Posted on 01/09/2015 4:07:09 PM PST by presidio9
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney , the Republican presidential nominee in 2012, told a meeting of donors Friday that he is considering another White House bid in 2016, people present said.
The possibility of a third Romney bid could upend the emerging GOP field, coming as top Republican donors are starting to rally behind former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.
Mr. Romney made the remarks during a session Friday afternoon -SNIP-
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
I'm not surprised that you're misreading the conversation that I'm having with windflier, but it turns out that we actually agree on the substantial points. We disagree on the use of a term. Because I am a diplomatic person, I asked him to suggest an alternative.
I won't put words in his mouth, but I believe that if you asked him, he would acknowledge the sad fact that candidate Ronald Reagan would have a difficult time winning a republican primary in 2016.
Nice. I like it!
Based on what? They elected a muslim after 9/11. they screamed racism when the war started.
They are on twitter calling for Bundy to be shot dead to this day over Nevada. They are begging for no blowback on Muslims and reelected Jon and Mitch to power after amnesty was promised.
I don’t call it cynical. I think it’s a fairly safe reading of the electorate.
Oh...And Furgeson and the surrounding events since. Open calls for white slaughter.
Oops...that was for windflier.
Perry is a poser — he'd be a terrible President, if only because he's all image and people would expect something from him.
(Case in point, the national guard call-up he did; it was all a PR stunt.)
And as far as the names being thrown out, heck, I'd be a better Presidential candidate.
Why.
We have by returning people/families to office over and over created an aristocracy whose only interest is getting returned to their “jobs” and enjoying their outlandish pay and retirements.
Reelect No One!!!
Romney Bush 2016
People in my position have to be satisfied with small victories, but perhaps that RINO president (they are never truly principled) will be instrumental in getting a Supreme Court nominee approved.
It should have said:
"People in my position have to be satisfied with small victories, but perhaps that RINO senator(they are never truly principled) will be instrumental in getting a Supreme Court nominee approved.
Small difference there, but it is a significant contextual change.
I don't believe that electing RINO presidents (or RINO I the classic sense, anyway) does much good for the country. But I do believe that it valuable, for opposition votes to be counted in this very liberal state.
And, for that same reason, I always vote straight Conservative Party line on all my ballots. I used to vote Right TO Life Party, but then a few years ago, that party did not get enough votes in an election and it was permanently removed from the ballot.
Thank you.
Why.
We have by returning people/families to office over and over created an aristocracy whose only interest is getting returned to their “jobs” and enjoying their outlandish pay and retirements.
Reelect No One!!!
Why.
We have by returning people/families to office over and over created an aristocracy whose only interest is getting returned to their “jobs” and enjoying their outlandish pay and retirements.
Reelect No One!!!
I swore after voting for McCain that I'd never vote for another liberal, primary or general election. I've kept my word. As long as the GOP keeps pushing liberals down our throat, to hell with them.
I’m voting for Ted Cruz.
If he’s not the nominee, I’ll write-in his name.
Perhaps this country IS mentioned in the book of Revelation.
In less than three years he has grown a set?
He lost in 2012 because the establishment platform caused a significant number of conservatives to stay home.
Apparently the Republican Establishment didn’t hear us the first time. So, here it is again - If you aren’t going to offer us a viable alternative to the Democratic platform across the board we aren’t going to vote! Why should we when there is no appreciable difference between the two political platforms.
Like many voters the last President that I voted for was Reagan in both 1980 and 1984. Since then my vote has been for the least offensive candidate. In both 2008 and 2012 the difference between the two candidates was so small as to be invisible.
When a political advisor opens his mouth to “advise” the Republicans the first and only question that should be asked is “When did this advisor have a successful candidate at the national level?” If it more than 10 years ago, kick him out and demand a refund. QED.
I’m not a purist. I have watched several of his campaigns now and I do not think he has what it takes. It’s hard to learn to fake sincerity convincingly.
Last time around he got caught saying something in what he thought was “in private” only to have it publicized to his disadvantage.
Like saying in public that he Saved The Olympics without a drop of federal money, then bragging in a speech to a business group that he got money from every level of the federal government.
When he ran against Kennedy he tried to run to the left of Teddy.
Then there are whoppers like he’s a gun owner and lifelong hunter. At least he’s not native American!
I think he loses because the general population sees a phoniness, shallowness, and a greed for power in which he’ll say anything to get what he wants.
I probably would vote Romney to avoid a Fauxahontas presidency, but my vote won’t be enough.
Ted Cruz would make an excellent president. But the GOP has fixed the primary schedule in such a way that it will make it very difficult, if not impossible, for him to win the nomination if he does not win two of three out of Iowa, New Hampshire and Utah. Along with NY, CO and MI these are the first six primaries.
Why the GOP would permit states that it can't win in the general election to move to such prominent positions, I can't say. But it will be a major concern for candidates like Cruz. He has no chance in NY or Minnesota, and very little chance in Colorado.
I don't think they believe our voices. They are playing chicken with us -- they think we'll be so desperate to prevent Hillary or whatever the Democrat Nightmare du jour is nominated in 2016, that we'll vote for the Republican out of sheer fear.
They gambled and lost on that bet in 2012.
I hope they fare as badly if they gamble again in 2016. My vote will be for a plurality in that event. Though I am registered as a Republican and have voted straight Republican ticket (until 2012) for some 35 years, I mean what I say, and all their bullying and shouting and hysteria that not voting for the Republican is the same as voting for the Democrat, will be for naught.
They can call my bluff or not.
I’m voting for Cruz, too. I could care less what these Bush and Romney screwballs want.
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.