And Mitt is?

bnelson44 on December 11, 2007 at 5:47 PM

Yes, from my perspective as a resident of Massachusetts, he is. I admit that statement carries absolutely no weight and I’m not trying to sway anybody. It’s just my opinion from my experience with having him as governor of this nutty state I live in.

Mitt’s still ahead in New Hampshire so there’s no need to panic, but if McCain pulls off the upset there we could be left with a choice between him and Huck as frontrunners going into South Carolina.

Why would that be the only choice? Iowa and New Hampshire speaks for all the conservatives in America? I don’t care who wins the primaries before my home state primary. I will vote for the candidate I feel will represent my values and beliefs best. The apparent problem with conservatives is we keep listening to the msm and to pundits about who is electable instead of electing who we want.

techno_barbarian on December 12, 2007 at 12:17 AM

Read the comments on the GrassFire page. Their supporters (including myself) can’t stand Huckabee.

Least we forget that “electability” is all that matters when confronting the Hill-a-beast or whatever incarnation of socialism the Demoncrats offer America!

dmann on December 11, 2007 at 8:17 PM

Well golly gee, I guess we should just nominate Obama then.

There’s no evidence that Mitt is the guy to beat Hillary. I’ll vote for someone that was a conservative before they actually started organizing their election campain, thankyouverymuch.

Evidently I have completely misunderstood what purports to be the ‘base’ in the GOP.

I am so very less than enthused.

Obviously, the folks at National Review didn’t live through the liberal Mitt during his stay as governor in MASS.

Tell me, how could someone allegedly as smart as Mitt maintain a pro choice position after having five children of his own? And, at his age.

K-Lo should be ashamed of herself, being the pro lifer that she is.

A floor fight. It would be delicious!

Rightwingsparkle on December 11, 2007 at 7:47 PM

I said the same in another thread today – haven’t had one in a while and indeed it w/b good/fun.

ok now, here are a couple irrefutable facts: (dowt)

1) Demoncrats do not want to see Mitt or Rudy nominated.
2) MSM will continue to be nothing more than tawdry whores for the Demoncrats.

That said, Mitt’s strenght is his track record, he is a very
carasmatic, succesful and capable leader. He can (and has) appeal to a diverse spectrum of voters covering most reasonable adults that have to work for a living. Mitts ability to be elected governer in the home state of Ted “the swimmer” Kennedy and John “if I only had a brain” Kerry can not be trivialised or dismissed. His biggest hurdle will be US. Continued conservative attacks on his religon, realistic position adjustments on weathervane issues and upholding the Reagan standard will sink us all. Least we forget that “electability” is all that matters when confronting the Hill-a-beast or whatever incarnation of socialism the Demoncrats offer America!

either one is fine with me, so I’ll probably vote for whichever of the two has the best chance.

…Or if Rudy or Huck already has it in the bag, I’ll vote for Tancredo on principle.

Rudolph Giuliani did extraordinary work as mayor of New York and was inspirational on 9/11. But he and Mike Huckabee would pull apart the coalition from opposite ends: Giuliani alienating the social conservatives, and Huckabee the economic (and foreign-policy) conservatives.

I can’t disagree with their reasoning considering I’ve been making the same point the past few weeks, but although I find Romney acceptable I still prefer Fred. In the end, though, either one is fine with me, so I’ll probably vote for whichever of the two has the best chance.

I’m rather confused here…. The big (policy) knock on Romney is his alleged social liberalism. The fear is that deep within his soul, Romney is a liberal.

But does that make sense?

It makes no sense at all when you look at what actually happened in MA. It is inexplicable to me that supposed consevatives follow the narrative laid out by the MSM about Romney. He is a legitimate conservative who is so effective that the Boston Globe resorts to printing negative stories which are barely even passable as being associated with him – which they got by stalking his lawn care company for 2 months. The globe spent his whole term as governor complaining about how he was a right wing wacko. Now for the Republican primary they are suddenly publishing stories about how he is actually not conservative compared to other Republicans. Figure it out! Liberals are terrified of Romney and concervatives should not buy the line of the MSM.

For those who dont know the Boston Globe = New York Times, same company.

This should be good. Subtle!

if McCain pulls off the upset there we could be left with a choice between him and Huck as frontrunners going into South Carolina. God help us.

You damn fools.
I have sent you Tom Tancredo, and you have forsaken him.
I have sent you Duncan Hunter, and you have forsaken him.
I know that they say that God protects fools, drunks and Americans, but my patience is wearing very thin.
- God

But he and Mike Huckabee would pull apart the coalition from opposite ends: Giuliani alienating the social conservatives, and Huckabee the economic (and foreign-policy) conservatives.

Don’t forget about me!!!

I am not a social conservative, although I am not the opposite either.

And I am not an economic conservative, not a W$J type anyway and i am not a foreign policy conservative either, not what has come to represent that anyway, e.g. neocons.

And both of them have alienated me!

Yeah, but so does Dennis Kucinich.

Mark Jaquith on December 11, 2007 at 6:58 PM

Best looking wife: Elizabeth Edwards
Snottiest, pettiest, thinnest-skinned wife: Elizabeth Edwards

(And I’ve got to give it to Kucinich’s woman for living by her beliefs, even if I don’t share them all…)

How about Steele’s name tacked on in the VP slot? (Unless he has done something stupid lately that I wasn’t paying attention to.)

Mitt/Steele…? That could be attractive.

TwoCents on December 11, 2007 at 6:35 PM

Sounds good to me!