Posted on 11/24/2011 8:28:09 PM PST by rocky88
"In short, the electoral experience of the last 50 years does nothing to undermine the common-sense notion that most political battles are won by seizing and holding the ideological center. In the last two presidential elections, more than 44% of voters described themselves as "moderate," and no conservative candidate could possibly prevail without coming close to winning half of them (as George W. Bush did in his re-election).
The notion that ideologically pure conservative candidates can win by disregarding centrists and magically producing previously undiscovered legions of true-believer voters remains a fantasy. It is not a strategy. At the moment, it is easy to imagine Mitt Romney appealing to many citizens who would never consider Rick Perry or Herman Cain. It is much harder (if not impossible) to describe the sort of voter—Republican, Democrat or independent—who would refuse to support Mr. Romney (over Barack Obama!) but would somehow eagerly back Messrs. Perry, Cain or Gingrich, let alone Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum or Ron Paul.
Conservatives, as well as their moderate and progressive neighbors, may have plenty of reasons to oppose Mitt Romney in favor of some rival candidate. Electability can't reasonably count as one of them."
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
“So far, it’s disappointing. I see a lot of people putting their own ‘feelings’ ahead of what’s good for the country - a massive Obama defeat.”
I will not vote for Romney undser any circumstance. Moderates have destroyed the country, they are as bad as Obama because they are enablers. Tough Love a coming.
“We are probably already done as a country no matter who wins at this point. My prediction is that when the smoke clears, Obamacare becomes law and the only way it is repealed is not by the will of elected representatives, but by the crushing weight of debt it thrusts onto American taxpayers. Essentially, it will repeal itself and unfortunately everything with it in total economic collapse.”
That’s my read too. With Romney, we would have to take ownership of the collapse.
[that some will just let the roots of our country (Christianity, free enterprise, etc) die off via voting 3rd party or not at all...]
Except Romney isn’t Christian, he isn’t free enterprise (see Romneycare) and the roots of the country will be just as devastated by him as by a weakened Obama.
GOP, you’ve been warned by some of us that we won’t put up with this same old crap this time around.
As another Freeper has said - with the House and possibly Senate full of Rebublicans, everything the socialist Romney proposes might get passed. But if Obama proposes them - a lot better chance they will be defeated.
As much as I can’t stand the thought - it would be better to have Obama. Plus as you say, the longterm effects of the party moving to the left, ingraining the idea that only “moderates” can win.
And what the heck do they mean that the elections have been going to the moderates!? Look who the &*^% is president!
Romney is not likeable. Not trustworthy. Unlikeable.
Distasteful. Yuck. Moderate, Rino , or conservative, never mind. Let’s have someone who is attractive like Cain
or Gingrich. or Bachman. Someone we would like seeing picture of every day for four years. It is sickening to see Obama’s picture five times every day. Wouldn’t it be
so much more pleasant to see a picture of a likeable guy like Cain for next four years instead of a slimy guy like Romney?
Yes, that Ron Dellums, the socialist.
Of course, Medved, a Yale grad, supports Romney. He of all the GOP candidates at least went to a good school. The elites have to stick together, you know.
Is there any place you will draw a line, and refuse to cross it?
Sorry FRiend, but I have taken a vow not to vote for Romney, just like I didn't vote for McCain.
It's not going to happen.
Romney is an obama victory. If for no other reason, if a liberal romney gets elected, he'll govern as a liberal rat, end the nation as we know it, and that will be our fault, not the left's...
If we must die as a nation, let it be under a true rat, and not one who doesn't have the courage of his convictions to run as one.
OTOH, if we elect a conservative, we have a chance. That's what this next election is all about.
No to Romney, no way...
Unfortunately I do not have a person in mind, but they are out there.
I am not excited about any you suggested.
I think the personal trashing that running for office gives the candidate keeps many good people out of public office.
And most of the really good ones, would take huge pay cuts.
I understand what you are saying and understand your convictions. There are great conservatives in the running right now - Santorum, Cain are my two faves - but they just aren’t catching on with the majority. I love Cain and want him to win, but he now sounds gimmicky to the average person with using 9-9-9 for every other answer - Santorum doesn’t have the ‘it’ factor sadly because he’s got everything else going on. Bachmann has great ideas but she’s been ‘Palin’d’ by the media and screwed up by hammering Perry on Gardasil. We’ve given them and other conservatives wide exposure with an unfriendly media and that is a HUGE part of the problem. There are too many candidates who’ve managed to tear each other to shreds rather than spew their invective toward Obama, where it would have been less damaging (see Bachmann/Gardasil (Perry) and Bachmann/amnesty (Newt). And if you are an average American, you’re wondering what planet Ron Paul is from everytime they show a soundbite on the MSM. He has no business in the GOP debate and only serves to drag down the public perception of conservatives, no matter how many good ideas the man has.
Since 80% of Americans still get their news from the MSM, the way I see it is that conservatives are doomed in national races until the MSM changes and has something positive to report about conservative ideals. On the local and state level, electing conservatives is less challenging (see Tea Party successes) because you are not dealing with the national media all the time. Again, that is my opinion only. After the ‘R’ candidate is chosen, if we don’t get a pure conservative I would rather support someone who is malleable to conservatives (like Newt) than a rigid progressive idealogue like Obama anyday, and be grateful to have a foot in the door of the political system to try and change the system by getting the national media to at least discuss conservative ideals. Having an ‘R’ in office will get those ideals out front in the news cycle much moreso than having Obama there.
Let’s say Newt gets it and we have an ‘R’ congress. Would you at least agree that even though he is not the perfect conservative, that a government like that would at least do favorable things for our country and turn it around? IMO more Americans will see that yes, a more conservative political direction is a successful direction for our country, and want more of it when the next election cycle comes.
Perhaps if we weren’t living in such desperate times I would understand the mentality of just sitting this one out or throwing away a vote to a third party because I didn’t get what I wanted - but an newly emboldened, 2nd term Obama/Holder combo with a ‘mandate’ is going to be the death of us. Or is that what you want, to start from scratch after we pass the point of no return?
We obviously have two different viewpoints, and I do respect yours - I am really trying hard to understand why many would rather take the whole country down into the abyss of another Obama/Holder term than attempt to work with what the majority of the voting public gives us. Romney sucks, and being Christian I don’t like many of his positions. Many of us here don’t, but IMO having an ‘R’ in the oval office is a better shot to get conservative ideas through Congress, no matter who that ‘R’ is. It’s just foreign to me to put our families and future generations through hell because I didn’t get EXACTLY what I wanted. Frankly, if I stepped away from everything in life I didn’t like 100% I’d have no friends and no job experience, probably wouldn’t have had kids because of that painful labor thing and would have stopped dating my husband when he got a really bad haircut one time early in our relationship - but my parents taught me that part of being a grown up is working with what you’ve got and doing the best you can with it, and that it’s unrealistic (not to mention damaging) to expect perfection in people, especially public people.
As an aside, I joined FR in either ‘02 or ‘03 and did step away from posting for a while but recently have decided to start contributing again, but wow, it certainly has changed over the past couple of years. I’ll continue to hang around though, because after either Mitt or Newt gets the nod (I see that as inevitable) I’ll remain hopeful that some members will work for the good of the ‘R’ candidate as well as the good of the other ‘R’s down ballot (conservative and moderately conservative) as if our lives depended on it.
Thanks for sharing your viewpoints on this topic and I hope to learn something from your response that helps me understand your position better. Have a blessed day! :-)
I say IBTZ
I say IBTZ
1. Romney is not nor has ever been a true Republican.
2. He will have extreme support in pockets in the U.S. but not nationwide.
3. Yes, 3rd party is not a good thing. But it may happen if Mitt gets the nomination. I do not think he will.
4. There is no way that Mitt will carry the South and West. It is not his Mormonism, but his liberal history. The Republican party cannot win in the general election without the Southern and Western votes. Those areas were in place from the time of Nixon, but will not vote for Mitt.
5. The media and the Dems want Mitt, few others. The Dems know they can beat him, and if they don’t they can “turn” him.
6. The Republican Establishment who support Mitt, know the consequences. It is theirs to loose.
Probably right, but I simply stated what we need, not what we will get.
I smell a Romney Sycophant
Even though his position on the individual mandate is worse than Romney's.
They haven't gotten to that part yet.
There is a myth that gets recycled every election, namely the myth that there are legions of social liberals who are eager to vote Republican, and are just waiting for socially liberal candidates like Romney to be nominated.
Regarding the ‘throw the baby out with the bath water’ phrase, that is precisely what Romney will do if elected, why is why pro-lifers like myself will never support him.
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.