Ann Coulter on 2016: Second look at Mitt Romney?

posted at 3:21 pm on April 3, 2014 by Allahpundit

Via MofoPolitics, which is responsible for the clip, and Free Republic, where the Romney 3.0 movement is, shall we say, off to a bad start in the comments. I’m 90 percent sure she’s joking but there’s no way to be sure: Any conservative willing to offer three cheers for RomneyCare qualifies, indisputably, as a true blue Mitt fan. I didn’t think they existed, but they do. Even among people who knew all along that, if nominated, he would lose.

Why Romney instead of someone else, though? One big reason, she says, is immigration. He was the guy who hammered Rick Perry in the debates for supporting in-state tuition for illegals; he was also the guy who made attrition through enforcement — a.k.a. “self-deportation” — the foundation of his immigration policy, despite endless bleating from the media. Call him a squish on other matters if you like but on amnesty he was rock-solid. But see, this was the whole problem with Romney: Was he rock-solid on immigration or was he merely telling primary voters what he thought they wanted to hear? You never really knew with Mitt. He already had one gigantic, potentially fatal political liability with health care. He likely reasoned, correctly, that he couldn’t afford another one by taking a centrist line on immigration. So he became a staunch conservative on legalization and citizenship and it worked for him — for awhile.

How about after the election, though, when he no longer had to worry about offending voters? Here’s what he told a WaPo reporter for a book on the 2012 campaign that came out last year:

On his plan for self-deportation, Romney said, “I still don’t know whether it’s seen as being punitive in the Hispanic community. I mean, I know it is in the Anglo community … I didn’t recognize how negative and punitive that term would be seen by the voting community.”…

When Romney started to trail Gingrich in polls ahead of the South Carolina primary, the book explains that his advisers want to run immigration-themed ads against Gingrich — but Romney refused to “run an immigration campaign.”

Balz also reports in Collision 2012 that Romney’s campaign manager, Matt Rhoades, thought that the immigration attacks on Perry were “both damaging and unnecessary.”

“Looking back, I think that’s right,” Romney told Balz. “I think that I was ineffective in being able to bring Hispanic voters into our circle and that had I been less pointed on that in the debates, I would have been more likely to get more Hispanic voters.”

That sounds to me like a man who regrets having taken such a hard line. Here he is again in November 2013, months after the Gang of Eight bill passed the Senate:

Another issue — immigration — is something the Republican Party must deal with, Mitt Romney said. Asked if there should be a pathway to citizenship put forward, he said, “I do believe those who come here illegally ought to have an opportunity to get in line with everybody else. I don’t think those who come here illegally should jump to the front of the line or be given a special deal, be rewarded for coming here illegally, but I think they should have a chance just like anybody else to get in line and to become a citizen if they’d like to do so.”

It’s not entirely clear what he means there. Does he think illegals should be allowed to stay, with legal status, while they get in line to apply for citizenship, or does he think they should be removed and then try applying for a visa while back in their own country just like every other aspiring American in the world? Come to think of it, that’s not the right question. The right question is, how would President Romney, having just won a squeaker over Obama but having lost 70+ percent of the Latino vote, respond to a concerted push by congressional Democrats for immigration reform? Would he have held firm to “self-deportation” or, having been chastened by the Latino reaction to “self-deportation” during the campaign and with Republican leaders breathing down his neck about changing demographics and 2016, would he have tried to broker some sort of deal involving legalization? Which seems truer to the Romney ethos to you? Reagan signed an amnesty but Mitt the Unconquerable wouldn’t have?

I do think she’s right that it’ll probably be a governor in 2016, though. Are there any of those on the Republican bench who are as firmly opposed to amnesty as Romney 2012 was?


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

I am not joking when I saw eff off Ann..

melle1228 on April 3, 2014 at 3:23 PM

Yeah, because you were so spot on the last time, Anne.

rbj on April 3, 2014 at 3:24 PM

Coulter jumped the shark when she tried to push Chris Christie on us.

Nessuno on April 3, 2014 at 3:24 PM

She is right, of course. Romney was the GOP’s best candidate in decades. he would be again.

Drunk Report on April 3, 2014 at 3:25 PM

He’ll no. He barely even ran a campaign after the primary.

ConstantineXI on April 3, 2014 at 3:25 PM

The thing I liked best about Romney during the primaries was his stance on illegal alien amnesty. Don’t know if he was sincere, but he’s not running again.

We need a new candidate who will be solid on opposing amnesty.

bluegill on April 3, 2014 at 3:26 PM

He’ll no. He barely even ran a campaign after the primary.

ConstantineXI on April 3, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Yeah. Because a ham sandwich could have beat Barack Obama. Next time we should run a ham sandwich since politicians ain’t gonna fix what politicians broke.

gryphon202 on April 3, 2014 at 3:26 PM

Ummm….Second?

kcewa on April 3, 2014 at 3:26 PM

Coulter jumped the shark when she tried to push Chris Christie on us.

Nessuno on April 3, 2014 at 3:24 PM

Ann Coulter is proof that man less and childless women go insane at the age the baby factory shuts down for good.

ConstantineXI on April 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM

Bob Dole says a second look at Bob Dole?

NotCoach on April 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM

He’ll no. He barely even ran a campaign after the primary.

ConstantineXI on April 3, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Her crystal ball is broken.

Tasha on April 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM


She is right, of course. Romney was the GOP’s best candidate in decades. he would be again.

You forgot the ‘/s’ tag.

casuist on April 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM

I am not joking when I saw say eff off Ann..

melle1228 on April 3, 2014 at 3:23 PM

I give up. My little fingers much be way too fat or something to type on my phone.

melle1228 on April 3, 2014 at 3:28 PM

Are there any of those on the Republican bench who are as firmly opposed to amnesty as Romney 2012 was?

Mike Pence?

BeachBum on April 3, 2014 at 3:28 PM

She is right, of course. Romney was the GOP’s best candidate in decades. he would be again.

Drunk Report on April 3, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Bob Dole wonders what you are smoking.

NotCoach on April 3, 2014 at 3:29 PM

Are there any of those on the Republican bench who are as firmly opposed to amnesty as Romney 2012 was?

Here is a golden opportunity for one of them to emerge now and run. They could likely have my support.

bluegill on April 3, 2014 at 3:30 PM

Nigel Farage for US President in ’16!

This is the guy I want to be president, not an open-borders amnesty sell-out like Rand Paul. This is the debate the tea party should be having in the USA. Watch this debate from yesterday, Nigel is awesome! You’ll be hooked from the time you watch his opening remarks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd9rsmD4HiM

FloatingRock on April 3, 2014 at 3:30 PM

You forgot the ‘/s’ tag.

casuist on April 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM

Um… *whispering* He’s drunk.

Fallon on April 3, 2014 at 3:30 PM

I don’t get the Romney second look(or is it third look if we count 2008?) crowd. The only reason to run him again is as a big fat “I told you so” to the moronic electorate who put Obama back in office. But that won’t be too effective of a narrative given that it won’t be Obama who’s the Democrat nominee in 2016. Plus he failed to turn out the base in 2012. Why would anyone think the results will be different 4 years later?

Doughboy on April 3, 2014 at 3:30 PM

They would have mine and millions of others’ support, that is.

bluegill on April 3, 2014 at 3:31 PM

LOL

You couldn’t make that kind of stupid up.

Midas on April 3, 2014 at 3:32 PM

But…I thought the 2016 field was so much stronger!

vlad martel on April 3, 2014 at 3:32 PM

Easy to dismiss until you look at the parade of candidates coming out of the Tea Party clown car.

I’m sure they’re busy tearing down candidates like Scott Walker and Paul Ryan, so the next Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, or Rick Santorum can step up to the plate.

Thing about Romney is that he can ramp up is operation quick, and has huge name recogntion and deep pockets.

If phony agitators want to push so lame candidate whose only qualification is that they can scream “Constitution” real loud, then I’m down for Romney 3.0

swamp_yankee on April 3, 2014 at 3:34 PM

Anti-EU Farage Crushes Clegg in 68-27 Debate Result

FloatingRock on April 3, 2014 at 3:31 PM

Worth watching for numerous reasons. One is to counter the reflexive pro-EU attitude of the would-be Russian invaders.

vlad martel on April 3, 2014 at 3:34 PM

She is right, of course. Romney was the GOP’s best candidate in decades. he would be again.

Drunk Report on April 3, 2014 at 3:25 PM

That ain’t saying much. Look at our candidates over the last couple decades:

1992 – Bush 41: A disastrous campaign. He looked like he wanted to lose.

1996 – Dole: Another lackluster candidate. Was anyone excited to vote for him?

2000 – Bush 43: He ran an ok campaign, but he only won because nobody liked Gore.

2004 – Bush 43: Another ok campaign, but again he barely won thanks largely to a lousy Democrat candidate.

2008 – McCain: Maybe the worst Republican Presidential nominee in modern times.

2012 – Romney: He dominated the first debate, but the rest of the time it looked like he was playing not to lose.

Doughboy on April 3, 2014 at 3:34 PM

It doesn’t make any difference who runs if there isn’t an election. You don’t really think the marxists will allow the senate to be taken over do you? If you don’t do something now it won’t matter who you think should run.

Two things we must deal with are voter fraud and the government media. The media is the front line in the war.

crankyoldlady on April 3, 2014 at 3:34 PM

And this is why we shouldnt legalize pot, boys and girls!

Valkyriepundit on April 3, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Romney would have been the best President since Reagan, but let’s face it. It’d be a mistake to run him again. The people picked a Marxist-lite a-hole over him. Do you really think they’d vote for him over Hillary? No way.

DisneyFan on April 3, 2014 at 3:35 PM

No one wins as Governor of Mass. that isn’t liberal. The same state that elected Ted Kennedy, elected Romney. That’s all you need to know.

Conservatives aren’t as stupid as Anne Coulter thinks we are.

Bigbullets on April 3, 2014 at 3:35 PM

…I worked for him…phones…etc…tried to get out the vote for him.
…he had so much potential when he did the rapid responses (like the press conference in front of Solyndra)…and then he went wimpy…and did not go after JugEars… like he did his fellow Republicans during the primary…and the results broke my heart!
…he let the media bend him over…even at the debates…can’t have him do it again!

KOOLAID2 on April 3, 2014 at 3:36 PM

I forgot, did they ever make a third Death Star?

Dongemaharu on April 3, 2014 at 3:36 PM

And this is why we shouldnt legalize pot, boys and girls!

Valkyriepundit on April 3, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Bingo.

Bigbullets on April 3, 2014 at 3:36 PM

2016 would make look #3 for Romney.
I say no – I’m ready for someone else.

dentarthurdent on April 3, 2014 at 3:37 PM

Doughboy on April 3, 2014 at 3:34 PM

Pretty good historical summary there.

dentarthurdent on April 3, 2014 at 3:38 PM

Ok second look

He looks just as bad as he did the first time.

bgibbs1000 on April 3, 2014 at 3:39 PM

How many looks does it take to figure it out, I wonder?

Keep f*cking that chicken, GOPe.

Midas on April 3, 2014 at 3:39 PM

That pic of Romney holding his lip in is fitting, because that about sums the man up.

Diffident, reticent, calculating. It was all a political calculation to him as if he was fielding a product (himself). In a sense he appeared to be a man without a core as he double talked and equivocated on key issues like gay marriage, immigration (he’s now come out for amnesty!), abortion, Windmill tax credits, whatever.

Problem is that his calculating disingenuous character was fully transparent to the public, it was painfully obvious, and his “smirk” didn’t help, so the “product” couldn’t be saved despite his endless calculations and fine-tuned words. The best thing for us is that Romney just goes away. He is no “wise elder” that we should look up to. He single-highhandedly with the negative coattails messed it all up for us in 2012. Just be gone.

anotherJoe on April 3, 2014 at 3:42 PM

Same comment as the Schmuckabee thread.

Hell to the no.

Nineball on April 3, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Are there any of those on the Republican bench who are as firmly opposed to amnesty as Romney 2012 was?

Here is a golden opportunity for one of them to emerge now and run. They could likely have my support.

bluegill on April 3, 2014 at 3:30 PM

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2013/11/15/in-about-face-mitt-romney-says-undocumented-immigrants-should-have-path-to/

Former presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who took a restrictionist hard line on illegal immigration during last year’s campaign, said Friday that undocumented immigrants should have a chance to obtain legal status.

Romney’s support for a path to legal status is in stark contrast to the position many in his own Republican Party have taken on the issue, and a dramatic departure from the views he expressed last year while running for president.

On the campaign trail, Romney said he was against giving undocumented immigrants a break, and that he favored making life so difficult for them that they would opt for “self-deportation.”

But in an interview Friday with CBS News, the former Massachusetts governor said: “I do believe those who come here illegally ought to have an opportunity to get in line with everybody else.”

Romney continued: “I don’t think those who come here illegally should jump to the front of the line or be given a special deal, be rewarded for coming here illegally, but I think they should have a chance just like anybody else to get in line and to become a citizen if they’d like to do so,” he said.

Romney also said that the Republican Party must address immigration and work on legislation to reform the system.

Not so fast.

Cheese Wheel on April 3, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Yeah.. we need somebody who is willing to reach across the aisle and work with the democrats.

(that was sarcasm)

JellyToast on April 3, 2014 at 3:43 PM

What we need is leadership. Now.

crankyoldlady on April 3, 2014 at 3:44 PM

Easy to dismiss until you look at the parade of candidates coming out of the Tea Party clown car.

I’m sure they’re busy tearing down candidates like Scott Walker and Paul Ryan, so the next Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, or Rick Santorum can step up to the plate.

Thing about Romney is that he can ramp up is operation quick, and has huge name recogntion and deep pockets.

If phony agitators want to push so lame candidate whose only qualification is that they can scream “Constitution” real loud, then I’m down for Romney 3.0

swamp_yankee on April 3, 2014 at 3:34 PM

Romney 3.0 losing is a charm.

Cheese Wheel on April 3, 2014 at 3:45 PM

She is right, of course. Romney was the GOP’s best candidate in decades. he would be again.

Drunk Report on April 3, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Too bad so many Republicans, including many here, did not vote for him.

(Ducks behind Snowdial #1,000)

Del Dolemonte on April 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM

He would have made a great POTUS. However, he lost and his day is done.

MJBrutus on April 3, 2014 at 3:49 PM

Nigel Farage for US President in ’16!
This is the guy I want to be president, not an open-borders amnesty sell-out like Rand Paul. This is the debate the tea party should be having in the USA. Watch this debate from yesterday, Nigel is awesome! You’ll be hooked from the time you watch his opening remarks:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd9rsmD4HiM

FloatingRock on April 3, 2014 at 3:30 PM

Love that man’s energy.

bluegill on April 3, 2014 at 3:51 PM

Clearly not WASPy enough for some.

Tater Salad on April 3, 2014 at 3:52 PM

She is right, of course. Romney was the GOP’s best candidate in decades. he would be again.

Drunk Report on April 3, 2014 at 3:25 PM

If true, that is really, really depressing and one of the reasons why I will not reflexively vote for the Republican presidential candidate again.

The fear of conservatives is palpable in the GOP these days.
“Move Left! Move Left! There must be a sweet spot where the voters thinks we are just statist enough but not too socialist-y!! And get out of the damn tent, you sofisccons- yer stinkin’ up the ambiance!”

Good luck to ya, GOPe. Friggin’ losers who happily nominate more losers. But you have lost this loser, which seems to please you, so there’s that.

Pless1foEngrish on April 3, 2014 at 3:55 PM

Hey kids. I have an idea. Lets run McCain again. This time he won’t have Palin dragging down. He’ll win for sure.

tominsd on April 3, 2014 at 3:56 PM

Mitt Romney, the John Kerry of the r party. Ann must be hanging out with Bill Maher again…

Gohawgs on April 3, 2014 at 3:56 PM

I agree with her on governors being more capable and, if people voted with their heads, would stand a better shot of getting elected but that said: Ted Cruz has an A+ report card from NumbersUSA so I’m not sure where she’s getting this “disaster on immigration” thing from. Romney also had an A+ rating as I recall. Obama was an “f-”.
It’s looking like the die is cast anyway though.. Already starting to see the rumblings of a “If it aint Ted Cruz I’m gonna vote for Hillary and let it burn kuz Ima konsurvitive or sumthin” meme….

V7_Sport on April 3, 2014 at 3:56 PM

Reagan ran 3 times – just sayin’

What Coulter is correct about:

1. no marginal candidates in 2016 that needlessly, stupidly pull the entire offering of candidates too far to the right and who never held elective office (e.g., Herman Cain)

2. must be a governor. The last GOP senator elected directly to the presidency was Warren Harding in 1920.

GOP senators bring a voting record albatross that the MSM can pick to death and have no executive experience. If the American people don’t value executive experience, they’ll vote for the RAT.

All losers: when GOP nominated senators Landon, Goldwater, Dole, McCain. Doesn’t mean a GOP governor will win, but it demonstrates that a senator will most assuredly lose.

We need to nominate Scott Walker, Mike Pence, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Rick Perry, etc. Rand Paul or Marco Rubio for VP.

matthew8787 on April 3, 2014 at 3:57 PM

Drunk Report on April 3, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Sadly, he was a lousy candidate. Would have been a terrific POTUS if he had the chops for campaigning. We gotta face facts.

MJBrutus on April 3, 2014 at 3:58 PM

If you want to see what a debate between Rand Paul and Nigel Farage on immigration would sound like, watch the debate I linked to above. The immigration part starts at about 18:00.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd9rsmD4HiM

Nigel Farage ’16!

FloatingRock on April 3, 2014 at 3:58 PM

OT:
Russia to U.S. on Crimea annexation

(Reuters) – U.S. policymakers need to calm down, maybe do some yoga and accept that Crimea is now part of Russia, a senior Russian diplomat said on Thursday in unusually caustic remarks directed at Moscow’s former Cold War-era adversary.

“What can one advise our U.S. colleagues to do? Spend more time in the open, practice yoga, stick to food-combining diets, maybe watch some comedy sketch shows on TV,” Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told Interfax news agency.

“This would be better than winding oneself up and winding up others, knowing that the ship has already sailed … Tantrums, weeping and hysteria won’t help.”

kcewa on April 3, 2014 at 3:59 PM

No. Ted Cruz is the one for me

neyney on April 3, 2014 at 3:59 PM

Calling Mike Pence. Mike Pence to the bridge. The GOP needs you.

HiJack on April 3, 2014 at 3:59 PM

he let the media bend him over…even at the debates…can’t have him do it again!

KOOLAID2 on April 3, 2014 at 3:36 PM

Romney was lousy in the 3rd debate and played it safe, but this was because they legitimately thought they had the election won, not lost.

matthew8787 on April 3, 2014 at 4:00 PM

No.

GWB on April 3, 2014 at 4:01 PM

I’m only interested in a candidate who will fight. Romney rolled over like the family dog when we needed him to be a pitt bull. We need a Cruz missile not a limp noodle.

neyney on April 3, 2014 at 4:01 PM

Reagan ran 3 times – just sayin’

matthew8787 on April 3, 2014 at 3:57 PM

Reagan never, EVER, gave the impression after his lost that his heart wasn’t in it.

HiJack on April 3, 2014 at 4:01 PM

matthew8787 on April 3, 2014 at 3:57 PM

Add Jindal and maybe even Kasic to your list and drop Christie and I think you have a pretty good slate. Oh and you can throw Huckabee in there if you want to make the religion crowd feels like they had a dog in the fight.

MJBrutus on April 3, 2014 at 4:01 PM

Uh, let’s see … According to Mitt Romney’s son, in 2012, Mitt did not want to run, and had no interest in being president, and he went on to lose what should have been an easily winnable race against the worst “president” in U.S. history, because he refused to fight, and he was not in it to win it.

The answer is NO – Romney does not deserve a “second look”, or another chance, and surely, Romney is even less interested in running in 2016, than he was in 2012.

Pork-Chop on April 3, 2014 at 4:01 PM

This is a non-starter. I don’t know what is wrong with Coulter, her writing is excellent; but she seems to have a fetish for RINOs.

I like Romney the person. He is a great man, but he needs to go away…

Raquel Pinkbullet on April 3, 2014 at 4:02 PM

You’ve got to be fu*king kidding me. The world is going insane — our side included.

I think what’s happening is that the void created by the total and paralyzed refusal on the mainstream Right to take on the Left like it needs to be taken on has produced a kind of compensatory insanity, a frenzy of acting out in delusion and fear. It’s like we’re all either waiting for the other guy to do it, or have lost the actual skill of doing it, or can no longer imagine doing it on the scale that’s necessary to brush back the awesome might of the cultural forces of Progressivism, or simply have convinced ourselves both that we shouldn’t because of the costs and that there must be a better way (the delusion).

No. There is no other way. Confront or die. We seem to be choosing slow death.

rrpjr on April 3, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Don’t know if he was sincere, but he’s not running again.

We need a new candidate who will be solid on opposing amnesty.

bluegill on April 3, 2014 at 3:26 PM

If Bush doesn’t run, and Hillary doesn’t run, I think he’d at least consider it.

He’d wrap up all the big donors, and he could beat Biden.

Jon0815 on April 3, 2014 at 4:03 PM

If the GOP is DUMB enough to elect Romney or ANY OTHER GOPe DimocRat-Lite Republican, they deserve to lose…AGAIN.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

McLame ’08, Romney ’12, Romney again in ’16 or any other Northeastern liberal Republican is INSANE.

Nominate a Conservative and let’s turn this country around!

Meople on April 3, 2014 at 4:04 PM

Reagan ran 3 times – just sayin’

Reagan was never, ever the darling of the GOP establishment — that was GHW Bush. Reagan won the third time because his message of hope was resonant with the population after the disaster of Carter.

Romney et. al. are not Reagan.

tominsd on April 3, 2014 at 4:04 PM

BWAHAHAHAHA, Allah really likes to rattle the monkey cage.

He must put on a plastic Mack before putting up posts like this, everyone else has to duck the flying poo among the screeching.

Of course Romney is the best qualified man for the job. He made his fortune taking over failing operations, shedding the useless employees, and turning them around with efficiency. It’s like they wrote the role of cleaning up after Obama for him personally.

But life isn’t a movie, and there is a large segment of evangelicals and snake-handlers, and of course many of the Cruz Cultists and Paulbots, who won’t vote for him in any case, and in fact stayed home and gave the last election to Obama. So, as ignorant as they are, we need them to turn out vote this time instead of throwing another tantrum.

Adjoran on April 3, 2014 at 4:05 PM

Add Jindal and maybe even Kasic to your list and drop Christie and I think you have a pretty good slate. Oh and you can throw Huckabee in there if you want to make the religion crowd feels like they had a dog in the fight.

MJBrutus on April 3, 2014 at 4:01 PM

I barf on every one of them. H3ll NO! to all ‘em.

HiJack on April 3, 2014 at 4:05 PM

Reagan ran 3 times – just sayin’

matthew8787 on April 3, 2014 at 3:57 PM

Reagan won when he got the nomination.

There is a difference.

Only Nixon pulled it off. He waited 8 years to run again. And he was VP for 8 years and a US Senator for 4 years, and a State congressman for 3 years.

portlandon on April 3, 2014 at 4:05 PM

Mitt-did not win(obviously). but i do think he was the best qualified person around-still-for fixing the country’s fiscal problems.

If he is smart-he won’t run agian.

gerrym51 on April 3, 2014 at 4:06 PM

Calling Mike Pence. Mike Pence to the bridge. The GOP needs you.

HiJack on April 3, 2014 at 3:59 PM

Pence: Sorry, I’m busy running for re-election. Call Bobby Jindal.

kcewa on April 3, 2014 at 4:07 PM

Calling Mike Pence. Mike Pence to the bridge. The GOP needs you.

HiJack on April 3, 2014 at 3:59 PM

Pence loves amnesty. He had his own amnesty bill when he was in Congress.

Jon0815 on April 3, 2014 at 4:08 PM

Reagan was never, ever the darling of the GOP establishment — that was GHW Bush. Reagan won the third time because his message of hope was resonant with the population after the disaster of Carter.

Romney et. al. are not Reagan.

tominsd on April 3, 2014 at 4:04 PM

The way I remember it was that ANYBODY would have beaten Carter. The hard part was to win the GOP nomination, and when Reagan angrily stated at a debate that he paid for his microphone when someone tried to shut him down that was the beginning of his rise. The people loved it.

HiJack on April 3, 2014 at 4:08 PM

Mike Pence?

BeachBum on April 3, 2014 at 3:28 PM

Not really: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/217912/another-no-amnesty-amnesty/mark-krikorian

But that was 8 years ago. He may have changed but I doubt it. But it’s hardly surprising. No one in politics professionally does not support amnesty of some sort. The really bad part about this is not that they support some type of amnesty but that so many Republicans politicians support not truly securing our southern border.

Rocks on April 3, 2014 at 4:09 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd9rsmD4HiM

FloatingRock on April 3, 2014 at 3:30 PM

I just watchd the first 15 minutes. The distinction between these two guys is enormous. Nigel is for self-determination and a strong Great Britain. Nick is for a weakened faceless membership in the EU for the purpose of protection and welfare. One has pride in being British and the other wants to be a European citizen, I guess.

The parallels in this debate with what we experience here are astounding. Just wow!

freedomfirst on April 3, 2014 at 4:10 PM

The arch conservatives basically set up a self fulfilling prophecy. They said he wouldn’t win, and then made sure of it by not voting. It is what it is. He never was good enough for them, no matter how far to their side he got.

I guess I shouldn’t go here, but if Romney had been a Southern Baptist, would the base had turned out for him? I think so.

cimbri on April 3, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Voters support immigration law enforcement.

There is no strong desire out there among voters for amnesty. Quite the opposite. Immigration law enforcement is not merely a concern of the base.

That’s why pro-amnesty supporters have to lie to voters, hide their true intentions and pay for ads like this:
VIDEO: http://youtu.be/ecrUDjMlf5s. (Gives impression Graham and Rubio are for getting “tough” on illegal aliens)

And here’s a Zuckerberg-funded, fake “conservative” ad that tries to trick voters into thinking the Republican sellout amnesty proposal is what’s needed to “get tough” on illegals:
VIDEO: http://youtu.be/l9XRF_kqIN4

This from Byron York is important to remember:

In 2012, President Obama famously won 71% of the Hispanic vote to Mitt Romney’s 27%. If all other factors remained the same, how large a percentage of the Hispanic vote would Romney have had to win to capture the White House?

What if Romney had won 44% of the Hispanic vote, the high-water mark for Republicans achieved by George W. Bush in 2004? As it turns out, if Romney had hit that Bush mark, he still would have lost, with 240 electoral votes to 298 for Obama.

But what if Romney had been able to make history and attract 50% of Hispanic voters? What then? He still would have been beaten, 283 electoral votes to 255.

What if Romney had been able to do something absolutely astonishing for a Republican and win 60% of the Hispanic vote? He would have lost by the same margin, 283 electoral votes to 255.

But what if Romney had been able to reach a mind-blowing 70% of the Hispanic vote? Surely that would have meant victory, right? No, it wouldn’t. Romney still would have lost, although by the narrowest of electoral margins, 270 to 268. (Under that scenario, Romney would have won the popular vote but lost in the Electoral College.)
According to the Times’ calculator, Romney would have had to win 73% of the Hispanic vote to prevail in 2012. Which suggests that Romney, and Republicans, had bigger problems than Hispanic voters.

bluegill on April 3, 2014 at 4:12 PM

For those who want me to believe Mitt would have been just a totally wunnerful POTUS.

This is a guy who couldn’t stand up to a fat chick pseudo-journalist on a debate platform.

But he would have been great going toe to toe with Putin!!! Man, he would have been awesome!

Color me…unimpressed.

And the vice-presidential candidate, Paul Ryan, budget writer supreme? Smiled and nodded while being eviscerated by the embarrassing antics of an manic idiot on national TV. ABSOLUTELY got the chops for that “heartbeat away” stuff.

You’ve convinced me, Miz Coulter- totally retread that ticket.

Pless1foEngrish on April 3, 2014 at 4:13 PM

Coulter is kidding right?

searcher on April 3, 2014 at 4:13 PM

Just sick to death of RINOS. Federal Government is non-self regulating. Only the states can stop the cancer now, and they don’t have to stones to do so.

djtnt on April 3, 2014 at 4:14 PM

No. To the hellth degree.

trigon on April 3, 2014 at 4:14 PM

The way I remember it was that ANYBODY would have beaten Carter. The hard part was to win the GOP nomination, and when Reagan angrily stated at a debate that he paid for his microphone when someone tried to shut him down that was the beginning of his rise. The people loved it.

HiJack on April 3, 2014 at 4:08 PM

You’re right. ANYBODY could have beaten Carter, Just like ANYBODY could have beaten Obama.

The difference was, as you state, Reagan didn’t roll over for the “conventional wisdom”. He fought back.

Reminds me of a certain Ted Cruz.

tominsd on April 3, 2014 at 4:16 PM

I guess I shouldn’t go here, but if Romney had been a Southern Baptist, would the base had turned out for him? I think so.

cimbri on April 3, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Only one real problem with that theory:

If he was a southern baptist, he never would have been elected gov in MA.

But it is nice to see that a number of people blame the loss on bigotry. I guess it’s all that they have.

nobar on April 3, 2014 at 4:18 PM

Sadly, he was a lousy candidate. Would have been a terrific POTUS if he had the chops for campaigning. We gotta face facts.

MJBrutus on April 3, 2014 at 3:58 PM

Fully concur.

dentarthurdent on April 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Cruz/Gowdy.
These guys have fight.

freedomfirst on April 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM

I want a candidate who is dedicated to taking a machete to the directory of gov. agencies and the Federal Register. We worked just fine with only five Secretaries up until 1903 and have gone to he!! in a hand basket since then. We even won WW II without a Sec Def (added in 1947).

Rick Perry is my candidate but I would be happy to see a ticket with him at the top and any of the young bucks (or Palin) in the bottom slot.

jffree1 on April 3, 2014 at 4:21 PM

I guess I shouldn’t go here, but if Romney had been a Southern Baptist, would the base had turned out for him? I think so.

cimbri on April 3, 2014 at 4:11 PM

I love how this meme has gotten traction among the GOP. “Its the conservatives fault Mitty lost! Its them…Kerrrristians!”

I know and talk with a lot of evangelical, conservative Christians (I avoid substantive discussions with lefties) and I don’t know even ONE who said or implied or intimated that they did not vote for Romney because of his Mormon faith. I’m pretty sure they ALL voted for him.

In fact, they all felt he would do the right things when it came to Christian values in the public square, but I admit that idea kinda got knocked in the head for me when he refused to acknowledge the Chik-fil-A kerfluffle.

But yeah, GOP moonspinners, don’t blame anything but the right side of the Party, cuz Mitt was, like, totally awesome and he woudda won but for those rude guys over there under that Cross.

Pless1foEngrish on April 3, 2014 at 4:22 PM

Second look at Mitt Romney?

Nope. Satisfied with the first look. Or should that read unsatisfied with the first look? No matter. No.

Bmore on April 3, 2014 at 4:23 PM

What are your thoughts on Martinez?

She’s a very popular governor and would bring both Hispanic and female credentials to a VP slot. I liked her speech at the convention.

Kaffa on April 3, 2014 at 4:26 PM

I guess I shouldn’t go here, but if Romney had been a Southern Baptist, would the base had turned out for him? I think so.

cimbri on April 3, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Um, no. That’s nonsense. You have to walk around the other large and smelly gorilla’s in the room that *are* reasons why many conservatives stayed home in 2012 to get to *that* little shivering puppy in the corner.

Midas on April 3, 2014 at 4:27 PM

I guess I shouldn’t go here, but if Romney had been a Southern Baptist, would the base had turned out for him? I think so.

cimbri on April 3, 2014 at 4:11 PM

All Romney had to do to turn out the base was to show he could take on the Left. He couldn’t. It’s that simple. Conservatives would have stormed the voting booths if he’d signaled just once that he was a fearless SOB and was ready to mix it up with the media and the hard Left. But he was a pussy. That’s why he lost. He was a pussy.

rrpjr on April 3, 2014 at 4:28 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd9rsmD4HiM

I just watchd the first 15 minutes. The distinction between these two guys is enormous. Nigel is for self-determination and a strong Great Britain. Nick is for a weakened faceless membership in the EU for the purpose of protection and welfare. One has pride in being British and the other wants to be a European citizen, I guess.

The parallels in this debate with what we experience here are astounding. Just wow!

freedomfirst on April 3, 2014 at 4:10 PM

As far as I’m concerned Nigel Farage is the leader of the free world. I like him more than any American politician in my lifetime. He represents my principles and ideals better than any other.

FloatingRock on April 3, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Mitt was easy on the eyes. I’ll give you that. He was impressive all around. Attractive on the inside as well.

bluegill on March 28, 2013 at 10:04 PM

Bmore on April 3, 2014 at 4:28 PM

What are your thoughts on Martinez?

She’s a very popular governor and would bring both Hispanic and female credentials to a VP slot. I liked her speech at the convention.

Kaffa on April 3, 2014 at 4:26 PM

Why not the first spot?

HiJack on April 3, 2014 at 4:28 PM

We gotta face facts.

MJBrutus on April 3, 2014 at 3:58 PM

Let me know when you decide to start, m’kay?

Midas on April 3, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Shut up Coulter

workingclass artist on April 3, 2014 at 4:29 PM

Damn, Alla P just keeps recyclying the RINOS. Has HA turned into a RNC shill site?

they lie on April 3, 2014 at 4:29 PM

Amnesty, shamnesty. It.Is.G’wan.To.Happen. What we need is someone who’s going to get our fiscal house in order. Mormons are strict, honest, moral and hard working by design. My businessman son tries to hire all he can find. Romney is just too much of a gentleman to ever be hired for the job. That’s why the ‘feeling’ crowd will make the first ‘female’ (debatable) the next Prez. God help us…

vnvet on April 3, 2014 at 4:31 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3