Do you honestly think ANY christian would pick Fred over Mitt if they were just looking at social issues? I doubt it.

davenp35 on December 20, 2007 at 11:21 PM

You’re kidding right?

- The Cat

P.S. Bad timing on the Fred laugh on the 2nd clip. Also the setup on this was just plain bad, it shines a light on the defeat.

P.P.S. If I get married and have three kids we could be the Cat5. Man, I’m such a geek.

Do you honestly think ANY christian would pick Fred over Mitt if they were just looking at social issues? I doubt it.

I like Fred as well, but he can’t woo the social cons like Mitt can and Mitt is just as good for fiscal cons, if not better. Think about it!

davenp35 on December 20, 2007 at 6:40 PM

News flash: Fred IS a social con. Mitt is not!

davenp35 on December 20, 2007 at 6:40 PM

I’m not interested in “wooing” anybody by being disingenuous. I don’t care about winning for the sake of winning.
I AM a social con. And I don’t trust Mitt as far as I can throw him.
Mitt has a PROVEN RECORD of being a social lib and do you think he stands a snowball’s chance in hell of cutting spending with Pelosi in charge? Do you honestly think Mitt will keep steering right of center once he gets the nomination?
As Governors, Bush was a Barry Goldwater conservative compared to Mitt. Romney is a go-along-to-get-along, middle of the road, moderate who is desperately trying to appear conservative to win the nomination. That’s not good enough for me.

I’m not so sure about that. Although business-oriented conservatives (the Wall Street Journal crowd) are a minority of the party, I could definitely see them breaking for Bloomberg over Romney, especially if Romney takes a hard line on immigration in the general election.

Big S on December 20, 2007 at 6:16 PM

There are two distinct sides to the WSJ- the editorial side which is conservative, and the rest which is not. I don’t see the editorial side endorsing Bloomberg.

No doubt a lot of New Yorkers like Bloomberg because he is a liberal, but are “business oriented conservatives” really a minority in the Republican Party? How much of a minority?

What about small business owners?

Thanks to Hot Air for the video. I’m surprised Tanc picked Romney, this post comes to mind. No news as to whether Romney pulled over and cried….

I’m not talking about the paper specifically, but the kind of people who read it. I would guess that the WSJ would probably either endorse Romney or nobody in such a race, but there are plenty of secular, pragmatic, business-oriented conservative-ish voters who could go for Bloomberg.

Big S on December 20, 2007 at 6:51 PM

Ok gotcha. Appreciate the clarification.

I’m not talking about the paper specifically, but the kind of people who read it. I would guess that the WSJ would probably either endorse Romney or nobody in such a race, but there are plenty of secular, pragmatic, business-oriented conservative-ish voters who could go for Bloomberg.

Loose the cynicism and start thinking about the actual election consequences. Yeah. Mitt has changed some positions, but if you think he won’t be more conservative than Bush, I’m not sure how you are forming your opinions. I like Fred as well, but he can’t woo the social cons like Mitt can and Mitt is just as good for fiscal cons, if not better. Think about it!

Duly noted, but between the Tancredo brand and the King brand, no one would choose the latter.

It might be a bit of sour grapes on my part, but since it’s a choice between ending illegal immigration (the King brand) and ending all immigration (the Tancredo brand), put me down as choosing the King brand.

I guess flopping at the right time has its advantages.

I’m not so sure about that. Although business-oriented conservatives (the Wall Street Journal crowd) are a minority of the party, I could definitely see them breaking for Bloomberg over Romney, especially if Romney takes a hard line on immigration in the general election.

Big S on December 20, 2007 at 6:16 PM

Its not even close Big S. The Wall St Journal will weigh the political consequences and realize that supporting Bloomberg will damage their credibility. They will happily support Romney come day #1 of the general election. Then they will say, “thank you sir may I have another.” Tancredo will be smiling in the background.

davenp35 on December 20, 2007 at 6:09 PM

I’m not so sure about that. Although business-oriented conservatives (the Wall Street Journal crowd) are a minority of the party, I could definitely see them breaking for Bloomberg over Romney, especially if Romney takes a hard line on immigration in the general election.

Bloomberg’s gotta like his chances a little more. He always said he’d get in if “extremists” (his word) were nominated in both parties, and he’s very pro-immigrant. With Tancredo endorsing Romney’s position, that has to make him look more extreme to the likes of Bloomberg.

Big S on December 20, 2007 at 6:04 PM

With Hagel hanging around his neck, he couldn’t win even if he was loved like Rudy. Talk about an anchor.

If Bloomberg gets in as a pro-illegal immigrant candidate, he’ll only help Romney (or whomever gets the Rep nomination). I know I wouldn’t mind that one bit.

Good one AP.

ChrisM on December 20, 2007 at 6:01 PM

I’m still trying to wrap my head around that. I must have missed something somewhere.

Allahpundit on December 20, 2007 at 5:44 PM

Good one AP.