Posted on 11/10/2011 8:48:21 AM PST by IbJensen
Conservatives just need to come to grips with the fact that it's always going to be a Mitt Romney-type who leads the ticket.
Conservatives are fired up. Thanks to the Tea Party and Obama’s general left-wing bungling, we’re mad and ready to go for the throat on government spending. So who does Intrade show as having a 70% chance of winning the Republican nomination for president? Mitt “Social Security is just fine” Romney.
The left is always shrieking that the Republicans are going to nominate some right-wing nut for the presidency; if only that were true. The Republican base’s perfect candidate would be someone who emerged from his bomb shelter toting a shotgun with the sole purpose of dismantling government. We want someone who can barely restrain himself from violence when talking to the normal useless, arrogant, tax-and-spend politician. Someone who, when given a bill to raise taxes, wouldn’t only veto it but would also publicly burn it and then hunt down the perpetrators who wrote it.
So who have the we nominated for president in the past? John McCain. George W. Bush with his “compassionate” conservatism — not that mean old conservatism that holds people responsible for their actions. Bob Dole. Exciting, right?
Obviously there is some sort of disconnect between what the conservative base of the Republican party wants and who the party ends up nominating for president. The states that go first in the primary and thus hold the most influence — New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina, Florida — seem random, but from the results in past elections one has to conclude they were chosen by some sort of RINO genius to ensure that only a milquetoast right-of-center candidate will win the nomination. Right now the country is a car speeding towards a cliff due to out-of- control spending, and conservatives want a president who will seize the wheel of that car and turn it around. But the Republican we nominate is always someone who only promises to ease up on the gas a little.
The left don’t have this problem. They nominate impractical left-wing nuts for president all the time. In fact, their more centrist candidates like Bill Clinton are the exceptions, not the rule. So why is that? Are the left just more devoted to their cause than we are?
“The true conservatives are always going to be those of us who never have the taint of politics on us…”
Good line. The obsession bordering on paranoid delusion in some folks (you know who you are) about getting a Palin or an Allen West in the White House seems to undermine one of the bigger lessons of 2010: conservatives and conservatism can win at levels closer to home. There is “taint of politics” involved at those levels, but conservatism is just not well suited to a monstrously large role like the POTUS — and that is by design: “The people who succeed in politics are those who kinda like government and see it as a great tool for change.”
The problem is that at the end of the day, conservatives are just practical people. Why do we have the bomb shelters? We like to survive. And you don’t survive by getting caught up in wild-eyed fantasies. While we want to nominate some crazed anti-politician, at the end of the day we can’t pull the trigger when we know it just means we’re guaranteeing four more years of having a far left Democrat in charge. Sure, we’d love to send an extreme right-winger to the White House screaming about how Gardasil makes you retarded — if for no other reason than to make the left apoplectic — but we know that’s not going to happen. That’s why we always end up with someone like Mitt Romney, the creator of Obamacare’s predecessor. Yes, conservatives loathe him, and he loathes us, but he seems like the best chance to win.
And maybe it’s best that there is some loathing between conservatives and our presidential nominee. The last thing we want to do is fall in love with a politician. Because what type of people become skilled politicians? People who hate government? No, those people never learn to work in the system. The people who succeed in politics are those who kinda like government and see it as a great tool for change — i.e., they’re the enemy. No one gets to the level of being able to run a skilled campaign for president and remains a true conservative. So that’s why conservatives holding onto Reagan as the ideal politician hurts us in the end. We have this fantasy that the move to reduce government will one day be led from the top, but it’s just not going to happen. Anyone who makes it to that level is no longer one of us.
Conservatives just need to come to grips with the fact that it’s always going to be a Mitt Romney-type who leads the ticket, which is why we can’t make the president the standard bearer for conservatism. The true conservatives are always going to be those of us who never have the taint of politics on us, and if we want real change that reduces the size of government in this country, that means we’ll have to put even more pressure on a Republican president than we do on a Democrat. When the car is speeding towards the cliff, we have to be on the hood of that car, screaming at the driver, “TURN THIS THING AROUND!” So the ideal candidate for conservatives isn’t some extreme right-winger. It’s a skilled politician we know we can bully.
Iowa hasn’t even happened yet.
It’s a bit premature to declare Willard the Winner.
What ignorant drivel. No wonder Conservatives never win when 1/3 of them are Preemptive Surrender monkeys afraid to fight the GOP Machine on anything.
And then they wonder how we got here?
You cannot run away yet again Blog boys, you MUST fight.
Yes, a FAR right-wing Nut. Someone who espouses personal liberty and limited government. You know, one of those John Adams - Thomas Jefferson types.
Inserted an important word. Myth Romney will not lead the ticket I vote for, however.
Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater. Nuff said.
Whether by design or luck, the 2012 GOP field seems to be following a pattern similar to 2008 —
One or two contenders who have backing/support/preferences from the GOP Elite, and a dozen contenders from the ‘extreme’ Right or ‘fringe’.
As the race progresses, the ‘extreme’ Right contenders attack each other, as the conservative field is whittled down.
In 2008, Huckabee was a hanger-on, who seemed to have the only viable purpose of stopping any Romney momentum. Huckabee was lauded as the field conservative, following the demise of Hunter, Tancredo, Thompson.
2012 has the Elite GOP candidate, Romney. Which of the others are serious contenders and which are the hucka-tool(s) whose real purpose is to get the Elite GOP’s candidate to the nomination?
She said she wouldn’t run.
*Conservatives just need to come to grips with the fact that it’s always going to be a Mitt Romney-type who leads the ticket*
Not this time Frank, the Tea Party movement has shown we still have the power.
who is a opportunistic pragmatist supporter of the mixed economy status quo
“The left don’t have this problem. “
The left don’t”?????
OR
The left DOESN’T.
Interesting goalposts you set there! Funny how that even though Adams and Jefferson differed greatly in what they believed to be the proper role of the federal government, I'd venture to guess that both of them would be vehemently opposed to the overwhelming majority of politicians practicing at the federal level today.
Matt can’t win with 25%
Why are we having so much difficulty with this ??? It’s so obvious, NEWT GINGRICH 2012.
Because its much like the original 13 colonies trying to make a decision.
"We have to make thirteen clocks all strike at the same time", John Adams.
There are conservatives for Cain, for Romney, for Perry, for Bachman, Paul, etc. (neglecting for now the point that some of those conservatives are out of their minds). We need more to, rather the same time striking a clock, the same choice choosing a candidate. Those souring now on Perry will be coming more to Cain, imho...
Open primaries.
We really need to close all primaries, and prevent 'Rats from picking our candidate.
“Why are we having so much difficulty with this ??? It’s so obvious, NEWT GINGRICH 2012.”
That’ll be the day, when I vote for that lying corpostooge weasel...no, scratch that. If Newt “Honey, mind the IV, got something to talk to you about” Gingrich gets the GOP nomination, there will be a lot of us voting third party happily. I will not vote for that POS any more than I would have voted for Rudy Giuliani.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.