Posted on 01/29/2012 4:20:41 AM PST by Kaslin
This Tuesday, voters in Florida will have their chance to tell the country which Republican candidate they favor.
The winner will say the people have spoken, thank them for their support and move on. The losers will say they’re moving on to the next primary. The media and DC powerbrokers will hype it all like it matters, but if it goes the way they’re predicting, the way they want, nothing will change.
Given the millions of dollars he’s dumped into the state, both directly and through supportive SuperPACs, and the early voting in Florida, Mitt Romney is expected to win. A victory for him will mean…nothing, really. But it will be presented as a major victory by the Romney camp, the media and – let’s be honest – the silent defenders of the status quo.
Mitt Romney is a great businessman who deserves credit for wise investing and saving the 2002 Winter Olympics, but he is no boat-rocker.
Similarly, Bain Capital didn’t make hundreds of millions of dollars by throwing money around. The firm did its research, studied risks and decided if the potential reward justified the risk.
That’s what you want in an investor, but it is what these times demand in a president?
If things were going great, if the economy was growing by leaps and bounds and good jobs abounded, we would need only a few minor course corrections – and Romney would be perfect for that. But things aren’t going great, we‘re speeding toward an iceberg, and anything short of bold leadership will change only the angle at which we hit the iceberg.
Aside from the Olympics, which were going to happen no matter what, there’s nothing in Mitt Romney’s past or his rhetoric to lead anyone to believe he’d offer bold leadership and take serious risks based upon long-standing, proven conservative principles.
I have nothing against Mitt Romney, I’ve met him twice and both times he seemed like a perfectly nice guy. He’s well-educated, a loving family man and quite successful. All traits to be admired.
And it’s pretty clear he wants to be president, I just don’t know why.
He hasn’t articulated a vision for American that he wants to institute beyond a few boilerplate standards, such as repealing Obamacare, and platitudes unworthy of a front-runner. Yes, he would be better than the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Every one of them would be. But is better good enough when the circumstances require more?
This isn’t about who is the most conservative candidate. The question is: Who will bring about the dramatic roll-back of government size, power and spending that’s required to avoid that iceberg? But there’s nothing in Romney’s past, or his current rhetoric, that leads me to believe he’ll do what is necessary to right the ship.
Mitt’s caution is understandable. He has the money and establishment support to outlast his opponents in the primaries if he avoids serious errors. But avoiding errors does not indicate the level of boldness we need now.
Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum are fighting as if their political lives depend on it – because they do. Gingrich and Santorum spend time with the press whenever possible – in part to try to overcome Romney’s incredible monetary and establishment advantage. Meanwhile, Mitt does scheduled interviews almost exclusively.
In 2008, the campaign of then-Sen. Barack Obama made it nearly impossible for even the friendliest of media outlets to get in an unscheduled or unscripted question. At the same time, Republican nominee John McCain avoided conservative media like it was a hooker with an open lip sore. Only at the end, when desperate times required it, did McCain open himself up to national and local talk radio. It was too little, too late.
Why McCain avoided talking to radio shows with the very audience he needed to motivate, I don’t know. Maybe he thought picking Sarah Palin as vice-president was enough. He’d never been that conservative. He presented himself as a “maverick” progressive Republican, and the media ate it up – until it suited the media’s needs to throw him under the bus.
I see much of that in Romney. And it worries me. When I hear him in 2002 say he’s a moderate, that his views are “progressive,” it worries me. Again, that was 2002, not exactly a lifetime ago.
He says he’s the only electable candidate, but he’s just 1 for 3 in the Republican primaries. And, yes, he’s spent most of his life in the private sector, but that’s only because he has been unable to win most of the races he has entered.
He’d be a much better president than Barack Obama, but would he be the president we need right now?
Of course none of this will matter if Newt Gingrich wins the Florida primary next Tuesday. If that happens, Romney will have no choice but to remove some of his bubble-wrap suit and make himself more accessible. He’ll either move to the right and give more specifics about why he should be president, or show his truly “progressive” colors, which will mean he differs from the current administration only in method.
I like Newt. I’ve warmed to Santorum. Even Ron Paul has his charm (but only on spending issues), and I want to like Mitt. But after years and years of him running for president and being in the public eye, I still know little about him beyond sound bites and platitudes. Electing someone simply because he wants to be president is as foolish as electing someone with no experience and no record simply because he gives a good speech. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice…
Mitt won’t get it period.
But Mr. Hunter reaches the right conclusion - Not Romney, not now.
How about Not Romney, not now, not ever?
If Romney gets the nomination, the Democrats’ work of bashing has been done by the Freepers. I can see it now: “Here’s what conservatives think of him!”
Limbaugh said that he would not side with any candidate during the primaries. I believe that is wise.
“If Romney gets the nomination, the Democrats’ work of bashing has been done by the Freepers.”
Well, then, let’s make sure someone else gets the nomination. Isn’t that the point of the article?
Go, Florida! Shock the world!!!
I never heard the democrats lament the Hitlery-O’Stalin civil war of ‘08. Geez it’s 10 months until November.
He sure did so, although some freepers accused him for having endorsed Romney
The author, btw is also not endorsing Romney or any of the other candidates right now. He wants the voters make their own choice, which is also wise
At candidate level; furious at Santorum; for not seeing the big picture - and getting out. Disgusted with the Romney group for the most dishonest of attacks against Newt; that now match the lowest; most debased level of Leftist MO's. Angry at Newt for being sucked into Romney propaganda cesspool; and not focusing - re-concentrating - his challenge of Mitt's 'lack of vision' for America; versus the artful; Constitution-embracing vision that Newt speaks to, so eloquently and to the effect of 'water on parched earth'.
Mitt; offering that 'we do not need to go to the moon' should as well, been siezed by Newt - and reframed - by the practical visionary Newt. He tried; but needs to be part of his message; if only in in simple soundbites; when time does not allow. No question; a big order; for big ideas. But too many; still need to hear. And clock is ticking.
It is all too painful an unfolding. Do hope Repubs wake up; but fear they will not. Our country hanging over 'oblivion' by a paper clip. We need not; a smiling 'hair do'; but huge and determined leadership to save it. And only Newt is capable/willing/wanting to actually save our Country from the darkest of forces, currently at work - and in power.
Mitt with 'log in eye' perhaps; seems not to see the big picture.
No question, that Newt recognizes the challenge at hand. And he knows; as we should/must; if not now, for America; then never. . .
Given the dire straights our Country is in; think Rush should endorse; at least choose between Mitt and Newt (Rush's brother chose Santorum; so enough of that; IMHO/ wondered if had been Newt or MItt; would Rush have offered info).
Perhaps I would not want Rush to 'go here' if I thought he would pick Romney. What I really want; is for all the best voices 'out there' to support Newt and say so. Do not want to hear 'later'; where they stood; and silently.
I agree with you.
After watching the carpet bombing by the entire establishment this past Thursday, being told in December by Glenn back that I must be a racist if I support Newt, being told by Ann Coulter that I’m naive and backwards for supporting Newt, being told by Glenn Beck (again) this past Monday that I’m stupid if I support Newt, being called all kinds of names and smears by the establishment and their media sycophants, do they actually believe that I will get off of the couch in November and cast a vote for Mitt Romney?
Their scorched Earth, over-the-top raging will turn off enough conservative voters to hand the White House back to Obama. It won’t take many. 2-1/2% would do just fine in most swing states. Don’t believe me? Ask President Gore.
These clowns are berating and busing the conservatives in the base. If Romney wins watch them go all Ike Turner on us: “Baby I didn’t want to have to do that, but you brought it on yourself. You know I love you baby. Nobody loves you like I do. Come on baby, let me back onto your ballot.”
Of course, Hume, Krauthammer, Beck, Coulter, Rove, Drudge, et al will be telling us daily that we’re great and wonderful and we’ve done fantastic things for the Party and it’s time to come together again and march forward and defeat the common enemy. They will fail.
Not this time. The beatings are too horrific. The abuse too over-the-top. Sure, some will forgive and forget. Some will forgive and never forget. But, enough of us will not forgive and and certainly will never forget. It is the latter that will make the difference in Ohio, Florida, New Mexico, Virginia and Missouri. It is the latter that will make certain Mitt Romney never occupies the Oval Office.
I'd say "it depends." When one of the candidates is as overt a liar as Romney is, and Limbaugh barely manages to notice it, then he's essentially facilitating mendacity.
It's a free country, he does what he wants, but I'm of a belief that it isn't necessarily wise to feign ignorance.
As between the rest of the candidates, the ones who aren't as mendacious as Romney, I agree that it is wise to educate the people about the policy differences then let the people decide.
Well, at this point, votes going to Santorum only helps Romney so I question Rush’s motives in passing that info. on. Rush isn’t stupid so he knows votes going to Santorum in FL helps Romney.
True - and felt alarm, really; when he offered that info. (But also; do not think too many swayed by Rush's brother). OTOH...Rush sharing this; does have a double-edge; inasmuch as those perhaps; rethinking their vote for a 'viable'(not) Santorum; might move on to Newt - w/o Santorum's final 'blessing'.
Better; really; that Rush 'did not go there' as it added nothing positive; as Santorum IS not going to win this; and every sane person knows that; and so this just made a 'wash' of it.
Personally, am sick of - and Rush does this too - offer that ANY of our candidates is better than Obama.
Well, TOTUS would be better too; as would anyone who did not have a Marxist machine behind them; but that is not the issue. It is who can beat Obama.
That takes a strong, opposing Leader; not a 'head-bobber' like Romney; and not candidates who otherwise; have little to offer; other than the fact that they are likeable Conservatives.
Personally believe; that Rush will vote for Newt - and not the Liberal health care Architect, from Massachussets.
It appears that you would rather have Obama than Romney.
Not me.
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.