« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Our Choice for 2012

People are constantly faced with choices in their lives. At times the choice which appears to be the correct one to make may in the long run reveal itself as not that good of a decision and the same is true vice versa. This is especially so when faced with the choice of whom to support amongst several candidates during a primary. Although some folks have become discouraged over the years when the choice they’ve selected turned out to not be as originally envisioned, it’s important to continue making decisions and choosing the candidate which appears best at the time. At other times, one choice is obviously negative and although the other option may not be perfect, it is definitely the better of the two – as explained all the way below.

Since no-one is perfect and it is impossible to agree with one’s candidate/supported official 100% of the time, even when making a correct choice it is often accompanied with many gray areas which at times overshadow the white. Prior to the 2010 elections Arlen Specter, Republican Senator of purple-blue Pennsylvania was approaching a reelection and wavered on a decision before ultimately shocking and angering Republicans when he cast his vote in favor of Obama’s stimulus plan. This was the first time he sided with the Democrats on a major bill and his action resulted in conservatives and Tea Partiers to declare war on Specter at every cost. Their mission appeared noble and correct, and Pat Toomey is now the Republican Senator of Pennsylvania after barely winning the general election with a single point in the 2010 mid-term elections; a year in which Republicans swept victories across the country. He is surely a better representative of conservative values in the Senate than Specter had been.

However, the price tag it had cost for conservatives to place Toomey in the Senate had turned out be unexpectedly sky-rocketing expensive and resulted in many to question whether the goal was worth the consequences. When Specter saw he would be unable to win the Republican Primary, he made a mad dash to save his seat, switched parties, and provided the Democrats with the 60th vote which led to the passage of their infamous Obamacare. Thus, although we now have a solid conservative in the Senate who replaced a RINO (not an outright liberal) we are now weighed down with Obamacare which threatens to overtake a sixth of the private sector and is currently awaiting judgment on its constitutionality by the Supreme Court Justices.

Incidentally, two of our current conservative Supreme Court Justices, Roberts and Alito, are currently on the bench thanks to Specter, after Senator Santorum had made the choice to support Specter for reelection in ’04 when he was challenged in a primary by Pat Toomey. At the time, Senator Santorum was faced with the difficult choice whether he should support the incumbent Senator Specter and his senior colleague who although was a less conservative choice than Toomey, was far more probable to be successful in keeping the seat red during an election where the balance on Senate was up in the air and anti-Republican emotions were thick. This surmise turned out pretty accurate since Toomey barely managed to eke out a 1% victory in 2010 when the public was outraged at Obamacare and looked favorably upon the Tea Party candidates.

Maintaining the Republican control of the Senate was by far not the only factor which Santorum focused on when making his decision. He was also strongly aware that Bush would be nominating at least two and possibly three justices for the Supreme Court and that Specter who headed the judiciary committee would be extremely influential whether Bush’s proponents would ultimately be approved by the Senate. Santorum therefore opted to support Specter after receiving his word that he would support the conservative candidates for the Supreme Court which Bush would propose, something which will influence U.S. history for years to come as is visible now with the Obamacare hearings.

Santorum’s support of Specter indeed resulted in two strong conservatives on the bench, although it may have likely cost him the nomination in the current GOP presidential primary. In addition to having been hammered for supporting Specter in’04 for actions taken years later and were impossible to foretell six years earlier, his act resulted in Specter’s former opponent and the current Conservative Senator of Pennsylvania and Santorum’s home-state, Pat Toomey, to act favorably towards Santorum’s opponent – the author of Romneycare. In fact, immediately after Santorum announced he was suspending his campaign yesterday, Toomey released an official endorsement endorsing Romney, causing many to speculate whether the endorsement would occur regardless prior to Pennsylvania’s primary and whether it was one of the causes which led to the Santorum campaign suspension.

The above two examples clearly illustrate how when one makes a choice which appears to be good, it isn’t necessarily all good as is later revealed. It shouldn’t however leave us disheartened for ultimately many good also emerged from those choices. Additionally, many decisions are pretty clear-cut where one option is definitely bad. Even if the other one doesn’t necessarily turn out to be all that good, we still know it is better than the alternative.

Supporting a candidate doesn’t necessarily mean that one agrees with all they’ve done or stand for, although a candidate usually will have some supporters who do identify with them to an extreme. Many supporters of a specific candidate usually support the candidate because they identify with them on a single issue while many others don’t even have that. They simply support a certain candidate because he’s the better choice than the alternative. This was visible numerous times amongst this primary and is very typical. After Palin chose not to run, a majority of her supporter split between Cain and Newt. After Bachmann, Cain, and Perry exited the race, their supporters too turned to find a second or third ro fourth choice amongst the remaining candidates. This led to the momentum to shift from Perry to Cain to Newt to Santorum as voters were forced to reevaluate the field once it was clear the person they supported wasn’t running at all or any longer. I too have first supported Palin, and when she announced she wasn’t running though long and hard until turning to support Santorum approximately a month prior to the Iowa caucuses.

With Santorum now having suspended his campaign, the primary is sort of wrapped up despite the many voters including myself who haven’t yet received the opportunity to cast their ballots. Unlike the primary where the choices were plentiful – at least at the start, the general will boil down to two choices; four more years for Barack Obama or Mitt Romney. Obama has already been in office long enough for everyone with an open mind to recognize the damage he’s wrought upon this country. Obama is clearly not only the bad choice but an utter disaster for this country. Any alternative will be far better and less to the left than the Marxist Obama.

Romney’s Attorney General will not be someone like Eric Holder who looks the other way when the Black Panther sets a price-tag of a million dollars on Zimmerman’s head and refuses to take responsibility or even answer basic questions regarding Fast & Furious. Nor will Romney chose the dopey Kathleen Sebelius as Secretary of Health and Human Services, the unqualified leftist Janet Napolitano as his Secretary of Homeland Security, and so on and so forth.

The choice now has boiled down between two people; Obama and Romney and it is time to unite under the better of the two – Mitt Romney. There are many who have announced that they refuse to vote for Romney and are planning to sit out the 2012 election, all the while talking of setting him up with a conservative in 2016. It is okay to talk of 2016, but only after the 2012 elections have taken place and giving Romney a chance at the presidency, if he reaches it. He may or may not make a good president but he’s not a definite Obama, and if conservatives will dislike him so greatly we can challenge him in 2016 just as we would put out a conservative against Obama.

We conservatives have proven our power the last couple of years by successfully challenging lots of  incumbents in primaries and Romney is aware of it.. He won’t want to face a primary from his own party and will probably go along with whatever conservatives in Congress present him. Obama, on the other hand, is aware it’ll be his last term and will have no need to appease to any voters except for his leftist base who will replace Karl Marx with Barack Obama. If we thought he was radical in his first term, a second Obama term will be so much more disastrous it defies description. I plead with you fellow conservatives, w can look ahead to the future but at the same time we MUST REMEMBER THE HERE AND NOW AND MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICE FOR 2012. WE MUST SAY NO TO OBAMA AND THUS SAY YES TO MITT ROMNEY.

 

Abie Rubin blogs at The Thinking Voter and can be followed on Twitter.

 

 

COMMENTS

  • cheetah2

    .

  • APA Guy

    Rec’d for the sentiment AND accompanying elucidation.

  • avagreen

    ^ ^
    * *
    (__)

    • http://thethinkingvoter.blogspot.com abierubin

      this is what we’re left with and in order to defeat Obama we have to support Romney.

      • garfieldjl

        If not then vote for who you want and let the chips fall where they may.

        I consider state’s primary which is over a month away to mean something and so should you.

        • http://thethinkingvoter.blogspot.com abierubin

          planning to cast my ballot for Santorum to send establishment a message but will cast my ballot in the general in favor of Romney in order to defeat Obama.

        • avagreen

          And yes, I will vote for Perry. :)

      • dbkohl

        For those who haven’t been able t vote yet, get out there any make yourself heard. We can still influence the choice of VP. Romney will need a VP Right of him to shore up an angry base while he sits in the middle where he always has truly been. (Also, a strong conservative as VP and decent 1st term may help Romney avoid getting Primaried… It would be much harder to put up a primary battle against him in 2016 if he has a strong conservative with him.)

        I’ve heard a lot of talk about Santorum as VP, and I really like that idea if both sides can agree to it. I think that he would bolster support for social conservatives in the South with his strong social conservative history, as well as help pull in states in the Great Lakes region (including my home state of Ohio). Yes, he lost those states to Romney, but only after 5-1 or greater media spending blitzes by Romney. Romney won’t have that kind of cash-flow in the general.

        At any rate, make our voice known, and get his attention. We might still be able to effect the VP choice and thus the hope for winning the general. We can try to make him go Right (Santorum or someone else) with his VP pick

  • https://www.facebook.com/HanoverHenry hanoverhenry

    …you are correct, what else would you do if you want Obama out and like me, you were for Santorum? We can begin bellyaching about anything liberal coming from Romney the day after the last votes are counted but for now, the threat is from the far left – Obama.

    My take on this is at my article here yesterday, http://www.redstate.com/hanoverhenry/2012/04/11/should-romney-appeal-to-santorum-voters-or-copy-ford-1976-strategy-vs-reagan/

  • laodalisque

    There are two problems in this post. First, Abie seems to suggest, and quite wrongly, that Arlen Specter’s presence in the GOP was something to be tolerated because the alternative proved much worse! I watched that vile toad wreak ideological havoc on the party for a long time before he decamped to the dark side and I, for one, say good riddance!

    I would like to suggest that if the GOP had maintained even a modicum of ideological rigor in their stable of candidates in the first place, instead of their usual MO of malleability and waywardness, serious Republicans would never have had to tolerate that treacherous leftist git anywhere near the right side of the aisle. His presence was an almost continuous source of disruption for the party and he could never, NEVER be relied upon for a dependable conservative vote. I remember it was always a question with him: “What will Specter do??” or, “Can we count on him on this one??” etc, etc.

    Oh, Specter caused much more collateral damage than just his vote with the DemoMob on Obamacare: he was a berserker who demoralized his own, more commitedly conservative colleagues and played a leading role in fostering the leftward drift of the party.

    And, this is the issue I’ve still got with the GOP–Specter’s legacy is still very apparent to me in chilly little amphibians like Mittens. I refuse to be at peace with him because, for me, he is just the latest ‘specter’ of Specter: supremely repellent, ideologically unreliable, and demoralizing to those of us at the conservative core.

    And the second problem is that Abie wishes for us to “give [Romney] a chance.” Why? Why, for the love o’ Mike, do we need to have demonstrated to us yet again, the fact that centrist Republicans are toxic at the polls?? What has Mittens EVER said (let alone done) that is dependably conservative? We vote these people in, deluding ourselves that if we just unite behind this guy or that and ‘give him a chance’ to feel our love, he’ll actually accomplish one or two conservative platform planks, like, say, curb spending, or return power to the states. Have any ***ANY*** of these invertebrate centrists ever met even our mildest expectations of earnest conservatism? No. The beltway’s maw is bigger than ever.

    Anyone care to guess why? It’s because the GOP-Establishment has long-since ceded the moral high ground to the left. What, with the Specters, McCains, Hatches, Santorums, and Romneys chin deep in the party, it’s grown hard to remember that the initial objective was to drain the swamp. In the GOP-Establishment, there’s a tacit, (dare I say even complicit?) acknowledgement that the left’s profligacy–in every sense of the word–must be right because it feels so good. And, anything that feels so good must be right. Right?? Thus, for them, anyone whose conscience and common sense screams that no long term good can come of this insanity is only being selfish, cheap, small minded, and hard hearted.

    You badger Romney enough–like Obummer’s gonna do this fall, and he’ll eventually admit as much. But, by then it’ll be too late and y’all will be sorry you backed that loser.

    • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

      You got that off your chest, I am not even going to disagree with it.

      But now we have an important job to do. To defeat this toxic socialist before he destroys the nation. And to do that we have to be united.

      This is not the usual choice. A Republican could have reasonably voted for Clinton against Dole back in the nineties because Dole was a squish and Clinton, for a Democrat, was not all that bad.

      This is not that kind of choice.

  • laodalisque

    I’m making an extremely valid argument on a purportedly right wing blog and my opinion is every bit as cogent as yours to the issue at hand.

    Think about it: would you even feel the need to be this rude to me if you aren’t, somewhere in your deep recesses where you’re still honest with yourself, just as worried about this squishy monster’s ideological reliability as I am?? Then why do you think it’s okay to use the hard left’s MO and tell me to get back in line, turn off the functioning cognitive and moral centers of my conscience, and vote for him anyway because we really need a groundswell of enthusiasm and acclaim and because “the alternative’s much worse.”

    The alternative wouldn’t be “much worse” if the GOP HAD SHOWN SOME IDEOLOGICAL BACKBONE and had actively worked to anchor the country in firmly grounded right wing principles to begin with. Sheesh, we HAVE the Constitution to help us with this, after all. It’s not like we’re having to invent sovereign individualism as we go along, ya know. We wouldn’t be dealing with the commie/fascist nonsense of Obummer right now if we hadn’t ceded the moral highground to these collectivist pigs in the first place.

    The GOP AIDED AND ABETTED the extremism of the left by going along to get along. When they had their brief periods in power they inexplicably not only continued but expanded the government’s appetite, intrusiveness and arrogance. Now’s not the time to whine to me about where this appeasement has gotten us.

    Obummer is the product of GOP waywardness every bit as much as he is of leftwing collectivism. Indeed, to the topic at hand, Romney’s unacceptability as a standardbearer

    • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

      which may be exactly what they’ll do if you refuse to vote for Romney (if he becomes the GOP nominee). It’s conservative in the primary, GOP in the general.

      Romney was about my 5th choice of those who actually ran, and I understand exactly who he is. However, 4 more years of an unfettered, more arrogant Obama who would likely get to appoint another couple of Supreme Court justices is not a risk I’m willing to take. Those who are need to reconsider, and if they can’t get on board, then they need to get out of the way. That’s not being rude, but we have a big enough fight on our hands with the left. We shouldn’t have to worry about our own team.

      • laodalisque

        Been the one ‘our team’ needed to worry about. My GOP street cred dates back to the Nixon era. I’ve never pulled the lever for the collectivists and I certainly won’t start now.

        As a Cold Warrior from back in the day, I have actually been to the former Soviet Union & the Iron Curtain basket cases and I’m planning to do so again next month to see IF anything has changed for that region since the collapse. I want to see for myself IF people can find their way back from the unique Kafkaesque horrors of collectivist totalitarianism. I’ll be going to Russia, the Ukraine, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria for a 3 month travel stint and spend thousands of my own hard earned cash simply because I cannot depend on anyone in our media to give me an accurate account of it, since they are all lockstep with its agenda.

        But, I did make the mistake of assuming that the people who frequent this blog have an innate and inalienable regard for open dialog about the people whose political attitudes and policies will shape our government and lives. I didn’t realize I would be threatened with banishment from one of ‘our own’ for being a voice of loyal opposition to Mitt Romney’s brand of “severe conservatism.”

        I am deeply sorry that you all felt so threatened by the potential dissention in the ranks my opinions might cause that it brought out a knee jerk reaction from you. Such are usually the province of the hard left, no? I am obviously much more philosophically purist than others who visit here; and it’s because I made a personal decision long ago that if I hold a political opinion at all, it ‘d better be one my conscience would let me live with. Expediency is not a term I’m willing to embrace.

        We all learn about the decades of degrading compromises with the slave-owning South that only served to delay the inevitable and culminate in the horrors of the Civil War. Indeed, I teach my own college students that there are some universalizable moral and ethical issues upon which no compromise is ever possible. For me, the issue of the slow and tortuous descent into collectivist slavery is every bit a non-negotiable moral issue as that faced by Antebellum Americans.

        My issue on this blog has always been whether or not we take back the moral high ground; reassert our intrinsic love of individualism and Freedom FROM Government; and, the strength of our commitment to rally to those whose profession of conservative ideals are even better than those we hold on our own. If we make compromises with our consciences for expediency’s sake, we’ll have deserved every minute of the new civil war to come. The question is, do we have faith in the rightness of our cause?

        Nothing I’ve seen from Romney indicates that he’s anything better than a Henry Clay ‘Great Compromiser.’. No one even talks about Ron Paul or Newt on this forum anymore, and either of them was more in line regarding the rightful limitations on government and the need to control spending. No one’s talking about them and yet THOSE TWO MEN ARE ACTUALLY STILL IN THE RACE! Go figure.

        I didn’t know that as far as RedState was concerned, the primary was over.

        • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

          I suppose I’ve become more realistic and pragmatic as I get older. If Mitt gets the nom, I’ll vote for him with a clear conscience because I have no doubt he is better than Obama. I do not believe he is a conservative, but neither do I believe he wants to destroy this country.

          As for Newt, I’ve written several diaries about my support for him, I donated to his campaign, and I voted for him in the AL primary last month. I’ve been very vocal throughout this process re my antipathy toward Romney. I encourage everyone who hasn’t voted in their primary yet to vote for Newt or the candidate of their conscience.

          I assumed that when you said “Never” to Romney, you meant it. So what will you do if he gets the nomination? Vote for Obama? Stay at home when we’ll need all the votes we can get to defeat Obama? If that’s the case and Obama is re-elected, I hope your purist philosophies and clear conscience remain intact while we watch him destroy our country.

  • laodalisque

    Anyway, Romney’s unacceptability as a standardbearer of conservatism, for me at least, is due to his superPAC’s viciousness and his own obscene spending blitz to knockout his own GOP colleagues. Oh, and nobody’s mentioned it, but the bimbo eruption which tanked Cain has the unmistakeable stink of TeamRomney all over it. Anyone who thinks this guy is going to be this ballsy with Obummer this fall is dreaming. He reserves this particular brand of hatefulness toward those with whom HE HAS NO IDEOLOGICAL AFFINITY. Mark my words.

    And please, if it hadn’t been for those of us who stand the lonely vigil for conservative principles, the GOP would be just another leftwing crapfest. You vote for Mittens if you want, but I sure hope you can feel clean afterwards when he inevitably betrays you.

    • Viet71

      As in, too much.

      Whose side are you really on?

    • Viet71

      As in, too much.

      Plan A is now to rally around Romney, unless you back Obama.

    • garfieldjl

      As far as I’m concerned since Romney hasn’t gotten the magic number yet, and Newt is still in the race, I’m voting for Newt.

      I share laodalisque’s concern as a fellow conservative. I am deeply troubled with the behavior of some people here.

      I don’t think the primary is over and there are other people that share that view. If Romney ends up hitting the magic number fine, but until then, I’m sorry this primary is not over as much as Romney supporters wish it to be.

      Until Romney crosses the finish line, anything can happen and this primary isn’t over, if Romney supporters don’t like that fact too bad.

      Primary isn’t over until someone has the magic number of delegates.

  • laodalisque

    If it’s short sound bites, easy words and simple images you’re after then there’re all kinds of leftwing sites for the philosophically disabled.

    Reasoned arguments are available only to those who possess reason, after all.

  • redeyes

    You make comparisons with Obama, which may be valid, but what of the unknown? If people still believed in God things would be so much different. As a christian, this is how I approach things. I make dicisions based on what is right or wrong. If I do something because it is morally, ethically,and legally right, then I have FAITH that God is in control of the outcome.. Problem is too may people want to be in control of everything themselves and they inevitably mess up and end up with Specters. Our country is on the wrong track. Romney may take us down a different track than Obama, but it still may be the wrong track. Romney may have some good plans for our counrty, but there are things about Romney that scare me just as much as Obama does. Romney has only added to my reservations in this primary season, and nothing to calm my fears.

  • ken58

    Having to pick between Obama and Romney is like the choices Bear Grylls has to make on what to eat in the wild– “Should I go with the scorpion or does that spider look tastier?”
    In the end I’ll probably force the Romney stew down, but I know it won’t taste very good and will probably make me sick.