Replies

He can also be quoted to the right of center on the very same issues.

Romney has three positions for every issue. Just tell him which one you'd like to hear and he'll fill you in.

And although it is certainly true that most people do not cast their votes according to who is at the bottom of the ticket, just enough do take that into consideration to make it appealing for Gov. Romney to select Paul Ryan (if the latter can be persuaded to accept the position). It might just tip the balance, in Wisconsin, to the GOP.

That would be an interesting play on Romney's behalf. I'll keep an eye out for it, but I won't hold my breath. The folks pulling the GOP-e strings do not appear to be in the mood to toss the base a bone.

Are you suggesting, then, that some third-party candidate is more likely than Mitt Romney to win the presidency in November 2012?

That is not likely, I concede that. Not impossible, but at least improbable. So, no, that is not my suggestion. My suggestion is that the point is moot -- Romney is "winning" by out advertising the opponents in high population, but decidedly liberal, counties. He is "winning" like a democrat. And when the progressive liberal Romney with an "R" behind his name goes head to head with the progressive liberal Obama with a "D" behind his name ... he will lose. The same counties giving him victories today will turn on him in favor off Obama in November. The support that has gotten him this far will erode. He has lost before the first general election vote was cast. McCain was in a similar boat, and even the brilliant VP pick Palin could not rescue him.

So, my position is that we conservatives cannot win because the GOP has foisted a liberal progressive upon us ... pretending that he represents our values. The progressive liberal Romney cannot win because he cannot "out liberal" the progressive liberal Obama. So ... if ever there was a time to seed a 3rd party, give it a base, redirect RNC funding to it, and build a contender for future elections ... this is it. There is no downside and nothing to lose because there is no victory to be had this go round. That is, of course, assuming something "interesting" does not happen with the convention. I will keep my fingers crossed, eyes open, and prayers up. But this is the time to develop a contingency plan.

we conservatives cannot win because the GOP has foisted a liberal progressive upon us

I don't think this is true. The GOP didn't stop anyone from entering the field and didn't keep all the notMitts in the race and didn't split the vote between them.

We couldn't agree on here who to back; we still can't agree on Newt and he's the only one left.

We didn't have a good field of candidates and we didn't unite behind one of the ones we had. If we magically created a FR Conservative Party tomorrow, I doubt we wouldn't split and fight and destroy each nominee again.

The party ain't the problem.

Romney is "winning" by out advertising the opponents in high population, but decidedly liberal, counties. He is "winning" like a democrat. And when the progressive liberal Romney with an "R" behind his name goes head to head with the progressive liberal Obama with a "D" behind his name ...

I simply do not agree that Mitt Romney can be characterized as a "liberal."

The very best that we can reasonably hope to be elected as president, in any general election, is a center-right candidate, sauch as the late Ronald Reagan.

Not hard right.

But center-right.

[Mitt Romney] will lose.

That strikes me as a mere sentiment--not serious analysis.

For truly serious analysis, one might look to, say, the musings of Larry Sabato; Charlie Cook; Stu Rothenberg; Scott Rasmussen; or even Dick Morris.

So ... if ever there was a time to seed a 3rd party, give it a base, redirect RNC funding to it, and build a contender for future elections ... this is it.

Frankly, I harbor no desire for a third party.

In any case, your plan seems to require the sacrifice of the 2012 presidential election, in the (rather fatuous) hope that this sacrifice might help "build a contender for future elections."

And this represents precisely the sort of Big Picture mindset that I find most unfortunate...

There is no downside and nothing to lose because there is no victory to be had this go round.

Again, I disagree.

Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are nothing at all alike as regarding their respective approaches to (1) the illegal invasion of the Southwest (a.k.a. "illegal immigration"); (2) our nation's close relationship with Israel; (3) the preferable approach to Iran; (4) the need to drill for oil domestically; or (5) America's proper place in the world--just to name a few.

I believe that those who see America in terms of constitutionalists versus anti-constitutionalists are missing the point. Quite badly.

The real dichotomy, it seems to me, is between liberals and conservatives.