Posted on 11/06/2007 2:08:50 PM PST by Spiff
I spoke to Paul Weyrich, chairman of the Free Congress Foundation and a founder of the Heritage Foundation and the Moral Majority, about his endorsement of Mitt Romney.
“I felt it would come down to a contest between Giuliani and Romney,” Weyrich said. “I don’t want Giuliani as the nominee because a lot of our values voters will defect... I know the same argument is made about Romney, but eventually, I think those voters can be brought around. There is a hardcore group that absolutely will not vote for Giuliani… I don’t think they’ll go for a third party candidate, I think they’ll stay home. I think there’s no convincing them. I’ve talked to a number of these folks. Even though they recognize that Hillary is a real problem, they think that it’s better to have somebody bad like that than it is to have somebody halfway reasonable.”
On the other candidates, Weyrich said each one, ultimately, had flaws too large to earn his endorsement.
“I’m on the permanent executive committee of the Arlington Group, which was formed to push for the Federal Marriage Amendment. We’ve got [Fred] Thompson who says he can’t support that. I can’t push this for the past several years and then say, ‘oh, that’s not so important.’ … I’ve been working with candidates for close to fifty years I recognize candidates with fire in the belly. I’ve got to tell you, I do not think Thompson really wants to be elected that badly.”
“As for McCain, I can’t support him — McCain-Feingold is a dealbreaker, as far as I’m concerned.”
“Huckabee, I came close to supporting him, and if we were running for some sort of religious organization, I would support him, but we’re not. He has compromised on so many conservative issues, I simply can’t be for him. Every time you turn around, he’s taking the wrong stand on a different issue.”
“I know there’s the issue that Romney has flip-flopped, but so have most of the other candidates,” Weyrich said. “I’ve questioned him very thoroughly and I’m of a mind that he is sincere in his change of heart. I may be wrong but I have interviewed hundreds of candidates over the years, and I have a sense of these things.
Weyrich said he wasn’t worried about Romney’s comparatively low name ID at this point.
“If he wins Iowa, New Hampshire, maybe wins in South Carolina, that it’ll take care of itself. Anybody who wins in all of those states is going to get a lot of coverage.”
Weyrich said other candidates sought his nomination, but that he reached out to Romney, not the other way around. “I was impressed with the dynamism of the candidate. He’s a candidate that will impress the American public.”
Paul Weyrich Talks About Why He Endorsed Romney - And Not the Others
National Review Online
Jim Geraghty
6 November 2007
That Willard fellar reminds me a little of that ‘Gov. Goodhair’ down Texas way.......
57 days and the selection process begins in earnest....
The stragglers need to get their numbers up or
begin deciding who they will pick their lot with....
This is a sell-out of Benedict Arnold proportions.
*BUMP*
No I did not.
I think a 50-year-running conservative activist might have a good sense of who's real and who's not.
He's not much of a conservative if he agrees with Kucinich and Paul about the Battle of Iraq. He sounds quite nuts, whatever he might have done before this.
"Fire in the belly" is the oldest, most cliched, most hackneyed criticism out there. It's a substitute for actual intellectual consideration.
Meanwhile, Willard Myth Romney is still a fraud.
When hell freezes solid.
I don’t know what’s wrong with Weyrich. He’s dead wrong on the most important national security issue of our day, and now he endorses this liberal Trojan horse named Willard. Perhaps senile dementia is setting in.
Perhaps. Unfortunately, he can't win.
One of Thompson's northern California co-chairs donated over $4000 to Rudy a few months ago. No donations listed to Thompson. Unless she has a twin with her unusual name and residence it is a mystery.
If a candidate could spend all his time courting voters like that, campaiging would be a very pleasant experience indeed!
That's an interesting point. Regardless of his platform, Mitt has been one to govern as he promised during his campaign. His record proves it. He kept his word.
That isn't exactly the kind of glowing endorsement I was expecting. Hmmm.
I have to be honest. I am heavily leaning towards Fred; Mitt Romney just comes across to me as too slick. I think "Used car salesman trying to sell me a lemon" when I hear him speak and that really bothers me. I don't know that I trust him. His pro-life conversion also seems politically contrived. Though, if it is genuine, I am thrilled. More advocates for babies--hallelujah! His other flip-flops in conservative issues leave me skeptical,though I give him the benefit of the doubt on some matters.
My hinky meter is still way up on him at this point.
And he isn’t even looking down her top. . .
“Thompson is consistently closer to Rudy in most polls than is Romney.”
Classic half-truth, the most insidious form of distortion. Which polls? National, yes; key states, no, so one could just as easily turn your statement around, depending on which polls one has up one’s sleeve.
So “most polls” is a meaningless statement, but you were counting on people being awed by such meaninglessness. Sorry, not everybody’s that dumb.
“Thompson is consistently closer to Rudy in most polls than is Romney.”
“Romney isn’t in second place, Thompson is, so in the name of tactical reasons , maybe you should consider supporting Thompson .”
I guess you didn’t take time to read Weyrich’s reasoning. He acknowledge’s Thompson has greater name rec now but offers a reason why Romney will in the end surpass Thompson. That’s the basis upon which he sees Romney as the leading alternative to Juliehoney, not Thompson or Elron or Huckabooboo or even Duncan, all of whom are fine folks but less convincing Juliequashers.
With the string of top conservative endorsements like Weyrich that Romney has amassed, I urge you to entertain the possibility that you may have the wrong impression of Mitt Romney. These conservative leaders might actually have a point about Romney - a point which should be carefully considered. They are staking their reputations as conservative leaders and their careers on the conservatism and viability of Mitt Romney. Their decisions to endorse Romney were not made lightly.
“That isn’t exactly the kind of glowing endorsement I was expecting. Hmmm.”
Who said anything about glowing endorsements. It’s about tactics. If this bickering among the “values voters” goes on for another month or two, Julie is our girl and that means we get Hillary. Weyrich is trying to wake you folks up to the disaster that is bearing down on us. Meanwhile, everyone sits in his corner bashing everyone but his own pet candidate.
Hunter, Huckabee, Thompson, they are all fine folks. All Weyrich is doing is making a tactical assessment that none of them can rally sufficient support to stop Julie. He thinks Romney can. Sure, he might be right, but those who think Thompson can or Huckabee can better think about it at least as carefully as Weyrich has, because if they are wrong, we end up with Julie, which means we end up with Hilly.
Why do you suppose that Hunter is worth mentioning?
“Regardless of his platform, Mitt has been one to govern as he promised during his campaign. His record proves it. He kept his word.”
The whole Romney thing becomes so complicated, I think that I know what you mean, but like all things Romney, I am not sure.
Here is campaign video from the last time he was a candidate and the only race he has won (narrowly).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
I vividly recall how thompson was rolled by Glenn and other 'rats during the 90's senate hearings. It was pathetic and a quality we do not need to stand up to the hildebeast and commie despots.
Add his refusal to endorse the marriage amendment and state he didn't think he could win, thompson is out.
He can't find any, and for good reason. But since Weyrich is reluctant to stand on principle in his candidate selection - "Hunter can't win I was told" - he has to work with what's available in the remainder of the field. ...which isn't much.
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.