Another election in the past, remember a wonderful conservative man, who ran against a corrupt democrat, and he lost because he just did not have that extra edge of vitality? Ann is right!
Another election in the past, remember a wonderful conservative man, who ran against a corrupt democrat, and he lost because he just did not have that extra edge of vitality? Ann is right!
I guess her dates are vibrant and full of life too.
“wonderful, conservative man.”
Dole? No wonder you think Romney is the cat’s meow. Your bar for what is and is not a conservative is pretty low. If youth and energy were what the American people wanted, in 1980, they could have chosen the 56 year old Bob Dole over the 69 year old Ronald Reagan. After all, he was a wonderful conservative man. And, remind me, the youthful, energetic vibrant Clinton...He won 2 elections by a plurality. He never got a majority. The youthful Mondale would have clobbered Reagan in 1984. Remind me. How did that one come out?
Which is something Mitt has in common with him. Mitt Romney has run two state wide elections. In the first he was clobbered by the swimmer, right after the Au Bar/ William Kennedy Smith scandal (when he should have been vulnerable) by 58-41.
In the second election, against the redoubtable Shannon O’Brien (who?) Mitt won with 49.77% of the vote to 45% for her. He did not seek reelection, because the polls showed he would have been trounced.
So here is a guy, a real electoral powerhouse, who has run 2 races, been trounced in one, narrowly won by a plurality in the other against a “no name”, and you want to entrust the Republican electoral fortunes to this electoral powerhouse.
'Nuff said.
AmericanMade1776 wrote: “Another election in the past, remember a wonderful conservative man, who ran against a corrupt democrat, and he lost because he just did not have that extra edge of vitality?”
Vitality didn’t have jack shiite to do with it. Americans weren’t about to elect some guy who always referred to himself in the third person...