Romney vs Mitch Daniels in 2012? (Vanity Discussion)

Me | 07/03/09 | Me

[GOPGuide]

Sanford has committed sepuku on live TV.

Ensign has discovered what goes on in Vegas does not always stay in Vegas.

Palin is retiring from politics.

Haley Barbour is a former lobbyist who runs the poorest state in the Union.

Huckabee is a 5th stringer.

John Thune is running for Vice President and we have no idea whether General Petraeus is a conservative or not.

It looks like the only guy who can stop the Mitt Machine is Daniels.

If you don't like Daniels, then Romney is the nominee by default in 2012.

[JSDude1]

Then I guess he doesn’t understand our constitution, becuase if he did, he’d realize that it is the left (through the courts) which fight for liberal social policy. Have you (and he) forgotten THEY actually started the “cultural wars”, and pushed big government through the couts..(roe v. wade, etc..) not conservatives. If we went back to strict adherance to the Constitution “social issues” wouldn’t be as much an issue on the Federal level!

I for one will NEVER support anyone who is not 1) Smaller government oriented (both fiscally as well as personal liberty)-either libertarian or traditional conservative 2) Is not a Constitutionalist (committe to returning government to the original principles upon which we are founded), and fight government corruption, and 3) Is not “morally” traditionally socially conservative as well.

[ansel12]

Hard to be sure with all the polygamy in the family. In his direct line, I guess you are right. I see that his father George headed the Automotive Council for War Production during WW2, so he made a contribution. The brother of his great grandfather Miles Pratt Romney, also named George Romney, appears to have been in the Mormon militia, the Nauvoo Legion, which fought against the U.S. Army in the 1858 Utah War.

Thanks, I know all that, I would never have started posting the information a couple of years ago if I hadn't discovered it by looking into the family, his father worked in a civilian administrative role and then ran as the antiwar republican candidate during the Vietnam War while Mitt was living in France being sheltered from the draft by a Mormon assigned draft deferment.

The fact that no Romney man has ever served the United States in uniform and that includes since before the Civil War, tied in with modern Romney politics that we can trace, seems to reveal an anti-Americanism in the Romney family.

[MSF BU]

EVERYBODY recognizes that 30/40% of young men are unfit to serve for physical or other reasons. I’d don’t question Krauthammer, or Senator East or anybody else who were prohibited from joining. I do have contempt for folks who got deferment after deferment to avoid service; that includes everybody in that category, ESPECIALLY those who want to subsequently put themselves in leadership positions. The same goes for our able bodied young men of today who tune in to watch women there age deploy (many for the second and third times) into hazardous fire areas while they sit at home. I have nothing but contempt for them.

[MSF BU]

Good for you. Yes, a libertarian would never have tried to appoint Robert Bork to the USSC. He also would have never implemented the “We Ask, Don’t Join” policy for the military.

[HokieMom]

I think (and I may be wrong, but I have a lot of friends and relatives who know Bob McDonnell very well), that Bob McDonnell plans to be governor and then possibly run against Mark Warner in 2014.

I sure hope he wins in November.

[MSF BU]

This is sarcasm, correct?

[MSF BU]

I never called him a draft dodger, he is a hockey enthusiast I guess.

[ansel12]

What?

[MSF BU]

This doesn’t bode well for us because the population as a whole is becoming less observant.

[SaraJohnson]

They gave it to Dole and McCain, too.

[MadIsh32]

I personally am a so-con in my own life.

My approach to this issue electorally is essentially “I won’t bother you if you don’t bother me, but don’t expect me to accept nor like what you do”

Am I personally a moral social conservative? Yea, the way I live my life I am. But honestly, on my list of priorities, I don’t care if my neighbor is or not. Doesn’t mean I won’t disapprove

[nathanbedford]

Sorry, but no white male is going to beat O in 2012.Gingrich especially needs to stay away-O would destroy him.

Welcome to Free Republic, I am honored to be the recipient of your second post. There was no need to apologize for it

I fear you are right but Gingrich's chances are diminished not so much because he is white but because of his baggage. On the other hand, we have no one who could mount a bully pulpit and damn the Obama administration for its sins like Gingrich. He already has access to the cameras which no other Republican, including regrettably (or perhaps fortuitously) the chairman of the Republican National Committee, can equal as well as the power of speech to make his points.

The problem for Gingrich is a problem for all Republicans. I don't think we are even beginning to understand the forces that are arrayed against us. I think that the shadow party described by David Horowitz in his book of that name begins to glimpse the stranglehold which Soros and his few cronies have over our media, our institutions, and the Democrat party. We do not even have the weapons to begin counter battery fire.

It is terrifying to watch Obama pick off our industry leaders such as General Motors and General Electric one by one as he co-opts them to support his socialist takeover. This he does with a combination of intimidation and promises reminiscent of Adolf Hitler in 1933. All of this is shielded by a media hypnotized by its own visions of a new race renaissance in America and utterly incapable therefore of mustering critical oversight. The Soros operation controls so much money that it is doubtful that the Republicans will be able to compete realistically. The ground game has been won a long time ago by Acorn and the unions. The air war has been lost for a long time. War has really now move into cyberspace where the Republicans are so outclassed here that they do not even know what is coming at them.

Finally, there are the unmeasurable but very real cumulative effect of years of liberal education and liberal media. Add to this an equally irresistible tidal wave of immigration and the odds against the Republicans lengthen literally every passing day to the point where our chances can only be redeemed by Obama himself.

[MrEdd]

Palin 2012!

[MrEdd]

Sarah Palin has effectively just taken herself out of the running.

not in any way, shape or form.

Like Ross Perot in 1990, she has enough pull to run with or without the republican party. Their choice I suppose. Unlike Perot, she is a conservative ideologue. She wont be jumping in and out of the race as a spoiler.

If the Republicans want to try with one of the liberal Troika again in the face of her candidacy, fine. But the votes she siphons off are not votes they were somehow entitled too, and the whining they will do is going to be reflected strait back at them just as is being done now for pushing McStain, Romney, and Rooty.

Look at her history against heavy opposition (much of it from within the Republican party) in Alaska. This is a candidate that thrives on establishment opposition. She has chosen to give up state office to concentrate on the presidency now.

Good luck with trying to make her go away with words.

[bluecollarman]

My Vote:
Mitt 0
Anyone else 1

[MrEdd]

Of course Libertarianism as Reagan knew it - vanished under Ayn Rand’s communist makeover.

/old school libertarian.

[nathanbedford]

It is my view that Sarah Palin has concluded that her family must come first and she intends to withdraw from active politics in the sense of seeking higher office. I regret that. I think it is a grave loss to the whole country. I wish she had taken my advice gratuitously given well before the election that she spend this last, long, dark Alaska winter undergoing forensic training. If she were to run and could somehow miraculously overcome the strategic blunder, I would support her.

Please do not confuse an honest appraisal of the facts with some sort of endorsement of those facts.

I offer the following three posts, the last of which done I think before the election, so that you will understand my position:

I fully agree with Mark Steyn's take, in fact, it parallels my post which came out with the news:

It is the explanation that makes the most sense, her family has been so battered by this process, by the unmitigated venom of the Democrat attacks against her, that they are simply withdrawing into their Alaskan reality. They never lived by the Beltway reality. They are just going home.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2285287/posts?page=6#6

Your points are well considered but could it be that we have just witnessed Sarah Palin jump the shark moment? Please understand, I do not wish it so, quite the contrary, I dearly wish it were otherwise. I merely calls 'em as I sees 'em.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2285086/posts?page=97#97

Finally, so that you understand how I feel about Sarah Palin, I add this lengthy reply:

You know I have spent considerable time in Alaska and much of it in Wasilla. I can well understand how somebody with Sarah Palin's personality and energy could rise to become governor of that state by virtue of her merit. In Alaska, at least in the Wasilla area, everybody knows everybody else and you better be a standup guy. You can be as eccentric as an out- house rat, but you better be a straight shooter and you better not put on no airs.

These down-home virtues are what is needed but not what is prized in Washington. I believe Sarah Palin is up against two psychological forces which she must overcome.

The first is a phenomenon applied to all Republican candidates that I can remember since Eisenhower. I can remember being told quite earnestly that the man who commanded the biggest, most complicated, and most successful amphibious operation in history was really quite stupid. Every succeeding Republican president since Eisenhower (excepting Nixon who was evil) was stupid. This calumny is tried on against every Republican candidate who comes along. We saw what happened to Dan Quayle. Can you recall how stupid Ronald Reagan was? Bedtime for Bozo? George Bush Sr. was out of touch and stupid, although his wife was conceded to be house smart in a grandmotherly sort of way. We all know her son is a moron. Sarah Palin, like Dan Quayle, was left out there exposed, unprepared and unsupported and no one should be surprised that the result was the same. So when Palin drops her gs and says "aw shucks," that is all the Eastern establishment needed to hear to match up the person with the holes in the template.

Of course, President Kennedy was in near genius who sped read at an amazing clip. We found out later that this was a lie and that his Pulitzer prize-winning book was ghostwritten. We now know that he must have been in a thick drug-induced cloud for much of his tenure in the Oval Office. Do you remember being told how intuitive Bill Clinton was and how he could summarize an expert's presentation better than the expert? Al Gore was a genius who was too good for the schools he flunked out of. And Barak Obama, well one can only express astonishment that his coming was not announced by John the Baptist.

And this messianic allusion brings me to the main problem which Sarah Palin confronts in structuring her image. It is the Billy Budd effect. If you recall your Melville, you will know that Billy Budd was a figure of good whose very presence antagonized the first mate who persecuted Billy Budd unmercifully. The mate was driven to do this unconsciously because the mate was a figure of evil. The mate had his demons. So it is with the left in America today, they are driven to a visceral hatred of Sarah Palin because she is the 21st century figure of Billy Budd. Sarah Palin committed an unforgivable affront, she knowingly carried a Mongoloid to term. This cannot be forgiven. This is the ultimate reproach to the entire belief system of the left. Sarah Palin need not even open her mouth and she is hated with a cold and unremitting fury.

This is why I said that the left hates Sarah Palin not for what she says or how she appears on television but for who she is. The left must react as evil always reacts in the presence of good. Like the second mate, they must persecute Sarah Palin and they do not even know why.

But Sarah Palin ought to know why if she is going to be able to cope with a brick bats that will come her way. She must know that she can never charm these people. The more she tries the more they will hate her. She must focus on her target, the conservative base which she will keep so long as she is faithful and the independent middle which is persuadable if she can appear to be a normal and a wholesome person.

[calex59]

No more Romney or any other frickin’ RINO. If RINOs are all the GOP has then they will not be getting my vote for any of them. Palin is going to run in 2012, whether as a republican or some other party remains to be seen. I will vote for her, if she is not on the ticket and their is no equivalent candidate running, I will write in her name. The GOP is totally responsible for this type of thinking and I am not alone in the way I think. To blame the voter for voting for their beliefs is ridiculous. Run conservatives or lose the conservative base. The handwriting is on the wall for the GOP to see, they simply refuse to read it.

[calex59]

BS, the base will not vote for either of these RINO a**hats.

[Ol' Sparky]

The field now narrows to Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich

If that is the case, given Romney's abhorrent liberal record and history of flip-flopping, Newt is the man.

Romney is a disaster for the GOP as he does and always will divide the base. And, sane conservatives don't trust Willard.

But, there will be other candidates. Haley Barbour as well as Daniels being two.