Posted on 07/17/2011 1:16:58 PM PDT by Kaslin
Did conservatives learn the wrong lesson from losing to Obama the first time?
Recently Politico ran a piece by Alexander Burns titled “Mitt Romney’s Warning Signs.” Burns outlined three major reasons why Romney is a weak frontrunner and “remains extremely beatable.”
The three reasons are:
Now I agree with all of the above but would like to add one more extremely important reason that explains both the lackluster fundraising and the stalled polling — Romney is being hurt by the political shadow of 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain. Here’s why:
During the course of writing about national politics, especially the 2012 presidential election, I have noticed a continuous theme in comments from Pajamas Media readers, comments from other conservative web sites that have picked up my columns, and personal emails from politically active conservative friends and associates commenting on my writings.
All three sources of comments shout loud and clear the reason why many conservatives do not support Mitt Romney for the 2012 GOP nomination.
That argument goes like this: Conservatives like to say that in 2008 they reluctantly supported “RINO” John McCain. They did not consider him to be a “true conservative.” (RINO is shorthand for “Republican in name only.”)
After getting “burned” by McCain’s loss to Obama, they are determined not to repeat the same mistake in 2012 by supporting Romney the “RINO.”
Here are some representative comments from the sources mentioned above:
This last argument has been voiced again by Republican moderates as a good reason to support Romney in 2012 and of course was used by those same moderates in 2008 to garner support for McCain during the primary process.
The argument worked and McCain was initially popular with independent voters.
However, in the fall of 2008 independents fled from John McCain — some would argue because Sarah Palin as McCain’s running mate scared them off, but others would say she attracted conservatives and fired up the base. The truth is both arguments are correct and the voter groups partially canceled each other out, helping to ensure Obama’s victory.
Now looking to the 2012 election, independent voters hold the key to defeating President Obama, and any Republican nominee must be somewhat mainstream to attract them or risk going down to a certain defeat.
But for conservatives to use “RINO” McCain’s inability to attract independents in the 2008 general election against Mitt Romney and thus withhold their support is flawed and dangerous thinking that will assist in President Obama’s re-election.
Independents, according to a Gallup poll, now comprise 38% of the electorate.
Other polling finds they are turning against Obama, and the Republican nominee must be someone to whom they can run.
But if only a “true conservative” is acceptable to the base in 2012, one who can win the GOP nomination and has a reasonable chance of defeating President Obama — that person better rise up fast because time is running out to organize and finance a campaign against an incumbent president who will raise close to $1 billion.
Besides, can anyone even define a “true conservative” these days? For example, could President Ronald Reagan, who granted amnesty to three million illegal aliens in 1986, even win his party’s nomination in 2012?
Romney is being dogged by the shadow of John McCain. This explanation also sheds light on why Romney is not catching on with the base and subsequently why his polling and fundraising are stalled and lackluster.
There is no doubt that Romney is beatable for the GOP nomination, but someone has to step up and actually beat him.
Just the idyllic concept of a “true conservative” candidate does not cut it.
Enter Texas Governor Rick Perry.
An informed source says Perry will make entry into the presidential race “within the month.” Is this three-term governor of Texas the man on the great white horse who can ride in and rescue the base from Romney the “RINO”?
The answer to that question will soon be obvious in polls and fundraising.
However, Governor Perry will have an even more toxic shadow than the one following Mitt Romney. This shadow will follow Perry throughout the primary process, then grow even larger during the general election, if Perry makes it that far. This is the shadow of a former Texas governor, President George W. Bush.
Remember during the 2008 election how Senator Obama waged his campaign more against President Bush than his actual opponent, Senator John McCain?
In 2012, if Governor Perry is the nominee he will be Obama’s George W. Bush version 2.0. Do Republicans really want to make it that easy for Obama’s campaign message machine?
The truth is Rick Perry is not George W. Bush, but a billion dollars of Obama’s campaign money can buy a lot of TV commercials convincing voters or making them at least think how Governor Perry could be George W. Bush the sequel.
But if Perry stalls out and Romney does manage to win the nomination, then the GOP may be in trouble with comments like “Romney is worse than McCain. We are not doing that again.”
The political shadow of John McCain is now hovering over Romney and George W. Bush’s shadow will soon be dogging Perry. Therefore, it is imperative that both men find a way to blot out these shadows before voters are spooked.
Romney hurt himself with his completely unconvincing conversion to conservatism overnight. I don’t care how much money he has, it’s not going to mean anything because people don’t trust him. McCain and Romney are country club elitists, and the public is sick of their types running Washington.
Even if perry is seen as a bush sequel , why is a bush sequel worse than more obama?
If so, it’s a sign voters are learning, and that’s a good thing.
I am a Palin fan. But after four years of Obama, Bush will not cast nearly as long a shadow as some think.
It was a waste of time to read this, the writer doesn’t bring anything useful to the subject.
The more I read and the more I research, the more I am convinced that the only ticket that can beat Obama (and by a wide margin) is Palin/Cain.
No Romney’s shadow is harming Romney.
the pubies are helpless against the evil party’s well-orchestrated attacks and cover ups.
socialists are always on topic.
bush 43 was above speaking regularly to the american people; indeed, his administration allowed socialist untruths to stand.
mccain inherited a pr mess, and was unable to state his positions forcefully because “bipartisanship” is useless as an opposition party strategy against the dems.
The RINOs are much like the Bourbon royal house of France - they learn nothing, and they forget nothing.
Their collective enemy is NOT the Democrats, with whom they are forever forging alliances, but the conservative wing of their OWN party, i.e., the T.E.A. activists.
The RINOs, though, are a minority in what is rightly a majority, fifth columnists sent out under the seemingly similar flag of “Republicanism”, appealing to the loyalty to a former and now faded glory, and even mouthing the pieties and platitudes that would seem a resounding endorsement of whatever the T.E.A. activists are calling for.
But alas, their hearts are simply not in the game, and through apparent fumbling and ineptitude, a strong political position is lost to an inferior and even wholly incompetent opponent, but one that is entirely willing to seek power for the sheer sake of power.
We have gone down that wrong path before.
Yes, and he's still doing it, and people ain't buying it anymore. The focus of this campaign needs to be on the economy and whoever the nominee is needs to take the fight right to Hussein. When he Obie says things like ,"80% of the American people want a tax increase...", then make him prove it. When he says 0bamacare will save money, again show specifically that he's lying.
Trump got a huge following because he didn't let the marxist punk define the debate, and he wouldn't settle for a B.S. answer to questions. When we hear "Hope and Change" from Hussein, our nominee needs to ask him point blank, "Hope and Change to WHAT?" , "What is this fundimental transformation you've been leading us on these past 4 years, and why should we let you continue it?"
the Architect of zer0bamacare...needs no help being a loser...he is a self made man.
Romney is boring. As was Dole. As was McCain. We can’t win with boring. Perry is the man and he will run and win.
Perry is NOT Bush and most voters are smart enough to realize this. And Bush II is a helluva lot better than Carter II.
He should be running as a Democrat.
Anybody liberal enough to be Governor of Massachusetts is too liberal for me.
Might as well keep the Richard Cranium we have and elect a Republican Senate.
If you look at who is funding Romney the RINO it’s the big finance houses....smells of back room deals. And then he has Romenycare hanging over his head.
Unless you want the country club elitists GOP leaders to pick the next candidate, I suggest you do not FUND the RNC, but the candidate of your choice. They don’t get the message until you cut their funding off.
None of the candidates are perfect, we just have to find the most conservative, the most Constitutional, pro USA candidate we can and stand united behind that candidate.
West, Cain, Palin, Bachmann have the most Brass so far as I can see. West nor Palin have declared yet. MSM is digging dirt on all of them, Palin has already been raked over the coals by them.
IF I were choosing it would be West/Palin.
Wrong! How soon they forget.
McCain's campaign was going nowhere before he chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. I was just looking at a chart the other day that clearly shows that support for his campaign angled up in a 45 degree ascent, after Sarah joined him.
Obama didn't catch up to him until McCain threw the race by suspending his campaign to vote on the big bail out package.
BINGO
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.
