Posted on 01/25/2012 11:58:12 AM PST by Kaslin
Apparently there is no one in the GOP who is willing to run for president and who would be a candidate everyone would like, if not love.
Mitch’s wife didn’t want him to run. Haven’t heard why, but I understand that’s the reason.
I’m seeing a lot of buyer’s remorse here on Free Republic now that we’ve decided to go with Newt.
It’s ironic and mildly satisfying to me, as I supported Rick Perry, who—out of all the original candidates— was the only one with true credentials to run for president.
He was destroyed with hate here on Free Republic and wasn’t warmly received by the general public, probably because he was a Texan and people related him to Bush. He’s much more conservative than Bush.
But when he dropped out and endorsed Gingrich, I moved over to Gingrich. He has a lot of faults but also a lot of virtues.
When you consider the field we started with:
Cain - a nasty man with no record to run on except being a nice man which he turned out not to be. A joke as a candidate.
Bachmann - a lovely lady who self-destructed in hysteria over Gardisal.
Rick Santorum - a loser who was looking for work after an inglorious defeat for senator. Hadn’t done much since so president seemed like a good idea.
Mitch Romney - good businessman who decided he’d like to run the country. conceived the idea of government run healthcare.
Ron Paul - nothing needs to be said. He didn’t run to win, but just to get his ideas out there.
Rick Perry - perfect candidate that nobody wanted.
And so, we’re left with Newt.
Deal with it everybody.
Cute. Even clever.
Of course, Rush, the Response is getting more attention than the SOTU address.....by that one-third of the Republicans who are said to want Newt derailed and to cut Romney loose and impose Daniels the Other Equally Moderate.
Not true. He was a part of the problem as a member of the U.S. Senate, especially as part of the majority from 2006-2008. That is where our problems truly began, although they existed before this, too.
I see your list. My condolences on Perry for you.
I think I would still rather have Cain over either Gingrich or Romney. I am shaken by his apparent character flaw. I feel fooled a little bit. But still think he would be grounded in some honest values.
I am happy his wife allowed him to speak. I guess. Whatever.
No. Rush is a staunch conservative. He’s very far from being a rino.
Call him a rino if you want because he isn’t going all out for your candidate.
There are a couple or three reasons for this. One, there are things about Newt that are unsettling. Let’s just admit it.
Two, and more important, Rush and Mark Davis have a deathly fear of Newt doing something to self destruct and give Obama the presidency.
We all know he’s capable of doing just that. Let’s pray he doesn’t.
Was that Mitch Daniels? I thought is was Tim Pawlenty or maybe Evan Bye. I get the milk toast “moderates” all mixed up.
As the song goes “It’s better to burn out than fade away” I support NEWT purely because he is the only one willing to oratorically tear Obama limb from limb.
Daniels wife divorced or left him leaving the children with him for two years before they were reunited. She quashed his nomination run and he obliged. (I believe this is close, as I would have to be refreshed also on the details of the story.)
I was being facetious, I agree with Rush and mucof what you just wrote btw.
“I agree with Rush.
There was steel in his speech. It was well constructed and communicated the real need to begin to reunite the country and reject class envy.”
Huh? I thought RUSH believed in defeating the enemy not “uniting the country” (i.e. compromise)
Nice try establishment but there aint gonna be a draft mitch movement anytime soon
thanks. My condolences to the country for making the mistake of rejecting him.
And my condolences to you for putting your trust in somebody who betrayed it.
“Rush is off his game here trying to play both ends against the middle.”
Rush is hedging bets or doing prep work.
Immediately after Gingrich gutted Romney in SC, the muttering begins about a brokered convention and Mitch Daniels being that brokered candidate. The GOP nomenklatura had better check with Mrs. Daniels to see if she will allow Mitch to come outside and play.
The media cannot unmake Rush. His audience can. He may no longer care.
I won’t argue what kind of a president Daniels would make. I’m honestly not sure. Indiana is a conservative state. He has a large majority of conservative legislature and Hoosier citizens in general. It’s not that hard to do the right thing if you are a real conservative in IN.
That said, he is a man whose actions are more impressive than his words. For instance, last year, he did not want to press the Right to Work issue first. Well, it did get pressed. This year, true to his promise, Katie bar the door.
He is unassuming, has a great conservative track record in IN but is lacking any carisma, fire and brimstone that might inspire.
I might support Daniels over Gingrich or Romney given the choice.
Daniels was flaccid and insipid.Herman Cain should have given the GOP reply !
I'm glad he gave the TEA PARTY reply !
"There is a second item on our national must-do list: we must unite to save the safety net. Medicare and Social Security have served us well, and that must continue. But after half and three quarters of a century respectively, it's not surprising that they need some repairs. We can preserve them unchanged and untouched for those now in or near retirement, but we must fashion a new, affordable safety net so future Americans are protected, too.
"Decades ago, for instance, we could afford to send millionaires pension checks and pay medical bills for even the wealthiest among us. Now, we can't, so the dollars we have should be devoted to those who need them most.
"The mortal enemies of Social Security and Medicare are those who, in contempt of the plain arithmetic, continue to mislead Americans that we should change nothing. Listening to them much longer will mean that these proud programs implode, and take the American economy with them. It will mean that coming generations are denied the jobs they need in their youth and the protection they deserve in their later years.
THIS IS UNMASKED UNRESTRAINED CALL TO TURN SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE INTO A REDISTRIBUTIONIST PROGRESSIVE TAX REGIME. THIS IS PURE SOCIALISM.
And Gov Daniels, Rush Limbaugh, dozens of other blowhard pundits, and hundreds of freepers have openly applauded this stance.
I do not understand how FR's community has fallen so far from the fundamental values of traditional conservative political thought. Turning the UK equivalent of Social Security into a Progressive redistributionist scheme was a step too far for even the hardened Socialists of new Labour during the Blair/Brown/Cook/Milliband eras.
Can anyone chime in on this?
Agreed.
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.