Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Lazlo in PA; Antoninus; AmericanInTokyo; cripplecreek; writer33; napscoordinator; Steelfish; ...
Again, this is another case of an article I'm posting in “front page” news, which I almost never do, because I believe the subject deserves widespread attention.

Mitt Romney, or someone in his campaign, appears to be sending up a trial balloon to see if he can get away with nominating someone with even worse conservative credentials than himself.

Guys, it's well-known here that I support Santorum. But this is an issue on which secularists in the Tea Party movement, “Teavangelicals” (i.e., Sarah Palin people), as well as more traditional evangelicals and conservative Catholics need to unite with an overwhelming shout of “NO!” to Romney.

Whether you support Gingrich or Santorum, if this trial balloon is correctly representing Romney's views (or even of a significant element in his campaign leadership) we're dealing with a candidate for the Republican nomination who, much like Bob Dole, once securing the nomination, will try to torpedo his own party's conservative base by “moving to the center” in an attempt to win moderates away from the Democrats instead of trying to energize conservatives.

That worked really well for Dole, didn't it? And he was running against someone who, compared to Obama, was a moderate Democrat. Obama is far, far worse.

By comparison, at least John McCain had brains when he reached out to conservatives with two different VP proposals in 2000 and then again in 2008. In both cases he knew he needed to solidify support from conservatives; apparently Romney hasn't learned that lesson.

Newt Gingrich may have been right when he said Mitt Romney is the weakest Republican frontrunner since Maj. Gen. Leonard Wood in 1920. On that point, I think Gingrich is right and he needs to be commended for his grasp of history. Apparently Romney either hasn't learned from Republican Party history, or perhaps he has learned the wrong lessons from 1964.

2 posted on 04/02/2012 1:45:48 PM PDT by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: darrellmaurina
Mitt Romney, or someone in his campaign, appears to be sending up a trial balloon to see if he can get away with nominating someone with even worse conservative credentials than himself.

We knew where he was going to go with this. His wins have come in Obama strongholds and he's stupid enough to believe it means he's tamed conservatives.
3 posted on 04/02/2012 1:49:14 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: darrellmaurina; All

I agree but the problem may well lie with the conservative base for being unable to rally around a strong conservative candidate as VP. Bear in mind that Romney won’t have Santorum on the ticket, he’s already said so, and for other reasons he would not choose Gingrich. Obama is opening up a gender gap with Romney and adding Gingrich would only widen this divide against Romney.

So who is in the running from the conservative base for VP? To ask the question highlights the nature of the difference. Some would want Rick Perry to shore up the southern flank but Perry’s poll numbers are sinking in Texas. Rubio? This appears the likely choice to firm up both Florida and improve the level of Hispanic support. Perhaps Paul Ryan but this would commit Romney to Ryan’s budget plan and would give the Democrats a shooting target. So who’s left who can energize the base and at the same time is not vulnerable to a media onslaught?


6 posted on 04/02/2012 2:59:21 PM PDT by Steelfish (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: darrellmaurina
I believe (no, this is not an endorsement though I'm sure I'll be accused of such) Romney could choose a strong Tea Party VP who is not highly regarded by SoCon base and win.

However, I do not believe he can win by choosing a strong SoCon who is not held in high regard by the Tea Party.

I also believe the "independents" are generally repulsed by any SoCon issue besides abortion...and if it's of a low enough priority, Homo Marriage.

Any further discussion of contraception once Romney wins the nomination, and I believe it's nearly certain at this point, will ascertain defeat.

My experience is that most "Social Conservatives" are not hard-core or binary. That role is left to the folks who turn out in every GOP nomination and VOTE. And I believe that committed faction amounts to about 5% of the general electorate...though those who are "moderately" SoCon probably constitute about 50% of the general electorate. Many of those can swing between GOP or Democrat...depending on who is on the ballot.

For instance: Jews and Catholics are, for the most part, Social Conservatives. And for the most part they vote Democrat.

9 posted on 04/02/2012 3:43:24 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson