Romney warns tea party activists not to form third party

[mrjarrell]

Just do as you're told and support the status quo. As I have suspected for some time now, the GOP sees the tea party movement as nothing more than a tool for their election purposes and part of the GOP hive mind. You're not anti-GOP, you're only anti-Dem, (despite the fact that the GOP has contributed significantly to our current dire straits and you've said as much). So, just sit back and do as you're told. The tea party express people will be by soon to give you your marching orders. Sheesh. Romney's arrogance is showing through. Guess he figures that people will forget he's a socialist if he plays the party game.

via USA Today

Former and likely future GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney issued a warning to tea party activists in an interview with the conservative newsmax.com website.
His warning: don't form a third party and run candidates in the general election. That would divide the Republican vote and keep the Democrats in power, he told newsmax.com.
"That would hand over the country to Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and that would be very sad indeed," Romney said.
In the interview, he says Sarah Palin is qualified to be president, disagreed with conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh that it was a mistake for him to endorse Sen. John McCain's re-election, and he declined to choose between Senate candidates Marco Rubio and Charlie Crist in Florida's contentious GOP primary.

Video at the source. The very fact that he thinks Palin is fit to be president says more about him than his past does. A vote for her would throw the election to the Dems.

 

[bigg cheese]

Romney and McCain are both hopeless progressives. I never want to see or hear from them again.

 

[level.eleven]

That' rich. I'm sure many will agree with him, unfortunately, and we will hear the same excuses. Throwing your vote away, I voted third party and got Clinton, etc.

 

[henktermaat]

Even if I believed the republicans had the answer, I wouldn't listen a word out of Romney's mouth.

Romney is from Mass. Nuff said.

 

[Joe Williams]

Romney on the ticket would divide the party vote, also.

I'll be darned if I'll vote for a non-conservative Republican again. If my party continues to drive itself away from my ideals, and toward that of the leftists in order to court their votes.... well, they can have their votes, but not mine, nor that of many other conservatives. Nor will I vote for a Democrat, that party is blatantly driving us torward a Soviet style society, and Libertarians have allowed their party to be driven just as far left. I'll write in Mickey Mouse before I'll vote for another RINO ticket, or any of the above. I don't care if it means another four years of bin Obama, which will just accelerate what I fear is becoming inevitable if the pols continue to refuse to listen to their electorate, and continue to disregard the Constitution.

I'm f-ing fed up.

 

[Joe Williams]

snip
Video at the source. The very fact that he thinks Palin is fit to be president says more about him than his past does. A vote for her would throw the election to the Dems.

Hardly. She's the only reason McCain got as many votes as he did. I, along with other conservatives, would never have voted for McCain without her on the ticket.

 

[Expat]

I do fear that given the lack of a suitably conservative leader in the Republican Party, many people will either not vote or vote for one of several third parties. I cannot sufficiently express my concern for this country if we are saddled with President Obama for an additional four years. There just doesn't seem to be anyone out there that grabs my attention. Where is another Reagan when you need one...

 

[level.eleven]

Romney on the ticket would divide the party vote, also.

I'll be darned if I'll vote for a non-conservative Republican again. If my party continues to drive itself away from my ideals, and toward that of the leftists in order to court their votes.... well, they can have their votes, but not mine, nor that of many other conservatives. Nor will I vote for a Democrat, that party is blatantly driving us torward a Soviet style society, and Libertarians have allowed their party to be driven just as far left. I'll write in Mickey Mouse before I'll vote for another RINO ticket, or any of the above. I don't care if it means another four years of bin Obama, which will just accelerate what I fear is becoming inevitable if the pols continue to refuse to listen to their electorate, and continue to disregard the Constitution.

I'm f-ing fed up.

Joe, on several occasions you have made the assertion that the Libertarian Party has been "driven to the left". I just find that sort of interesting because the members feel the exact opposite. The party has been hijacked by unelectable Republicans. I mean, the Libertarian's presidential candidate was a washed up Republican drug warrior (Barr Amendment), ex-CIA, who made a name for himself chasing the Clinto bj scandal. There was quite a divide at their convention (privately funded, no tax dollars) between the warhawking Republican camp and the small L libertarians. This divide caused many to give up on the party as they aren't interested in Republican Lite. On the surface, it would appear as if your opinion is actually the polar opposite of what is actually happening to the party. The party abandoned the non aggression principle, once a right of passage for party membership.

Perhaps you have some more input to back up your assertion. I would certainly love to hear it. Or, maybe you mean the party is moving more to left as it courts more and more Republicans?

 

[irishfan]

I think Romney is a POS but I do agree with him that a third party in the national election as of right now is not a great idea but I do believe that in local elections to get the ground work in is a great idea.

 

[Ramen]

Joe, on several occasions you have made the assertion that the Libertarian Party has been "driven to the left". I just find that sort of interesting because the members feel the exact opposite. The party has been hijacked by unelectable Republicans. I mean, the Libertarian's presidential candidate was a washed up Republican drug warrior (Barr Amendment), ex-CIA, who made a name for himself chasing the Clinto bj scandal. There was quite a divide at their convention (privately funded, no tax dollars) between the warhawking Republican camp and the small L libertarians. This divide caused many to give up on the party as they aren't interested in Republican Lite. On the surface, it would appear as if your opinion is actually the polar opposite of what is actually happening to the party. The party abandoned the non aggression principle, once a right of passage for party membership.

Perhaps you have some more input to back up your assertion. I would certainly love to hear it. Or, maybe you mean the party is moving more to left as it courts more and more Republicans?

I do believe that Joe says they are moving left because of the anti-aggression/non-interventionist policies. Also, he I think he believes that Islam is a threat to US Security and that measures should be taken to remove that threat. As far as I know, most libertarians are against the "War on Terror" and the policies that go with it, both foreign and domestic.

I could be wrong, that is just what I get out of reading his comments. Your question has crossed my mind before. I hope he responds to clarify the statement.

 

[henktermaat]

And I assumed Joe meant that the L is being invaded by RINOS. I guess I can see it both ways.

 

[Joe Williams]

I do believe that Joe says they are moving left because of the anti-aggression/non-interventionist policies. Also, he I think he believes that Islam is a threat to US Security and that measures should be taken to remove that threat. As far as I know, most libertarians are against the "War on Terror" and the policies that go with it, both foreign and domestic.

I could be wrong, that is just what I get out of reading his comments. Your question has crossed my mind before. I hope he responds to clarify the statement.

Well, no need to repeat a mostly correct interpretation LOL.

I do not see Islam, as a religion, as a threat to national security any more than I see any other religion as a threat. However, many of it's adherents have chosen to re-enact the Crusades (remember, unlike what many now think the Crusades was the West's response to the military expansion of the Islamic empire), and have the stated goal of spreading their religion via the sword, and THAT is the threat to us.

 

[Joe Williams]

And I assumed Joe meant that the L is being invaded by RINOS. I guess I can see it both ways.

That is, indeed, another part of it. The Libertarian Party simply isn't what it used to be. They've become a playground for folks from both major parties who simply do not fit in those parties, and who are usually left leaning, Bob Barr aside.

 

[level.eleven]

That is, indeed, another part of it. The Libertarian Party simply isn't what it used to be. They've become a playground for folks from both major parties who simply do not fit in those parties, and who are usually left leaning, Bob Barr aside.

So....presidential candidate aside, the libertarian party is usually left leaning? What facts are you using to make this assumption. I am truly interested as this is an interesting public relations/fact gathering opportunity. Can you name a party platform you view left leaning and not pro-freedom? Of the Libertarians on the ballot in the state of Indiana during the last election cycle, which would you consider to be left leaning.

I would also welcome you to attend a Libertarian party meet-up. A lot of counties have monthly get togethers/planning sessions. There certainly aren't any progressives attending these meetings. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I simply don't understand how you arrive at the conclusion that the Libertarian Party trends towards progressive ideas when in all actuality it is trending the exact opposite direction. It was a Libertarian that proposed a bill that would allow you to carry into public parks. The bill was posted here and was in the news lately. Is that a left leaning idea?

In addition, I would also enjoy your take on what you consider the Libertarian party "used to be".

 

[Expat]

I know there are some decent arguments for legalization of drugs (made by Wm. Buckley Jr for one) but every time I see some Libertarian on TV it seems like he just can't wait to get off camera so he can light one up. I don't think I have ever heard one talk where that wasn't one of his major points. I also disagree with them on the open borders position. I think we need to know exactly who comes into our country and should have to right to limit the numbers and keep out ones that we don't want here.

 

[CarmelHP]

Joe, on several occasions you have made the assertion that the Libertarian Party has been "driven to the left". I just find that sort of interesting because the members feel the exact opposite. The party has been hijacked by unelectable Republicans. I mean, the Libertarian's presidential candidate was a washed up Republican drug warrior (Barr Amendment), ex-CIA, who made a name for himself chasing the Clinto bj scandal. There was quite a divide at their convention (privately funded, no tax dollars) between the warhawking Republican camp and the small L libertarians. This divide caused many to give up on the party as they aren't interested in Republican Lite. On the surface, it would appear as if your opinion is actually the polar opposite of what is actually happening to the party. The party abandoned the non aggression principle, once a right of passage for party membership.

Thank you, all excellent reasons to continue to ignore that party.

 

[level.eleven]

Thank you, all excellent reasons to continue to ignore that party.

No problem. Like I said, they have enough old, washed up Republicans. Certainly no need for another to join their ranks.

 

[CarmelHP]

No problem. Like I said, they have enough old, washed up Republicans. Certainly no need for another to join their ranks.

Well, with their record of successes, I can see why they wouldn't want to share. They'll pretty soon be able to have their national convention in a Volkswagen, but it's the Republicans who are washed up.

 

[ocsdor]

Have some of you conservatives ever consider the Constitution Party?

Constitution Party Platform

Of all the presidential candidates this last cycle, Chuck Baldwin was, by far, the best shot (as in actual firearm shooting). This is who I voted for last election.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFkcOIsHCnc]YouTube - Chuck Baldwin on 2nd Amendment Rights[/ame]

 

[Ogre]

Well, with their record of successes, I can see why they wouldn't want to share. They'll pretty soon be able to have their national convention in a Volkswagen, but it's the Republicans who are washed up.

At least you get something right everynow and again. R's, not unlike yourself (Thankfully you haven't made it to that point yet), who finally give up on their own party and join the Libertarians, and bring along their own socially conservative, and foerign policy stances, is where the party gets weakened.
(I'll go ahead and get my flame retardent suit, and wait over here for your "scolding")