Skip to comments.The Long-Distance Runner (Be afraid, be very afraid for 2012)
Posted on 08/30/2009 10:25:41 AM PDT by Replace all Democrats
Just before Thanksgiving last year, a group of former aides to Mitt Romney convened at his salmon-colored Belmont home, many of them gathering for the first time since Romney had disbanded his presidential campaign some nine months before. Romney had invited them for a post-mortem of the election weeks earlier, the type of dispassionate assessment that the Harvard Business School alumnus so enjoyed. But over cookies, they found few of the metrics for success that Romney prized -- Republicans had been decisively thumped at all levels -- and his attention shifted from 2008 to the future.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Yup. Romney. Just the man to run against Obama. Whether he wins or loses, it makes no difference. Just takes the country another four years closer to doomsday.
I haven't missed an election since 1978 and I have never voted for a Democrat in my life. But now things are different.
A RINO at the top makes me stay home. All Republicans suffer. Deal with it.
Fully agreed. The last thing we need is a North Eastern RINO. He wouldn’t even take his home state against the 0.
Your preaching to the choir here. You could probably count the Mittbots at FR on one hand. The general masses are another story. I for one don’t believe that he could pull off a McCain style snookering like in 2008.
I will NOT vote for Romney.
Anything to keep Sarah off the ballot...
I'd prefer Romney to Huckabee. But I'd much prefer Paul, Palin, Hunter or Thompson to Romney.
But the overriding, controlling principle is clear and undeniable: United we stand, divided we fall.
That came out wrong. I MEAN to say that the MSM will raise Romney up if it keeps Sarah of the ballot.
I seriously threatened to vote Libertarian last year, and was blasted here for it.
That’s not te headline.
I know. What we need is a conservative candidate to rally around for 2012. We need somebody who has four traits.
First, we need somebody who is electable and can remove the illegal, anti-American, socialist Commander in Chief. Secondly, we need a strong fiscal conservative who respects a balanced budget and won’t bury the United States in Debit. Third, we need a strong cultural conservative who respects religion and morals, not someone who views whites as the KKK or thinks America deserved the 9/11 attacks. Finally, we need somebody who can inspire a devoted base to support him. If Mittens runs in 2012, there will be one part rule in D.C. We need to stop that from happening.
I agree, Romney is not the one. He got nowhere in the primaries last time and there is no reason to think he’ll do better this time. In fact the whole field was a disappointment. However, the pubbies have an annoying habit of nominating the “next in line”. I could see why Romney would think he was next.
We need a fresh face, as they say.
And, I’m sorry to say this, but I think the election of Obama, Bush II, and Clinton indicate that from here on out, in the Video driven media age, you have to have at least a modicum of charm. Charisma, personality, whatever you want to call it. And it’s got to be translatable on the tube.
They say Al Gore is quite charming in private, sorry Al, it didn’t come across, for example. Sarah Palin has it in spades, and she will continue to be influencial no matter how much the beltway elites of both partys look down their noses at her.
McCain had none of it. I’m not saying that is why he lost, but I think it is an indispensible ingredient at this time. And it is a born-in gift from God, it cannot be learned or acquired.
So, we better find some charming, telegenic, smart, able, conservative, because no matter how bad Obama is, or becomes, we will not be able to beat something with nothing.
Oh yes, we also need someone who doesn’t give a hoot what the NY Times, et al say about them. Rudi Giuliani has this quality in spades and I think for a republican this quality too is essential.
All names mentioned are for demonstration purposes only.
There is a very big push to make Romney the next McCain......................................OH he will be for sure, with no Palin there he’s sure to bomb. And the MSM will support him as they did with McCain. They will only ridicule and tear down the ones they fear will win the most. I’m changing from Independent to Republican so I can vote in the GOP primaries.
We need Senator Jim DeMint!!!!!
I'm very sorry I did.
The GOP needs to recognize the fact that a lot of party loyalists won't put up with the RINOs any more. Open primaries are bad. Big tent is bad. When we run RINOs, we lose. The GOP doesn't seem to grasp that this is a losing strategy. So, I will stay home and vote for no Republicans, if a RINO is at the top. Maybe Democrat landslides will make the GOP understand that their losing strategy is why they lose.
Romney is unelectable because of his religion. The minute he is nominated all of the more batty beliefs of the Mormon church, including their presidential prophecy, will come to national light.
Plus, I’m not convinced Obama will be the Democratic nominee in 2012. I have a sneaking suspicion that the economy will not be getting better any time soon and that the Clintons will probably try for revenge in 2012, and unlike Ted Kennedy in ‘80, can probably pull it off.
The best candidate to run would probably be Bob Riley though his image will take a hit here simply because the economy is bad and while people will blame the President, they’ll also blame him because in short order we went from having one of the best state economies to one of the worst
“Be afraid, be very afraid for 2012”
is not the title of the article you posted.
I’m not a fan of Mitt Romney, but I’d take him in a heartbeat in place of the person currently in the Oval Office.
If us conservatives had rebelled in mass, the party leadership wouldn't be taking us for granted as now.
That pretty much tells you all you need to know about Romney.
A frigging pink house....
I would vote for Romney in a heads up battle against Obama, but in no way do I want him as our candidate. I’m afraid Palin would be eaten alive by the media, but I would find it refreshing to see her as the candidate in 2012.
My opinion is we need a man’s man... a Reagan, John Wayne type of candidate. I haven’t seen him emerge yet, but there is time. It certainly has to be someone with powerful speaking skills.
Do what your conscience tells you, not someone else’s.
We are stuck in a bind there. If we rebel in the 2012 elections and run our own conservative candidate then we and the RINO split the election and BHO gets a massive mandate. We could lose everything and give Obama 4 lame duck years to ruin America without the risk of him losing office in 2016. I fear for our party. Where’s our generation’s Goldwater or Reagan? We need you.
Are they going to have a special election for Ted’s seat?
Pray for America
Last thing we need is Palin. It is my honest opinion that she foisted herself onto McCain and that he wasn’t actively seeking her out. I don’t like Palin. I do believe that she cost us a lot of votes. Hispanics and women did not like Obama. However, when Sarah Palin got on the ticket they suddenly put away their anger and hate because of their honest distaste for her.
We should have run a Hispanic, a Hispanic woman or a woman who could have at least held her own intellectually which I never got the feeling that Palin could. Kay Bailey Hutchinson would have been inspired politically. Women like her, a lot of the same women that liked Hillary and that combined with the fact that we were running against a black opponent would have won us the election.
I would say though that the best candidate for 2012 would be someone like Riley or Barbour though I get the feeling that Barbour is going to become damaged goods as he’ll soon begin taking the blame for Mississippi’s economic woes.
What we need is a strong ethnic Catholic.
Does the GOP really understand what that means? It means that the GOP candidate needs to be a Conservative Republican.
Last time we tried that was 1980 and 1984. Worked pretty well both times.
I’m not sure it is going to matter who the Pubs nominate and who each of us votes for.
The people who decide the election are not the voters, but the people who will count the votes (see Stalin). I’m rapidly losing confidence that we will ever have a true, honest election from here forward.
This woman (and Texan) thinks that Kay Bailey Hutchison is a major RINO.
I’m still trying to figure out why the Republicans seem to despise Sarah as much as the Dems.
Even ole backstabber Chambliss started dissing her after SHE helped him get reelected.
I have no use for any of them anymore.
I would be wary of 2010 also. At this point in time, the Socialists have achieved their goal. They have in their hand and all they have to do is close their hand around it.
Now, as hard they had to work to accomplish this, they are not about to give it all up merely because they were outvoted.
With the Democrats controlling both Houses of Congress and the Whitehouse, there will br fraud and intimidation on a scale never seen anywhere in the world.
I’d like to see them change the way the primaries are done. Ohio was a swing state for several elections, yet never had a say in who the candidate would be. All states should have a say.
There’s a reason we don’t do FR polls anymore. It may well be because there were a lot more Mitt supporters here than was comfortable.
However, we have worked very hard at chasing away Mitt voters, and Mormons in general, since last year.
Only Sarah can keep Sarah off the ballot. If she raises money, gets experience, speaks clearly and with force, she could well be the nominee.
Romney must not be the candidate in 2012!
GOP 2010, Palin 2012!
(BTW I wouldn't mind seeing Sarah on the bottom of the ticket at all with a good candidate...she's plenty young enough to run for President a few years down the road.)
I think the point was the Hutchison has the same toughness that Hillary is perceived by women to have. So in that sense, Hutchison probably would’ve won more Hillary Democrats than Sarah Palin did.
No more Romney. No more old goats who thing they should get the nomination because it’s their turn (Dole, McCain). No more Republican Establishment.
My guess is you're a troll, but I'll try to address this honestly. First off, Palin is the ONLY reason McCain did as well as he did...he was a disastrous candidate.
Palin is the victim of a vicious, unfair, and unwarranted attack by the media. Compare the way the disaster that is Joe Biden was handled, compared with the "intellectual lightweight" Sarah Palin. Joe shows little of anything resembling intelligence, IMO.
The only reason "Hispanics and women" didn't like Sarah was the constant, dogmatic pounding by the press. I actually know several women myself who love Sarah, so the feeling is by no means universal even after the smear campaign.
I think if Sarah sticks to core Reagan Republican principles and policies as we go towards 2012, she'll do exceptionally well. I hope she sharpens her tongue and wit so she can skewer some members of the press (Katie Couric!) along the way.
The more they bash her the stronger she becomes.
So they will just push Mitt to insure Odumba for life.
Sarah's a political outsider, don't forget. The deeper they are in the "old boy's network", the less they'll like Palin on general principle.
Palin is quite a reformer, they're afraid of her.
We need a charming, authentically black authentcally conservative candidate to run against “O” and paint him as the “faux” candidate who is actually white. I don’t believe in characterizing people into groups and types and skin colors, but people seem almost bound and determined to use this identification (racial, gender etc.) as a major element. It is stupid but is how the current rules seem to be constructed.
I refuse to vote for any ticket with the worthless liberal puke Mutt Romney on it!
None of the above needs to be true. But it all has some plausibility. For those of us who think the Left has an ability to manipulate vote counts, then any race that Mitt is in can be manipulated to some degree, large or small, Mitt can lose, and the talking heads cannot really be surprised. They will just trot out the ol' "Well, I guess being a Mormon really hurt his chances ..."
Mitt is a perfect GOP candidate for the Democrats, because his eventual loss can be blamed on diverse and untraceable reasons.
Romney is unelectable because of his religion.
I’m no fan of Mitt, but didn’t “they” say the same about JFK?
How was McCain a disasterous candidate? He spent 5 years in a VC prison camp while most of the older members of my generation were spitting on the vets who actually fought for their country rather than participating in those protest marches.
And you can complain about how the media treated her, and yes they were harsh, but she also gave them plenty of ammunition to do it. It also doesn’t help when someone from Alaska harps about socialism because Alaska has historically had one of the more activist state governments in the country and they actually take oil profits and issue a check to each Alaskan household every year. Now, taking the profits of a company and then redistributing them to the public, what do you call that?
I also question Palin’s ability to lead when she resigns 3 years in office. If she really wants to be President, why quit the job that your whole argument for the experience to be President is based upon? It does not speak well for her that she left a job that she promised the people of Alaska that she would do just because the fire was getting too hot.
I’ll be clear, I believe we need to go with someone like Haley Barbour, Bob Riley or we need to find someone who is an ethnic Catholic and who can resonate with ethnic Catholics
2012 will probably be a key year for the party. Either they get their act together in the next couple of years, or it will be time to found a new party. At the moment, Sarah looks like the best bet to help make this decision. If the party leaders continue to stiff her, then I would be willing to follow her into new third party territory.
This isn’t normally something I would recommend. I don’t vote third party. But history shows that political parties eventually get old and lost and tired, and disintegrate.
Then, maybe every 150 years or so, a new party is born. The Whigs died, and the Republicans were born. The Republicans will die—sooner or later and maybe in the next year or two—and a new party will be born.
If it is to succeed, that new party will have to be fiscally conservative, socially conservative, Christian in orientation, supportive of marriage and family, and dedicated to the traditional freedoms that are in our Constitution.
I don’t mean that it should be explicitly Christian—like the “Christian Democrats” in Europe, founded in hope but since then increasingly astray. Jews and reasonable secularists and others of good will would be welcome. I think that we have to recognize the values that have been the basis of our civilization for more than a thousand years, and that were basic to the founding of America, and that came out of the Judeo-Christian tradition, drawing also on the best of ancient Greece and Rome.
Most Republican politicians think very little about such matters these days. Hopefully, if a third party proves necessary, real conservative politicians would come over from the remains of the Republican party, in due course if not immediately.
Does it have to be Sarah? Not necessarily, but I haven’t seen anyone as promising on the political stage for many years.
What a surprise (not) to see the usual RomneyBOTs
try to put down Gov Palin.