It begins: Jeb Bush endorses Romney

posted at 11:00 am on March 21, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Jeb Bush stayed out of the endorsement business when Republicans went to the polls in Florida this past January, despite rumors that he might endorse Mitt Romney.  Two months later, Bush finally made his decision — and perhaps sent a signal to the rest of the GOP to get in line:

In a statement Bush says, “I am endorsing Mitt Romney for our Party’s nomination.”

The statement reads, “Congratulations to Governor Mitt Romney on his win last night and to all the candidates for a hard fought, thoughtful debate and primary season. Primary elections have been held in thirty-four states, and now is the time for Republicans to unite behind Governor Romney and take our message of fiscal conservatism and job creation to all voters this fall. I am endorsing Mitt Romney for our Party’s nomination. We face huge challenges, and we need a leader who understands the economy, recognizes more government regulation is not the answer, believes in entrepreneurial capitalism and works to ensure that all Americans have the opportunity to succeed.”

That ends one of the supposed scenarios for a brokered convention.  Some had figured that the most likely non-candidate to prevail in an open floor fight would either be Jeb Bush or Mitch Daniels.  Bush’s endorsement takes that off the table, and with it any reason to push for a brokered convention to get another candidate onto the ticket.  Bush made sense as a way to carry Florida, a much-needed swing state in the fall, while Daniels has remained consistently hostile to any sort of run, and the GOP should carry Indiana this time.

This endorsement might start a wave of declarations for Romney, as it’s almost certainly a signal from Bush that the nomination race has to finish soon.  There aren’t too many more big endorsements left to get, though, except perhaps for his brother George.  A bigger and more acute question will be whether this could push Romney into the lead in Louisiana.  A win there would all but finish Rick Santorum as a credible threat to Romney’s nomination.  Expect Romney to push the Bush endorsement hard in the next three days and look for a quick exit by both of his competitors.


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 3 4

annoyinglittletwerp on March 21, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I understand your POV, and I respect it, but I don’t agree with it. I am not getting on the ABO bandwagon. I am going to consider what will be best for this country IN THE LONG RUN. Simply getting rid of Obama is not going to solve all the problems we face now. If I think Romney will be worse than Obama, then I can’t vote for him.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:23 PM

This is what the Romneycare hacks are supporting

*Enacted a Huge mandated HC program that makes all citizens buy insurance or go to jail or be fined. This sociolism was then modeled by romneycare advisors into obamacare. It has bankrupted romneycare (romneycare) and will bankrupt the US (obamacare)when it takes effect 2014.

*Raised taxes $550 million

*Appointed radical liberal judges

*Agrees global warming is man made- fraud science

*Supports Cap & tax- the end of the coal industry

*Pro choice- now pro life- will be pro choice again

*Had more democrats than republicans in his administration

*Was ted kennedy great friend and is very friendly with john kerry

*Republicans lost the few seats they had in the state legilature and senate

*Has 12 off shore accounts in the cayman islands not to pay taxes

*His last year in office 2006 he spent 212 days out of 300 out of state campaigning for president. All transportation, staff, security was paid for by taxpayers

*For gun control

*Has flipped on every major issue

*In 1994 Romneycare advocated a single payer health insurance, pur sociolism- he actually ran to the left of ted kennedy in his senate lost to him

Romneycare tools you own this mutt- Seamus, wherever you are, excuse the dog analogy

Danielvito on March 21, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Oh, and BTW, if I decide I can’t vote for Romney, I will not be “staying home.” I will be voting for the rest of the (conservative) candidates down ticket.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:25 PM

ROFLMAO. I tried to be civil and look how you treat me. President Romney. Sounds good, huh!

Oracleforhire on March 21, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Simply getting rid of Obama is not going to solve all the problems we face now.

It will stop him from making things much worse.

If I think Romney will be worse than Obama, then I can’t vote for him.
JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:23 PM

He can’t be worse and Obama is the alternative. He should be better than Dubya on the budget, at least.

gh on March 21, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Yes, maybe even in the general – who knows – a 3rd party candidate might actually have a chance if it comes to that. mozalf on March 21, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Umm, no.

No third party candidate has ever won the presidency. There isn’t even a viable third party candidate on the horizon at this time.

Of the remaining candidates, Mitt is my first choice. My first 3 didn’t run-some have been mentioned above. My next two dropped out.

The reality is the only possibility of defeating Obama is with the Republican party nominee. Romney is dominating the field in votes, states won and delegates. Romney could not possibly be worse than another 4 years of Obama.

If you haven’t had a chance, and you don’t like Romney, I would suggest you watch his speech from last night. He is a passionate believer in some things-capitalism and the entrepreneurial spirit. I would say those are his core values.

I think, if elected, Romney will try to restore our country to more of a free market system. He is a businessman. He understands that at some point you have to pay your bills. He will try to balance the budget (remembering, of course, that Congress is reponsible for the budget). Given that health care is one of the biggest cost drivers, he’ll have to work on that. Obamacare raises costs, so if he can, I think he’ll try to get it repealed. Obama will do none of these things. Any of the Republican candidates would be better than Obama, but Romney is far ahead of the pack. We need to shift our focus to defeating Obama.

talkingpoints on March 21, 2012 at 1:27 PM

If Romney is going to be a squish as president, and“reach across the aisle” to the liberal democrats, and damage conservatism, then he is my enemy. What don’t you understand about that?

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 12:50 PM

What don’t you understand about bills having to originate in one of the two houses of Congress?

And nobody has said just getting rid of Obama will solve ALL the country’s problems.

M240H on March 21, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Wow! The anti-Mitts are in a frenzy.. Regardless of who you prefer to be the candidate, the time has passed to attack fellow republicans as if they were libs. Shameful behavior. I only would have expected this sort of thing from libs.

Oracleforhire on March 21, 2012 at 1:18 PM

You, of course, took note of how “civil” the pro-Mitt people are, right?

Why don’t you tell Mitt to stop attacking fellow Republicans? Shame on him, right?

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:29 PM

Oracleforhire on March 21, 2012 at 1:26 PM

So far you’re 0 for 2. Give us a postive reason to vote for Romney.

gh on March 21, 2012 at 1:30 PM

What don’t you understand about bills having to originate in one of the two houses of Congress?

And nobody has said just getting rid of Obama will solve ALL the country’s problems.

M240H on March 21, 2012 at 1:28 PM

We will work, campaign and give money to Consrvatives running for the Senate and the House….

That has nothing to do with Romney.

idesign on March 21, 2012 at 1:31 PM

All those holding on to the delusion that a brokered convention would be a good thing need to realize the history of them. No party that has gone to a brokered convention in the last 100 years has ever won the Presidency. The people are so beat up by the time they turn their guns towards the opposition that there is no ammo left. It would be a kamikaze mission. The only one we would take out is ourselves.

Minnfidel on March 21, 2012 at 1:33 PM

He can’t be worse and Obama is the alternative. He should be better than Dubya on the budget, at least.

gh on March 21, 2012 at 1:26 PM

If he governs as a squish, then he can be worse than Obama, in the long run, for this country.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:34 PM

I understand your POV, and I respect it, but I don’t agree with it. I am not getting on the ABO bandwagon. I am going to consider what will be best for this country IN THE LONG RUN. Simply getting rid of Obama is not going to solve all the problems we face now. If I think Romney will be worse than Obama, then I can’t vote for him.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:23 PM

You have a legitimate point worthy of further discussion.

SparkPlug on March 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM

It will stop him from making things much worse. — gh

Not if we retain the house and retake the senate.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM

If he governs as a squish, then he can be worse than Obama, in the long run, for this country.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:34 PM

I don’t think so. This election is a tipping point.

gh on March 21, 2012 at 1:37 PM

You Romney bots can keep dismissing us doubters as ABR “haters” but you can’t change who Romney is. He is a candidate with no core, no principles, and he’s on a quest for power.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Oh I get it, I am a Romney bot because I happen to think he’s a better option than Obama, o.k. thanks for clarifying it. Of course he was my third choice, but hey, no point in discussing anything with a bot eh?

Minnfidel on March 21, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Well that pretty much settles it for me. I just refuse to vote for Romney. In the last two days Romney has gotten the endorsement of two anti- Republicans American hating Left wingers; Jeb Bush and Jeff Immelt. Just what more do you need to know.

pwb on March 21, 2012 at 11:31 AM

John Bolton endorsed Romney. John. Bolton.

Swerve22 on March 21, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Oh, and BTW, if I decide I can’t vote for Romney, I will not be “staying home.” I will be voting for the rest of the (conservative) candidates down ticket.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Same here. Romney will not get my vote, but I will vote for conservative candidates downticket.

Norwegian on March 21, 2012 at 1:42 PM

I’m so sick of the self appointed “base”. Who appointed you the base? I’ve never been anything but a Republican for my 30+ voting years and because I’m willing to support Romney I’m now some sort of RINO or not part of the base?

You may need to look in the mirror because there have been more registered Republicans vote for Romney than almost all of the other candidates combined.

Tater Salad on March 21, 2012 at 11:15 AM

I totally agree. I am voting in my 8th Presidential election and have ALWAYS been pro-life, pro 2nd Amendment, pro-drilling, SUV driving, military member, freedom-loving conservative and because I support Romney I am all of sudden supposed to be looking in from the outside of “conservatism” and am a RINO? Makes no sense.

I tell you the TP was hijacked by social conservatism which was NEVER, NEVER, the intent of the TP and what attracted a HUGE response in 2009/10 from AMERICANS of ALL backgrounds and now unless you are a conservative of the “right kind” you do not belong. hogwash!

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 1:43 PM

What don’t you understand about bills having to originate in one of the two houses of Congress?

And nobody has said just getting rid of Obama will solve ALL the country’s problems.

M240H on March 21, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Nice job of clipping off the first part of my comment.

This is what I said, that you edited out:

What makes you think we will re-take the Senate with Romney as our nominee, and what makes you think that Romney will be a compliant yes-man in the White House?

You carefully avoided answering this question.

You’re presuming that the Republicans in the House (and possibly the senate) will control Romney. What if those Republican leaders are moderate Republicans like we have now? There will be nobody to blame but Republicans when they fail to be fiscally responsible.

Some do seem to think that Obama is the source of all the country’s problems, although I don’t believe I ever made that statement. I said I’m looking at the long term, not the short term.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:44 PM

John Bolton endorsed Romney. John. Bolton.

Swerve22 on March 21, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Good news. Bolton is a very practical man.

gh on March 21, 2012 at 1:50 PM

Danielvito on March 21, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Daniel…
I counter your argument with Romney’s ACTUAL record from MA records.

some of your points are laughable.
*Supports Cap & tax- the end of the coal industry – WRONG

*Pro choice- now pro life- will be pro choice again – See below

*Had more democrats than republicans in his administration – Well, Duh, this is MA.

*Was ted kennedy great friend and is very friendly with john kerry – nothing wrong being friendly to those you work around

*Republicans lost the few seats they had in the state legislature and senate – see below. He tried to recruit MORE R’s in…

ROMNEY’S MA RECORD AS GOVERNOR:
Romney’s MA RECORD AS GOVERNOR:
Romney repeatedly pushed the state legislature to roll back the state income tax from 5.3% to 5.0%

The state’s unemployment rate fell during Romney’s period, from 5.6 to 4.7 percent.

He also proposed a “tax-free shopping day

Property tax relief for Seniors.

A manufacturing tax credit.

Massachusetts finished 2004 with a $700 million surplus

Finished 2005 with a $500 million surplus. “We have successfully closed the largest deficit in our state’s history without raising taxes,

Romney vetoed the transfer of funds from the contingency account. “One of the primary responsibilities of government is keeping the books balanced,” said Romney “The problem here is not revenues; the problem is overspending. The level of spending which we’re looking at would put us on the same road to financial crisis and ruin that our commonwealth has been down before.” The veto was overturned by the legislature, and all 250 of Romney’s 2006 vetoes were overturned by the Massachusetts Legislature. A common practice by the LIBERAL Legislature.

According to an analysis by the Tax Foundation, The combined state and local tax burden in Massachusetts was 9.8 percent in 2002 (below the national average of 10.3 percent), and 10.5 percent in 2006 (below the national average of 10.8 percent)

Romney established and funded the John and Abigail Adams Scholarship Program to reward the top 25 percent of Massachusetts high school students with a four-year, tuition-free scholarship to the state’s public universities or colleges.

Romney also drafted other education reforms, including the recruitment of 1,000 skilled math and science instructors, bonuses of as much as $15,000 a year for top-performing teachers, and new intervention programs for failing schools

He also supported English immersion classes
for students that cannot speak English and opposed bilingual education.

During Romney’s tenure as governor, Massachusetts’ per capita funding for public higher education decreased from $158 to $137

Romney denounced Harvard University of Cambridge, Massachusetts for inviting former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami to speak at the school. Romney ordered all state agencies to boycott the visit by refusing to provide state police escorts and other service typically given to former heads of state.

Romney attempted to block implementation of the decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court that legalized same-sex marriage in 2003.

Romney instructed town clerks not to issue marriage licenses to out-of-state gay couples, except for those announcing their intention to relocate to the Commonwealth by requiring the enforcement of the “1913 law” (General Legislation, Part II, Title III, Chapter. 207 (Certain Marriages Prohibited), Sections 11, 12, & 13), which prohibits non-residents from marrying in Massachusetts if the marriage would be void in their home state. THIS ONE ACT GREATLY CHANGED GAY MARRIAGE WHICH WOULD HAVE MADE MA THE GATEWAY FOR THE ENTIRE COUNTRY!

“Like me, the great majority of Americans wish both to preserve the traditional definition of marriage
and to oppose bias and intolerance directed towards gays and lesbians,” Romney said in 2004.

Persuade the U.S. Senate to pass the Defense of Marriage Amendment. On June 22, 2004 he testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, urging its members to protect the definition of marriage. “Marriage is not an evolving paradigm,”

On June 2, 2006, Romney sent a letter to each member of the U.S. Senate urging them to vote in favor of the Marriage Protection Amendment.

In 2003 Romney vetoed a bill funding hate crimes prevention

Romney announced plans to file a death penalty bill in early 2005. The bill, filed April 28, 2005, sought to reinstate the death penalty in cases that include terrorism, the assassination of law enforcement officials and multiple killings.

In May 2005, Romney presented a proposal to the Massachusetts General Court to crack down on repeat drunk drivers. Massachusetts had some of the weakest drunk driving laws of any state in the country. Romney called his proposal “Melanie’s Bill” in honor of Melanie Powell, a 13-year-old who was killed in 2003 by a repeat drunk driver.

Romney was the first governor in modern Massachusetts history to deny every request for a pardon or commutation during his four years in office.

In March 2002 during his run for governor, said that, “On a personal basis, I don’t favor abortion. However, as governor of the commonwealth, I will protect a woman’s right to choose under the laws of the country and the commonwealth. That’s the same position I’ve had for many years

He vetoed a bill on pro-life grounds that the bill would expand access to emergency contraception in hospitals and pharmacies. He returned from his vacation house in New Hampshire to veto the bill, because the Lt. Govorner, Kerry Healey would have signed the bill into law. The legislature voted overwhelmingly to overturn the veto and pass the bill into law on September 15, 2005.

Vetoed a Massachusetts bill to fund stem-cell research because the legislation allowed such cloning of human embryos. “I am not in favor of creating new human embryos through cloning,” said Romney, calling the practice “a matter of profound moral and ethical consequence” The state legislature overrode Romney’s veto, with many legislators feeling that stem-cell research will be important in the future to the state’s biotech industry

In February 2005, Romney filed legislation to increase benefits for Massachusetts National Guard members. Working with the state legislature, Romney developed the “Welcome Home Bill” which provides Guardsman with reduced life-insurance premiums and free tuition and fees at Massachusetts universities and community colleges.

The bill also increases daily state active-duty pay rate from $75 to $100, and increases the death benefit paid to families of Guard members killed in the line of duty from $5,000 to $100,000. Additionally, the “Welcome Home Bill” creates a $1,000 bonus for Guardsman and reservists called to active duty in Iraq and Afghanistan since the September 11, 2001 attacks and a $500 bonus for those who were activated for duty elsewhere.

The legislation provides a $2,000 benefit for Gold Star spouses and increases the Gold Star parents’ benefit from $1,500 to $2,000. High school diplomas will also be granted to veterans who dropped out to enlist in World War II, Korea or Vietnam wars. Romney signed the bill into law on Veterans Day 2005.

Voted and eased 2nd Amendment bills in MA
See here: “Massachusetts oldest, largest and premier pro-second amendment/gun rights group, Gun owners` Action League (GOAL) stated:“The bill was the greatest victory for gun owners since the passage of the gun control laws in 1998 (Chapter 180 of the Acts of 1998). It was a reform bill totally supported by GOAL. Press and media stories around the country got it completely wrong when claimed the bill was an extension of the ‘assault weapon’ ban”

In the Massachusetts Senate elections, 2004 and Massachusetts House election, 2004, Romney campaigned heavily to try to recruit Republican candidates to contest seats.

Romney issued nearly a thousand vetoes as governor, the large share of which were overturned by one or the other of the state houses. “I know how to veto. I like vetoes. I’ve vetoed hundreds of spending appropriations as governor.

After Democrat Deval Patrick succeeded Romney as Governor of Massachusetts, he undid several of Romney’s initiatives, including those related to budget cuts, policing of illegal immigration, and the state’s automobile insurance system. Patrick ran into his own set of difficulties with the public.[192] Patrick’s approval rating was 33% in April 2009, with 49% saying Romney did a better job as governor than Patrick, and at its lowest Patrick’s approval rating reached 22%.

These are conservative principles and TOO MANY of you are believing what you WANT to see in Romney’s record.

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 1:50 PM

I don’t think so. This election is a tipping point.

gh on March 21, 2012 at 1:37 PM

I really hope so. Maybe Romney can give me a reason to vote FOR him, if he focuses more on defeating Obama. But “he’s not as bad as Obama” is not a compelling reason to vote FOR Romney.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:54 PM

So far you’re 0 for 2. Give us a postive reason to vote for Romney.

gh on March 21, 2012 at 1:30 PM

I don’t care who you vote for, as long as it’s not Obama. ROFLMAO. I made a plea for civility, that’s all. Make your points for or against a candidate without being insulting.

Oracleforhire on March 21, 2012 at 1:55 PM

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/03/21/nudge_to_the_right_produces_mitt_s_best_speech_yet_if_he_means_it

Looks like Rush is ready to hop on the Romney train.

Sorry HA 35 – probably the worst wednesday you’ve had in a long time; Santy routed in Il, Jeb endorses Romney, TP gives tepid support and says time to wrap it up, and last but not least the big man himself indicates he is ready to support him….

Bradky on March 21, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Well that pretty much settles it for me. I just refuse to vote for Romney. In the last two days Romney has gotten the endorsement of two anti- Republicans American hating Left wingers; Jeb Bush and Jeff Immelt. Just what more do you need to know.

pwb on March 21, 2012 at 11:31 AM

John Bolton endorsed Romney. John. Bolton.

Swerve22 on March 21, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Additionally, Ted Nugent. Robert Bork. Kid Rock. Cofer Black. Michael Mukasey. John Ashcroft. Kelly Ayotte. Nikki Haley.

Take your pick of a WIDE variety of backers…that is the appeal to Romney EXCEPT for a small percentage of people who reside here on HA that THINK they represent the majority of conservatism.

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Oh I get it, I am a Romney bot because I happen to think he’s a better option than Obama, o.k. thanks for clarifying it. Of course he was my third choice, but hey, no point in discussing anything with a bot eh?

Minnfidel on March 21, 2012 at 1:41 PM

No. Not at all. I got carried away in my comment, and I wrongly left the impression that you are Romney bot. I apologize for that.

You and I seem to be on the same page.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:00 PM

I totally agree. I am voting in my 8th Presidential election and have ALWAYS been pro-life, pro 2nd Amendment, pro-drilling, SUV driving, military member, freedom-loving conservative and because I support Romney I am all of sudden supposed to be looking in from the outside of “conservatism” and am a RINO? Makes no sense.

I tell you the TP was hijacked by social conservatism which was NEVER, NEVER, the intent of the TP and what attracted a HUGE response in 2009/10 from AMERICANS of ALL backgrounds and now unless you are a conservative of the “right kind” you do not belong. hogwash!

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 1:43 PM

We didn’t have a conservative candidate to choose from. They’re all RINOs in one way or another.

There are lots of anti-Romneys who are jackasses, but they’re balanced out by the Mittbot zealots. It’s okay for them to accuse those who won’t fall in line behind Mitt of being Obama supporters. They take the same stance of their opponents not being “conservatives of the right kind,” so I’m afraid I don’t have much sympathy for you.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Oracleforhire on March 21, 2012 at 1:55 PM

ABO is fine. I try to be civil to those who act the same way. As much as I can, I ignore the others. However, it is tiresome constantly seeing the same hit-and-runs on this site. I’m glad to hear you’re not one of them.

gh on March 21, 2012 at 2:06 PM

I don’t care who you vote for, as long as it’s not Obama. ROFLMAO. I made a plea for civility, that’s all. Make your points for or against a candidate without being insulting.

Oracleforhire on March 21, 2012 at 1:55 PM

This also applies to Romney’s supporters, right? You seem to have only called out those who are “bashing” Romney for “shameful behavior.” You don’t engage in double standards, right?

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Oh, and BTW, if I decide I can’t vote for Romney, I will not be “staying home.” I will be voting for the rest of the (conservative) candidates down ticket.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:25 PM

I’m right there with ya JannyMae!

KickandSwimMom on March 21, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Is it really necessary to go through the Mittens “endorsement game” anymore at this point ? Wouldn’t Jeb’s “endorsement” been a little more apropros during the Florida primary ?

Granted, Sarah should have held onto her chips a little longer, but isn’t a little too convenient for anyone now to go all in on Romney ?

Jeb, Where were ya ?

FlaMurph on March 21, 2012 at 2:12 PM

The Mitt Zealots have driven me away from Romney. Almost permanently. Not even ABO can bring me back.

The only way someone can get me to vote for Mitt Romney is if they give me a really good reason that hasn’t already been attempted by others. And the person delivering it must be reasonable, and not a zealot.

UODuckMan on March 21, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Additionally, Ted Nugent. Robert Bork. Kid Rock. Cofer Black. Michael Mukasey. John Ashcroft. Kelly Ayotte. Nikki Haley.

Take your pick of a WIDE variety of backers…that is the appeal to Romney EXCEPT for a small percentage of people who reside here on HA that THINK they represent the majority of conservatism.

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Does Romney actually “appeal” to these endorsers, or do they look at him as “not as bad as Obama” or “most electable candidate?” The obvious truth is that the “majority” of conservatives are not enthused about ANY of these candidates. I think you’re making a mistake in trying to promote Romney based on those who have endorsed him.

I can’t help but think back to 2008, when we were told that we had to nominate McCain, because he could draw in the “moderates” and independents. How did that work out for us?

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:14 PM

We didn’t have a conservative candidate to choose from. They’re all RINOs in one way or another.

There are lots of anti-Romneys who are jackasses, but they’re balanced out by the Mittbot zealots. It’s okay for them to accuse those who won’t fall in line behind Mitt of being Obama supporters. They take the same stance of their opponents not being “conservatives of the right kind,” so I’m afraid I don’t have much sympathy for you.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:05 PM

JM,
I have always been civil and MOST Romney supporters have as well…I think bluegill and a couple of others get carried away in their comments just as a select few supporters from OTHER candidates do as well. Most of the Romney supporters just get tired of being called Mittbots when we are as conservative, and in some cases, likely MORE conservative than some others on here. :o)

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:15 PM

I’m right there with ya JannyMae!

KickandSwimMom on March 21, 2012 at 2:10 PM

.
LADIES !

Think of your vote only as a vote AGAINST OBAMA……. and not so much as supportive of voting for Romney.

Just say to yourself “I am voting against Obama, and next time I will get to vote for my conservative dream date” (If you can find one!)

FlaMurph on March 21, 2012 at 2:17 PM

I have to get this straight.

Some think that if you don’t like Romney and refuse to vote on the presidential part of the ballot (and vote the rest) you are the enemy.

You’re going to be in a shrinking club if you think like this, because you’re going to have a lot more “enemies” than just liberal progressives. It’s an odd thing when moderates make enemies out of people that want real American, conservative resolutions to real progressive generated problems.
People saying that are moderate squish progressive republicans that wanted Romney in there from the get-go. If Romney is anything, he’s a squish moderate progressive, not a conservative.

I am not, never have, never will, going to vote for or support obama. That does not mean that I HAVE TO vote for or support someone I think is going to be just as bad for the country as obama, just to get rid of obama.

I don’t believe for a minute Romney is going to do anything but further his agenda, same as obama has, and Romney is going to practice the same kind of crony capitalism that obama has, and will not undo the damage obama has done. He’ll hear the left complain and turn into an overcooked noodle in the hands of the left and the RINO progressive idiots.

Worst of all, he’ll be a one term president, and you can bet your RINO ass that the liberal that replaces the one term Romney (if Romney even wins) will be ten times worse as a progressive socialist than obama is.

You tell me then, which is worse, and why should I support someone who is just going to stick the knife in even deeper and gleefully twist the handle.

The GOP could have encouraged REAL conservatives to primary instead of sitting on their useless hands watching a pack of idiots prepare to drive the car further into the ditch, over the cliff, into the sun, whatever. It ain’t gonna be pretty, and I will not have to be one of the people saying I voted for this to happen. No thanks.

Wolfmoon on March 21, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Jeb, Where were ya ?

FlaMurph on March 21, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Hey, now, Romney winning wasn’t a sure thing back then. Had to wait for the smoke to clear. He’s a profile in courage, you know.

Bitter Clinger on March 21, 2012 at 2:18 PM

I find your Immelt comment amusing. While I have a great dislike for Immelt, I do hope there are millions more like him who have seen that Obama is not what they thought and are willing to vote for Romney.

Instead of making fun of him we should be celebrating this turn of events.

Tater Salad on March 21, 2012 at 11:35 AM

I find your faith in believing Immelt (and the millions like him, etc) to do the right thing to be inspiring, but I can’t follow you down that road.

I don’t believe that he and the millions of others like him will do the right thing when it comes down to doing what’s right or keeping the gravy train going and I think it’s folly to count on it.

kim roy on March 21, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Additionally, Ted Nugent. Robert Bork. Kid Rock. Cofer Black. Michael Mukasey. John Ashcroft. Kelly Ayotte. Nikki Haley.

Take your pick of a WIDE variety of backers…that is the appeal to Romney EXCEPT for a small percentage of people who reside here on HA that THINK they represent the majority of conservatism.

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Does Romney actually “appeal” to these endorsers, or do they look at him as “not as bad as Obama” or “most electable candidate?” The obvious truth is that the “majority” of conservatives are not enthused about ANY of these candidates. I think you’re making a mistake in trying to promote Romney based on those who have endorsed him.

I can’t help but think back to 2008, when we were told that we had to nominate McCain, because he could draw in the “moderates” and independents. How did that work out for us?

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:14 PM

JM,
I think you are PROJECTING your lack of enthusiasm for Romney and believing that there CANNOT be those that do ENTHUSIASTICALLY endorse Romney. We exist.

Romney has approx 4.1 million votes and while not all of those are “enthusiastic” votes FOR him, there are millions that do support him because we DO LIKE HIS POLICIES and believe he will trounce Obama.

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:18 PM

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 1:50 PM

I refuted you on Romney on some of his record a few weeks ago.

Beginning here:

Romney equivocates and finds refuge in finding rationale as to why his hands are tied. He did it in MA regarding abortion. He did it in MA regarding same-sex “marriage”.

So much of Romney’s so-called conservative record is simply smoke and mirrors.

INC on March 21, 2012 at 2:23 PM

More here:

Here from the The Missing Governor by Hadley Arkes, is the first thing Romney could have done:

Romney could have invoked the Massachusetts constitution (Part 2, ch. III, art. V): “All causes of marriage, divorce, and alimony, and all appeals from the Judges of probate shall be heard and determined by the Governor and Council, until the Legislature shall, by law, make other provision.”

Romney could have pointed out here that the Supreme Judicial Court had actually violated the constitution by taking jurisdiction in a class of cases that the constitution had explicitly withheld from the courts.

From November 11, 2005, No More Striking Down Constitutions by John Haskins:

If constitutions count, homosexual marriage remains illegal in Massachusetts. John Adams’s constitution says explicitly the people are “not bound” by any law not ratified by their Legislature. Four Boston judges struck down a constitution that stood in their way — one they’ve sworn to uphold. The word “treason” comes to mind — a strong word that Liberals would use lustily if they could, but then the Left is all about winning and conservatives are about slowing them down.

Has “conservative” governor Mitt Romney refused to enforce a ruling dissenting justices and Harvard law professors say is bogus? His oath compels him to refuse the court its pleasure. He pleads impotence. Do constitutionalists demand that the outlaw justices resign? Silence. Or Romney? No, they fancy him in the White House. At what point will “constitutionalists” stop siding with the establishment against the Constitution?

INC on March 21, 2012 at 2:24 PM

I also linked to the MA Constitution:

Check out Part I, Article X, XX, XXX and Part II, Ch. III, Article V.

Here’s an excerpt from Part I, Article X:

In fine, the people of this commonwealth are not controllable by any other laws than those to which their constitutional representative body have given their consent.

INC on March 21, 2012 at 2:25 PM

… I said I’m looking at the long term, not the short term.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:44 PM

No, you’re not. Another term of Obama will put this country further along an irreversible course of government dependency for an even larger portion of the populace. A Romney administration – as opposed to a second Obama administration, which your non-vote will help make probable- would at least slow the damage.

A spite-vote for Obama or a non-vote for the R candidate is the same thing. And it makes you the enemy.

M240H on March 21, 2012 at 2:26 PM

The Mitt Zealots have driven me away from Romney. Almost permanently. Not even ABO can bring me back.

The only way someone can get me to vote for Mitt Romney is if they give me a really good reason that hasn’t already been attempted by others. And the person delivering it must be reasonable, and not a zealot.

UODuckMan on March 21, 2012 at 2:14 PM

I have tried not to do that, because I hated it when the anti-Palins did the same thing with the Palin supporters. Even Ann Coulter jumped on that bandwagon.

There are reasonable Romney supporters. Unfortunately, they’re outnumbered and out shouted by the zealots. I tune many of them out, but sometimes they are in such quantity here on HotAir that they are unavoidable. I understand why you feel the way you do.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:27 PM

I also commented:

Maggie Gallagher wrote in 2005:

Take a look at the new unisex marriage licenses that Gov. Romney has decided (without any authorization by the state legislature) to create. Gone is the language of bride and groom, husband and wife, replaced by the new, deeply moving announcement that “Party A” is going to join with “Party B” in something the court insists we call marriage.

So why did Romney not stand firm? Why would he go along with a court ruling when the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction, and when one John Adams, wisely wrote into the Massachusetts Constitution that the people could not be controlled by any laws than those their constitutional representative body passed???????

Well, here’s some insight. My emphasis.

From the NYT on September 8, 2007, when Romney was actively running for president the first time:

Romney’s Tone on Gay Rights Is Seen as Shift

Mitt Romney seemed comfortable as a group of gay Republicans quizzed him over breakfast one morning in 2002. Running for governor of Massachusetts, he was at a gay bar in Boston to court members of Log Cabin Republicans.

Mr. Romney explained to the group that his perspective on gay rights had been largely shaped by his experience in the private sector, where, he said, discrimination was frowned upon. When the discussion turned to a court case on same-sex marriage that was then wending its way through the state’s judicial system, he said he believed that marriage should be limited to the union of a man and a woman. But, according to several people present, he promised to obey the courts’ ultimate ruling and not champion a fight on either side of the issue.

“I’ll keep my head low,” he said, making a bobbing motion with his head like a boxer, one participant recalled….

Jonathan Spampinato, a Republican activist who is openly gay and worked as Mr. Romney’s deputy political director during the run for governor…

Calling Mr. Romney a flip-flopper on gay rights would be overly simplistic, Mr. Spampinato said. But he conceded that his old boss had promised the Log Cabin members that he would not champion a fight against same-sex marriage.

“It’s definitely a shift in political priorities and strategy,” he said.

INC on March 21, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Interesting….

Sarah Palin vs. Jeb Bush: Inside their fight for control of the Republican Party

http://www.amazon.com/Sarah-Palin-vs-Bush-ebook/dp/B007MX6QAQ/ref=sr_1_27?ie=UTF8&qid=1332352229&sr=8-27

idesign on March 21, 2012 at 2:29 PM

And I said:

g2825m on March 3, 2012 at 7:26 AM

Even if you disagree with me on these issues, the fact remains that Romney shifts his policies at will. He also creates his own myths of his record according to the need of the moment. This isn’t spin, this is a fact.

INC on March 21, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Thank you G28 for finally setting Mitt’s record straight. Boy, he needs to strongly push his governing record in the general. The “base”, whatever that is, thinks that the only people who live in this country must think like they do. I have been a REpub for over 50 years and realize that you have differing factions in the party but such bitter angry people whose slogan must be “my way or the highway” are off track. This country is diversified, sometimes good and sometimes bad, but constant. One of the big criticisms of Odumba is that he does everything his way and doesn’t consult with anyone else; what is the difference between what he does and the way the base wants to run things? I want a good moral man, good family man, somewhat shy and reserved, who loves this country. I also want a guy who governs all. thinks of all, and works with and for all. (As a footnote, I really can’t understand the hate for someone, whom you don’t personally know, written for public dissemination and lying about the facts). Sorry for those angry unhappy people.

AReadyRepub on March 21, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Wolfmoon on March 21, 2012 at 2:17 PM

I have NO IDEA what sites you have been reading but Romney is NOT what you are making him out to be…I seriously have to laugh as I do not know what you have been reading.

Romney CUT taxes in MA BUT did raise fees to shorten the budget deficit of 3BILLION MA faced…and fees which had not been adjusted in decades. This is why many Republicans whined in MA. Reagan did this SAME THING country-wide.

Romney opened and expanded gun rights it is on record. The assault weapons ban was FALSE. EVEN the NRA in MA said that was wrong.

He was FOR NON-Discrimination laws against Gays/Lesbians which MANY here confuse he was FOR gay marriage which he WAS NOT. He testified twice before Congress FOR DOMA. Romney was on the FRONT LINES to BAN GAY Marriage in his state.

Is Pro-life.

Increased benefits for Vets.

Created Melanie’s bill which many states followed his lead on DUI’s

Against illegal immigration BEFORE it became a FAD in the Party. Endorsed his troopers to detain illegals and turn them over to ICE

Lobbied to reinstitute the Death Penalty in MA.

These are ALL conservative positions he held and there are more I am not even covering. The MA Healthcare was happening whether Romney did anything or not. But he was elected the Governor to represent ALL the people and so he sought Heritage to come up with the most CONSERVATIVE angle he could on healthcare and 98% of us THEN had no issues with what he did FOR HIS STATE as every State has that 10th Amendment right to do.

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:33 PM

AReadyRepub on March 21, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Read the links I’ve been posting.

It’s one thing to support Romney, it’s another thing to perpetrate the myth that he has a conservative record.

INC on March 21, 2012 at 2:34 PM

This article is on one issue: abortion. I’ve linked to it because I think Saletan does an excellent job in his analysis of Mitt Romney.

The Conversion
How, when, and why Mitt Romney changed his mind on abortion.

The intro states:

To understand Mitt Romney, you have to understand the most difficult passage of his political life: how he changed his position on abortion. Not the story he tells about it, but the real story.

Romney began his political career as a pro-choicer. In the story he tells, he had an epiphany, a flash of insight, and committed himself thereafter to protecting life. But that isn’t what happened. The real story of Romney’s conversion—a series of tentative, equivocal, and confused shifts, accompanied by a constant rewriting of his past—paints a more accurate picture of who he is. Romney has complex views and a talent for framing them either way, depending on his audience. He values truth, so he makes sure there’s an element of it in everything he says. He can’t stand to break his promises, so he reinterprets them.

INC on March 21, 2012 at 2:35 PM

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:33 PM

On illegal aliens: Romney came out with that trooper edict a few weeks before his term ended. Nothing ever came of it. It was mere cover to give him a “record” of action.

INC on March 21, 2012 at 2:37 PM

At the start of the financial crisis, most “true conservatives” felt that the banks and corporations like GM should have been left to fail, despite the consequences. And perhaps so. The point was, and is, about making hard choices instead of easy ones for the greater good.

Helping the Democrats tear Romney down is the easy choice. The harder choice, for the greater good of conservativism at this particular point in history, is to not only support him but to do so vocally. Conservativism simply will not blossom and thrive under another four years of Obama’s administration. It will wither with every new law passed, with every new ban put in place, and with every new attack on Americans’ fundamental rights. Conservatives who are considering taking their ball and going home are actually just handing it off to the Sandra Flukes of the world. Don’t do that.

Scuttling GM might have actually benefitted the American auto industry. Scuttling the Republican party will not benefit conservativism. Not in the short term, and not in the long term, either. Make change happen from within, once you’ve won the White House.

Afterall, that’s what the liberals have been doing.

The Resolute Desk on March 21, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Emphasis added.

This is what has me still listening to the scorched earthers. I wonder if conservatism would actually flourish under another Obama term.

The Dems will own every bad decision and won’t have the cover of blaming anyone. In another four years, if things go as they are now, the LSM will be completely or close to being completely discredited.

Out of that is an opportunity to bring about a real conservative party, not one that pretends to be conservative only to line the pockets of the lucky few.

Then there’s the idea of the next four years being run by a tepid Republican party without the will do to the hard work and while that’s marginally better than Obama, it’s not something that’s going to make a difference in the long term. It will only continue the status quo.

It’s a tough decision. Go with having the Democrats own it and hope conservatives are smart enough to “not let a crisis to go to waste” and exploit it.

Or hope that in the next four years, if Romney wins, the conservatives are smart enough to take advantage of the four years to build something.

kim roy on March 21, 2012 at 2:39 PM

No, you’re not. Another term of Obama will put this country further along an irreversible course of government dependency for an even larger portion of the populace. A Romney administration – as opposed to a second Obama administration, which your non-vote will help make probable- would at least slow the damage.

That’s your opinion. I explained why I don’t necessarily agree with it, but I’ll elaborate, since you don’t seem to understand.

Slowing the damage is not preferable to me to destroying conservatism and the Republican Party for many years to come. It would open the door to a whole series of new Obamas. That’s why I refuse to step onto your ABO bandwagon.

A spite-vote for Obama or a non-vote for the R candidate is the same thing. And it makes you the enemy.

M240H on March 21, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Let’s see, here. Not voting for Romney is a vote for Obama, so if I go to the polls and vote FOR Obama, then by your logic I’ve effectively voted for him twice.

I will not vote FOR Romney, but I may still vote AGAINST Obama, depending on what Romney does and says between now and November. Your intimidation tactics will not sway me to your point of view, and they may just do the opposite.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:40 PM

INC on March 21, 2012 at 2:25 PM

INC…
you post these and I have as many sites to counter what you have posted.

The bottom line is that Romney VETOED over 800 bills by his Legislature and they overrode him EVERY TIME because they had SUPER-Majorities there. BUT Romney was RIGHT in that he showed he IS a CONSERVATIVE in a BLUE STATE and yet you and others want to continue to pound on him for existing in a heavily Democrat state.

He did what the people mainly wanted from him which was they were faced with an enormous debt of 3BILLION dollars and when he left he left a surplus. THIS. is what our country is faced with NOW.

RS has NO EXECUTIVE experience and Gingrich is in that same boat. Romney is the right candidate for this time. He SHOULD have been elected last time if not undercut last time and we likely would not be in this same position today.

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:43 PM

kim roy on March 21, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Well said.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:47 PM

That ends one of the supposed scenarios for a brokered convention. Some had figured that the most likely non-candidate to prevail in an of open floor fight would either be Jeb Bush or Mitch Daniels. Bush’s endorsement takes that off the table, and with it any reason to push for a brokered convention to get another candidate onto the ticket.

There was never a reason! It was always a ludicrous fantasy born out of sour grapes, and encouraged by Sarah Palin, talk radio hosts, and other not helpful to the cause of defeating Obama.

Buy Danish on March 21, 2012 at 2:49 PM

This is what has me still listening to the scorched earthers. I wonder if conservatism would actually flourish under another Obama term.

kim roy on March 21, 2012 at 2:39 PM

I read your entire qoute…so don’t worry. I am just taking this part because I hope you do not believe this.

Our country will NOT recover for a LONG time if it falls under another four years of Obama, czars, Obamacare, unelected cabinet selections, etc

I scratch my head wondering where many of you think Romney is like Obama-lite? It is not even close. Romney WANTS the country to succeed through free enterprise, Obama hates free enterprise.

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:50 PM

If I think Romney will be worse than Obama, then I can’t vote for him.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Stay home (again) then. If we divorce the chest thumping supposed “conservatives” from the GOP it will weaken both. If supposed “conservatives” can’t be counted on to vote against an existential threat to the country like Obama then they can’t be counted on to do anything. 4 million stayed at home last election cycle because they were butthurt over the primaries and didn’t like McCain. If a similar number do the same this time around then you aren’t going to be taken seriously and that will push the country left faster than almost anything.
Your guy lost. Probably several of your guys lost. If you can’t be counted on to step up and do what is right for the USA then we will have to muddle through without you, but you aren’t a conservative and you aren’t a patriot if you are helping to elect Obama.

V7_Sport on March 21, 2012 at 2:52 PM

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:43 PM

It doesn’t take much to look like a conservative in a blue state.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:52 PM

There was never a reason! It was always a ludicrous fantasy born out of sour grapes, and encouraged by Sarah Palin, talk radio hosts, and other not helpful to the cause of defeating Obama.

Buy Danish on March 21, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Hey Mittwit, ponder this…

Palin is someone GOP delegates might be able to unify around in the case of a hopelessly deadlocked convention. She is seen positively by Gingrich voters (85/7), Santorum supporters (80/10), and Romney ones (57/27) alike. That’s a contrast to Romney who is disliked by both Santorum (38/48) and Gingrich (32/54) voters and Santorum who is disliked by Romney (38/48) voters and only seen narrowly favorably by Gingrich (46/42) backers.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_US_032112.pdf

idesign on March 21, 2012 at 2:53 PM

This is what has me still listening to the scorched earthers. I wonder if conservatism would actually flourish under another Obama term.

kim roy on March 21, 2012 at 2:39 PM

This is why that wont work. There wont be any pieces left to pick up.

V7_Sport on March 21, 2012 at 2:54 PM

idesign on March 21, 2012 at 2:53 PM

There is no cavalry coming. The delegates are not going to over-rule the will of tens of millions of voters, none of whom voted for Palin.

V7_Sport on March 21, 2012 at 2:56 PM

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:33 PM

On illegal aliens: Romney came out with that trooper edict a few weeks before his term ended. Nothing ever came of it. It was mere cover to give him a “record” of action.

INC on March 21, 2012 at 2:37 PM

No. He authorized them because he saw that the country at this time was heating up with the whole Amnesty bill of 2006. but I see it doesn’t COUNT in your eyes because the DEMOCRAT Legislature over rode it after he was out office. Surprise!

To INC, angryed, and others here they are soooo anti-Romney it blinds them to what Obama is currently doing to our country. Romney WILL turn it around as he has ALMOST every other endeavor he has been involved with…

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Stay home (again) then. If we divorce the chest thumping supposed “conservatives” from the GOP it will weaken both. If supposed “conservatives” can’t be counted on to vote against an existential threat to the country like Obama then they can’t be counted on to do anything. 4 million stayed at home last election cycle because they were butthurt over the primaries and didn’t like McCain. If a similar number do the same this time around then you aren’t going to be taken seriously and that will push the country left faster than almost anything.
Your guy lost. Probably several of your guys lost. If you can’t be counted on to step up and do what is right for the USA then we will have to muddle through without you, but you aren’t a conservative and you aren’t a patriot if you are helping to elect Obama.

V7_Sport on March 21, 2012 at 2:52 PM

I didn’t stay home last time. Is it STILL my fault that McCain lost?

I do want to do what’s right for the USA. That’s why I’m not ready to accept that Romney is better than Obama. You telling me I’m not a conservative and a patriot is not going to convince me, because it’s utterly FALSE.

I’m not going to take the blame if Romney loses. If Romney loses it will be his fault, and the fault of jerks like you who attack and accuse people for not agreeing with you.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:57 PM

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:43 PM

It doesn’t take much to look like a conservative in a blue state.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:52 PM

I would say it takes 800 VETOES TO LOOK LIKE A CONSERVATIVE.

How’s that for you? :o)

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:58 PM

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:43 PM

You and other Romney supporters post links that while true, only tell part of the story and so give an erroneous impression of who Romney is.

Step back and read links that cover the entire time span and you see just who Romney is.

INC on March 21, 2012 at 3:00 PM

idesign on March 21, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Where did I say that Gingrich and Santorum supporters don’t luvvvvv Palin? It’s irrelevant. There is not going to be a brokered convention, there never was going to be one. It’s a fantasy, and if Palin wanted to run she should have entered the arena (as T.R. once famously said) instead of playing coy games from the sidelines.

Buy Danish on March 21, 2012 at 3:00 PM

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:56 PM

I’m not at all blind to what Obama has done or is doing. You only have to read my comments over the past few years to know that. I have no idea why you came to that conclusion.

INC on March 21, 2012 at 3:01 PM

This evangelical, anti-Mormon bigot has voted for Jeff Flake four times.

Then you wouldn’t be an “anti-Mormon bigot” then would you. You are disgusting in your dishonesty.

You and your Mittbot brethren are obviously trying to position yourselves so that you can blame anyone other than Mitt Romney, if he loses to Obama.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 12:54 PM

The anti-Mormon bigoted Evangelicals weren’t strong enough to prevent Romney from getting the nomination.

If they want to have any credible influence in the future of the GOP they need to give up their bigotry and get on the Romney train NOW.

If they don’t support the GOP nominee (Romney) then they will have demonstrated that they are UNRELIABLE Republicans and deserve to be banished to obscurity.

Just saying.

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:02 PM

I would say it takes 800 VETOES TO LOOK LIKE A CONSERVATIVE.

How’s that for you? :o)

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:58 PM

All of which were overridden. I’m afraid I can’t get past. “I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose.” Romney will say anything to get elected. How do we know he didn’t veto those bills, knowing that they would be overridden?

I really want to believe you about Romney, but I just don’t trust him. Can you understand that?

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:02 PM

I do want to do what’s right for the USA. That’s why I’m not ready to accept that Romney is better than Obama.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:57 PM

JM…
V7 is making these comments because when we read this above we question you because THIS election should not be that difficult.

We ALL need to be voting against Obama…choose your reason…some are voting FOR Romney but others are voting AGAINST Obama for his LAST FOUR YEARS and the damage he has inflicted.

V7 is not trying to be flippant nor am I but for ALL of us this should NOT even be a question on WHO we vote for this year. Right?

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Where did I say that Gingrich and Santorum supporters don’t luvvvvv Palin? It’s irrelevant. There is not going to be a brokered convention, there never was going to be one. It’s a fantasy, and if Palin wanted to run she should have entered the arena (as T.R. once famously said) instead of playing coy games from the sidelines.

Buy Danish on March 21, 2012 at 3:00 PM

More from PPP, for your viewing pleasure..:)

The talk of a brokered convention never seems to die down and one interesting finding on this poll was that Sarah Palin is far more popular than any of the actual Republican candidates in the race. Her net favorability is +48, with 68% of voters rating her favorably to only 20% with a negative opinion. That compares favorably to +29 for Santorum, +19 for Romney, and -26 for Paul.

idesign on March 21, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Re.JannyMae

I didn’t stay home last time. Is it STILL my fault that McCain lost?

Nope.

I do want to do what’s right for the USA. That’s why I’m not ready to accept that Romney is better than Obama.

A ham sandwich is better than Obama.

You telling me I’m not a conservative and a patriot is not going to convince me, because it’s utterly FALSE.

Then how can you not see that Obama is an existential threat to the country?

I’m not going to take the blame if Romney loses.

If you are confronted with a choice between Obama and not obama and you chose to do nothing you are helping Obama.

If Romney loses it will be his fault, and the fault of jerks like you who attack and accuse people for not agreeing with you.

I haven’t said anything to you until today, however if you are going to stay at home because someone said something to you that you didn’t like on hotair your principles aren’t all that strong to begin with.

V7_Sport on March 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Palin, for what ever reason, didn’t run for the GOP nomination.

In spite of her efforts to the contrary, ROMNEY will be the NOMINEE.

It is time for her to make peace with Romney for the good of the party and the good of the country.

We shall see where her true interests lie.

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM

The Dems will own every bad decision and won’t have the cover of blaming anyone. In another four years, if things go as they are now, the LSM will be completely or close to being completely discredited.

Out of that is an opportunity to bring about a real conservative party, not one that pretends to be conservative only to line the pockets of the lucky few.

Then there’s the idea of the next four years being run by a tepid Republican party without the will do to the hard work and while that’s marginally better than Obama, it’s not something that’s going to make a difference in the long term. It will only continue the status quo.

It’s a tough decision. Go with having the Democrats own it and hope conservatives are smart enough to “not let a crisis to go to waste” and exploit it.

Or hope that in the next four years, if Romney wins, the conservatives are smart enough to take advantage of the four years to build something.

kim roy on March 21, 2012 at 2:39 PM

The press will continue to cover for the Democrats. The Democrats will continue to shirk their responsibilities. Do we want to go another 4 years with no budget? Has the media put any light on this at all? Will they in the future? Will the people out there following American Idol and the Kardashians care about anything other than Obama’s latest vocal efforts or Michelle’s dance moves?

Maybe 10% of Amercians pay significant attention to what is really going on in the government. With the help of the media, Obama is perfectly capable of fooling most of the people, most of the time.

If you really think Obama is the best presidential candidate running, vote for Obama. Please don’t waste this opportunity to defeat Obama on the very unrealistic hope that somehow the media and low information voters will see the light.

A colleague recently complained about how Obama’s brilliance was being thwarted by the evil Republican Congress who had fillibustered every attempt by Obama to enact his brilliant legislation that would fix the economy. Of course, he couldn’t name a single instance, but he fervently believed it was true. He’s a 65 year old white male radiologist.

Obama and the Democrats will never be held to “own” anything by the media or the majority of Americans.

talkingpoints on March 21, 2012 at 3:07 PM

V7 is making these comments because when we read this above we question you because THIS election should not be that difficult.

We ALL need to be voting against Obama…choose your reason…some are voting FOR Romney but others are voting AGAINST Obama for his LAST FOUR YEARS and the damage he has inflicted.

V7 is not trying to be flippant nor am I but for ALL of us this should NOT even be a question on WHO we vote for this year. Right?

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Yes, Yes, Yes… Thanks-

V7_Sport on March 21, 2012 at 3:08 PM

Palin, for what ever reason, didn’t run for the GOP nomination.

In spite of her efforts to the contrary, ROMNEY will be the NOMINEE.

It is time for her to make peace with Romney for the good of the party and the good of the country.

We shall see where her true interests lie.

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Palin believes in what’s best for the Country.

Romney believes in what’s best fror Romney.

idesign on March 21, 2012 at 3:11 PM

I would say it takes 800 VETOES TO LOOK LIKE A CONSERVATIVE.

How’s that for you? :o)

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 2:58 PM

All of which were overridden. I’m afraid I can’t get past. “I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose.” Romney will say anything to get elected. How do we know he didn’t veto those bills, knowing that they would be overridden?

I really want to believe you about Romney, but I just don’t trust him. Can you understand that?

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:02 PM

JM,
I understand what you are saying. :o) Romney also was saying that he would protect the LAWS on the books as a Governor HE HAS TO UNTIL they are overturned. However, why do you jump all the way BACK to when he made that comment rather than give him the CREDIT for making his switch as Reagan did. I do not see people switch back to when Reagan implemented abortion in CA and frankly was the camel’s nose under the tent for abortion. Romney has been pro-life. however, this election is NOT about social issues as we see the social issues candidate is losing. Americans WANT/NEED the economy FIXED and are voting for THAT candidate.

We want/need you along for the ride in November JM.

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Then you wouldn’t be an “anti-Mormon bigot” then would you. You are disgusting in your dishonesty.

You might want to look up “sarcasm” in the dictionary. Hint: it’s not dishonesty.

I was actually called an anti-Mormon bigot by one of the commentators here just for pointing out that Obama’s minions will exploit Romney’s religion. I’m still waiting for an explanation from the Romney supporters on how Mitt will counter the anti-Mormon attacks that we all know will come, once he’s established as the nominee.

The anti-Mormon bigoted Evangelicals weren’t strong enough to prevent Romney from getting the nomination.

If they want to have any credible influence in the future of the GOP they need to give up their bigotry and get on the Romney train NOW.

If they don’t support the GOP nominee (Romney) then they will have demonstrated that they are UNRELIABLE Republicans and deserve to be banished to obscurity.

Just saying.

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:02 PM

What on earth are you babbling about? You can’t even tell us who these “anti-Mormon bigots” are, much less determine if they will “get behind Romney.” There is no factual support for your assumption that there is some large group of evangelical bigots who won’t get behind Romney because he’s Mormon. There are, I am sure, some individuals who won’t vote for Romney because of his religion, but I’d be greatly surprised if the vast majority of them aren’t Democrats.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:12 PM

V7_Sport on March 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM

I never said that Obama is not a threat to this country. I said that Romney might be worse for this country, in the long term, because he could screw things up and pave the way for a whole series of NEW OBAMAS.

What would be worse? Enduring four more years of Obama, or four years of a spineless squish and then decades more of Obama-like presidents?

That’s what I have to decide.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:16 PM

Romney believes in what’s best fror Romney.

idesign on March 21, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Right, that’s why he accepted and exorbitant salary and bonus for his service as Mass. Gov. and head of the SLC Olympics. /s

That’s why he gives away MILLIONS, right?

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Not in the short term, and not in the long term, either. Make change happen from within, once you’ve won the White House.

Afterall, that’s what the liberals have been doing.

The Resolute Desk on March 21, 2012 at 1:10 PM

it is quite possible that the nomination of Mittens is the end of the GOP
but not conservatives …. think Whigs …. as the GOP replaced the Whigs …
something else will replace the GOP ….
I will vote for the nominee … I will NOT support him in anyway other then that ..
no money … no yard signs … bumperstickers … no talking him up …
at this point now if/when he

resets

I very well may vote for a 3rd party candidate …
I am a conservative independent ….

conservative tarheel on March 21, 2012 at 3:22 PM

V7_Sport on March 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM

I never said that Obama is not a threat to this country. I said that Romney might be worse for this country, in the long term, because he could screw things up and pave the way for a whole series of NEW OBAMAS.

What would be worse? Enduring four more years of Obama, or four years of a spineless squish and then decades more of Obama-like presidents?

That’s what I have to decide.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:16 PM

How can you call Romney a spineless squish (which he is not) and seem to OVERLOOK ALL the VOTES of Gingrich and Santorum as some savior of conservatism? These TWO have some fairly liberal voting/lobbying records.

I think the candidate that MOST Republicans want is winning. Yet, here again, you question Romney as being WORSE than Obama. THIS. is why some of us are questioning you. This election should not even be close on who R’s vote for ONCE the Primary season is over.

Right?

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 3:23 PM

I’m still waiting for an explanation from the Romney supporters on how Mitt will counter the anti-Mormon attacks that we all know will come, once he’s established as the nominee.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:12 PM

The anti-Mormon attacks that we all know will come will ONLY influence (in the way that the Obama campaign intends) the religious BIGOTS of either party.

I am not sure why we should be concerned with getting the BIGOT vote.

Just saying.

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:25 PM

JM,
I understand what you are saying. :o) Romney also was saying that he would protect the LAWS on the books as a Governor HE HAS TO UNTIL they are overturned. However, why do you jump all the way BACK to when he made that comment rather than give him the CREDIT for making his switch as Reagan did. I do not see people switch back to when Reagan implemented abortion in CA and frankly was the camel’s nose under the tent for abortion. Romney has been pro-life. however, this election is NOT about social issues as we see the social issues candidate is losing. Americans WANT/NEED the economy FIXED and are voting for THAT candidate.

We want/need you along for the ride in November JM.

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 3:11 PM

I told you why I went back to that. It shows that Romney will say anything to get elected, and it makes me not believe that he’s had some “epiphany” and conversion. He’s not Reagan. Not by a long shot.

The reason Santorum is losing is because Romney and his supporters have successfully painted him as “the social issues candidate.” He has not focused on social issues. That’s a myth that Romney and his supporters have created. They had to pull up, from his website, the 23rd platform statement, out of 23, to paint him as “wanting to ban pornography.” They had to drag out a video of him speaking to a group of Catholics, unrelated to politics, in order to paint him as some religious wacko. Romney’s attack ads against Santorum, in Arizona were disgusting, filled with half-truths and cherry-picked “points.”

There is dishonesty on all sides of this primary campaign. It’s difficult to cut through all of it to get to the truth.

I really hope you are right about Romney. As I said, I will see what he does between now and November.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Sorry to break it to you Palin fans but Palin can’t be the nominee.

RNC rules prevent it.

Nominations(b) Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination.

Read it, weep, and then fabricate some excuse as to why the rule won’t apply.

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:28 PM

How can you call Romney a spineless squish (which he is not) and seem to OVERLOOK ALL the VOTES of Gingrich and Santorum as some savior of conservatism? These TWO have some fairly liberal voting/lobbying records.

I think the candidate that MOST Republicans want is winning. Yet, here again, you question Romney as being WORSE than Obama. THIS. is why some of us are questioning you. This election should not even be close on who R’s vote for ONCE the Primary season is over.

Right?

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 3:23 PM

I never said Romney is a spineless squish. I said I am afraid that’s the way he will govern, and if he does, he could be worse than Obama, in the long run.

I have overlooked nothing about Santorum and Gingrich. I never stated they were conservative, let alone saviors. In fact, I have stated on this thread that none of these candidates are conservative, and I have repeatedly said, over many months here, that I don’t like any of them.

You have been very civil and reasonable, so far. Please don’t put words in my mouth and make assumptions.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:31 PM

. Your intimidation tactics will not sway me to your point of view, and they may just do the opposite.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Oh good grief. “Intimidation tactics”?! You and your petulance should go to the zoo on election day instead of voting. You can fling poo with your peers in the primate house.

M240H on March 21, 2012 at 3:32 PM

NEWSFLASH !!!

The Republican party is made up of a VERY WIDE variety of voters. Some call it the three legged stool to quote Ronaldus Maximus Reagan.

Those that want some extreme conservatism make up only about 20-25% of the WHOLE (100%) party. Yet you think you can WIN elections with your group. It is a losing situation. When we conservatives win elections it is going conservative BUT not to the extreme and pushing out the other 30-40% of moderates in our party. Reagan appealed to ALL of our party and was NEVER extreme.

This is why Santorum can ONLY win in CERTAIN states and with ONLY CERTAIN voters because he repels the others in our party.

We need to remember we are ALL on the same side and want the defeat of Obama
but CANNOT have any of our side sit home (the extremes, moderates, liberal conservative repubs) this election.

I consider myself knocking at the door on extreme BUT I am also level-headed enough to realize that my VIEWS of conservatism are on the smaller scale of our party. :o)

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 3:32 PM

The anti-Mormon attacks that we all know will come will ONLY influence (in the way that the Obama campaign intends) the religious BIGOTS of either party.

I am not sure why we should be concerned with getting the BIGOT vote.

Just saying.

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Well, then why did you bring the issue up, in the first place? To marginalize people who disagree with you? Or to make excuses when Romney fails to win in the south, where most of those alleged (Republican) bigots reside?

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:34 PM

There is no factual support for your assumption that there is some large group of evangelical bigots who won’t get behind Romney because he’s Mormon. There are, I am sure, some individuals who won’t vote for Romney because of his religion, but I’d be greatly surprised if the vast majority of them aren’t Democrats.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:12 PM

You mean other than the numerous examples of said bigots on demonstration here at HA, and every other political site I have seen, right?

The Bigoted “true conservatives” will have to choose between their bigotry or their country.

I hope they choose wisely.

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Right, that’s why he accepted and exorbitant salary and bonus for his service as Mass. Gov. and head of the SLC Olympics. /s

That’s why he gives away MILLIONS, right?

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Romney buys things….

That’s why he out spends the other candidates 10 to 1.

All it says is that Romney has lots of money, not that he’s a good candidate.

idesign on March 21, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Oh good grief. “Intimidation tactics”?! You and your petulance should go to the zoo on election day instead of voting. You can fling poo with your peers in the primate house.

M240H on March 21, 2012 at 3:32 PM

GFY

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:35 PM

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Where in AZ do you live approx…no addresses please…of course…just curious.

Phoenix area? East Valley? Tucson? I am from the PHX area as well

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 3:36 PM

You mean other than the numerous examples of said bigots on demonstration here at HA, and every other political site I have seen, right?

The Bigoted “true conservatives” will have to choose between their bigotry or their country.

I hope they choose wisely.

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:34 PM

How many have you counted on HotAir, who won’t vote for Mitt because he’s Mormon? Do you believe that HotAir is representative of the entire electorate? Funny how you deny that, when things don’t go your way here.

Keep assuming things. It gives you so much credibility.

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:39 PM

That’s why he out spends the other candidates 10 to 1.

All it says is that Romney has lots of money, not that he’s a good candidate.

idesign on March 21, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Sorry but the facts don’t support you drivel. Based on the ACTUAL money spent by the campaigns, in the month of February (the latest month for which data is available) Romney only out spent Santorum 1.56 to 1.

Read it and weep.

The fact that Romney was more selective than Richard on which states he spent the money only shows that he is a better money manager than Richard.

Gunlock Bill on March 21, 2012 at 3:40 PM

g2825m on March 21, 2012 at 3:36 PM

I’m in the east valley, in Jeff Flake’s district. Hello, fellow Arizonan!

JannyMae on March 21, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4