David wrote this article to educate Fred. I have done my best to educate the rest of you about Fred around here. David’s conclusions about Mitt are the same as my own, Mitt is electable. I like Mitt and I am glad he is courting my vote. I doubt that David has met Mitt. Rush has held court with Mitt for forty five minutes, and found him in no way to be phony or robotic.
Rush likes Mitt and Rush intends to hold Mitt to the conservative agenda.
I disagree that Rush likes Mitt. The only time he’s fawned over Mitt was his religion speech. Rush liked the content and the premise. Apart from that he is very guarded when he speaks of him and has made it clear he has no conservative record to stand on. I think he’s worried Mitt could win and he may have to support him over Hillary, but that’s not “like”.
I have read your post on the thread regarding Mitt and his money. It is true the man is self financing. 50 million is going to be a low ball through the general though. He has spent a fifth of that just on advertising alone to get to where he is now.
So now it is time for a new term to come into play, something not new in politics, but this case is unusual due to it’s scale. It’s called Return on Investment. I don’t know if Mitt has looked at it seriously or not, but others are. Iowa will be the first “lab” for this.
It is also part of the electability question. How much of Mitt’s electability has been tied to expenditures and how much has he spent on retaking the same ground over and over.
I think what we want is for Thompson to beat Huckster and let some of the next races tease it out with Mitt and Fred.
Listen, we here in CA were quite fooled by Ahnold, some of us. I too lived in Socialist Europe like he did, which is where I learned that socialism sucks, and I believed him. I ignored the other side of his 4-poster-bed and got him elected, where he has now forgotten every tiny bit of his conservatism and the American Drean he lives, etc. I am not sure I could get my hands to stop shaking to vote for Romney.
I couldn't vote for Mitt the flip-flopping Ken Doll even in the general. He is an artificial construct. Any one who is an experienced observer of people, listens carefully, and watches his body language when he cannot answer an unexpectedly tough question (like one about pro-life or gun control) can see that. I don't think he could fool Rush.
“David’s conclusions about Mitt are the same as my own, Mitt is electable.”
Mitt is unelectable because of the Mormon issue, it deletes 10% of his base off the top. Much less the flip flopping and liberal streak (with Romneycare in flames as we speak). Sorry to hurt your feelings.