-
Born-Alive Infants Butchered to Death — No News Here
April 11, 2013 | 11 comments
-
Refuting the Libertarian Argument on Marriage
March 28, 2013 | 2 comments
-
New, Young Faces of the Pro-Life Movement
February 20, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Friedman: Liberals Are ‘Pro-Life’ For Banning Soda
October 31, 2012 | 5 comments
-
Will Charlotte Taxpayers Be on the Hook For Democrats’ Party?
October 29, 2012 | 6 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Conventional wisdom says that Mitt Romney is a more viable candidate than Rick Santorum in a head-to-head fight with President Obama. Polling bolsters that viewpoint, though by a slight margin. But my sense is that the so-called Romney-Santorum electability divide underestimates one of Romney’s biggest liabilities in the general election: His aura of being the guy who just fired you.
Now, free marketeers in the Republican base understand Romney’s tenure at Bain Capital. They don’t have a problem with his net worth. Swing voters won’t have nearly as sanguine a view, especially as they’re fed misinformation by Obama’s $1-billion campaign machine. A well-orchestrated attack by Obama against Romney’s background and wealth could be just as effective — if not more so — than an attack leveled against Santorum’s social conservatism. That’s especially true if Romney continues to let slip such utterances as “I like being able to fire people who provide services to me,” “I’m not concerned about the very poor,” and “corporations are people, my friends.”
Of particular concern to Republicans should be Romney’s precipitous slide in the polls among independents. It’s not because the former Massachusetts governor is emphasizing his social conservatism more. It’s because swing voters don’t trust or like him, even though they’re fed up with Obama and the poor economy. As Nate Silver of The New York Times has written, the electability divide between Romney and Santorum isn’t as significant as one might think. Also check out results from the left-of-center Public Policy Polling finding that Romney’s electability argument is weakening. (A caveat: Some of Santorum’s positive polling could be because his “dirty laundry” isn’t yet as visible as Romney’s.)
No doubt, Santorum’s social conservatism would be a liability with swing voters. But so would Romney’s background and perceived lack of trustworthiness. As Jim has pointed out, Santorum’s more pressing problem would be assembling a presidential campaign on the fly, not his social conservatism.
Another aspect that’s underestimated: Santorum would excite evangelical (and perhaps Catholic) voters in a way that Romney never could. Although libertarians have criticized Santorum’s track record on fiscal concerns, his sins are far less numerous than Romney’s. So it’s quite possible that a strong Santorum campaign could generate a more energized Tea Party voting base. Yes, swing voters are critical, but so is turning out the base. Santorum would give conservatives a candidate to vote for rather than merely an incumbent to vote against.
View all comments (109) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by David N. Bass
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/02/24/romneys-aura-of-electability-i
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
WL| 2.24.12 @ 2:17PM
You are correct about Romney...and the only people who ever thought he was electable were pundits and those inside the beltway...
Romney was only in the spotlight because he has been running for president for the entire 3ish years since he LOST the last nomination to a rusty ol' coot.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.24.12 @ 9:32PM
One of the stupidest articles ever printed at AMSPEC.
Dennis| 2.27.12 @ 11:42AM
One of the stupidest comments ever printed at AMSPEC.
Dai Alanye | 2.25.12 @ 9:48PM
Quite a sensible and realistic analysis by Bass. Romney is one of those persons who, the more you know him the less you like him. More specifically in Romney's case, the more you hear him the less you trust his conservative credentials.
Former Republican| 2.26.12 @ 1:46PM
Most people conclude they don't like Willard once they get to know him. Happened in 08 and is happening this time.
12 will be a bloodbath for the GOP with him at the top.
RJ| 2.24.12 @ 2:27PM
Conventional wisdom comes from established interests and is usually wrong. We saw the split between the GOP establishment and the Tea Party in 2010. We know now that the GOP establishment does not share our concerns or values. We don't need them to tell us who to vote for.
Marco2| 2.24.12 @ 2:39PM
Santorum is going nowhere out in actual America. You people have to talk to some others who don't dance around your bonfire of conservative purity, and try to get a grip on things as they are. Da schlub ain't gotta chance, as his double losses next Tuesday may help you to understand.
RJ| 2.24.12 @ 2:53PM
My comment isn't about Santorum or any other candidate. I just don't think that any of us should base our opinion of a candidate or who we are going to vote for based on what the mass media or establishment figures say. We know that whoever the GOP selects will be serially lied about by most of the mass media. So screen out what the mass media says, select the best candidate and support him as best you can in the general election. The media has increasingly tried to manipulate the electorate, so don't let them influence your decision or discourage you.
R. Freedom| 2.24.12 @ 3:56PM
I think I’ve tracked down the origins of the term, “Republican Establishment.” Confounded for months, I think I may’ve stumbled across the beginnings (and perhaps understandings) of the term.
Use of the term “Establishment” can be traced back to Hunter “Gonzo” Thompson in an article titled, "The Hashbury is the Capital of the Hippies" (May, 1967). Thompson explained that the hippies were protesting against the values of the “Establishment.” William Ayers, B. Rae Dohrn, & the Weather Underground picked up the mantle around 1969 and claimed they were fighting against the evils of the “Establishment.”
Then, Rush “Gonzo” Limbaugh resurrected the term by cleverly putting the word “Republican” in front of it. (As Gonzo Thompson was fond of saying: "Viva la Rush!") Now the “Republican Establishment” is the contemned straw man for Rush’s radio listeners (indoctrinaires? Indoctrination airs?).
So, the Republican Establishment appears to be about as real as the motivations for the Cultural Revolution of the 60s and as real as the perceived enemies of Bill Ayers’ Weather Underground. But don’t bother looking for them. Other than some (yet unidentified) guests at a luncheon in the Hamptons Limbaugh attended in the early 1990s, nobody as yet is quite certain who they are.
Supposedly, many of the Republican Establishment are big campaign donors. Therefore, Sheldon Adelson, Foster Friess, and the Koch brothers all have to a part of the cabal.
obadiah| 2.24.12 @ 4:18PM
The Establishment Junta meets every Wednesday at 10 a.m. with the Mass Media Directorate to plot the next step in the Athe0-Marxist plan for world domination. Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright are Obama-selected convenors.
RJ| 2.24.12 @ 5:53PM
To me "GOP Establishment" means political professionals, often working in the beltway, and major interest groups who work with them to obtain special favors from government. To these people, government & politics is a business, not an interest or "hobby." You can find them on K Street, in Congressional office buildings, working as campaign consultants, and in the media, among other places. Big individual donors might fit into this group, but I expect that many of them are concerned citizens who worry about the future of America. It is interesting on how many of the same names show up on the walls of non-profit institutions as major benefactors, where no special interest is to be gained.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 6:51PM
Is that the same K street where both Newt and Santorum made a living after they left office?
RJ| 2.25.12 @ 2:07AM
Newt fits the description of GOP Establishment, but they clearly hate him these days. Santorum too, but his social conservatism is not well received in those circles (its viewed as getting in the way of business). So is Romney, having lobbied for federal aid while at Bain and for the Olympics. He is also the beneficiary of the majority of support from the GOP Establishment. The only candidate who doesn't fit in with the GOP Establishment is Ron Paul. We need to pick the best candidate from those four and back him all the way in November, despite negative press and the naysayers. We cannot afford to lose this one.
Proud Mormon| 2.24.12 @ 2:35PM
Romney's aura of electability will be back in place by mid-March. With the nomination sown up and high gas prices Mitt's inevitability as your next President will be a lead pipe cinch. Ricky and Newt's political careers will be in Reagan's dust bin and a big thanks to Dr. Paul.
Marco2| 2.24.12 @ 2:42PM
Thank you, Dr. Paul, for helping to save us from the consummate insider conservative establishment, and their proxy twin candidates.
Simon Templar| 2.24.12 @ 3:03PM
You too jack asses just proved without a doubt my belief that you are not conservatives but progressives. As one of your own right here at TAS, Ross, made clear as a bell, "I am not a conservative, I am a libertarian."
You both are a disease and a trojan horse that will kill the nation and the GOP.
jaspk| 2.24.12 @ 3:24PM
Sorry asimon, you and your fellow uber-conservatives are the disease that is destroying the GOP. The GOP was never - and should never be -the conservative party you imagine. I suggest that your guys should form your own party and see how far that gets you - nowhere.
Simon Templar| 2.24.12 @ 3:35PM
You are the asses that bought the crap the liberals and radicals have been peddling for nearly sixty years, not us. You and your liberal cousins have nothing to do with any kind of conservativism, the founding fathers, or a true constitutional republic.
You are the product of 45 years of liberal education and liberal propaganda and you are a GD minority that pretends to be a majority like all progressive do.
No, you take the hike. I am confident that you and Dennis will make a wonderful couple. You can now get married, how wonderful. I will send you a wedding present.
Purple Lips| 2.24.12 @ 4:07PM
Ah yes, but the opposite also holds true. GOP voter turnout in 2008 was 15% less than in 2004. Result - McCain lost in a near landslide. The 15% lower turn-out was attributed to conservatives staying home. This was so true in Indiana, which voted for a Dem (Obama) for the 1st time since 1964. And the difference in both 2000 and 2004 was a much larger than expected turn-out of conservatives than expected.
The GOP run by Establishment Liberals is a sure path to defeat.
Clint| 2.24.12 @ 9:53PM
Ronald Reagan,
" If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are traveling the same path."
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
sam Cafone| 2.24.12 @ 5:27PM
After watching the disgusting display of mudslinging by the tag team of Magic Underwear and his stooge, Ron coot Paul, I and most of the conservatiuves I've spoken to, will sit on our hands and not vote for the proud mormon whose slippery slime disgusts me and most real conservatives. Where is Ronald Reagen when we need him. We sure don't need Romneycare and same sex marriage as espoused by Magic Underwear when he was governor of Mass.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 6:35PM
The best disinfectant for bigotry is the light of day.
D Pawl Trebas| 2.24.12 @ 7:25PM
Many people of faith wear garments as an exercise of that faith. Would you mock the garments of an orthodox Jew? Would you mock the Amish? Would you mock Muslim women? Would you mock the Pope? Most likely not. Then why mock a devout Mormon because of their clothing. You clearly do not like Gov. Romney's positions on many things. However, mocking people of faith for their devout exercise of that faith is wrong and does nothing to advance conservatism.
Clint| 2.24.12 @ 9:43PM
You're Full Of Crap, Buffoon Cafone.
Mr. Paul, a 76-year-old congressman from Texas, sees his three Republican rivals as more or less the same politically. He can be tough on Mr. Romney, whom he describes as a flip-flopper with a dubious political core.
“He’s been all over the place on some of this stuff,” Mr. Paul said in a recent interview near his Texas home. But he seems to segregate those views from his personal feelings for Mr. Romney, whom he sees as a steady, dignified personality whose devotion to wife and family reflect his own values. "
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
kingsmill| 2.24.12 @ 2:40PM
Willard is electoral poison. Look at his numbers in Massachusettts, coming off 8 years of GOP holding the executive, Willard relied on a divided field to win. The guy is the pits, and Obuma will prevail against him, anemic economy and gas prices notwithstanding.
Simon Templar| 2.24.12 @ 2:57PM
Maybe Bass you should look at the news before you submit your articles. One looks a bit silly when a Rasmussen poll comes out putting Romney way ahead of Santorum in todays michigan poll and then you submit your opinion that Romney is unelectable and diminishing in your title.
As I said a year ago the GOP establishment by hook, crook, negative ad, lie, group think, or millions of dollars will see Romney nominated one way or another.
My belief is he will be nominated and he will pick Ron Paul or another libertarian posing as a conservative as a running mate. They WILL lose the general election by a landslide and then the two progressives and every Paulbot, moderate republican, Proud Moron Mormon will turn right around and blame conservatives, the Tea Party, and everything and everybody else. The dems will have political orgasms and make the final claim that conservativism is dead; this time, unfortunately, they will be correct.
"Although libertarians have criticized Santorum's track record on fiscal concerns, his sins are far less numerous than Romney's."
Yes, you are correct. Libertarians, however, really are not as concerned about fiscal issues as they are their hatred for christianity, their social liberalism, and their views that America is the problem and isolationism and appeasement the solution. This is why they can high five Romney because they share the same progressive world view that the progressive Republican have and are natural allies. This is also why Ron Paul can chum around with and work with radical Dennis Kusinich and spit on every other conservative from Ronald Reagan to Gingrich to Santorum.
The achiles heel for conservatives is their tendency towards listening to and caring too much what media and the liberals think and there tendencies to be reactionary. Their desire for a pure candidate is being used against them and keeping them divided and their suceptibility to negative ads is pushing them all over the place and over a cliff.
Gingrich and Santorum apparently can not see that if one of them is ever going to win they need to work together to fully expose Romney. What did all these conservatives do this past year? They spent more time tearing each other to shreds to gain second place and move up? What pure idiocy.
Keep this up and the guy they largely ignored that nipped at their heels for a year (Ron Paul) and the guy that stood there and watched, combing his great looking hair, will be the only ones left standing.
sam Cafone| 2.24.12 @ 5:30PM
and who the hell, outside of the Paul Zombies, would vote for that crazy old coot?
Simon Templar| 2.24.12 @ 7:41PM
My friend ,we might not have a choice...
David N. Bass| 2.24.12 @ 3:03PM
Simon: The RealClearPolitics.com average of polls still puts Romney and Santorum in a statistical deadheat in Michigan. Santorum's performance in the debate Wednesday night hurt him and boosted Romney, but that contest is still very much in the air.
Notice I wrote aura of "electability," not "inevitability." I still believe that Romney will be the nominee, although it's vastly more competitive now. But I don't think he is more electable. In fact, he's less so.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 3:31PM
Check out gallup tracking today Obama vs. Romney.
Romney is UP vs. Obama.
It is amazing that Romney is where is he with the daily barrage by the MSM, his opponents, Axelrod, and some conservative pundits who have a vested interest in other candidates or a brokered convention. This includes most of FOX News (we know where Rupert stands), the WSJ, Bill Kristol, Rush and Laura Ingraham.
Maybe I sound like Oliver Stone but consider that 78% of the MSM stories about Romney have been negative and that is far greater than to any other candidate.
Given all of this, Romney is doing quite well. Is he perfect? Far from it. His greatest weakness is campaigning but he is a doer and a leader. Obama is a mirror image of Romney. Obama's great skill is campaigning; everything else he does is a vote of 'present'.
Doug| 2.24.12 @ 3:40PM
But who cares if moderates in Calif, NY, Mass and Illinois think Romney is great. Their votes won't change who wins the electoral votes in those states. And Romney won't help elect "moderate" Senators and Representatives from those states either.
But Mitt can discourage the base in true swing states and hurt the conservastive cause at the Senate and House level. How many of those independents that many believe will back Mitt will also back conservative congressmen?
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 3:48PM
I disagree. Romney is running on a TEA party platform of limited government, balanced budgets and pro-growth tax reform. He will do very well all states that care about those issues and will help down ticket. I've seen some polling analysis that shows Newt hurts down ticket and we might lose the house if he is the nominee (I take some of these polls with a grain of salt but Newt does have high negatives-for good cause).
Are largest debt driver is Medicare because it is a $80T unfunded liability. Paul Ryan said that Romney has the boldest and most detailed Medicare reform plan of ANY GOP candidate. Romney is not afraid of taking on entitlement reform.
Doug| 2.24.12 @ 3:57PM
So his words say. But his words also say he is proud of RomneyCare. He also says he will repeal ObamaCare. Nothing in Mitt's history suggests he is anywhere near the Tea Party in ideology or action.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 4:08PM
You couldn't be more wrong. He came into office in MA with a $3B budget deficit. Every pundit and politician in the state claimed the only solution was broad based taxes. Mitt solved the problem by cutting government. He was protecting taxpayers. He left office with fewer state employees than when he started. The hacks in the state hate him because he closed down their favorite patronage havens. He also protected the taxpayer by vetoing 800 liberal bills from the 85% dem legislature. Romney had the taxpayer's back in a state where that is rare.
I'm not a fan of RC but I am less of a fan of deadbeats. RC was a state specific solution to ERs being clogged up by deadbeats using ERs for non-urgent care. It worked as advertised but only because the unique situation in MA..
Uomo Del Ghiaccio| 2.24.12 @ 6:56PM
What is the Tea Parties ideology?
Purple Lips| 2.24.12 @ 4:09PM
News flash - all of the GOP candidates are running on that platform. And Mitt attracts few conservatives and fewer teapartiers. It isn't his plank that they disagree with. They simply do not trust the guy.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 4:27PM
Some don't trust him. Some do. In all four states he won he did win the conservative and tea party vote.
Romney's campaign has been horrible. They let the Mitt vs. anti-Mitt meme marinate for 6 months and that was a terrible error.
Simon Templar| 2.24.12 @ 4:10PM
Yeah, you are worried for the country.
Actually you are part of the problem and represent a significant segment, unfortunately, of the GOP electorate. Of course, assuming your just not another liberal troll posing.
This is really quite simple, you are either incredibly stupid or evil. Sorry, but logically these are the only possible choices.
You can sit there with a straight face and tell us that Romney is going to do all these wonderful things, he is the true conservative, and HE will bring the needed change to D.C. that the Tea Party wants to see.
I will, for the sake of argument, give all your 'facts" and "criticisms" for a moment to be truthful. Ok, fine. So, you expect me to buy and believe that a guy who has admitted publically that he is new to conservativism and has led a whole political life as not a conservative, is being shoved down our throats by the establishment GOP, and has a record of liberal policy making and voting that is quite astounding that it makes you wonder why he just did not run as a Democrat should be nominated and expected to keep his promises, and as Barack says, fundamentally change DC, and without question actually bring about the gigantic changes that are being requested by conservatives and the Tea party?????????????????????????????
You must think of us as stupid dupes or you must be rather simple minded and a useful idiot.
The basis of your own argument collaspes on itself. Do you notice this?
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 4:21PM
Yes, I am convinced Romney will be a better President than Reagan. I am certain of it.
This is no dig on Reagan. Romney will have the advantage of a Paul Ryan led congress and will be able implement Reagan's vision.
Remember, Romney made his living turning around failing companies into thriving enterprises by slashing and burning. Cut. Cut. Cut.
I want him to do that in DC and he will.
He did that in MA to the limit of the 85% dem legislature. He was able to do what he did by leveraging a fiscal crisis. Sound familiar?
You aren't a stupid dupe but you appear blind to the gift of Romney's turn around skills and your opportunity to vote for him.
Simon Templar| 2.24.12 @ 8:22PM
First, you are making some incredible assumptions that have little to do with the real world and are half truths.
I have no doubts that his work at Bain and in the business world was just as you claim it was, for the most part.
The business world, however, is not government and the forces, elements, and dynamics within the business world are completely different than those in government.
Businesses do not have people lobbying for more expense spending, or have no regard or incentive to reduce expenses and be efficient, or have bureacratic tape, interest groups, constituencies, or media corrupting its attempts to be profitable and efficient. Government is a completely different animal.
Second, his time in the political world also involved his passing and standing for a ton of liberal positions and policies as well that you conveniently failed to mention on a whole host of social and political issues and government programs.
Now, my guess is you could give a rats as about that and have concealed the fact that you are not a social conservative but most likely a moderate Republican or a liberaltarian. Like most people of this pursuasion, you can not make the connection between culture, values, and world view as the basis of economics and political freedom.
Now, the endorsement of Donald Trump should have been a clue. But you most likely missed it because you have never worked in the corporate world.
Business men are by nature opportunist in the sense that they are more than willing to compromise and endorse anyone who will stay out of there way and make deals with the devil to do so. For them, this is understandable as their primary interest is protecting the company and the shareholders. This is why Trump can give money to both parties at the same time and think the mayor of New York is just great.
This is exactly the same temperment as Romney and why he largely compromised himself on so many issues and by his own admission just came to conservativism recently.
So, you are telling me and he is telling me now that he has deep conservative values, is prolife, believes strongly in the family, is against homosexual marriage, will defend the rights of religious people, and stop the encroachment of government in every aspect of our life from gun control to our schools overun with socialist and marxist? He and you are pandering.
If that is not enough to distrust him, you expect us to overlok the fact that this man has boldly lied about himself and has without hesitation lied throughout this campaign about his opponents. Shit, nonpartisan groups have been tracking him and he is outdoing all the rest. The length of his nose should be reaching his east coast state sometime this evening. Yeah, let's let the best liar win. I am suppose to believe he will cut, cut, cut and stand on conservative principles?
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 9:01PM
You are very concerned about 'some' endorsements but you ignore the endorsements from respected conservatives like Jim DeMint a nd Laura Ingraham in 2008 and John Thune and Bob McDonald now. Maybe Trump realizes that Obama is a disaster, just like he claims, and he firmly believes Romney can take him out better than any other candidate.
Romney DID cut government in MA. He was clearly constrained by the Dems but he removed patronage, hack havens which no other governor was able to accomplish. He took political heat for every one of his 800 vetoes. The vetoes were a combination of protecting taxpayers AND social issues. He was taking a stand. Is he perfect? Of course not. None of the other candidates are either (and that includes those who didn't get in).
Romney's experience in saving the Olympics was not a typical private sector turnaround. He had to root out corruption and restore solvency. He needed his leadership and problem solving skills to be successful.
Simon Templar| 2.27.12 @ 2:13PM
Worried about a real conservative winning,
Projecting again. I do not give a rats ass who is endorsing him and who is not or who did. Some of those people do no longer endorse him now. many of these people supported him in 2008 because the choices were worse than we have now.
You have not addressed anything I posted but returned right back to the vomit like a dog that you threw before. See, the idea is you make some points, I counter them, then you counter and address the points I am making, that is how it is suppose to work.
Romney is a liar and has no problem with lying about anything or using lies to get what he wants. His campaign has been shameful.
I am not looking for someone to turn the private sector around, I am looking for someone to turn the federal government around and get it the hell out of the private sector and remove the radicals and progressives from it and the myriad of public policy they have created.
Any candidate the GOP establishment picks is suspect. They have no interest in changing anything other than managing the decay.
Romney can not even mention the name of the Tea Party in public let alone get behind it.
Poyman (also a Texan)| 2.27.12 @ 12:05AM
Actually, I think of you as a Bully, part of the Hard Right Political Mob that wants to shove a losing candidate down our throats similar to what happened in NV and DE in 2010 when both states had winning candidates and they were pushed aside because they didn't align wiith your own definition of "True Conservatism".... In actuality it is you and your buddies that is killing the Republican Party.... The Tea Party Movement was founded on three principles: 1)Lower Taxes; 2) Less Government;and 3) Fewer Regulations.... You and your buddies have bastardized those principles to include alot more stuff... Social Policies that not all Reeps agree with; Agressive Foreign Policy; Zero Spending; Religios foundation Preferences; etc.... If you want the definition of evil, get yourself a mirror and take a hard look.... Under Reagan we had a BiiiG Tent.... Under the Tea Party that tent has been cut in half.... And that means we become nothing but losers onder your's and the "My way or the Highway" Mob's form of Leadership... I am a lifetime Republican and proudly voted for Reagan each chance that I got.... Today I would refuse to vote for a candidate that your croud shoves down our throat and I mean specifically Santorum or Gingrich.
Simon Templar| 2.27.12 @ 1:55PM
Poyboy,
You have an amazingly twisted version of history, reality, and conservativism.
First, Ronald Reagan was the perfect example of the very element you describe as the hard right political mob candidate that was considered by the establishment GOP and moderate phony progressive republicans like yourself as unelectable, extreme, and far right.
Conservativism has traditionally consisted of both social, econmic, amd political conservativism for nearly a century. Most conservatives consider themselves both social conservatives and economic conservatives. They represent the majority, not you.
Seventy five percent of the republican voting electorate do NOT want Romeny. The distinction you created and the divisiveness you have encouraged with your hatred of those that hold conservative social values and political positions is obvious and detrimental to conservativism.
The party was a big tent because those within it understood their commonalities and shared values on many fronts and RESPECTED others in that tent that had differing concerns and did not for the most part attack each other to the level they do now.
There has always been for the most part a bullying coming from the Rockefeller progressive republicans who have beat the drum since Goldwater that a real conservative can not be elected and we MUST settle for a progressive, moderate like Romney.
Social conservatives need not shut up, apologize to anyone, or capitulate. The majority of Americans do not want abortion, do not approve of homo marriage, do not approve of left wing cultural marxist agendas. You are the one revising history and bastardizing conservativism. You are the bully telling others to shut up and telling them they have no right to a contrary opinion or values other than those shared with your progressive cousins on the Left.
The Tea Party is made up of all types of people who share the common values you listed and have come together to promote those objectives and values.
This does not exclude social conservativism or peoples concerns about the cultural rot promoted by the Left or imply that these concerns are irrevelant or unwelcome.
What really amazes me about useful idiots like yourself is your uncanny disability in being unable to connect the dots between culture and values to politics and public policy. The Left understands it too well.
Well, if standing with the founding fathers who believed that religion, morality, and knowledge stood as the foundation stones of a free republic, then I gladly be called evil in your F*&^K up version of the world.
securetheborders| 2.24.12 @ 5:28PM
I disagree. Romney is a moderate liberal. Do you know how Romneycare was financed? With federal tax dollars, that's right, alltaxpayers in the US paid for Romneycare. Just because he pretends to be aconservative now does not make it fact. If Romney is the Republican candidate, for the first time I will NOT vote for the Republican candidate. Obama and Romney are cut from the same cloth.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 5:36PM
Did you see the report on Greta? Federal money is used everywhere. The welfare reform that Newt touts as his great achievement used the EXACT program of federal dollars for a pilot program in WI.
Also, did you know that MA is one of the biggest loser states in federal tax dollars. They get back $.77 of every $1 of taxes sent to DC.
Romney is nothing like Obama but your vote is your own. God help our country if others think like you. I have seen Axelrod trolls sow the seeds of doubt like you are.
hondr| 2.24.12 @ 6:16PM
Dude,
WI was a pilot program.
Gingrich's welfare reform RETURNED all welfare to the states. It is completely different than what Romney inflicted on everybody in that state, and paid for with federal dollars.
It's just another Romney lie.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 6:41PM
Dude,
You are wrong. Tomy Thomson was governor of WI and HE was the one that implemented the pilot welfare reform when Newt was speaker. He was also the head of HSS and approved the pilot funding for RC under the same program.
Greta interviewed him last week and explained it all. I wasn't aware of these details until I saw it. It is still on line if you are interested at greta-wire.
There is no lie. You can't handle the truth.
Romney want all health care returned to the states too.
Uomo Del Ghiaccio| 2.24.12 @ 7:08PM
Check your facts and consider that Mass. is a very liberal state. The fact that any Republican was able to get elected in Mass. and accomplish anything that even slightly resembles the Conservative point of view is amazing.
You complain about the Mass. Health Care Reform, but you forget that this was a Conservative Idea that came out of the Conservative Think Tank "The Heritage Foundation".
It was touted and promoted by volumes of Republicans as the alternative to Bill Clinton's attempts at Health Care Reform.
Poyman (also a Texan)| 2.27.12 @ 12:10AM
MA gets the same amount of Federal Assistance to service the uninsured as all other states on a percapita basis... But, istead of using the money to reimburse Hospitals for the actual treatment of the uninsured, MA uses their money to help the poor to be able to afford paying for insurance.... And truth is that MA has been more efficient against actual cost by about 2%.... You really need to get your facts straight before you start spewing...
sam Cafone| 2.24.12 @ 5:33PM
What the hell are you smoking? I'd love to get some of that stuff.
Simon templar| 2.24.12 @ 3:26PM
Bass, Rasmussen puts Romney ahead of Santorum a full 10 points or more. This was released just an hour ago. It is being reported by many conservatives web magazines that Romney's 'fabulous performance' the other night has put him in front.
The group think will now set in as it has done, let's see 5 times in the past 9 months. Much of it created not from reality or facts but unchallenged lies, distortions and a media, including the conservative media, which goes along with it, accepts the lies through silent consent, and refuses to inform the public of all the facts surrounding these candidates and their claims.
Once again, may the best liar win! On with the destruction of the Republic!
I think we are in general agreement. But I do not believe that his aura of electability has diminished at all to any degree that it makes a difference. I also do not believe this is inevitable unless we let it happen. Seventy five percent do not want this guy but they will let themselves be divided, fooled, distracted, and manipulated.
If he is nominated and loses this election, there will be hell to pay in so many ways and levels, one dare not imagine.
SnowCypher| 2.24.12 @ 11:22PM
The so-called 75% Anti-Romney number is itself nonsense. Not nationally and certainly not in states that will count in the fall. Turn that number around to about 25% of Republicans have some level of personal prejudice against Romney but want the cloak of larger numbers (which keep shrinking) to hide behind.
R. Freedom| 2.24.12 @ 3:34PM
“One of the reasons why I’m in favor of less government is because when you have more government, business takes it over.” — Milton Friedman
Politicians make promises, but then do different things when we’re not looking. We get the same campaign blather every election cycle, yet little ever seems to change. The reasons why? Big business, big labor, big education, etc., have seized control of our government. How do they do it? Through their smooth-talking K Street lobbyists and consultants.
Highly paid lobbyists/consultants like Newt & Santorum broker deals with government that gain their clients hundreds of millions in taxpayer funds (some call it plunder). In the process, lobbyists/consultants become millionaires while their wealthy clients become billionaires.
When Newt & Santorum were in Congress, they traded favors with big the big boys. Newt & Santorum used their political clout to give the big boys our money through use of earmarks, and the big boys returned the favors by contributing to Newt’s & Santorum’s re-election campaigns.
Capitalism is a tough game. Competition is fierce. The risks of failure are high. The profits are sometimes low. But theft from the government is a much easier game. The risks are low; the rewards are high; and there’s enough for everyone with connections & money to pay for it. The big boys just pay off the Congressman, and stick our money in their pockets.
Now, I’m not accusing Newt & Rick of crimes. As Washington insiders, they’ve ensured this sellout is perfectly legal, in the same way they made insider trading illegal for all of us, but not them.
So, smooth talking politicians (BTW, smooth-talk is what makes them lobbyists/consultants extraordinaire) like Newt & Rick “talk the talk,” but when we’re not looking, they’re walkin’ the crooked walk.
The Tea Party needs to send them a message that “we’re mad as hell, and we (and politician/lobbyists/consultants) are not going to take it anymore.”
Bay Stater| 2.24.12 @ 3:37PM
Coming off three victories Santorum knew the kitchen sink would be thrown at him in the last debate. He stumbled because you can't defend the indefensible...his voting record during the Bush regime was repugnant to GOP conservatives hence the '06 drubbing 59-41. Knowing what the opposition had in mind Santorum tried to throw conservatives a curve ball emphasizing social issues on the eve of the debate but the opposition stayed on message and in the end Santorum "team" emphasis alienated hyper right-wingers and effectively ended his campaign. I disagree with the posts above, his Catholicism and social positions were not a factor.
R. Freedom| 2.24.12 @ 3:39PM
Here's Santorum's "walk the walk" record:
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/.....d=15298204
http://www.forbes.com/sites/bi.....n-america/
Doug| 2.24.12 @ 3:42PM
If Mitt is so electable then why has he only won ONE contest in his 20+ years of running for office?
Uomo Del Ghiaccio| 2.24.12 @ 7:11PM
Mitt Romney is not a career politician like the Washington DC Insider and Lobbyist Rick Santorium who was sited as one of the most corrupt Senators while he was in office.
hondr| 2.24.12 @ 3:45PM
No, Romney is not up by 10 in Michigan. Rasmussen has him up by 6.
Mitchell has him up by 3, and Mitchell had the 2008 R primary nailed, as you'll recall.
And do you think the undecided are going to break for Romney? After staring at his plastic face on their Michigan television screens for the last 6 years? I don't think so. Undecideds number at least 10-12 points right now, and Santorum will take most of them, not the "incumbent" Romney. If they liked Romney, they'd already be over with him, but after 6 years of trying, they're not and won't be.
Michigan is Romney's graveyard.
Simon Temlplar| 2.24.12 @ 3:51PM
hondr, I sincerely hope you are correct. If your not, then what?
hondr| 2.24.12 @ 3:56PM
If Romney takes Michigan, it will only be by a sliver. He'll get stomped outstate, and he'll lose the delegate count most certainly, as Santorum is set to win the majority of the congressional districts, even if Romney dominates in the Detroit area and wins the popular vote.
Romney's cash flow will suffer drastically, I'd predict, as a result.
Thus weakened, Romney will likely get stomped on Super Tuesday. Then we'll see.
I can see a brokered convention. I can see Santorum winning it, especially if Gingrich pulls out. But I can see no path where Romney gets whooped through as he attempted to do, and is failing at. Romney is a certain loser in the South, the Heartland and in the Midwest as we're seeing.
Simon Templar| 2.24.12 @ 3:48PM
Well, jimminy crickets! You don't say!
Gee, I did notice you did not say a word about Progressive Romney or the liberalatarian Ron Paul. Is that just a coincidence or an oversight?
And a quote from Milton Friedman!
What no quotes from Ronald Reagan or Buckley or are the neo-cons today?
The hypocricy, illogic, and deceipt of you liberalatarians is really and truly atounding. As much as I detest liberals, and man do I, you make me sick to my stomach. In many ways, you are more dangerous then they are, as liberals are liberals and most of the time do not pretend to be something else. They will talk out of the Left side of their mouth and their rhetoric and world view is generally consistent.
Poyman (also a Texan)| 2.25.12 @ 4:11AM
This is precisely the time to run a candidate who has proven himself successful in this Economy.... People are tired of words, we want somebody who actually knows how to succeed to show us how.... I'm tired of the whole Robin Hood thing with Obama... It's time to get this Economy fixed and we need a Leader that knows how to do that.... Romney is the only guy on either side of the aisle that has the experience and the know how to make it happen.
Clint| 2.25.12 @ 4:25AM
Tell It To Ronald Reagan, Israel Firster Smear Bund Bibi Pimpler.
Ronald Reagan,
" If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are traveling the same path."
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
KeithE| 2.24.12 @ 4:06PM
You are exactly right, this is the wrong cycle to run a 1/4 billionaire. Most republicans celebrate wealth and living in a country where success is possible. But a lot of them (tea party types) resent wealth, and most non-republicans don't seem terribly eager to elect a wealthy stiff who doesn't seem to connect with, or care about, average people.
I would add that while Romney can probably add a lot of votes in states we'll lose anyway (like CA, NY, MA, and IL) and states we will definitely WIN anyway (UT, AZ) I have trouble seeing his appeal in swing states like NC, VA, OH, IA, PA, WI, or MI. Two dixie states and four blue collar rust belt states. Give me Santorum for those. Mitt gives us a good chance in FL and NH, but add those to McCain's states and we still lose by about 180 EV's...
hondr| 2.24.12 @ 4:23PM
Yeah, Romney is a loser in flyover country. A certain loser. Everybody knows this guy is a liar. Everybody. He'll lose worse than McCain.
Scorpio51| 2.24.12 @ 4:26PM
Why is it I have a very eery feeling about the Paul and Romney alliance? Something very evil about that seems to be hanging over this campaign against Newt and Santorum.
I have been trying to convince the Newt and Santorum supporters that we need to combine and fight back. Maybe it will get some traction, maybe not.
As far as I'm concerned, Romney is the one to get rid of. Any way that happens is fine by me.
Uomo Del Ghiaccio| 2.24.12 @ 7:17PM
Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorium already have an alliance.
Notice that when Rick Santorium was the front runner that Newt Gingrich rushed in to his defense.
Newt Gingrich has also left Michigan in an attempt to benefit Rick Santorium.
Both Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorium were scandal riddled while in office and both were lobbyists and both live in the Washington DC area.
They both are the very essence of what is a Washington DC Insider.
Poyman (also a Texan)| 2.25.12 @ 4:15AM
What is it with all you hard right wingers ??? Paul has been critical of Romney, but Romney hasn't been playing the game like the others where he says "Yeah, that was stupid, I shouldn't have voted for those things but I don't support them now".... Or "I do support them now, but I couldn't vote for it back then".... "Sometimes you have to do something you don't like to be a "Team Player."
PattyMor| 2.24.12 @ 4:53PM
Romney's electability is diminishing; one can only hope and pray its true. The man lies just about as much as Barack. He lies to cover up his liberal record. And he's backstabbed Newt running the dishonest news clip that Newt resigned in disgrace.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 5:04PM
Pious baloney. He did resign his speakership in disgrace. It wasn't just the ethics charges. Ask Dr. Tom Coburn or Steve Largent. He even had a coup by conservatives against him the year before.
Newt did great things but, as Santorum says, his leadership was 'chaotic'.
david| 2.25.12 @ 1:29AM
newt attacked mitt first buddy boy
Garfield| 2.26.12 @ 6:47PM
Actually, Romney attacked Newt first, stop trying to rewrite history.
Bill| 2.24.12 @ 4:53PM
Santorum and Romney are sinking, while Gingrich is rising from the ashes.
david| 2.25.12 @ 1:29AM
i doubt it
Poyman (also a Texan)| 2.25.12 @ 4:07AM
Not in this lifetime.
Kerri| 2.24.12 @ 5:00PM
Devout evangelical Christians are not uniform group you seem to keep hoping us to be, SORRY. In addition to being well informed, we have an abundance of common sense. We want Romney knowing exactly who he is and what his experience, life and work have been. Could you give up the manipulation to get someone else elected. First, it was the the one of great girth, Newt, then when that philanderer couldn't past the smell test, you try to foist the whiny career politician, Santorum, on us unsuspecting gullible Christians. He is so not the tea party candidate. What is it with your bigotry to Mitt? It's weird at the American Spectator.
hondr| 2.24.12 @ 6:18PM
Sorry, bubba, but evangelical Christians don't support pro abortion candidates, and Romney is a pro abortion candidate. That's why the polling shows we're flocking to the pro lifers, and that sure ain't Romney.
Uomo Del Ghiaccio| 2.24.12 @ 7:18PM
News Flash: Rick Santorium started his career supporting Abortion for the first six months.
Kerri| 2.24.12 @ 7:50PM
I am pro life and an evangelical Christian who homeschooled my three children, gosh, we even tithe to our Church which isn't too common these days among our fellow evangelicals, but we hope their hearts and pocketbooks will change. Even if I wasn't, Mitt Romney is pro life. Of course, I am always overjoyed when citizens change their belief from pro abortion to pro life. It is something to praise, not condemn.
Beppo| 2.24.12 @ 5:03PM
Agree entirely. If Romney is the nominee the entire Bain Capital, 13.9% taxes and offshore accounts issue is going to come into full focus. Does anyone really think he's going to be able to get away with publishing one years tax returns. The media hyenas are going to be all over this one and the Chicago thugs have probably got all kinds of stuff tucked away ready for the general. We're probably going to lose but lets at least have a candidate that's a real Republican not a rino.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 5:10PM
Gallup trial heat today has:
Romney 50%
Obama 46%
Santorum 48%
Obama 49%
This is will all the negatives in the GOP primary. Don't despair.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 5:18PM
I guess the author's definition of 'aura of electability' hasn't caught up with the voters.
RJ| 2.24.12 @ 6:09PM
Thanks for the good news. Yes, we shouldn't despair; that is for losers and we can't afford to lose this one.
sam Cafone| 2.24.12 @ 5:48PM
Read the article on Real Clear Politics where a spokesman for the Catholic Church explains how Romney lied before the whole country in the last debate. He actually mandated that the Church comply with the draconian contraception laws which were agains the teachings of the Church. After watching the disgusting display of mudslinging by Romney and his stooge, Ron Paul, there is no way I would vote for Romney, magic underwear and all.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 5:57PM
Wrong this was from a blogger not the church. Cardinal O'Malley and the official paper of the Boston archdiocese disputes this blog and supports Romney.
I am a Catholic from MA and I trust the Cardinal over this blogger -- who has shown contempt for Romney in the past.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 5:58PM
Truth is Cardinal O’Malley called Romney the “better friend to the Catholic church than any other MA governor in decades, and he was about the only one that wasn’t Catholic.” Ask him, even to this day he supports Romney because of all he did.
hondr| 2.24.12 @ 6:21PM
Romney must have helped that cardinal cover up the pedophelia in Boston, huh?
The Catholics are against what Romney did then. That's why he's lying about it, as usual.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 6:43PM
Nice try! You have no clue.
Also, its a different Cardinal, pal.
Poyman (also a Texan)| 2.25.12 @ 4:06AM
I'm sure you were solidly in his camp before the debate, weren't you Sam.... Romney didn't lie, it's common knowledge of where he was on that whole issue and I am certain that the local church in the area will clear that up shortly.... He was, as Cardinal O'Malley said "one of the best friends that the Catholic Church had ever had in a Governor".... So nice try with the last minute smear but like all of the rest, it will fail.
Stan| 2.24.12 @ 7:18PM
I swear. When Santorum is not the nominee the mf's on this site will off themselves.
Worried for the country| 2.24.12 @ 9:07PM
LOL.
Romney Derangement Syndrom is rampant.
Now that Bush is out of office maybe the Democrat's psychiatrists have some openings for treatment.
TeaPartyPatriot4ever| 2.24.12 @ 9:00PM
"Electability" is so misused and abused, especially as a tool against anyone of conbservative political ideology.
Romney is the GOP RINO establsihemnt standard bearer, and as such, he gets all the promotion and media hype of being electable, when in fact, he is not, because he is nothing more than a progressive liberal in GOP clothing.
They said the very same thing about GHW Bush in 1980, being the only one electable, against then Gov Ronald Reagan. History has shown us why they were wrong then, and why they are wrong now.
Only a real Reagan Conservative c an beat Obama and restore this nation, from America's helm, back to economic, political, and social, as well as US National Security and Military stability and prosperity.
David Wasmundt| 2.24.12 @ 11:13PM
The Arizona debate revealed Rick can’t take it when the front runner’s target was on his back and he seemed to crumble into the whiney, petty, nasty, hyper-defensive duplicitous politician that he is. Along with the other Repub candidates, Santorum has been viciously attacking Romney for months and when Mitt finally turned the focus on his Washington insider record, Santorum showed he is not presidential timber no matter how much the Romney haters try to spin it otherwise.
I think it’s time for the likes of Bill Crystal and his cockamamie conservative establishment friends on Fox and elsewhere to put a cork in their Romney hating peevish punditry. And that goes for the Limbaugh’s, Hannity’s and Sarah Palin’s also. I have lost so much respect for these people...Ok, I get it, you don’t like Romney...you don’t believe what he says etc. So you think Ricky or Newt is the answer? I am a tea party conservative who would be proud to have Mitt Romney leading this nation instead of unleashing the present White House occupant to drag this county to the “bridge to socialism” with a smirk on his face and a chuckle at the raving right who stupidly snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in the 2012 election. Let’s deny him that arrogant sneer! Romney 2012!
SnowCypher| 2.24.12 @ 11:18PM
Exactly right. I could not have said it better myself.
Bumr50| 2.24.12 @ 11:20PM
That's such contrived BS, I hope you're getting paid.
If you're going to work or volunteer for Mittens the Inevitable Moderate by coming onto websites to help drive the debate in favor of your candidate, might I suggest toning down the talking points and rhetoric to THIS side of reason.
Just some free advice...
SnowCypher| 2.24.12 @ 11:16PM
This article is simply more wishful thinking from political elites who want to manage and/or even shape the news rather than actually comment on the news. America watched Santorum stumble all over himself in Arizona and give genuinely awful answers. Some of you conservative elites tries to invent a Paul-Romney conspiracy to blame. Some tried to blame it on CNN and the moderator. And all you did was show yourselves to be the out-of-touch conservative establishment elites who deem yourselves privileged to know what's best for the rest of us. Romney showed himself tough enough to take the fight to Santorum and by extension, Obama. And that frightens you folks because Romney is NOT actually the establishment pick this year.
Chaz| 2.24.12 @ 11:16PM
Any doofus can readily figure out that anyone's figures would slip among independents if you had mud slung at you from BOTH Obama AND inside your own party for months and months and months the way Romney has.
Through it all, he is a been a total gentleman and took it like a man.
The rest of the Republican crybabies and whiners should take a cue from him and stop bitchin and moaning about things.
Republicans like this Bass fellow come off like immature children constantly wanting something more.....
Get over yourselves...
Bumr50| 2.24.12 @ 11:23PM
If Romney's so great, why does 70% of the GOP electorate refuse to vote for him??
"Conservative media" and the "news cycle"???
BWAHAHAHA!!!
If you're going to insult those of us who recognize Mittens for the plastic-fantastic moderate that he is, at least be creative.
I see some of you are already pulling out the "Mormon persecution" card that you hoped to save for the general.
That's beyond reproach.
No chance you'll get my name| 2.25.12 @ 12:39AM
The article read like a really crappy young journalist wrote it, then saw his picture. Dude/David, make sure your shirt is real classy or you might lose some cred.
Honestly, I encourage people like you to keep writing poorly and puking out stupid article titles like this one so that this unfortunate phase of communication becomes less and less relevant. Good luck, sarcastically of course, on your oxymoronically selfish bandwagon.
david| 2.25.12 @ 1:27AM
yeah this is bs
Matt Kauble| 2.25.12 @ 3:43AM
The polling shows that actual swing voters really do not make their final vote on the hot button social issues that the culture wars are fought on. Swing voters care about 3 basic issues. 1. Economic Security (the economy, jobs, taxes, etc...); 2. Personal Security (crime, national security, etc...); 3. Their future and the future of their love ones (education, pensions, etc...). In other words they only really care about the issues that they believe impact their daily lives and the lives of those they love. For instance, they may be pro-life or pro-choice, but the issue of abortion is not an issue upon which they decide their vote; the same thing goes for issues like homosexual marriage, the 2nd Amendment, the environment, etc...
So, while the mainstream media will say that Santorum's social conservatism will cost him votes, for the most part those votes are already lost to almost any Republican nominee, including Romney, primarily because most voters do not take a close look at the candidates on issues that they don't care about, but buy into the stereotypes on issues that they are not concerned about. They will only look closely at those issues that they actually care about.
Poyman (also a Texan)| 2.25.12 @ 3:56AM
What a sad and tired premise for an article challenging Romney's electabiliity.... In 2008 maybe the foundation would have made some sense.... People were losing their jobs, unemployment was skyrocketing, and the country was slipping into the jaws of a long and mean recession from which we still have not recovered...
But people aren't looking for retribution today, they are looking for solutions, for some formula of success, someone who knows how to navigate through a tough Economy and bring back prosperity.... They blame some of where we are today on "W" and they blame alot on the guy who promised hope and change. Most thought that the "change would be for the better" but they have learned that Barry is simply over his head.... They want someone "COMPETENT" and Romney and his Background screams "Competency".... They don't look at Romney as the guy who fired you, they look at him as the guy who knows how to find you work and bring prosperity back to this country... In fact, Romney is probably the only guy on either side of the aisle that has the Pedigree and Know How to pull it off.
I believe that had he become President in 2008, we would have long been out of the crisis by now.... In fact, Obama knows that that very topic is a huge weakness for himself and that is why he has joined hands with the Hard Right to see if he can't cause Romney to fail in the primaries as he knows it is going to be a tough thing to overcome one on one....
redmanrt| 2.25.12 @ 6:11AM
Neither Romney nor Santorum will be nominated. It's so obvious that we should nominate one of our sitting governors that we will nominate one of our sitting governors.
martin j smith| 2.25.12 @ 9:14AM
I think there will be a brokered convention. Romney's so called aura of being the WINNER is MEDIA GENERATED backed by Establishment Republicans and the Real Socialists. That is how it is perceived I believe and thus why he is weak. And because he does not care.
Fiscal| 2.26.12 @ 8:50AM
Get over it. You all seem to miss the point. THERE ARE NO GOOD REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES -- PERIOD!!!! There are either religious extremists, or flip flopper opportunists, or egomaniacle loons or ideologues. But the further truth is that this exists because the Republican party itself is morphing into being an evangelical, non-factual, extremist group of people who are prone to fits of hate and cannot comprehend the notion of compromise.
We all remember Reagan fondly, but we also knew he wouldn't act on his socially conservative beliefs and he was full of compromise. He didn't have a message of hate, but a message of hope. Almost all of the advertising we see by candidates today is negative advertising. That's the problem.
Republicans today remember the huge Reagan tax cut, but not the 11 times thereafter he actually raised taxes and doubled the social security tax. He did that and still created the largest deficit at that time in history. If Reagan ran today, he'd never make it through the primaries, if for no other reason than he would not attack Obama as much and he would be hit for the 11 tax increases.
quelque chose| 2.26.12 @ 11:48AM
After 20 debates, isn't it time these guys got down to the issues and THEIR IDEAS to get this country going again, and stop with the scorched earth, personal destruction ads of anyone who DARES to come close to the darling of the media and the "establishment," Mittens in the polls? Reagan's 11th Commandment has been shredded in this primary. Frankly, he was a gentleman and a statesman, which is more than I can say about Mittens and Congressman House Plant at this stage of the process.
Since Romney LOVES to tout his business experience, let's look at it this way: We, the voters are (or should be) the CEO/HR of the country. He's putting forth a resume and is interviewing for the position of being THE candidate to be the Republican nominee to take on Oblame-a in the fall.
In 20 debates, I am drained. I want a difference and a DISTINCTION between these guys, not personal attacks just to get my vote. None of them have "sealed the deal" with me, ( and one has never been on my radar!). I'm looking at their resumes, and I'm also looking at the way they have been comporting themselves in these "interviews." If they cannot put daylight between themselves and the others with regard to THEIR IDEAS and WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO for the country NOW, not where they have been, then to coin the popular saying from one of Mitten's endorsers, "YOU'RE FIRED!", right off the bat. Your resume is in the trash.
I can look up these guys records online to figure out WHERE THEY HAVE BEEN. I want to know WHERE THEY ARE GOING NOW IN 2012. I want to know WHY they want to do the things they say they want to do, not leave me with going to their websites to read all about it. Frankly, it TELLS me, but it doesn't EXPLAIN why their course of action is better. I want to hear it from them because there are questions, and they can give more details. The country is on fire, and they're playing like the Democrats, with this kindergarten-playground-Saul Alinsky bullying behavior.
To paraphrase a great line from the classic movie, "Pride of the Yankees" that would best be heeded NOW by Gov. Arrogant-I'm-Entitled-to-the Nomination of MA, Congressman House Plant of TX, Speaker Lighting Rod of GA, and Senator Pay Attention to Me of PA, save the sorched earth, mudslinging for Oblame-a in the fall. The thing they all have forgotten is, they are not perfect, and they all bring baggage to the table.
We know their histories. Enough of THAT already. If they aspire to higher office, then these guys should be interviewing for THEMSELVES, and then let the voters decide if their ideas merit our votes.
We, the CEO's (aka, the voters), deserve much better than what these 4 Dwarfs have been giving us of late.
Fiscal| 2.26.12 @ 12:22PM
While I agree with everything you've said, it should be noted that Romney's dad was a personal friend of Alinsky and that Rush Limbaugh and FreedomWorks use most of Alinsky's techniques. In fact, FreedomWorks likes Alinsky so much they hand out his book to their people.
quelque chose| 2.26.12 @ 3:19PM
1) Not surprised about Gov. Arrogant's father.
2) There's a book out called, "Rules for Conservative Radicals," so where's the surprise that the "right" is taking a page out of the left's play book? Haven't you heard of "fighting fire with fire"? What's digusting is, and this goes back to Reagan's 11th commandment, these tactics are being used by our own AGAINST our own.
The time is NOW for the candidates to have a conversation with the voters about the issues and how they intend to deal with them, NOT going into scorched earth attack mode against each other. That needs to be saved for Oblame-a.