-13 votes

Romney Winning Could Be Good for the Liberty Movement?

I think the argument I have heard most is that a Romney win would be worse for the liberty movement than an Obama victory. The logic being the conservative movement as a whole would roll over to any Romney request - much like they did for Bush - and since his policies are the same as Obama's - big gov't would roll and there would be no opposition. However, an Obama presidency would guarantee an engergized conservative opposition - and at least gridlock is better than advancing statism.

However, I was thinking perhaps a Romney win would actually be better for the liberty movement in the long run if a dollar collapse and some serious financial chaos took place during his term. I want to preface that with saying - I dont wish that on our country in anyway - but I think it is inevitable - given the math and the shared consenus that neither Obama or Romney will change current policy much (financially, monetarily, or in foreign policy). Now I suppose chaos under Romney could push people left toward more gov't - but I think it could wake conservatives up to the idea (which they should get at this point - but for some reason do not) that both parties are the same and that nothing changes from one president to the next.

I welcome people's input on this and am curious to see what others think.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

If Romney wins and the

If Romney wins and the economy collapses, as it will, I guarantee that conservatism, not neo-conservatism, will be blamed. Mark my word. There will be a hard left turn in America. People will not starve. There will be riots as we see in Spain and Greece. DO NOT VOTE FOR ROMNEY!!!!!!!

Ironically, Obama must win

Ironically, Obama must win for freedom to prevail. The next president will likely be the one that presides over the collapse of the dollar and possibly the US. Their policies will be what is blamed.
If Obama is there when all that happens, his policies and their socialistic tendencies will be a major thing that is blamed for the disaster. If Romney is there, it will be the free market stuff that gets blamed. Romney being there would likely set the liberty movement back by a couple decades.

To climb the mountain, you must believe you can.

A Rmoney win

means all of the Bush Zionist will be advising Rmoney. A Romney win really means nut-n-yahoo will be deciding American foreign policy. That means war with Iran. That means WW3. That means the game is up. No win there. As far as the party loyaltist waking up...I don't see that. The Zionist controlled media will take care of that.

I don't see liberty gaining anything with a new President.

In 43 other tries the people have failed to elect a President that improved liberty for everyone.

Free includes debt-free!

as a white guy . .

I'd rather have Obama in there screwing things up. white guys are still trying to live down george W bush, the last thing we need is Romney. I'm joking . . . but kinda serious too.

Go figure...

Seems like Granger would write this...

UnMittigated evil.

Nope, there's no silver lining in a Romney win. When (not if) the economy crashes, "Conservatives" and their "free market policies" will get the blame. The coming war with Iran will be a Republican war. The further trashing of civil liberties will be a Republican policy.

Ron Paul might have prevented a meltdown and chaos. Mitt won't, and he'll poison the well for future Republican candidates.

Recommended reading: The Most Dangerous Superstition by Larken Rose

Great post

What do you think?

Maybe the GOP "rolled over" FOR Bush because the Neocons were at their Zenith? Maybe the Ron Paul RepubliCANs, Palin Earthquakers, Sanatorm Right Wink, Bachman Tea Partiers and Baldwin Constitutionalists who have replaced many of the old and tired Neocons who have no new blood coming in, won't roll over, espcially since we've all ready been rolled over once, being held hostage to loyalty oaths, the ionclude the constituion and looking forard to holding Romney to the constitution as blowback for the RNC?

I realize we dislike Romney

and Im not going to vote for him. My point wasnt to some how advocate for people to vote for Romney. If you believe in the principles that Ron Paul espouses I find it hard to understand why you would ever vote for Mitt Romney. But my point here was just to say maybe people think Obama would be better for the liberty movement in the long run - when if the financial calamity we all think is coming hits under a Romney presidency - Maybe the GOP emplodes as a party because of it. I think we all have seen how deceitful and disgusting the Republican party is and we all want it either radically remade or completely dead. So if a monster financial crisis hit during an Obama presidency would the GOP come out looking rosy?? - Could they say "see it was those damn socialist democrats led by Obama that did this..." the memory of GW Bush long gone......Im just throwing it out there for discussion. I think maybe Im wrong......but I wonder .....we are all in agreement here Romney and Obama are the same...sucks when you have no real choices -I am just trying to figure out how our movement stays alive - as Ron heads to retirement...

My husband and I have had this conversation

and we wonder the same thing about a Romney win. Would conservatives even get it? They look at you like you're a traitor when you point out the truth about George W., much less Romney EVEN NOW before he's President!!!!

This might sound a little rude, but I don't know how some people can be so dense. And yes, if these things happen under an Obama presidency, for SURE the neo-cons will say its all his fault*, and none of it would have happened if Romney had won. (*ex: they love to talk about the trillions that Obama has racked up but they conveniently forget the trillions Bush racked up, too.)

On the other hand, how do we stand another eight years?????? And as someone else pointed out, if Romney does win (he was at the Bilderberg meeting, so he might be the plan), it will look like the Republican party does not need the Constitutionalists. Its kind of nice having them begging us to vote for Romney, now ist't it? "...oh, you want us now? Too BAD!!!!!"

Our Country is in grave, grave danger no matter which one of these two gets in. My solution is more than voting on principle, we also must pray for God's direction over these next four years for restoring America and that He will mercifully help we freedom fighters to get the message out no matter who's in power. And pray that our Liberty candidates will win seats in the Senate and House.

And frankly, as a Nation, we MUST turn to God. Benjamin Franklin said, "The longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?"

Problem is...

a Willard victory means no liberty candidate in 2016, and also emboldens the neocons to completely shut us out of the GOP, since they can argue that they don't need us to win.

I don't play, I commission the league.

I don't agree

The Neocons resorted to dirty tricks because they had too.

There is no new Neocon blood coming in to replace them. We are replacing them. We will hold Romney to the loyalty oath he took to the constitution. He deserves it after the RNC.

There is new neocon blood in the GOP...

and you're part of it.

I don't play, I commission the league.

how so?

If you're anti-establishment, then why vote at all?

The same banksters who CAUSED the financial crisis get credit...

for it not being worse than it was. Driving Romney to third will do a lot more for the liberty movement than a Romney victory would. As George Bush's chief strategist, Lee Atwater, used to say about conservatives, "Where are they gonna go?"

As powerful as the bankers are

I'm betting Ron paul is correct and holding them to the constitution is key to freedom, if we show up and stand up to them in the GOP rather than run away in the name of feeling good elsewhere.