ROMNEY DEPARTURE SHOWED WAY FORWARD

boblonsberry.com ^ | 02/09/08 | Bob Lonsberry

[exit82]

Good graphic.

But isn’t over ‘til it’s over.

Check in with me in September.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>Check in with me in September.

September 2016, right! LOL

[GVnana]

I'd be perfectly happy to see Mitt as the VP choice. But this election is shaping-up as a contest for the middle -- not an ideological battle.

A Romney-Obama contest would be the ideological fight.

You're right, of course. Reagan selected Bush. But Reagan had a strong background of practical governance. He didn't need "shoring-up." He could afford to be magnanimous. But that's not always how these things go.

Ford did not select Reagan after the most narrowly divided convention of the 20th century. (If I recall the rumors correctly, Reagan would have declined.) Bush selected Cheney, who wasn't even on the radar screen.

In the respect of practical governance, Romney would be a logical choice as well, except, EXCEPT, he's already being hammered by certain segments on the right as a "flip-flopper". As I read the record, this charge is unjust. But additionally, it doesn't fit with McCain.

Romney's strength is his ideology, but this is not an ideological fight.

From what I've seen of this primary, the left is sick and tired of the fighting (that's what Obama's candidacy is all about). The right wants to stop Hillary Clinton and they're sending in the old war horse to do it.

Instead of miming a Democrat party patchwork coalition, McCain will choose someone who forwards his own agenda. It's the time-honored practice.

[GVnana]

This just in from Charles Krauthammer:

"In the absence of a compelling conservative, the Republican electorate turned to the apostate sheriff."

[K-oneTexas]

I like and agree with what you wrote. My thoughts say that picking someone that forwards his agenda, will not help his cause. Picking an unknown on the national radar-screen will not forward his acceptance by the people. Picking an 'old, been around awhile types' (past/present Senators, Newt, past/present State Governors) will not please all but regional folks. Picking Huckabee will alienate others and not balance the ticket. McCain is in a no win situation in much of what he does.

McCain should chose being magnanimous. That may well shore him up, helping his cause. That just might bring his goal well within his grasp. Romney is a plus on a McCain ticket ... the only one I can think of at the moment.

The Veeps will debate each other ... something in the back of my mind leans toward Hillary accepting anything/anyone to get he in the White House. She'd like his money and his fund raising ability too. Possibly Obama is a VP and at his age it could be the thing that propels him higher than ever in the eyes of Libs.

Maybe it's time to think out of the box.

[exit82]

“Voting for John McCain will certainly not preserve our nation. You will ensure its destruction. McCain is a leftist tool sponsored by Soros. You will not get conservative judges with McCain who sponsored Gang of Fourteen. You will not win the war on terror with a candidate dedicated to closing Gitmo, giving ACLU trials to terrorists, opposing waterboarding, and who accused our nation of torture in Iraq. You will not get a social conservative with a candidate who led the fight against the marriage amendment and who stated in 1999 that Roe v. Wade should not be overturned. You will not get capitalism with a candidate who is against drug companies and who sponsors global warming legislation. You will not get a strong economy with a candidate who admits he doesn’t know much about the economy. You will not get an IRS opponent with someone who voted twice against Bush’s tax cuts.
You might get a fiscal conservative. But, the Clintons have a better record than McCain on this issue. And, for all that, you still think we should support McCain? Sorry, I think we need to take the garbage out.”

Definitely worth repeating,MBB1984!

[b9]

Thanks for posting the full text.

Terrific speech.

[EternalVigilance]

Perfect.

[GVnana]

Picking Huckabee will alienate others and not balance the ticket. McCain is in a no win situation in much of what he does.

I agree on Huckabee. But I don't think McCain is in a "no win." It's easy to forget, on forums such as this, that 40% of the American electorate are basically independent voters. McCain has ALWAYS had huge appeal with this segment. I think it's going to come down to who offers the most in terms of practical governance.

When Hillary's plan for providing free health care to illegal immigrants at the expense of our pocketbooks comes under the spotlight -- she's going to have some "splainin' to do."

[Maneesh]

“yeah I know, it’s actually private but the government pays for it”

You are dead wrong and clueless. 93% of MA residents pay their own health insurance and can choose from an array of private companies. The 7% that are under the poverty limit are covered by medicaid.

His plan forces freeloaders to pay their own way and keeps their hands out of my back pocket when they show up at the ER. This is absolutely not socialized medicine and call it that is intellectual dishonesty.

[Swordfished]

Romney knows McCain will lose in a landslide, he’s positioning himself for 2012.

[b9]

When Hillary's plan for providing free health care to illegal immigrants at the expense of our pocketbooks comes under the spotlight -- she's going to have some "splainin' to do."

Not to mention garnishing wages!

[jonrick46]

You are right on about everything you say. I am thinking about the DemonRATS. I can see Hillary getting the nomination for President and taking Obama as her running mate. This would solidify the Black vote as well as keep the hispanics, who favor Hillary, on board.

If McCain were to reach out to Romney, early on, he would have a jump on the DemonRATS. The Party would be instantly healed by the Hand of God! Conservatives would be kissing the moderates and going forth. We would be pulling out of the gate will all fours stroking while the DemonRATs would be fighting over which hat they would wear.

Mitt Romney would be the ideal successor after McCain left office. By that time, all the kissing and going forth with the conservatives and moderates would turn our party into a force to be reckoned with. The DemonRATs would rue the day that they ran another Clintoon and danced to the tune of money from the far Left and our enemies.

[K-oneTexas]

Just my thoughts.

We continue arguing one side of this equation ... McCain. Lets look at some had data from the Primaries and Caucasus thru Super Tuesday which is almost 50% of the country. Granted some votes skip the Primary Season and only do the General Election and some don't do either. Also, I don't know the grand total of registered Repubs vs. the registered Dem or Independents and Others across the country. None the less I think maybe a fair representation of the country.

McCain got 4,867,159 votes or 37.84% of the grand total.
Romney got 4,139,460 votes or 32.19% of the grand total.
Hillary got 8,914,611 votes or 47.81% of the grand total .
Obama got 8,388,693 votes or 44.99% of the grand total.


Numbers wise for the Repubs it's over (McCain's 799 to Romney's 179 delegates). To draw it out would kill all chances of anything ever in a bitter, bitter battle that all will walk away from and turn on each other. All or nothing is not always the best option.

For the Dems and their contrived system ... well. But somehow the winner in November must have 51% or more of the all the votes nationwide to win. For me, I don't want the Dems and their total socialist platform from getting approved and then executed.

In looking at the data for the Dems it seems that there is a lot of folks not wanting Hillary. They are not thrilled with a 'Billary' return to the White House. Adding that to the Repubs that fell the same way well ... I guess any things possible.

For most, just my ramblings and musings that will not matter.

[definitelynotaliberal]

Thank you for the lavish praise ;-)