Why people are excited about Cantor.
Posted on 08/27/2008 7:52:58 AM PDT by MeanWestTexan
10. Inexperience. Romney, a one-term governor who did not run for reelection, has precisely one-third of the elective experience that Dan Quayle had when nominated for Vice President, and Quayle was attacked for his inexperience. A Romney nomination would cut against the grain of one of McCain’s best arguments – Obama’s inexperience – and this is particularly true when placed against Joe Biden.
9. Rommey supporters typically say that he would be good on the economy. But why, exactly? Paul O’Neill and John Snow were both highly successful businessmen, and yet were weak as Treasury Secretary. Why would Romney be any different – and would McCain want to be seen to hand over control of the economy to his vice president? Business and government require different leadership styles. Few people can handle both well, and Romney’s thin record as governor provides little evidence he can. The conservative Tax Foundation stated that the total state and local tax burden in Massachusetts rose 5.1 percent on Romney’s watch, and the state ranked 46th in job growth from 2003-2005 (in the middle of a boom). In any event, skill in business is very different from skill in finance – or governing.
8. Thin skin. In the Republican debates, Romney always wanted to be the focus of attention, taking more than his allotted share of time and reacting badly when others questioned his statements or views. McCain clobbered him in the debates, helping assure his own nomination. Joe Biden would do likewise.
7. While “anybody but _______” efforts rarely work in American politics (think Carter, Reagan, Mondale), this one did. At least three candidates – Huckabee, Giuliani, Thompson – decided that they simply preferred beating Romney and effectively worked together to stop him. What was it about Romney they so disliked? This also doesn’t say much about his ability to unite the party, keep support, or exert political leadership.
6. Whether one is pro-choice or pro-life, Romney’s flip-flop on abortion seems terribly insincere. To believe the story as it was originally told, Romney was concerned over stem cell research. Ask any of your active pro-life friends: they will probably know many people who are pro-life except for the stem cells issue and will have met no one who became pro-life because of it. His palpable anger when asked detailed questions about his views does not give credence to the sincerity of his conversion.
5. Can Romney supporters point to even one poll – just one poll – showing that he would have won reelection in 2006? It is not good enough to say “oh, but he said he wanted to run for President, so there were no polls.” (What about Romney internals?) George Bush faced this dilemma in 1998 and won reelection handily as Governor of Texas. What does this say about Romney’s record as Governor? Isn’t the better conclusion that he won (with less than 50% of the vote) only against a very weak Democratic candidate from western Massachusetts and governed in an undistinguished fashion? If we want to say that Barack Obama’s record is thin, we must say the same about Romney’s, so he cannot be the nominee.
4. In 2004, some very effective advertising mocked John Kerry for windsurfing off Nantucket as a sign he was out of touch with the people. How, then, would the people react, in a time of economic gloom, to learning that Romney’s hedge funds – based offshore, presumably to avoid U.S. taxation – are named after a lighthouse on the same island? Can’t you just picture the ads now?
3. With McCain’s implicit one-term pledge, a Romney nomination – giving the vice presidency to a deep-pocketed candidate – would sharply divide the Republican party by effectively conceding the 2012 nomination to him, sidelining both up-and-coming candidates like Governors Pawlenty, Palin, and Jindal and current figures such as Mike Huckabee (who came in second, remember – Romney did not). How will the party react? The same consideration does not apply for a pick of, for instance, Pawlenty, Jindal, Governor Jon Huntsman, or Rep. Eric Cantor. They do not have the money to dominate the party and the conservative movement as Romney does. The 1988 primaries show that a sitting Vice President can be effectively challenged – but Romney would begin the race with a huge advantage simply because of his personal wealth. Allegations have already been raised that Romney’s foundation money has been used (improperly?) to bolster his political image And given this, would President McCain have any assurance that Romney would be loyal?
2. Can Romney supporters name a single major accomplishment of Romeny’s as Governor that would please conservatives? His “RomneyCare” health plan? Unlikely, as the candidate himself walked away from it during the primaries. Did he have any ability to persuade the legislature? After the Massachusetts Supreme Court’s decision on gay marriage, did Romney even switch a single legislator to vote in favor of placing a constitutional amendment on gay marriage on the ballot, so the people could deicide rather than judges? If so, who? The burden should be on Romney supporters to provide the names and details. Did the Legislature not like him, or is it better to say that he simply walked away from the issue? The Boston Globe’s valedictory editorial (December 26, 2006) sums it up well: "Romney himself admits that a number of his goals remain unmet. His inability to lower the nation's highest unemployment insurance rate, to secure merit pay for teachers, and to reinvigorate the Republican Party were among the frustrations he listed."
1. On a family vacation, he put the family dog in a cage on top of the car while driving for 12 hours, across an international border – an experiment in logistics, aerodynamics, and animal welfare that predictably failed when the dog became ill. Over 50 million American dogs – and 40 million American dog owners – would be horrified. For my own part, I think Obama's selection of Joe Biden (one of the least wealthy men in the US Senate) makes a Romney pick a very, very dangerous exercise in bad optics
Being from NH I am suspicious of any Mass politician. Mitt has changed his position on a number of issues and then there is his statewide health care plan. Mitt passed a plan in Mass that is the same as what Hillary wants nationwide.
In my opinion Romney will not be a positive addition to the McCain ticket.
10 reasons...Anti-gun, Pro-abortion, Pro-queer. Say it 3.33 times!
LOL the number 1 reason was the dog? In a carrier? With a windscreen?
Greatly overstates the amount of people “horrified”.
This non-issue was so blown out of proportion it was comical.
He's supposed to have been restoring 1.)our manufacturing economy in New England 2.)Cost-control and fiscal responsibility to Massachusetts Government and 3.)a decent culture of traditional, pro-family values.
One of the main methods of bringing all this about was supposed to be the restoration of the Republican Party in Massachusetts. It can't be restored except as a clearly dynamic Conservative party -- both Pro-Family and Pro-Stewardship -- offering a clear alternative to the DemocratLeftist Freakshow we've witnessed. But that never seemed to interest Romney much. He never effectively challenged the Judicial tyrrany that sought to impose 'gay marriage' on our state, nor even the 'Governor's Commision on Gay,Lesbian, etc. Youth' which funds a considerable part of the homosexual movement in this state. It was launched under pseudo-republican Bill Weld,and maintained under pseudo-republicans Cellucci, Swift, and Romney. Only in his last year in office (perhaps contemplating his Presidential run) did Romney suggest defunding the Governor's Gay Whatever Youth Commission, and then decided not to when pro-homosexual advocates objected.
So, our economy declined, state spending increased pronouncedly, taxes increased, and our Commonwealth was made to look like a ludicrous, degenerate freakshow. If he wants to redeem himself Romney should return to his job and do it right. Perhaps establish a record that doesn't contradict/disprove his Presidential campaign rhetoric.
“Two reasons he should be the VP:
1. His position on illegal immigrants. 2. His stance fighting radical islam.”
Illegals? Mutt says hire them to mow the lawn!
Fight Islam? Where did he do that? At a garden party?
Yeah, I thought that was weak.
My two points seem better. Perhaps I should write for NRO.
Yea I thought "did Frum watch the same debates I did?"
Well, this Mormon is begging John McCain NOT to pick Romney. Condi would be better.
I think Romney would do well in a debate with blah,blah Biden.
But when the best choice on the short list just happens to be Jewish, it isn't unreasonable to pick him and hope there is some corresponding benefit in the Jewish vote.Exactly. MeanWestTexan isn't playing identity politics while at the same time acknowledging that many people do. As for myself, Cantor piqued my interest when he first came to light because he got some good recommendations on here, but I never really looked that deeply into him.
Does Deval Patrick know about this?
Ditto what you just said.
People have been opposing Romney because of his religion, which is why Romney had to make a major speech on the issue during the primary campaign. There are those out there, including on FR, who are anti-Mormon zealots and make no secret of it. I find such general religious attacks reprehensible, regardless of the religion [Yes, even against Muslims and Jews.]
A stupid Frum argument you missed was McCain besting Romney in debates. Romney generally smote McCain in the debates, as the consensus of observers, focus groups and polls demonstrated. The ultimate California debate, for example, was on all accounts a Romney victory. Frum couldn't cite any debates in which McCain clearly triumphed.
If you are going to misrepresent what I have stated (which is very clear in a post on this thread), you should at least ping me.
I expect too much, I suppose.
I didn’t misrepresent anything. It is not just this post but many others. You are pushing Cantor for VP and using his religion as one reason why he should be nominated.
For good reason. Just as he did in 1994, in 2002 Romney ran as a pro-big government, pro-gun control, pro-gay rights and pro-abortion liberal Republican. The key word here isn't "Democrat", its "liberal". Massachusetts is a liberal state and Romney fit in perfectly.
After four years as Governor the Romney legacy is based on one accomplishment --- government mandated and subsidized healthcare that is now running $200-million in cost overruns. A liberal achievement of the first order and the first step on the road to socialized medicine.
>>>>> ... Romney served in France for 30 months as a missionary for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
You know how that happened? Through the influence and power of the Mormon Church. Because of his pull within the LDS, Romney received draft deferments that enabled him to dodge military service. Of course over the years Romney has told two stories about this subject matter. LOL
Also, if being a successful businessman was a prerequisite for being a good POTUS, than Bill Gates would have been elected years ago.
But what other possible nominee is out there and vocal this past week - commenting on world affairs, etc? Romney.
(just like Biden going to Georgia just before BHO’s announcement)
I got a stinking suspicion that Romney is it.
Wait and see.
I will let my posts 33 and 50 on this thread speak for themselves and let all the world see what you are, Pat.
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.