Posted on 09/12/2014 10:09:16 AM PDT by C19fan
In early June 1964, a group of Republican governors sought to wrestle control of their party from Barry Goldwater, the Arizona conservative who was about to lead the GOP to one of the most crushing defeats in its history. The governors saw a disaster in the making, and sought a moderate candidate who could capture the imaginations of grassroots Republicans—but also beat President Lyndon Johnson in the general election. Led by Ohio’s James Rhodes—the Republican Governors Association was meeting in Cleveland, and Rhodes was a legendary vote counter—the group included Pennsylvania’s William Scranton and later New York’s Nelson Rockefeller.
........................................................
Couple that interview or statement with the real Mitt Romney—the one from the documentary— speaking to the nation from the heart every day and on every stop. Match that Mitt against the polished and calculating Hillary Clinton. Well then, as Paul Ryan said, the third time really could be the charm. Romney may still do this—2016 needs Mitt even if Mitt doesn’t think he needs it … yet.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/09/mitt-romney-2016-110870.html#ixzz3D7d2GQFj
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
His biggest baggage is MassCare, the father of Obamacare.
Romney is a moderate Republican. But conservatives can’t stand him and won’t vote for him.
I stayed home in 2012. I saw no compelling reason to vote.
Notice that it is mainly liberals in the media who are calling for Willard to run?
Personally I think we would be much better off right now with Willard as President instead of the Obamanation, but I didn’t want Willard to be the nominee then and I sure as bell don’t want him to be the nominee now.
How about we all agree that neither Romney nor McCain will be the Republican nominee this year and move on?
Its Politico...screw them
THAT'S THE PROBLEM!....................
The whole problem is the different parts of the conservative base pick their favorite son so the Cultural Cons go for one person, the Fiscal Cons go for someone else, and now the more libertarian element goes for a third person allowing the GOPe candidate to win early states.
The Praetorian Media for the Ruling Class will always tell us whom the Oligarchy will ‘select’ to be our ‘candidate’.
Remember when Obama told them in late 2009 that he ‘feared’ Romney getting into a race in 2012?.
I said then, Romney will be ‘selected’ to be our ‘candidate’, and sure enough - the machine went on to destroy every single challenge to Romney.
And of course Romney “lost” to Obama. This is what they used to do in the old Soviet Union. The Party would pick a weakling to create an illusion of ‘choice’ among ‘the proletariat’, but the Party would always make sure ‘their guy’ “won”.
We went Soviet folks, and hardly anyone noticed.
No way. he had his chance and lost.
Agreed, but let’s add to that another name Bush!
NO!
Yep, we definitely have a problem, but most often we allow ourselves to be defeated by the very strategy I just recommended: many conservatives run, while the GOP “moderates” rally gehind one candidate. Hopefully we can get a Reagan conservative (such as Cruz) who can unite all the base while the so called “moderates” have a lot of candidates splitting their vote.
It may be more accurate to say - “There wasn’t a Republican *in the race* that could have won that election.”
I wholeheartedly believe that if we got a level headed, conservative, working man up on the stage, that could enunciate how much we’re getting screwed by the government, that people of all stripes would flock to him - media be damned.
Unfortunately all the level headed, conservative, working men are too busy getting screwed by the government, working their asses off to keep up with all the demonization and burdensome taxes, fees and regulations.
Besides, who wants to try and lead a nation full of losers. Take care of #1 and we’ll be just fine, right? RIGHT?
Funny how they keep telling us these loser moderates can win as long as they keep running again and again!!!
I know one thing, we don’t need another Senator Elect for president. We need someone who has run a large company and a state as governor. Romney would make a great president. He would get good people around him.
He would run the govt like a company and get rid of countless buracracies and regulations.
Sorry, no one candidate is perfect and frankly there are no Ronald REagans out there, but Romney would be good for our country, and I’m not afraid or embarrassed to say so.
This is ONE conservative who held his nose and voted for Romney, but I will sit out if he is the nominee again.
(Oh, and if you recall, Hugh Hewitt was a cheerleader for Harriet Miers.)
Cruz is a great senator, would be a good VP, but sorry not presidential timber.
Hugh is however the best interviewer of Democrats and Liberals that is on radio today. The way he peppers his guest kindly but firmly with direct questions is admirable and a pleasure to hear the people cringe e at having to answer and show their ignorance and evil.
Yes he should run so Hitlery could be President which will be like a double tap to the US.
WHAT! No gag/barf alert? If it took 6 years to realize that the lyin’ king would be “this bad” then mittens ain’t astute enough to hold the office. He should have checked here about 7 and a half years ago to get the straight skinny on the “won”.
But for at least the next 20 years, no Bush for President.
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.