« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Cleaning House: The Republican Primary is About Rino’s vs Conservatives

There are two patterns in the polling of our primary candidates: Romney consistently holds 20% – 25% of the national polling, while the other candidates play musical chairs for the spotlight.  First, Bachmann’s campaign went from an anemic 5% early this summer to 15% in August.  Then her campaign cratered and Perry came on the scene with 30% of the polling, and was soon replaced himself by the Cain campaign, now at about 25%.

While Romney’s flipflops, beginning with RomneyCare, become more and more transparent to the electorate at large, conservatives paying attention to the primary process are looking to find someone to support instead of Romney.  The problem for Romney is that voters seem to have made up their mind about him, and he doesn’t have 50%.  Eventually, as some of the other candidates begin to drop out, their supporters will have to choose someone else.  Is a Cain, Bachmann, or Perry supporter really going to vote for Romney?  The fact is, Cain, Bachmann, and Perry supporters have a lot more in common than they do with Romney supporters, and the combined polling of Cain, Bachmann, and Perry tops well over 50%.  We may have a scenario where Romney does well in the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries, but then fairs steadily worse as other candidates drop out and their supporters switch to backing someone other than Romney.

Looking at the big picture, this primary is about Republicans cleaning house. Romney is the vanguard fighting against the rise of fiscal conservatives who see politicians like Romney as part of the same over-regulating, big government spending crowd which lost Republicans control of the Presidency and Congress in 2008. In short, Romney is in the same league as President George Bush.  For example, it’s hard to see how any small government, fiscal conservative could support universal healthcare, aka RomneyCare. Even if Romney is right that healthcare should be a states rights issue, no small government, fiscal conservative in their right minds would support their state creating a universal healthcare system.  It’s a bad idea, because an overly-controlling big spending state government is no better than an overly-controlling big spending federal government.  In a nutshell, this is the problem conservatives have with Romney, and it’s why at the end of the primary process, someone besides Romney will be the Republican Nominee.

COMMENTS

  • traversecityconservative

    This is very true – and shows you that in a Rinos vs. Conservatives movement, we are the 75% and they are the 25%. Once we make our decision and get back in the same camp, Romney and the Rinos are toast.

  • paulplantowin

    Some speculate about how radical a 2nd term for Obama would be. He and Dems would play it as a validation of their socialist agenda. Nightmare.

    But- a RINO victory (a Romney win) would also be spun by the Boehner beltway crowd as a victory over the Tea Party movement.

    Romney, Boehner, McConnell DC mess would really muddy the water, like Bush’s BigGov ways led to 2006 losses, followed by 2008 all Dem govt. that gave us Stim I and Obamacare etc.

    However – Obama, Reid, Pelosi overreach also brought about the Tea Party awakening.

    The point – it is Vital to not only win the WH, but to do it with a not-Romney.
    Or so it appears from the efforts to get Christie, the Rove anti-Perry stance, etc.
    Conservatism has some momentum now – Romney would kill it IMO (unless we could replace the current Speaker and McConnell with Demint and Ryan or some such combo that could hold Romney to the Right.

    • conservativeparrothead

      and Im all for Conservative values, you have to recognize electability. The TEA party, probably cost Republicans the Senate.

      What candidate did they run that won the general election because they were Tea Party backed that a RINO couldnt of won?

      Sorry but Rand Paul winning Kentucky, did we really believe a Democrat was going to win Kentucky?

      The only so called TEA Party candidate that really won a swing election was Marco Rubio, who is articulate, cuban, and good looking. If he was a RINO he still would of won. Sharon Angle, would not of won the Senate in Florida?

      Im not saying this because I want Mitt Romney to win, Im not supporting him but rather Newt Gingrich, and really wish that Paul Ryan or Mitch Daniels were running.

      So…my view is this:
      1. Priority should be someone who holds your values and can articulate and educate those to a general “undecided” audience. Paul Ryan can win in Wisconsin, etc.

      2. If you cant get someone to articulate, then go with the candidate who has the best chance of winning and wont hurt your message the way a Sharon Engle did. She was bad for the Conservative movement, in some ways O’Donnell was too.

      I think Newt can deliver the message, especially if he can get Obama to agree to L-D debate style. Mitt Romney cannot.

      • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

        Pat Toomey’s insurgency pushed Specter over the line and out of the GOP, got him carved up in the Democratic primary, and gave us the win.

        A ‘RiNO’ Marco Rubio would never have challenged the then-popular Charlie Crist’s nomination/coronation in the first place.

        Ron Johnson came out of freaking nowhere on a tide of grassroots support. Russ Feingold was not on our lists.

        And yes, we were worried about freaking Kentucky. Jack Conway would have been a dangerous candidate in 2008. That he wasn’t in 2010 is largely due to grassroots enthusiasm.

  • Pingback: Morris Nocon

  • Pingback: Scottie Coursey

  • Pingback: Auto Forum

  • Pingback: SEO Services Australia

  • Pingback: Reverse Number Lookup

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: serwis randkowy

  • Pingback: Investment House

  • Pingback: home distilling vodka

  • Pingback: randka przez internet

  • Pingback: darmowa strona z randkami

  • Pingback: wielu ludzi w jednym miejscu

  • Pingback: randki internetowe

  • Pingback: steel strapping

  • Pingback: randki za darmo

  • Pingback: charles david boots

  • Pingback: rubinetti

  • Pingback: martial art ideas

  • Pingback: wedding planner italy

  • Pingback: distilling rum

  • Pingback: Upgrade

  • Pingback: see

  • Pingback: Click For Info

  • Pingback: read more

  • Pingback: Hop Over To Here

  • Pingback: breastactives breast enhancement pills

  • Pingback: web design barrow

  • Pingback: property in chennai

  • Pingback: high investment return

  • Pingback: madamelux

  • Pingback: desain interior rumah

  • Pingback: working from home jobs uk

  • Pingback: biaya bangun rumah

  • Pingback: Wilmer Ammirati

  • Pingback: Will Bruechert

  • Pingback: Union Millwork Installers

  • Pingback: growing aloe vera

  • Pingback: Claudie Strange

  • Pingback: cv wzór

  • Pingback: cv wzór

  • Pingback: Shellie Spitler

  • Pingback: Find Out More

  • Pingback: sofy rozkładane

  • Pingback: John Markin

  • Pingback: John Markin

  • Pingback: reverse call look up

  • Pingback: Car Forum

  • Pingback: แทงบอล

  • Pingback: kids bikes

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: darmowy serwis randkowy

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

    After all they have firm control of the leadership in the House, and the minority leadership in the Senate. And it looks more and more likely that their candidate, Mitt the moderate, will be the nominee.

  • http://www.texasyoungrepublicans.com Mark Brown

    of the Senate and House – leadership positions are determined by seniority rules which favor the status quo and establishment. You can’t reform the Rinos in the House and Senate until you elect more true conservatives. We need to take all the great freshman elected in 2010 and re-elect them in 2012, and build upon our electoral successes in the Senate.
    And I would disagree that Mitt is the inevitable nominee – as my diary points out. And I don’t know how anyone can call Mitt a moderate. That imply you know where he stands on issues, but he flip flops so much, I don’t know where he stands. Mitt is not for conservativism or liberalism; Mitt is for Mitt.