FreedomWorks chief: If Romney’s the nominee, tea partiers might have to stay home

posted at 4:10 pm on June 10, 2011 by Allahpundit

Don’t look now, but between this and Amy Kremer’s comments on Fox last weekend, we’ve got a bona fide tea-party split over Mitt.

I knew that FreedomWorks was intent on torpedoing him in the primary but I didn’t think they’d take it quite this far quite so soon. Better Obama II than Romney I?

If Mitt Romney wins the Republican nomination for president, Tea Party activists may not show up at all to vote in the general election, one leading group associated with the Tea Party movement is warning.

“I think that’s a potential problem,” said Matt Kibbe, FreedomWorks’ president, during a wide-ranging interview with reporters at The Daily Caller.

He also warned that if Republicans nominate another “John McCain,” activists might even vote third party in 2012.

“I believe in redemption, but at some point, you sort of give up,” he said. “And we’ve given up on Mitt Romney.”

An idle threat? Potentially not:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds that in a three-way congressional contest with a Tea Party candidate on the ballot, the Democrat picks up 40% of the vote. The Republican earns 21% support, while nearly as many (18%) favor the Tea Party candidate. Twenty-one percent (21%), however, remain undecided…

In the new survey, the Tea Party candidate draws 28% support from GOP voters, while 85% of Democrats back their party’s candidate. Just 45% of Republicans support the Republican candidate in the three-way matchup. Among voters not affiliated with either of the major parties, 15% like the Republican, 29% the Democrat and 25% the Tea Party candidate.

When asked about Romney’s rivals, Kibbe told the DC that Cain could be vulnerable for his TARP position and that, while he likes Palin, “she needs to prove that she can study up.” Where does that leave FreedomWorks at the moment, then? With Bachmann? I’m skeptical given their approach to the Castle/O’Donnell primary in Delaware. While other tea-party heroes like Palin and DeMint lined up behind O’D, Kibbe told the Christian Science Monitor at the time, “We stayed out of that race because we are not convinced that Christine O’Donnell can win.” Bachmann’s a longer shot for the nomination than O’Donnell was in her Senate race, so presumably she’s not an option for them. Maybe they’re holding out for Perry to jump in? Or maybe, per their O’Donnell logic, they’re going to invest in Pawlenty as a conservative yet electable candidate.

It’s worth flagging this if for no other reason than as a sneak preview of how wrenching Romney’s nomination could be within the party, especially among activists. The possibility of people staying home in protest is real but it’s already priced into his stock; what hasn’t been fully considered yet is the prospect of rifts opening within the grassroots and between tea party groups as people choose sides between the Kibbe and Kremer approaches. Any group that bolsters Obama’s chances by walking away will be so vilified afterwards that they’ll be essentially committing themselves to a fully third-party identity. Maybe FreedomWorks will think better of that strategy — Kibbe could simply be bluffing to nudge people towards nominating someone else — but “we’ve given up on Mitt Romney” is pretty high-stakes.

Update: Tabitha Hale of FreedomWorks tweets that we shouldn’t jump to any conclusions:

The piece didn’t say it was “purity” or Obama at all. In fact, Kibbe actually said opposite – that he was CONCERNED about that.

We’re willing to rally, right now we’re not sure around who – but this is the time to duke it out.

Okay, but if there’s a chance the group might grudgingly support Romney in the interest of beating Obama, why drop “we’ve given up on Mitt Romney” on him now?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Okay fine, if you really don’t want to understand what anyone is saying and want to assume that they might refuse to vote for a RINO as some sort of temper tantrum, then you do us all a favor and just vote for Obama.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 5:42 PM

I’m focused on getting rid of the real threat which is Obama. I’m not out pontificating on how I’m not going to vote for whoever if I don’t get what I want. The “if you don’t play by my rules, I’m taking my ball and going home” approach doesn’t work on the playground, it’s really not going to work in an election.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 5:59 PM

Sekhmet on June 10, 2011 at 5:56 PM

at least somebody gets it.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 5:59 PM

Splashman on June 10, 2011 at 5:52 PM

Seriously? You don’t think Obama is worse?

I think you’re full of shiite. I think you and your ilk are Dems. And trolls.

sloopy on June 10, 2011 at 6:00 PM

I will not vote for Mitt Romney. If we’re going to be led by a socialist dimwit in a suit, I will not cast a vote for them. Write-in or third party this time.

MadisonConservative on June 10, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Get a clue. In this election Mitt is last election’s John.

We can’t afford the President’s recovery summers and anyone who has policies that can be confused with the President’s policies isn’t going to contrast enough with the insane administration we have now.

Speakup on June 10, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Romney’s Supreme picks would be just as bad as Obama’s.

tetriskid on June 10, 2011 at 4:14 PM

And by way of contrast here you have the latter. Happily, we are starting this 16 months earlier than we did with McCain. And since these guys are either too stoned, too dumb, or just looking for a fight, it’s entirely possible that they will come around by 11/2012.

With McCain, we had a career pro-life fiscal conservative (lifetime ACU – 83; 2009 – 96; 2010 – 100%) with some obvious flaws versus an apparent Marxist with an open contempt for the military and western culture in general and a serious case of racial confusion. And yet there were knuckleheads like these who sat at home.

Does anyone seriously believe we’d be this bad off or worse with McCain in office? Seriously?

Jaibones on June 10, 2011 at 6:01 PM

Romney’s Supreme picks would be just as bad as Obama’s.

This one’s my favorite. “As bad as” Kagan and the Wise Latina? How could you be that crazy?

Jaibones on June 10, 2011 at 6:03 PM

Moot point. Moot Romney won’t be nominated.

rrpjr on June 10, 2011 at 6:07 PM

Romney is my LAST choice in the primary. ANYONE but him.

But in the general against Ofilth? Yeah, I’d vote for him.

KeepOhioRed on June 10, 2011 at 4:49 PM

Damn glad to meet you. I like people with functional brains, unlike the nitwits who think it would be a good idea to vote for a third party or stay home if it’s Romney vs. O’Bonehead.

Jaibones on June 10, 2011 at 5:46 PM

..and baby makes three. If you folks ever get to Southern California, let’s party. I’m buyin’.

The War Planner on June 10, 2011 at 6:08 PM

Oh no we won’t stay home.. ANYONE BUT OBAMA….

reshas1 on June 10, 2011 at 6:08 PM

OBAMA VICTORY 2012 = BANKRUPT NATION – SOCIALISM GETS THE BLAME – CONSERVATIVE ASCENDENCY.

ROMNEY VICTORY 2012 = BANKRUPT NATION – CONSERVATISM GETS THE BLAME – SOCIALIST ASCENDENCY.

If the choice is between those two – I’ll take Obama thank you – and consider his re-election a down payment on the new TRULY CONSERVATIVE government that will follow him.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 6:08 PM

Besides if we get the weirdos out we might get some reasonable Independents to join up, and have a true center right party called the Republicans.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 5:51 PM

The weirdo’s you speak of – are 100 percent of the Southern Republican base. You get them out – and your new “center right party” will not only be “center left” – it’ll be the THIRD PARTY.

I’m all for making a new party – taking the real conservatives and making a new party – it’ll mean the GOP becomes so small they’re the THIRD party.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 6:12 PM

Update: Tabitha Hale of FreedomWorks tweets that we shouldn’t jump to any conclusions:

Okay, but if there’s a chance the group might grudgingly support Romney in the interest of beating Obama, why drop “we’ve given up on Mitt Romney” on him now?

Because they’re eggheaded reactionaries.

The Ugly American on June 10, 2011 at 6:12 PM

How odd. I don’t see a dime’s worth of difference between Huntsman, Romney, and Christie, at least from a policy and history view. Pawlenty would seem to be more conservative, historically, than any of the three. Huntsman seems to be the most consistently liberal.

Jaibones on June 10, 2011 at 5:44 PM

The difference is that Pawlenty and Christie seem to have some honesty and integrity. Pawlenty had the courage to go to Iowa and say that ethanol subsidies had to end. Christie dared pick a public fight with school teachers and won. They may be RINOs but unlike Romney and Huntsman they seem to put truth and good policy ahead of polls and media approval.

joe_doufu on June 10, 2011 at 6:14 PM

If Romney or Huntsman is nominated; Obama walks to a 2nd term.

Norwegian on June 10, 2011 at 5:51 PM

Some would say that’s a bad thing. I don’t.

Here are the scenarios:

1) Romney (or any other RINO) wins the nomination. In the general, Tea Partiers vote for Romney on the “anybody-but-Obama” theory. Romney narrowly wins. A massive victory for RINOs everywhere. With Republican control of both chambers of Congress, Romney convinces squishy Repubs and moderate Dems to enact his big-government policies. More RINOs are encouraged to embrace their inner socialist. In 2016, RINO utopia is achieved when Romney is re-elected. Dogs and cats live together.

2) Romney (or any other RINO) wins the nomination. In the general, Tea Partiers do not vote for Romney. Romney loses in a Mondale-esque landslide. A massive defeat for RINOs everywhere. With Republican control of both chambers of Congress, Obama is hamstrung and forced to limit his socialistic ambitions to executive orders. In 2014, Republican majorities are increased with a wave of Tea Party-fearing freshmen. In 2016, Marco Rubio is elected President. Unicorns frolic in wild abandon.

Here’s my message to Repubs: if you want to win the White House in 2012, don’t nominate a RINO.

Splashman on June 10, 2011 at 6:14 PM

I’m all for making a new party – taking the real conservatives and making a new party – it’ll mean the GOP becomes so small they’re the THIRD party.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 6:12 PM

And the Democrats will live happily ever after. Hope you enjoy the new world you help create. I, for one, will be moving to Panama.

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 6:16 PM

OBAMA VICTORY 2012 = BANKRUPT NATION – SOCIALISM GETS THE BLAME – CONSERVATIVE ASCENDENCY.

ROMNEY VICTORY 2012 = BANKRUPT NATION – CONSERVATISM GETS THE BLAME – SOCIALIST ASCENDENCY.

If the choice is between those two – I’ll take Obama thank you – and consider his re-election a down payment on the new TRULY CONSERVATIVE government that will follow him.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 6:08 PM

Exactly. Even though Romney is no conservative, conservatism will get the blame.

No need for all caps, though.

Splashman on June 10, 2011 at 6:16 PM

The difference is that Pawlenty and Christie seem to have some honesty and integrity.

joe_doufu on June 10, 2011 at 6:14 PM

Right – Tim Pawlenty LED the Climate Change Scaremongering for the US Governors along with Dimmocrit Janet Napalitano. Now that the nation’s turned against Climate Change – Timmah has “shifted” his position to. Great bravery there.

As far as ethanol subsidies and him being “brave” in Iowa – newsflash – the GOP voters DON’T LIKE Ethanol – and don’t like the subsidies. So pissing a few Iowans off is chump change compared to the payday he gets from the rest of the voters in other states in future primaries.

Please.

Christie? He’s running now? Nope – Nope he ain’t. So he is irrelevant in the discussion.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 6:18 PM

I’m focused on getting rid of the real threat which is Obama.
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 5:59 PM

You need to adjust your focus. If you indeed succeed at this goal, it becomes immediately irrelevant. What becomes relevant at that moment is who you elected to replace him. Sadly, “none of the above” isn’t a real-world option. So if you can’t nominate somebody better than Obama, there’s no sense in getting rid of him.

joe_doufu on June 10, 2011 at 6:19 PM

Exactly. Even though Romney is no conservative, conservatism will get the blame.

No need for all caps, though.

Splashman on June 10, 2011 at 6:16 PM

Caps Lock is “cruise control” for cool my man!

Only joking … sorry!

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 6:20 PM

People, here is an example Tea Party justification for preferring Obama over Romney.

elfman on June 10, 2011 at 2:09 PM

blink on June 10, 2011 at 6:19 PM

What kind of a BLIND IDIOT takes a random post off HotAir and then tries to pass it off as “Tea Party Justification”?

An idiot – that’s who.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 6:22 PM

Moot point. Moot Romney won’t be nominated.

rrpjr on June 10, 2011 at 6:07 PM

Dude, almost everything on Hotair is moot.

AshleyTKing on June 10, 2011 at 6:22 PM

2) Romney (or any other RINO) wins the nomination. In the general, Tea Partiers do not vote for Romney. Romney loses in a Mondale-esque landslide. A massive defeat for RINOs everywhere. With Republican control of both chambers of Congress, Obama is hamstrung and forced to limit his socialistic ambitions to executive orders. In 2014, Republican majorities are increased with a wave of Tea Party-fearing freshmen. In 2016, Marco Rubio is elected President. Unicorns frolic in wild abandon.

Here’s my message to Repubs: if you want to win the White House in 2012, don’t nominate a RINO.

Splashman on June 10, 2011 at 6:14 PM

..appreciate the logic but you might be working too hard to thread the needle on your #2 above. Cannot see Romney losing in a landslide if we take both House and senate. (But, then again..)

Consider this — and I ain’t saying this is gospel — but, if Romney is as squishy as you say he is (and he may very well be), then the left-center folks who got stung with Obama might not find Romney so objectionable and he may attract them.

Not idealistic, but a scenario that gets Obama out — which is my ultimate concern.

Now, we’re 16 month’s out which is like 2nd and 6 on our own 40 in the first quarter tied 7-7. we don’t need to go to a Hail Mary just yet. We can try a short out, and a draw.

..as I said, I am still looking at the GOP field and, after all of the primaries, Mitt might not be around.

The War Planner on June 10, 2011 at 6:25 PM

You know I just realized we’ve forgotten all about Newt. I hope we can all agree that if Newt is the nominee, all of us will be voting together for a third party. Right? Right?

joe_doufu on June 10, 2011 at 6:28 PM

Romney is the best the Democrats have.

Roy Rogers on June 10, 2011 at 6:29 PM

You know I just realized we’ve forgotten all about Newt. I hope we can all agree that if Newt is the nominee, all of us will be voting together for a third party. Right? Right?

joe_doufu on June 10, 2011 at 6:28 PM

We’ve been trying to forget him. You’re not helping. :)

Seriously, Newt has zero chance. Not worth discussing, especially in a Romney thread.

Splashman on June 10, 2011 at 6:31 PM

What a bunch of stupid morons. These so-called stupid tea party morons have a death wish. The imbeciles would rather have Obama than Romney? They just want power, and are a bunch of selfish wimps.

Chudi on June 10, 2011 at 6:31 PM

This one’s my favorite. “As bad as” Kagan and the Wise Latina? How could you be that crazy?

Jaibones on June 10, 2011 at 6:03 PM

Because Romney has no core ideology. He will lie to whatever crowd is in front of him.

How can any voter trust his selection process for Judges?

He has been on both sides of every major policy.

Abortion.

2nd Amendment.

Taxes.

If polls shift so does Romney’s opinion.

tetriskid on June 10, 2011 at 6:33 PM

Again, if that’s your ultimate concern, then you better factor in the Tea Party’s reaction to the nominated candidate.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 6:30 PM

I am. It’s a happy reality that has to be dealt with. I’d rather have that than some socialistic crowd of barbarians demonstrating in the street a la France or Greece or some other EU toilet country whose workers are revolting.

The War Planner on June 10, 2011 at 6:34 PM

I’ll await your apology.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 6:28 PM

My apologies. :D

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 6:35 PM

What a bunch of stupid morons. These so-called stupid tea party morons have a death wish. The imbeciles would rather have Obama than Romney? They just want power, and are a bunch of selfish wimps.

Chudi on June 10, 2011 at 6:31 PM

.easy, old son. You might be mistaken for a troll..

The War Planner on June 10, 2011 at 6:36 PM

What a bunch of stupid morons. These so-called stupid tea party morons have a death wish. The imbeciles would rather have Obama than Romney? They just want power, and are a bunch of selfish wimps.

Chudi on June 10, 2011 at 6:31 PM

Ombama Victory = Bankrupt Nation where Socialism gets the blame.

Romney Victory = Bankrupt Nation where Conservatism gets the blame.

Either way – we go broke. So who’s really better? The guy who’s going to sink Conservatism along with him – or the guy who will sink Socialism.

Who gets the blame – MATTERS in what comes next.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 6:37 PM

Kibbe is on Barry and Jack Davis’ payroll.

bayview on June 10, 2011 at 6:39 PM

Not idealistic, but a scenario that gets Obama out — which is my ultimate concern.

The War Planner on June 10, 2011 at 6:25 PM

I’m not trying to pick a fight. I am going to assume that your ultimate concern is the the long-term health of America, which is dependent on the long-term health of conservatism. Do you agree? If so, how does electing Romney over Obama contribute to the long-term health of America? Won’t RINO politicians everywhere be encouraged to ignore the Tea Party? Won’t that propagate the myth that a true conservative can’t be elected, and that RINO is the only way to go? Won’t conservatives be blamed for the blamed for the meltdown which Romney’s big-spending, big-government solutions will inevitably bring?

Again, not being snarky. Honestly curious how you square this circle.

Splashman on June 10, 2011 at 6:42 PM

blink on June 10, 2011 at 6:12 PM

If I get f’d in the butt by Obama for another four years plus, I’m blaming the tea party. I don’t like saying that but I’m feeling it.

I supported the tea party before because I like the ideas, but they are now at the point where they are so powerful that they can screw everything up because it’s gotta be their way or the highway and that’s more dangerous than any RINO nominee could be.

The this is being spouted about, the more I’m seeing them becoming the fringe group people on the other side are afraid of.

This is really ticking me off. Because no matter how any of you try to package it, all I get is “if I don’t get exactly what I want, then f*** all y’all!” Just like in 2008, I kept telling people we were going to elect our own Hugo Chavez and nobody believed me, now I’m seeing the same sh*t that happened in Venezuela happen here again and everybody’s too stupid to see it except me. I tell people that politics is like physics, the same thing tried in two different places still yields the same results. I’ll be damned if I’m not right. If we stand any chance of getting the country back on track we have to stop Obama’s momentum first. That needs to be the primary goal. But it’s not. Not from what I can see. whoever the nominee is, we need to get behind him or her if we have any chance of stopping the momentum. If that means voting for someone you don’t fully support, well then, what’s more important, the country or your pride and the tea party? I’m sorry, we have a better chance to turn things around with a RINO in office then we would with another four years of Obama. That’s the truth. Romney’s not my first choice but when it comes to it, I’ll take what I can get if it means getting rid of the person I believe is more of a threat than any RINO is. I don’t look my kids in the face and tell them we had a chance to stop him and we didn’t because we were too busy fighting with ourselves.

If we’re not willing to come together in one voice and tell Obama “enough!, No More!” then we should just throw in the towel because he’s already won. Obama is beatable now. And the one thing I see standing in the way of that I’m afraid, is the tea party. One voice. That’s what we need to have more than anything. And I don’t see it happening.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 6:49 PM

Is Obama worse than Romney?

It depends… are we talking tactically, or strategically?

On the one hand, yes Obama is worse than Romney for a 4 year period… I don’t see a way to claim otherwise.

Tactically, for the current fight Romney is the choice to make.

On the other hand, we are a two party nation… one party will never be serious about our fiscal problem (not in my lifetime anyhow); one party might be serious with the proper encouragement. Voting for Romney allows neither party to be serious about the problem ever.

So Strategically, you don’t vote for Romney with the goal of wanting a Republican party that understands that if they’re not serious they won’t get votes and being “just a little bit better” than the Democrats isn’t sufficient to get elected… which makes some sense for a long term plan.

Does that pretty much sum up the arguments for everyone?

So, are you a tactical planner willing to let the Republicans be candy-asses forever on every major issue? Or are you a strategic planner who is basically just voting for Obama because you’re secretly a Democrat and can’t see what is clearly in front of your face?

Hmm, who haven’t I offended here? Anyone?

Allah, not only are you a beta-male, your breath smells funky today!

Now I think I’ve offended everyone.

gekkobear on June 10, 2011 at 6:53 PM

The people who voted in the Tea Party candidates in November 2010 will not nominate or support a RINO in 2012.

If RINO’s continue to emulate Democrats, and drive away the conservative vote again, it won’t be the first time RINO’s screwed America.

Roy Rogers on June 10, 2011 at 6:53 PM

I AM NOT voting for another LIBERAL! NO RINOS

It’s time the RINOS vote consevative for a change.

LeeSeneca on June 10, 2011 at 6:55 PM

The Supreme Cort Justices appointed in Barry’s second term will outlaw the Tea Party.

bayview on June 10, 2011 at 6:56 PM

The weirdo’s you speak of – are 100 percent of the Southern Republican base. You get them out – and your new “center right party” will not only be “center left” – it’ll be the THIRD PARTY.

I’m all for making a new party – taking the real conservatives and making a new party – it’ll mean the GOP becomes so small they’re the THIRD party.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 6:12 PM

Perhaps you don’t understand how democracy works.

Candidates run for office and voters vote for them

Then the person with the most votes wins.

So if you don’t like Romney, put up someone else and we will all get a chance to vote. If your person is the best person for the job they will win. If they are the second best person for the job they will not win.

What you and the Tea Party want is to do it a different way. You want to choose the candidate instead of letting us vote. That is not democracy.

You may make a new party if you choose. That is also democracy.

But don’t threaten me!!! I do not like to be black-mailed and I think giving in to the black-mailing gangesters is worse than Obama getting back in the Whitehouse.

You see, Barack Obama has not black-mailed me. I hate his guts but he won an election. That is how my country works.

So take your delusions of grandeur and your totalitarian way of getting your way in elections and move to Russia where you belong!!!!

You will not get my vote by threats and intimidation!!!

You do not scare me you thug.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 6:57 PM

No Progressives, don’t care what their party affiliation is. No Newt, No Mittens, no more progressives.

batterup on June 10, 2011 at 6:58 PM

Barf:

Powerline: Romney on Energy Efficiency

Yeah, Romney will be much better than Obama. Can’t wait. Sign me up.

Splashman on June 10, 2011 at 6:58 PM

Behind every liberal socialist is a RINO enaber.

RINO’s moved so far to the left they made the far left wing look “reasonable.”

Look where that got us now.

Roy Rogers on June 10, 2011 at 7:01 PM

Dude, almost everything on Hotair is moot.

AshleyTKing on June 10, 2011 at 6:22 PM

I don’t know about that. But Mitt Romney certainly is.

rrpjr on June 10, 2011 at 7:01 PM

Freedom Works needs to be cut down to size. They do not get to claim the mantle of “voice” of the Tea Party just because they pay for the effin’ sound system at some rallies.

TC@LeatherPenguin on June 10, 2011 at 4:15 PM

No kidding.

citrus on June 10, 2011 at 7:02 PM

RINO Hypocrisy …

Dammit! We can’t nominate Palin – the INDEPENDENTS won’t vote for her!

versus …

You God**ned CONSERVATIVES better vote for Romney when we nominate him!

Which is why I give less than 2 cents about the Republican Party – they care more about the votes of INDEPENDENTS than they do CONSERVATIVES – many of whom, by the way – fund the campaigns and do volunteer work for the candidates.

Look – let’s make this REAL EASY for you guys – just don’t nominate Romney or anyone like him and you’ll prolly get our support.

But the days were you could COUNT ON OUR SUPPORT – are over.

It’s our vote – now go ahead and pound your little fists on the table because we won’t vote the way you want us to unless (le gasp!) you put up a worthy nominee.

LOL

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:04 PM

Maybe the moderate republicans need to make sure they vote for a true conservative in the Primary. Why is it that the conservative voters are always expected to make the compromise? Everyone is so busy complaining that the tea partiers are traitors if they don’t vote for Mitt if he wins the primary, what about those republicans who vote for Mitt in the primary knowing full well he does not have the backing of conservatives or the tea party, If there is a split then you are just as much to blame.

spypeach on June 10, 2011 at 7:04 PM

The Supreme Cort Justices appointed in Barry’s second term will outlaw the Tea Party.

bayview on June 10, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Then we’ll just have to throw them into Boston Harbor when the trouble begins.

joe_doufu on June 10, 2011 at 7:05 PM

(just kidding!)

joe_doufu on June 10, 2011 at 7:05 PM

If you aren’t factoring the Tea Party stance into your primary vote, then I hope you enjoy the new world you help to create.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 6:21 PM

You sound like some union thug: “Vote my way or else.”

I don’t care to be part of your world blink, where everyone must pass an ideological purity test or be branded a traitor to the cause.

You and others here have made your point absolutely clear: either vote your way; support the candidate that you approve of; do exactly as you say, or the world will come to end. Not only will it end, but, out of pure selfish spite, you’ll help usher it in.

So no – I don’t want any part of your narrow world, Blink, where blackmail is the preferred method of persuasion. You can have it.

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 7:05 PM

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 6:57 PM

Perhaps you don’t understand how Democracy works.

If you nominate Romney – I don’t have to vote for him.

MAKE ME.

Heh

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:06 PM

You sound like some union thug: “Vote my way or else.”

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 7:05 PM

You sound like a fascist … “Vote for the party candidate or else!”

See how that works? You put a bad face on us we can turn that puppy right back on you.

The fact is – you guys don’t want to nominate someone like Palin because you don’t think indies will vote for her in the general.

But then – out of the OTHER side of your mouth – you DEMAND that we Conservatives vote for your nominee – even if you nominate a Socialist.

Since when did INDIES get more priority in this party – when WE CONSERVATIVES pay for these campaigns and provided the enthusiasm for the victory last year?

Indies didn’t do squat – you kow tow to them.

Conservatives are the backbone of your party – you make DEMANDS of us.

LOL – I’m not a Republican anymore bro – so start kissing my independent arse. I’m not voting for Romney.

I’ll vote Obama.

How’s that?

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:09 PM

Er… the last time the Republicans ran a conservative extremist for president, he won 49 states.

PersonFromPorlock on June 10, 2011 at 7:11 PM

You thugs really need to leave Petunia alone. /

Bugler on June 10, 2011 at 7:12 PM

The Supreme Cort Justices appointed in Barry’s second term will outlaw the Tea Party.

bayview on June 10, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Which is another reason I’ll vote Obama over Romney – let the bastards try that. I’d LOVE to see that. I live in the South – no one is going to outlaw the TP down here and get away with it.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:12 PM

I’m focused on getting rid of the real threat which is Obama.
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 5:59 PM

Big mistake – the real threat is the liberals in both parties that have taken America down by systematiclly turning awayfrom her basic principles -which must include recognition of the fact that the only rights we have, come from nature’s God. It is that alone which requires we behave accordingly -raise our kids accordily, don’t commit crimes, become slothful dependend and parisites to society,expect or allow the government to touch what is rightfully our realm of power. The government’s role must be a linmited one if freedom is to prevail -it’s not rocket science.

Show me a RINO who belives that. They are all closet Marxists.

Don L on June 10, 2011 at 7:12 PM

Er… the last time the Republicans ran a conservative extremist for president, he won 49 states.

PersonFromPorlock on June 10, 2011 at 7:11 PM

Exactly right – and I’ll argue that’s the LAST election we really won where Americans were voting FOR us.

Bush 41 was a coattail victory.

Bush 43 was a reaction against Gore.

Second time he won was a reaction to 9-11.

Then we ran McRage – Mr. Moderate – and he lost.

He lost because he stood for nothing – same as Romney.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:14 PM

blink on June 10, 2011 at 7:02 PM

when you say that, it sounds like “you have to work with me but I won’t work with you?”

Isn’t that the Democrat version of compromise that ticks so many of us off?

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 7:15 PM

You thugs really need to leave Petunia alone. /

Bugler on June 10, 2011 at 7:12 PM

Heh – yeah – she’s a real delicate flower. Been in every Palin thread saying we absolutely can’t nominate her because she won’t win indie votes.

But – she’s willing to nominate Romney even though he won’t have the support of the base.

Rocket Science – it’s a tough study.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:16 PM

I’ll vote Obama.

How’s that?

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:09 PM

I applaud you for openly admitting that you’ll sell out your country to make a point.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 7:17 PM

Er… the last time the Republicans ran a conservative extremist for president, he won 49 states.

PersonFromPorlock on June 10, 2011 at 7:11 PM

That was the election for his second term. It wasn’t that big a landslide when Reagan got elected. But the country being pissed at Carter helped.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 7:19 PM

when you say that, it sounds like “you have to work with me but I won’t work with you?”

Isn’t that the Democrat version of compromise that ticks so many of us off?

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 7:15 PM

You don’t have to work with us. Nominate Romney – it’s your choice.

We just won’t vote for him.

You don’t ask “indies” to work with you do you? No – you guys argue they should be given the candidate they want. Screw the Conservatives going door to door – and paying for the campaigns – that guy doesn’t deserve to get anything he wants. He better vote for Romney because indies like Romney and that’s who we’re nominating.

WTH? I mean – thats YOUR side of the argument.

You want our votes – give us a good candidate. That’s your rationale with the indies isn’t it?

We’re “indies” too – because most of us don’t consider ourselves to be Republicans – we’re conservatives. So you can nominate whomever you want – and if he or she’ll tickles ours fancy – we’ll support them.

If they don’t we won’t.

Sounds like Democracy to me.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:20 PM

I have never told anyone that I wouldn’t vote for Romney, but I’m also smart enough to know that these Tea Partiers mean business. Ignore their desires and blackmail at our peril.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 7:12 PM

All it takes is a small taste of power to convince a person that he can change the world.

Power corrupts.

I liked the tea party better when they were a movement, not an organization.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Nonsense. I wont stay home, I’ll vote Republican up and down … I just will NEVER vote for Romney. To those saying “vote for Obama”: voting for Romney is the exact same thing.

Shambhala on June 10, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Kennedy, Scalia, and Thomas retire from the Supreme Court and Obama gets to replace all three of them. The court is then a 7-2 liberal court for the next 50 years and every liberal policy rejected by voters is made law by the court. Buh-bye 1st Amendment. Buh-bye 2nd Amendment. Buh-bye all property rights. Buh-bye America.

Rational Thought on June 10, 2011 at 4:35 PM

Which goes to show how important it is that we nominate a true Conservative in 2012. The fight over the past two years highlighted by the races involving such people as Charlie Crist, Scozzafa, Castle and others is the fight to pull the Republican Party to Right and make the Republican Party the vehicle for advancing Conservatism. If we nominate a Liberal Republican, that would mean that fight is settled and many of us will give up on the Republicans and look for a third party.

“ANYBODYBUTOBAMA 2102″ basically negates the fight that Conservatives have fought and won over the last two years.

sartana on June 10, 2011 at 7:22 PM

Sounds like Democracy to me.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:20 PM

to me it sounds like “if you don’t play by my rules, I’m taking my ball and going home.”

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 7:22 PM

That was the election for his second term. It wasn’t that big a landslide when Reagan got elected. But the country being pissed at Carter helped.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 7:19 PM

Another good reason to vote for Obama – if four years of him isn’t enough to get Americans to elect a REAL CONSERVATIVE – then maybe another four years will do it.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:22 PM

Romney is a believer in AGW, brought Romneycare, and is about as pro-life as your average Catholic Democrat. Anyone wonder that so many pause?

CW on June 10, 2011 at 7:25 PM

to me it sounds like “if you don’t play by my rules, I’m taking my ball and going home.”

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 7:22 PM

It’s MY BALL – so do you see a problem with that?

My vote is MINE – not YOURS. You cannot make demands of me regarding my vote – OUR VOTES. We’ll support who we want. You want a candidate that appeals to indies – go ahead – and good luck with that, because you didn’t get their votes the last time you tried it.

You want to get Conservative votes – nominate someone we like.

The “essence” of Conservatism is that … I can DO WHATEVER THE HELL I WANT TO DO WITH MY BALL – It’s mine – It’s not yours.

You want party loyalty by the rule of the baseball bat – you’re in the wrong one. Dimmocrit party to the left there sir – where there are plenty of union thugs with baseball bats to convince you whom to vote for.

My ball.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:25 PM

I liked the tea party better when they were a movement, not an organization.
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Guess your delusions of control were shattered, huh?

Shambhala on June 10, 2011 at 7:26 PM

I applaud you for openly admitting that you’ll sell out your country to make a point.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 7:17 PM

You SOB – I served this nation in uniform for 24 years fighting the Soviets in a cold water underwater and later the Taliban and AQ. You have no clue how many patriots I have buried … how many good friends I’ve seen fall.

Have you served?

I’ve earned my damned vote – and no pit twiddle like you will tell me how to use my vote.

Now dust off flecker.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:28 PM

We on Wall Street need to keep making the big bucks. Now that we have raped the mortgage industry we need to find a new source of income. We are already predicting that the Carbon Trading will be the next way to line our pockets to make our tens of millions dollar bonuses.

We backed Barack Obama but he didn’t come through for us. Now half of us on “The Street” are backing Mitt Romney, a hedge fund guy who is one of us. We figure this way it is a win/win situation for us.

Notice how one of the first questions asked of Mitt when he announced in New Hampshire was about Global Warming to signal to everyone that the raping of the Middle Class by Wall Street bankers will continue. Goldman Sachs has already set up their trading desk in Carbon Credits and relocated the head trader from London to New York. All systems have been waiting on go. In fact we are already predicting that this will be the next bubble.

We continue to find it amazing how the American middle class can be so stupid!

Sheeple anyone?

Jayrae on June 10, 2011 at 7:29 PM

I liked the tea party better when they were a movement, not an organization.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 7:21 PM

You’ll like theme EVEN MORE when we’re a PARTY.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:29 PM

Sheeple anyone?

Jayrae on June 10, 2011 at 7:29 PM

You’ve hit the nail on the head my man. Wall Street has been “distilled” down into a few companies who parlay in crony capitalism no matter who the party is in the White House and Capitol.

The Republican elites are even better crony capitalists than the Dimmocrits. We have to put forth a nominee who’s not beholden to Wall Street and who can clean that mess up.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:34 PM

Your “True Conservative” can win if voting in 2012 election is restricted to some 20 posters on HotAir only.

bayview on June 10, 2011 at 7:39 PM

I feel like I just walked into an insane asylum. So many people here need to take a chill pill and relax! The volume here is turned up way too high and it’s doing no one any good.

Obama needs to be defeated in 2012! No if’s, and’s, or but’s. HE MUST BE DEFEATED.

If that means I will have to vote for Romney, I will enthusiastically do that. Romney should have been nominated in 2008, and if he did, he would have beaten Obama after the economy collapsed.

FredrickB on June 10, 2011 at 7:40 PM

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:34 PM

I work on “The Street.”

No pun intended, I laugh at these Republican moderates all the way to the bank! We will just get richer.

Jayrae on June 10, 2011 at 7:46 PM

Fred, you don’t have to vote for a RINO.

STOP THE MADNESS
Vote conservative

Don’t believe the spin that Romney is the nominee

Roy Rogers on June 10, 2011 at 7:48 PM

LOL…..The Tea Party branding/messanging cluster***k continues unabated….LOL!

These bozos are making Newt Gingrich’s campaign look like a well oiled machine!!!! These purist’s don’t have the crediability of advocating anything let alone who should be our next president.

How many Obama operatives are now going to go to work (ala Rush’s Operation Chaos with Hillary) to get Romney elected because this group has just telegraphed their intentions to stay home.

It sounds like FreedomWorks doesn’t like anyone, except for maybe themselves.

Per Kibbe’s bio on FreedomWorks, he’s spent most of his life in the bastions of academia (ala Obama & Co.), with little or no private sector experience….ROFLMAO!!!

This guys resume isn’t fit to be in the same galaxy with Romney’s, he’s experience is all theory and commentary.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 7:49 PM

If that means I will have to vote for Romney, I will enthusiastically do that. Romney should have been nominated in 2008, and if he did, he would have beaten Obama after the economy collapsed.

FredrickB on June 10, 2011 at 7:40 PM

Good Luck – it’s YOUR vote. Vote how you wish.

Leave me to vote how I wish. I don’t wish to vote for the fool (Romney).

I have that right correct?

Go ahead – call me names. Tell me I’m selling my country out (hell, I served in uniform in some touchy combat for 24 years – so I guess you’re right – I don’t give a damn about this nation – LOL)

What upsets me – is that you guys are willing to deliver the independents their PREFERRED candidate … but you’re not willing to show us the same respect.

That tells me – we don’t have your respect. If that’s the case – well …

OBAMA 2012 BABY!!

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:50 PM

This guys resume isn’t fit to be in the same galaxy with Romney’s, he’s experience is all theory and commentary.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 7:49 PM

Oh well … it doesn’t sound to me like he’ll vote for Romney – which means there’s another vote you’re going to have to “coax” out of the independents. Not only that – he’s not the only one – there’s going to millions of votes you lose when you nominate Romney.

Should have learnt a lesson in 2008 – but since not – guess you’ll have to repeat the experience.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:52 PM

Um, plenty of true conservatives won in 2010, or didn’t you notice?

blink on June 10, 2011 at 7:52 PM

As pointed out by some posters here: Marco Rubio is a RINO and not a true conservative.

bayview on June 10, 2011 at 7:58 PM

Now dust off flecker.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:28 PM

Well, despite your service, I agree with him and, as you’ve already clearly stated, you would vote for Obama just to prove a point.

Anyway, and with all due respect, I’m intrigued by your service. As a Vietnam era vet who also served in USARAL which, as you may know, existed during that time specifically to fight the Russians should they cross the bearing strait, where did you get your cold water training? Perhaps we served together?

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 8:00 PM

Better Obama II than Romney I?

Absolutely!

We need a small government, state’s rights party. I won’t vote for another GOP-normal, two-faced candidate. The GOP is dead without us so they better shape up. We’re not falling for their bait & switch anymore!!!

rcl on June 10, 2011 at 8:00 PM

RINO Hypocrisy …

Dammit! We can’t nominate Palin – the INDEPENDENTS won’t vote for her!

versus …

You God**ned CONSERVATIVES better vote for Romney when we nominate him!

HondaV65

Yes, an awful lot of childish screaming by the Rino supporters here. I proudly did not vote for McCain after all the years of him screwing conservative plans – he was constantly giving Democratic schemes “bi-partisan” cover. I viewed it as killing any chance of him being very effective ever again.

Look Rino supporters, we tried your way with both Bushes – and what did we get? One who raised taxes and one who expanded the government more than Bill Clinton and did not have the balls to face down Barney Frank. If Romney’s elected and loses, I will view that as good – knocking off one more Rino. And whether its Obama or Romney building bigger government, more government control over healthcare or supporting AGW policies does not make a bit of difference.

Romney will never see the inside of the Oval Office.

Over50 on June 10, 2011 at 8:02 PM

Well, despite your service, I agree with him and, as you’ve already clearly stated, you would vote for Obama just to prove a point.

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 8:00 PM

False – It’s not a point I’m proving.

My rationale for voting for Obama is … and I’ve stated this a million times …

POINT 1: Obama or Romney – either one will sink the ship. This ship is going down – thanks to Dimmocrits AND Republicans. It will take BOLD AND DECISIVE action to save this nation – and Romney’s incapable of it.

POINT 2: If the choice for me is between two pilots – both of whom are going to simply pilot this plane to the scene of the crash – who then – do I REALLY want piloting it?

Romney? So that Conservatives get the blame – and the backlash is against us – making USA ver 2.0 a SOCIALIST state? or …

Obama? So that Socialism gets the blame and the backlash is against Socialims and USA ver 2.0 is based more on what the founders intended.

Obviously – it would appear – that in a choice between two LOSERS – my best choice is Obama.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:05 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5