Posted on 07/25/2009 12:52:30 PM PDT by DB9
By Joshua Livestro
You all probably remember my good friend Michael van der Galien. He's the guy who wrote an 'ironic' post about the star qualities of Gov. Palin which led to a little back and forth between C4P and his site, Poligazette.
In all seriousness, Michael actually is a good friend of mine. He may be wrong about one big thing (i.e. his blind, uncritical support for the Mittrosexual Man), but he is right about a lot of other things. If I'd have to pick a man to stand next to me in the trenches to defend life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness against the socialist hordes of Obama & Co, Michael would probably be that man. But even the best of friends can have the odd argument, and well, he's asking for one with his latest post.
Unable - or is it unwilling? - to see the WaPo poll for what it is, namely a politically motivated push poll cut out of whole cloth for the purpose of 'phraming' Palin's farewell speech as Governor this coming Sunday as being merely another step on the inevitable road to oblivion, Michael decides to act as if the poll contains actually relevant pieces of data. I mean come on Michael, you're a serious citizen journalist. A poll that oversamples Democrats vs. Republicans by a good four or five percent (33D 22R), and that doesn't even use registered voters, let alone the infinitely more reliable category of likely voters, is not a serious poll and doesn't deserve to be treated like one. You know this as well as I do (as does your friend AP, whose anti-Palin hackery is getting beyond the stage of deeply tiresome), and still you decide to write about this poll as if it is divinely inspired. What possible motive could you have for this, apart from trying to promote the cause of your candidate by trying to damage that of one of his main contenders?
Well, two can play that game, Michael. In fact, I'll have a lot more to work with than you do. I'm not referring to the many serious objections to Romney's candidacy (his disastrous healthcare reform project in Massachusetts, his anti-Reagan statements in the early nineties, his flipflopping on a key issue like abortion) or the non-serious ones, like the fact that he's boring (as in: 50 people, Michael. 50. And half of them were probably on Romney's payroll. Then again, boring men sometimes do end up winning their party's nomination. They always lose in the end, but that's another matter), or the fact that he's a Mormon (who cares - apart from Mike Huckabee, that is?).
No, I'll limit myself to the most serious, and potentially most deadly, objection to Romney, which is that his own party's voters simply don't dig the man. Just look at the data from this poll by Democratic pollsters PPP (before you ask: it's a registered voters survey, with party ID 42D, 35R, 23I - a reliable survey basically, unlike the one you used for your post). The figures make pretty devastating reading for Romney-fans. Among all Republican voters, Romney is 12 points behind Huckabee, 22 points behind Palin. Among conservative Republicans (75 percent of the electorate in the GOP primaries), the gap with Palin is even wider: 23 percent (81-58). Oh and before you get your hopes up about Romney somehow making up this astronomical difference through his support among moderate Republican voters: forget it. Even among what should be his core constituency, Romney trails Huckabee by 8 percent and Palin by a whopping 19 percent.
Face it Michael: Romney's toast. He's a flipflopper, a fake, a phony, a guy who can't even decide which state he's supposed to be from (is it Michigan? Utah? Massachusetts? You tell me). People smell his fakery a hundred miles away, and they avoid it like the plague. That's the reason only 50 people showed up at that campaign event in New Jersey, that's why he finished third in the weakest presidential field the GOP had produced in the past hundred years or so. And that's why he's trailing the other main contenders for the 2012 nomination by at least ten percent - even among his supposed core constituency of moderates.
Three years is plenty of time to take away any lingering doubts voters may have about Palin's fitness for the presidency. But all the time in the world won't be enought to convince conservative Republican voters that Romney is really one of them. Because deep down inside, he simply isn't.
Now Michael, if you want more of this, all I can say is: bring it on. But I suggest you use the rest of this weekend to ponder the deeper meaning of Reagan's 11th Commandment. There is a war on for the soul of the American project, with an ultraliberal in the White House who is determined to change his country into a European-style social democracy, but for some reason moderate Republicans like yourself are more interested in fighting Gov. Palin. It reminds me of that old Churchill anecdote when a young backbench MP approached the great old man, pointed at the Labour benches and asked him what he thought of 'the enemy'. "The enemy?", he answered. "My boy, that is the opposition. The enemy is seated behind me."
Bronkie, take a deep breath and stop typing with your fists. You Slick Willardbots have such anger and hate.
Purge the Romneybots.
From what I have read in the past, that seems to be your specialty.
He outspent everyone 2-1 at least here in the 08 primary. He won, but could not break 50% despite some assistance from McCain's comments on the auto industry which sunk him here.
I was up at the big Republican event back in 07 up on Mackinac Island. Most of the presidential candidates were there, and I got to hear Mitt speak. What did he spend most of his time on? Gay marriage. Why? Because he wanted to say "I'm conservative too." There was not much talk on the economy. I was not convinced on his "conversion" with the abortion issue. He was pandering and untrustworthy on the gun issue. Give me something to work with, Mitt. He lost any chance of my vote at the conference. Too bad Fred Thompson was not a good speaker. He could have been the winner following Romney.
08 was Mitt's time, but he could not win despite the money, the network, and the orginization. People simply did not trust him. He was too slick and changed his mind on too many issues. That does not even go to his health care plan.
We need a fresh face in 2012, preferably not someone who ran in 08.
How many Republican governors are there? Barbour? Daniels? Pawlenty? (not as conservative as I'd like, but he won Minnesota twice). Huntsman (not as conservative as I'd like, but thrown out for argument's sake.)
Romney couldn't even beat McCain.
Oh, Bronkie, projecting again with your blinding liberal hate as usual. You could stay a lot calmer sticking to your Wankers for Willard website instead of coming over to a Conservative website and insulting your betters. :-)
How many stayed home when Bob Dole was the nominee and wasn't even good enough for the NRA endorsement against Clinton of all people?
Don't count on the conservative voting just against someone. We need someone to work with. It's not THAT hard if Bush was able to get the conservative vote in 04.
I gave some thought to Huntsman. He seemed to be like another Romney without past Romney Care support. however, Obama gave Huntsman an ambassadorship to China. Anyone willing to work for Obama is crossed out in my book. Romney will be a contender for 2012. The RNC will support Romney if he is willing to self-finance again. The RNC folks love self-financers, because they won’t be as pressured to fund raise.
I gave some thought to Huntsman. He seemed to be like another Romney without past Romney Care support. however, Obama gave Huntsman an ambassadorship to China. Anyone willing to work for Obama is crossed out in my book. Romney will be a contender for 2012. The RNC will support Romney if he is willing to self-finance again. The RNC folks love self-financers, because they won’t be as pressured to fund raise.
Couldn't agree more.
In 2008 Romney (and Huckabee and Giuliani and Thompson) all had their opportunity, running against John McCain -- a candidate who regularly abandoned the party in the Senate and majored in insulting the party's base.
If Mitt (and the others) could not beat the weakest GOP nominee for the Presidency since Thomas Dewey, why would we expect them to defeat the Democrat nominee?
We don't need any of the second-rate 2008 primary crop muddying the 2012 waters.
Self Financers start with one strike in my book. They don't win. Too many independent populists hate rich people, a lot of them being social conservatives. They "don't care about the little guy."
Who???
Certainly you don't mean Sarah Palin? I don't think she's going to run again - for anything. Why would she leave her governorship?
The answer was, who do you think that conservatives are all excited about. Do you know or are we playing a child’s game where we have to indulge your little game playing?
That and the fact that you registered here to promote Mitt Romney.
Here is your 20th post at FR, 18 of the previous 19 were Romney posts as was your very first one and most of those that followed. You didn't even like FR but you had to join to defend Romney.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007 11:12:14 PM · 120 of 129 broncobilly to ansel12
So you dont think much of freerepublic, but you signed up 16 days ago to push a fellow Mormon, we have been seeing a lot of that lately
First you say you want to stop wasting time. And now you want to start an accusation and guessing game.
” Who???
Certainly you don’t mean Sarah Palin? I don’t think she’s going to run again - for anything. Why would she leave her governorship?”
Is this your serious analysis?
Nobody asked me for a serious analysis. I’m just briefly commenting. It’s late here, and I should be in bed.
I'm not game playing. Give me a break, it's late here.
Me too. Didn’t know if you were being facetious, since she seems so likely to be the conservative standard bearer—and to have had ample reason to step down from the governorship.
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.