Newt says he's gonna stick it out, and he might. But let's say Romney is the guy. This is not the prediction thread, but I predict Romney will be the nominee and Solar will realize there are not three houses of Congress. (See his first post in the prediction thread if you're wondering about that statement.)
Anyhow, assuming Romney is the guy, Tea partiers are left with at least three options:
1. Obama
2. Obama-lite (according to Mr. Family Values)
3. Putting on their tri-corner hats, wrapping themselves in their don't tread on me flags, picking up their "we came unarmed.....this time" signs, and going off to sulk in the corner.
Which do you think most of them will take?
That really didn't make a lot of sense.
But to clear your obviously confused mind, the 3rd House in my reference, was the White House.
But since then, I've changed my mind, I don't care if Hussein gets another four or not, with a RINO at the helm, what's the difference?
We will still slip to the left anyway...
The economy under Romney would improve dramatically however I doubt he would take the necessary steps to prevent future bubbles and he would probably not advance a true Conservative agenda. But we do need to survive as a country and under Obama I don't think we can.
The choice should be:
1. A screaming socialist ego maniac who will run amok if re elected and assure our doom with another four disasterous years.
2. A RINO who MIGHT, I say MIGHT be able to do something about the economy if the house and Senate co-operate....and if people like Nancy Pelosi do the right thing and retire.
3. A RINO is always better than a socialist.
Billy
Depends. The Tea Party has been working and organizing at the local level, which means that many of the incoming Republicans in Congress will be fiscal conservatives, which is a start. We can live for one term with Romney in the White House. It took a while to get the country into this mess, it will probably take time to get it out of it. I realize that you're attempting to set up the narrative, that if all our problems aren't solved immediately, conservatism has been a failure. But you should understand that conservatives aren't into instant gratification like those children on the left.
Quote from: mdgiles on February 06, 2012, 06:29:26 AM
Depends. The Tea Party has been working and organizing at the local level, which means that many of the incoming Republicans in Congress will be fiscal conservatives, which is a start. We can live for one term with Romney in the White House. It took a while to get the country into this mess, it will probably take time to get it out of it. I realize that you're attempting to set up the narrative, that if all our problems aren't solved immediately, conservatism has been a failure. But you should understand that conservatives aren't into instant gratification like those children on the left.
The real problem is that you conservatards don't recognize conservatism when you see it. The Tea Party's days are pretty much over. They're too simplistic, too naive, and, frankly, too dense.
Quote from: elmerfudd on February 06, 2012, 10:38:06 AM
The real problem is that you conservatards don't recognize conservatism when you see it. The Tea Party's days are pretty much over. They're too simplistic, too naive, and, frankly, too dense.
No matter how you try to spin it, piggy, Obama ain't conservative! :)) :)) :)) :)) :))
Quote from: elmerfudd on February 06, 2012, 10:38:06 AM
The real problem is that you conservatards don't recognize conservatism when you see it. The Tea Party's days are pretty much over. They're too simplistic, too naive, and, frankly, too dense.
Ha! The Tea Party is very much alive and well. It's hard to fight the leftist media when they like to pretend the Tea Party has fizzled out.. but..they can't vote for us... now can they?
I'd vote for a turnip before I'd place a vote for Obama, or any liberal for that matter.
Quote from: Harry on February 06, 2012, 11:20:05 AM
No matter how you try to spin it, piggy, Obama ain't conservative! :)) :)) :)) :)) :))
And neither is Fuddy.
Quote from: elmerfudd on February 06, 2012, 10:38:06 AM
The real problem is that you conservatards don't recognize conservatism when you see it. The Tea Party's days are pretty much over. They're too simplistic, too naive, and, frankly, too dense.
Because they aren't in the streets holding demonstrations, Libtards want to believe they've gone away. What they've done is turned to the harder task of having candidates, who believe as they do, elected at the local level. Change requires more than people just marching in the street, holding some signs. Understandable, that leftists don't recognize this. Leftists are in love with the idea of imposing their views on others, not convincing others of the rightness of their views.
Quote from: mdgiles on February 06, 2012, 12:12:49 PM
Because they aren't in the streets holding demonstrations, Libtards want to believe they've gone away. What they've done is turned to the harder task of having candidates, who believe as they do, elected at the local level. Change requires more than people just marching in the street, holding some signs. Understandable, that leftists don't recognize this. Leftists are in love with the idea of imposing their views on others, not convincing others of the rightness of their views.
Very true Md, just because you don't see a lot of rallies in the dead of Winter, doesn't mean we are collaborating.
We are working very hard for the 2012 elections, not for a potential POTUS, but for, as you say "the grassroots entry level" candidates.
Quote from: Solar on February 06, 2012, 12:19:55 PM
Very true Md, just because you don't see a lot of rallies in the dead of Winter, doesn't mean we are collaborating.
We are working very hard for the 2012 elections, not for a potential POTUS, but for, as you say "the grassroots entry level" candidates.
And there is that thing about most of the Tea Party people being employed. Doesn't leave much time for camping out in parks.
Quote from: Solar on February 06, 2012, 12:19:55 PM
Very true Md, just because you don't see a lot of rallies in the dead of Winter, doesn't mean we are collaborating.
We are working very hard for the 2012 elections, not for a potential POTUS, but for, as you say "the grassroots entry level" candidates.
Right! It's hard to camp out in public parks and pee on the grass when you have jobs. Working to take the senate is no easy task..either. Hopefully, our work will pay off and even if Obama is re-elected by some miracle...he will be hamstrung and reduced to whining for the next four years.
Quote from: mdgiles on February 06, 2012, 12:23:18 PM
And there is that thing about most of the Tea Party people being employed. Doesn't leave much time for camping out in parks.
SOOOO True!!!
Most of us network via computer nowadays and I hate to say it, but are split on who to vote for in 2012.
Like me, more than half plan to vote Conservative, while the rest will vote for any RINO the GOP throw-up, or rather throw out....
But aside from that, we are all focused on the Freshmen class, it will be all Tea party only, no RINO...
Quote from: Holly on February 06, 2012, 12:28:57 PM
Right! It's hard to camp out in public parks and pee on the grass when you have jobs. Working to take the senate is no easy task..either. Hopefully, our work will pay off and even if Obama is re-elected by some miracle...he will be hamstrung and reduced to whining for the next four years.
I don't find my job a hindrance toward peeing on the grass...
Why do people assume the only way to get anything done is to hold street protests ad nauseum, without any gameplan for moving forward?
Quote from: Holly on February 06, 2012, 12:09:15 PM
Ha! The Tea Party is very much alive and well. It's hard to fight the leftist media when they like to pretend the Tea Party has fizzled out.. but..they can't vote for us... now can they?
I'd vote for a turnip before I'd place a vote for Obama, or any liberal for that matter.
No, the leftist media can't vote for tea party candidates. But what does Fair and Balanced Fox say? Also, it is telling that those who CAN vote for tea party candidates, at least for president, choose not to. That might have more to do with the caliber of the candidates offered (e.g., St. Sarah of Wasilla), but still, they seem to have fizzled on the national scene, don't they?
Quote from: CubaLibre on February 06, 2012, 01:49:58 PM
Why do people assume the only way to get anything done is to hold street protests ad nauseum, without any gameplan for moving forward?
Two pieces of history, and how they've been distorted. One was the Civil Rights struggle. The other the anti Vietnam protests. Many people remember the demonstration portion of the Civil Rights struggle, but the forget it's purpose and the political element that was a part of it. After all the 3 young Civil Rights workers who were murdered in Mississippi, were working on a voter registration drive. And the purpose of many of the demonstration was to show the evils of segregation and stiffen the spines of the Democrats who were against it. The Vietnam demonstrations were falsely given credit for "stopping the war", when in fact the War continued long after Johnson left office. In any case, Nixon took the air out of the "movement's" sails when they ended the draft - which was pretty much all those cowardly left wingers cared about in the first place and he negotiated a "Peace Treaty" and withdrew American troops. Not to mention that Kent State/Jackson State showed that the public was actively hostile to their cause, and sympathetic to the National Guard.