« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

CPAC: Folks, Mitt Romney Lost

Mitt Romney addressed CPAC this afternoon, and I did support his candidacy.  After all, he was the only person in our miserable 2012 crop of candidates that had the best chance of winning.  However, his communications team was mostly on defense, his high-tech GOTV ORCA program crashed rendering 30,000 volunteers helpless on Election Day, and his candidacy prohibited conservatives from talking about health care.  As a result, he lost, and gave Obama a second term.

Romney began his speech with:

Of course, I left the race disappointed that we didn’t win. But I also left honored and humbled to have represented values we believe in and to speak for so many good and decent people. We’ve lost races before, and in the past, those setbacks prepared us for larger victories. It is up to us to make sure that we learn from my mistakes, and from our mistakes, so that we can win the victories those people and this nation depend upon.

It’s fashionable in some circles to be pessimistic about America, about conservative solutions, about the Republican Party. I utterly reject that pessimism. We may not have carried the day last November 7th, but we haven’t lost the country we love, and we haven’t lost our way. Our nation is still full of aspirations and hungry for new solutions. We’re a nation of invention and of reinventing. My optimism about America wasn’t diminished by my campaign; no, it grew—It grew as I came to know more of our fellow Americans.

Well, I agree with Romney that losses have prepared conservatives for larger victories.  The 1964 presidential election, where Sen. Barry Goldwater was destroyed by Lyndon Johnson, paved way for Ronald Reagan’s landslide win in 1980.  However, as he spoke, Romney said:

We need the ideas and leadership of each of these governors. We particularly need to hear from the Governors of the blue and purple states, like Bob McDonnell, Scott Walker, John Kasich, Susanna Martinez, Chris Christie, and Brian Sandoval because their states are among those we must win to take the Senate and the White House.

Save for Scott Walker, Govs. Susanna Martinez, Brian Sandoval, John Kasich, and Chris Christie are all expanding the most expensive provision in Obamacare.  Gov. Bob McDonnell is still on the fence, but his crime is much worse. He’s proposed $6.1 billion in tax increases to supplement infrastructure development.  Lastly, when Christie says he agrees with ultra-liberal Gov. Cuomo of New York on 98% of the issues.  With statements like that, you have to wonder about his commitment to the principles of limited government.

So, yes, Mitt Romney is right he he says, “it is up to us to make sure that we learn from my mistakes, and from our mistakes, so that we can win the victories those people and this nation depend upon.”  We shouldn’t make the mistake of nominating another Northeastern Republican to the national stage again. We should nominate politicians that adhere to the Madisonian vision of limited government, and won’t cave to big government liberal policies a la Chris Christie – or propose billions in tax increases.  It’s time for conservatives leave squishy Republicans behind. It’s time for them to tell moderates – in the words of Francis Underwood – that “well cleave you from the herd, and watch you die in the wilderness.”

COMMENTS

  • plumely

    Mitt Romney lost because his goal was to make the case that he was a better manager of the govt. bureaocracy instead of persuading that he was an advocate for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

    • sudomakeme

      He lost because he was too nice.
      He had the ammunition and started to use it in the first debate.
      Something changed and I am left with the feeling he was told to stand down. As soon as Mitt took the approach of “He’s a nice guy but he’s in over his head”, I knew it was all over.

  • midwestconservative

    How on earth does Chris Christie think he is going to be the Nominee in 2016 against most likely Andrew Cuomo, and somehow convince Americans that he is a viable alternative, you know I’ve always though Christie was strong on Fiscal Issues, and whats more I never really thought he was a Rockefeller Republican, I was pretty certain we had exterminated that type of Liberal Republican from the party and were left with moderate/squish/rinos vs conservatives; however his statement he agrees with Cuomo 98% of the time really brings all of that into question

    • bobmark

      Only in a state as blue as New Jersey is CC considered a conservative. 64k question about CC is whether he’s a conservative who moved left because of his state, or if he’s a squish who talks tough.

      • midwestconservative

        Hes probably a squish who talkes tough, which is why conservatives liked him, Mitch Daniels was a conservative who talked like a squish, which is why some people on this site didn’t really like him, there are very few strong conservatives capable or willing to go to bat against the liberal talking point

  • midwestconservative

    You know whats really weird is that, Chris Christie and Bob McDonnell weren’t invited but Donald Trump was…….does someone else see whats wrong with this picture?

  • etbass

    Good points. We need a candidate who can take the small government/liberty message and sell it to the masses. We need to quit throwing out trillion this and billion that and budget increases by X%. Not because it isn’t important and not because it doesn’t matter, but because the average voter votes on what they believe to be the best for them personally. Number crunching doesn’t persuade people. We have to explain why our ideas will help everyone. If specific questions are asked, give specifics. But stick to the main themes, over and over.

    We get in the weeds too much. Paul Ryan is a good example. Smart man, smart ideas. However the average voter’s eyes gloss over when you dig too deep. I don’t. I’m a numbers guy who closely follows politics. We don’t win with me. My mind is made up on facts and details that can’t be easily pandered to. The campaign rhetoric is not influential to us. It is important to the low-info voter and that is what America is. We need a salesman. Not the used car type, but the Ronald Reagan type.

    • midwestconservative

      I think Paul Ryan could do that but he needs to win statewide before we give him a go, besides hes what 39, he has plenty of time most candidates are in their 60s, Ryan needs to build executive experience, and whatever else might be said Paul Ryan can win statewide in Wisconsin