Romney was unacceptable to many "conservatives" because a.) he was from Massachusetts and, worse, b.) he was a Morman.
Palin is unacceptable to many "conservatives" in 2012 because she is a.) uneducated and b.) a redneck.
Now, Jindal is unacceptable to many "conservatives" because he is a.) too callow and b.) not a good speaker.
Note that all of the objections fall into the category of either irrelevant or shallow and subjective. An odd phenomenon, don't you think, since conservatives are supposed to be all about substance!
I also note that many of the negative assessments come from screen-names that are relatively unfamiliar (though some are of long-standing) -- which suggests a concerted effort on the part of somebody to shoot down any GOP candidate whose head rises above the horizon.
Finally, in the interest of full disclosure, I note that a.) I supported Romney after Thompson withdrew and b.) I'm prepared to support either a Palin or Jindal in 2012 (or any other legitimate conservative candidate who might yet emerge).
But, my God, Palin has "it" -- the electricity that can rivet attention -- plus strong conservative credentials as a government executive. And Jindal has "substance" -- he clearly understands conservative philosophy and possesses the ability to articulate it -- plus strong conservative credentials as a government executive.
And there are FReepers who are prepared to totally discount both...even attack them?
Pardon me if I wonder whether the board is becoming infested with trolls and we are being manipulated by posters who do not have our conservative interests at heart...
Frankly, now would be a very good time for us to invoke Reagan's 11th Amendment -- thou shalt not speak ill of any Republican. If you've got a candidate for 2012, by all means, promote him (or her)! But don't undertake to do it by tearing down another candidate.
The Politics of Personal Destruction are, after all, a liberal device...
Amen to that. I see too many blatant operatives blending in here, using FR to trash the other candidates and spread falsehoods. I don't know if the 11th Amendment is the answer, but we should try to ferret out the obvious trolls.
Don’t know much about Jindal at this point, but my objection to Romney had nothing whatsoever to do with his religion. He was (is) a slimy two-faced politician who would do or say anything to get elected. He ran and governed as an abortionist socialist liberal. His convenient conversion to pro-life conservatism just in time to try to capture the Republican nomination for president is laughable. He’s a fraud. JMHO, of course.
I agree 100%. Any of Romney, Palin or Jindhal would be a far better President than Obama, and would be better candidate than McCain was. So why the shallow criticisms???? Trolls or the ever-present circular-firing squad type conservatives, who would rather destroy conservative unity than let someone who they have a nitpick disagreement on succeed.
Either way, the result is liberal Democrat triumph.