Daily Caller
FreedomWorks chief: Tea partiers might stay home if Romney’s the nominee
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.
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: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Romney + GOP congress = Bush-level spending & entitlements, no Obamacare repeal, likely tax hikes, soaring deficit
Obama + GOP congress = flat or reduced spending, defunding Obamacare, no new taxes, deficit reduced
History (1996-2000 vs. 2004-2008) shows the way.
Bat Chain Puller on June 10, 2011 at 1:21 PM
This is like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Anything that makes the Progressives giddy with excitement doesn’t sit well. The Tea Party is becoming more powerful, no doubt it, but it’s still pretty nascent and misunderstood (thanks pravda USA) to really be a third party force this election cycle. Patience. The TeaPparty just might be the little train that could in the future. With a billion dollar campaign and the lamestream, we’re gonna need all hands on deck, Romney or not.
RepubChica on June 10, 2011 at 1:25 PM
The Romneyfiles would like to imply that it’s a fait accompli, they want to pretend that the primary process is over and that our only choice is between Obowmao and the champion of Romneycare.
It would seem like that is the only way they can garner support for him – couching it in those terms and completely forgetting the reality of the situation.
Chip on June 10, 2011 at 1:27 PM
I;m reading the comments and I’m seeing “if Romney wins, we’ll going to throw temper tantrums because we didn’t get our way and let Obama have a second term.”
Time to grow up children. We have an idiot to get out of the White House. After that’s done, you can storm off in a huff and hold your breath until your face turns purple. But let’s focus on the common threat to everyone first.
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 12:47 PM
How did that “idiot” get into the WH in the first place?
Blank out.
ebrown2 on June 10, 2011 at 1:34 PM
I don’t know what the “Tea Party” people will do, but I know I won’t vote for Romney. I might write in Mickey Mouse or vote for myself. I’ve done both before.
Bugler on June 10, 2011 at 1:34 PM
For what?
What do we “win” if we make Romney President?
Will he put a stop to abortion?
Will he balance the budget and pay down the debt (not “reduce” the “deficit”)?
Will he put a stop to Iran’s nuclear program?
Will he attempt to win the war?
Will he even have the fortitude to support conservative Supreme Court nominees when the media get nasty?
Can anybody think of anything Romney would actually do for us, or is the sole case for his election that he won’t be as destructive as Obama?
joe_doufu on June 10, 2011 at 1:36 PM
Rod on June 10, 2011 at 1:09 PM
Opps.
Anyway, I’ve been hearing this type of over-the-top crap since Goldwater was going to usher in Armageddon. And with all due respect it’s absolute hogwash.
In my 60+ years I’ve never had the opportunity to vote for a candidate that matched my beliefs 100%. Never. But I’ve also never sat home and pouted like some spoiled rotten brat because they didn’t.
Sitting out an election or voting for a 3rd party spoiler will always help those you oppose the most. Always.
In this case, if Mitt gets the nomination, just make it official and vote for Obama.
Rod on June 10, 2011 at 1:37 PM
Bootie’s fault and a “Serious crisis”, it’s happened before and it can happen again.
Chip on June 10, 2011 at 1:38 PM
Nah, it’s a lot more fun to vote for Mickey.
Bugler on June 10, 2011 at 1:42 PM
Obama read this and he is smiling; he is happy. “4 more years”, they are chanting in the White House.
albill on June 10, 2011 at 1:46 PM
Perhaps the RINO brigade should be reading this, and seriously reconsider whom they’re supporting.
Nah, just kidding – only conservatives have to sacrifice their principles for electability.
Rebar on June 10, 2011 at 1:51 PM
It’s not a matter of “throwing a tantrum.”
It’s a matter of not casting a vote that you believe deeply will make things worse.
Bat Chain Puller on June 10, 2011 at 1:51 PM
If you can’t even conceive of the possibility of America having an end, or a catastrophe of any kind, then you’re part of the problem. If “it can’t happen here”, and nothing bad can ever upset our apple cart, then why vote at all? Why even pay attention to politics?
In 1964, nuclear Armageddon was a real threat, and serious people knew it.
In 2011, economic and moral collapse are real threats, and serious people are the ones paying attention.
joe_doufu on June 10, 2011 at 1:54 PM
Pardon me for being blunt, but it’s idiotic to think that Romney would be worse than Obama. I like to think that Romeny would have enough common sense to NOT DO what Obama’s been doing the last four years.
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 1:58 PM
When your firetruck is extinguishing Obamacare by adding Romneycare then the house will burn down even faster.
FloatingRock on June 10, 2011 at 2:00 PM
I don’t know who this Tea Party in Chief is but … he’s only half right.
We won’t sit home – we’ll go to the polls and VOTE OBAMA!
People think this is “fringe” attitude – it ain’t. We’re sick and tired of the GOP and it’s establishment LIES. We’re tired of being taken advantage of. If the GOP nominates Romney it will be “message not received” and we shall UP THE VOLUME for them in General Election by sending them a freakin’ “Hope and Change” message.
HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 2:01 PM
Let’s see: he’s pushed for government controlled healthcare, he’s pushed for gun control and he believes in Global Warming.
Is that enough for you so far?
Chip on June 10, 2011 at 2:02 PM
Fail analogy is Fail – but – don’t worry about us complaining – we won’t.
HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 2:03 PM
We don’t just need someone to “not be 0bama”.
We need someone who will be the anti-0bama, who’s going to do the deeply unpopular but absolutely necessary task to cut entitlement programs drastically.
That someone will not be Romney – he simply doesn’t have the will or core beliefs to do anything that might make people angry.
Rebar on June 10, 2011 at 2:05 PM
You left out ethanol subsidies.
Bugler on June 10, 2011 at 2:06 PM
You know, the only reason this is even an issue is because many of us conservatives have reached a breaking point. Conservatives have been supporting GOP moderates in elections for years, and we see that this has not helped the country in the long run. Then when we insist on supporting actual conservative candidates, the very people in the GOP who have been urging us to support moderates are suddenly refusing to reciprocate, and in fact stand ready to oppose and even sabotage conservative candidates.
Don’t tell us to support another “squish.” The “squish” you put forward in 2008 didn’t stop the leftist lunatic from winning. If getting the leftist lunatic out of the White House in 2013 is really such a high priority, then maybe the GOP should do all it can to nominate somebody its base will come out for, instead of just trying to push the next guy in their queue on us and then implying that we’re responsible for unleashing Obama on the country when we see no point in voting for the feckless bum.
Aitch748 on June 10, 2011 at 2:06 PM
No more RINO’s is right. If getting that message driven home takes 4 more years of Obama, so be it. If it takes subjecting this nation and the dumber low information voters to as much Socialist/Communist pain as they can stand to drive home the evil…so be it.
Myself, I would rather see the country go into the sewer completely, on the Democraps watch. It is doubtful that a
Republican majority in all three branches can turn things around, so we’re going there regardless. So let the Dems eat it. Once we hit rock bottom, we can gut the Left and rebuild.
PakviRoti on June 10, 2011 at 2:07 PM
I say again: research deficits & spending 1996-2000 versus 2004-2008.
I know which 4 years I’d prefer.
Bat Chain Puller on June 10, 2011 at 2:07 PM
Explain how.
Exactly, Romney would be a much better progressive than Obama, getting a lot more done and advancing authoritarian big-government programs that are more likely to survive, thanks to the support of progressive RINO’s.
I would argue that another progressive R, in the aftermath of Obama, will do even more damage by failing to correct course to save freedom and liberty our Constitutional Republic.
FloatingRock on June 10, 2011 at 2:07 PM
I think that our future is much brighter after another Obama victory than a RINO Republican victory.
SCENARIO #1: Romney beats Obama (with Teaparty support)
Romney and Boehner agree on a “cruel” budget that cuts our $1.5 trillion/year deficit spending in half while modifying Obamacare. But the mathematics prove that this just pushes our real financial collapse back a couple of years, leaving investors and entrepreneurs unimpressed. Meanwhile, Democrats get away with pinning the continued economic stagnation on all the public workers and contractors laid off from the budget cuts as well as conservative’s “Failure to Invest in Jobs, Jobs Jobs!” Progressives promote anarchy and economic sabotage until a panicked population screams for more “temporary” government management of critical economic areas. The dollar is devalued through QE4-10, all taxes are raised and liberty is permanently lost.
SCENARIO #2: Obama beats Romney (without Teaparty support)
Obama is crippled by a conservative House that’s emboldened by the failure of both McCain and Romney to win as a moderates. Obama is forced to sign a succession of interim budgets funding only essential services, as his administration rallies the jobless into widespread civil disobedience. As this threatens to devastate the economy, the public turns against the rioters and the left, and they throw their support behind conservatives in subsequent elections. Investors and entrepreneurs see a reasonable path to financial success developing and aggressively pursue opportunities, ending unemployment.
elfman on June 10, 2011 at 2:09 PM
Nah, just kidding – only conservatives have to sacrifice their principles for electability.
Rebar on June 10, 2011 at 1:51 PM
Well, between the two, conservatives are the only ones who have authentic principles, other than “win the game for my faction.”
ebrown2 on June 10, 2011 at 2:10 PM
A Romney Administration wastes our most valuable resource – time. We would not have a chance to elect a conservative until 2020, which is probably too late to save the American small government, free market model from the coming tsunami of debt.
Ted Torgerson on June 10, 2011 at 2:11 PM
Pardon me for being blunt, but it’s idiotic to think that Romney would be worse than Obama. I like to think that Romeny would have enough common sense to NOT DO what Obama’s been doing the last four years.
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 1:58 PM
With a 14 TRILLION dollar deficit, simply not being a raging anti-American leftist is not good enough.
ebrown2 on June 10, 2011 at 2:13 PM
+1000
Missy on June 10, 2011 at 2:15 PM
Excellent commentary.
Sadly, it is far too sophisticated for many readers on here to understand your point.
blink on June 10, 2011 at 2:19 PM
SCENARIO #1: Romney beats Obama (with Teaparty support)
Romney and Boehner agree on a “cruel” budget that cuts our $1.5 trillion/year deficit spending in half while modifying Obamacare. But the mathematics prove that this just pushes our real financial collapse back a couple of years, leaving investors and entrepreneurs unimpressed. Meanwhile, Democrats get away with pinning the continued economic stagnation on all the public workers and contractors laid off from the budget cuts as well as conservative’s “Failure to Invest in Jobs, Jobs Jobs!” Progressives promote anarchy and economic sabotage until a panicked population screams for more “temporary” government management of critical economic areas. The dollar is devalued through QE4-10, all taxes are raised and liberty is permanently lost.
elfman on June 10, 2011 at 2:09 PM
This is spot on. Your second scenario underestimates the “I WAA FWEE CANDY!” mentality in the electorate, aided and enabled by the America-hating press.
ebrown2 on June 10, 2011 at 2:20 PM
Ronald Reagan was a Democrat, by your logic he never should have even been considered to be president.
pushed, past tense. Has he openly endorsed Obamacare today saying it’s a good idea?
T-Paw pushed for global warming green measures. Yet people here back him.
I’m sorry but I think it’s stupid (yes I said stupid) to be so ideoloigcally puritanical that you can’t see that even a Mitt Romney would bring more to the table and do things way differently than Barack Obama. Romney’s ran corporations. Don’t we need someone with that experience right now?
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 2:22 PM
Maybe it is idiotic, but you need to understand that many TP’ers believe this (as demonstrated by half a dozen replies to this).
It’s a reality that the GOP will be forced to deal with.
But here’s what I don’t understand. Centrists have already demonstrated their willingness to vote in favor of fiscal responsibility. Look at the debt ceiling polls! The centrists get it. The centrists are onboard. Why risk an election by shunning the Tea Party?
blink on June 10, 2011 at 2:23 PM
As I said in an earlier comment on the previous page, I’ve read and agree with most of your comments, and I don’t believe for a minute that a conservative like you would walk into a voting booth and actually pull the lever for 0bama.
Really, think about it. Could you do that?
UltimateBob on June 10, 2011 at 2:24 PM
So has Herman Cain.
But I can do you one better: I know of a candidate who’s actually run a state (and not directly to bankruptcy, as Romney did) and had more success in two years than most others in four. And she’s run private-sector businesses.
joe_doufu on June 10, 2011 at 2:25 PM
I ain’t holding my breath on Palin.
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 2:31 PM
It’s not insignificant experience. But we also need someone with rock solid principles he won’t sell out for the next election.
As I see it, Romney is not that person.
Missy on June 10, 2011 at 2:31 PM
Excellent elfman. Best summary I’ve seen put together.
portlandon on June 10, 2011 at 2:34 PM
I respect you for being honest enough to admit that you would sell out your own country if you didn’t get your way. Most people aren’t that open about their selfishness.
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 2:41 PM
Evicting the Obama admin 4 years ahead of schedule? That really is the bottom line next election…even with a flawed contender as Romney. He’s polling the strongest against Obama. The most thing the Progressives fear is party cohesiveness this election cycle on the part of Republicans, particularly in this economy and Obama’s sagging approval ratings. I just don’t like the fact they’re kicking back and enjoying our disunity…this from someone who supports the Tea Party 150%.
RepubChica on June 10, 2011 at 2:42 PM
Some people love to post without reading (or comprehending) any previous posts.
Bat Chain Puller on June 10, 2011 at 2:44 PM
This is a very condescending and simplistic point of view. Romney would not be much of an improvement over Obama. He may very well hurt the conservative cause more than help it. There is a lot to take into account, before just declaring “anybody but Obama.”
JannyMae on June 10, 2011 at 2:45 PM
The only thing I can think of where Romney might be much better than Obama is one you mentioned: in Supreme Court nominees. Otherwise, the RINO would be no better than Obama, IMO.
JannyMae on June 10, 2011 at 2:49 PM
I hear the self-styled elites of the GOP joining with the DNC/MSN consortium to undermine Palin and others, as if they were members of a single Republicrat party. Given the way our economy is going, I can’t see that as a selfless commitment to a better tomorrow.
littleguy on June 10, 2011 at 2:51 PM
Ronald Reagan was a Democrat, by your logic he never should have even been considered to be president.
pushed, past tense. Has he openly endorsed Obamacare today saying it’s a good idea?
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 2:22 PM
You forgot gun control – or as other have stated it: The fundamental human right of self defense.
How long ago did he say he Believed in Global Warming?
Are you saying we can’t judge him on what he’s done in the past (few weeks in the Global Warming issue)?
So how do we judge him then?
Chip on June 10, 2011 at 2:51 PM
It’s best you don’t. You need all possible oxygen to your brain.
alwaysfiredup on June 10, 2011 at 2:51 PM
So has Herman Cain.
But I can do you one better: I know of a candidate who’s actually run a state (and not directly to bankruptcy, as Romney did) and had more success in two years than most others in four. And she’s run private-sector businesses.
joe_doufu on June 10, 2011 at 2:25 PM
I want Herman Cain. But I’m being honest enough to admit that if I don’t get want I want, I’m not bailing out on everyone else when what we really need is someone who isn’t Obama running the ship. And I’m not going to buy the logic that someone who is watching the ship steer towards the iceberg, wouldn’t even try to avoid it any way possible. You people act like he would step on the gas and go towards it faster which is ridiculous on it’s very premise.
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 2:52 PM
At least my brain’s in my head and not up my a**.
Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 2:54 PM
And if the shoe were on the other foot and we nominated Christine O’Donnell, you wouldn’t flatly refuse to vote for her? There is such a thing as a bridge too far.
alwaysfiredup on June 10, 2011 at 2:55 PM
If voting for Obama and Obamacare is “selling out our country”, then why isn’t voting for Romneycare also?
FloatingRock on June 10, 2011 at 2:56 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »