Former President George H.W. Bush To Formally Endorse Romney

Former President George H. W. Bush will formally endorse Mitt Romney on Thursday in Houston, Texas.

The endorsement comes a week after the former president’s son, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) endorsed Romney. Former first lady Barbara Bush has also endorsed Romney.

In December of 2011 the elder President Bush indicated support for Romney, saying that “Romney is the best choice for us.”

The endorsements by most members of the Bush family suggest mainstream Republican heavyweights want the Republican primary to effectively end and for the party to rally around Romney.

“Primary elections have been held in 34 states, and now is the time for Republicans to unite behind Gov. Romney and take our message of fiscal conservatism and job creation to all voters this fall,” the Florida governor said in his endorsement.

You have more acceptance of a bad mistake than I have.

I could vote for Obama -- and that is what voting 3rd party will do. I did that in 1996... and I will not make that mistake AGAIN.

the choice really is Obama or Mitt...and I am not going to let Obama rip up the constitution because of his MARXIST ideals!!

One Republican establishment man endorsing another Republican establishment man is hardly news and with Bush's abysmal approval numbers during his last few years in office (thanks in part to 24/7 media Bush-bashing) I hardly think Romney will get much from this predetermined endorsement.

Don't forget that in 1988 George H.W. Bush kicked off a 20+ year string of RINOs who got the nomination because it was "their turn", or they had the most money, or both. Since 1998, those nominees either lost to Democrats or in the case of the two Bushes who won, expanded the size, power, and cost of the federal government, and then handed the keys to liberals.

If Romney gets the nomination, it will the culmination of 24 years of watering down the GOP, and him being more liberal than the previous 24 years worth of nominees is no surprise.

I could vote for Obama -- and that is what voting 3rd party will do. I did that in 1996... and I will not make that mistake AGAIN.

the choice really is Obama or Mitt...and I am not going to let Obama rip up the constitution because of his MARXIST ideals!!

If you support Willard, you are tossing whatever pro-life views you had to the wayside. Both Obama and Willard are both pro-abortion. Wait, it's Thursday, Willard might claim to be pro-life today, but tomorrow's Friday and he'll be back to supporting the murder of innocent children.

If you support Willard if he gets the nomination, you are bending over and spreading for the GOP and telling them that it's okay for them to continue a streak of over two decades of running crappy big-government candidates. And you're contributing to the GOP lining up another liberal with an (R) next to their name running in 2016.

Because Willard is not going to win - he can only win in areas that Obama will win, or where he spends the most money, and Obama will definitely be able to outspend him in the general election.

If John McCain couldn't beat Obama, Willard definitely won't be able to - he's got even more baggage, and unlike McCain, a lot of Conservatives will not allow themselves to be used by the GOP. Hell, Willard's even more pro-Big Government than George W. Bush. That's frightening.

What I want is Rick...but I am not going to vote 3rd party, because you’ll get stuck with a MARXIST. With Mitt...and a GOP house and Senate..we could keep Mitt Liberal Views from spreading...but if the MARXIST win again... he might stay in power.

If you vote Romney, you're voting for a liberal with an (R) next to their name.

You know what the difference is between a liberal with an (R) next to their name and a liberal with a (D) next to their name?

The only difference is how fast they are going to push you down the road to socialism. That liberal with the (R) next to his name is going to push you down that road to socialism.

Going back to 1988, we've had 24 years of these types of candidates that want to push moderate policies and Big Government on us, and they've done so successfully when they've gotten in the White House, or they've lost to crappy Democrats. The two that got in the White House - Bush Sr and Jr, well not only did they turn the White House over to Democrats, but they gave us more Big Government. George W. Bush was the worst - until Obama decided to try and break his record, George W. gave us the biggest, most expensive, and most powerful government in the history of the USA. We bring in another moderate whose turn it is, and he loses to Obama, so that even more powerful, more expensive, and larger Big Government that George W Bush was so proud of, was turned over to a scumbag like Obama to abuse and grow even further.

But that's not the biggest problem with your argument. The biggest problem with your argument is that you're hoping the Republicans in Congress could keep in check.

They won't. Most of them are liberals with (R) next to their names. They oppose Obama and their fellow Democratic legislators when it's convenient, but otherwise, they play the whole compromise game far too often.

In fact, with somebody like Romney in the White House, they would probably accelerate us down the road to socialism, because they are going to scratch Romney's back and he's going to scratch their backs.

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.