Romney’s Vicious Attack Ads Against Conservatives May Doom Romney Now or in November

Conservative HQ ^ | 4-4-12 | Richard A. Viguerie

[muleskinner]

Romney is the one who has singlehandedly ...blah, blah, ...can screw.

And what does Mark say after he gets done telling everyone how bad Romney is?

"We have to vote against Obama and for the Republican nominee."

[NavyCanDo]

Come August 27th nobody is going to remember squat about what ads were run in the primary. Once the Key note speakers at the convention take stage, and maybe we see another Palin like speech by the VP, from that point it will be all about sending Obama back to Chicago.

[SoConPubbie]

Come August 27th nobody is going to remember squat about what ads were run in the primary. Once the Key note speakers at the convention take stage, and maybe we see another Palin like speech by the VP, from that point it will be all about sending Obama back to Chicago.

We all saw how well that worked for McCain last time in 2008 and Romney is orders of magnitude worse than McCain and he doesn't have the War Hero thing going for him. In fact, Romney, with his left-wing Progressive Liberal record, makes McCain look conservative.

Wishful thinking and hope on your part isn't going to get it done.

Sarah, as good as she is, couldn't get it done in 2008.

Romney will lose in epic landslide proportions because of Romney.

[Lazlo in PA]

I didn’t know we had a nominee yet. Until I have to chose the orange juice can, I am fighting against Milt.

[ngat]

“Why are people voting for this weenie?”

Which weenie, blue jeans/buttondown or sweatervest?

[ModelBreaker]

“Romney’s ads will play just fine against Obama.”

Establishment R’s don’t attack progressives. They attack conservatives.

[ngat]

“Do not fool yourself into thinking that Santorum and Newt wouldn’t have run vicious attack ads against Romney,...”

Mis Marple forgets it was Romney that fired the first shots back in December, and those ads were as close to outright fabrications as it gets.

Don’t try to excuse Romney of responsibilty for what he has done by saying Santorum and Gingrich WOULD have done it. That simply does not excuse what Romney ACTUALLY did to destroy party unity.

[AmericanInTokyo]

Karl Rove Approves of This Message (for Romney)

[AmericanInTokyo]

I cannot consider a nominee for the GOP who crafted Obamacare initially, or supported gay marriage and assailed Ronald Reagan, to be a conservative and a patriot.

[Raider Sam]

When did conservative become such crybabies?

[Zhang Fei]

It sounds like Romney doesn’t pull any punches. If he attacks Obama with anything like this kind of fervor, it should be interesting to see whether he can make a dent in the Messiah’s numbers. I’m a Santorum guy, but I’ve always been curious as to whether McCain could have won in 2008 if he (1) hadn’t signed on for Federal financing, thereby ensuring he would be outspent 3 to 1 and (2) had relentlessly attacked Obama for his radical connections, instead of holding back in the interest of an unfair and one-sided “civility”. I think there are two ways for Romney to get the base energized. One is to pick a conservative VP - Ryan, Rubio, Palin, Santorum or Gingrich would do it. Another is to pick a non-conservative, but go nuclear on Obama, the way he went after his opponents in the GOP primaries.

[Zhang Fei]

One thing’s for sure - whomever the nominee is, this cycle will be replete with Super PAC money ready to match Obama dollar for dollar in terms of negative ads. Can money parity alone win 2012 for the GOP? Given the lack of charisma among all the GOP candidates (with the exception of Cain), I think we’re about to find out.

[Raider Sam]

I think you hit it on the head. In the deabtes, they all went after each other, which means they dont have a problem with negative. Just mad that Romney had more money. Im not going to play the class warfare game.

[Raider Sam]

They are both politicians, so that would support it. They both went negative in the debates, which supports it as well.

[SoConPubbie]

They are both politicians, so that would support it.

That is the most oblique reason you could ever give.

[SoConPubbie]

They both went negative in the debates, which supports it as well.

1. When Romney goes negative he lies and spins.
2. When either Newt or Rick goes negative, for the vast majority of the time, they don't, in fact, they have enough ammo with Romney's lying, left-wing, Progressive Liberal record that they don't need to.
3. When Newt's ads went astray, he had them corrected.

No comparison at all.

And using the term negative to describe accurately the telling of Romney's record is the game of the left, not conservatives.

[SoConPubbie]

I cannot consider a nominee for the GOP who crafted Obamacare initially, or supported gay marriage and assailed Ronald Reagan, to be a conservative and a patriot.

He didn't just support Gay Marriage, he implemented it single-handledly in an unconstitutional manner without the Legislature.

Furthermore he implemented a Cap and Trade system and an "Assault" weapons ban.

Romney IS the 2nd cousin to Obama in terms of policies and actions.

[xzins]

Any pro-lifer who ever votes for Romney is a hypocrite.

[Raider Sam]

Fine, live in the bubble. Everything you dont like is a lie, the people you dont like are lying, and your people dont lie.

[SoConPubbie]

Fine, live in the bubble. Everything you dont like is a lie, the people you dont like are lying, and your people dont lie.

The only people living in a bubble are those refusing to take a good hard look at the left-wing, Progressive Liberal record of Mitt Romney and then believing that he can somehow win against an extremely aggressive Obama and the Media both of which have no scruples whatsover over using that record of Mitt's to destroy his candidacy.

All you Mitt Supporters and Mitt himself have to offer is Hope and Not Much Change.

And Mitt Romney has a long way to go before he wraps up the nomination, and there is still a good chance he won't.