All the conservative candidates are self destructing. From Perry's poor performances, Newt's attack on capitalism and support of global warming, Cain's obvious issues, Paul being a nut, and Santorum’s lack of charisma, - no one is left standing except Mitt.
Unless the others drop out and let Newt go head to head with Mitt, there is no serious challenge to Mitt. He is better organized, better disciplined and makes few errors. Actually, those should be pretty important to us.
He is also right that if you want Obamacare to be fully entrenched and 2 or 3 more Supreme Court Justices be appointed from the far left, stay home. Obama will waltz in. You will all prove what disciplined conservatives you are.
Second, by having everyone and his brother running for the non-Mitt position, we have solidified his position.
Your thoughts about Romney vs Obama seem to be rooted in the false premise that there's a substantial, or meaningful ideological difference between them.
Despite the conservative rhetoric emanating from Romney's flip-flopping lips, his governing record bears a striking resemblance to any liberal Democrat's. Even worse for the doomsday scenario you're projecting, Romney is the acknowledged father of ObamaCare, and his record of appointing judges to the bench is as liberal as it gets.
Unless the others drop out and let Newt go head to head with Mitt, there is no serious challenge to Mitt. He is better organized, better disciplined and makes few errors. Actually, those should be pretty important to us.What us? You do not speak for "us" at the point you begin to pimp shamelessly for a creep like Romney. Further: I don't care about Romney's alleged "discipline" and "organization," especially since the only achievement to date of Romney's "discipline" is RomneyCare with all its new rules, new taxes, its assumptions about the state supervision of private economic activity to support progressive goals, and its mandates, a program functionally identical to ObamaCare.