Oh my: McCain to host fundraiser for … Romney

posted at 8:27 pm on September 25, 2009 by Allahpundit

There’s nothing necessarily unseemly about this — it’s an event for Mitt’s PAC, not for his campaign — but the grassroots remembers well Maverick’s conspicuous omission of a certain someone when naming exciting young Republicans on Leno’s show.

Smells like … betrayal.

Sen. John McCain is co-hosting a fundraiser for his former 2008 Republican primary rival Mitt Romney next Wednesday in Phoenix…

The fundraiser will benefit Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC, and features a $3,000 per person VIP reception along with a $300 per person luncheon.

The politic thing to do would have been to hold off on fundraisers for anyone else until he’s done one for Sarah PAC. Although that, of course, presumes that Sarah PAC wants him for a fundraiser, which it may not. Given the base’s contempt for McCain and the ‘Cuda’s emerging positioning as a libertarian populist in 2012, the Maverick brand may be something she’s trying to edge away from. The question is, what’s Mitt thinking here? Every time PPP does one of its Obama vs. X polls, Romney unfailingly lags behind Palin and Huckabee among Republicans. Hooking up with McCain will do nothing to change that and may well exacerbate it. I guess he’s committed to being the centrist next time out. Exit question: Where does that leave Huck? Social-con heaven?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

katiejane on September 26, 2009 at 10:41 AM

“Palin and Paul in 2012”

Geezer on September 26, 2009 at 11:06 AM

katiejane

When in life did you get a 100% of what you want or had someone agreeing with you a 100%?

What kind of seat will the Dems give the conservatives after Barry wins another 4 years in 2012 with the GOPs still fragmented with infighting? I suspect it will be inside an uncleaned outhouse.

bayview on September 26, 2009 at 11:06 AM

I think that Mitt Romney is a good man. People do change and evolve as they get older. I never even voted until the last two election cycles. I wasn’t into politics at all. Now I can’t get enough. As I get older I see the big picture more and more. I think that Romney had a genuine change of heart on some things. As for the health care… he tried something and it didn’t work. It is great that we have states so that we can try things out and if they don’t work we can scrap them. If they work great it is at that point that we can take them to a national level. It takes a big person to admit that they made a mistake and to change courses all in the public eye.

ReneePA on September 26, 2009 at 11:19 AM

bayview on September 26, 2009 at 11:06 AM

So maybe the concern of their own lack of influence at the table should keep the GOP from disregarding conservatives. They need conservatives just as much as conservatives need them.

Why is it that conservatives are the ones being told to suck it up and vote for the same type of guy (one who hasn’t won) and the RINOs aren’t being told THEY can’t have it all?

katiejane on September 26, 2009 at 11:28 AM

Funny to read how the Mittbots try to explain his flip-flops as “maturing” or “getting the big picture” on everything from Reagan, who Mittens denounced in 1994 (at the tender age of 47) to abortion, which he supported when he was just a teenie-bop, eh, I mean 54 years old.

Get over it, people. The GOP won’t nominate a RINO in 2012.

Norwegian on September 26, 2009 at 11:33 AM

Being a political party, every side has to ( and will ) make accommodation to hold a coalition together, what Reagan referred to as the Big Tent. Some posters here may be different in that they demand adherence from everyone to everything they want or else you are RINO or things worse.

I just do not think nasty name calling and venom to people who are for the most part, on your side, serve any purpose.

bayview on September 26, 2009 at 11:37 AM

I am not an anyone bot. I call it like I see it. There are a few people that I really like in politics and their styles are very different. For example I love both Palin and Bachman. People can experience spiritual growth at any age.

ReneePA on September 26, 2009 at 11:37 AM

He picked Sarah Palin, as well, and it seems to me that accusations that he “snubbed” and “attacked” her have been based almost 100% on anecdotal “evidence” from the MSM.

No, it’s about what he did NOT say. His own campaign staffer was putting out nonsense. He never said a word. He never said a word about the clothes. He waited way too long before even commenting positively on her.

It was clear. He’ll not endorse her.

And it’s similarly clear that only negative Palin stories will be on HA.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 11:38 AM

The guy is so remote he probably looks back on his splendid pick of Sarah Palin and goes, “What was I thinking??”

Forget McLame, he’s old and irrelevant, it’s time to move forward.

Yephora on September 26, 2009 at 11:39 AM

Mitt Romney is, to me, a consummate insider guy. And, for that reason, will not excite people.

The issues people have are with gov’t, and I can’t see he’d be a whole lot different from Obama, except on a few liberal agenda items.

He is, in short, just a suit.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 11:39 AM

This is like The Mummy hugging Frankenstein.

Sarah will step over their dusty embrace and march on.

(I liked Romney till this move. McCain… feh.)

profitsbeard on September 26, 2009 at 11:40 AM

The guy is so remote he probably looks back on his splendid pick of Sarah Palin and goes, “What was I thinking??”

Only if he can’t read polls. He was dead in the water before he chose her.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 11:40 AM

An aside, just because someone is a genuinely good person does not make them a viable candidate.

ReneePA on September 26, 2009 at 11:53 AM

Norwegian on September 26, 2009 at 11:33 AM

Let me be brutally honest. If Sarah Palin does not run for POTUS a RINO will get the nomination in 2012. However if sh does run, which is quite likely I really believe there are millions like you and me who will be bound and determined to get behind Sarah, because quite simply she, as I see it, is the only chance conservatives have to nominate a conservative in 2012.

And I really believe in 2011 Sarah will be a much better candidate than she is now. At least on the conservative side there will be fewer detractors then but the moderate Republicans will always slow to embrace her.

technopeasant on September 26, 2009 at 11:53 AM

Sarah Palin is just like Fred! except she doesn’t remind us of Baloo from Jungle Book.

mike_NC9 on September 26, 2009 at 11:56 AM

mike_NC9 on September 26, 2009 at 11:56 AM

But unlike Fred, Sarah is going to be prepared to do battle early in the primary season and not leave it until the last moment.

technopeasant on September 26, 2009 at 12:02 PM

If McCain supported Sarah, it would mean a more united GOP (at least in theory). So by apparently trying to divide the party, he’s just being his ol’ mavericky self. The press will take the ball and run.

Akzed on September 26, 2009 at 12:11 PM

If McCain supported Sarah, it would mean a more united GOP (at least in theory). So by apparently trying to divide the party, he’s just being his ol’ mavericky self…

Akzed on September 26, 2009 at 12:11 PM

An asshat, my friend.

That what we call them in my book.

Classless, petty, short-sighted, and a loser.

Loser being the operative word.

As his flaccid campaign showed.

profitsbeard on September 26, 2009 at 12:15 PM

McCain hosting the fundraiser? That ought to be good for an extra 10-12 people.

lonestar1 on September 26, 2009 at 12:20 PM

So if a person (let’s use Romney as an example) changed his position to either because his philosphy changed or he does so to accomodate the positions of the more conservative wing of the party, his attempt will be rejected, and he will be called a flip-floper and sneered at.

How is it going to work now? Are you only willing to support someone who is born with the set of values and beliefs of the “conservatives” and never allowed any change, no matter what?

bayview on September 26, 2009 at 12:44 PM

I still think it will not be Romney, Palin, or of course Huck in 2012. I, again, think it will be Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, etc. Mitch Daniels or Bobby Jindal might change their minds. There is still time. The public option healthcare bill that could very well pass could be the pivot point for both Jindal and Daniels. Jindal definitely needs to work on his speech-giving skills. He’s the exact opposite of Obama: policy wonk, very intelligent without a lot of charisma, while Obama is just a speech-maker without a lot of expertise in anything besides legalese, and, of course, bravado.

NathanG on September 26, 2009 at 12:48 PM

Why is anyone doing any fundraising for anything that isn’t to fight Obamacare, trillion dollar spending, and the nationalization of our economy?

He needs to get his keister in gear and fight this regime. McCain has already given much to our country, but if he isn’t up to the battle anymore (not even close), then he needs to step aside for younger, tougher, braver souls to take up the fight.

Laura in Maryland on September 26, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Too early for this kind of analysis for “posturing” in 2012.

I just hope that the money of Romney PAC will be used to support GOOD LOCAL CANDIDATES.

So, instead of creating issues on OldMac’s hosting ….

WHY NOT DISCUSS THE NAMES OF POTENTIAL LOCAL CANDIDATES WHO MAY BE BENEFITTED/SUPPORTED BY ROMNEYCARE, ESTE ROMNEYPAC?

TheAlamos on September 26, 2009 at 1:04 PM

As Soros and ACORN bought McLame during the amnesty kerfuffle, McLame should lose his seat to show all RINOS that there days are over.

No bi-partisan, no reaching across the aisle, no “my friend”…..McLame hates the tea parties and all that they represent…..Don’t you remember, we are racist, and ask questions…..That poor dude at a townhall that begged McLame to actually fight….That was the line in the sand….McLame belongs to the lefties.

nondhimmie on September 26, 2009 at 1:21 PM

It’s obvious that McCain isn’t going to come out of the gate endorsing Palin. He may end up endorsing someone else at some point, but has pointedly and repeatedly addressed questions about 2012 by noting it’s a loooong way out to place bets.

Unless I miss my guess, he’ll be fundraising with multiple politicians and vice versa in the coming months/years. It’s how politics is done.

Anybody trying to blow this up into some kind of BETRAYAL!!!!!!! is full of….

well, let’s just say “Hot Air.”

cs89 on September 26, 2009 at 1:24 PM

I wouldn’t cross the street to meet that dumb SOB McCain if he was giving ME 3000 samolians.

I want to throw up when I think of the decrepit old fart and guess what…I’m a repub!

Mr. Grump on September 26, 2009 at 1:30 PM

No, it’s about what he did NOT say. His own campaign staffer was putting out nonsense. He never said a word. He never said a word about the clothes. He waited way too long before even commenting positively on her.

It was clear. He’ll not endorse her.

And it’s similarly clear that only negative Palin stories will be on HA.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 11:38 AM

That’s because AP is a Frumian.

True_King on September 26, 2009 at 1:37 PM

Nathan G on September 26, 2009 at 12:48 PM

I hate to sound traditional because I am an iconoclast but I strongly believe you have before you the top 3 candidates in 2011 (Palin, Romney, Huckabee) unless Huckabee does not run. In that case there is a potential for a Pawlenty or another candidate to emerge into the first tier.

technopeasant on September 26, 2009 at 1:58 PM

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

Good for Marverick

Squid Shark on September 26, 2009 at 2:09 PM

So if a person (let’s use Romney as an example) changed his position to either because his philosphy changed or he does so to accomodate the positions of the more conservative wing of the party, his attempt will be rejected, and he will be called a flip-floper and sneered at.

How is it going to work now? Are you only willing to support someone who is born with the set of values and beliefs of the “conservatives” and never allowed any change, no matter what?

Exactly!! Everyone seems to forget that Ronald Reagan himself flip flopped on issues! If Ronald Reagan ran in 2012, people would be trash talking on him they way they do with Mitt.

I swear, people have selective memory when it comes to the idolization of Ronald Reagan…

Both Palin and Romney have Reagan-like qualities and are using some tatics from the Gipper’s playbook.

I happen to like Palin and Romney. Maybe a Romney-Palin ticket is the way to go in 2012.

But 2012 is a long time off. We need to focus on 2010 and get rid of as many democrats in Congress as we can.

Conservative Samizdat on September 26, 2009 at 2:12 PM

But 2012 is a long time off. We need to focus on 2010 and get rid of as many democrats in Congress as we can.

Conservative Samizdat on September 26, 2009 at 2:12 PM

I agree. I believe Obama will be re-elected in 2012 anyway, so we really need to look at winning in 2010 in the House and chipping away at the Dem majority in the Senate in order to block Obama. I believe that with the minority vote, liberal vote, and the “I wanna keep the incumbent vote” will re-elect Obama. It won’t matter that the economy is crippled or the budget deficit is at a record high. A lot of voters, in fact I’d say most voters, don’t think about things like that. They think about the here and now, and that’s unfortunate. I wish Sarah Palin would run for Mark Begich’s seat in 2014. She would be a shoe-in. He only won because of Ted Stevens’ corruption. Yes, I know that national politics sucks, but ya know what, it would give her some national experience.

NathanG on September 26, 2009 at 2:20 PM

I think Sarah us gearing up for an Independent run. In the past few days she has publicly branded herself a libertarian. There is a definite sense that the party establishment would need to be forced into lukewarm support for her.

It won’t matter for her – as her support base is large and will support her over all other options.

Mr Purple on September 26, 2009 at 2:21 PM

Sarah is following the Reagan playbook to the letter and as another poster mentioned earlier IS NOT trying to reinvent the wheel. She knows what she is doing and is confident of what she is planning to do because as you say gary4205 it has worked in the past. And she is student of past success.

People often comment that Reagan’s advantage of being in the wilderness was that he was already a two-term governor and he was much older and more experienced than Palin. But what Reagan did not have was the complete assurance that his “wilderness” strategy would work and he was operating under late 1970’s communications and technology.

What Sarah has going for her is again a proven blueprint but even as important the use of 21st c technology (Internet, Facebook, Twitter, e-mail, blackberries etc) that she can use to get her message out without having to rely on the MSM who frankly hate her guts because she is a Reagan conservative and a definite future threat to the Messiah in 2010 and 2012.

And being younger than Reagan she may not be as “experienced” but she does have his memoirs and books written about Reagan to fall back on and unlike Reagan in her mid-forties has a boundless amount of energy to “do what she must do”. Yes Reagan in his late 60’s also had a lot of energy but you cannot compare the energy of a senior citizen with that of someone who has not reached 50 yet and runs every day. Where Reagan would have tired more often, Sarah will not. This is an advantage that few talk of now but I know will pay dividends for Sarah down the road.

There is no substitute for youth but when you combine youth and superstardom it is a combination that few can compete with. Tiger Woods has been a dominant force in golf since 1999 when he was 23; no other golfer has even approached his greatness; and with Sarah I think it will be the same as the next couple of years unfold.

technopeasant on September 26, 2009 at 5:22 AM

Well said, as usual!

Sarah has an X factor that few will ever have. Frankly, Obama seemed to have it to. Of course, he had the entire media pushing him to messiah status. Now the bloom is off the rose, and we see her really didn’t have anything at all.

In my 50 years, I’ve never seen someone so savaged as Sarah Palin. The left have thrown absolutely everything they have at her, to absolutely no effect. Sarah just shrugs it off and keeps coming. THAT is what makes her a superstar.

I still go back to her championship winning basketball game, where she broke her foot, and still played, eventually scoring the game winning points.

Then I go to the time she was fishing and two of the boats collided, and pinned her hand between them, breaking it. She went and got that looked at, and went right back to work.

That sort of stuff says a hell of a lot about who Sarah Palin is.

And yeah, her energy level is high. She is said to be a consummate multi-tasker. Her high energy level, that lust for life, will take her places that no other candidate can go.

Like Reagan, Sarah sees America as GOOD. We all know Obama and the rest of his communist hoard see America as basically evil, flawed beyond help. It’s why they want to destroy the country and “rebuild it” in their likeness.

The American people see America the way Sarah sees America, and frankly, Sarah is the only one of the current “front runners” on our side that sounds the way she sounds. Sarah, like Reagan in his day, is optimistic. She makes you feel optimistic as well.

Right now, with Obama in office, we are facing some of Anmerica’s darkest days, her most troubling times. But when Sarah speaks of American exceptionalism, you just know we’ll get through this.

As Dr Zero wrote Sarah Plain is the Leader of the Free World.

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 3:10 PM

I voted for McCain/Palin. Being a Libertarian there wasn’t much choice: Big Government Statism vs. Democrat Lite…

I liked what Palin said like a lot of others. Unfortunately, the messenger turned out to be not as great as the message. There isn’t anyone in politics who didn’t think she was way over her head, just like the Chicago Thug.

As for her being a Libertarian, she’s anti abortion. Real Libertarians have a real hard time with social conservatism. Social Conservatives hate all government intrusion except when it comes to pushing their fundamentalist agenda..Government should stay out of people’s business interests, their bedrooms and doctor’s office. Otherwise, individual liberty is a joke. Huckabee is a Southern Baptist socially conservative liberal. Running him is death. Palin is known as a quitter,period. She won’t shake that..Other than her synchophants, most people find her whiny voice and “down home” demeanor irritating.She’s a Hockey Mom PTA nightmare.Romney is a self made millionaire with lots of experience. He should have gotten the last nomination, which as the economy decided the last election, he probably would have beaten Obama as people see him as an economy kind of guy. He’s more palatable than any other Republican to Independents,which of course wins elections…

Choose Huckabee or Palin and it’ll guarantee the Republican Party will go the way of the Whigs after 2012..

adamsmith on September 26, 2009 at 3:14 PM

adamsmith on September 26, 2009 at 3:14 PM

As another poster said if Clinton could shake Gennifer Flowers in 1992 and Obama could shake his radical ties to Bill Ayres and company, Sarah Palin should be able to shake the “quitting” meme quite easily. After all she did not leave Alaska unattended nor did she take money under false pretenses after she resigned. She moved on. I do not see this as a huge problem.

Actually the only problem that I see for Sarah is whether fence-sitters see her as a LEGITIMATE candidate for POTUS.

And that is why the 2010 midterms are so important to her future endeavors. Orchestrate a huge GOP comeback in the House and Senate and maybe regain one of the houses, Sarah will be seen in a different light. Bomb out, it will not matter what Sarah’s poll numbers are at the time. She will not gain the nomination. In 12-14 months we will find out the answer.

technopeasant on September 26, 2009 at 3:25 PM

Just when I thought Republicans were finally uniting, the rabid Romney haters come out and start screaming about how Palin is a victim. The screams of flip-flops and empty suits aren’t doing our party any good. Why can’t we just come together?

Dr B on September 26, 2009 at 3:34 PM

So you are angry that McCain dumped Palin, and then speculate that this move means Romney is “committed to being the centrist.” So you didn’t want McCain to fundraise for Palin after all?

It is just another case of Palin followers complaining. I have been sympathetic to the bashing Palin gets in the media. I have complained about it, so has Romney. But this crosses the line and divides the Republican party just when I thought it was starting to mend itself.

Dr B on September 26, 2009 at 3:44 PM

Dr. B.

I am not opposed to Romney asking McCain to help him but I am opposed to McCain being so willing to help Romney knowing full well that his VP running mate may be running for POTUS.

Now if McCain had agreed to hold a fundraiser for Palin first and then later for Romney, I can go along with that but to embrace Romney first rankles me, especially after McCain’s people bashed Sarah with false accusations right after campaign ended. IMHO, McCain has not defended Sarah very well for the last year.

So Dr. B. I have nothing against Romney asking McCain for help. He has done nothing wrong IMHO. My bone is with McCain.

technopeasant on September 26, 2009 at 3:54 PM

It is just another case of Palin followers complaining. I have been sympathetic to the bashing Palin gets in the media. I have complained about it, so has Romney. But this crosses the line and divides the Republican party just when I thought it was starting to mend itself.

Dr B on September 26, 2009 at 3:44 PM

funny but what I see here is a bunch of Romney followers whining because people who currently support Palin aren’t eager to jump right on the Romney express because he’s “such a nice guy, has so much business experience and deserved it last cycle.” Why does the GOP need to mend itself and unite behind Romney? Why can’t it unite behind Palin?

Comments like “Other than her synchophants, most people find her whiny voice and “down home” demeanor irritating.She’s a Hockey Mom PTA nightmare” cetainly aren’t likely to draw her supporters to your man.

katiejane on September 26, 2009 at 4:02 PM

katiejane on September 26, 2009 at 4:02 PM

That is why IMHO we should all refrain from attacking candidates on a personal basis and stick to the issues.

By calling attention to Romneycare or Huck’s fiscal liberalism or to question political motives or actions is fair but to utilize scurrilous individual rhetoric only harms our side while we forget who the real enemy is: Obama and his agenda.

technopeasant on September 26, 2009 at 4:15 PM

Why can’t we unite behind Newt!

Palin/Newt 2012

mike_NC9 on September 26, 2009 at 4:22 PM

Today is the 4th straight day that instapundit.com is conducting a presidential poll. Today he allows two choices.

Current results:

Sarah Palin 2021 votes

David Petraeus 866

Mitt Romney 841

Condi Rice 624

Tim Pawlenty 601

Bobby Jindal 598

Mitch Daniels 285

Haley Barbour 260

Other 210

Mike Pence 163

Bob Corker 151

Rick Perry 136

Mike Huckabee 113

Gary Johnson 41

3679 voters

http://poll.pollcode.com/mzh_result?v

technopeasant on September 26, 2009 at 4:56 PM

I always liked Romney. McCain might have won if he put him on the ticket.

Reagan Republican on September 26, 2009 at 5:37 PM

My last remaining drop of respect for Romney has just fallen from the leaf .

borntoraisehogs on September 26, 2009 at 6:45 PM

The Democrats put out a statement on Romney after the VV vote. They said nobody could trust him in the Republican party because he changes his positions so much…. Just like with Kerry, Romney would get killed in the General Election because of so many flip flops. On abortion: He was pro-life when he lived in Utah, he moved to MA and was pro-choice when he ran for the Senate against Ted Kennedy and as Gov. Then all of a sudden he was pro-life again when he wanted to run for President! How can anybody trust this man not to change his mind again according to the polls? He promised the Republicans in MA that he would be a better friend to them than his opponent (Dem) when he ran for Gov. Indeed he was because he didn’t even fight the vote for gay marriage. He spoke the words, but his actions were for the gays.

He came up with the liberal mandated healthcare program in MA that has almost bankrupted the state according to many, many articles. For those who said the man tried but he can be forgiven because he now knows it was wrong (Romneycare). Guess what, he has not said he made a mistake…he still thinks that Romneycare was good, still defends it. Don’t you know he would be the equivalent of Obama (only Republican) if he got in the WH?

For those who said Romney at least supported McCain after he lost the nomination…he wanted desperately to be VP so he could be the next President. That’s why he sucked up to McCain. Mitt Romney was for the Tarp and advised McCain to support it. Many people think that was McCain’s downfall. Isn’t it fishy that if McCain lost, Romney, at least he thinks, would be next in line? There were many Romney staff hired by McCain after he won the nomination. They were the ones handling Sarah Palin. We all know what a great job they did, don’t we? After McCain lost there were people from his campaign (Romney people?)who put out bad information against Palin. Just think he had to take down Palin too to be the favorite in 2012. During the Republican Convention, Mitt Romney was asked if he still supported John McCain, and,good ole Romney, said,”Well I don’t agree with his moderate stances”. This was the man who just before Sarah Palin was picked for VP, was all gungho for McCain. He flipped again!

Now for a reversal for Romney again…his people put out a statement saying that it was a mistake to go to the far right in 2008. Think about this….Romney goes for the positions that he THINKS will help him win. Not that they are REAL VALUES OR PRINCIPLES, but what he can pander to the public. He saw McCain win in 2008 going to the middle, so now that’s what Romney is doing. During his speech at the VV, he hardly mentioned any Christian values because he is going after the moderates, just like McCain. That’s the reason he is letting McCain throw this fundraiser for him because he wants the Independents and Moderate Dems. He wants to win in NY, NJ, all the East Coast and CA, just like McCain did. Unfortunately, it won’t work because everybody will call him for what he is a phony, untrustworthy, pandering liberal Republican who thinks he can buy the WH like he tried to do in 2008. I hope the other Republicans can see through his facade as a Conservative and never vote for him!!!

If any of you think Mike Huckabee is a slimy politician, Mitt Romney makes him look squeaky clean and fresh and most of all a person who has had the same principles all of his life (even when he was Gov. of Arkansas for 10 1/2 yrs, a very Democratic state).

VFT on September 26, 2009 at 6:47 PM

BTW for anybody to try and claim that Romney would have won the nomination against Obama, think again. Remember the people hated the Wall Street crowd and blamed them for losing their money. Romney is a rich, Wall Street man!!!!

His approval ratings in MA after he left was 77% unfavorable.

VFT on September 26, 2009 at 6:50 PM

You are funny Allah. It’s so obvious that you are trying to stir the pot & try to provoke outrage & division amongst conservatives. You don’t move me. At all. Have a great weekend!

kg598301 on September 26, 2009 at 7:38 PM

NathanG on September 26, 2009 at 2:20 PM

You might want to ask Jimmy C. about your analysis.

chemman on September 26, 2009 at 7:49 PM

You are funny Allah. It’s so obvious that you are trying to stir the pot & try to provoke outrage & division amongst conservatives. You don’t move me. At all. Have a great weekend!

kg598301 on September 26, 2009 at 7:38 PM

As I’ve stated, AP is a frumian.

True_King on September 26, 2009 at 7:55 PM

I always liked Romney. McCain might have won if he put him on the ticket.

Reagan Republican on September 26, 2009 at 5:37 PM

LOL…the defeat would then have been of Mondale proportions.

ddrintn on September 26, 2009 at 8:41 PM

Real Libertarians have a real hard time with social conservatism.

adamsmith on September 26, 2009 at 3:14 PM

Which is probably why “Real Libertarians” can never draw vote totals much past six figures nationally.

ddrintn on September 26, 2009 at 8:43 PM

Reagan Republican on September 26, 2009 at 5:37 PM

Here’s one for you. I would agree with you if Romney could have convinced McCain to oppose the bailout.

That unfortunately would have been virtually impossible. McCain bought into the fear of the economy collapsing and secondly I believe Romney did favor TARP.

Other than that are you really trying to tell me that McCain would have won Florida, NC, Ohio and Virginia with Romney on the ticket. I don’t think so.

technopeasant on September 26, 2009 at 9:09 PM

That’s because AP is a Frumian.

True_King on September 26, 2009 at 1:37 PM

What’s that?

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 9:44 PM

Real Libertarians have a real hard time with social conservatism. Social Conservatives hate all government intrusion except when it comes to pushing their fundamentalist agenda..Government should stay out of people’s business interests, their bedrooms and doctor’s office. Otherwise, individual liberty is a joke. Huckabee is a Southern Baptist socially conservative liberal. Running him is death. Palin is known as a quitter,period. She won’t shake that..

I’m not into social conservatism either. I’m frankly toast on the entire abortion question. It’s not for political fodder in my opinion. It’s a medical and highly individual decision, and that’s that.

But I’m no longer willing to make that a dealbreaker.

Now, if she simply panders to the far right, she’ll lose me. So far, she hasn’t. Nary a word on even the teaparties, and they would have loved to have her.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 9:46 PM

Okay, I have had with McCain. What a bum, (my friends)!

My friends, McCain`s only claim to fame is the fact that he was shot down and was a prisoner of war and I cannot imagine how horrible that must have been.

But it remains his only claim to fame as he repeated as often as he did “my friend(s)” during the campaign practically driving me bonkers and making me wonder why someone on his staff did not put a stop to it. Hypnotism might have worked. Anything!

Okay, to be brutally honest, I would prefer to have a winner as president. Someone like Eisenhower or even Grant (although Grant didn`t do awfully well as president).

Getting shot down is not exactly a winning claim to fame.

Not getting shot down is better.

And McCain did wreck a couple of other aircraft in his day, but got away with it.

Of course I respect the man for surviving that horrible Hanoi Hilton.

But he has turned out to be a loser and whoops he did it again.

Betrayed Palin.

Certainly, McCain would have made a better president than Obama.

But then again, we knew the faux praise McCain got initially from the illiberal media was a bad bad sign.

They knew a loser when they saw one and they picked him for us! And those semi-republicans did not help, did they?

And that`s all I have to say on that, friendos!

Sherman1864 on September 26, 2009 at 9:52 PM

Romney isn’t horrible. In fact, had the primary not basically been over by the time it got to Texas, I would have voted for him over McCain and Elmer Gantry. But that is only because he was the best we had at the time, and of course, I would never, ever vote for a communist, so Obama was out from the get go!

That being said, why would one settle for Mitt Romney now? Seriously, why accept second, or third best, when we already HAVE the best?

As long as we have Sarah Palin, no one else really matters. They are all running for Vice President, and I hopeKNOW she has the good sense to not pick anyone out of this bunch as second chair.

Mitt Romney might make a good Treasury Secretary, or Fed chair, but that’s as far as it should go. Mitt is just not a leader. I mean the guy can’t even draw a crowd handing out pizza!

Palin is a real leader. She’s got an actual record to run on, that “inexperienced like Barry” BS doesn’t fly. The woman is only a few years shy of having two DECADES worth of executive level experience. That’s more than most people who become President have.

As someone pointed out, when Romney left office, his approval rating was in the low 30’s. Palin’s approval rate, BEFORE Barry and the Alaska Mafia started their crap was over 80 percent. They threw everything they had at her, lied about her, and caused all sorts issues for her, and she still had a high 50 low 60 number. Those are the kind of numbers most politicians would kill for. (and those were really low, for her!)

There might be someone out there none of us have heard of that will pop up and wow us, but as it stands, anyone but Sarah Palin as the nominee is a guaranteed loss, and 4 more years of Soetoro, as well as the end of the Republic.

Romney can’t beat Barry. Huckabee absolutely can’t beat Barry. Sarah is already beating him like a rented mule, and she’s just getting warmed up! My guess is she won’t stop until she has him stuffed,and mounted in her trophy room.

Only a fool would count her out of this deal.

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 9:54 PM

Sarah Palin should be able to shake the “quitting” meme quite easily.

technopeasant on September 26, 2009 at 3:25 PM

Yup.

She chaired the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission from 2003 until her resignation in 2004. She was elected Governor of Alaska in November 2006.

She quit and became Governor. So much for the quitting-will-end-your-career meme. Facts are stubborn things.

Geochelone on September 26, 2009 at 9:55 PM

Now, if she simply panders to the far right, she’ll lose me. So far, she hasn’t. Nary a word on even the teaparties, and they would have loved to have her.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 9:46 PM

From Sarah’s speech in Hong Kong:

When members of America’s greatest generation – the World War II generation – lose their homes and their life savings because their retirement funds were wiped after the financial collapse, people feel a great anger. There is suddenly a growing sentiment to just “throw the bums out” of Washington, D.C. – and by bums they mean the Republicans and the Democrats. Americans are suffering from pay cuts and job losses, and they want to know why their elected leaders are not tightening their belts. It’s not lost on people that Congress voted to exempt themselves from the health care plan they are thrusting on the rest of the nation. There is a growing sense of frustration on Main Street. But even in the midst of crisis and despair, we see signs of hope.

In fact, it’s a sea change in America, I believe. Recently, there have been protests by ordinary Americans who marched on Washington to demand their government stop spending away their future. Large numbers of ordinary, middle-class Democrats, Republicans, and Independents from all over the country marching on Washington?! You know something’s up!

These are the same people who flocked to the town halls this summer to face their elected officials who were home on hiatus from that distant capital and were now confronted with the people they represent. Big town hall meetings – video clips circulating coverage – people watching, feeling not so alone anymore.

The town halls and the Tea Party movement are both part of a growing grassroots consciousness among ordinary Americans who’ve decided that if they want real change, they must take the lead and not wait to be led. Real change – and, you know, you don’t need a title to do it.

The “Tea Party Movement” is aptly named to remind people of the American Revolution – of colonial patriots who shook off the yoke of a distant government and declared their freedom from indifferent – elitist – rulers who limited their progress and showed them no respect. Today, Main Street Americans see Washington in similar terms.

When my country again achieves financial stability and economic growth – when we roar back to life as we shall do – it will be thanks in large part to the hard work and common sense of these ordinary Americans who are demanding that government spend less and tax less and allow the private sector to grow and prosper.

Seems like Sarah knows exactly what the Tea Party movement is all about.

You know why she wasn’t in D.C. on 9/12? She’s just too big. Had Sarah went, or even sent a message, that would have been the story. The rest of the message would have been lost. Sarah knows this movement is not about her. It’s about retaking our government. It’s about going back to smaller government.

One thing about Sarah. I don’t think you will ever see her pander to anyone. She’ll tell you what she thinks, and you’ll either like what she is say, or not. But you can bet it will be her saying what she is say, not the results of some polling, or focus group.

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 10:09 PM

Seems like Sarah knows exactly what the Tea Party movement is all about.

You know why she wasn’t in D.C. on 9/12? She’s just too big. Had Sarah went, or even sent a message, that would have been the story. The rest of the message would have been lost. Sarah knows this movement is not about her. It’s about retaking our government. It’s about going back to smaller government.

One thing about Sarah. I don’t think you will ever see her pander to anyone. She’ll tell you what she thinks, and you’ll either like what she is say, or not. But you can bet it will be her saying what she is say, not the results of some polling, or focus group.

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 10:09 PM

Of course, she knows what they are about. I’m not so sure about the second part. It just was timing.

And all contemporary presidential hopefuls DO pay attention to polling, focus groups, and their managers…or they won’t be candidates for long.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 10:15 PM

Yup.

She chaired the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission from 2003 until her resignation in 2004. She was elected Governor of Alaska in November 2006.

Lesson learned in business. It is ALWAYS OK to quit, provided the next goal is even better or bigger.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 10:16 PM

Yup.

She chaired the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission from 2003 until her resignation in 2004. She was elected Governor of Alaska in November 2006.

She quit and became Governor. So much for the quitting-will-end-your-career meme. Facts are stubborn things.

Geochelone on September 26, 2009 at 9:55 PM

Ahhhh but what did she do with that time between jobs? Why did she “quit” and what did she do afterward?

Well, her day job was running a PAC for Ted Stevens that was set up to groom women to be leaders in the Republican party, but her real focus was taking down Murkowski’s “Corrupt Bastards Club.” Which she did in spectacular fashion.

This time she “quit” so she can go after Obama, unencumbered. I say this all of the time, but Sarah basically took down the whole Republican party leadership, there are still people in jail over it.

All of that was simply dress rehearsal for what she is doing now. She will destroy Obama. We know this because she’s already used this formula with devastating results.

The “quitter” BS doesn’t work on people who can think logically, and can understand the facts. Her “quitting” was a brilliant move. It was as brilliant for her, as Barry and the Mafia screwing with her was beyond stupid.

You poke a mama grizzly enough, and she is going to turn around and rip you to shreds, and never think twice about it!

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 10:21 PM

If I’m more representative of mildly liberal Independents, I totally got her resignation from being governor. It was time to cut the losses.

Had she wanted a traditional path, the answer to McCain should have been No, Thanks though.

Alaska couldn’t possibly handle the national focus. It was feeding time for the old-boy network up there whom she upended with the election there.

And she tried for a few months to give the national press a chance to ignore her. They did that to Quayle.

Didn’t work. She sneezed, it was news.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 10:26 PM

Of course, she knows what they are about. I’m not so sure about the second part. It just was timing.

And all contemporary presidential hopefuls DO pay attention to polling, focus groups, and their managers…or they won’t be candidates for long.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 10:15 PM

There’s a difference between seeing polls, and letting the polls drive you. I think this way she will be a lot like George Bush. She’ll know polls exist, but won’t care insomuch as she won’t base her actions on what the polls tell her to do. That’s the difference between a leader, and someone occupying an office.

She’ll have advisers, she’s always had advisers and mentors, but you know she’ll make the final decisions based on her own experiences and knowledge.

I guess my thing with Sarah is just this simple. I trust her 100 percent. I trust her like I trusted Reagan. I know she has the kind of integrity one needs to be President.

Will she make mistakes? Well, yes, I’m positive she will. But she won’t make stupid ones, rookie ones, and you can bet the ones she makes will be in an effort to do the right thing.

I always trusted Reagan. Reagan was an honest guy, and owned up to his failings. That’s all one can ask. And when all of the pretty words are said, with Palin, for me, it’s all about trust, period. Palin is the only one I trust to be as advertised, period.

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 10:33 PM

Sure. And some conservatives need to stop complaining and relish the fact that the New Media has diversified and thus extended its reach. The libs have always had CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, the NYT and LAT. Conservatives now have FOX, Rush, Hannity, and Beck.

pearson on September 26, 2009 at 10:36 PM

Awwww, that’s sweet. I think there’s one first kiss, one first love in politics, and enjoy it.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 10:45 PM

If I’m more representative of mildly liberal Independents, I totally got her resignation from being governor. It was time to cut the losses.

Had she wanted a traditional path, the answer to McCain should have been No, Thanks though.

Alaska couldn’t possibly handle the national focus. It was feeding time for the old-boy network up there whom she upended with the election there.

And she tried for a few months to give the national press a chance to ignore her. They did that to Quayle.

Didn’t work. She sneezed, it was news.

AnninCA on September 26, 2009 at 10:26 PM

Spot on!

The media had their marching order: Destroy Palin.

She’s so different from the pack, so unconventional. No reason to think she will be anything but an unconventional candidate. Oddly enough, as unconventional as she is in her methods, he grounding, her principles are as old fashioned and time honored as they come. The very fabric that made America strong.

I just know that part of the fun is just watching HOW she is going to do this.

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 10:57 PM

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 10:21 PM

A+

Geochelone on September 26, 2009 at 11:56 PM

Frauds of a feather, flock together.

nelsonknows on September 27, 2009 at 2:35 AM

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 10:57 PM

Bravo!

TheAlamos on September 27, 2009 at 9:04 AM

By calling attention to Romneycare or Huck’s fiscal liberalism or to question political motives or actions is fair but to utilize scurrilous individual rhetoric only harms our side while we forget who the real enemy is: Obama and his agenda.

technopeasant on September 26, 2009 at 4:15 PM

To fight an incumbent liberal, the opposing groups must unite immediately. Liberal presidents do not nothing in their term except “campaigning”.

That’s a lesson from History.

We must position now our candidate now or we will just repeat the FDR, Truman and Clinton eras.

TheAlamos on September 27, 2009 at 9:09 AM

To rectify:

To fight an incumbent liberal, the opposing groups must unite immediately. Liberal presidents do not nothing in their term except “campaigning”.

That’s a lesson from History.

We must position now our candidate now or we will just repeat the FDR, Truman and Clinton eras.

TheAlamos on September 27, 2009 at 9:10 AM

This tells me that Romney has no judgment!

kens on September 27, 2009 at 2:54 PM

The fact that Romney would even accept help from McCain evidences poor judgment on his part – like signing onto Massachusetts’ health care legislation.

He is history.

So is Huckabee.

They are nothing more than re-treads, just like John McCain.

molonlabe28 on September 27, 2009 at 3:04 PM

Mitt Romney is a very devious candidate. He knew he couldn’t compete with Sarah and Mike Huckabee, so he is now running toward the center (like McCain). It’s no accident that McCain is giving him a fundraiser (as if he needs it). Romney wants all the Independents and Moderate Democrats to see him with McCain so he can get their votes. I guess he thinks he can continue to lie about his social conservative values, and we will believe him and vote for him. No such thing will happen!

Now think about this….Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin both run and split their votes, which leaves Mitt Romney coming through the middle just like McCain did last time. AND Mitt has probably thought through this scenario in that if Mike Huckabee wins more than Sarah Palin, all the people who support Palin will turn to Romney..again giving him the victory.

People have stated many times since the 2008 primaries that Mike Huckabee was the spoiler. Doesn’t anybody ever think that if Mitt Romney had not been in the campaign spending his millions trying to smear Mike Huckabee enough so he would get the votes, Mike Huckabee might have won the nomination? Do you all just assume Mike Huckabee would have lost? After Mike Huckabee dropped out of the primary, he continued to win 10-13% of the voters in the states left. That’s without campaigning or spending any money there. Not even Mitt Romney continued to win near that kind of support after he dropped out.

I know all of you want Sarah to win. Personally I am a Mike Huckabee fan all the way, BUT if Mike Huckabee doesn’t run or drops out (which I doubt), I would vote for Sarah. I will never vote for Mitt Romney after what he did to MH during the last campaign, but mostly because I can never trust him to stand on principles because he doesn’t have any! He will pander to whomever he can fool to vote for him. Think about how horrible he would be as Pres. He would be so worried about losing the 2nd election, that he would continue to pander to everybody. He can’t be trusted. I firmly believe Romney was partially at fault for McCain’s loss. It was Romney who told McCain to vote yes for the TARP money. People say that’s what made McCain fail. His people handled Sarah Palin, and I think deliberately sabatoged her at every turn, and then leaked bad statements to the press to continue helping people turn against her. If Mike Huckabee should win against Sarah, please don’t let Romney win by voting for him. You know if MH wins, he would do it fairly and the people will make the decision. Remember what I have said when the time comes. Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin have many, many things in common. Sarah Palin and Romney, the elitist, have nothing in common.

VFT on September 27, 2009 at 3:05 PM

John McCain is a *****, ****** ***** MAVERICK!!!

xax on September 27, 2009 at 4:43 PM

<blockquoteThis tells me that Romney has no judgment!

kens on September 27, 2009 at 2:54 PM

What do you call signing a socialist healthcare plan and two unconstitutional gun bans as Governor of MA?
Romney is a fraud from the word GO.

nelsonknows on September 27, 2009 at 6:14 PM

I am very excited to hear this. Combined with the fundraiser Mitt already had scheduled in Utah, Mitt is going to have the funds he needs to help Republicans in the most important races around the country this year and next. Things are looking close in NJ and VA and we need every last dollar we can get to go to those races. When Mitt raised $100,000 in one night for McDonnell last week, that had to have helped a lot. Bob is facing a ridiculous smear campaign and Mitt came in right in the nick of time to give him the resources he needed to combat the lies.

dnlchisholm on September 27, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Sarah has an X factor that few will ever have. Frankly, Obama seemed to have it to. Of course, he had the entire media pushing him to messiah status. Now the bloom is off the rose, and we see her really didn’t have anything at all.

EXACTLY… You go to the head of the class…

I honestly can’t wait until the day when John McCain retires to Sonoma… Please… You’ve lived a good life… Now go and enjoy your retirement… You’ve earned it…

Khun Joe on September 27, 2009 at 9:12 PM

“bayview on September 26, 2009 at 12:44 PM

BV… for some on the political conservative side “pragmatism” is a dirty word.

From a military point of view “pragmatism” is the soldiers “best friend”.

Fore all practical purposes I can’t imagine why it couldn’t be successfully incorporated into the conservative view?

1] A practical, matter-of-fact way of approaching or assessing situations or of solving problems.
2] Policy dictated by practical consequences rather than by theory.
3] Philosophy the doctrine that the content of a concept consists only in its practical applicability.

Aw… after further perusal…perhaps I’ve “found the rub”…?
It [pragmatism] doesn’t necessarily bring God into the equation?
However a pragmatist could…!

“You poke a mama grizzly enough, and she is going to turn around and rip you to shreds, and never think twice about it!~~gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 10:21 PM

Geezer on September 27, 2009 at 9:46 PM

‘Cuda’s emerging positioning as a libertarian populist in 2012

lmao.. as if libertarians or even the “libertarian leaning Republicans” support pre-emptive war, nation-building, and erosion of sovereignty like she does. Until she admits that the Global War on Terror is a big sham then she’ll still be an AIPAC loving neocon.

popularpeoplesfront on September 27, 2009 at 11:46 PM

All of you Palin supporters ought to go over to race42012.com. You should hear those people. They have now crowned Mitt Romney as the “Establishment Candidate” (which is good in a way because the American people do not want anybody associated with the Washington DC elites). Unfortunately, Romney in the last campaign 2008, said he wanted to “fix” Washington DC. We have to state on every internet site that Mitt Romney is the Washington insider or Establishment candidate because that’s what he is.

You should hear them…they have a post about how the moderate candidate (Romney) can win. He will still have the Christian conservatives like McCain did in 2008, so he can be just like McCain trying to get the Independents and Moderate Democratic voters and assuming the Christian Conservatives will believe that he was supposed to be such a right-wing Conservative in the primary of 2008, now he’s a moderate Republican who is still pro-life….RIGHT!!! I guess they didn’t get the message that McCain lost….people are ready for a pro-life right-wing candidate like Mike Huckabee or Sarah Palin. They live in the East Coast, Washington DC bubble and haven’t a clue what the regular conservative voter in the middle of the country wants. It sure isn’t a flip flopper like Mitt Romney!!! We lost because McCain was trying so hard to get the Independents and moderate Dems. that he forgot about the Republican voters. If Sarah Palin hadn’t got into the race as the VP nominee, most of the Christian Conservatives would not have voted for him. All of the Mike Huckabee supporters were very happy that Sarah Palin was the VP nominee and happily supported her. On the other hand, Mitt Romney’s supporters bad mouthed her on every website after she was picked for VP choice. Especially after McCain lost, they bad mouth Sarah because they saw her as somebody who could beat Mitt.

VFT on September 28, 2009 at 1:47 AM

VFT on September 28, at 1:47 AM

Regardless of how much the establishment touts Mitt and dishes Mike and Sarah in the final analysis it will come down to these three in the end when primary season comes upon us. Each has a constituency and each is strong relatively to the others. No other conservative will be able to out-Reagan Sarah and I don’t believe any “moderate” will be able to “out-moderate” Mitt because of Mitt’s money. As for Huck he is viable as long as base continues to support him.

technopeasant on September 28, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Triangulation got McCain the nomination last election

It’s like peanuts, why stop with just one

entagor on September 28, 2009 at 12:35 PM

McCain is so frigging jealous of his former VP candidate he cannot stand it. He’s got to do anything he can to keep her from succeeding where he failed.

I’d bet money most of the anti-Palin viciousness on the right has its roots in McCain Land. Let’s face it, she made him look BAD.

Mad Mad Monica on September 28, 2009 at 1:10 PM

Doesn’t anybody ever think that if Mitt Romney had not been in the campaign spending his millions trying to smear Mike Huckabee

Wow. Mitt Romney smearing Mike Huckabee?

Do you not forget Mike Huckabee and his campaign managers attacking Mitt Romney’s faith? Do you not remember the special media announcement where he showed his advertisement to the press after stating he wouldn’t show it at all? Do you not remember the West Virginia deal that Mike Huckabee made with John McCain??

Do you all just assume Mike Huckabee would have lost? After Mike Huckabee dropped out of the primary, he continued to win 10-13% of the voters in the states left.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!! Riiiiiight. What ever you’re smoking, you gotta quit it.

Mike Huckabee said that he would win the election and that he believed in “miracles” despite the fact that the electoral math worked completely against him. There was no way Huckabee was going to win even after Romney dropped out.

Lets not forget that Mike Huckabee was in 3rd place in the primaries until the very last few weeks when he finally, finally, got 2nd place over Mitt Romney.

I will never vote for Mitt Romney after what he did to MH during the last campaign

VFT, I’m curious what it was that Mitt Romney did to Mike Huckabee that has you so upset with Romney?

How do you feel about the dirty deal that Mike Huckabee made with John McCain win West Virgina to rob Mitt Romney’s victory in West Virgina?

Thanks to Mike Huckabee’s deal with the devil, he allowed John McCain to win the GOP nomination. It was a stupid thing to do since it led to his loss.

Mike Huckabee is more of a slimy douchebag than Mitt Romney will ever be just on the West Virginia back room deals with John McCain.

Conservative Samizdat on September 28, 2009 at 1:19 PM

Mike Huckabee is more of a slimy douchebag than Mitt Romney will ever be just on the West Virginia back room deals with John McCain.

Conservative Samizdat on September 28, 2009 at 1:19 PM

I agree with you, but the operative wording here is more of a slimy douchebag than Romney. Neither one is worth the effort.

RomneyCare can’t win the primary, let alone the general against Obama, and much like McCain would have, even if RomneyCare wins, he is a Big Government “progressive” who won’t do our brand any good in the long run.

And lets face it, Elmer Gantry Huckabee has a small base, and Sarah Palin appeals to that base as well as her own much larger base of Reagan conservatives.

I want her to have a tough primary. If she is just coronated, it will look bad, and hurt her in the general. But when it comes to winning the hearts and minds of the American people, it will be all Sarah Palin.

Mitt and Huck are just bit players.

gary4205 on September 28, 2009 at 5:48 PM

I don’t smoke anything…why don’t you do the research. Just remember I am a Huckabee fan and I paid attention to all the states after he dropped out. He dropped out after Texas…check yourself…I guarantee you that is exactly what happened. We were very proud of him for doing so great.

As for the Romney mess, Mike Huckabee asked a reporter a stupid question about the Mormon faith (BTW I was on several websites during the last year, and that statement was true even if he shouldn’t have said it). He immediately apologized to Romney and apologized to the Mormon people on Larry King Live…I saw the video. What else do you want blood.

You ask what did Romney do to MH..well for starters he was the only candidate who put out half-truth ads against his fellow Republicans so he could win..I guess his record in MASS. wasn’t enough to him to put out ads on his own record. All the candidates hated him for doing that. He spent between $15-20M on ads just in Iowa against Mike Huckabee. Of course, part of it was true, so people believed the ads. I have heard many on this website state some of the information, so it was certainly effective. This made MH so mad, he made the ad against Romney. At the last minute he decided not to run the ad. He showed it to the reporters because they had been pretty negative with him, and he wanted to prove that he had made the ad. He called and cancelled the ads in the newspapers, but the first day had already printed and he couldn’t stop them. I understand your questioning this because if I was in your shoes, I probably would too. I am just telling you what happened. The people of Iowa must have believed him because he beat Romney by 9%. BTW, Mitt Romney and his surrogates “donated” over $500,000 to Club for Growth. You know the organization that had ads out every day against Mike Huckabee..calling him a liberal candidate. taxes etc. If you think that was a coincidence, you are smoking something. After the Iowa primary, Romney told the news that Mike Huckabee only got the Christian vote. Not then, but much later, I saw the breakdown in Iowa and Mitt Romney got a lot of the Christian vote too. Mike Huckabee got the Republican vote too, but since many other states had already voted, it didn’t seem important for the media to correct this info. Because Mitt Romney said this, of course, the media all picked up on this that MH only could get Christians to vote for him. That wasn’t true, but because of lot of people believed that lie, it affected who voted for him in the next primaries. It worked Romney and the radio and TV pundits said everytime they spoke about Mike Huckabee, the Baptist preacher so the voters wouldn’t vote for him. The Washington Establishment did not want Mike Huckabee to win because he was the pro-life Christian candidate from the far-right. When MH continued to win like on Super Tues when he won 5 states, then LA, KS after that, the radio and TV pundits just ignored him and never mentioned his name except on election night when the votes came in. Do you see how much the Republican Establishment, the media and Radio and TV pundits hurt his chances during the 2008 primary. Yet everyday, they pushed Mitt Romney for VP on their radio and TV shows.

I will tell you what really happened in Virginia. Nobody had enough votes in the caucus on the first round. Remember nobody liked Romney. Mike Huckabee came in second to Romney….John McCain was further down the list. Ron Paul told Mike Huckabee he would have his followers vote for MH if MH would give him the delegates. Mike agreed to this. It had nothing to do with John McCain other than, of course, he didn’t want Romney to win VA either. There were posts from Ron Paul thanking MH for doing this. It was because it helped John McCain that everybody assumed they had a deal. That wasn’t the case.

Mitt Romney paid surrogates to infiltrate all the internet blogs to push for him and criticize MH. Mike Huckabee was accused of robocalls. There was an organization, nothing from Huckabee, who did some robocalls for Mike. He told them to stop many times,but they thought they were helping him. That isn’t the way Mike Huckabee ran his campaign or wanted any part of that. They wouldn’t stop, and of course Mike Huckabee was blamed. I wouldn’t be surprised that Mitt Romney was behind that. He had the money to do that…Mike Huckabee didn’t have hardly any money. He ran his whole campaign on $5M against Romney’s $75-80M??, but Romney still couldn’t win, because the American people saw him for the phony he was and still is.

Mike Huckabee and his followers have nothing against the Mormon religion. That was “assumed” in the media probably because of his original statement. Yes, Mike Huckabee doesn’t like Mitt Romney but that’s because he has no principles that he stands on. He was for abortion before he was against…Even Ted Kennedy when he ran against Mitt Romney for the Senate said Mitt Romney had no principles. He says to people what it takes to get their votes, true or not!!!

Yes because Mike Huckabee is a Christian he believes in miracles and he knew it would take one to win the nomination. Remember with no money he went very far in that election. He wanted the people to still have a choice so they would come out and vote (and of course he hoped they would vote for him), but he was not only fighting John McCain,but all the media. Everyday after Mitt dropped out,all the news said things about John McCain and how he had “unofficially” won the nomination. Think about that, when people in the later primaries heard this day after day, they didn’t bother to vote for Mike Huckabee because they wanted to their vote to count for the “winner” John McCain. People accused him of colluding with John McCain…maybe he wanted to show them he was in it to win for himself, not John McCain. What if it had been your candidate that the whole Republican Party, the media, all the Republican radio and TV pundits treated like he wasn’t even running, how would you have felt as one of his supporters? Many of MH’s supporters dropped out of the Republican Party and joined the Independent Party because of how unfair they treated MH during the primaries.

Mike Huckabee wanted John McCain and Sarah Palin to win the general election,but John McCain did not ask or apparently want Mike Huckabee to campaign for him. Mike offered several times. But when John McCain was to pick his VP, Mike Huckabee did warn John McCain not to pick anybody, including Mitt Romney,who wasn’t pro-life because he knew John McCain would not get the far-right voters to support him in the general election. He had been on the websites and knew that the Christians would not support a VP like that on the ticket, it was bad enough to have John McCain as the nominee. He was thinking about Republicans winning the general. Of course, the media and probably most of you thought MH was showing his bigotry…but that was far from the truth. He stated many times he has no problem with any other religion and governed in Arkansas for 10 1/2 years and never pushed his religion on anybody. MH had many reasons to dislike Mitt Romney and he had the right to his own opinion (Mitt Romney did not like MH either).

I guess all to state that Mike Huckabee isn’t the slimy canidate,it is and was Mitt Romney. He just pays to have his surrogates do the dirty work for him behind the scenes so people think he’s a nice guy. He may be a nice guy, BUT not in politics..

Mike Huckabee had every right to stay in the race before Super Tuesday…look he won almost the whole south that day. Nobody had the right to say he should drop out of the race. Mitt Romney only one the state of Michigan on his own. What I mean is the other candidates didn’t have enough money to go out and campaign in the West, and because there is a huge Mormon population he won several of those states on Super Tues. Just because you didn’t want Mike Huckabee to stay in the race doesn’t mean he should get out. A “miracle” could have happened, nobody really knew for sure. It was a “miracle” that MH won Iowa on no money, so it could have happened again. Mike Huckabee didn’t allow John McCain to win and certainly never made a deal with the devil…you probably should be looking at Mitt Romney and how dirty he played in that campaign if you want to look for the deal with the devil.

As far as this election, looks like Mike Huckabee is pretty popular with lots of voters..that’s why he has won the PPP vote for 6 months as the Republican closest to beating Obama. He also is within 2-3 points (margin of error) and all the other polls except one. That doesn’t show that he has such a “small base.” People have seen him on this show, “Huckabee” and they like him. He has gone straight to the American people since the Republican Establishment won’t even give him the time of day…something like Sarah has gone on Facebook to get her info out to the public.

VFT on September 28, 2009 at 7:03 PM

From one CFR new world order freak to another.

ex-Democrat on September 28, 2009 at 9:32 PM