Quote: musiclady wrote in post #58

---

Quote: steph wrote in post #57

---

Quote: nerd wrote in post #55

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #48

---

Quote: nerd wrote in post #45

---

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #43

---

Quote: nerd wrote in post #39

---

How many of them (Republicans) are trying to undo obama care...??

---

Had John McCain been elected in '08, obviously, there would be no Obamacare to undo.

Yeah, that John McCain, the one you've bragged about not voting for.

---

Personal attacks a side I still would not have voted for him, he made his bed. Now it you think you can force people to vote for someone keep beating your head against the wall.

---

My question is (a genuine one, nerd), why would anyone ever brag about allowing Obama to fulfill the dreams of the Progressive movement and destroy the country?

Because John McCain, bad as he was, and Mitt Romney, were the only stopgaps we had to stop the complete takeover of our government by Marxists.

Why would not voting for them make you proud of yourself?

---

I like a few million others thought mccain was a big a pos as obama, and I and millions others refused to vote for his amnesty pushing butt. It was that simple. Now you should be more concerned as to why the rove moderates keep pushing moderates, they have lost how many times now. What about 3 million sit out the vote on Mit. And I voted for mit, and he was not a bit better than liberal mccain. But I do not know why you brought mit into it other than the millions that refused to vote for a moderate to liberal again. And if the gop keeps pushing this amnesty stuff and do not stop caving, they are going to lose again.

---

A moderate Mitt or McCain would have been light years better for all of us than the communist POS in office now. McCain wouldn't have let his ambassador and staff get slaughtered while watching and Mitt would have been able to at least understand the economy.

---

Nerd, if you think I should be as concerned with Karl Rove as I am with Obama/Soros/Holder/Jarrett/Ayers cabal you're sadly off-base.

Once again, you target the Republican, and not THE ENEMY.

steph is absolutely right. McCain would have been light years better than a COMMUNIST, and Mitt Romney a few light years more.

You have the wrong enemy in your sites.

YES, we need to reform the Republican party. YES, we have people in our party that are far from conservative.

But are they as vile, treacherous and evil as the leftists running the show right now? Are they anti-military, pro-abortion, pro-eugenics, anti-Constitutional, pro-Islamofascists?

It's a ridiculous premise.

You can't win this argument, nerd. Not against people who are educated and fact-based.

---

Here's the problem some conservatives fail to grasp. The primaries are where the candidate for the general is chosen. Every primary there seems to be at least 5 or more conservatives with one or maybe two moderates. When the primaries start happening then the conservatives split the vote between the conservative candidates and the moderate wins in primary after primary. They usually end up winning the primary. It is a numbers game.

The conservatives need to get together and figure out the best possible candidates and get behind two or three before the first caucus/primary is held. The outcome for the general may just be a surprise.

Quote: steph wrote in post #63

---

Here's the problem some conservatives fail to grasp. The primaries are where the candidate for the general is chosen. Every primary there seems to be at least 5 or more conservatives with one or maybe two moderates. When the primaries start happening then the conservatives split the vote between the conservative candidates and the moderate wins in primary after primary. They usually end up winning the primary. It is a numbers game.

The conservatives need to get together and figure out the best possible candidates and get behind two or three before the first caucus/primary is held. The outcome for the general may just be a surprise.

---

Quote: FP123 wrote in post #65

---

Quote: steph wrote in post #63

---

Here's the problem some conservatives fail to grasp. The primaries are where the candidate for the general is chosen. Every primary there seems to be at least 5 or more conservatives with one or maybe two moderates. When the primaries start happening then the conservatives split the vote between the conservative candidates and the moderate wins in primary after primary. They usually end up winning the primary. It is a numbers game.

The conservatives need to get together and figure out the best possible candidates and get behind two or three before the first caucus/primary is held. The outcome for the general may just be a surprise.

---

The problem is that there is no unifying entity to accomplish that. Each candidate (and their backers) enters the race for whatever reasons that they have, regardless of whether or not they have good reasons or not. I don't see how that will ever change, do you?

---

Quote: FP123 wrote in post #65

---

Quote: steph wrote in post #63

---

Here's the problem some conservatives fail to grasp. The primaries are where the candidate for the general is chosen. Every primary there seems to be at least 5 or more conservatives with one or maybe two moderates. When the primaries start happening then the conservatives split the vote between the conservative candidates and the moderate wins in primary after primary. They usually end up winning the primary. It is a numbers game.

The conservatives need to get together and figure out the best possible candidates and get behind two or three before the first caucus/primary is held. The outcome for the general may just be a surprise.

---

The problem is that there is no unifying entity to accomplish that. Each candidate (and their backers) enters the race for whatever reasons that they have, regardless of whether or not they have good reasons or not. I don't see how that will ever change, do you?

---

Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #66

---

I would add here in NJ, we had a strong conservative in the primary for governor and the 'country club' elite who run Jersey's repub party spent a fortune to defeat him in favor of the 'moderate' Christie. I'm certain there are other states where that happens.

---

Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #61

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #58

---

Quote: steph wrote in post #57

---

Quote: nerd wrote in post #55

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #48

---

Quote: nerd wrote in post #45

---

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #43

---

Quote: nerd wrote in post #39

---

How many of them (Republicans) are trying to undo obama care...??

---

Had John McCain been elected in '08, obviously, there would be no Obamacare to undo.

Yeah, that John McCain, the one you've bragged about not voting for.

---

Personal attacks a side I still would not have voted for him, he made his bed. Now it you think you can force people to vote for someone keep beating your head against the wall.

---

My question is (a genuine one, nerd), why would anyone ever brag about allowing Obama to fulfill the dreams of the Progressive movement and destroy the country?

Because John McCain, bad as he was, and Mitt Romney, were the only stopgaps we had to stop the complete takeover of our government by Marxists.

Why would not voting for them make you proud of yourself?

---

I like a few million others thought mccain was a big a pos as obama, and I and millions others refused to vote for his amnesty pushing butt. It was that simple. Now you should be more concerned as to why the rove moderates keep pushing moderates, they have lost how many times now. What about 3 million sit out the vote on Mit. And I voted for mit, and he was not a bit better than liberal mccain. But I do not know why you brought mit into it other than the millions that refused to vote for a moderate to liberal again. And if the gop keeps pushing this amnesty stuff and do not stop caving, they are going to lose again.

---

A moderate Mitt or McCain would have been light years better for all of us than the communist POS in office now. McCain wouldn't have let his ambassador and staff get slaughtered while watching and Mitt would have been able to at least understand the economy.

---

Nerd, if you think I should be as concerned with Karl Rove as I am with Obama/Soros/Holder/Jarrett/Ayers cabal you're sadly off-base.

Once again, you target the Republican, and not THE ENEMY.

steph is absolutely right. McCain would have been light years better than a COMMUNIST, and Mitt Romney a few light years more.

You have the wrong enemy in your sites.

YES, we need to reform the Republican party. YES, we have people in our party that are far from conservative.

But are they as vile, treacherous and evil as the leftists running the show right now? Are they anti-military, pro-abortion, pro-eugenics, anti-Constitutional, pro-Islamofascists?

It's a ridiculous premise.

You can't win this argument, nerd. Not against people who are educated and fact-based.

---

I can understand your frustration at the current situation the country is in.

However there are Republicans who are anti-Military, pro-abortion, anti-constitution, and pro-Islamofascist; many of them call themselves moderates. Karl Rove loves them. McCain falls into many of these categories. Calling this a ridiculous premise does not change the fact. People resort to calling facts ridiculous, and to implying that those who disagree with them ore not educated nor fact based but running on emotion when they lack facts themselves or are experiencing cognitive dissonance. These same people also show a lack of respect for others who are equally concerned about the future of our country and sharing their observations.

Please consider what I have written. The end.

---

Quote: FP123 wrote in post #65

---

Quote: steph wrote in post #63

---

Here's the problem some conservatives fail to grasp. The primaries are where the candidate for the general is chosen. Every primary there seems to be at least 5 or more conservatives with one or maybe two moderates. When the primaries start happening then the conservatives split the vote between the conservative candidates and the moderate wins in primary after primary. They usually end up winning the primary. It is a numbers game.

The conservatives need to get together and figure out the best possible candidates and get behind two or three before the first caucus/primary is held. The outcome for the general may just be a surprise.

---

The problem is that there is no unifying entity to accomplish that. Each candidate (and their backers) enters the race for whatever reasons that they have, regardless of whether or not they have good reasons or not. I don't see how that will ever change, do you?

---

Quote: FP123 wrote in post #68

---

Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #66

---

I would add here in NJ, we had a strong conservative in the primary for governor and the 'country club' elite who run Jersey's repub party spent a fortune to defeat him in favor of the 'moderate' Christie. I'm certain there are other states where that happens.

---

I'm sure that happens in many states as well.

---

Quote: steph wrote in post #67

---

Quote: FP123 wrote in post #65

---

Quote: steph wrote in post #63

---

Here's the problem some conservatives fail to grasp. The primaries are where the candidate for the general is chosen. Every primary there seems to be at least 5 or more conservatives with one or maybe two moderates. When the primaries start happening then the conservatives split the vote between the conservative candidates and the moderate wins in primary after primary. They usually end up winning the primary. It is a numbers game.

The conservatives need to get together and figure out the best possible candidates and get behind two or three before the first caucus/primary is held. The outcome for the general may just be a surprise.

---

The problem is that there is no unifying entity to accomplish that. Each candidate (and their backers) enters the race for whatever reasons that they have, regardless of whether or not they have good reasons or not. I don't see how that will ever change, do you?

---

I know that but until some decide that having a conservative win the primary instead of the moderate then they will keep losing. Blaming the GOP isn't helping with this particular problem.

---

There isn't a simple solution to be honest. Purifying the party isn't working too well though. Focusing on defeating the progressives should be the most important and unifying issue. Instead there is a major power play going on between the factions.

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #74

---

Quote: steph wrote in post #73

---

There isn't a simple solution....

---

Sure there is.

Conservatives: Stop whining and start beating RINOs in the primaries with conservative candidates who can win in the general elections.

Problem solved!

---