Posted on 06/24/2011 6:57:20 AM PDT by Hawk720
The anybody-but-Mitt Romney faction developing within the tea party may pose a problem for the former Massachusetts governor’s presidential ambitions, but some tea party organizers worry it could also backfire against the movement itself.
Romney, the current Republican front runner, is viewed skeptically – at best – by many tea partiers. And disagreement over whether to actively oppose him threatens to undo the uneasy truces forged in the run-up to the 2010 midterms and undermine the fledgling movement’s influence in the GOP.
The possibility of Romney winning the nomination is even reviving debate about whether activists should embrace, or even form, a third party – an idea that until recently had been dismissed as harmful to both the movement and the GOP.
“I honestly don’t know whether the movement will perform well” in the presidential election, said Mark Meckler, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, a national coalition of local groups. “I don’t think anybody is looking for a third party candidate, but anybody who would count out that possibility, I just think is ignorant.”
Another tea party leader, Matt Kibbe, president of FreedomWorks, describes the presidential election as a potential “Achilles heel” for the movement, which arose in 2009 in opposition to what its activists saw as unchecked government spending and expansion under President Barack Obama.
“Our power comes from the fact that we’re not dependent on anybody to be the leader,” Kibbe told POLITICO, conceding the tea party’s diffuse and decentralized nature may be better suited to congressional races than presidential politics.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Right. They get a split of the loot and no responsibility.
The Third Party threat is real. The nomination of Romney would enact the threat.
It’s possible for a Third Party candidate to win over one third of the vote, especially if the opponents were two candidates so similar on so many big issues. The real problem would be winning 270 votes in the Electoral College, which would throw the entire election to the House.
The question is if Mitt gets the nomination, do you stay home? The answer is NO. This country cannot afford 0bama now; it cannot afford 4 more years of him.
What would Reagan do?
...And I don’t blame you for holding your nose and voting Romney. I don’t think I would but I didn’t think I’d vote for McCain, but I did.
“Romney’s campaign contends that his business background and fiscal management in Massachusetts make him a good fit for the tea party.”
Wrong. You can not be a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. Also, Romney has proven, by his words and actions, that he is, at best, a RINO.
New tagline ...
And there’s the dilemma. I really don’t know what I’d do. Except I doubt any candidate could win if the vast majority of his voters are really not voting FOR him but AGAINST someone else. There’s no doubt in my mind that if Mitt wins the nom, 0 wins the presidency. Might as well vote 3rd party.
Romney should solve the problem by registering as a democrat.
If the Republican party (aka the Spend and Spend party, aka the "stupid party") is interested in my vote, they will put someone conservative on the ticket.
I want a President who will wear out the veto pen, and start most veto letters with, “I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution of the United States, …” With our current Congress, there is no reason Grover Cleveland's records for most vetoes in a single congressional session and most vetoes in a single presidential term can't be easily and significantly eclipsed. We just need to find a candidate who cares about the Constitution. Unfortunately, in the Republican party, I don't think there is one.
“What to do about Mitt Romney “
Pat him on his back, tell him “thanks anyway,” and send him on his way.
What’s so hard about that?
Agree. Romney is not acceptable at any level. I can’t go another cycle without a choice. The Republican Party will be in danger of extinction if it nominates Romney.
Reagan backed President Ford in 1976 after he lost the nomination fight.
Marxist Obama (D) or Socialist Romney (R). Hopefully, the TEA party and others have learned that it is important to vote on the other lines, even if they cannot stomach the top of the ticket.
It's a dilemma for the ruling-class RINOs who are about to be trampled if they don't get out of the way.
Gerald Ford was no Mitt Romney.
Remind me how that general election turned out, will ya?
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.