Posted on 01/23/2008 7:37:36 PM PST by reaganaut1
TAMPA, Fla. — At the end of the Republican presidential debate in New Hampshire this month, when the Democrats joined the candidates on stage, Mitt Romney found himself momentarily alone as his counterparts mingled, looking around a bit stiffly for a companion.
The moment was emblematic of a broader reality that has helped shape the Republican contest and could take center stage again on Thursday at a debate in Florida. Within the small circle of contenders, Mr. Romney has become the most disliked.
With so much attention recently on the sniping between Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama on the Democratic side, the almost visceral scorn directed at Mr. Romney by his rivals has been overshadowed.
“Never get into a wrestling match with a pig,” Senator John McCain said in New Hampshire this month after reporters asked him about Mr. Romney. “You both get dirty, and the pig likes it.”
Mike Huckabee’s pugilistic campaign chairman, Ed Rollins, appeared to stop just short of threatening Mr. Romney with physical violence at one point.
“What I have to do is make sure that my anger with a guy like Romney, whose teeth I want to knock out, doesn’t get in the way of my thought process,” Mr. Rollins said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
You said — “McCain and especially Huckabee preach envy and naturally dislike a successful businessman like Romney.”
Well, I don’t know whether that is so or not, since I’m not paying too much attention to either one of them, at this point in time.
There is *one unfortunate fact* — about Romney — for the Evangelical voters (regardless of who the other candidate are, who are running).
Mitt is a member of a “non-Christian cult group” and you won’t find the majority of Evangelical voters — voting for a man for President of the United States who is a member of a “non-Christian cult group”. That goes against the very concept of what makes up an “Evangelical” (although there are liberal Evangelicals... :-) ...).
That’s why I say that a majority of the Evangelicals won’t be voting for a person who is a member of a non-Christian cult group.
And I would think that it goes without saying (too much about it) that the GOP can’t field a candidate who is able to win an election without the majority support of the Evangelicals.
With Romney, the GOP won’t get the majority support of the Evangelicals. It would be extremely unfortunate (for the GOP) if they persist in putting forth Romney as a viable candidate. That would be the GOP committing political suicide...
Regards,
Star Traveler
What makes think any Republican governor of a state as liberal as Massachusetts would ever be able to appoint nothing but conservative judges? Why do you think Romney should have been able to govern Massachusetts as conservatively as Haley Barbour governs Mississippi? This makes no sense at all.
Op-Ed Columnist
The Voters Revolt
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: January 22, 2008
The Reagan administration had its pragmatists and its so-called ideologues. It had James Baker as well as Ed Meese. Reagan carried moderate states like Connecticut, Wisconsin and Washington, as well as conservative ones like Wyoming and South Carolina.But then a great tightening occurred. Conservative institutions and interest groups proliferated in Washington. The definition of who was a true conservative narrowed. It became necessary to pass certain purity tests — on immigration, abortion, taxes and Terri Schiavo.
An oppositional mentality set in: if the liberals worried about global warming, it was necessary to regard it as a hoax. If The New York Times editorial page worried about waterboarding, then the code of conservative correctness required one to think it O.K.
Except click on link to read the whole article
After all, CONGRESS IS CONTROLLED BY LIBERALS as well.
Guess MYTH won't be appointing too many CONSERVATIVES to the federal bench either.
And how many of these same guys will be all warm and friendly when he has a VP slot to fill, or cabinet posts to hand out? I hope Mitt has a good memory, false friends are not friends.
In the first five caucus/primary states, Romney picked up nearly as many evangelical votes overall as Huckabee. A head-to-head poll of Georgia voters conducted last week showed him beating Hillary in the general election. That would seem to indicate Romney can win sufficient evangelical votes to get the job done.
What it proves is that Romney is an amazing man. He got elected governor in the most liberal state in the nation and pushed it as hard in a conservative direction as has ever been done. Expecting him to make it into a state as conservative as Mississippi is unreasonable. He deserves applause for what he did, not small-minded irrational scorn.
So what did Mitt get for going along? For being a nice guy?
Politics is power, Mitt had some, what did he get with what he had?
Take your time.
Re: Ohio latest head-to-head polls from early January. http://hominidviews.com/?p=1252
--- When Gov Romney took office in Massachusetts, he inherited a $2 billion deficit. While in office, he turned the $2 billion into a surplus----WITHOUT raising taxes.
---Gov Romney solved the health care crisis in Massachusetts----and his plans are still used today. He did this by using the free market and competition---and without raising taxes.
--- Gov. Romney was instrumental in passing a bill abolishing a retroactive capital gains tax in the state that would have forced nearly 50,000 taxpayers to pay an additional $200 million in state taxes and fees
--- 4 years ago --- before the illegals marched in our streets --- Romney opposed a bill that would have allowed illegal aliens to get driver’s licenses. "Those who are here illegally should not receive tacit support from our government that gives an indication of legitimacy," the governor said. (Scott S. Greenberger, "Romney Stand Dims Chances Of License For Undocumented," The Boston Globe, 10/28/03)
--- Romney vetoed a bill in 2004 that would have permitted illegal aliens to pay the same in-state tuition rate paid by citizens at public colleges and universities in Massachusetts.
--- Romney vetoed the bill providing state funding for human embryonic stem cell research
--- Romney vetoed a bill that provided for the "morning after pill" without a prescription because it is an abortifacient and would have been available to minors without parental notification and consent
--- He vetoed legislation which would have redefined Massachusetts longstanding definition of the beginning of human life from fertilization to implantation
MYTH did nothing conservative at all while Governor.
Stop lying.
Are you a Mormon?
...That would be the GOP committing political suicide...People can truly say this about ANY of the remaining GOP Presidential candidates! :(
“Romney Leads in Ill Will Among G.O.P. Candidates”
No, no... mccain and huckster are bunched up at number one and mitt is right on their tails in a close third.
LLS
I’d vote for those two and feel better than voting for the choices that face me today.
LLS
I understand that “Evangelical” is getting to be a pretty loose term these days. In fact, if I’m not mistaken, some could include, in the term “Evangelical” — the Mormons, who are a non-Christian cult group. And *if* this is the definition that some are using (including a non-Christian cult group in the meaning of “Evangelical”) it would be no wonder that this would be shown to be the case (as you are saying).... LOL!
I certainly hope that those who are constructing these statistics that we are looking at (in terms of “Evangelicals”) are certainly *not* including “non-Christian cult groups” in their statistics. If they are, these people (who are formulating these statistics for us) are creating a totally meaningless statistic...
Regards,
Star Traveler
Yeah, Romney really worries them.
I suppose it would be. It’s not a pretty picture...
Perfect example why some of us don’t trust Romney.
Mitt has all the superficial qualities many voters like to see in a President. And apparently he has lived his own private family life according to strong traditional values. Kudos to him for that. But he’s a fast talker who will say anything to win, and who knows what he’ll do once in office...
Mitt had total constitutional powers to nominate judges. He couldn’t handle it. He created and accepted a politically correct committee to send nominates for him. In the famous case of Judge Tutman, it was an all vagina period of all female judges.( gays and females where pressuring him, quality be damned)
For almost a thousand years, leaders have had the option of pardoning prisoners. Mitt was the only leader that I have know, not to exercise the leader/governors option. Very,very odd, if not expressing politically cowardliness. Please explain this singular behavior.
Depending upon whom he, or his supporters are arguing with, Mittens was either the leader in forced, government financed RomneyCare, or was forced by the mean old, Democrat legislature, even though he takes credit for it, which would be stealing the efforts of Democrats. So, which is it, victim or handmaiden to Democrats?
Poor Mittens, worked over by high school graduate Democrats, but going to reform Washington.
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.