Mitt Romney & Gun Control

[Ben]

Don't construe my pragmatic support for a Romney candidacy as an endorsement of the GOP.  I think we all know the GOP establishment, as it is, is a fail.  Romney, for me, represents the last best hope to use the current political process to save what's left of Constitutional governance in America.  I am skeptical that the other GOP can really beat Obama given the state of this political culture, but Romney is not cure-all and everyone here knows that.  For those who don't like the notions of secession and/or civil war, he offers, if nothing else, some time.  

I honestly understand your position. But how long are we to be pragmatic merely to give ourselves some time? I've held your position through the last five elections (20 years!). The exception in that timeframe being George W's first term, but then he let me down with "safety over freedom" and DHS. At some point, we all reach our line in the sand and say, "no more". I understand those of you who haven't reached it yet, but I have.

I can no longer give the current Republican party the benefit of the doubt. I believe they need a slap in the face, and maybe 20-30% of the votes going to Ron Paul instead of Romney (or whoever the R candidate is if not Paul) will do it. And that's not a 'spite" vote. I honestly believe Ron Paul to be a better candidate than Mitt Romney. I've already sold out once voting McCain to keep Obama out. At this point I simply see nothing that Obama would do that is that much worse than what Romney would do (or not do). The line between the mainstream parties is blurring too much for my liking, and the blur screams "statism". I fear a right wing statist society as much as I fear a left wing statist society.

I want a "Leave Me The Hell Alone" party.

[Regolith]

At this point, unless Paul wins, it looks like voting for Johnson, who is running as a Libertarian.

As far as politics goes, he's pretty close to Paul, except not quite as crazy. He's also had a governorship under his belt, so he's got better experience, IMO.

No way in hell I'm voting for Obama Light. At least if Obama wins, the Republicans will spend the next four years being as obstructionist as possible. I doubt that will be the case if Romney wins.

[makattak]

I want a "Leave Me The Hell Alone" party.

I want a Federalist Party. A national party whose main position is to return almost all power to the States, and at the state level to return as much power to localities.

I have extreme doubts as to its viability, though.

[longeyes]

I guess I see the next four years under Obama II, should that occur, as more than a waiting game or obstructionism.  I see it as an outright fight for survival.

[stevelyn]

I understand, but what if he is the republican candidate in November?  I don't like his background with respect to firearms rights, but I am unwilling to stand by and do nothing while Obama is reelected. 
I had the same conundrum with Bush/Gore in 2000.  Shrubbie promised to re authorize the AWB.   But Gore was --IMHO -- so much worse overall I held my breath and voted for Shrubbie.
Sadly, I think it's going to be somewhat the same these twelve years later.
It has been a long time since I was able to enthusiastically support any candidate................

Well in that case we're stuck with him. The best we can do is try and make sure he's not the nominee. If he is I guess I'll show up at the polls half-drunk.

If I knew we could get good solid R majorities in both the House and Senate I wouldn't care if Zero got his second term because he'd theoretically be stopped dead in his tracks if he tried to push any of his Marxist d-baggery or at least have to try an end-run.


What worries me most about Romney is HE could push some of his Marxist d-baggery and Rs would vote for it in the name of team spirit.

I want a "Leave Me The Hell Alone" party.

That's what I've been saying all along. I'll pay my taxes just leave me the hell alone and stay out of my way.

[Tallpine]

What worries me most about Romney is HE could push some of his Marxist d-baggery and Rs would vote for it in the name of team spirit.

This.  Bush III 

[Ben]

If I knew we could get good solid R majorities in both the House and Senate I wouldn't care if Zero got his second term because he'd theoretically be stopped dead in his tracks if he tried to push any of his Marxist d-baggery or at least have to try an end-run.

You know, I don't even trust that anymore. Look at what just happened with the payroll tax. The Republican majority in the house LET THEMSELVES be steamrolled by the dems and media. Pretty much all the liberal leaning people I know bring this up as an example of how the Republicans have it in for the middle class, because the dems wanted to extend the cuts two months and the Republicans didn't. Nevermind that the Republicans were actually fighting the two month extension because they wanted to extend it for a full year. Not only did they not get the year extension, but they bungled things so badly that they made the dems look like the ones that are in favor of lower taxes.

We had a clear Tea Party-leaning mandate that brought the majority into the house, yet they fold on practically every fiscal issue, and we still have people like Harry Reid calling them "extremists". I read an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal a few weeks ago where one of their editors went through the entire budget fight over the last year and showed that pretty much for every cut, there was a budget increase somewhere else, so we pretty much ended up with no net savings.

If Romney is elected, there will be, like there is almost every term no matter who is in office, a flip to the other party's majority in Congress and/or the Senate. He'll "compromise" on most everything significant to show how well Republicans play with others.

[longeyes]

I think we need to see beyond the overt political process.  That is going to become an irrelevancy when the debt utterly crushes us and they come for our guns, etc.  The Tea Party, or what follows it, is not gone, it is just the seedwork for what is growing in many, many places around this nation.  One of these days a critical mass of Americans will stop being wiling to play the game,  It is all based on trust, and we know that has been sorely frayed in so many ways.

[Perd Hapley]

Sorry, I know this is a little necro, but:

Ummmm... what? Washington could be described as a career politician?

Yeah, I suppose so. I don't think that's an insult to him. He's still Cincinnatus.

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/delegates/washington.html

Prior Political Experience: Virginia House of Burgesses 1759-1774, Continental Congress 1774-1775, Commander in Chief of Continental Army 1775-1783

Committee Assignments: President of the Convention

Convention Contributions: Arrived May 25 and was present through the signing of the Constitution. He spoke only once near the end of the deliberations, but the record suggests that he had a profound influence on the scope and direction of the discussions. William Pierce stated that "having conducted these States to independence and peace, he now appears to assist in framing a Government to make the People happy. Like Gustavus Vasa, he made be said to be the deliverer of his Country."

New Government Participation: He supported ratification of the Constitution by the State of Virginia. He was unanimously elected by the Electoral College as President of the United States (1788 - 1796). He used his Presidential powers to put down the Whisky Rebellion (1794).

Biographies of delegates to the Constitutional Convention:
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/delegates/