Many major former Romney supporters not backing him this year?

posted at 9:22 pm on January 28, 2011 by Allahpundit

Most them aren’t definite no’s, but even if they’re holding out for the time being merely to see who else jumps in, that’s … not encouraging. Some, like Judd Gregg, may end up endorsing him anyway but might want to see if Daniels (or Huntsman?) declares first. Others, like DeMint, who have embraced the tea party full-fold almost certainly aren’t going to endorse him unless the entire “true conservative” bench decides not to run. Either way … not encouraging.

My favorite part? Hot on the heels of a rumor that Mitt might skip Iowa, there’s now a rumor circulating that he’ll skip South Carolina too. That makes superficial sense since both are social-conservative strongholds, but have we learned nothing from the Giuliani catastrophe, my friends?

As much as anything else, it calls into question just how far ahead of the pack he is as the 2012 contenders emerge. Even as Romney tries to project inevitability by signing up top GOP money men in Washington and New York, the defections suggest he’s seen as far from a sure thing even among insiders. After all, if top Republicans were willing to commit to Romney four years ago when he was a lesser known commodity, why won’t they get on board now when he’s a household name in the political circles and clearly among the most formidable candidates for his party’s nomination?…

Romney’s top strategists in [South Carolina] – who also are DeMint advisers – indicated that they hadn’t heard from their 2008 candidate and were unlikely to get behind him this time…

Peter Brown, a top GOP donor in Columbia who also served on Romney’s state finance committee in 2008, explained why he was not committed again.

“The word on the street is that Romney will skip South Carolina,” Brown said. “Most conservatives believe we need a Jim DeMint-type, assuming Jim will not run for president, someone who really wants to push for a limited federal government – not a government that will grow more slowly.”

Another possibility: His former South Carolina team might be convinced that Romney not only can’t win the state, he can’t win in the south more broadly. Whether that’s because he’s suspect on abortion or because he’s from Massachusetts or because of his faith, I don’t know, but PPP’s polling of some southern states suggests he’s having difficulties throughout the region. And by “difficulties,” I don’t mean he’s in second behind Huckabee. I mean he’s in fourth, way, way out of the lead, with a favorable rating among Republicans between 50 and 60 percent. If this is all about RomneyCare, I’m not sure why the objections would be so much sharper regionally. Any theories, southern readers?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Native South Carolinian weighing in:

ROMNEYCARE.

How can you fight Obamacare when you have the same type of nannystate healthcare govenment takeover named for you?

SandyToes on January 29, 2011 at 10:07 AM

ROMNEYCARE.

How can you fight Obamacare when you have the same type of nannystate healthcare govenment takeover named for you?

SandyToes on January 29, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Exactly.

pugwriter on January 29, 2011 at 10:17 AM

I challenge Allahpundit and the rest of you to post something actually positive about him. It’s not difficult.

Eichendorff on January 29, 2011 at 8:42 AM

I think he’s a good man of strong character. I’ll vote for him if he’s the nominee-but I do have MAJOR issues with Romneycare.

Positive enough?

annoyinglittletwerp on January 29, 2011 at 10:33 AM

Guys, think about the current president and the future president. Remember how hopey-changey Obama was and he convinced everyone he was the one to turn this country around. But now, especially after the SOTU, he seems like a sorry little boy who doesn’t have a clue what to do. And everything he has done has had the opposite effect. He is incompetent and most of all lacks leadership. He honestly doesn’t know what to do or how to do it.

So as you pick a Repbulican nominee, consider where we will be after a couple years in office. Will it be clear that our new Republican President talked a good game, “soaring rhetoric” as Christie calls it, but cannot deliver? Our national problems are many and huge. Which of these Republicans can trim government, tackle the deficit, help the private sector feel like they can hire again? Which will be a good role model, support family values and American values? Bring our nation back from the Obama abyss?

I don’t have the faith in Palin, Huck, not even Gingrich to accomplish this. Don’t think Palin has the wherewithall, Huck is to distracted by other issues (felons, pardons and such, and Gingrich is all talk, no proven experience. A former professor that fits the mold: those who can do, those who can’t teach.

Romney is the clear choice to deal with the mess. He has taken on many a lost cause and turned them to success. He is Mr. Fixit.

Now stop using the RINO label which should be reserved for republicans who might as well be democrats. Romney holds not a single position as presidential candidate that is NOT fully and completely Republican. Strong economy, strong defense, strong families. A RINO would hardly have any Republican ideals.

And in Massachusetts, what he accomplished kept health care between doctors and patients and in the private sector. Obama, not so much. And even Romney wanted an alternative to the indiv. mandate. He was over-ruled of course. But the mandate was not his idea it was part of a collaborative effort with conservative think tank, Heritage Foundation, that came up with that.

So remember to use your head. We need a Republican who can actually be competent, pro-active, and successful as president! Why even consider anyone else? Its Romney and only Romney

Lori on January 29, 2011 at 10:58 AM

Lori on January 29, 2011 at 10:58 AM

Palin has enough “wherewithall” to send oil company execs running with their tails between their legs, put some Rethuglican corruptocrats in jail, fend off flaming darts from the left and frightened GOP cronies like Wonder Woman deflecting bad guy bullets. Romney has the wherewithall to watch from the sidelines. Nice guy. Will never be president.

pugwriter on January 29, 2011 at 11:09 AM

Lori on January 29, 2011 at 10:58 AM

Only Romney? That’s a lot of people being discounted.

Cindy Munford on January 29, 2011 at 11:12 AM

Its Romney and only Romney

Lori on January 29, 2011 at 10:58 AM

For what? Making sandwiches?

Inanemergencydial on January 29, 2011 at 11:27 AM

I want Palin to be president, but it doesn’t HAVE to be her. All I ask for is a real conservative with a steel spine and leadership skills.

pugwriter on January 29, 2011 at 11:41 AM

If this is all about RomneyCare, I’m not sure why the objections would be so much sharper regionally. Any theories, southern readers?

I don’t think it’s RomneyCare or Romney’s Mormon faith. It’s that he’s never shown much concern about opinion in the South, and southerners are returning the favor.

ddrintn on January 29, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Lori made some good points. One thing I sometimes get tired of is this overemphasis on the celebrity aspects of running for office. It’s time we did some homework and really examine the records of those who would be our political leaders. We need to find someone who has the intelligence, moral character, competence and toughness to be President. We need to be fair in our assessments.

I understand that a candidate must sell his message and market it effectively. I also know that a candidate must appeal to a broad sector of the voting public. But those are not the only things to consider.

Romney has executive experience and ability in multiple areas. He rescued both Massachusetts and the Salt Lake Winter Olympics from financial ruin. He was a very successful venture capitalist. He knows how markets work and he knows what government policies should be in place to encourage free enterprise. He also understands the constitutional concept of limited government. Obama has absolutely no clue about any of these, and yet this country elected him.

There are times I wish Romney hadn’t implemented the health care system in Massachusetts, if for no other reason than the perception of it among conservative supporters right now isn’t the best. But there are at least four important distinctions between it and Obamacare:

1.Romney’s health care law was designed for Massachusetts, not the country as a whole. Romney has said repeatedly that he will not under any circumstances impose a one-size-fits-all system, but rather let states come up with their own legislation.

2. Romney enacted the health care system only AFTER he had balanced the Massachusetts state budget, and there was no tax increase. Anyone see a contrast with Obamacare here? It was also not a government takeover. The only people who get their health care from the government are those whose incomes are too low to afford private insurance.

3. Both parties in Massachusetts were consulted. Romney didn’t ram it down the throats of the people of the state using a corrupt process like the Democrats in the Senate and House did on the national level. He vetoed a number of provisions the Democrats inserted, but he was overruled by the overwhelming Democratic majority in the state legislature. It’s important to remember that.

4. Romney’s health care law is constitutional as far as the state is concerned. There are serious doubts about the constitutionality of Obamacare.

Romney is a conservative and he would govern like one. I have no doubt he has great reverence for the Constitution and believes fervently in American exceptionalism. It would be well for all of us to keep this in mind. He has a great marriage, a great family, and believes in God. He would make a really good president, of that I am sure.

Eichendorff on January 29, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Eichendorff on January 29, 2011 at 1:41 PM

He needs to get over his habit of remarking on current events after everyone in the world has weighed in. True or not it makes him appear to be a wind tester.

Cindy Munford on January 29, 2011 at 1:53 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 29, 2011 at 2:10 AM
Good to see you my friend..:)

Dire Straits on January 29, 2011 at 2:51 AM

Sorrr Sorry for the typo!

Dire Straits on January 29, 2011 at 2:55 AM

..:)

Dire Straits on January 29, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Someone, anyone, please name a department of the government that any one of these candidates will cut. We need a little ‘r’ republican and not a Republican this time. I think Senator Demint can be the visionary. I know it’s early and there will be many to enter, but we have to pick the correct person this time.

livermush on January 29, 2011 at 9:02 PM

technopeasant on January 28, 2011 at 10:53 PM
Funny how we are so concerned about religion, that we would never put a Mormon in the office even though you could never find more patriotic people, but it’s Ok, to put in a pseudo muslim who spent 20 years listening to anti American rants from rev wright. Is there something wrong with this picture?
I also don’t agree with your vast interpretation of what Mitt said. God help us if we refuse good people because they are Mormon we will have what we deserve. What are you afraid of?

Bambi on January 30, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Comment pages: 1 2