my comment about him running as a Dem was tongue in cheek but I think he’d be equally at home running as a “competent, pragmatic, and electable” Democrat.

take 1996 for instance.

While I have the same concerns that you enumerate I think that having a GOP House and Senate will act as an effective curb on them. The real question is do we believe that Romney Administration regulatory agencies would act much different than Obama agencies. Where at least a GOP Congress will push back on Obama, we can’t rely upon McConnell to do the same with a President Romney.

Will McConnell oppose Romney nominating more David Souters? I don’t know.

The fear of the “czars”, I think, is overblown. They reside in the Executive Office of the President and have no permanent staff or organization.

I refuse to believe that the “base” is so short sighted and so unthinking that they would sit out the election rather than vote for Romney. Anybody, and I mean ANYBODY currently in the primary is a 100% improvement over Obama. So what is the supposed logic here, that the base is upset because our candidate is not as conservative as we would ideally like, so we sit out so that a full blown Marxist/Socialist can continue to govern as President? Good grief, how does that help? We push for the most Conservative candidate in the primary, and VOTE Republican in the General. This is the most important election in most of our lifetimes…we don’t sit this one out because we didn’t get our first choice on the ballot.

The rigid extremism of the editors of Red State is really beginning to depress me as their unmitigated blind rage against Romney – whom I find as unacceptable for all the usual reasons – pits pragmatic patriots who wish to save the Republic against four more years of radical Leftist mischief, even if it means voting for a transparently phony candidate, against those whose bushido code requires defeat before ideological dishonor, believing it’s better to lose with a “true conservative” (which by the extreme views of the editors applies to NONE of these losers) than someone like Romney. Pitiful. It’s as if Daily Kos has hacked into the Red State site to post the most rancid stereotypical version of conservatism in order to discredit the movement.

What RichmondG30 touched upon cannot be minimized: Obama is poisoning the very permanent infrastructure of the government with Alinskyite disciples who are protected by civil service rules and thus will be able to impose liberal tenets from their unimpeachable sinecures until they cease breathing. No one votes for the regulators, so they’re actually more powerful than the transitory elected representatives of our government. Presidents come and go; Congressmen come and go; the bureaucracy endures eternal.

But who cares about the inconvenient truths when there is an extreme ideological agenda to be adhered to, win or lose, especially lose since martyrdom is the highest honor for the radical conservative. (In the form of losing on one’s principles.) When I saw streiff howling that any candidate who doesn’t believe in forcing women to serve as incubators against their will is pro-abortion, the alarms went off. Seeing Neil Stevens constant rage against Sprint and Erick’s endless anti-Romneyism has only confirmed my observations that someone needs to check the furnace at Red State and open a window.

NONE of the candidates running this year are acceptable to sane conservatives. I feel sorry for those who are barking for Perry (knows little; debates poorly) or Cain (knows nothing and doesn’t seem to care). Things are so dire that a Draft Pawlenty movement seems like a good idea. That the Stupid Party has for two consecutive cycles managed to put up a rogues gallery of twerps and twits which have no hope of overcoming the combined power of a billion dollars of smear ads and a coordinated JournoList media cabal makes me sad enough without coming here to see the belligerent purists eviscerating the one candidate who may be adequate enough to do the job.

Again, I’m no fan of Romney and agree with 99.44% of the knocks against him. However, I’m someone who is hard pressed to find another country to flee to if the public chooses to commit national suicide by voting for the proven failure of Obama over some truly unelectable, but ideologically pure (according to Red State ideologues) candidate.

I’m gonna go shopping now. May as well upholster my bunker with stuff.

I dont care who the nominee is, the court has been split for a while now but it’s likely to get tipped the next cycle so do we want liberal decisions or don’t we?

Rubio is pro amnesty.

regardless of who holds the top spot!

We showed we COULD effect change at the local levels all across the country in 10 and I sincerely believe we WILL step up to the ballot box to duplicate (or triplicate) our past success!

Mitt Romney is NOT the man to lead our party in 2012 – our country is in dire straits and must have a strong CONSERVATIVE leader who will direct and guide our ship of state back on course! Mitt has demonstrated he can garner no more than 25% of the vote…even with NO negative press. That is NOT the type candidate we need!

As a MA resident, I believe he abandoned us – we were ‘used and abused’ as he failed to take his term of office seriously. We were only a launching pad for his presidential run. He could have stood up to the judicial ruling about the homosexual marriage – had he done so, perhaps the ball never would have started rolling all across this nation – a nation blessed and a nation that has grown and prospered under good Judeo-Christian values! He put his personal desires above the good of the citizens of the commonwealth of Massachusetts and for that I cannot vote for him. Saying that, however, does not mean I will not vote for every other CONSERVATIVE on the ballot…I WILL vote for a return to a UNITED States of America. The days of devisive rantings from our chief executive will be OVER!

Has no one considered the fact that the 2012 Obama re-election campaign is based in CHICAGO??? Has no one considered how Obama has won every election since he ran for office???? By using the dirty Chicago Democrat political machine and smearing each and every opponent…and those methods will continue until November 2012!

Watch how Mitt’s $20 million CA home – his staff advising Obama on Obamacare – his signature on bills he should NEVER have signed…his constant flip-flopping and on and on and on – it’s all going to hit the fan if he ends up the R candidate. He will NOT get a primary vote from this household!!!

R ‘party’ crash & burn if they keep giving us status quo establishment candidates like Bush I & II, McLame, Romney, Perry, Gingrich, Huntsman, & though not as bad as these, Santorum & Bachmann who are not true conservative Constitutionalists.

You seem to forget history. When was the last time a RNC candidate who got elected POTUS actually followed the Constitution?

If we can’t get a true Constitutional conservative in the WH & back him or her up with with a Constitution minded Congress, we might as well keep 0. The only diff any of those I listed would make is that they may slow down the speed at which the USA is being decimated by the ‘progressive’ agenda. But like the Bushes & other R POTUSes they would still keep the US headed into the economic toilet.

What I am trying to say is that if all we do is switch the party the ‘progressive’ candidate comes out of, which wold be the case for the a fore mentioned, all we will have done is exercise in the gym of futility & self deception. But not much would change. Bush II is the poster boy for that.

If you actually believe what the candidates say at the ‘debates’ & don’t know how far from their actual records they are or what there actual records ARE,…well, that’s not good.

Remember, Bush II ran on a lot of Ron Paul positions, but GWB did not live up to his word, which has become all to common because people take to much at face value & don’t do deeper research.

http://tinyurl.com/6ofxyzg

http://tinyurl.com/6vjdo9a

SamFox

Forgot the closing tag again.

it would save you from self-beclowning.

being “tongue-in-cheek” when he said that Romney will run as a democrat.

But it is this type of invective that is laser-focused on Romney here. Making the same comment about Perry or Gingrich would put you in hot water here.

Romney’s acts as an elected official have been no worse than Rick Perry’s or Newt Gingrich’s. Who knows what Herman Cain will do as president? I don’t think even Herman Cain knows.

…….old story. Don’t you read? Or, just choose to ignore something called….the “truth”?

If you’re a betting man……..you’d lose. For the love of your family and finances, pls don’t try it. :/

Just sayin’.

The media has been spreading that meme as far as they can.

If you look at county-level maps, i.e. which counties did Bush 2.0 win in 2000 and 2004 that McCain lost, you’ll see that McCain lost the moderates, not the conservatives.

Mew

Heh.

Mew

nothing more, really.

but I’m hoping it won’t come to that.

Mew

A squish like Romney so demoralizes their base that the worst of opponents can beat them. That is what I think will happen if Mitt wins the nomination.

1. A sitting president is damned difficult to beat. To accomplish that you need a perfect storm of economic difficulties and a complete tone deafness to the mood of the country. I don’t think Obama is the latter.

2. If economic difficulties are sufficient to defeat Obama, then the GOP nominee will win regardless of who we put up. In that case, there is no reason to nominate Romney.

Angle had the Tea Party and “conservatives” behind her, right?

…he is almost reached the point of being unbeatable against anyone in the current Republican field.

We already know how Obama is going to run his campaign, and we’re following their campaign script to a “T”. And we seem determined to stick to script.

Our position is rapidly becoming untenable, as we keep surrendering strategic outposts. But perhaps I need to try to write a post to elaborate.

but it is mitigated by the fact that GOP voters already know that and are still heading in his direction. I don’t know how he’d do in a national election. My gut, from having met the guy, is that he’s not very likable and he makes Bill Clinton look like a model of self discipline.

His virtue is that the base would turn out in droves to support him and though he might lose, we’d do well on down ballot offices.

Why?

Are the Dems and lame stream media going to treat ANY Republican candidate w/ respect? They savagely took down McCain who took the high road. They’ll go dirty and go dirty often with any candidate. If they can’t find enough stuff, they’ll make stuff up, and exaggerate any rumor. Notice the bar gets lowered for “journalist” standards when it comes to reporting on Republicans? The media will report any rumor from “anonymous” sources about R’s but if you had a muslim terrorist committing a crime on video, the media will fall all over themselves saying “ALLEGED”, cannot report on it until we get confirmed sources, etc….

So it matters less about baggage. What really matters?

Is how capable our candidate can respond, refute, take the media head on with respect to the smears.

Critical.

Look at McCain taking the high road last election. GW taking the high road. That turned my stomach and did tremendous damage . We need a bulldog hard nosed fighter to take it to obama and call the media out every single time.

Romney is no more “electable” than John McCain or Bob Dole.

I cannot think of anything in Perry’s record that makes me not trust that he will try to do everyting he says he will, and this doe not even start to explain what makes Perry a much better candidate to face Obama come 2012. I sometimes think the establishment wants to lose, maybe its because they want jed bush to be president come 2016.

getting 400 if you want. It doesn’t mean it won’t cause people to lose bladder control laughing. That’s the same reaction your website caused with me.

In fact, they show a GOP electorate looking for anyone but Romney. As Bachmann,Perry, and Cain have faltered Romney has not only not gained strength, but last week he seemed to lose 2-3 points in most polls.

Gingrich has now run up an over 10 point lead in most polls.

We may end up with Romney as our nominee but he’s not electable because in the final analysis people have to vote for him.

We shouldn’t be running around saying that it’s green instead. In this instance, both those folks that you mentioned, and many Republicans, share a belief in Mitt Romney’s inauthenticity. While I think that Romney would probably win in 2012, I also don’t think that he would be spectacular for the down-ticket races, and that he would be a terrible President, besides. My opinion is shared by many conservatives. In many respects, once Romney is on the ballot conservatism has already lost — for it forces us to vote for a candidate who differs from Obama only by degree of severity, without a Congress to check these abuses. It also virtually guarantees a return of Democrats to power in the future, as a demoralized base, no natural constituency, and a lack of results in a Romney presidency will leave him without support.

Whether to trust Romney or not on abortion comes down to what kind of judges he’ll nominate. I’ve heard Romney talk about judges and he gets and expresses the conservative view on judges as well as anyone.

Romney’s not a regular politician in that way. His goal will not immediately be on winning in 2016. The man, if nothing else, has a compulsive need to get under the hood and fix things.

You’re worried about how he’s going to position himself for public adulation. I don’t think he’ll even lift his head up from the problems of government until at least the midterm.

….but I have friends who are “blue” or “purple” state Republicans who like Romney because of that Tony Manero quality. I can see that. I don’t know enough Mormons to have seen the JFK side of Romney’s support base, but I agree that neither group would find anti-Romney posts very interesting. Every time I hear of Romney being a decent person I think of that poor dog on the roof on a cross-country trip. No decent person would treat a beloved pet that way.

Saying that Mitt was 47th in job creation while Governor of MA is misleading. MA was a state that was in economic decline with the loss manufacturing jobs to China. Its regulations and hostile business climate was not the fault of Romney but a heavely controlled Democrat legislature and years of Democrat rule. It was Romney who actually made some job progress, balanced the budget and restored fiscal sanity to the State. Calling him Willard is disrespectful and is typical of those who emphasis his first name in order to make him look like a Rat.That is an unprofessional comment and is narrow minded.