That scenario fits me and, by the way, fits Jim Robinson. I don't think either one of us were liars, I think we were trying to make the best of a bad field of options in 2012.
People call George Bush a liar because there were allegedly no WMDs in Iraq. That was akin to calling a weatherman a liar because his prediction does not prove out. The only intelligent definition of a liar is:
One who knowingly tells an untruth
Laura Ingraham probably took similar positions to me in the primaries which was to support more conservative candidates-my choice at the time was Newt Gingrich-and to support Romney when the matter was virtually settled and the choice was no longer between an admittedly flawed conservative Republican and a Rino Republican but between a Rino Republican and a Manchurian Marxist.
Bill Buckley famously said that we should support the most conservative candidate who can win. Honest conservatives can and inevitably will disagree when it comes to the application of that doctrine but that does not make either side of the argument a liar. Can Senator Cruz win? I fear he can not win but I am going to support him as long as his candidacy is viable and no more conservative and electable candidate comes to the fore. That does not make me a liar but rather a prudent conservative.
No, it doesn't fit. JR and you acknowledged his flaws and did not pretend that Romney was some great nobleman after he got the nomination. Every freeper knew there were a LOT of issues with him. Very few here gave him whole-hearted support.
No actually, Jim never pushed anyone. They day he made his decision I told him I thought it was a huge mistake.
To my knowledge, and I looked, he never advocated for Mitt. He said we had to make our own decision. And that’s a huge part of why many didn’t leave that day.
That is a far different thing than what Inghram or Coulter or most of the rest did.