 The longer candidate, 2004 Even his hobby depended on which way the wind blew. |
Posted on 05/21/2011 9:03:11 AM PDT by Qbert
With friends like Conor with one N, Mitch Daniels probably doesn't need enemies within the conservative base.
Everything is upside down in the Republican primaries. The GOP establishment is rallying behind a principled candidate with a proven conservative track record. That's upsetting the conservative base: on talk radio and right wing blogs, they concede that the man in question governs as a staunch conservative, but insist his candidacy isn't viable because he lacks charisma and electability.
Gee, Daniels is making headlines, again. He has a real gift for that.
Indiana Republican governor Mitch Daniels was hit in the forehead by a swinging door after concluding a workout Friday afternoon, prompting an injury that required 16 stitches.
Naturally, a silly boy like Friedersdorf would love Daniels. Conor with one N doesn't understand, let alone effort to advance conservatism, while doing more harm, than good, to it when he purportedly does try. As for Daniels, time after time he has proved himself gaffe-prone and self-defeating whenever his profile rises to the level of national politics. I don't care how right he is for Indiana, or what his record may, or may not be. He's unelectable, even if the so-called elite's calculations claim he is the answer to all things Republican in 2012.
Ideology aside, if we can learn anything from watching John McCain stumble and bumble his way through the 2008 general election, it should be that a self-destructive, not truly ready for prime-time, ultimately uninspiring and unsympathetic figure will not do well against Obama. Whatever Obama is, or isn't, when it comes to performing on the campaign trail, with all the help he gets from the media, it's as if he can do no wrong.
The GOP can not afford a 2012 nominee who has consistently demonstrated an uncanny ability to say and do precisely the wrong thing to the wrong people at the wrong time. If anything, Daniels makes Romney's relatively weak political judgment look strong by comparison. The Indiana Governor is unelectable and, frankly, I'm not interested in hearing what a great conservative he is, allegedly.
It's time for the so-called elites to figure out that much of the opposition to Daniels has little to do with ideology and much to do with his earned perception of being unelectable in 2012. To the extent things may be turned upside down right now, it's that the grassroots get that and the establishment GOP hasn't figured it out. But then, perhaps that isn't all that surprising given what we've seen from them for the last decade, or more.
So, what’s wrong with sending that list back saying “Give me somebody I feel comfortable nominating”? And if the 45 days passes, then going public with what the commission is doing?
No. It's because he threw Conservatism under the bus at what was once the pre-eminent Conservative gathering known as CPAC.
First he lectures about the perils of demanding purity and then his minions go out and lecture about what a Purist he is.
Make up your minds, Danielistas. Is Conservatism a good thing or not.
Besides, why doesn't Daniels himself go out and explain what he meant at CPAC instead of leaving it up to his trolls to parse his words and massage his record. Coward.
Daniels worked for Sen Lugar.
Daniels supports a European style VAT Tax and OIL tax.
Exactly right. It’s the Democrats who have to hide their true intentions to get elected: The GOP positions align with the majority of voters. Instead we’re always being told that only RINOs are electable, and RINOs almost by definition are to the left of the positions they cop to.
Has to be chosen from the list they provide. I didn’t make the rules - I’m just posting what they are. Do you really think Palin isn’t pro-life?
Shirley, he wouldn't nominate such people to The Supreme Court.
“He supported single payer same, Newt, and Romney”
—I’m still confused as to what exactly his position is on the matter: He made some kind of statement in favor of universal health care- but then his handlers come out and now and say it wasn’t that bad because he supposedly wasn’t endorsing an individual mandate. But I’m thinking, how is this guy the supposed fiscal Conservative answer... when he appears to be supporting a new entitlement program?
“He seems uncomfortable making the all around conservative case.”
—Yep, and I don’t understand why. If his take is that fiscal matters are the most important issue facing us- okay (I don’t fully agree, btw), but why would he make his case in a way that *alienates* members of his own party, as if they are pariahs?
I wouldn’t vote for him with all that Muzzie support he has!
Mitch Daniels “Honored” by Notorious Jew-Hating, Supremacist Organization AAI
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2714004/posts
I think everyone needs to take a deep breath. We are early in the GOP presidential selection cycle. I’m thinking now that I could probably support Daniels, Cain, or T-Paw, or even maybe Romney if one of them prevail in the primaries -— but certainly not Newt. But until she bows out or is defeated in the primaries, my heart and my meager contributions belong to a lass from Alaska.
There are millions more like me, and look for a tidal wave of support if she announces, and a furious attack from everyone in the MSM and many in the establishment GOP. I expect Rove, Frum and Brooks to be denouncing her candidacy as loudly as the New York Slimes -— further convincing me that she’s the one.
The picture people post to complain about Daniels’ height is a cropped picture of Daniels and Bush walking up a hill. Daniels isn’t tall, he’s average to below-average height (I’d estimate he’s around 5’8”). If his height is a huge negative for you in line with Romney’s pro-abort positions, Palin’s support for the repeal of DADT, or Pawlenty and Newt’s global warming bull, then that’s your right, but let’s not be misleading.
“Besides, why doesn’t Daniels himself go out and explain what he meant at CPAC instead of leaving it up to his trolls to parse his words and massage his record.”
Exactly.
You will note that the large majority of those who attack Daniels are notorious Palinites. One wonders what they fear.
Perhaps they fear another McLame RINO candidate ?
As has been pointed out repeatedly, the AAI gave him an award because his grandparents are Syrian Christians, and he has been an excellent leader in Indiana. Nothing more. The bloviating morons who chant “Muslim-loving” are merely posters with an agenda, because they fear their candidate can’t hold up next to Mitch in a fair debate.
suit yourself.
In Mitch's case, it's from conservatives.
In Sarah's case, it's from liberals.
Wonder why?
The longer candidate, 2004 Even his hobby depended on which way the wind blew. |
Mitch who? “Daniels” you say? Uh... Who is he again?
A moderate, boring, physically unattractive candidate.
Trolls? Hey, many of us who are actually impressed with a certain candidate have every right to tout the positive aspects of a guy without being called names.
This is so far a wide open race with room for all kinds of characters. I have yet to hear from a single prospective GOP-nom unstained by a gaffe or conviction I don’t particularly agree with. I will not get 100% of what I want and Ronald Reagan ain’t running next year. SOMEBODY good will rise to the top. And I’m willing to give him/her a chance to delete the biggest mistake America has ever made from the White House.
Good of luck to whomever you’re behind. May the Best (not the media pick) Conservative win.
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.