Since this 1994 brochure doesn't jive with their RINO jibe, it will be ignored.
Posted on 02/11/2007 11:24:18 AM PST by Clintonfatigued
If you were devising a candidate for a presidential run, what would you throw into the mix? Executive experience, obviously, so probably a governor. But not a policy wonk or professional politician: someone with private sector experience as well. A proven ability to win in territory inhospitable to your party would be a good thing. Ties to some of the early voting primary states and key swing states would be useful. Strong ties to tight regions like the Mid-West and interior West, where there are many swing states, would certainly help. Family connections have proved useful in the past. Oh, and good hair!
Though opinion polls – which mostly measure name recognition at this point – show Rudy Giuliani and John McCain as Republican front runners, with no-one else cracking double figures, most commentators and bloggers talk about the ‘big three’. In poll ratings, Mitt Romney doesn’t qualify – but most are expecting that he will before Iowa and New Hampshire vote in January 2008.
In, Iowa, he is a Mid-westerner. His father was Governor of Michigan. In New Hampshire, however they already know him as the just retired Governor of Massachusetts. Most people in the Granite State pick up the Boston media market. The next cluster of states to vote includes several in the Mid-West, including Michigan itself.
As the race moves westward, Romney will remind people that he ran the successful Salt Lake City Olympics – rescuing it from scandal. He is LDS (Latter Day Saints, or Mormon), and LDS voters are a majority in Utah and significant minorities in Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado and California. In the general election Nevada, Colorado and possibly Arizona will be key swing states.
This business of having three home states – Massachusetts, Michigan and Utah – is a powerful asset.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Exactly! LOL! The voice of sanity. I'm glad to hear it.
Certainly not with the majority of Americans have that kind of attitude!
I bet you though we couldn’t put a man on the moon either.
As so-called Republicans keep lowering their standards, so goes the country.
Good point.
Still, if you ask the candidates about the God they serve, only Mitt could say that the general authorities of his church in the past taught that their God is himself a polygamist. (Some even said that God married Mary and that Jesus was conceived as you and I were). [See Orson Pratt's writings for the former, and LDS apostle McConkie's Mormon Doctrine for the "conceived" "as you and I were"--McConkie said it was a literal paternity).
Who is your most favorite? I am curious.
I don't think I can do that. Folks that call themselves conservatives do not uniformly share the same opinions, especially when it gets down to details.
Abortion is the easiest example to demonstrate that. There are those who believe human life begins at conception and must be protected at all costs. The GOP platform opposes abortion except in cases of rape, incest, and life of the mother. Other conservatives are tolerant of it if it occurs before the embryo starts developing brain cells. And some are tolerant of it up until birth, I guess.
No matter what your view on abortion is, you're not going to represent all conservatives.
And that's just one issue.
You can't find the perfect candidate who represents all your views unless you run yourself. So run yourself, and see if you represent the voters.
They all have pros and cons. McCain has the most positives, but in the past when he wanted media attention he proved untrustworthy. Rudy would be strong on terrorism and the budget, but too socially liberal. Mitt lacks the experience on terror and national defense, but will emerge as the strongest domestic candidate because he is articulate enough to explain his conversion to a more conservative person.
Romney's abortion stance is interesting. I heard him on Glenn Beck explaining it.
First he was against abortion.
Then a close friend died from a botched back street abortion, so he changed his mind and was for abortion.
Then he was at a stem cell research lab and they said there wasn't a problem with destroying a fertalized egg because they did it in the first seven day. He changed his mind because he thinks we've devalued life too much so he's against abortion again.
A bit of back and forth; however, it seems to be done for personal reasons rather than political. But it does raise the concern that his abortion stance isn't stable and that it may change again.
McCain is my least favorite. He has been groin kicking conservatives for so long it's a habit.
If you don't regard a clean living Mormon as conservative, then I suggest you get a new dictionary.
Actually, so far Romney hasn't turned me off. He seems to have found religion on the abortion issue, although I'm confused as to why it required a metamorphosis on his part.
These days my favorite in the field is Duncan Hunter. That is likely the kiss of death for him. My favorites since such things mattered to me have all faded.
McCain, on the other hand, has the same chance of becoming President as I have. If he gets the Republican nod in ought eight it will save me time and money. I won't contribute hard earned cash to his success, and I won't stump door to door for him as I have for Republicans since 1994.
Read Romney's campaign flyer from 1994. Out of 24 issues, Romney comes down on the conservative side for 23 of them. That's 95.8% conservative, 13 years ago.
Read it for yourself.
Some Freepers think that Americans are as conservative as they are. Its ridiculous. Its like they are in denial that John Kerry, an ultra liberal if ever there was one, got 48% of the vote. If Republicans don't even try to get some liberal and moderate votes, they will die out.
I think I'm going to write a greasemonkey script so I can browse FR and not have to read every moronic comment about "RINO's".
Since this 1994 brochure doesn't jive with their RINO jibe, it will be ignored.
So, your argument is that Mitt Romney is not acceptable since, being married only once, he is a "BAD MORMON"?
It is worse than that:
Some want to start a new, more conservative part, which is sure to get more real conservative elected, because in the current Republican party, only half of the Republican half are conservative.
I try to point out that you have to pass 51 percent of 51 percent (a majority of the majority) before you can get a simple majority. Putarch is right!
Huh?
He is currently on wife #3, who happens to be 23 years younger than he is and was rumored to be having an affair with him while he was still married to wife #2.
Yes. Still beats a liberal. But call me greedy. I would like someone who holds conservative positions AND a scandal free personal life. My point was, if we are going to ignore personal stuff, then give me Gingrich.
Both Beck and Romney are Mormon. Did Beck endorse Romney?
You can add that he's also a handsome man of one marriage ... and that is more important to moderate voters than it ought to be, but there it is. I personally accept his conversion to pro-life based upon the reasoning he gave recently.
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.