14 votes

Romney, The Disposable Candidate: Does the RNC Really Want to Win in 2012?

I question if the RNC really wants to win in 2012. If so, why was the establishment,from the beginning, promote a candidate that had a health care program of his own? And why would they pick a candidate that no one is enthusiastic about or really likes?

This is not to say that Romney doesn't want to win, but I think strategically as a party, they are willing to lose another election. The party leadership, in both parties, are not concerned about the country as much as they are concerned about power.

Obiviously they can't sit out as a party and not present a candidate, so they nominate a disposable candidate like they did with McCain in 2008.

Given the economy, the wars and going against the first black candidate, did the Repubicans expect to lose in 2008? And now do they really want to unseat the first black president and have potentional racial blowback for doing so? Are they content with Obama getting another 4 years and not being able to run again, so the Republicans can win in 2016? Or do they expect the economy is only going to get worse and want Obama to take the blame? Do they see a win in 2016 as a better way to get the next 8-12 years of Republican rule in the White House?

I could be totally wrong. I just wonder at times, with candidate like McCain and Romney, if Repubilcans really want to win. And isn't voting for a deposible candidate really throwing my vote away?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Yep!

We can call ROMNEY .... DEPENDS...........(AS IN THE DISPOSABLE DIAPER!) Seems right!

Scuttling the ship

I had this creepy idea that the RNC realized they could not repeal boarders, so they decided to scuttle the ship. Keep'er afloat, lads. Take the helm!

Ĵīɣȩ Ɖåđşŏń

"Fully half the quotations found on the internet are either mis-attributed, or outright fabrications." - Abraham Lincoln

northstar's picture

They just might want to lose

You know with all the QE and stuff, it's way better to pad their own pockets on the Dem's watch then their own. Both parties are mostly interchangeable, but they play a good charade in front of voters and the public at large.

Real eyes realize real lies

We want our country back

Every year is a year for Ron Paul!

It doesn't matter if we like him or not. They got the machines

and they got the vote. Screw you. Diebold wins.

SequoiaTrees4RonPaul

Those RNCheat crooks would never purposely throw an election.

They want power just as much as the Dems do. The reason why the GOP keeps nominating boring, unconservative oligarchs is because they won't challenge the status quo if elected and will give money and perks to the "right" groups.

I don't play, I commission the league.

It is the Quigley Principle

They are throwing it, and in 2008, because it is the best way to retain your donors and your sheep. Four years isn't enough to get a majority of voters pissed off enough to vote for the other guy - and the last three years end up being lame duck-like anyway given our media and the system.

And, this is the system the RNC and DNC elders have created. They use the same people as forecasters, hired by the banksters. They are on the same team.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

I agree . . .

The PTF want Obama to win, and Ron Paul was a real threat to that--

Romney is not, but this will become a divisive issue; it already has--

many of our neo-conservative friends claim that if Romney doesn't win it will be our (libert-lovers/Ron Paul supporters) fault--

no win--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Nope

I and many others have been saying it for a year now. Obama is supposed to win, it's been the plan all along. Just as they paraded McInsane and Sarah Semi-retarded-Palin because they knew they were going to lose; This time they want to lose because the collapse is going to happen during the next term. And, bonus, Obama has been able to institute the police state/united nations takeover without the "liberals" even catching on and being able to dismiss any criticism as racist and Teabaggery.

So, you need a plastic candidate that says stupid things and doesn't give anyone motivation - mission accomplished.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

They're getting

They're getting 90% of what they want with Obama, so they decided to throw this election with the "moderate" Romney. I think the TEA party scared them and they felt they needed to beat those people down to show the establishment they were still in control.

Who to vote for?

I am so confused about who to vote for. I'm thinking maybe to fill in the blanks for Romney and Obama, and then write in Ron Paul.

Ohmeohmy

No Need to Be Confused, Not If We Let Ron and Gary of the Lib-

ertarian Party know that we will support Ron as president. Time is running out and more info on post "It's Still Possible. Please go there and comment and vote up. ( : We want Ron Paul to announce of Leno show he is running 3rd party and he should be able to be in the national debates with Obama/Romoney.

A.Hansen

No one voting for him likes him

Most people I've talked to are only voting for him because they hate Obama so much more and want to see him out of office.

The GOP does NOT want to win

Those who control BOTH parties want to lose the Republic and the party that represents the Republic. They want a NWO, gloabl government. That is why they work so hard to STOP RON PAUL, give the cowrards among us a red herring like GJ (A CFR member).

That is why Ron Paul said we could take the GOP, all we had to do was join, get a committee seat, become a delegate, that most here didn't even try.

And now, armed with the costitution, that all elected sign loyalty oaths to, we can hold them.. but you have to get in the game, and that areana is in the GOP.

I remember when they trotted

I remember when they trotted out about 9 of the most repulsive individuals in the Republican Party for the first debate. My thought at the time was that the establishment was perfectly happy with Obama in the White House, so the GOP will just do whatever it has to in order to stop Ron Paul. The GOP doesn't care about winning. Neither party really does. The only reason we have presidential elections is to generate hundreds of millions of dollars in advertising revenue for the networks so they can afford to keep brainwashing us.

That was Meant to Confuse Voters

I try not to get into the conspiracies too much, but this whole nominating process just seems like one big psy-op mission against the American people. Seems like Romney was the guy all along and everything else was a distraction. If you followed the campaign closely you could tell when they didn't know what to do with Paul. Should we give him no coverage, a little coverage, a lot of very negative coverage? It seems like they alternated between total media blackout and limited negative coverage. Never positive. If it seemed like a positive article, somewhere in there it must be said "he can't win".

World government

.

We shall have it

by conquest or consent.

--Paul Warburg

And the RNC is cool with that.

So is

the DNC!

The RNC does not want to win

they just want to give the illusion of wanting to win. They love big government, they love debt, they love war. They have the both of both worlds now, all the big government they love, and the ability to fuss and moan about how much they hate it. If they win they lose that.

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*