Posted on 10/23/2007 6:52:12 AM PDT by Reaganesque
He is a “Slick Flip Flopper” from Massachusetts. That says it all. Every election we get one of these Massachusetts Liberals who come out and try to attain National Office. If we ever let one of them in, the country will regret it.
The leap from governor of the PRM (People’s Republic of Massachusetts) to the national stage as a conservative Republican is just too big to be made in two years. Mitt’s made a good effort at it but in the process he made himself look like a blow-up candidate filled with whatever hot air appeals to the audience of the moment. He seems like a phony and I think that will kill his candidacy.
Mitt has many strengths and I wish him well but I don’t think he’ll be heading the Republican ticket this year.
This backs up the American Research Group’s earlier poll showing a surge of Romney support in S.C. We’ll see the surge continue as a result of Bob Jones and Don Wilton ensorsements.
Being from MA is good.
Romney had to govern in MA, fighting left wing gale winds. He remained reasonably conservative. Other candidates, such as Thompson, had conservative constituencies. We do not know how they would react as President with a more liberal national constituency.
Yes, he said that illegals must have aspirations of citizenship, they cannot be deported and now he is talking tough. No, wait, that wasn’t Romney.
He's my #3 choice behind Fred and Rudy, but I won't hesitate to vote for him if it's between him and Hillary.
Strategery-wise, I think it's absolutely essential that Fred win SC. If Mitt goes 4 for 4---IA, NH, SC, and MI---the "coronation" effect will set in. But if someone breaks his momentum, I don't think Mitt will recover on Super Tuesday, where Rudy has all the cards. For Fred to even have a chance, he has to win either SC or MI.
The more people know about Romney, the greater the opposition to his candidacy.
Sure, there will always be people who will fall for the used car salesman's pitch. But used car salesmen are not terribly popular, and Mitt's unfavorable/would never vote for ratings have been terrible.
The surge has already failed!
Actually, that WAS Romney.
It is clear that Romney is going to win a lot of states, but maybe or maybe not enough to win the nomination.
It is also clear that Thompson is not able to overtake Giuliani so far because of the strong performance by Romney and aslo a bit of Mccain who are going for the conservative vote.
It was Fred Thompson, in Fox News interview earlier this year, who proudly stated that illegals must have aspirations of citizenship. Apart from his buddy McAmnesty, I don’t think any republican candidate has uttered such an amnesty nonsense.
If he gets the nomination, most Republicans will vote for him in the general election. Can the same be said for Guliani ?
Huckabee is now the emerging conservative candidate who will threaten Guliani and Romney. McCain is only a spoiler who may take 10% of the vote and help or hurt some other candidate.
Fred was supposed to be the conservative candidate, but after his non-campaign, Huckabee is rising in the polls. I can’t see any future for Fred now that Huckabee is a serious candidate. I still don’t know enough about Huckabee. What is his position on illegals?
Yep. Romney = Kerry.
Come on, make some distinction so we believe your sane!
Put on your glasses, Rose O'Donnell isn't Jenny McCarthy.
If Romney wins IA (leading), NH (leading), MI (leading) and SC (gaining) = game, set, match.
Would you settle for a fascist from Illinois?
Yes. Most Republicans would vote for either, but a sizable minority, including this FReeper, would not support a phony like Romney or a liberal like Rudy, and would work to defeat them.
Romney was for illegal immigrants before he was against them.
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.