FreedomWorks chief: If Romney’s the nominee, tea partiers might have to stay home

posted at 4:10 pm on June 10, 2011 by Allahpundit

Don’t look now, but between this and Amy Kremer’s comments on Fox last weekend, we’ve got a bona fide tea-party split over Mitt.

I knew that FreedomWorks was intent on torpedoing him in the primary but I didn’t think they’d take it quite this far quite so soon. Better Obama II than Romney I?

If Mitt Romney wins the Republican nomination for president, Tea Party activists may not show up at all to vote in the general election, one leading group associated with the Tea Party movement is warning.

“I think that’s a potential problem,” said Matt Kibbe, FreedomWorks’ president, during a wide-ranging interview with reporters at The Daily Caller.

He also warned that if Republicans nominate another “John McCain,” activists might even vote third party in 2012.

“I believe in redemption, but at some point, you sort of give up,” he said. “And we’ve given up on Mitt Romney.”

An idle threat? Potentially not:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds that in a three-way congressional contest with a Tea Party candidate on the ballot, the Democrat picks up 40% of the vote. The Republican earns 21% support, while nearly as many (18%) favor the Tea Party candidate. Twenty-one percent (21%), however, remain undecided…

In the new survey, the Tea Party candidate draws 28% support from GOP voters, while 85% of Democrats back their party’s candidate. Just 45% of Republicans support the Republican candidate in the three-way matchup. Among voters not affiliated with either of the major parties, 15% like the Republican, 29% the Democrat and 25% the Tea Party candidate.

When asked about Romney’s rivals, Kibbe told the DC that Cain could be vulnerable for his TARP position and that, while he likes Palin, “she needs to prove that she can study up.” Where does that leave FreedomWorks at the moment, then? With Bachmann? I’m skeptical given their approach to the Castle/O’Donnell primary in Delaware. While other tea-party heroes like Palin and DeMint lined up behind O’D, Kibbe told the Christian Science Monitor at the time, “We stayed out of that race because we are not convinced that Christine O’Donnell can win.” Bachmann’s a longer shot for the nomination than O’Donnell was in her Senate race, so presumably she’s not an option for them. Maybe they’re holding out for Perry to jump in? Or maybe, per their O’Donnell logic, they’re going to invest in Pawlenty as a conservative yet electable candidate.

It’s worth flagging this if for no other reason than as a sneak preview of how wrenching Romney’s nomination could be within the party, especially among activists. The possibility of people staying home in protest is real but it’s already priced into his stock; what hasn’t been fully considered yet is the prospect of rifts opening within the grassroots and between tea party groups as people choose sides between the Kibbe and Kremer approaches. Any group that bolsters Obama’s chances by walking away will be so vilified afterwards that they’ll be essentially committing themselves to a fully third-party identity. Maybe FreedomWorks will think better of that strategy — Kibbe could simply be bluffing to nudge people towards nominating someone else — but “we’ve given up on Mitt Romney” is pretty high-stakes.

Update: Tabitha Hale of FreedomWorks tweets that we shouldn’t jump to any conclusions:

The piece didn’t say it was “purity” or Obama at all. In fact, Kibbe actually said opposite – that he was CONCERNED about that.

We’re willing to rally, right now we’re not sure around who – but this is the time to duke it out.

Okay, but if there’s a chance the group might grudgingly support Romney in the interest of beating Obama, why drop “we’ve given up on Mitt Romney” on him now?

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 5

it doesn’t sound to me like he’ll vote for Romney

It doesn’t sound like this guy wants to vote for anyone.

The Tea Party groups & message was supposed to be this organic, “just plain folks”, wholesome, back to the America’s founding and it isn’t.

The movement has become as phony as a three dollar bill, that’s not being run by concerned citizens but by longtime political hacks with who knows what axe’s to grind.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 8:10 PM

If the Tea Party had a candidate that was better than Romney that candidate would win. I wouldn’t need threatened to vote for a better person.

I don’t care who you vote for.

Lot’s of times, almost always in fact, the one I like best isn’t chosen.

Then I vote for the nominee. Because that is how democracy works. You choose your guy, I choose mine… some one gets more votes than another and that person wins.

And then they govern and there is never a way to compare and see if the other one would have done better than another.

We get the one with the most people who agree with that person.

Not rocket science.

If you don’t like democracy go somewhere else.

I thought McCain should have won in 2000. I still think he would have done a better job than Bush.

I didn’t support him in 2008, until I had to.

When he lost in 2000 then he went off the deep end and started to toy with switching parties and laying traps for Republicans… he couldn’t handle the loss, he was bitter.

You remind me of that.

The Tea Party is trying to make themselves irrelevant.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 8:11 PM

Conservatives won in Red States. (Mike in Utah, Nikki Haley in SC)

Competent conservative candidates won in Purple States. (Ron Johnson in WI, Kelly Ayotte in NH, Marco Rubio in FL).

Incompetent conservative candidates LOST in Purple States (Sharron Angle in Nevada, Ken Buck in CO)

Competent moderate candidates won in Blue States (Scott Brown in MA, Mark Kirk in IL)

Incompetent conservative candidates LOST BIG in Blue States (O’Donnell in DE).

We are a center-right nation. A competent center-right nominee is necessary to win in a general election. States like Nevada, Colorado, and/or New Hampshire will need to be won. There’s only one person to that.

The Tea Party is responsible the Republicans losing Senate seats in Nevada and Delaware by getting Angle and O’Donnell nominated. They are amateurs in politics and are only helping the Dems win in elections.

The Tea Party is only going to get Obama elected for four more years. The are a bigger threat to conservatism than Romney could ever be if they continue to make these threats.

FredrickB on June 10, 2011 at 8:11 PM

where did you get your cold water training? Perhaps we served together?

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 8:00 PM

Not cold water training – that was a mistype. I was trying to type “Cold War Underwater” – meaning submarines. In 2001 – I went to the surface fleet and did operations against the Afghans and Iraqis. What we did was dangerous – interdicting shipping and protecting Iraqi oil platforms. We had a contingent of Force Recon Marines that we inserted into Iraq every single day for operations. I saw some good men die.

What I got a chuckle out of was him telling me I was willing to “sell out my country” to make a point. That’s the most asinine thing anyone could say. First – is voting Democrat “selling out your country” … if you think it is – then I submit to you that maybe I’m not the “purist” on this board.

The fact is – the founders gave me a farkin vote – and I can damn well use it as I see fit. Obama’s not going to tell me who I can vote for – and neither is any Ruling Class phony in the GOP.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:13 PM

I don’t care who you vote for.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 8:11 PM

Great – I’m glad that’s settled.

As far as the Tea Party making itself irrelevant – what do you care?

You’ll see who’s irrelevant soon enough.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:14 PM

I’m focused on getting rid of the real threat which is Obama. I’m not out pontificating on how I’m not going to vote for whoever if I don’t get what I want. The “if you don’t play by my rules, I’m taking my ball and going home” approach doesn’t work on the playground, it’s really not going to work in an election.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 5:59 PM

There are some candidates who will play to the squishy middle because they figure they can take the conservative vote for granted. That’s never more true than when a radical like Obama is the only other choice.

People who do that shouldn’t complain if it turns out that the base is tired of being taken for granted.

Romney is a perfect example. President McCain was another.

Oh, that’s right. It didn’t work out for McCain, did it?

Something to remember.

tom on June 10, 2011 at 8:19 PM

The Tea Party is only going to get Obama elected for four more years. The are a bigger threat to conservatism than Romney could ever be if they continue to make these threats.

FredrickB on June 10, 2011 at 8:11 PM

You’re wrong. The biggest threat to Conservatism is a “faux” Conservative in the White House who lays the blame for the nation’s failure on CONSERVATIVES.

That exact thing happened to us in 2008 when GW resorted to Socialism and TARP to “save” the economy. He didn’t save it – and in spite of the fact that his actions were most decidedly SOCIALIST – Conservative got the blame because he was identified as a Conservative (same as RomneyCare).

Shipmate – I’m a student of history – and I know, that now things are 100 times worse than they were in 2008. And I know -that Romney doesn’t have the balls to save the nation. When he fails – he’ll resort to Socialism to save it – and Conservatism will be blamed again for the fall.

Not going there.

If you don’t want my vote – don’t nominate Romney – pretty simple really. I mean – look – the Lame Stream is fawning all over the guy – they LOVE him. You tell me your “alarms” aren’t going off in your head at that?

Pfft!

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:21 PM

Oh, that’s right. It didn’t work out for McCain, did it?

Something to remember.

tom on June 10, 2011 at 8:19 PM

They don’t remember that. They don’t remember 60 years worth of elections and how the only great President the GOP produced was considered a “purist radical reactionary”.

That’s the only guy we ever put in the office that people were ENTHUSIASTIC about – and he was the greatest President of our lifetime. The rest of the time – we nominate elitist class candidates that perform in mediocre fashion in the white house – or worse.

That’s IF they even win. And it’s damned hard for them to win – because they stand for nothing and Americans – even indies – like to vote for people who STAND FOR SOMETHING.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:25 PM

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:05 PM

Well good for you and your convictions. I disagree and believe your scenario is wrong – based partly on the fact that I now live in MA, had him for governor, and, largely, because I despise Obama.

In any case, let’s agree that we love this county and want the best for it. Hopefully conservatives come together on that point rather than beating each other over the head.

Now back to your service. (And thank you for it) I’m genuinely interested in where you got your cold water training. It’s unlikely but, as I said, perhaps we served together.

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 8:26 PM

The fact is – the founders gave me a farkin vote – and I can damn well use it as I see fit.

The Founders gave me a vote too and I will damn well use it as I see fit and I’m voting for Romney.

I’m a working class girl that donates to him. My CEO just sent a huge check to Mitt’s campaign the other day and many, many other people in the businss community I talk are in love with Mitt Romney, his experience in business and in government.

Mitt Romney’s positive message for the fuure of America is really starting to resonate.

The Tea Party/FreedomWorks message is negative, destructive, polarizing, putrid politics as usual.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 8:27 PM

Not cold water training – that was a mistype

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:25 PM

Uh nope. We didn’t serve together. By 2001 I had be out for nearly a quarter of a century.

Gawd, I’m getting old.

Thank your service with hopes that we can work together to get this county back.

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 8:32 PM

@ sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 8:27 PM

The Tea Party/FreedomWorks message is negative, destructive, polarizing, putrid politics as usual

.

Are you serious, the Tea Party message is destructive and negative… really???

Obviously you have never attended a tea party.

spypeach on June 10, 2011 at 8:35 PM

You’ll see who’s irrelevant soon enough.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:14 PM

So will you. Your putrid purity message will not resonate with the American people.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 8:37 PM

There are some candidates who will play to the squishy middle because they figure they can take the conservative vote for granted. That’s never more true than when a radical like Obama is the only other choice.

People who do that shouldn’t complain if it turns out that the base is tired of being taken for granted.

Romney is a perfect example. President McCain was another.

Oh, that’s right. It didn’t work out for McCain, did it?

Something to remember.

tom on June 10, 2011 at 8:19 PM

I am sick of holier than thou “conservatives” I am every bit as conservative as you are! You and yours are nothing but discontents.

Romney is as conservative as any of the other candidates.

You don’t get to define conservative.

No one takes you for granted. There are simply not as many people who believe like you do. If there were the people you like would win. That is how it works.

You are trying to get people to agree with you by threatening them. Well, that is not going to work.

I have followed each one of the candidates. I like some things about them and don’t like others… because I checked them out for myself rather than following the talking points other gave me.

Again, start that other party. Okay with me. I would like to have intelligent candidates to choose from, not people who repeat silly “conservative” talking points.

I don’t think the Tea Party is even conservative. It has some small government parts, and Taxed Enough Already applied to lots of people. Not just conservatives.

If they were conservative they would be backing Romney. Because he has the best resume for getting the economy back on track.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 8:38 PM

Mitt Romney’s positive message for the fuure of America is really starting to resonate.

The Tea Party/FreedomWorks message is negative, destructive, polarizing, putrid politics as usual.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 8:27 PM

Read what she says, Honda. If it comes down to a choice between Romney and Obama, the choice is between a socialist and a capitalist. I’ll hold my nose and vote for the capitalist.

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 8:40 PM

You’ll see who’s irrelevant soon enough.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:14 PM

So will you. Your putrid purity message will not resonate with the American people.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 8:37 PM

Well there you go. People don’t want purity! They want … uh, corruption? Pandering? Plasticity?

Maybe sheryl can weigh back in to explain what people really want……

Just a hint, though: it’s not Mitt.

tom on June 10, 2011 at 8:41 PM

The Founders gave me a vote too and I will damn well use it as I see fit and I’m voting for Romney.

I’m a working class girl that donates to him. My CEO just sent a huge check to Mitt’s campaign the other day and many, many other people in the businss community I talk are in love with Mitt Romney, his experience in business and in government.

Mitt Romney’s positive message for the fuure of America is really starting to resonate.

The Tea Party/FreedomWorks message is negative, destructive, polarizing, putrid politics as usual.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 8:27 PM

VOTE FOR WHOM YOU WISH – IT’S COOL … WITH … ME.

I swear – you guys are the most transparent group of pantywaste’s I’ve ever seen.

If Mitt Romney’s message is starting to resonate with Americans – THEN WHY DO YOU NEED OUR VOTES?

Why do people – THINK THEY HAVE A WINNING CANDIDATE – get all upset at me when I say I won’t vote for him? IF you have a winner – you don’t NEED my vote – so what’s the big deal? Why waste all this time on me telling me I’m selling out my country by not voting for Romney? Who would care?

If I vote for Romney – then I’ll just be another voter with an investment in the guy – and I might say … “HAY – I voted for Romney and I now need something from President Romney!”

And – you might actually have to give it to me – seeing as how I supported the guy.

But now – I’ve relieved you of that horrendous responsibility. You can now get Mittens elected with your INDIES and you can then tell me to FRACK OFF because I didn’t vote for your boy.

You got a winner? Heh – you don’t need my vote.

So WHY ARE YOU SOOOOOO CONCERNED ABOUT IT? HMMMMMM?

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:43 PM

So will you. Your putrid purity message will not resonate with the American people.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 8:37 PM

Purity? I’m the one willing to vote for Obama – that’s not a very “pure” thing to do is it?

YOU – on the other hand – you’re the purist by insisting that I’m supposed to vote for the Republican brand wine – even when you’ve put vinegar in the bottle.

Nay Nay Sweet Toad.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:46 PM

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 8:37 PM

By the way – this argument’s a bit moot. Once Perry jumps in Mittens will looking at the bottom of Perry’s Texan boots on his neck.

Romney won’t be the nominee.

I can support Perry … he’s not a “purist” – he even supported in-state tuition for kids of illegals. Le Gasp!!

Now tell me that I’m voting for a RINO – after you’ve called me a purist!

LOL – you guys are sooooo fun!

Romney is wasting a lot of money hun.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:49 PM

Have you served?

I’ve earned my damned vote – and no pit twiddle like you will tell me how to use my vote.

Now dust off flecker.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 7:28 PM

PDQ’ed from service for medical reasons.

But let’s not forget, you served to protect my right to criticize your vote. For that, I thank you.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 8:50 PM

Better Obama II than Romney I

There is zero difference between them as far as I am concerned.

RomneyCare thats says it all. Last November we reFudiated that.

BTW NH flipped serious red and elected Kelly Ayotte over a RINO and a Socialist.

dogsoldier on June 10, 2011 at 8:52 PM

Well, it’s becoming less and less important how things sound to you, because I’m starting to believe that you’re not smart enough to matter anyway.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 7:24 PM

Ooh, personal attacks. How original. I expect that kind of behavior from a liberal not from anyone here.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 8:53 PM

So WHY ARE YOU SOOOOOO CONCERNED ABOUT IT? HMMMMMM?

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:43 PM

Because if conservatives split, Obama will be re-elected. Despite the fact that you think that would be wonderful, I, for one, don’t, and would rather see all of us unite behind whatever candidate is put forth to get him out of office.

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 8:54 PM

really???

Yes really.

Sarah (a tea party fav) made a veiled threat on Hannity that a third party might happen and didn’t rule out backing it (negative & destructive)

Rick Perry secession talk just a couple of years ago when the whole Tea Party got started was negative.

Donald Trump connecting birthism to the Tea Party was terrible for this movement….complete destructive.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 8:55 PM

Because if conservatives split, Obama will be re-elected. Despite the fact that you think that would be wonderful, I, for one, don’t, and would rather see all of us unite behind whatever candidate is put forth to get him out of office.

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 8:54 PM

Rod FTW

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 8:59 PM

First of all, Romney’s numbers look better than they will eventually be, because the media haven’t gotten the knives out yet. Without Schmuckabee in the race, they will have to bring out the knives. SO FRAKKING RELAX, IT’S NOT GONNA BE ROMNEY!!!!

Secondly, if I could tell you what’s gonna happen a year and a half from now, what am I doing fixing computers for a living when I could be picking winning lottery numbers? Who knows who all will be in, who will turn out to have been sending weenie pix to 17-year-olds, or anything else about to happen? It may very well turn out that the ultimate front-runner is not someone that some factions will be all that wild about. I hope that voters in the remaining GOP primaries will vote out of a sense of what is good for the country, not butthurt because it wasn’t their lad(y).

Thirdly, this pack of clowns would wipe their poopy rear ends with the Constitution if they could at all get away with it. A win in 2012 may just convince them they can get away with it. I don’t want to have the “OMG I can’t BELIEVE you voted 0bama, just because Palin turned out to be Elvis’s love child” discussion with my cellmate.

Sekhmet on June 10, 2011 at 8:59 PM

“Pack of clowns” referring above to the 0bama admin

Sekhmet on June 10, 2011 at 9:00 PM

I am sick of holier than thou “conservatives” I am every bit as conservative as you are! You and yours are nothing but discontents.

Namecalling is a great way to change minds.

Romney is as conservative as any of the other candidates.

You don’t get to define conservative.

Romney is less conservative than Bush 43, who was no great conservative himself. Romney is as conservative as he has to be to get elected, and no more. His problem is not that some commenter on the internet calls him squishy, but that he takes positions that are simply not conservative. Romneycare, support for global warming, cap and trade: these are the things that will give Romney fits.

No one takes you for granted. There are simply not as many people who believe like you do. If there were the people you like would win. That is how it works.

So how well did it work to run candidates who don’t believe like I do? There’s a reason we don’t talk about President McCain.

You are trying to get people to agree with you by threatening them. Well, that is not going to work.

What threat would that be? Threatening to not vote for them? Did you stop to think before typing that?

I don’t think the Tea Party is even conservative. It has some small government parts, and Taxed Enough Already applied to lots of people. Not just conservatives.

If they were conservative they would be backing Romney. Because he has the best resume for getting the economy back on track.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 8:38 PM

Lawsy, lawsy petunia. If the tea party is not even conservative, but Romney is not conservative enough for it, then how can you call Romney a conservative?

We have a choice in this primary between two types of candidates. We can go for another Reagan, or another Bush. The Bushes were very decent people and much mistreated, but they ultimately just give the progressive what they want a little slower.

We need a Reagan. Romney is another Bush. Actually, Romney doesn’t measure up to either Bush.

tom on June 10, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Romney is wasting a lot of money hun.

HondaV65 on June 10, 2011 at 8:49 PM

Aw thanks for the concern but no he isn’t.

Perry doesn’t take away votes from Romney. If anything he sucks votes from Bachman/Cain and Palin.

If the last two standing is Romney or Perry, no contest Romney wins.

There is no way a majority of people are going to vote for a Tea Party, white Southerner, tough talkin mono-syllabic Texan (again).

To win a war, pragmatism takes over and the people who want to win the battle will choose the right weapon and it ain’t Rick Perry.

Mitt is it. He’s the only GOP with everything needed to win against him in the general election battle.

Romney is the man……hon.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:06 PM

We need a Reagan
tom on June 10, 2011 at 9:01 PM

So you’re for mandates then. Because Ronald Reagan signed a healthcare mandate in 1986 called The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:08 PM

First of all, Romney’s numbers look better than they will eventually be

You lie.

Ever since the passing of Obamacare, Mitt Romney has been constantly attacked in the media and his poll numbers remain solid.

Romney’s organization and support is going to be solid enough so he’ll be ready for anythhing….a quick primary or a long haul primary.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:15 PM

Rod FTW

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 8:59 PM

I don’t know what that means but I suspect it’s not a compliment. Oh well.

I once I had a secretary hand me a stack of documents with a yellow sticky on top that said FYI. I asked her it it meant “F..k You, Idiot”. She gasped and quickly walked out of my office. I learned later it meant “for your information”.

I apologized.

I’m a little slow.

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 9:16 PM

Ever since the passing of Obamacare, Mitt Romney has been constantly attacked in the media and his poll numbers remain solid.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:15 PM

He’s never been constantly attacked in his life. Let’s see how he’d hold up under a little Palinization.

Romney’s unelectable. People just aren’t going to hold their noses and vote for yet another moderate who’s ultimately not terribly different from what is in office right now.

pseudoforce on June 10, 2011 at 9:20 PM

Mitt is it. He’s the only GOP with everything needed to win against him in the general election battle.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:06 PM

Except the ability to take on Obama head on. Will never happen.

pseudoforce on June 10, 2011 at 9:22 PM

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 9:16 PM

Rod for the win!

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 9:24 PM

That wasn’t a personal attack. I concluded that you weren’t worth wasting any more time on.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 9:20 PM

And yet, you’re still wasting time on me. And you suspect that I’m not that smart?

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 9:25 PM

Please admit your hypocrisy.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 9:12 PM

Calling out an organizations bad behavior isn’t hypocrisy, it truth telling.

It is putrid and FreedomWorks/Tea Party purist should know that their organization is the worst that politics has to offer.

And their doing it all under the guise that there ushering in a new kind of politics……now that is hypocrisy.

You don’t see the hypocrisy that a Tea Party group called “FreedomWorks” is being run by a CEO that is a Washington insider who’s spent most of his time in academia and in corporate media?

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:26 PM

Rod for the win!

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 9:24 PM

OMG! I’ve never won nothing …. anything! (Is that grammar nazi still around?)

(This is so much better than “foolish twit wad” which I’m sure blink and honda would gladly refer to me as being)

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 9:30 PM

I am uneasy about Romney. Tim Pawlenty seems to have a compelling track record and I think he could bridge some of the establishment GOP and some of the Tea Party.

If Palin does not get into the race, I believe Pawlenty presents the biggest threat to Mitt Romney because of his crossover appeal.

Of the candidates who are presently in the race, Pawlenty is the only one that I think could pull an upset in New Hampshire against Romney.

However, if Perry gets in the race I suspect that his record with job creation in Texas will present and even deeper threat to Romney.

If Perry ran and could win the nomination, I could see him picking Rubio, West, and maybe even Pawlenty as a running mate.

Barack Obama overpromised and under delivered.

He said with his stimulus that unemployment would not go above 8%.

Look at Rick Perry record when it comes to jobs.

“Jobs, Jobs, Jobs” needs to be the unifying theme going into 2012.

camtheman7 on June 10, 2011 at 9:31 PM

Except the ability to take on Obama head on. Will never happen.

pseudoforce on June 10, 2011 at 9:22 PM

He’s winning in the majority of the polls, is the only Republican who beats Obama and he’s just getting started.

He’s never been constantly attacked in his life

Ha, you’re funny and obviously not much of reader.

BTW, when Sarah Palin eventually supports Mitt in the general, how are you going to feel about that…..LOL!!

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:31 PM

I’ll not stay home, I’ll just write in Sarah Palin.

RJL on June 10, 2011 at 9:34 PM

The tea party started with the most noblest of intentions but then again so did many worker’s union we criticize now for being corrupt.

The tea party is in danger of going down that road.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 9:35 PM

Well there you go. People don’t want purity! They want … uh, corruption? Pandering? Plasticity?

Maybe sheryl can weigh back in to explain what people really want……

Just a hint, though: it’s not Mitt.

tom on June 10, 2011 at 8:41 PM

If the people don’t want Mitt, they won’t vote for him.

If the people do want Mitt they will vote for him.

That is how it works.

You, thankfully, get one vote.

Put up a better candidate and they will get more votes than Mitt.

Why is this so hard for you to understand.

People are not voting to make you mad. They are voting for the person they think will do the best job.

So you saying people chose McCain to make you made or because he could win or what ever is just wrong.

More people chose McCain because he out smarted his competition, he played a little dirty, and in the end he got more votes.

That is how this country is run. It isn’t perfect. It is just better than how other countries are run.

Unless your candidate convinces more people to vote for them they will lose.

It isn’t about you.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 9:37 PM

You attacked the Tea Party for being negative, yet you’ve been incredibly negative on this thread. That most certainly is hypocrisy.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 9:29 PM

I don’t think she’s being negative or hypocritical at all. When something smells, saying it stinks ain’t negative – it’s just saying it like it is.

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 9:38 PM

You attacked the Tea Party for being negative, yet you’ve been incredibly negative on this thread. That most certainly is hypocrisy.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 9:29 PM

Calling out FreedomWorks/Tea Party’s negative message and Sarah’s negative message with her veiled threats is bad…you can’t sugar coat it any other way.

All these folks have broken Reagan’s 11th amendment and should be called out for their deeds.

Call it hypocrisy, I really don’t care.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:39 PM

OK, I think this is really funny.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 9:23 PM

Thank’ya thankyaverramush

Seriously, though. Anything can happen. If Sarah Palin did turn out to be Elvis’s love child, Herman Cain pulled an Anthony Weiner, and Bachmann became gravely ill—we may be left with someone like Giuliani.

And like I said, the current Administration aren’t the biggest fans of this nation as Constitutionally founded, and will likely take a 2012 win as a sign to keep pushing ahead. They will simply bypass an opposition-controlled Congress–Unconstitutional?? Hello, who are we talking about here?

Sekhmet on June 10, 2011 at 9:46 PM

The tea party started with the most noblest of intentions but then again so did many worker’s union we criticize now for being corrupt.

The tea party is in danger of going down that road.

Pcoop on June 10, 2011 at 9:35 PM

Well said, I think this is true.

The Tea Party is trying to wrangle power from the Republicans.

So right now the Tea Party has none or microscopic support from Democrats and less than half of Republicans.

And I think that number will only go down because it’s run by so many factions, who will eventually want to have “some” connection to a winning team.

You’ll see an exodus where even a Tea Party hero like Rick Perry will be distance himself at some point.

Joe Miller is a perfect example. He’s a Tea Party favorite that the Tea Party got elected in the primary. And he lost to a write in candidate, in a relatively small state whose governor is a Tea party hero.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:54 PM

Rod on June 10, 2011 at 9:38 PM

Thanks Rod….great simile :)

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:57 PM

Sheryl thinks if it boils down to Mittens and Air Force Captain Perry that Mittens wins?

HeeeHeeeeeWooooooWooooooHaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!
Oh yeah! Now tell us how Mittens will carry Texas.

(snort)

Marcus on June 10, 2011 at 10:13 PM

Mitt is not a Conservative or Libertarian. My vote now requires that at the very least. If my “guy/gal” of choice does not win the primary I will vote for the winner. The exception is, I will never vote for a Progressive.

IowaWoman on June 10, 2011 at 10:26 PM

Interesting dilemma,to wit: if the Republican establishment nominates a RINO candidate, the party melts down because the Tea Party will not yield, regardless of the consequences. In effect, either the country will go toward liberalism/socialism, or conservatism/capitalism. There is no in-between.

Sounds like it is a time for choosing! The liberals have chosen their champion, Barak Obama. Conseratives will either get their champion, or the Republican party will not have a champion at all. The lines are now drawn.

SheetAnchor on June 10, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Lots of bombs going off in this thread and that’s a shame. Hopefully we will all band together and vote for the nominee whomever that may be. And stop with the “I’m more conservative then thou” nonsense that will spell defeat for us. What FreedomWorks has just said here is not helpful to any of us. But I’m sure it sounds delightful to Democrats.

Jesse on June 10, 2011 at 11:03 PM

Actually 46% of conservatives identified as Tea Partiers according to a poll on this site this morning.

If there were the people you like would win.

Um, I’m willing to bet that he liked plenty of people that won in 2010.

You are trying to get people to agree with you by threatening them.

If you were smart, then you would know that he isn’t trying to get anyone to agree with him. He is simply letting people know that he is “out there.”

Um, the rest of your comment isn’t really coherent.

blink on June 10, 2011 at 9:16 PM

Hey that’s me. I identify with the Tea Party and I like Romney just fine. I think he is very conservative.

But I don’t think I will go to hell for voting for him. That is the difference. That is what makes him not “conservative”

Rick Perry mandated little girls 11 to 13 years old get vacinations for a venereal decease in his state. That is not conservative. That is heavy handed government interfering in the rights of parents.

Rick Perry ran Al Gore’s campaign for President, before he decide to float with the political winds and become a Republican! Rick Perry is not a conservative.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 11:08 PM

Except the ability to take on Obama head on. Will never happen.

pseudoforce on June 10, 2011 at 9:22 PM

He’s winning in the majority of the polls, is the only Republican who beats Obama and he’s just getting started.

He’s never been constantly attacked in his life

Ha, you’re funny and obviously not much of reader.

BTW, when Sarah Palin eventually supports Mitt in the general, how are you going to feel about that…..LOL!!

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:31 PM

Put down the crack pipe.

wheelgun on June 10, 2011 at 11:10 PM

Anyone with a “R” is better than Zero. People that can’t see that are fools.

FireBlogger on June 10, 2011 at 11:17 PM

He’s winning in the majority of the polls, is the only Republican who beats Obama and he’s just getting started.

He’s tied with Obama in one poll I saw. Mitt right now is as popular as he’d probably going to be.

He’s never been constantly attacked in his life

Ha, you’re funny and obviously not much of reader.

I must’ve missed where thousands of his emails were dissected.

BTW, when Sarah Palin eventually supports Mitt in the general, how are you going to feel about that…..LOL!!

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:31 PM

I’ll vote for Romney in the general election if he’s the nominee, but I won’t be happy about it. It’d be 2008 all over again.

pseudoforce on June 11, 2011 at 12:03 AM

Rick Perry mandated little girls 11 to 13 years old get vacinations for a venereal decease in his state. That is not conservative. That is heavy handed government interfering in the rights of parents.

Rick Perry ran Al Gore’s campaign for President, before he decide to float with the political winds and become a Republican! Rick Perry is not a conservative.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 11:08 PM

Oh, stop it. If you think that trumps RomneyCare, you’re sadly mistaken.

pseudoforce on June 11, 2011 at 12:04 AM

Hey that’s me. I identify with the Tea Party and I like Romney just fine. I think he is very conservative.

You’re Tea Party like I’m chinese, not a drop. Sure Romney’s conservative, except for Cap & Trade, Global Warming, Healthcare and government bailouts for his pals on Wall Street.

Rick Perry mandated little girls 11 to 13 years old get vacinations for a venereal decease in his state. That is not conservative. That is heavy handed government interfering in the rights of parents.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 11:08 PM

Disease. HPV. He did push it but it was blocked and never took effect. I think he made a mistake. As you said, no one’s perfect. It’s obviously inconsistent of you to slam Perry for mandating a health routine which actually does prevent a real disease while giving your BFF Mittens a total pass for being suckered by the Global Warming hoax. He’s a dupe just like W. He’s got Cap ‘n Trade written all over him.

Rick Perry ran Al Gore’s campaign for President, before he decide to float with the political winds and become a Republican! Rick Perry is not a conservative.

Sorry Petunia. You’re not a conservative. Rick is a conservative. Gore WAS a conservative back then. He was the ONLY Democrat vote for the 1st Gulf War. He was staunchly pro-life and right-to-work. That’s why Slick Willy made him Veep. He needed the Southern conservative vote. As soon as Gore stepped up to VP he whored himself out to the left. The real Al Gore died in ’92.

Stick around, you might learn something.

rcl on June 11, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Sheryl thinks if it boils down to Mittens and Air Force Captain Perry that Mittens wins?
HeeeHeeeeeWooooooWooooooHaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!
Oh yeah! Now tell us how Mittens will carry Texas.
(snort)
Marcus on June 10, 2011 at 10:13 PM

I’m with you and Honda. As soon as Perry is in Mittens is done.

There’s no way Romney will sell in the South. He can’t even deliver his home state. The real non-Petunia T-Party loathes him.

Romney’s got no real accomplishments to brag about this time around. Massachusetts is a social and fiscal wreck. His business success was being one of the pirates who raped the country over the last two decades.

Texas is the healthiest, freest and richest state in the Union. More than half of all private sector jobs in America over the Obama years have been created in Texas. Perry’s done a damn good job. Maybe best of all Obama hates him.

I’m sure the feeling’s mutual. Grudge match!

rcl on June 11, 2011 at 12:37 AM

Sorry Petunia. You’re not a conservative. Rick is a conservative. Gore WAS a conservative back then. He was the ONLY Democrat vote for the 1st Gulf War. He was staunchly pro-life and right-to-work. That’s why Slick Willy made him Veep. He needed the Southern conservative vote. As soon as Gore stepped up to VP he whored himself out to the left. The real Al Gore died in ’92.

Stick around, you might learn something.

rcl on June 11, 2011 at 12:19 AM

You have no right to claim what is conservative and what is not.

You are a loser you will vote for Obama.

That proves who is a conservative and who is not.

You are more than happy to see the country be communist just so you can say you didn’t vote for a perfectly good conservative candidate who happens not to share all your views on every issue.

Romneycare was endorsed by the Hertiage foundation, at the time it was passed they championed it and said it made people take personal responsibilty rather than leeching off the government. That is conservative.

Then Obama… decided he could take Romney out by claiming he got his ideas from Romney. You took the bait, Hertitage stabbed Romney in the back. You are the gullible fool who lets Obama tell you what is conservative and what is not.

Obama does your thinking for you. No wonder you will vote for him. You are him. YOu are at heart a Marxist, that is why you start by using intimidation to force people to do what you want.

The Tea Party has become about personal power over others. Not about free thinkers choosing who they want in an election. The Tea Party is as Totalitarian as the Marxists.

Run your candidate. Who is it? Who is the one who can convince every one to vote for them. Are they too chicken to actually put their name in the race?

If Rick Perry is a better candidate than Romney I will gladly vote for him. I doubt we want to allow Obama to keeping running against Bush forever, but maybe Rick can overcome that stigma. But he sounds and acts just like Bush. That contest didn’t work last time. And he has a few liberal problems of his own. Al Gore fan, for one.

But first he has to have the guts to get in. Tick Tock. All these chicken pretend candidates, cowards! Tick Tock. He is an opportunists who might wander in to a campaign with the staff stolen from Gingrich… how did those folks do for Newt? Great crew he’s got. Loyal too.

Politics as usual. Big Washington insiders. Hypocrites.

petunia on June 11, 2011 at 12:57 AM

There’s no way Romney will sell in the South. He can’t even deliver his home state.

rcl on June 11, 2011 at 12:37 AM

Hannity usually won’t take a position, but tonight he correctly stated that for the Republicans, it’s “do or die time”. He stated he was not a registered Republican, and pretty much implied if it’s “next in line” time for the RNC, there would be a major split with a 3rd party.

You’re darn right Romney couldn’t carry the South. Is the RNC going to watch Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Alabama, Georgia become fractured because more people vote for the Tea Party ticket than the Republican one?

Just watched the “global warming” video on Right Scoop for the 1st time. CLASSIC Romney – pandering, sounding unsure of himself, and as limp as a jelly-fish.

Marcus on June 11, 2011 at 1:59 AM

We need a Reagan
tom on June 10, 2011 at 9:01 PM

So you’re for mandates then. Because Ronald Reagan signed a healthcare mandate in 1986 called The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act.

sheryl on June 10, 2011 at 9:08 PM

Not even trying to be honest, I see. The EMTALA act simply says that in an emergency, a hospital must treat a patient even if they’re not able to pay.

There was no mandate that every individual buy some kind of insurance.

There goes your straw man.

tom on June 11, 2011 at 2:25 AM

Well there you go. People don’t want purity! They want … uh, corruption? Pandering? Plasticity?

Maybe sheryl can weigh back in to explain what people really want……

Just a hint, though: it’s not Mitt.

tom on June 10, 2011 at 8:41 PM

If the people don’t want Mitt, they won’t vote for him.

If the people do want Mitt they will vote for him.

That is how it works.

You, thankfully, get one vote.

Put up a better candidate and they will get more votes than Mitt.

Why is this so hard for you to understand.

People don’t really want Mitt. Mitt’s strategy is to be the candidate people settle for to keep Obama from being elected. That’s why the watchword for Mitt is “electable.” As in, “Some voters make like Palin, but Mitt is electable.”

Every time that word is applied to Mitt as a justification for voting for him, it’s an admission that Mitt is not the one they really want to vote for.

Might as well call him Mitt McCain, because it’s the McCain strategy all over again.

You have an odd, non sequitur style of arguing. It seems to have no relevance to the point your respond to. I get a lecture about how people vote for the candidate they like, and don’t vote for the candidate they don’t like, and how if Romney wins it’s because everyone liked him, and why don’t I understand that?

And yet my basic point was that Mitt doesn’t really have that many people that like him. It’s more a matter of having people willing to vote for him if the only alternative is Obama.

But that’s not the only alternative.

People are not voting to make you mad. They are voting for the person they think will do the best job.

So you saying people chose McCain to make you made or because he could win or what ever is just wrong.

More people chose McCain because he out smarted his competition, he played a little dirty, and in the end he got more votes.

That is how this country is run. It isn’t perfect. It is just better than how other countries are run.

Unless your candidate convinces more people to vote for them they will lose.

It isn’t about you.

petunia on June 10, 2011 at 9:37 PM

Again, a string of non sequiturs. It’s never been about me. It IS about RINOs who pander to the left, because they figure the conservative base will have to vote for them or hand the election to the Democrat.

And the message is: Don’t count on it!

tom on June 11, 2011 at 2:47 AM

A Romney candidacy might be enough to prompt me to vote for a third party and try to make the Republican party a ragged piece of history. It’s not the party I grew up with and lived with for too many decades. It’s a sham parody. Maybe it is time to rip this country a new political party, “Tea Party” or “Constitutional” party.

{^_^}

herself on June 11, 2011 at 3:41 AM

“‘The EMTALA act simply says that in an emergency, a hospital must treat a patient even if they’re not able to pay.There was no mandate that every individual buy some kind of insurance.”
tom on June 11, 2011 at 2:25 AM”

Exactly there isn’t! There is only a mandate that you be treated (which is a good thing imho) for free, with no demand that you pay for being treated even if you can. Hospitals do recover some of the costs but over 50% of ER visits go unpaid.

Most people obtain health insurance. But the people that can afford to buy it and don’t pass on their financial decision onto everyone else (and thereby subsidizing them) with having to pay higher insurance premiums and state taxes.

The Constitution bestows the authority to the States to police/mandate all kinds of their citizen’s behavior. The state of MA and a majority of it’s citizens like that the state mandates every grown-up living there take financial responsibility for their own well being (a conservative tenet) by getting insurance.

Obamacare takes away that States right, that’s why the law should be repealed. Romney has brilliantly and the only one who has said how he will do it on day one.

Is the RNC going to watch Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Alabama, Georgia become fractured because more people vote for the Tea Party ticket than the Republican one?

Oh brother, more secession talk, are you a Perry supporter by chance. What is this the civil war? I reiterate, a Tea Party favorite, white Southerner, tough talkin secessionist would be a very bad candidate in the general against Obama and now I would add it will be bad for the primary election as well, precisely because of this kind of crap it dredges up.

The Tea Party leaders & Sarah Palin’s words being voiced in the media combined with the Tea Party commenters on this site (and others) bringing up with more regularity; the 1860 election, going third party and having Ayn Randian leaders like the dude from FreedomWorks applying purity standards to candidates it’s a very scary sounding in these hard economic times.

As a life long Republican I don’t like it. I also don’t think this is an uplifting message to recruit new people to the party with. And I think it fosters more division in politics.

sheryl on June 11, 2011 at 5:21 AM

While another 4 years of nothin-to-lose Obama will be the end of this country as we know it, Romney’s such a squish that his election would simply slow the inevitable end, not reverse course.

That’s the problem – RINOs have been discrediting the R brand for decades and I will not support another one. PERIOD.

So Republicans – if you nominate Mitt, you’ve lost my vote.

NO MORE RINOs!

disa on June 11, 2011 at 8:04 AM

O-bam-a!

O-BAM-A!!

O-BAM-A!!!

profitsbeard on June 11, 2011 at 9:55 AM

It’s really simple. Uf we continue with plastic unprincipled politicians so loved by the establishment GOP, there will be no America left worth fighting to keep. Our freedoms are just as jeopardized by the fiscal right who winks at taking the verybasis of freedom away -life itself- abortion, but claims it immoral if the government wishes to do the same with their money.Man is both soul and body -money may help nourish the body but is has also destroyed many a soul.
If they ever wake up and run on the principle of subsidiarity -there money would be appropriately be used only when and where reasonable.
Government is not the culprit -immoral men running it is. That is why the fiscal right and the social right need to be united -two parts of the same coin.

(I suspect)It is the fiscal (money centered) right that has divorced and divided the Reagan coalition in the GOP party,that they may do their liberal social and moral depravity without guilt or (naivly) without consequence.

Why else would they so snarl at their God and family loving allies?

Don L on June 11, 2011 at 10:14 AM

While another 4 years of nothin-to-lose Obama will be the end of this country as we know it, Romney’s such a squish that his election would simply slow the inevitable end, not reverse course.

That’s the problem – RINOs have been discrediting the R brand for decades and I will not support another one. PERIOD.

So Republicans – if you nominate Mitt, you’ve lost my vote.

NO MORE RINOs!

disa on June 11, 2011 at 8:04 AM

Anyone supporting RINO’s deserves to be alGORED

Roy Rogers on June 11, 2011 at 11:40 AM

RINO’s are the third party.

Roy Rogers on June 11, 2011 at 11:41 AM

I guess Freedom Works would rather have 4 more years of Obama. That is good to know about them.
By the way, this is exactly why third parties do not work. We end up Clintons and probably 4 more years of Obama. Good work.
Voter from WA State on June 11, 2011 at 10:50 AM

So true.

FreedomWorks’ motives are suspect to me. All I know is their message of division is bad for my party.

The more I hear from people like them (tom,rcl,disa etc), the surer I am that a man like Mitt, who’s message is one of uniting people and promoting positive aspects of all Republican views in the party is the best hope for making the party stronger.

FreedomWorks and their ilk seem to seek to make it weaker and that’s a bad strategy for winning anything.

sheryl on June 11, 2011 at 11:45 AM

My vote will be against Obamalinsky no matter who the Republicans run. I will not stay home and watch my country further destroyed by Communists…..

adamsmith on June 11, 2011 at 11:50 AM

Anyone with a “R” is better than Zero. People that can’t see that are fools.

FireBlogger on June 10, 2011 at 11:17 PM

People that disagree with you have outlined their logic. Do you care to address their logic in any meaningful way?

blink on June 11, 2011 at 12:43 PM

Well, I never thought it would happen but I have to say I agree with you blink.

It probably would have been better if FireBlogger had said:

“I have read all the illogical comments that the so-called pursuits have posted here in their lame attempt to support their self-centered and myopic viewpoint and have concluded that they are all fools.”

That’s much better, don’t you think? Much more meaningful.

Rod on June 11, 2011 at 1:03 PM

“‘The EMTALA act simply says that in an emergency, a hospital must treat a patient even if they’re not able to pay.There was no mandate that every individual buy some kind of insurance.”
tom on June 11, 2011 at 2:25 AM”

Exactly there isn’t! There is only a mandate that you be treated (which is a good thing imho) for free, with no demand that you pay for being treated even if you can. Hospitals do recover some of the costs but over 50% of ER visits go unpaid.

There is no mandate that you be treated for free. There is a mandate that you be treated whether you can pay or not. But the hospital can still send you a bill, and still follow up with collection actions.

Yes, some of the costs are never recovered. And some of the charges on a credit card are defaulted on. But no one claims that credit cards are therefore free.

You keep trying to make this act work as an argument for Romneycare being conservative, but there’s such a big difference between them that the argument is specious at best.

tom on June 11, 2011 at 1:06 PM

opps: “purists” … I think … although “pursuits” might work …. nah. Well, at least you can’t accuse me of being smart!

Rod on June 11, 2011 at 1:07 PM

You keep trying to make this act work as an argument for Romneycare being conservative, but there’s such a big difference between them that the argument is specious at best.

tom on June 11, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Why do you think mandating people who have the ability to pay for health insurance and don’t, then use free access to healthcare in ER’s, why is that viewpoint conservative?

sheryl on June 11, 2011 at 1:23 PM

That’s the problem – RINOs have been discrediting the R brand for decades and I will not support another one. PERIOD.

disa on June 11, 2011 at 8:04 AM

Well said.

joe_doufu on June 11, 2011 at 1:35 PM

That’s the problem – RINOs have been discrediting the R brand for decades and I will not support another one. PERIOD.

disa on June 11, 2011 at 8:04 AM

Well said.

joe_doufu on June 11, 2011 at 1:35 PM

That’s the only way to drive RINO’s from office, or compel them to do the jobs they were elected to do if they feel pressured.

When they start with the “fear mongering”, driving them from office seems the better option of the two.

Roy Rogers on June 11, 2011 at 1:40 PM

That’s the only way to drive RINO’s from office

Yet another message of division, seperation and purity or else coming from TP supporters @ Hot Air!

LOL….um Roy Rogers, that’s not fear mongereing that’s telling you how your message is coming across to a lifelong moderate Republican.

That purity is offensive too me (driving me out?) how do you think that rather rancid message will be in the general?

sheryl on June 11, 2011 at 2:01 PM

In other words, you’re unable to argue against their logic.

blink on June 11, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Not true. I’ve already argued against it as have many others.

It’s time to move on – and pray that, as has been seen here, there are very few thought-police purists who will sit home, pout and hand the election to Obama when their perfect candidate doesn’t materialize.

Rod on June 11, 2011 at 2:45 PM

The people who are saying that RINOs are the real threat to the country obviously haven’t been paying attention to anything that’s happened since 2009.

I have to ask blink one question: who do you supporting? The country or the tea party? And you can’t tell me “I’m supporting the country by supporting the tea party” because everything I read from you puts the tea party first. And that scares the hell out of me.

How much longer until the tea party becomes that which it rallies against?

Pcoop on June 11, 2011 at 6:16 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5