As we all await tonight’s debate in New Hampshire, it becomes clear that those of us who understand the necessity to unseat Barack Obama have a lot to worry about. Mitt Romney is still leading the pack, and is ahead even in the South Carolina polls. But the momentum of Rick Santorum’s challenge and the no-holds-barred attacks on Romney coming from Newt Gingrich (Gingrich regularly refers to Romney as the “Massachusetts moderate”) are taking their tolls.
Even the liberal columnist Joe Klein writes respectfully of Santorum, a candidate whose brand of social conservatism he strongly disagrees with. The man “lives his faith,” Klein writes, and he thinks that Santorum “will pose a significant working-class challenge to Romney’s corporate conservatism.”
Santorum will not win the nomination, and neither will Newt Gingrich. But the problem is that with many Republicans and especially self-proclaimed conservatives not being enthusiastic about Romney, as Klein writes, he “may not inspire sufficient numbers of Republicans to come out and vote.” The result, then, will be a second term for Barack Obama.
Then one must consider Newt Gingrich’s new motivation for his campaign — revenge against the Romney Super PAC for running the negative ads that resulted in the complete collapse of Newt’s efforts in Iowa. The man who only a few weeks ago predicted with confidence that he would get the nomination is now down in all the polls. Rather than maintain his prior promise of running no negative ads, Gingrich is promising to blast Romney with everything he has, to show the Republican electorate that Romney is not a conservative and will lose to the president if he gets the nomination.
If one is looking ahead to the November 2012 election campaign, all the anti-Romney attacks will work only to do precisely what Klein predicts — cause a lack of enthusiasm on the part of the Republican Party conservative base and quite likely lead them to not get to the polling booth on voting day.
As usual Ron you are wrong. The process that the R’s are going through is called trial by fire. That means that the winner will emerge with everything that can be said bad about him and still wins the battle. Your way would create a wimp that would face a dirty war from the msm and the entire Demoratic party. Every new revelation by the msm or web sites would require another day of denials or explanations by the candidate. As we have seen from the libs in the Santorum baby death comments, the Dems know NO LIMITS on attacking us. The worst thing we could do is have an early winner without the required hardening by combat. The next thing our side should do is fight fire with fire. By that I mean that when the Dems bring up something personal about our candidate, ie his religion, we should counter with a question about BHO personally. Not to the degree that libs do but enough to make them have to answer it publicly. Things like how did BHO NOT know about Fast & Furious and if he didn’t shouldn’t Holder be fired for not telling him? How did BHO NOT know about the energy dept. approving the $530 millon loan to Solyndra even when it’s lawyers advised against it? Why has BHO given so many Obamacare exemptions to unions? If our candidate uses these questions to counter personal attacks then the msm will have a hard time not asking the same questions during the campaign.
No, he’s not wrong. As long as there are so-called Conservatives who insist on claiming that there’s no difference between electing Romney and electing Obama then it’s a big problem. Anybody who thinks like that is a saboteur, whether they intend to be or not.
I am sick of hearing about how it is always the conservatives ruining the party. The GD “establishment” Republicans didn’t like when conservatives won primaries in Delaware, Nevada, New York and other places so did they rally behind the GOP candidate no they got there panties in a twist stomped their feet and undermined the candidates. These moderates we are told are so electable from the the wise power brokers of Washington have given us the likes of W Bush who barley won in a three way races against the likes of Gore and Kerry, and lets not forget the truly inspiring campaigns run by Bob Dole (who it should be noted pushed Bush to break his read my lips promise as senator) and McCain who was going to attract independents and moderate democrats because of he was a courageous maverick.
Unfortunately I think we are stuck with holding our nose and voting for Mittens the RINO, but it is also way beyond time to start purging the RINOs and democrats (Arlen Sphincter) from the republican party.
Nope, I will not vote for romney, If that is what the ‘R’douch’s say I MUST vote for I will vote for obama instead. Slow sufocation or fast.. I choose fast.
Some alinsky back at them, let it burn, …. let it burn hot and fast, instead of a smolder. At least then we may emerge free… all the sooner.
A Simple Bricklayer.
Voting for Obama is unconscionable. That means you approve of the trampling asunder of our rights and laws, and it also means you approve of leaving babies to die, since Obama voted against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act and never recanted. Vote third party or abstain from voting for President if you must, but under no circumstances should you vote for Obama.
Nope voting for romney is unconscionable.
That means you approve of the trampling asunder of our rights and laws, and it also means you approve of leaving babies to die, since romney voted to fund Planed Parenthood in romneycare and never recanted. Vote third party or abstain from voting for President if you must, but under no circumstances should you vote for romney.
Meh, romney, or obama… what would Galen chose….. Alexander Hamilton had something to say about electing an enemy. To paraphrase, I do believe his context was,… it was better that said enemy be elected to the opposition(obama) than for us to be tainted and undermined by the same enemy(romney) elected to our People.
Obama will get nothing of what he wants.
Romney will get some of it.
That’s unconscionable. The few things he might really believe in–he’s never flip flopped on them–are government healthcare, gun control, and global warming.
Which of those do you want? Is it believable that man will really cut the budget?
No.
I will not vote for Romney.
Simple, all right.
Let’s just take ONE area: judicial appointments. The next President will appoint at least one more Supreme Court Justice (up to three) and 200-300 other lifetime federal judges. These appointments will affect the country for the next 30-40 years at least. Your grandchildren and their kids will suffer because you were too “simple” to figure out the difference.
I’m with you. I wouldn’t vote for Mitt Romney is my life depended on it. Him and Obama are basically the same policy-wise. For instance, Obamacare was modeled after Romneycare. Does anyone think Rpmney would repeal ObamaRomneycare? Even though he says he will (and Romney just tells us all what we want to hear) we can be sure he won’t. Romney is just another corporate stooge. Pick your poison.
@Estragon
Simple, all right.
Let’s just take ONE area: judicial appointments. The next President will appoint at least one more Supreme Court Justice (up to three) and 200-300 other lifetime federal judges.
And what makes you think that Romney will appoint anyone different than what Bush I gave us? At least Obama’s appointments will face opposition from a republican Senate.
@Fantom
Nope voting for romney is unconscionable.
That means you approve of the trampling asunder of our rights and laws, and it also means you approve of leaving babies to die, since romney voted to fund Planed Parenthood in romneycare and never recanted. Vote third party or abstain from voting for President if you must, but under no circumstances should you vote for romney.
I agree 100%.
The way to really send the republican establishment an unmistakable message is to elect a republican Senate and vote 3rd party if Romney is the nominee.
His getting fewer votes than cast for GOP Senatorial candidates will be an unspinable rejection of the establishment.
@Estragon
Out of the issues you want to see a conservative appointment to the court on, how does Romney feel? What has he always said he really believes in?
Gun control.
Carbon Control.
Government run healthcare.
Do you think any SCOTUS appointment Romney will approve of will overturn Wickard? We won’t get the court we want out of Romney. And I’d rather see thebench shy several justices for a few years than the sort of mind Romney approves of actually on it.
And aren’t most of the oldest justices liberals? We make no gains, but take no losses, if lefties replace lefties.
I’m no Romney fan
I’m fairly solid behind Santorum who, despite the “big government” lie being said about him these days from so-called conservatives (who, not suprisingly, support very non-conservative ideas like gay rights, etc) remains the most solid conservative of the bunch. He has flaws, but none that approach Mitt or any of the others.
But for those of you claiming you won’t support the candidate if it is Mitt who emerges, you are:
1. comfortable with obama being re-elected; or
2. delusional
For the comment that the gop can simply oppose his actions should he be re-elected, you must not be paying close attention. Our tyrant-in-chief has just deemed the Senate to be in recess, even though they are not, to insert his nominess through illegitimate recess appointments. But boehner and company will not do a thing to stop him. What makes you think the next congress will do any differently?
In light of the issues we face, there are no differences between Obama and Romney which are substantive enough for me to risk the then near certainty, should Romney be elected, that the disaster of half measures happens when the R’s–but not conservatives–are entirely in charge of the national government.
I’d like to preserve the value of the brand towards picking up the pieces later.
Romney believes firmly that government should control healthcare, that gun control laws are good ideas, and that man-made CO2 is screwing up the planet. He is a technocrat who thinks as a matter of principle that government exists to nudge and manage society and the economy–even the ecology!
Therefore I should not vote for him, a candidate who will drag the nation left and not right if elected.
Yeah Perkins, you would like to preserve the brand alright. In a pig’s eye. You are so f**king stupid that you cannot see the effect Obama will have on our country in four more years. Are you to stupid to realize that if the GOP nominee gets a Republican Congress he will have to toe the line? Do you really think that a Romney could do what he wants to do if the R’s run Congress? You take your brand and stick it up you a**!
The reason a President is called the head of his party is because he is that. A Republican Congress will more toe his line, that’s why it must not be Romney.
Obama will get nothing from a Republican Congress. I’m ok with that.
4 years of not moving towards the edge is better than creeping over it like the ride Romney will take us on.
Let’s look at the facts in the record. When was the last time the Pubs cut government. You have to go all the way back to Coolidge for that. It didn’t happen with Reagan even though he wanted to. It didn’t happen with the 1994 pub house even though they did effect some welfare changes and balanced the budget using social security money. It certainly didn’t happen with Bush II even though we had a Pub Congress for a good portion of his tenure. In fact Bush II and that GOP congress grew government. Many of those same Pubs are still in office. What makes you think they will cut government with a known conservative managerial progressive as their titular head. If what you want is someone that will manage the administrative state more efficiently than Obama then definitely Romney is as good a choice as any. But don’t deceive yourself into thinking the Leviathan will be tamed. Romney and the current pub congress will ease the fall into bankruptcy but they won’t change the trajectory.
Thank you, Moira and Professor Radosh. You both write the truth, clear as day to all who wish to see it.
Ptui! Buckley the younger and Dave Brooks both thought Obama was fine fellow.
Shows what the judgement of such as you is worth.
Hey Bellodonna, you still think it’s a terrible thing some US airlines are repatriating petrodollars?
No good judgement to be found from your whole quarter of the party.
You are part of the problem.
Put a sock in it, Tom. All you can do is rant and rave. You want a 100% pure Republican party and would prefer another four years of Zero?
So what if Christopher Buckley and David Brooks got it wrong? Is that any reason for PJM to fall for this tripe you dangle as if it were intellectual gold?
Get over yourself and your my way or the highway attitude. It doesn’t make you appear as bright as you apparently think you are.
Say, have you Romniacs noticed you don’t have the mental horsepower to make a counterargument?
Then you fall back on the explanation, “shut up.”
LOL, the choir is congratulating themselves.
You are totally blind to the arguments already made here by many people. But since I’m magnanimous
I’ll try it again:
1.- There is no difference between Obama and Romney, like it or not. Any difference is only of degree not of essentials.
2.- Therefore between an open enemy of Freedom like Obama and a fake friend like Romney, it’s always better to choose the open enemy, at least you are not compromising and selling your mind, and you keep clear your vision of what your enemy is.
I’m not going to elaborate more on this, you can just read many commenters here like Tom Perkins or Fantom.
It is far past time for the establishment and those who support them, in light of their manifold failures, to sit down and shut up, where is the origin of their pride that they do not?
They led us to this pass no less than have the Dims.
What Wilson hath wrought, what FDR hath wrought, what Johnson hath wrought, and for God’s sake what the moron Obama hath wrought–and what progressive Teddy wrought that is a mouldered branch–it’s time to stick the knife in and undo those things.
The pendulum must go the other way for several decades to come, and if it crushes the establishment before it that is a good thing, they do not know what is wise.
So I will not vote for Romney.
“As usual Ron you are wrong.”
As usual? Well, okay then. I’ll vote for Obama, support communism, oppose the Zionist lobby and stop using commas.
Every recent PJM column has attracted at least one truculent troll. The one in this column is Tom Perkins.
Advice to readers: Skip all his comments. He makes no sense and is an angry. angry piece of work.
Fnord is another.
Save your time for something valuable. They do not qualify as anything but paid troublemakers. Kinds sad, really.
Except I keep on bringing up the same perfectly true points that show why Romney hasn’t gotten past 25% and shouldn’t be the nominee. Trolls don’t use true facts.
Useless party hacks and partisan drones can’t make replies. Can you prove you aren’t one of those two?
O’Toole? Appropriate.
ORomney is nothing but Clorox-dipped Obama. I hear a lot of people saying it’s so important that the R is the only thing that matters. Well, except for one small thing: When Progressive policies continue to be implemented under an ORomney administration, the country WILL crash. What cannot continue, will not. When that crash comes, I want nothing but Copperhead Progressive fingerprints on it. No cover from screaming “A Republican was President!!!eleventy!”
That will matter when we rebuild a Constitutional government.
On more than one occasion Romney has acknowledged that he was a Progressive. Just prior to the late December debate he stated that he had not changed his belief’s except for abortion. You have two choices: (1) he is still a progressive per his own words or (2) he out and out lied for personal gain, getting elected. The first fits the totality of his record but you are certainly entitled to what ever you choose to believe.
Whether I’m particularly pleased with whoever wins the Republican nomination or not matters little. I will vote in November, and Barack Obama won’t get it. Another four years of him is more than this country can withstand.
– other way around. He will stand alone as the nominee and lose as such.
I will vote for anybody but Ron Paul, on the GOP ticket this fall.
Please note, Ron, that the Tea Party influence, new seats in the South, and less seats up North, will produce a GOP controlled Congress (both House and Senate) and that Romney wont have a chance to acquiesce to the Left…in a Romney presidency.
My only hope is that a Romney Administration will appoint another Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia….and not God forbid another OConnor, Souter, or Stevens.
The attacks by Gingrich aren’t discouraging the GOP base from supporting Romney. They were already threatening to disendorse him back when Cain was still running.
Too many in the GOP base don’t just want a candidate who can run effectively against Obama and his policies. They want a candidate who will take on FDR and the New Deal, the whole concept of entitlements for the disadvantaged.
They loved it when Perry called Social Security a “Ponzi scheme.” And they hated it when Romney called Perry out on it as wrecking the GOP’s chances of winning FL with its heavy population of retirees.
They know Romney won’t give them the red meat they want.
They knew that before Gingrich aired a single attack ad on Romney.
I think the GOP should find another candidate who is not as divisive as either Romney or Santorem. It’s not as if this controversy is a bolt out of the blue. They have known about this but have allowed the far, far right to become a powerhouse in the party. I know of some who absolutely refused to vote in the last election because of feelings against McCain. I didn’t especially like McCain but could vote for him. The same feeling exists now but, I think, the divide is greater.
I voted for McCain even when the idiot went to save the bailout, not end it.
Romney is worse, I will not vote for him.
Calling John McCain an idiot doesn’t make him one. It makes you one.
I didn’t just call him one, I explained how he was one–TARP.
That makes him one.
I am not particularly fond of any of the candidates and the infighting of the nomination process has become agonizingly tiresome. I don’t even consider myself a Republican anymore given the spineless constant appeasement the party seems to insist upon. But the Republicans could nominate a steaming pile of dog@&?t straight from the sidewalk and I will be at the polls in November to vote for it instead of that marxist SOB now occupying the White House. That is a promise!
Let’s get a little perspective. Primary elections are not Kumbayah filled endeavors. Once a candidate is selected, the base will rally around him. Look at the Democrats in 2008 for the most recent example. Also, let’s get all the nasty stuff out in the open now rather than have a surprise after the candidate is selected. You think if we don’t mention the dirt that Obama’s team (hired workers and leftstream media volunteers) won’t find it? Here in Colorado we had an upstart gubernatorial candidate who coasted through the primaries and then was found to have considerable baggage – huge GOP loss in the general election.
This line really got me -”But the momentum of Rick Santorum’s challenge and the no-holds-barred attacks on Romney coming from Newt Gingrich (Gingrich regularly refers to Romney as the “Massachusetts moderate”) are taking their tolls.”. I don’t often find such rollicking humor at PJMedia. It took me a while to get off the floor and recall the debates where Rick Perry was attacked by all moderators and all the candidates. Or e debts where Herman Cain dealt with fierce questions about invented stories from a made up past by women paid for by either the DNC, or Romney PACs. Or also the attacks on Newt for his insanity. Now, Mitt Romney is going to lose all his supporters because Newt gently refers to him as a Massachusetts Moderate. What a crock. Mitt has skated through the entire pre-primary season watching in amusement as the liberal and conservative intelligentsia conducted drive by attacks on whoever happened to be his toughest competitor in any given week. Mitt was accorded a different, collegial treatment by moderators and National Review. In fact, voters were instructed by higher authorities that the purpose of the primary was not to have a competition, but to choose Mitt before Iowa so that he would not be worn out when he needed to conduct his gentlemanly contest with Obama.
I say Newt, take the gloves off. After the disgusting attacks Romney did to you in Iowa, Mitt deserves the worst thing you can do – tell the people the truth about how he will choose collaboration rather than combat as a means of dealing with Harry Reid and company. For the good of America, may Rick or Newt or Rick succeed. If not, America is doomed.
For the good of America, may Rick or Newt or Rick succeed. If not, America is doomed.
Hilarious. Each would be blown away by Obama and neither has Romney’s phenomenal executive ability. America doesn’t deserve Mitt Romney, but boy does she ever need him.
You must be attempting to cause mass murder by laughter induced aneurysms.
There a reason why he’s lost every campaign but one and never dared to try for re-election. He’s a loser.
We need someone who will throw bombs into the establishment that got us into this mess. In declining order or likelihood, that’s Newt, Perry, Santorum, etc… Paul would believe he’s throwing bombs, but his Uncle Sam would still be holding them when they went off…
The reason he lost is because he ran in an ultra liberal state. Republicans comprise no more that 40% of the electorate and can’t win without support from Independents. Perry, Gingrich and Santorum are not electable. Romney inherited a deficit in uber liberal Massachusetts and then ran 4 straight surpluses. He will be a great President and will govern as conservatively as he can. Bomb throwers accomplish nothing.
Romney never did balance the budget, not once. He had one term and put off the financial reckoning for the idiotic government run healthcare he signed off on and defends to this day.
Now with that crashing, how is that a balanced budget?
Congratulations! That’s the most pompous, asinine post I’ve ever read. Please point the word “manager” anywhere in the Constitution. America doesn’t need a “manager” because America isn’t a “business”. Businesses exist to do two things; grow and increase revenue. I’d say we’ve had quiet enough running of the government as a “business”.
Thanks, I needed the laugh too!
I’m with you. So far Newt seems to be the only one capable of really bringing the fight to the media. He’s got a funny way of throwing their bias right back in their face.
He seems to be the only one capable of really changing the argument, not just arguing.
I don’t know about disunity, but it looks to me like 75 percent of the republican base pukes at the thought of Romney. Now that mass projectile vomiting sure looks like a uniform stimulus response. Instead of blaming the puking masses, maybe you should blame the cook or the dishwashers or that mighty fine to big to fail corporate menu of rich entrees. Maybe it’s a mass allergic reaction? Whatever it it is, I don’t working on their immune systems is going to get it.
Chiming in to second gverdi’s first paragraph at 1350 hours; I also note that the question can be more rationally addressed by looking at it the other way around.
If one is looking ahead to the November 2012 election campaign, all the anti-Romney attacks will work only to do precisely what Klein predicts — cause a lack of enthusiasm on the part of the Republican Party conservative base and quite likely lead them to not get to the polling booth on voting day.
Will not the Institutional Republicans’ incessant pushing to force the nomination of a candidate that a) self-described as a “moderate progressive”, b) despite it being claimed that he is uniquely “electable” has been running for office with all the benefits of wealth, name recognition, and Institutional support since 1994 and only managed to be elected once and then was hated by both parties so much that he dare not run for re-election, c) in order to get elected specifically adopted Democrat positions on abortion, 2nd Amendment, and taxation, d) whose sole accomplishment in office was to impose the prototype for Obamacare [the repeal of which in its entirety is a prime Conservative goal to which he will not commit himself], e) whose surrogates in NH have openly said that principles and beliefs do not matter at all in this election, f) who for years has been attacking conservatives and fellow Republicans and yet somehow not aimed his fire at the Enemy, g) has come out for the Leftist fiscal wet-dream, the imposition of a VAT on Americans and h) who 75% of the Republican Party hates; might just have a depressing effect “causing a lack of enthusiasm on the part of the Republican Party conservative base and quite likely lead them to not get to the polling booth on voting day”?
Either we choose our candidates according to what we believe and support, or the Republican Party is not our party but the wholly owned subsidiary of the Institutionals to which we do not owe any loyalty. If the only end goal is to have those looting the country and trashing the Constitution have an “R” behind their name instead of a “D”; why should we support them?
Subotai Bahadur
kol hakavod! Thank you for stating it so well.
In a light bulb moment, I think of this as the start of the NFL season, with the ultimate goal as the super bowl ie. the Defeat of obama. We have a long season ahead of us many games some losses some wins but keep on playing and fighting. Many a super bowl team has peaked at the right moment, just like our Republican nominee must. Let the games begin.
Nothing would discourage the GOP base more than Romney getting the nomination.
Seconded. Romney doesn’t need any Romney-bashing to turn off the conservatives. They can’t warm up to him because he’s not a conservative. Never was. Never will be. He’s a liberal, through and through. Having John McCain vouch for him just makes it worse.
Face it, all your candidates are losers.
Not true; one will beat Barky like a redheaded step-child in November.
Nominating Romney will discourage the base and give Obama the election. Romney’s only concern about the size and scope of the federal government is that he’s not in charge of continuing to make even more pervasive. Perry has made many mistakes and is weak, if not as scary as Ron Paul on several issues but he was right on the money about “making the federal government as inconsequential in our lives as possible”. If the Republican candidate doesn’t intend to take on the New Deal, eliminate five or ten federal departments and push back against the political correctness and multicultural diversity nonsense. If the Republican candidate isn’t going to eliminate the power of the enviro-nazis and free us from efforts to de-develop our economy by outlawing resource development through regulation there is no point in having an election at all.
Conservatives are not pining for another Bush, Daniels or Christie, the want a conservative candidate who can win not another Dole or McCain who can’t.
Yes, it’s us “moronic populists” that are the problem.
I’ve heard this song before, Ron.
No attempt to shame me will result in me cheer leading for Mittens.
Good job of mouthing the Ruling Class spin, Mr. Radosh.
Let’s review. Mitt Romney and his establishmen buddies have serially and maliciously attacked the character of Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich and now Rick Santorum. The first three have all dropped significantly in the polls. Quel Shocke.
And what we hear from the republican catrati is a plea for unity, after they mock their victims for whining about the underhanded way they were destroyed.
Romney himself cannot climb above 25% in the polls, and the public have at any one point prefered Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Perry, Cain, Gingrich, Santorum and may well in the future prefer Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman or the local dogcatchr.
Until recently, I have been consistently positive about Mr. Romney, but it is becoming more and more difficult to do so, since it is clear that the dirty pool is being played by him and his supporters. Frankly, if I thought for a second that he would do the same to Obama, I might shrug it off. But he won’t.
I assume my feelings are at least somewhat shared by many. I will still support Romney if he gets the nomination, but it is becoming increasing difficult to do so with enthusiasm.
One of Romney’s strengths, for a while, appeared to be personal integrity. Looks like he is down to the jutting jawline and the hair.
“Romney himself cannot climb above 25% in the polls”
And the reasons for that are conclusive and almost self-explanatory.
There’s no point to electing that man, no points worthy of the problems we face.
Did the Ruling Class knock down Perry, or was it his poor performance in the debates? I’m definitely not Ruling Class, but I had questions about Cain re. foreign policy. He wasn’t prepared to answer them (not to me personally, of course). Quite frankly, as someone who has done quite a bit of serious reading since 9/11, I consider that an insult. I’m glad to know about Newt and Freddi
e Mac because his support of GSEs undermined those like Bush and McCain who were warning about bad loans. Why didn’t Newt get on line with them? Now he wants to be the big team player who has been betrayed.
As far as I can see, the Ruling Class only asked questions we all should have asked before we jumped on bandwagons.
Perry’s worst enemy was Perry. Flub city.
Yep, Perry communicates like obama without teleprompters. Would say they are both about 20 IQ short of a real debate.
Perry’s heart may, or may not be in the right place. But he makes the WOn look downright Einstein on stage.
My wife and I are through holding our noses. If Romney is the candidate, we sill stay home. We’ve been voting a Republican ticket since 1960 but are finished with Rhinos.
Please people! We’re embarrassing our betters again. Quiet down, shut up & accept your fate.
The Republicans pretended to accept us after we brought them an electoral victory in 2010. But they never really approved of us. They snickered about us behind our backs and told the Dems that they had to act like they were trying to keep us happy. Why do you think Mitt Romney won’t denounce Romneycare or play to the Tea Party crowd? Because he thinks we’re icky too.
So these are out orders. Quit bickering, show up in November & pull the R lever and swallow your medicine like good little plebes.
And we should care what they think why? Frankly I think it’s high time to give them a taste of their own medicine. We expect the establishment to show up, vote, and donate millions of dollars for electing Republicans, but take one step out of line, one step off of the Conservative orthodoxy, and you get all your party funds cut off and targeted for a primary challenge. The party will then back the conservative challenger. The establishment can have their prestige provided they do exactly as we say, when we say it, without hesitation or question. Any backtalk and you’re career is over. Time to show them who’s boss.
You asinine troll.
The RNC does not put in for Conservatives. Only Progressive hemorrhoids like romney. That is why no Conservative sends the RNC a dime. We send it directly to our People, or the few.. DeMint who pass it on , wisely to our People.
You misunderstand me- I wasn’t describing things as they are, but as they should be. We need to take over the Republican Party and give the establishment a taste of their own medicine. Inform them that their money is welcome and expected, but their opinions are not. They are welcome to have their sinecures, provided they shut up and do as they’re told. One hint of resistance to the conservative agenda and they ought to be fired and replaced with someone who will implement the conservative agenda.
Ah, then you have my apology as I agree with you. Taking over the Republican party is underway I do believe.
Yeah use your pack to dishonestly destroy your opposition, and when called on it, acts like a little kid. Do we really want someone that flips, flops, and turns summersaults? Romney is just a tad to the right of Obama, and if you can’t see that, well the country will pay the price.
“If one is looking ahead to the November 2012 election campaign, all the anti-Romney attacks will work only to do precisely what Klein predicts — cause a lack of enthusiasm on the part of the Republican Party conservative base and quite likely lead them to not get to the polling booth on voting day.”
Mr. Radosh, nominating Mitt Romney is what will lead to a lack of enthusiasm on the part of the Republican Party conservative base and quite likely lead them to not get to the polling booth on voting day, not the sniping.
I disagree entirely. We are in the primary season. There is nothing wrong with slugging it out amongst ourselves ( I just wish our dumbass party functionaries could come up with sane & consistent rules — most importantly, limiting participation in the GOP nominating process to registered Republicans ONLY — I mean, how long does the rank & file base have to put up with this crap? — and yet “The Party” calls us day & night for cash infusions — telling us how URGENT it is that we feed the Washington GOP elite, presumably so that they can continue to spit in our eye and pitch woo to confused “independents” who can’t quite make up their own minds or settle upon a coherent political philosophy).
.. pardon the run-on ..
AFTER we have our candidate selected, and the losers have had a moment to lick their wounds, we unite around him — Our Man (this time) — and we ATTACK the boy king and his libtard/Alinskyite court with everything we have. Take no prisoners.
“Sniping against Romney”?!? PTUI on you-ey, Radosh.
Romney has had his fun trashing – among others – Gingrich to his detriment in Iowa. He’s a big boy now and darned well be ready for attacks from his GOP competitors…which will be *nothing* compared to that which The Obama Machine is capable of unleashing soon enough.
*I’d* say attacking the more conservative candidates is what brings disunity to the GOP AND ITS CONSERVATIVE BASE, and subsequently offers the chance to aid Obama.
But NOOOOOOOOOOOO…even with all the sycophantic MSM, and their johnny-come-lately Right-wing bed partners (Coulter, Steyn, Beck, etc, etc), it’s gotta be the ones criticizing RINO ROMNEY* who are the “bad guys.”
WHAT A PILE OF CR*P. GINGRICH IN 2012!!!
* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OQoBxZZPqU&feature=player_embedded
One question – is it not better that we know what Romney’s weaknesses are prior to naming him as the standard-bearer? Because the Democrats surely have a significant pile of negative information, and think it’s going to work.
I have no wish to vote for Romney. I looked at him hard in 2008, and was not enthusiastic or impressed. I’m even less impressed now, after the passage of ObamaCare, with RomneyCare, and not best pleased with Romney’s inability to hold a principled position.
If you think Romney’s the right man at the right time, that’s great, and it’s good that you advocate for him. But his negatives must be aired, and aired early, or there are going to be some nasty surprises in the general.
Finally, it is my intention to vote for the Republican nominee with great enthusiasm and conviction, even if it’s Romney. I’d just rather it was not.
It should also be considered, that if three quarters of the party is looking for any one but Romney, if only 1 in 10 of them cannot stomach voting for the polished heap, he is the only candidate likely to lose against the One.
For the good of the nation and the party he should step aside.
Patriots should strive to sabotage the ongoing Progressive movement’s destruction of these United States. Romney is not only an admitted Progressive; he governed as a committed Progressive. Those of you who hope that a Republican-controlled Congress will keep him in line may lose cause for that hope if we end up with a Republican version of a crony capitalist dream team consisting of Romney, Speaker Boehner, and Majority Leader McConnell.
The Republicans had better get together and quit trying to destroy each other, otherwise the US will have Obama for four more years unencumbered by the laws or the Constitution. This will not be the US we know today. Get ready to watch your freedom disappear.
Years ago, someone wrote or said that the GOP had “snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.” (I forget when it was, or what it was about. It might have been the Kennedy/Nixon campaign.)
I am concerned about that this time.
Pre-Convention is usually rough-and-tumble, but there’s something different here.
Romney being nominated and elected POTUS will do MORE harm to the U.S. of A. than just reelecting Ozero.
All these so called “moderate Republicans” (a.k.a RINOS) should go the history books, if they have an ounce of intellectual honesty, and see why an OPEN enemy is better than a FAKE friend.
If you want a contemporary example, see what just happened to Spain: The election was going to the Right wing, the leftist previous government really screwed the country. The conservatives there (classic liberals) were speaking against the would be right wing candidate all the time (because there are no primaries in Spain), warning about his flip-flopping, always sitting in the fence, always trying to be Mr. nice but his inability to take a principled position (thanks Dianna.25 for these words) in favor of Freedom.
And what happened?
Against all logic (but somehow expected by the conservatives there), he rose the taxes, punishing the rents, the capital and even the savings, putting Spain to the left of all Europe (mind that!).
Now, I know that when elections come, many people thinks it’s just a matter of opinion, but the economy laws and the Reality just say otherwise. You should KNOW by now that punishing the Market (i.e. the people) just increase the poverty, and worsen the crisis. And those LAWS are the main reason a CANDIDATE should take a stand and hold a PRINCIPLED position, be it in favor or against; the citizens NEED TO KNOW.
When firms declarations are not coming from a candidate, then just look at his record. Mitt’s been found wanting, sorry.
Now, what will happen in Spain? When everything goes from bad to worse and to the worst, the people (the “independents” and “moderates”, the centered middle-of-the-road third-way ones) is going to just blame the Right wing and return to the Left in the next turn. And the Left will complete the destruction.
WAY TO GO, RINOS!
In the good old U.S. of A., there are still people with enough integrity to just refuse to play this perverse game by not voting, the entire political class be damned. If we are going to be proved and tested by fire, so be it. Everything can collapse, the nation as we know it can collapse, but then you know:
1.- you keep your integrity and didn’t sell your soul for a lentils stew
2.- the thing collapsing is immoral and deserving the collapse
3.- it’s the Evil that will be washed away. The Good people will always resurge, come back again and rebuilt and lifes goes on exactly like it has been in the good Earth we live in.
Tom Perkins – “The few things he might really believe in–he’s never flip flopped on them–are government healthcare, gun control, and global warming.”
You forgot to include his unending commitment to Wall Street BAILOUTS. He believes they ARE necessary, and as such under President Romney the Wall Street Bailouts WILL CONTINUE, at least until the country detonates ala Iceland, Argentina or Greece.
To the extent it’s true*, another good reason not to vote for Romney.
If they all supported the bailouts, it would be a reason not be any happier with any of them, and Romney’s unique drawbacks would remain.
*I just don’t from my own personal readings know it is, is all.
Many say that anyone is better than Obama, I disagree. A choice that has no principles to guide the nation into a brighter future would do more damage than good for America. He would discredit fiscal conservative solutions by failing to properly implement them. He would crumble in the face of even the least resistance to reform, looking to “go along in order to get along” rather than fight for the limited constitutional government we must have to thrive. We should be patient and leave Obama in for another 4 years if necessary rather than discredit the right with failure of implementation.
We must be successful immediately after taking control, in turning the economy around as the American people have run out of patience and 2014 could be as good for the Left as 2010 was for the Right, if we pick a leader without principles to guide us.
Yea, keep it up. Obama will be re-elected because the candidates so far are nothing but an accumulation of clowns riding around in one of the little cars that come out to the middle ring and entertain the crowd with their dumb-ass silly antics. They expect us to fawn all over their insipid comments and even worse, believe they can actually win!
Gingrich is an intellectual elitist who thinks, no believes, he is smarter than all of us combined. He has as much a chance of winning as a snowball in hades.
Then there is Ron Paul. This man is perhaps the biggest joke to ever be played on the voters. And what is worse, he has enough supporters to actually run as a third party candidate and guarantee an Obama victory.
Santorum – good guy but couldn’t win in his own state and some expect him to be able to unseat Obama.
Bachman – out of the race – good!!
Romney – can’t keep his record straight. First, he is for something, then, he is not for it any longer. He is not a RINO, he is a closet liberal and will show his colors if he is the nominee and against all odds, become the president.
Rick Perry – I guess we can find humor in almost anything and he provides more than his fair share. He needs to stay in Texas and stop the comedy routine of running for president.
The rest of the field, not worthy of commentary.
This is absolutely the worst field of candidates I can remember in over 50 years of supporting Republicans. The real candidates are not in the race. The best we have won’t touch the race this time around.
We will be saddled with another four years of Obama. Get used to it. What we need to do is regain control of the senate and maintain control of the house. It will be better to have four years of absolute stagnation than suffer through four years of having a RINO in the White House even with control of congress.
I will be glad when this one is over.
At least the other fools that would acquiesce to another four years of O had some substance behind their position….you have nothing and say it so well.
The senate won’t matter. We are ruled by and will continue to be ruled by unelected bureaucrats. I’m all in for the anti-totalitarian party.
If you didn’t get my point, your problem. We have qualified people who could easily unseat Obama but aren’t in the race. Instead, we have a crowd of candidates who are engaging in a firing circle, knocking each other off and at the same time, giving the opposition all of their left over ammunition to use against the eventual candidate.
Brokered convention it is, then. If you don’t think any of them can or should win, vote for the deadlock so we can draft somebody new on the Convention floor.
I can’t believe what I’m reading here…get a clue people, or its over. If you truly believe that Romney will be worse or the same as Obama, you may as well slit your wrists now and get it over with. Pompous arrogant fools.
My guess, is that people are intelligent enough to decide they don’t like Mitt Romney themselves. If people don’t want to vote for Mitt Romney it’s not because of what someone said about him. It’s because of him.
Mitt Romney, Socialized Medicine
Mitt Romney gave cars with AAA memberships to welfare recipients in MA, allowing them to keep them, even if they went off of welfare. Who would with perks like that.
Mitt Romney was advised by John Holdren who now works for Zero’s EPA. He feels it’s ok to put something in the water to sterilize people. All in the name of population control? Sounds more like Josef Mengele to me.
This is why people don’t want Mitt Romney. He’s done it to himself.
And to those who think Governor Perry is a joke? Why? He’s been a successful Gov. in Texas for 10 years. He is a former Military Pilot. We’re not electing an American Idol Winner here.
Last I checked Holdren was the science czar. I don’t think you know what MassHealth is. Medicaid is socialized medecine. Perry would be OK, but he won’t be nominated.
Bear – Have you looked at Romney’s record, read his website marketing material or done any due diligence to determine if what he says is what he actually DOES?
If you do, then the only impression you will get is that Romney is an empty suit who only has 2 core beliefs –
1) He wants to be president.
2) He is committed to endless Wall Street bailouts.
In what way are those positions DIFFERENT from Hopey McChange the teleprompter in chief?
Romney is the WHITE OBAMA, that is why his support is stuck at ~ 25%.
Why can’t we find an non RINO alternative that would be acceptable to independents and the small proportion of Democrats that realize the cool aid is poisoned and the country will end up like Greece and or Argentina if the current trends under Obama continue for another 4-5 years.
We MUST do better. Our futures depend on it.
I live in NY, and Cuomo would be better than Obama which isn’t saying alot. If bailouts are all you re worried about, than have at it. Romney may be an empty suit but Obama is an illusion. Better to have an empty suit with a gop congress than have a usurper at the helm. Romney isn’t highest on my list, but I’m an anyone but O supporter, a stanch the bleeding supporter…And I suspect I’ve done alot more homework than you think.
The danger of politics as usual; When the 2nd Great Depression arrives,
they will all be hounded out of office, and none of their nominees on
either side will be able to get elected Dogcatcher.
Anybody who is serious about having a future in politics is just now
entering the field, at the local or state level, like David Kirkham
of Utah.
Was Bush that much better than Obama when it comes to preserving personnel freedom or fiscal responsibility. Under the protection of freedom we got the Mccain/Fiengold first amendment curtailment act, creation of the federal gropers assoc more commonly known as the TSA and the patriot act (anyone believe this hasn’t been abused by Obama). As for fiscal matters how about we start with the unfunded drug program, failure to do anything about the sub-prime mortgage mess on the horizon, and we cant forget the original Wall street bailout and slush fund. Then there is the Ted Kennedy education bill and the push for amnesty for illegal aliens.
Maybe it’s just me but seems like RINOs and Marxists take us to the same place an all powerful government with subservient populace.
Mittens loves big government and is willing to take whatever position he has to and say anything to get elected. After elected the ride to serfdom continues.
No, it’s not just you. Anyone who is actually willing to look at this situation sees that the so-cons/neo-cons like W are not very different at all than the communists like O. The all want an all powerful, centralized police state, and their all stupid enough to think it won’t ultimately be used against them.
Mitt Romney was lacking excitment from us before all the bombs got tossed and to be blunt that’s what this porcess is for.
If Romeny can’t get our support that’s it. We are not required to law our votes out for him on a silver platter.
Yeesh typos galore.
I don’t know if it is so emotional because of panic, fear, or disgust.
First, anyone from this point on who throws out a kneejerk “RINO” comment for anyone and everyone who doesn’t toe some “purity” line on conservatism, loses all credibility with me. The term has become trite and ignorant on multiple levels.
Second, anyone who says that they will vote for Obama if “so and so” is the candidate, is not worthy of further discussion on any website other than Kos Kidz or Huffpo. If your ultra-conservative candidate isn’t chosen, you are going to throw a tantrum and vote for the small c communists? Go home. Take a hot bath. You are wound a bit too tight for sane discussion.
Third, let me direct the rest of my comments to the sane. There is no consensus candidate, someone to rally behind. Romney is NOT my candidate. Not for many of the rather unhinged reasons I see bouncing off the walls here and elsewhere, but because I am not impressed with his timidity, playing it soft and safe, “take a knee” posture. He does give off the impression to me of someone who thinks the definition of compromise is letting leftists get away with murder, instead of mass murder…figuratively speaking.
Long before Conrad Black said it…I have been hoping for a brokered convention. Not because I insist on some “litany of purity” or else I will take my ball and go home and hold my breath until I turn blue, and mommy, mommy, mommy doesn’t love us anymore. But, because I consider the entire roster to be uninspiring, or too brand damaged to WIN. (In one case, I consider the candidate unworthy of holding elective office at all, he is a blight on the Party and belongs on the other side)
Clearly, Romney evokes strong negatives from what should be the base. If that is because a tantrum-throwing imbecile hates anyone who isn’t “conservatively pure” within the party…then we should discard that opinion for its ignorance and lack of character. If, however, it is because Romney will not adequately fight the small c communists, has no real zeal or loyalty toward the fight…then I’m on their side….just not for the puerile reasons.
We need to be lead by someone who isn’t going to roll over and capitulate…calling it “compromise”. A little communism in replacement of a lot of communism won’t cure what ails us.
My assessment right now is that defeating the implantation of small c communism into every nook and cranny in our entire system of government is a grave danger to our continued well being. I don’t believe five of these guys can garner enough votes to beat Obama. I am very concerned that Romney isn’t up to the task of taking on what needs to be done. He’s too soft, timid, nibbling around the edges.
That leaves me a Hobson’s Choice. Support someone I believe in my heart is a sure loser, or support a guy I think will do half a job on what I believe is the most important in our history.
Or…push for cleaning the slate of the “B” team and DEMAND a Ryan/Rubio ticket. Or Mitch Daniels.
It’s time for an adult conversation. Paul and Huntsman need to get lost.
Perry ran a campaign that either needed less medication or more. It’s over.
Newt is so highly brand damaged…it is futile to keep backing him. And it’s time for less fanaticism and more strategic planning. He’s done, put a fork in him. There is no Lazarus or Phoenix in his future.
That leaves Romney and Santorum. Neither is a consensus candidate. Neither will heal the fractured base. And VDH’s “circular firing squad” isn’t helping anyone. A primary may be rough and tumble a bit…but there is a line across which it becomes damaging to the long term goal…and nobody with an ounce of brains should want the long term goal to be severely damaged. In football, you can hit as hard as you want, but not after the whistle, not out of bounds and not leading with your helmet. It is NOT “anything goes”, that’s utterly, stupendously, ignorant.
It has become abundantly clear to me that nobody on this slate can heal, only further divide…the base needed. It is time to form a committee to address this before it gets worse.
Allen West, Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Haley Barbour, John Thune, Kristi Noem, Mitch Daniels, Eric Cantor, Bobby Jindal…should form a committee and figure out a way to put a ticket together that doesn’t tear the party apart. They need to assess the best way to LEAD the country, fight back the totalitarian small c communists and also assess which ticket would most likely beat Obama. Give those who want to put down the leftist totalitarian revolution a chance to get behind someone.
Conrad Black is right. But we shouldn’t wait for the convention. The mood is getting ugly. And the party is not responding to the clear signals. “None of the Above” is the clear choice right now. And right now is the time to cure it. Before it’s too late.
Is it, according to the GOP constitution, legal to nominate a candidate who hasn’t been through this vetting process?
If it is, then I’d agree with you. How about a Christie/Rubio ticket?
Some of your other suggestions, such as Ryan, Cantor, Jindal probably wouldn’t run.
But, this is only feasible if such an action is legal. Is it?
If it isn’t, then, I’d suggest that it’s either Romney, Santorum, Perry, along with Rubio or Christie.
I’m beginning to think that this nomination process harms a party because the process is televised nationally. I think that the process should be televised only within each particular state. The problem is, that the national vetting process sets up an image of the GOP as internally divided, uncertain, with no clear message – instead, displaying every range from low to high on each issue.
The Democratic Party has the same internal debates and wide range of opinions but, these are not displayed nationally. By displaying this conflict nationally, the GOP isn’t presenting itself as a party with a single clear, well-planned platform but a hodge podge of arguable personal opinions.
Christie? That arrogant, pro-choice, blustery and bully of a liberal who just hates teacher unions? You’ve got to think deeper than that dear conservatives.
I agree. The notion of the rock star Christie is worse than Mitt. The second his positions are known beyond fighting unions, you’ll see the base go anywhere but a voting booth on election day.
Christi’s appointment of Sohail Mohammed to a judgeship in New Jersey should disqualify him from holding any public office in America beyond local dog catcher.
Yes, the winner of the nomination is the one who the majority of delegates vote for, provided the same is legally eligible to be President. No delegate in the convention is bound for more than two rounds of voting, and the overwhelming majority are bound only for a single round. Once they are unbound, they may vote for anyone legally eligible to the Presidency, regardless of whether he or she has been campaigning for two years or one hour.
I don’t know, ETAB, if the Democratic Party any longer has these types of issues.
However, the GOP is fractured.
Mitt is very likely to keep his “chicken and waffles” campaign going. Too chicken to hit on any of the tough issues, waffling on many of the others.
Ron Paul has doubled down on gutting the military and propping up as many enemies of state he can.
Newt will astonish and amaze us with his feats of brilliance on issues he finds interesting that day. Or minute. I WILL give him this…he gets it on the issue of taking the fight to the propaganda machine. He gets big points from me for that. But, he’s not my candidate…as much as I love to see him at his best…with the Marxists in his gunsights.
Perry has FINALLY figured out how to campaign and hone in on the issues and tactics that will serve him well. Finally. It may be too late. But, maybe not. He has more money and a stronger retail game than Newt. The game moves South and that’s a smoother road with less bumps. He only has to leapfrog Santorum…which is still possible, but not easy.
Huntsman let loose today a real gem for the Marxists. An oblique reference that the GOP base is crazy and they are “not ready for a diamond like him”. Good riddance.
Santorum is the present wild card in the deck. He is going to have to go through the gauntlet. Ron Paul, for some reason…is brandishing the sword against him. This is good news for Perry, because then he doesn’t have to do it. Perry has to very lightly latch onto some of Paul’s sword…and merely “ask” if any of those attacks on Santorum hold water.
If Perry can grab some momentum in the South away from Santorum…AND…stay focused on his FINALLY sensible game plan…he can climb out of the gaffe machine and make his final run for the roses.
Santorum won’t be easy to blow past. He is articulate and nimble with facts.
Santorum, however, is going to be portrayed as a lunatic extremist…and it IS going to do damage to him with swing voters.
That leaves Romney. He has no real sound base…he has those who hate him and those who haven’t made up their minds.
He will sap the energy out of the general election, there will be an enthusiasm gap that could drain from the Senate and the House.
Failure to garner enough delegates…would and SHOULD mean a brokered election. Ordinarily, I would be against that. This year, I’m not. In fact, I’m rooting for it.
A Ryan/Rubio ticket I believe is nearly unbeatable. They won’t have suffered the circular firing squad, they are both extremely likeable and articulate, they appeal across the board, can help mend the fracture and the media will find it hard to lay a glove on them. They are not brand damaged. The Midwest/Florida combo can help carry enormous value in the swing states, they are not mercurial, divas, erratic or polarizing.
Debates would be a pleasure to watch, neither is a “play safe” or “take a knee” type of playcaller.
Mitch Daniels, John Thune, Nikki Haley, Bobby Jindal, Allen West, Chris Christie, …could all get behind this ticket. It’s a winner in every way.
Young, fresh, appealing, solid, …instead of old, stale, off-putting, wobbly.
In an election to save us from totalitarianism…we ought to be putting our best ticket together…not settling for “whatever”. A ticket that can coalesce the various factions, renew the enthusiasm, stay true to core principles and take on the Marxists and their propaganda machine head on.
We should not only pray for this outcome…we should demand it.
But, according to the rules of the GOP, is it legally possible for someone to be nominated as the presidential nominee for that party, who has NOT gone through all the primaries?
That is, could the GOP executive, after all these various primaries, say that they believe that ‘none of the candidates’ is suitable (thus blowing all their money, supporters and voters out the door)…and come up, on their own, with a different nominee?
Is this legally possible according to the Republican Constitution or rules?
I already told you, the answer is yes. Besides, the Party Chairman doesn’t have a vote on the Convention floor. The State party chairs do (except those who were disqualified due to sanctions imposed by the RNC against their states for holding their primaries too early), but the national chairman does not. The nominee will be whichever legally eligible candidate obtains the vote of the majority of the delegates eligible to vote on the convention floor. Once the delegates have fulfilled their obligation to support the candidate they were pledged to during the first round or two of voting, they become unpledged and may vote for anyone legally eligible, regardless of whether that person has campaigned in any state. They will keep deliberating and voting until someone receives at least 50%+1.
In order to get a brokered convention, you need Paul to stay in the race and pick up a few hundred delegates.
“I don’t know if it is so emotional because of panic, fear, or disgust.”
None of the above, it’s because the stakes are so high–the establishment has put us into such a precarious position they must be rejected. They have to be seen to be beaten so they know they are rejected.
“First, anyone from this point on who throws out a kneejerk “RINO” comment for anyone and everyone who doesn’t toe some “purity” line on conservatism, loses all credibility with me. The term has become trite and ignorant on multiple levels.”
How about showing by the candidates’ only firmly held positions and their history that as far as being Republican goes, they ain’t much? They don’t know what the right direction is.
“Second, anyone who says that they will vote for Obama if “so and so” is the candidate, is not worthy of further discussion on any website other than Kos Kidz or Huffpo. If your ultra-conservative candidate isn’t chosen, you are going to throw a tantrum and vote for the small c communists? Go home. Take a hot bath. You are wound a bit too tight for sane discussion.”
You don’t understand what’s at stake.
“Third, let me direct the rest of my comments to the sane. There is no consensus candidate, someone to rally behind. Romney is NOT my candidate. Not for many of the rather unhinged reasons I see bouncing off the walls here and elsewhere, but because I am not impressed with his timidity, playing it soft and safe, “take a knee” posture. He does give off the impression to me of someone who thinks the definition of compromise is letting leftists get away with murder, instead of mass murder…figuratively speaking.”
Funny, you reject Romney on the basis of something other facts–you are claiming to reject him for emotional reasons. I get it, those characterisations of him are true. They are also the least of the reasons most of the base is rejecting him.
“Long before Conrad Black said it…I have been hoping for a brokered convention. Not because I insist on some “litany of purity” or else I will take my ball and go home and hold my breath until I turn blue, and mommy, mommy, mommy doesn’t love us anymore. But, because I consider the entire roster to be uninspiring, or too brand damaged to WIN. (In one case, I consider the candidate unworthy of holding elective office at all, he is a blight on the Party and belongs on the other side)”
No such tantrum has anything to do with my rejection of Romney. Instead, his concrete and firmly held positions are contemptible, and clearly show he would make progress towards disaster nearer term than would a 2nd term Obama who would be allowed by a Republican congress to accomplish nothing. An anchoring in place is better than progress towards the cliffs.
“Clearly, Romney evokes strong negatives from what should be the base.”
That sentence shows how twisted and screwed up is the place you are coming from. The people who are rejecting Romeny aren’t the people who should be the base they ARE the base. The ones rejecting the base are the ones supporting Romney.
“If that is because a tantrum-throwing imbecile hates anyone who isn’t “conservatively pure” within the party…then we should discard that opinion for its ignorance and lack of character.”
Again tantrum throwing has nothing to do with it. It is the cool strategic calculation that a Romney presidency is a diasater for both the nation and party. He is a liberal who would get some of what he wants. He does no know the right direction and approach to governance.
“If, however, it is because Romney will not adequately fight the small c communists, has no real zeal or loyalty toward the fight…then I’m on their side….just not for the puerile reasons.”
I submit that if there is a distinction between rejecting an otherwise reasonable candidate not because they will not fight hard enough, but because they will fight for the wrong things, that the second is a better reason. It certainly is no peurile reason.
“We need to be lead by someone who isn’t going to roll over and capitulate…calling it “compromise”. A little communism in replacement of a lot of communism won’t cure what ails us.”
His evident steadfast desire to compromise with the enemy is of little concern when he would have both houses, the problem is the very great degree to which he is the enemy.
“My assessment right now is that defeating the implantation of small c communism into every nook and cranny in our entire system of government is a grave danger to our continued well being. I don’t believe five of these guys can garner enough votes to beat Obama. I am very concerned that Romney isn’t up to the task of taking on what needs to be done. He’s too soft, timid, nibbling around the edges.”
Pshaw, he doesn’t think the elephant should be killed, he want to tweak it’s diet into health.
“That leaves me a Hobson’s Choice. Support someone I believe in my heart is a sure loser, or support a guy I think will do half a job on what I believe is the most important [election/SIC] in our history.
Or…push for cleaning the slate of the “B” team and DEMAND a Ryan/Rubio ticket. Or Mitch Daniels.
It’s time for an adult conversation. Paul and Huntsman need to get lost.”
I’ll go for that.
“Perry ran a campaign that either needed less medication or more. It’s over.
Newt is so highly brand damaged…it is futile to keep backing him. And it’s time for less fanaticism and more strategic planning. He’s done, put a fork in him. There is no Lazarus or Phoenix in his future.”
That leaves Romney and Santorum. Neither is a consensus candidate.
Neither will heal the fractured base.”
The base is not fractured, it is united on the question of anyone but Romney.
“And VDH’s “circular firing squad” isn’t helping anyone. A primary may be rough and tumble a bit…but there is a line across which it becomes damaging to the long term goal…and nobody with an ounce of brains should want the long term goal to be severely damaged. In football, you can hit as hard as you want, but not after the whistle, not out of bounds and not leading with your helmet. It is NOT “anything goes”, that’s utterly, stupendously, ignorant.
It has become abundantly clear to me that nobody on this slate can heal, only further divide…the base needed. It is time to form a committee to address this before it gets worse.
Allen West, Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Haley Barbour, John Thune, Kristi Noem, Mitch Daniels, Eric Cantor, Bobby Jindal…should form a committee and figure out a way to put a ticket together that doesn’t tear the party apart. They need to assess the best way to LEAD the country, fight back the totalitarian small c communists and also assess which ticket would most likely beat Obama. Give those who want to put down the leftist totalitarian revolution a chance to get behind someone.”
Between leaving Palin out, and your praising Romney with faint damns, these suggest to me the degree to which you are the establishment’s man.
“Conrad Black is right. But we shouldn’t wait for the convention. The mood is getting ugly. And the party is not responding to the clear signals. “None of the Above” is the clear choice right now. And right now is the time to cure it. Before it’s too late.”
It can only get uglier when you fail to recognize the validity of the explicit, non-peurile reasons why Romney is a non-starter–he represents continuation to disaster–and why a Progressless Obama 2nd term would be preferable to Romney and the establishment getting what it wants, which is business as usual.
We cannot afford business as usual. Better a dead stop at the cliff’s edge.
The establishment can start paying attention to us or it can go to hell. Their problems are not ours. They make them up entirely on their own.
Will all of the current sniping against Mitt Romney discourage the GOP base in November?”
Whoa! Did I fall asleep with my friend Rip Van Winkle? Isn’t this the question that voters clearly answered in 2008? They don’t want the RINO!
It is Mitt that is discouraging the GOP voters -and his friends in the inside GOP and punditry who are the tightest group of dirty gate-keepers in decades, destroying any real conservatives from going up against their gauntlet.
Coulter Krauthammer and Christie alone would shoot down Ronald Reagan if they could….
“If one is looking ahead to the November 2012 election campaign, all the anti-Romney attacks will work only to do precisely what Klein predicts — cause a lack of enthusiasm on the part of the Republican Party conservative base and quite likely lead them to not get to the polling booth on voting day.”
So it can’t be possible that it is the delinquencies and deficiencies in Romney’s history, his flip flops–and few firmly held positions–that will be discouraging.
How blinkered.
If just 1 of 10 who don’t support him now can’t stomach pulling the trigger for him, Obama wins in walk.
If just 1 in 100 do, that may well tip the balance in a narrow electoral vote.
Dwell on that, Romniacs.
Then do what’s right.
From the beginning of this process we have been told only Romney had a chance of winning the nomination, and then the White House. How is this possible since most of us would rather stick pins in ours and jump into the Lake of Fire than vote for this new RINO plastic Ken doll? for the first time in my life I have begun to consider the option of joining a pitchfork toting mob to gather around the bonfire and shout ‘off with their heads!’ And this Ron Radosh is one of the number of those who has chosen to speak as though the Romney nomination is established from before the beginning of time. Why, because we are the cattle and they have had the cattle shute prepared from the beginning of the season? Here comes Radosh with another cattle prod. This angry little heifer is not going quietly.
EVEN A RINO IS BETTER THAN A MARXIST MUSLIM !!
We need a better candidate than Mitt Romney, it really is that simple.
As Tom Perkins said, look at the spending, the demographics and the longer term economic trends, business as usual will end in a “Greece” style economic crisis and sooner rather than later. Remember, 18 months ago Greece was rated AAA and could borrow as much as it wanted, 12 months later it’s facing national bankruptcy and economic disaster as it cannot afford to borrow money any more.
We spend 40% more than we earn and 10,000 more baby boomers are retiring everyday.
That which cannot continue will not…
I will vote for whomever the Republican nominee except for Ron Paul. In a contest between Paul and Obama, I will a stay at home
Did you forget that there are other offices you are voting on besides the one for POTUS. Talk of “staying home” is just silly & foolish.
I couldn’t agree more with this: it doesn’t matter who, just not Obama….(but please, not Paul. He’s a wacko.)
OBAMA’S ONE REPUBLICAN GIFT
There is only one Republican gift that can reelect our failed commander in chief to four more failed years: the nomination of Ron Paul. I know that I speak for most Republicans when I say, I’LL ENTHUSIASTICALLY BACK ANYONE BUT PAUL!
BTW, I’m a Newt man. The electable Romeny would have an easier time beating Obama than the electable Newt. But Newt would make the better President. He’s got in abundance what the country needs: THE VISION THING.
1. In the general election, I will vote for the Republican nominee, whoever he (or she!) is. (Ron Paul is a probable exception.)
2. These arguments that we need to coalesce behind a candidate are nonsense. That’s the whole point of the primary process. We need to determine, who do “Republicans” (in aggregate) want to represent them. We need to weed out the weaker candidates–by whatever criteria we consider weak (records, speaking/arguing ability, etc.).
This is the process. Get used to it. Stop trying to bypass it.
It just doesn’t stop, the pre-ordination of Mitt by so-many who call themselves conservatives. Disunity is the buzz now, as we must preserve the chosen one.
And all of the supposed vanguards of conservatism all promoting, either directly (by articles such as this) or indirectly (by attcking his opposition) the farce that Santorum is a lib. And before it was Rick, it was the other Rick who got the negative attention (admittedly, he didn’t help with some poor debates).
You would think someone would have learned by now. I now realize that I must be on guard when reading “conservative” sources more closely, as they seem to have the same tendency as the libs when it comes to spinning.
You can like or dislike Santorum if you like, but the current attack line of him being a “big government lib” is of the most utter nonsense I have heard in a while. To make it worse, the goal is to discredit him and prop up Mitt. Yes, the same Mitt who gave us the precursor to obamacare. The same Mitt who got elected governor in a left state by embracing many views he now rejects.
And this is what we get from supposed conservative journalists?
Those much brighter than we have determined we need to get in line to support Mitt, who is the only person in a country of 300+ million who immediately becomes defanged when debating obama on obamacare (the offspring of Romneycare, as the drumbeat will surely go), which will surely be a big election issue in light of a Supreme Court ruling coming down around that time.
RR’s true message: Shhh! All this truth-telling about the bozos running for the GOP nomination is KILLING US!
I disagree with this article. Hillary and Obama had a long hard fight in 2008 and it ended up making Obama into a stronger candidate. I think being in a real fight will make the eventual repub nominee a stronger candidate as well. If they cant learn to survive attacks from each other, then how will they survive the Obama onslaught. We just have to remember that when our nominee is finally selected, we need to let bygones be bygones, and close ranks for the nominee and against Obama, just like dems closed ranks for Obama and against repubs in 2008. Just make sure that while we all fight hard for our guy now, we must remember that whoever is nominated will be much better than Obama, and each of them in their own way are pretty good representatives for our party.
I also dont buy this repubs lack enthusiasism story. I have gobs of enthusiasm AGAINST Obama, and once I find out who the repub candidate is, I will be able to turn that into enthusiasm FOR them.
Nope. If the Republicans want to sell me a candidate, they are going to have to offer me a candidate I will buy.
Romney is far and away the most Conservative on the issue of illegal immigration. Go to http://www.numbersusa.com to see ratings of candidates, specific issue by issue.
Perry and Gingrich both favor Dream Act, phased-in amnesties, no workplace enforcement through E-Verify, no change to anchor baby status – the list goes on. How do Perry or Gingrich differ from Obama on this critical issue?
Santorum and Paul are hardly better. Huntsman is all out open-borders, cheap labor, multinational globalist.
Romney may be flawed, but on national sovereignty and immigration he’s all we’ve got.