« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

We’re Fighting Over Two Guys and Neither Side Thinks the Other Can Win

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  January 24th, 2012 at 05:30 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I am a firm believer that primaries make stronger candidates. But at some point you just have to stand back, take a sip of bourbon, and sigh “Damn” under your breath as you behold the carnage being wrought within the Republican Party.

The fight has gotten so bitter and acrimonious with only three states chosen because neither side thinks the other side can win. Gingrich supporters understand that the secularists in the media — not the Democrats, but the media to the extent it can be separated from the Obama Machine — will spend six months creeping out independent suburban voters about Mormons, holy underwear, Kolob, postmortem baptism, and views on black people and then, as the coup de grace, Barack Obama will fire up millions of dollars of ads on Bain Capital raiding pension funds forcing the government to cover the debt so Mitt Romney could make millions whether he won or lost a deal.

Romney supporters understand Newt Gingrich will open his mouth.

Mitt Romney will find it very hard to beat Barack Obama because of what Barack Obama will do to him. Newt Gingrich will find it very hard to beat Barack Obama because of what Newt Gingrich will do to himself. That’s the simple truth. Both men will have amazingly difficult times beating Barack Obama. It is possible, but probability never favors picking off an incumbent just for starters.

About the only real difference between the Gingrich and Romney camps is that the Gingrich camp intuitive understands this and is happy to go down with a fighter. The Romney camp is still deluded into thinking a milquetoast moderate from Massachusetts who can’t win Iowa twice in a primary is somehow electable.

In the past the Republican Party has had “party elders” who could help the “electable” candidate get to the general election — Ford in 1976 (loser), Dole in 1996 (loser), McCain in 2008 (loser) and the general contempt these “elders” have shown the tea party give the core of Republican voters no faith in their “elders” or leaders any more. In other words, the nomination process has gone off the rails. It has become extremely unpredictable because the base wants to beat its party leaders on the more likely than not correct assumption that it must do that in order to beat Barack Obama.

In short, this election is more volatile than any we have seen in a very long time because the party leaders, after years of learning to corral its base activists have now lost control and lost the respect of the base.

The deadly consequence is a cage match between the base and the establishment both of whom are backing two deeply, deeply flawed candidates with the odds heavily against them in a general election.

Perhaps, just perhaps, it is time for both sides to let the scales fall from their eyes and in a bit of sanity rethink this thing. Time is short, but there is still time. Surely there is someone out there that both the Romney supporters and Newt supporters can agree on who is not named either Romney or Newt.

I am part of the base that will do everything I can to defeat Mitt Romney because I believe he will be a disastrous nominee who will cost us the House, the Senate, the White House, and consequently the Supreme Court. There are Mitt supporters who feel the same about Newt, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul. So maybe we ought to all find someone who we all kind of like instead of heading to Tampa in August all licking wounds and pretending to rally to the man the voters chose between the evils of two real lessers.

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

    …if there’s a plausible path to it.

    Failing that, I’m with Newt.

  • http://www.letfreedomringblog.com ggross56

    This isn’t that complicated. Newt will defeat President Obama this November because Newt’s economic policies are smart, his reforms are what people agree with & his energy plans are precisely what people are looking for.

    These are 70-30 issues in a nation that’s 2:1 conservative to liberal. What’s difficult about that?

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

    I heard Milquetoast Mitt actually fighting for capitalism, free markets and smaller government. Maybe he doesn’t mean it, but at least he said it.

    That was rather refreshing after weeks of bashing capitalism by republican candidates.

  • votemout2012

    Now we are left with the unelectables. I guess thats what happens when conservatives with a platform to millions sit back and hardly offer a peep when Fox and MSM beating the hell out of good candidate cause he has a couple whoops moments And not to mention when they encourage him to get out of the race. Oh well I guess now we get Newt. Hip Hip hooray!

  • acat

    When’s the last time the candidate was *chosen* (selected, not elected) at the convention?

    Has any candidate ever un-suspended a campaign? (I can’t help but think Pawlenty at least, and maybe also Perry are questioning …)

    Mew

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    You picked Ford (right after the Watergate scandal), Dole (Clinton’s second term), and McCain (2008 economic collapse and Bush) as examples of the “party elders picking electable candidates”. I would argue in none of those elections did we have much of a shot no matter who we ran. Much like the Dems in 1984, it really didn’t matter who they ran, Reagan would have won. Not all elections are really up for grabs in the first place.

    Let’s not forget that those same people railing against the elders also recently gave us Sharon Angle, Christine O’Donnell, and Ken Buck (and let’s not forget Alaska either). Just because the base likes someone doesn’t equate to electability.

    As for Newt, I am going to guess that outside of another economic collapse/recession, he loses big to Obama. Newt can’t keep his mouth shut, has BIG issues from his past, won’t get to have an audience in the presidential debates (since those have historically been silent), has a tax plan that plays right into Obama’s populism theme, and his ego very well may force him to select himself as his running mate.

    I am not sure if Romney wins either, but i think he has a better shot than Newt and do we really think he would veto Republican legislation out of the Congress?

  • runner12

    race who is not named Mittens or Newt. I can think of at least half a dozen who would unite the base and establishment and be a better candidate than either if they entered the race right now.

    I am not sure how plausible that is, but I find myself hoping it will happen. I think Newt would respectfully bow out if this happened, but not Mittens. By all appearances, Mittens feels he is owed the nomination.

    Why the establishment destroyed Perry I will never know. He looks better and better every minute that goes by.

  • clintonformccain

    Stick a fork in the Republican chances in November. The base is more concerned with “sending a message” than beating Barack Obama. And, that is exactly what they are going to get. The Repubican party has sealed the deal on the meme that extremists have taken over the party.

    At this point, it really doesn’t matter who the nominee is. The party has failed to field a candidate capable of winning in November.

    It’s very depressing, but it is what it is.

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    which was what the 60s? And while I think you could un-suspend a campaign, I don’t think Pawlenty is on the ballot anywhere. Perry simply has no shot, once he dumped in SC it was over.

  • http://ironknuckle2012.blogspot.com ironknuckle

    National Review Online just published an editorial on Gingrich that says he is “a gamble.”

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/289051/hour-newt-editors

    “Gingrich has never been popular. Polls have never shown more than 43 percent of the public viewing him favorably at any point in his career. Gingrich backers say that he is inspiring. What he mostly seems to inspire is opposition.”

    I read Erickson’s post and my one reaction is that we have seven (7) days before we nominate someone who could embarass the Republican Party before the whole universe.

  • http://www.letfreedomringblog.com ggross56

    Newt’s fighting for a robust domestic energy plan. That’s got 70% approval.
    Newt’s fighting for balanced budgets, another 70% issue.
    Newt’s fighting for cutting regulations & taxes, another 70% issue.
    Newt’s fighting for appointing strict constructionist judges, another 70% issue.

    Please explain again why Newt isn’t electable.

  • clintonformccain

    was a realitvely bloodless nomination win that allowed him to continue his “non-threatening” middle of the road, competent technocrat general election strategy from Iowa through November.

    Of course, that is no longer an option and the once-gettable swing voters now largely view the Republicans as scary idealogues, high-jacked by the extremist tea party.

  • lineholder

    Seriously, we’ve gone through it again and again. Some people are adamant about wanting executive experience, even if it means that the person with that kind of experience isn’t the most solid of Conservatives. Others would rather have the solid Conservative position, even it means only legislative experience, than to put blind trust in someone who with questionable executive experience.

    Starting from that point forward, the extent to which we seem to be able to come to any point of agreement is limited.

    (Sigh) At this point I’d say have the Conservatives in Congress let it be known that they will take on the mantle of getting this nation back on the right track, focusing on down-ticket elections, and letting POTUS land where it will.

  • texashistorian

    That would be Taft, wouldn’t it? Long time back . . .

    And yes Acat, Pawlenty must feel like Adummy right now

    I just don’t think we get anyone else in this late with no money, no organization built, doesn’t look good.

  • drivlikejehu

    The situation is just horrible. There really aren’t even words for it. The real question is whether there is someone with enough courage to take on the task of saving the party and country. It sure doesn’t look like it.

  • benko

    NT

  • benko

    NT

  • txpat

    They were so in the tank for Mittens, they pushed out the good candidate, Rick Perry.
    So now the elite, fox, some of the conservatives can just choke on what they have brought about trying to push us not Romney folks around.

  • hobiecat

    Explain, besides incumbency, what makes Obama so hard to beat? Wasn’t this the whole reason the RNC has forced the Romneybot on us in the first place?
    The examples you’ve stated, Ford, Dole, McCain and you can throw HW Bush in there as well because his win in 88 was by riding the Reagan coat tails, lost because of this notion that conservatives scare moderates and swing voters. Conservatism wins when it is articulated and championed and this is why Speaker Gingrich is doing so well. I hate to parrot Rush Limbaugh but he is 100% correct about this.
    I cant see anything about Obama that anyone would want more of. And the only way he can win is by trying to take the highroad with him in the General which is what Romney’s handlers are telling him to do. This is why McCain lost and why I and a lot of people fear Romney. Newt may not be the ultamate conservative candidate but he is saying what a lot of us have been feeling for years now,and I believe it will energize not only the base but moderates and independants as well in a landslide victory in the general.
    Look at the breakdown of voters in SC that Newt won. That should tell you something.

  • lineholder

    then what in the dickens are you even doing at a site that promotes Conservative activism???

  • earlgrey

    the Presidency.

    Perhaps we should focus on Sentate and congressional races??

  • romansdaughter

    I have been thinking the same thing and personally I snicker at this whole article. I think I said something like this was going to happen when the only conservative, small government candidate was blacked out and none of the conservatives with a platform even would come to his aid that they were going to regret it and sure enough that is what is happening…cause the ones that are left are not going to beat Obama…they are not enough contrast from Obama….Mittens will not be able to stand up to the criticism that Obama will pour on him and Newt will blast away with all guns blazing but will go down also to Obama. Rick Santorum just isn’t ready to be President and Ron Paul we won’t even go there. I was listening to BBC and it just amazes me how that people from other countries can see so much clearer than people from our own country. This reporter was saying that the Republicans had just committed suicide by rejecting the last really conservative candidate and here he has the best record, blah, blah to run against Obama. I thought yeah tell me about it.

  • Tbone

    and wonder what happened.

    Newt supporters are ready for a fight. They may get whupped but they’ll at least fight.

    I think I’ll throw in with the warriors not the victims.

  • clintonformccain

    … Gosh darn it, people just don’t like Newt Gingrich. In fact, he provokes visceral dislike. Now, some may think that is an admirable quality, but it’s really not a great thing in Presidential candidate.

    I, for example, dislike him so much, that I have changed the channel or hit the mute button every time I’ve seen him on TV for nearly 20 years now. I literally can’t stand to hear his voice. He is a pompous windbag and makes no effort at all to conceal it.

  • txpat

    let’s pick who would be the best that is not currently running.

  • gipper823

    think they know what’s best. And let’s just call them by name, shall we…George Will, John McCain, David Brooks, et al…

    And I couldn’t believe the stuff I was hearing out of Chris Christie’s mouth lately. He tarred and feathered Newt at the expense of the rest of the party. Really? We know he’s in the bag for Mitt, but good grief.

  • texashistorian

    I am a bad historian- Taft beat out TR at convention; how could I forget. I think we need to cast the net further back to William McKinley. Harding was “selected” if you will in a brokered convention, so that might count.

  • romansdaughter

    nt

  • clintonformccain

    All it would have taken is a competent nominee, with a credible track record, who can offer hope for the economy, run a professional caliber campaign, and not scare people.

  • texastory63

    Look, we should be focusing on reality here. There is zero chance that a brokered deal gives us a conservative standard bearer. We would get someone worse than Romney. I know all y’all on this site are down on Santorum, but if the tea party issues are what this election is about: he is the best against Obama care-mandates and bailouts.

  • runner12

    By the way, I happen to be a supporter of those “radical” Tea Party people. Are not they the ones who occupied Zuccotti park, engaged in assaults on women, and broke numerous laws? Oh, no wait… that was the OWS crowd. You know, the Leftists.

    After the Tea Party left their rallies, they cleaned up after themselves and were respectful to law enforcement. Those radical Tea Party people! How dare they be responsible citizens! What is the world coming to…..

  • clintonformccain

    Don;’t confuse Republican primary voters in the most Republican state in the country with the demographics of the swing state voters who will decide this, and every other, Presidential election.

  • texastaxpayer

    :(

  • clintonformccain

    I’m telling you how this is playing in Peoria. The GOP is committing political suicide.

  • texashistorian

    Which one of the current field can’t make claims to any of those things? As for scary- who is scared of who? Squishy middle of the roaders that are scared by conservatism? How are the campaigns unprofessional? as compared to whom? Obama? We know what he’s got, and it isn’t going to work this time around. All of the GOP nominees, including Paul, offer a hell of a lot more hope for the economy than Obama, and all have claims to a credible track record. Again, what is the comparison here? Obama’s track record? It isn’t anywhere close to lost just because you don’t get your ideal candidate. Guess what, I didn’t either, but why cry and moan about it now? Let’s back whoever our guy is, and be realistic about the chances. Obama sucks, and only someone like a Bob Dole could go down to him. I don’t even think Romney is that hapless.

  • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

    this wouldst light a fire under the bottom of the gop electorate. That would be a good day indeed.

  • nativetexan41

    We are stuck with the candidates that are left. I am a Perry supporter and am finding it hard to get excited about anyone. I will probably vote for Newt if it’s not decided before it gets to my state. I am against anyone jumping in now, don’t care for the names being thrown around.
    This is one big mess!! Romney feels entitled to the nomination this year.
    In the mean time while our guys bloody each other up, Obama has said no to the Keystone Pipeline that would create jobs, and he gave a company in Brazil a contract to build a military plane, that several American companies could build thus creating more jobs for Americans.
    This is the real issues our guys need to be discussing. We need jobs.

  • texashistorian

    You give Obama too much credit. How is he doing with those swing voters in swing states? Poorly enough that any of the three (and maybe even Paul) can beat him.

  • texastaxpayer

    ;)

  • PubliusII

    is not a retread from past decades and does not have the overwhekming baggage both Newt and Romney lug along. Who, you ask? Well, how about:

    1. Scott Walker.
    2. Marco Rubio.
    3. Chris Christie.
    4, Bob McDonnell of Virginia.
    5. Bobbie Jindal.

    There are surely others. The foregoing are just a sample of fresh people, most of whom are governors, not Washington insiders.

    I am sure that people will find something objectionable about each of them.
    No candidate will be perfect for everybody.

    But the Obama smear machine, aided by the media, is going to crucify whomever we nominate. I think that this election will be the ugliest of my lifetime. Newt and Romney are both big, fat targets for Obama and the media; each offers plenty of raw material for them to use.

    Eric is right: neither Newt nor Romney can win against what Obama is preparing. If we want to beat Obama, we have to nominate somebody else.

  • clintonformccain

    Oh, I don’t know. I would think that managing to get your name on the ballot in all the states would be kind of a baseline criteria for a professional campaign…

    If you can’t get your name on the ballot, you are wearing a clown costume and driving a clown car when it comes to running a national campaign. It’s a joke, really.

  • clintonformccain

    I can’t stand him. But, the Republicans can’t seem to manage to field a competent candidate to run against him. The GOP is in the middle of turning a silk purse into a sow’s ear for 2012. It’s like watching a train wreck.

  • jdaman

    I’ve asked this before, who do you want to try for a convention run? Who do you think has a chance?

    By the way, to anyone trying to blitz this post and say that that’s not possible or whatever, I know it’s unlikely, I am simply asking Erick Erickson who he thinks has the best chance.

  • Common_Cents

    There will be no magic rescuer riding in to save the day. Let’s just deal with that and put it to the side. It is pure fantasy to think there is some prepared vetted magical candidate out there who can consolidate, unify and build a winning organization.

    We have 4 choices, we have to pick the best one, and as Buckley said, the most conservative that can actually win.

    Gingrich has the tools to deal w/ his baggage. That can be overcome.

    Romney does not have the tools of genuine electability. Romney cannot be someone he isn’t.

    Newt is Newt, but Romney fails at being a chameleon. People pick up on that phony stuff very quickly.

  • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

    thus is what happens. A great speaker is often just a great liar. We have two candidates that deflect question about record pretty well. But that is scaring the while party, because both have serious baggage. Perry is probably looking pretty good right about now to those elders.

  • texashistorian

    so let’s remember it’s a primary. This happens fairly often- they beat and bloody each other to get the nomination. Then, someone is chosen with plenty of time to make the necessary case against Obama. It will happen, but we have to get through this first. Remember the ancient history that is 2008 and the nastiness in the GOP and Dem primaries. We political junkies get caught up in the process sometimes and fail to see the larger picture. One way of the other this is sorted by summer with a few months to take it to Obama and all that stuff- Boeing, Keyston XL, Solyndra, the A-10- comes out. There is a ton of it and it will get hit hard. But first things first.

  • ctredstater

    I am still grieving over the early demise of the potentially best candidate we had since Reagan.

    Having had time to think about it – I conclude that when Perry entered the race his opponents were far more prepared for him than he was for them. The assault on Gardasil, the mischaracterization of his immigration policy, the comments that “he reminds people of GWB”, etc.

    the left wing media knew how “dangerous” he would be to them, and they didn’t want him to get traction. the pro-Romney Beltway Republicans knew he was a real threat to Romney’s candidacy.

    I agree that he gave them too much material to trash him with. but it is also true that outside RS the real Big Kahunas of the Conservative Media just stood by while he was destroyed and never stood up to him. Rush FINALLY had a great testimony AFTER he left the campaign.

    So we are left with this. I think this entire discussion is a bit looney. It presumes to think for the rest of the electorate. Erik seems to be saying that he is okay with this thing being decided in smoke filled rooms as long as he is one of the ones in the room.

    Let the process play out. Let the candidates make their case – address their weaknesses. Let some other candidate jump in if they feel they have something to add. But lets NOT all be the smartest guy in the room and “pick” someone we in the abstract think might be good. EVERY one of the so-called “top tier” people I hear mentioned have significant flaws which the bloodthirsty media would be only too happy to feast on.

    Let the process play out. Connecticut votes later this spring.

  • kowalski

    I’ve never said Newt would cost us the House and the Senate. First of all, we don’t even hold the Senate yet ;) . Secondly, I really just don’t understand the idea that if *either* of these guys is the nominee it will have a major impact on the House and Senate races.

    I’m probably ignorant here but what makes anyone think the Senate and House are either more or less in play for Republicans because of the Presidential nominee they choose? Am I the only person left in America who thinks of all these things separately?

  • Scope

    for saying that. Yes, when conservatives that have the microphone sit back, and allow a complete trashing of a good candidate, you will wind up with “unelectables” every time. The very same thing happened in 08, and is why we wound up with McCain. So much goes for the “when conservatism is on the ballot, it wins every time.” That went out the window long ago, and the author of that comment still hasn’t gotten that message, or felt no need to further it. Imagine that, after only three contests, there isn’t a conservative left on the stage.

  • likeaglove

    Newt has a HIGH familiarity rating and his unfavorables are high (mid- to upper-50s).

    People viscerally don’t like the guy. He’s arrogant and condescending and spiteful. I don’t like milquetoast (Romney), either, but I’d take milquetoast over petty, nasty, and hypocritical.

    I don’t know if it’s possible, but I wish someone else would get in. I was hoping against hope for DeMint or Coburn. Heck, I wish ERICK would get in. He could unite the GOP and probably win it easily. Please, GOP. Give us a better choice — an ELECTABLE candidate. I’m scared (literally) of getting another four years of the empty-suit-in-chief.

  • lineholder

    If you were, then you’d realize that the TEA Party has had its own part to play in the reviving the Conservative cause during the past few years.

    This is one situation in particular where taking a conservative path, particularly a fiscally conservative path, is the RIGHT thing to do, clintonformccain. What the people in Peoria think doesn’t alter what is right. If they want to go on being of the mind that it is “extreme”, that’s their choice. But it shouldn’t dissuade those who know it to be the wisest path to take from pursuing it and speaking openly about it.

  • hobiecat

    That all depends on how you define a competent candidate. Explain please.

  • clintonformccain

    I figured that, with any luck, a really strong Republican candidate would emerge from the primaries. But, the ace in the hole was that the fall-back guy, Romney, was at least a credible nominee, positioned as a safe technocrat. I was really hoping it wouldn’t come to that, but at least the safety net was there.

    And now the GOP base has cut the wires and taken down the safety net, basically kissing November goodbye. Not because there is anything particular to like about Newt Gingrich, but because they are mad as hell and want to send somebody (not sure who) a message. Just like throwing away a Senate seat with Christine O’Donnell.

  • kowalski

    Why are the House and Senate being tied to the Presidential nomination with Newt or Mitt any more than they would have been, say, if Bachmann was the nominee? Or Cain? What is so special about Mitt/Newt/Newt/Mitt that they have special coattails to change the outcomes in the individual House and Senate races?

  • likeaglove

    I would be a happy camper if Jindal jumped in (if it’s even possible at this point).

  • fightnright

    moosepoop!

    No way I’m giving up the ship yet – what are you the captain of the Concordia? ;-)

    There are hundreds of thousands of voters out there – independents, moderate Dems, – people who know d@mn well that they are NOT as well off as they were 13-and-counting trillion dollars ago, and are smart enough to identify Obama’s ‘lingering Bush economy’ / ‘it’s too soon to see my results’ excuses as the BS that they are. No piece of Democrat ad campaign fantasy will be able to overcome fiscal reality.

    Just as conservative voters are searching for anybody but Romney/Newt here, there will be plenty of desperate Americans searching for anybody but Obama to vote for in November. The 50/50 current poll results reflect a larger name recognition gap than has been taken into account, and chances are, a worse jobs/housing/energy/everyday inflation price environment than the one that prompted scores of voters to jump ship in 2008 will have the same effect in 2012.

    The smartest and probably falsest meme being planted by Dems today is not one of polity, it the one that says Obama is infallible and terrorizes us into apathy. That apathy – NOT fielding the perfect Republican candidate (as if O. was ever the perfect candidate himself !) is the biggest danger we all face.

  • votemout2012

    Santorum is a social conservative and that is where his conservatism end. He screams establishment republican b/c of his record. He does not have the experience we need to run this country. I would vote for Romney over Santorum.

  • romansdaughter

    and who was the best candidate for jobs? They blew it and now we are all going to suffer. Obama is just doesn’t care if America goes down the toilet. Yep, the best conservative job candidate and he was rejected cause he had some oops moments in debates and so who cares about jobs or the economy..lets just elect someone who is a good debater, Now we are finding out that Mittens isn”t a good debater himself and that Newt is a good debater but we need someone who isn’t going to blow up when he can;t contain his ego. I am so disgusted.

  • clintonformccain

    That’s the problem. Clown show.

  • likeaglove

    I’m usually more than happy to send a message. However, I don’t think the ends justify the means in this case. I fear we can’t survive four more years of the community organizer — and this rally around Newt makes Obama all but inevitable (IMO). Romney’s not great, either, but Newt is palpably loathed by a wide swath of the electorate. Besides that, he has a tendency to self-destruct.

  • nativetexan41

    I know you are right but it is hard to watch all this going on. The 24-7 news gets overwhelming for sure. We do have some good people not in the race but to me they would not have time to get vetted.

  • ctredstater

    political trends these days have a “half life” of about twelve hours. it will all look different by Friday.

  • redcal

    You live by the sword, you die by the sword. If Gingrich is fatally flawed because of his popularity ratings, what does that make Romney? They’re within the margin-of-error of being similarly unpopular, except that we’re on old ground with Gingrich and all-new terrain for Mittens. In other words, Mitt has more room to fall.

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/poll-romney-s-unfavorability-skyrockets-20120124?mrefid=election2012

  • votemout2012

    And look what we did to him. No wonder no conservatives don’t have the courage to come forward. We allow MSM, conservative pundits and FoxNews to tell us the most electable is unelectable.

  • texashistorian

    Every one that gets named has pretty much said no to running already. They didn’t want to then, and won’t likely change their minds. It’s like Kristol and his Mitch Daniel’s drumbeat. The man said no, his wife doesn’t want it, he won’t bother. Christie said no, Jindal has ruled it out. Can we draft Fred? He doesn’t stay busy enough selling reverse mortgages.

  • hoosierdad

    So why isn’t Santorum catching on? Can he be the viable “third option” here, if the base doesn’t want Romney and the establishment doesn’t want Newt?

  • romansdaughter

    I have said the same thing about up thread. How come a few days back Erick was encouraging Perry to get out of the race and endorse Newt? That is what I would really like to know??? And now suddenly Erick doesn’t think Newt can beat Obama either.
    What a mess.

  • texashistorian

    has a competent campaign, as does Romney. There’s two of the four right there. And they can do all the other things you suggest.

  • nativetexan41

    Perry was rejected by the establishment and then the people , he was by far the best one to create jobs for America and to change things on DC.
    I am sad for the loss of Perry and disgusted with the Republican leadership.

  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    The myth of Newt’s electability.

    Favorability stats:
    Gingrich 26% favorable, 60% unfavorable

    Fox News, 1/12-1/14:
    Obama +5
    Romney +7
    Gingrich -29

    CBS/NYT, 1/12-1/17:
    Obama -7
    Romney -14
    Gingrich -32

    PPP, 1/13-1/17:
    Obama -3
    Romney -18
    Gingrich -34

    Newt loses to One-bama by as much as 14 points in some polls
    CBS/NYT (all numbers are VS OBAMA):
    Romney EVEN
    Paul -4
    Santorum -11
    Gingrich -11

    ABC/WAPO
    Romney +2
    Paul -7
    Santorum -9
    Gingrich -12

    Fox News:
    Romney -1
    Santorum -12
    Gingrich -14

    CNN
    Romney +1
    Paul -2
    Santorum -6
    Gingrich -9

    Newt suffers from Sarah Palin Syndrome: very popular with their fan base but absolute poison to the general public.

  • kowalski

    Herman Cain was not a “joke” candidate by any stretch of the imagination. That’s not an opinion, it’s the result of the tremendous outpouring of support he got and the immediacy with which he rose to the front of the news cycle and the Republican field.

    When Cain won the Florida straw poll in late September he went from being the “Rent’s Too Damn High” candidate to a serious contender literally overnight and he was still in that position until he decided to end his candidacy.

    You can call him a “flawed” candidate but he definitely wasn’t a joke.

    Bachmann was closer to a joke. She did her best and she was sincere but there was *never* any blip of strong momentum building for her candidacy. In fact I think calling her a “joke” is an insult she doesn’t deserve. She just wasn’t the candidate people wanted despite doing everything she could to convince them. In a crowded field, it’s going to happen to everyone eventually except the one who gets the nomination.

  • http://ironknuckle2012.blogspot.com ironknuckle

    What you’ve acknowledged is that Gingrich has distorted Governor Romney’s record of success enough to risk the general election.

  • nocontest

    this is amateur hour

  • trevorb

    but I also don’t think he was ready for what it would take to run a national campaign. It’s a real shame, because he was better than what our choices are now.

  • dp79

    This site’s comments sections are some of the most defeated bs I’ve ever seen. Rick Perry was my first option, however I suggest you whiners get behind the guy who “the chosen one” endorsed. You guys all claim to be such Perry lovers but yet when he tells you to get behind somebody what exactly do you people do? You go and pick asinine statistics, and your “expert” gut feeling that he’ll get crushed in a general election. Guess what? The Tea Party did the same damn thing in 2010, because of anger and they had enough, what exactly do you think is the sentiment behind Newt? God almighty this is so crazy, you all remind me of Top Gun when they’re telling Maverick to get back in the game and engage. Wake up folks, it’s time to get behind a mouth piece who can express what the party should stand for confidently, without a consultant and who I have a feeling after reading Allen West’s comments lately might be a potential Veep. If it works out for Newt, I’ll be glad to see somebody fire off as many shots as he can, and he will. Win the crowd, and get back in the game. Sorry for the rant. Don’t mean to offend but it’s true.

  • dp79

    This visceral hatred of Newt comes from liberals, primarily that should tell you something, and the establishment hates him too, that should also tell you something.

  • lineholder

    clintonformccain doesn’t particularly like Repubs anyway, so if you’re looking for optimism and/or objectivity from that quarter…you might be waiting for a while.

  • mkozikowski

    Perhaps we can convince R. Perry to re-enter the race. Now that the Smallish, liberal states are over, and we are starting to enter the real Conservative states, we can get a little forward momentum for the only real Conservative.

  • texastaxpayer

    BTW….. isn’t this the same Erick that demanded Rick Perry drop out and endorse the very same Newt he now calls “unelectable”? I mean sure it was a long long long time ago, last week. Now he is suggesting what? He shouldn’t have? Newt was never electable? Now that he is winning and leading the polls he says he can’t win? WTF? I think its time someone starts drug testing Erickson he is becoming completely erratic.

  • redsox9687

    I have been agonizing over this for the past several days. What I have resolved at this point is:

    1) Romney– We all know that the Democrats have absolutely nothing to run on, and will just attempt to turn the entire debate into “forget our record– just look bad a Republican administration would be for the middle class.” While this may seem like a pathetic joke to many of us, when they start putting a billion dollars behind the message that “the middle class is hurting right now and all the Republicans are proposing to do about it is to gut the safety net in order to keep billionaires’ tax rate at 14%,” whether like it or not, I GUARANTEE YOU IT WILL GET TRACTION. This is the absolute WORST POSSIBLE TIME to nominate a private equity barron worth a quarter of a billion dollars to represent us. The Democratic machine will destroy him.
    2) Newt– we all love him, but he was essentially taylor-made for a Republican primary– NOT A GENERAL ELECTION. Forceful and eloquent jabs at the MSM in debates will always give us “cold shivers up our thighs” in ecstatic euphoria and may make us willing to forget everything that is fundamentally wrong with him, but we do it at our own peril… In a general election when he needs to try to persuade independent women voters that he isn’t a complete scumbag he won’t be able to do it by just deflecting the whole thing into another attack on the media. That works in a Republican primary… not in a general election. With his Congressional ethics issues, his “history as a lobbyist,” and his numerous (and probably many more yet to come) rhetorical gems on how “maybe we should change our child labor laws so that poor kids can start cleaning our toilets”, he is not going to win this.

    Conclusion (and it seems like Erick is already a step ahead of me on this one): we need someone else. The fear surrounding it seems to be that “since it is so ‘late in the process,’ someone new would have absolutely no chance since they would have to completely start from scratch in terms of fundraising and building an organization.” The response to this would be: in past elections, organization may have been important. We are now in the territory, though, where everyone is so running around with their hair on fire that 30 seconds in a debate wound up swinging the South Carolina electorate by 25 points. This is a whole new world.

    The question to figure out now is: WHO? (and anyone who delightedly chimes in now saying it should be Ron Paul will not be taken seriously). Santorum? I don’t think so either. At this point it’s gotta be someone new.

  • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

    …again: there’s nothing we can do about that now. We go to war with the party we have.

  • nocontest

    question is where is the first string of candidates? Who are they? Why aren’t they running now?

  • hobiecat

    If you remember, was the only one besides Mitt that was considered a serious contender by the News media when he first got into the race. Rick Perry was a casualty of his first debate appearance mainly because of Michelle Bachmann’s kamakazi attack about gardasil and twelve year old girls. Combine that with Ricks ill-fated attempt to fire a shot across Mitt Romney’s bow and the media blackout afterword, Perry never fully recovered.
    His biggest issue was that the expectations were set too high to begin with.

  • redsox9687

    ?forget our record? just look *how* bad a Republican administration would be for the middle class.?

  • redsox9687

    ?forget our record? just look *how* bad a Republican administration would be for the middle class.?

  • acat

    Inter-party or intra-party, we’re still at war with the party we have.

    Mew

  • neum432

    candidates are in their 2nd or 3rd year of service in the governorships or congress. The “R” bench is strong but the current starting lineup really sucks.

  • nocontest

    our second sting of candidates so where is the first string?

  • http://dreamsfrommyforefathers.com RoguePolitics

    Picking somebody acceptable to the Base AND acceptable to the Establishment is no longer possible.

    After watching ourselves get sold out by the party of “less government” and “fiscal responsibility” and “moral values” from 2000-2006 and again by the Establishment folks in the House since 2010, the base is beginning to recognize that ANY candidate acceptable to the Establishment will only be acceptable to the Establishment because they will sell out conservatism again.
    The Establishment doesn’t want conservatism, they want to control the purse strings of, and wand-of-power for, the ever expanding monster in Washington. They had an opportunity in 2000 and again in 2010 and they have displayed their colors without shame.

    This is a battle for the soul of the party and any “compromise” candidate is conservatism being bartered away again.

  • Tbone

    Kinda like Romney.

  • acat

    (cat is in the shadow of Chicago)

    … and this is not what I’m seeing.

    It was never going to be an easy election, but dissatisfaction with Obama is quite high, outside the urban centers. Those “swing” voters you were counting on? They still don’t like Obama .. so as long as the GOP nominee comes across as relatively sane, they’ll go along.

    Reagan’s challenge in the 1980 debates was to be nice but undeniably different from Carter. The 2012 GOP nominee has the same challenge.

    Mew

  • ohiohistorian

    Obama and Clinton were “licking wounds” like you describe 3 years ago. It sure didn’t hurt BHO against McCain. In fact, it probably helped.

    I am worried that we have so far picked four elitists to run against each other. Let them keep battling it out. It will energize the base, and make a convention pick of someone like Jindal or even John Kasich (the man who REALLY balanced the budget) to be a convention pick. The only regret that I have is that the advertisers and networks will get fat out of all of the money spent to try to elect these guys.

  • lushboi

    Thank you Red State, for this moment of pure schadenfreude!

    Go Newt!

  • Tbone

    behavior.

  • carolina

    So, whoever wins the Presidency brings on a bunch of down ticket people on his “coattails”.
    I vote specifically for each office, by candidate. Many, many people just pull the party lever with no serious thought of the down ticket people they just voted for.

  • ohiohistorian

    How was Eisenhower drafted? Wasn’t that by the convention?

    Now for the comment: Ross Perot in one of his runs unsuspended his general election campaign. So precedents do exist.

    Bark?

  • Scope

    “Am I the only person left in America who thinks of all these things separately?” Yes.

    The 08 promise of “hope and change” swept aside most Republicans, and brought about a Senate and House to help him accomplish that “hope and change.” If you deny that, you are the only one thinking that elections don’t go in waves, usually they call that coat-tails.

  • beee

    All I can say is we had a great candidate in Perry and he was ridiculed out of the race..So what if he made some gaffes early on…His message was conservative and his baggage factor was tiny…Now look what we’ve got..this back and forth of who’s more unelectable…Totally ridiculous..lets be honest..We have been “Played by the media and the establishment power brokers”

  • unsk

    This fight is not just about who is electable.

    It is about who will represent the interests of the vast majority of the Republican Party – the base.

    There is no evidence that Romney at all will represent the base’s interests. He and the rest of the RINO establishment have consistently sold out the base over the last few years. Why would you expect him to govern any differently in the future?. Except that he may – and I use that word with great caution- may be preferable over Buraq Obama, I have seen no reason to vote for Romney in either the primaries or the general election.

    Romney represents the interests of the Progressive/Rino TBTF/ Nanny State Hegemon that really is at war with the rest of America. He makes my blood boil. I will never vote for him.

    Newt on the other hand can genuinely connect and inspire the base. There is an excitement about the prospect of finally have a guy who take on the Establishment and turn around this country.

    You guys seems to forget – and seldom mention – that we are in the midst of a very deep, destructive, demoralizing Depression that is ruining the lives of tens of millions of Americans.

    Neither Romney nor Obama seems to give a crap. To them, our current approach is just peachy. Bailouts are just the ticket. Global Warming is our greatest problem. That Obamacare is really great. We really don’t need to cut the deficit or regulations but it sure would be nice if we could raise your taxes
    – a lot. Oh ya, have we got a great new thing for you – a Value Added Tax that will enslave you forever and help us in the Establishment to grow government to the moon.

    Newt will have none of it. He of all the candidates is the only one who seems to have the passion to take on the entrenched Progressive/Rino Hegemon and really fix our problems. None of the rest – even Perry- have that passion. And yes, he is only one who seems willing to fight for us and we know it will be a hellacious, knock down drag out fight to the death because the Ruling Class will not give up their power without a huge fight.

    The base is excited about Newt. That will translate into greater turnout and greater enthusiasm and a winning candidate.

    Also everyone knows Obama has not even tried to fix the economy. He is the most ideological, radical, destructive and corrupt President of all time, and the Left knows it. Few like him anymore and many on the Left are disappointed how he has handled the economy, the Banks and the War.

    Just a decent campaign by Newt will wipe out Buraq. No question about it.

  • ohiohistorian

    He cut government by about 1/3 and cut the heck out of Wilson’s income tax rates. So we entered what were called the “Roaring 20′s”. Not a bad candidate. His “cronyism” can be ignored as piking by today’s standards (Solyndra out-does Teapot Dome by several thousand times).

  • Tbone

    Bachmann was worse than a joke. She was an embarrassment and a spoiler.

  • Tbone

    What’s your point?

  • neum432

    but I just get disgusted when I hear him say that FDR was the greatest President of the 20th century or his fawning over Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt. He seems to gather some of his inspiration from the early progressives and it just bothers me.

    At least Newt will put up a fight. After 4 years of GWB hiding under his desk and Mclame refusing to criticize Obama, republicans are just looking for a fighter.

  • Tbone

    to kill themselves as a result. Looks like I will have to settle for just one.

  • carolina

    He may find himself SERIOUSLY drafted. (the establishment thinks the base loves him, which is a different subject)
    Christie could out-Newt Newt.
    He has major name recognition.
    Another obvious candidate is Mitch Daniels. It is no coincidence that he is giving the SOTU rebuttal speech.
    NBC said that the GOP establishment would find another candidate if Romney loses FL. They will. There is too much at stake.

  • votemout2012

    Brokered convention only thing that can save us from Newt and Romney and I am PRAYING really hard.

  • trevorb

    I fully remember the kind of beating Perry took when he entered the race. Both Obama and the establishment saw him as a threat, so he had to be destroyed. Unfortunately, they managed to do so, at least his current run for president, but the message isn’t gone.

  • ctredstater

    I was praying that Perry would survive to this “round” – when there would only be a few left. it is absurd that these “winnowing” states have so much power. and the media has been screaming for the field to narrow – so they can figure out who the candidate is and spend the rest of the year trying to wipe him out.

    so much turned when the Iowan evangelicals went “in” for Santorum instead of Perry. It became a self-fulfilling prophecy. People didn’t vote for him because he was “unelectable’ despite a whole string of excellent debates, a great platform, and a fantastic governance record.

  • jswolter

    I think three facts suggest that the Virginia GOP is more to blame than the candidates.

    First, only 2 out of 5 candidates made it on the ballot. That is ridiculous and sugests by itself that the procedure is flawed. Why not make it even harder that way we can narrow the number of people on the ballot to one person. Thus, we could elect a nominee based solely on their ability to get on a ballot (since this is the true measure of a professional and competent campaign).

    Second, the only two people who made it on the ballot were candidates that had run in 2008. This suggests that the ballot procedure is flawed in that it heavily favors previous candidates with established networks in Virginia.

    Third, it has been noted that the Virginia GOP changed their validation policies:

    http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/12/26/va-gop-changed-ballot-access-rules-last-month/

    Thus, missing the Virginia ballot is less a measure of competence and more a measure of the extent the ballot procedure is flawed.

  • ww2nd95

    .. why Huntsman was pushed aside, while Romney glided forward as the “electable” candidate. Huntsman seemed to me, to be the only one running that had a very good shot at beating Obama, not just a 50/50 chance.

    I know it’s to late and I’m just ranting, but I just do not understand it. The man was a 2 time elected Gov from a very conservative state, and did an excellent job, without raising taxes.

    “He left office with his approval ratings over 80%. Utah was named the best managed state by the Pew Center on the States. Following his term as governor, Utah was also named a top 3 state to do business in”

    I simply do not get it..

  • ctredstater

    and dignity. I have this fantasy that his candidacy could somehow be brought to life again – especially considering what we have here.

    but I don’t that is realistic. So I pray that Newt will survive, hew to the conservative line, and grow up.

  • Scope

    In an early debate we had Bachmann with her wild eyed mental retardation screetches on one side of the stage, and Santorum with his AK47 hit on Perry as an amnesty supporter, until the moderator removed his finger from the trigger. At least PA was smart enough to send Santorum home. Hopefully Bachmann will be sent home for some much needed counseling, hopefully not from her husbands government funded clinic.

  • dajeeps

    there are [insert candidate name here] bots crawling all up and down RS. You can tell who they are because they relentlessly attack the same candidate over and over like they are, well… paid to attack said candidate over and over and no one slaps them down for being redundant, glib, etc,,,

  • carolina

    The GOP establishment really blew this one by being so locked into Romney. However, since the GOP political elite GROOMED Romney since the early 90′s ……. they couldn’t ‘think on their feet’. (besides, most of these GOP elite are getting OLD)
    However, they WILL get someone else to run if Romney loses FL. You can count on it.
    At least Newt will have gotten rid of Romney for us!

  • jswolter

    …that he was the most consequential president in modern history. Newt was not endorsing his policies. I know Glenn Beck is big on this but he’s freaking crazy so please discount what he says.

    You cannot seriously suggest that Newt hopes to create a new New Deal or to advance the cause of socialism. However, taking into consideration that FDR’s policies completely reshaped our country and dramatically altered its direction, you can see how Gingrich, who also hopes to dramatically change the course of the country, would appreciate and complement FDR.

  • andystone

    without even listening to him speak, just because you have some freak psychological issue that you imagine is shared by everyone else. That’s exactly why he won SC by 13 points – voters turned out in record numbers, filled with admiration for the visceral dislike the mere sound of his voice caused during the debates, didn’t they?

  • conservnca

    before Perry was forced out by the same people you mention, I wrote on this site about what the so called conservatives were doing to Perry and to this country’s chances of recovering, and said those same people live here too! They might think because of money, position, or friends in high places they will be able to escape the consequences of all of their actions.
    Think again, we truly do reap what we sow! No matter what your belief system is, there are some principals in place that are universal. Reaping and sowing is one of them.
    If those with influence would have used it to rally around the only one that could have united the R,s and gotten our country on it’s way to recovery we would be energized with hope for the upcoming election instead of dread.
    I can’t believe what I just read from EE. He was one of the one’s to push Perry out, as well as the silent tea partiers who are now lamenting over the choices we have. Even Europe, Europe mind you, is saying we just killed our chances by pushing Perry out.
    The reason’s behind not backing Perry are the lamest I think I have ever heard. He is the only one with the RECORD! At least we wouldn’t have to find excuses for his. obama and his team would’ve had to make things up to use against him, not have a treasure trove to campaign with.
    Those who pushed Perry out, either directly or indirectly by not endorsing him, should be uniting to beg him back.At least maybe then we would still have a chance.

  • mikelindell2

    Put in Daniels, Christie, Ryan, Bush and i think newt woukd still be a strong contender. His knowledge base is so extensive, his national record is so impressive, his plans are so original, and he articulates so well that i feel he could still do well with all of them in the field. The only drawback is some personal stuff from decades ago which will be irrelevant in the campaign.

  • elayman

    Why is it too late since voters are only now realizing they’ve been had, for one or both be able to unsuspend his campaign?

    Legally speaking, the logistics of someone new would be difficult. Besides the horrendous perception of a party in national chaos when candidate are already limping out of South Carolina, they’ll limp through Florida, there would be a three way race killing each other and killing the party’s chances.

  • trevorb

    do not have a perfect candidate. I was hoping for Perry, but while his message was strong, perhaps being president just isn’t in the cards for him right now.

    Like it or not, this is who we have: a choice between Romney and Gingrich. I suggest we not forget our real target: the left-wing president in the White House.

  • Tman8

    General David Petraeus.

  • dajeeps

    Live by the polls. die by the polls….

  • neum432

    was just hoping for a pres. nominee who would try to dismantle parts of a 3.6 trillion dollar govt not just steer it to the right. In my mind any guy who would get paid millions of dollars to consult fannie and freddie must not really believe in small government solutions. We will see, Newt will get my vote in Nov….but I might not put a sign up this year.

  • squeek71

    I really believe that the base could rally around Allen West (or even Bobby Jindal) as our candidate. Almost everyone loves West, and he has both the knowledge and the backbone to take the fight to Obama. I would give anything for a do-over on this primary election. I am miserable with the choices left. Please, please give me a better option.

  • romeg

    (1) No one “Trashed” Rick Perry into quitting. Rick Perry would be the first one to admit that his debate performances cost him dearly in terms of performance at the polls. The conventional wisdom is that debates don’t influence elections. That simply is not true. Ever since the Kennedy/Nixon debates they have been powerful influences on voters. Debate performance brought Governor Perry low and Debate Performance saved Newt’s bacon.

    (2) Neither Newt nor Mitt are “Unelectable”. But, as Erick so eloquently point out, that can be arranged and by attempting and, to some degree, succeeding at gutting one another in this knife fight of a primary campaign, they stand a good chance of doing exactly that.

    That said, November is a long way off; an epoch in political terms. If a clear winner emerges before the Convention in Tampa then the obvious loser owes it to the party and to the nation to capitulate and then fall in behind the leader and drive the barbarians out of the gates of the city.

    While I prefer Newt’s firebrand, bomb-throwing style to Mitt’s Eastern Liberal establishment go along to get along, EITHER of these men are vastly superior to the Commie-in-Chief that now occupies the White House.

    Besides, if Newt is the nominee, there’s a pretty good chance that Rick Perry will be his running mate making him the obvious successor to Newt IF that comes to pass.

  • ww2nd95

    I cannot stand Romney or Newt to be honest. Newt is as much of a flip flopper as Romney is and I honestly do not think either one is genuine. How can people hop on the Romney band wagon, when he’s taken ever possible position, simply to LOSE elections? He won in MA, a very blue state, I’ll give him credit for pulling that off, but then he left with the 47th ranked state in job creation during a boom period.

    The establishment absolutely blew this one backing Romney. And the rip on Huntsman for serving under Obama as an Ambassador to a very real rival country, I think was a very weak argument against him. If anything, that should have been a boost since he probably has more knowledge about our chief rival in the global market, then anyone else in Washington.

    It was a missed opportunity that will come back to haunt us in November.

  • papabear

    nt

  • carolina

    doing some public event.
    You might be onto something.

  • jordanmc109

    I really do believe that Daniels is the best option currently not on the table. Hopefully his wife will let him if he dares ask again.

  • http://ironknuckle2012.blogspot.com ironknuckle

    What about winning 2012? Or is that just for Romney supporters?

  • elayman

    Especially right wing media that took on the destruction of his candidacy as a moral crusade. There were rookie mis-steps in campaign strategy and messaging but disqualifying compared to the flat out unelectable choices left ? In a conventional year of course he would have been a massive threat and Gingrich would not have gotten that second look.

  • tngal

    My candidate, Herman Cain, has been given the honor to give the Tea Party Express’ rebuttal to the SOTU. Mitch Daniels gives the GOP response then theTea party gets their turn. Its the 2nd year they’ve done one. Last year Michelle Bachmann gave it.

    The talk will focus a lot on pro-growth with a nod to reforming our tax structure.

    That’s what TEA is about — Taxed Enough Already. If working to fix the tax mess is extreme, then yeah, we’re extremists.

  • goodgovernance

    having chosen Romney by now. If so, I would think many wish they had chosen Huntsman.

    Huntsman’s only problem is that he peaked too late. If the voting in New Hampshire had started a week after that last Meet The Press debate, I think he might not just have come in second, he could have toppled Romney.

  • Kyle-MI

    The Dems managed to keep Obama a blank slate the whole election with respect to favorable/unfavorable ratio.

    How does Newt rebuild his reputation, especially among swing voters?

  • clowngirl

    Super Tuesday is a little over a month away. How are we going to get another candidate vetted and completely up to speed before then?

    Speaking as a Newt supporter, there’s nobody not running that I’d prefer. There’s nobody alive who we can guarantee will beat Obama and Newt has the best chance of anybody.

    If there was anybody else who was both very qualified and willing to go through the horrors of running for President as a Republican — they’d already be running.

    Governor Perry looked like an ideal candidate when he wasn’t running and then starkly demonstrated the disadvantages of coming in (relatively) late in the game — and he was ultra-early compared to any candidate who would enter now.

    BTW, just for the sake of argument, neither Jeb Bush or Mitch Daniels sounds especially electable to me. Jeb Bush has a guilt-by-relation problem and Mitch Daniels is reportedly boring and would have problems with social conservatives.

    The grass is always greener. These supposed fantasy candidates wouldn’t look so perfect to people if they were actually options.

  • hweila

    What Gingrinch has done is attack Romney’s record of “success” in a manner far, gentler and milder than the attacks that would be forthcoming in a general election. Given how quickly what little popularity he’s had has faltered, if he gains the nomination we’ll be looking at a general where Willard ends up losing in a manner comparable to McGovern.

  • redcal

    The fact that Newt Gingrich (Newt Gingrich!) came out of cryogenic deep-freeze to take him down….res ipsa loquitur.

    Oh, and Gallup now shows the head to head to be equal between the two. Obama 50% against 48% for either Newt or Mittens:

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx

  • John6078

    Perry was my pick all along. He has 10 times the political skills of Newt or Mitt. He needed to start studying about 6 months earlier.

  • anonymousbosch

    Newt drew 3000-4000 in Sarasota this afternoon. 6000+ in Naples this evening. It’ll likely only grow throughout the week. By far the largest of the cycle. Romney is getting a few hundred by comparison

    Newt is consolidating supoprt. He’s consolidating conservatives. Those Palin-level crowds, Obama-level crowds. I can only speculate as to what the crowd size might be at a weekend rally if Palin is there to endorse him.

    And some think someone like Mitch Daniels is going to show up when he can’t even get on the ballot in states until the end of April. Daniels was at 1-2% back in the Spring and no one knows who he is. And he’ll be painted as the choice of the establishment soley to pick up the pieces of the failed Romney campaogn to stop Newt. If part of the reason for Newt’s rise in support is to stop the establishment and prevent them from forcing their pick down our throats, why would their new pick designed to replace Romney be any different?

    If Newt wins big in FL there won’t be anyone else. He has the excitement, the crowds, the support is only growing. He has a best friend worth 23 Billion dollars funding his campaign and even the establishment can’t compete with that.

    The people decide this and right now in FL they seem to be moving towards Newt.

    The establishment should take notice that in about a week Newt has drawn more excitement and galvanized more people than Romney has been able to ini 7 years,

  • rwcbarry

    there is nothing that can be done to save what was once the greatest country in the world. We are all screwed.

    At least there is the after life to look forward to.

  • Kyle-MI

    Quit focusing on the Republican candidate, and turn our fire on Obama and the Dems.

    All of the GOP candidates left have enormous flaws but all of them would be better presidents than the current occupant. Right now everyone is getting caught up on the flaws of their GOP opponent. We are all walking around complaining about the sticks in our opponents’ eyes while ignoring the log in our favorite candidate’s eye.

    Everyone is yelling that theirs is the only one who can win. Everyone is screaming that their opponents are the sure means to disaster. Frankly, I don’t buy any of it. I am not enamored about any of the remaining ones, but I will gladly vote for any of them.

    I am at the point, where I just want the GOP primary to be done. Lets get on with the real task. Lets focus our ire on Obama. That is what will unite everyone if anything.

  • redcal

    And Glass Jaw Willard has crumpled under the tiniest pressure. As wimpy as Bush 41.

  • jswolter

    but i’ll definitely vote for the republican nominee nonetheless.

    However, regarding the 1.6 million that Newt was paid by Freddie (not Fannie), here’s an actual lobbyist’s view:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/289087/1-million-contract-freddie-was-chump-change

    As you can see, the amount he was paid was nowhere near to what they actually pay true lobbyists. This false meme of Newt being a lobbyist needs to be countered. Hopefully, Newt can do so.

  • texastaxpayer

    (1) actually I took the “trashed” above to mean threw away. But to your necessary response. Erick himself did all but demand Perry to drop out last week. He went as far as to suggest Perry not leaving the race would guaranty a Romney win. So this sentiment is not totally without merit regardless of how you may see the facts.
    (2) Erick suggests above that both candidates are likely to loose to Obama. To paraphrase Newt supporters are satisfied to go down fighting while Romney supporters mistakenly believe their candidate is electable after losing Iowa twice. That suggests if not spells outright that Ericl believes these candidates are unelectable. He further goes on to suggest a non Newt/Romney compromise. Maybe that screams support to you but I hear it quite differently.

    Perhaps next time you “have to respond” you should actually read what you are responding to.

  • redcal

    The more people see Mitt, the less they like him. That’s not my opinion; that’s the data.

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/poll-romney-s-unfavorability-skyrockets-20120124?mrefid=election2012

  • romansdaughter

    I don’t know if I am being a pessimist or a realist but I am pretty sure neither Mitt or Newt are going to beat Obama. Like my Dad says who is a pretty good political analyst, this country needs jobs and to jump start the economy but we throw the one jobs and more jobs candidate under a bus and now we have two candidates with horrible baggage that aren’t going to get us jobs cause they can’t win. So no I can’t seem to get excited about either candidate.

  • redcal

    Sorry for bursting your bubble, NickDeringer.

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx

  • writescribe

    but I think you will be proven correct, clintonformccain. Erick summarized it correctly. Newt has no chance, and Romney will succeed in making it closer.

    Believe me, I hope we are both wrong on this, but I suspect come November conservatives will look back and wonder what the heck we were thinking.

  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    Just for a point of reference:

    John McCain 2008 10/31 – 11/2

    Favorable/unfavorable = 52.3%/41.5%

    McCain was only at 41% unfavorable before the election and we all know how well that worked out.

  • texastaxpayer

    So for now anyway its Newt for me too. Count me in the GO DOWN FIGHTING crowd.

  • ww2nd95

    .regret not voting for Huntsman. I do agree elayman that if this was a normal election year, Huntsman would have done better, but the base is just so angry at Obama, that they just couldn’t stand the fact that Huntsman served under him and that he didn’t take every opportunity to call Obama European socialist. He rather gave his own policy ideas without resulting to utterly negative rhetoric, which doesn’t accomplish anything beyond getting some cheers.

    I’ll stop ranting about this since it’s pointless, but I’m just astounded that in this particular year, there is the possibility of throwing up Newt Gingrich up as our nominee.

  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    You suffer from the “if the poll doesn’t say what I want to say it’s not valid” syndrome.

    You better tell Newt to stop doing all the nasty internal polling.

  • ww2nd95

    .regret not voting for Huntsman. I do agree elayman that if this was a normal election year, Huntsman would have done better, but the base is just so angry at Obama, that they just couldn?t stand the fact that Huntsman served under him and that he didn?t take every opportunity to call Obama European socialist. He rather gave his own policy ideas without resorting to utterly negative rhetoric, which doesn?t accomplish anything beyond getting some cheers.

    I?ll stop ranting about this since it?s pointless, but I?m just astounded that in this particular year, there is the possibility of throwing up Newt Gingrich up as our nominee

  • Stan

    I don’t think the establishment destroyed Perry as much as Perry destroyed Perry. Sadly, his “brain freeze” during the debate was lethal. I wish it weren’t so, but… :-(

  • utahtim

    Erick, I still like you. Get some sleep and rethink this tomorrow.

  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    You would be right if polls were the only measure.The advantage Mitt has is that the MSM won’t be releasing his divorece records 30 days before the election the way they did with Jack Ryan thus electing One-bama.

    Just sayin’

  • texastaxpayer

    47th in job and economic growth during a boom period for the country.
    34% approval rating at the end of his single term leading a government.

    Romney has no credibility as a leader period. Even his much touted private sector experience is proving to be a liability. So whats his case? Never mind my failures, flip flops and questionable business practices. I saved the olympics which clearly makes me the most qualified to lead the free world.

    Your joking right?????

  • trevorb

    going to be very hard for Obama to win a second term. Even in 2008, for a while, it seemed like McCain would beat him. Then the economy collapsed and he managed to obtain the presidency.

    Our economy is showing no signs of getting better and however you spin it, it doesn’t look good for him. The only real way I see him winning re-election is if Paul goes on a third party run.

  • hweila

    And while, like every other election cycle, part of the hype will be that it’s the MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION EVER ™, it isn’t.

    Gingrich we will, at a minimum, bring the conservative base out and make sure we hold the House and most likely take the Senate, and that we’ll have a shot at the Presidency. Even if we don’t get the Presidency in 2012 though, the odds are we’ll be looking at gains in the House and Senate in 2014.

    With Willard though, there’s a very serious possibility of losing ALL of it and being right back to where we were in 2008. In addition to a large portion of the base being utterly disinclined to bothering to show up to vote for him, By November of 2012, the media will have reduced his image to that of a sort of 80′s B-movie villain who belongs to bizarre cult that most Americans distrust and loves rolling around in his giant pile of money only slightly less than he enjoys firing people.

  • http://www.neoavatara.com/blog neoavatara

    Although not chose, the Ford/Reagan convention of 1976 is the closest analogy.

    Ford won more delegates, but not enough for the nomination.

    Reagan made a strategic error by saying he would nominate liberal Sen. Schweiker of Pennsylvania, which alienated some conservatives like Jesse Helms. He lost more conservative votes than he gained moderate votes. Then because of some procedural maneuvering, Ford gained the upper hand and won the nomination. Bob Dole was then selected as VP. Reagan conceded, actually in glowing fashion that set him up for 1980.

    Maybe, if we are lucky, this will occur, except the Newt and Mitt factions both lose.

    The real question is…who is our Reagan?

  • carolina

    You have a good point: “if Newt wins big in FL there won’t be anyone else”

    I think Newt has made an emotional connection with the voters. If he really has …… then he will be unbeatable!

  • Tbone

    and have fun doing something you like because Newt is going to be the nominee and there isn’t anything you can do to change that. So, brother, dis-engage now, save yourself from wasted time and spare us your incessant whining. See, a win/win.

  • redcal

    Look at how evangelical South Carolina shrugged off the ‘open marriage’ thing, even though a third of their voters actually believed it to be true. Newt is Teflon when it comes to his marriages, now, especially after his home run against John King to start the last SC debate.

    You brought up polls. I’m just showing you, since you seemed to have absolutely no clue, about the full data. Mitt and Newt are about 2% apart on favorability, unfavorability, and less than that on the head-to-head. You were using polls to support the “Myth of Newt’s Electability.” Do you admit that the broader data proves the Myth of Mitt’s Electability, by your own argument?

  • redcal

    nt

  • texashistorian

    you might as well stay home, right? The “1st string” doesn’t exist, my friend. We have what we have, so we either suck it up and support them and stay positive and recognize the crap that is Obama. The O would break a sweat beating a garden gnome at this point. Yeah, he could, but he is in deeper crap than you realize, and we don’t have to have the “perfect” candidate. In fact, there is no such thing and I would go even further to suggest that any of the so-called first string that could have gotten in, plenty of people would be moaning and worrying about. Every one of these great candidates that didn’t run have warts and problems and they would all be magnified right now.

  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    via Drudge: Pelosi On A Gingrich Presidency: “That Will Never Happen” ‘THERE IS SOMETHING I KNOW’

    Get your popcorn here, Get your popcorn.

  • hweila

    approval ratings aren’t a meaningful way to predict how someone will perform in a presidential election. People people don’t have to like you to vote for you, just as having them like you doesn’t mean they will vote for you.

  • lalupa

    Huntsman was the only candidate who had a shot at beating Obama. Great conservative record as governor. Foreign policy experience. Presidential in demeanor and a great looking family. He also was smart enough not to sign all those idiotic pledges which are nothing more than fundraising tools for the organizations pushing them. And serve as ammunition for the Democrats in the general election.

    And what was so offensive to the “base” about what Huntsman did or said. The tweet about evolution? Why is evolution even a political issue? Let the scientists deal with it. Same with global warming. Let the scientists deal with scientific matters. As long as a candidate does not push cap and trade or some scheme that will hurt our economy and give other countries a competitive advantage I do not care to hear about global warming.

    We also need to be realistic about illegal immigration. Perry was attacked for his comment about “no heart”. He didn’t go far enough IMO. The GOP has no heart or brain when it comes to dealing with the issue of illegal immigration. The Latinos are the fastest growing demographic group. If the Democrats lock the Latino vote like they have the AA vote, then Texas will become blue. Once Texas is blue you might as well forget getting a Republican in the White House.

    The instate tuition is not a drain to the Texas taxpayers. In Texas we do not have an state income tax. We fund our schools through property and sales taxes and illegal immigrats pay them like everybody else in Texas. The upside of this policy was the GOP getting enough of the Latino voter to win elections. Besides we are talking about students who were brought here as children and are caught in a legal limbo that they did not create. They grew up in this country. This is the only country they know.

    After the 2008 defeat, I felt the GOP needed to take the time and review what happened under Bush and develop a new agenda (same principles) that would unite the party. We are too fractured. Too many competing interests. The only unifying thing we have going is the desire to defeat Obama. But once we defeat him we have to be able to govern effectively or we will find ourselves out the next election cycle.

  • lalupa

    Huntsman was the only candidate who had a shot at beating Obama. Great conservative record as governor. Foreign policy experience. Presidential in demeanor and a great looking family. He also was smart enough not to sign all those idiotic pledges which are nothing more than fundraising tools for the organizations pushing them. And serve as ammunition for the Democrats in the general election.

    And what was so offensive to the “base” about what Huntsman did or said. The tweet about evolution? Why is evolution even a political issue? Let the scientists deal with it. Same with global warming. Let the scientists deal with scientific matters. As long as a candidate does not push cap and trade or some scheme that will hurt our economy and give other countries a competitive advantage I do not care to hear about global warming.

    We also need to be realistic about illegal immigration. Perry was attacked for his comment about “no heart”. He didn’t go far enough IMO. The GOP has no heart or brain when it comes to dealing with the issue of illegal immigration. The Latinos are the fastest growing demographic group. If the Democrats lock the Latino vote like they have the AA vote, then Texas will become blue. Once Texas is blue you might as well forget getting a Republican in the White House.

    The instate tuition is not a drain to the Texas taxpayers. In Texas we do not have an state income tax. We fund our schools through property and sales taxes and illegal immigrats pay them like everybody else in Texas. The upside of this policy was the GOP getting enough of the Latino voter to win elections. Besides we are talking about students who were brought here as children and are caught in a legal limbo that they did not create. They grew up in this country. This is the only country they know.

    After the 2008 defeat, I felt the GOP needed to take the time and review what happened under Bush and develop a new agenda (same principles) that would unite the party. We are too fractured. Too many competing interests. The only unifying thing we have going is the desire to defeat Obama. But once we defeat him we have to be able to govern effectively or we will find ourselves out the next election cycle.

  • votemout2012

    Perhaps you didn’t witness the same primary election that I have but I stand by my commit and apparently others do as well. When Fox wasn’t bashing Perry they were ignoring to the point of not even mentioning his name when reporting about the candidates. They took a couple slips and blew it up into comedy hour central. They had the power of the press and they used just like MSM used to promote Obama and conservative saps ate it up. I hope when Newt implodes you will be satisfied you stood behind the best debater that lost the election.

  • redcal

    They were just appealing to different demographics — Obama to upscale voters and minorities, Clinton to blue collar and women. There wasn’t a lot of policy difference in their stated platforms or between their target audiences.

    Newt and Mitt are incredibly different on ideology. Mitt believes that the prez is a ‘nice guy’ who is over his head and needs to step down. Newt says he’s a dangerous socialist who must be conquered. Those aren’t anywhere in the same ballpark.

    If they were closer together on approach/ideology, I’d agree with you — they would rile up the base and then the winner could unify the pre-energized coalition. Here, we’re just getting more and more fractured.

    Some more concrete data: Hillary and Obama maintained their favorability ratings through the spring/summer of 2008. Newt and Mitt are both driving the other’s favorability way, way down.

  • hweila

    is because they likely have issues they don’t want the national spotlight on. The vetting that goes on at the state level is nothing at all like what happens in a Presidential election.

  • trickamsterdam

    We should probably all just go to sleep, and wake up in November, in a glorious new world…

    Because it’s all so simple and uncomplicated.

    How about we just have a BROKERED CONVENTION and pick Paul Ryan? Why are you all so against it?

    Is it because you’re conservatives, you dogs?

  • clintonformccain

    He’s an ex-Senator of little accomplishment who rode the wave pandering to the so-cons in the 90s and then got demolished in his reelection bid. That’s the problem — the whole field is collection of lightweights and clown candidates. Good grief, only two of them even managed to get on the ballot in Virgiinia and one of them is crazy as a hoot owl. If you step back for a little perspective, it’s a train wreck.

    The GOP only has one credible candidate who actually has a national campaign, a track record to run on, and so forth. But, the base can’t stand him. Nothing would surprise me. Heck, it wouldn’t surprise me to see Ron Paul get the nomination.

  • votemout2012

    Misspelled comment my oops moment. For shame.

  • circlegranch

    has nothing to bring to the table regarding the fiscal crises that mount everyday. We’re a war weary country also, but his knowledge of what’s going on in the Mideast is vital. Overall, I fear he does not have nearly enough time to catch up and may end up like Gov. Perry–coming onto the stage without enough prep in place and always being behind. Any Cabinet position in 2012? Absolutely. He’s a true patriot, smarter than all of Obama’s czars and Cabinet put together so any role we can get him to willing to serve in, all the better for America.

  • scottishjew

    It’s one thing for Romney to send out his supporters to extol his virtues. But that’s not what Romney’s doing. He’s actually sending out people to criticize Gingrich by calling him names. Is this something (real) Republicans do. What happens should Newt win the nomination. We will have lots of nasty comments about Newt made by Republicans. I also find it amazing how these self styled “moderate” columnists like Charen and Noonan and Barone can write such seething and snide comments about Newt. They write nothing to convince anyone that Mitt Romney is a good conservative candidate. They just seek to tear down their opponent. That appears to be the Romney strategy. He is not interested in convincing conservatives to vote for him. Instead, Romney is trying to be the only choice.

    Anyway, this primary has exposed a lot of RINO establishment media types in the party….so far I have Charen, Noonan, Barone, Hume, Coulter (!), Brooks (no he’s never been a Republican)Podhoretz.

  • jonerik

    I think either Newt or Mitt can beat Obama in the general. But I would rather have Newt with the chance than Mitt.

  • aj_0000

    Look at Rick Perry. He got in late, was unprepared, and flopped. The idea of installing someone out of nowhere at the convention, with no preparation, to take on Obama a few months later, is psychotic.

    As for the “deeply flawed” nature of the candidates, they both currently have high unfavorable ratings. Romney does not have an edge there, his have gone up to match Gingrich’s. So that anti-Newt argument is gone. But favorability ratings are ephemeral. They fluctuate dramatically, and they don’t get to the heart of the matter. Obama had much higher favorability ratings than job approval a while back (his favorability is down now), and job approval is what matters.

    What matters is that both Romney and Gingrich are statistically tied with Obama in Gallup’s latest head to head poll. The notion that Republicans are in a weak position to beat Obama is establishment nuttery. They’re completely out of touch. Obama is extremely weak, and the conservative base is extremely motivated, IF IT HAS A CANDIDATE IT CAN SUPPORT.

    That candidate is Gingrich.

  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    Google Jack Ryan and Obama and read the whole sad story. You live in the fantasy bubble that give Gingrich magical powers. “These are not the divorce records you are looking for.” Sure.

    The Gallup poll shows “Registered voters” not “likely voterswhichch is a another animal. But I’m sure a polling expert like yourself already knows that.

    Gingrich will not be the candidate and he sure won’t be the POTUS.

    Popcorn, get your popcorn!!!

  • circlegranch

    We know why he suspended; polling was in single digits in SC and FL and money was basically gone.

    For every Republican in IA, NH and SC that are wringing their hands now thinking neither Newt or Mitt can get this job done, all we say say at this point is, WE TOLD YOU SO.

  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    Just you wait an dsee. Newt has burned a lot of people along the way.

    And pleae stop your whining. If you don’t like what I have to say

    DON’T READ IT.

  • elayman

    After seeing the genesis of a ticket in their debate, I would be confident that if Gingrich chose Huntsman whether as VP or cabinet minister, or in any capacity, and conservatives were re-introduced they would swallow him without any difficulty. It surely won’t happen in a Romney presidency which may be reason enough itself to push for Newt.

  • texastaxpayer

    Guess you can’t be president now either…..lol
    ;)

  • maybenexttime

    That’s an incredibly naive statement, especially since the Republican establishment wants Gingrich to disappear ASAP. The establishment isn’t going to sit back and do nothing. They may not succeed in derailing Gingrich entirely, but he’ll be tarred in a way no other GOP candidate ever has. You can bet on that.

    Meanwhile, Newt hasn’t even yet secured the nomination, and you’re already predicting he’ll win the White House. What Romney did to him in Iowa is a mere “trial size” of what Obama/DNC will attempt this fall. If you think female and Independent voters will just ignore their noise machine, think again. Freddie Mac. Individual mandate. Sitting on Pelosi’s lap. Right-wing social engineering. Overlapping marriages. Gingrich will present a target-rich environment for the James Carvilles of the world.

    Romney isn’t the most attractive alternative, but there seems to be much less dirt on the guy. That’s what the Republican establishment has settled for, and I’m 80% sure they’ll have their way by August.

  • lizzie

    Perry made a tactical retreat (HIS words) and endorsed Gingrich, and most of Perry’s organization has trusted Perry’s judgment.
    They are still figuring out what to do with the Drs. Paul who WANT a brokered convention. I would share the inside baseball on why Gingrich/Perry seem to be dancing with the Pauls, but I do not want to add fuel to the conspiracy theorists. Follow the money is my only hint.

    Once I read this a few hours ago, Romney is no longer even a mayonnaise sandwich on a silver platter:
    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/rich-really-are-different_617667.html?nopager=1

    Both Perry and Gingrich study military history – Perry may not be as into the Civil War as Newt.

    but, now that Perry is not island hopping (The Pacific WW2), which is what I was thinking the morning after Iowa,
    I am beginning to think this is the Civil War. not the one in Virginia and Gettysburg. The one in Tennessee and Vicksburg.
    Even 21st century Southerners can borrow some 19th century Yankee tactics.

    Erick is making RS tough – every day a new panic.

    I do not know who this clintonformccain is, but, as a disillusioned dem who went for McCain because of his policies and worldview, I know the initial Obama surge was to stop Hillary, and then the Hillary surgelet was to stop Obama.
    Most of us were mad they were the only two options on Super Tuesday 2008.

    My advice to the GOP?
    NO ONE WITH ANY service in Bush43, and that includes, alas, Mitch Daniels.

    and stop worrying about the polls, especially about likeability.
    Perry was polling so low on likeability from day 1 that I had no idea why – and he got labelled a Bully after that Romney hand on shoulder exchange. Go figure how people perceive stuff – by Jan. 18, Perry was probably surging on likeability – he just started too late to deal with a national campaign because he does still have that “another gov from Texas, dumber than W/male Sarah Palin” stereotypes to shake off.

    At least the Jerusalem Post knows Perry was correct about Turkey.

    you wait -

  • texast

    Do we have a perfect candidate, no. The GOP establishment with the media’s help ran off the best candidate that we had, Rick Perry. Now we are stuck with McRomney or Newt. Of the two, I see Newt as the only one with enough fight to take on Obama. Yes, Newt has lots of baggage but Obama has a lot more. Everyone is acting like Obama is perfect and baggage free. Newt is the only one with the stones to expose Obama’s past corruption. The amount of Obama luggage is endless, take your pick: fast and furious , failed economy, tarp, Solyndra, bail outs, Obamacare, lost law licenses for both Barry and Muchelle, raised by communists and socialists, Blago, ACORN, Eric Holder, suspicious foreign campaign donations, lack of college records and grades, how was Harvard paid for, on and on. Obama is hanging heavy with baggage, stop acting like he is unbeatable. Start exposing him for what he is and stop being afraid of being called a racist, that’s how to beat the O. Newt is the only one up for the task, so GO NEWT!!!

  • circlegranch

    after he slammed Perry over and over and accused him of offering ‘magnets’. No talk last light about building a fence across every single inch of the border; no more rounding people up and sending them home. Now that he succeeded in scaring Republicans into thinking Perry was going to sign an amnesty bill on Day One of his presidency, Mitt’s pulling his usual trick: flip flopping and mispresenting himself and others. He also was not honest last night when he said he doesn’t support ethanol subsidies. A whole bunch of money was spent in IA prodding voters to support him because he has been in favor of them.

    This is all turning out very sad. But, as they say in the midst of the ruling class of the GOP, “It’s his turn.”

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    5% support. Couldn’t even get Republicans to vote for him.

  • onenationundrgod

    To bad, Gov Perry was the best! Your right, the people who should have united around him did not…..This is just bad politics, and arrogant manuvering.

  • alredadams

    Santorum supported closed shop, that means Santorum supports
    unions. SC (Boeing) and Detroit (wonderland to wasteland) are examples of unions affects. What does that make Santorum?
    A vote for Santorum is a vote for the establishment Republicans and
    a vote for unions and the NLRB job busters.

    Did you see Senator Pat Toomey on Fox today?
    Santorum supported turncoat Arlen Specter against Toomey.

    This election is the most important election in our lifetime and they are telling us it’s imperative we’re supposed to vote for the same crew that allowed this Ship to be grounded. Really?

    The request is immoral. No thanks.

  • conservnca

    the conventional wisdom is there isn’t time for the vetting process with someone new.
    Soooooooo what about Perry? He’s been thoroughly vetted.Three times if you don’t count this last time.
    He has a team already, he knows what they did wrong before, he knows what to expect now in the national waters and his backers would probably give to his campaign again(knowing what they know now, with the current crop).
    What about the saying “What’s old is new again”. It could work here.
    Perry would’ve been obama and his team’s biggest headache. He thinks they have won by eliminating him. Let’s prove him wrong and somehow get Perry back in.Just think how horrified they would be. After all the horror he has made us live through it be so nice to return the sentiment.
    I can dream can’t I?

  • deVere

    And how do you propose to do that, oh political cyber seer?

    A Perry/Huntsman or Huntsman/Perry ticket would be ok with me, but how do you get there? Neither Romney nor Gingrich is famous for sacrificing their own interest to do the right thing.

  • circlegranch

    they, along with talk radio ignored Perry and were disrespectful every chance they thought they could get away with it. Never did they circle the wagons and come to his defense and try to beat back some of the garbage coming at him. By contrast, when Herman had his troubles, he got literally hours of live air time on Hannity’s radio and TV shows and several others entertained him generously also. Hannity never told Dick Morris or Ann Coulter to tone it down and require they keep comments civil.

    The only time Perry got quite of bit of air time on Fox was when he spent some big bucks on advertising. Pay to play required for some, exuberant and frequent coverage for others.

  • lizzie

    retreat into the American Revolutionary War last night because I just can not bear the thought that it could be Romney v Obama in 2012.

    really, can not bear it. imagine how more than half the country feels – I still have savings.

    but, so tempting to re-read that Tennesse campaign that preceded Vicksburg, Grant’s tacticl retreats that led to victory….

  • unclefred

    Perry utterly misunderstood how his position on instate tuition for illegals was perceived by the VAST majority of the country. He sank his own campaign entirely on his own.

    That single issue derailed his campaign. Sad really, because he could have fixed this so easily, but he failed to do so. I really wish he had gotten the message. I really wish that those of you who had access to his campaign had gotten the message. Instead you lecture those of us who could see this coming about the integrity of your guy.

    Had Perry listened to the primary voters on this issue, neither Santorum nor Gingrich would still be in this race. He did not, and we are left with what we have. Don’t blame everyone else, Perry blew this entirely on his own, and I for one am very sorry he was so tone deaf.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    Like Colorado? Newt is running even with Romney here now. Never thought I’d see that here.

  • maybenexttime

    Campaign organizations and their resulting ground game are going to matter big time in this election. We’d all like to think this will be a GOP blow-out, but every indicator points to a 2000 or 2004-style outcome where a couple really hotly-contested states will decide the outcome.

    If we get a brokered convention with a non-Newt, non-Mitt candidate…that already puts us behind the proverbial 8-ball. Attempting to organize a national campaign with less than 80 days before election day will be a handicap of massive proportions.

    I think the party needs to pick a candidate democratically and rally around that candidate no matter what. No voter in this country gets everything they want. It’s time to get practical about this, or we’ll get another four years of Obama.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    ..notext..

  • alredadams

    I dream of a brokered convention with Rick Perry as our candidate.
    He could win in the national hands down.

    Gazing through crystal balls and looking at chicken bones a brokered convention would be a nightmare. We have no organization, even the evangelicals scattered when Perry stumbled, steadfast and true men all.

    We go to a brokered convention an we’ll wish it were Romney.
    It’s Newt. Newt is the man of the day. He will take it to them. It’s Newt.

  • votemout2012

    Hate to tell you conservatives will not be “rallying” around Newt or Romney. By the end of this Primary we will be hating even more than we do now finding all the skeletons. As for no voter gets every thing they want I don’t believe conservatives are getting ANYTHING they want from these tow guys.

  • redcal

    incorrectly spelled, grammatically atrocious, incoherently reasoned Romney-bot rantings.

    But you keep on posting!

  • kipling

    None of the candidates had enough delegates and none would wheel and deal to get there. Harding was a dark horse choice.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    **notext**

  • trevorb

    that Gingrich can get the economy moving again, people will be willing to overlook, if not forgive, his baggage. for all the talk about social issues, the economy is what is on everyone’s minds.

  • Flagstaff

    CAN Newt get elected?

    If most conservatives and Republicans were pretty sure that the answer is “yes,” Newt would already be way ahead. The fact that he isn’t proves that not enough “R’s” can honestly say “yes” to that question.

    This isn?t that complicated. Newt will defeat President Obama this November because Newt?s economic policies are smart, his reforms are what people agree with & his energy plans are precisely what people are looking for.

    I agree that is what he should be campaigning on, however he’s spending way too much time complaining about this, that and the other, wasting time trying to destroy a fellow Republican after having made a lot of noise about getting along with his colleagues.

    Also, the press can spin all this appearance carp. If he sticks to issues and has his facts straight, they can’t spin them away. Substance will beat “hope and change” because it can be understood as real by voters if articulated properly, and one thing Newt can do extremely well is articulate.

    These are 70-30 issues in a nation that?s 2:1 conservative to liberal. What?s difficult about that?

    What’s difficult is that Newt’s unfavorable/favorable ratio is about 50/25, and another 25 don’t care. He has to convince a huge majority in the Republican camp because, if he can’t change those ratios, he’ll get no effective help from independents. If we nominate Newt, we will be counting on his ability to get every last Republican and conservative voter out to vote for him and to convince a lot of the “don’t cares” to come down on his side.

    I don’t know who Erick is hoping will step forward (some of you are probably saying “Don’t you read what he writes??? It’s clear.”) I’m not that regular a reader in recent weeks, so no, not clear to me. But all the names that were floated earlier in the year have their own problems. Had they stayed in, we’d be talking about those problems right now.

    Previously, I’ve written that we need a candidate who is conservative, articulate (coherent), compelling, convincing, and credible. Just to add a couple more C‘s, I threw in competent and having good character. I submit that none of our candidates have an overabundance of all of these characteristics (I can’t help myself!) so now we have to compromise (see?) Still, three of the four stand up pretty well on most of the criteria. (Aiyeee)

    To hear some folks tell it, we can’t win unless we pick A. Others tell us that we can’t lose unless we pick A. Now Erick is telling us we can’t win with either A or B, but we need X to come in from the cold, and we don’t know who X is or if he even wants to feel the heat in the kitchen.

  • likeaglove

    TPM has Newt as 54.8% unfavorable and Romney at 49.4%

    http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/

    The difference I’ve seen, though, is the familiarity. Almost everyone has already formed an opinion on Newt. That’s less the case with Romney.

    I’m not saying Romney is a great or even good candidate. Newt is a loathsome person, though. I’m a conservative, and I have no respect for the man. I’d much rather have Santorum over Newt, and I’m not a big Santorum fan, either.

    I just regret that these are our only real choices.

  • texast

    Every time the media asks about Newt’s past, he should ask when is Obama going to release his college grades and how the classes were paid for. Use the Alinsky tactics on them. He should ask why neither of the Obamas have a law license in Ill. and for the release of all records surrounding the loss of law licenses. Do any of you think that if a Republican candidate had forfeited their law license and were running for President that the info would not be “leaked”? Ask the uncomfortable questions, Newt. We know they are going to do the same and more to you.

  • Scope

    that Perry’s money was gone? The only place I’ve read that was here at RS. I’d also read that Perry had held back $9 million for the Fla. race, elsewhere. As far as I know, no one really has any direct knowledge about the Perry finances. Has he disclosed his FEC report showing any of that?

  • tngal

    He was hit by the media, but so was Cain. Bachmann was too but not as hard. But Perry didn’t lose support simply because he forgot the third leg of his overhaul on tv then oopsied.

    His inability to get on ballots (VA) or get many delegates (illinois) showed some campaign problems. Sure Gingrich didn’t get on VA either but everybody already knew he had no infrastructure. Perry was suppose to have a great team behind him. He was after all the star.

    He came in on the day of the Ames straw poll. He could have announced a week before or after, but instead went for the very day of the straw poll. Not that its a big deal everywhere but it is kind of traditional in the political world. The candidate that wins it gets some pub for a day or two. This year it happened to be bachmann. He should have let the candidate have her moment. (even though his entrance was leaked a day or two in advance and it wasn’t a shocker) Couldn’t believe someone would do this to another GOP candidate.

    Forgetting what agency you want to cut might be overlooked. Unless you forget a bunch of stuff afterward. Like the voting age vs drinking age. He said the election date was Nov 12th, its the 6th. He then forgets one of his three agencies to cut -again. He forget how many supreme court justices there are… and on and on.

    And, dare I say, those opposed to illegal immigration don’t like to be called “without heart” at the beginning of the campain season. He would end up spending a lot of time after that trying to straighten out what he meant in the minds of others, but if you have to spend days upon days explaining why you did or said something, you’ve already lost them.

    And..george bush came from you know where.

    The media didn’t trash him. He was a bad candidate this time out. It doesn’t matter if he was a good person or not. Candidates win elections and he was not a good candidate.

  • maybenexttime

    I don’t see Newt picking Perry as his running mate. I think Gingrich would feel Perry’s propensity for debate gaffes might pose a hazard to his own chances in the general campaign.

    Like it or not, Gingrich has an air of intellectual superiority that might preclude somebody like Perry from the ticket. I think Pawlenty, Huckabee, Jindal, or Daniels are more likely options for Newt. Perry’s collapse on the national stage was too dramatic and is still too fresh in the public’s memory.

  • votemout2012

    If it makes you feel better to justify what happened to Perry go ahead. Facts are the facts if you choose to see them. This immigration issue was blown way out of proportion. Perry tried many times to put it to rest with solid plan for the border but the media wouldn’t let it. Sorry I blame ppl for not getting to know these candidates instead of looking for a rockstar debater.

  • gracie

    I cannot add wisdom above that above. Just the opinion that Newt won with more points and in more demographics in SC and has passed Romney in Fla.

    As far as likeable I like the way he tells Romney and Obama off just fine. He is like Christie in that way only Chris Christie is DEFINITELY NOT a conservative!

    WHY is Erick throwing him under the bus so soon after asking Perry to drop out?

    Erick you are panicking. Or maybe you are trying to get people to think…can I defend this man? I wanted Perry but hey I do not hate Newt. At times he is even likeable and I definitely think he will bring out mucho more of the base which will help with the coattails.

    Erick take a chill pill.

  • maybenexttime

    …After he had a commanding lead in national polls just four months ago. Perry is damaged goods right now. He could very easily resurface in 2016 as a viable candidate if Obama gets re-elected in 2012.

    It’s ironic in a way. The best hopes for a Perry candidacy now rests on the premise of Obama getting a second term. Perry won’t be on the GOP ticket this year because he’s still radioactive from the meltdown.

    Give it four years, though, and he just might mount a Nixonian comeback.

  • votemout2012

    Kinda hard going up against the known conservative outlet FoxNews and pundits like Malkin, Coulter, Ingraham….

  • conservnca

    that Perry got out because of his debate performances are you? He knows what he had to give to the country. He got out because he was so pressured to and didn’t want to be responsible for what he thought would be harming his country.He knows he was the right one for the job, and still knows it. If it was just about his debate performances how do you explain all the rest of them where he dominated the issues so many times.
    The American people would’ve forgiven any poor performances once they understood why they happened and if he had a conservative media and radio pundits fighting for him instead of against him we would be discussing something entirely different right now.
    With his abilities and credentials it is clear, he got hosed and so did we.

  • veto

    I personally think Romney nor Newt are good choices, but we will get one of the two. That being said Newt has an extremely high unfavorable rating, I saw it on fox news today around 57% or something, that’s nuts.

    So ya he does well in the south, but don’t republicans always do well in the south? How we do with independents and states like NH, pennsylvania, Ohio, etc….

  • Scope

    that it has been less than a 5% margin that has elected the last few presidents. Keep bashing the Perry supporters who you need, really badly, in order to get your guy elected. People like you will insure an Obama win, because you just simply can’t let the bashing go, even when Perry has backed out. I call that pretty dumb myself.

  • maybenexttime

    Like it or not, being able to handle Obama in a debate is part of the job requirement. Gingrich’s surge is based almost single-handedly on this reality. Perry would not win the general election with a debate performance similar to those he conducted this fall. That’s just reality, as cold as it may seem.

    There’s a point where idealism can smother practicality. Perry was a case study in this phenomenon. He wasn’t ready for the national stage even though his message resonated with most conservatives. Winning the White House is the most important goal for Republicans in this election. Every candidate has to bring their A-Game to the debate stage. Perry did not and the rest is history.

  • Scope

    n/t

  • usedtobelib

    without any understanding of where the guy stands on a whole host of domestic issues.

    Just great. Just great.

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

    You don’t get to pick who engages or doesn’t engage with your awful commenting here.

    I second the suggestion that you leave if you’re unable to defend your crush on Nancy Pelosi.

  • bluerose75

    I am sorry sir but indeed the elders picked McCain because he was “more electable” and he ran the worst campaign in history. He ran against a one term NO NAME Senator from Illinois, had tons of ammunition he could have used, looked dated, did not excite the base and LOST! Sorry he indeed sir could have won. In fact, Obama was massively flawed. McCain stunk!

    2012 with his record? Obama is totally vulnerable! As for Newt, yeah he has flaws but I am sorry he knows the Gravity of this Election and I think he has learned some valuable lessons. It is funny, his tax plan plays into what Obama’s Class Warfare? Sorry I totally disagree! See you fall for the MSM populism and fall into the trap to play it safe and stay with moderate, do not rock the boat, do not be bold and offer a CLEAR DISTINCTION with Obama! Wrong!

    People like you could never been successful getting Reagan elected. You are so blinded by your fear. American Exceptionalism is exactly what the US needs. The similar feelings from 1980 is prevalent all over in the year 2012!

    Obama tells us America is in decline (Carter), high unemployment (Carter), high energy and gas prices (Carter), misery index high, (Carter), Americans need to accept less (Carter), home ownership falling (Carter) and bigger government (Carter) and taxes going up (Carter).

    The parallels are striking wake up! Obama is most often compared to whom?? Carter!! Mitt is a dud! Newt has tapped the sentiment that Reagan did back in the 80s….and I am sorry NO ONE thought he could win…An actor, not smart, clueless and not endorsed by the Establishment, which at the time backed G HW BUSH! Newt is not Reagan I agree but he has some very strong instincts and unique abilities.

    Newt can indeed win…Obama already just handed him a MASSIVE line of attact….The Keystone Pipeline!! My goodness Obama vetoed a major job creator for UNIONS!! which could open that door for Newt….and reduced reliance on foreign resources of oil and energy….another beautiful door opened for Newt! not to mention all the capital investments!

    Obama pandered to environmentalists…..which are far outnumbered by the people who would have benefited from jobs, capital, building and lower enegy costs!! Obama is weak!

    Newt if he articulates Conservatism and does so well…He can indeed win!!

  • usedtobelib

    couldn’t win anything he entered, yet you are rejecting the two who have won something.

    If he couldn’t get GOP voters to like him, what makes you think he can get the rest of America to like him.

    The guy’s got NOTHING! Let him stay in Texas where there’s a weak governership.

  • texastaxpayer

    ;)

    Perry 2016————>

  • Samsara

    Exactly correct.

    In 2008, the GOP was on it’s knees, directionless, and on life support. The Base of the Republican Party became energized to bring change to the GOP and take a principled stand against big government, coney capitalism, and the reckless spending of both the Bush and Obama administrations.

    Establishment Republicans now want to return to business as usual, with the only difference being that the old machine will be run by “reliable” Republicans. That has been their intention from the start. This primary will show if they can achieve their ends with money and media connections.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    Perry just didn’t have enough support. Even he saw that. I see no reason why resurrecting him now would achieve a different result. I had to come to the same conclusion with Pawlenty, but I’ve had a lot more time to deal with it.

  • Kyle-MI

    Either Mitt or Newt can win. Unfortunately, both sides have so heavily invested themselves emotionally in their candidate that they want to make their rhetoric a self-fulfilling prophecy. At the end of this process someone is going to look awfully foolish when they have sworn up and down that the winning candidate would destroy the GOP but we should now vote for him because he is the greatest thing since apple pie. Or they can simply mutter to themselves, slink into the shadows, and just not show up on election day thus enabling an Obama win – instant self-fulfilling prophecy.

  • runner12

    You are always trashing Perry, which just appears juvenile at this point. So who is it you will be voting for?

    I have a guess, and I do not think he is on the GOP ticket.

  • Scope

    to think that any of the remaining candidates can beat the incumbent simply because you think he is so beatable. Hey, even Mickey Mouse voted for him in 2008, and even the entire Dallas cheerleader squad did the same. Do you really think for a moment they will not do the same in 12? Do you really believe that the great debater can take Obama down, or that the class warfare crowd will allow the other one? Perhaps you should listen to the address tonight from the One. He will insure that class warfare is the message going forward. Maybe George Soros can convince you of that, the one who is at the heart of the class warfare drive.

  • maybenexttime

    Mitt can still claim a moral victory when Obama has to take out a mortgage on his house to secure a second term. I can’t believe Romney thinks THAT is an accomplishment…or that it helps him further his electability argument.

    Romney tends to stray from his message very easily. I can only imagine what Obama/Plouffe have in store for him as it relates to the individual mandate. Romney is going to twist himself into a pretzel and swing voters will see this guy has no core. That can’t be good for winning crucial states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, or Florida.

  • daveinthed

    Romney Ryan ’12

    Palin as Energy Sect.
    Newt as Education Sect
    Cain as Treausry Sect.
    Huntsman as Sect of State
    Rudy G. at the Justice Dept.
    Ron Paul as a special advisor on budgetary matters.

    Find a place for Santorum also.

    This is the winning formula. Newt at the top of the ticket is a sure loser for the GOP. It’s fact. Newt made his own bed…and perhaps his lovers helped along the way…and now he sleeps in it.

  • Kyle-MI

    We cannot afford four more years of Obama, no matter how much we need to teach the GOP establishment a lesson. As bad as an establishment candidate is, at least we have a chance with them. We have absolutely no chance with Obama – none, nadda, zero, zip, a big fat goose egg.

    It is a better strategy to balance an establishment candidate with a conservative controlled House and Senate.

  • votemout2012

    After Palin said she would vote for Newt and Erick at restate telling him to drop out conservative pundits doing the same. Of coarse he dropped that was the idea. By the way what is Palin up to. I bet she was thinking brokered conventions as she was saying vote for Newt.

  • lapert

    Just like how all of Hilary’s supporters would never vote for Obama.

    The tiny number of emotionally attached individuals are irrelevant to the election, the other 5.9% of republicans who supported Perry will vote for the nominee regardless.

  • SteveM

    Erick complains that we’re tearing the party up, and then goes on about…tearing up one of the candidates. You can’t make this stuff up.

    And another thing: If you really want to kill the party, go ahead and have a brokered convention. Hello? Buehler? Is this mic on?

    Let’s say for grins that sombody we all just love steps forward at the convention and says, “I’ll do it!!” and grabs the nomination. What, are Newt, Paul and Mitt going to roll over and let that happen? Absolutely not they won’t.

    Next. Where’s the organization and money going to come from? You’re telling a bunch of people who’ve invested months of effort into what they thought was a fair primary process that their effort, money and time was completely wasted? A lot of donors who maxed out to either Newt or Mitt aren’t going to be happy to be asked to max out / raise money for some other person. And Mitt and Newt won’t release their war chests to the new person. Not. Gonna. Happen. Even if they wanted to, by the time all the paperwork gets filed, it’s too late for the money to do any good.

    In what universe does that make sense? It makes great sense if you’re a democrat and you want to watch the GOP eat itself. Nowhere else.

  • votemout2012

    Apparently you only watched the first few debates b/c Perry had rock solid debates the last couple of months. If winning the WH is the goal what is Newt and Romney doing in the front runners position?

  • SteveM

    What really drives me nuts about this whole thing is that Rush, this site, and a whole lot of us have devlolved this process into some kind of bizarro conservative beauty pageant:

    “And here she is, ladies and gentlemen – Miss Reagan Conservative!” <– At least Newt isn't out there in a 1-piece.

    "And now, feast your eyes on the electable moderate!!" And in struts Mitt in his evening gown.

    How about instead of this "Who's a better conservative?" contest, we get back to, who's the most qualified to be President and why? thingy called an electoral process?

  • aj_0000

    The latest WP/ABC poll has Romney at 49-31 unfavorable. Gingrich’s is 51-29. The numbers are similar among independents. They’re basically tied, and both have seen their negatives rise from their peaks over the last few months. That’s what negative campaigning does. But these numbers change frequently.

  • maybenexttime

    Santorum has zero chance of winning a national election, which is about the same chance he has at winning the Republican nomination. He’ll be forced to drop out after Florida, similar to the way Rick #1 was pressured out of South Carolina.

  • swi2522

    for the analysis and i totally agree
    also if the rinos in washington dont like him then he is my guy

    i want a fighter and hope gingrich leans on the tea party repubs

    also newt is not liked by the msm and that is another reason to vote for him

  • clintonformccain

    Most of those people aren’t qualified for the jobs you’ve assigned. The idea is for an administration to have an effective government!

  • tngal

    You’re right about Perry. I don’t see it happening. But I could see Newt picking Cain.

    They cannot go after Cain on any past votes. He’s purely a businessman. Cain is more conservative than Newt which would be a plus. Trying to tie him to a couple of year way back when in Chicago is shaky at best and if they’re forgiving newt’s cheating transgressions, they will overlook innuendo. He held his own in the debates and even Lincoln Douglased (Yeah, its a verb) with Newt, which some of the others wouldn’t dare do. And Cain comes off more humble than Newt. Ok, truthfully, everybody comes off more humble than Newt. And Obama is also still very afraid of Cain.

  • barleycorn

    That is the only name that I can think of that could step in at this late date and theoretically sweep the field.

    Everyone else I can think of would be unacceptable out of hand to either the moderates or the conservatives or is too young/inexperienced.

    And I by no means am suggesting it would be a slam dunk for him.

  • clintonformccain

    “How about instead of this “Who’s a better conservative?” contest, we get back to, who’s the most qualified to be President and why? thingy called an electoral process?”

    That’s the key element that’s been missing from the entire process. I mean, how could anyone listen to Herb Cain on foreign policy and thing that he could even remotely be qualified to be Commander in Chief?

    This is exactly what happened to the Dems with Barry Obama. Everybody was too busy with tingles in their legs to stop and think how a part time Illinois statehouse hack was qualified to be President of the United States.

  • swi2522

    i think i dislike mitch john and kantor almost as much as obama

  • Scope

    You absolutely were throwing it in the face of the Perry supporters with saying that he couldn’t even get Republicans to vote for him, and reminding everyone where his poll numbers were. You can say whatever you want, and deny your negative post, but it is as dishonest as Newt saying he wasn’t a lobbyist, or Mitt saying that he will repeal Obamacare. Again, that doesn’t endear any Perry supporters to your side. The nominee cannot win without that measly peasly 5% support that Perry garnered, period.

  • barleycorn

    Yes, there are things to be thankful for.

  • snowshooze

    They still hold the cards.

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

    we will again. The machinations required to fool the voters is not within me any longer…truth from the heart…

  • snowshooze

    I would have loved to drop by and say hi.

  • snowshooze

    lol

  • snowshooze

    Far beyond what we can do here.
    Dr. Bob might be able to refer you…

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    We’re all really getting tired of it.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    You obviously no nothing about either the Tea Party or Santorum.

    The driving force behind the Tea Parties is smaller government. Santorum’s whole career has been about enlarging government. If you think he’s a conservative, you need a dictionary and a really good shampoo because your hair is brown and icky.

  • benko

    and not so good days.

  • stumpy

    It is over. Perry cannot reenter. He couldn’t get any significant support. As much as I don’t get why he didn’t get a second look, it is over. We are left with the best of bad options, Newt.

    Someone else might enter the race, but not likely. We will have what we have.

  • snowshooze

    I don’t know much about his business exp. but the first two points carry for me.

  • snowshooze

    establishment again.

  • Scope

    and not trying to beat the timer to get a quick weak cup in before it’s time. That’s about as good as it gets with your opinion on Perry’s instate tuition position. In other words, you drank the wine before it’s time, and now we are all left to pay for that.

  • katem

    How about a Mitch Daniels/Jon Huntsman ticket? They should appeal to both the base and the “establishment” and would be a conservative, competent, mature and serious team. Daniels/Huntsman (or vice versa) would bring substantial domestic and foreign policy experience to the White House. Both are successful governors and are eminently qualified to work with Paul Ryan and others in Congress to tackle the deficit and budget issues.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    get the POTUS they deserve. Those of us who fought him and continue to do deserve better.

  • snowshooze

    Ha.
    Man… I just can’t even imagine that one.

  • Scope

    welcome to American Idol.

  • SteveM

    It’s ludicrous.

    Set aside who’s a REAL SCREAMING CONSERVATIVE or not. How about we ask the question, who’s qualified to do the friggin’ job?

    Romney’s the only guy on stage with real experience running stuff. Newt has zero. Paul has zero. Santorum has zero.

    To me, lack of exec experience is a non-starter. Anyone care to guess who the last GOP President was that didn’t have any prior to assuming office?

    I’ll answer: Herbert Hoover. How’d that work out? For history buffs:

    *Bush43 = sitting governor
    *Bush41 = former Vice President
    *Reagan = sitting governor
    *Ford = Appointed, not elected
    *Nixon = Former VP
    *Ike = General of the Army (plenty of experience)
    *Hoover = No elected experience
    *Coolidge = VP, prior to that, sitting governor
    *Harding = former Lt. Gov (was a sittng Senator)
    *Taft = Governor-general of the Phillipenes, Gov. Of Cuba
    *TR = sitting governor when elected VP
    *McKinley = sitting governor
    *Harrison = was a Brig. General
    *Arthur = was VP when Garfield died
    *Garfield = came from the House of Representatives

    Anyone notice a pattern? You have to go all the way back to 1881 to find the last GOP President from the House.

    Exec experience is the norm, not the exception, and should be treated as such.

  • SteveM

    It’s ludicrous.

    Set aside who’s a REAL SCREAMING CONSERVATIVE or not. How about we ask the question, who’s qualified to do the friggin’ job?

    Romney’s the only guy on stage with real experience running stuff. Newt has zero. Paul has zero. Santorum has zero.

    To me, lack of exec experience is a non-starter. Anyone care to guess who the last GOP President was that didn’t have any prior to assuming office?

    I’ll answer: Herbert Hoover. How’d that work out? For history buffs:

    *Bush43 = sitting governor
    *Bush41 = former Vice President
    *Reagan = sitting governor
    *Ford = Appointed, not elected
    *Nixon = Former VP
    *Ike = General of the Army (plenty of experience)
    *Hoover = No elected experience
    *Coolidge = VP, prior to that, sitting governor
    *Harding = former Lt. Gov (was a sittng Senator)
    *Taft = Governor-general of the Phillipenes, Gov. Of Cuba
    *TR = sitting governor when elected VP
    *McKinley = sitting governor
    *Harrison = was a Brig. General
    *Arthur = was VP when Garfield died
    *Garfield = came from the House of Representatives

    Anyone notice a pattern? You have to go all the way back to 1881 to find the last GOP President from the House.

    Exec experience is the norm, not the exception, and should be treated as such.

  • lapert

    You what they say about the loser who blames voters for his loss right? Well, he is still a loser.

    Honestly, at some point you are going to have to come to grips for yourself that the reason why Perry didn’t succeed is because he ran a poor campaign. Heck, he wasn’t even competitive.

  • Scope

    above these comments that acknowledges the fact that we now have two “unelectable” candidates for one reason or another? I would suggest that you speak for yourself, rather than saying “we’re all” getting tired of it. Isn’t there something about mouses in pockets when someone tries to use “we.”

  • Scope

    when I see two losers left on the stage. Your sadness will be when Obama wins re-election, bank on it.

    BTW, why are you so fascinated with my posts? You have been stalking me for a while now with whatever I say. You are giving me the creeps, as I don’t see you doing the same with other Perry supporters. I would suggest you back off leper.

  • naraht

    I just can’t see a brokered convention happening. While Paul may get a few delegates from the early states which aren’t winner take all, he isn’t goint to take any states. And I seriously doubt that Santorum take many additional states and even if he does, he’ll know that he can’t manage to win at convention. If Santorum takes less than 5 states, I think he be willing to withdraw and throw his support one way or another in exchange for a cabinet position (H&HS?).

    Someone is going to get 50% of the delegates, the questions are
    1) Who?
    2) When (before California would be nice..)?
    3) Will the party manage to unify behind them ?

  • lapert

    No, I will do what I can. If it is not enough I will what lessons I can, wake up the next morning and move forward. There is no place for ‘grief’ or ‘sadness’ here, he didn’t die he is just another politician who ran a lousy campaign, they are a dime a dozen.

  • jayjayson

    I am confused as to the point you are trying to make.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    Mitch Daniels….I think most of us would agree he would be a load for Obama

  • snowshooze

    nt

  • carolina

    They have already started marketing him.
    btw – I like Daniels. He is not as ‘establishment’ as Romney, and he has been an excellent conservative gov.

  • snowshooze

    He doesn’t seem to be a gutless coward, or a Megalomaniac either.

  • usgreatagain2012

    Send your messages to Perry, Fox, Rush, Mark Levin, and KRove!

    Gov Perry & Team,

    We need you back in this race! If you read RedState.com, folks want Perry for President!
    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/24/were-fighting-over-two-guys-and-neither-side-thinks-the-other-can-win/ (please read the comments!)

    It’s not too late, you just need the “establishment” to see the light! Contact KRove, Fox, and whoever else, and get them behind you. We know darn well if they hadn’t shunned you, you would be heading to Tampa as the nominee!

    Romney nor Gingrich are going to beat Obama.

    You are our only hope, with your record as Gov of TX, no baggage, and very good message, not to mention, your refined debating skills.

    UN-SUSPEND, ASAP! If you do, will be more than happy to send $$ your way to win the nomination.

    Fox, Rove, Rush, Mark – please see the errors of you ways! Perry is the best candidate to beat Obama, and save this country! You all have the power (voice) to make this happen.

  • SteveM

    We’re electing a President. We’re not having an ideology contest.

    Which of the candidates is best qualifed to serve as President? It’s a simple question. It’s not being answered.

    Go look at the list of GOP elected Presidents I posted and see if anything jumps out at you.

  • SteveM

    We’re electing a President. We’re not having an ideology contest.

    Which of the candidates is best qualifed to serve as President? It’s a simple question. It’s not being answered.

    Go look at the list of GOP elected Presidents I posted and see if anything jumps out at you.

  • lisaque

    I have been a Dem for thirty years and I will gladly be voting for Newt, I will go door to door what ever he needs to help him. He has the best plans and he loves our Country, Obama must be stopped do you not understand this?. I believe its about Country before Party, Obama will win if you people pull the same crap you did with McCain and stay home.

  • bonnman

    which Romney or even Obama could claim they are fighting for. Issues do not equal candidates.

  • snowshooze

    Well..
    The Nuerotics, they build them castles in the sky…
    And the Psychotics…
    They live in them.
    I’d love to see Perry come back to.

  • naql

    The candidate I support, Gary Johnson, was run off by the RNC and the Republican establishment. A successful two term Governor who cut taxes, never raised them, entered office with a deficit and left a surplus, vetoed more spending bills than all other 49 Governors combined. Why? Because he doesn’t care if homosexuals wish to bugger each other in civil unions? Because he thinks, like a majority of Americans, that the drug war is a huge waste of time and money that is destabilizing our southern neighbor?

    It is the domination of the Republican party by socially conservative evangelicals that believe our “exceptional” fate is to be fighting alongside Israel at Armaggedon that is the problem. This blind and ignorant zealotry, fueled by media neo-con demagogues, prevents the Republican party from having a big enough tent to accomodate the Libertarians, Independents and this is why neither Romney or Newt will be electable.

    Because, Romney is not different enough from Obama to matter, Newt Gingrich is an egomaniacal narcissist and an ethically challenged serial hypocrite; Ron Paul supporters will vote for neither. They will either stay home, or flock to Gary Johnson on the Libertarian ticket. And it is exactly what the Republican party deseves after the mockery and scorn they have heaped on Ron Paul supporters and Libertarians in general.

  • votemout2012

    You think he may be Paul supporter they are Ticks hang on until we can Pick them off. Love you posts keep them coming!

  • votemout2012

    Perry 2016 wish it would have been 2012!

  • septembergurl

    the four currently running, all of whom are terribly flawed. Newt is the best of the bunch but that is not saying much. Our primary system has failed miserably to provide a range of viable candidates, instead presenting us with this clown car.

    I think we will end up with a ticket including one of our already vetted candidates — Perry, pawlenty, Huntsman — and someone not yet in the race — daniels or more likely Ryan. someone like Petraeus might also be roped in.

    It’s hard to imagine Obama would be re-elected after this pathetic speech.

  • http://www.writeinryan.com ragnarthepirate

    I will write in Paul Ryan, but you can all vote anyone else not in the field. There’s very little to stop you.

    Write in Paul Ryan for President

  • http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

    If we’re going down, let’s at least go down fighting.

  • traversecityconservative

    I’m not against doing so. I just think it would take the endorsements of Sarah Palin, Rush and Sean to get enough people to vote for him.

  • JSobieski

    There is nothing moderate or squishy about Daniels on entitlements, budgets, and taxes.

    Too bad so many on our side get so wrapped up in labels like “establishment” that they miss out on the substance.

  • lepelerin

    Mitt and Newt both have an equal amout of chance getting elected, not much. However I think there is more passion for and against Newt. I think more of the base will come out for Newt then Mitt in the general election. Look down in Florida today, up to 4000 people came out to see Newt ( this on a work day) but only hundreds came out to see Mitt and Rick.

  • snowshooze

    That is why I came back and stated I would like to hear more of him .
    I realize I cannot always rely on even our own, to brush out my own stance.

  • redsox9687

    “the conventional wisdom is there isn?t time for the vetting process with someone new. Soooooooo what about Perry? He?s been thoroughly vetted.”
    - right… and he got his ass kicked……… A lot of us had extremely high hopes for him. A solid conservative who created so many new jobs in Texas, was the instant frontrunner immediately after announcing he was running, and then he instantly crashed and burned because he couldn’t beat the current jokers in a debate……. no one beat him… he beat himself by being an absolutely atrocious candidate which is why he went nowhere fast.
    “He has a team already, he knows what they did wrong before, he knows what to expect now in the national waters and his backers would probably give to his campaign again(knowing what they know now, with the current crop).”
    - you all said the exact same thing after he got his ass kicked in Iowa. Absolutely nothing changed and he kept getting his ass kicked until he dropped out. It is tragic. He has a ton of potential, but he was in over his head.

  • lepelerin

    becaue people just associate hime with Bush 1 and 2. People aren’t going to go for 3.

  • JSobieski

    and it shows what is wrong with the conservative movement.

    At 10:12 EST you characterize Daniels as simply another version of establishment Romney. That characterization was based on what exactly? Daniels has always addressed budget, entitlement, and tax issues with a courageous seriousness. Romney has never done those things.

    You go from bad mouthing Daniels to cheering him on as if you were watching a football game.

    News flash—the Daniels who are loving at 10:45 EST is the same guy you were dismissing at 10:12 EST for no apparent reason.

    Daniels would have been the best guy to engage Obama in a healthcare debate—Obamacare, Medicaid, Medicare, everything.

    But because some DC folks liked him, people like you put him the “Romney category”.

    Absolute insanity. We deserve exactly what we get. We label excellent potential candidates as “establishment” just because apparently some people in DC knew more about Daniels than you did.

    So by all means, lets complain about how all our candidates are flawed. Its our own damn fault.

  • jeffreywturner

    All that matters is how the economy does over the next few months. If it does good, Obama wins no matter who we nominate. If it does bad, Obama loses no matter who we nominate. That’s just how it works with incumbents.

    Just nominate whoever would make the best President. IMHO that is Rick Santorum. He is the only remaining candidate who is, always has been and always will be a conservative on both economic and social issues.

  • bonnman

    I can see why lots of people are wishing he was one of our nominee choices but I don’t see anyone else jumping into the race at this point

  • Tman8

    but whatever.

    Actually one of the first thoughts I had was that we have no idea where he stands on domestic policy. People wondered the same thing about Colin Powell when his named was kicked around early on.

    But there is still a certain appeal to the notion of a modern day Eisenhower – who was drafted by the GOP to run in ’52 – being asked to serve his country once again as a real unifying figure. I don’t even know if Petraeus is a Republican – but if he is and he can adopt a pro-business tax policy and check the pro-life box, then I think he would have tremendous appeal. Could you imagine how many independent voters we would get. I think Obama wouldn’t stand a chance.

  • lepelerin

    ((:-)

  • snowshooze

    And that is really wrong.
    But there it is. We can’t wste time on what ” could have been ”
    We are stuck with reality.
    It sucks, sometimes.
    Because I think Perry was the best one of the bunch.

  • katem

    I like Jeb Bush too but it seems that only 4 years after George W. Bush left office is much too soon for many voters who are still very unhappy with George W. It’s probably going to be almost impossible for Jeb to ever be elected president. Three presidents from one family is a tough sell. That’s unfair to Jeb but I suspect it’s the reality.

  • JSobieski

    Person X says Candidate Y is Z, and the assessment is mindlessly repeated until it becomes conventional wisdom. Congrats for being part of the problem.

    It took a 7 minute media appearance from you to go from dismissive critic to a big fan. Never thought to Google the guy? Maybe read about his record? The man actually voucherized medicaid in his state, but people compare him to Romney?!?!?!?!?

    Why do any of that, when you just repeat a label?!?!?!

    There are many Republican primary voters who also rely on “proxy assessments” of candidates, and that is as much a part of the problem as any “establishment” out there.

    I need to sign off–and I do apologize, but this chain of comments crystalizes so much of what is wrong with our political process. It makes me sad and mad at the same time . ..

  • snowshooze

    Yeah, three bags full of wrong.
    I have never done any Mitch Daniels research. Not a drop.
    I parroted what I have heard. I blew it.
    If nothing else, Mitch is a King of rhetoric.
    I do not know his records.
    I will now have to shut up and do my homework.
    But, based on his response, and that alone…
    I would put him on the brokered ” Dream Team “

  • JSobieski

    Looks like the assistant to my accountant.

    Isn’t he the guy Dr. K and Miss. Noonan like so much?

    Clearly an establishment squish.

  • acat

    (Cheshire grin)

  • clowngirl

    You’re being very selective with your statistics.

    Not only does one poll have Newt and Romney both within the margin of error (both polling 48 to Obama’s 50) but another poll ( I believe Rasmussen) has him and Romney at roughly the same favorability right now.

    And why are citing polls from January 14th – before Newt’s second surge?

    His numbers have changed pretty dramatically since then.

    as to the comparison to Sarah Palin — while in many ways that’s a compliment to Newt – he doesn’t have the same areas of vulnerability. Palin came onto the scene as a virtual unknown (at the national level) she took a couple of interviews with journalists determined to bring them down and the media was able to paint her as not very well informed and generally not ready.

    That is not a charge that’s going to stand against Newt. and – unlike Sarah Palin when she came onto the scene – Newt has a very long record in national politics – that’s a plus and a minus but it does mean the media won’t be able to define him for most people.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    This is Bad Logic.

    ONLY THE NOMINEE has a shot at beating Obama.

    The idea that these 2nd teir candidates WHO COULDNT EVEN GET UP A CAMPAIGN ENOUGH TO WIN A SINGLE PRIMARY are up for defeating Obama is … bunk.

    By definition, the best campaigner is the guy who wins the primary.

    And by definition, we dont know who is really electable until the election happens.

  • ctredstater

    I go back to multiple postings Erik had saying that he was getting “more comfortable” with ending up in the Newt camp. What happened to that?

    Has Erick been spooked by the Karl Roves of the world? by the Mike Murphys of the world?

    A question Rush asks – why should we let the media – or the Beltway Republicans choose our candidates? Where has that gotten us in the past?

    It could be that this is a death struggle between the conservatives and the establishment – and if that is the case, we have the Tea Party and we owe it to the country to win!

  • annie54

    in his final speech. He also said that although he felt he was called to enter the race, that doesn’t mean he was going to win. He said it could have been for the journey.

    During that journey, the citizenry got to know him. When he appears and you hear his voice – which surpasses absolutely ANY of the candidates – it is commanding.

    Perry would make a great Secretary of the Interior and there have been some rumors of that. He could do a lot of things. Remember, what he said:

    “Things are going to be good no matter what I do.”

    Thank you, Jesus, for that assurance and knowledge!

    I miss him, too..

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Seriously Romney adores Eisenhower and would emulate him.

    I’m not an Ike fan. I’m a Reaganite.

    But it is funny how even conservatives fall for the ‘lets support a general without knowing a single thing about what he really is for’.

  • Change Jar Conservative

    Mitch Daniels has cut the size of government since he took office, cut union rights, rides a Harley, and has worked on education reform.

    He’s far from an establishment squish.

    He’s the best man for the job. Only his wife leaving for a few years then coming back prevented him from running and probably winning.

    He’s still my first choice … just will have to wait for the convention or a Romney face plant.

    Check out this article and you’ll see why I would have loved for him to run for President:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/ride-along-mitch

  • katem

    Christie might be a good candidate down the road. But he is only halfway through his first term as governor. I saw another post suggesting Jindal, who is only 40 years old. We shouldn’t repeat the Obama mistake. Obama was grossly inexperienced and underqualified and it showed the minute he took office. We should let our young and inexperienced candidates (Rubio as well as Jindal and Christie) build their careers and gain more experience. There will be plenty of elections for them in the future. I suggest that our presidential and vice presidential candidates should be people who have substantial experience, preferably in different government posts. That’s why I like Daniels and Huntsman — they have a lot more to offer in 2012 and wouldn’t be learning on the job.

  • acat

    What, you think Karl Rove leaked the entire oppo research file the KBH campaign had just for giggles? If not Romney, who do you think paid him?

    Mew

  • JSobieski

    shows how bad off we are.

    Actually, the various comments I made were essentially copied and pasted from things I read on this site.

    I was just venting—-I am actually a big Daniels fan.

  • snowshooze

    In case this dream brokered convention… might actually come to pass.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    He had zero support.
    Your attacks on leading candidates is wrong and wont change that.

    If you want to talk “blind and ignorant zealotry” look at your own rhetoric, accusing GOP of things that are not true. Stuff like … “evangelicals that believe our ?exceptional? fate is to be fighting alongside Israel at Armaggedon” … is insane and only confirms my own personal view that recreational drugs can indeed lead to mental instability. Please lay down the crack pipe, you are hallucinating.

  • jatx

    Isn’t this exactly how we ended up in this mess? What happened to bold colors? I don’t want to just vote for the “R” anymore. It’s time to fight or IMHO we’ll lose more than just an election.

    So if Newt is the only one left who has an ounce of fight in him, I’ll follow Perry and support him.

  • katem

    Huntsman was a missed opportunity for both the base and the party leadership. Sure, his team made some strategic errors but the conservative media killed his campaign when it started.

    If there’s any possiblity of a brokered convention and a GOP ticket without Mitt or Newt, we would be lucky to get Huntsman on it. He is head and shoulders above all of the declared candidates and I’d put him ahead of Daniels, Bush, Barbour and others who chose not to run. At least he had the courage to get in the arena and campaign; they didn’t.

    Huntsman is still the person who can defeat Obama. Most independents and some Democrats I talk to can’t believe that Huntsman is out of the race. He’s the only Republican they would have voted for.

  • snowshooze

    And I would like to start a self-help group…
    ” Who shall we gather behind now? ”
    newt is all I got.

  • txpat

    Moment for Perry, even when they had current debate clips that showed his improvement.
    They will rerun the bad clip to keep showing he wasn’t electable.
    When they would talk about 2nd tier candidates they would mention the names of the one polling lower than Perry, couldn’t even say his name.
    It was a total black out on Perry.
    So now they can enjoy the fruits of they’re labor.

  • goodgovernance

    A brokered convention would definitely be worth it if that was the ultimate outcome.

  • annie54

    he could do it and do it well!
    In the meantime, we’re are stuck with reality.

    Newt can go all the way with his 3rd wife at his side (wearing that hair that needs an extreme makeover.).

    Perhaps it’s time for “Perry’s Posse” to come to the rescue. We’ve got to stop sulking and get behind our candidate. Rather Newt than Romney.

    Mark Levin really cut loose on his show last night against Romney and Christie. He’s for Newt baggage and all.

    It’s time for Perry’s Posse to saddle up. I’m ready!

  • txpat

    From a swing state we will need to win, and someone that is popular.
    It won’t be Perry for a couple of reasons
    1. Texas is red all day long
    2. Perry made his feelings known about the VP spot
    ” compares VP spot to bucket of warm spit”

  • acat

    Johnson was kept out of some of the early debates despite polling better than Huntsman.

    There is an appearance of “running off” here .. although it wasn’t the GOP’s doing.

    (yet another problem with letting the media manage the debates)

    Mew

  • lakeshore

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_McDonnell

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

    the others? I think so.

  • tea4me

    The media, the punditz, the naysayers, the disbelievers. NONE of them will figure out that the most unelectable candidate on this planet is Obama…until he’s actually defeated

  • lakeshore

    If Thune had run, he would have won Iowa, and would be the front runner right now, and acceptable to everyone. Be honest: wouldn’t you prefer him over Romney, Gingrich or Santorum?

  • tea4me

    …

  • redsox9687

    regardless of whether newt or mitt wins, the vp pick will be either a woman or a latino (brian sandoval, marco rubio, nikki haley, kay bailey hutchison take your pick, but up against obama there is absolutely no way that the republican ticket will just be “two old white guys”) and the only logical position for huntsman in newt’s cabinet would be secretary of state and newt has already promised adelson that the sec of state will be john bolton if he wins. UN ambassador possibly, but that’s just about it…….

  • lineholder

    and about three hundred comments…we’re not an inch closer on agreeing on anything. I’m not even sure we’re in agreement on what we’re fighting for or against. It should be simple to define that much, shouldn’t it? I mean…can’t we all at least agree that we should fight to protect and preserve our nation, or to stand up against socialistic destruction of our economy, or something of significance. Too little clarity of thought with no sense of direction or purpose and way, WAY too much interjection of personalities involved in the election.

    So where do we go from here, realistically? I hope you know, Erick, because I’m not sure any more. And I’m not all that certain any one else is either.

  • texastaxpayer

    Got my wallet out. If ya’ll can talk him back in I will donate to support him. Perry 2012???/

  • lakeshore

    he’ll at least want to bring down Gingrich too, and their group will try to put one of the Romney backers in his place, which gives us Thune or McDonnell. If Rubio is a Gingrich backer (still unclear) that camp could back him for VP at least.

  • annie54

    and you know why?

    Beck had chosen Bachmann and now Santorum to boost. Never Perry or Newt. He’s just clearing the way for his Morman Brother, Willard Mittsy Romney!

    He’s scared that Newt is going to make it – over Romney. He’s being vicious against Newt right now.

    Fred Thompson endorsed Newt last night and Palin told Christie that he had his pants in a wad over Newt. She’s coming out stronger and stronger for Newt.

    Is Perry’s Posse going to remain stalwart?

  • redsox9687

    i love this site, but i gotta say it’s a little odd to hear some of you people just reminiscently wondering now how it was possible that huntsman never took off…… every other comment on this site about him when he was running whether it was by Erick or anyone else was either about how he was “too liberal” because he refused to personally bash the hell out of obama, or some kind of a joke who couldn’t be trusted because he was in obama’s administration…. now you miss him all of a sudden??????

  • goodgovernance

    a nominee who wants to be president just because it’d be the ultimate feather in his cap and because he’d enjoy keeping the gears and mechanisms of the status quo machine in good working order. We don’t need no stinkin’ status quo machine!

    I want a candidate who will fight to create the real changes we need right now. And the base is telling you and the Establishment that we’re not joking about Romney not being acceptable. Take us seriously.

  • krish

    I hope you are NOT equating the two- that would be a gross injustice to Newt! Newt is a conservative (based on his record) who strays sometimes to the moderate side when his mouth gets detached from his brain (however his actions most of the time have not followed the mouth in most cases!).

    Romney on the other hand is a self-described Massachusetts Moderate =Basic Liberal! Look at his record not his words. His only goal is to somehow become the President …just to prove his worth to his father! He does NOT have a core – have seen him in action in MA!

    There will not be anyone that the Conservatives/Tea Partyers (Newt Supporters) and Republican Establishment (Romney supporters) will agree on ! That is the bigger issue – as long as the RINOs in Washington establishment have the control of the party, there will Not be a candidate we all can support!

    If things do not change (do not think so – after seeing the republican freshmen actions), it is time for the third party – Tea Party!

  • krish

    I hope you are NOT equating the two- that would be a gross injustice to Newt! Newt is a conservative (based on his record) who strays sometimes to the moderate side when his mouth gets detached from his brain (however his actions most of the time have not followed the mouth in most cases!).

    Romney on the other hand is a self-described Massachusetts Moderate =Basic Liberal! Look at his record not his words. His only goal is to somehow become the President …just to prove his worth to his father! He does NOT have a core – have seen him in action in MA!

    There will not be anyone that the Conservatives/Tea Partyers (Newt Supporters) and Republican Establishment (Romney supporters) will agree on ! That is the bigger issue – as long as the RINOs in Washington establishment have the control of the party, there will Not be a candidate we all can support!

    If things do not change (do not think so – after seeing the republican freshmen actions), it is time for the third party – Tea Party!

  • lakeshore

    So you’re saying Santorum would have been chosen over Thune in Iowa? Thune is a evangelical’s dream, even graduated from a Christian college.

  • redsox9687

    well, it’s an interesting idea. Any idea whatsoever, though, on what his positions are……. on virtually ANYTHING?… we all thought perry was going to be the best candidate in the history of the party and then the second he started opening his mouth he crashed and burned. one would certainly think that if petraeus was able to become top brass in the Army he probably has a solid head on his shoulders, but no one knows his positions on anything…

  • lakeshore

    who would that be, and how would they win after splitting the anti-Obama vote? It sounds like ’92 and ’96 again.

  • acat

    The horndog, the gold-plated weather vane, the nanny-stater, or the quack.

    I’ll take the horndog. At least he’s got some fight in him, and maybe old age and guile have cured some of his youthful exuberance….

    Mew

  • texasref

    The base and outside the beltway folks (the people) far outnumber the Establishmentarians, so although they may both be deluded in their thinking that the other candidate can’t win, majority rules.

    And let’s not equate Newt’s electability issues (minor) with Mitt’s (major). See SC exit polling.

    Don’t go wobbly, Erick. A convention is the last thing we need. Although it couldn’t possibly produce a worse result than a “Romney-Romney’s First Choice” ticket.

    Even dear old Mitch or Haley or Pawlenty for God’s sakes would be better. I don’t rate Hillary much lower than Mitt.

    Newt 2012.

  • texasref

    Plus we hate their guy more than his people hate ours.

  • redsox9687

    so many people on this site seem to love discarding people as “moderate establishment sellouts” when they know absolutely nothing about the person…. what exactly is wrong with daniels???? literally all i know about him is what i just saw in the SOTU response which seemed pretty solid to me and that he’s a popular republican governor… please just COOL IT with the smug self-righteous zealotry for once and give the guy a chance.

  • rwnewsnut

    It’s going to be one of these four guys. Stop complaining. Your picks of Rick Perry and then Jon Huntsman didn’t work out that great.

    Let the people vote in the primaries. Then work to support our candidate to defeat Obama.

  • krish

    Thanks to GW Bush, we got Obama! He was the biggest spender & most fiscally irresponsible Republican ever! His legacy was losing both houses & getting a Marxist elected!
    At least now, real conservatives stand up to Obama -remeber how they had to sign off on every liberal idea from Bush! Many of them were goners in the 2010 elections for spending like drunken sailors!
    Jeb Bush – give me a break! Enough already with the Bushies!

    Most Republicans including the so called conservatives on our side including the famous talk show hosts (lone exception was Savage) are hypocriteswhen it comes to spending because they kept their mouth shut when Bush was giving away the house! Now they talk like Deficit reduction hawks (including Rush – he has been wrong on this issue for a long time!)

  • krish

    Thanks to GW Bush, we got Obama! He was the biggest spender & most fiscally irresponsible Republican ever! His legacy was losing both houses & getting a Marxist elected!
    At least now, real conservatives stand up to Obama -remeber how they had to sign off on every liberal idea from Bush! Many of them were goners in the 2010 elections for spending like drunken sailors!
    Jeb Bush – give me a break! Enough already with the Bushies!

    Most Republicans including the so called conservatives on our side including the famous talk show hosts (lone exception was Savage) are hypocriteswhen it comes to spending because they kept their mouth shut when Bush was giving away the house! Now they talk like Deficit reduction hawks (including Rush – he has been wrong on this issue for a long time!)

  • Ned Reck

    ANYBODY but Obama.

    He is killing this nation.

    Does anybody out there hear me?

    Ned

  • redsox9687

    it this winds up newt vs. obama, i wouldn’t be surprised at all to see bloomberg running third party. (should be interesting and possibly even good for us actually…. all i know about his national policy views is that he’s just about as far-left on immigration as you can get and that he defends nyc as a sanctuary city… could actually split the left).

  • texasref

    nt

  • texasref

    Are you a Romney shill or an Obama shill?

  • JSobieski

    Huntsman had Obamalike qualities in only 1 way:

    He appeared to be more of a centrist than he really was.

    More specifically, he was tempermentally not an ideologue, even though he is quite conservative.

    There are things we could learn from liberals.

  • krish

    Rove, Laura Ingram, Medved (same guy who supported McCain – never learns his lessons), Republican talking heads at Fox(Hannity indirectly – citing Romney as conservative),

  • JSobieski

    He has a proven record, good ideas, and an ability to articulate clearly in a way that people understand.

    So of course people weren’t interested in a Daniels run because some tepid DC turds said good things about Daniels.

    The same logic compels some people to embrace who the lefties attack the most.

    It is not a good idea to rely on the assessments of enemies (the dems) or rivals (the establishment). Unfortunately, we on the right are suckers for this.

    Newt could talk about market-based reforms to government, and he is labelled a big government establish hack. But if he attacks the press, he is everyone’s hero?

    This primary season is even more depressing than 2008. The speech by Daniels did more to address tea party concerns than anything Newt, Romney, or any other candidate has said in the last 6 weeks put together.

  • jimcyr

    Eh. Love ya, Erick. But that’s kind of a cheap idea.
    Attack, attack, attack, I say.

  • snowshooze

    Guilty.
    I made my statement based only on the choir.
    Seeing Mitch in action, only moments later, I realized he was worth looking into.
    It may take a backhoe to get all the egg off of my face…
    But I have one.
    And I shall do myvery best to dissallow those statements which may have led me to a flawed presumption in the future.
    I actually know better. I just trusted what I had heard.
    until I axctually do DO my homework… I cannot further afford to throw myself at your feet.
    But I accept the admonishment.
    I found Mitch to be an absolute pleasure to listen to.
    So my apologies go directly to him as well.
    Sorry, Mitch. I blew it.
    Mark

  • texasref

    See Beck and Huntsman for evidence.

    Blest be the ties that bind…

  • bs61

    My Dem friends refuse to believe any alternative news than the NYT and the MSM. I say to them their kids futures and America is at risk, and they think that I’m some conspiracy nut!

  • Adjoran

    “Draft Daniels: Let The Healing Begin”

  • texasref

    and a slim chance of beating Obama with any other Establishment candidate.

    Its YOUR turn to compromise.

  • bs61

    n/t

  • snowshooze

    And I am still with him 100%
    But in the fast-food media.. it is only bluster. Not content.
    It still blows me away that he did not get a better reception.
    I don’t care if he can’t hardly say hello without tripping.
    I was always patient enough to let his message come through.
    I guess, we are in a minority.

  • naql

    He was kept out of the debates, not only by the media, but the RNC as well. Yes, you’re right; Reince Priebus gave him zero support as well. I think it’s tragically hilarious to hear Newt and other Neo-cons taking up the media bias issue as they speak in great sweeping circles to generally avoid any mention of “He Who Shall Remain Nameless”, aka Ron Paul. And you don’t have to listen to talk radio hosts like Medved or Levine for very long to hear Paul supporters and Libertarians described as “dangerous fringe lunatics”.

    Why, you yourself cannot even manage a civil discussion without resorting to “crack pipe” schoolboy taunts to prop up your argument. Sorry you don’t like drugs; it’s still an expensive, failed policy.

    And my comments wrt evangelicals was taken directly from a conversation I had with a Newt Gingrich supporter earlier today. He said, “We have to stand by Israel, because if they go, it’s all over.” He’s perfectly willing to overlook that Gingrich is a slimeball, because he thinks he can’t get his first choice, Santorum.

    Bottom line: go look at a chart of the debt over the past 50 years; Republican and Democrats, both are responsible. Both would sacrifice liberty for a false sense of security. Time to stop choosing the lesser of two evils. Time to vote Libertarian.

  • JSobieski

    I don’t support Johnson since he left the party, but the “standards” for being included in the debates were specifically designed to include Huntsman and exclude Johnson.

    The guy wasn’t listed in most polls, so his poll numbers were de minimis. A total scam.

    I can totally understand why he would be hacked off.

    The guy started a one-man handyman business and turned it into a large thriving business.

    He has the best record on spending above EVERYONE.

    The MSM screwed him, and the GOP was happy that it happened.

  • snowshooze

    I have two infant daughters. If Johnson want’s to make society worse.. I will never endorse him. Whack job.

  • snowshooze

    I have two infant daughters. If Johnson want’s to make society worse.. I will never endorse him. Whack job.

  • snowshooze

    I have two infant daughters. If Johnson want’s to make society worse.. I will never endorse him. Whack job.

  • snowshooze

    screw Johnson if that is what he thinks.

  • JSobieski

    Most criminial laws are at the state level. Remember that 10th Amendment thing? You know, the Amendment Perry talks about all the time?

    Removing federal laws against pot doesn’t mean its legal–it means its up to the states. Which is what a 10th Amendment person should want.

    What is the constitutional basis for criminalizing marijuana?

    Johnson had the best record on actually cutting spending—better than Perry, better than Daniels—and he did it in a Blue State.

    But what the heck, he wouldn’t have improved the presidential debates in any way, because our candidates are talking about budgetary issues much anyway. I mean, who cares about that stuff?

    Totally green eye-shade talk.

  • JSobieski

    so why is Johnson’s position so strange?

    Does you lack of advocacy for federal laws on those issues make you pro-murder? pro-rape?

  • texasref

    :-)

  • elayman

    So there is still a chance. You are probably right about VP being driven by the horrible trait of identity politics intended to divide us even further. As long as it isn’t the most sickening pander of a female Hispanic. Leave that to Romney.

  • cheetah2

    6k at Naples and 4k at Sarasota showed up for Newt rallies today. Meanwhile crowds of 250 to 400 turned out for Santorum and Romney.

    http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/gingrich-draws-thousands-in-fla-while-romneys-santorums-2123241.html

  • mikelindell2

    I think Newt would do well even in a strong field. He has such an impressive national record, has such bold policy proposals, and is so knowledgable and articulate that he could compete with anyone. In a stronger field, there would at least be a more substantive discussion of the issues though. Mitch Daniels, while I admire his policies, is too timid and inarticulate to win (just watch his jon stewart intvw) Jeb Bush is a Bush, way too soon. Paul Ryan is terrific, but I fear he does not explain complex issues in a succint enough manner. Christie would be good, even though I’ve lost respect for him for caving to establishment. Let’s stick with Newt, he has been running a disciplined campaign and is a brilliant politician and would be a highly effective, conservative president.

  • eruthk

    I think so too; I think Newt is an older wiser and happily married Newt, and that will also help keep him grounded which he is going to have to be in these crazy times. He really is inspiring people and changing minds, He is a brilliant and flawed Winston Churchill sort of candidate, and although I can see why some people can see a disaster in the making, it may also be that no one else can possibly win this election, it is going to be absolutely brutal.

  • penhall99

    Thanks for the pep talk, Erick. The whole field of candidates have SUCKED (with the exception of Rick Perry) so now we are stuck with some flawed and weak guys to choose from. I personally think any of them except Ron Paul would make a decent POTUS, so I will support the one with the best chance of winning. And I do not agree that Newt is that guy.

  • naql

    Just curious, why would you not vote for the best qualified candidate whose principles match your own, regardless of whether there’s an R after his name? I think a third party win would be just the thing to shake things up, and Johnson wouldn’t need to control congress to do what he did so well: just veto all the spending.

  • Risky

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/05/09/why-i-will-not-support-jon-huntsman/

    He was very proud of it at the time. I assume he still thinks he was doing the right thing.

  • Risky

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/05/09/why-i-will-not-support-jon-huntsman/

    He was very proud of it at the time. I assume he still thinks he was doing the right thing.

  • Risky

    I think this should be the dream ticket. It says that the GOP is serious about the budget and the economy above all and willing to make tough choices.

    Sometime the media underestimate the ecectorates willingness to vote for someone giving them the bad news straight. Obama will tell people that they can fix the budget by taxing “other people” and cutting spending on stuff that doesn’t affect them. If pushed the electorate can see this as a con. It’s a bit like claiming you’ll fix the family finances by asking your boss for a big raise, spending less at Starbucks and looking for spare change around the house- one isn’t going to happen and the rest won’t make much difference.

    In the UK we voted for a party that said they would cut spending heavily and raise more in tax. In the US it plays differently but if you go in with a platform of serious spending cuts and tax reform that everyone can understand, they will buy it. However if you tell them you’ll just cut “waste” and claim that the tax system needs more loopholes not less then they won’t belive a word.

    The only problem is that the VP debate might be a bit cruel on Joe.

  • clintonformccain

    Voters also missed the memo that Christine O’Donnell was unelectable, too. Cost the Republicans a Senate seat. But, hey, a message was sent, and that’s apparently all that matters.

  • snappy101

    I haven’t voted yet and the way I see it, there are other candidates still on my ballot that have “suspended” their campaign. Why shouldn’t I protest the current candidates by voting for one of the drop outs? Why do 3 states get to tell me I can’t? All it would take is one big voice to organize a protest vote for that candidate.

  • sowa1

    should never be allowed to vote in a Republican primary. Voteing for Obama because you don’t like the Republican candidate is just plain stupid. Did you listen to his speech? If you did, there is no way anyone would vote for him again, EVER.

  • romansdaughter

    interview in Texas. That now he realizes that he needs to get into the race a lot earlier and don’t have back surgery a month before you jump into the campaign. But he promised that they haven’t heard the end of him in politics. But I am sorry, but I think we are going to have 4 more years of Obama so no I am not too excited about any of the candidates that we”ve got now. I think of the field now that Newt is the best but that is not saying much.

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

    …that commentary is mandated.

    Most of my viewpoints [articulated last week] overlap with points made herein…
    http://www.saveardmorecoalition.org/node/5848/rick-perry-hes-guy?page=3
    …most notably how unfairly Perry was treated, but also how The Newt can indeed prevail.

    I also noted that EE unfairly/publicly “pushed” Perry, for public/insider reasons he has yet to explain. Perhaps, now, this internal conflict is emerging, revealing both satisfaction that The Newt won SC and that the anticipated Establishment-reaction has proven [already, noting Mitt's debate-posture] so destructive.

    Rather than providing a point-by-point refutation of “tngal”…it’s preferable to illustrate the larceny that underlies these comments….

  • jlsankot

    what if…….

    I know nothing about his finances, but I know I went through a period of depression when he dropped out. I really thought we had found our candidate.

    Now we’re stuck with a couple of wannabes to run against another wannabe (who, unfortunately, is already there).

  • jlsankot

    nt

  • romansdaughter

    He is just another Rino. Nope there is way better candidates than him.

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

    …the focus is on the above-posting, although other issues abound [such as Perry NOT being the VP...but gaining a cabinet position...perhaps opening The Newt to choose Toomey].

    Whether Perry had an optimal campaign-staff was, per personal on-the-ground experience, tangential; they were competent, candid and creative [recalling the desire to start a patter with the letter "c"].

    His announcement @ the RS-Gathering was pre-ordained and NOT directed @ Michele; recalling the break-neck scheduling, he couldn’t have done so on Friday [and, if he had, he would have been accused of trying to undercut her potential success].

    Raising the minor rhetorical-points he corrected [e.g., illegal immigration supporters being called ?without heart?] without noting his superb policies regarding such issues [e.g., beefing-up the border] is disingenuous.

    More important were ad-hominem attacks [he was a Texas Governor like GWB, so what?] that reflected superficiality; again, depending upon such diatribes is beneath RS-blogging.

    Finally, the absence of recognition of his positives [superb debating during past two months, widespread support for his proposals] tarnishes whatever credibility would remain in this posting.

  • Common_Cents

    Romney might have a bit of advantage from early voters when he was in the lead.

    Interesting that Gingrich has the largest paid staff in FL of all campaigns. why does the news say romney is so organized and Newt doesn’t have anything? Newt also had the largest staff in SC.

    “Absentee and early voting have been very brisk, on a pace ahead of the presidential primary four years ago. As of Monday evening, about 301,000 voters had cast ballots – 212,000 absentees and 89,000 early voters – said Chris Cate, spokesman for the Florida secretary of state?s office. That?s 52,000 more than had been submitted as of a day earlier.”

    In the 2008 presidential primaries, nearly a third of Florida voters cast ballots absentee or at early voting locations, according to data provided by Cate.

    That year, about 1.95 million, or 51 percent of registered Republicans, cast ballots in the presidential primary in which Romney finished second to eventual nominee John McCain. This year there are 4.06 million registered Republicans in the state.

    The Gingrich campaign, which was late assembling its Florida operation, has also used mail to contact absentee voters, campaign spokesman R.C. Hammond said. The campaign has made up lost ground, however, naming chairs and cochairs in all 67 counties, and has more paid staff in Florida than the Romney campaign. Jose Mallea, who managed Marco Rubio?s successful US Senate campaign in 2010, is Gingrich?s state director in Florida.”

    http://bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/01/25/romney-has-reached-out-florida-early-and-absentee-voters/2TcOuFBP9xTH23jueC13QP/story.html

  • jlsankot

    Why should we let the media choose?

    I was SO DISGUSTED with him the day he gave a testimony for Rick Perry AFTER Perry dropped out. I kept waiting for him to give him a boost while Perry was still in the race, but he never did—outside of 5 second comments here and there.

    So what was Rush doing? He was picking our candidate and he is part of the media. Hypocrite!!

  • JSobieski

    If Johnson couldn’t get registerable support in an R primary system (he was in two debates after all), the idea that he would actually win as an L is laughable.

    Tell you what, I will modify Rule #2 in a general election for Johnson if he polls BETTER than the R. Otherwise, Rule #2 stands, which means that Rule #2 stands.

    The purpose is to put a more conservative person in the WH than Obama, not to merely make some vacuous political statement.

  • paco12348

    If Palin doesn’t jump in, then I’m with Newt. I would walk through ice and snow to vote for Palin. She’s a fighter, just like Newt. The Big Headed Ignorant Gop Leaders don’t like her anymore than Newt but she has no baggage. If the so called “leaders” bring in anyone else I’ll still vote for Newt.
    In fact here’s my gut feeling: Barack Obama is not the only one we need to get rid of; the Gop leaders also need to go. They have outlived themselves and no longer represent the base.

  • JSobieski

    but voting L is voting for Obama.

    If the L’s are actually capable of winning a majority in the general election, they would also be capable of winning a majority in an R primary, so L’s would be well advised to try and take over the Republican party than vote L and give Obama 4 more years.

  • wbf

    Yep, that is what he said in Florida yesterday!! Not exactly that but that is how it came across!!

    I have received negative robot calls from the Newt campaign against Romney. I wouldn’t be surprised to receive negative calls from the Romney campaign too.

    I received an automated PPP call. I thought the questions were focused and fair . I think PPP has Gingrich up in Florida.

    Gingrich linked Romney to Crist. Perhaps you saw that Marco Rubio came out in defense of Romney who helped him in his campaign. I don’t know how that will play out

  • dudette

    in the face, you can present facts but it doesnt matter to liberals they have a reset button to their brains that just doesnt work. I truly think there is a genetic difference between conservatives and liberals or something deeply psychological. I have tried to find the roots of liberal psyche going back to Rousseau thru industrial revolution—i find only that liberals seem tobelieve in the here and now , in the perfectability of human nature and problems. Their thinking leads them to grandiose plans of re-engineering society acc. to their plans. Lack of faith is at the basis of liberalism i have come to believe.

  • tngal

    And a flower for you this fine Wed morn.

  • michaelbowler

    under the sun.

    Those who refuse to learn history are doomed to repeat it…

  • maybenexttime

    Clinton and Obama’s primary was not nearly as toxic. There were a few moments of tense debate, but nothing on the personal level that we’ve seen in this GOP primary.

    Newt embarked on a Kamikaze-style mission after his loss in Iowa. His only goal was to take Romney down, even if it meant using the rhetoric of Occupy Wall Street to do it. The strategy worked and Newt managed to not completely damage himself in the process.

    So now it will only get uglier. Romney is going blast Gingrich with more Super PAC ads. Gingrich will keep finding new ways to express contempt for Romney’s experience in the business sector. Both candidates will continue to lose their presidential stature as this battle goes forward.

    As far as a brokered convention goes, I still think it’s asking for trouble. The ground game and organization will be extremely important since Obama has quite a bit of both from 2008. Also, Obama can get the national microphone any day he wants by virtue of being president. If the GOP picks some guy at the last minute with no ground game or campaign staff, it’s going to be a disaster.

  • elayman

    As a resident of Indiana I am neutral with him overall but very much opposed to Daniels’ pushing a constitutional cap of state property taxes at 1?3% which has unnecessarily decimated local government budgets, and public library budgets in particular (=potentially my job).

    On point, I don’t think late entry for 2012 is a workable proposition in any case. Evidently something rather bizarre and untoward happened in their marriage that the wife doesn’t want public and is now refusing to allow him a chance. Hmmm…

  • michaelbowler

    That man is a liberal, with just a few common sense tenencies. He’s pro abortion, gun control and, just as bad, a Mitt Panderer.

  • maybenexttime

    The Perry thing played itself out months ago. Let it go. The gaffes were not only destructive to his credibility within the minds of Republican voters (He went from 32% to under 10% in two months) but Independents wouldn’t have liked him either.

    You can’t say unusual things like, “We ought to put troops back in Iraq,” and expect that swing voters will flock to your campaign.

  • In The Hook

    By all means, let’s run people out there who will “fight” and get beat by 20 points the way Sarah would. She’s even more clownish than Newt and made herself irrelevant by resigning from her post and putting herself and her kids on reality shows. I had huge respect for her taking on party cronies in Alaska and was massively sympathetic towards her after the media tore her apart because she had the audacity to be a conservative woman in power.

    And then she validated the criticisms of her by abandoning the governorship and becoming a caricature.

  • In The Hook

    The same guy who didn’t even both trying to appeal to the base when he was, you know, actually running for president? No thanks.

  • duanej

    That neither candidate can beat Obama. It is wholly absurd to think, even for a millisecond, that Obama will win. Probability shmobability. If all elections were evenly balanced, if all the candidates were justly square, with no rough edges and no leanings, probability of the incumbent might matter. How many times have we said, or heard said, wrote or read that Obama is the second term of Jimmy Carter?

    Look, I don’t take that comparison lightly. I believe it. I accept that is the single most apt description of Obama available. He is the second term of Jimmy Carter and he is way worse. So let’s look at that and consider it. Reagan won that year by nothing less than a landslide. 489/49 electoral college votes. Reagan would have won that year even if he had been Gerald Ford. The ECV would be more in parity. More like 389 to 149, but the point remains Carter could not have won.

    So, through that prism, it is not only not likely Obama will win (even though he is the incumbent) it is entirely NOT possible.

    Of the two leading primary candidates, Gingrich is closer to Reagan than any of the others with personality, style and, yes, conservatism. So the question is simple. Do you want a 489/49 victory or do you want a 389/149 victory, or do you want something still less, but none the less a victory? If you want the former, Gingrich is the guy. If you want any of the latters then Romney is your guy.

    People, we’ve got to convince others this thing is in the bag. Obama is out. We’ve got to believe that and embrace it or we cannot convince others of the same.

  • maybenexttime

    Christie endorsed and vehemently defended a Muslim judge. Yeah. That’ll play real well with the “Stamp Out Sharia Law” types.

    Christie says global warming is real and has human causes. Gee, I wonder if Al Gore would run as his Veep.

    Christie supports the assualt weapons ban. So does Michael Moore.

    Christie thinks illegal immigration is not a problem in America.

    This is the “true conservative” who will put Newt and Mitt in their place?

  • jakeofalltrades

    And I’m STILL not seeing how we get to a brokered convention when all the pundits demand everyone drop out.

  • circlegranch

    that Perry may have been low or about out of money extends only as far as personal experience. In the final days, I was solicited for money several times which had not happened with such frequency before. It was also reported in the final days that a key contributor had left the Perry camp and gone over to Romney.

    The experts claim Florida takes a million dollars a day to be competitive so in doing the math of cash on hand after Iowa lead me to conclude that money was perhaps becoming an issue and combined with low polling numbers in SC and nationally, the decision to withdraw came about when it did.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    You may as well state that “those Catholics” or “those Evangelicals” … or “those Social Conservatives”…

    Check your ignorance at the door pal.

  • duanej

    Republicans and Independents can vote, but not Democrats. Sorry. Nice try though.

    I do agree, though, Obama will lose handily to either candidate we put up, no matter who it is. So why not go with the one guy who has a history of bringing independents and moderates under the same umbrella and capturing te HOR for the first time in 40+ years?

  • remalimo

    Rasmussen polled (Sept 2010) over 4000 people (Lib & con) on theri understanding of economic principals. I forget the exact numbers but it was something like the very liberals got 1.6 answers right and the conservatives got 6.8 correctly out of 8 facts.

  • naql

    Well, here are my rules:

    #1) find that candidate or party that best matches your principles, and then support them. Anything else is vacuous partisanship.

    #2) don’t listen to people that say your candidate or your party is unelectable, they just want their candidate, party, or principles to prevail over yours.

    #3) if you wake up one day and find yourself supporting a man like Newt Gingrich, you have no principles, you are just a partisan.

  • Scope

    and again with no proof, that Perry had set aside $9 million for his Fla. race. I also read that a SC donor had jumped over to Romney, but, I’m sure Perry had more than one donor.

    As to being solicited for money, I had contributed to Cain’s race very early on. That put me on his email list. Even after many attempts to beg Cain’s campaign to take me off their list, no luck. I was solicited daily by the Cain campaign for money. It seems that all the campaigns solicit those on their email lists for money. I’m sure Gingrich is begging for money to compete also.

    I really have no idea what the financial state was of Perry’s campaign, and without knowing that, I am not willing to buy that that lead to his suspension. IMO, he felt betrayed, both from some within his campaign staff, to those on the outside either ignoring his existence or portraying him as some dumb Texan, and saying he wasn’t “electible” such as the so-called Evangelical leaders. That had to have been a crushing blow to him to say that Santorum was more electable than he was.

    I’ve been torn between being glad that Perry got out when he did, as he did so with grace and dignity. He can rise up on another day. He would have been thrown into the same gutter politics as Romney and Gingrich are displaying currently, and that wasn’t Perry’s style. On the other hand, if he could have just maintained a seat at the table, he could have watched the implosion of the current two so-called front runners. People are tiring of it already, and it’s only just begun. Perry may have been seen as the last conservative choice, and adult left standing, as the other two try to cut the legs off each other daily. It is very ugly, and the MSM is loving it, and encouraging it, and calling it very exciting and interesting. The GOP proves yet again that they still have not learned that doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results, , is the description of insanity.

  • acat

    have the effect of “stealing a vote” from whichever of the major party candidates is more closely ideologically aligned with you.

    That said, if you’re voting for Johnson and live in a very blue State, it’s not going to matter. If, on the other paw, you live in a purple State – one that could go either way – and you follow your “rules” .. you’re an idiot.

    Mew

  • evenyn123456

    I will vote for our nominee but I do have an opinion of who I would prefer of the remaining choices and that is NOT NEWT.
    For those who believe in redemption, Newt is defending his time at Freddie Mac is not part of his “redemption.” He ADMITTED that they hired an advisor to advise them on how they could avoid having to REGISTER as a lobbyist for Freddie Mac — in other words to go to the line but not over it. Incredible! Sounds to me like INFLUENCE PEDDLING at the very least.
    Newt, while in the House, voted FOR the individual mandate on health care.
    Newt has recently stated that he supports ILLEGALS/lawbreakers and has NOT clarified who he means. Illegals are partly to blame for the problems we are in. Cause illegals to SELF DEPORT by losing their jobs and NOT being able to collect on social services would give 1 million plus jobs to citizens. Who is more important: citizens or illegals!? You decide.

  • irishgirl

    “evangelical” leaders really blew it also. That aspect has been a huge letdown. The ones in Iowa throw their support behind Santorum, but neglect to take into account his record and compare it to Rick Perry’s. I can’t figure that one out. Sad.

  • jakeofalltrades
  • circlegranch

    and not focus on funding. As I’ve tried to clarify, from my personal experience, it seemed that PERHAPS money may have contributed to his departure from the race. I’m sure there is a host of reasons. The take away is that he’s left and its a huge loss for the country. Texas has a pretty stellar record to tout these days, and in a normal situation, the governor of a state with that much to its credit would be applauded. Its only my assumption that his campaign donations were reflective of his polling data. We knew about Make America Great Again and that they had alot of cash on hand, so maybe the money was there and maybe that was not the driving force behind his decision. At this point, it doesn’t seem to matter, at least to me.

    We agree that this is a blow for conservatism. The comment about possibly a shortage of money was not intended to be the core thought of my comment.

  • http://dreamsfrommyforefathers.com RoguePolitics

    Check EE frontpage.
    Still wanna keep supporting these dirtbags?

    I am done with ‘em.

  • jakeofalltrades

    Going by statistics alone. You are apparently in favor of them serving time in federal prison for doing so. I find this… inconsistent.

  • romansdaughter

    I read that Vander Platt offered his endorsement to Rick Perry but Rick turned him down and so then he offered it to Santorum and Santorum paid him. To me that is so wrong for an evangelical leader to do that. Also Santorum likes subsidies and you know that Iowa likes them.

  • edintexas

    I think those who are Christie fans either are taken in by the MSM claiming he is “far right wing”, or are dazzled by his verbal attacks on unions to the degree that they don’t recognize the other issues.

  • nepanyrush

    This was a well-written analysis by Erick, although I would substitute Newt for Romney is this statement: “I am part of the base that will do everything I can to defeat Mitt Romney because I believe he will be a disastrous nominee who will cost us the House, the Senate, the White House, and consequently the Supreme Court.”

    Romney would do well in a general election. Newt would be a disaster in the general. For one thing, his bombastic statements are actually quite ridiculous when examined in the light of day, and they would be examined. He said he supported Reagan. I was around then. He did not support Reagan but demagoged against Reagan’s ideas and denigrated Reagan as a failure and even compared him to Neville Chamberlain in his summit with Gorbachev. His idea for “no-loss” personal SS accounts, where even if one loses all their money the government just bails them out, means twice the risk of great debt.

    But most importantly, Newt is an ethical mess and was a disaster in the one leadershp role he had. He will take down everyone down ticket. I am totally baffled that people are supporting him. I lived through the Gingrich years. He was a disaster. And I just listened to him on a talk show and he is on a scorched-earth campaign. it was just “Romney is a liar” “Everyone knows Romney is a liar” and other bizarre invectives.

  • democratsarefascists

    …then there’s no point in voting.

  • democratsarefascists

    If people who said things like that had paid attention and not relied on liberal “news” outlets, like some city rube, they’d know he was totally vindicated.

  • jseville

    Have I missed it or is RedState also intentionally not telling us about some of Newt’s exonerations by IRS, etc.

    http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/what-really-happened-gingrich-ethics-case/336051

  • jseville

    http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/what-really-happened-gingrich-ethics-case/336051

  • courdeleon02

    I am disgusted in particular with the propaganda that is coming out of the Gingrich camp. Newt is literally the King of mudslinging and misinformation. The intolerance of some on the ultra ultra radical right has clearly been examined by Ann Coutler in her recent comments alluding to the unelectablity of Gingrich because of his failed leadership.Even today, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida has severely criticized the Newt camp with its false and misleading advertising on Romney’s immigration policy.Gingrich is in reality the pro-amnesty candidate and the record and statements by him proves that case. As Coutler has so carefully examined the record it is now evident that Romney is far more conservative than the Newtster.The nomination of Gingrich will result in a landslide victory for Obama. You can bet on that. Those of us who are rational must rise up to stop his nomination at all costs.

  • SteveM

    I AM part of the friggin’ base. Enough with this ‘your team’, ‘my team’ bullcrap. We’re on the same team.

    The martyr complexes being developed around here are getting out of hand.

  • BrendanW

    on RedState is typified in Erick’s post:

    Mitt has a whole chest full of flaws that will be exploited by BHO and Media. (Mitt’s money from “bailouts” is a liability.)

    But Newt’s only enemy is what he’ll do to himself. (But Newt’s money from Fannie and Freddie isn’t?)

    Sigh. The focus should be on constraining the candidates as best possible, no matter who the R’s nominate and if the president is elected we are going to be faced with an unreliable president. (Still much better than being faced with BHO as president.) Romney can be constrained by forcing him to ID what he’ll do specifically – there should be a post on RS “What Mitt Romney needs to do to establish a foundation for conservative support” – or similar. I’m not sure how you constrain Newt’s propensity to jump on the next intellectual fad – but it’s doable – a promise to do these three things before he looks at another idea, etc.

    Of course I think Perry could have been the candidate we agreed on – Mitt’s executive experience and temperament – with better success executing in office, Newt’s ideological pros – but without the personal and intellectual baggage (e.g. Nancy Pelosi add). Too bad Perry got bad advice on how to run a campaign.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    We see this in candidate after candidate.

    They all have pros and cons, but these things get presented where only the flaws of the ‘bad’ candidate are mentioned, none of the good, and only the good of the ‘good’ candidate, and none of the flaws.

    It becomes an echo-chamber and cheerleading section, not a discussion sounding board. As such, it risks being out-of-touch to reality, In particular, I’d note the notable lack of recognition of the real risks posed by Newt’s electability. It should be determined factually and not merely asserted and then denounced. I dont really know.

  • bluerose75

    This gets old already!! I would love to see the Dems bring up Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae…bring it on!! I am sure Newt can line and name Dem after Dem that is tied to both. And quite frankll JC Watts yesterday advised Hannity that Newt never lobbied his committee (which was in charge of looking at Fanny and Freddie) and he would have known since he and Newt know each other very well!! That line on Freddie and Fannie is going to go bust!!

    Mitt is no conservative and you need to face the fact. Restrain him…what a joke….with McCain and the GOP dimwits in Washington in charge from the Establishment! Get real! Mitt is no more principled then the man in the moon! He flips and flops like a fish on hook and magically becomes what he never governed like…sorry no thanks!

    Perry is a great guy!! But he hurt himself…no one did that to him! He was not ready for prime time. He needed to better prepare. I like Rick and he would be a dynamic candidate when he is ready!

    Now Coleman is a Romney adviser telling us NO REPEAL OF OBAMACARE???? and Charlie Crist is an adviser of Romney in Florida….ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!

    Romney will never convince conservatives with this brilliant choices…I guess we are seeing what a Cabinet of Romney would look like….my god that is a liberal!

  • JSobieski

    Criminal drug penalties at the federal level are based on the commerce clause.

    If you want to narrow/limit the scope of the commerce clause, marijuana may be a good place to start.

  • JSobieski

    would lead to the candidate most ideologically unlike you if your proposed “rules” were adopted by a lot of people.

    Self-government has always been a team sport. Coalition building is unavoidable.

  • jacobite

    As the GOP Establishment has opposite goals than the GOP base, compromise seems impossible. What has happened since 1928 has been the Base accepting Establishment candidates (i.e., surrendering), except for ’64 and ’80. The thing is that the Base looses whether the Establishment candidate wins or looses, because he doesn’t represent Base interests. The Establishment has gotten further from the Base every election, until the elastic can stretch no more. Romney (and all the other RINOs) are tokens for the Establishment in the power struggle for control of the GOP. Newt is the place-holder for the Base. That’s why which one wins doesn’t matter. All that matters is that the Base take over the GOP, or found a new party that they can control. The GOP Establishment is now closer to the Dem-Left than to its own Base.

  • tea4me

    But it’s irrelevant. He didn’t run. Gingrich is going to win the nomination

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    There are those who won’t even accept the Greatest Story ever told despite our efforts to teach, in which case we’re admonished to move on. I think the same principle applies.

    Matthew 10:14 – And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

  • avagreen

    he could have run a perfect campaign, which is IMPOSSIBLE…..ergo every other candidate………and he still would have been trashed by FOX (the formerly perceived mouthpiece for conservatives) and their harpies.

    He was ignored when he did well and blasted all over the news when a perceived error was made.

    Face it: FOX destroyed Perry. I’ve let them know, by sending this link to them, of how incredibly low an opinion they are being held.

  • avagreen

    /o o\
    -?-
    [------]

    Waiting…………..

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

    of conservatives opting out of cultural institutions like the press, academia and Hollywood…some guilt?

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

    …without screaming.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    but another scripture comes to mind. The one about casting pearls before swine. Only so much one can do or say toward convincing those who will not see. Many are just going to have to live it, and hopefully come out on the other side.

    No doubt I have not done or said everything I could during my entire life to sway those on the other side, so in that regard, you’re right. Mea culpa.

    Okay, I’ll stop preaching now.

  • romansdaughter

    what is going to happen…Obama is getting 4 more years. Because the candidates that are left are seriously flawed and the only reason they are even leading is to do with debates which I am thinking wont be a big factor in the General anyways…who knows the great Obama might even talk his MS media fans right out of having debates. When the American people don’t care about achievements or records or anything except 60 sec sound bites then they deserve who they are going get. Romney a liar and a sneak. Newt is volatile and don’t know when the Good Newt will be there or when the Bad Newt will be there. Santorum is whiney and not very likable and has no records that inspire me. Ron Paul well we won’t talk about him. What a mess!

  • funwithknives

    so I’ll make this short: 4 more years of BHO will shred this country. SCOTUS nominations alone are enough reason to Back Up the nominee. Staying engaged and “showing our stuff” continually, only makes up for a shortfall in our choices. But this is what we have , short of a brokered convention.

    Perfection and Utopia are not in the cards,d a f. This is IT!

    No point in voting? The Point will get Painfully Obvious, {in our private place,} by 4/2013 if Barry wins, rest assured. He’ll think He’s Golden and has a mandate. No climbing that hill unless we get both houses.
    Not so short after all. My Bad!

  • romansdaughter

    that the reason she isn’t on RS these days is cause she is feeling poorly with her arthritis acting up and also a chest cold. I hope she isn’t coming down with that bronchial thing again. I miss Gov. Perry..these other candidates do not inspire me at all. I am left cold as I am starting to agree with my Dad none of them can beat Obama cause they are way to flawed. The Establishment drove off all the conservative candidates and now this is what we have left. Yuck! Man, we truly did need Perry to go in with a wrecking ball. Well I am sure the Lord is going to use him yet and mightily.

  • romansdaughter

    Yeah Scope he/she is fascinated with you. What gives with these type of people? I don’t agree with the Newt people; Mitt people; Santorum people but I sure don’t stalk them. Creepy!

  • In The Hook

    It’s the language of the left and now we’re adopting it and many people are responding to it when Gingrich uses it. This is sad folks. As conservatives, we should refuse to be victims. And since Perry is one, I bet if you asked him why he lost he’d say he didn’t do a good enough job.

    This might be the most discouraging part of Newt’s “rise.” The fact that conservatives are responding to the language of victims. The same language that says “It’s time for a woman” or “It’s time for an African-American” or “It’s time for a Hispanic” to do X, Y or Z because “we’ve been put down for too long.”

    I think we all understand that journalists by and large are liberals and that their liberalism creeps into their work. That’s life folks. It’s our job to overcome that and continue to be happy warriors, not adopt the language and feelings of victims.

  • romansdaughter

    read after Rick Perry got back to Texas…he said he learned that you have to jump in sooner into the race and also not to have back surgery one month before entering the race. He did not blame anyone that I know but his campaign staff are blaming Joe Allbaum. You can read that on RickPerryReport.

  • Kyle-MI

    Both of my favored candidates dropped out.

    And a curse on both houses of the remaining front runners as well as on that pathetic excuse for a candidate running third who probably cannot even win his own home state in the general election. Everyone left stinks, but I would crawl over glass to vote for them over Obama.

  • In The Hook

    Stand up guy who laid out the facts. The surgery is a personal issue so I have no idea if it could have been postponed but that’s neither here nor there. He was recruited into the race and I think did the best that he could. He wasn’t prepared campaign wise and it showed. You don’t see him railing against FNC or bloggers or anybody else. Good man.

  • snowshooze

    But I sure don’t want to make it easy or legal.

  • cheetah2

    I do believer that if Newt convinces grass roots conservatives that he is the one who will fight effectively and faithfully for them, he is going to win.

  • JSobieski

    Just curious, and thanks for being a good sport yesterday.

  • aesthete

    you accept the fact that your vote for a third party at the federal level is essentially meaningless. (Of course, this is also true when voting for President in most cases, where you’re casting a statistically-insignificant vote among millions.)

    The two parties have rigged the system so that it favors them. Our culture and politics are predisposed towards a two-party system. In the real world, that’s what you have to work this.

  • aesthete

    made it so that Huntsman was in, and Johnson was out. If they had excluded Huntsman as well, then they would have had something, but they didn’t and it’s patently obvious that they were locking Johnson out for no real reason.

  • jakeofalltrades

    We lost our way when home gardening for home use came under the definition of interstate commerce. Aggregate effect doctrine needs to go the way of the dodo.

  • avagreen

    I was wondering where she was.
    Stress can affect arthritis…..and I think seeing how the “conservative” media treated our candidate, knowing full well they will continue influencing the unknowing, is both stressful and sickening.

  • jakeofalltrades

    Shouldn’t Californians be allowed to consume marijuana as directed by their physician? Or should the lot of them go to federal prison?

    Why does snowshooze want to prevent the states from innovating here? Do we now believe it best that the diverse peoples of this nation should be subject to the tyranny of a national majority that completely disagrees with them? In the area of health and police – traditionally areas where the states were supreme?

    How can snowshooze be a conservative and be so against the tenth amendment?

  • jakeofalltrades

    Do you hate doctors? Why do you want the federal government to regulate medical care – I thought you were against that?!?!?

  • texasref

    irrelevant factor will continue to be lambasted by me and every other thoughtful conservative.

    I’ve got no problem with Mormons, Catholics, Evangelicals, or Social Conservatives. I am in one or more of those groups myself.

    It’s just a massive coincidence that an otherwise reliably conservative Huntsman (Mormon) and an otherwise reliably conservative Beck (Mormon) and an otherwise reliably conservative standardcandle (Mormon) would go for the Massachusetts Moderate over the Georgia Conservative. Yeah, right. Just like it was a massive coincidence that Obama got 97% of the black vote in 2008–race had NOTHING to do with that. Yeah, right.

    And by the way, if you aren’t supporting Gingrich, you’re supporting Romney. And since Romney can’t beat Obama (see Erickson’s numerous posts substantiating this point), you’re supporting Obama. Unless you have a darn good reason for supporting Santorum and can convince redstate of a plausible path to victory for the Pennsylvania senator who lost by 18 points in his re-election bid and who equates what consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedroom with pedophilia.

  • aesthete

    If it can make everything that conservatives say about any other subject be completely contradicted by those same conservatives when they start talking about it, just imagine what it would do to society. You know, because obviously having a little more than half of all Americans try one of the substances on the Controlled Substances list isn’t affecting society at all, whereas if we legalize at the federal level and let the states do as they will, all hell will break loose.

  • aesthete

    Your rules are a designed to maximize your self-congratulation and maintain your presumed integrity of voting.

    JSob’s are designed to increase cohesiveness and effectiveness in our current political environment.

    I’ll agree that the first is tempting — especially since, if Johnson is the Libertarian nominee — he’ll be the first major third party alternative to be clearly superior to the GOP alternative. It is, however, not generally sound if we are to maintain unity between those who could be a formidable voting block against Leviathan, if mobilized and unified effectively.

  • aesthete

    You know what’s funny? Gary Johnson didn’t put much emphasis on his marijuana legalization plank in the debates or as part of his campaign: he was running on cutting the government. Yet, he got pigeonholed as the marijuana guy. Not that this is surprising, but it is something to think about.

  • cbartlett

    Two part article on why Rick Perry didn’t go all the way. It’s not a simple, one-reason answer. This is a VERY honest assessment from someone close to the campaign. Has very enlightening information about the media’s part in it, too – it’s a lot worse than I thought (especially here in Texas).

  • cbartlett

    Two part article on why Rick Perry didn’t go all the way. It’s not a simple, one-reason answer. This is a VERY honest assessment from someone close to the campaign. Has very enlightening information about the media’s part in it, too – it’s a lot worse than I thought (especially here in Texas).

  • cbartlett

    nt

  • cbartlett

    in Iowa. See Vander Platts article on rickperryreport. I will not support Santorum in this primary – this reeks of desperation. He is way too inexperienced – the Dems and the MSM would eat him up in a general election.

  • romansdaughter

    and that is fine with me but in the primaries I don’t exactly feel Like any of the 4 candidates that are left are going to beat Obama. They are seriously flawed. So sorry if I don’t get all thrilled about voting for any of them. Maybe by the time they get to my state, Washington I will feel differently.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    but since you’re here, you might want to do so yourself since you’re mentioned therein.

  • likeaglove

    I’m no Santorum fan. I don’t think he could win. The fact that I’d prefer him over Gingrich is only a product my disdain for Newt.

  • avagreen

    How can I describe this mistake in judgment ,blunder, wrong step in thinking??!!

    ROF!

    Cain?

  • cbartlett

    And while you’re at it – can you shut up Crazy Ann and Crazy Glenn? I really used to like and respect them both but their Newt-bashing is over the top these days.

  • cbartlett

    And while you’re at it – can you shut up Crazy Ann and Crazy Glenn? I really used to like and respect them both but their Newt-bashing is over the top these days.

  • Tbone

    and told her not to call anymore.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    –no-text–

  • avagreen

    http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/allen-west-vice-president/2011/02/25/id/387512

    This may have already been posted. The story broke today.

  • alfromfl

    The best candidate is a former governor and senators usually don’t do well. Although Romney is a former governor and has business experience which is great, he has shown that he is a weak debater (unless the question has been rehearsed beforehand) and conservatives worry about which Romney will emerge in a tight fight with congress if he is president. In a debate, he won’t get the next few days to get it right, he’ll be blown out by the media. Conservatives have two choices, one a senator and one who has experience with balancing the congressional budget and can debate toe to toe, nose to nose with Pres Obama. They need to fall in behind Gringrich, baggage and all, because he has tapped into what the prople are feeling and what they want. As Gov Perry said, he isn’t perfect but he can get the job done. It’s foolish, at this point, to worry about Newt making mistakes. He’ll more than make up for it with a sound defeat of the Obama/newsmedia machine and can rally the people to force a reticent congress to do what is needed. The so-called republican establishment is dead wrong and out of touch with us, the people. Like Crist, Romney doesn’t want to follow the tea party crowd so what is he doing? Going negative instead of taking Newt in a substantive debate.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    notext

  • snowshooze

    I don’t approve. It R bad.
    Even if controlled like cigarettes.. where minors are never supposed to have the stuff… it would go into far greater circulation.
    And be as easily put into the hands of kids.
    “Where’d I put my pack of dope?”
    ” You seen Junior?”
    No, I realize many are all for decriminalization and some for full legalization.
    We have enough problems in this country.
    I have seen families where the kids smoke dope.
    They weren’t doing so very well.
    And so far as taxing the daylights out of it to fund the government..
    Any government that agrees to profit at the expense of the health and welfare of it’s people is sick. To plan and do this with that intent is no better than a heroine pusher.
    I do not view drug use as a right.
    And so far as Mr. Johnson goes.. well..he is a party jumper for a good reason. He doesn’t stand a chance with the GOP. hopeless…
    But I do not claim moral high ground here at all.
    I just wonder what kind of idiot would dream of doing this.
    You can’t fix stupid.

  • naql

    …is like being told you’re free to order anything you want off the menu, but we only serve fried eggs or scrambled eggs, so you better like eggs.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    Thank you, Thank you, Thank you…. for proving my point.

    1. I’m sure the “thoughtful conservatives” out there are grateful for your representation of their views.

    2. The moment you can point to one shred of evidence that I’m supporting Romney, I’ll concede your idiotic point.

    3. I happen to disagree with your assessment regarding the electability factors you mentioned. Let’s face it, if Newt is electable, let’s see his campaign beat Romney’s… if Newt is the “true conservative” his team will need to cut their teeth on Romney before going up against Obama… so I’m perfectly fine letting the best “Big Government Conservative” win…

    4. Read my current diary in the Recommended list… Does it sound like I’m anti-Newt?

    5. It’s like you said “Blind loyalty based on race, religion, or some other irrelevant factor”… will indeed be lambasted… for what it is… identity politics… which is exactly what you’re doing lumping a Worldwide Church membership of over 14 million members that the majority of said membership are not even allowed to vote, because they don’t have citizenship nor do they live in this country.

    So cram it you self-righteous candi-bot… Oh and Glenn Beck was psuedo endorsing Rick Santorum back in November… which was BEFORE the Iowa Caucus… So that’s 2 out 3 you’ve been wrong on… Next you’ll be saying that Harry Reid has endorsed Mitt Romney…

    I’m a conservative, and I don’t require a pledge to any candidate to be honest about my opinions. I was rooting heavily for Rick Perry, but since he dropped out, I have yet found an acceptable replacement for my primary vote… deal with reality pal, not everyone believes the hype no matter if it’s blowing from MA or GA.

  • http://undo4me.com WmCraig

    So who voted? Maybe a few Republicans who actually think Newt might win, probably people that look back on his time in Washington with nostalgia and no other information, The rest? My opinion is that it was mostly Obama supporters who don’t have anything better to do and want see Obama face someone likely to turn off the conservative base. Which is why we see Romney (who alienates fiscal and social conservatives as well as many Christian conservatives) and Newt (who alienates everyone) running against each other. They are the progressive independents favorite, and some fool in the party went and signed off on open primaries so we Republicans could get the opinion of other people who aren’t willing to commit to be part of the party.

    What is the point of a primary that is open? It really makes no sense. Not when your opponent in the next election isn’t going to face a serious challenge.

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

    So your theory is purely a fantasy with no grounding in actual fact.

  • JSobieski

    voters quickly disqualify candidates based on a single word or phrase

    cold hearted
    truce (not surrendor, it means not the primary focus)
    legalize marijuana (which of course is just federal decriminalization, not legalization)
    believe in science

    As a country we get the candidates we deserve. The fact that I am a Newt guy shocks the heck out of me.

  • JSobieski

    How is that different than a liberal position?

    You either believe in a federal government that is limited to the powers enumerated in the Constitution or you just cite the Constitution opportunistically, and ignore it when you don’t like the result.

    Most 10th Amendment people are fakers.

  • JSobieski

    There are no guarantees in life–whether personal, professional, or political.

    Politics and law making is an applied art, not an art that one engages in for aesthetic purposes.

  • snowshooze

    Yeah… right.

  • aesthete

    I don’t. You also don’t have to legalize drugs for minors — I don’t support that position. In fact, the only thing which the 10th Amendment compels is the state’s proper authority to write drug laws, just as they write laws for murder and rape.

    That said, we should acknowledge that everything that conservatives say about economics, rule of law in the case of publicly-flouted laws, and federalism v states’ rights does not become untrue simply because drugs are the issue. Laws that the public views as too harsh won’t go enforced, especially in the case of victimless crimes that many take part in — this reduces rule of law. Black markets produce incentives for those who can coldly and effectively utilize violence to circumvent the law — this allows criminals to take control of a very lucrative market. Goods that are in high demand will find suppliers, if the price is high enough to justify it — and in the case of drugs, it is.

    1/2 of the American population has used some substance on the Controlled Substances list — most of these people stopped using at some point, and are productive citizens. The vast majority of these people did so *voluntarily* and because they saw the damage being done in their lives and the lives of those close to them, in just the same way that many smokers have stopped smoking to get a grip on their finances. Many of these people have found relief in a church, or other institutions within voluntary society. Most of these people, including our last three Presidents and 2 of 4 remaining contenders for the Republican nomination (hint: not Ron Paul or Mitt Romney, neither of whom have used) have escaped any sort of punishment from the courts and government for their criminal behavior. You and other drug warriors propose that society would have been better off if all of these people had spent time locked in a cage in the company of rapists, murderers, and thieves — that this is the responsible, moral, logical, and most inexpensive choice available to us.

    Unlike Prohibition, drug warriors add to their utter disregard for conservative principles the slander of the Constitution. At least the Prohibitionists had the decency to get a Constitutional amendment, and at least they didn’t have an example of a failed scheme like Prohibition to dissuade them from their course of action. Drug warriors don’t have either advantage: if ObamaCare is found Constitutional, you can thank drug warriors and their enablers — for surely, Raich v Gonzalez, and other precedents for wide interpretation of the Commerce Clause based on our drug laws, will be used to much effect by defenders of the law in court.

  • aesthete

    I certainly don’t.

    Reality doesn’t seem to mind that I disapprove of it, though.

    It’s interesting that third-partiers are never willing to go to the root of the problem: the Presidential system of democracy. Changing it is certainly unlikely, but no more so than a third party winning the Presidential election.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    So everyone who is in Congress for those years created 27 million, because they were there?!?

    Hmmm, give him credit for his time as speaker but beyond that, the link is dubious.

  • aesthete

    Easy to get them confused, I know…

  • snowshooze

    I have the right to keep and bear arms.
    So what business is it of anyone else if I want a grenade launcher, a couple dozen LAWS rocket launchers and a few useful gasses?
    What I do in my home and back yard are the province of only myself and my State.
    Yeah. And them guys across the street in that other State… who cares?
    This argument actually tires me.

  • aesthete

    First of all, if you’re going to use a lousy, hyperbolic pro-gun control argument that has been rebutted effectively hundreds of times by pro-RKBA folks, then do us the common courtesy of informing us in your title that you’re going to phone it in.

    Secondly, you’re confirming, not contradicting, our point by exclusively using arguments that liberals use vis a vis Constitutional interpretation when they want to justify their absurd view that the only part of the Constitution that matters the Commerce Clause, and that the Commerce Clause = Congress Gets Whatever It Wants, Unless the Opposition Party Is In Charge.

    Thirdly… are you seriously positing that the Congress has no restraints except the completely made-up and arbitrary “common sense” ones that only exist in your head? For the record, I’d much rather the law allow you to end your life in abject ignorance, than foist that tyrannical mode of thinking on the rest of the country. “Natural manure”, indeed!

    I hope this argument tires you: it should anger you, given that you profess to be a conservative.

  • snowshooze

    Ho-hum.

  • aesthete

    our politics sucks — people who are unwilling to reason or work through cognitive dissonance.

  • acat

    One reason why I’ve skipped this fun fest.

    I’ll just jump in now – it should be a States issue. Part of the reason it’s not is cross-border transportation. We’d need to figure on replacing the DEA and related anti-drug FBI roles with some non-Federal cross-border outfit …

    And yeah, even though I think this should be a State issue, I don’t see broad-based legalization. California and Oregon? Sure. Idaho? Maybe. Illinois? Depends on whether Jesse Jackson can get himself a distributorship on the deal….

    Mew

  • JSobieski

    to time, place, and manner restrictions.

    However, the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with the concept of enumerated powers.

    Just admit that you embrace the same “commerce clause” flexibility that liberals do, and there won’t be anything left to say.

  • snowshooze

    Great move Sherlock!
    You has Pasteurized Milk, you had Light Bulbs you had about a million great issues you could have selected, and every single one of them are superior in every way.
    You picked dope.
    You wonder why it is going to be hard to pull this job with that kind of thinking?
    Back at ya.

  • moodyboots

    attacked the 10th Amendment. And did it with dope.

  • lapert

    You absolutely should defend the 10th amendment in the most personally distasteful circumstances – it isn’t interesting to assert states right when it is easy it is when it is hard that you demonstrate the principle.

    Its just like National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie as the perfect test case for the first amendment.

    That you can’t defend the 10th amendment when it doesn’t suit you is what undermines any use of it when it does.

  • jakeofalltrades

    Come back later.

  • Finrod

    You said that much better than I ever could have.

  • JSobieski

    Why not leave drug criminalization to the states?

    You are asked questions in a serious way, and you insist on non-responses.

    Do you really believe in the concept of constitutionally limited federal government, or not?

    Its a simple question. Why not just answer without all of the unrelated issues (Bill of Rights has nothing to do with enumerated powers)??

  • jakeofalltrades

    Dittos @ Finrod

  • naql

    I certainly cannot dispute the lack of success historically of third party candidates, nor that the system is rigged in favor of two parties. However, just because something has never happened, doesn’t mean that it never will. The internet will change things, make it harder for the two parties to control the message, lead to “balkanization” of voters. The perception (and the reality) is that the duopoly is dysfunctional; it has become all about winning at any cost, denying the other side any victories or successes so they can be painted as failures in the next election cycle.

    I suspect that we agree on many things, but we’ll just have to agree to disagree on whether it matters whether you “waste”your vote on a third party candidate or stick with the party. I cannot really see that JSob’s “teamwork” and “coalition building” is doing anything to slow down the growth of the leviathan police state. And I am never voting for Newt Gingrich. I just can’t bring myself to do it.

  • jakeofalltrades

    The U.S. Marshals and the FBI and the DEA can still handle that, just like they do for cross-border kidnapping and mail/wire fraud.

    No one argues the federal government lacks the power to completely shut down interstate commerce in drugs.

    I agree with you about broad-based legalization. But why not give potheads one state in the 50 where they can live how they please instead of how Nanny tells them to? Especially if they’re the majority in that state.

    Imagine if the federal government made gambling illegal. Imagine a world with no Las Vegas. I think we are culturally richer because of federalism – not poorer.

    Federalism is a good thing, people! Federalism is freedom. Concentration of power in the general government is slavery.

  • jakeofalltrades

    As well as every other area where the general government has usurped the sovereignty of the states. The federal government does not have general police power. That belongs exclusively to the states.

  • SoFiMil

    The two legs of Elayman’s stool:

    1) charitable contributions
    2) Hunstman

  • jakeofalltrades

  • JSobieski

    for your consideration.

    If a candidate of my liking can’t get 30% of the vote in a subset of center-right voters, that candidate is not going to be able to get 270 electoral votes running under a third party banner.

    The math just doesn’t make sense.

    Perot could have gotten 30% of the vote in an R primary.

    Johnson clearly couldn’t.

  • snowshooze

    In the world of an idealist… you start with the extreme.
    In the real world, that is the worst way you could possibly do it.

  • naql

    …so, I am probably not as well read on the subject as I suspect some of you are. In 2008 I read the Libertarian platform carefully and decided that it best described what I believed. I even voted for Bob Barr. ( I would go back in a time machine and shoot myself before pulling the lever if I could, now that Barr has endorsed Gingrich.). But only recently have I started studying politics and history in more depth, so I have a tendency to be newly discovering things that others have long known. Consider the following article dated Nov 17, 2003. It’s as if the author were psychic. It basically sums up my feelings exactly:

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2003/nov/17/00008/

    And note the phrase “Having abandoned the substance of limited government since early in the Gingrich ?revolution,? conservatives increasingly eschew even the rhetoric of limited government.”.

    This is the conservative standard bearer 9 years later? If my vote isn’t going to matter anyway, I might as well indulge myself by voting my principles. Why continue to reward Republicans with my vote. ( and, yes, before my Libertarian epiphany I did, and continue to do so where there are no L options)

  • naql

    ..here I stumble over another really fine article that seems to parallel my own thinking about evangelicals and their influence on the party:

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2012/01/20/evangelicals-ron-paul-and-war/

    I guess the author of this article was also insane and huffing on a crack pipe.

  • aesthete

    and drugs are the issue before us. I am thrilled to defend the 10th in the case of pasteurized milk, light bulbs, and a multitude of other issues, as well.

    Part of being consistent is being able to defend adherence to principle even if the outcome is not favorable to you.

  • JSobieski

    I look at the Constitution in the same way that Sir Thomas Moore looked at the law—chopping them down only invites peril.

    I am disappointed that a real discussion wasn’t possible.

  • romansdaughter

    I have been over DDR with Walt and also RPR with Joe Hyde and they too are trying to figure out how we can get our conservative ideas across when most of the conservative media is going against you. I think LouPat and Joe Hyde have it right we need to start real conservative blogs etc and just bombard the internet all pushing a very conservative agenda with the three legs of the stool. I also discovered where retire05 is. I thought she had deserted us and I guess that was not the reason…won’t mention the reason here.

  • Scope

    I’ve been reading all that stuff also. It has been my opinion that a whole new effort needs to rise up, and yes, it needs to be a three legged stool effort. I backed away from the Tea Parties when they claimed to only represent the fiscal end of conservatism. It is also why I loved Perry so much, he was a full spectrum conservatism, and knew that national security will require just a tad more than a few good submarines to protect this nation. I would have felt very safe with him as CIC.

    I agree that the MSM (which includes Fox) did a number on Perry. Anyone who is willing to be honest, has to admit that he was purposely ignored, except when he was being mocked for a flub of some sort. Every single one of them made flubs, yet they were given passes, especially Cain who was given pass after pass for months. It was so-called conservative talk radio, and the pundits also. He was forced to go through his campaign money, and that of his PAC, just to get his name out there. That was even after he bought $1 million dollars on an ad buy on Fox.

    Please read Pilgrim’s diary, where he believes that the meme that Romney was the “inevitable” candidate, in order to clear the field, and to discourage others from getting in the race was pushed. That did start happening very early on. How many times did you see in headlines that Romney was inevitable, even though he was only polling at about 25% for most of this primary season, and he is still at about that same number. How was that all arranged and coordinated? Who decided at Fox that Perry’s name would not be mentioned by “any” of them? Roger Ailes? Who put that whole meme together?

    Pilgrim also mentions that Preibus, the RNC Chair., is the one who agreed to all of the gazillions of debates with all of the leftist TV broadcasts. Why? Why would someone who is supposed to be on our side agreeing to allow the liberals to turn our candidates into a traveling circus show? Of course the liberals want to make our candidates look like dopes.

    The very biggest disappointment to me of all was when Rush, Levin and Hannity (the biggest idiot) all went to bat for Cain, and attacked back at the media for their attacks on him. They never lifted a finger to help Perry, even after the rock story, when he was being called dumb, and with the media blackout.

    It’s over, there is nothing we can do about it now, but if this whole thing is not addressed, and acknowledged now, it will continue to happen every election cycle. We will never ever have any conservatives who are willing to run, or who will be given the opportunity to be elected by the people, rather than those that are selected by those that think they know so much better than us. A new 3 legged movement is the only answer. This time though, we have to keep the Paul’s far away from out efforts. They promised they were going to take over the Republican party, and change it into what they wanted it to be. That most definitely is a big part of the divide in the party, and we all get blamed for their radicalness.

  • lapert

    Notice how I gave you a real world example with the first amendment. If the Constitution means anything at all it needs to apply in extreme conditions.

    If w don’t trust the states to adequately handle the ‘obvious’ situations like drugs how can we trust them to handle the challenging ones like abortion?

  • guest1776

    I’m a Newt supporter who happens to be pretty good at this politics stuff and slicing and dicing lame Romney talking points. The Washington Times site banned me, I post on many articles at RCP and they disappear. Same at Right Scoop. Apparently somebody in the establishment don’t like me and is making noise. Silencing dissention is very unAmerican and very cowardly and very unbecoming of the cowards who consider themselves patriots.

    Apparently posting the following truth makes them nervous. They accuse me of being paid by the Gingrich campaign, question why I spend my time doing what I do and in the end try to silence me. The GOP has left me and if Romney is the nominee I will not vote for any of those cowards.

    Oh wait! The people that worked with him hate him blah blah blah.

    Newt passed the only conservative entitlement reform in our lifetime. Why would I trust what the people who ran him out of town on trumped up BS charges say ie Romney is the guy? Those people doubled the debt in his absence while they grew the size and scope of government more than any since LBJ. Those people left the GOP brand so tainted that Republicans were basically unelectable in 2006 and 2008 and we got Nancy, Harry, Obama another 5 trillion in debt piled onto our children and Obamacare as a result.

    The fact the establishment GOPers call themselves ‘conservative’ is a joke because conservatism begins with and ends without fiscal sanity. The fact they call Newt immoral because of his personal business which does not affect my children is laughable because piling 10 trillion onto the backs of my children is far more immorally irresponsible and reprehensible than anything Newt ever did in his private life.

  • acat

    That was what I’d meant to point out by citing different areas where legalization was likely to take place fastest.

    The catch is that export from those areas to non-legalized areas must still be a Federal issue if it crosses a State border.

    Mew

  • janvones

    There’s a huge difference between Newt and Willard. Newt will fire up the base while if Willard gets the nod they stay home. The base is what will elect a majority in both houses. With Willard all is lost.

  • janvones

    You are absolutely right about the fiscal issue and I too will stay home (or probably just vote local contests) rather than vote for the socialist from Massachusetts.

  • guest1776

    http://tinyurl.com/78pn8dw

  • guest1776

    Gingrich is ?a man who fought in Congress for my father?s programs, a man who believes that President Obama?s vision for America is a dangerous one and must be stopped and reversed.?

    Recounting Gingrich?s amazing career, Reagan says that, after he was first elected to Congress in 1978, he ?began to confront the usual politics and became a leading ally of my father, Ronald Reagan. He helped Congress push through massive tax cuts. He worked to secure a military buildup that helped defeat the Soviet Union. Under his leadership, Congress also limited the welfare state. As a leader in the Reagan revolution, Gingrich began to confront both Republicans and Democrats in Congress for their cozy insider deals.?

    Michael Reagan also reminds viewers that House Speaker Newt Gingrich was the key conservative figure behind the Contract with America, which helped the GOP gain control of Congress in 1994 and led to the first balanced budget in decades. And since leaving Congress, Reagan adds, Gingrich ?has remained at the forefront of an American political scene? and ?helped keep my father?s legacy alive.?

    http://tinyurl.com/7a3gq8e

  • overdubbed

    There is no more partisan attacker of Republicans than Eric Erickson.

    He cannot possibly pretend to not be part of the destructive melt-down in the Republican Election. I have to shake my head at the hypocrisy of this article.

    He CONSTANTLY has beaten the drum against Romney — ENTIRELY IGNORING FACTS — merely because for some weird reason he does not like Romney.

    Maybe Eric is just anti-Mormon. I don’t know. But for whatever reason he despises Romney and will use every tool in his chest to attack him.

    This is one more.

    He knows Romney will beat Gingrich and rather than accept a Republican Candidate who has a REAL chance to beat Obama, he prefers to find someone else.

    In other words… Eric Erickson is the very picture of a RINO — Republican in name only — unwilling to support the party nominee even if he has the very best chances of winning, out of all candidates.

  • gekster

    has Erick really attacked Romney, or just posted facts about him.
    Lefties call posting facts about a candidate attacks.
    So are you a lefty?
    And what has Erick said about Romney that might be construed as a lie.
    What has been said that is wrong.

  • circlegranch

    your statements beg the question, “why do you stop by here?” Seems you’d be happier elsewhere. This is EE’s site and he has First Amendment rights like the rest of us. If offended, there’s plenty of other places to go hang your hat.

  • JSobieski

    and the atni-Mormon cheap shot does nothing to remedy that obvious inaccuracies.

  • streiff

    is people who can’t spell “Erick”.

    There is a reason that Romney can’t get above 25/26% in polls. People don’t like him. People don’t trust him. So far Ted Kennedy, Miike Huckabee, Rick Santorum,, Newt Gingrich, and John McCain have all beaten Mitt Romney in elections. Deval Patrick would have too if Brave Sir Mitt had not run away.

    Romney remains the least electable candidate because he is a loser with a track record of losing.

    The reliance on “anti-Mormon” to describe 75% of the GOP electorate marks you as a freakin imbecile. Ditto with any Romney supporter calling Erick a “RINO.”

    So I hope burning down your account was worth that toddler-ish outburst.

  • jakeofalltrades

  • renl57

    …then why did RedState harp so much on Romney and what he did at Bain?

    On RedState.com, there have been perhaps twenty diaries about Romney’s political baggage over the last month or so. Search RS for yourself.

    Evidently Erick Erickson didn’t believe that all Republican candidates are equally vulnerable to Dem charges. He implied that Romney would be most vulnerable.

  • lapert

    When did I say he wasn’t a conservative? Waiting……..

  • romansdaughter

    Yes. that is the problem that it wasn’t just the MSM but the conservative pundits and talking heads were to blame also and you wonder how to overcome that? I saw on Twitter that Rush said today or yesterday that I wonder when the signs with a picture of Perry are going to be going up all over the U.S with the question, ‘Miss me?” Yeah but I still maintain that God is not through with Rick Perry yet. So hang in there.

  • avagreen

    are you a paid staffer for Romney?

  • bluerose75

    Romney can easily be displayed as a phony, a a flip flopper, a fraud, a liberal, a con and anti-Reagan. You spout the usual Newt was anti-Reagan when in the American Spectator today that was clearly disputed. Nancy Reagan herself spoke about Ronnie passing the torch to Newt not you and not Mitt, who did nothing but criticize and distance himself from Reagan in the late 80s and 90s. Did Newt ever support a Democrat for President? Oh that is right Mitt did!!

    Mitt clearly governed from the left which I know Obama’s team will eat up left and right. Why? It will so turn off the conservative vote and independents will have no reason to vote for him. Obama should invite Mitt to his Cabinet. Their policies are identical except Mitt made money for himself, which is great, but of course he raised taxes in Mass. He appointed left leaning judges…..his money for planned parenthood as well. It is funny how people like you will just gloss over Mitt’s record and think that will work. Wake Up! There is no way Mitt can defend Romneycare and you can call Tinkerbell all you want to spread fairydust to hope Obama’s team and everyone else will forget! WILL NOT HAPPEN!! Obama’s team will paint Mitt correctly as a flip flopping liberal who became conservative as a means to achieve higher office. Mitt has no convictions that he can point to in governance with any conservative credentials. Hey Mitt who did you support in the 92 Presidential Election??….TSONGAS!! A liberal Democrat not GHW BUSH or BUCHANAN…

    Mitt is nothing more than an Opportunist!! He becomes whatever he has to for his own political goals. He will be charred in an election just like McCain was and Obama will have a field day with this fraud!

    Romney is a liar and his team is a bunch of goons from the Establishment crowd.

    It will be funny when people like you beg the true conservatives to help Romney if he wins the nomination. IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. He cannot carry the south and the south is the one area the GOP MUST WIN to capture the WH. No Northeast liberal RINO has a prayer in heck to carry the south. The GOP conservatives in the south will not back Obama’s best friend! Obama will win Virginia, NC, Florida,possibly Tenn and more. Mitt is a joke!

    The GOP fails to see that without the conservatives they are doomed. Mitt may appeal to some in the middle but it will no way make up for the loss from the right. Sorry!

  • bs61

    Only RS can answer your post, Plus, I don’t count up postings here, but in the end, despite what I personally feel, Erick turns out to be correct.

  • olds88er

    So tell me, Sen. Devine, just how long are you going to sit on the fence? I don’t see you casting your lot with either Newt or Romney. You can only sit around clucking like a game cock for a short time. I was a Reagan delegate at the “76 convention when we tried to take the nomination away from the sitting President. Very hard to do and because we were short of delegates he was advised to name his VP choice early in order to win over the PA delegates. Close but no cigar. I am supporting Romney as he has no adultery in his life. Newt is a serial adulterer and will lose many married women’s votes in Nov. Romney looks Presidential and has the funding to win. Maybe not perfect but the best of a very limited lot.

  • WillWong

    yet you do not see that Romney is the perfect foil for Obama….the Mr. One Percent against Obama’s OWS 99%…and the Grand Daddy of Obamacare!! How is that electable?

  • bluerose75

    Sorry adultery is not going to carry the day bud!! If so Clinton would have lost to another loser Dole!! I am sure you backed that dud!! Romney is not perfect really??? Not only is he not perfect is a blantant fraud! He is not Presidential in any shape or form. When Obama’s machines finishes this flip flopping fraud off with his that was me then…this is me now who in God’s name will know what Romney stands for? Are you so ignorant to think that all those actions and quotes this man has from the 80s and 90s will not be used by Obama and his 1 billion dollars?? Buddy flip flopping will be taken to whole new level! And if you think women are going to stick with a man that will do or say anything to be elected without the charisma like Clinton….boy are you clueless!!

    Obama will just have to google Romney’s name and they will have more ads and material then a 3 hour Broadway play and the final act will be a landslide against the tin suit!! You cannot convert to conservatism with a lifelong liberal record!! Obama is what he is….WHO THE HECK IS ROMNEY??? No one knows and that is the point!

  • WillWong

    Not quite! The anti war people of the 60′s stayed on in colleges, earning PhD’s and ended up getting tenures and poisoning our youth.

  • lushboi

    Karma’s a cruel mistress isn’t it? You’re all stuck with a candidate you hate. You deserve it though for your politics as warfare model of governance.

    Your self-righteousness has blinded you to the fact that compromise is a key element of democratic governance. You had plenty of opportunity to be involved while in the minority. Democrats even used Republican ideas as the basis for the ACA instead of pushing for single payer. Debt ceilings that were routinely raised under previous Republican administrations and payroll tax cuts that Republicans would normally support suddenly became battle lines.

    You made getting a super majority the new normal to get anything done in the Senate. Government shut-down became a household term after the Tea Party House victories in 2010. You fought tooth and nail to protect tax cuts for the wealthy while trying to balance the budget on the backs of the poor, the sick, and the elderly by privatizing Social Security and turning Medicare into a voucher program.

    People took notice and took to the streets in protest. Now the President can run against a 9% approval, do-nothing Congress on a populist wave of resentment against the 1%.

  • Juggernaut

    Otherwise I think you’re lost. Total jibberish, GIGO and then some. Dems pushed lousy ideas that are too expensive and won’t solve long term problems. OWS sucks, bunch of domestic terrorists…………the only good thing about them is police riot gear sales are up………laissez-faire!!!

  • tngal

    That’s two rooms with garbage bags. Has he dumped in the hwole house.