Confusion to BOTH of our Enemies

His Majesty has laid out a plan for voting in the Virginia Primary, where it has been arranged that Willard Mitt “Flipper” Romney would only have Ron “Protocols of Ron” Paul to oppose him; guaranteeing him a sweep of Virginia’s delegates, and the superficial appearance of strong support in a southern state. I don’t live in Virginia, but if I did, I would follow His Majesty’s plan. Vote for Paul in hope of damaging Mittens.

And, acknowledging that Newt is a deeply flawed candidate for the nomination [no hostility to Santorum, but it must be admitted that he does not rouse the passion to fight], he at least is not an open enemy of Conservatives, Patriots, and the TEA party. Thus, I can see supporting him as the only way to stop Mittens, despite Newt’s flaws.

But that leaves us with the problem of what to do if the Institutionals force Romney’s nomination. I am not saying that is certain. There are … rumblings of a brokered convention, and a certain lady from the far North has been far more involved of late, including with an open declaration of war against the Institutionals. But it is always a good thing to have a plan ready to cope with what the enemy does.

I frequent many places on the Internet, and among them is the site LEGAL INSURRECTION. One of the commenters came up with an idea that would seem to work, and work well.

1. Voting for Obama in the general election is akin to treason.
2. Voting for Romney is not functionally different in outcome, if he wins. The problem is that there is no way that he will win.
3. Further, voting for Romney only encourages the Institutionals to keep putting up Vichy Republicans and suppressing Conservatives.
4. Voting for another conservative party has downsides I will explain.
5. Undervoting the ticket [leaving the President/VP lines blank] or writing in even if it will not be counted are options, but not as effective as this from “Darkstar58” at LEGAL INSURRECTION:

Darkstar58 | January 31, 2012 at 2:17 pm

Many of us will likely do the same if extreme Liberal Governor turned say anything car salesman Establishment candidate gets the nod.

Although, if there is someone on the ticket, I still think our votes would be best served going to whoever is under the Green Party flag. If they get 5%, they get Fed help for future elections and splitting the Dem ticket for years to come is a chance I cant pass up if forced to choose between “Them (Obama) and Them (Romney)” (as STF put it)

And

Darkstar58 | January 31, 2012 at 3:00 pm

No, getting the “Green Party” Fed recognition will ensure the Democrat vote is split in the future (making it easier for Republicans or Tea Party-like candidates running under a Republican Nomination to get elected)

If the “Libertarian Party” were to gain Fed Recognition it would hurt the GOP/TeaParty and mean much more Democrat Control moving forward.

“sending a message” will be accomplished by the low percentage of Romney-Republican and Romney-Independent turnout. Voting Johnson ultimately accomplishes nothing, and stands to hurt us a ton moving forward.

I will not vote Libertarian because of it unless there is absolutely no other name on the ticket.

I’m a Nader (or whoever) man all the way if Romney gets the nod…

The discrepancy between total votes cast for Republicans downticket, and for Romney should get the attention of the Institutional leadership. And it would; if they gave an airborne coital thrust at a rotating, radially symmetric, toroidal fried piece of dough translating over a surface, about what the base thinks. They do not care about us, so long as they hold on to power within the party. They are not only willing, but eager, to lose to Obama. If Obama wins, there is no additional internal party threat to the power of the Institutional Republicans. Being a kept opposition is a very good and profitable gig, if you have no soul.

So what do we do to not collaborate with the Institutionals and still hurt the Democrats?

There are two minor parties on the Conservative side, the Libertarians and the Constitution Party. Like it or not, the Libertarians are tainted with the mixed message of being associated with the more outré statements of Ron Paul. So long as he is one of their leading lights, that condition will obtain.

The Constitution Party is irredeemably tainted, for me at least. Here in Colorado, we have a Democrat as governor, elected in 2010. A TEA Party supported candidate won the Republican nomination. This horrified the Republican Central Committee, and they demanded that he step down because he was “unsuitable”. The meeting with the Central Committee was … noteworthy. Also, unsatisfactory from the Central Committee’s point of view as the general tenor of our candidate’s response was FOAD.

So, the Republican Central Committee cut a deal with the Constitution Party. The Constitution Party replaced their already selected governor candidate with a RCC selected Republican who changed his registration temporarily [Tom Tancredo, a Republican again since a week after the election]. In return, the Republicans arranged to finance the Constitution Party’s campaign, and guaranteed them 5% of the vote. That last gave them Major Party status under Colorado law, and automatic ballot access without petitions statewide. With the Republicans pushing the Constitution Party and NOT supporting the TEA Party Republican, the Democrat won handily, which pleased them. The Republicans kept a TEA Party candidate from winning office; which for them was a worthwhile trade for the governorship. And the Constitution Party got major party status, which they never would have done electorally. The only ones who lost were the TEA Party Patriots.

But if Romney is the Republican candidate; a vote for the Green Party presidential candidate, whoever he/she/it is gives us a win, with no additional downside. If Conservatives can get them to the point where they qualify for Federal campaign financing, they will have a real, albeit small and less than competent, national campaign. It means that instead of voting automatically for the Democrat and helping them win; they will vote for their own and lose. It will weaken the Democrats and make our own separation from the Institutionals that much easier. And it is not as if Democrat attempts to pander to the Greens will make things worse. When is the last time that the Democrats have made a policy decision that did not put the opinions of the Greens above the rest of the country? And if the Greens go full-on Moonbat, all it will do is discredit themselves further with the rest of the country, and harm the Democrats by implication.

I grant that the elections of 2012 are themselves at great risk from a possible fake state of emergency. And if Obama is re-elected, future elections are problematical at best. But if Romney is the nominee, he is not going to win. It is impossible, and his Institutional sponsors well know it. So, just to have the chance of influencing any putative future elections that might occur in 2014 and beyond; instead of voting for the pale pastel pink Romney, vote for the Greenest critter you can find at the top of a ticket.

LC Subotai Bahadur, Lord Pao An