Freeper meltdown: Reagan picking Bush in '80 'hurt the party for three decades'

[alp227]

I searched the Other Forum to know what they thought about a brokered convention, and post #7 of this thread particularly stood out:

(Establishment Republicans) are the same morons who demanded Reagan take George H.W. Bush as his running mate at the 1980 GOP convention. A decision that has hurt the party for three decades.

And to quote the poster, Peyton Rudolph: "Prefer Haley Barbour or Sarah Palin as GOP presidential nominee in 2012."

So why would Bush Sr. as Reagan's running mate have ruined the GOP? Even if Reagan remains a conservative ICON! They still can't get over "read my lips no new taxes" and '92?

This thread was from January. How about a more recent one from the 4/3 primaries? It looks like the Freepers are waving a white flag already.

Post 13:

As I have said before on this forum, I will not vote for that RINO sonofabitch (Romney) in the general election!

Post 17:

When (Santorum) made noises in the summer of 2010 that he might run, I publicly declared my support for him. When he officially announced in the summer of 2011, I started donating to him. As soon as a bumper sticker was available on eBay (late summer 2011) I put it on my car.

I decided not to hold my nose this election cycle. Win or lose, I believe that my donations to Rick have been well worth it to get his message out if only for a little while longer.

As a social conservative, I won’t vote for Obama or Romney in November. If Rick (or Newt) doesn’t win the nomination, I will be looking at third party this year, and Santorum 2016 (or Pence 2016; or whatever good conservative runs 2016).

Post 19 apparently thinks that WE gamed some primaries in Santo's favor:

The only chance Santorum has, is if the Democrats show up in large enough numbers to Prank the vote, like they did in Michigan, Alabama and Mississippi.

However, this poster at least had some understanding about why people were voting Romney:

It appears like the electorate is starting to take a stand and make a solid choice to defeat Obama. They almost unanimously said that it is now more important to get behind a candidate soon, and to not delay or hinder the nomination. It is far more important to vote Obama out of office. ABO!, is the new battle cry.

Post 33 thinks that Congress would cave into RINOmney:

Obama - Romney: there is little to no difference in the evil they will do. Thankfully, if McRomney needs my vote here in Tennessee, he has already lost. I will just have to vote in the House and Senate and hope they can check Obama, as they would not oppose a president of the same party.

Post 35 essentially huffed at the idea that Freeper types could change the GOP from within (in contrast with Thom Hartmann advocating "change from within" rather than despair).

[Art_from_Ark]

1. Picking Reagan has hurt the country for 3 decades

[PoliticAverse]

2. It may be difficult to find a Conservative that will admit they actually ever voted for a Bush

before long.

[woodsprite]

3. Which would be good going into 2016 when the float Jeb.

I hope they have even more distaste for Bushes then.

[Jamaal510]

4. I don't know about that.

A few weeks ago, Willard tried to insinuate that Obama constantly plays the blame game with Bush. It's as if Republicans live in a parallel universe from us. Who we thought was a failure as a president turns out to be not so bad from a Republican's POV, while a guy who is actually doing something to improve the economy (Obama) is ridiculed by them.

[bongbong]

6. Name doesn't matter

The sheep repukes vote for whoever they're ordered to by the Drug Addict With No Advertisers.

[tanyev]

5. Aha! Maybe that's the record John McCain was trying to beat.

[Major Hogwash]

7. That is very strange.

You would have thought that some of them would have blamed Nixon or Ford for Bush's rise within the GOP party instead of Reagan.

When Nixon resigned after the Saturday Night Massacre, and vice President Spiro T. Agnew had resigned, President Ford -- the only President of the United States NOT elected by ANYONE -- appointed George H. W. Bush to be the Director of the CIA in 1976.

After President Carter won the 1976 Presidential election and was sworn in as President, he fired Bush as the Director of the CIA before the day was over, on the very same day, January 20th, 1977.

[Art_from_Ark]

8. Very interesting bit of information there:

"After President Carter won the 1976 Presidential election and was sworn in as President, he fired Bush as the Director of the CIA before the day was over, on the very same day, January 20th, 1977."

[treestar]

9. McRomney?

So he's implying McCain was also similarly unacceptable to him. Weird stuff.

I wonder that they don't see Reagan as "too liberal" at this point.