I disagree with the premise. Republicans who continue to think that Romney would have been just fine, are not conservatives. It's not about courtesy pings and "hysteria," it's about identifying the lengths that folks are driven to go to justify Romney and thereby leaving him still in play.
The only things folks like Irish can do when challenged is to cite what Romney said. Actions speak more truly than words; in action, Romney has been a liberal Democrat. Republicans who can't perceive that aren't conservatives.
Whether you voted for him or not, agreeing that Romney is OUT and should always have been out is a bedrock issue, as far as I'm concerned. So soundly bedrock that it's looking like the only way to ditch the gangrene Romney symptomizes in the GOPe is to go third party. I don't like it any better than either of you, but facts is facts. Romneyitis has to be ditched.
But establishing groundrule principles is just too "hysterical" an undertaking, I guess.
Finny, not one Romneybot has been able to answer the questions I've posted previously. "Principles" are little more than a punch line in a joke for too many Stupid Party supporters.
What's worse is they can't understand how the dems can try to be all things to all people - gays and muslims, Catholics and abortionists etc.......but then they turn around and expect the base to be exactly that FOR the stupid party.
The party works for and represents us.....not the other way around. We work for the party (to get them elected) when they demonstrate they'll represent us and do the people's work.
I guess some folks think of politics like college football. They never went to that school, nor do they live in that state - they just like them because they do. They don't support the candidate, nor does he represent anything they claim to believe in, but he's "their guy."