I am not worried (yet).
I liked Cain but he had serious shortcomings unrelated to any bimbo eruptions.
I also liked Bachmann, but again she fell short in certain key ways.
Ditto Perry. He is well-suited for the job he has.
Gingrich is still in, Santorum has risen, and Romney is still where he has always been which is rejected by 75% of the GOP primary electorate.
I’m not concerned by how much Gingrich and Santorum have been ripped on so far by whomever. It is nothing compared to what either of them will face from the left if nominated.
We have NH, SC, FL, and NV coming up in fairly rapid succession. Once these four states have voted, I expect at least one of Perry, Santorum, and Gingrich will be out and maybe two of them (but not all three).
At that point, just four short weeks away, we will have a much clearer idea of who the non-Romney option is for conservatives. We will not have destroyed all of our options.
The only way Romney wins the nomination is if two or more of Newt, Santorum, and Perry are still in the race and running neck-and-neck with one another come early March, and continue to do so going forward from that point, keeping them all below Mitt’s 25% base.
Also, for Romney to stay out front as the field narrows, those formerly supporting Michelle, Newt, or the two Ricks will have to flock to Mitt instead of to one of the others. This has not happened yet this year, it didn’t happen in 2008, and I don’t expect it ever will happen. We conservatives just don’t like Mitt.
My expectation is that Perry and Santorum will both fade over the rest of January, and Newt will rise back up some to become the clear non-Romney leader. Then, by Super Tuesday in March, the others will have dropped out and it will be Newt vs. Mitt for the GOP nod.
We conservatives will have nothing to be despondent over if this comes to pass.
Jim, we had this exact discussion four years ago about McCain. Is there any evidence, anywhere, that the will of conservative voters can subtract even a few percentage points from the choice of the GOP Money Men?
In the absence of a Reagan-like candidate who can appeal to both activist conservatives and the broader, politically disinterested Republican voting public I submit that we are always going to get the nominee the GOP insiders want.
Free Republic is all I need.
GO NEWT! I feel he is the best man to be President. He is not part of the status quo and that has the RINOs very worried. I agree it is Newt, Santorum or Perry. If Perry does not do well in South Caroline then it is Newt or Santorum. It is still very fluid out there and all you have to do is look at the national polls.
Supposedly, per FoxNews and some other news outlets, there is some secret group of conservatives who are meeting behind closed doors in some secret bunker somewhere in the world to determine who the conservative candidate to face Romney should be.
Now, who got invited to this big secret meeting I don’t know. I wasn’t. And it is so secret, no on else, except a few in the media, apparently know about it.
When are they going to announce a decision? That is a secret, too.
Who is in the group? That is a secret, too.
How many are in the group? That is a secret, too.
Are they going to let the rest of us in on their secret? That is a secret, too.
Perhaps it is time conservatives lead the way for all Americans and get over our collective obsessions with cults of personality and the Imperial Presidency.
Constitutionally, the President’s duties are fairly limited in scope and should provide an easy framework for the ideal candidate.
1. The President is Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces. You don’t put a supply clerk or the mess attendant in charge of the Normandy offensive, so why should we put someone with limited real-world military experience in the position to be “the most powerful man in the world”?
For a time there was a real dearth of talented, driven, men willing to trade their military careers for a life in the fishbowl of national politics. That, however, should no longer be the case. There are plenty of men, and women, who are now in their late forties who served honorably and well in the military of the 1990’s.
2. The President is America’s figurehead for meeting with foreign leaders. Foreign policy experience is an incredibly important qualification for a President. You cannot craft the modern version of the Monroe Doctrine if you cannot name the countries bordering Afghanistan.
3. Head of the executive Branch. In a conservative dream world, this job category would be far easier, since most of the Executive Branch would be pared down or eliminated. What would be left must be handled with the kind of people skills and management outlook that a military career teaches. A good understanding of Constitutional law should be considered a bonus, since so many Executive Branch activities are on the.. shady.. side of Constitutional precedent.
4. Finally, the ideal candidate has to have a working knowledge of the “powers that be”. He, or she, has to know the top judges in the country in case he needs to make an appointment to the Supreme Court. He, or she, has to know that Harry Reid plays brinksmanship like a bloodsport. He, or she, has to know the best “players” to advise him, or her, and the best “players” to ignore or out-right banish.
We do not need an economic guru. Economic policy is the responsibility of the Congress. We do not NEED an attractive, telegenic, superstar. There are far more “craptastically ugly” Presidents than there are “hunk” Presidents. Furthermore, superstars have super-egos that must be petted and feted on a daily basis - usually through involvement in issues and policies the President has no business being involved in.
As for social conservatism: keep in mind that the President does not write laws governing abortion, what is taught in our schools, freedom of expression, or the legalities of marriage. The writing of those laws falls to the Congress and the States. The President can appoint judges that share his, or her, outlook on social issues, but aren’t we, as conservatives, against the practice of law via judicial fiat? We should be content with the man, or woman, possessing the moral fortitude to know what is right and what is wrong and showing that through the actions of his, or her, life. The signing, and/or repudiation, of empty pledges as a litmus test of Presidential candidates is just one more bit of populist theatre that has no business in the serious business of electing one of the country’s leaders.
And that, right there, is my parting thought. “ONE of the country’s leaders”. The Presidential election garners far more attention and money, than that of the people who directly affect our lives: school board members, state officials, and Congressmen. That needs to end. THAT is the real change we need.
Ping
I think Iowa + New Hampshire + South Carolina is the key.
We should look at the average support of each of the top 3 conservatives ... Gingrich, Perry, and Santorum ... and pick the Free Republic Endorsed candidate based on the highest average.
Then we should go like gang-busters for that candidate in Florida and beyond.
Those 3 will give a feel for a balanced ability: Religious conservatives, traditional conservatives, fiscal conservatives, and independent and/or cross-over conservatives.
If Romney still prevails, then I’ll vote for the most conservative, alternate party candidate or do a write-in. I don’t want some recount committee looking at a blank space for president and deciding I really meant to do _____.
We now know that all of the attacks were orchestrated by Romney’s PACs, but I’m fearful their research was simply reading the pages of Free Republic.
Word to the people Jim. No go on Paul and Romney. Any of the others are tolerable to great.
I expect Perry and Huntsman to be out after SC. That leaves 4. Big trouble for Romney because Huntsman’s contingent isn’t going to boost him more than a percent. Paul will stagnate or fade. He was a fluke here in Iowa due to the nature of our politics in the GOP. That leaves Santorum and Gingrich to battle for the remaining 55-60% of the vote.
It could go to the end or we could have a brokered convention. I could see a Gingrich-Santorum ticket or vice versa and those two have already said they’d ally against Romney. We conservatives need to funnel it to that end to avoid the other two alternatives.
Same problem as last time around: one candidate unifying the left-leaning vote, while a slate of candidates split the right-leaning vote - leaving just the “centrist” standing.
McCain is the history to learn from. Learn quick, lest a repeat.
I didn’t want Romney at all, ever. But now that McSaine endorsed him, I want him even less. Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, Huntsman would be 10 times better than Romney and 100 times better than what we have in there now.
Lets concentrate on sending the Kenyan Kommie back to Illinois.
USP Marion, specifically.
Newt and Rick will beat each other up, and Mitten’s will get the nomination. Leading to another term for Obama.
I don’t just “want to win”...I want to win with a CONSERVATIVE AGENDA...a candidate that promises to dismantle the failed big goobermint policies of the past. We should have a STRONG CONSERVATIVE in the White House, not a big goobermint progressive.
The primaries are for supporting the MOST CONSERVATIVE candidates in order to eliminate the RINOs, progressive and LIEberal Republicans. If there ever was a need for a strong conservative, the time is certainly now so that the next generation has something left to share with future generations instead of a country in ruin after years of DUmmycrat rule.
Agree 100%. Including the part about not supporting or voting for Romney. I think 0bama would stomp Slick willard in the general. But, if Myth wins we’ll be in the same if not worse position than if 0bama had won. The House would go back to the dims in ‘14 and Romney would make Arnold’s 2nd term as gov look like the heyday of conservatism by comparison. I will not vote for Romney in the general.
I’m staying on the Gingrich wagon until the nom. is decided. In the end, though, I’ll vote for whomever wears an (R) on their chest, and hang my hopes on taking the Senate and keeping the House, in order to reign in a RINO(R)POTUS. If not, and we get 0 again, we’ll have another four more years to unwind and repair from when it’s all said and done, some years later.
This is my observation from what I read on this site on a daily basis.
The problem Conservatives have Jim is that we expect our nominees to live up to every standard of conservatism. We want them to be able to hold the moral, logical and philosophical high ground when debating with liberals. They should be brilliant with the ability to explain every minute detail of any policy with ease. Their policies should check down the entire line of everything a conservative believes in. Small government. Strong military. Pro life. Pro gun. Strong morals which they have lived by their entire life without waver. Knowledgeable about business. Willing and able to work within Washington to pare down the size of the massive State. etc.. etc...etc...
As soon as a tidbit of information which doesn’t follow that checklist comes to light, they are discounted, pilloried and destroyed.
The problem we have as Conservatives is that, on the whole, we do not accept that they all have flaws. We expect them to be perfect citizens, perfect conservatives, perfectly moral etc...but they are still human beings.
We need to accept their flaws and understand that 95% of the time people like Santorum, Cain, Palin, Bachmann, Perry will be on our side. Expecting 100% compliance is unreasonable, imo.
Kudos to you for speaking the common-sense truth:
“I’d suggest that we all stop trying to tear down the other conservative candidates in the race and instead concentrate on trying to build up our own personal favorites. Who knows? May even discover an acceptable conservative (if not a great conservative) in the bunch. We’ve never had a perfect conservative yet. Not even the magnificent Ronald Reagan. We and they all have warts.”
Thank-you for your commentary.
I can live with Perry, Newt or Santorum. I can’t get enthusiastic.....but any one of those three will get my vote.