Romney: I won’t back down on AGW

posted at 10:49 am on June 9, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Mitt Romney may have enraged the GOP base with his answers on anthropogenic global warming, but as Politico reports, he won’t back down from them in the face of withering criticism from conservatives.  Instead, he appears to be offering a compromise.  He’ll continue to declare his belief in AGW, but promises not to do anything about it:

Mitt Romney won’t be doing any apology tours on climate change.

The early GOP presidential front-runner has broken with his party’s conservative ranks to declare global warming a real threat to the planet that merits some sort of action to curb heat-trapping emissions.

But the former Massachusetts governor is also quick to trash cap and trade, carbon taxes and other controversial policies that have been kicked around over the last decade in Washington.

In a sense, Romney’s initial global warming stance sounds a lot like that of  former President George W. Bush, who during his two terms reluctantly accepted climate science while fighting Democrats and environmentalists over what to do about it.

Er … okay.  If one accepts the premise of AGW, doesn’t that more or less make it incumbent to craft policies that address it?  After all, the theory states that AGW is cumulative, which means that the longer it goes, the problem increases in at least an arithmetic projection, if not an exponential one.  It’s a bit like saying that the federal budget deficit is a real problem, but continuing to propose budgets with trillion-dollar annual deficits.

You know … like Barack Obama did this year.  Twice.

Of course, one hint that AGW isn’t a threat is that its predictions of arithmetic and exponential catastrophes have utterly failed to materialize.  We don’t have 50 million climate-change refugees, as the UN predicted for this year.  Sea levels haven’t swallowed up whole populations.  The modeling from AGW advocates have repeatedly and routinely failed at predictions, which for normal science would mean an end to the theories they claim to prove.

In fact, former AGW advocate and scientist David Evans drove the point home last month in his debunking of AGW:

This is the core idea of every official climate model: For each bit of warming due to carbon dioxide, they claim it ends up causing three bits of warming due to the extra moist air. The climate models amplify the carbon dioxide warming by a factor of three — so two-thirds of their projected warming is due to extra moist air (and other factors); only one-third is due to extra carbon dioxide.

That’s the core of the issue. All the disagreements and misunderstandings spring from this. The alarmist case is based on this guess about moisture in the atmosphere, and there is simply no evidence for the amplification that is at the core of their alarmism.

What did they find when they tried to prove this theory?

Weather balloons had been measuring the atmosphere since the 1960s, many thousands of them every year. The climate models all predict that as the planet warms, a hot spot of moist air will develop over the tropics about 10 kilometres up, as the layer of moist air expands upwards into the cool dry air above. During the warming of the late 1970s, ’80s and ’90s, the weather balloons found no hot spot. None at all. Not even a small one. This evidence proves that the climate models are fundamentally flawed, that they greatly overestimate the temperature increases due to carbon dioxide.

This evidence first became clear around the mid-1990s.

Physicist William Happer writes about the AGW “science” in First Things this month:

The earth’s climate has always been changing. Our present global warming is not at all unusual by the standards of geological history, and it is probably benefiting the biosphere. Indeed, there is very little correlation between the estimates of CO2 and of the earth’s temperature over the past 550 million years (the “Phanerozoic” period). The message is clear that several factors must influence the earth’s temperature, and that while CO2 is one of these factors, it is seldom the dominant one. The other factors are not well understood. Plausible candidates are spontaneous variations of the complicated fluid flow patterns in the oceans and atmosphere of the earth—perhaps influenced by continental drift, volcanoes, variations of the earth’s orbital parameters (ellipticity, spin-axis orientation, etc.), asteroid and comet impacts, variations in the sun’s output (not only the visible radiation but the amount of ultraviolet light, and the solar wind with its magnetic field), variations in cosmic rays leading to variations in cloud cover, and other causes.

The existence of the little ice age and the medieval warm period were an embarrassment to the global-warming establishment, because they showed that the current warming is almost indistinguishable from previous warmings and coolings that had nothing to do with burning fossil fuel. The organization charged with producing scientific support for the climate change crusade, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), finally found a solution. They rewrote the climate history of the past 1000 years with the celebrated “hockey stick” temperature record.

The first IPCC report, issued in 1990, showed both the medieval warm period and the little ice age very clearly. In the IPCC’s 2001 report was a graph that purported to show the earth’s mean temperature since the year 1000. A yet more extreme version of the hockey stick graph made the cover of the Fiftieth Anniversary Report of the United Nation’s World Meteorological Organization. To the surprise of everyone who knew about the strong evidence for the little ice age and the medieval climate optimum, the graph showed a nearly constant temperature from the year 1000 until about 150 years ago, when the temperature began to rise abruptly like the blade of a hockey stick. The inference was that this was due to the anthropogenic “pollutant” CO2.

This damnatia memoriae of inconvenient facts was simply expunged from the 2001 IPCC report, much as Trotsky and Yezhov were removed from Stalin’s photographs by dark-room specialists in the later years of the dictator’s reign. There was no explanation of why both the medieval warm period and the little ice age, very clearly shown in the 1990 report, had simply disappeared eleven years later. …

The frightening warnings that alarmists offer about the effects of doubling CO2 are based on computer models that assume that the direct warming effect of CO2 is multiplied by a large “feedback factor” from CO2-induced changes in water vapor and clouds, which supposedly contribute much more to the greenhouse warming of the earth than CO2. But there is observational evidence that the feedback factor is small and may even be negative. The models are not in good agreement with observations—even if they appear to fit the temperature rise over the last 150 years very well.

Indeed, the computer programs that produce climate change models have been “tuned” to get the desired answer. The values of various parameters like clouds and the concentrations of anthropogenic aerosols are adjusted to get the best fit to observations. And—perhaps partly because of that—they have been unsuccessful in predicting future climate, even over periods as short as fifteen years. In fact, the real values of most parameters, and the physics of how they affect the earth’s climate, are in most cases only roughly known, too roughly to supply accurate enough data for computer predictions. In my judgment, and in that of many other scientists familiar with the issues, the main problem with models has been their treatment of clouds, changes of which probably have a much bigger effect on the temperature of the earth than changing levels of CO2.

Scientifically, Romney is on weak ground.  Politically, it’s even worse.  He took a beating for his reversal on abortion in the 2007-8 campaign cycle, acquiring the sobriquet of “flip-flopper.”  As a result, Romney simply can’t reverse himself on RomneyCare in Massachusetts, nor will he be able to reverse himself on AGW.  He’s stuck with both positions, and the best he can do on either is to promise to end up doing nothing as President — which isn’t a credible stance, either with the base or with the moderates he seeks to attract.

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 3 4

Instead, he appears to be offering a compromise. He’ll continue to declare his belief in AGW, but promises not to do anything about it….

Romney 2012: Comprisable Leadership

Sir Napsalot on June 9, 2011 at 11:32 AM

One more time – if Romney is the GOP nominee I will stay home in 2012. He’s the mainstream media’s choice for GOP nominee – for good reason.

Over50 on June 9, 2011 at 11:32 AM

tflst5 on June 9, 2011 at 11:27 AM

Your concern is noted, but the Primaries haven’t even started yet. Everyone that’s going to get in to the race, haven’t even declared yet.

Dr Evil on June 9, 2011 at 11:32 AM

I guess we know whom David Frum and MeggyMac will be backing in the primaries.

MeatHeadinCA on June 9, 2011 at 11:32 AM

What this site is doing is not honest journalism.

Falz on June 9, 2011 at 11:08 AM

Putting aside that accusation, you seem to fail your own standard. At the end of Palin’s excellent response, she is asked a yes or no “do you support capping carbon emissions” and she replies “yes”.

No mention of the specific proposal Cap and Trade, or cap and tax as you would have it. I have no knowledge of her positions, past or present, on Cap and Trade, or the specifics of her support for capping carbon emissions.

Jaibones on June 9, 2011 at 11:32 AM

Nope, he’s the only one that is consistent.

Falz on June 9, 2011 at 11:14 AM

General Custer was consistent too.

portlandon on June 9, 2011 at 11:18 AM

And Obama.

fossten on June 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

If Republicans go for another McCain type of moron again, then I will help them elect Obama who is actually their first choice anyway. No AGW’ers or Cap and Traders…they are wasting their time looking for my vote. If they are not tired of Obama, then they can have him for another 4 years. I’ve already cashed out…downsized bigtime, and collect SS, Medicare, and have just qualified for food stamps and Medicaid assistance (apparently they will pay my Medicare monthly payments, plus more stuff).

Karmi on June 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

One more time – if Romney is the GOP nominee I will stay home in 2012. He’s the mainstream media’s choice for GOP nominee – for good reason.

Over50 on June 9, 2011 at 11:32 AM

Don’t stay home. Vote 3rd party or write in if you won’t vote for Romney. If enough conservatives did this, the GOP MIGHT get the message.

MeatHeadinCA on June 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

The GOP is dead. Long Live the Tea Party.

james23 on June 9, 2011 at 11:34 AM

Bachmann and Romney commit hari-kari in the same week.

faraway on June 9, 2011 at 11:34 AM

Thanks for the clarity, Mitt. DLTDHYOTWO

G. Charles on June 9, 2011 at 11:35 AM

Bachmann and Romney commit hari-kari in the same week.

faraway on June 9, 2011 at 11:34 AM

Romney was already in dangerous waters back with the Gingrich kerfuffle … but he just didn’t get the attention Newt did.

MeatHeadinCA on June 9, 2011 at 11:36 AM

Les Grossman: Speedman Romney is a dying star. A white dwarf headed for a black hole. That’s physics. It’s inevitable.

Palin: Game On.

Palin/Grossman 2012.

Dr Evil on June 9, 2011 at 11:36 AM

One more time – if Romney is the GOP nominee I will stay home in 2012. He’s the mainstream media’s choice for GOP nominee – for good reason.

Over50 on June 9, 2011 at 11:32 AM

And give obambi carte blanche to finish destroying this country. I think not. I held my nose for McCain and will gladly do the same for Romney. He’s not in my top 5 but obambi is not in my top 5,000,000,000.

VegasRick on June 9, 2011 at 11:37 AM

Has anyone to Mitt that ‘global warming’ is real, but AGW is a myth of BIBICAL proportions?

If he believes that AGW is real, then he has a very inflated view of man’s ability to affect/change the atmospheric environment and he is the wrong guy for the job. Do we want the government to be fixing the planet’s atmosphere like it has fixed all the other problems it has gotten involved in?

B-b-b-but he promises not to do anything to fix it!

First of all let’s get the true facts out on the table.
1) ALL politicians lie!
2) Refer to #1

belad on June 9, 2011 at 11:37 AM

Has anyone to Mitt that ‘global warming’ is real, but AGW is a myth of BIBICAL proportions?

Should be:

Has anyone told Mitt that ‘global warming’ is real, but AGW is a myth of BIBICAL proportions?

Sorry, fat fingers!!!

belad on June 9, 2011 at 11:38 AM

c’mon rick perry, get in the race!

chasdal on June 9, 2011 at 11:41 AM

One more time – if Romney is the GOP nominee I will stay home in 2012. He’s the mainstream media’s choice for GOP nominee – for good reason.

Over50 on June 9, 2011 at 11:32 AM

Don’t stay home. Vote 3rd party or write in if you won’t vote for Romney. If enough conservatives did this, the GOP MIGHT get the message.

MeatHeadinCA on June 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Still don’t beleive Romney’s going to get the nod. Remember 2008?

This dope is a walking contradiction…he’s going to get killed in the primary debates.

Stand up in front of the electorate and say “I beleive in AGW but choose to ignore it. Which friggin’ side are you going to please with that little tidbit?

Stand up in front of Republicans and say I invented ObamaCare..It was perfect for my state…even though it’s failing miserably and causing insufferable wait times and ballooning costs…and I’m still for it at the state level.
Who does this make happy?

And Ethanol subsidies?…unless you live in Iowa…..?

This guy is a walking gaffe and quite frankly a joke. Use him as comedic releif.

Tim_CA on June 9, 2011 at 11:41 AM

It’s a bit like saying that the federal budget deficit is a real problem, but continuing to propose budgets with trillion-dollar annual deficits.

You know … like Barack Obama did this year. Twice.

Ed, your snark levels are approaching those of AP! How long before it rubs off on Tina? Anyway…I approve.

Goldenavatar on June 9, 2011 at 11:43 AM

This guy is a walking gaffe and quite frankly a joke. Use him as comedic releif.

Tim_CA on June 9, 2011 at 11:41 AM

I don’t think he’ll pull it off, but many in this country are still blind.

MeatHeadinCA on June 9, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Dr Evil on June 9, 2011 at 11:36 AM

Careful…

“Black Holes” are Racist

There are no rules in the upcoming campaign. Watch where you tread.

Roy Rogers on June 9, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Les Grossman commenting on Romney’s dying political career.

Les Grossman: And we’ll weep for him… in the press, set up a scholarship in his name, eventually – and I’m talkin’ way, way down the road – we file an insurance claim. SNARK.

Dr Evil on June 9, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Unprincipled flip flopping panderer, IOW your typical “mainstream electable” candidate. His opponents (Palin…cough cough) will surely club him mercilessly with these types of stances, awesome!

NY Conservative on June 9, 2011 at 11:44 AM

If one accepts the premise of AGW, doesn’t that more or less make it incumbent to craft policies that address it?

That assumes the federal government has the right to address it, and that premise I vehemently disagree with.

Vashta.Nerada on June 9, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Romney’s Gingrich moment. KMAGYOYO.

TXUS on June 9, 2011 at 11:04 AM

Hayes Carll’s KMAG YOYO

Youtube comment: Just back from six months in Herat, Afghanistan, my second tour. Thanks brother. Nobody else gives a shit.

flyfisher on June 9, 2011 at 11:46 AM

He’s stuck with both positions, and the best he can do on either is to promise to end up doing nothing as President — which isn’t a credible stance, either with the base or with the moderates he seeks to attract.

He hopes that holding both positions at the same time will give him a net increase of support. He figures doing something is extreme and doing nothing is extreme. That leaves support in the middle that loves it and he knows the base will support him over Obama.

It may be smart, but I don’t like it. I think there are better ways to attract the indies.

csdeven on June 9, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Bubye .. Nice knowin’ ya, Mitt.

pambi on June 9, 2011 at 11:50 AM

If one accepts the premise of AGW, doesn’t that more or less make it incumbent to craft policies that address it?

No! It’s this sort of leap that has conservatives losing the battle in which government is the solution to all problems–even perceived.

theperfecteconomist on June 9, 2011 at 11:52 AM

He’ll continue to declare his belief in AGW, but promises not to do anything about it:

Bwahahahaha, just like McCain promising not to actually promote his comprehensive immigration reform package any more if we just vote for him. Hell, we voted for him only to have him break his promise because he is a sore loser.

What a ninny Mitt is, promising to “do nothing” for a vote.

Mark Levin shredded Mitt last night as the NOT conservative GOP primary candidate for potus.

Three strikes against Mitt:

1. Mandated universal “health care” State & Federal;
2. Big Spending panderer, pro-Ethanol tax subsidies, not cutting either Federal spending or the budget;
3. Man made global warming hoax proponent, not only a scientific fraud, but the economic abuse of globalist financiers to mandate taxes and limit trade and destroy Liberty.

maverick muse on June 9, 2011 at 11:52 AM

When Krakatoa erupted on August 26, 1883 it released vast quantities of CO2, and global temperatures declined.//

Slowburn on June 9, 2011 at 11:52 AM

Mitt is full-on Rockefeller. For him it has always been about power, not principle.

flyfisher on June 9, 2011 at 11:52 AM

flyfisher on June 9, 2011 at 11:46 AM

My husband is getting ready to go back over, he told me Herat used to be calm, but when we stirred up the ants in the south – Kandahar, they just moved to the Herat. That’s what happens you turn on the lights, and the cockroaches scatter.

Dr Evil on June 9, 2011 at 11:52 AM

“Romney: I won’t back down on AGW”

… and I won’t vote for you, how’s that?

Seven Percent Solution on June 9, 2011 at 11:53 AM

One more time – if Romney is the GOP nominee I will stay home in 2012. He’s the mainstream media’s choice for GOP nominee – for good reason.

Over50 on June 9, 2011 at 11:32 AM

One more stealth Obama voter.

Just come out and endorse Barry.

If you don’t pry him out of power, you guarantee, with him, all that you are complaining about here.

profitsbeard on June 9, 2011 at 11:54 AM

My husband is getting ready to go back over, he told me Herat used to be calm, but when we stirred up the ants in the south – Kandahar, they just moved to the Herat. That’s what happens you turn on the lights, and the cockroaches scatter.

Dr Evil on June 9, 2011 at 11:52 AM

I can’t really imagine what either of you face. What’s the endgame?

flyfisher on June 9, 2011 at 11:55 AM

Always sad watching someone play the party game “Twister” by himself. Time to head home Mitt.

in_awe on June 9, 2011 at 11:56 AM

One more time – if Romney is the GOP nominee I will stay home in 2012. He’s the mainstream media’s choice for GOP nominee – for good reason.

Over50 on June 9, 2011 at 11:32 AM

And one more time – if you stay home – you put a vote into Obama’s pocket.

There is no need to stay home. Get out and vote.

If you aren’t going to vote COP, fine. But get out and exercise your franchise. Vote 3rd Party, write something in – anything.

Our country is more important than your ‘take your ball and go home’ attitude.

catmman on June 9, 2011 at 11:57 AM

There it is again the bias of Hot Air a.k.a. Palin’s Hot Air. You can not attack a candidate for a position that others like Tim Pawlenty and Sarah Palin share:

Sarah Palin Supports Cap and Tax on Carbon Emissions and Drill Baby Drill

What this site is doing is not honest journalism.

Falz on June 9, 2011 at 11:08 AM

Do you believe in AGW and Cap and Tax as the solution?

There it is again the bias of Hot Air a.k.a. Palin’s Hot Air. You can not attack a candidate for a position that others like Tim Pawlenty and Sarah Palin share:

Sarah Palin Supports Cap and Tax on Carbon Emissions and Drill Baby Drill

What this site is doing is not honest journalism.

Falz on June 9, 2011 at 11:08 AM

Do you believe in AGW and that Cap and Tax as the solution?

bluemarlin on June 9, 2011 at 11:57 AM

If only these RINO’s would stand up to the democrats like they stand up to the heart of the GOP. *sigh*

SouthernGent on June 9, 2011 at 11:58 AM

I’m sorry to all of you Romney supporters out there, but Romney is just another RINO, his positions just prove that. As far as I can tell, his positions are not rooted in conservatism.

Flip flopping on abortion is one thing, I think a lot of people may struggle with that at some time (most sooner than Romney did). But, Romneycare shows a lack of conviction on Romney’s part that is a bridge too far for me to ever lend him my vote. Not because I’m an ideological “purist”, but because having a ‘not-as-bad-as-Obama’ candidate is worthless to this country and will fail not only to pull us out of this mess, but is likely to make things worse (resulting in conservatives getting the blame historically for our financial crisis) and will never lead the party out of the centralized, big-government, insane spending pathway that RINOs always take.

We need to go down fighting for conservatism, either we believe it’s the best way or we are all just wasting our breath by supporting it. If we believe it works, then put up a candidate that is a strong conservative and STOP being fearful of what the voters will or will not except! I’d rather go down fast with a Reagan than draw this out for another 12 years with a McCain…

Geministorm on June 9, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Oops , sorry, messed that last one up.

bluemarlin on June 9, 2011 at 11:59 AM

So by that rationale, he could think Obamacare is a terrible piece of legislation….but do nothing about it if elected President.

Doughboy on June 9, 2011 at 10:54 AM

..actually, in his interview with Hannity, he said that he would issue Obamacare waivers for all 52 (57?) states upon becoming president and then work form there to repeal it.

The War Planner on June 9, 2011 at 12:00 PM

Mitt Romney, just another Ivy Beleaguering politician running Americans into the ground through authoritarianism.

Nice hair, good manners and a smile do not make a great statesman. Executive experience does not make a great POTUS. Mitt’s executive experience in government proved a poor performance. And Mitt’s professional executive experience was not in “business” but in financing — he’s just another Geithner, Paulson wannabe from the Oval Office. I used to think he’d make a decent Sec./Treasury, but since all the national bail-outs, that would be horrible to allow him to influence for MORE.

Mitt is an elitist authoritarian who knows better than you what is good and proper (politically correct).

maverick muse on June 9, 2011 at 12:00 PM

Every single one of these candidates are going to be asked questions designed around the idea that the Left’s dogma is taken as a given.

If a candidate isn’t prepared to answer those questions in a way that disputes the left’s dogma and establishes an alternative based on sound capitalist principles, then they don’t need to be running in the Republican primary. That’s what Democratic primaries are for.

grahsco on June 9, 2011 at 12:00 PM

Bye bye nomination.

— Limbaugh

fossten on June 9, 2011 at 10:54 AM

-
My thoughts too. I thought Mitt was smarter than this. Masscare and now this. It’s over for Mitt before he even starts.

diogenes on June 9, 2011 at 12:03 PM

I can’t really imagine what either of you face. What’s the endgame?

flyfisher on June 9, 2011 at 11:55 AM

They kill the dead enders and repatriate the rest. But there is noise in the U.S. Legislature to move up our time table for withdrawal. Who knows maybe that large cache of info found at Bin Laden’s compound can speed up our departure. We aren’t going to change those people.

My husband is a contractor, they don’t take any chances with their security.

Dr Evil on June 9, 2011 at 12:03 PM

When Krakatoa erupted on August 26, 1883 it released vast quantities of CO2, and global temperatures declined.//

Slowburn on June 9, 2011 at 11:52 AM

The particulate matter and atmospheric aerosols are what dropped global temps, blocking sunlight. Same with Pinatubo in ’91.

catmman on June 9, 2011 at 12:03 PM

OT: Herman Cain described homosexuality as “a sin” and “a choice.”

faraway on June 9, 2011 at 12:02 PM

So, he’s not pandering to the homosexual lobby?

Good for him.

catmman on June 9, 2011 at 12:04 PM

Physicist William Happer writes about the AGW “science” in First Things this month:

So superbly well-written. Dear me.

blatantblue on June 9, 2011 at 12:05 PM

No! It’s this sort of leap that has conservatives losing the battle in which government is the solution to all problems–even perceived.

theperfecteconomist on June 9, 2011 at 11:52 AM

You do realize that as an integral part of the federal government, the PotUS will be seeing any bill leaving the Congress and be able to sign it into law? If Romney doesn’t have the conviction to stand up to the AGW fearmongers, then he WILL sign a cap-n-tax bill if it comes before him…because he’s NOT a principled conservative.

Romney = a failure for our country
Romney = a poor example of what conservatism is

Win or lose, I’m voting for a conservative and Romney doesn’t meet that simple criteria. Being slightly right of center doesn’t make a conservative.

It continues to amaze me that Democrats/Liberals have no problem putting up the most liberal candidate to ever get the Dem nod and yet conservatives are afraid that a center-right country wouldn’t vote for a strong conservative (I guess because Reagan was such a poor example). Gee, let me think, is it more realistic to believe that a center-right country will make the reach and vote for an extreme leftist or that they’ll make the short trip over to the far right?!?

Geministorm on June 9, 2011 at 12:09 PM

Mttt Romney. Working his way down the B list.

Could he be an more gutless? Has this man ever believed in anything in his life?

bofh on June 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Rasmussen Reports Tuesday, April 05, 2011

Global Warming is Primarily Caused By.

Human Activity 36% – This is NO majority of Americans, identifying Independent or otherwise.

Planetary Trends 47%

Other 7%

I wonder what issue American’s will, be paying attention to in November 2012, when they go to vote ? “It’s the economy stupid”

Dr Evil on June 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

I’d rather go down fast with a Reagan than draw this out for another 12 years with a McCain…

Geministorm on June 9, 2011 at 11:58 AM

And we haven’t another 12 years to dally.

This 2012 election is the make or break of America’s survival. We are already economically ruined. The spending cuts must happen this time; not in another 4, 8, 10 or 12 years. And that doesn’t even address the constitutional business of confronting Marxist Federal authoritarianism running our government today from BOTH party leadership “sharing common values” (Pelosi).

Whoever wins the GOP ticket will beat Obama. So choose the candidate you WANT to be President, to set right America’s Constitutional Governance through a strictly cut budget for LIMITED GOVERNMENT POWER, rather than the “winnable” RINO loser.

maverick muse on June 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Just think of Mittens like he is McCain…

… Promise to secure the border, but do nothing about it.

Oh, wait…!

Seven Percent Solution on June 9, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Logic tells me that if AGW is a problem then he must do something to solve it.
If he says he will do nothing about AGW, then it can not be a problem.

This tells me he is a do nothing canidate who wants the White House as a place to get free Wague beef.

Mitt is dead to me.

Remember the fight will be in the primary to determine the next leader of the USA.

mechkiller_k on June 9, 2011 at 12:12 PM

I know, let’s get a Romney/McCain ticket just like the conservative elite in DC want, and then we can lose by a huge margin as everyone refuses to hold their nose again and just never show up. Let the Dems win because we don’t even present a clear difference between the two parties. RINOs love to lose as they play Dem-lite…well, if staying means a vote for Obama, then give my vote to Obama because YOU refuse to put up a strong conservative candidate to battle this stupid liberal bullshit. Don’t blame the voter, blame the GOP and weak Republicans for putting up Rockafeller…er, I mean Romney because it’s “his turn”….God, it makes me sick.

Geministorm on June 9, 2011 at 12:17 PM

It’s obvious that Romney is the “establishment” choice who is taking carefully contrived positions on things like AGW hoping to placate everybody. Not what I want to see as president.

EasyEight on June 9, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Iowa and NH needs to close primary voting to declared party only. Otherwise, we get Dem-lite every time.

We need a Fred Thompson 2.0, maybe Herman Cain is that candidate?

New idea: Form the Centrist party, and Mitt, McCain, Snow, et al can join that. Then we’d see that America doesn’t want spineless ditherers.

Geministorm on June 9, 2011 at 12:21 PM

This tells me he is a do nothing canidate who wants the White House as a place to get free Wague beef

mechkiller_k on June 9, 2011 at 12:12 PM

.
That’s the nice way to say it! If somebody got a blue sticky and adhered gold letters on it reading “President” and pasted the sticky on Romney’s forehead, then he could check off the box on his list, and get out of our path.
.
As it is, he is going to be sand in the gears for a year before he falls on hs sword. Double Down, Dummy!

ExpressoBold on June 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

To all of you saying “staying home is a vote for Obama” – you don’t understand: (1) Given his positions, Romney is not going to be very different than Obama – AGW silliness, big government, more spending, more interference in private markets; (2) if Romney loses to Obama, that’s one more RINO down and maybe in 2016 we’ll get a small government, fiscal conservative nominee instead of Romney, Democrat-lite, running for a second term.

Sorry, the GOP left me, I did not leave the GOP’s former fiscal and individual freedom principles.

Over50 on June 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

You know who this hurts…

Valiant on June 9, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Okay, so lets be clear… Romney has 20+% of the GOP polling numbers… which meand 80% of GOP want someone other than Romney, so how does he beat Obama with only 20+% GOP voter support?

Of all the people I know who actually vote conservative GOP tickets, Romney is not their choice, and many would simply not vote for him.

This means Romney has the same problem as McCain did last cycle.

What Romney is counting on, which is what McCain was counting on, is that GOP voters will be so against Obama and Democrats that they’d vote for anyone the GOP runs, just because.

Note to Romney. Don’t bet the farm on this gamble.

Lawrence on June 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

California State Senator Tom McClintock:
Why not former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney? “I want somebody with a consistent record,” McClintock said. “I want someone who didn’t have to go through a political epiphany the day before he announced his candidacy.”

The Mitt Romney Report http://bit.ly/g5ZfiO

Willard “Mitt” Romney http://bit.ly/bad8PI

True Romney http://www.trueromney.com

Winghunter on June 9, 2011 at 12:27 PM

What the GOP is counting on for 2012, which is what the GOP was counting on in 2008, that GOP voters will be so against Obama and Democrats that they’d vote for anyone the GOP runs, just because.

Note to the GOP. Don’t bet the farm on this gamble.

Lawrence on June 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

FIFY

Geministorm on June 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

Sorry, the GOP left me, I did not leave the GOP’s former fiscal and individual freedom principles.

Over50 on June 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

As someone over 50, I understand how you feel. However, America will be horribly, generationally damaged if we have to endure 4 more years of Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).

Let’s throw the bum out now.

kingsjester on June 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

What the GOP is counting on for 2012, which is what the GOP was counting on in 2008, that GOP voters will be so against Obama and Democrats that they’d vote for anyone the GOP runs, just because.

Note to the GOP. Don’t bet the farm on this gamble.

Lawrence on June 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

FIFY

Geministorm on June 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

Signed,

The 2010 elections

fossten on June 9, 2011 at 12:32 PM

I think I need to run for President. This isn’t so hard, Mitt!

Reporter: What’s your position on AGW?

Candidate: Once I get unemployment down to 5%, I’ll let you know. My focus is on jobs. Americans are hurting. I want to help them first.

hawksruleva on June 9, 2011 at 12:33 PM

“Romney: I won’t back down on AGW” until I discover it’s hurting me in the polls.

bw222 on June 9, 2011 at 12:34 PM

Mittens is doubling down on stupid. First, the ridiculous doubling down on Romneycare, and now doubling down on this false science. DUMB DUMB DUMB

Limbaugh hung up on a caller yesterday trying to start his debate with the automatic premis that global warming exists. Rush wouldn’t even let him finish going from there. He hung up on him and pointed out where the false science started. Go check his website. It was a good segment.

Based on this, in the UNLIKELY event Romney makes it through the primary, I guarantee you this will put Trump in the race. He warned the GOP to not nominate a “stiff”.

Romney is trying to run a general election in the early primary season. What an idiot. He is loathed by the base and he is doing NOTHING to try to get the base to even consider him.

The more this goes on, the more this primary season is Sarah’s to lose.

karenhasfreedom on June 9, 2011 at 12:36 PM

Don’t worry Mitt. Newt will be there to hold the door on your way out.

Stephen Macklin on June 9, 2011 at 12:38 PM

Here are may choices: Palin, Perry, Cain, Pawlenty, 12 yet unannounced dark horses, Bachmann (who was #2 in her pre-Rollins days), Gingrich, Romney, Obama, Huntsman.

bw222 on June 9, 2011 at 12:38 PM

With these positions, Obama would wipe the floor with Mitt. Obamacare same as Romneycare – check. AGW – Obama I’m a believer; Mitt, me too! Ethanol subsidies – Obama says it’s green and needed. Mitt agrees. Obama says why bother voting for Mitt when you’ve got me! Ugh ! ! !

Mitt keeps packing his knapsack with these please-every-voter goodies, and it’s making his primary run a steeper uphill climb. Don’t think he’ll make the grade unless the media begin to dump on Obama and see Mitt as someone who can keep the ‘progressive’ steamroller running despite his being a Pubbie. The media will be pushing Mitt down our throats and then backstab him in the general election.

Bob in VA on June 9, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Let’s throw the bum out now.

kingsjester on June 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

I think he may be on the way out but if the Republicans think anyone but Obama can win, they are deluding themselves. 47% of people in this country don’t pay taxes, they like the idea of getting stuff, and not paying for any of it. The Republicans need to run someone who can get people excited to vote – that would be a conservative candidate. The idea that a conservative candidate can’t peal off Democrat votes is disproved by Reagan and the Reagan Democrats. It’s just going to take someone appealing with some cahonees. Does that even come close to describing Mitt Romney?

I posted above that 47% of Americans polled, believe that Climate Change is caused by Planetary Trends. Every time middle class people gas up at the pump, that number will go up IMO. They can’t afford “the elitist belief system” Does Mitt get this or his handlers? Apparently not he is out of touch with Middle America.

Dr Evil on June 9, 2011 at 12:40 PM

We need a Fred Thompson 2.0, maybe Herman Cain is that candidate?

Being a Fredhead, I wish Teh Fred wanted to campaign for ’12.

Out of the crew, I’m ready to support Herman Cain’s campaign.

And I’ll warn non-Texans looking at Perry to note well that he is very much AGAINST Tea Party CONSTITUTIONAL INTERESTS. Perry has an executive anti-constitutional record as TX Governor that he’ll bring into the White House if afforded the opportunity by idiots who vote for “winnable” tripe. He will NOT protect our borders from the White House any better than his ineffectual “sternly written” letter to Obama protects Texas from the onslaught of incoming criminal illegal aliens, importing violence, sex slavery, and drug wars not to mention the tax payer burden of housing, feeding and educating illegal residents (and prison inmates).

Perry mangled matters outside of Eldorado, and has never lifted a finger to stop the encroaching authoritarians, being one himself.

maverick muse on June 9, 2011 at 12:41 PM

OT: Mitt reminds me of Gary Hart.

Geministorm on June 9, 2011 at 12:43 PM

I do not support Romney. I will never support Romney, even if he is the nominee for the Republican party. I will not even support a third party ticket as a protest vote if Romney is the nominee for president. I will cast my ballot for Obama. So, I 100% stand behind Romney’s plan to stand firm on his mole hill of sand called AGW perched inches away from an unsteady cliff overlooking jagged rocks below. Why? Because it will make it almost impossible for him and his hundreds of millions of dollars to actually win the nomination for the Republican party, thus saving me the moral requirement to vote Obama in 2012 as a protest vote against the Republican progressive establishment party nominee.

This does not preclude some other worthless progressive liberal socialistic worm from winning the nomination like happened long ago in 2008. That would still force my hand to vote Obama, but hey, be happy of the small victories. Romney a few tens of millions or hundreds of millions poorer cannot be a bad thing.

astonerii on June 9, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Between this and RomneyCare!, he’s DOA.

Everyone I talk to can’t stand His Greasiness.

Give me Cain, Palin, or my next door neighbor.

joshlbetts on June 9, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Being a Fredhead, I wish Teh Fred wanted to campaign for ’12.

OT: Had a “Fred” sticker on my car for over a year, it’s the only sticker I’ve ever put on one of my cars. I don’t think that there is a single person that rode with me (besides the wife and kids) who knew who “Fred” was initially. After McCain got the nod, my kids eventually started telling their friends that “Fred” was the kid that makes those squealing-voiced you-tube videos and that I was a big fan…heh.

Geministorm on June 9, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Between the Romneycare, the fake science & the general grow government positions he takes, it shows one thing: Mitt is a Progressive, it doesn’t matter if there is a D or an R after his name – he is a Progressive.

No more Progressives.

batterup on June 9, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Anyone listening to Rush? What book was he talking about? I missed the author and title. He said this book is the best weapon for the GOP in 2012 because it lays out exactly why the banks melted down because of the CRA, Frank, Dodd, Acorn, etc.

karenhasfreedom on June 9, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Every single one of these candidates are going to be asked questions designed around the idea that the Left’s dogma is taken as a given.

If a candidate isn’t prepared to answer those questions in a way that disputes the left’s dogma and establishes an alternative based on sound capitalist principles, then they don’t need to be running in the Republican primary. That’s what Democratic primaries are for.

grahsco on June 9, 2011 at 12:00 PM

Worth repeating and highlighting.

Best comment I’ve read in a long time.

GrannyDee on June 9, 2011 at 12:52 PM

astonerii on June 9, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Hmmm, maybe you’re right. With Romney as the candidate, I’ll vote for Obama too. I’d rather our country go down fast and furious with him (Dems) at the helm. The sooner this whole fiasco goes down, the sooner we can start rebuilding and discredit liberalism as the cancerous society destroyer that it is…

Geministorm on June 9, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Why must we continue to judge this man on the basis of his beliefs?

/sarc…

TexasDan on June 9, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Anyone listening to Rush? What book was he talking about? I missed the author and title. He said this book is the best weapon for the GOP in 2012 because it lays out exactly why the banks melted down because of the CRA, Frank, Dodd, Acorn, etc.

karenhasfreedom on June 9, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Reckless Endangerment

fossten on June 9, 2011 at 12:56 PM

astonerii on June 9, 2011 at 12:47 PM

I think I understand you, but honestly, there’s not a power on Earth that could make me pull the lever for Duh Won, no matter how PO’d I am at the Republicans. I’d just as likely stay home or vote for every position except President.

SKYFOX on June 9, 2011 at 1:05 PM

Scientifically, Romney is on weak ground.

Uh, no. He basically is saying exactly what Bjorn Lomborg has been saying.

Politically, it’s even worse.

No doubt. Could be quite bad politically, yeah.

BocaJuniors on June 9, 2011 at 1:08 PM

Over50 on June 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Stay home.

Frankly, that you would help doom the country to another four years of Obama – given all the damage he’s done – tells us plenty about the type of person you are.

catmman on June 9, 2011 at 1:09 PM

If Romney believes in a religion based on one man’s finding some metal plates placed by an “angel” called Moroni with no witnesses around and also believes in the cuckoo claims regarding manmade global warming, I’m not sure I’d be inclined to trust his judgement in other areas.

Yes, there is climate change and there has been since the earth was created. It’s called Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter. Man’s puny efforts in trying to change the climate is akin to putting a forest fire out with a toy firetruck.

If these so called climate scientists are so intelligent, then I’d like to see them not only predict, but also harness, a tornado or hurricane. Shoot, I’d be happy if they could give an accurate prediction 3 or 4 days in advance.

iamsaved on June 9, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Over50 on June 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Who’s your preferred candidate?

catmman on June 9, 2011 at 1:10 PM

Being a Fredhead, I wish Teh Fred wanted to campaign for ’12.

maverick muse on June 9, 2011 at 12:41 PM

V 2.0 better be more decisive!

csdeven on June 9, 2011 at 1:12 PM

He’ll continue to declare his belief in AGW, but promises not to do anything about it

But he doesn’t have to be president to do nothing about it. So why should I vote for him?

He seems to get stupider every day.

PetecminMd on June 9, 2011 at 1:14 PM

So his campaign is to be all things to all people…..there is a word for that….pandering…

unseen on June 9, 2011 at 1:22 PM

If Romney believes in a religion based on one man’s finding some metal plates placed by an “angel” called Moroni with no witnesses around and also believes in the cuckoo claims regarding manmade global warming, I’m not sure I’d be inclined to trust his judgement in other areas.

iamsaved on June 9, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Then no one can support ay candidate who believes in God. Where were the witnesses when God took the rib from Adam? Where were the witnesses who saw Adam and Eve cast out of the Garden of Eden?

Please don’t use religious arguments against any candidate. Disparaging one disparages all. Leave the religion out of it. That is why the founders insisted there be no religious test for public office.

csdeven on June 9, 2011 at 1:22 PM

Has anyone seen csdevin?

MeatHeadinCA on June 9, 2011 at 11:26 AM

Over on the Palin thread watching the Palin supporters turn it into a referendum on Palin skeptics. You know, the same old lame tactic to defend her.

csdeven on June 9, 2011 at 1:24 PM

Please don’t use religious arguments against any candidate. Disparaging one disparages all. Leave the religion out of it. That is why the founders insisted there be no religious test for public office.

csLouis on June 9, 2011 at 1:22 PM

You’re the one who brought up your women’s church group that you attended and made a point to highlight that group’s supposedly unanimous disapproval of Palin.

Did you bring this up during the meeting?

fossten on June 9, 2011 at 1:25 PM

One more stealth Obama voter.

Just come out and endorse Barry.

If you don’t pry him out of power, you guarantee, with him, all that you are complaining about here.

profitsbeard on June 9, 2011 at 11:54 AM

Meh. Maybe a lot of people will vote Libertarian or Constitution. It’s their prerogative.

pseudoforce on June 9, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Over on the Palin thread watching the Palin supporters turn it into a referendum on Palin skeptics. You know, the same old lame tactic to defend her.

csdeven on June 9, 2011 at 1:24 PM

Over there watching you run like a coward in the face of challenges to your false accusation that Sarah is violating FEC laws.

fossten on June 9, 2011 at 1:29 PM

It worked for Obama. Hope and Change and here comes our version of it.

Herb on June 9, 2011 at 1:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4