The problem with a Mitt nomination, SETTING ASIDE any possibly-unfair attacks on him due to his wealth, is simply this: The base of conservative voters has HAD IT with “getting in line,” obediently voting for a Dole and a McCain, and now a Mitt, instead of for a solid conservative. Mitt would lose a lot of the right bank of the mainstream.
Yeah, I think Newt has problems, OTHER problems. (I can’t speak to the polling data on women voters.) I’m just saying Don’t overlook Mitt’s problem of losing a lot of conservative voters.
Some have suggested that Newt is preferable because his candidacy would not affect “down ticket” races. In contrast, a Mitt nomination just might make a lot of conservatives sit at home in disgust.
Who knows ...
Oops, silly me, didn’t see it was a Just-Signed-Upper. My bad for taking it as a serious conversation starter ..
The only “speaking to the polls” anyone needs to do at this point is to say Kerry was 7 points ahead of Bush in July 2004. Gingrich shooting up 30 points in one week in South Carolina is probably worth noting too.
I don’t think the problem is as large as you’re making it.
According to El Rushbo on Monday’s broadcast, Newt carried every county in SC, and had a majority of the various women’s demographics.
The base of conservative voters has HAD IT with “getting in line,” obediently voting for a Dole and a McCain, and now a Mitt, instead of for a solid conservative. Mitt would lose a lot of the right bank of the mainstream.
***
Don’t forget Bush43 and his “drunken sailor spending” ...