« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Mitt Romney as the Nominee: Conservatism Dies and Barack Obama Wins

Mit Romney will not go on Special Report with Brett Baier to answer the tough questions as the other candidates have done. No worries. Conservatives will bitch and moan for a few days and Romney will claim it was a scheduling issue, he’d always meant to go on, and he will go on.

Should Mitt Romney win the Presidency, conservatives will find this pattern play out repeatedly. Romney will head in a direction conservatives do not like and they will bitch and moan repeatedly and maybe, just maybe, he’ll part his hair in their direction.

We’ve seen this play out over and over. Jon Huntsman comes up with the best economic plan of all the candidates, Herman Cain follows up with 999, Perry comes out with a flat tax, and Romney refuses to do anything. Until he does something.

Mitt Romney is not the George W. Bush of 2012 — he is the Harriet Miers of 2012, only conservative because a few conservative grand pooh-bahs tell us Mitt Romney is conservative and for no other reason.

That is precisely why Mitt Romney will not win in 2012. But no worry, once he loses, Republican establishment types will blame conservatives for not doing enough for Mitt Romney, never mind that Mitt Romney has never been able to sell himself to more than 25% of the GOP voters. It’s not his fault though, it is the 75%’s fault.

Mitt Romney is going to be the Republican nominee. And his general election campaign will be an utter disaster for conservatives as he takes the GOP down with him and burns up what it means to be a conservative in the process.

Why Romney Will Be The Nominee

Mitt Romney will be the nominee because the other candidates, right now, are a pretty pathetic lot.

The base will not forgive Rick Perry his immigration sins. In fact, that has hurt him far more than his debate performances, but his debate performances have hurt him badly. Perry, who came out principled and fiery with a record others could only envy, has left others with the impression that he’s a poor man’s version of the village idiot, which in the SEC we call “Aggies”. Maybe he can turn it around.

Newt Gingrich will not be the nominee because, despite his daughter’s rebuttals to the horror stories of how Gingrich divorced his first of three wives, Jackie Gingrich told the Washington Post on January 3, 1985, “He walked out in the spring of 1980 and I returned to Georgia. By September, I went into the hospital for my third surgery. The two girls came to see me, and said Daddy is downstairs and could he come up? When he got there, he wanted to discuss the terms of the divorce while I was recovering from the surgery.”

Gingrich went on to cheat on the second wife with the third. Regardless of the actual facts or even the spin, he won’t win women.

Herman Cain won’t be the nominee because he can’t win women either. Regardless of what you think of the Politico story, Cain’s handling of the story has been an epic disaster. He’s down at least 10 points with women in Iowa. He’s falling even further and doesn’t even realize it. He’s largely been emboldened by a conservative media that is so used to standing by its men that too few are telling Herman that he is now at the point where he must actually sit and answer questions whether he wants to or not and whether he feels maligned or not and whether I think he should have to or not. If he loses women by as big as he is starting to lose the women, he cannot win.

So Mitt Romney will be the nominee. Conservatives will not rally together with the least of the bad alternatives and Romney, like John McCain before him, will run up the middle to the nomination. But, just like McCain, Romney will not beat Barack Obama.

Why Mitt Romney Will Not Beat Barack Obama

You’d think that given the economy, jobs, and the present angst about the direction of the country that the GOP would have an easy path to victory. You would be wrong.

You forget the electoral college. The vote is coming down to a handful of states and Barack Obama still maintains the advantage of incumbency and not terribly terrible polling in those swing states.

Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is a man devoid of any principles other than getting himself elected. As much as the American public does not like Barack Obama, they loath a man so fueled with ambition that he will say or do anything to get himself elected. Mitt Romney is that man.

I’ve been reading the 200 pages of single spaced opposition research from the John McCain campaign on Mitt Romney. There is no issue I can find on which Mitt Romney has not taken both sides. He is neither liberal nor conservative. He is simply unprincipled. The man has no core beliefs other than in himself. You want him to be tough? He’ll be tough. You want him to be sensitive? He’ll be sensitive. You want him to be for killing the unborn? He’ll go all in on abortion rights until he wants to run for an office where it is not in his advantage.

Along the way, he’ll drop lots of coin to grease the skids for himself. Mitt Romney is the silly putty of politicians — press on him real hard and he’ll take on whatever image you press into him until the next group starts pressing.

Republican billionaires have a fantastic track record of getting Republican opinion leaders to support them and an even better track record at losing elections. Mitt Romney will be no different.

To beat Barack Obama, a candidate must paint a bold contrast with the Democrats on their policies. When Mitt Romney tries, Barack Obama will be able to show that just the other day Mitt Romney held exactly the opposite position as the one he holds today.

Voters may not like Barack Obama, but by the time Obama is done with Romney they will not trust Mitt Romney. And voters would rather the guy they don’t like than they guy they don’t trust.

Why Conservatism Will Die

Conservatism is already dying. Republicans on Capitol Hill are about to raise taxes on the American people with this Super Committee, but they’ll say they are just “raising revenue,” not taxes. Conservatives will give them a pass as they have on virtually every other major issue. Conservatives keep giving passes to people who shouldn’t be given passes because conservative in Washington have been there so long, they’d much rather get invited to the cocktail parties and avoid awkward encounters.

Washington, D.C. conservatives will also rally around Mitt Romney, just as they kept doing over and over and over with George W. Bush even after steel tariffs in Pennsylvania, No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, the GM Bailout, and TARP. At some point the public will cease taking conservatives seriously when the most prominent conservatives — those in Washington who pose as the faces, voices, and writers of the conservative movement at large, keep throwing their lot in with a guy who keeps selling out the very principles conservatives claim to hold dear.

Some conservatives, of course, will not go all in for Romney. These conservatives will be blamed by major Republican and “conservative” mouth pieces for not doing enough to help Mitt Romney. They will be alienated, blamed, and made the scapegoat for the failures of the establishment GOP.

But there is something else too — Mitt Romney is winning the nomination without conservative help. The only time he pays conservatives any attention is when they cry loud enough that the media takes notice and Romney decides the story needs to go away. Once he is the nominee, it will be all about wooing the independents.

Hell, he can give the base Marco Rubio as the veep nominee, just like McCain did with Palin — a token for the base. But don’t delude yourself into thinking he will seriously take conservatives seriously. He got the nomination without them and he’ll only use them when it is opportunistically convenient for him.

Conservatism itself will not really die. But it might as well be dead as even conservatives in the heartland of the country stop taking Washington conservatives seriously.

The Contrast To Be Drawn

It is striking to me that in 2012 there is broad based popular angst against Wall Street and Washington and the Republican Party is on the verge of nominating a multi-millionaire scion of the Rockefeller Wing of the Republican Party whose closest encounters with the common man are accidentally touching one of the many hired hands in one of the many rooms of one of his many mansions. But then many of the DC-NYC Republican “conservatives” who support Romney are the same, only coming into contact with regular people when they are served their breakfast by a steward in the first class car on the Acela Express.

Neither Romney nor the Washington GOP crowd who loves him have very much at all in common with fly over country conservatives who see the GOP and Democrats both as out to lunch tools of K-Street and Wall Street. The party that could lead a conservative, populist campaign against Wall Street and Barack Obama, the former getting fat off the latter, will instead nominate a guy more at home on Wall Street than Main Street.

And enough conservatives will be cheerleaders and rally around him that by November of 2012 the ideological underpinnings of the modern American conservative movement will be coming apart.

I’m starting to think I need to walk it back on my rejection of Jon Huntsman. Because I’m starting to think even he would be more faithful in his conservative convictions than Mitt Romney. [Note: A lot of people are reading this as an endorsement of Jon Huntsman. It is not. Considering this, you might want to view it more as an expression of just how frustrated I have become with the field that I'm starting to think I may have to have another look given my conviction that a Romney nomination would (a) cause Barack Obama's re-election and (b) the destruction of the conservative movement as we know it.]

COMMENTS

  • bk

    is that if Obama wins, we are going to get 50-something replacements for Breyer and Ginsburg, as well as possibly for Kennedy and/or Scalia, both of whom will be 80 by the end of an Obama second term. Can you imagine a court with 5 Sotomayors on it for the next quarter century?

  • gettingsl

    nt

  • rechts

    I think you’re right at this point about Romney being the nominee. I just don’t see any of the alternatives getting it together. I had hopes for Perry early on but as with others he lost me over immigration early on; it’s good to be consistent, but not consistently wrong.

    The sad thing is the GOP really hasn’t had a good conservative POTUS candidate in 25 years. People often ask why there is so much Reagan-worship within the GOP; it’s because that’s the last good candidate the GOP really had. Since then there’s been H.W. Bush, Dole, W Bush, and McCain. All had some good qualities, but none were exactly the most conservative or charismatic men around.

  • rechts

    I think you’re right at this point about Romney being the nominee. I just don’t see any of the alternatives getting it together. I had hopes for Perry early on but as with others he lost me over immigration early on; it’s good to be consistent, but not consistently wrong.

    The sad thing is the GOP really hasn’t had a good conservative POTUS candidate in 25 years. People often ask why there is so much Reagan-worship within the GOP; it’s because that’s the last good candidate the GOP really had. Since then there’s been H.W. Bush, Dole, W Bush, and McCain. All had some good qualities, but none were exactly the most conservative or charismatic men around.

  • davesinsanantonio

    I fear you are right.

    God help us if you are, because this country will be destroyed spiritually from within before it is destroyed physically from without.

    Someone once asked the Senate chaplain if he prayed for the senators. He replied, “No, I look at the senators and pray for the country.” He could now add the House, the White House, the Supreme Court, and state capitals and city halls across this once great land. What a sorry mess we have let ourselves get into.

    I now believe if this country is to be saved at all it will be by individuals only. Parties, unions, collectives of all sorts are no longer following a moral, or even a sensible, path. Only by doing what is right as individuals and families can we survive the troubles that are coming. Again, God help us please.

  • pttx333

    supported for years and will continue to support through thick and thin. Do you know exactly his stance on immigration or is it what you have heard or read someone? You might have been hearing some of the absolute smears that are out there. If you would like, I can tell you about his immigration stance, or most anyone here can do so. I don’t want to impose on you if you aren’t interesting in listening, though. You can ask me if so, and I will reply.

    As for me, I have strong immigration feelings, too, but agree with Perry’s approach in that it is the only practical, real-world approach to take.

    There won’t ever be another Reagan – it would be impossible to do. But there can be and there are others who come close but stand on their own merits. No one should or even can stand on someone else’s coattails and be successful. Think about it. Don’t give up … we aren’t done yet!

  • SoFiMil

    And I’d be so happy if Rick Perry gets the nomination, there’d be no time for gloating or saying you got it wrong. I don’t just hope, but also believe this is still Perry’s nomination to lose. Perry’s slow gains are another good sign. He’s reached his floor, and his ceiling potential is much higher than Romney’s. I’d be even more confident, except Romney’s prevent defense finally cracked 25%..

    The Cain distraction has benefited Romney’s attempt to keep running out the clock, as Perry and the other candidates are having a heck of a time getting anyone to talk policy. Big debate coming up tomorrow, and hopefully the public (who I blame as much as the MSM) will refocus.

    And you implied, at least Perry tells us where he stands on immigration. Meanwhile Romney remains in Mittness Protection.

  • jbritterjr

    Eric’s writing (especially his book) keep me coming back to this site daily. This was harsh and it’s a sobering assessment of “present reality.” Sometimes you have to yell “Fire” in a crowded theater, but, boy, I sure do prefer a more optimistic conservatism.

  • SoFiMil

    Nice headline, DISA. Was writing my response during the time you hit “send.”

  • agconservative

    I have to disagree with almost this whole post. Besides being very pessimistic, it seems to jump to conclusions that I just don’t see. Is Mitt Romney a principled Conservative? No. Is he the favorite to be the nominee at this point? Probably, but none of that leads to Erick’s conclusions.

    Firstly, Romney is simply a typical politician. He doesn’t possess strong convictions, but that doesn’t mean he won’t act mostly conservative in office based solely on the current political shift in the country. Second, we haven’t even cast one vote in the primaries, so it is ridiculous to hand him the nomination outright. Thirdly, even if he did win the nomination, this is a very different election than previous ones. People will be voting mostly based on their feelings regarding Obama, not the R nominee. Romney, even with all his flip-flops, will likely have a decent shot at beating Obama. I know that most conservatives will work hard to get him elected if he is the nominee because 4 more years of Obama could be the end of our Republic. I would rather have Romney picking SC court justices & signing the legislation of the conservative congress.

    The assertion that conservatism is dying is beyond ridiculous as this is probably the strongest the conservative movement has ever been. Conservatism depends on individual beliefs, not political leaders. Conservatives will keep fighting on important issues, including when they have to oppose the Republicans in Washington. Not to mention we now have a reliable group of leaders in congress to promote conservatism, a group we haven’t had in recent history. You think Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan etc. won’t have any say in what happens moving forward? Also, conservatism does not necessarily mean never giving any concessions. No politicians are the “common man”, so it is ridiculous to even try to compare any 2 such a figure. The fact that Romney has had success will hardly be his biggest issue. Plus, no one is more wall street than Barack Obama. Enough with this wall street v. main street stuff, we are starting to sound like the left. That creates unnecessary division in our society. Also, Jon Huntsman, unlike Romney, is consistently out there insulting conservatives. The point being that conservatism will be fine, Mitt Romney might not be ideal but he is hardly a guarantee for an Obama victory, and we should start looking at our future with a little more optimism. Millions of Americans are actively paying attention now and hearing the conservative message for the first time, let’s not waive the white flag during a winning battle.

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    Not only will he lose, but the Democrats will hold the Senate – and may even retake the House. Or possibly just sharply reduce the Republican majority such that it will not be able to effective oppose the Democratic juggernaut. And that will take us past the point of no return – not to mention that we almost certainly will lose the SCOTUS.

    That’s the impending reality if conservatives can’t get their act together in 2012. We have a bench team, but they may never be able to get on the national field.

    However, there is a glimmer of hope – if by some miracle flip the Senate with Romney heading the ticket, we may get a tiny bit of breathing room. No margin for any error, though.

    This is the new reality if we don’t get our act together to stop Romney.

  • The_Gadfly

    Philosophically I am in the “build the d*** fence and man it” camp, but I’ll listen to Perry’s criticisms of it. Why? Because I’m not on the governor of the state with the longest border with Mexico. Perry HAS deployed the Texas Rangers to supplement ICE, which is about as much as a governor can do when the federal government fails to perform its assigned functions. I get that.

    Similarly, because of the various SCOTUS rulings, I recognize that allowing the children of illegals to pay in-state tuition rates is the most practical solution for the governor. He has at least put a requirement on it that they need to apply for citizenship as part of the process. I’m willing to say that the kids need to go back with their parents when the feds send them back, but if the feds aren’t sending them back and the kid was born here, and graduated from high school, it doesn’t strike me as fair to send them back. And the most practical thing to do to make them productive members of society is to allow them to finish a college education.

    Yes, as President I want him to build as much of the d*** fence as is practical (and no, I don’t count saving the smelt fish as a practical limitation), ship back the illegals, and enforce the law against the companies and people who illegally employ the illegals. But given that he put the Rangers on the border to do that, I think we can count on him to do those things.

    I’m not a Perry supporter yet, but I do like him and other than his debate performance, I don’t think he’s been given a fair shake. Right now I’m trying to decide who to support, because the person I was supporting took unfair and improper swipes at Perry. I still like him too but I can’t support him until those mistakes are rectified or he is the last alternative to Romney (or God forbid, Luap Nor).

  • SoFiMil

    It has nothing to do with that. It’s that Romney’s a lefty lib, a FCINO, SCINO, and DEFCONINO in disguise.

    Subsidies for all! In both the hardback and paperback version.

  • MikeG

    It’s too early in the morning for you to have me reaching for a bottle of scotch. Are you auditioning for the role of Private Hudson in this year’s electoral cycle?

    Seriously, though, you perfectly encapsulated my gut’s churning fears about this election. My one (earthly) consolation is that there still remains time for things to turn around.

    Stay frosty, dude.

  • MikeG

    And then there is Pollyanna-ism. The Movement is in no way served by the later.

  • diehardcon

    You cannot let your obvious despondence overcome you yet. You are EXACTLY correct in your analysis on the womens’ vote effect on Gingrich and Cain. You are also precisely correct that the immigration issue is suffocating Perry; however, it does not have to be so. He has released superb plans for addressing the tax code and our growing need for energy development. What’s glaringly missing now is a new, aggressive plan to truly seal the border and make the immigration weakness a strength. Because Perry is a proven man of his word, he should propose to draw from Eisenhower’s approach, and promise to appoint a point man for illegal immigration, just as Ike did with retired General Jack Swing. Their efforts were immensely successful, and stand as the only effective modern attempt to reverse illegal border crossings. This approach does not conflict with his stated opposition to the fence, and in fact, could be combined with his “strategic fencing” to strengthen it further. Ultimately, Perry must recognize the paramount truth of this issue to conservatives; we see it as a core respect for the rule of law matter. He CANNOT win our support unless he can be influenced to raise its prominence in his profile. We care less about what he did as Texas governor than what he credibly commits to doing as president. But do not doubt that there is still time to make this happen; especially with his resources and overall record, and the fact that no one on the stage is going to stop him with all their own problems. It is now up to him; do not give up yet!

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    If Cain’s personal-negatives rise quickly enough and everyone is reminded that The Newt is a statist/elitist, Perry’s stated-views [noting the "unforgiving" history regarding Gardisil/Immigration/Debates] should remind true-conservatives [who may, by then, have read "Fed Up!"] that he is The One [for us].

  • bzip

    If is turns out true and Romney is the nominee the only people to blame for it is the same conservatives running around looking for idols rather than proven conservative.

    We will only have our selves to blame for this. Stop looking for the idol or the perfect which doesn’t exist. The most consistent conservative with proven governing experience is right in front of you.

  • sowa1

    For every flip-flop you accuse Romeny of, Obama has two. If you have followed the news on a chanel that is not owned by Obama, you would never, ever want Obama to be re-elected. Romney is a million times better whether you like him or not. Newt also would be a good candidate. He would wipe the floor with Obama in a debate.

  • Jim

    It is really refreshing to read a sobering and honest assessment of Romney. I want everyone in the “ABO crowd” to read Erick’s wonderful piece here and explain where he is wrong. Explain how, in what universe, Mitt Romney will be less bad to the goal of reducing the size and scope of government to it’s constitutional bounds.

    I have never, ever, ever been a fan of third party candidates for the presidency…but maybe this is the year conservatives pull out that card, start waving it at the GOP establishment if/when Romney get the nomination. What do we have to lose? The grand debate of the century between Romney and Obama as to whether the top margin tax rate should be 36% or 40%?!? A debate between the merits of socialized medicine on the state level versus the federal level? A debate between raising the debt $15 trillion over ten years versus $12 trillion over ten years?

    Ugh.

    To be honest, my interest/support in the presidential contest ends the day Romney secures the nomination. I’ll focus on state on local issues/candidates. Hell, maybe we can get a good nullification movement going to end Romneycare v2.0….I mean Obamacare.

  • Jim

    “Romney is a million times better whether you like him or not.”

    Hahahahahahahahahaha!

    No, he is not. Stop lying to yourself.

  • politicalqrm

    if Washington had given up after his humiliating defeat at New York, we’d still be a colony of Great Britain. It ain’t over till it’s over.

    However, am I afraid that Romney will be the nominee? Of course, because he’ll lose. All Obama has to do is run the many videos of Romney flip-flopping on issues and he can show the American people that we can’t trust him because you never know where he’ll stand day to day. The best offense in a political campaign is to use the other candidate’s own words. No way he can fight that.

    Here in NH all I see of my neighbors have Romney signs. Amazing since some of these people are staunch pro-lifers.

    Yes, it’s tough going right now, but I am not going to give up. That would wipe out any gains that conservatives have made over the past 2 years. And also sending a wrong message to those already in office and those who want to run.

    Take a deep breath.. As Scarlett said: Tomorrow is another day..

  • diehardcon

    While you’ve been painfully reading the “200 SINGLE-SPACED pages of opposition research” on Romney, what the devil do you think Tony Fabrizio and Co. have been doing?? This will become their bible for taking down Romney, bet the house on it!

  • pttx333

    enlighten you a little more on the fence issue here in Texas. All of Perry’s stances on immigration have come from a practical direction – the fence, in-state tuition, securing the border, etc.

    Texas has a 1,200 mile border with Mexico with only the Rio Grande River separating the two. As for a fence, how would it be built? In the middle of the river? Next to impossible given the moutainous terrain of parts of it and the very unfriendly terrain of a lot of it. On either the Mexico side or the American side? Either way you go, one of the countries would lose access to the water from the river which, for the most part, is depended on by the ranchers, etc., in some of the desert areas. So, then there would be a big battle over water. The cost of such? God only knows. How long it would take to build it? God only knows.

    Perry has fought with Obama/D.C. for several years over sending help to our border to help secure it. Not a word from them. B.O. did fly over El Paso or somewhere and said it looked fine to him. What a crock! A governor’s hands are more or less tied in this issue in that it comes under the feds’ governance. And you know what kind of help we get there! No help even with the horrible wildfires we have experienced – once again, nada. Our punishment because we didn’t vote for the monster-in-chief, doncha know.

    In-state tuition: It has been reported all over the place that the children of illegals can get up to $100K for college, and in others reports “lots of $$” – all baloney. What happened is that our legislature voted 177-4 to allow children of illegals to get in-state tuition rates (NO MONEY) IF they attend Texas schools here for three years, graduate from high school, have a citizenship plan in place, THEN they get to go to college if they can pay the in-state tuition rates on their own. We do not assist them. The reasoning is that it is better to have them educated so they can become legal taxpayers into the U.S. economy, along with the Texas economy. The Federal government mandates that all states educate their children grades K-12, so in every state they are given a free education. Isn’t that just great?

    As for deporting all of the millions? How on earth does that happen? Do you line up thousands upon thousands of buses to transport them, do you round them up by horseback, or do fly helicopters to round ‘em up that way? What on earth would all of that cost? The more practical thing is to have laws in place with strict restrictions/fines on those who employ illegals, no more freebies/entitlements, etc., and they will self-deport if there are no jobs. Now, there is no one more strongly opposed to illegal immigration than me, but this has been going on for decades and decades with no one doing anything about it.

    Perry is NOT soft on illegal immigration at all. If he is our next President, there will be many, many changes along those lines. He WILL secure our borders.

    Hope this helps. I’m probably missing a lot here, but maybe some of the others can fill in for me.

  • usa1776usa

    Perry’s successful, conservative record over 10 years eclipses all other candidates in the field. Jobs and the economy are the number one issues right now and Perry is the only candidate who can boast miraculous job creation and a growing economy over the last few years. Other successes are; best pro life stance, tort reform, voter ID, less govt regulation, smaller govt, cut spending, etc….Regarding immigration, he has been tough but sensible. It’s easy for the other candidates to say what they would do but that is just talk following polling data. Perry has been on the border with boots on the ground, high tech equipment deployed, and has spent 400 million of Texas taxpayer money to fight the problem. 98% of the Texas legislature representing approximately 98% of he electorate voted for in-state tuition in Texas and Perry signed it. When 98% of your constituents tell you they want something, you better listen. Besides, it was the right thing to do to make these children productive members of our society,

  • bobguzzardi

    This is a helpful post in explaining the real world in which a governor operates. We have been living with this problem since 1986 and before that. There are no simple solutions except for the simple minded.

  • jjkoran

    Sounds like Erick has decided he can no longer prop up the failed Perry campaign and decided to just cry about it.

    Listen conservatives….you can just give up and allow Obama to take this country over the cliff or you can fight. If fighting means electing Romney and then fighting like hell to to keep him on the the most conservative track then that is what we do because we love this country.

    Don’t be a crybaby like Erick and keep fighting…even if it means supporting Romeny and then fighting Romney after he wins.

  • evilleramsfan

    http://reason.com/assets/mc/psuderman/2011_11/mittfudge.jpg

  • bobguzzardi

    I thought this was the primary issue of interest to voters, not immigration which, as far as I know, has not moved any election.

    Hardliners on immigration have repeatedly failed in elections. It is not a determining issue. pttx33 had a good explanation of Gov. Perry’s position.

    If immigration is the decider, then there is no candidate for you.

    What are you going to do?

  • jkines

    with this assessment, In fact, I’ve been making similiar arguments for several months now. However, I take absolute no pleasure in this at all. That sliver of optimism that maybe I was wrong and everything really would work out fine in 2012 just died a little. Erick is reading the samne tea leaves I am and drawing the same conclusions, and there is a surfeit of historical evidence, trends, and parallels to support this analysis. Hopefully, we can get our act together in 2016 and nominate a viable candidate. In the meantime, I take solace only in the fact that the GOP will hold the House, could feasibly wrest control of the Senate, and just might contain the fallout from a second Obama term sufficiently that the country endures until 2016. I say this not out of some maniacal delusion that D.C. conservatives have any more backbone than a jellyfish or conviction than Mitt Romney. However, being consummate opportunists, Obama’s lame duck status will embolden them to pander and contain in an attempt to rally the base for 2016. Hopefully, such will be enough to survive the four year statist siege that will be Obama’s second term.

  • bobguzzardi

    Immigration is not a vote moving issue in Pennsylvania.

    Jobs through energy exploration and the tax code are very attractive issues.

    There has been no mention of foreign policy. As Iran moves towards acquiring nuclear weapons, there are serious issues for the President to contend with and foreign policy has not even been mentioned.

  • williamjameson

    I understand if your bound by contract or have given your word. I think many of us would like to read the research.

    I’m not giving up on the wild cards till key states are won as Perry and the other 2 shouldn’t be dropped till its hopeless.. Why, because we’re caving into a FAKE like Romney whom if elected will spend us deeper into the hole sine Romney sold MA down the river. Dems will own Romney and they will bully him into becoming their presidential bitch. Debt will deepen with no hope for winning 2016.

    Had a scary thought, Elizabeth Warren wins the Senate and runs for potus 2016, she’s Hollywood’s “It Girl”. So expect another far left plutocrat.

    Huntsman, other than his record in office, his healthcare plan is appealing but on a national level could be hacked to death. Regardless its a better plan than ORomneyCare.

    Perry has fund raising skills and good support, so he made a few mistakes, the immigration issue is out there. Those who still hold a grudge better think about the alternative, even worse, who wants 4 more years of the Messiah. Has Perry changed his mind as often as John Kerry? Mitt certainly has and such a man can’t be trusted to lead this country.

    Remember, Obama has spent over $10 Trillion when you count all gov spending since inauguration. Romney losing to Obama will be unforgivable so get dirty on Romney and demand the media challenge his record in office.

    We have to demand FOX, CNN, online media, papers etc…. to challenge Romney on his record because he’s been the only front runner not to be called out on his record.. We all have to push the media or attack Romney on as many sites as possible making the attacks irresistible to the media. Sooner, not later, like starting this week. Publishing the opposition research everywhere is the beginning of taking Romney down. Online, in print, pass it around.

  • btpull

    Unless Cain has convincing evidence that the 4th accuser is lying or took a bribe, etc he is done. The Cain vote will fracture between Romney, Gingrich, Perry, and the others. The gap between Romney and Perry and Romney and Gingrich is too big for either of them to over come with fractured Cain support.

  • jjkoran

    Yes, Romney is a flip flopper but hell Obama says contradictory things every time he talks…..so there is just as much fodder on the other side. When he begins a sentence….”I have always said”….this is clue that he is about to say something exactly opposite of something he said last week or last month.

    Besides Romney murky conservatism might be enough to attract the those democrats disenchanted with Obama. I think Erick is wrong….if the election is held today Romney wins easily. If the economy does not improve (and it won’t) there is not anything that can save Obama.

    Again I am no fan of Romney but I think all of us would agree he ANYONE in this field of Republicans would be better than Obama. We can’t be defeatist and do everything we can to get whomever the nominee is elected…then we work to make him or her govern the right way. This will be the hard part…

    Don’t give up people…..

  • kelly4econ

    That is depressing. Perhaps I have a little more faith in Republicans, let alone conservatives. No wonder the POTUS team wants Mitt so bad.

  • sunshinek67

    Santorum thinks Iowa is going to bring him victory and extrapolate to the other primaries. Wrong. Huntsman thinks NH is going to bring him off of life support, another wrong theory. Probably studying the phenomenal McCain’s rise from the dead in 2008.

    EE had a bad night of sleep and decided to grab that laptop before his feet hit the ground. Take heart, Perry’s numbers are going up~

  • jjkoran

    Maybe Romeny is a better candidate than Romney…..

  • pttx333

    it helps for those who are fence sitting of uninformed. It is a very inadequate explanation, I’m sure, but should assist somewhat in pointing out the absolute smears that Perry receives.

    I’ll swear, I don’t know how he does what he does, having to fight b.o. and thugs, deal with all of the things he must face each day. And then there are those who still complain that he was terrible in his debates! My God, the man had back surgery (late June, I believe), dealt with wildfires all over the state, even working here all day on the wildfire situation then flying out to CA to debate that night. And they think he should have been a top-notch speaker? God help us all! Some folks are pathetic, you know.

    All I know, bob, is that I have voted for my guy Perry every single time he has run for office and will remain firmly behind him through thick and thin without a single wobble. Full steam ahead, damn the torpedos and all that stuff! ;-) And I speak as a 71 year-old female who has been through a lot in this life, and pretty much know of what I speak. How’s that?

    Yep, we have all too many simple-minded people out there – just look at what they voted into OUR White House!

  • bobguzzardi

    Devastating. The Ds will run continuous loop of many mansions and Romney’s ties to Wall Street. Mitt Romney is candidate from and for Wall Street. Rick Perry is Main Street.

    “It is striking to me that in 2012 there is broad based popular angst against Wall Street and Washington and the Republican Party is on the verge of nominating a multi-millionaire scion of the Rockefeller Wing of the Republican Party whose closest encounters with the common man are accidentally touching one of the many hired hands in one of the many rooms of one of his many mansions.”

  • swamphermit

    I’ll vote for Obama first…don’t give me that ‘he’ll ruin the country with 4 more years’! Hard to believe that liberals like McCain and possibly Romney can win the Republican primaries?!

  • sunshinek67

    Shockingly enough the man that crams so many words within a minute timeframe is giving stump speeches to small modest crowds (i.e.100) in Iowa yesterday and is not answering Q’s. No talk shows. Nothing.

    As a matter of fact, he seems to have silenced ever since sexgate erupted. Interestingly coincidental.

  • earlgrey

    I won’t make it through a year of this. Let alone the 2nd term for Obama.

  • repubnut

    Mitt will not win the Republicans vote—-Newt will definitely get the go-a-head from the Republicans- Then all the way to the White House. Newt is the only one that will be able to get America out of the mess we are in !! His personal problems or just that-”his personal problems.”

  • pttx333

    has yet to sing, and not a soul has turned out the lights! We cannot give up – there is too much at stake here. I will do anything in my power to see this through and make things right for those who come behind us.

  • jbritterjr

    Prefer the truth. Sometimes it just hurts.

  • radicalrighty

    Who else can we trust to do even just these things?

    Romney? Maybe. Maybe not.

  • RebelRoss0587

    Erick, I think you mistitled this post. It should be titled “Mitt Romney as the Nominee: Conservatism Lives and Barack Obama Loses”. This post is the complete opposite of the truth. Just ask the people of Massachusetts how conservative Mitt is. Mitt Romney was WAY more conservative than the voters of Massachusetts expected. Just ask anyone who pays attention and gas been living in Massachusetts since 2003.

  • GoldieAZ50

    He knows how to do that.

  • sunshinek67

    There is a very strong resistance to a candidate Romney, no doubt. There is also very strong support for Rick Perry out there, and even for Ron Paul. The other candidates don’t seem to be getting as much media time.

    For example, this past Sunday, Bob Schieffer had his roundtable discussion, and he includes Romney & Perry backers. This is a continuing trend. You don’t see Bachmann or Santorum backers on Meet the Press, or the Situation Room. The media knows that Perry is going to be around for a while, and has a core group of supporters.

    EE is a frustrated coach leading a fractured group of players that can’t decide who is going to carry the ball, his message is clear, conservatives should forgive Perry for his immigration, which is acceptable if you take an honest eye to the record in its entirety, and let him carry the ball to the finish line. One can hope that in the meantime, Vegas Perry shows up in these next debates. No fumbles and no penalties. Game over for Romney~

  • nathanalbright

    …but the level of conservatism of Massachusetts voters (which is not very great) is not a standard by which would-be standard bearers for the Conservatives of the United States should be judged. Mittens is the left of about 75% or so of the Republican party nationwide. Whether you like that fact or not, it is what it is, and that means that the likelihood of Romney’s success being met with anything other than a tepid and lukewarm response here is next to nil.

  • nativetexan41

    It makes a person want to just give up on politics and elections. No vote has been cast and to say it’s over is depressing. We as Repiblicans are willing to count Perry out over the immigration issue and go for Romney as this article says is unprincipled does not make sense to me. I am and have been a Perry supporter, he has strong core values. Are we afraid to support Perry because the Republican establishment says Romney can beat Obama? I will continue to support Perry and will vote for him in the primary and hope many others will do the same,

  • pttx333

    only one running who even understands the EPA regs and absolute necessity of ending the outrageous and intentional strangulation of what was once our beloved country – jobs, industry, our blessed military who keep us from harm, freedoms disappearing one by one, and on down the line.

    How can anyone believe that Romney truly cares one fig about any of these things? I have always questioned why would anyone spend a virtual fortune as a serial and professional candidate for President? The only thing that comes to mind is because that is the only thing he has never HAD before – a trophy to put on the mantle. Guess he thinks he can just buy the office, cuz he’s sure trying. And the power? But, of course – he’s never had that kind of power in the past, and, I pray daily, neither will he EVER in the future.

  • radicalrighty

    maybe things wouldn’t look so rosie for Romney. In fact, he would probably be in 3rd place.

    Romney’s probably keeping half of those wannabes funded, for that very reason . . .

  • thescreaminghead

    Romney has been well known as a guy who waits on hard data before making a decision, ever since his days at Bain Capital, and during his tenure as Governor of Massachusetts.

    I dislike the fact that because all of these decisions were not hardline ideological conservativism,, you disagree.

    Sometimes you Gordon Gekko the company, sometimes you build it (Staples). It depends on the INDIVIDUAL situation. Not applying a blind ideology to dynamic problems.

    Romney’s not a flip-flopper; conservatives just hate him because he’s too rich to reign in. He does what he wants, and many times, even when he is more traditionally liberal with his decisions, his decisions are the best for the leadership mantle with which he was bestowed.

    Check my opinion on Romney, if you dare. mwuhuhuhahahahaha

    http://thepurpletruth.blogspot.com/2011/11/purple-truth-why-democrats-should-vote.html

  • williamjameson

    diary. Mika read a portion out loud starting at 7:08AM EST till 7:18AM @ commercial break. Joe agrees but then the group dreams of Huntsman as desirable and they discuss could RS go against Romney.. Joe says “Erickson knows the conservative base quite well”.

    Expect the Obamabots to celebrate. People see Joe as a Rino, more of a journalist who criticizes his party and gets paid by MSDNC the media arm of the Democratic Party. I see some Rino but more of someone who gets loud and rowdy criticizing Obama while kissing MSNBC’s arse. Different since Comcast took over.

  • txchick57

    But agree that Romney will be force fed to us. Oh well. I will vote for Obama as a protest. Might as well make some money off it too – I bought Obama contracts on Intrade recently.

  • nathanalbright

    If you call yourself purple rather than read you are a self-declared moderate. Being a moderate does not make you bad, it just means that you’re not going to find a lot of love on a conservative site.

  • ag8tor

    made this clear during the debates? I must admit that it has sounded like the illegals were getting $$$$ to go to school from the people of Texas. Didnt make sense that someone running for President would be behind such an offer. Perry needs to get the word out and clarify his position.

  • radicalrighty

    my prayers alone could have kept this RADICAL out.

  • manny

    True Republicans and conservatives cannot possibly support Romney – the man who included Planned Parenthood on the RomneyCare advisory board, and included $50 copay abortions. The Governor who violated the Mass. Constitution when he implemented “gay marriage” without legislative authorization. The Governor who kowtowed to an illegitimate Court ruling, against the clear separation of powers laid out in the Mass. Constitution by John Adams. The Governor who supported Kevin Jennings’ “Safe Schools” programs in the Mass. schools, had his own “Governor’s Commission on Gay & Lesbian Youth” and even issued proclamations for GLBT Youth Pride events.
    MITT ROMNEY’S DECEPTION – amazon and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwwcAa6nHm4
    Mitt Romney’s Job Creation: Supporting Companies with Radical Social Policies at http://www.amycontrada.com/Page_9.html

  • radicalrighty

    If Obama wins, with no fear of re-election hanging over him, the USA will be unrecogzinable in 4 years. He already ignores the Constitution.

    $30 Trillion National Debt

    $100 Trillion in unfunded liabilities.

    Greece x 1000.

  • pttx333

    sometimes God has to teach us a lesson, I suppose. I have to believe that we have been down a wrong path for so very long, and if b.o. hasn’t taught us anything about going the wrong way and to correct it, then nothing will. It is up to US to turn it around. I happen to be an optimist who believes that each of us can contribute to that change, even if it is only by word spoken – we never know what other people are going to pick up from what we say. I have to hope and pray, and do what I can each day to perhaps assist in that directional change.

    So, radical, lets just be positive today, then wake up tomorrow and do it again – over and over. How’s that sound?

  • dcarter888

    You are a fool and are paid by Soros to post here?

  • dcarter888

    How many of you pompus conservatives who are clueless have gone to Heritage Foundation Website to watch 2006 roll out of Romneycare which Heritage helped design? Go watch then stop blaming Mitt for what the MA Democrats changed it to be:

    http://www.heritage.org/Events/2006/01/Massachusetts-Health-Care-Reform?query=Romney+at+Heritage:+Massachusetts+Health+Care+Reform

  • texabama

    when no one is willing to listen. I’ve barely heard the media even mention that he is still in the running for the nomination. Unfortunately right now Cain is sucking up all the air time and because the attention is negative it’s really hurting all Republicans.

  • stoneyfield

    Where is the Tea Party? Are they only paying attention to the pronouncements of the pundits and not to the candidates themselves? Go to CSPAN and watch Perry’s interview with the Union Leader, watch his speeches to groups in Iowa, read his tax and energy plans. In fact, watch his speech to Cornerstone in its’ entirety, not the spliced together hit job edited to make Perry look bad. I’m from Texas and completely agree with how Perry handles the illegal immigration issue. We are dealing with REALITY here in Texas. Texans don’t want illegal immigration and we don’t want our tax dollars benefitting illegals, but the Supreme Court’s ruling that we must take care of them is the magnet that draws them and Texans are stuck with that reality until a future court does something to change that.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    A bit of hyperbole…don’t you think?

    First and foremost, conservatism will not die. It never has nor will it. Conservatism will take a respite, because there is no conservative candidate this election which has captured the imagination of voters or consistently and enigmatically expressed conservative principles- no matter how hard you try to inflate them (the candidates). There is also no “perfect” candidate. More on that later.

    I would also note that negotiation and common sense seems to also have taken a respite. Instead of dealing with realities and achievable agreements we are stuck on all or nothing. That strategy never helps to achieve your goals. Never.

    So this smells oddly like “I am going to take my ball and go home because I didn’t get my way”. Rather than “I am going to speak directly with the candidate to express my views and concerns to build consensus and win this thing.” Where is that post? Will Romney’s team not speak with you? Have we somehow cataloged and discussed our political disagreements rather than ad nauseum articulated his personal flaws? There seems to be plenty of internecine cannibalism occurring under the guise of “screening” a candidate. Who does that ultimately help?

    I would agree with you in the sense that Romney has a fundamental flaw which makes him dangerously unelectable as President. There is a very careful strategy designed to get him the Republican nomination. It will probably succeed, but fail in the ultimate goal. That is due Mr. Romney’s lack of appeal in key electoral groups. Source? A lack of trust and questions about his core belief’s and principles. His team also wrongly believes they can ride Obama’s current weakness to the White House. They believe only the “establishment” is needed to get elected. They believe the Tea Party is a sideshow to be ignored, focusing on the movement rather than the general discontent responsible for its creation- at their peril. That belief will be the final nail in Romney’s Presidential aspirations. He will be the modern day McGovern unless his team starts to work to address the many concerns Conservatives and others have about his platform.

    Obama will have a historic size campaign fund, good electoral organization and enough improving economic signs to fool plenty of people again in 2012. There is no doubt people are very concerned about our country and the monumental issues that require resolution. Obama will capitalize on that trepidation by saying we are headed in the right direction- why go back to the “mess” we had before. They will distract and deflect from the real issues.

    So you can either stand around and watch it happen, or be part of the fight and leave your blood on the field. I am not about to stand around and wait for the perfect candidate. I will throw Romney’s flaws against Mr. Obama’s any day of the week and show not only how they are eminently better for our country, but also how his ideas are more consistent with those that made our country the great shining light that it was before he took office.

  • johnnyappleseed

    Agreed with your comments, I watched Romney in action when he took over the 2002 SLC Olympics, no one more than myself despised the debt legacy the Olympics bring to their host.
    Romney not only turned that Olympics around but left the host city with over 50 million in the bank, first time ANY Olympics made money.
    Then on to Massachussets, brought their state from the verge of bankruptcy, he is very well disciplined, on fiscal policies, he left it with a balanced budget, and money in the bank.
    As to Romney care, if the folks in Mass. don’t like it they can throw it out, unlike Obamacare, so lets not get too hasty with Romney, he at least believes in state rights, can balance a budget and is a very savvy in making things work.
    My guy is Gingrich, but until the primaries are over we need to, as fellow Americans to get ourselves out of this tear down mode and think about the future of our country.

  • pttx333

    can explain much of anything during those 30-second or so sound bites allowed during those silly debates! Particularly with Perry, from the moment he steps on stage, all of the others have attacked him viciously and untruthfully (by some) so he was having to defend himself in all sorts of directions. There is no way to explain all of the things I wrote in a very short amount of time – especially when you are interrupted or aren’t even called upon to speak.

    Perry now has numerous interview videos out there, some have been here, some are on CNN, youtube, Fox News – I’m pretty sure. There are other sites to go to: rickperryreport and rickperry.org. I believe those are accurate. At any rate, you can find them. He truly is a great and strong speaker, firm in his beliefs, never waffling and certainly no lies from him – ever. And I have supported him faithfully for years.

    I would like to share with the two of you an article about his parents in Paint Creek, Texas. It is very sweet and will give you a lot of insight as to who Perry is and what he is about. It is from a liberal Dallas newspaper so you will need to overlook 2 things in the article: they refer to the Perry’s deer lease as the “Perry family hunting lodge” (what a joke! a family lodge is a world away from a deer lease) and to the stupid rock story. Anyway, this is the link:

    http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/perry-watch/headlines/20111105-rick-perrys-parents-say-their-son-is-strong-medicine-needed-by-a-sickly-nation.ece?ssimg=368982#

  • jonerik

    The primary season is just getting started. There hasn’t been a single real vote yet. So the game hasn’t yet started in earnest. Yes, there are trends, but they are different than two months ago and will be different than two months from now. Except, Romney will probably poll around 21-25%.

    Erick, I see Perry coming back. He is gaining in the polls lately and others will fall back to earth. If his immigration stances are the big problem, then get out on the hustings and help show why those stances mesh with Conservative principles. The man is NOT for amnesty and never has been. He’s NOT against fencing, he’s against stupid, expensive and useless fencing. He’s NOT against the concept of E-verify, he’s against the manner of its execution and how it has caused more problems than helped.

    So everyone, not just Erick, needs to bring these issues to true light, stop risking the ability for true Conservatives to achieve real power and support the only viable Conservative in this race…Rick Perry.

  • johnnyappleseed

    That third party deal with Perot, how did that work out, gave us slick willy.

  • gator_hoo

    By how much people misunderstand Perry’s immigration stance. They have convinced themselves that Perry has supported amnesty, which he never has, and then convince themselves to vote for Romney, who actually has supported amnesty, or Cain, whose plan is to kill illegals entering the country, but I haven’t seen him begin to address the issue of what happens to this who are already here. Firing squads, maybe?

    In that respect, I think Perry has a bit of a Cain problem, in that it never would have become an issue if he would have explained it clearly to begin, but he messed up, and the heartless line was grade A stupid. I’m willing to give him a pass because 1) he is the only candidate with a great conservative record, and 2) he is the only candidate who has full time responsibilities outside of being a candidate (ymmv re: Bachmann, but my understanding is that she has hardly been on the House floor since running).

    Perry’s debate performances were not entirely bad, he crushed Romney on social security issues. So he isn’t entirely a bad debater. In hindsight, with the wildfires and back surgery, he should have bowed out of some of the early debates, he just had too much on his plate.

    In my view, Perry is the only principled conservative, and possibly the only nominee, who can win. He has a record of success, his immigration stances will be a feature, not a bug, in the general election, and he can provide a strong contrast to Obama. He is the only one who can truly claim the mantle of Washington outsider (Cain is the former head of a lobbying group; Romney and Newt, ‘Nuff said.)

    I think that he will be improved in the upcoming debates; I hope that will help put some voters at ease regarding him.

  • texasroots

    Perry will be in the race only 3 months on 11/13/11, while the rest have been running for a while. He won the last debate, and I don’t think he did so bad in the first two. Romney is placed along side Perry intentionally to keep cutting off Perry every time he starts to speak. Perry should just do the debate on foreign policy and no more. The debates are filled with Romney’s supporters behaving like they are in a hockey game.

    Don’t give up on Perry, I am not!.

  • dcarter888

    Dear Self – Righteous Conservatives

    I’m a conservative as well but I am also a realist- Our Republic Will Not Survive a 2nd Term of our Community Organizer in Chief. Eric could not be more wrong. Romney is the best candidate to beat Obama. His inner circle fear Romney the most. I predict Romney will Win and He will become the next Reagan! Remember how many republicans were against his candidacy ? Romney will go on all the shows and talk when he’s ready to. He learned his lessons on how press destroyed Palin. As I posted already go to Heritage and watch 2006 video of roll out of Romneycare which Heritage helped design. All the majority of conservatives are doing is repeating liberal talking points about Romney on MA Healthcare. I lived in MA at the time and I can tell you how few conservatives there are there it is a wonder that any of the conservative portions of the original plan survived. Please go watch video be informed: http://www.heritage.org/Events/2006/01/Massachusetts-Health-Care-Reform?query=Romney+at+Heritage:+Massachusetts+Health+Care+Reform

    As a Utahn I can tell you that Jon Huntsman Jr is more liberal than McCain, Crist or Swartzenneger. The only reason he won 2nd term was because the population around Salt Lake City is mostly democrat. The Democrats, illegals and Gay Community Love Love Love Jon Jr.!!! Jon Jr. makes Perry look conservative and that’s a joke! Eric you’ve not done your homework again!

    As a retired Wall Street money manager I know that Mitt is the only candidate who understands the complexity of what has to be done to get our country back to capitalism vs. European style Socialism and who understands the economy & can turn it around.

    With as much scorn that conservatives have given Mitt he is not going to go rogue on us. Conservatives get off your high horses and start thinking.
    1) We have got to stop putting Congressmen and Senators in the White House – they have been our worst presidents. The majority have not had enough executive experience to run an enterprise as larges as our republic.

    That leaves us with Mitt. Nominating Perry who makes Bush 43 look like a Rhodes Scholar would give Obama the election in a landslide. , , , Bye Bye Republic!

  • bzip

    You will note Reagan’s position on amnesty in the below video and Rubio’s position on illegals.:

    Marco Rubio: The GOP ‘Cannot Be The Anti-Illegal Immigration Party’
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/05/marco-rubio-anti-illegal-immigration-party_n_996640.html

    “?In 2003, as a member of the Florida state legislature, Rubio also backed legislation — which ultimately failed — to provide in-state tuition rates to some undocumented students”

    Reagan on immigration 2

    http://youtu.be/0_zNR53k5Lg

  • AceInTX

    Conservatism itself will not really die. But it might as well be dead as even conservatives in the heartland of the country stop taking Washington conservatives seriously.

    This has all been set up starting with Romney’s concession speech at CPAC clearing the way for John McCian in the 98 primaries. Romney sold us down the river then.

    I came into this primary with that in mind but hopeful that the tea party movement could actually beat the establishment after the way we stormed the ramparts in 10 but then I watched as McConnell and company engineered a cave during the lame duck session in the Senate giving Harry Reid 10 out of the ten items he was pushing for without a fight…then as they caved on the debt limit by taking this fools deal to cut $1 Trillion or raise taxes $1 Trillion with this Super Committee lest defense be cut by $500 Billion and taxes raised $500 Billion as is McConnel and his ass clowns hadn’t voted it that way to begin with…

    Any damned ignorant fool could see what’s about to befall us when McConnell, Cantor and the rest of the Asshats in leadership cut this debt limit deal…all the Dems have to do is refuse to make a deal, and they get to do what they’ve been able to do since the days of Reagan and that’s gut our military and cut it to the bone…and we handed it to them on a silver platter because these candy asses who call themselves leaders were so scared the big bad media was about to beat them up for a shut down that most of this country was screaming for.

    We’re about to gut the military, raise taxes on the rich, nominate and maybe elect an establishment Rockefeller RINO as our nominee for POTUS and walk back our promise to repeal Obamacare which is opposed by 60% of this country….

    WTF

  • banzaibob

    Erick,

    Pardon me if I refuse to get depressed at this time but the votes have not been cast as of yet. If anything this should act as a wakeup call to all conservatives and we should start to ralley around someone other than Romney.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8lT1o0sDwI

  • unitedwestood

    Shortly after the debate Hannity had Perry on, who explained his position. Then the next night he had Santorum (sp?) on. Santorum was still spewing the same blabber about Texans paying 22-100,000 for these peoples education. Hannity nailed him down on the fact that he too believed they should be educated, but that it shouldn’t cost the people a dime. Sean left it right there. I don’t know why he didn’t clear it up a bit… or if he’s waiting for Perry to do so… but he just kept his mouth shut.

    Also, do you remember here about 3 months ago when Perry had to make the FEDS promise they would actually deport the people from our prison, not just dump them on the closest street corner ( like they did last time). He also demanded the FEDS pay us, I believe it was 3 million for the illegals we pay to keep in our prisons ……NOW, that costs us, the tax payers. I wish Perry would clear this up as well. I live in Texas, he is my gov. and frankly, I have mixed emotions… He’s be nice to have as President, but I do not want to lose him as gov either. Perry is a good man, and Texas is a good state to live in. He’s right about government staying out of our day in and day out lives…. I like that. Taxes here are low and I can compare to at least two other states that I’ve lived in. Example – Missouri and Kansas 6-800 a year to tag my lexus……………..TEXAS – 69.00 Yes, you read that right! Property taxes, here in Texas once you hit retirement age, there is a freeze on your property taxes, so I’m told by my neighbor… I’ve seen that in Kansas or Missouri either one. No State income tax. There are many perks to living in Texas. I hope this helps you to understand our gov a little better. I believe him to be a good man. Please understand, when we sold our business and was looking to move.. we could have went any where in the world… we chose Texas! That say’s something. Have great day!

  • robobbob

    will Romney ever get my vote. I have never skipped an election, so I will vote for a third party candidate.
    America must reverse course now with true conservative values. Without that, a trainwreck is coming. Let that wreck happen under the full banner and endorsement of progressive democrats. It would be complete stupitity to let that wreck destroy the right by letting it happen under a faux republican who is nothing but a dem-lite progressive.
    Will Romney lift a finger to destroy Obamacare? NO
    Will Romney put up the fence on the southern border? NO
    Will Romney extricate us from these foreign intrigues and wars? NO
    Will Romney balance the budget? maybe
    Will Romney make any significant dent in the debt? NO
    Will Romney do anything to end the crony capitalism/big banksterism/fascism/lobbying that is destroying the country? NO
    I see absolutely no reason to vote for Romney.
    Per the cliche, going over the cliff at 30mph creates no different outcome than going over it at 70. The left is in the drivers seat. Unless we’re electing someone who is going to turn the wheel, then let them stay there. Then at least the conservatives may have enough credibility to pick up the pieces in the aftermath.
    Don’t worry if Romney loses, Rove and the establishment will be waiting with faux conservative little Jebby in 2016 to sell us out again.

  • bzip

    Newt:
    A very good summary on: Newt Gingrich – Marital Affairs
    http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/rep_bios.php?rep_id=72471931&category=scandals&id=20110513100912

    also:
    http://youtu.be/8VOzpdat9Lo

    Remember -> Newt: Describes Ryan?s plan as: Rightwing social engineering

    Nancy Pelosi, Newt Gingrich ad About Global Warming
    http://youtu.be/VuBd1atfhQ4

  • ss396

    why do we want to waste Rubio as Veep in 2012?

    Can we survive to 2016 with Romney? Can we survive until 2016 with Obama? If the Republicans in Congress can stall the Federal Agency’s power grabs, Obama will accomplish nothing domistic in a 2nd term, and even a de-fanged USA is still pretty formidable in the international scene.

    Let’s not waste Rubio as a veep in 2012, much less as accompanying a failed candidate. Let’s prepare the ground for the most successful Conservative Presidency in three generations that he could bring to us in 2016.

  • ss396

    why do we want to waste Rubio as Veep in 2012?

    Can we survive to 2016 with Romney? Can we survive until 2016 with Obama? If the Republicans in Congress can stall the Federal Agency’s power grabs, Obama will accomplish nothing domistic in a 2nd term, and even a de-fanged USA is still pretty formidable in the international scene.

    Let’s not waste Rubio as a veep in 2012, much less as accompanying a failed candidate. Let’s prepare the ground for the most successful Conservative Presidency in three generations that he could bring to us in 2016.

  • unitedwestood

    That should have read…. I’ve NOT seen that in Kansas or Missouri either one ( on the property taxes)

  • nathanalbright

    I don’t see too many people in here supporting Huntsman, but there’s no way that any genuine conservative could feel comfortable with Romney. And when you preface your attack on conservatives by insulting Perry’s intelligence and calling opponents of Romney (roughly 3/4 of the entire Republican base) self-righteous, you might want to take the beam out of your own eye before you complain about the specks in the eyes of others, for your own good. Either that or you can learn some fine recipes when the admins start feeding Romney trolls. Your pick.

  • snappy101

    I’m still voting for Rick Perry because If I was governor, I too would do what I had to do to avoid more people on the public dole causing a drain on my state. I’m mostly impressed with what I believe he can do for jobs and energy for this country, something I don’t believe the more articulate others on the debate stage can do. I really do think Perry can put America back to work on expanding our domestic energy policy. I wish he could explain that means all kinds of jobs for all kinds of workers so the American public doesn’t just visualize oil rig jobs. I also know Perry isn’t afraid to veto, something G W Bush was loathe to do when it came to spending and just about anything else. I also don’t understand why he doesn’t talk more about Texas’ BUSINESS relationship with Israel. Did you know there is a Texas-Israel Chamber of Commerce? Why is the focus now “taxes” instead of putting America back to work?

    I’m not voting for the Congress people who have never held an executive position nor have any kind of job history showing that they ever thought they had the capability to run something large. They have ideas but absolutely no history of executing any or dealing with problems resulting from implementing their ideas. And having foster children doesn’t qualify as executive experience.

    I’m not voting for Mitt Romney because who the heck knows what he stands for on anything. he’s changed his position on most issues. By the way, I really think he’s secretly angling to be on Baier’s show closer to the primaries, not avoiding it altogether. Watch, he’ll make a December appearance.

    I’m not voting for Herman Cain who thinks we should pay two taxes and because I know zero about his record of handling big or controversial decisions/problems. Why is it that no interviewer or debate moderator ever asks him when the governors are criticized for their decisions as executives? Also, I’d like to know why he’s changed jobs throughout his career just to fill in more blank spots. This is a non-traditional candidate. Where are the non-traditional questions?

    And I’m certainly not voting for a man who thinks Barack Obama is a “remarkable” leader and proved it by going to work for him.

    The thing is, the other candidates won’t knock out Huntsman because his 2 percent will go to Romney. I don’t know why Romney doesn’t do it himself. And Romney won’t knock out any of the non-Romney candidates before the primaries. As long as they are all in there splitting up the non-Romney vote no one candidate will best his 20 something percent. I believe it’s why he agreed to do so many debates. It keeps the candidates with no money still in the running because they don’t have to pay for the publicity.

  • cfoy65

    I feel Rick Perry still has time to ressurect himself as some of the candidates fall by the wayside due to money in the coming months. If Mitt were to get the nomination, I think Ericks assessment that he would take the consevative movement right down with him is absolutely correct. There is absolutely no excuse for a flip flopping liberal elite RINO to be getting the nomination this year with the political climate we are in. There will be a lot of disheartened people out there that will simply give up on politics, myself included.

    The first time I really paid attention to politics was in the early ninetys after finishing college and getting married. I have had to continually support the Doles and Mc Cains of our party, and quite frankly have just grown tired of doing this. I will not support another RINO, even if it means four more years of Barry. If conservative voters are really concerned about Supreme court nominees then they have a choice to make..either ban together around one anti-Mitt candidate or lose the election. Maybe we should have a separate primary for the candidate that will run against Mitt:)!!

    It takes a lot of effort to stay informed and active in the political process, and if you continually see that effort is for nothing or wasted, or doesn’t matter….why even bother? I am definitely at that breaking point this election cycle.

  • radicalrighty

    .

  • 4suramcan

    uses just plain old common sense with a desire to help America get back on the right path. How much common sense do you see being used these days. Not much. But we had better get back to it and start informing others who are uninformed of whats happening.

  • anjinconsulting

    Well I might have to agree with Erick on the debate point, especially in the first debates. I guess if we were to compare him to Captain Zero, the ?greatest orator in the world? it would be easy to point out they are at least equivocal in that regard. Having said that, it is worth noting that the most accomplished liars speak well and in detail.

    But looking realistically at the subject of immigration as it exists in Texas, one would find it is about as good as it can be given the inaction/ineptitude of the federal government entities responsible for border and immigration control. Texas cannot deport foreigners, nor can it enforce the Texas/Mexico border without the tacit permission of the federal government. Texas does not ?pay for illegal aliens to attend college?; they do require students to pay either in state or out of state tuition based on their residency. I am pretty sure it is currently illegal to require a student to validate his citizenship during the college application process, but they are required to demonstrate residency. IF illegal aliens are attending college as I am sure they are in EVRY state, any tuition assistance they are receiving is likely coming from the federal government. And as Erick so explicitly pointed out, Perry does have a ?record others could only envy?.

    With the exception of Cain, ALL the candidates are career politicians and Cain has a deep desire to become one. It is simply a function of the desire for power and position, and a way to enhance one?s finances. Any aggressive, assertive personality with leadership ability would exhibit those traits in the corporate world so why is it deplorable in politics?

    That impression of ?a poor man?s village idiot? that he espouses sounds like something I would expect to hear in a discussion of the subject by the ?elite media? whatever that is. For the most part, I personally find those folks tiresome and their rationale illogical not to mention arrogant and condescending; an unctuous trait normally exhibited by Ivy League graduates. I suspect that his pessimism for the conservative ideology has suffered from a lack of coffee during his writing.

    It seems to me that Perry/Cain would be a pretty competitive ticket. I would relish an in-your-face, no-holds-barred, politically incorrect campaign in which the blatant hypocrisy of the media and the establishment party structure of BOTH side is forced to engage and defend their behavior.

    Just my opinion…

  • gawken

    if you can be this depressed at 4am…

    And I assume you’re gonna shut down Red State also, after Mitt secures the nomination, as there is obviously no point, right…

    I’d remind you sir, that after the Nov 2008 elections, conservatism and the GOP were pronounced DEAD, FINISHED, BURIED..we were all now progressives, socialists, whatever…anything EXCEPT conservatives.

    And look what happened..what is happening.

    Mitt won’t get the nomination..form one simple reason…he’s never going to get above 25-30% in the polls…heck..he won’t even be able to get a majority in NH..where he’s all but a favorite son. IAnd in the south, SC and FL..he has NO chance. It will soon dawn on most that he has NO chance, and we’ll decide which candidate to back enthusiastically.

    Cain can turn it around, Perry will rebound, and Newt will be the VP candidate for one of them.

    Courage, my friend.

  • bzip

    In my mind it is Perry or we conservatives have lost and might as well just let our country turn into the socialist country that Obama has tried to make it.

    It is about time the conservatives woke up and realized their is only one true consistent conservative running who has the governing experience to get this country back on its feet again.

  • jgge

    to throw down the towel. Perry is the most qualified candidate we have and by far. His record dwarf all the records of the all the other candidates. If we conservatives start supporting him and get behind him then Romney would have no chance of winning the nomination. There is a reason why Romney is still attacking Perry continuously even though Perry is low in the polling. Deep down Romney understands that Perry is by far the biggest threat to him and deep down he knows that Perry can come back very strong and he is not as finished as the polls are saying now.

    Folks, it is time to use reason and get rid of emotions. If you want to disqualify Perry from the nomination because of his stand on in-state tuition for illegal immigration then you are making a huge mistake. If you want to disqualify him because he is not a good debater then you are also making a huge mistake. President do not and must not govern with 30 seconds sound bites and 3 second zinger.
    We still have time, not a single vote has been cast yet, please think hard.
    I am for Perry all the way.

  • 4suramcan

    And wee need to expound to them what they need to understand.

  • ronlsb

    The supreme court really is the ultimate prize and your analysis of an Obama win on the court is spot on. There is one other principled conservative in the race that Eric chooses to ignore for some reason–Michelle Backmann. She doesn’t have the baggage he describes of the others and has indeed been a steadfast conservative who’s done well in the debates.

  • 4suramcan

    spot on. Pass that understanding on to the voters.

  • RebelRoss0587

    http://mittromneycentral.com/2011/11/08/red-state-and-free-republic-double-down-on-their-war-on-romney-and-were-not-gunna-take-it-anymore/

    1. ?Mitt Romney will not go on Special Report with Brett Baier to answer the tough questions as the other candidates have done? ? I assure you Mitt Romney isn?t afraid of ?tough questions?. Mitt has chosen not to reward a program that has been one of the worst offenders of anti-Romney bias just like Mitt has chosen not to reward Jon Stewart with an appearance. This is not to say Mitt will never go on either program, but he has chosen not to go on either program for the time being and he has every right not to. Mitt would get free publicity from either program, so his refusal to go on either program says more about those programs than it does about Mitt.

    2. ?Romney will head in a direction conservatives do not like? ? Based on what? McCain?s opposition research you?ve been reading? Maybe you don?t understand what opposition research is intended to do?

    3. ?Romney refuses to do anything. Until he does something.? ? This waste of space statement speaks for itself.

    4. ?Mitt Romney is not the George W. Bush of 2012 ? he is the Harriet Miers of 2012, only conservative because a few conservative grand pooh-bahs tell us Mitt Romney is conservative and for no other reason.? ? The grand pooh-bahs are not sold on Mitt Romney. They are as scared of Mitt as the left is. If Mitt Romney is elected President, he will not owe anyone but the voters. That is what scares people. As for the Harriet Miers assertion, just ask the people of Massachusetts how conservative Mitt is. Mitt Romney was WAY more conservative than the voters of Massachusetts expected. Just ask anyone who pays attention and has been living in Massachusetts since 2003.

    5. ?Romney, like John McCain before him, will run up the middle to the nomination. But, just like McCain, Romney will not beat Barack Obama.? ? How can you not remember who McCain ?ran up the middle? against? Mitt Romney was the conservative choice in 2008, and the biggest mistake made in 2008 was not coalescing behind Mitt before Super Tuesday. Despite your best efforts to paint Mitt as a moderate, a lot of people know Mitt Romney is a true conservative. Unfortunately for you and your ilk, people can watch the speeches Gov. Romney has given, read his op-eds and books, and make up their own minds.

    6. ?The vote is coming down to a handful of states and Barack Obama still maintains the advantage of incumbency and not terribly terrible polling in those swing states.? = Who has the greatest appeal in those states like Michigan, Nevada, Florida, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Virginia, and New Hampshire? Oh right, Mitt Romney!

    7. ?There is no issue I can find on which Mitt Romney has not taken both sides.? ? Besides Mitt?s well documented conversion to the pro-life cause, what do you have? This is a huge exaggeration that I even the Obama administration would want to tone down for fear of sounding ridiculous.

    8. ?press on him real hard and he?ll take on whatever image you press into him until the next group starts pressing.? ? Not true! Ask the groups who oppose Mitt most vehemently and you?ll find the common thread that Mitt isn?t pandering to them.

    9. ?To beat Barack Obama, a candidate must paint a bold contrast with the Democrats on their policies.? ? I?m guessing you haven?t read this article.

    10. ?Voters may not like Barack Obama, but by the time Obama is done with Romney they will not trust Mitt Romney.? ? Voters like President Obama much more than they trust him. Also, Mitt Romney is an honorable man who deserves our trust and you shouldn?t be doing President Obama?s dirty work for him.

    11. ?Mitt Romney is winning the nomination without conservative help? ? The only problem with that assertion is that it isn?t based in reality. Find me even one poll to back that claim up. I can find you more than ten that disprove it. Mitt Romney has stronger self-identified tea party and conservative support than most of the other candidates in poll after poll and that fact isn?t going to change no matter how many times you lie about it.

    12. ?I?m starting to think I need to walk it back on my rejection of Jon Huntsman. Because I?m starting to think even he would be more faithful in his conservative convictions than Mitt Romney.? ? If this concluding statement doesn?t show everyone who reads it that you have an ulterior motive to see Mitt Romney defeated, I don?t know what will.

  • AceInTX

    Republican’s nominated all of them…Romney will be Nixon all over again…Johnson gave us the great society, the EPA, and the NEA…Nexon solidified them and expanded them…

    Ain’t it great to be a Republican…I feel like the Trix Rabbit or the Lucky Charms Lepricon leprechaun who keeps getting lured in thinking they’ll finally get a taste only to have some sadistic bastard yank it away just before we get it in our mouth

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

    But let us have no doubt about this we HAVE to beat the Republican party as it is currently run. We have to beat them down like dogs. We have to support right wing candidates in every primary, even if they have less of a chance to beat the democrats.

    I am not an ideological purist. I can put up with some Republicans who are not 100% conservative, but NOT if they are part of the east coast old money elite. That is the group who are our true enemies.

    Only once their power is broken can the Republican party be a true alternative to the Democrats.

  • ronlsb

    Well said, Anjin. I’m surprised Eric is throwing in the towel so early in the contest. I’d have expected him to at least go down fighting. In being so harsh on Perry, perhaps he didn’t see his 20 minute interview on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, who is no pansy on his guests. Perry was very impressive and yet I haven’t heard a peep about the interview by the MSM nor conservatives. What gives?

  • pttx333

    ,,

  • 4suramcan

    If we as a nation get GOD back into our daily lives. llChronicles 7;14

  • pttx333

    First and foremost, so glad that you see the inner workings of this great state and what truly goes on here. You have chosen correctly by supporting Perry – I have voted for him each and every time he has run and will continue to do so. No wavering, no wobbling, no back-tracking, he is my choice. He is a good, honest, decent, SMART man who doesn’t speak with a forked tongue.

    Did you read my comments above? There are several that might enlighten you more, and be sure to be the article about Perry’s parents – it is delightful.

    Welcome again, united!

  • nathanalbright

    n/t

  • wacowboy

    that the “debates” were more about the other candidates misrepresenting the Texas law…

  • texanlady

    Romney might beat Obama. The battle will be over the vote of affluent planned parenthood women.

  • pttx333

    hilarious and SPOT ON! Bravo!

  • adamd

    I could not disagree more with Erick. First of all, it is not a forgone conclusion Romney will be the nominee. At this point in 2008 McCain was trailing and Giuliani was the front runner. In 2004 on the Democrat side Dean was leading and Kerry was in single digits. Did anyone believe Obama would beat Hillary at this point in 2008?

    Iowa does not take shape until the last couple weeks before the election day. Romney is topped out at 25%. The conservatives will likely rally around a candidate in the last couple weeks who can stop him, much like they did Huckabee in 2008. It is anyone’s guess who that will be, but I still think Perry with $15mm cash on hand will be the guy. Romney will probably win New Hampshire, but anything short of a landslide victory will be seen as a disappointment. I doubt Romney can win the South Carolina primary, the it is off to Florida and then Super Tuesday which do not favor Romney.

    As for the general, Obama is toast no matter who the nominee is. Look at the Electoral College map. First of all traditional “Red States” will pick up an additional 6 votes. Does anyone really think Obama is going to win NC, IN, VA, FL and OH again? In fact Obama is going to have a tough time defending PA, MI, WI, CO, OR and NH. The economy is a mess and unemployment is at 9% and real unemployment is at 16.2%. Obama will not be reelected.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/08/erick-erickson-romney-will-win-the-nomination-but-lose-to-obama/#ixzz1d7cVJZJf

  • Change Jar Conservative

    will be our next President (and in 2012).

    Having said that, I hope that Cain ends things soon so his followers head elsewhere.

    While I”d prefer Perry’s strong anti-federal government stance, what I’m hearing in the press is how impressive Gingrich has been in Iowa such as during the Reagan dinner.

    If it is true that America is becoming more of a “vote for the best debater” republic then Gingrich would surely be our guy against Obama.

  • nathanalbright

    As a student of political history I am reminded that the Civil War sprang out of a long crisis where an illegitimate majority (the Democratic South, with their willing northern doughface accomplices, ironically enough) held power for decades and made demands and forced Northerners to compromise time and time again against their principles (see 1820, 1850, 1854). After the third compromise, over the Kansas-Nebraska Act, it became political suicide in the North for candidates to kowtow to the corrupt Southern pro-slavery elites, since a candidate who was a compromiser couldn’t win election as the town dog-catcher.

    It was the anger of voters back home that led Northern politicians who (like our RINOs or even genuinely conservative politicians that just want a collegial atmosphere in Washington DC) to develop a spine, which when their electoral majority made itself felt the South was unable to accept defeat and started the American Civil War. On my more pessimistic days I see ourselves approaching the same kind of conflict, with moderates throwing all principles away to make craven surrenders of principles to socialists in order to preserve peace and with even genuine conservatives quailing at the face of a real conflict over principle. If you want politicians to stand up, you have to be aware that there are consequences for it. Right now the base appears willing and able to accept the fight, but we need to have leaders who are willing to fight. Elites who have profited off of the way things are don’t want to face the realities of the cultural war (which, if we are unfortunate, could very well end up as a shooting war), and are willing, like the craven appeasers of the 1930′s, to surrender their principles and the spoils of office rather than face the reality of that conflict.

  • pttx333

    And no one will ever convince me that there was no intentional collusion involved between at least 3-4 of them! They were LYING through their teeth by design – that is a given. Pffft to them!

  • dcarter888

    Did you go watch video or just email me back?

    Are you part of the conservative GOP Base who have not read Article VI?

    Just Curious

  • nathanalbright

    I could really go for some southern fried chicken, maybe with corn flake crust. That would really hit the spot, along with a glass of sweet tea :) . Despite being born in Western Pennsylvania, growing up in Central Florida did allow me to appreciate Southern cooking :B.

  • circlegranch

    He adamantly opposes the Dream Act, he just signed photo ID required to vote law** and no candidate in this race has done ANYTHING close to Gov Perry in securing our longest border with Mexico. Instate tuition for the children of illegals has been media-hyped and spun (including people supposedly on our side of the spectrum) to where people have the false notion that he’s soft on immigration. It’s been written here 100 times but here it is again because apparently, too many have not done their own homework and investigated the facts.

    In a nutshell, go look up Plyler v Doe, which is a Supreme Court decision that ruled against Texas. Then look up how it was that Texas joined a number of other states, many considered conservative such as Oklahoma and Arkansas, when it decided to offer this. It was the business community that lobbied the Texas legislature because they were tired of illegals standing in front of their businesses trying to get day work for cash. They were tired of kids getting into gangs and violence that affected their downtowns as well as their neighborhoods. It was hotly debated. In the end, acting on the will of the people, a large majority of legislators voted in favor of it. Once the bill reached Perry’s desk, it clearly was the overwhelming majority of Texans that, through their legislators, wanted this. As Perry says over and over, Texans, acting as a sovereign state, made a decision to try and turn tax wasters into tax payers. Perry also believes the cost of college for every person is too high and he’s got a proposal that would make a 4 yr degree cost a total of $10,000.

    If you’d take the time to go to the Texas Governor’s website you can learn all about the policies and accomplishments of Gov. Rick Perry. People that have done that usually decide he’s their candidate because he’s the only guy in the race that has real-time achievement in this Recession. People like to complain that he talks too much about Texas but that’s where his acocmplishments are. During a very tough economic climate worldwide, Rick Perry balanced the Texas budget, the 14th largest ecomony in the world. He busted up on trial lawyers by signing some serious tort reforms including Loser Pays and subsequently, physicians raced to move their practices to Texas. Small retailers can no longer be held liable for faulty manufactured goods. Cain talks about being a CEO 15 years ago and nobody seems to ask him to move on past the pizza business and show what he’s done lately. Romney’s experience is not current and Newt’been busy selling books and being a paid contributor on Fox and Hannity’s radio show. No wonder they’re all so relaxed and able to debate–they spend their days practicing instead of having sleeves rolled up trying to work our way out of this quagmire.

    To say Perry ‘lost’ you over immigration shows that you haven’t done your homework, with all due respect. This election is huge. Please take the time to fully vet candidates and encourage everyone to do the same. That includes due diligence in researching records and who has done what and when. Thank you for reconsidering Rick Perry. If you take an hour of your time to visit www.rickperry.org and www.makeamericangreatagain.com you’ll learn alot.

    **Under the required photo ID to vote law, that does not include student photo ID. However, a Texas gun owner photo ID IS accepted at the polling place. Perry is the National Rifle Assoc. endorsed candidate.
    Texas created the environment for jobs and while the US suffered an S&P downgrade, Texas saw their credit standing raised by S&P in ’09 because a favorable ecnomic enviroment currently and anticpated in the future.

    Don’t rely on the media for your information. It’s hard work but you have to do your own research and investigation.

  • geoph

    And “read my lips” H.W. Would have been better?

    Reagan, sadly, capitulated and added Bush to the ticket. Bush was never Conservative, never learned Conservatism under 8 years of Dutch, and began the dismantling of the Reagan agenda. Too bad Quayle didn’t/couldnt challenge him in a primary.

    And while I’m at it, I am soooooo tired of hearing about Perot.
    IF the GOP would have listened to the reasoning as to why he ran (I did bit Bush however) and why he was able to glean enough support nationally – they may have been able to stem the Liberal rise. Perot was the first, most obvious, hint the Dems and GOP were too similar.
    Why do you think we Cons should plug our noses and continue to vote “R”?
    We have seen how that works out for us: our platform is ignored. Clinton might be seen as the best thing that ever happened to the GOP proper. They were able to parlay that into a decade or better of Conservative support for Liberal candidates.

    If the GOP leadership again desires Conservative support, perhaps they need to realize that it no longer comes without forfeiting some of their Liberal tendencies. We don’t care if its a “D” or an “R” in office ruining our Country – we want someone in office who will try and stop the destruction.

  • Marcus_Traianus
  • wacowboy

    What EE said was the truth. That if conservatives don’t come together around Perry or Newt, then Romney is what we’ll get, and he will lose to Obama.

    maybe this is the shock treatment needed to lead some backers of santorum/bachmann/huntsman/etc to consider putting their eggs behind Perry or Newt.

    At least I can hope. Rick Perry 2012!

  • nathanalbright

    ….since all I needed to know was in your text. I’m a bit baffled as to your reference to the Sixth Amendment. Have you ever heard of the First Amendment, which guarantees me the free exercise of my religious beliefs? So when I quote the Bible, which is a nonsectarian document and therefore not a ‘religious test’ (it should be noted, since you appear to have forgotten that, since you don’t appear too wise about Article VI either–you’re probably one of those people who believes in the phony SC “wall of separation”), I’m not violating the constitution.

    On the other hand, by implying that I don’t have a right to paraphrase the Bible in political discourse you are attempting to violate my free exercise to religion. I don’t know about you (or the other good people on this site), but that’s not the kind of conservative I want to be, or the kind of person I recognize as anything remotely approaching a conservative. The fact that you’re a Romney troll only reinforces my point about you (and your chosen candidate) not being conservative enough.

  • buddha1556

    and may God have mercy on your soul.

    “…just ask the people of Massachusetts how conservative Mitt is.”

    I’m not sure they could stifle their vomit long enough to get out, “Romneycare.” Just like everyone else, you’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

    Now give us some examples of how your hero turned MA into a bastion of conservatism or go away.

    Romney has the support of DC and Wall St. Republicans, and the delusional, like you. They typically live in that region of the country. The conservative vote is split among the other candidates, save for Huntsman (moderates) and Paul (libertarians).

    Romney may be POTUS someday, but it will not be based on a conservative platform.

  • nathanalbright

    I meant to say “Article VI” in the first sentence.

    Thanks :B.

  • pttx333

    favorite way is to dip chicken in buttermilk, then roll in some flour, dip again in the buttermilk, and again in the flour – then put it into pre-heated skillet with plenty of canola oil. I like to brown it first on all sides – seals in moistness – then cover and turn heat a tad to continue cooking. Then ya gotta have the milk gravy. Little secret of mine – use evaporated milk diluted about 1/3 with water for the gravy. Scrumptious! Oh, and mashed potatoes with lots of butter and cream. Whoo boy! Artery-clogging good eating there!

  • bornafterreagan

    Is Huntsman more conservative than Romney? Absolutely.

    Is Huntsman more electable that Perry/Cain/Gingrich? Given his impressive resume and moderate appeal and lack of personal baggage, I’d say that looks pretty likely too.

    So there’s a guy more conservative than Romney who’s arguably the most electable guy in the field? He’s cool with me.

  • jaykali

    re: “To beat Barack Obama, a candidate must paint a bold contrast with the Democrats on their policies. When Mitt Romney tries, Barack Obama will be able to show that just the other day Mitt Romney held exactly the opposite position as the one he holds today.”

    1. He will paint a contrast, Romney has a tax plan – where is Obama’s? Romney has a domestic energy plan, etc. etc.
    2. I disagree with the “must” part anyways, this election is a referendum on Obama. Romney has not presided over this failed economy, Obama has. So it’s a phony argument to say only nominating the most ‘conservative’ candidate will lead to victory.

    I agree the general consensus that Romney is a professional politician and isn’t a principled conservative. Was Bill Clinton principled? I think he adapted to his realities and did so quite cunningly. I think you could draw a lot of parallels btwn the 2 and Clinton will go down as one of the most popular presidents of this era.

    The problem is the idea that well since we don’t have any really good candidates we need to just go with the most conservative of the bunch. I would rather go with the candidate that can beat Obama than elect Michelle Bachmann who can’t win anyway. Being principled and letting Obama have 4 more years is not a choice I am willing to make. I want a winner and any Republican is going to be better than Obama for a host of reasons I do not have to rattle off, we all know this to be true.

  • streiff

    than anyone else?

    I find the statement to be mind boggling.

    Alternatively you’d let Romney win because the others don’t meet your standard on immigration.

    My heaven, with people like you on our side we really, really, really deserve to lose.

  • clowngirl

    First off, I’m sure it’s a misprint but Gingrich divorced 2 wives, not three.

    Speaking as a woman — I’m not that concerned with what Newt Gingrich did decades ago. Apparently he’s been faithful to his current wife and seems very fond of her. His staff that quit even complained she was too involved in the campaign — that sounds like a man who has a lot of respect for, and a high opinion of, his wife.

    He says he’s repented — after 20 years or so- I’d say it’s time to forgive him.

    My mom , a Reagan Democrat who hated Newt in the 90s has come around on him this election cycle and has stated that he is the ONLY Republican she’d consider voting for (the first time I’d heard her express the possibility of not voting for Obama )

    Actually the only people I’ve personally heard or seen going on about Newt’s moral failings, and how they make him too fatally damaged despite all his remarkable accomplishments and qualities, are men.

    So it strikes me as silly that you would assume women automatically won’t vote for Newt.

    Ken Buck — who made an unbelievably stupid and sexist statement in the primary ( said he was more qualified ” because I don’t wear high heels” ) was very effectively painted as anti-women and lost an election he should have one and in which a lot of people who voted Republican in every other race voted against Ken Buck. Herman Cain who is treated sexual harassment as though it is a silly, non issue unworthy of his attention and who was said to have made “awkward and inappropriate” remarks — not years, but only weeks ago hasn’t a prayer of winning women or the general election.

    But here’s the crucial distinction: these men both showed disrespect for women *in the present*. Newt reportedly has accountability partners and is very pro-active about staying faithful to his current wife (for whom he has a $500,000 revolving credit at Tiffany’s) He’s said that he has trouble believing that God can forgive him for cheating because he has so much trouble forgiving himself.

    What more do you want?

    There’s no reason to think Gingrich is anything but what he claims — a changed man who has repented and respects his wife very much.

    And I expect most women are primarily concerned with a candidate’s ability and vision. Newt has both. His ideas are compelling. More than any other candidate, he makes a case for being able to turn around our economy. he’s got extensive legislative as well as executive experience which, makes him — I believe – unique in the field.

    He’s the only candidate who comes across as knowing what needs to be done and having the practical knowledge to do it.

    He’s got prior experience with one of the highest offices in the land — got a lot accomplished. Really quite a lot. Made mistakes too — but has had time to reflect on and learn from them.

    Newt’s capacity to learn from his mistakes can be seen even in this campaign. He made an unfortunately phrased remark and was hammered as “undisciplined” and for breaking the 11th commandment. He took a little time to regroup and since then has ran an extremely positive campaign – that honors the 11th commandment more than anybody else.

    And it’s working.

    It’s interesting to see both Cain and Perry supporters liking the idea of Newt as VP. (which actually is the only way I could see Rick Perry winning)

    Speaking of the 11th commandment Erick, is it really necessary for you to be dragging up that old story about the divorce papers? Come on.

  • streiff

    a Romney candidacy will cost us down ticket.

  • PubliusII

    Erick’s prediction of disaster is way premature. As others have said, not even one vote has been cast in the first primary, and this post is already calling the general election a year away. We simply can’t know what will happen between now and then, or where the electorate will be, a year from now.

    I agree that, the way things are now, Romney looks likely to be the nominee. And I agree with everything the post says about Romney’s lack of any principles. And the post is right that none of Romney’s op[ponents will be able to stop him. Reasons:

    1. Cain is self destructing. The new allegations by woman No.4 attach a name, face, and specific actions, dates and times to otherwise vague accusations. She seemed rational and credible on the news. Cain is going down over this.

    2. Newt. Bright, articulate. But he is an organizational disaster, and is thrice married. Plus he is yesterday’s man. Can’t we find somebody who isn’t 70+?

    3. Huntsman. neither a real conservative nor a Republican.

    4. Perry. Not ready for prime time.

    In sum, all of Roney’s opponents fall short. Why not somebody new? I personally prefer somebody whose emphasis is fiscal discipline. How about Ryan or Pawlenty?

  • pttx333

    today!

    Forgot to add to my recipe (of sorts) that it is “so good, it’ll make you slap yore Mama.” Had to throw that in – a dear friend of mine from “Missippi” as she pronounces it, uses that phrase all of the time. It is so funny to hear her.

  • streiff

    if anything Obama has performed very consistently with what he said on the trail. He has failed to move as far left as he and his supporters hoped but his flip flops, like keeping Gitmo open, were positive.

  • macbookben

    down to the bottom of the reply list, and nary a word about Ron Paul. Not even in Eric’s original post. New campaign slogan: No sex scandals, no flip flopping, just bat shite crazy!

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    why we invited you! ;)

    You’re such a downer Erick! Sheesh!

    And yet, your pessimism is rightly placed.

    Four things however –
    1) Many msm papers believe that Romney is the only candidate capable of beating Obama and that he does in fact have a possibility to do so. That most of these papers and writers are naturally in the bag for Obama may be irrelevant if they are actually being honest in their assessments.
    2) You note Huntsman and interestingly, for some odd reason a stat chart at the NYT comparing Obama to the current Republican field put Jon as having the best chances of beating Obama. Either the people setting up the model were playing or the stats see something in Mr. Huntsman that the conservatives/Republican collective does not.
    3) If independents and women can vote for Bill Clinton, they can vote for Newt Gingrich… of course, Bill was “handsome” and a “center-left” Democrat with a sprayed on aura of JFK. Gingrich’s moral bankruptcy has always been in the open, thus, while a failing, there’s no new scandals. If the issue is trust, even though Gingrich has an untrust-worthy history with women, if we’re being pragmatic, he’s more trust-worthy than Romney and even Mr. Cain when you look at the whole plate.
    4) How do the current standings, polls and expectations compare to prior primary lead-ups? According to one article I’d come across, quite often the polling favorite going into the primaries doesn’t always do well in Iowa and New Hampshire, and evidently those two states have trended towards showing who’s going to be the nominee (the nominee typically placing in the top two in both states). Thus, how did McCain’s chances look going into 2008? How did GWB’s in 2000, Dole in 1996, etc? Not once they got the nomination, but prior to Iowa and New Hampshire. To that end, perhaps there is an outside chance that Romney’s lead and assumptive nomination is irrelevant, especially in light of his 25% plateau. Iowa and New Hampshire evidently don’t always go for the top guy apparently.

    Of course, I can see Romney hanging in there through January even if he didn’t get first or second in Iowa or New Hampshire in the hopes of getting South Carolina or Florida, and if he placed at least second there, pushing on.

    For all of his foibles, Gingrich may well be the candidate that conservatives need to rally behind, and hopefully he’ll be the dark-horse candidate to pull the nomination out of the blue as McCain did in 08.

    All that aside however, since Redstate will place pragmatism before principle when push comes to shove from the convention to election day, I fully expect to see Erick and others here falling in line behind Romney if he gets the nomination. Grudgingly so, to be sure, but y’all might as well dust off all your articles from fall 2008, delete McCain and insert Romney.

    I cannot see myself holding my nose for Romney as I did for McCain. My principles mean far more to me than politics, compromise or even the future of this nation.

    If you don’t want conservatism to “die”, you have to be willing to lose, to be okay with losing, to stand firm in your convictions and principles. Yes, winning is important, elections have consequences and the state and future of this nation is important, but at the end of the day, at the end of my life, I’d like to be able to say that my moral and spiritual principles guided my actions and choices in life, even when supporting and voting for people and issues, instead of compromising my values in favor of political pragmatism as if this life, this nation is more important than eternity. If that means not voting for a candidate, for “wasting” my vote, so be it.

    Some of the candidates this go round have been saying they’re running a non-conventional campaign, not playing by the rules. They might lose because of that strategy. I think they have something right though because for far too long the GOP and DNC have shaped the game and told the nation that it’s the only way it can be played. Perhaps conservatives need to go John Galt, come what may, because at the end of the day, if Mitt Romney wins the nomination and loses the election, you’ve allowed the RNC and GOP bigwigs to continue to control and write the narrative which most of you continue to buy into in the name of “winning”, in the name of compromise, in the name of pragmatism, in the name of putting this country first.

    I guess I’m the real party pooper, and I don’t mind it one bit.

  • nathanalbright

    …definitely is artery clogging. I must mention because here in Thailand, where I am, I happen to have some cornflakes but it’s hard to find all of the flour I take for granted in the States. :B. And, sadly, no one here seems to have heard of cheese, because it costs about three to five times what it does in the States.

  • anxious4change

    that Erick would write something that is so hurtful to all of our candidates, knowing this would be picked up by other outlets and that the left is going to run with it. The general election is a year away!! Was this really necessary?

    When a well known conservatives lists all the reasons why none of our ABR candidates can be nominated, or if nominated, beat Obama, you can bet the left is jumping for joy for the gift.

    Thanks Erick.

    It’s election day and today I will vote straight down the republican column. That’s how I give voice to the fact that I think Obama is THE most inept president this country has ever had to suffer through. I know I’m not alone in this opinion. How do you suppose others who feel the same way will “voice” their dissatisfaction come November 2012? You need to give “we the people” a little more credit, Erick.

  • nathanalbright

    That does sound really funny :B.

  • jussmartenuf

    Wonderful news, it means our freedom will be protected from a strangling, overbearing fanatical religious theocracy from the fanatical religious right that would make the Taliban look like school girls.

  • 4suramcan

    common sense, man

  • BA Cyclone

    Perry has ads up in Iowa, but if he wants a serious look from voters he had better spend the rest of the non-debate days between Iowa and South Carolina.

    He only has himself to blame for being at the bottom of the polls today.

  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    It is a sad reality, but the GOP has not been conservative for a long time. What conservatives voted for McCain in the primaries? Do people even know what the word “Conservative” means anymore?

  • bk

     

  • gekster

    (modified)

    Men’s courses will foreshadow certain ends,
    to which, if persevered in, they must lead,
    But if the courses be departed from, the ends will change.
    Say it is thus with what you show me!
    I will live in the Past, the Present, and the Future.
    The Spirits of all Three shall strive within me.
    I will shut out the lessons that they teach.
    Oh, tell me I may sponge away the writing on this stone!

    It is not yet so, until it has been done.

  • pttx333

    what are you doing there? Well, ok, scratch the buttermilk and flour. Here goes (under the circumstances) … crush the cornflakes, but not to a powder – leave some “oomph” there – and use milk (can you get that?) instead of buttermilk (unless they have it – it is preferable).

    Well, how do you like it over there? I assume you are there working – that is interesting. You’ll have to tell me about your adventure as we go along.

  • bk

    I’d have to say a court of Kennedys is preferable to court of Sotomayors. At least they’d get some things right as opposed to getting nothing right.

  • don12345

    I agree with almost everything you said except…

    I don’t think a God that cares about His Shining City on the Hill would allow it to fall. Obama’s current course would make that almost certain. If America falls, the world as we know it would be in almost certain trouble.
    What you need to be asking is why does it seem that Romney who should be losing with 75% of the electorate against him is going to win the nomination, because the only guys who got into the race against him are either adulterers or down right crazy. Every time on of them is ahead of the polls something happens that no one can explain to cause their demise. Watching Romney is like watching Alexander the Great conquering the New World in his pajamas.
    I wouldn’t count out a President Romney, yet. That was the same mistake we all made about Romney a year ago, and look at where we are today.
    Since Romney is impressionable and willing to do whatever his constituents want, let’s just make sure we are his constituents and make a good impression on the future President.

  • geoph

    I await with baited breath, the returns from Ohio today.
    Wisconsin was crucial, Michigan and Minnesota were important, but Ohio can tell us if a Conservative constituency is motivated to overcome a Liberal agenda and attack without the overt counter campaigning and attention to issues that we saw in 2010 and later in the flee-baggers, riots/Protests, recalls and judiciary elections in Wisconsin.

    If Cons are motivated to vote with no other stimuli than a desire to defeat Liberalism, I have confidence when the primary voting begins, Romney will be defeated. The field will narrow, and support will congeal around “not Romney”. Now will that play out Nationally like O’Donnel did locally in Delaware? Who knows, but even if it should (getting back to considering the electoral map for Pres) Conservative efforts could payoff with more Representation in Congress – perhaps even enough to swing Congress to the Right.
    I just don’t see Obama having the coattails to carry any support for Congress. My guess is that a successful 2012-16 hinges on GOP candidates for Congress. If too many RINOs remain, THEN we lost.

  • pttx333

  • nathanalbright

    …I am a missionary teacher of religious history, leadership, and public speaking at a school for hill tribes young adults (mostly Lahu, some Karen refugees, and one Kachin student from Burma) north of Chiang Mai. I do like it over here, though I’m not really fond of spicy food. :B. I’ll definitely have to look for buttermilk, though they do have regular milk at least. :D .

    I happen to be raised in Florida and my “permanent address,” if you will, stateside is in Tampa. I have been in Thailand since May, though.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    That it was decades ago and that he’s genuinely contrite doesn’t matter. It’s unfortunate, but it is what it is.

  • wacowboy

    1. Cain needs to drop out. It just seems that regardless of the truth of it, the story isn’t going away. He can’t win.

    2. Perry needs to convince Newt to drop out and endorse him. Promise him a top position, even the VP if necessary. Newt’s ideas and Perry’s executive experience would make a good team.

    3. lead the other 4 conservatives to see that they need to drop out.

    if only it were that easy.

    in my mind, Perry is the guy to unite around. He’s not without his warts, but he’s the best of the field when it comes to doing what needs to be done to right the ship.

  • http://www.savejersey.com mattdeluca

    This this this x1000000. Regardless of the top of the ticket we MUST work to elect conservatives and try to make some headway there…

  • streiff

    while throwing up in my mouth.

    I should get used to that when reading defenses of Romney

  • don12345

    Newt was cheating on his first wife while she was sick in the hospital and when he came to visit it wasn’t to see how she was doing. He then cheated on his second wife.

    At least the cheating that Cain did wasn’t with a wife that was in the hospital.

  • tngal

    Sidestepping the issue of Erick needing to get laid, all the candidates are still in, with the eception of a few who are waaaay down there. And the children who say, well if so and so is the candidate I’m not going to take part (ahem streiff et al) then I gotta wonder how much they were contributing to the election process anyway. This isn’t one card poker. One card you’re in or your out.

    When we have selected our more preferred conservative candidate, we focus on taking out romney. When that is done we get the attack ads out for Obama. And we have plenty of ammo this year. the ads are writing themselves daily.

    Occupy the USA can be tied to him and his policies, support for them is waning.
    People are not better off than they were years ago
    The Jewish population is beginning to understand his duplicity
    Obamacare
    Overreach on executive powers
    Lack of immigration enforcement
    Penny Ante crap like beer summit, nobel prize, czars, etc

    Geez, that’s a tiny tip of the iceberg. Our oppo on him is going to be waaay more than his oppo on us. We’re not through We’re just stopping for a smoke break and to get some chips.

  • pttx333

    very interesting. I would have made a wild guess that you are a teacher, and I can tell that you are a very good one. Your students are blessed indeed. Are you there for a long while or just this year?

    Thank heavens they at least have milk! Still can’t get over no cheese, though. I would croak without cheese – Mom said that my very first word was cheese. Not Mama or Dada, just cheese. And not long after that it was “cheese, please.” How’s that for unusual?

  • Ausonius

    About a month ago, I wrote a diary on why the odds are NOT in our favor.

    People are hoping that the polls are wrong, and that people do not want to admit that they will support the restrictions placed on public-sector unions by Ohio Senate Bill 5.

    I can tell you that NO TO SENATE BILL 5!!! signs are everywhere: I have recently visited Dayton and Springfirled, and live in Columbus and a “Yes” sign was nowhere to be seen. My wife says that people are intimidated, that the local fire department might not show up at your house if it had a “Yes” sign.

    If the sign phenomenon means anything, if the polls showing a 55% win for the unions are correct, the election will bring defeat today, and it will be a defeat for the reasons listed in my essay.

    The Republicans ran a dreadful, incompetent campaign. If we win, it will be a miracle: I certainly hope we will, but right now it looks bleak.

    See:

    http://www.redstate.com/ausonius/2011/10/09/ohio-republicans-show-america-how-to-lose-in-2012/

  • irishgirl

    Count me as one who is for Perry til the bitter end. And although I know the mantra “vote conservative in the primary, Repub in the general”, I totally agree with Erick as I just don’t think enough people can get excited about Romney enough to betray their principals and vote.

  • streiff

    Stop it. You’re killing me.

  • bzip

    I forgot to also add in the famous Reagan Bush debate on Illegals

    Reagan and Bush Sr. debate illegal immigration

    http://youtu.be/6gYHMwEdvIk

  • streiff

    is creepy. That is all.

  • irishgirl

    n/t

  • nathanalbright

    ….that I was a teacher? That is an unusual first word, I have to agree, but cheese is very tasty, one of my favorite ingredients in food.

  • RebelRoss0587

    Has all the money Erick Erickson has been making over the last three years caused him to want President Obama to be re-elected? He has attacked all of our candidates and given President Obama all the ammo he’ll need. I’m shocked that any conservatives would listen to Erickson anymore after this little stunt.

  • don12345

    Clinton ran as a moderate and compared to all the liberals he ran against was hated for it. Clinton was slick though and spoke very well, so he eventually won.
    I like your analogy of Romney and Clinton excepting one thing, at least with a Romney President we won’t have to worry about a sexual scandal that will make us Republicans look bad. The guy won’t even drink coffee. The closest this guy gets to wine is in food with the alchohol cooked off.

  • windwaker24

    I believe John Edwards’ trial is next year, so this kind of behavior will be front and center in the media. His cheating on dying women will be an issue.

  • nathanalbright

    What’s the deal with all the advertisments on Red State for her book about some freedom-loving elephant? Not being able to read a lot of books on the other side of the Pacific I must say I’m not quite sure what all the fuss is about. Could someone please explain that to me? When I think of Callista Gingrich I think of that elephant in Ellis Island xD.

  • irishgirl

    Perry really doesn’t articulate very well about this stuff. And I’ve also thought that he’s (for whatever reason) thought the rest of the nation just automatically knew the particulars.

  • thescreaminghead

    I don’t care about “getting love,” I care about fruitful discussion, not more comments about colors. I named my blog Purple Truth because I believe both sides have a piece of the truth, not because I’m automatically a moderate on all issues. That’s your ideological stereotype, which is exactly what I’m arguing against.

  • anjinconsulting

    and then rebuilt? Why wouldn’t he permit someone’s “shining city on a hill” to suffer the same fate his own people suffered.

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    I do realize that pragmatism has a part and role in selecting and voting for candidates. I guess I’m focusing on the weight we give to both sides of the scale.

    Politics is not faith, but our faith, morals, values, principles and convictions certainly should be shaping our political views and actions.

    If I’m voting purely on principle in the primary, if Mr. Santorum is still in the race by March, I’d probably vote for him. If I’m weighing pragmatism with my principles, as of now, probably Mr. Gingrich. And if Romney gets the nomination, as it stands right now, I’ll probably vote Constitution Party irrespective of who their irrelevant candidate is.

    For the record, in 2008 for the primary I either voted for Fred Thompson – even though he’d dropped out of the race by then – or Mitt Romney. Surprising, yes, but I was a bit deluded about Romney, and while in theory, principle-wise I should have voted for Huckabee, something about him just didn’t sit with me… I bought the lie that Romney had a change of heart and had “converted” to conservatism. I then placed pragmatism wholly before principles, voting for McCain, accepting the plot that Palin as vp mattered, that winning is everything and that in an AB race, as a conservative you absolutely cannot vote for Obama/Democrat and have to vote so he can’t win. I felt sick to my stomach that I voted for McCain.

    I voted Constitution Party in 04 and Bush in 00. Had I voted in 96, I probably would have voted for Keyes in the primary (NY at the time), but I’m unsure if I would have voted for Dole or a third party in the general.

    There is a part of me that wonders if we as a nation don’t already have the president we deserve in Mr. Obama?

    The United States needs restoration. A real, genuine one. I suspect that the only way it’s going to happen is after we’ve reached rock bottom. I don’t believe we’ve reached that point yet.

    This nation needs a proverbial King David, Solomon, Hezekiah or Josiah. Instead we’ve been getting a whole bunch of Ahabs and Mannasehs. Perhaps we’re at the point of a Jehoiakim or Jehoiachin and it’s not time for Zerrubabel to appear on the scene.

  • don12345

    Newt’s poor third wife has to spend more than $100k at tiffany’s because she’s so worried that he will look elsewhere. If all we had to choose from were adulterers and murderers than Newt’s sins wouldn’t matter as much, but we don’t and we will never vote for an adulterer when there are real candidates to choose from. Adulterers are what get elected on Democratic tickets. So your mom’s a Democrat and can vote for Newt? So what. We Republicans vote for real men of character, while Democrats just vote for politicians.

  • timmycrw91

    One, you quit on us already. Two, you’re helping the enemy (democrats, establishment republicans, take your pick) with this drivel. Did 2010 mean anything to you? Is this about the recent Cain nonsense, as though there’s no one but Cain? Nominating Romney is not like conservatism shooting itself in the foot. It’s like conservatism shotgunning its head clean off. Your efforts need to be about distancing us away from the Romneys and letting establishment republicans know they are America’s enemy too, and will pay the price at the polls in 2012, whether it’s Cain, Newt, Bachmann, or Perry. So man-up Erick, and start fighting the good fight again buddy. It’s gut-check time.

  • Wes_W

    Funny stuff. Thank you for the laugh.

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    that Mr. Erickson’s piece is a huge slap.

    However, that said, at the same time it could perhaps wake up conservatives. The left and msm are going to jump for joy any time a “negative” intra-”party” article from someone prominent is written, and ham it up. Of course, we do similarly to “them”.

    Reverse psychology and all that jazz…

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    , but of course, most of the opinionaters and leadership of the right will say it’s not possible, not good or not time, whether it’s right after a presidential election or all the way up to a presidential election.

    In other words, for quite some time, it’s never been the right time to shake up the party and stop playing by their games. There’s always some excuse why we have to keep playing the game and stay within the party/system.

    And so, we get GH Bush, Dole, GW Bush, McCain and Romney.

  • dalehogue

    What proof do you have that Newt cheated on his wife? Get it out there so we can all see what you have to offer in the way of factual evidence. Until you do so, then your snarky comments are just that “snarkey comments”.

    What proof do those Romney haters have that Mitt Romney is not a conservative. Get this information out there so everyone can see it and evaluate it.

    What proof do those who claim that Cain made sexual advances toward them some ten, twenty or thirty years ago? Get this information out there so everybody can see it and evaluate it.

    It appears to most everybody who reads your posts that you are a Democratic Party Mole who makes claims you can’t possibley prove. I don’t have don’t have to prove my statement about you, if you don’t have to prove your statements about Romney or Newt.

  • tailfins1959

    Don’t let odds of winning be the motivation. Make what’s right be the motivation. Work with what you have. The conservative movement deserves to die if it is so racist that it jettisons Perry for a long term strategy to keep the Latino vote competitive. If someone can visit Latino media outlets, get Latinos to register and vote in GOP primaries for Rick Perry, he will win the nomination. Has Perry ever given a presentation in Spanish?

  • notpropagandized

    An erstwhile conservative, now sellout.

  • ladydoc

    . . .(~$1 million/day) is just NOT going to be a priority for that many women. Some affluent women? Sure, some. But most for whom a pro-abortion-choice position is an absolute requirement aren’t going to trust Romney any more than they’d trust Perry, Cain, Gingrich or any of the other Republicans (excepting Johnson who says he’s not pro-life).

    While pro-lifers have good reason for anxiety over how pro-life Romney really is, pro-choicers know very well that they can have complete confidence in Obama to support and promote abortion at every possible juncture, both domestically and internationally through the corrupted use of foreign aid to many parts of the developing world.

  • johnt

    In a blazing piece by the intrepid NY Times, it is recounted by a stunned passenger that Romney wasn’t very talkative when he sat next to her. A column in fact. Big news !! Idiots across the country reported to be alarmed.
    By the time the media is done with Romney they’ll have Obama looking like God come down from heaven. They will pick off any and all GOP candidates one by one.

  • msjallen

    NO Mitt. What is wrong with the GOP that they can’t seem to get it right for our country!!!! Romney, in my opinion is DANGEROUS

  • Ausonius

    He has been stuck at the c. 25% level for a year, and it has not budged much at all.

    I believe Mr. Erickson is attempting to galvanize the opposition to Romney by showing what will happen with a Romney candidacy. He is not presenting a present to MAObama nor quitting early.

    It is quite possible that by February nothing will be clear about a nominee, and that a candidate as yet unknown may start to be the focus.

    DeMint? McCotter? Rubio? Steve Wynn? Who knows?

  • pttx333

    your life experience (given your young age – you may not think you are, but it is true), your interests, style of writing, even the fact that you were so interested in politics as a little boy. You have too much knowledge to not share it. And what better way to share than to impart that knowledge to others. How’s that?

  • wxguy

    EE… you’re “conservatism dies” comments aside (I happen to disagree with those)… I will vote for a ham sandwich over Barack Obama.

    All of the current crop of Republicans are ham sandwiches… Romney just has the crust trimmed off, served with Grey Poupon and a slice brie on the side.

    Not the way I like my ham sandwiches… but, if that’s all I can get, I’ll take it… over the arugula-chomping Food Stamp King.

  • tnguy

    I agree on Perry.

    Erick is 100% dead on with Perry and what went wrong, except I think he overstates the impact of the debates. Very few people saw the debates, and few give much credence to the beltway repulicans criticism of him in them.

    What hurt (and still does hurt) Perry is his inability to communicate what his view of illegal immigration and immigrants is, going forward. It’s as if he and his team missed the gigantic grassroots uprising re: immigration during the Bush administration. How he and his team failed to understand and be prepared to articulately respond to us on this issue mystifies me almost as much as Cain botching the sexual harrassment claims, when he had to know this was going to surface eventually.

    That is the one singular thing that has truly hurt Perry’s campaign, and the wound might be mortal. His economic/tax plan was a huge step in getting his campaign moving again, but IMO, the best thing he could do is release a plan for dealing with illegal immigration that conservatives can get on board with. It is their biggest concern with him, not his debate issues.

    At the same time, I don’t want him to do something for political expediency. If that means he has a position I disagree with, so be it. If he basically has the same position on it that George Bush did, he might as well close up shop today, but I’d rather him do that than fabricate a position that will try to appeal to everyone, ala Romney.

  • acat

    Depending on what poll you look at, they’re #2 and #3 … and together they dwarf Mittens.

    Why not?

    Mew

  • streiff

    ads aren’t sold by this site. They are sold by Eagle Publishing. We can object to ads… and we have a couple of times… but we aren’t in the ad selling business.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I could really get behind this.

  • windwaker24

    If you say so, dude. :)

  • http://theusreport.com KBDay

    What Erick has said here Democrats already know. Why do you think the press has gone so easy on Romney?

    The same thing happened when Reagan opposed Ford for the GOP nomination in 1976. Republican power brokers pushed Ford, painting Reagan as a scary conserv. Major newspapers dissed Reagan, aligning with the GOP power brokers. And of course we lost, with Carter muddling around the White House for the next 4 years. GOP missed the fact those major newspapers wanted Ford to win because he was the easier candidate to take down in the General.

    When Reagan tried again, he succeeded despite major newspapers grousing about “skeletons” in his closet and painting him at times as an extreme rightwinger.

    There is a groundswell of anger right now among Main St. conservs. And there is an awareness that yes, many of us may loyally vote Republican no matter who the nominee is, but our hearts will not be in the fight.

    I will not repeat 2008. The McCain fiasco took it all out of me. And for those of us who remember Dole and Saint George, (41) well, we’ve pretty much had it with anointing a candidate.

    As an aside (I haven’t endorsed a candidate yet though I will do so this week), it’s useful to point out Perry has amazing abilities but if he cannot communicate those abilities in a debate, we will lose

    Hello? Nixon-JFK?

    Debate is a keystone in governing. How else does an elected official persuade the opposition?

    As another aside, every time I see someone mention Gingrich’s climate change ad, I’m amused. Gingrich more than earned redemption when he bested Henry Waxman during Energy and Commerce hearings in April, 2009. Media just couldn’t be bothered to tell you about that. Most of us assumed progressives would succeed with Cap and Trade–the whole energy industry was gearing up for it. Gingrich, even then, had a mix of solutions for energy.

    Perry has a solid foundation in the energy sector and he has actually been solid on most aspects of immigration.

    Both Perry and Gingrich are Tenthers and that is the wall we can erect between ourselves and the central powers.

    Baggage is the least concern–look who we’re running against. I predict he will have some new baggage come out ahead of November, 2012. Besides, this president has broken more laws than any prez I can recall. If we can’t do opposition campaiging on the Obama disaster, we deserve to lose.

    There’s an obvious solution. Conservs must decide on a candidate and get behind him. Only if there is a convergence within the Not-Mitt sector can the primary outcome be changed.

    Otherwise, although I don’t always agree with Erick on every issue, on this matter I am in complete agreement. He pegged this deal.

  • acat

    which is great – but be aware that just because you think a given blue truth is wonderful doesn’t mean others will agree….

    And that’s really the problem here. It’s very hard to build an alliance around a cafeteria plan. Much more likely to end in a food fight.

    Mew

  • gekster

    Can you tell me what you know as far as Perrys stand on immigrtation is.
    This is a legit, and not a gotcha question.

  • tailfins1959

    This country has taken such a beating with Obama in charge. Let’s hope a majority of those who go to the trouble to vote won’t come back for more. Given that most people aren’t masochists, I still think B-HO won’t be re-elected.

  • rickperryreport

    That was Newt’s first wife who was “dying” in the hospital. The tumor was benign. But Newt still went on to the next woman.

    I agree with Erickson. Newt will have an extremely hard time winning the women vote. His Tiggany credit line ($500k) isn’t high enough to buy ‘em all something special.

    And I like Newt, too. So hold your fire!

  • jabajax44

    First, Newt. My parents helped to elect him during his first three races for Congress. I have a pic of my dad with him and a half dozen other campaign workers. After the 1980 divorce, my parents never helped him again but did support him politically. If he was still single, he’d have a huge problem, but his current marriage seems strong. At least he doesn’t smoke, or lie.
    Romney picking Rubio for VP would be huge. Maybe Romney would be a moderate or maybe he has been a moderate while living in MA because that’s the only way he could get elected up there, and the MA legislature was 85% Democrat, enough to override vetoes. But…did you see his speech yesterday to the TX tea party and AFP? His platform is definitely conservative, even though he phrases it in moderate tones for the independents. Reagan did this very thing also. As much as I loved Barry Goldwater, he needed a few speaking lessons from Reagan.

  • rickperryreport

    That was Newt’s first wife who was “dying” in the hospital. The tumor was benign. But Newt still went on to the next woman.

    I agree with Erickson. Newt will have an extremely hard time winning the women vote. His Tiffany credit line ($500k) isn’t high enough to buy ‘em all something special.

    And I like Newt, too. So hold your fire!

  • acat

    Depending on what State txchick57 is in, this isn’t necessarily as crazy as it sounds….

    If she’s in Texas, it’s bughouse nuts.

    Mew

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    Paul ’12 – If you hate da Joos, vote for me!

    He may or may not be an actual anti-semite, but he certainly does seem to attract more than his fair share of anti-semites… along with conspiracists.

    Or…

    Paul ’12 – Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you are…

    Hey folks, that’s the common perception of the man. If Mr. Paul wants to be a credible candidate, he needs to confront these two major detractions to his brand.

  • goat

    I think little Erick is mad that Mitt won’t sit down for an interview with him..

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    Lol!

  • texasroots

    Huntsman was a successful governor like Perry. I would prefer Huntsman over Gingrich or any of the other candidates. I do not trust Newt. Mr. Huntsman seems to be for real, and has a lovely family. We do not want Newt’s baggage and Mitt is too uppity.

  • rickperryreport

    He’s yelling a warning over the transom. If the conservative movement splits over the not-Romney candidates, Romney wins. If Romney wins, we all lose.

    How’s that for a 3 sentence summary of the Erickson op ed?

  • red_oakster

    It’s not going to play with social conservative voters in Iowa. And there will end the campaign of Newt.

  • wacowboy

    in numerous interviews over the last two months. THe problem is that very few have bothered to listen because they fell prey to the demagoguery which took place in the “debates”.

    Here’s an example, from a recent Fox News Sunday.

    (hope the embed works…)

  • rickperryreport

    You are spot on. But many “conservatives” are too busy wasting bandwidth defending sexual harassment charges and maligning women. Misogyny is not the path to victory, Cain supporters.

  • pttx333

    comments I made today regarding Perry’s stance on immigration. The first outlines the immigration issue in Texas, the second regards the reasons for his inabiiity to explain issues in previous debates:

    (1) Texas has a 1,200 mile border with Mexico with only the Rio Grande River separating the two. As for a fence, how would it be built? In the middle of the river? Next to impossible given the moutainous terrain of parts of it and the very unfriendly terrain of a lot of it. On either the Mexico side or the American side? Either way you go, one of the countries would lose access to the water from the river which, for the most part, is depended on by the ranchers, etc., in some of the desert areas. So, then there would be a big battle over water. The cost of such? God only knows. How long it would take to build it? God only knows.
    Perry has fought with Obama/D.C. for several years over sending help to our border to help secure it. Not a word from them. B.O. did fly over El Paso or somewhere and said it looked fine to him. What a crock! A governor?s hands are more or less tied in this issue in that it comes under the feds? governance. And you know what kind of help we get there! No help even with the horrible wildfires we have experienced ? once again, nada. Our punishment because we didn?t vote for the monster-in-chief, doncha know.
    In-state tuition: It has been reported all over the place that the children of illegals can get up to $100K for college, and in others reports ?lots of $$? ? all baloney. What happened is that our legislature voted 177-4 to allow children of illegals to get in-state tuition rates (NO MONEY) IF they attend Texas schools here for three years, graduate from high school, have a citizenship plan in place, THEN they get to go to college if they can pay the in-state tuition rates on their own. We do not assist them. The reasoning is that it is better to have them educated so they can become legal taxpayers into the U.S. economy, along with the Texas economy. The Federal government mandates that all states educate their children grades K-12, so in every state they are given a free education. Isn?t that just great?
    As for deporting all of the millions? How on earth does that happen? Do you line up thousands upon thousands of buses to transport them, do you round them up by horseback, or do fly helicopters to round ?em up that way? What on earth would all of that cost? The more practical thing is to have laws in place with strict restrictions/fines on those who employ illegals, no more freebies/entitlements, etc., and they will self-deport if there are no jobs. Now, there is no one more strongly opposed to illegal immigration than me, but this has been going on for decades and decades with no one doing anything about it.
    Perry is NOT soft on illegal immigration at all. If he is our next President, there will be many, many changes along those lines. He WILL secure our borders.

    (2)To begin, there is no way that Perry (or anyone else) can explain much of anything during those 30-second or so sound bites allowed during those silly debates! Particularly with Perry, from the moment he steps on stage, all of the others have attacked him viciously and untruthfully (by some) so he was having to defend himself in all sorts of directions. There is no way to explain all of the things I wrote in a very short amount of time ? especially when you are interrupted or aren?t even called upon to speak.
    Perry now has numerous interview videos out there, some have been here, some are on CNN, youtube, Fox News ? I?m pretty sure. There are other sites to go to: rickperryreport and rickperry.org. I believe those are accurate. At any rate, you can find them. He truly is a great and strong speaker, firm in his beliefs, never waffling and certainly no lies from him ? ever. And I have supported him faithfully for years.

  • jakeofalltrades

    rather than marching conservatism, the TEA party, and the nation of a cliff.

  • Lesstressrx

    I read this several times and I kept thinking this couldn?t possibly happen, but without conservatives coming together on a person that they could support, this article is so right on it is down right scary. DO WE WANT 4 MORE YEARS OF OBAMA??? Everyone of us had better ask ourselves how bad we want to rid America of Obama. If you think this couldn?t happen you are so wrong. I feel it. I know it could happen. The established republicans are like the unions, They are strong in number, power and money. They can pick our candidate as they did with McCain. If you don?t think so, just open your eyes and see who are making the rules in Washington. It isn?t the conservatives.
    Everyone of us better do some serious thinking and support one of the candidates that isn?t Romney. We better come together fast or we will have 4 more years of Obama.
    We can then kiss our freedoms goodbye. We have no candidate that is perfect. Get over it. We conservatives better get off our high and mighty selves and make some quick changes. God help us, I?m not sure we will.
    For those of you that think God will not allow America to fail, better think again. We already have Obama because people didn’t make good choices in 2008. God didn’t stop that. We were given all the right information before Obama was elected and the majority chose to ignore it. Don’t kid yourselves, it could happen again. I am amazed at the people in this blog that are still condemning Newt for his past transgressions. Trashing Perry and all the others. Even some still supporting Mitt. You have just made Eric?s point beautifully.

  • macbookben

    I would have gotten the metaphor. Sadly, I can quote only The Lord’s Prayer, The Apostle’s Creed, and John 3:16 from memory. Forgive me, but I’m a Cathodist. More churching, less blogging. That’ll do it.

  • wacowboy

    nt

  • anjinconsulting

    I am not convinced that the “conservative” movement will split over Romney. I tend to think the “conservative movement” will reject Romney. I think the MSM wants the “conservative movement” to believe they are divided, and the GOP establishment is only happy to go along with that narrative.

  • haumea

    Rules go out the window.

    Gingrich isn’t merely “best debater” – he’s best COMMUNICATOR, highest IQ guy.

    It’s going to take someone like that to make the case to the America people – both to get elected and enact the reforms.

    Perry can’t get it done. Cain isn’t a serious candidate.

    Elect Newt and keep the pressure on.

  • haumea

    …rules go out the window.

    Gingrich isn’t merely “best debater” – he’s best COMMUNICATOR, highest IQ guy.

    It’s going to take someone like that to make the case to the America people – both to get elected and enact the reforms.

    Perry can’t get it done. Cain isn’t a serious candidate.

    Elect Newt and keep the pressure on.

  • bzip

    The Tea Party and a certain fraction of the conservative base are too busy trying to nominate the perfect Idol. It makes me sick to watch this happening to the conservative base.

    Oh, no we couldn’t get behind the person who has the most experience in governing, has the most consistent conservative record ….oh no we have to pick someone without any experience, who has more gaffes than Biden (I didn’t think that was possible).

    What a joke this is turning intpo and Cain is running the GOP into the most embarrassing party in decades.

  • jakeofalltrades

    n/t

  • pttx333

    You did very well to condense what he wrote into a mere three sentences!

  • thirstyboots

    This:

    ?So if the Presidential Preference Primary in Georgia were tomorrow, I?d vote for Mitt. Sure, he has waffled on social issues ? but I think that highlights his pragmatic approach to politics. He was never going to get elected as a pro-life candidate in Massachusetts and he knew it. I won?t fault him. I think, if he gets elected based on conservative support, he won?t betray that support in office.?

    ???????????????

    ?Giluiani had leadership. Romney had conservatism. Make no mistake about that.

    The people who want a conservative have found their man, it seems. Mitt Romney was pitch perfect and willing to talk social issues ? something totally missing from Giuliani?s speech. And people noticed.

    I have to say that it was a tremendous speech. I actually could not listen to all of Rudy?s, but Mitt?s was great.?

    ?????????????????

    ?Mitt was followed by Ann Coulter who put the red meat conservative seal of approval on him. It was an excellent speech that should resolve all fears conservatives have about Romney.

    The race is on ? it?s now between Rudy and Mitt. McCain is a non-starter.?

    ————–

    And a lot more like this. Just google it folks. Flip-flopping? Heh.

    Plus, if there is no good alternative to Romney – which is unfortunate to me, as, unlike Mr. Erickson, I’ve always disliked Romney and just 4 years ago I had 6 candidates that I’d support over Romney – Fred Thompson, Sam Brownback, Duncan Hunter, Giuliani, Tommy Thompson and John McCain. All those were better than Romney. Now? Not a single one.

    The largest blame resides on “identity conservatives” who were too quick to coalesce around a very mediocre politician like Perry, a machine hack in the uber-red Texas, a state that hasnt’ elected a statewide Dem in 20 years, sucking the oxygen out of the room and scaring other conservatives from entering the race – and scaring the only reasonable Romney alternative, Tim Pawlenty, out of it. As I’ve always said, this field was extremely weak and Romney, who I hate, would end up being the only acceptable nominee. He is. He’s an A-lister amongst C and D listers.

  • sunshinek67

    :D

  • texasroots

    Could it be because Erick is a CNN contributor? Media wants all the candidates only Obama left standing…get the picture? One by one republican candidates are dissected, chewed and spit out. Fox News is coming out with all kinds of “gotcha segments” for the candidates, yank them here, there, everywhere but on the ground campaigning.

  • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

    earlier and then Newt and his wife announced the decision to her and her sister. before they left Fairfax, VA in 1980 to return to GA. Then the wife went into the hospital in GA.

    My mother and I have both recently run into quite a few people who hold an inaccurate understanding of this hospital visit. Many think my mother is dead.

    So, to correct the record, here is what happened: My mother, Jackie Battley Gingrich, is very much alive, and often spends time with my family. I am lucky to have such a “Miracle Mom,” as I titled her in a column this week.

    As for my parents’ divorce, I can remember when they told me.

    It was the spring of 1980.

    I was 13 years old, and we were about to leave Fairfax, Va., and drive to Carrollton, Ga., for the summer. My parents told my sister and me that they were getting a divorce as our family of four sat around the kitchen table of our ranch home.

    Soon afterward, my mom, sister and I got into our light-blue Chevrolet Impala and drove back to Carrollton.

    Later that summer, Mom went to Emory University Hospital in Atlanta for surgery to remove a tumor. While she was there, Dad took my sister and me to see her.

    It is this visit that has turned into the infamous hospital visit about which many untruths have been told. I won’t repeat them. You can look them up online if you are interested in untruths. But here’s what happened:

    My mother and father were already in the process of getting a divorce, which she requested.

    Dad took my sister and me to the hospital to see our mother.

    She had undergone surgery the day before to remove a tumor.

    The tumor was benign.

    Read the entire account here:

    http://www.creators.com/conservative/jackie-gingrich-cushman/setting-the-record-straight.html

    Thank you.

    ColdWarrior

  • texasroots

    meant to say “media wants all the candidates out so only Obama is left standing”

  • gekster

    Not when they are that blantantly idiotic.

    (I am not a mod, but I see no problem with a response)

  • lesueur8

    It is far from over. Perry still has a chance, although he really has not been too impressive. Here is hoping he can turn around. Having said that, pundits like Erick contribute to the potential of 4 more years of Obama. Erick, seriously, you remind me of my teenage daughter when she doesn’t get her way. Your attitude of “If Mitt wins the the GOP we will all lose”, is really sad. I have lost respect for you. You may not think so, but you will contribute to a GOP loss with your lack of leadership. If you help even a small percentage of the GOP population to stay home and not vote, we will assuredly have Obama for another 4 years. Hopefully, you will get past your anger and engage in defeating Obama. You seem to prefer an outcome that has Obama beating Mitt so you can say “see, I told you so”.

    I am extremely disappointed in your position. As with many of your followers, I hope you can rethink your position and rally behind whomever wins the nomination. Seriously, it is time to show real leadership and rally our party. Pouting, of any kind, reminds me of what I dislike so much with the Democrats. Let’s not be them.

    It is time to band together and defeat Obama.

  • Common_Cents

    Yes, the left wing media will make a big splash with it, but it’ll fall on largely deaf ears. Why? Our country is on fire, people want confidence and common sense solutions. Old baggage is not going to rank that high when people are out of work.

    It’ll hurt Gingrich more in the R nomination, but less so in the general if he were to get the nod.

    There are millions of new voters who are new to Gingrich. They don’t give a rip about his past 20-30 yrs. I’m hearing it daily.

    Plus, Gingrich is the only R candidate that can unite all R camps. Nearly every R camp has indicated Gingrich as a 2nd choice. There would be little or no bad blood going into the general. This could not be said for Romney, Cain, or Perry.

    Most any other candidate would be eaten up by the gotcha media. Newt has already laid down the gauntlet and NOBODY in the media will take him on face to face. Obama will NOT take him on face to face in Lincoln Douglas debates.

  • jaykali

    We don’t have a great field, let’s face it. Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan are on the sidelines. For those of us that like Chris Christie’s leadership skills, even tho he is too a moderate on some things, we don’t have him either.

    We have Bachmann and Perry and Cain and Gingrich. We have learned to love each for short spans of time but we know all of them have a lot of flaws and not just flaws in their character, but flaws as a legitimate contender for the presidency. That is the one thing I think is difficult to argue against Romney. Romney’s issues are with conservatives. We all know that everyone on these boards are going to vote AGAINST Obama this time around. Conservatives are mad like hell and they are going to vote for the Republican candidate. No matter what. We voted for McCain. And conservatives are MORE motivated not less this time around.

    Romney is not a Tea-party guy they can paint as extreme to get the liberal base motivated. Everyone on the liberal side of things knows he is the most formidable. Yes he has problems. But as a campaigner he has proven to be very good and has a bunch of money and has been doing this for like 5 years or maybe his whole life. He is believable and that is very important. If I can’t have my Rubio, etc I am not going to settle for a checklist conservative that can’t win. I want the best Republican that can win. Romney is not going to have Cap and Trade on his agenda, period. He is not going to shut down oil rigs. He is not going to be in the tank for big labor. So stop telling me he’s going to be /just like/ Obama. That is an immature argument. We need to have priorities and the #1 priority above all else is unseating Obama with a Republican candidate, period.

  • thescreaminghead

    Well, if you like to eat in cafeterias, that’s fine. I much prefer the company of those who like to eat in cafes.

    What I mean is – yeah, you throw together a bunch of crap on a low level, like combining Cain’s plan with Obama’s EOs, you get cafeteria food.

    You are a cat. You eat cat food, so I guess I can’t blame ya for seeing my opinion as “blue truth.”

    I was thinking more along the lines of tweaking Huntsman with Romney. Cafe cuisine.

  • wacowboy

    and think it’s part of Perry’s road to the nomination

  • bjames

    And I don’t say that with any satisfaction – lies, distorted truths, etc. that have been out there that long, a thrice married Newt will have a tough time acquitting himself of that accusal.

    That said, I’m not sure Erick’s statement that Newt won’t win women will have anything to do with his past. Many women still love Slick Willy, despite the fact he couldn’t be a more unfaithful husband and a louse. The women who love Bubba overlook his faults because he protected their right to kill the babies in the womb. We will never get those voters, so there’s no use in worrying about them. I actually think Newt would garner more women voters than any of the other GOP nominees this side of Romney because women respect confident men, and Newt may be the most confident guy on any debate stage. (Romney gets honorable mention here and is aided by his, shall we say, historical flexibility on abortion.)

    Cain’s problem is the number of women casting allegations, compounded by his inability to diffuse the problem. If it were me, I would voluntarily submit to a polygraph test, make the results public and tell these women to stuff it (that is to say, if he were innocent – of which I’m not convinced).

    I mostly agree with you on Romney. His RINO-ism is somewhat overblown considering Rush gave him his conservative imprimatur 4 years ago. Erick makes a good point that he’s the only guy who won’t even appear on Special Report, which is annoying. People are ready for a straight talker and someone ready to take on all comers, but his campaign so far has been nothing if not calculating and risk-averse in the extreme. Whether he’s attacking Perry on SS (or addressing serious entitlement reform at all) or hedging on health care issues, it’s really bothering that he won’t get out in front of any issues of the day. Paul Ryan he is not.

  • tyman

    NT

  • clowngirl

    Granted, it’s not scientific but the question was “does Newt deserve a second look?” and 76% said yes.

    That’s enough that he could conceivably win the primary — and Independents and Democrats are likely to be less concerned about it.

    I agree that is would, of course, be better if Newt had never cheated — but I’d hardly describe him as a pathetic candidate. Other than the baggage, he’s excellent!

  • red_oakster

    The campaign hasn’t gone far. We haven’t seen whether there is going to be a serious challenger to Romney. Romney may lose a bunch of the early contests against what is a motley crew of opponents. So you can have a situation where Romney is losing steam and no one else is winning.

    Most important, trying to prognosticate election results a year away is silly. If the American people are ready to fire Obama next fall, Romney will do just fine (as would every other current GOP candidate with the possible exception of Ron Paul).

    So Romney could win. Most important, assuming the Republicans win the Senate, the two most important figures in US economic policy are going to be Paul Ryan and Jeff Sessions, the two chairmen of the Budget committees. Do you think for a second that Romney will veto anything these two men pass through reconciliation? Both are committed to serious reform.

    Erick’s analysis, whether it was TARP or the debt ceiling or 2012, has repeatedly confused an unwillingness of many conservatives to roll the dice in the midst of a crisis with an unwillingness to fight for conservative principles. People like Ryan and Cantor refuse to take what they consider to be reckless gambles in a crisis. But outside of a crisis, it’s the RINOs who are now a minority as people like Ryan and Cantor will be able to deliver a majority for entitlement reform and debt and tax reduction through budget reconciliation.

    For these and other reasons, I say hold the lamentations and do what you can to keep Romney from winning the nomination. And to repeat a point I’ve made repeatedly already, this is a year in which it’s quite possible that no candidate will get more than 50% of the delegates locked up before the convention. And that means a brokered convention at which more possibilities than the current field of candidates would be available.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    Gingrich will have to find a way to get enough support in the Primary, but it won’t get a lot of play in the General, especially against Obama.

  • mrmises

    Hunstman is the best choice. His qualifications are impeccable. His stance on the issues that matter right now (the economy and foreign policy) are conservative and coherent. Also, he is the most electable.

    Nate Silver, the economist/political guru of the fivethirtyeight blog, predicts that Romney and Huntsman are the only Republican candidates who would defeat Obama in a general election. (Silver’s model predicted 49 of 50 states correctly in the last presidential election, so his prognostications deserve deference).

    This is a center right country. However, general election voters and Republican primary voters in states that aren’t deep red can be scared away from their principles when a candidate speaks only to the far right. The same holds when a candidate’s platform is based on a single issue that will not realistically pass (e.g., 999, flat tax, disbanding the 9th Cir.). Those ideas are bold and appeal to some conservatives, but the country as a whole recognizes that such proposals are election props rather than visions for governing.

    Hunstman and Romney, more than the other candidates, present themselves as capable of nuance and realistic about what needs to be done to fix the country now. Unfortunately, Romney has lost credibility because of his inconsistency. Hunstman was an outstanding governor without a record he can embrace rather than run from.

    Finally, I would like to address Mr. Erikson’s prior complaints about Hunstman’s ambassadorship. I admit that I am not very familiar with the foreign service, but I doubt it is uncommon for a diplomat to resign his or her position for a variety of reasons. I am sure Obama was well aware of Hunstman’s politics when he gave him the job and knew that there was a possibility Huntsman might want his boss’s job. He did his job in China but found (as everyone on this site knows) that a Conservative cure to Obama is urgent. Also, as Mr. Erikson notes, this isn’t the strongest group of candidates. He didn’t handle the situation inappropriately. Obama didn’t accuse him of disloyalty. Hunstman acquired vital experience.

    Huntsman is conservative. Huntsman is electable.

  • reggie182

    The author of the article uses McCain as an example for why Mitt Romney can’t be elected. Part of the argument here is that strident conservatives will stay home if Romney is nominated as they did in 2008.

    Except that assumption that many have is a historical fallacy. There is no compelling evidence to suggest that John McCain lost because conservatives failed to vote for him. He lost because independents sided primarily with Obama, and the main reason for that was the onset of the financial crisis in September 2008. Just before the crisis, the ticket of McCain/Palin led in most polls. I can even remember a Drudge headline at the time with a picture of BHO asking the question “Can Obama get his mojo back?”.

    Romney is the most electible candidate, and I believe would govern in a reasonably conservative manor. He would learn the lesson of George W. Bush, whose ratings plummetted to a great extent because he stubbornly governed in a less than conservative way. In order to remain politically utilitarian, Romney would also have to yield to the agenda of what should be conservative Congress.

    Gingrich is the candidate most likely to induce a real conservative transformation. His head to head numbers in polls with Obama are improving and I have to say that my support is leaning towards him right now. Whatever Jackie Gingrich said he did in 1985 I believe is of paltry consequence, considering that awful story people heard about him serving her divorce papers while she was dying of cancer was patently false.

    So I think it’s really between Romney and Gingrich right now, and I have to say I’m leaning a bit toward Gingrich.

  • AceInTX

    how would that strike your fancy?

    I think Romney would be much more likely to saddle us with Souder type judges just like George the first did. with the same disastrous results.

    I don’t know what the answer is here…I just know…with the current people we have in charge of this party…we’re SCREWED….Even when they have a winning hand they and the other side has shown their losing cards they fold…

  • clintonformccain

    I agree that Mitt Romney has no principles and will take whatever position will help him in the curent election.

    I agree that Romney is the prohibitive favorite for the nomination at this point. The conservative base has made that inevitable by keeping many candidates out of the race and killing others (like Perry) over red-meat litmus test issues. I mean, how pathetic is it that the “conservative base” has coalesced behind a joke candidate who has never run a serious campaign or won an election in his life and doesn’t even know China has the bomb? Think about it. it’s embarrassing.

    I disagree that Romney would not be an effective Republican nominee against Obama. I haven’t ruled out the possibility that he would be a particularly strong general election candidate because of his abilityt to play well in some swing states and with swing voters.

    As a bit of an outsider, I think the problem with the Republican party is that the conservative wing has gotten side-tracked into litmus test issues (like “electrocuting” illegal immigrants) that make it difficult for conservative candidates to achieve broad popular support. Unfortunately, the base does not leave room for the kind of nuanced positions that might play in a general election.

    I think this Republican nomination battle so far has been an unmitigated disaster. The potential for a Christine O’Donnell or Sharon Angle nomination is truly frightening if you share my desire to see Barack Obama booted from office.

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    For all their flaws, David, Solomon, Hezekiah and Josiah were seen as good kings that grew the nation, kept it together or revived it. Ahab and the others were almost polar opposites, eventually bringing Israel and Judah to rock bottom where they were carried off.

    It’s not until the Jewish people were in captivity, having lost their nation, that they began to experience some sort of restoration as they were allowed to go back home under the leadership of Zerrubabel (Davidic royalty), Ezra, Nehemiah and others.

    The point is that the kings of Israel/Judah not only shaped their nations but also were a reflection of their nation(s). This analogy is somewhat applicable to the United States and our presidents as well as the present state of our nation.

  • thirstyboots

    Problem is that he’s probably to the left of Obama when it comes to entitlement reform. Or, as he’d say, right-wing social engineering.

    I don’t see the point of electing Gingrich as the president. It’d be better to say to the bureaucrats “read the polls and decide accordingly to the majority of the public”. It’d save a lot of money.

  • AceInTX

    You sound like a Demoncrat

  • jakeofalltrades

    If the GOP keeps nominating liberals for the Presidency, they will not have any conservatives left in the GOP.

    Mitt Romney won’t destroy conservatism, but he may very well kill our party. And that stinks, because “Republican” is a really, really good name for what conservatives believe.

    We HAVE TO DEFEAT ROMNEY. Consolidate, people! Experience + Electoral Success Track Record!

  • gekster

    (modified)

    Men?s courses will foreshadow certain ends,
    to which, if persevered in, they must lead,
    But if the courses be departed from, the ends will change.
    Say it is thus with what you show me!
    I will live in the Past, the Present, and the Future.
    The Spirits of all Three shall strive within me.
    I will ‘not’ shut out the lessons that they teach.
    Oh, tell me I may sponge away the writing on this stone!

    It is not yet so, until it has been done.

  • acat

    And while Romney and Huntsman may appeal to you, I’ll pass.

    In short, yours is a minority viewpoint, not a consensus.

    Mew

  • lineholder

    I really don’t see that we have a lot of options here. Conservatives have to continue to press forward and present Conservatism as the best hope this nation has for a future. Failing isn’t even an option we should be considering at this point.

    There are NO perfect candidates running for President of the United States against Barack Obama. We need ABO with as many Conservatives elected to Congress in 2012 as we can get. If we the people can succeed in doing this much, then our country has a chance to change direction.

    Erick, Conservatives need strong leadership right now, even before the election takes place. We need those who are in a position to do so to provide a confident voice that will help all us “we the people” out here on the Conservative end of the spectrum in persuading voters to join us in voting Obama out of office.

    The plurality of people in this country don’t want Socialism. They believe it is the wrong direction for this nation. But if Conservatives can’t get their act together in presenting Conservatism any better than we have lately, we’ve got no one but ourselves to blame if this nation falls.

  • Duke

    Mr. Mittens isn’t even close to the likes of a Herman Cain (not an endorsement), or any other outside-the-beltway political figure.

    The Cain take on the sex harrassment/sex assualt claims seems to be Romney and/or Perry, but after reading Erick’s take on Oblahblah’s potential electoral win I think he’s the culprit. He can’t afford to have the black vote split, or even impacted by another black candidate. He needs their 95% vote to null-out his horrible first term record.

    On the other hand, he would greatly benefit by having Mr. ObamaCare Light on the ballot. The Chicago Machine will make quick work of Mitt’s desire to repeal ObamaCare, and then what differences are there between the two candidates?

    We are so screwed!

  • reggie182

    Mitt Romney has been endorsed by Robert Bork both in 2008 and in this election cycle. He is also an advisor to Romney’s current campaign.

    If Bork has confidence that Romney will nominate originalists to the court, then I do as well.

  • http://www.reddit.com/user/pi_over_three/ Pi Over Three

    then it doesn’t matter who get the nomination.

  • jakeofalltrades

    sans codus

  • windwaker24

    I thought he cheated on both wives while they were dying in a hospital. That’s the story that’s been told. Why doesn’t he just calmly state this instead of getting all defensive. The way he’s been acting, I thought the stories were true.

  • proud2btexasmom

    Gov Perry will be our nominee and he will beat Obama. Just saying.

    Now to Newt. I like this guy . He knows more than most people have forgotten. That said.. didn’t he get censored as Speaker of the House due to ethics violations? I haven’t researched it out because frankly I think his many affairs and marriages will keep many social conservatives from supporting him.

    As far as Cain goes… well, fair or not, I’m sick of hearing about all of his past issues. He lost my vote not because of what he was accused of but because of the amateur way he handled the situation.

  • jabajax44

    Kennedy has been pretty reliably conservative, not like Souter at all. Bush 41 says he regretted Souter and was fooled by him. That’s what happens when you choose a state court judge. I doubt that mistake will happen again, but Ford made the same mistake. Nixon nominated some very conservative SC judges, but some couldn’t pass through the Senate. O’Connor sided with the conservatives for a long time before becoming a swing vote.

  • tnguy

    I’m not even referring to what he did as governor, directly, though I do not approve of all that he did.

    His we-can’t-deport-them defeatist attitude of accepting 10-20 million illegal immigrants doesn’t fly. It is overwhelmingly the reason he went from 30% to 10% in national polling.

    How you deal with them is pretty simple. Any business found hiring an undocumented immigrant gets a massive fine. That would immediately dry up the illegal immigrant job market, and a huge majority of them would drift home.

    From my profession, I know what they do. There are thousands of them who live in my area and I know how it works. It’s not just a Texas issue. Most of them do not pay taxes. The majority of them make their $$$ and wire a huge portion of it home. I dealt with a mexican couple a few years ago who had lived in America for over 20 years, and had never filed a tax return, and the wife could not even speak english. They had to bring their children with them to translate to them for the attorney.

    To me, this is a huge part of the fight for the survival of our way of life, and throwing up our hands and acting as though we can’t do anything about tens of millions who are here illegally is unacceptable. He needs to have a coherent policy which effectively and respectfully deals with those already here, and at the same time secures the border for the future.

    It’s up to him. The problem is, I suspect, his beliefs on the issue do not align with conservatives, especially those that ID themselves at tea-partiers. That’s a shame, because it will cost him the nomination.

  • drfredc

    OK, I’ll go along with Mitt is the “all about me” candidate. In other words, he could be the GOPs Clinton. Clinton was more about himself than any particular political principle. Which is fine, this can be useful — Mitt in the WH can clearly be swayed to sign conservative legislation.

    What made the Clinton years a success wasn’t Clinton in the White House, but having a Conservative leaning Congress. This Congress was mostly led by Newt and associates, and not the entrenched GOP LOSERship of the Senate which brought us Bob Dole, it’s my turn, as a candidate. Where the Newt Congress went wrong was they didn’t continue to push the conservative message, instead deferring to the Senate GOP LOSERship for a moderate message… Aka, a message (and leadership) vacuum.

    So, no Mitt in the WH won’t be the end of conservativism — that’s just plain nonsense. Just don’t expect much leadership in conservative directions to come from a Mitt WH, unless Mitt is sold going conservative is in his best interests. Which means the battleground for conservatives in the coming election needs to be focused upon pushing Congress towards the Conservative goal posts with Tea Party conservative grass roots power.

    The Top Down paradigm of having the President (or candidate) lead the GOP while the grass roots sit around and perhaps follow is DEAD. It just isn’t going to get the job done — those top down days can be easily beat, time to move on from that old school thinking — these are the grass root days of talk shows, blogs, twitter, texting, viral you tube vids and more. Embrace the opportunity to lead from the grass roots and the power will be conservatives to take.

  • pttx333

    me in what I sent to you. In fact, I just sent the second part of it to both you and ‘patriette. Try one more time.

  • tncdel

    Cain, Romney, Gingrich and Perry are all RINO’s with ties to Bilderberg.
    Bachmann is a true Conservative with NO Bilderberg ties. And she received the HIGHEST rating on illegal immigration of all the candidates. See:
    https://www.numbersusa.com/content/action/2012-presidential-hopefuls-immigration-stances.html?

    Bachmann is the one we should support!

  • jakeofalltrades

    And then turned upside down read “6-6-6″, did you know that?

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

    Expect the black helicopters any moment.

  • jakeofalltrades

    Has both high levels of healthy HDL cholesterol and is cholesterol free. It’s a miracle food!

  • streiff

    and fortunately they were gunships

  • jakeofalltrades

    no loons

  • jakeofalltrades

    no survivors

  • http://kevin-wardsworld.blogspot.com/ kevinaw2

    That is the best analysis of our fortunes with Mitt Romney as the nominee

  • jakeofalltrades

    no text

  • pttx333

    immigration issues? And she’s no RINO with ties to Bilderberg? Really? Imagine that … unbelievable. Truly … I don’t believe one stinking word that you wrote. Truly, I do not.

  • easyb

    My initial response to Erick’s analysis is to think “no way”. It makes me want to fight harder for the anti-Romney. Maybe that’s what Erick intended….

  • http://www.periodictablet.com superamerican

    Doesn’t matter if he wins or loses. Republicans don’t have a clue; they are a frightened bunch. Afraid to speak out truths like: business is good. It creates jobs, wealth and innovation. What Republoican candidate has said this? They are afraid the NY Times and NBC will yell at them, then they will be derided on the golf course, or something like that. The far-left and the NY TImes and NBC left-wing propagtanda machine controls the dialogue and makes the rules.

    End of story, end of game, end of America.

  • suzywuzy

    Unreal ..

    Newt’s personal life and his personal decisions are his own and frankly everyone needs to realize that he’s the most qualified candidate and the most capable of the lot and frankly. He’s not perfect but perfection is not what’s needed now to fix this friggin mess we are in. Someone that knows how to fix it is what’s needed and Newt does.

    NO ONE LIKES ROMNEY .. except Obama .. because Obama and his “Dream Election Team” know they can beat him.

    We do have a few great choice Newt is one of them, Michele Bachmann great choice, Rick Santorum great choice. Frankly, this article insults any Conservative with a brain.

    Love you Eric but HATE this ‘take’. Sus

  • bonnman

    I think you’re right that people might not like Obama but they don’t trust Romney. But I don’t think Conservatism will die. I don’t believe the failed policies of Obama for four more years could ever ruin the U.S. we’re stronger than that, but it would present a crystal clear opportunity to draw the distinction between liberal and conservative principles by introducing the next generation leadership like Rubio or Nikki Haley. I can see a silver lining to this cloud.

  • hendrig

    Perhaps you should ask some of us who lived in Michigan in the 60′s when Mitt’s old man was Governor. He was a flip flopper from the word “GO”. After researching the information on Mitt, I have one conclusion. Like Father Like Son. It wouldn’t surprise me if Obama is secretly supporting and assisting Romney to help him win the nomination. If that happens Obama will tear him up and become a shoe-in for reelection. I, for one, do not intend to vote for Romney in the primaries but, if he wins the nomination, he will get my vote as the lesser of two evils.

  • skep41

    When are you easily-led clowns going to stop believing stuff that Hillary leaked when her hubby got impeached? Nothing the Clintons have ever said is true. Is this ancient history enough to forget that Newt balanced the budget, a feat the BJ now claims credit for, and impeached that lying, corrupt employee of the Chicoms as he disgraced the White House with his incompetence and dishonesty. The stakes are too high with our country on the verge of bankruptcy to let Mutt Romney win because of this refried Clinton trivia.

  • jqcitizen

    The tone of this article basically indicates that the people of this Country are stuck with someone who is arguably the worst President ever elected too this office. I disagree. I think the vetting process will yield an appropriate candidate and that Obama is toast.

    My personal choice is Newt Gingrich. I have followed his career, his shoe-string campaign, read his biography on Wikipedia (including his personal marriage problems and infidelities), read his articles, and position statements, reviewed his solutions, listened to the debates, and to the pundits who say he can’t win.

    Digesting all of this, I believe that this man is best qualified to start addressing the problems that face this country, which have largely been caused by government actions since the Great Depression. We are a Country of the people for the people and of the people. We have got away from the first principle provided in our Constitution. In so doing we have allowed the federal government to infringe upon our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Its time that we let the our representatives know that we will not accept their stupidity any longer.

    Newt has shown that he has the intelligence, knowledge, and proven ability to identify problems and formulate solutions, He will listen to others with other ideas and adopt them if they offer a better alternatives. Above all he will work with all of Congress if they exhibit a concern for the welfare of all Americans as their first priority and demonstrate a true belief in the first principles of our founding documents.

    Having said this, make no mistake, I will support any reasonably conservative Republican who believes that American traditional values and a market base economy subject only to those regulations that are necessary to provide reasonable protection to our citizens and an equal opportunity to succeed in any legal endeavor they desire to undertake.

    For those Christians (myself included) especially women who believe that Newt Gingrich earlier marital problems are a dis-qualifier, Remember King David, whose digressions were much worst and also remember Jesus saying “let he who is without sin cast the first stone”.

  • carolynr

    Romney is willing to do whatever his constituents wants…well…how about he has 50 states with different ideologies…that ought to make it even more maddening for people to figure out his positions…which constantly change according to what group he addresses.

  • gekster

    Or Newt, Or any other candidate.
    And you are on a conservative Republican site.
    Except for a few here, we have a clue.
    You are looking through a narrow lens, and I think it might be by choice.
    Just because all conservatives are not standing up and yelling, it doesn’t mean they are not there.
    Where did all those tea Party come from.
    They are not gone. they are just not yelling at the top of thier lings right now.

  • texassean

    and I am making the assumption, you are TAMU bashing, since that is Gov.
    Perry’s alma mater? This was gratuitous TAMU trashing. Is this really part of the conversation?
    Also, Gov. Perry has discussed immigration. He will not bash the Texas instate tuition law, brought forth by the elected representatives of the people
    of the State of Texas, passed by all but 4 votes and then signed into law by the Governor. Gov. Perry has spent almost a half a billion dollars of state money trying to secure the border. He has sent the Guard down to assist.
    I do not know what more can be done, by the Governor to satisfy the critics, who absent of any real knowledge on the specific problems seem to think
    they know how to do a better job. Gov. Perry has said he is against Amnesty.
    That is very clear to me and I do not know how anyone can not understand it.
    What amount of money does Texas need to spend, securing the border to satisfy you? Mind you, that this is Texas money, and we are still dealing with damages from all of the fires and believe it or not, damages from hurricane Ike in 2008. Also, there is damage still from hurricane Rita in 2005. I think the
    church groups from various places like TAMU continue to assist those with damages. Sorry you are having a bad day, but don’t trash Texas or TAMU.

  • tnguy

    I know Perry is not GWB on the issue. Or I hope he isn’t.

    But go to his website. There is one paragraph on illegal immigration, dealing with securing the border. Securing the border is only part of the issue!!!! Dealing with the illegals already here is just as large of a problem.

    He needs to have an upfront aggressive policy on what he’s going to do. I’m a Perry supporter…. He’s the only candidate I’ve sent $$$ to. But generally speaking, he sounds weak and sort of pathetic on the issue, which does not gel with how decisive he is on most other things. But don’t argue with me. Look at his polling and his contributions dropping off. He either has a bad plan or has been horrible at communicating it.

    I realize that debates are hardly the best place to address complex issues, but it would be so much better if he said “given the opportunity, I will resolve this issue” accompanied by a quick summary of a plan to do so. Or, “it’s on my website” or something. The words “we can’t deport” should never cross his lips,

    Saying “we can’t deport 10 million people” sounds like punting, no matter what details he throws out otherwise. Throw internet links at me and pull out comments he’s made here and there, but the onus is on him to address this issue head on, not act like it’s a minor act in this play. It is the singular thing that is destroying his campaign.

  • westcoastpatriette

    ..

  • 2warabnvet

    DIRC – Democrat in Republican Clothing

  • jacobite

    prohibited from making valid contracts under our Common Law, because they lacked the ability to make rational decisions. This is also why women were not allowed to vote. This entire Cain/Gingrich discussion just points up, yet again, the superior wisdom of the Founding Fathers, and other men of the 18th Century, who were still guided by actual observation and experience, instead of ideology. Historians who live in the real world have observed the rise of Leftism of every sort in countries after womens’ sufferage was adopted. Coincidence??

  • pttx333

    don’t. If you are a one-issue voter, then be a one-issue voter. You are free to do as you please. I was trying to help, but I see you have made up your mind. Good luck with your choice.

  • badgerbyte

    Maybe to George Will, Bill Kristol and Karl Rove. These are the same beltway ingrates that gave us John McCain. Not this time fellas……..and it won’t be Romney up there debating Obama so you boys just might as well board the people’s train lest YOU get left behind.

  • blarman

    … good people don’t act. The problem is that most good people want nothing to do with politics, so we get left with those for whom their ambition is more important than their principles. This is the reason why there are so many liberals in office. When you don’t have many principles except the pursuit of power, it’s pretty easy not to worry about anything else.

    Now, to be fair, I disagree with Erick’s assertions here. He takes a defeatist attitude regarding every candidate because they are not perfect. It’s time to get real, people. YOU ARE NEVER GOING TO ELECT THE PERFECT CONSERVATIVE, because those people are never going to run for President. They’re busy with their normal, everyday lives and families. Deal with it. The goal is to pick the best of what is available and support them. The thing to realize is that politics in this age is about choosing the lesser of two evils rather than the choice of good vs evil. This is a product of the corruption of American decency as a people – the political process is a mirror of everyday life. Immoral people choose immoral leaders.

    If you want a true revolution in politics and a return to true conservatism, you have to start in your homes and your communities by promoting conservative values. Conservatism is a tough road – especially when compared to a liberal “there-is-no-such-thing-as-evil” approach to life.

    I don’t really care who the Republican nominee is, I’m going to vote AGAINST Obama.

  • thirstyboots

    George Will didn’t endorse Romney 4 years ago and he’s not endorsing him now. Same for Bill Kristol – he didn’t support Romney 4 years ago and he’s spent this entire cycle begging Mitch Daniels, Paul Ryan and Chris Christie to run.

    Do you want to know who called Romney a conservative? Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin and Erick Erickson.

    Oh the irony.

    I think it’s amazing how people can build their own reality with complete disregard for the facts.

  • wacowboy

    is is the election about jobs or immigration?

    getting the fiscal house in order or immigration?

    stopping the overreach of the FEDs or immigration?

    in terms of important issues that affect our nation, dealing with the illegals already here sits at #4 at best. Not to say that it is not important, but the economy and spending and stopping the feds is simply more important.

    if we conservatives going to poo poo a candidate who has the best record when it comes to jobs, the best record for states rights, and a good record for fiscal sanity, do we want to kick him to the curb because he falls short of where we want him to be on the 4th most important issue, especially when his place on the top three is the best combination among the candidates?

    and I don’t think he’s kicking the can down the road. It just seems to me that he doesn’t see the point in making a plan to deal with those already here until the border is secure. You could say that his plan is enforcing the laws currently on the books

  • cdthat

    When you make comments like “…whose closest encounters with the common man are accidentally touching one of the many hired hands in one of the many rooms of one of his many mansions.” It sounds like you are jealous of his success. My brother lives in San Diego County and was witness to Mitt getting down and dirty during the 2008 campaign when he was in California for what was supposed to be a fund raiser but turned into a service project to help with the wild fires that were threatening and eventually destroyed several homes.

    Mitt and his sons showed up at the site of one of the largest fire fighting activities being done by volunteers, took off their jackets, picked up shovels and spent the entire day working with the local citizens to build fire breaks to protect several homes. He never asked for media attention, the only pictures of the event were taken by private citizens who recognized him.

    You are dead set against Mitt Romney, that is your right. But don’t spend time disparaging the man for things that aren’t true. You write at least one post per day against him, yet I have never read anything that you have written about an actual conversation you have had with him. Maybe as a journalist you should take the time to go to him and ask for an interview. And your letter inviting him to come to Georgia and sit down with you doesn’t count. He’s a busy man and he probably hasn’t even seen your letter. I’m sure one of him “servants” got it and hasn’t passed it on to him.

    One thing I know about politics is that you will never find the perfect candidate. I try to look at the candidates and find the one I can agree with most often. I’m never going to find 100% match, but I believe that with Mitt Romney it is around 85%, I know you think he is a flip flopper, I disagree. I know he has changed positions, but so did Ronald Reagan and every other politician out there (unless you believe the Ronulons who say that Ron Paul has never changed his position on anything). Once Mitt has taken a conservative position, I have never seen him leave that position. If you can show me where he has, I will take that in to consideration.

    Yes, I support Mitt Romney. No, I am not going to commit suicide if he isn’t the nominee. I will vote for the Republican nominee is the general election. Who ever that may be.

  • ihateliberals

    There is nothing there that I haven?t been saying since he announced he was running. If Mitt Romney wins the Nomination we will have Four more years of Obamanism and the worst part is there will be no stopping him because he has nothing to lose now. The odds right now is he will also recover control of the House because the Republicans did absolutely nothing while they had control. Boehner has caved on all major issues sent his way and has not been a leader as Speaker of the House. We might as well have Kept Nancy Pelosi.

    Mitt Romney in the eyes of conservatives is no better than Obama except Romney does like America and would not go around apologizing for our country. Romney being a Mormon will not have any effect on the voters after all they voted for a closet Muslim. The next five years are going to prove to be the ugliest and most destructive to our way of life in our over 200 years. By the time the voters wake up and see what has happened Obama will become the reigning King as Chavez did in Venezuela. People have laughed at me for making these statements but the closer we come to Election Day the more sound my theories become. I have stated from the day Obama signed the Obamacare bill that he now had no intentions of ever leaving office. He would find a way to stay in power and eventually make a power grab that we would not fight. Obamacare will give him power to dictate many things we do and those demands will be outside of the law because they will be inside of Obamacare. His next assault will be to remove as many guns from our control as possible.

    Go ahead and laugh but if you can come back and read what I have written in two years the last laugh will be by me.

  • iidvbii

    Conflating Christians with the taliban not only demonstrates your complete ignorance but has the added benefit of belittling the pain, suffering and opression of an entire generation of innocent people at the hands of one of the most brutal groups since the Nazi’s. While its obvious you have no respect for yourself please have enough respect for others on this site, Christian’s and the victims of the taliban to keep this vile despicable garbage you are trying to pass off as an intelligent thought to yourself.

  • Michael_Handley

    I have concerns over his apparent lack of ability to debate. If he does get the nod he will have a big problem debating Obama. He has snown that he is the weakest debater running for the job. he has to step up his game if he wants my vote…. I hope he can??

  • robertyates

    I wish Romney were more conservative, but please look at his other qualifications. He is the hardest worker and most disciplined of the other candidates. He is very smart and was the valedictorian at BYU and gave the main student address at commencement exercises. His BA was in English. BYU had 30,000 students at that time. He graduated from Harvard with a joint JD/MBA degree and with honors. He did all this education with a young wife and a growing family. Most of five sons were born during the time he was in school. That takes a lot of commitment and devotion. He was a very successful businessman. He has no moral or legal problems.

    Amazingly, during these very busy 15-20 years as a young father, student, and start-up businessman, he showed his devotion to his religious principles by volunteering up to 25 hours a week year in and year out to his Church. That’s quite an accomplishment when you consider he probably was working 50-60 hours a week at Bain Capital. To those who say he is out of touch as an elite Rockerfeller Republican, you need to know that his Church leadership positions required him to hear confessions about ten hours a week for years and to give counsel and provide service.. He has seen every possible problem and dealt with every possible sin. He probably understands human suffering and the human condition better than 99% of the people reading this comment.

    His greatest sin is being too much of a politician. Had he run for office in a more conservative state than Mass., he probably wouldn’t have had the flip flop problem. Had he emphasized his natural conservative inclinations in running for office in Mass., he would have never been elected even in a Republican Primary there. So, if you are a conservative/moderate who lives in Mass. and who wants to run for statewide office, what do you do? Had Romney followed the advice of most on this board, he couldn’t have been elected as dogcatcher and we wouldn’t even be talking about him.

  • surfcitysocal

    “Woohoo!” I thought, believing this would be another well-researched, informative article explaining why Romney as the nominee would be the worst thing that could ever happen for this election.

    But no, instead we get some lame excuse for supporting another RINO extraordinaire–Huntsman, a few snipes at Cain and Gingrich, one of whom has absolutely zero experience and the other with a mountain of baggage, with absolutely no mention of the best conservative bet–for many reasons–for beating Obama: Michele Bachmann.

    Thinking like yours absolutely guarantees Obama’s reelection. Thanks a lot.

  • steve010

    in there plugging away. Only cowards say the things you do without action.

  • steve010

    President than anyone else. Why don’t you move to Cuba.

  • gekster

    just throw out a few cuss words.
    The f-bomb would do it.
    It would be quicker and less painfull for all involved.

  • streiff

    that’s all for right now. You may read more about it later.

  • bigboy46

    I wish I could disagree with your position. Alas, I cannot. This entire situation puts me in a profound funk. Add to this the super committee debacle which is proof positive that DC is an absolutely hopeless case.
    Both parties. All politicians.

  • avagreen

    and, I’m a Tea Sipper (for those ignorant of Texas terminology, I graduated from University of Texas).

    Those that trash A&M are just showing their stupidity and prejudice.

  • redster

    While passionate, this article is just plain incorrect.

    The hypothesis is incorrect.
    The details are incorrect.
    The conclusion is definitely incorrect.

    As for details… one thing you have repeatedly stated, similar to this mantra in this article:

    “never mind that Mitt Romney has never been able to sell himself to more than 25%”

    He has polled over 25% vs. the rest of the field many times, including 28% in a poll that finished Nov 5th and is used in the current realclear politics rolling average. He has even creeped above 25% in the realclearpolitics rolling averge, although he didn’t stay there.

    He doesn’t have 75% against him, he has a base of 25% and a much larger chunk that has him as their second or third choice. With a field of 8 main candidates, 25% is a great base of support no other candidate can match. It will grow as candidates start to drop out. Other’s base is much smaller, with moments of being the candidate of the month.

    If, or once as you state, he gets the nomination, he will have the support of the vast majority of republicans and a majority of independents. If he can clear the primary he will win. Polls have shown this. Real Clear Politics, which tracks the republican primary support you continue to reference, shows he is the ONLY candidate that polls above Obama in a head to head on some occasions and ties or is just behind in others. All other republicans poll significant below Obama. Come next November, if Romney gets the nomination, he will not only be competetive with Obama, he will pull ahead.

  • center77

    says Newt, because he had 84 ethics violations levied against him, one he was found guilty of, which makes him the only speaker to have done that. No, Newt destroyed conservatism once, it cannot happen again.

  • travis690

    Great article, Erick! I agree with almost all the points.

    Mitt Romney is the least-principled candidate the Republicans have had as their standard-bearer since…oh, John McCain. Whereas one got his way by compromising with everybody on the other side, the other gets along by compromising anything that could be called a principled position.

    If the Republican Party is to survive in its current form, the Grand Poobahs need to address a few issues:

    1. What does the party stand for?
    2. How do you differentiate yourselves from the Democrat Party?

    If I could attach any single individual to the demise of the Republican Party, it would be Bill Kristol. He has purported to represent conservatism, but instead has acted as someone bought and paid for by the Insidious Beltway Crowd, the Country Club Republicans instead of the Country Class Republicans. He acted as one of McCain’s biggest cheerleaders in 2008, and now acts as Romney’s biggest supporter with a microphone to spew his amazing lack of wisdom.

    One additional thing I would like every Romney supporter of 2011 to consider: Did you support his candidacy in 2008? If yes, then you are more consistent than the candidate you support; if no, then why not? What makes him so much a better candidate this year than in 2008?

  • redster

    but he does not want to support him.

    Posters have said he supported Romney early in the 2008 cycle, recanted when Fred entered and supported Fred, then after Fred dropped out, supported Romney again.

    This article gives his endorsement and thinking on the subject 4 years ago:

    http://archive.redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/i_want_to_support_rudy_but_im_support_romney

    he states:

    Were the Presidential Preference Primary held today, I’d be voting for MItt Romney…

    My preference is Rudy, but his positions on social matters prevent me from voting for him. I hope he’ll have a come to Jesus moment…

    So if the Presidential Preference Primary in Georgia were tomorrow, I’d vote for Mitt. Sure, he has waffled on social issues — but I think that highlights his pragmatic approach to politics. He was never going to get elected as a pro-life candidate in Massachusetts and he knew it. I won’t fault him. I think, if he gets elected based on conservative support, he won’t betray that support in office.

    At the same time, Mitt Romney does not excite me like he does some. He’s very polished and very smooth. His RedState Radio interview was great. But, again, I think it is my upbringing; I prefer candidates with a little less polish…

    And this, ladies and gentlemen, highlights my frustration with the Republican lineup for 2008. My candidate, Jeb, is not running. I’m left, at the moment, with several choices. The one I’d prefer (Rudy) won’t get me with his presently held views on social issues. The one I’d love to go with (Brownback) just isn’t viable right now. That leaves Mitt Romney and Insane McCain — and that, as it is, is a no brainer for me.

  • georgefwashington
    You “conservatives” are such charlatans. Having trouble getting your imbecile soldiers to toe the corporate master’s line? Oh gee, what a surprise. The thing is, you act like this is some perfect storm when any fool can see that the farcical “beliefs” of “conservatives” would inevitably lead to the demise of any candidate who tried to embody them. Mitt is your only hope. He will lie to you just sweetly enough to mesmerize you into submission and you might actually have a chance at being pandered to for 4 years. But I say that is a coward’s way out. You think your idiotic philosophies are legitimate? Then get real, show some stones, and start backing someone who propounds these ideas unabashedly, because I’m not gonna stand for another 4 years of crying that you lost because your candidate wasn’t “conservative” enough. It’s time for y’all to put up or shut up. You don’t like Obama? Yeah. We get that already. Well, here’s your chance. A closed primary. No excuses. Pick your “conservative” candidate and let’s see what happens. I’m willing to bet Perry, Bachmann, Gingrich – whoever – goes down in a landslide, and proves that this is not the country you all think it is. So stop being pathetic p**sies who, oh heavens, can’t stop the juggernaut of Mitt Romney and put your man on the ticket and let’s see what happens. Loser shuts his yap for 4 years. Deal?
  • iidvbii

    Signatures in Texas. That’s right I said it and I d@mn well mean it. If you Romney supporters insist on re-electing Obama it is our duty as conservatives to defeat you. I will work actively to support a third party in Texas and encourage everyone I know in other states to do the same. Now there’s a dream for you, how well do you think ol switch hit Mitt with his record of flat out lying about perry and attacking texas is going to go over in a contested primary. Sounding like a nightmare yet? Do the math on romneys chances of winning without the largest red state in the union.
    Think i am bluffing? You just pull that Romney/obama lever and we’ll see who’s dreaming….

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    .

  • rickindenver

    Governor Palin please reconsider!

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    nt

  • jakeofalltrades

    instead of the bottom, which means he’s leaning toward Huntsman/Paul.

    /sarc

  • iidvbii

    Lol dead on acat

  • jimmyg

    Texas offers state educational grants to illegals. They are not eligible for federal grants and loans, but are eligible, and receive state funding in addition to instate tuition if they qualify.

    http://soc.hfac.uh.edu/artman/publish/article_388.shtml

  • wingnut43

    I like her, she has been right about a great many things, but unless she comes up with a credible economic plan, she has no chance of a comeback. There is no way the majority of the American People are going to vote for extreme austerity during a balance sheet recession/depression. She needs to study up on Modern Monetary Theory (not Keynes), so she can present a credible plan. There is still time since no one has voted yet.

  • jakeofalltrades

    I got nada.

  • wingnut43

    Obama will beat Romney like a drum. I don’t know that any of the others can beat the big 0 in a 2-way race either, but at least we will lose with honor if we have a real conservative candidate. We don’t have a good bench this cycle since Haley Barbour took a pass, but we must compete with what we have. One intriguing possibility is that there will be a 3rd party candidate this cycle (there are real serious rumblings of this), and if we nominate a real conservative, this could be the first election to be decided by the House since 1824. In that event, holding not just the House, but a majority of the State Delegations in the House will be critical. This isn’t over yet by a longshot, and a lot of surprising things are likely to happen.

  • pttx333

    is something that did not rev up in Texas. It was re-written as Senate Bill 2075, introduced to the U.S. Senate by Dick Durbin, and it did not pass. As to where it truly stands as of this date, I do not know. I’ve not seen or heard of it before, but it seems to me that it was bounced around in Texas then kicked to D.C. and it never came to fruition.

    Thanks for letting me know of this, though. If you find something that is etched in stone, please let me know.

  • iidvbii

    Make it so wise cat…..

  • pttx333

    the Senate Bill 2075.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-2075

  • jimmyg

    Snip

    Aid for Undocumented immigrants qualify as Texas residents if they have lived in Texas for at least 36 months prior to high school graduation or the receipt of the GED. These students
    are eligible to apply for state aid such as Texas Grant, Texas Educational Opportunity Grant, Texas Public Education Grant, or CAL Loans. Interested individuals must first contact the International Student Office.
    Loans
    Snip
    http://www.austincc.edu/cataloghtml/finaid.php

    From the Austin Community College Financial Aid site

  • omegamale

    Romney is a moderate Republican. Big deal. Most Republican Presidents have been moderates, yet conservatism never “died”. Someone to the “Right” could have easily beat Romney, but the problem is, no one credible showed up. I’m not giving Obama a second term because of some ridiculous purity test that no candidate can ever meet.

    The flip flopping meme is getting old, especially since Rick Perry is the King of Flip Floppers, having been Al Gore’s campaign chairman for President, supported Hillary Care, changing his position on Social Security multiple times, etc. And his open border policies are truly dangerous, which is why he’s been backtracking furiously on his “compassionate” policies towards illegal immigration. Perry’s flip flops are far worse than Romneys.

    All politicians change their positions, most adults that live in the real world aren’t so naive to think otherwise. What’s funny is, Erick Erickson was Romney’s biggest booster in 2008. Does that make Erick a flip flopper, or a closet liberal for supporting Romney? What about Jim DeMint’s endorsement of Romney in 2008? Also a flip flopper?

    Please show me the evidence that a Rick Perry can beat Obama, all I see in the polls is Palin-like numbers. You put Rick Perry in three debates with Obama and we’ll be lucky to carry the South. And don’t give me the nonsense that Rick Perry doesn’t have enough name ID yet, Perry has had plenty of exposure and is Governor of the second largest state for over a decade. In the end, it doesn’t matter, Perry will not be the nominee, he’s tied with Ron Paul right now despite being a comfortable front runner. Perry fumbled the ball too many times, he’s not going to get another chance.

    I will agree with Erick on this part, Romney WILL be the nominee, BUT he’ll also beat Obama. Anyone who has actually watched the debates knows Romney is the only credible candidate. Nearly every poll has Romney ahead or within the margin of error against Obama. He’s the only candidate that can do that. You put an 8-9% unemployment rate and a devastated housing market and combine that with a candidate that can appeal to independent voters, you have a landslide for the GOP against the incumbent Obama.

    Saying Romney will be the nominee but lose to Obama is doing a disservice to all conservatives. It strikes me as being an immature crybaby who’s going to take their ball home because they didn’t get their way.

  • center77

    is conservatives are throwing away a chance to beat Obama and Romney because of some in state tuition issue believed about Perry, who never gave free anything to anybody. Romney is a joke, Cain is in trouble, Newt has been a crook, and Perry has a beast of a record.

  • center77

    and that matters, because that means he still has not found that core.

    The next debate, Perry will have his plans, and will show a great ability to fight, watch what happen tomorrow folks.

  • tomkinney

    Anybody, anything other than Obamageddon.

    Romney certainly fits that picture and that’s concern #1. Beyond that, it’s all gravvy.

    The endless search for the holy grail of the perfect Republican candidate is a waste of time, not to mention a red herring. It’s like wishing on having a quarterback who’s never had an incomplete pass and whose every throw ends up a touchdown. Ain’t going to happen, ain’t worth waiting on.

    Romney has a perfect combination of experience, having been a CEO AND a governor. The mood on the right today is go big or go home, and Romney will have to listen or he won’t be listened to.

    Personally, at this point I’d prefer Gingrich and I’m not as sure as Erickson that he’s not viable. This will be a very unusual election and quite possibly will break all the “rules of engagement” hitherto set forth. Money will likely matter less, as it did in 2010; purity of platform will be secondary to the ability to beat Obama; sins of the fathers will be less likely to be visited on those who have gone astray from time to time; but economic wisdom and knowhow will be valued above all else.

    Go Newt, or Mitt, or nameyourcandidate as long as he/she is from the right.

  • bzip

    I would like to think that is what Erick is saying and I have gotten that impression from some of his writings but…

    Could Erick and should Erick just come out and say it and lets get behind Perry. So we beat Romney and Obama instead of this three ring circus with Cain and his sex scandals.

  • pttx333

    students, having met the requirements to get in-state tuition in Texas, are considered residents of the state, and who therefore would be eligible to apply for financial aid. Some of the aid appears to be in the form of a federally-funded grant(s), along with some Texas loans/grants. So … it appears that as a Texas resident, they may be eligible for some aid. On the other hand, since only 1% of them ever follow up on the in-state tuition for college, there can’t be much money involved when you factor in that only a percentage of that 1% would be eligible to apply.

    This something I had not heard or read about, but it is also something that doesn’t bother me even remotely. given the grand scheme of things as they stand today in this country. I will not lose a wink of sleep over it.

    Thanks, jimmy, for providing your etched-in-stone link!

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    Seriously, in a general election match-up between Romney and Obama, 1) what states could a third-party conservative win the plurality to capture its EC votes; and 2) what would be the math that would deprive an EC majority to one of the candidates?

    Otherwise, it will be a two-person race, and a conservative 3rd party campaign will split the conservative vote and ensure an Obama vin.

  • http://www.AmericanThinker.com Hammer2008

    As to the loss of the female vote, women in general break more for the Democrat nominee, period. Had Clinton run again in 2000, he would have gotten the majority of the female vote.

    Do not degrade women to voting against Speaker Newt Gingrich, just because he was by his own admission, a poor husband to his first two wives. I believe even Sen. Bob Dole in 1996 said he chose his political career over his first marriage.

    Women, especially those out of work, or worried about their families economic well being, will put that ahead of unproven charges against Mr. CEO Herman Cain.

    As for Governor Rick Perry, he’s about as good a debater as candidate George W. Bush ever was, and a much much better speaker. He connects with the crowd. I’m hoping MIttens Romney takes the bait and comes to Iowa and gets dusted with a 4th or 5th place finish with Rep. Ron Paul.

    Erick is right, Mittens will not beat Obama. Not because the base won’t come out for him as they did for Sen. John McCain, but because independents will not be convinced to vote for him over Obama.

  • constitutionalconservative

    And you make many good points, but this sort of language is not helpful. It only serves to embolden our enemies and discourage our allies. . Let’s work to nominate the best conservative nominee that we can and then support the eventual nominee, no matter who it is, to the best of our ability.

    Obama is such a danger to the Republic that any of our potential nominees, no matter what their flaws, would be a dramatic improvement.

  • sensiblecenter

    Erik is right about a lot of predictions, but not about Obama winning.

    No matter how bright Newt is he is still too odious a human being to occupy the White House; the others have little chance, as Erik points out.

    But you all needn’t be forlorn about your principal objective of getting Obama out.

    The economy is in the tank. Nothing will be allowed to happen to improve it before the election. Presidents are elected on the strength of the economy, pretty much PERIOD.

    All the Republican nominee, Mitt or anyone else, has to do to get elected is put on pants and show up. It’s a done deal.

  • 1rationalmind

    It is time to follow Ronald Reagan?s Eleventh Commandment “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.” Or at least speak truthfully, factually and honorably.

    Same Sex Marrige
    Governor Mitt Romney Press Conference at Massachusetts State House, June 16, 2005, Regarding the Coalition for Marriage’s proposed amendment:
    ?My view is that marriage should be defined as a relationship between a man and a woman. I also maintain that something so fundamental to our society as marriage should be decided by the citizens, and not by a court with a one-justice majority. My preference is that when the issue is decided by the citizens, that it’s a very clean, straightforward, unambiguous amendment which they have the opportunity to vote on, rather than something which is confused by multiple features being combined. And I’m concerned that the amendment currently under consideration in the legislature is somewhat confused or muddied by the combination of two things. One is the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman, which I support. The other is the requirement that there be civil unions in the Commonwealth, which is a condition I do not support.?
    Mitt Romney
    Q: Governor, Will you continue, as you have in the past, to strongly emphasize your opposition to gay marriage as you travel the country making “non-presidential” campaign appearances?
    A: I will be happy to continue to emphasize my view that marriage should be a relationship between a man and a woman. And I hope the voters of Massachusetts get the same chance the voters in 11 other states got last year, and that is the chance to preserve marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman, which of course passed in all 11 states where it was taken to the voters. And I’m convinced it will pass here. And also recognize that this is a matter of conscience for individuals. It is not a party line matter. Republicans and Democrats will be divided on this issue, and some will support it, some will not support it as it stands. I happen to support and think it’s a good idea, but it’s something people will decide without regard to party affiliation.
    At the beginning of his governorship, Romney opposed same-sex marriage and civil unions, but advocated tolerance and supported some domestic partnership benefits.[98][107][108] Faced with the dilemma of choosing between same-sex marriage or civil unions after the November 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision legalizing same-sex marriages Romney reluctantly backed a state constitutional amendment in February 2004 that would have banned same-sex marriage but still allow civil unions, viewing it as the only feasible way to ban same-sex marriage in Massachusetts.[109] In May 2004 Romney instructed town clerks to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples (court mandated), but citing a 1913 law that barred out-of-state residents from getting married in Massachusetts if their union would be illegal in their home state, no marriage licenses were to be issued to out-of-state same-sex couples not planning to move to Massachusetts.[107][110] In June 2005, Romney abandoned his support for the compromise amendment, stating that the amendment confused voters who oppose both same-sex marriage and civil unions.[107] Instead, Romney endorsed a petition effort led by the Coalition for Marriage & Family that would have banned same-sex marriage and made no provisions for civil unions.[107] In 2004 and 2006

    Prolife Flipper not flopper:
    Mitt Romney has flipped on one very important issue, to the right side of abortion (prolife), and that is NO flop. Conservatives and people of faith should welcome, celebrate and encourage this kind of flip! And if I?m not mistaken, Ronald Reagan also flipped to prolife. Let?s stop the divisive, my prolife is bigger then yours.

    Massachusetts Citizens For Life Pioneer Valley Chapter Chairman Kevin Jourdain: “Mitt Romney was a great Governor, who served with honor and distinction. But most importantly, he was a pro-life Governor. He vetoed a number of pro-abortion pieces of legislation and made many pro-life appointments. He was always there for us?

    ?Every piece of legislation which came to my desk in the coming years as the governor, I came down on the side of preserving the sanctity of life.? — Mitt Romney 12/16/07 on Meet
    the Press

    FACT: Governor Romney Opposed Efforts To Advance Embryo-Destructive Research In Massachusetts. In 2005, Governor Romney Vetoed A State Stem Cell Bill That Would Have Permitted EmbryoDestructive Research. “Gov. Mitt Romney vetoed a bill Friday to expand stem cell experiments in Massachusetts because it would allow the cloning of human embryos ? a practice he has called morally wrong.” (Theo Emery, “Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney Vetoes Stem Cell Bill,” The Associated Press, 5/27/05)
    ? Governor Romney: “It is wrong to allow science to take an assembly line approach to the production of human embryos, the creation of which will be rooted in experimentation and destruction.” (Theo Emery, “Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney Vetoes Stem Cell Bill,” The Associated Press, 5/27/05)
    FACT: Governor Romney Opposes Using Taxpayer Money To Fund Embryo-Destructive Research. Governor Romney: “I don’t believe that somatic cell nuclear transfer or cloning and embryo farming are appropriate and would not pursue federal funding of those forms of stem cell research.” (David A. Lieb, “Romney Wraps Self In Reagan Lingo,” The Associated Press, 2/11/07)
    ? Governor Romney Believes We Can Support Techniques That “Produce The Equivalent Of Embryonic Stem Cells But Without Cloning, Creating, Harming, Or Destroying Developing Human Lives.” “I studied the issue for many months, and entered into conversation with experts from across the nation who were looking for consensus solutions, like Stanford?s Dr. William Hurlbut. In the end, I became persuaded that the stem-cell debate was grounded in a false premise, and that the way through it was around it: by the use of scientific techniques that could produce the equivalent of embryonic stem cells but without cloning, creating, harming, or destroying developing human lives.” (Governor Mitt Romney, Op-Ed, “A Stem-Cell Solution,” National Review Online, 6/15/07)
    ? Governor Romney Vetoed Legislation That Would Have Provided For The “Morning After Pill” Without A Prescription. (Governor Mitt Romney, Op-Ed, “Why I Vetoed The Contraception Bill,” The Boston Globe, 7/26/05)
    ? Governor Romney Promoted Abstinence Education In The Classroom. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Announces Award Of Abstinence Education Contract,” Press Release, 4/20/06)?
    Governor Romney Vetoed Legislation That Would Have Changed The Longstanding Definition Of The Beginning Of Human Life From Fertilization To Implantation. (Governor Mitt Romney, Letter To The Massachusetts State Senate And House Of Representatives, 5/12/05)
    ? Governor Romney Supported Parental Notification Laws And Opposed Efforts To Weaken Parental Involvement. (John McElhenny, “O’Brien And Romney Spar In Last Debate Before Election,” The Associated Press, 10/29/02)
    Massachusetts Citizens For Life Executive Director Marie Sturgis: “Having Governor Romney in the corner office for the last four years has been one of the strongest assets the pro-life movement has had in Massachusetts.” (Kathryn Jean Lopez, “An Early Massachusetts Primary,” National Review, 1/10/07)
    Massachusetts Citizens For Life Pioneer Valley Chapter Chairman Kevin Jourdain: “Mitt Romney was a great Governor, who served with honor and distinction. But most importantly, he was a pro-life Governor. He vetoed a number of pro-abortion pieces of legislation and made many pro-life appointments. He was always there for us?
    RomneyCare:
    Most conservatives respect and are big states rights advocates, but some end their respect and support for states rights when the Executive and Legislative branches exercise the power the people of that state sent them there for, when it doesn?t agree with their prescribed values and political ideology, this is not being a true conservative; you either believe in states rights or you don?t. The Massachusetts healthcare law was passed with the input and support from all levels of society, the people, and small to large business community, healthcare advocates, healthcare providers, insurance providers, academics and yes the uber conservative Heritage Foundation (Heritage championed personal mandates). Gov. Romney had cost controls in the original bill, but the legislative removed them, and with an overwhelming majority (85%) the Demarcates overrode Gov. Romney?s veto. Nevertheless the legislation was passed by the Massachusetts legislature by a vote of 154 to 2 in the House and 37 to 0 in the Senate. If it hadn?t, $385 million a year from the federal government would have being taken away, money that went to the federal government from the tax payers of Massachusetts. The seven biggest differences between Massachusetts?s healthcare and the National healthcare are, 1) It is constitutional, 2) if a resident of the state really hates it, he/she can walk to Texas or some other state with a different or no healthcare program to get away from it, with the national healthcare program you can only walk into the Pacific or the Atlantic oceans, 3) the law passed with strong support from the residents of the state and the business community. Recent polls show that almost 70% of Massachusetts residents are satisfied with the law, 4) the law is meeting its main goal, almost universal coverage, with over 98 % of all Massachusetts residents and over 99% of children are now covered with healthcare. 5) Mass. healthcare raised no taxes 6) market based 7) Mass healthcare was created to cover a small percentage residents of Mass that weren?t covered, ObamaCare intrudes in all aspect of society and raises all kind of taxes. Is the law perfect, no; what in government is? Can it be improved? Gov. Romney says yes and it should. But Gov Romney is no longer the Governor of the state. It is up to the people, current Demarcate Governor and legislature of Massachusetts to do so.

    Cap and Trade:
    I am uncertain how much of the warming, however, is attributable to man and how much is attributable to factors out of our control. I do not support radical feel-good policies like a unilateral U.S. cap-and-trade mandate. Such policies would have little effect on climate but could cripple economic growth with devastating results for people across the planet.? — Mitt Romney No Apology, p. 22

    Mitt Romney on How Spending Cannot Solve Global Warming:
    ?In 2004, Danish economist Bjorn Lomborg gathered ten of the world?s leading economists, including three Nobel laureates, in what he called the Copenhagen Consensus. He asked them prioritize the greatest problems faced by humankind. They were not asked to determine which problems were the most severe, but rather to rank the most severe global challenges according to the coast and benefit of overcoming them? Astonishingly, spending money to prevent global warming came in last. Why? To reduce global temperature even by a very small amount requires enormous investment. Achieving the Kyoto objectives, they reasoned, would cost $150 billion a year and only delay the global temperature that would otherwise have been reached in the year 2100 by six years.? — No Apology, p. 228-229

    Mitt Romney on Climate Change:
    ?Scientists are nearly unanimous in laying the blame for rising temperatures on greenhouse gas emissions. Of course there are also reasons for skepticism. The earth may be getting warmer, but there have been numerous times in the earth?s history when temperatures have been warmer than they are now. Climate cycles with great variations in temperature predate the greenhouse gas emissions of the past three centuries, and they even predate the rise of human populations. In fact, climate change has been going on from the beginning of the world; it is certainly not a new phenomenon. Even the apparent unity among scientists is not a sure indicator of scientific fact.? — No Apology, p. 227

    Now You Decide!

  • 1rationalmind

    It is time to follow Ronald Reagan?s Eleventh Commandment “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.” Or at least speak truthfully, factually and honorably.

    Same Sex Marrige
    Governor Mitt Romney Press Conference at Massachusetts State House, June 16, 2005, Regarding the Coalition for Marriage’s proposed amendment:
    ?My view is that marriage should be defined as a relationship between a man and a woman. I also maintain that something so fundamental to our society as marriage should be decided by the citizens, and not by a court with a one-justice majority. My preference is that when the issue is decided by the citizens, that it’s a very clean, straightforward, unambiguous amendment which they have the opportunity to vote on, rather than something which is confused by multiple features being combined. And I’m concerned that the amendment currently under consideration in the legislature is somewhat confused or muddied by the combination of two things. One is the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman, which I support. The other is the requirement that there be civil unions in the Commonwealth, which is a condition I do not support.?
    Mitt Romney
    Q: Governor, Will you continue, as you have in the past, to strongly emphasize your opposition to gay marriage as you travel the country making “non-presidential” campaign appearances?
    A: I will be happy to continue to emphasize my view that marriage should be a relationship between a man and a woman. And I hope the voters of Massachusetts get the same chance the voters in 11 other states got last year, and that is the chance to preserve marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman, which of course passed in all 11 states where it was taken to the voters. And I’m convinced it will pass here. And also recognize that this is a matter of conscience for individuals. It is not a party line matter. Republicans and Democrats will be divided on this issue, and some will support it, some will not support it as it stands. I happen to support and think it’s a good idea, but it’s something people will decide without regard to party affiliation.
    At the beginning of his governorship, Romney opposed same-sex marriage and civil unions, but advocated tolerance and supported some domestic partnership benefits.[98][107][108] Faced with the dilemma of choosing between same-sex marriage or civil unions after the November 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision legalizing same-sex marriages Romney reluctantly backed a state constitutional amendment in February 2004 that would have banned same-sex marriage but still allow civil unions, viewing it as the only feasible way to ban same-sex marriage in Massachusetts.[109] In May 2004 Romney instructed town clerks to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples (court mandated), but citing a 1913 law that barred out-of-state residents from getting married in Massachusetts if their union would be illegal in their home state, no marriage licenses were to be issued to out-of-state same-sex couples not planning to move to Massachusetts.[107][110] In June 2005, Romney abandoned his support for the compromise amendment, stating that the amendment confused voters who oppose both same-sex marriage and civil unions.[107] Instead, Romney endorsed a petition effort led by the Coalition for Marriage & Family that would have banned same-sex marriage and made no provisions for civil unions.[107] In 2004 and 2006

    Prolife Flipper not flopper:
    Mitt Romney has flipped on one very important issue, to the right side of abortion (prolife), and that is NO flop. Conservatives and people of faith should welcome, celebrate and encourage this kind of flip! And if I?m not mistaken, Ronald Reagan also flipped to prolife. Let?s stop the divisive, my prolife is bigger then yours.

    Massachusetts Citizens For Life Pioneer Valley Chapter Chairman Kevin Jourdain: “Mitt Romney was a great Governor, who served with honor and distinction. But most importantly, he was a pro-life Governor. He vetoed a number of pro-abortion pieces of legislation and made many pro-life appointments. He was always there for us?

    ?Every piece of legislation which came to my desk in the coming years as the governor, I came down on the side of preserving the sanctity of life.? — Mitt Romney 12/16/07 on Meet
    the Press

    FACT: Governor Romney Opposed Efforts To Advance Embryo-Destructive Research In Massachusetts. In 2005, Governor Romney Vetoed A State Stem Cell Bill That Would Have Permitted EmbryoDestructive Research. “Gov. Mitt Romney vetoed a bill Friday to expand stem cell experiments in Massachusetts because it would allow the cloning of human embryos ? a practice he has called morally wrong.” (Theo Emery, “Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney Vetoes Stem Cell Bill,” The Associated Press, 5/27/05)

    ? Governor Romney: “It is wrong to allow science to take an assembly line approach to the production of human embryos, the creation of which will be rooted in experimentation and destruction.” (Theo Emery, “Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney Vetoes Stem Cell Bill,” The Associated Press, 5/27/05)

    FACT: Governor Romney Opposes Using Taxpayer Money To Fund Embryo-Destructive Research. Governor Romney: “I don’t believe that somatic cell nuclear transfer or cloning and embryo farming are appropriate and would not pursue federal funding of those forms of stem cell research.” (David A. Lieb, “Romney Wraps Self In Reagan Lingo,” The Associated Press, 2/11/07)

    ? Governor Romney Believes We Can Support Techniques That “Produce The Equivalent Of Embryonic Stem Cells But Without Cloning, Creating, Harming, Or Destroying Developing Human Lives.” “I studied the issue for many months, and entered into conversation with experts from across the nation who were looking for consensus solutions, like Stanford?s Dr. William Hurlbut. In the end, I became persuaded that the stem-cell debate was grounded in a false premise, and that the way through it was around it: by the use of scientific techniques that could produce the equivalent of embryonic stem cells but without cloning, creating, harming, or destroying developing human lives.” (Governor Mitt Romney, Op-Ed, “A Stem-Cell Solution,” National Review Online, 6/15/07)

    ? Governor Romney Vetoed Legislation That Would Have Provided For The “Morning After Pill” Without A Prescription. (Governor Mitt Romney, Op-Ed, “Why I Vetoed The Contraception Bill,” The Boston Globe, 7/26/05)

    Governor Romney Promoted Abstinence Education In The Classroom. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Announces Award Of Abstinence Education Contract,” Press Release, 4/20/06)

    ? Governor Romney Vetoed Legislation That Would Have Changed The Longstanding Definition Of The Beginning Of Human Life From Fertilization To Implantation. (Governor Mitt Romney, Letter To The Massachusetts State Senate And House Of Representatives, 5/12/05)

    ? Governor Romney Supported Parental Notification Laws And Opposed Efforts To Weaken Parental Involvement. (John McElhenny, “O’Brien And Romney Spar In Last Debate Before Election,” The Associated Press, 10/29/02)

    Massachusetts Citizens For Life Executive Director Marie Sturgis: “Having Governor Romney in the corner office for the last four years has been one of the strongest assets the pro-life movement has had in Massachusetts.” (Kathryn Jean Lopez, “An Early Massachusetts Primary,” National Review, 1/10/07)

    RomneyCare:
    Most conservatives respect and are big states rights advocates, but some end their respect and support for states rights when the Executive and Legislative branches exercise the power the people of that state sent them there for, when it doesn?t agree with their prescribed values and political ideology, this is not being a true conservative; you either believe in states rights or you don?t. The Massachusetts healthcare law was passed with the input and support from all levels of society, the people, and small to large business community, healthcare advocates, healthcare providers, insurance providers, academics and yes the uber conservative Heritage Foundation (Heritage championed personal mandates). Gov. Romney had cost controls in the original bill, but the legislative removed them, and with an overwhelming majority (85%) the Demarcates overrode Gov. Romney?s veto. Nevertheless the legislation was passed by the Massachusetts legislature by a vote of 154 to 2 in the House and 37 to 0 in the Senate. If it hadn?t, $385 million a year from the federal government would have being taken away, money that went to the federal government from the tax payers of Massachusetts. The seven biggest differences between Massachusetts?s healthcare and the National healthcare are, 1) It is constitutional, 2) if a resident of the state really hates it, he/she can walk to Texas or some other state with a different or no healthcare program to get away from it, with the national healthcare program you can only walk into the Pacific or the Atlantic oceans, 3) the law passed with strong support from the residents of the state and the business community. Recent polls show that almost 70% of Massachusetts residents are satisfied with the law, 4) the law is meeting its main goal, almost universal coverage, with over 98 % of all Massachusetts residents and over 99% of children are now covered with healthcare. 5) Mass. healthcare raised no taxes 6) market based 7) Mass healthcare was created to cover a small percentage residents of Mass that weren?t covered, ObamaCare intrudes in all aspect of society and raises all kind of taxes. Is the law perfect, no; what in government is? Can it be improved? Gov. Romney says yes and it should. But Gov Romney is no longer the Governor of the state. It is up to the people, current Demarcate Governor and legislature of Massachusetts to do so.

    Cap and Trade:

    I am uncertain how much of the warming, however, is attributable to man and how much is attributable to factors out of our control. I do not support radical feel-good policies like a unilateral U.S. cap-and-trade mandate. Such policies would have little effect on climate but could cripple economic growth with devastating results for people across the planet.? — Mitt Romney No Apology, p. 22

    Mitt Romney on How Spending Cannot Solve Global Warming:
    ?In 2004, Danish economist Bjorn Lomborg gathered ten of the world?s leading economists, including three Nobel laureates, in what he called the Copenhagen Consensus. He asked them prioritize the greatest problems faced by humankind. They were not asked to determine which problems were the most severe, but rather to rank the most severe global challenges according to the coast and benefit of overcoming them? Astonishingly, spending money to prevent global warming came in last. Why? To reduce global temperature even by a very small amount requires enormous investment. Achieving the Kyoto objectives, they reasoned, would cost $150 billion a year and only delay the global temperature that would otherwise have been reached in the year 2100 by six years.? — No Apology, p. 228-229

    Mitt Romney on Climate Change:
    ?Scientists are nearly unanimous in laying the blame for rising temperatures on greenhouse gas emissions. Of course there are also reasons for skepticism. The earth may be getting warmer, but there have been numerous times in the earth?s history when temperatures have been warmer than they are now. Climate cycles with great variations in temperature predate the greenhouse gas emissions of the past three centuries, and they even predate the rise of human populations. In fact, climate change has been going on from the beginning of the world; it is certainly not a new phenomenon. Even the apparent unity among scientists is not a sure indicator of scientific fact.? — No Apology, p. 227

    Now You Decide!

  • gekster

    Sorry, but RS doesn’t have a fiction section, so nowhere to post this.

  • pttx333

    and it certainly isn’t Romney!

  • tarnishedroses
    GOP nominee, whoever that may be.

    We can’t have a liberal court decided what the laws of each state will be. That court is only a heartbeat away from becoming a reality.

    We need a conservative in the White House that we can trust. I trust Romney more than any of the other Republicans running for president this year.

  • tarnishedroses
    You call it “fiction”? Prove that it is fiction.

    It sounds like he’s got direct quotes. Are you really going to challenge those quotes?

    It is people like you that put idiots like Obama in charge. I hope you like his leadership. Because people like you will stay home so that Obama can sink what is left of the U.S. economy in order to try a new pay phone solution in a smart phone era.

  • tarnishedroses
    I have to doubt the “repub” part.

    Dems have been saying for 5 years that Newt Gingrich is the most beatable republican. Either you are unwittingly repeating their talking points or you know exactly what you’re doing.

  • tarnishedroses
    Mitt Romney as a means of trying to advance his flailing circling-the-drain candidacy.

    Rick needs to stay in Texas. He doesn’t have a good grasp on the purview of the American president.

  • gekster

    Telling the truth about him.
    Got an example.

  • tarnishedroses
    EE found out that it is much easier to be against something than it is to be for anything.

    If you are for a candidate, you have to defend him/her when he/she is attacked.

    If you are just against every candidate, you never have to defend anyone. Great strategy for hedging, terrible strategy for winning back the White House.

    Pick a side, Erick. Any side. Don’t just be anti-Romney. Be for someone.

  • retire05

    wiltedroses. Mittens needs to just go home to the state that gives Obama’s aunt free public housing and a welfare check and stay there.

  • tarnishedroses
    to reduce the price of gas down to a dollar a gallon.

    It makes absolutely no sense. It doesn’t qualify as a conservative proposal. It is far, far left if you ask me.

    I have no idea whose votes she is trying to pander for.

    Conservatives don’t vote for candidates who propose mandatory price controls on the private sector.

  • tarnishedroses
    than anyone else.

    He is against giving perks to illegals and Perry is for it.

    Period.

  • gekster

    jrmaxs replacement.

  • retire05

    are ABR in the GOP primary.

    (that would be anybody but Romney)

  • 1rationalmind

    You are spot on, but on this site facts and the truth don’t seem to matter, when it comes Mitt Romney.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    He couldn’t keep track of whether he liked Bachmann, or not. Sloppy job, that.

  • retire05

    while Obama’s illegal aunt, who was ordered deported, continued to live in Massachusetts public housing and get a welfare check under Romney? Or hiring a fellow church member to do the lawn and tennis courts at his tony estate, only to find the company was using illegal Hondurans and he did nothing, like turning the company into ICE, as required by law?

    You are a funny person.

  • pttx333

    It reads:

    Hi, I am the retread formerly known as jackdaniels11. I just cannot quit this site.

    Good old Jack! Back in a new outfit! ROFL

  • pttx333

    It reads:

    Hi, I am the retread formerly known as jackdaniels11. I just cannot quit this site.

    Good old Jack! Back in a new outfit! ROFL

  • pttx333

    and acting goofy all day for me. We have had some big thunderboomers this evening (what a blessing!) so wonder if that causes glitches.

  • pttx333

    and acting goofy all day for me. We have had some big thunderboomers this evening (what a blessing!) so wonder if that causes glitches.

  • pttx333

    nt

  • sunshinek67

    underestimating a significant portion of the Republican base that does not and will never support a nominee Romney for President. There is a very strong resistance to a candidate Romney, he has no core. The “illegals” statement in front of millions is affirmation of that.

  • http://jeffemanuel.net Jeff Emanuel

    JackDaniels11 is no more as of yesterday, by my hand. Today, his ghost is vanquished by someone else’s – and good riddance.

  • notayounglib

    Really take a polygraph? That will not solve anything. Who in their right mind even believes the results from something that is not even immiscible in court. People can be taught to beat a polygraph. People need to wake up and not listen to what people in charge want them to believe.

  • gekster

    First, what browser are you using.

  • pttx333

    the darndest thing, irritating also. You’re such a dear – any help sure would be appreciated if I’m doing something wrong on my end.

  • pttx333

    the darndest thing, irritating also. You’re such a dear – any help sure would be appreciated if I’m doing something wrong on my end.

  • lizzie

    watch Obama with netanyahu, or with anyone tougher and more prinicipled than O.
    Perry’s physical presence should not be underestimated.

    Plus, what makes anyone here think Obama is such a great debater, um, ,um – he wore a wire in one of the debates….

    besides, Perry gets better and better at debateing when he is not waiting for the 60 second gong. I figure Newt is giving Perry secret lessons..

    by Oct 2012, Perry will be on NCIS in prime time when Gibbs has to go to Texas to find a sniper…you just wait for it.

  • pttx333

    a sight to behold. b.o. (I will NOT capitalize even his initials.) will be curled up in a ball over in the corner, wimpering and sucking his thumb. And I’m not kidding! Woo hoo – bowls of popcorn and confetti for that one! b.o. is such a wimpie, nerdy, prissy thug who tries to be cool and macho – or what he thinks is macho. Pretty pathetic, actually.

  • pttx333

    a sight to behold. b.o. (I will NOT capitalize even his initials.) will be curled up in a ball over in the corner, wimpering and sucking his thumb. And I’m not kidding! Woo hoo – bowls of popcorn and confetti for that one! b.o. is such a wimpie, nerdy, prissy thug who tries to be cool and macho – or what he thinks is macho. Pretty pathetic, actually.

  • gekster

    On the top is a menue bar with ‘tools’.
    click on that, and a menue will drop down.
    on the bottom of that is ‘internet options, click on that.
    A box will pop up.
    now a couple of things here.
    first, click on the ‘advanced tab.
    click ‘restore advanced settings’
    don’t worry, it will do no harm.
    next, click on ‘ general’.
    in the middle is ‘browsing history’.
    click on the delete button.
    another box will show up.
    check all the boxes except ‘passwords’
    click delete.
    when that is done, the box will disapear, and then click ‘ok’
    When that box disapears, close out you browser and restart you computer,
    then log back on.
    The reply took awhile because I did just now did that myself.
    this will work 90% of the time.

  • RichmondG30

    What exactly do you hope to accomplish with this diatribe?

    Trash all of the non-Romney field?…….Check

    Destroy Romney?………Check

    Demoralize the base?……Check

    Thanks Erick. Great article. Keep up the good work.

  • nathanalbright

    …that, but I do now. On a more on-topic thread comment, I would think that any rise in poll numbers by Newt would make his family life (and his wife, and how she appears) more relevant to the voters.

  • nathanalbright

    …I suppose that would be a good sign. And you’re right as well that when one knows so much that one cannot help but share it. It just bursts out without being able to help it sometimes, and so one tries to find people that aren’t offended by it or think it arrogance to share it.

  • pttx333

    and given my ‘puter a fall cleaning! You’re a genius, totally.

    THANKS BUNCHES!!!

  • pttx333

    thanks again for all of your help, always.

  • californium

    Well, Erick, that was about the cherry on the pie to a really crappy newsweek. Not that I dispute a word about what you say (though I have to force myself to be more optimistic about women voters re Cain allegations to keep from losing it), but this really spells the terrifying peril that faces us unless we really get serious and slap the other contenders into fighting shape. Conservatism alone won’t just die, Erick – America will, at least as we know it. This is our last chance. Obama cannot win; and therefore Romney cannot take the Primary sweep.
    I already hear bolder Tea Party leaders saying they will not only not vote for Romney, but will vote FOR Obama as a major middle-finger to the GOP. Many argue that President Romney will be much worse for Conservative Policy in the next 4 years than a rerun of President Obama. And for all of my reasoning, I cannot disprove that assertion.

    …We are in real trouble.

  • gekster

    Happy to have helped. ;)

  • gekster

    it’s good to do that at least once a month.

    And you do know I’m the squirrel.

  • pttx333

    I’m spoiled. I always had a team of techies who came around fixing every little thing all of those years that I worked – and they really didn’t want us to do anything so as to tear up their “toys.”

    I know you’re a jewel, but I didn’t know anything about a squirrel. And that would mean ….?

  • pttx333

    where I forgot to put your name in the title line.

    (I’m trying out new silly words cuz I keep getting “duplicate” messages that aren’t even dups.)

  • gekster

    Hence the “even a bling squirrel finds a nut now and then”.

  • AceInTX

    That argument is and always has been a canard…

    The problem with Romney in the general is…No matter what argument hemakes about why Obama must be defeated…Obama will be able to hammer him with the opposite argument Romney has made in the past.

    If he’s the nominee, this is going to be a joke…and will make the Dole and McCain candidacies look absolutely genius in comparison!

  • pttx333

    squirrels burying all of the pecans then trying to find them again! Surely you jest, though – wouldn’t your statement apply to everyone on the planet? It is for darn sure that I’ve gotten things wrong at least a pajillion times. LOL

    Still trying new words … maybe I’ll publish a new and improved dictionary one day. ;-)

  • txpat

    He cheated on her with his current wife, right??

  • RebelRoss0587

    Mitt is not a flip-flopper. He flipped on abortion, but that’s it. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous or ignorant.

  • antisesquipedalion

    in my 30+ years as an ER doctor, i’ve had the opportunity to observe many other doctors skills. some of the best ones were nothing less than scumbags. one , in particular, was living with a woman, after 4 divorces, and was bedding down at least 2 of the student nurses that worked in the ER. but if you’d ask me who i would like to see in the ER if i or my family member had an emergency, there is no doubt as to who it would be.
    Newt is a problem solver– which is what ER docs do for a living, that’s why he appeals to me. when Krauthammer asks about Iran, Newt gives several proposed solutions, none of which is “more sanctions” (everyone’s response) or “we could be more friendly with them” (except Ron Paul)
    the new standard for baggage is THE BLUE DRESS. stuff from 30 years ago I’m not interested

    we need someone with a brain and courage

    the answer is obvious

  • richard90

    vetoing 800 pieces of liberal crap?

    Balancing Mass’s 3B deficit and leaving a 2B surplus largely without “revenue increases”?

    EnforcingFed immigration laws?

    Opting out of the Northeast Regional Climate agreement?

    Having the support of Judd Gregg, Connie Mack, Mark DeMoss, Darrel Issa, Jeff Flake, Jason Chaffetz and about two dozen other far right conservatives?

    Not sure what’s gotten into Erick, and Rush, but if Mitt was good enough last time, he’s even better now. The fact that the party moved right, and the electoral context is different doesnt make Romney less conservative.

  • richard90

    Loved the reference to Alexander in jammies….

  • richard90

    Did I read that Sessions has endorsed Romney?

    I concur that Paul Ryan and Jeff Sessions will be powerful, and even a fence siter like Romney will have to listen to them.

    Far better than Obama pointing fingers at them for 4 years.

  • richard90

    Noone more conservative and focused than Justice Bork. If Romney earns his endorsement, it makes me feel better.

  • richard90

    Just like in Texas, Massachusetts is complex too. Funny, how so few on this site seem to extend the same courtesy to Romney as they do to Perry.

    The irony is that Mass is far more complex politically speaking than Texas. The skill set to lead a liberal house in Mass, compared to the skill set to lead the predominantly republican Texas house, can’t be compared. Romney is vastly better prepared, based on their relative times in charge of two different states.

  • gekster

    we have no consevative principles, just so voters will like us, but in Texas, we Govern on priciples, and don’t care if we are liked.
    So why did Perry get re-elected three times, but Mittens aproach was so good, he couldn’t run for a second term.
    And don’t say because he couldn’t be covernor and run for President.
    That obviously won’t fly.

  • A_Ready_Repub

    Blogger halfway down the comments questions why do you support Romney (you being anyone) Simple answer from a lifelong Republican who pray every night for O to drop off the planet. BECAUSE HE CAN WIN, STUPIDS!

  • http://www.whyromney.com Ryan Larsen

    I’m assuming that before writing this diary you took time to look into the other side of the story on these claims, and found the other side of the story to be without merit. However, your diary doesn’t mention that the other side exists. It doesn’t mention that Romney has a defense. Why not present all sides and then let people make up their minds?

  • macphisto96

    Just like Mark Levin and many others who hailed Romney as the best conservative choice back in 2008.

    This Chicken Little stuff is nonsense. Romney showed his seriousness with his economic speech the other day outlining some details. Herman Cain’s given us catchy names on things that won’t work and could expand government. Perry’s plans are not well thought out and indicate to me that he thought he could just jump in and win.

    Everyone talks about the “75%”, but how many of those people are just hemming and hawing to see what’s out there? The field is crowded and with that many people not even Ronald Reagan would approach 50% (well, maybe after the fact).

    Of course, if Erick were blogging back in 1980 he would have decried Reagan and his record in California. He would have said Reagan was not a true conservative and that his election would end the conservative movement. He probably would have called Bob Dole the only hope for conservatism. And he would have been wrong.

    Good way to discourage voters and try to get them not to vote. When did you start getting paid by Democrats to suppress the conservative vote?

  • acat

    I mean, you went to a lot of trouble writing them and then discussing..

    Open Letter 1 – Defending Romneycare

    Open Letter 2 – Defending the Abortion Waffles

    Open Letter 3 – Everything Else

    Seems simpler than trying to get people to visit a site not affiliated with Red State, after all.

    Mew

  • acat

    First, Erick has a c in his name.

    Second, still waiting for the rest of your follow-up on The Combine as related to Kjellander .. and why Romney has never repudiated this guy.

    Yeah, the Illinois primary is late, but some of the citizens of the Land of Lincoln are not happy with Candidate Romney’s disregard for our problems.

    Mew

  • redmymind

    beneath the apparently “depressing” read of Erick’s article, I actually pick up a call to action in order not to let things end this way. I take it as clever reverse psychology on his part to get us fired up enough to come to our senses and never go for Romney. Beneath his defeatist tone, I hear him urging: “It doesn’t have to be this way. Don’t let it end like this!”

    But then, this is merely redmymind writing; not “mindreader.” I just thought I’d give Erick the benefit of the doubt. After all, why would he fuss at all if there was really nothing we could do to change the outcome? . . . Food for thought . . . and perhaps some attempts at “reading minds”???

    Just my $0.02, friend!

  • gekster

    His lame diaries didn’t work for the effort someone else did that he posted. (why do you think he couldn’t answer basic questions about Romney, and kept refering to ‘his’ diaries and the ‘spinformitt ‘ website) and is trying another aproach to get hits.
    I will admit, he is more transparent than Obama.

  • acat

    what with all that effort went into the triptych diaries… what a waste!

    (either that or he wants the conversation where he’s the moderator…)

    Mew

  • gekster

    And he has proven as much.

  • acat

    thought Ryan was just spiffy!

    Mew

  • gekster

    He would have to do a search, he doesn’t know how,
    or his handlers won’t let him.

  • gekster

    nuff said. ;)

  • 1rationalmind

    If someone makes there choice on who best reflects what they want the country be, and can do it without misrepresenting the record and positions of other candidates, I believe that most persons respect that, I know that I do. I look forward to the honest debate as we race to regain the White House on Nov. 2012. Good luck to your choice, but not more then Mitt (:-)

  • pttx333

    because you’ve done so in being civil and courteous. BTW, my choice is Perry – he’s my Guv and I know exactly who and what is he. I choose him years ago when I first voted for him and have never changed my mind.

    May the best man win.

  • http://www.whyromney.com Ryan Larsen

    Thanks for posting the links. As far as Kjellander goes, I thought I was still waiting to hear back from you

    My last response was titled, “My point still stands”:

    I said, ?But it seems the worst thing you accuse Romney of is believing someone who you think is lying.?

    Calling him corrupt doesn?t make it so. What did Kjellander do that you know for a fact?

  • gekster

    But you already know that.
    I guess I know more about it than yu do.
    But it puts Romney in a bad light, so you don’t want to see.
    Blind ignorance. Face up.
    Romney is not the pretty boy you blindly see.

  • pttx333

    his intent is just what you describe. Look at the responses, some even indignant, but by golly it got everyone talking, didn’t it. This is serious stuff we’re dealing with, and we’d better get serious about it and get over the silliness and petty stuff.

    Guess it is easy for me because I made my choice long ago to vote for my Governor Perry that I have supported since his Day One in office. Haven’t changed my mind, so there ya go.

  • dcacklam

    Ok, so the ‘overbearing’ Religeous RIght wants to:

    Have US law protect the unborn child over the woman who in the overwhelming majority of cases made her choice when she had unprotected sex….

    Keep recreational drugs illegal…

    Establish that protecting the free exercise of religion by private individuals in public places, is a greater constitutional priority than the establishment clause.

    COMPARE THAT TO:

    The Taliban:

    Want to resume complete dictatorial control of Afghanistan…

    Extort money & compliance from Afghan civilians at knife-point…

    Kidnap/kill families of those who don’t play along….

    Plant bombs in the roads, killing local civilians and US/NATO forces alike…

    Destroy historical landmarks they consider ‘un-Islamic’….

    Oh, the Taliban have killed 3 guys in my company this tour – 2 from my platoon…

    They were a violent, brutal government – and are now a violent, brutal insurgency – having more in common with the Mafia or a street gang, than with the US Religious Right.

    I’ve never been shot at by a Dr James Dobson listener… I have been shot at by Mullah Omar’s thugs (+1 for MRAP truck armor & the M2 50cal MG)…

  • dcacklam

    First off, people need to realize something: The Immigration situation is a STALEMATE – it doesn’t matter who’s President, NOTHING will get done at the Federal level to change the status quo.

    Amnesty failed under W Bush, DREAM failed under Obama – and that was with Dem majorities.

    SO….

    The question is: Is Perry the right man for the job, in terms of things a President *CAN* impact…

    And it seems – in terms of such things as energy policy (appointees, getting rid of Zero’s anti-drilling orders, etc), foreign policy, and so on, Rick is the right one for the job…

    The only real ‘problem’ is his monetary policy – but if we get him in, someone can explain to him that ‘hard money’ and the accompanying DEFLATION are far worse for actual, real-world Americans (eg, people with lots of debt & no savings) than the nu-realized prospect of moderate inflation.

  • LibertyWins

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xfwz2TRGss

  • bhconservative

    For once, Erick you are absolutely correct! Now maybe you rethink your Vitriol toward Governor Sarah Palin.She maybe be our only real hope for a genuine Reagan conservative.
    Now you can start by asking her to reconsider.

  • sunshinek67

    The Atlantic and of course “Right Turn” for two are not happy with his assessment of Romney losing the general without his base support. Ha. Keep it coming~

  • sunshinek67

    just curious~

  • sunshinek67

    Hang on to that thread post Election Day :/

  • lineholder

    I got an email this morning from someone who attended their local GOP meeting last night. General mood described of those present was grim, resolved, united against the left, and unwilling to allow the left to dictate the narrative on anything. Those on the right who lend credence to the narrative defined by the left do so at their own peril.

    Just one meeting, that’s all. But if it’s indicative at all in a broad spectrum context…No, Conservatism won’t die. It’s more along the lines of “We’ve just begun to fight”.

  • geoph

    You mean aside from the cheating on his wife, he doesn’t lie? Assuming withholding of the truth doesn’t count as a lie either, I guess you may be right.

    Of course I’d still like to hear his explanation of his Pelosi ad and, frankly, his explanation for what appeared to be a disavowment of Conservative principles after he left Congress. Maybe it’d be more accurate to say since, no make that during, the shut down debacle.
    Look, I loved Newt. I just want to understand this knife in my back!

  • sunshinek67

    A year later, after folks received that Democratic led legislative smack down and the backlash that ensued, the paperback version was “revised”. The line that is removed in the paperback version reads, ?We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country.?

    The “illegals” statement in front of millions and the subsequent anger problem, under pressure, he cracks. Coreless.

  • macphisto96

    Because I have the original hardcover, first edition of No Apology. Romney concludes his chapter on healthcare with this:

    “Before we go the way of socialized medicine, let’s bring to the health care crisis the tools the American economy has perfected – innovation, productivity, cost efficiency, and quality through a consumer driver free market.” (Pg. 193)

    The line about accomplishing the same thing for everyone in the country is in regards to providing subsidies for those that can’t afford insurance instead of standard Medicaid outlays or mandatory emergency room service. It is not a reference to instituting the whole Massachusetts plan nationally.

    And the Mass plan wasn’t what Romney wanted fully either. He vetoed provisions that gave anyone a full subsidy – his original idea was that everyone needed to pay a premium. He also vetoed the taxes levied on businesses that didn’t provide health insurance. Those and several other vetoes were overturned. The subsidies were raised as the Democratic legislature and Gov. Patrick lower subsidy thresholds, drastically driving up the costs.

    Even if Romney did at one time thing this might have been a good idea nationally, does it matter if he doesn’t believe so now?

    Let’s not forget that Newt Gingrich championed mandates at one time. Let’s not forget that an org that Rush LOVES called The Heritage Foundation helped to craft RomneyCare in the first place.

    Heritage has run away from it. Romney has said he doesn’t support Federal mandates at this point. Gingrich has run away from it. Yet only Romney gets fiercely criticized by the right.

    Is it because Romney thinks for himself and is not just some down the line conservative sycophant? Romney’s pragmatism comes from being a businessman, not a politician. He tried something in Mass. He has said he would have implemented it differently, but he’s not governor now.

    And then we get the Chicken Littles of the world telling us the sky is falling if Romney get the nod. The same people who championed Romney and called his plan in Massachusetts BOLD four years ago.

    I think Erick and so many “conservatives” prefer to be martyrs and not be winners. If Romney does well then there’ll be nothing to complain about here – and lack of complaints means lack of web hits.

  • dcarter888

    Oh, So only Romney will appoint a judge who is clueless?

  • gekster

    Reagan made a mistake, so we overlook Romneys appointments.
    I don’t think so.
    I have a habit os not looking of what a politicion says, but what he has done.
    They can say anything, like Romney, they want.
    But you can’t erase the history of what they have done.
    You can’t walk back history.
    And that’s Romney biggest problem, we know what he has done.

  • sunshinek67

    Problem is, he positions in every single campaign for elected office. Tells the voters what they want to hear to get elected. Remember, [he's] “running for office, for Pete’s sake, [he] can’t have illegals”

    From ThinkProgress:
    But Romney is wrong ? after signing reform into law in 2006, he repeatedly argued that his plan could serve as a model for the nation as a whole and the states individually. For instance, in the article by Dan Balz from Nov. 26, 2007 Romney said, ?I was just across the country this week talking about my plan. I?m very proud of my health-care plan and think it should be a model for other states to adopt.? Other examples:
    ? ?How much of our health-care plan applies to other states? A lot. Instead of thinking that the best way to cover the uninsured is by expanding Medicaid, they can instead reform insurance.? [WSJ, 4/11/2006]
    ? ?There are certain aspects of it that I think would work across the country, perhaps better in some states than others. Of course the great thing about federalism is you let a state try it and see how it works before you spread it out. [MSNBC, 4/12/2006]
    -? ?And there may be some aspects of it that can be picked up by other states and that would be valuable for other states, perhaps even some national elements that could be adopted?Everybody in our state has to have health insurance. We`re not going to have free riders ? people who can afford to buy insurance, but who decide instead just to show up at the hospital and get free care. And that`s a model which I think has some merit more generally.? [PBS, 6/5/2006]
    -? ?I?m proud of what we?ve done. If Massachusetts succeeds in implementing it, then that will be a model for the nation.? [Newsweek, 12/2/2007]”

    Take care~

  • ceili_dancer

    Issues 1-12. “insert quote” – Not true.
    Therefore I I have irrefutably countered all of your objections. Now get in line.

    I hope that helps.

  • gekster

    This guy is trying to show him as a conservative.
    Did you have to pop his bubble.
    You can’t point out his liberal past.
    You have to show his conservative future. ;)

    (sarc off)

  • sunshinek67

    ;)

  • 1bunny

    The one big question I really have is Romney with all his money could live anywhere why did he choose Massachusetts? If he is conservative in any way even a moderate conservative why would he choose to live in a very liberal state? I find it a big indicator of his liberal ways. He was not forced to live there, he could have moved to any other state that would fit his views and to be honest you would think the smartest political move to make. Most people are limited by where they grew up, or worked etc but he has a lot of money has a background in Utah and Michigan where his dad was the gov. and he chooses a very liberal state. Why not make the move so many years ago to the state that would be the best to base his political career? The only reason I can think is he is very comfortable living in Massachusetts. So why didn’t he become a moderate democrat? I know his dad was a republican but why not follow your beliefs and not your parents political party. He comes across as more believable as mod dem than a conservative republican.

  • 1spark

    nt

  • sunshinek67

    TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2011
    Romney’s electability questioned

    There are two, primary things that have fueled Mitt Romney’s campaign — his image as an economic guru and the idea that he’s the most electable of the Republican nominees.

    But there are joint arguments that call the latter into question.

    First, there’s the theoretical argument — made today by Red State’s Erick Erickson in a blistering, bruising post — which claims that Romney is a certain loser against Barack Obama.

    Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is a man devoid of any principles other than getting himself elected. As much as the American public does not like Barack Obama, they loath a man so fueled with ambition that he will say or do anything to get himself elected. Mitt Romney is that man.

    …. To beat Barack Obama, a candidate must paint a bold contrast with the Democrats on their policies. When Mitt Romney tries, Barack Obama will be able to show that just the other day Mitt Romney held exactly the opposite position as the one he holds today.

    Voters may not like Barack Obama, but by the time Obama is done with Romney they will not trust Mitt Romney. And voters would rather the guy they don?t like than they guy they don?t trust.

    There’s some evidence that Erickson is right.

    Karl Rove, whom most peg to be quietly backing Romney, has made the same point — except in the context of John Kerry; not Romney.

    In the 2004 election, most Americans stood on Kerry’s side of the issues, but Rove claims they ultimately voted for Bush because they didn’t really believe Kerry believed anything. Voters supposedly like strong leaders they disagree with better than weak leaders who might agree with them on Monday but wake up on Tuesday, wearing a different face.

    That’s exactly the argument Erickson is making, and it’s precisely the one that could hurt Romney badly.

    Now here’s the empirical argument.

    A new WSJ/NBC poll (pdf) shows that a 3rd party bid by a strong libertarian/tea party challenger like Ron Paul would be disastrous for the Republican cause next November.

    Barack Obama decisively beats Romney in a three-way matchup with Paul, 44%-32%. That’s because Paul wins 18% of the vote.

    It’s safe to say that, besides Jon Huntsman, a Romney nomination would have the greatest chance of inspiring such a third party bid. thereby, dooming the Republican candidate and reelecting Obama.

    Now, the counter to that (which I buy) is that Paul actually wouldn’t pull in 18% of the vote — that when push came to shove, lots of folks who hate Obama and hate Romney only slightly less would grudgingly vote for Mitt.

    But it does put Romney’s electability argument in an entirely new light.

  • mikeevergreen

    I don’t always agree with Erick Erickson, but I have to admire his commitment to conservatism in writing this piece.

    I hope Erick does give Huntsman another look. Huntsman is the only Republican candidate I could support that would prevent me from voting for Ron Paul. I talked to an acquaintance from Salt Lake yesterday who said he misses Huntsman as governor, as do many people. The guy has a lot to offer. He has the support of Arianna Huffington as well as potentially someone like Erick Erickson. That says he has wide appeal. Why else would Obama have yanked him out of Utah to be ambassador to China? That probably was an Axelrod move.

  • avagreen

    has the support of Arianna Huffington, you say?
    And, Alexrod, you say?

    Hadn’t realized that conservatives had began thinking this type of endorsement is a “plus”………guess I’m really, really behind times.
    ;/

  • mikeevergreen

    Said Axelrod was trying to clear the field for Obama and probably was behind Obama choosing Huntsman to be ambassador – to remove a potentially strong rival for 2012. Do you actually think Axelrod would vote for Huntsman for president??!!

    My point was that a former Obama supporter like Huffington now promoting the candidacy of Jon Huntsman is a sign that Huntsman has cross-over appeal, despite his socially conservative views.

    Whatever! If Obama wins, Huntsman probably will run in 2016. It might be better for the country if he was a serious contender this year though.

    If Romney becomes the nominee, I hope Ron Paul runs third party. I will vote for him if he does.

  • redmymind

    You are truly blessed to have that great man as Governor of Texas! Our guy out here in California is nothing but a nutty, 60s hippie re-tread who is leading this state to ruin!!!

    Like yourself, I don’t need to go through the mental gymnastics of still “searching for the right candidate” as if we’ve got all the time in the world (WE DON’T). Ever since he jumped into the race, Governor Perry always was and IS the candidate I support!

    Regarding Governor Perry, redmymind will never mutate to “changemymind”!

  • pttx333

    first go-round way back when – he hasn’t changed on iota. They always referred to him as “Moonbeam” and the moniker still fits.

    Yes, we are so blessed with our Governor, and it rips my heart apart to read and hear all of the vicious, vile and disgusting lies that are spouted about him. Even the totally skewed facts are repugnant and end up so skewed that they are lies also. I can tell you from years of personal knowledge, he is a good, rock-solid, funny, great personality, honorable and decent man – not to mention smart as a whip with good character oozing from every pore. I think lots of folks think that because he isn’t an Ivy League graduate that he is stupid. HA, I’ll take an Aggie over any one of them – it is a tough, tough school that graduates some brilliant and mighty fine people, not a dummy to be found. I’m here to tell you that people are in for a ride with him – he’s a winner.

    Don’t know if you’ve read my post elsewhere on RS, but here is an article about Perry’s parents that will tell you exactly who and what Perry is. I grew up in the same area of Texas, and his parents are exactly like everyone I ever knew – good, honest, decent, hard-working folks.

    http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/perry-watch/headlines/20111105-rick-perrys-parents-say-their-son-is-strong-medicine-needed-by-a-sickly-nation.ece?ssimg=368982#

  • macphisto96

    Romney has been very consistent on this in my view, always stating that individual states can decide to do what they want – whether they like the Massachusetts model or want to try something else.

    Unlike most people that just like to talk, Romney actually at least did something. Unfortunately he did it in a place where it wasn’t everything he wanted it to be.

    Romney was on record back then stating that he wanted to take mandates off insurance plans and let people choose ala carte, but the legislature did not allow that, forcing everyone to have coverage for in vitro fertilization and many other things. He did a line item veto and was overridden.

    But never once did he advocate that the Federal Gov’t should take the ideas from Mass. and implement them. He has been consistent in stating that the States should decide what is best for them.

    Isn’t that being a true Federal Republican? How can anyone claim that Romney is an architect for Obamacare when he’s always favor State action on this issue over Federal action.

    Any mandates that Romney has championed, he has done so by encouraging States to enforce them, no the Federal Gov’t. And for most States, that is completely constitutional. For the Federal Gov’t it is not IMHO.

    Knowing about RomneyCare back in 2008, where was the outrage from Erickson, Levin, Rush, etc? All these guys attack him and say he’s not a conservative, yet they all seemed to think he was the great conservative hope in 2008.

    Could it be that Erick Erickson, Rush Limbaugh, and Mark Levin have no idea what a conservative truly is since they keep moving the line? Maybe they’re just upset that Romney isn’t interviewing with them, so they throw fits because he doesn’t play to their narcissistic tendencies.

  • beaker55

    Eric, it’s way too early to tell WHO will be the nominee and you’ve written off the whole election. Conservatism will not die. The world will not end. Obama will likely be defeated and if not, he’ll be neutered by the new conservative tidal wave sweeping America. Heck, in the Socialist Republic of Seattle, the new tax proposals were defeated by a whopping 60% of voters and a ballot proposition to end Washington State’s liquor monopoly (run by SEIU Union employees) won by the same margin! All is not lost. Chin up big boy. Now, get back out there and FIGHT!

  • josephine

    I have not deserted Mr. Cain. I believe he will be cleared of these accusations and will continue to be the front man.
    I will vote for whoever-but I will not desert Mr. Cain.
    I believe that some journalists are chasing who they believe will be the nominee. Deserting too soon. I will not.
    Jon Harwood even talked of “there being no wizard in the GOP to call for his getting out of the race” or something like that. Wizard was used .
    They have looped that noose over the limb and trying very hard to do the trick. This is disgraceful, unAmerican and revolting to me as southern white woman. They are trying to represent Mr. Cain as a black man who assaults and offends blonde white women. Investigations are going on right now that will prove to the public just what these women stand for. They look like prostitutes and whiners to me. They are everything no upstanding honest female would ever want to even be associated with. I have met these types, I stay far a way, they are poison.
    I have been listening to Michael Savage and Mark Levin tonight and they have their thoughts in place. I agree with them.
    I would feel safe and fairly cared for as an American if Mr. Cain were elected Potus. I would feel just about that good if Gov. Perry were elected. I would feel ok if Newt were elected, although he is not really conservative. I will vote for Romney if I have to.
    Nothing any of our radio hosts or journalist or those people that spat out lies can change my mind.
    Mr. Cain is an old school southern gentleman. He has a wonderful sense of humor. I appreciate his person. The uptight Washingtonians and North Easterners need to learn a little humanity. In the south we know about things. We may talk slow, but our minds are very perceptive and bright. We would never want to sound like those in the north. It is very possible that Karl Rove is involved here or it may be O’Bama himself. So there.

  • dcacklam

    Is further left than Romney…

    Figures that he’s be the ‘Alternative to Ron Paul’…

  • krish

    Last few days, I see Wall Street crowd justifying flipflops of previous presidents, now conservatives Ann Coulter, Laura Ingram & the washington RINOS (Rove, Kristol, etc.) are all pushing for Romney & kind of mad that Tea Partyers & Conservatives did not go from Cain to Romney but to Newt!

    If Romney is our nominee….I am certain Obama will be our President for next 4 years! There is no significant difference between Obama & Romney! Obama will just list all Romney’s positions & say, he agrees with him in all of the issues that Romney supported before he decided to run for President!

    Romney’s core principles (if there are any) are more liberal than conservative! call him moderate is a lie! Just take a look at the article or even his recent staments regarding occupy wall street, global warming, issue 2 in Ohio, …..nothing has changed in his principles!

    He will face the same fate as McCain, Dole, HW Bush, Ford……. I do not understand how people say he is better than McCain….at least McCain stood for something such as cutting few departments…Romney will not even do that if elected ..I can bet on that! Conservatives will stay home. Even by a miracle, if he gets elected, he might be only marginally better than Obama…….

    TIme for conservatives & tea partyers to rally behind Newt or Cain…..not elect this LID Romeny. IA & NH Republican primary voters, please make sure Romney loses! The future of the country is in your hands. Dont buy the argument from Fox news or some of the talk show hosts!

  • krish

    Last few days, I see Wall Street crowd justifying flipflops of previous presidents to jsutify Romey. Now conservatives Ann Coulter, Laura Ingram & the washington RINOS (Rove, Kristol, etc.) are all pushing for Romney & kind of mad that Tea Partyers & Conservatives did not go from Cain to Romney but to Newt!

    Ann coulter is writing a hit piece on Newt …yes, so called conservatives sharpening their knives against Newt….. both the liberal media & East coast republicans will no doubt follow…about his temperament, personal issues next..

    Time for conservatives & tea partyers to rally behind Newt or Cain….. IA & NH Republican primary voters, please make sure Romney loses! The future of the country is in your hands. Dont buy the argument from Fox news or some of the talk show hosts etc…