Mitch McConnell: Mitt Romney will be an outstanding nominee

posted at 9:50 am on April 2, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Without issuing an official endorsement, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell joined the chorus this morning, saying it’s time for Republicans to accept Mitt Romney as the probable nominee and to turn their attention to the fall campaign.

“It’s absolutely apparent that it’s in the best interests of our party at this particular point to get behind the person who is obviously going to be our nominee and to begin to make the case against the president of the United States,” McConnell told CNN Chief Political Correspondent Candy Crowley.

Asked why he has not thrown his support behind Romney in the form of an endorsement, McConnell said voters in the upcoming contests in Wisconsin, Maryland and the District of Columbia do not need his advice.

“Most of the members of the Senate Republican Conference are either supporting him, or they have the view that I do, that it’s time to turn our attention to the fall campaign,” he said. …

“I think he will be an outstanding nominee,” McConnell said. “I think he can win the election.”

Mitt Romney has a commanding lead in the delegate count (568 to Rick Santorum’s 273), and he’s poised to win primaries in Wisconsin, Maryland and Washington D.C. tomorrow. The best chance of any of the other candidates to secure the nomination is to thwart him from securing a majority of delegates before the Republican National Convention in August, but even Romney’s competitors seem to doubt that possibility. Newt Gingrich, for example, has signaled that he plans to train his attacks on Barack Obama once again, a possible signal that he fully expects Mitt Romney to be the nominee.

Whether Romney will be as competitive in the general as McConnell claims remains to be seen. A new Gallup/USA Today poll shows Obama leading Romney in 12 key swing states by a solid nine points. Just a month ago, Romney held a two-point edge in those same states. Women under 50 are largely responsible for the boost to Obama, who can claim the support of more than 60 percent of them.

The Fix’s Chris Cillizza and Aaron Blake ask the key questions:

There’s little debate that Romney is as low (or close to it) as he has ever been in a matchup against Obama — whether nationally or in swing states. What’s less clear is a) how much of Romney’s current struggles are directly attributable to him, and b) whether his poll numbers are a moment in time or have the potential to be a longer-term problem.

On both questions, I think Republicans have reason to be hopeful. Nothing inherently “Romney” has alienated women. In fact, I’d argue that it’s not that Romney has lost the support of women so much as it is that Obama has gained that support. How? He’s made repeated references to Malia and Sasha. He has appropriated in-the-news figures like Sandra Fluke and Trayvon Martin as his own children. At the very same time that he’s waging a war on women’s fertility, he’s appealing to their maternal instincts with his parental rhetoric. Brilliant. Meanwhile, Romney and the Republicans remain cold and distant as they discuss issues that matter primarily for the ways they touch on people’s personal, private lives. Voter reactions to candidates — especially as captured in polls — are visceral, emotional. Romney has yet to tap into the power of the heart, but, if and when he manages to make the case that Republicans stand for the freedom that leads to prosperous individuals and flourishing families, he’ll be able to win women voters over again.


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

MITT ROMNEY WILL BE AN EXCELLENT PRESIDENT!

bluegill on April 2, 2012 at 9:53 AM

What else is he going to say?

right2bright on April 2, 2012 at 9:53 AM

MITT ROMNEY WILL BE AN EXCELLENT PRESIDENT!

bluegill on April 2, 2012 at 9:53 AM

If only he can win…fortunately, McCain is not running this time…

right2bright on April 2, 2012 at 9:54 AM

He is correct. Better than a guy who does nothing but whine, and is hurting the party by not dropping out.

Oh, and once Republicans take the Senate in November, McConnell should not be Majority Leader.

milcus on April 2, 2012 at 9:55 AM

(sigh)……

NeoKong on April 2, 2012 at 9:55 AM

With a conservative house and senate, we can bring him to us.

msupertas on April 2, 2012 at 9:55 AM

What else is he going to say?

right2bright on April 2, 2012 at 9:53 AM

“rage against the machine, vote Newt”

hanzblinx on April 2, 2012 at 9:55 AM

If that doesn’t fire up the base, I don’t know what will.

forest on April 2, 2012 at 9:57 AM

If only he can win…fortunately, McCain is not running this time…

right2bright on April 2, 2012 at 9:54 AM

You are right. He simply cannot win. I mean, in reputable polls Obama is under the magic 45% number, and Romney is already either up (as is he is in Rasmussen), or within the margin of error (as he is in Gallup).

But there is nothing to see here folks, he simply can’t win though.
Romney will simply not improve his position once he goes on the air against Obama and exposes his record. As soon as he gets the nomination, he should just call Obama and concede.

milcus on April 2, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Romney wasn’t my first choice either but it’s time to end this and start spending money against Obama not each other.

gophergirl on April 2, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Yes, McConnell will love Romney. He will easily compromise.

rickv404 on April 2, 2012 at 10:00 AM

ZOMG! Mush McConnell supports the ‘bot? Who’d have guessed?
Next you’ll tell me Bohner is “on borg,” too.

james23 on April 2, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Romney needs to lay off the April Fools jokes and any planned theatrics. Quit trying to give him a personality. I’ve accepted him and it’s up to him to act like an adult and if he tries to out Obama Obama with fireworks I will puke. But you know what – as a campaigner he and his team have a penchant for doing at times the worst thing they could possibly do at that moment so let me get a bucket.

Marcus on April 2, 2012 at 10:02 AM

The GOP establishment has already chosen THEIR nominee (it would be so much more efficient if we just eliminated primaries all together, and let the party elders choose for us – right?), and no one is more thrilled with THEIR choice, than obama. A “Nominee Romney” is obama’s dream come true.

Pork-Chop on April 2, 2012 at 10:04 AM

Mitt still sucks. DUMP MITT NOW (before it’s too late)!

Perry/West 2012

Pragmatic on April 2, 2012 at 10:05 AM

He has appropriated in-the-news figures like Sandra Fluke and Trayvon Martin as his own children. At the very same time that he’s waging a war on women’s fertility, he’s appealing to their maternal instincts with his parental rhetoric. Brilliant. Meanwhile, Romney and the Republicans remain cold and distant as they discuss issues that matter primarily for the ways they touch on people’s personal, private lives. Voter reactions to candidates — especially as captured in polls — are visceral, emotional.

It’s pathetic that sheeple fall for this emotional pap. It’s this kind of emotional crap that led people to vote for Obama in the first place. Forget the issues or his record. Just vote for the guy who makes your little heart pitter-patter.

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2012 at 10:05 AM

birds of a feather….YUCK AND ICK!

Pragmatic on April 2, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Doesn’t McConnell have another bailout, tarp or raising the debt ceiling to vote for. God, does this moron understand the more the establishment comes out to support romneycare, the more the grassroots will vote against him.

Vote anybody but Romneycare, get it to the convention!

Danielvito on April 2, 2012 at 10:08 AM

….if enough people tell me that the world is flat, eventually I guess I’ll believe it…..

/Republican Sheeple

search4truth on April 2, 2012 at 10:08 AM

I know I am wasting my breath but why do we have to play identity politics? I’m pretty sure that what is good for the economy will be good for everyone.

Cindy Munford on April 2, 2012 at 10:11 AM

The establishment have been singing this song before the very first vote was cast…

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:12 AM

If that doesn’t fire up the base, I don’t know what will.

I’m a mittbot but I agree the conservative base does not want him.

Oh well!

gerrym51 on April 2, 2012 at 10:17 AM

“rage against the machine, vote Newt”

hanzblinx on April 2, 2012 at 9:55 AM

Based on results so far..How is that working out?

rich801 on April 2, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Perry/West 2012

Pragmatic on April 2, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Pragmatic you are the least pragmatic poster.

accept annoyinglittletwerps recomendation

gerrym51 on April 2, 2012 at 10:20 AM

I’m a mittbot but I agree the conservative base does not want him.

Oh well!

gerrym51 on April 2, 2012 at 10:17 AM

It’ll happen once it’s down to Mitt or Obama. In the meantime, the tepid support from Mitch “charisma” McConnell will keep my enthusiasm cranking.

forest on April 2, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Uh, Mitch…No, he won’t.

Gordy on April 2, 2012 at 10:22 AM

Mitch McConnell is just another face on the same Bush Led Progressive gop.

Reagans biggest mistake?….

…leaving George Bush in charge of the party, by making him his heir in the 1980′s.

it’s been 24 years since the “kinder / gentler” gop became the norm and now we have a completely castrated republican leadership, a COMPLETELY INEFFECTIVE “Tea Party” movement and are about to be forced to embrace another milquetoast Bush-lite nominee (like Dole/McCain and Bush himself).

It’s great to have two choices that are destroying individual liberty and freedom, one doing it on steroids with a shove, and the other option doing it more gently with just a soft nudge.

OBAMAROMNEY 2012!!

PappyD61 on April 2, 2012 at 10:23 AM

It’s great to have two choices that are destroying individual liberty and freedom, one doing it on steroids with a shove, and the other option doing it more gently with just a soft nudge.

OBAMAROMNEY 2012!!

PappyD61 on April 2, 2012 at 10:23 AM

To all those who say it’s time to end this and unite in support for Romney:

GET BENT

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:24 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psbKsJ7Kg48

The end of Conservatism in the gop.

We must be pretty stupid to think that after nearly a quarter century of failing to get a TRUE LIMITED GOVERNMENT republican that’s PRO-INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY that somehow we’re going to get one.

DUH, on me.

PappyD61 on April 2, 2012 at 10:28 AM

To all those who say it’s time to end this and unite in support for Romney:

GET BENT

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Tell us how you REALLY feel

lol

gerrym51 on April 2, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Romney is another McCain. He’ll be just as outstanding as McCain was.. and as Dole was. Oh, wait… did you say “outstanding”? Like “out standing by himself” without voters who really are enthused and believe in him? I’d have to agree with you on that one…

PackerFan4Life on April 2, 2012 at 10:32 AM

PappyD61 on April 2, 2012 at 10:23 AM

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Two more of Axelrod’s useful idiots.

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:33 AM

PackerFan4Life on April 2, 2012 at 10:32 AM

And another one…

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Mitt still sucks. DUMP MITT NOW (before it’s too late)!

Perry/West 2012

Pragmatic on April 2, 2012 at 10:05 AM

It is too late… The die is cast… I am just going to operate on “ABO” mode… Romney’s worst day in office will be better than Obama’s best day ever…

At least we won’t have to worry about President Romney wasting the nation’s time by filling out an NCAA tournament bracket and associated show on ESPN… He’ll be too busy unscrewing the mess that Obama and his Administration is going to leave behind… That will make an “Occupy camp” look like “high tea” at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel…

Khun Joe on April 2, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Two more of Axelrod’s useful idiots.

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Oh yeah. I’m so busted. You got me. I’m a closet Obama supporter. And a member of WWP and SEIU. And I’m secretly going to vote for Obama in November. Cause I don’t like Romney and it’s personal./

Douchebag.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:36 AM

“Compassionate conservative” again will be coined by this campaign.

Starlink on April 2, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Romney may be a centrist RINO and have all the wrong ideas, but “compassionate” he is not. If elected, he’ll govern as a technocrat opportunist. Do not expect firebrand appointments or pivotal decisions from him – he’ll strive to “minimize the impact”, the game for which many CEO’s are known. While this is not exactly what the country needs, it’s still infinitely better than the traitorous scum-in-chief we have now.

Archivarix on April 2, 2012 at 10:36 AM

MITT ROMNEY WILL BE AN EXCELLENT PRESIDENT!

bluegill on April 2, 2012 at 9:53 AM

“I’m Mitt Romney and I approved this message.”

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2012 at 10:36 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdVRB9x_DAA

Pro-Choice Mitt Romney seems pretty convincing when he told Mass voters that he would “protect a womans’ right to choose”.

When voters have a choice between a openly Progressive/Moderate gop candidate and a left-leaning “centrist” do they ever pick a republican poser?

I can cite several examples:
Bush 1992,
Revealed to not be a Conservative by breaking his “read my lips, no new taxes” pledge……….lost to Clinton.

Dole 1996,
Same day, different clothes. so called “Moderate” Kansas “next in line” nominee loses to Clinton.

McCain 2008,
Refuses to go after Obama and really “Fight”. He completely mismanages his campaign and tells us we have nothing to fear from an Obama presidency. McCain hails Progressive Teddy Roosevelt as his hero and role model.

Ford in 1976,
Most liberal nominee in my lifetime runs against an inexperienced former Peanut farmer with a great smile, and a daughter that sells lemonade that summer. Ford can’t even fake being a Conservative.

PappyD61 on April 2, 2012 at 10:37 AM

Romney may be a centrist RINO and have all the wrong ideas, but “compassionate” he is not. If elected, he’ll govern as a technocrat opportunist. Do not expect firebrand appointments or pivotal decisions from him – he’ll strive to “minimize the impact”, the game for which many CEO’s are known. While this is not exactly what the country needs, it’s still infinitely better than the traitorous scum-in-chief we have now.

Archivarix on April 2, 2012 at 10:36 AM

My feelings exactly. Let’s have Romney defeat Obama then give him a conservative primary challenge in 2016.

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Oh yeah. I’m so busted. You got me. I’m a closet Obama supporter. And a member of WWP and SEIU. And I’m secretly going to vote for Obama in November. Cause I don’t like Romney and it’s personal./

Douchebag.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:36 AM

U mad? I just call ‘em like I see ‘em. If you don’t like being called a troll then don’t go trolling.

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Oh yeah. I’m so busted. You got me. I’m a closet Obama supporter. And a member of WWP and SEIU. And I’m secretly going to vote for Obama in November. Cause I don’t like Romney and it’s personal./

Douchebag.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:36 AM

The newest tactic now is apparently to call anyone who criticizes Romney or supports Republicans other than Romney for president “secret Obama supporters.”

Doomberg on April 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

U mad? I just call ‘em like I see ‘em. If you don’t like being called a troll then don’t go trolling.

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:38 AM

A troll throws bombs for the sake of throwing bombs. My dislike of Romney is genuine and I will not accept his “inevitability” unless and until he hits the 1144 mark.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 AM

The newest tactic now is apparently to call anyone who criticizes Romney or supports Republicans other than Romney for president “secret Obama supporters.”

Doomberg on April 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Why not? It’s accurate.

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 AM

The establishment have been singing this song before the very first vote was cast…

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:12 AM

…so, sing us a couple of those notes…instead of recanting your stupidity.

KOOLAID2 on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 AM

The newest tactic now is apparently to call anyone who criticizes Romney or supports Republicans other than Romney for president “secret Obama supporters.”

Doomberg on April 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

A little hint, rombots…that’s not going to get me any closer to supporting Mitt before the convention.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:42 AM

The newest tactic now is apparently to call anyone who criticizes Romney or supports Republicans other than Romney for president “secret Obama supporters.”

Doomberg on April 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Why not? It’s accurate.

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you:

ARGUMENTUM AD NAUSEAM

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:42 AM

A troll throws bombs for the sake of throwing bombs. My dislike of Romney is genuine and I will not accept his “inevitability” unless and until he hits the 1144 mark.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 AM

You’re not helping yourself out here… lol

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:43 AM

A little hint, rombots…that’s not going to get me any closer to supporting Mitt before the convention.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:42 AM

A little hint, you’re free to waste your vote. But don’t expect me to give you a pat on the back for it. So yeah, you’re going to get called out over and over again. Just like the rest of the ABR misfits who insist on trolling on behalf of ObaMao, whether they have the wits to realize it or not.

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:45 AM

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 AM

You’re not helping yourself out here… lol

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:43 AM

That depends on what you mean by “helping.” If you mean to say your opinion of me isn’t getting any better, I really couldn’t care less.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:45 AM

A little hint, you’re free to waste your vote. But don’t expect me to give you a pat on the back for it. So yeah, you’re going to get called out over and over again. Just like the rest of the ABR misfits who insist on trolling on behalf of ObaMao, whether they have the wits to realize it or not.

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:45 AM

A primary vote is never a wasted vote, douchebag. I’m hanging fire on the ABO outrage until we actually have a candidate, and we don’t yet, all protests to the contrary. When we do, I vote against Obama. If that means putting Mitt in office, so be it. I’m not acting out of fear of Mitt anymore than I’m acting out of fear of Obama. I just can’t figure out for the life of me why so many of Romney’s rombot supporters think that he’s entitled to my support simply on account of having just less than half of the delegates he needs come convention time.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:48 AM

I know I am wasting my breath but why do we have to play identity politics? I’m pretty sure that what is good for the economy will be good for everyone.

Cindy Munford on April 2, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Because it works, Cindy. It wins elections, and voters like it.

1) By gathering a coalition of special interests (government workers, the youth, the elderly, women, union workers, minorities, gays), the Democratic party has become the majority party. They can always outvote white males (along with a smattering of conservative white females who don’t care that much about free birth control pills). Why would Democrats stop using a method that gets their party elected?

2) From the voter’s point of view, if you’re a member of an identity, and you vote Democrat, you get free stuff. If you’re black, you get preferential treatment; if you’re Hispanic, you get the promise of amnesty for fellow Mexicans; if you’re part of the youth, you get the assurance that your college bills will all be written off; and so forth.

All the Republicans have in answer is, “But, but, but…the country will be better off if you vote conservative.” But that’s a general good rather than a direct one, and it’s not very appealing to voters when they try to evaluate which party will help them in particular.

Burke on April 2, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Based on results so far..How is that working out?

rich801 on April 2, 2012 at 10:18 AM

not worth snot

hanzblinx on April 2, 2012 at 10:50 AM


If that doesn’t fire up the base, I don’t know what will.

Yes, fire them up with resignation, defeat, and despair.

casuist on April 2, 2012 at 10:50 AM

MittBots hate it when they have to hear his actual words.

Audio and video clips abound on the internet and youtube, Google Romney and the words, pro-choice, carbon tax, progressive, global warming, you name it…..he’s said it.

He’s a PROGRESSIVE, blank canvas just like Obama was to the Dems.

He’s next in line.

He’s a redux of what we’ve been getting in the gop since 1988 (self-castrated republicans that are truly embarassed by the hick/hayseed gop base).

He’s also a huge government guy.

In an interview with Larry Kudlow he said he used language like Obama and Holdren and Chu about “consumption” being the problem.

He’s a believer in man made Global warming.

He would be a grower of all things government and to be frank he’s likely to appoint people like David Souter and John Paul Stevens (both appointed by republicans).

And he might tell Rush that he’ll do what’s right and is willing to correct the course of the ship and be a one-termer but when you put the smiling Marxist that reeks of compassion and hugs against the cold icy slick haired stutterer on a debate stage…

…not good.

Does anyone seriously think we’re going to get a different result (in an “improving” economy) if we nominate a moderate republican?

dumb.

PappyD61 on April 2, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Romney should be forgiven for not tugging the heartstrings the way Obama can. The mass media is dying for the quotes to use to kill any Republican candidate, while it polishes the shoes of a liberal Democrat. Any Republican needs to think 90% defense because of that, and Rick Santorum too.

Only a fundamental change in the political battle-space can change that. Basically, rich conservatives have to be willing to buy media, not for profit, but as rich liberals do, for influence. And they have to do it together, to enjoy safety in numbers, as rich liberals do, and they have to keep at it, year after year and decade after decade, as rich liberals have.

Also, Republicans have to decide to oppose the demographic shift of the country in an anti-White direction. Ultimately you cannot win the hearts, minds and votes of people who think like Samuel L. Jackson and who vote for the candidate that looks like them or that pushes their “tribe” regardless of other considerations. To get a hearing in the long run, you have to oppose the creation of a new electorate that won’t give you a hearing.

Romney is blameworthy like all other Republican leaders for doing nothing about either necessity. But he’s not blameworthy for being cautious in an increasingly hostile environment.

David Blue on April 2, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Does anyone seriously think we’re going to get a different result (in an “improving” economy) if we nominate a moderate republican?

dumb.

PappyD61 on April 2, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Mitt Romney’s biggest selling point is that he’s not Obama. That’s the A-number one thing he has going for himself. No matter how similar he is to Obama, “he’s not Obama” is a default fallback position for Romney’s supporters.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:52 AM

The newest tactic now is apparently to call anyone who criticizes Romney or supports Republicans other than Romney for president “secret Obama supporters.”

Doomberg on April 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Why not? It’s accurate.

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Wow. What a load of cr*p. I’m 60 and have voted for only one democrat my whole life- and that was my very first vote when I was fresh out of high school. I just know that Romney is going to have a really tough time against Obama:
- RomneyCare (what happens when the SCOTUS comes out with their verdict?)
- the multitude of “YouTube” vidoes of him declaring himself to be more liberal than Teddy Kennedy.
I will vote for “ABO” (anybody but Obama)…. but it will be holding my nose with one hand and holding a barf bag in the other. He will be an improvement over Obama; but then again, it doesn’t take much to be that.

PackerFan4Life on April 2, 2012 at 10:54 AM

I just can’t figure out for the life of me why so many of Romney’s rombot supporters think that he’s entitled to my support simply on account of having just less than half of the delegates he needs come convention time.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:48 AM

As usual, you’re missing the point. How you vote is your business. That’s why we have secret ballots. This is about things that get said. And I’m seeing a lot of idiotic things being said about Romney that I would expect only from the Left. So if you don’t want to get labeled then it’s best not to adopt the rhetoric of the Left simply to sabotage Romney.

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 AM

As usual, you’re missing the point. How you vote is your business. That’s why we have secret ballots. This is about things that get said. And I’m seeing a lot of idiotic things being said about Romney that I would expect only from the Left. So if you don’t want to get labeled then it’s best not to adopt the rhetoric of the Left simply to sabotage Romney.

cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 AM

“Romney is not conservative” and “Romney’s campaign depends on redefining conservatism” is not the “language of the left.” And furthermore, how you get the language of the left out of “I’ll vote against Obama if it means putting Romney into office” is beyond me. Maybe you ought to quit with the kneejerk reactions and actually listen to people’s genuine concerns instead of labelling everyone you disagree with a “concern troll” automatically.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Mitch McConnell has joined the chorus circus.

Fixed it.

WhatNot on April 2, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Mitch McConnell: Mitt Romney will be an outstanding nominee

Why not just get an endorsement from Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev while you are at it Willard…

SilverDeth on April 2, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Mitt Romney’s biggest selling point is that he’s not Obama. That’s the A-number one thing he has going for himself. No matter how similar he is to Obama, “he’s not Obama” is a default fallback position for Romney’s supporters.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Not good enough to make me vote for him. No conservative? No vote.

SilverDeth on April 2, 2012 at 11:06 AM

With a conservative house and senate, we can bring him to us.

msupertas on April 2, 2012 at 9:55 AM

With moderate mushes like Mitch McConnell running the show, expect Willard to be nearly indistinguishable from Obama…

SilverDeth on April 2, 2012 at 11:08 AM

I still want any mittbot to explain to me why it’s ok for 9% of liberal republicans or 6.5 million voters TO ACTUALLY VOTE FOR OBAMA IN 2008, which gave him the election, Obama won by 10 million votes, and it’s not ok for conservatives to not vote for obama but sit out the election because Romneycare is Obama lite!

Explain to me liberal republicans what is the difference!

Danielvito on April 2, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Probably ? And that is an endorsement.

democratsarefools on April 2, 2012 at 11:10 AM

“Romney is not conservative” and “Romney’s campaign depends on redefining conservatism” is not the “language of the left.” And furthermore, how you get the language of the left out of “I’ll vote against Obama if it means putting Romney into office” is beyond me. Maybe you ought to quit with the kneejerk reactions and actually listen to people’s genuine concerns instead of labelling everyone you disagree with a “concern troll” automatically.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:59 AM

It appears that Romney supporters plan to take that tactic national.

Night Owl on April 2, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Mitch? Who is this Mitch? Mitch McCain?
What has this Mitch done?

KOOLAID2 on April 2, 2012 at 11:11 AM

The newest tactic now is apparently to call anyone who criticizes Romney or supports Republicans other than Romney for president “secret Obama supporters.”

Doomberg on April 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM

This will work well for the Rombots in the election.

SilverDeth on April 2, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Sorry, Mitch, I don’t agree. This should be a Republican year, but I fear that Romney can and will lose to Obama. This is a time that we should be running a conservative with a clear conservative message offering a conservative course for America. Despite the makeover efforts, Romney is not such a conservative. His record as Massachusetts Governor was a liberal one. Romney raised fees and taxes, was adamantly pro-abortion rights, appointed liberal pro-abortion rights Democrats to the state judiciary, oversaw Massachusetts being 47th in the country in job growth, and championed RomneyCare (socialized medicine at the state level), which Romney has never disavowed, which is the precursor to ObamaCare (socialized medicine at the national level) and which resulted in billions of dollars of sky rocketing health care costs. In terms of his beliefs, Romney is a flip flopper. Romney was adamantly pro-abortion rights until around 2006 when he started running for President. The “Etch-A-Sketch” comment of a campaign manager for Romney was on target. Romney will say what he needs to fulfill his political ambitions. That is what he learned in the private equity world to seal the sale, and that will be a weakness in the general election.

I recommend all to read or re-read Thomas Sowell’s column “The ‘Inevitability’ Vote” published March 19 on National Review Online. Sowell has it right. What are Romney’s “strengths” in the GOP primary will not be strengths in the general election. To quote Sowell: “It is truer in this election than in most that ‘it takes a candidate to beat a candidate.’ And that candidate has to offer both himself and his vision. Massive ad campaigns against rivals is not a vision.”

Phil Byler on April 2, 2012 at 11:12 AM

-Yawn-

Yep, I sure am energized. Wake me when something interesting happens, like when Romney picks that unstoppable juggernaut of energy, Mitch Daniels, for veep.

Buckshot Bill on April 2, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Willard Fillmoure Romneycare’s campaign can be the tombstone on the Republican party’s grave. Once the dust settles, it’s high time for a new political party. This one has joined the Whigs in terms of irrelevancy.

SilverDeth on April 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Not good enough to make me vote for him. No conservative? No vote.

SilverDeth on April 2, 2012 at 11:06 AM

I’m waiting to see what he does in the general. If I can be convinced he at least won’t make things worse, I will hold my nose and vote for him. If he starts talking about tax increases, cap & trade, or “fixing” Obamacare by requiring every state to pass a mandate instead of the Federal government, I’m going to vote third party or just leave the president slot blank on my ballot.

Doomberg on April 2, 2012 at 11:16 AM

I still want any mittbot to explain to me why it’s ok for 9% of liberal republicans or 6.5 million voters TO ACTUALLY VOTE FOR OBAMA IN 2008, which gave him the election, Obama won by 10 million votes, and it’s not ok for conservatives to not vote for obama but sit out the election because Romneycare is Obama lite!

Explain to me liberal republicans what is the difference!

Danielvito on April 2, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Weren’t you paying attention in 2010? Rinos believe its better for the democrat to win, if the alternative is giving the conservatives another seat.

Sadly, not /.

Buckshot Bill on April 2, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Willard Fillmoure Romneycare’s campaign can be the tombstone on the Republican party’s grave. Once the dust settles, it’s high time for a new political party. This one has joined the Whigs in terms of irrelevancy.

SilverDeth on April 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM

“Now, now, let’s not get too ahead of our selves. If Obama wins, it won’t be the end of the world.” – Romney, managing expectations at a political rally, July 2012

Buckshot Bill on April 2, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Just as outstanding as you are as a Senate leader- NOT!
All these clowns will do is shift the blame to themselves when trhe financial collapses comes next term.

michaelo on April 2, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Note to Rick Santorum:

My voting against Obama by helping Romney into office is the true definition of “taking one for the team.”

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Buckshot Bill on April 2, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Bill, it’s almost as if the GOP wants to lose this presidential election w/romneycare, so Jebbie Bushie gets a free run in 2016.

It makes NO sense to run Obamalite. The winning issues of 2010 midterms off the table because of romneycare are;

Healthcare mandates- Obamacare & Romneycare the same
Taxes- Both raised taxes
Cap & tax- both favor
Liberal judges- Both have appointed
Global warming- both agree on this
Job creation- both horrible- romneycare as gov ranked 47th out of 50 states

Further w/the economy being the central issue and dems running on romneycare only caring about the 1% richest, what does romneycare do, he builds an extravagant vacation home WITH ELEVATORS FOR HIS FREAKIN CAR IN AN ELECTION YEAR RUN.

Finally, with unemployment being an incredibly important issue, romneycare has been quoted as saying “I ENJOY FIRING PEOPLE”.
God, we are screwed!!!

Danielvito on April 2, 2012 at 11:26 AM

At the very same time that he’s waging a war on women’s fertility, he’s appealing to their maternal instincts with his parental rhetoric.

This sort of hyperbole is not helpful. Yes it’s true that Democrat policy does not promote women having children (who are seen as “polluters” and all sorts of neo-Malthusian nonsense). But to argue he wants women to be infertile (which is the logical extension of calling it a “war on fertility”) is a no sale with women.

Buy Danish on April 2, 2012 at 11:28 AM

This sort of hyperbole is not helpful. Yes it’s true that Democrat policy does not promote women having children (who are seen as “polluters” and all sorts of neo-Malthusian nonsense). But to argue he wants women to be infertile (which is the logical extension of calling it a “war on fertility”) is a no sale with women.

Buy Danish on April 2, 2012 at 11:28 AM

I don’t find it to be hyperbole, myself, but maybe that’s because I’m a guy. The consequence of government paying for contraception and abortifacients will be fewer fertile women since subsidizing an activity encourages and increases it. Not that I think you’re necessarily wrong out of hand, but you and I do have a difference of opinion here.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Danielvito on April 2, 2012 at 11:26 AM

I’m not so sure that they are intentionally throwing the election to Obama, as much as the establishment isn’t willing to actually fight for victory if it requires them to risk damaging their well-earned reputations as sane moderates. Or as Romney would say, “Winning isn’t worth ruining a $300 haircut.”

Buckshot Bill on April 2, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Romney may be a centrist RINO and have all the wrong ideas, but “compassionate” he is not. If elected, he’ll govern as a technocrat opportunist. Do not expect firebrand appointments or pivotal decisions from him – he’ll strive to “minimize the impact”, the game for which many CEO’s are known. While this is not exactly what the country needs, it’s still infinitely better than the traitorous scum-in-chief we have now.

Archivarix on April 2, 2012 at 10:36 AM

I’ve been trying to figure out how to articulate this very same point, and now I don’t have to! I agree with every word.

Just Sayin on April 2, 2012 at 11:42 AM

I respect Megan McCain’s voice more than I do Mitch McConnell’s.

LOSER.

HondaV65 on April 2, 2012 at 11:43 AM

I respect Megan McCain’s voice more than I do Mitch McConnell’s.

LOSER.

HondaV65 on April 2, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Now, that’s an insult! :)

Buckshot Bill on April 2, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Romney may be a centrist RINO and have all the wrong ideas, but “compassionate” he is not. If elected, he’ll govern as a technocrat opportunist. Do not expect firebrand appointments or pivotal decisions from him – he’ll strive to “minimize the impact”, the game for which many CEO’s are known. While this is not exactly what the country needs, it’s still infinitely better than the traitorous scum-in-chief we have now.

Archivarix on April 2, 2012 at 10:36 AM

The problem with your analysis is this …

The US is on a collision course with failure in the next few years.

Romney can govern “middle of the road” – but if he does, he’s simply piloting the plane to the scene of the crash. Make no mistake, the next President inherits a plane in a death spiral toward doom – and sitting in the cockpit and smiling and taking half measures and working around the fringes isn’t going to cut it. At the end of the day, the plane will crash and he (as well as his supporters and the political philosophy he is identified with) – will get the blame.

The next President, in order to save this nation – will have to immediately take BOLD AN DECISIVE action. That means drastically slashing spending on entitlements. In fact, the cuts will necessarily have to be SO deep that the American public aren’t going to like them. Making these cuts will make the next President a HISTORIC President – and also a ONE TERM President. Michelle Bachmann is a loon – but she at least understood this much.

Romney doesn’t understand this – and neither do his supporters. Willard doesn’t have the balls to take bold and decisive action (he’s never taken it – I challenge you to point it out in his entire past … it’s just not there). This is why … with a choice between Willard and Barry – I’ll take Barry because, when he crashes the plane – Socialism gets the blame.

Republicans never play the “long game” – they are always playing the “HAY LETS WIN THIS NEXT ELECTION!” game … and that’s why they’re always losing.

HondaV65 on April 2, 2012 at 11:51 AM

I don’t find it to be hyperbole, myself, but maybe that’s because I’m a guy. The consequence of government paying for contraception and abortifacients will be fewer fertile women since subsidizing an activity encourages and increases it. Not that I think you’re necessarily wrong out of hand, but you and I do have a difference of opinion here.
gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Contraception doesn’t make women “infertile”. It temporarily prevents pregnancy. There’s more than a nuanced difference between the two. It’s entirely fair to argue that there will be fewer babies born and that this is a very worrisome trend (see Mark Steyn’s work) but it won’t be because women were made “infertile”, it will be because they were indoctrinated into believing babies kill the planet or are in some way a burden (or “punishment”) to be avoided.

It’s worth noting that selling eggs so that infertile women can hope to become pregnant via in vitro methods does risk making the egg donor infertile. I have grave ethical reservations about this process (and also have a huge issue with multiple sperm donations from a single source, but that’s another issue related to the gene pool and the rising odds of being impregnated by someone in your own genetic pool).

Buy Danish on April 2, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Contraception doesn’t make women “infertile”. It temporarily prevents pregnancy. There’s more than a nuanced difference between the two. It’s entirely fair to argue that there will be fewer babies born and that this is a very worrisome trend (see Mark Steyn’s work) but it won’t be because women were made “infertile”, it will be because they were indoctrinated into believing babies kill the planet or are in some way a burden (or “punishment”) to be avoided.

Contraception does not make women “sterile” most of the time. Having taken classes for medical office administration, including Anatomy & Physiology, I draw a distinction between “infertile” and “sterile.” By the strictest medical definition, contraception DOES make a woman infertile for as long as that woman chooses to use it. And there are most certainly some instances (such as with Depo) in which contraception can render a woman permanently sterile.

It’s worth noting that selling eggs so that infertile women can hope to become pregnant via in vitro methods does risk making the egg donor infertile sterile. I have grave ethical reservations about this process (and also have a huge issue with multiple sperm donations from a single source, but that’s another issue related to the gene pool and the rising odds of being impregnated by someone in your own genetic pool).

Buy Danish on April 2, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Just a minor clarification there. As I said, I think that the issue of “hyperbole” in this instance is one that we can respecfully agree to disagree on.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 12:00 PM

HondaV65 on April 2, 2012 at 11:51 AM

I would like to jump in here for a minute, if you don’t mind.

You make a very compelling case, but I would like to challenge you on one point: I don’t believe that if Obama is reelected that things will collapse under his watch. I think what will happen under his watch is that collapse will become inevitable, but it could well happen under Obama’s successor. If we have a reasonably strong presence in Congress, it is even more likely that the collapse won’t come until after Obama and Michelle are long gone. The only thing that can stop it would be large Conservative (not Republican, but Conservative) majorities in both the House and the Senate, which will not happen in 2012.

Although I hate the idea of voting for Romney – in 1994 following the disastrous Kennedy-Romney debate I made a promise to myself never to vote for the man – I will do so if he is the nominee for one reason only: this may be the last chance we have to slow things down to give us enough time to get Conservative majorities in 2014. It’s the only chance we have.

Just Sayin on April 2, 2012 at 12:17 PM

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Gotcha. But even if Depo causes infertility in some cases that doesn’t mean it’s an intentional side effect promoted by Democrats as part of a war on women’s fertility.

Buy Danish on April 2, 2012 at 12:26 PM

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Gotcha. But even if Depo causes infertility in some cases that doesn’t mean it’s an intentional side effect promoted by Democrats as part of a war on women’s fertility.

Buy Danish on April 2, 2012 at 12:26 PM

I know. It’s just the would-be medical professional in me that feels the need to point out the difference between “infertile,” which contraception absolutely does cause, albeit temporarily, and “sterile,” which is a permanent medical condition. No, I don’t really think Democrats seek to make as many women permanently sterile as possible, but I do think that women’s fertility is one front of several on which they wage their war against life and freedom.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 12:40 PM

What else is he going to say?

right2bright on April 2, 2012 at 9:53 AM

My exact reaction.

JannyMae on April 2, 2012 at 12:46 PM

MITT ROMNEY WILL BE AN EXCELLENT PRESIDENT!

bluegill on April 2, 2012 at 9:53 AM

“I’m Mitt Romney Barack Obama and I approved paid for this message.”

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Fixed.

JannyMae on April 2, 2012 at 12:50 PM

RINO’s of a feather flocking? Could be!

DannoJyd on April 2, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Relevant to the discussion:

Mitt Romney’s Sinking Approval Ratings

And the liberals succeed again! /s

DannoJyd on April 2, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Fixed.
JannyMae on April 2, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Beyond lame. And gosh, and I thought you claim to have supported Mitt in 2008.

Buy Danish on April 2, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Holding my nose and voting for Mittens will be a little less painful than holding my nose and voting for Little Ricky Santorum would have been.

/settling
//ABO

MidniteRambler on April 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM

I can deal with having another 4 years of King Barry Hussein with a republican congress to frustrate his agenda.

I can’t cope with casting a vote for Willard Fillmoure Romneycare – presidential check box stays blank.

SilverDeth on April 2, 2012 at 5:25 PM

A little hint, rombots…that’s not going to get me any closer to supporting Mitt before the convention.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:42 AM

As long as you vote for him in the general election you’re cool in my book :-)

MJBrutus on April 2, 2012 at 5:30 PM

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 10:42 AM

As long as you vote for him in the general election you’re cool in my book :-)

MJBrutus on April 2, 2012 at 5:30 PM

I don’t require much convincing at all that we need to get rid of Obama. I just view that as a means to an end rather than my ultimate goal.

gryphon202 on April 2, 2012 at 5:43 PM

If only he can win…fortunately, McCain is not running this time…

right2bright on April 2, 2012 at 9:54 AM

He just changed his name for the second time; this time it’s Romney, his original last name was Dole.

Dunedainn on April 2, 2012 at 9:11 PM