Hey, I resemble that remark.
For the record, lots of us 'yankees' also are thrilled to see the Mittster expose the walking contradiction 'disaster' that he really is.
Posted on 03/07/2010 7:58:15 PM PST by Bigtigermike
I watched the Mitt Romney interview on Fox News Watch with Chris Wallace this morning. I actually watched twice, I was stunned. What a debacle! Apparently, this was his opening gambit in his 2012 Presidential campaign, since he has written a book. Wallace, by far the most skilled of the talking head interviewers, pressed Romney on his two primary claims: that Obama has spent his first year apologizing for being an American, and that his health care plan is awful.
Romney was unable to delineate any major differences between the plan he developed in Massachusetts and Obama’s, except that the latter is a national policy, whereas Romney’s just applied to one state. He claimed that insurance companies bear no responsibility for rising health care costs, and then said that when insurance companies act ‘badly’, actions should be taken against them, but couldn’t clarify what he meant. When he tried to say a difference was that the Massachusetts plan didn’t have a public option, Wallace nearly laughed out loud. I don’t know if Romney thought that Wallace would give him a free ride, since it was on Fox. If he did think that, he might have wanted to watch the show once in awhile or at least prepare.
I readily admit that he is the presumptive nominee. Wall Street adores him. My guess is that if he gets the nomination, it would be a debacle. Name one Bible Belt state that would support him – perhaps Mississippi. He will bring down a number of Republican House seats in this region. He didn’t say anything that I thought was believable in the last campaign. I had made a bet with a friend that if he and HRC won their respective nominations, we could set up lie detectors on both of them, and make a drinking game out of it. But that’s beside the point. Instead of just foisting another nominee upon the American public, it might be worth the party’s time to actually try to figure out who the voters would support. For his part Romney might try being honest, and see how Americans like actually knowing what he would do. But I sort of think he doesn’t even know what he believes any more.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgEIpEQclJQ&feature=youtube_gdata
I wonder if Rick Perry will throw his name in the hat.
Hey, I resemble that remark.
For the record, lots of us 'yankees' also are thrilled to see the Mittster expose the walking contradiction 'disaster' that he really is.
Post 25
Interesting, Wallace may have done, in one interview, what you and your group hasn’t been able to do in a year. He was even able to do it without false accusations and name calling, may be a lesson there.
“Until further notice, this is a two person contest. At the moment, either could win the GOP nomination”
Actually it’s not a contest at all. It won’t be for at least a year, at which time we will have a much better ideas of what will shape the race and who the candidates will be.
Was BHO raising money for a POTUS run....in 2006?
Obama already trounced Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin and McCain lost the election because they both supported TARP and gigantic government.
If you want to believe that a lap dog can change into a wolf, be my guest.
I would like to throw Bob Riley into your listing. I think Governors are better suited for the office of president, than members of Congress, so would place them above the others. I would put them at the top of the list, in this order; Barbour, Riley, Jindal and Palin.
I base this on, in my view, the success of their governnorships. There are however far too many unknowns for this list to be meaningful. After all Gov. Sanford would have once been on this list.
You obviously think the guy's still a threat, and I don't understand why. He hasn't got a prayer in hell of getting out of the primary let alone being elected.
Actually.....most voters for Obama...had NO CLUE about "TARP..and gigantic government".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm1KOBMg1Y8...
Personally I think the MSM trounced Sarah Palin, and McCain....
FRegards,
“She supported the bailouts and TARP because she was under McCain campaign, just like Cheney had to support Bush’s anti-gay marriage although he personally supported gay marriage because of his gay daughter.”
So now, if she runs, she will have the opportunity to explain/correct this and chart her own course.
Absolutely, nothing like HRC of course, but he was definitely in the hunt.
Sarah only has publicly supported one bailout, that is TARP I that was promoted by Hank Paulson. And her support of TARP I was based on SUPPORTING JOHN MCCAIN’S DECISION to back Paulson and Bush; and now McCain claims he was misled by Paulson and Bush to the use of the funds. That’s like blaming an ex-wife for her husband deciding to take a government loan in his business when she had virtually no say in the decision, being essentially a cheerleader and after her ex-husband does a mea culpa that he shouldn’t have taken the loan in the first place.
“You obviously think this guy’s still is a threat.”
Mitt Romney is not to be discounted. Anyone who is on top of INTRADE currently gets my attention. He is not currently at the bottom of the totem pole as Huckabee is now. Mitt is a threat, a definite threat to win the GOP nomination; he has reputedly the entire GOP establishment behind him. That’s pretty heady stuff, my friend.
How quickly everyone forgets the 2006 trouncing the Republicans took. The Republicans lost control in 2006 because they were spending like liberal drunken sailors.
Personally I think the MSM trounced Sarah Palin, and McCain....
Yes and what were the main MSM and Obummer talking points? Out of control government spending and the depression because of Bushes policies. Remember that change and hope thingy? Obama promised to reign in an out of control government. Now our hope is to portray Obummer as Bush II, which he is.
The only reason Mitt is in the hunt is because of the backing of the Republican establishment support.....he doesn’t have strong backing by the general public but has that “it’s his turn” syndrome and we know how Republicans vote on that term.
“I wish DeMint, Pence, Barbour, Bachmann or one of those people would start making 2012 noises. We can’t be positive Palin is going to run (I hope she does), but the only one really making the big signals at this point is that horrid RINO Romney.”
Actually I think any “noise” they make should be in support of congressional candidates. This give them some exposure as well as defines their ideology by statements made during the campaign. They can then hone their message and start their campaign after the holidays, don’t insert politicos into our holidays.
That’s why, dare I say it, I think Romney’s statement, about waiting until after the election (for an announcement), makes sense.
And Obummer wrote his book too : )
I don't care too much anymore about what people say. I care about what they do.
Sarah supported McCain, who singlehandedly rescued TARP, pinning their election on the outcome of that bill. And Sarah continues to Support McCain to this day, even after all the vicious attacks on her from McCain and his cronies.
I don't want a lap dog for President.
Defending you is difficult, Mr. Horry.
Romney HATES the GOP. Witness that he never called off
his Team Romney from attacks on Gov. Palin either during Election 2008
or thereafter.
Romney HATES the GOP and wants to weaken it.
Would you like some urls of Team Romney's surrogate attacks
on Sen.Thompson, or perhaps Gov. Pain, or perhaps Sen. McCain?
Which would you like to see and defend? (or attack the messenger, perhaps)?
Romney on Letterman (same night as Gov. Palin
After Letterman attacked Gov. Palin’s daughters!):
Romney (D, shapeshifter): "I'm not running as the Republican view or a continuation of Republican values.
That's not what brings me to the race.
(Backstabber Romney Video, accessed 9/19/07)
"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party
over to the traitors in the battle just ended.
We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged
to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support.
Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates
wouldn’t make any sense at all.""
-- President Ronald Reagan
I'm very clear I think, to the people across the Commonwealth
my "R" didn't stand so much for Republican as it does for reform."
(Flip-flop chameleon artiste and carpetbagger Mitt Romney
Video, accessed 9/19/07)
"A political party cannot be all things to all people.
It must represent certain fundamental beliefs
which must not be compromised to political expediency
or simply to swell its numbers."
-- President Ronald Reagan
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.