Skip to comments.RINO Romney Is the Least Electable.
Posted on 03/30/2012 10:27:40 AM PDT by Mozilla
Romney assured Massachusetts voters when he was running for the Senate in 1994 that he did not want to go back to Reaganomics. He said during that campaign, "I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush."
Romney was also one of the few Republicans in 1994 to refuse to sign on to Newt Gingrich's Contract with America.
[snip] True to form, even today Romney is effectively promising not to take America back to pro-growth Reaganomics. Cowed by President Obama's class warfare rhetoric, Romney promises to eliminate taxes on capital gains, interest, and dividends, but only for middle income Americans. He says he would do that because they, not the wealthy, were the ones most hurt by the recession.
But effective tax policy does not distribute tax cuts based on who "needs" a tax cut the most. That is Obama neo-socialist class rhetoric. Effective tax policy enacts tax cuts that will do the most to promote economic growth and prosperity.
That is what Reagan did in cutting tax rates across the board for everybody, including the wealthy who have the most resources to invest. That is what the middle class and working people actually need most, cutting tax rates that will promote their jobs, higher wages, and personal prosperity.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Romney's understanding of economic policy as a businessman is overblown.
RINO Romney Is Not Electable.
Spectator ^ | 1/11/12 | Peter Ferrara
Heh-heh, there, fixed it.
If Romney wins the nomination, I’ll support him. But I’m pretty sure we’re going to get our ass kicked again, just like the last time we ran a RINO (McCain, Dole, HW, etc.).
GET A GRIP! Whatever you may think of Romney, he’s likely all we’ll have to run AGAINST Zero, so get your head out of it, get behind him, and kick HIS a$$ if he doesn’t tow the line. Enough of this blasted WHINING cause your blessed one didn’t win. Damned kids!
Well I wish it were somebody else who I could rally behind. But I spent the past year disliking Romney. So it is not in me to be copted into supporting him all of a sudden.
His only chance is VP Rubio who will greatly over shadow him.
IMHO, Rubio would be a fool to accept, when he could likely have the top spot on his own in 2016.
“Well I wish it were somebody else who I could rally behind. But I spent the past year disliking Romney. So it is not in me to be copted into supporting him all of a sudden.”
I hear you, but I’ve spent the past 3 years increasingly despising Obama.
From an earlier thread:
While it will be a bitter pill to swallow, those on the Right would be wise to realize two things. The Anyone But Obama approach is a losing strategy, since negative premises always produce inferior candidates.
Romney is about as inferior as we can find. I wont vote for him. Not now, not in November, not EVER!
Voting for an obvious loser will not only ensure the election of Obama but will encourage the RNC to keep running RINOs in future elections.
I understand. I dislike them both equally. I don’t think that I know what do since both parties are giving no reason to like them. That’s I feel up to voting 3rd party. I don’t feel good supporting Romney.
As a conservative Obama is as un-conservative as it gets. So I’m frustrated. I don’t agree with Romney.
Maybe you can explain why the “most electable” can’t beat the “least electable” in the primary. Odd math you’re using.
Personally, I think Gingrich is the most intelligent and persuasive candidate but he’s not “likeable” according to the polls. So is he electable?
Is Rick Santorum electable? The MSM will paint him as a religious, anti-women extremist and lot’s of single females, not too politically astute, will believe it.
If the economy is still in the dumpster by November, and gas prices are still high, than Obama will lose no matter who our candidate is.
Similar comment to those who accuse of taking toys & going home.
oNLY the likes of a you would compare voting for a pro-abort socialist idol = whining & comparable to acting like little kids.
It's your kind of 'tude which has (in part) given us RINOs to begin with.
By 2036, your kids & grandkids -- having been mentored by you -- will vote for somebody to the left of Obama merely because he has an (R) by his name [if they're not extinct by then] & because he's supposedly "more conservative" than whatever (D) is running.
Some Freepers don't want to hear this.
They realize then, that if they wind up voting for a nominated Romney, that they've not only wasted their vote...
...but seared their conscience forever...
...setting, perhaps, a personal precedent of voting for a pro-abortionist socialist cultic idol.
“I dislike them both equally.”
I’m by no means pro-Romney, but there is no U.S. politician (and very few outside the U.S.) that I find more absolutely vile than Obama.
[Maybe you can explain why the most electable cant beat the least electable in the primary.]
For some here, reality itself is a Paradox!
Well, pitch a tantrum and show your manly maturity!
So, what’s YOUR SOLUTION; buy a blow-up Santorum love-doll and put IT on the ticket?>
And just how do you propose to do that after the election, when we've failed to do it during the primary?
Anybody-but-Obama is a nice sounding slogan, but what I want is anybody-but-a-statist. If we must have a statist in office, I'd rather have one the Republican majority will oppose rather than one the Republican majority will salute.