Would a Romney Presidency Be Worse for the Conservative Cause Than a Second Term for Obama?

Since what I am writing is probably blasphemy to a lot of Republicans, let me just begin by saying that I have considered myself a Republican since I was 6 years old (when I first saw a Reagan press conference) and would never ever vote for a radical anti-American socialist like Obama. The purpose of this post is just to think about the future, past the 2012 election to what might happen in 2014 and beyond. It just seems that so many people are focused on "how do we win" instead of focusing on "what do we win?". With Mitt Romney, the answer is clearly "not much" and I would suggest that longer term, conservatives will be the losers with a Romney presidency.

Romney is what they used to call an 80%-er. A Republican who essentially agrees with the Democrats, but will only do about 80% of what they will do. Think about it, how exactly would a President Romney be that different than a President Obama for another 4 years (especially if Obama doesn't have a filibuster proof majority)? In both cases, Obamacare will still be intact as it has been clear that Romney will not repeal it. His 59 point plan uses the same kinds of class warfare oriented targeted tax cuts as Obama, and that is even before having to give up anything in negotiations with the Democrats. His big argument with Obama on Afghanistan is that Obama wants to remove surge troops in September 2012 instead of December, as Romney would prefer, a whopping 3 month difference. No talk of victory, just fine tuning the timing of withdrawal. His big argument with Obama on Israel is that he doesn't think he should have criticized him publicly. Big whoop. Most conservatives want to elect someone who actually agrees with Israel, not someone who will turn the screws on them. If Israel is being pressured to give in to terrorists, how does it matter exactly if it is public or private? Worst of all, because Romney won Florida and all his yes men seem to have told him that he has the nomination in the bag, he has already started veering left for the general. Just yesterday, he said he supported increasing the minimum wage despite the fact that most conservative economists believe this will be a "job killer" (which is what the Club for Growth said would happen if his plan were enacted). Essentially, he is a guy who only believes in the free market if he and his friends can make money, but not for the rest of us. No, we have to be taken care of by the government. He just doesn't see anything wrong with saying "I'm from the government and I'm here to help".

Now just think about what having a Republican like that will do to the conservative cause in 2014 and beyond. Time and again, when Republicans start acting like 80%-ers (or RINO's, Democrat-Lites, etc.) the base stays home and the Republicans get decimated at the ballot box. After all, what is the point of voting for Republicans if they act like Democrats? Just look at history. In 1952, after betraying the true conservative Robert Taft, the GOP nominated Eisenhower, who was by definition a RINO (he only decided on being a Republican instead of a Democrat not long before the election). This helped them in that election where they took control of both the House and the Senate but that didn't last long at all. Thanks to Eisenhower's Democrat-lite policies, the GOP lost control of both houses in the 1954 election. In fact, in the 1958 election the Democrats ended up with a whopping 64 seats in the Senate (vs. 34 for the GOP) and 283 in the House (vs. a paltry 153 for the GOP). The Nixon/Ford years were even worse as we never got even close to having a majority in either House of Congress. The high water mark seems to have been only 44 Senate seats after the 1970 elections and 192 House seats after the 1972 elections (which is pretty amazing given that Nixon carried 49 states that year!). That is not so surprising given that Nixon was soft on the Soviets, surrendered to the North Vietnamese and even implemented socialist wage and price controls! After the 1976 election, the GOP was down to only 38 seats in the Senate and an embarrassing 143 in the House (the equivalent of only having 33 Senate seats)! That was a pretty big hole, but thanks to Reagan and then later Newt Gingrich, the GOP was finally able to take control of both Houses of Congress for multiple elections, only losing control in 2006 after Bush started tacking to the center (though the ongoing Iraq war didn't help).

In 2014, after two years of Romney, Obamacare will have been implemented, costing much more than advertised and being a major drag on the economy, and none of his 59 point fine tuning will have done anything to help us solve either our short or long term problems. He will prove a squish who will use moderate GOP and Democratic support to pass big government programs in order to "alleviate the suffering of the middle class". I would expect no major changes on taxes or regulations and nothing that you can hang your hat on foreign policy wise. Midterm elections are usually bad for Presidents and I would expect 2014 to be unusually so as most of the Tea Party simply stays home, if they haven't started a third party by then. Plus, as he would have reneged on his promise to repeal Obamacare, he will probably be blamed for many of its failings (the fact that he implemented the model for it in Massachusetts won't help matters either). As primary challenges pretty much never work, we'd be stuck with Romney again for 2016 in which case we probably get a full fledged liberal democrat at the helm, potentially with a filibuster proof majority. Any benefit we will have gained in terms of judicial appointments from 2012-2016 will immediately be reversed. In other words, under Romney, we'd probably be almost guaranteed to have malaise until 2020 or even beyond as our long term problems will continue to get worse.

If Obama wins in 2012, as long as the GOP still has enough members of Congress to block most of his legislation, the situation won't be that different in the short term. Obamacare will be implemented, dragging on the economy and Obama will continue to mismanage everything under the sun. But by 2014, he will have to answer for that 2,000 page monstrosity he jammed down our throats without any Republican support, hopefully opening the way for another watershed year like 1994 or 2010. By 2014, the negative impact of Obamacare will no longer be theoretical, but real, felt by almost every American. By 2016, hopefully the Tea Party will have been able to get more influence within the GOP so that people like Romney and McCain aren't even considered for the nomination and we end up having a real conservative as President.

Now I do realize that this was an argument some were making in 2008, that it might be better for Obama to win as one term of someone like Carter will get us someone like Reagan. The difference in this case though is that Obama will not likely have a filibuster proof majority, so the dangers of him passing another Obamacare (as Cap and Trade would be) are minimal, if not almost nonexistent. Also, the Tea Party is still relatively new and wasn't able to get very close to the levers of power in the year since taking over the House. Given additional time, it is possible that the Tea Party will have the power within the GOP that they deserve.

Anyway, hopefully this argument turns out to be purely academic and Newt is able to be our Reagan, win the nomination and help save America. As I wrote before, this is very possible.

The numbers are exactly right.

Romney jurist picks not tilted to GOP, Independents, Democrats get call.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/07/25/romney_jurist_picks_not_tilted_to_gop/

There is NO difference between Romney and Obama.

If you or any other anti-Romney FReeper really believe that ... you've obviously never read each candidate's own words on 'hot topic' issues at OnTheIssues.org.

If that's too much to read, scroll to the bottom graphic on these two webpages to see a comparison of political ideologies between Romney and Obama:
0bama
Romney

Now, since Mitt isn't my choice in the GOP Primary, I'll do what I can to see he isn't the nominee. Then crawl through broken glass to vote for him in November if he is.

yes I know I’m already being shunned by some very conservative friends for speaking out about what exactly it is that Mormons believe I am shilling for the left they say

No I’m “shilling” for the truth he is Jesus Christ the true and ever living God

There is no difference between any of the candidates, Republican or Democrat, We, the Republic, have been being denied the choice to say no to socialism.

It's a setup.

We, the Republic, have been loosing a war of financial attrition for decades. We, the Republic are engaged in a war with those who govern us. Drastic measures are required to defeat this enemy in order to stop the bleeding that each of us are seeing in the depreciation of our savings, the constant onslaught of taxes, fees, and licenses. Each of them designed to remove our ability to live free.
If a slave is a person who works for no money, then a paid person who works with no money left for savings or investment is therefore a slave. In each case work is done, the slave is fed and roofed.

We must spread the word, at the water cooler, over the fence, while standing in a line at the store or bank. We need a grassroots party, with vetting, to make sure the party is not subverted (we've seen these tactics in use with Tea Parties).

We need to enroll those who love to enroll others. After ten years or so we can launch a powerful and viable third party to win back the freedom that was guaranteed to us thru the law of the land.

Could be, if we don’t control the House and Senate. We’d tend to pay less attention to things that would make us stand up and holler with Obama in place, because “our guy is in, he’ll fix it”.

Feet must be held to the fire!!!

“The people can not be all, and always, well informed.(1) The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.(2) The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.”

(1) He did not forsee the free press becoming a domestic enemy, keeping the majority of the public underinformed or misinformed.
(2) Warning our “rulers” via TEA Parties has put them on notice, and they are scrambling to get as many of us as possible disarmed.

The problem is that Obamacare is based on Romneycare and Romney’s main objection to the individual mandate is that it needs to come from the state, not the feds, but he supports the mandated purchase of insurance.

Then there is cap and trade, where Romney’s advisor on Cap and Trade is now working in Obama’s EPA, enforcing the new stricter O2 regulations on power companies.

How does Romney run away from that? Romney is going to be just another McCain and Dole, a GOP candidate that even the Republicans have hold their noses to vote for.

It does not matter whether its better or worse for the “conservative cause.”

You said: “On this site? It sure does matter. You might want to re-read its purpose.”

I’m sorry, I thought that as conservatives, we were concerned about what is best for the country, I didn’t realize that we were to supposed to put our private goals ahead of the good of the country. Guess I’m not a good “conservative” by your standard.

In a choice between Romney and Obama, there is no contest. We should vote for Romney. Maybe you think it is better to see the country destroyed and turned into a socialist state, but I would rather take my chances in the hope that Romney will help right the ship, then allow Obama to intentionally scuttle her.

There are too many conservatives who actually believe that by letting Obama destroy the country, that it will result in a second revolution, a restoration if you will... but it won’t happen... by the time, the socialists will control your healthcare, they will control your food, they will control communications... Do you really think that Free Republic will still be around? Do you believe for a second that they will allow any sort of organized resistance to form? If you do, then you are a fool. If you can’t stop the train, at least slow it down to buy time...

"If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." - Alexander Hamilton

That's about the it of where I stand. I'd prefer fighting Obama who we know is an enemy of our country. Then Romney who conceals and hides who he really is...and as much will do so with his agenda once he's in and make it look like other than what it really is. Deception will dominate his Presidency beyond what most can imagine.

".....what is the point of voting for Republicans if they act like Democrats?"

Worse is voting for one who will continue to hide his real agenda. Romney doesn't just act like a Democrate...he is one and then some. He is a Mormon High Priest and people better take a hard look at the LDS agenda for our country because they see Romney as their man of the hour. This is dangerous stuff and you can be sure Romney will usher us into the ONE WORLD ORDER in a heartbeat. He does not make decisions....he is under the leadership of the LDS leadership and he will do as they say regardless. That's just a fact regardless of his denying so. There's a reason Romney comes across as out of touch...he is the front man for the LDS leadership....a vote for Romney is a vote for his leadership. MAke no mistake about that.

".....what is the point of voting for Republicans if they act like Democrats?"

If we’re not going to change course, I’d rather see them blamed for the inevitable than us.

I mentioned long ago that I think the Democrates have set Romney in their sites as the one king pin they can blame...and then in four years pick the ball up and run with it, thereby coming out smelling like a rose...and the general public will by it.

Thus I will not vote for Romney..let Obama take the hit and the liberal a*sses that put him in there....not going to let them jump the ship they turned to crash course.

On Newt can turn this ,Romney won't...you can bank on it.

If romney beats obama in the general, the voters WILL hold him accountable.

That isn't possible....Romney is the front for the LDS agenda and it's hierarcy. He is accountable to them despite his denial and lies otherwise. They are not in reach of the voters so it simply isn't possible to control or hold Romney in account...won't work. Name the LDS leadership and you name who voters are really voting for...make no mistake about that.

Mormon cult (political) agenda

Unfortunately most see Romney's take as a religious issue, it's not, it's a political issue within the LDS who Romney is foremost accountable to...and so won't our nation be if he's elected, howbeit behind the scene.

Romney speaks Mormon speak if you know about Mormons. But most don't. Even their leadership has stated that the Jesus they serve is not the Christian Jesus. After that was stated the Mormon church went into major damage control, but the cat was out of the bag.

It's wrong to support Romney regardless if Obama serves another four years, you will never know what the LDS is doing to advance their political agenda which is not favorable to our country....and worse than Obama's plan.

If this is our choice, I'd rather see our side take over Congress, and tie Obama's hands for four years. A second flush in November will likely bring us a congressional majority in both houses, and the OPPOSITION to the tyranny residing in the White House will INCREASE exponentially.

I agree with you Windflier, we can tie Obama's hands. If Romney wins then the people will be disallusioned by his false statements he's so well known for and will assume he's on our side...he is anything but that.!!!!

The right will be sucked into becoming the foot soldiers of mainstreaming and rationalizing Mormonism.

Not hard to imagine possible Ansell, look what the left is doing with Islam....inviting them in and pacifying everything about their political agenda under the disguise of being a religion. Same goes with LDS/Mormonism....the right can be just as deceived because LDS claims Christian beliefs when in fact they are not close to and why the overall Christian community has refused to acknowledge them as Christian. Even their leadership deny the Christian Christ.

Romney deceives many with his words...he isn't about truth he's about deception and lies framed to look like truth......since when should any believe where he stands on the issues when we know by his history he will flip in order to retain his position....let it be known then... any who believe Romney on the issues is as deceived as those who voted for Obama....that's simply a fact.

Ony those ignorant of the LDS political agenda would even consider voting for Romney. Bad enough he's a Democrate in truth masqurading as a Republican....but it's far worse than that. He IS all about deception and lies.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.