Romney: Oh, you’d better believe I’d vote for Ron Paul over Obama

posted at 7:45 pm on December 28, 2011 by Allahpundit

Via Mediaite, a predictable contrast to Gingrich’s ambivalence yesterday. Newt needs a win in Iowa or a close second to boost him in South Carolina and right now Paul and Romney are making that unlikely. He has to attack. All Romney needs is a decent third-place finish or better behind Paul and one of the lightly funded social-con candidates like Bachmann or Santorum who pose no real threat to him nationally. He’s right on track. Why say something critical that might give undecideds in Iowa pause about Paul and might give Paul fans even more of a reason not to hold their nose and vote Romney down the line against Obama? He refused to even mention Paul by name this morning when criticizing him on Iran, in fact, even though Paul’s new ad unloads on him for being a serial flip-flopper. It’ll be amusing to see how far he’ll let Paul go in attacking him without responding as the early primaries play out. And unlike 2008 when McCain and Huckabee played nice with each other after they emerged as the two remaining viable candidates, Paul will attack.

New Hampshire’s an open primary, don’t forget, so if Paul wins big in Iowa via Democratic and independent support and Romney finishes worse than expected, Romney may have to start firing back whether he wants to or not. Maybe we should do a pool on when he flip-flops on his intention to support RP over The One. Exit question: Santorum also said today that he’d support Paul over Obama, however grudgingly. Er, why would he say that? He badly needs a win in Iowa and this would have been a powerful grenade to toss at the frontrunner — who, don’t forget, almost certainly won’t end up supporting the eventual GOP nominee over Obama when he’s asked to choose.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

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

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

If Romney can vote for Paul over Obama, it shouldn’t scare the others right?

promachus on December 28, 2011 at 7:49 PM

Despite whatever the current controversy over Paul might be, this is the correct answer. Never, ever, give in to Progressives. You will never be repaid in kind and you will never be forgiven by your allies.

Hannibal Smith on December 28, 2011 at 7:50 PM

Meh. RupaulRon Paul will be ancient history soon. I say by March .

Hawkerflyer on December 28, 2011 at 7:51 PM

Total pander monkey. At least Newt was willing to be blunt and honest about Paul’s problems and the fact that Paul will never be the nominee. The second craziest person in the race is probably MB, and I don’t think she would be hugging on Paul

Southernblogger on December 28, 2011 at 7:52 PM

“Pandering to the Paulbots,” Mitt’s version of “Sweatin’ to the Oldies.”

predator on December 28, 2011 at 7:53 PM

Despite whatever the current controversy over Paul might be, this is the correct answer. Never, ever, give in to Progressives. You will never be repaid in kind and you will never be forgiven by your allies.

Hannibal Smith on December 28, 2011 at 7:50 PM

All things considered, and as much as it pains me to say,I would rather have The One for four more years than Ron Paul. Fixing Obama’s mess is one thing, but it would be far too costly to correct what Paul would do to this country.

JetBoy on December 28, 2011 at 7:53 PM

Hannibal Smith on December 28, 2011 at 7:50 PM

Paul does not represent the GOP period

Southernblogger on December 28, 2011 at 7:54 PM

On Kudlow’s show, a Romney aide was already talking like Romney was the next President.

Thankfully, Kudlow battled back against the aide, but who will Romney pick that would give him conservative cred? Whoever he chooses is going to need a base that will have volunteers that will go all out since the reception for Mitt will be lukewarm.

Midwestprincesse on December 28, 2011 at 7:55 PM

I can’t believe how we’ve lost this race to Obama already. He’s up by 5 point doing nothing.

Why?

The chewing up and spitting out (ie infighting of our side) along with some of the nuttiness (and the supporters) of those candidates in our republican field makes Dumbo ears the community organizer look Good.

athenadelphi on December 28, 2011 at 7:55 PM

AP, in your world, does a politician ever say something because they believe it?

You have a very bad habit (shared by Ed) of constantly telling us what people are thinking. How do you do it?

mockmook on December 28, 2011 at 7:56 PM

If Mitt Romney was running for mayor of San Francisco, he’d endorse free hand jobs for the homeless. And if he thought it would get him elected, he’d provide them himself.

RBMN on December 28, 2011 at 7:56 PM

Right answer. Newt’s answer fired up Paul supporters. Who do you think they go to now? His name isn’t Newt.

Redford on December 28, 2011 at 7:56 PM

JetBoy on December 28, 2011 at 7:53 PM

RP talks about our coming economic collapse like he cannot wait for it. I would vote Obama also

Southernblogger on December 28, 2011 at 7:56 PM

JetBoy on December 28, 2011 at 7:53 PM

Agreed. Give the country a quick political death with Obama versus a slow political death that any of the top position holders would bring. Completely deplete the DNC over the next four years. Who will the DNC run in 2016?

Midwestprincesse on December 28, 2011 at 7:57 PM

So far, the GOP candidates are doing a terrific job of convincing me to vote for Obama, and work hard to convince others to do so too.

TwoShortPlanks on December 28, 2011 at 7:58 PM

So Romney will vote for Ron Paul but he won’t even talk to tea partiers? Wow. Disconnect.

athenadelphi on December 28, 2011 at 7:59 PM

Romney gets it. Newt pulled a classic Newt in his Ron Paul answer. It reminding me of when he attacked Paul Ryan. Or does Newt just really hate men with 2 first names?

Roymunson on December 28, 2011 at 7:59 PM

I’d also vote for Ron Paul over BHO. Then I’d go home, get drunk, then cry myself to sleep.

Oink on December 28, 2011 at 8:00 PM

Even if he ran 3rd party?

If so, why are you even bothering, Mitt?

unclesmrgol on December 28, 2011 at 8:00 PM

So far, the GOP candidates are doing a terrific job of convincing me to vote for Obama, and work hard to convince others to do so too.

TwoShortPlanks on December 28, 2011 at 7:58 PM

Wait, what?!

Roymunson on December 28, 2011 at 8:02 PM

Anyone need any further proof the Republican train has hit the Titanic?

Limerick on December 28, 2011 at 8:02 PM

All things considered, and as much as it pains me to say,I would rather have The One for four more years than Ron Paul. Fixing Obama’s mess is one thing, but it would be far too costly to correct what Paul would do to this country.

JetBoy on December 28, 2011 at 7:53 PM

It’s a valid debate, for sure, and not one I have an easy answer to. My calculus is based mainly on the fact that a Paul presidency would get almost zero accomplished (hey, there was a time we said gridlock was good!) If he has any integrity at all, the Dems would discovery very quickly that he means what he says about domestic programs. And the vast majority of the GOP would stand in the way of his FP excesses, with most Dems joining them.

Another four years of Obama, on the other hand, means endless State Propaganda about a “progressive mandate” and a validation of the previous four years. Coupled with a lame-duck, going-for-broke president, we’d be in for major damage. The only hope then, I guess, is that the GOP holds at least one house of congress and we’re back to pitiful obstructionism.

Hannibal Smith on December 28, 2011 at 8:02 PM

AP, in your world, does a politician ever say something because they believe it?

You have a very bad habit (shared by Ed) of constantly telling us what people are thinking. How do you do it?

You find it strange that I or anyone else would speculate about a politician’s strategic motives? With the most important primary of the 2012 race six days away?

No, you’re right. Obviously Romney’s only saying this because he means it. That’s also why he’s not attacking Paul, who leads in the polls, but has been unloading on Gingrich for weeks. It’s because he just likes Ron Paul.

Allahpundit on December 28, 2011 at 8:03 PM

Ron Paul vs. Obama?

Ugh. I shudder to think about what I would do in that situation.

Red Cloud on December 28, 2011 at 8:03 PM

Oh what a panderer.

evergreenland on December 28, 2011 at 8:04 PM

The right answer is ” Neither, they both stink”.
Unfortunately Mitt likes Paul as a roadblock to his opponents, so it’s pander away.

jjshaka on December 28, 2011 at 8:04 PM

I can’t believe how we’ve lost this race to Obama already. He’s up by 5 point doing nothing.

Why?

The chewing up and spitting out (ie infighting of our side) along with some of the nuttiness (and the supporters) of those candidates in our republican field makes Dumbo ears the community organizer look Good.

athenadelphi on December 28, 2011 at 7:55 PM

Quit reading MSM polls. The One IS NOT up by 5 points. I’d be surprised if he’s not actually down by 5 points or more.

dddave on December 28, 2011 at 8:04 PM

Romney his a man of zero principle. He knows that Paul is a whackjob, and yet he will pander to the Paultards, because he wants to use them as a buffer against Gingrich. And if the Republican Party and the country is damaged in the process, that’s OK by Romney.

BCrago66 on December 28, 2011 at 8:04 PM

“What are those things, daddy?”

“Those are Paulbot Cicadas, son. Every four years, in mid-fall, they come out of the ground, make a lot of noise, shed their skins, mate (unfortunately), and then by March they’re gone.”

“What purpose do they serve, daddy?”

“None that anyone can recognize, son.”

predator on December 28, 2011 at 8:04 PM

At least Newt was willing to be blunt and honest about Paul’s problems and the fact that Paul will never be the nominee.

Southernblogger on December 28, 2011 at 7:52 PM

Maybe Gingrich could try being blunt and honest about his own problems for a change. As far as Gingrich’s chances of being the Republican nominee they are only about twice Paul’s chances anyway.

VorDaj on December 28, 2011 at 8:05 PM

****************Judgement Call******************************

And,Mitten’s isn’t even in office yet,telling,it could be!!

canopfor on December 28, 2011 at 8:06 PM

Mitt is smart…. even a paultrd’s vote counts.

V7_Sport on December 28, 2011 at 8:07 PM

No one surpasses Gingrich in the whackjob department. So many of his statements and claims do not even have a toe in reality.

VorDaj on December 28, 2011 at 8:07 PM

All things considered, and as much as it pains me to say,I would rather have The One for four more years than Ron Paul. Fixing Obama’s mess is one thing, but it would be far too costly to correct what Paul would do to this country.

JetBoy on December 28, 2011 at 7:53 PM

JetBoy:Excellent point,who needs a compounded double mess!:)

canopfor on December 28, 2011 at 8:08 PM

Ron Paul and allies dropped millions in brutal, character-assassinating negative television ads against Newt in Iowa before Newt ever responded. RP fans are hardly in a position to criticize Newt for pushing back.

Robert_Paulson on December 28, 2011 at 8:08 PM

It’s a valid debate, for sure, and not one I have an easy answer to. My calculus is based mainly on the fact that a Paul presidency would get almost zero accomplished (hey, there was a time we said gridlock was good!) If he has any integrity at all, the Dems would discovery very quickly that he means what he says about domestic programs. And the vast majority of the GOP would stand in the way of his FP excesses, with most Dems joining them.

Another four years of Obama, on the other hand, means endless State Propaganda about a “progressive mandate” and a validation of the previous four years. Coupled with a lame-duck, going-for-broke president, we’d be in for major damage. The only hope then, I guess, is that the GOP holds at least one house of congress and we’re back to pitiful obstructionism.

Hannibal Smith on December 28, 2011 at 8:02 PM

For me it would simply boil down to taking the devil I know over the alternative. I wouldn’t mind seeing if Paul’s domestic fiscal plans would work, but if they don’t it’ll be chaos. It’s his foreign policy views that scare the cr*p out of me. At least Obama wouldn’t recall every US troop around the globe and stick his head in the sand, or even let Iran go nuke.

JetBoy on December 28, 2011 at 8:08 PM

Maybe Ace is right: Romney doesn’t even want to be the Republican nominee.

davisbr on December 28, 2011 at 8:08 PM

A President Ron Paul puts our national security at risk. For Governor Romney to make this statement for his own personal political expediency is as dangerous as Ron Paul, Commander in Chief.

Deep Timber on December 28, 2011 at 8:09 PM

Pander…

golfmann on December 28, 2011 at 8:10 PM

The “politically” right answer to the boobs in Iowa giving Ron Faulks more then .20 % of the vote.

I wouldn’t vote for Ron P. unless Putin were the only other alternative.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:10 PM

Anyone need any further proof the Republican train has hit the Titanic?

Limerick on December 28, 2011 at 8:02 PM

Limerick:Good point,I hope the train,isn’y carrying any Plutonium,
er,Pelosium,I mean!(snark):)

canopfor on December 28, 2011 at 8:10 PM

You have a very bad habit (shared by Ed) of constantly telling us what people are thinking. How do you do it?

They must have alien acknowledged like in Stargate SG-1.

VorDaj on December 28, 2011 at 8:10 PM

Oh, you’d better believe I’d vote for Ron Paul over Obama

Score 1 for Mitt.

Both Øbama and Paul are disasters on foreign policy. Not much diff there.

On domestic policy, Øbama loses and Paul wins big.

On domestic policy, Paul is a hero. It’s his foreign policy that makes him unacceptable.

petefrt on December 28, 2011 at 8:11 PM

Maybe we should do a pool on when he flip-flops on his intention to support RP over The One.

LOL. Allah cant control himself. His Romney angst is wonderful to behold. President Romney is going to be great and watching these anybody-but-Romney clowns is all the more fun!!!!

THANKS!!!

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:12 PM

I’d also vote for Ron Paul over BHO. Then I’d go home, get drunk, then cry myself to sleep.

Oink on December 28, 2011 at 8:00 PM

Laughed out loud on your post. Good one. I’m right there with you. Even if it’s only a speedbump, we’ve gotta throw something in front of this runaway freight train. By the way, crying in baseball, no way. Crying in politics, absolutely expected.

msupertas on December 28, 2011 at 8:13 PM

Actually he’d wait until the day after the election and endorse the winner.

Ted Torgerson on December 28, 2011 at 8:13 PM

Both candidates are morons for falling into this media trap.

batterup on December 28, 2011 at 8:14 PM

Santorum also said today that he’d support Paul over Obama, however grudgingly. Er, why would he say that?

I don’t know AP.

Maybe because Obama is a Marxist?

mockmook on December 28, 2011 at 8:14 PM

I’d also vote for Ron Paul over BHO. Then I’d go home, get drunk, then cry myself to sleep.

Oink on December 28, 2011 at 8:00 PM

This. Or, you know, get the hell out of Dodge.

Syzygy on December 28, 2011 at 8:14 PM

OK Mitt, but would you vote for Bachmann or Santorum over Obama?

bgibbs1000 on December 28, 2011 at 8:14 PM

Ron Paul’s candidacy is a godsend for the Romney campaign since Paul locks up votes that might otherwise go to more electable conservative Not Romney candidates.

If Ron Paul didn’t exist, Romney’s evil Illuminati overlords would create him in one of their secret laboratories, along with those giant spider-goat DNA hybrids that Ron Paul associate Alex Jones exposed in his riveting, mind-blowing documentary.

troyriser_gopftw on December 28, 2011 at 8:15 PM

No one surpasses Gingrich in the whackjob department. So many of his statements and claims do not even have a toe in reality.

VorDaj on December 28, 2011 at 8:07 PM

Gingrich is however in favor of synthesizing men on Mars.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:15 PM

Santorum told Blitzer that he’d hold his nose and vote for Ron Paul tonight.

CoffeeLover on December 28, 2011 at 8:16 PM

Maybe Gingrich could try being blunt and honest about his own problems for a change. As far as Gingrich’s chances of being the Republican nominee they are only about twice Paul’s chances anyway.

VorDaj on December 28, 2011 at 8:05 PM

Solid point.

I’d vote for Paul over Obama, no question.

Hell, I voted for McCain over Obama, it can’t get much worse than that.

Let’s just hope the MITTMENTUM continues.

1punchWill on December 28, 2011 at 8:16 PM

Bolling trying to get MB . She isn’t playing. Said RP would be dangerous to US.

Southernblogger on December 28, 2011 at 8:16 PM

Paul has run for president three times, Romney only twice. By the establishment logic it is Ron Paul’s turn.

Valiant on December 28, 2011 at 8:17 PM

Ya, this actually makes me respect Romney a little more.

JohnJ on December 28, 2011 at 8:18 PM

Ron Paul and allies dropped millions in brutal, character-assassinating negative television ads against Newt in Iowa before Newt ever responded. RP fans are hardly in a position to criticize Newt for pushing back.

Robert_Paulson on December 28, 2011 at 8:08 PM

I live in Iowa and honestly nothing in those ads against Newt was false. That is why Newt wanted to be “above it all and positive” because he knew he couldn’t offer a rebuttal. I mean what exactly do you say when your opponents just run a commercial you made with Nancy Pelosi about Global Warming in a loop?

Roymunson on December 28, 2011 at 8:18 PM

No We Can’t

Newt: Can’t be trusted.
Perry: Can’t be articulate.
Romney: Can’t be conservative.
Bachmann: Can’t be ready.
Paul: Can’t be sane.
Santorum: Can’t be inspiring.
Huntsman: Can’t be Republican.
Cain: Can’t be faithful.
Palin: Can’t be running.
Reagan: Can’t be alive.

Obama: Can’t be reelected.

spiritof61 on December 28, 2011 at 8:19 PM

Maybe we should do a pool on when he flip-flops on his intention to support RP over The One.
LOL. Allah cant control himself. His Romney angst is wonderful to behold. President Romney is going to be great and watching these anybody-but-Romney clowns is all the more fun!!!!

THANKS!!!

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:12 PM

By the way, I guess Allah missed the point that Mitt was making that Newt’s change of heart about not supporting Ron Paul over Obama is a FLIP FLOP. I distinctly remembering the Fannie historian claim numerous times that everbody on the stage was a vast improvement over Obama. Thats a major flip-flop.

Just dont expect Allah or Ed Morissey to cover it. They just want to go on and on and on about Mitt’s flip flops, most of which are imagined.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:19 PM

All Romney needs is a decent third-place finish or better behind Paul and one of the lightly funded social-con candidates like Bachmann or Santorum who pose no real threat to him nationally.

Why is that all Romney needs? At the rate he’s going, he’s set to badly underperform his 2008 showing in the caucuses.

steebo77 on December 28, 2011 at 8:23 PM

By the way, I guess Allah missed the point that Mitt was making that Newt’s change of heart about not supporting Ron Paul over Obama is a FLIP FLOP. I distinctly remembering the Fannie historian claim numerous times that everbody on the stage was a vast improvement over Obama. Thats a major flip-flop.

Just dont expect Allah or Ed Morissey to cover it. They just want to go on and on and on about Mitt’s flip flops, most of which are imagined.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:19 PM

Exactly. We won’t hear about that, but I’m sure pretty soon we’ll be getting a “Did Romney flip flop on his 10,000$ bet?” headline again.

1punchWill on December 28, 2011 at 8:24 PM

I wouldn’t vote for Ron P. unless Putin were the only other alternative.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:10 PM

I control Obama in case you hadn’t caught on yet.

PootyPoot on December 28, 2011 at 8:24 PM

O/T a tad,

Raw Video: Perry Tries to Regain Campaign Buzz
5 Hrs.ago
http://www.breakingnews.com/
============================

Raw Video: Perry Tries to Regain Campaign Buzz
Published on Dec 28, 2011 by AssociatedPress
********************************************

Texas Governor Rick Perry, looking to recapture the enthusiasm that greeted his entry into the Republican presidential race in August, railed against Washington and Wall Street insiders as he met with conservatives for breakfast near Des Moines. (Dec. 28)
===============================================================

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBlRjqqIcwY

canopfor on December 28, 2011 at 8:24 PM

Ron Paul does an interview with Iranian state owned English language propaganda channel, Press TV, where he urges ending support of Israel, defends Hamas and tactics of suicide bombing, states that Hamas is innocent and the Israeli state are the aggressors.

” to me i look at it like it’s a concentration camp, and people are making bombs, like, they’re the aggressors?”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1t4O9CcZQ0

golembythehudson on December 28, 2011 at 8:26 PM

I watched a Romney town hall earlier today and Ann Romney spoke before he arrived. She comes off as so warm and endearing….why doesn’t she rub off on her husband!!!

terryannonline on December 28, 2011 at 8:27 PM

Anyone need any further proof the Republican train has hit the Titanic?

Limerick on December 28, 2011 at 8:02 PM

Guess the train was on that Intercontinental Railroad, huh?

Syzygy on December 28, 2011 at 8:27 PM

No one surpasses Gingrich in the whackjob department. So many of his statements and claims do not even have a toe in reality.

VorDaj on December 28, 2011 at 8:07 PM

Gingrich is however in favor of synthesizing men on Mars.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:15 PM

These are statements by individuals who take a peculiar pride in their own stupidity.

Ron Paul, in one of the early 2012 debates, stated that he was against the border fence, because it may be used, Soviet-style, to keep US citizens in when the currency collapses. Ron Paul is on video supporting a Congressional investigation to see if the United Stated physically executed the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center. Ron Paul has stated that Gov. Rick Perry participated in Bilderberg meeting with the likely goal of controlling the currency & our natural resources.

So we’re literally talking about a *ucked up conspiratorial freak.

Because these facts – and so many other deranged conspiracy theories that Paul has indulged in – are so amply documented & well known, it calls into question the maturity, and – for people over 20 – the basic mental health of Paul’s supporters.

Paul’s supporters may a tad more rational than the Larouchies, but that’s the best you can say about them.

BCrago66 on December 28, 2011 at 8:28 PM

Mitt’s strategy is to stay close enough to Paul’s “good side” so he can pick up his delegates at the convention without too much of a ruckus. Romney ought to play nice and even send Ron Paul a box full of elephant cupcakes every morning.

adamcr on December 28, 2011 at 8:29 PM

Just dont expect Allah or Ed Morissey to cover it. They just want to go on and on and on about Mitt’s flip flops, most of which are imagined.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:19 PM

Don’t tell me. You’ve got another feeling, right?

And you think AP is a Newt fan?

Feelings…

SlaveDog on December 28, 2011 at 8:29 PM

Gingrich is however in favor of synthesizing men on Mars.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:15 PM

Gingrich would not last 2 seconds against a padwar.

VorDaj on December 28, 2011 at 8:29 PM

O/T a tad,!
===========

nationaljournal tweeted:
The super PAC backing Gingrich is going on the air in Iowa today to counter what they call $6 million in attack ads http://t.co/5katUNKN
9 hrs.ago

http://www.breakingnews.com/
============================

canopfor on December 28, 2011 at 8:30 PM

spiritof61 on December 28, 2011 at 8:19 PM

well done.

batterup on December 28, 2011 at 8:30 PM

Can someone tell me why we’re still talking about Ron Paul? The guy’s the Louis Farrakhan of the GOP. Anyone in Iowa still supporting him is either a disaffected GOP voter who hasn’t caught up with his newsletters story or is one of his nutjob conspiracy theorist supporters.

The Count on December 28, 2011 at 8:31 PM

Obama and Paul’s stated foreign policies are essentially the same; on the domestic side, Paul is a huge improvement – pro-life, anti Roe vs. Wade, strict constructionist, small government, pro 2nd amendment. As Romney correctly points out, once in office, Paul would be forced to be more realistic, as has Obama who, once elected, turned in Bush on the international front. Paul is a much better candidate than Obama.

Some polls have Paul leading in Iowa. He has got a good organization, some serious money, and a carefully honed message. None of the attacks on him have done a damn thing; he is rising in the polls. Paul will go into the convention with some serious pull. Why alienate him and his supporters when you don’t have to.

Paul may be attacking Romney, but it is not doing any good – Romney has been rising in Iowa. He may even win it. Why acknowledge Paul’s attacks when they are not working?

Romney understands that his statement is an opportunity to pass judgement on Obama, not on Ron Paul. He knows Paul’s reputation as a kook. He has just said that the kook is better than what he have now. He just insulted the right guy.

Mr. Arkadin on December 28, 2011 at 8:31 PM

Can I start calling him Mitt Crist yet?

MadisonConservative on December 28, 2011 at 8:31 PM

If Mitt Romney was running for mayor of San Francisco, he’d endorse free hand jobs for the homeless. And if he thought it would get him elected, he’d provide them himself.

RBMN on December 28, 2011 at 7:56 PM

DING! DING! We have a winner!

they lie on December 28, 2011 at 8:32 PM

Can I start calling him Mitt Crist yet?

MadisonConservative on December 28, 2011 at 8:31 PM

To be fair Mitt isn’t orange.

terryannonline on December 28, 2011 at 8:33 PM

But how would Romney vote if it was Obama vs the Lawn Gnome?

jfox21 on December 28, 2011 at 8:33 PM

I’d vote for Paul over Obama, without hesitation. Good answer by Romney.

Rational Thought on December 28, 2011 at 8:33 PM

So Romney would support Paul? He’s a better man than I am, Gunga Din.

Tom Servo on December 28, 2011 at 8:33 PM

Despite whatever the current controversy over Paul might be, this is the correct answer. Never, ever, give in to Progressives. You will never be repaid in kind and you will never be forgiven by your allies.

Hannibal Smith on December 28, 2011 at 7:50 PM

Very true. Gingrich’s attack comparing Ron Paul to Obama is just one of 6-8 incredibly stupid mistakes the former speaker made during the past week that has all but destroyed his chances.

Should Gingrich miraculously win the nomination, he can count on total non-support by Ron Paul supporters. Paulbots don’t forget and they don’t forgive.

bw222 on December 28, 2011 at 8:33 PM

Can I start calling him Mitt Crist yet?

MadisonConservative on December 28, 2011 at 8:31 PM

He needs more orange.

predator on December 28, 2011 at 8:34 PM

I’d vote for Paul over Obama, without hesitation. Good answer by Romney.

Rational Thought on December 28, 2011 at 8:33 PM

I wouldn’t. I think the most important job a president has is to keep us safe. I wouldn’t feel safe with Ron Paul.

terryannonline on December 28, 2011 at 8:34 PM

Gingrich is however in favor of synthesizing men on Mars.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:15 PM

Gingrich would not last 2 seconds against a padwar.

VorDaj on December 28, 2011 at 8:29 PM

His third wife is a banth, though.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:34 PM

Can I start calling him Mitt Crist yet?

MadisonConservative on December 28, 2011 at 8:31 PM

Mitt’s nowhere near Charlie Christ.

Mitt is a conservative at heart, don’t believe all the true believer conservatives out there that think Mitt supports cap n’ trade just because he said he doesn’t know how much humans are contributing.

1punchWill on December 28, 2011 at 8:35 PM

Obama and Paul’s stated foreign policies are essentially the same

Mr. Arkadin on December 28, 2011 at 8:31 PM

You must be kidding. Obama more than doubled the number of American troops in Afghanistan and Paul would have pulled them all out. And that is just one example.

RasThavas on December 28, 2011 at 8:35 PM

Yesterday, I said I would vote begrudgingly vote for Paul over Obama, but today I’m undecided. Paul is scary. Anyway the good news is that Paul will never make it so I shouldn’t be agonizing over what I would do.

RonDelDon on December 28, 2011 at 8:36 PM

Just dont expect Allah or Ed Morissey to cover it. They just want to go on and on and on about Mitt’s flip flops, most of which are imagined.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:19 PM

Jailbreak:Just my 2 cents,but there is sooooo much news coming in,
and there is only so much time in the day,like this one!
===================================================================

California Supreme Court set to rule on redevelopment money
Posted: 12/28/2011 10:41:49 AM PST
**********************************

The California Supreme Court will rule Thursday on the legality of the state’s move to grab $1.7 billion in redevelopment money to help close California’s budget shortfall.

The state’s high court indicated on its website Wednesday that it would rule by 10 a.m. Thursday on the legal conflict. The Supreme Court previously had agreed to rule on the crucial issue by Jan. 15, when half of the redevelopment money is slated to be turned over to the state for the 2011-12 fiscal year.(More….)
========================================================

http://www.mercurynews.com/twitter/ci_19632057?source=rss&cid=dlvr.it

canopfor on December 28, 2011 at 8:36 PM

I wouldn’t vote for Ron P. unless Putin were the only other alternative.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:10 PM

Unfortunately, Putin is the only other alternative, his proxy a guy named Obama. The two have almost identical beliefs, the most important being the destruction of the USA. The good news, Ron Paul will not be the R nominee. The potentially bad news, if he goes 3rd party, we get Putin/Obama no matter who the R nominee might be.

TXUS on December 28, 2011 at 8:37 PM

Paulbots don’t forget and they don’t forgive.

bw222 on December 28, 2011 at 8:33 PM

What fantasy characters do they resemble?

spiritof61 on December 28, 2011 at 8:37 PM

No one surpasses Gingrich in the whackjob department. So many of his statements and claims do not even have a toe in reality.

VorDaj on December 28, 2011 at 8:07 PM

Gingrich is however in favor of synthesizing men on Mars.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:15 PM

These are statements by individuals who take a peculiar pride in their own stupidity.

BCrago66 on December 28, 2011 at 8:28 PM

Maybe you’d better do a google search of the name Vor Daj.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:37 PM

The Republican nomination process has derailed before it even started. So sad. Obama must be laughing all the way to the golf course.

MrX on December 28, 2011 at 8:38 PM

I wouldn’t vote for Ron P. unless Putin were the only other alternative.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:10 PM

Unfortunately, Putin is the only other alternative, his proxy a guy named Obama. The two have almost identical beliefs, the most important being the destruction of the USA. The good news, Ron Paul will not be the R nominee. The potentially bad news, if he goes 3rd party, we get Putin/Obama no matter who the R nominee might be.

TXUS on December 28, 2011 at 8:37 PM

Yup.

profitsbeard on December 28, 2011 at 8:39 PM

Why is that all Romney needs? At the rate he’s going, he’s set to badly underperform his 2008 showing in the caucuses.

steebo77 on December 28, 2011 at 8:23 PM

Which particular drug are you on?

Exactly. We won’t hear about that, but I’m sure pretty soon we’ll be getting a “Did Romney flip flop on his 10,000$ bet?” headline again.

1punchWill on December 28, 2011 at 8:24 PM

Indeed. That headline was atrocious and blatantly false and showed a willful lack of reason. Allah and Ed are anybody-but-Mitt types and watching Allah freak out as Mitt’s numbes improve is a wonderful thing to behold. Guess they betted on the wrong horseys.

Typical for right-wing and talk-radio blather in the alternate universe.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:40 PM

Yes! That was the right answer! I’d vote for Ron Paul too….and I hate this mormon.

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on December 28, 2011 at 8:41 PM

Paulbots don’t forget and they don’t forgive.

bw222 on December 28, 2011 at 8:33 PM

Yes they forget and forgive.

They have forgotten history. They also forgive American hater.

terryannonline on December 28, 2011 at 8:41 PM

Wait, what?
How many more ppl will holder have to kill to get you ppl to vote for RonPaul?
Do you ppl realize what four more for King Putt means?
I like Newt, but if he doesn’t make it I hold my nose and vote the nominee.

angrymike on December 28, 2011 at 8:43 PM

Hair Endorses Paul!

Paulbots Jubilant!

Perry Files Federal Lawsuit to Rescind Endorsement!

Newt Calls Endorsement “Another Pearl Harbor.”

Headlines from tomorrow’s New York Slimes.

Horace on December 28, 2011 at 8:43 PM

Yes! That was the right answer! I’d vote for Ron Paul too….and I hate this mormon.

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on December 28, 2011 at 8:41 PM

How do you feel about Jews?

Ed and Allah allow this hate speech because HotGas is full of haters and they dont want to lose 75% of their audience. Any decent blog-site would ban haters like that…dont expect it to happen here though.

I’m not Mormon but allow me to speak to Mr. Middle on behalf of them and say you can bite me.

Jailbreak on December 28, 2011 at 8:43 PM

Comment pages: 1 2