Mitt Romney: Vote for me — or for Herman Cain

posted at 8:46 pm on October 10, 2011 by Allahpundit

I don’t get it. Why would Romney want to promote a “true conservative” competitor who’s, er … much less organized and lightly funded than Rick Perry?

You know who this benefits?

Mitt Romney’s affection for Herman Cain has been well documented, at POLITICO and elsewhere. Romney took it to the next level at a New Hampshire town hall this evening.

“We each have our own experiences, he’s a great guy. Vote for either one of us and you’ll be happy,” Romney said, per POLITICO’s Reid Epstein.

Romney also called Cain a “terrific guy” and said voters should “give him a good look.”

So obvious and cynical is the game here that if I were Cain, I’d find it patronizing. Don’t agree? Here’s what else he said at the town hall tonight:

After talking about his experience going from Bain Capital to the governor’s mansion, Romney suggested that Cain was, perhaps, not quite as ready as he is for the Oval Office.

“I was able to find ways to use my skills in a public sector setting, probably something — if I were Herman — I’d say I wish I had that too because you don’t want to necessarily learn that for the first time as the president of the United States,” Romney said.

Romney’s jab at the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO came in response to a question from a college student who has asked Romney to contrast himself with Cain.

Translation: “He’d be a risk due to his inexperience, but that’s okay as long as you’re not thinking about voting for the guy who governed Texas for 10 years with terrific job growth.” As a gloss on this, go read Philip Klein’s short but insightful post about the persistent weakness of the GOP field. Since 1959, no Republican has gone on to win the presidency without earning at least 40 percent of the primary vote at this point in the race. Our top tier, meanwhile, is chronically mired in the mid to low 20s, with Romney so desperate to break through the 25-percent ceiling that he’s now actually touting other candidates in the race to try to force the most advantageous hold-your-nose Romney vs. Not Romney showdown that he can. It’s come to this, my friends. Or no, rather — it’s come to this.

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 6 7 8

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 2:06 PM

Where are you getting your information? The last polling shows the indies leaving Obama and Romney increasing his support among them. If your point is that Romney should have a 20 point lead over Obama with the indies then yes, he could get that kind of lead eventually. They are simply distrustful of Obama and not all have made a decision yet.

Stale bread is subjective and you cannot seriously claim that it will be the issue with the indies. The economy is not subjective and Romney is very strong on the economy and Obama is not. You are failing to understand voter psychology. Absent a real alternative to Obama, the indies will stay home. But when a candidate has a substantive solution to the economy, the indies will vote for that alternative. This is a very unique time in history and even the indies will be paying attention. Romney has a substantive clear solution and most importantly the record and experience to be POTUS. Romney can beat Obama. That is why they are throwing in with the disaffected GOP in linking Obamacare with Romneycare.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Yet the Heritage Foundation praised it.

Are you claiming that Romneycare is conservative? That is was good policy? Is this the new magic wand to replace “federalism”?

Your problem is that you want an ideological candidate. Which may seem principled to you, but in effect is unprincipled. Romney is a moderate conservative and any examination of his record proves that.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 2:16 PM

No, I want a candidate who did not support something as anti-conservative and big gov’t as Romneycare.

Romney is not a conservative and he has changed positions so many times I do not trust him. I will accept a less than perfect candidate, as they are all less than perfect. I currently support Perry as the most conservative viable candidate, even though I absolutely hate his immigration stance (which, again, Romney has been on both side of). At least with Perry, you can trust his position will remain the same.

Anyone who backed Romneycare is disqualified. I’m sure that Romney was a decent governor of MA (although most of my republican friends in MA don’t really like him, considering how he basically was out only for himself and did nothing to help build the MA GOP, indeed left it in worse shape than he found it). In a state like MA, a center-right guy like Romney is probably about the best you can get. But we can do much. much, much better for President. I don’t want MA republicanism to be the norm. Or else why have a republican party? MA republican is Democrat in most states.

And claiming that Romneycare is conservative and “used the free market approach” means you support Obamacare. The differences between the 2 programs are minute at best.

I would at least respect you if you admitted that Romneycare is a travesty and that you are supporting Mitt in spite of it. I could understand, though disagree, with your reasoning that Romney is fiscally prudent and center-right and you believed he could win against Obama. Trying to pretend that Romneycare was a good or conservative approach loses you any credibility you may have had as a conservative in my book.

And, show me one instance where Romney has led a conservative fight? Just one. He always comes in at the end with a tepid op-ed once the polls are in. He doesn’t fight. He’s been absent the 1st 2 years of Obama’s admin. What out of that makes you believe he will lead the fight to repeal obamacare? He has given no evidence of a willingness to fight for anything ever. He will never make a principled stand. He certainly has not done so to date.

There is a big difference between wanting someone who is “pure” and someone who has conservative principals. Romney is certainly not pure, but he also has no conservative principles. He is a pragmatist deal-maker. Romneycare, if nothing else, showed us that. Well, pragmatism isn’t all bad, but when that is all you have, it means there will be no vision and no leadership on conservative issues.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 2:29 PM

You put too much faith that the base is simply going to turn out for whoever is the nominee.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 1:59 PM

Again, check the polling…..74% of the GOP feel beating Obama is more important than having an ideologically pure candidate. So your opinion is so far out of the mainstream that I wonder if you even pay attention much of the time.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 2:31 PM

This is why Obama would DESTROY Mitt in debate for the presidency…

RedLizard64 on October 11, 2011 at 12:20 PM

OUCH!!! Yep, that’s a biggie. Not to mention that Romney has become the candidate of canned phrases and his own style of rhetoric. I’m already to the point that I can’t stand listening to his voice anymore. He sounds like a pussy (for lack of a better name), and would undoubtedly govern like one.

We need strength, and Perry is the only one standing who can give that to us. I don’t imagine he’d take much crap from anyone…

stacman on October 11, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Stale bread is subjective and you cannot seriously claim that it will be the issue with the indies. The economy is not subjective and Romney is very strong on the economy and Obama is not. You are failing to understand voter psychology. Absent a real alternative to Obama, the indies will stay home. But when a candidate has a substantive solution to the economy, the indies will vote for that alternative. This is a very unique time in history and even the indies will be paying attention. Romney has a substantive clear solution and most importantly the record and experience to be POTUS. Romney can beat Obama. That is why they are throwing in with the disaffected GOP in linking Obamacare with Romneycare.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Stale bread is not subjective. Name one person who believes Romney is charismatic or excites anyone. Please. That is an objective description of Romney as candidate.

Second, you are missing the point with independents yet again. Most polls show independents leaving Obama, but not in the waves you imply. And the campaign has not started. Once Obama effectively defines Romney, which i think he will, independents will move back toward Obama.

You claim to know the “psychology of the voter”. I think you do not. “This time – this time they will see reason and vote substance over style”. I reiterate – that is wishful thinking. The mushy middle almost always votes style over substance. Al Gore mostly lost b/c he came across as fake. Same with John Kerry. Clinton beat GHW Bush mostly on style. Same with Obama over McCain. Or do you believe that “hope and change” is substance?

And, by the way, by your logic it does not matter who the nominee is, they will get the indie vote, so you are defeating your own argument. If you are trying to persuade people to back Romney as having the best chance against Obama – arguing that the base is going to turn out for whoever and that the indies will vote for whoever is not Obama than you are basically saying that it doesn’t matter who the nominee is – he’ll beat Obama.

Regardless, my point was I don’t believe that Romney has the best chance against Obama, which is the only reason many republicans are supporting Romney. It does not matter though. Even if I thought Romney had the best chance in the general election, I would not support him.

And, it is reality that Obamacare and Romneycare are linked. Romney’s only defense is that one is state and one is federal. But it is the same underlying philosophy for both. that is the problem – the philosophy. I understand that Romneycare does not have the individual mandate constitutional issue. That doesn’t make it a good policy that we should reward by nominating its architect to run for president.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Are you claiming that Romneycare is conservative? That is was good policy? Is this the new magic wand to replace “federalism”?

You need to read more carefully. I do not like mandated healthcare. But it was the solution the voters of MA wanted. Romney accommodated them. Apply that to his service as POTUS and you can only come to the conclusion that he will accommodate the American people. And we want Obamacare gone and he has committed to do so. So I trust him to do so.

Romney is a fiscal conservative and even his approach toward Romneycare was from a fiscal approach. He wasn’t preaching socialism but rather a fiscal response to problems created when Reagan signed EMTALA into law. It doesn’t matter if Obamacare is a free market approach…IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Period.

You should be more worried about his stance on the 2nd amendment than healthcare. He certainly did sound like a progressive on that issue.

I don’t really care about Romney leading the fight. Palin and Perry tried to lead the fight and they came off looking like loons. Perry has probably taken himself right out of the race. Tonight’s debate is key for him. If he falters again, he’s done.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 2:44 PM

Again, check the polling…..74% of the GOP feel beating Obama is more important than having an ideologically pure candidate. So your opinion is so far out of the mainstream that I wonder if you even pay attention much of the time.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 2:31 PM

I don’t know if you are purposefully misrepresenting my arguments or just obtuse.

I said I’m not looking for ideological purity myself, just someone not such a clown as to create/back/endorse the socialistic big-gov’t Romneycare (among many other non-conservative positions Romney has taken over the years). I want someone not who is “pure” in the sense of never deviating, but who comes from a conservative principal philosophy of governance. Romney does not come close to that. If you can’t see the difference, you are too dim to continue speaking with. I support Perry even though his immigration position is anathema to me. he is hardly ideologically pure. but he starts from a much more conservative philosophy than romney has ever demonstrated. I could support Cain, or others. I don’t need “purity” – so that is an inane straw-man argument that you have trotted out several times and need to give up on.

Second, getting 74% of the base to the polls is not going to defeat Obama, so your factoid again reinforces the point I was making. If Romney cannot get above 90% of the base to turn out and vote for him – plus at least 51% of independents, he is going to lose. If he picks up 65% of independents, but only gets 74% of the base, he will likely lose. That is my very point.

If Romney cannot fire up the base, he will lose the election. I don’t think Romney can fire up the base.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Name one person who believes Romney is charismatic or excites anyone.

Here is the answer to that silliness…..”We tried exciting and look where it got us”. The excitement is in his message of fiscal responsibility and economic recovery. When people are jobless, they don’t want a rock star, they want a problem solver.

You are ignoring the uniqueness of times we are living in. In times like these, even the indies get focused. Just as they did for Reagan in 1980.

And where are you getting the rest of that nonsense?

I didn’t say the indies will go to anyone. I said they will stay home if we nominate a Perry or Palin because they offer no real solutions. The indies can leave Obama and then not vote at all ya know. That is why Romney is our best chance. The indies like him. And the issue of voting for the candidate that can beat Obama is in the context of the GOP base. Because you are stuck on thinking that you are representative of the GOP base, you refuse to see the polling that proves the GOP BASE WILL TURN OUT IN 2012 TO DEFEAT OBAMA and they aren’t interested in ideological purity. The GOP nominees challenge is to get the indies to vote for him. Romney is the one doing that. Ergo, he can and will beat Obama.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 2:55 PM

You need to read more carefully. I do not like mandated healthcare. But it was the solution the voters of MA wanted. Romney accommodated them. Apply that to his service as POTUS and you can only come to the conclusion that he will accommodate the American people. And we want Obamacare gone and he has committed to do so. So I trust him to do so.

So, he will do waht the polls tell him? He’ll raise taxes if the polls say so? Enact cap/trade? Card-check? do whatever is popular at the moment despite what is the best policy?

thank you for admitting what I have been arguing all along.

I don’t really care about Romney leading the fight.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 2:44 PM

That speaks volumes.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 2:56 PM

I didn’t say the indies will go to anyone. I said they will stay home if we nominate a Perry or Palin because they offer no real solutions. The indies can leave Obama and then not vote at all ya know. That is why Romney is our best chance. The indies like him. And the issue of voting for the candidate that can beat Obama is in the context of the GOP base. Because you are stuck on thinking that you are representative of the GOP base, you refuse to see the polling that proves the GOP BASE WILL TURN OUT IN 2012 TO DEFEAT OBAMA and they aren’t interested in ideological purity. The GOP nominees challenge is to get the indies to vote for him. Romney is the one doing that. Ergo, he can and will beat Obama.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 2:55 PM

You really don’t understand what you are talking about.

You are dishonest in representing what I say and then change what you have said.

We aren’t going to convince each other – you are obviously fanatically devoted to Romney. I think Romney is a disaster in the making for the country. I’m confident in my arguments. You simply seem to not understand them as instead of responding to any of them, you have restated the same words over and over “independents” “federalism”. Those aren’t arguments, they are talismans. And they are not working.

And to claim that Perry or Cain “offer nothing” is again, dishonest. To claim that only Romney can win is ridiculous.

Perhaps Romney will win it all and prove me wrong and govern as a conservative. His history and evidence don’t support such happening, but I’m always happy to be pleasantly surprised.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 3:01 PM

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 2:48 PM

1) You refuse to admit that Romney does have conservative positions, ergo you are being a purist.

2) Perry is in worse shape in the conservative sense than Romney is because his failure to be conservative is a magnet to illegals. Again, the polls show this.

3) The 74% doesn’t preclude the 24% from voting for him in the end. As time progresses, those who are being purists today may moderate themselves on election day.

4) No candidate needs to fire up the base. Obama’s destructive policies are doing that for the candidates. You are under the misconception that you are representative of the GOP base. You are not. You are coming across as a purist who will not vote for Romney if he is the GOP nominee. In the end, you and those like you, wont matter a hill of beans to the outcome because even if there are 24% that feel that way today, they wont feel that way on election day. They simply are not going to sit at home and hack off their noses to spite America.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 3:03 PM

So, he will do waht the polls tell him? He’ll raise taxes if the polls say so? Enact cap/trade? Card-check? do whatever is popular at the moment despite what is the best policy?

thank you for admitting what I have been arguing all along.

Nice try at the straw man. Americans do not and will not want those policies enacted.

That speaks volumes.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Yeah, I’m with the majority of the GOP and don’t need an ideologically pure candidate. You do even though you are trying to convince everyone that you don’t.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 3:06 PM

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 2:48 PM

1) You refuse to admit that Romney does have conservative positions, ergo you are being a purist.

2) Perry is in worse shape in the conservative sense than Romney is because his failure to be conservative is a magnet to illegals. Again, the polls show this.

3) The 74% doesn’t preclude the 24% from voting for him in the end. As time progresses, those who are being purists today may moderate themselves on election day.

4) No candidate needs to fire up the base. Obama’s destructive policies are doing that for the candidates. You are under the misconception that you are representative of the GOP base. You are not. You are coming across as a purist who will not vote for Romney if he is the GOP nominee. In the end, you and those like you, wont matter a hill of beans to the outcome because even if there are 24% that feel that way today, they wont feel that way on election day. They simply are not going to sit at home and hack off their noses to spite America.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 3:03 PM

1) I never said that romney had absolutely no conservative positions. I said that he does not start from a conservative philosophy. Again, big difference. And, I admit freely that he claims to have much more conservative positions this time around than last time around. Again, that is part of my problem with Romney. I also don’t claim he took no conservative positions as governor – of course he did. I think Romneycare trumps most of that. Somebody with a conservative core philosophy would never, ever have supported Romneycare. it’s just that simple.

2) Perry is in bad shape for a number of reasons. Taht doesn’t mean that Romney is more conservative or even a conservative (again, having some conservative positions does not make one a conservative)

3) I never said that the 74% precludes anything. YOU were the one who threw that out there as “evidence” that the base was going to come out in huge numbers to support Romney. I was just using the same “evidence” you supplied to demonstrate how your argument was fallacious.

4) Proving that you don’t actually read my comments to you, I actually said that I might not vote for Romney as I think he would be worse long-term for America than 4 more years of Obama. But, I am not advocating for anyone else to do that. Regardless, getting out the base is not as easy as you seem to think it is. Have you paid attention to past election? how old are you? I ask not to be mean, but you are making a lot of assumptions that are not born out by historical evidence – which demonstrates to me that you fairly new in following politics closely. Simply assuming that the base will turn out is a dangerous attitude. Simply assuming that independents will break our way is a dangerous attitude. And, it is that attitude that I think will defeat Romney – the fact that he is going to run a campaign centered around the belief that he just needs to show up and people will turn out and vote against Obama.

No matter how bad the other side is, the base will not all turn out on election day. The “base” is much more than the 15% or so who are rabid politicos, commenting on the blogs. there are a lot of republican voters who don’t really pay attention and need to be excited into voting and cajoled into vote through get-out-the-vote efforts. if it were as easy as the base always coming out to vote b/c the other side is so bad, we wouldn’t need t pour so much time and money into get-out-the-vote efforts (which are aimed at republicans -i.e., the base – not independents). You keep claiming that this time will be different. You can’t know that. Nobody can. Maybe there will be huge voter turnout, maybe there will be average voter turnout, maybe there will be apathetic voter turnout. I think there will be a large voter turnout, but will it be big enough to overcome the large voter turnout on the other side? You need some excitement for that. Simply fear of the other side does not motivate as well as excitement for your guy. That is always true in elections.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 3:18 PM

You know as well as the rest Of Hot Air knows that you have been bashing our Mormon friends since you showed up here at Hot Air. You are an unmitigated bigot.

And I’m still waiting for you to provide the proof that I am a Mormon.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Wait, you mean criticizing Mitt makes you a bigot…I’ll be darn.
I don’t bash “Mormon’s” until they bash me, at least not the ones alive. I think Mormon’s are like anyone else, good, bad, indifferent to me…it’s people like Joseph Smith, the child molester that I have a problem with and making him a “Prophet”, that is who I bashed, and with good reason, along with Brigham Young, another child bride collector.
Now, if I give you the answer that you gave me years ago whether you are Mormon or not…and if that is a yes, will you promise never, ever to post on here again?

right2bright on October 11, 2011 at 3:20 PM

Nice try at the straw man. Americans do not and will not want those policies enacted.

That speaks volumes.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Yeah, I’m with the majority of the GOP and don’t need an ideologically pure candidate. You do even though you are trying to convince everyone that you don’t.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 3:06 PM

Good lord. You are dense. You argued that Romney passed Romneycare not b/c it was good policy or conservative, but b/c it was “what the people wanted” and he would do that as President.

And, are you claiming that polls don’t show an increase in taxes on “the rich”? Or that polls don’t show that most people don’t want entitlements touched? Or that polls don’t show that most people don’t want “their” gov’t spending cut? you want your cake and eat it too. it is not a straw-man. taht was your argument.

As far as Obamacare, it has been all over the place in polls – with a majority AGAINST repeal at times (even though a majority were against the bill itself, which makes no sense). So, if the polls show that a majority is against repeal – what will a follower like Romney do?

As far as an “ideologically pure” candidate – I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything. I’m responding to your repeated lies. Others on this board warned that you do this, but I have been trying to argue with you in good faith and have noticed a tendency toward dishonesty. I pointed out quite clearly why I am against Romney and who I am willing to support and I am hardly supporting an “ideologically pure” candidate – as no such candidate exists. So, you can continue with lying or you can try and argue in good faith. Either way doesn’t bother me. It’s just sad that you feel the need to do so.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 3:23 PM

Yeah, I’m with the majority of the GOP and don’t need an ideologically pure candidate. You do even though you are trying to convince everyone that you don’t.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 3:06 PM

And, by the way, if I wanted someone more “pure” i would have been a palinista, or would support Santorum. So, that puts the lie to your argument quickly enough. Purity has nothing to do with it. Having a conservative core philosophy is the important thing. Every politician / office-holder is going to have some deviations, even if starting from a core philosophy. It is important what those deviations are, but some have to be accepted.

But simply not having a core conservative philosophy like romney “i’m not conservative” “I don’t supprot reagan/bush”? Not acceptable, at least to me.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 3:28 PM

Now, if I give you the answer that you gave me years ago whether you are Mormon or not…and if that is a yes, will you promise never, ever to post on here again?

right2bright on October 11, 2011 at 3:20 PM

If you have a point you want to make, then make it rather than try to play silly games.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 3:38 PM

You argued that Romney passed Romneycare not b/c it was good policy or conservative, but b/c it was “what the people wanted” and he would do that as President.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 3:23 PM

As a response to your straw man that Romney is a socialist. The people of MA did, and still do want it. That doesn’t make Romney a socialist. Clearly his concerns were of a fiscal nature.

This country is center right, and when considering all polling and the wording etc, the policies the people will want will be center right. You example of entitlements ignores the other polling that reveals they want a balanced budget. Romney has the experience to come up with policies that will find a balance between the two response.

Look, we get that you love your candidate and reject candidates that have less serious breaks from conservatism. Perry’s immigration failures are hurting him more than Romneycare hurts Romney. You’ll have to find a way to process that before you have a meltdown.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Look, we get that you love your candidate and reject candidates that have less serious breaks from conservatism. Perry’s immigration failures are hurting him more than Romneycare hurts Romney. You’ll have to find a way to process that before you have a meltdown.

csdeven on October 11, 2011 at 3:49 PM

You really are something. I said I currently support Perry but am open to Cain. I don’t “love” anyone. Maybe you should look in the mirror before casting stones.

As to your argument that Romney “did what the people wanted” even though it was as anti-conservative as it gets and the dumbest policy ever – that is exactly my point. You have proven my point. You keep saying the same empty things, but you fail to make a logical argument. If his concerns were fiscal – he never would have passed Romneycare – as it is a fiscal nightmare. Instead, his concern was entirely political. He wanted a big capstone policy to use as a platform for the next presidential election, but badly misjudged. The whole point is that leader doesn’t simply give the people what they want – he leads. romney obviously did not do that. Either he truly believes in romneycare or he is not a leader.

You also manage to ignore all polling in your claim that the people at large want all the things you claim that Romney wants and always have. If what you said were true, Obama would never have been elected.

I get that you love your candidate and are emotionally invested in him, but you should take a step back and find a logical way to rationalize why you support him instead of throwing everything against the wall and hoping something sticks. So far you tried “federalism”!!! After I tore that “argument” apart, you went with “he just did what MA wanted”. Now that I demonstrated it proves he shouldn’t be president b/c he is merely a poll follower – you go with “well the polls will always support conservative policies so it is ok to be a poll follower.” Since we all know that isn’t true – what is your next claim?

I get it, you are wedded to Romney and can’t accept any criticism of him. It just leaves you with little credibility is all.

And, “less serious breaks” from conservatism? The father of Obamacare? Romney – the guy who backed something so far left as to make Obama jealous? That is the guy that is more conservative than Perry or Cain? Really? You do realize that even his most ardent serious supporters would not make such a claim. it lacks any credibility whatsoever. It is laughable. I mean, are you even trying to sound serious? the Author of romneycare (who, by the way, supported amnesty in the past – even Perry didn’t go that far) is more conservative than Perry or Cain? Really?

Now, I know Perry sucks on immigration. He lost votes b/c of his debate performances, coupled with immigration and coupled with Cain doing really well in the debates. If Cain shows he can go the distance, I will likely get behind Cain. I wish there were a better candidate out there than Perry or Cain. There isn’t. Certainly not Romney – who is a complete non-starter based on the reasons I pointed out repeatedly. Romney had more than 3 years to demonstrate to me that he would govern as a conservative or had a conservative core. He failed to do that and instead pretty much demonstrated that it isn’t the case. If Romney ends up the nominee – there is nothing I can do about it and I’ll go on living. I think it will be bad for both America and the GOP, but I have no control over the outcome.

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 4:10 PM

As a response to your straw man that Romney is a socialist. The people of MA did, and still do want it. That doesn’t make Romney a socialist.

You can’t blame Romney for Romneycare – the people wanted it. Sure, he should be president then. Because that is what leadership is all about. Institution horrible policies that will bankrupt the state, even if you disagree with those policies, b/c polls show that the people want it.

You have convinced me. Where do I sign up for your newsletter?

Monkeytoe on October 11, 2011 at 4:12 PM

A few LEADERS (HAHAHA)

1. WHO Cain beat Obama? Cain you say HERMAN CAIN

2. The Obama train wreck needs a new CAINductor

3. Herman will DECAINSTRUCT the Obama nightmare

4. Hermain will Cainsign Obama to the ASHcain of history

5. To Obama in January 2012 our sincere CAINdolences

6. The Messiah known as Obama is about to be CAINonized

RedLizard64 on October 11, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Am I changing anyone’s thought processes on Romney?

Do not believe what you have been fed!

g2825m on October 11, 2011 at 7:28 AM

very useful post, g2, which I shall retain

entagor on October 11, 2011 at 5:36 PM

Stalking horse anyone? This smells too much like Huckabee thinking he’d get the VP slot if he helped derail Romney in 2008. Perry really lost me with the “if you don’t support illegals you don’t have a heart” but I feel like Cain is doing just enough to get 2nd place and the VP slot which will undoubtedly happen if Romney wins. But I’m ABR – Anybody but Romney.

LtBarnwell02 on October 11, 2011 at 8:02 PM

Comment pages: 1 6 7 8