Is Romney the only possible candidate who can deliver and actually win a national election? (vanity)

Self | 8/25/2011 | self

[Signalman]

I understand Mitt Romney is unpopular on FR. But I was just reading a series of posts on a conservative website and in a discussion of the GOP candidate, a poster made the comment, "Romney is the only possible candidate who can deliver enough cross-over votes and actually win a national election."

The gist of the discussion was that if, specifically, Rick Perry or any other candidates perceived as "too conservative" were the nominee, the Democratic base would be "energized" and insure a Dem victory. (Note: I'm a Perry supporter.)

Can anyone comment on the validity of the above speculation? Would having a candidate who is "too conservative" energize the Dem base and, even more importantly, turn off large numbers of independent voters and, thus, give Obama a 2nd term? (What a sickening thought)?

[Rich21IE]

you won’t get an answer here.

[melsec]

To me it seems to be the question of do you just want to win or do you want to change the face of America and possibly save it from itself. Seemingly a vote for Romney would be a less vigorous form of Socialism (than Obama) and a vote for say Palin would be for a stricter conservatism.

I suppose it depends on what you believe the current state of the USA is. If you think that you just need a GOP politician in power to tweek a few things Mitt would be a safe bet. If you think America has been going down the wrong path for quite awhile and needs radical change then find someone else.

I do wonder if Mitt would be fairing so well if Palin was announced as being in the race.

Mel

[SoJoCo]

I hope not because I don’t think he’s going to be the Republican nominee.

[NonValueAdded]

But I was just reading a series of posts on a conservative website and in a discussion of the GOP candidate, a poster made the comment, "Romney is the only possible candidate who can deliver enough cross-over votes and actually win a national election."

How did Ayn Rand put it? "Check your premises, one of them could be wrong" or something tot hat effect?

[Designer]

Pay no attention to the claims of an invincible Romney. This is the same tactic promulgated by the same people who bullied us into (not yours truly) nominating G.H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, and John McCain.

There is a certain powerful cabal of "moderates" who shy away from conservative values, and are horrified at the thought that we might actually nominate a conservative. Ignore them.

[carjic]

Romney, Perry...small difference same result. If you want TALK AND WALK Palin is the only choice. They all want to be the conservative to get elected then start acting like senators upon election. Sarah has shown she won’t do that.

[papasmurf]

Short answer, no. Longer answer, it remains to be seen. I’ll have MY prognostication on the evening of 9/3/2011.

[Grunthor]

“That was really heroic.”

Not really, I just despise John McCain with every fiber of my being. I voted the down-ticket races but I could not cast a vote for John McCain. If McCain was running THIS time.....I’d have to get really REALLY drunk to cast that vote.

[YHAOS]

Is this a question?

Or an assertion masquerading as a question?

[Lou Budvis]

Romney would be beaten the same way Brown beat Romney’s surrogate, Nutmeg Whitman and the way Boxer beat Fiorina - constant ads showing how much money he made at Bain while his companies were laying off people. Pure pandering, the last ditch effort of a candidate who can’t run on their own record - but lethally effective. Couple that with a disaffected base and you’ve got 4 more years of 0bama.

[Vigilanteman]

Don't think so. Carter apologists back then even blamed Illinois Congressman John Anderson for throwing the race to Reagan.

Two problems with this theory:

1. Anderson was a moderate Republican from Illinois who openly courted the RINO vote which didn't like Reagan much.
   
2. If every Anderson vote had gone to Carter, Reagan would have still won with over 330 electoral votes.
   
   (Green states would have swung from Reagan to Carter if every Anderson vote had gone to Carter)
   

[Grunthor]

“If you want TALK AND WALK Palin is the only choice.”

That’s what I like about her. I hope that she gives us that choice.

[papasmurf]

I will vote for any nominee who has an (R) in front of their name.

I would prefer the ticket includes one Sarah Palin, former Governor of the State of Alaska, and currently the most polite ass kicker in the public eye. And, yes, that infers I would be happy with her as VeeP under any (R), as well.

ARIBTAD=AnyRepublicanIsBetterThanAnyDemocrap.

[MortMan]

Only if he can do it without a lot of conservatives.

[shield]

Americans BOTTOM LINE are jobs and economy...anyone who has that record will be easily elected. Romney’s record in that area is ZERO.

[NavyCanDo]

Its not the Dem Base being energized or not that will make the difference. Its the moderate swing voters, and right now they are NOT polling well for Obama, even though they in majority numbers voted for him. Perry, Ronmey and Palin I think are capable of pulling in the swing voters. Perry by his charisma and Reagan like mannerisms, Palin by her amazing speaking ability, she is the most well known, and her electric personality. And Romney because he IS a moderate

[napscoordinator]

I don’t think Rick Perry can beat Obama. He seems more McCain to me. Sarah is our only hope. She must announce 3 September and get these impotent Republicans out of the way.

[chris_bdba]

No I don;’t believe it.The only people saying that crap are Mitt fans.The same thing was said about Reagan and see how wrong they were.Anyone who gets up there and talks deficit and jobs and sounds lie they have a better plan than Barkys no plan will win.

[Servant of the Cross]

Anybody forwarding a "he's better than the alternative" argument had better think again, and think hard.

You echo a large segment of FR with this post. I do believe that there is a line (you know it when you see it) where this can come into play if the nominee (e.g. Romney, McQueeg, Newtie) is below a minimum acceptance level. However, since the consequences of an n0bama re-election are so severe (e.g. life-long Supreme Court appointments), I also believe that conservatives need to think hard on broadening the acceptable nominees who are truly above 'the line' (e.g. Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Palin), and indeed beyond one's favorite candidate.

I really do wonder WWRD* in the GOP POTUS 2012. Possibly this ...

"If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that's what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.

* What Would Reagan Do?

[chris_bdba]

No I don;’t believe it.The only people saying that crap are Mitt fans.The same thing was said about Reagan and see how wrong they were.Anyone who gets up there and talks deficit and jobs and sounds like they have a better plan than Barkys no plan will win.