um... yeah
I can see the groundswell starting for Willard “Mitt” Romney
becuase his campaign of “Hey, I’m next, right?” has me bowled over.
“I can see the groundswell starting for Willard “Mitt” Romney”
FR is opposed to Romney because of his many liberal positions and his flip-flopping, and his collaboration with Ted Kennedy etc (not because his name if Willard or because of his religion).
If you look at Newt’s positions, there is no meaningful difference. Newt has signed on to the every liberal cause in the last few years (amnesty, global warming, cap-and-trade, individual mandate in ObamaCare, Fairness doctrine etc). He eagerly collaborated with Nancy Pelosi and Al Sharpton).
He has flip-flopped and lied about many things, including support for cap-and-trade and his Fannie Mae lobbying.
Yes, in the general election we probably have to vote for Newt over Obama (and pray that House has conservatives to stop him in amnesty/GW/FairnessDoct etc), but we are in primary now.
Newt and Willard are both flip-flopping politicians who have joined pretty much every liberal cause in the past. Both have done few nice things. Why would you support either one of them (and not both?).
In the primaries, there is no need to vote for liberal.
We still have, for example, Bachmann and Santorum (and who knows, brokered convention).
I thought he couldn't get above it ~ now he's at 19% ~ and I'll have to say he won't be able to break that either.
That was Romney ~ Newt is darned near 50% ~ so whatever the arguments they aren’t working.