Santorum sticker on my car to prove it.

I will work my ass off to get Mitt Romney elected in Nov 2012.

Posted by: Nora at April 11, 2012 02:45 PM (VxqUc)

128
We have no time to court disgruntled conservatives.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:45 PM (jUytm)

129 Cake or death? I'm sorry, we're all out of cake...

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ at April 11, 2012 02:45 PM (ZKzrr)

130 Right- because the guy who's been running for
President the last 8 years and has been frequently accused of attacking
his opponents too harshly will just roll over and play dead when it
comes to the general election, because he doesn't really want it that
badly.Posted by: Hollowpoint


That only happens if his middle name is McCain.

Ummm, his middle name isn't McCain....is it?

Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 11, 2012 02:45 PM (sbV1u)

131 Gentlemen. About-face!

Posted by: Circular Firing Squad at April 11, 2012 02:45 PM (NF2Bf)

132 Romney's worst SCOTUS pick will still be better than Obutthole's best.


Posted by: weft cut-loop at April 11, 2012 02:45 PM (qfooS)

133 but the point of Wrath of Khan is that Kirk ducked this lesson, and hence was unprepared for the actual no-win scenario.
Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 02:42 PM (nj1bB)

I was objecting to your characterization of this as a particularly "female" strategy, since its most famous practitioner is a star-ship captain known for his hyper-masculinity.

I agree with your overall point, though, and strongly.

Posted by: elizabethe is at stage 5 at April 11, 2012 02:46 PM (hCc/i)

134 I almost went with the cake or death but I wanted to get awful imagery of Nan and Helen in there with the "imbabwe/bunga bunga" part

not sure how successful I was

my estimate is over half our Eeyores are actually D/lib "plants" to keep spirits down

Posted by: BlackOrchid at April 11, 2012 02:47 PM (SB0V2)

135 100
one of the few good things i see about living in California, at least
from now until November, is that i don't have to psyche myself up into
voting for Mittens.


In 2008, every single vote I cast in San Diego was a loser, from school boards, Prop 8 (eh, let them marry, I don't care), McCain-Palin, and Nick Popaditch. I mixed my votes left and right, but they ALL lost.

Posted by: wooga at April 11, 2012 02:47 PM (vjyZP)

136
btw, that un-aired PA ad against Santorum was brutal.

That's what I like to see coming from Mitt.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:47 PM (jUytm)

137 Posted by: Miss Marple at April 11, 2012 02:44 PM (GoIUi)

Thank you.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at April 11, 2012 02:47 PM (OWjjx)

138 128


We have no time to court disgruntled conservatives.





Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:45 PM (jUytm)

All conservatives are disgruntled. I argue that disgruntlitude is diagnostic of conservatives. Ace's point is whether conservatives are realistically disgruntled -- this is, willing to accept reality. That too SHOULD be a conservative trait.

Posted by: joncelli, a man of gravity at April 11, 2012 02:47 PM (RD7QR)

139 We can now finish the job, either with Obama or with Romney. It really doesn't matter.

Then the Pascalian wager should be Romney, for a non-zero chance of survival.

I tried to make a Ted Williams frozen head allusion but came up empty.

Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 02:47 PM (GTbGH)

140 I'll gladly vote for a candidate who doesn't hate America.

Posted by: steevy at April 11, 2012 02:47 PM (6HIQG)

141 ABO!!!! err...I mean - GO MITT

Posted by: minutemen for Mitt (formerly trainer) until the JEF is gone at April 11, 2012 02:48 PM (Rojyk)

142 Obama lies every time he opens his mouth. I simply find it astounding that he can say one thing a few days ago and come back and deny it later. Not astounding that he does that, astounding that the MFM thinks we will not notice that.

With Obama up is down, back is white, and stupid is smart.

George Orwell was a piker. We now have Orwellian Obamaspeak.

Posted by: Vic at April 11, 2012 02:48 PM (YdQQY)

143 what's it like to be gruntled? is that actually something a person should want to be?

Posted by: BlackOrchid at April 11, 2012 02:48 PM (SB0V2)

144 "I wish I could join you in the coward's path but I have more respect for myself."


Name-call all you want, Sparky.

Nothing cowardly about standing for my principles. You wanna elect the guy who is almost Obama based solely on the fact that he isn't actually Obama. You want to do this because you think winning a high-profile office is more important than winning Congress and digging in for four years. You want Obamalite because you've decided to buy into the bullshit he's been saying during primary season while ignoring his record, his history, and his stated beliefs before he declared himself a candidate. So you've self-deceptively declared you "like" the same guy who was practically a commie back when Perry was still int he race.

At least I stand for something. You seem to stand for anything, as long as it's "your side" that wins.

Give me a Republican-controlled congress and an Obama second term wherein the president will be able to accomplish nothing for four years. Then give me a real candidate in '12.

That's not the "Coward's way out", it's the long game; give up the battle to win the war. Standing for my principles isn't cowardly, and your pravda-esque proclamations of such only confirm I'm right.

Frankly, I don't think you have any respect for yourself, much as you want to claim otherwise. I know (ad hominem denigrations aside) I can't respect someone who demands we fall in line behind the nominee because the establishment has chosen their king.

This is why - as a Conservative - I left the Republican Party years ago, because the Republican Party left Conservatism in favor of "winning".

It's all about "winning". Even if your guy is in favor of many of the things the President has already proposed or enacted.

Keep fucking that chicken...

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 02:48 PM (vyS+v)

145 Finally, we are getting Toure’s opinion of the Zimmerman announcement.

Now we context.

Posted by: jwest at April 11, 2012 02:48 PM (ZDsRL)

146
@115 "It was either Clarence Thomas or Thomas Sowell who learned me that not making a choice is still making a choice."

Uh, that was Neal Peart and Geddy Lee, dude.

Posted by: Jaws at April 11, 2012 02:49 PM (4I3Uo)

147
I tried to make a Ted Williams frozen head allusion but came up empty.

I like how you think.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:49 PM (jUytm)

148 The people who were bothered by Obama's connection to Ayers got out to vote last time. The people who didn't know or care then, won't likely know or care know.

But he's got a record now.

Tone matters. It absolutely matters. They want to paint Romney as extreme because they know that 13% "independent" vote is not happy with Hope and Change.

Posted by: Daniel Jeyn at April 11, 2012 02:49 PM (jBA6+)

149 9 Romney is the Chupacabra!!!

Posted by: DNC

Attack of the Mormen!

Posted by: Blue Hen at April 11, 2012 02:49 PM (c9Ivb)

150 "Uou do have to consider the popular vote, and this is another excuse."

no, i don't have to consider the "popular vote", since it has absolutely NOTHING to do with electing the President. (MFM harping on it to the contrary)

Posted by: redc1c4 at April 11, 2012 02:49 PM (8MasJ)

151 However, I do reserve the right to continue calling him Mittens.

Posted by: Nora at April 11, 2012 02:50 PM (VxqUc)

152 One of the things bothering me is the people saying "The Santorum voters will sit out the election"

You know, that is incredibly insulting to the Santorum voters and the SoCons. You are in effect claiming that a core part of the GOP base is so childish that they would rather see the country burn to the ground, than vote for someone who beat their guy in the primaries.

I call bullshit.

Posted by: Dave in Fla at April 11, 2012 02:50 PM (9t6jP)

153 Zimmermans left the country already. The lawyers gave it away at that press conference where they dropped him and said they hadn't heard from him in 2 days. Thats cause he's in transit. He's a dead man walking in America, in or out of jail. They're rushing to charge him before he's gone, but I think they're too late. He can go legally if he's not charged, right?

Posted by: Jewish janitor in SF at April 11, 2012 02:50 PM (bwFDU)

154 142 Obama lies every time he opens his mouth. I simply find it astounding that he can say one thing a few days ago and come back and deny it later.

As I've clearly stated before ...

Posted by: Barky at April 11, 2012 02:50 PM (Qxe/p)

155 Here's hoping Romney picks a veep that will generate emotional excitement and stimulation. And if it's not a woman, then that statement sounds teh ghey. So I preemptively denounce myself.

Posted by: Havedash at April 11, 2012 02:50 PM (F0WNa)

156 >>but I wanted to get awful imagery of Nan and Helen in there with the "imbabwe/bunga bunga" part

We can haz snu-snu?

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ at April 11, 2012 02:51 PM (ZKzrr)

157 This is why - as a Conservative - I left the Republican Party years ago,
because the Republican Party left Conservatism in favor of "winning".


So who do you vote for? And does it bother you that whoever you vote for has no chance whatsoever to actually influence the direction of the country, or is it just about being pure of heart?

Posted by: joncelli, a man of gravity at April 11, 2012 02:51 PM (RD7QR)

158 It's not the Santorum voters who will sit it out, it's the Ronulans.

Posted by: Jaws at April 11, 2012 02:51 PM (4I3Uo)

159 150 "Uou do have to consider the popular vote, and this is another excuse."

no, i don't have to consider the "popular vote", since it has absolutely NOTHING to do with electing the President. (MFM harping on it to the contrary)
Posted by: redc1c4 at April 11, 2012 02:49 PM (8MasJ)


*************

Look shouldn't living in California give you a hint as to how the rest of the country is going to go to hell in a hand basket if Liberals stay unchecked for too long?

Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 02:51 PM (r2PLg)

160 With Obama up is down, back is white, and stupid is smart.
George Orwell was a piker. We now have Orwellian Obamaspeak.

Posted by: Vic at April 11, 2012 02:48 PM (YdQQY)

Hmmm.... interesting thought... could his entire view of reality be based on the fact that he is neither Black, nor White? but both?

Ergo, he gets to 'choose'... making only the choice important? Which leads to subjective reality is unimportant? because how he has portrayed himself has gotten him to the Presidency?

Posted by: Romeo13 at April 11, 2012 02:52 PM (lZBBB)

161 what's it like to be gruntled? is that actually something a person should want to be?

Posted by: BlackOrchid

It's about the same as being tarded I think.

Posted by: Blue Hen at April 11, 2012 02:52 PM (c9Ivb)

162 You are in effect claiming that a core part of the
GOP base is so childish that they would rather see the country burn to
the ground, than vote for someone who beat their guy in the primaries.Posted by: Dave in Fla


As evidence See York, Sgt.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at April 11, 2012 02:52 PM (sbV1u)

163 Dump Mittens Now . ..(they don't fit so he must quit)!

Posted by: Pragmatic at April 11, 2012 02:52 PM (lTnzg)

164 no, i don't have to consider the "popular vote", since it has absolutely
NOTHING to do with electing the President. (MFM harping on it to the
contrary)


Romney needs The Mandate of a popular win if he's going to be able to do anything at all, so yeah, it does.

Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 02:52 PM (GTbGH)

165
143what's it like to be gruntled? is that actually something a person should want to be?

gruntle


verb

to cause to be more favorably inclined; gain the good will of; "She managed to mollify the angry customer" [syn: pacify]

Posted by: wheatie at April 11, 2012 02:53 PM (+5U+B)

166 Posted by: Dave in Fla at April 11, 2012 02:50 PM (9t6jP)

see my post at #127

Posted by: Nora at April 11, 2012 02:53 PM (VxqUc)

167 The ones who drive me more nuts are the ones who can't wait to have Romney fail for the "i told you so's".

Posted by: steevy at April 11, 2012 02:53 PM (6HIQG)

168 @100 so my vote doesn't matter at all.

If I recall correctly, that's what approximately 2,000 people in Florida also thought in Florida in 2000.

Thankfully, they were all Democrats.....

Don't you DARE let the Dems have the chance to say, "Well, Obama won the Popular vote".....

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at April 11, 2012 02:53 PM (0xqzf)

169 Hm. I'm liking the Zimmerman-has-left-the-country hypothesis.

Posted by: Mister Christopher at April 11, 2012 02:53 PM (DQhAB)

170 I haven't heard that 'bunga bunga' joke since I retired from the Royal Navy

Posted by: Fopworth Higgglesbey Cranworth, Rear Admiral, M.B.E. at April 11, 2012 02:53 PM (Dll6b)

171 We can explain to the abstainers that voting against Obama is what America craves. It's got electrolytes. How do we know? I am able to communicate with America.

Posted by: HoboJerky at April 11, 2012 02:53 PM (xAtAj)

172 Please.
If Romney can't paint Obama as an Extremist's Extremist merely by citing his record, then he needs to quite politics and run a kid's softball team, instead.
The GOP will indeed be the Party of Stupid if is allows itself to be painted as "extremist" by the Party of Extremism.

Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 02:53 PM (Iaxlk)

173 redc1c4

And if you are going to invoke Goldwater on a thread and claim you know him you cannot selectively choose and edit what Goldwater held as his upmost priority-

National Security.

Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 02:53 PM (r2PLg)

174 I think Romney has a decent shot. The economy really is that bad, and Obama really is that poor at presidentin'. His base is mad that he didn't shower them with unicorns and ponies, and he's not going to have incumbent levels of turnout. All repubs have to do is stay focused and keep up their enthusiasm for voting Obama out and Romney could narrowly win independents and eke out that 50+1 victory.

I think intrade is behind the curve and that Romney has a solid 50% chance right now and it can only go up from there.

Posted by: argh at April 11, 2012 02:54 PM (/Kqvx)

175
Dear Eeyores:

Get the fuck out. You are tiresome.

No, really--there is the door.<<<<

They would argue that hurting their feelings is not persuasive. They want you to kiss their ass and then MAYBE they'll vote for Romney.

Fuck that.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at April 11, 2012 02:54 PM (zacpj)

176 my estimate is over half our Eeyores are actually D/lib "plants" to keep spirits down

Posted by: BlackOrchid at April 11, 2012 02:47 PM (SB0V2)


If they're not they may as well be. Willard wasn't my first or second choice but I'm 100% for him in November. And I won't pout and badmouth him like fans of a certain fuckheaded Delaware politician did 2 years ago.

Posted by: Captain Hate at April 11, 2012 02:54 PM (Cw+Gl)

177 get a new nickname york. it's entirely inappropriate for a man of your principles.

Posted by: Come And Take It at April 11, 2012 02:54 PM (8Yc/9)

178 announcing the updates on George Zimmerman after sundown....

Posted by: Good Plan at April 11, 2012 02:55 PM (VxqUc)

179 'appointment' is not the opposite of 'disappointment' --- sheesh....

Posted by: Fopworth Higgglesbey Cranworth, Rear Admiral, M.B.E. at April 11, 2012 02:55 PM (Dll6b)

180 Give me a Republican-controlled congress and an Obama second term
wherein the president will be able to accomplish nothing for four years.


Scalia is 76 years old. Kennedy is 76 years old. Ginsburg is 79. Breyer is 74. You underestimate the likelihood and magnitude of Obama getting more appointments.

Posted by: wooga at April 11, 2012 02:55 PM (vjyZP)

181 It's all about "winning". Even if your guy is in favor of many of the things the President has already proposed or enacted.
Welcome to the realities of politics. Yes,winning matters......because the losers have very little say in the actual process of governance. Yes, they can get a gig on tv or talk radio, but other than preaching to the choir, what impact does that actually have on anything?

I suppose you can feel good about yourself in that you did not compromise your principles. However, if the disaster of 2008 proved anything, it is standing on the sidelines while the Democrats bullrush to power leads to all sorts of horrible things (stimulus, Obamacare).

We live in a 2 party system and it is going to stay that way. Pick a side or be quiet. Either way, I don't care.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at April 11, 2012 02:55 PM (OWjjx)

182 I like Sgt. York's fantasy world where we get a GOP House and Senate without supporting Romney.
That's really special, the way that mind works.

That's like saying, "I really want to win this war--believe me--, but our general is a no-good, piece of shit, who I'll never support."

Good luck with that, sir.

Posted by: jimmuy at April 11, 2012 02:55 PM (kSaUf)

183 If I recall correctly, that's what approximately 2,000 people in Florida also thought in Florida in 2000.

Thankfully, they were all Democrats.....

Don't you DARE let the Dems have the chance to say, "Well, Obama won the Popular vote".....
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at April 11, 2012 02:53 PM (0xqzf)


****************

Thank you Teresa.

Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 02:55 PM (r2PLg)

184 175 I agree.Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out!

Posted by: steevy at April 11, 2012 02:56 PM (6HIQG)

185 "You don't want to choose between Romney or Obama? Fine. But don't lie and pretend you haven't made a choice."


Nevada has a "None of the Above" which will be getting my vote in November (at least at the presidential level). I won't be telling myself I haven't made choice.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 02:56 PM (vyS+v)

186
Ace drops the Free Will lyrics FTW!
Ironic because under Obama, we are losing our ability to make choices for ourselves.
Anybody that votes Obama or doesnt vote because Romney isn't pure enough does not live in reality and shoudl never call themselves conservatives.
Romney isnt perfect. He isnt my ideal Tea Party guy. He is establishment, RINO, flip flopper, etc.
But I am all in on Romney baby. Cuz we are staring down a pair of Obama terms that this nation cannot survive.
For SCOTUS appointments alone you vote Romney? To avoid the actions of a lame duck Obamayou vote Romney. (Think de-arming vis a vis the soviets).
How any conservative or libertarian could not support Romney in the face of Obama defies me. Purists need to get some pragmatism and get on board the Romney train.

Posted by: California Red at April 11, 2012 02:56 PM (DXTKe)

187 Posted by: Pragmatic at April 11, 2012 02:52 PM (lTnzg)


Is Allahpundit playing a joke on us by sending the most retarded HA commenters here?

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 11, 2012 02:56 PM (SY2Kh)

188 They would argue that hurting their feelings is not
persuasive. They want you to kiss their ass and then MAYBE they'll vote
for Romney.

Fuck that.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at April 11, 2012 02:54 PM (zacpj)


If they have no desire to save their OWN asses (and the asses of their children) by voting Obama out....I have no desire to kiss it. Fuck 'em.

Posted by: Tami at April 11, 2012 02:56 PM (X6akg)

189 Romney 2012
Good enough for government work!

Posted by: Hrothgar at April 11, 2012 02:56 PM (i3+c5)

190 Nevada has a "None of the Above" which will be getting my vote in
November (at least at the presidential level). I won't be telling myself
I haven't made choice.


Marvel at this. Just marvel.

Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 02:56 PM (GTbGH)

191
"His actual policy profile (as he's announced it during the campaign) is solidly right, however."
What?
When you need to include the parenthetical for the statement to be (superficially) truthful, there's a problem.
I am voting for him. I'm not one of those morons who only vote for Not-Witches, though I am displeased that my d20 was of no avail in building my Conservative Elf.

Posted by: Crispian at April 11, 2012 02:56 PM (P9LP6)

192 This is serious shit,this country is in real trouble.We don't have the luxury of purity.

Posted by: steevy at April 11, 2012 02:57 PM (6HIQG)

193 ace, you are drifting. It is early, nothing we post now will mean shit in 180 days.

Just saying. Let Obama fire his shit now, it is falling to nowhere.

The election is decided after labor day, so chill out and go to the beach

Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo-intellectual at April 11, 2012 02:57 PM (hXJOG)

194
Could this happen?

Interlopers and confederates posing as true conservatives try to disrupt the convention.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:57 PM (jUytm)

195
If they're not they may as well be. Willard
wasn't my first or second choice but I'm 100% for him in November. And I
won't pout and badmouth him like fans of a certain fuckheaded Delaware
politician did 2 years ago.


Posted by: Captain Hate

Yaarrrgh. I'm having flashbacks.

Posted by: Blue Hen at April 11, 2012 02:57 PM (c9Ivb)

196 Ivote None of the Above for Sgt york.

Posted by: California Red at April 11, 2012 02:57 PM (DXTKe)

197
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 02:48 PM (vyS+v)

Really? Really? Have you not been paying attention these last few weeks? We could control the House and the Senate and we're not going to rein this rabid dog in. Obama is an expert at utilizing "regulations" and "appointments" to accomplish his crazy goals. Best we could hope for is to mitagate some of the damage.
Also, I'm all for the standing up for your principles bit, really I am. Rock on with that. But you can't be so staunch about them to the point of contradiction. First off, they're not mutually exclusive. You stood up for your principles in the primary. Majority overruled, you. You now have a different chance to stand up for the principles that Obama's against (by bouncing him from office) but you're so staunch about the otherprinciplesyou won't do it? Do you not see the paradox?

Finally all you "I'm glad I live in a Solid Blue/Red state so I can sit this out" people. Go screw yourselves. Those of us in purple states are holding the line and damn proud to do it. I'm glad you sleep at night with your Faux pride. I sleep better knowing I didn't just run away. (If I'm reading these posts wrong, I'm sorry, I saw that somewhere else and may be projecting it here.)

Posted by: tsrblke at April 11, 2012 02:58 PM (SYrwI)

198
I can already imagine there are some right now trying poison the nomination of Mitt Romney by pushing the idea of a brokered convention.

Posted by: Soothsayer at April 11, 2012 02:58 PM (jUytm)

199 Need more popcorn. This is much better than watching Grey Fox TKO himself shadow-boxing against the commentators' voices.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, in Cylon hell at April 11, 2012 02:58 PM (GBXon)

200 "They want you to kiss their ass and then MAYBE they'll vote for Romney."


I don't want you to kiss my ass. I don't want Romney to court my vote. I won't be swayed by bullshit and I'm done voting for the lesser of two evils because our side decided this was the best choice to "win".

That's not winning.

Good luck with your candidate.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 02:58 PM (vyS+v)

201 Obama picking MORE supreme court justices

Posted by: Good Plan at April 11, 2012 02:58 PM (VxqUc)

202 Exactly Nora. You are like 99.99% of the Santorum supporters IMO.

If I was a Santorum supporter, I would be insulted by the implications of some of the statements I'm hearing.

Hell, my guy didn't even wait for the SC primary to be held, so I've had lots of time to get used to Romney.

Posted by: Dave in Fla at April 11, 2012 02:58 PM (9t6jP)

203 Actually, Reagan is now portrayed by libs as moderate -- he couldn't win the nomination in today's GOP....

Posted by: SFGoth at April 11, 2012 02:58 PM (dZ756)

204
For me it's still Cake or Death.

Romney is not the cake I was hoping for.....but compared to Barky, he's still cake. ....And the consequences are dire, and indeed death. Death to our freedom. Death to our country.

So I will take the cake....even though it is the bland pound cake with no icing on top. ....It's better than death.

Posted by: wheatie at April 11, 2012 02:58 PM (+5U+B)

205 That's like saying, "I really want to win this war--believe me--, but our general is a no-good, piece of shit, who I'll never support."
Good luck with that, sir.

Posted by: jimmuy at April 11, 2012 02:55 PM (kSaUf)

And just how many Generals did Lincoln fire during the Civil War?

Posted by: Romeo13 at April 11, 2012 02:59 PM (lZBBB)

206 #153 Yes, there was nothing keeping him in the country. I would have been gone as of last Friday, sending text messages from places for a while to keep the illusion I was still in US.

Then I would ditch the phone with the GPS device and high-tail it to a remote place with either no extradition or a complicated, long process, one that could get tied up for years.

Zimmerman should also get some Hispanic help from places like, oh, the Peruvian ambassador. And he should file a complaint against the Attorney General with the human rights section of the UN, to get THEM all tied in circles.

Posted by: Miss Marple at April 11, 2012 02:59 PM (GoIUi)

207 185
"You don't want to choose between Romney or Obama? Fine. But don't lie and pretend you haven't made a choice."


Nevada
has a "None of the Above" which will be getting my vote in November (at
least at the presidential level). I won't be telling myself I haven't
made choice.


Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 02:56 PM (vyS+v)
Yes, because not choosing the only relevant options maintains your purity. You won't give the candidates you essence, right?

Posted by: joncelli, a man of gravity at April 11, 2012 03:00 PM (RD7QR)

208 What Teresa @109 said. Remember, we don't just have to counteract actual Obama voters-- we have to counteract the dead and non-existent ones too. If Dems are good at anything, they are experts at this: they are historical masters of election fraud. We're not just voting against Obama, people, but Obama/ Acorn (or whatever the current incarnation of Acorn is). Every conservative who chooses to sit it out is thus, by his/ her inaction, not offsetting an Obama voter-- or what comes to the same, a fake Obama voter.

*Every* vote counts. Red state, swing state... even blue state. I'd like to see Obama go out, not just on electoral votes, but with a popular vote tsunami against him. And if anyone could swing a blue state, as extremely unlikely as that is, Romney-- who won MA-- just might. Cf. New Jersey. So fuck yeah vote for Romney, even in California! Stranger things have happened.

Posted by: lael at April 11, 2012 03:00 PM (bKBHl)

209 "None of the above". Last time I heard that expressed as a viable alternative, I was talking to my then 8 year old daughter about dinner options.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at April 11, 2012 03:01 PM (OWjjx)

210 The Conservative question becomes: "How do we control Romney after the election." He will want to compromise, please all. My suggestion, drag the Overton Window to the right of Attila. Put up Conservative ideas and bills that would make Goldwater blush. Let Romney save the country from the arch-conservatives; all while governing to the right of RINO.

Posted by: Jean at April 11, 2012 03:01 PM (WkuV6)

211 All repubs have to do is stay focused and keep up their enthusiasm for voting Obama out and Romney could narrowly win independents and eke out that 50+1 victory.

I don't know why you think it will be so narrow. Polls of Likely Voters consistently show Obama and Romney within the margin of error, and the undecideds at around 7%. Undecided voters invariably break 80/20 against a sitting President.
Not only will Romney win... he'll CREAM Obama.

Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 03:02 PM (Iaxlk)

212 "Posted by: Dave in Fla at April 11, 2012 02:58 PM (9t6jP)"
It's probably Ronulans trying to get Santorum supporters to back the nutjob....

Posted by: Nora at April 11, 2012 03:02 PM (VxqUc)

213
And just how many Generals did Lincoln fire during the Civil War?

I didn't even want the job in Ohio. But President Lincoln insisted. Then, well, you know what happened later.

Posted by: Ambrose Burnside at April 11, 2012 03:02 PM (jUytm)

214 And I
won't pout and badmouth him like fans of a certain fuckheaded Delaware

politician did 2 years ago.


Mittens best do better than O'Notawitch did, or $#!+ will definitely get real.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, in Cylon hell at April 11, 2012 03:02 PM (GBXon)

215 Since I am not looking for a savior, a messiah, a man on horseback to save me, I'll take Romney.

That other crap is for Obama voters.

Posted by: Mikey NTH at April 11, 2012 03:02 PM (hLRSq)

216 So, Sgt. York, is that some kind of military reference or are you just a big fan of Elizabeth Montgomery?

Posted by: elizabethe is at stage 5 at April 11, 2012 03:03 PM (hCc/i)

217 Wow... interesting how the Firebrand Holier than Thou Republican Zealots, are telling those not so zelous, to go to hell...

And that a loss will be THEIR fault... for not believing enough...

Sounds EXACTLY like conversations in 2008...

Posted by: Romeo13 at April 11, 2012 03:03 PM (lZBBB)

218 Yaarrrgh. I'm having flashbacks.


Posted by: Blue Hen at April 11, 2012 02:57 PM (c9Ivb)


Sorry but I knew you, of all people, would remember it well.

Posted by: Captain Hate at April 11, 2012 03:03 PM (Cw+Gl)

219 "Really? Really? Have you not been paying attention these last few weeks?
We could control the House and the Senate and we're not going to rein
this rabid dog in."

Sounds like the decisions already been made then. And if that's the case, why should I vote against my principles?

Or...maybe with actual control of Congress, he would be reined in by a house and Senate that knows they cannot be overridden.

Seriously, between this and the endorsement of Romney as "the guy who could most likely win", why would I want to join with those who have such defeatist attitudes and wind up with someone I didn't want anyway?

Not really a convincing argument.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:03 PM (vyS+v)

220 You know, you republicans are acting like a bunch of pathetic 6yo girls
Boohoo, Romney is our pick and not my guy, he's not conservative enough, when's 2016
Suck it up buttercup and vote and grab your friends and get them to vote or don't bitch if Obama wins

Posted by: navycopjoe at April 11, 2012 03:04 PM (Ca+zh)

221 The problem with people like Sgt. York is that they're... how do I put this charitably... stupid.

In their hyper-simplistic mind, their thinking (using the term loosely) goes like this:

I don't like Obama.
I also don't like Romney.
Therefore, Romney is the same as Obama.

I'm too principled to vote for Obama.
Since Romney is just like Obama, I'm also too principled to vote for him.

Don't bother with facts, logic, or reason with people like this. You might as well try to explain quantum mechanics to a 6 year old.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 11, 2012 03:04 PM (SY2Kh)

222
Question Sgt. York,
If None of the Above winds in NV what happens? No seriously, because if it doesn't actually trigger anything (say for example they just discount all of those votes and move to the runner up instead of a second election.) it is literally the same thing is merely skipping that part of the ballot.
No, you don't get the claim the moral ground of "I made a choice." because you didn't you chose not to vote, NV just has a box to check so they can verify their counts on that.

Posted by: tsrblke at April 11, 2012 03:05 PM (SYrwI)

223 my two cents (yeah not worth muh) I would hope holdouts can be shown where it is in our best interests to vote for our team even if we find our candidate deplorable for our ideas. Obama has shown a propensity to force laws down our throats, If we are to keep the House YAY, the Senate YAYier.
still would it stop Obama? he went around congress to wage war. He doesn't believe He is limited or in any respect a partner in leadership. HE wants full control of every decision from legislation to what we eat.
He instigates racism and hate Through his administtrations tatcics, is this really what our country can take for another 4 years until we get a better pick?
why does one think a better pick is possible in four years anyway?

Posted by: willow at April 11, 2012 03:06 PM (TomZ9)

224
Nose. Face. Spite. Some disassembly required.

I've not seen this level of adolescent reasoning since I last chatted with a gunboard 3per / Luap Nor supporter.

Posted by: Jaws at April 11, 2012 03:06 PM (4I3Uo)

225 I am proud to offer a field promotion to Sgt. York for his service to the cause. Said cause being an agent provocateur.

Congratulations. Henceforth you shall be addressed as Major Moby.

Dismissed.

Posted by: Field Marshal Mellow at April 11, 2012 03:06 PM (OokNw)

226 On the upside IF Mitt loses he would saddle us with a big, fat ho Daily Beast Writer....

Posted by: Nora, former Santorum supporter, says MITT 2012 at April 11, 2012 03:07 PM (VxqUc)

227 would = would not

Posted by: Nora, former Santorum supporter, says MITT 2012 at April 11, 2012 03:07 PM (VxqUc)

228 I predict that by the time November rolls around, the conservatives who will refuse to vote for Romney will be very, very few in number. Obama will see to that. The best thing that folks can do to rally support for Romney is to point out the SCOAMF's scoamfiness, not harangue those who are still upset with Romney.

Posted by: Grey Fox at April 11, 2012 03:07 PM (zj1Yv)

229 Obama works at the will of fellow socialists and the UN. please lets at the least vote for a guy that believes america needs to be taken down to third world status??

Posted by: willow at April 11, 2012 03:07 PM (TomZ9)

230 Yes, because not choosing the only relevant options maintains your purity. You won't give the candidates you essence, right?

Nice. I wish I had snarked it.

Posted by: Sterling Hayden at April 11, 2012 03:08 PM (GTbGH)

231 Or...maybe with actual control of Congress, he would be reined in by a house and Senate that knows they cannot be overridden.
The flaw in your logic is that you are putting your faith into reigning in Obama in the hand of:

Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Lisa Moocowski, the other Maine sister and Mitch McConnell

Really?

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at April 11, 2012 03:08 PM (OWjjx)

232 Romney CANNOT pick worse SC Justices than Obama will most definitely pick (think Kagan, Sotomayor redux).


The nightmare of this scenario is enough for me to say "I have always been totally supportive of Mittens Romney as THE Republican candidate in 2012!"

Posted by: Hrothgar at April 11, 2012 03:08 PM (i3+c5)

233 anyway I understand some that would be despondent over the choice we have teaken.
yet this is what we have, we cannot wait 4 more years i believe that with all my soul.

Posted by: willow at April 11, 2012 03:09 PM (TomZ9)

234 Wanted to address this before:

<<Whether this blows a processor or not, Obama DID win 54% of the vote in
2008. He won ten million more votes than John McCain and Sarah Palin.>>


Yeah. And why? Because McCain represented a third Bush term. McCain represented Amnesty, TARP, Medicare Part D and so forth.

Seriously, do you HONESTLY think that Obama won '08 because the Leftist Agenda is so appealing?

He won because he had a charismatic message that the Right could not produce. He won because of fatigue with Bush's domestic agenda that McCain intended to double down on. He won because he made a lot of vague statements that made him look a hell of a lot more appealing than some old guy who felt he should be president because it was his turn.

And you tell me I don't live in reality?

Reagan won because he sounded like a Conservative. So did Nixon.

Hell, so did Clinton.

Don't try to tell me '09 was the result of some kind of policy appeal to the center. If you beileve that then one of us is DEFINITELY not living in reality.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:09 PM (vyS+v)

235
@210 "The Conservative question becomes: "How do we control Romney after the election." He will want to compromise, please all. My suggestion, drag the Overton Window to the right of Attila. Put up Conservative ideas and bills that would make Goldwater blush. Let Romney save the country from the arch-conservatives; all while governing to the right of RINO."

Finally! Someone who knows how to negotiate!

Posted by: Jaws at April 11, 2012 03:09 PM (4I3Uo)

236 Folks, you can argue with the guy all you want, but he's here, on this thread at the ol' Ace o Spades HQ. He's getting what he wants. Which has nothing to do with anything he intends to do in November.

Posted by: BurtTC at April 11, 2012 03:09 PM (TOk1P)

237 Listen to Sgt York - Fuck Mitt Romney! Don't vote for Mitt! Purity Of Essence!

Posted by: Buddy Roemer at April 11, 2012 03:09 PM (chysP)

238 My main principle for voting for Romney is this:

I want the United States of America to survive as a free-market, Constitutional Republic, with the freedoms guaranteed us under the Bill of Rights.

I have grandchildren that I care about and I do not want their futures hampered by massive debt, preferences for certain political and ethnic groups, and a China and Russia which control the balance of power.

Romney is our only hope. Ordering my bumper sticker today.

Posted by: Miss Marple at April 11, 2012 03:09 PM (GoIUi)

239 duh, a guy that doesn't think we should be reduced to third world status *correction*

Posted by: willow at April 11, 2012 03:10 PM (TomZ9)

240 Embrace the REALITY - Mitt is not worth your vote.

Posted by: Buddy Roemer at April 11, 2012 03:11 PM (chysP)

241
Dear Morons,
If you do not choose Obama or Romney, for the next 4 years abide the(Crispian's)Golden Rule: silence!
If you want to vote 'present' and pretend that's a choice, knock yourselves out. But say nothing when policies are enacted and judges nominated.
Romney wouldn't even be my third choice but he will nominate better judges andhe will refrain from the disastrous economic policies advanced by Obama. Is it loathesome that we have to vote for the "lesser ofevils"? America has always been faced with such a choice. That no candidate (not even Reagan) has been perfect, does not mean those who care about America should not vote. Every presidential choice is significant. Many people habitually choose not to not vote - because they don't care. They don't care because 'it's all a game,' because 'all politicians are the same,' because 'it doesn't really effect them.' Don't add your own stupid reason to the list about the 'lesser of evils.'
Make a real choice and stop being cowards.

Posted by: Crispian at April 11, 2012 03:11 PM (P9LP6)

242 My friends, my good friend Sgt.York is right, you can trust me to stop President Obama from implementing any radical ideas like Amnesty.......

Posted by: John McCain at April 11, 2012 03:11 PM (OWjjx)

243 215

Yes, ++

Posted by: Daniel Jeyn at April 11, 2012 03:11 PM (jBA6+)

244 Seriously, between this and the endorsement of Romney as "the guy who could most likely win", why would I want to join with those who have such defeatist attitudes and wind up with someone I didn't want anyway?Not really a convincing argument.
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:03 PM (vyS+v)


I'm not asking you or anyone else to "join" with anybody.

I'm just asking you to please, Please, PLEASE vote against the fucking Marxist we have in the White House before he destroys us. Please?

Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 03:11 PM (Iaxlk)

245 "None of the Above" is meaningless. Getting "None" of the candidates is not possible. You will get Obama or Romney, no matter how many silly little fictions you construct in your mind.

Posted by: Lincolntf at April 11, 2012 03:11 PM (HethX)

246 Don't settle for only choices A or B, Santorum fans - remember, Santorum said that Romney is no different than Obama.

Posted by: Buddy Roemer at April 11, 2012 03:12 PM (chysP)

247 The REAL choice is neither A nor B!

Posted by: Buddy Roemer at April 11, 2012 03:13 PM (chysP)

248 <<we cannot wait 4 more years i believe that with all my soul.>>

I believe we can.

They said the same thing with Clinton. (and yet, we got welfare reform, and the Contract with America)

They said the same thing when Carter won his first election (we were all doomed...and in those days, my parents were ecstatic to buy their first house with a 19% interest rate in 1979).

And we're hearing it now.

With a Republican-controlled congress, we can do four more years.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:13 PM (vyS+v)

249
Sounds like the decisions already been made then. And if that's the case, why should I vote against my principles?

Okay maybe I wasn't clear (although I'd like to think I was, I'll take a show of hands on that one.) "The Decisions" can still be undone with anything slightly right of Obama in office. 4 years from now, not so much, the damange will be pretty signficant. So yes it does matter. It matters a lot, it's not "already a done deal." Don't misinterpret me so badly.
Again, you're logic is even more torturous than my own. You claim principles so strong they can't be violated, yet by not accepting the reality (whether you like it or not) you're going to allow those principles to be walked all over.
Let me be entirely clear: Unless you accept 3rd party options (I don't), you have 2 choices. It sucks, it really does. In such a case, (since either A or B will have to win there is not "try again" or "don't fill spot" option) not chosing A is a effective vote for B. Them's the breaks.

Posted by: tsrblke at April 11, 2012 03:13 PM (SYrwI)

250 There is always the capitalist utopia of Canada to look forward to.

Posted by: Bob Saget at April 11, 2012 03:14 PM (SDkq3)

251 They said the same thing when Carter won his first election (we were all doomed...
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:13 PM (vyS+v)


And they were right.

Posted by: Joe Mama at April 11, 2012 03:15 PM (OokNw)

252 <<"None of the Above" is meaningless. Getting "None" of the candidates is not possible. You will get Obama or Romney>>

I know this. But at least I won't feel dirty when I step out of the voting booth. "None of the Above" is me expressing my displeasure with all candidates via my vote.

Plus it allows me to say "don't blame me, I voted for none of them!"

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:15 PM (vyS+v)

253 Listen to Sgt York's wise words of Reason and Enlightenment!

Posted by: Buddy Roemer, the REAL candidate at April 11, 2012 03:15 PM (chysP)

254
Lesser/Evil 2012.


Works for me.

Posted by: Joe Mama at April 11, 2012 03:16 PM (OokNw)

255 So not "feeling dirty" and not being subject to "blame" are your real driving principles. What a guy.

Posted by: Lincolntf at April 11, 2012 03:17 PM (HethX)

256 I voted for none of them! Just like you!

Posted by: Buddy Roemer, the REAL candidate at April 11, 2012 03:17 PM (chysP)

257 <<"The Decisions" can still be undone with anything slightly right of
Obama in office. 4 years from now, not so much, the damange will be
pretty signficant.>>

Like I said. I've been hearing this for thirty years.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:17 PM (vyS+v)

258 Sgt. York, O'Fuckstick has already completely ignored the courts (drilling moratorium) and created business killing EPA mandates that will be the death blow to our economy. He did this regardless of the constitution and congress. What the hell do you think he'll do if he doesn't have to worry about re-election?

I'm all in for Romney. Now that the missus has a job again, I may even give a few bucks. This country will be unrecognizable if Obama gets another 4 years.

Posted by: Hedgehog at April 11, 2012 03:17 PM (3jGS1)

259 Nevada has a "None of the Above" which will be getting my vote in November (at least at the presidential level). I won't be telling myself I haven't made choice.
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 02:56 PM (vyS+v)


So instead of Obama having to come up with 2 votes (to your 1)to get ahead, you're going to let him slide by with just 1 vote (to your 0 vote).

We could have had a Republican rocket scientist - a CUTE one! - sitting in Raul Grijalva's seat if 5,000 voters hadn't seen fit tothrow their vote away onan "independent" candidate in 2010.

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at April 11, 2012 03:17 PM (0xqzf)

260 All I'm hearing is RonPaul!

Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 03:17 PM (GTbGH)

261 Don't feel dirty, vote for me!

Posted by: Buddy Roemer, the REAL candidate at April 11, 2012 03:17 PM (chysP)

262 For what it's worth, I've been solidly convinced since before the '08 election that there was not much greater than a 0% chance ANY Republican was going to win in '08. It wasn't going to happen. Period.

And with that being said, John McCain did us all a favor by taking the pounding nobody else wanted to take. Fred didn't want it, Rudy didn't either. You could make the case that Romney and Huckleberry were putting their time in so they could run this year.

If we had run a TRUE CONSERVATIVE, that person would have been trounced too. Probably worse than McCain.

Posted by: BurtTC at April 11, 2012 03:18 PM (TOk1P)

263 I think it will be a close race because, rampant democrat voter fraud and obama might give away some free money in summertime. I am pretty jaded in that respect.

Posted by: argh at April 11, 2012 03:18 PM (/Kqvx)

264 Hello? Anyone paying attention to my campaign? Hello?

Posted by: Buddy Roemer, the REAL candidate at April 11, 2012 03:18 PM (chysP)

265 <<So not "feeling dirty" and not being subject to "blame" are your real driving principles. What a guy.>>

What part of "not compromising my principles" do you just fail to comprehend?

Did I not repeat that enough?

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:18 PM (vyS+v)

266 "I won't be telling myself I haven't made choice."

Thanks for supporting me!!!

Posted by: B H Obama at April 11, 2012 03:18 PM (kaOJx)

267 Sgt. York,

As long as you feel all warm and fuzzy and have a pleasant quip, I suppose it doesn't matter what becomes of our nation. Clearly your vote alone isn't going to change the election, but to the extent that many people think like you do, it's idiotic.

Posted by: Crispian at April 11, 2012 03:18 PM (P9LP6)

268 <<If we had run a TRUE CONSERVATIVE, that person would have been trounced too. Probably worse than McCain.>>

Probably right.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:19 PM (vyS+v)

269 <<As long as you feel all warm and fuzzy and have a pleasant quip, I
suppose it doesn't matter what becomes of our nation. Clearly your vote
alone isn't going to change the election, but to the extent that many
people think like you do, it's idiotic.>>

Right back atcha, Sparky.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:20 PM (vyS+v)

270 NO COMPROMISING OF PRICIPLES. VOTE SMART. VOTE S-Mart.

Posted by: Buddy Roemer, the REAL candidate at April 11, 2012 03:20 PM (chysP)

271 Sgt. York,

Voting isn't about principles, it's about choosing a PERSON.

Posted by: Crispian at April 11, 2012 03:20 PM (P9LP6)

272 Vote Romney and then primary his ass 3 years from now. Indulge us.

Posted by: Jaws at April 11, 2012 03:20 PM (4I3Uo)

273 I'm the PERSON you should vote for! Not Mitt! Mitt who?

Posted by: Buddy Roemer, the REAL candidate at April 11, 2012 03:21 PM (chysP)

274 All I can say is God love you Sgt York. You really are ramping up the support for Romney and the enthusiasm to go and vote here. Also, you are of course allowed to fill in none of the above on your ballot. It is America after all. If you want to focus on getting the Senate, well then by-golly you do that. Pick those most conservative candidates for Senate positions and send them your money and give them your time. Go for it! The rest of us will do the heavy lifting.

Posted by: Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain at April 11, 2012 03:22 PM (bj+Nc)

275 If elected, I will do nothing

Posted by: None of The Above, A Candidate for Everyone at April 11, 2012 03:22 PM (OWjjx)

276 I still do not understand what principles are more important than getting rid of Obama.

Posted by: Miss Marple at April 11, 2012 03:23 PM (GoIUi)

277 <<I'm all in for Romney.>>

Cool. Hey, you know what? I totally support your choice to do just that. My distaste is for a candidate, not those who choose to support him. I'm just saying what I think should be done.

<< This country will be unrecognizable if Obama gets
another 4 years.>>

I know...I've been hearing these same words since I was six years old, when Carter won election. I'm sure we'll survive.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:23 PM (vyS+v)

278 250 "There is always the capitalist utopia of Canada to look forward to."
Posted by: Bob Saget at April 11, 2012 03:14 PM (SDkq3)

Canada also has the ceremonial scraping off of the butterscotch pudding. You have to admire a country with such rich traditions.

Posted by: BurtTC at April 11, 2012 03:24 PM (TOk1P)

279
Posted by: Miss Marple at April 11, 2012 03:23 PM (GoIUi)

Indeed, it's usually impossible to satisfy all principles at all times (it is not an idea world). Such we rank principles. I rank ABO as #1. I weighed all my principles and I'm morally satisfied voting for Romney.

Posted by: tsrblke at April 11, 2012 03:24 PM (SYrwI)

280 Posted by: argh at April 11, 2012 03:18 PM (/Kqvx)


Also, the 2012 vote counting for many states has been outsourced to a Spanish company owned by Soros! (couldn't find a reputable link for this so I might be wrong).


When it comes to Dem voting rules, no headstone is left unturned!

Posted by: Hrothgar at April 11, 2012 03:25 PM (i3+c5)

281 "I know...I've been hearing these same words since I was six years old, when Carter won election. I'm sure we'll survive."

So elections don't matter? 4 more years of a liberal presidency has no effect on the trajectory of our nation? Finally, we've got to the heart of the matter, you really don't care since you don't think presidents make much of a difference. Voting is just your way of exercising your "principles." How fulfilling!

Posted by: Crispian at April 11, 2012 03:26 PM (P9LP6)

282 <<I still do not understand what principles are more important than getting rid of Obama.>>

Short Answer: The primary principle of not replacing him with someone a lot like him.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:27 PM (vyS+v)

283
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:23 PM (vyS+v)
You keep referencing Carter and I think it's important to note they did kick him out after 4 years. Which is what we're trying to do here. We could generate tons of hypotheticals about what would have happened if Carter had won a second term.

Posted by: tsrblke at April 11, 2012 03:27 PM (SYrwI)

284 <<So elections don't matter?>>

Right...because THAT's what I said...

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:27 PM (vyS+v)

285 Is it possible that the president is pushing romney along because he fears running against either ron paul or newt gingrich more than he fears running against romney?

Cause really, Romney hasn't been to the convention, he hasn't been anointed yet, so it's a little premature. Especially considering the fact that all those folks who helped with the 2010 election may not be on board with Romney but rather waiting for the newt, perry, cain, bachman, palin, the fred crowd to do something at the convention to save them from romney.

Posted by: Mittens! at April 11, 2012 03:28 PM (oZfic)

286 << I weighed all my principles and I'm morally satisfied voting for Romney.>>

And that's your choice to make.

I promise I won't try to denigrate you for making it...or talk you out of it.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:29 PM (vyS+v)

287 Sgt. York, of course we will survive. So did the peasants after the Black Death swept through Europe. You yourself will probably do fine with a second Obama term.

I was an adult when Carter was elected. Due to Carter, we got the Dept. of Education. We got the Panama Canal; given away. We got all of the draft-dodgers pardoned, who mostly have come back to work with the left. We got the Shah thrown out, and the beginning of the Islamic jihad.

Carter did a lot of bad stuff which could not be undone even by Reagan, especially in foreign policy. His gutting of the intelligence agencies and the military left us severely weakened when Reagan came in.

It's the COUNTRY that will be harmed; individuals may do ok under Obama. But a lot of people won't, and our foreign policy, our military, and Israel in particular cannot stand 4 more years.

What principle is more important than defeating Obama?

Posted by: Miss Marple at April 11, 2012 03:29 PM (GoIUi)

288
What principle is compromised by voting for Romney?
Is that principleabove the principle of "slowing the destruction of your country" in your hierarchy of principles?
Suppose yourkid or someone you lovedhad a type of cancer that could only be successfully treated by one drug manufactured by pharmaceutical company which also manufactured abortifacients, something you deem gravely immoral. The alternative would be to let the cancer go untreated and the loved one would die. How does your conscience reconcile the hierachical place of those principles?

Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at April 11, 2012 03:30 PM (qwK3S)

289 <<If elected, I will do nothing>>

It worked for Clinton.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:30 PM (vyS+v)

290
Posted by: Mittens! at April 11, 2012 03:28 PM (oZfic)


You are the dumbest fucking person to have ever existed. Is your braindead daddy still claiming that Huckabee is going to become the nominee through the convention you retarded skank?

Posted by: buzzion at April 11, 2012 03:30 PM (GULKT)

291 #282 So, this is all based on your opinion that Obama and Romney are similar.

That is simply fatuous codswollop.

I am done talking. I need to go get supper started.

Posted by: Miss Marple at April 11, 2012 03:31 PM (GoIUi)

292 What part of "not compromising my principles" do you just fail to comprehend?

You know who else never has to "compromise their principles" or say, "I didn't vote for him"?

People who live in dictatorships.

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at April 11, 2012 03:31 PM (0xqzf)

293 Plus it allows me to say "don't blame me, I voted for none of them!"
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:15 PM (vyS+v)


So it's all about YOU, then?

Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 03:31 PM (Iaxlk)

294 <<What principle is compromised by voting for Romney?>>

See my post above. Romney is no Conservative...he's hardly a Republican...I vote for candidates who match - or closely match within reason - my political ideology.

I think Romney would have a better chance of winning if he ran as a Democrat.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:32 PM (vyS+v)

295 <<So it's all about YOU, then?>>

Voting?

Oh hell YES it is!

My vote is mine, and no one else's.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:33 PM (vyS+v)

296 -1,0,+1

I understand there isn't supposed to be any math on this blog but these are 3 distinct #s.

I just look at that as cowardly, as it stubbornly refuses to answer the actual question posed.


Name calling won't help or don't you remember saying something similar just a few days ago.

4 years of full throttle fuckup vs 4 years of possible good mgt. from the top having a slim chance of actually getting done let alone changing anything in the face of DOOM.



Posted by: DaveA at April 11, 2012 03:33 PM (onSRg)

297 '...I vote for candidates who match - or closely match within reason - my political ideology."

I appreciate your support!!!!

Posted by: B H Obama at April 11, 2012 03:34 PM (kaOJx)

298 Well, all that is fine, York.
We just don't want to hear your complaints about the second term of President Barak Marx Obama for four long years. Because someone that couldn't be bothered to pull the lever against him has no standing to say one negative word about him.

Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 03:34 PM (Iaxlk)

299 You should hope Mitt doesn't get elected. He will make you look like a fool.

Posted by: Huggy at April 11, 2012 03:35 PM (VtU/3)

300
And that's your choice to make.

I promise I won't try to denigrate you for making it...or talk you out of it.


No, try, I insist. Really that's not snark, I love discussion, opposing points, the whole 9 yards. I cannot make an informed choice without hearing argument from the other side. I've been swayed before. Present arguments, draw conclusions! Put them out there to be critiqued. Mine are out there (in fact you've critiqued them!) Why not do the same? That's what makes this country so freaken awesome.
FWIW, you've put forward the "principles matter" argument. I'm not sure you've given it an adaquate defense though considering the number of people who have pointed out that votes matter too. Carried to it's logical conclusion you could say that if enough people felt as you did on that matter Obama would win by default, a conclusion that is inconsistant with it's premise.

Posted by: tsrblke at April 11, 2012 03:35 PM (SYrwI)

301 <<You know who else never has to "compromise their principles" or say, "I didn't vote for him"?



People who live in dictatorships.>>

Also dead people...which has as much relevance as what you just said...

...did you have to restrain yourself from breaking Godwin's law, or was that your next step?

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:36 PM (vyS+v)

302 Fuck Godwin. Who the hell elected him to Lawmaker, anyway?

Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 03:37 PM (Iaxlk)

303 I'm sorry, York, but I just don't see how abstaining from the effort to prevent four more years of Obama somehow furthers conservative principles.
Anyway you slice it the baloney, it's bullshit.

Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 03:39 PM (Iaxlk)

304 <<Because someone that couldn't be bothered to pull the lever against him has no standing to say one negative word about him.>>

You want to play the Union strong-arm card and tell me that my vote is a de facto vote for Obama, you go right ahead with your stupid bullshit. Doesn't mean it's reality.

I'm pulling the lever, fuckstick, and I'm pulling it against both Obama and Romney. And the more assholes like you tell me I have no right to express myself with my vote the more I am convinced it's the right thing to do.

Better believe I've got "standing".

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:40 PM (vyS+v)

305 <<I'm sorry, York, but I just don't see how abstaining from the effort to
prevent four more years of Obama somehow furthers conservative
principles.>>

I don't care...

...mostly because you categorize it as "absatining".

And that's pure bullshit.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:41 PM (vyS+v)

306 Maybe the real question is not who you vote for but who you help elect by your actions or inactions.

Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at April 11, 2012 03:41 PM (qwK3S)

307 @304: Sorry, but you know as well as the rest of us that pulling the lever for some total BS candidate is the same as staying home on Election Night.
Your complaints about Obama will fall on deaf ears. No one will care.

Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 03:42 PM (Iaxlk)

308 I'm not abstaining, I'm pulling levers!

Posted by: Admiral York at April 11, 2012 03:42 PM (P9LP6)

309 "Better believe I've got "standing"."

Yeah you got standing, whatever that means. To me, you are just another cocksucking Obama supporter, who is probably anti American.

Posted by: Dick Nxion at April 11, 2012 03:42 PM (kaOJx)

310 But intrade has "None of the above" up 13.2%!

Posted by: In before In before the Troll at April 11, 2012 03:43 PM (OWjjx)

311 <<Voting isn't about principles, it's about choosing a PERSON.>>

Um...yeah...a person who represents your ideology (i.e. your principles).

Why? Is it a beauty contest for you?

Or popularity?

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:43 PM (vyS+v)

312 I vote for nothing!

Posted by: Sgt. York Schultz at April 11, 2012 03:44 PM (OWjjx)

313 <<Yeah you got standing, whatever that means. To me, you are just another
cocksucking Obama supporter, who is probably anti American.>>

and to me, you are nothing.

probably to a LOT of others as well I don't doubt.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:44 PM (vyS+v)

314 >>>>>>Plus it allows me to say "don't blame me, I voted for none of them!"

If Obama wins and you didn't vote against him, you're blameless? Not really.

Posted by: Come And Take It at April 11, 2012 03:45 PM (8Yc/9)

315 BTW, do you guys think my cancer analogy is bullshit? I am always looking for an easily understandable way to make a point. And this is where I come to find snarky Logicians.

Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at April 11, 2012 03:45 PM (qwK3S)

316 "probably to a LOT of others as well I don't doubt."

So what York? Go vote for your "messiah" Obama. WIth my blessing your anti American prick bastard.

Posted by: Dick Nixon at April 11, 2012 03:46 PM (kaOJx)

317
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:43 PM (vyS+v)

To me it's always been the person that best represents my ideology of the choices in front of me. I'm more flexable in the general election that I am in the primary since primaries shape parties.
If the choices are very from me (and the position will have to be filled) I default to "against the person most opposed to my position." There's enough space between Romney and Obama in this case.

Posted by: tsrblke at April 11, 2012 03:48 PM (SYrwI)

318 Um...yeah...a person who represents your ideology (i.e. your principles).Why? Is it a beauty contest for you?Or popularity?
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:43 PM (vyS+v)


If you want that you better go and file the paperwork to run yourself. Because even whatever stupid pot-obsessed protest candidate you will wind up choosing won't represent your ideology.

Posted by: buzzion at April 11, 2012 03:49 PM (GULKT)

319 Ace, you look so gosh darn cute in that cheerleader outfit!

I'll vote for the lying blob of pond scum but I'll never delude myself that Romney is anything other than what his mediocre political record says he is. He's better than Obama because he's smart enough not to wage war against basic arithmetic but otherwise? Romney's inability to articulate a positive vision isn't some clever campaign ploy. It's because his vision is quite similar to Obama's in the core idea that an Ivy League educated automatically knows what's best and us stupid morons in flyover country should just shut up and let them run things.

Posted by: NC Mountain Girl at April 11, 2012 03:54 PM (E9BEf)

320
@Sgt York
Fuck you, you sanctimonious prick.


I despise you and your ilk. Go ahead and stand
by and let this country be destroyed. All because you didn't get your perfect
candidate. Coward is too kind. You are the enemy.

Posted by: Dumb_Blonde at April 11, 2012 03:56 PM (6U9Rf)

321 Back from starting supper (got the family room vacuumed too).

An election isn't really about principles except as a secondary motivator.

We are presented with two men, and asked to choose which one we think would be the best to lead the country. Not "who agrees with me" or "who is conservative" or "who is the right race, religion or party."

The question is thus of Mitt and BO, who is the best to lead the country right now?

You don't get points for choosing a "none of the above" even if you believe that to be true. The fate of the country depends on millions of people making this choice. Some are going to think Obama is the best due to race, free stuff, Marxist desire for complete chaos, etc.

If you believe this country is worth preserving, then you have to vote for a guy who will at least TRY to fix it, rather than one who piles on destruction after destruction.

I do not think this is a morally difficult choice, myself.

Posted by: Miss Marple at April 11, 2012 03:59 PM (GoIUi)

322 So it begins... and here we have the Obama campaign using the same strategy against Romney as they did against McCain. I mean seriously, who except rabid liberals bought the argument that McCain was some scary arch conservative that would be forcing his religion and morals on everyone. I think what all the independents saw in McCain was a wimp who couldn't stand up to his opponent much less the Democratic congress or foreign leaders. Though one thing can be said in his defense, he sure as heck wouldn't have been bowing to dictators.

Posted by: Chairman LMAO at April 11, 2012 03:59 PM (9eDbm)

323 A lot of mighty fine work being done in this thread.

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 11, 2012 04:00 PM (irCrF)

324 #319 Personally, I thought his speech about helping dreamers and not killing dreams was a pretty good explanation of his core principle, which is all about restoring America. How did you miss that?

Posted by: Miss Marple at April 11, 2012 04:01 PM (GoIUi)

325
By the way, isn't one of curious's cats named "Sgt. York?"

Well, it should be in any event.

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 11, 2012 04:02 PM (irCrF)

326 Man, some of you keep feeding the troll.

BTW, I believe "Sgt York" is anti-aircraft artillery system, or something like that.

Posted by: SFGoth at April 11, 2012 04:04 PM (dZ756)

327 "I despise you and your ilk. Go ahead and stand
by and let this country be destroyed. All because you didn't get your perfect
candidate. Coward is too kind. You are the enemy.
Posted by: Dumb_Blonde at April 11, 2012 03:56 PM (6U9Rf)"


HE'S YOUR CANDIDATE. SO YOU SHOULD KNOW HOW TO MAKE HIM WIN, RIGHT? AFTER ALL, YOUR ILKS SAY THAT HE'S THE ONLY ELECTABLE R! ENJOY YOUR CANDIDATE TIL NOVEMBER.

GO CONSTITUTION PARTY!

Posted by: Rod Patrick at April 11, 2012 04:09 PM (IlEiO)

328 Romney appears to be something that Obama isn't: Competent. And mere competence cannot be too highly rated.
Posted by: Mikey NTH at April 11, 2012 02:26 PM (hLRSq)

Yeah, we liked the way he competently came up with that conservative idea to make STATE-RUN health care mandatory in Mass. My administration and I rated that very highly. Romneycare 2012!

Posted by: Baracka H. Obama, I Won at April 11, 2012 04:11 PM (tQHzJ)

329 <<I despise you and your ilk.>>

Good. It means precisely jack shit.

You hate me because I won't vote in lockstep with cunts like you and yet you call me anti-american.

You are precisely what is wrong with the Republican Party. And you are no different from the fascist wannabes on the Left.

You just wear a different stripe of fascism.

Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 04:13 PM (vyS+v)

330

Ramesh Ponuru wrote some time ago that Obama would have a choice of
portraying Romney as either a flip-flopper with no principles or an
extremist conservative ideologue.
Can't really do both.




MFM: He can if he wants to. And we'll try to make every smear stick

Posted by: TheQuietMan at April 11, 2012 04:21 PM (1Jaio)

331 Romney appears to be something that Obama isn't: Competent. And mere competence cannot be too highly rated.
*snickering in corner*

The way he outsmarted us in the '08 primary showed us he was a real braintrust.

Posted by: Huck & Juan at April 11, 2012 04:29 PM (tQHzJ)

332 I'm no Mitt fan, but I will say one thing. I like him a whole hell of a lot more than that backstabbing schmuck McVain. And I guess if you are superficial, he does look like a president from central casting.

Posted by: Schwalbe: The Me-262© at April 11, 2012 04:33 PM (UU0OF)

333 There is a way to do both, and Obama will try it: He can claim that Romney has no core but is a mercenary opportunist, and his only chance for power is to be a "severely conservative" extremist, and hence has flip-flopped to the extremist position.

I don't know if you can really grab both of those, though.
----------


I think you can if you couple it with a Scary Republican Congress thing. People hate Congress. They don't seem to like Republicans in Congress any more than they like Democrats.

So the sell will be that Romney is an unprincipled automaton from the oh-so-evil world of Wall Street (who is out of touch and weird on a personal level, to boot) and if he gets in office the Scary Republican Congress will be pulling his strings.

That's my guess, anyway.

Posted by: Y-not at April 11, 2012 04:35 PM (5H6zj)

334 Damn. Here I thought that the "If you aren't part of our group think and don't vote how you're told, then you're ONE OF THEM" argument was the exclusive property of the left.

Some of this shit thrown at Sgt. York here is worthy of Koos.

Posted by: Damiano at April 11, 2012 04:42 PM (A2+pr)

335 Relax folks, there are always a few retards who vote for the wrong candidate because they can't even read a fucking ballot. I count Sgt York in that category...pitiful, but unfortunately some people can't be helped.

Posted by: packsoldier at April 11, 2012 04:53 PM (9tLNI)

336 "Now if you know, why the hell aren't you blogging here?"

I've asked to; you don't want me. Blackballing bastids ...

Posted by: Knemon at April 11, 2012 05:14 PM (u1+3w)

337 Some folks are just mad that Santy is out, a guy with an actual voting record as un-conservative as they are asserting Romney is.

Posted by: Chairman LMAO at April 11, 2012 05:16 PM (9eDbm)

338 Some of this shit thrown at Sgt. York here is worthy of Koos.

If you don't vote against the SCoaMF, you are "one of them". It's rather definitional.

Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 05:19 PM (GTbGH)

339 Gee Mr rPesident, you mean I have to choose between a communist and a capitalist, in America no less? Tough choice but I'll do my best. What a maroon.

Posted by: Rich K at April 11, 2012 06:42 PM (X4l3T)

340 Ya ya I flipped the letters on pResident (rPesident)so it makes me look like the maroon too. Blow me!

Posted by: Rich K at April 11, 2012 06:45 PM (X4l3T)

341 I agree with Ace for one reason: this is not the last election. This is not about how the GOP is better than the Dems in some theoretical fashion.

Mitt knows that there is indeed a third party in the US -- the tea party, or the fiscal conservatives, or the people who just want to stop the nation from jumping off a financial cliff into an abyss, or whatever you want to call them. Mitt knows that they are only holding their tongues and watching the candidates and the election play out.

If there is business as usual in DC come January 2013, there will be hell to pay. And Mitt knows it. Obama does, too, but he intends to use that hell and the flexibility that a second term will give him. Scary word in his mouth: flexibility.

Go Mitt.

Posted by: PJ at April 11, 2012 07:42 PM (DQHjw)

342 Prayer is more powerful than voting. Pray for a USA that you want to live in. Not for which failed-flawed-man gets elected president.

Posted by: Huggy at April 12, 2012 08:18 AM (FKGw9)






Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.0557 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0178 seconds, 351 records returned.
Page size 181 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat