You seem like a campaigner for the guy, and are repeating yourself almost verbatim in multiple posts. You are coming off as disingenuous.

Uh, NO.

Cruz or nothing for me.  He's the last and only Republican I'll ever vote for again.

Romney beat retard Santorum and philanderer Gingrich in the Primary...

Ideal?

Romney did his best to keep Obama out of the Oval Office. He debated conservative ideals, he trashed liberal ideals... He defended gun rights after Aurora during the campaign...

I believe that Romney would have been a better President compared to Obama...

It is interesting the ideal that folks want to hold Romney to... When the ideal of the purist conservative candidate who can win simply does not exist in reality... Who we end up with is Reagan...

Reagan was a great, great, great conservative leader... "Ideal?" Not in a million years.

Reagan kept Carter out of the Oval Office. That is what Reagan needs to be compared to.

"May God bless America!" Romney tried to keep "G- D- America!" Obama out of the Oval Office...

I do not know about anyone else... But I was willing to walk across hot coals to vote for pro-free-market, anti-Union, "No new gun laws" Romney...

Romney's comparison is against a retard, philanderer, and a tyrant... Yes, I would vote for Romney against retard Santorum, philanderer Gingrich, and tyrant "G- D- America!" Obama if I had to do it all again...

But... Romney is not running again... Good for him. He has earned his retirement. It is good to see him funding conservative issues and candidates from the sidelines. His wife is dying slowly, she has said he isn't running and he has said as much... Let him play head games with liberals. He isn't running again... But it is good to have his leadership, influence, and money on the conservative side of the line...

"Ideal?"

The "ideal" perfect purist conservative does not exist in reality... What you get is Reagan, warts and all... Or Romney... warts and all...

Akin, Angle, etc... All retards. And on paper, they all "appear" to be "perfect" conservatives on each issue. In reality... They are retards with no chance of winning anything, ever.

How can you campaign for a guy who is not running, and never running again...?-?

Seriously...?-!

The guy said that I would support R's even if that meant gun control...

Could not let that one go...

Did not mean to repeat myself...

The next POTUS will be the first woman.  And the one after that, the first Hispanic.  GOP better pull an all female, all minority ticket out of their ass ASAP.

Id take him x1000 over Christie (sp)

Curious if you would walk across hot coals (in a vacuum) to vote for Christie?

Wow.  See if this makes it more clear for you.  Try to read slowly this time.  Not sure how to make it more simple.

I WILL NOT VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT SUPPORTS GUN BANS.

Well to be honest, based upon the past that family is quite electable....

Nah, some random BS poll TWO YEARS before the election in an accurate representation of things to come...

You know, it's not so much that the thread subject itself is annoying, so much as the knucleheads in this thread that buy this crap hook, line, and sinker.  These guys know better, but yet constantly jump head first into this BS every time.

Dude it's a BS poll from yahoo, don't buy this crap.

Anyone else notice the the OP of this craptastic thread hasn't posted in it since the OP?  Your in a troll thread people....

So, he's planning on running on the "Hey I'm not Obama" platform?

I've already decided next election I'm just going to bring a permanent marker and draw a gigantic dick on my ballot and turn it in.

Jesus tap dancing Christ, are you kidding me?

Elections are no longer legitimate, not to mention the 30 million new voters we just created. If a republican ever wins again, it will be because the democrats put him in office. The people only require the smallest pretense of freedom.





They check in every four years:
Voter: Am I free?





Politicians: Yes.





Voter: Super, see you next election. Good luck with things.
No one wants to upset the status quo as long as the bread and circuses continue.

 

Well, if conservatives field another dozen guys and can't pull together the moderates will kick our @$$es again.  

Hate to say it, but if we get Cruz and Paul both in the primaries what will happen is that conservatives will be split and someone like Romney will just walk away with the nomination.

I'd still take Romney over Christie and Jeb in a heartbeat. He may be my 10th over all primary choice, but he is still better than alot of the others that will get votes.

Mormon doesn't matter.  He's too committed though.  I'd like to see a list of everything he disagrees with.  If there's as many "disagrees" as there are "agrees" then I'll take him serious.

Is it wishful thinking for a Scott Walker run. Good record on 2A, true fiscal conservative, and love what he did  to the unions here in WI. Plus as a bonus, he has executive  experience, and is very electable, and certainly knows what it takes to win being that he's already won 3 races in the last 4 years. A Walker/Cruz ticket would be a true conservatives wet dream that would certainly motivate that base and bring in many new voters. But instead the gop will totally botch '16, Rand and Cruz will split the conservative vote and we'll either get Jebby or Gov. Krispy Kreme.

Again with the, "When did you stop beating your wife" argument.

Rudy Giuliani was an extremely media-popular "Republican" from a huge media market.

He was on TV every day. Every day.

Somehow it went to his head, and he thought that he could run for President. He was gutted. In the early Primaries. It wasn't even close.

Chris Christie is close to the New York media market. Probably the biggest media market in the world. He is on TV every single day...

Here is Christies problem..

He will get the same result as Giuliani when he ran.

Here is how Primaries work: You get supporters to get your name on ballots in Primary States. The first Primary State that allows Democrats to vote is Michigan. It is later in the Primary Season. The candidate is usually chosen by then...

*If* Christie decides to run, he will have to win The Republican South, The Republican West (It is laughable to think of Christie winning Wyoming), and the Mid West before Democrats can participate in the Primary.

If you think that Chris Christie can beat anyone else in Wyoming, then you are a complete retard.

I would write this in a crayon if I could: Christ Christie is not going to win a single Primary in the South or the West. Not one. And if there are more than two choices, he will come in last among whatever the other choices are.

Here is the deal. Folks want to try to compare  Christie to Romney... Christie is a lifelong government employee, never hired (or fired) anyone, never taught anyone how to shoot, and never led a religious congregation.

Retards and idiots want to say, "Bbbbut, we should just give up on the Northeast, let the commies have it..." That is stupid and dumb. Christie was supported ***for Governor*** by conservatives across the board because he is/was better than the extremist liberal alternative.

Reagan said, "Always support conservatives, even moderate and weak ones."

Reagan was 100% correct. Controlling governorships, even if they need improvement, is a good goal of conservatives... And Christie was far, far better than the extremist liberal Democrat option for Governor.

And... Don't forget that Reagan said to always support conservatives against liberals, even in liberal states...

Christie and Romney are about as far-apart as night and day...

Romney taught his boys how to shoot. His boys are now "assault weapons" advocates, and contributing members of society.

Romney participated and led in the open-market.

Romney openly fought and tried to destroy Unions his entire professional life.

His entire professional life, Romney was a religious leader.

And Romney's popularities is *bigger* outside the Northeast... Romney's extreme popularity was in the Republican West. Romney was outright begged by conservatives to run for Governor after the highly-successful Olympics...

Where is Christies popularity outside the New Jersy/New York media market?

Romney always, always had a chance. He was highly-popular in the Republican West, his business leadership and acumen resonated with segments of conservative voters, he had large numbers of volunteers in every state... His name-recognition among Primary voters was from his success at the Olympics...

Chris Christies only support from *real* conservatives comes from the fact that Reagan taught, and *real* conservatives follow the mantra:" Support conservatives, even weak ones, when they are fighting to keep an extremist liberal Democrat from office."

Ever heard of "Battered Wife Syndrome"?

I was just curious how far you would go supporting the Republicans.IF,IF Christie somehow got in the running (and Romney crashed...again),would you support him?


The whole "support the weak/moderate conservatives" no matter what is why this country is where it is at,and unfortunately where it's heading will be worse.

It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to look back and see that we keep getting an ever expanding government controlling every detail of our lives.Personally,I don't like where the country is,or where it's heading,but there is little I can do about it.


Anyone that has talked/talks about banning guns or any other restrictions has no clue about actual freedom and will never get my vote.It's a simple concept-Freedom and Liberty.

Reagan supported gun bans as Governor.

There had been riots when Reagan was Governor, and Reagan reacted wrongly... The House was controlled by Democrats, and they were pushing hard... And Reagan reacted wrongly... They *all* over-reacted...

Reagan banned open-carry in California, among other serious restrictions to gun rights.

But...

Reagan didn't run for President in a vacuum.

Reagan ran to keep an even more-serious gun-banner off the ballot...

For President, it was Reagan vs. Carter.

Reagan vs. Carter...?-!-?-!

You would not have voted for Reagan to fight to keep communist Carter out of the Oval Office?

Huh.

Reagan made mistakes on gun rights, but he also included provisions in his "ban" that were a net-positive for gun owners... How can you *not* see that?-?!-?

"No new gun laws" Romney vs. "Lead by Tyranny and Executive Orders," "Comprehensive restrictions to gun rights." Obama... How can you not se that "No new gun laws" is much, much better than "Comprehensive restrictions go gun ownership."

I am going to look my grandkids *proudly* in the eye, and say, "I voted for Romney. You cannot blame me."

What are you going to say, "I sat at home. Because I believe in fairy-land and I believe in the perfect purist conservative."

Akin, Angle and the rest of the retards can say (on paper) that they are perfect pure conservatives... Here is the problem with sitting on the sidelines waiting for a purist to come-by... They are completely, wholly, and utterly un-electable....

You can sit on the sidelines smug in your idiotic purity (Reagan vs. Carter, and you would not vote for Reagan -- almost unbelievable) meanwhile Obama leads by fiat and Executive Orders...

Here is a heavy dose of reality: The perfect pure conservative is *exactly* what liberal Democrats want to run against. They *want* to run against the Akins and the Angles. They *love* purist conservatives. They are easy to beat for extremist liberal Democrats. Nobody asks the Democrat the hard questions when the retard is answering questions about retarded abortion scenarios...

The purist, perfect conservative you are waiting for does not exist... Not in reality, anyway. So you are either 1. A real conservative, but who never actually votes conservative, just sits at home every election day. 2. A Democrat. Democrats love, adore, and pray for purist conservatives to run.

I do not know how to say this in more plain-English.

In the real-world, you are going to have to vote for someone like Reagan to keep Carter out of the Oval Office. You are going to need to vote, "May God bless America!" Romney to keep Obama the tyrant out of the Oval Office...

NO! No more Romneys! No more Democrat Lites.

Fucking sick and tried of having to choose between someone who wants to put us over a cliff at mach 3 and someone who wants to do it at 55.

What does that mean?

What I disagree with Romney on?-?

Romney isn't/wasn't perfect... Not in a million years.

Reagan wasn't. Reagan gets compared to Carter and Mondale.

Romney gets compared to multiple philanderer, decades-in-Washington, mandate-writer, class-warfare politician, Newt Gingrich. He also gets compared to retard Santorum who *actively* campaigned that he had fully-supported Obama's bailouts while Romney had called for "Let Detroit go bankrupt" (which meant that the market could fix Detroit.)

Gingrich had not-only supported ***NATIONWIDE*** gun-bans when he was in elected office... Gingrich had helped to write the Lautenberg gun ban, and if that was not enough, Gingrich had helped write the Gun-Free-Zones ban.

Gingrich sucked. Gingrich sucked really, really bad.

Santorum was a retard.

Romney was the better choice out of the Primary options...

Then it was Romney vs. Obama.

Obama made-clear after the Aurora incident that he was not content with a ban on just "Assault weapons." Obama made-clear that his restrictions to gun rights would be "Comprehensive." He used that term *multiple* times, and debated it *multiple* times during the campaign.

Romney stood-the-line on gun rights after Aurora, and debated it during the campaign.

"No new gun laws" Romney vs. "Comprehensive restrictions to gun ownership" Obama.

It wasn't a question of choosing two different evils... It was good vs. evil.... It could not get any more clear-cut for me...

I didn't need to hold my nose.

Romney vs. Obama... I am going to look my grand children in the eye, and say, "I voted for Romney. I did my best."

No, I don't.  Catchin' on, yet?

For someone with no words, you talk a lot.

"If?"

Christie isn't winning South Carolina. No question.

Christie isn't winning Wyoming. No question. If you honestly question that, go get your head examined.

If you think he has a chance in either state...



The people who voted for Reagan... The veterans and folks who worked their entire life... Are dying. The population is changing.

That isn't the Republican Party's fault... We are still running pro-life, pro-gun, pro-free-enterprise candidates...

Romney wasn't the choice between two evils against "Executive Order" Obama. It was good vs. evil... We had a chance to turn things around, and many folks stayed-at-home...

I agree though. Government is expanding... And we needed someone like Romney to make positive course changes. Sometimes a minor positive course change is better than a major negative course change... That is what Reagan meant... A small positive course change is better overall than a major negative course change.

I fully-agree with Reagans principle. He was correct.

I think this is evident on the subject of abortion. Reagan said, "Abortion should be legal in extremely, extremely rare cases." That ended the debate on abortion, and the argument could turn to other issues.

Recently, folks who "claim" to be concerned about the number of abortions in the US have run on a "criminalize all cases of abortion" platform. Akin, among others, lost races to vulnerable extremist Democrats because they decided to go to extremes on criminalizing abortion... And they lost-big to liberal Democrats.

But the retards claim that they think abortion is important, and they claim that their overall-goal was to reduce the numbers of abortions in this country. *If* that is their goal, then they are idiots.

Because what they got was extremist liberal Democrats elected.

So instead of *any* positive course changes... They got major negative course turns... The retards got folks elected who are going to do the opposite of what they claim is important...

Reagan was correct in his principle... Sometimes it is great to get a major conservative elected who is going to make major course corrections. If that is not possible, and the alternative is a extremist liberal Democrat, then vote for the conservative promising minor course corrections.

A minor course correction is better than a major negative turn in course...

Wow.

Unbelievable...

Reagan vs. Carter, and you would not have tried to keep Carter out of office...

Wow.

Are you a Democrat?

No, are you anti-gun?

If you want my vote, put up a conservative that won't ban guns.  

Or, fuck off.  I'll vote Libertarian.

If the destination is the same,the course variations don't matter a whole lot.

I'm just trying to figure out how far you are willing to compromise your principles when I ask if you would ever vote for Christie (which you not answering answers).

Reminds me of the old -guy asks a woman if she would sleep with him for a million dollars,she says yes.Then he asks if she would sleep with him for 5 dollars and she asks what kind of girl he thinks she is.He says we already figured that out,we are just negotiating a price.

What's your price?

I will not vote for anyone that is anti gun-that includes someone that says they will sign an AWB if it gets to his desk.Again,it's a simple concept.

Looking in to your grandkids eyes and telling him them how you voted for the lesser evil wont be hard-they will have grown up in a world with a heluva lot less freedom than the generations before,but they wont know it..........

Reagan and Romney might have both tripped-up on conservative issues. Neither were perfect... Far from it...

I don't know... I don't know how I could look future generations in the eye, and say, I didn't vote for "No new gun laws" Romney vs. "Comprehensive restrictions go gun ownership" Obama.

I guess that is my point...

Pro-gun through and through...

You are going to be waiting and waiting and waiting for a perfect purist conservative --who can win-- to run...

Barry Goldwater was the last perfect pure conservative to run for President. He lost Wyoming. He lost Idaho. He lost Utah... Think about this for a minute... Utah County Utah (home of BYU) has the highest number of registered Republicans compared to any other area in the country. Barry Goldwater *lost* Utah County... He did the utterly impossible. My point is that the perfect pure conservative --who can win-- simply does not exist in reality...

"No new gun laws" Romney vs. "Comprehensive restrictions to gun ownership" Obama was not a choice between two evils... It was good vs. evil...

That is the thing...

The destination is not the same, if you actually read the Republican National Platform on guns vs. The Democrat National Platform on guns.

Democrats want what Obama has repeated: Comprehensive restrictions to gun ownership.

They are constantly trying to move that direction, per their overall-goal.

Look at the actual "Platform" on guns and you will see that they both are not trying to steer the ship the same direction...

Yes, all Romney was able to do as a governor of a heavily-Democrat state was minor course corrections... But per the NRA, and conservative groups, the course-corrections were in the *positive* direction...



Chris Christie is a non-issue...

Chris Christie is a "When did you stop hitting your spouse" issue for people who believe in fairies, la-la-land and perfect conservatives.

I will never be in a position to cast a vote for Christie.

If all the other conservatives who are running against Christie dies, Christie will lose by write-in in Wyoming and South Carolina...

If all the other conservatives running against Christie die, and only one person shows up to vote in South Carolina, and they support Christie, and it is Christie vs. Hillary (or Janet Reno or E Warren, etc.)...

I will vote *against* the Democrat... If that is your question...



Romney spent his entire professional life destroying Unions..

Romney spent his entire professional life in the open free market...

Romney was a volunteer religious leader his entire professional life...

Romney taught his guns to shoot and own guns, and pushed-back against Democrats in MA...

I did not see Romney as a "compromise" candidate...



That is the thing...

"No new gun laws" Romney wasn't a compromise against, "Comprehensive restrictions to gun ownership" Obama.

I do not see that as a choice between two evils. I see it as a choice between good and evil...

"Romney taught his guns to shoot..."

Should have been, "Romney taught his boys to shoot..."

I'm not waiting for perfect.  

I'm waiting for a conservative that WILL NOT BAN GUNS.

Pretty fucking simple.  Jeebus.

edit: didn't mean to quote

Well, I'm hoping Gov. Perry will run, as he's the most down-to-earth conservative I've seen willing to stand up to the social progressives.  He's 110% pro-gun, pro-defense, pro-traditional marriage, and seems to have been a damn fine governor.

He's an upright American.

Catching on that you are fine with the Dems in control.

This. He's a tried and true loser and will lose again.

Romney is your guy then. He has never signed a gun ban into law. He just signed a gun ban into law because it would help gun owners. But he never banned any guns when he banned guns. It was the democrats what banned them, Romney didn't do it.  Romney loves guns, he would never ban guns, even if he did ban guns. He never signed his state into Obamcare before it was cool either. He may have signed his state into Obamacare before it was cool, but it was really the democrats what did it. He would never support Obama care, even though his state beta tested it. He hates Obamacare. That is why he signed into law in his state.

He is a small government balanced budget kind of guy.... He would go to any length to protect your rights, unless someone forced his hand by putting a bill on his desk. Then he would take your rights away, but only because he didn't want too.

Democrats, who hold a veto-proof majority in MA had banned guns long before Romney was elected...

Here is the NRA on Romney's bill:

On June 24, 2004 at approximately 11:20 AM , the Senate took the last legislative vote on S.2367 and sent it to Governor Romney`s desk for his consideration. Representing the greatest set of firearm law reforms since the passage of the Commonwealth`s worst in the nation gun laws, S.2367 is a breath of fresh air for law abiding gun owners. Governor Romney is expected to sign the bill into law later this week.

While not perfect by any means, this bill represents a step forward for gun owners in Massachusetts. The bill was passed in the Senate by a vote of 36 - 1 in favor and the House passed it with no amendments or debate on a "voice" vote. This represented by far the broadest support a reform bill has ever seen in the Massachusetts State House. Only one legislator in the entire building voiced opposition to the bill.

S.2367 does the following:
•Instructs the Executive Director of the Criminal History Systems Board to make the Firearms Identification Card and the License To Carry a Firearm the same size as a driver`s license;


•Changes the term of a Firearms Identification Card and a License to Carry to six years;


•Creates a grace period of 90 days, if the Firearms Identification Card or License to Carry holder applies for renewal before the expiration date, and if the application for renewal is not denied;


•Creates a Firearms Licensing Review Board. Applicants disqualified by a misdemeanor record, from obtaining a License To Carry or Firearms Identification Card, may file a petition for review of eligibility with the board, five years after conviction, adjudication, commitment, probation or parole;


•and in the case where an officer is confiscating the guns of a person with an expired license, requires the officer to provide a written inventory and receipt for all guns.

Despite the efforts of some (including The Boston Globe) to spin this bill as an extension of or creation of a new "Assault Weapons" ban, the bill makes no net changes to the Commonwealth`s laws regarding those types of firearms. The three sections referencing them merely dealt with re-affirming the definitions of what an "Assault Weapon" could be.

Here are just some of the points that the media (including The Boston Globe) got wrong.

Myth: Some headlines claimed that the legislature voted to expand the ban on the sale of the same 19 guns that the federal government has banned.

Fact: The guns are already banned in Massachusetts . The legislature only voted to clarify the definition of so-called "assault weapons," but made no changes to the number of guns included.

Myth: The gun ban was extended.

Fact: Our state`s gun ban was not due to disappear, nor will it become invalid if the federal ban sunsets in September.

Myth: The legislature somehow "won over" gun-rights supporters by including reforms.

Fact: NRA and Gun owners` Action League (GOAL) had made it very clear to the legislature that we would not give up any ground. NRA and GOAL supported this bill because it did not ban any guns, and because it made much-needed reforms.

Myth: Those legislators that wanted to expand the semi-auto gun ban claimed that they "spearheaded" S.2367.

Fact: Credit should be given to Senator Stephen Brewer (D- Barre) and Senator Richard T. Moore (D - Uxbridge) for the reform language.

Myth: The Massachusetts House approved a new version of the ban that would decouple the state definitions from the federal ones.

Fact: The bill merely takes the existing state references to federal law, and fixes the language to a point in time in 1994. Because that is the federal language is currently in effect, the net effect on Massachusetts gun owners is zero. No new gun bans are banned. Keep in mind that the state language in effect before this bill was NEVER set to expire.

With that in mind, NRA members should be very pleased in knowing that their efforts to educate and work with their local representatives and senators resulted in a successful reform action.

Thanks to you and the Gun Owners` Action League, lawful gun owners can now take advantage of this first set of real reforms in over five years.

For more information concerning this legislation you can contact ILA Grassroots at 1-800-392-8683 or the Gun Owners` Action League at 508-393-5333.

Link





You are being purposefully dense.

Press Release from the Heritage Foundation:

Governor Mitt Romney has been working with the Massachusetts Legislature to pass a comprehensive, market-based reform program for health care. This Plan creatively uses an 1115 Waiver to bring affordable private health insurance products to all uninsured residents of the Commonwealth. The cornerstone for this reform is a personal responsibility principle. The Plan establishes a health insurance exchange to enable individuals to purchase health insurance on a pre-tax basis. The Plan also focuses on restraining the growth in heath care costs by empowering consumers and making healthcare service and cost information more easily available. Please join us as Governor Romney reviews this transformative Massachusetts health care reform plan.

Link

Democrats held a veto-proof majority in Massachusetts. Do you understand how politics work? Do you understand what a veto-proof majority means? It means that Democrats control MA politics...

Against a Democrat-majority in MA, Romney pushed-back against Democrats on guns and included provisions for forcing freeloaders to pay, and protecting doctors from frivolous lawsuits.

Those conservative provisions were gutted by "Obamacare."



You are correct, sir.

On this there is absolutely zero argument.

"Any Republican governor of a blue state who manages to balance the budget without raising taxes should be a nominee for Mount Rushmore, to say nothing of president."

Link

"As governor of one of the most liberal states in the union, Mitt Romney did something even Ronald Reagan didn't do as governor of California: He balanced the budget without raising taxes."

Link




Romney was hated by Democrats in MA when he finished his governorship because Romney proposed conservative solutions to every pressing issue.

He called for lower taxes, and for eliminating government agencies. Romney was hated by Democrats. Because Romney's cuts made sense.

As for Romney protecting folks rights... How is Obama doing for your rights...?!-?!

Romney campaigned to make government smaller and cheaper. Obama campaigned to do the opposite.

Romney campaigned to open the markets, and get government out of the marketplace. Obama campaigned to do the opposite...

Romney campaigned for "No new gun laws." Obama campaigned to end gun ownership in the United States. Obama campaigned promising, "Comprehensive restrictions to gun ownership..."

Romney perfect? Not in a million years. Reagan wasn't.

But on rights-elimination, the comparison for Romney is against Obama. Obama has used Executive Orders to eliminate rights by fiat...

That is where the comparison is fair and accurate...

If you people vote for an anti-gunner as the Republican candidate, it is YOU that didn't want my vote, and you won't get it.

Give Christie the nomination, I won't vote Republican.

Give Romney the nomination, I won't vote Republican.

Put an actual conservative that won't surrender my 2nd amendment rights up there, and I'll gladly vote for him/her.

Up to you.

Romney SAID HE WOULD SIGN A GUN BAN.

He's out.  Fuck him.  End of story.

Yup, they should have learned that lesson in 2012 when they had one of the poorest turn outs in history. Conservatives just stayed home and didn't vote at all, which is a bit idiotic since there are more races than just the Presidential one.  

You know in 2010 the Republicans enjoyed a significant victory. They let the media convince them that they were too radical and could have taken more seats otherwise.  In 2012 they tried to play middle of the road milk toast luke warm again and got their asses handed to them.  The media, those wizards of smart, said that the government shut down would turn everyone off from the Republicans and what followed that was a HUGE victory in 2014.  

I don't know when these idiots at the Republican National Party are going to learn that people reward conservative behavior with victory.  Reagan didn't win in a landslide by trying to play middle of the road or taking advice from the liberal media.  

The name of the game is about turn out. IF they can't light a fire under their base and get them excited about voting they'll lose.  Only about 30% of the American people actually vote so stop worrying about "popular opinion polls even if they are of registered voters" and stand for something.  People respect a man who stands for something and they know the difference between a bullshit artist and someone who is sincere.

Were you paying attention last go-around...

After the Aurora incident during the election, Obama said he would sign a gun ban... He said he would restrict firearms ownership beyond "assault weapons." He said he supported "Comprehensive restrictions to gun ownership."

Romney stood-the-line on gun rights... Romney defended gun rights and said, "No new gun laws."

So which time was he telling the truth?

You can believe him if you want to.  I don't.

Then I will put you down for Perry.  Thanks!

 

Romney might have banned guns and said he would do so on the federal level given opportunity, but he wont ban guns. He respects the second amendment. He respects it so much he banned firearms to help gun owners, and would do it again. He isn't like the democrats whould ban guns without respect to the second amendment and to hurt gun owners. Romney would only ban guns out of respect for the Constitution and the greater good of gun owners.

Reagan was a Hollywood trained actor who had led the SAG Union his entire professional life...

Reagan had signed a pro-abortion bill into law prior to R v W. Reagan spearheaded and supported eliminating open-carry in California as Governor. Reagan spearheaded and supported lopsided pro-union legislation as Governor.

Reagan ran for President touting his "bipartisan" record as Governor. He touted his pro-Union legacy. He touted his work with Democrats to restrict gun rights...

Much of what folks remember Reagan by is myth and legend... And good. He was a good President.

His comparison is Carter and Mondale. He kept two extremist liberals out of the Oval Office. Good for him.

He toed-the-line on conservative issues as President. He did the right thing when decisions needed to be made...

But his pro-union, pro-amnesty, mistakes-on-gun record is clear-cut and open for all to see...

And he was the much, much, much better choice against Mondale and Carter... Reagan, mistakes and all, was much, much better than Carter and Mondale.

Romney, and his pro-business, let-the-market-fix-the-economy, "no new gun laws," anti-47% platform is compared to the tyrant Obama... That is where the comparison is fair and accurate...

You're exactly correct, waterglass.

But, even though he would only do it for my own enlightenment and glory to all that is holy....

Fuck him.

The Aurora incident occurred *during* the election.

It occurred *after* Santorum had run out of money and momentum and declared bankruptcy. It occurred *after* Gingrich had run out of momentum, and was in deep debt.

Palin was still calling for spitting the ticket to benefit Obama. But she didn't have any delegates to the convention...

Romney was the nominee.

Then Aurora.

The media was in a frenzy. Obama and Democrats were in a frenzy.

Romney stood-the-line on gun rights. If Romney was a closet gun-banner... Every media outlet in the United States was calling for a wholesale ban.

Romney stood-the-line on gun rights.

Romney holds at a religious level an appreciation for the Constitution. He understands that gun ownership is a civil right.



Romney took his boys shooting and taught them to shoot...

He instilled in them a love for the Second Amendment. They are all "assault weapon" owners, and are all contributing members of society.



According to the NRA, the majority-Democrats who run all of MA politics *own* MA gun laws. The majority-Democrats in MA had passed restrictive gun laws long before Romney was ever elected...

According to the NRA, Romney pushed-back against Democrats in MA and tried to make things better for gun owners in MA.

Romney believes that the US Constitution is sacred, and inspired by God...

He preached it from the pulpit his entire professional life as a volunteer religious leader...

Yep.

Governor Jan Brewer, Nikki Haley, among other Governors are *extremely* pro-gun and excellent conservative communicators.

Perfect? No one is.

Jason Chaffetz, Mia Love... *Real* conservatives, and *excellent* conservative communicators...

Rick Perry is a good dude, a great Governor, a Veteran, and a great leader... We would be lucky to have him lead the Republican ticket...

Rand Paul is a great choice as well... Perfect? Not in a million years. Perfect only exists in the minds of retards and liberal Democrats...

Folks, it is not rocket science... There is no secret to winning the Republican nomination...

Say you are going to run, and get volunteers to caucus for you, and get your name on the state ballots. Easy-breasy...

Find a conservative you can get-behind, and send them money, and volunteer time for them and support them...