As Romney nears nod, GOP base nods off; Enthusiasm saved for Obama ouster

The Washington Times ^ | 4/1/2012 | Seth McLaughlin

[darrellmaurina]

Pledges of support from powerful Republicans last week may have edged Mitt Romney closer to the GOP presidential nomination, but the former Massachusetts governor still struggles to fire the imaginations of most in his party — even the coveted endorsements from former President George H.W. Bush and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida seemed underwhelming in tone. Mr. Rubio and Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, who also endorsed Mr. Romney last week, focused less on his qualifications for the presidency than on the vulnerabilities of President Obama. “[Mr. Romney‘s] challenge, assuming he gets the nomination, is to create more enthusiasm among the Republican base,” said Frank M. Newport of Gallup. “Obviously, he needs a Herman Cain injection of charisma.” ... “The bad news is, when you mention [Romney‘s] name they go, ‘eh,’” he said. In a poll last month, Gallup found that 35 percent of Republican voters are “enthusiastic” about Mr. Romney’s candidacy, while 19 percent said they would either vote for Mr. Obama or sit on their hands come Election Day. While former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia fared worse in the survey, the same poll four years ago found that a larger pool of Republicans, 47 percent, were “enthusiastic” about the presidential bid of Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

[darrellmaurina]

I virtually never identify something as "front page news" but I believe this warrants the designation. Buried in the story is the amazing info that all three of the remaining Republican candidates fare **WORSE** than John McCain did four years ago on the percentage who considered themselves "enthusiastic" supporters.

If this polling data is correct, we have a horrible problem, and it's one which nomination of Mitt Romney is likely to make even worse.

[darrellmaurina]

Lazlo/Antoninus, please consider pinging to the Santorum list. I believe this is useful information that all three of the remaining Republican candidates fare **WORSE** than John McCain did four years ago on the percentage who considered themselves “enthusiastic” supporters. Obviously that's not great news for Santorum or Gingrich supporters, but it does show how bad things are for Romney.

[Cicero]

Well, no numbers are given, but I presume that Santorum and Gingrich do worse than McCain at this point last year because they are still splitting the vote—and so is Ron Paul. There are really no credible details at all, other than that number for McCain last year.

[EternalVigilance]

Support a FReeper for President

[BaldJohn]

The only reason I voted for McCain was because of Sarah Palin.

[IrishBrigade]

The only reason I voted for McCain was because of Sarah Palin...

...otherwise, you’d have voted for Obama, apparently...

[Diogenesis]

Many people ONLY voted GOP because of Gov. Palin,
and more WOULD HAVE, were it not for Milt Romney.

FLASHBACK:

The McCain/Palin ticket was up ++4 to 10 pts
in some polls, days prior to Election 2008.
So rather than helping the GOP, Romney and
TeamROMNEY and the RNME (Republican National Media Establishment)
decided …to attack Gov. Palin to throw Election2008.

Romney, and the Van der Sloot RNME RINOs for Obama in 2008

Late in October, The American Spectator's The Prowler revealed:
"Former Mitt Romney presidential campaign staffers…
have been involved in spreading anti-Palin spin to reporters, seeking to diminish her standing after the election.
'Sarah Palin is a lightweight, she won't be the first, not even the third, person people will think of when it comes to 2012,'
says one former Romney aide…
'The only serious candidate ready to challenge to lead the Republican Party is Mitt Romney.
"Some former Romney aides were behind the recent leaks to media, including CNN, that Governor Sarah Palin was a 'diva' and was going off message intentionally."

---

The Palmetto Scoop reported: "One of the first stories to hit the national airwaves was
the claim of a major internal strife between close McCain aides and the folks handling his running mate Sarah Palin."
"I’m told by very good sources that this was indeed the case and that a rift had developed, but it was between Palin’s people and the staffers brought on from the failed presidential campaign of former Gov. Mitt Romney, not McCain aides."
"The sources said nearly 80 percent of Romney’s former staff was absorbed by McCain and these individuals were responsible for what amounts to a premeditated, last-minute sabotage of Palin."
… aides loyal to Romney inside the McCain campaign, said The Scoop, reportedly saw
that Palin would be a serious contender for the Republican nomination in 2012 or 2016, which made her a threat to another presidential quest by Romney.

---

"These staffers are now out trying to finish her off ….hoping it would ingratiate themselves with Mitt Romney."

---

"Who's the Palin Leaker from the McCain Campaign?
National Review Online The publication of a Vanity Fair profile of Sarah Palin
appears to have opened old wounds in the McCain campaign.
... the source of the “Diva” leak was Nicolle Wallace’s husband."

---

"Peeking Out From the McCain Wreckage: Mitt Romney"

"Someone's got to say it: IS MITT ROMNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMA'S VICTORY?"

"Vanity: Team Romney Sabotaged Palin and Continuing to Do So?"

"Romney Supporters Trashing Palin"

"Romney advisors sniping at Palin?"

---

[BfloGuy]

...otherwise, you’d have voted for Obama, apparently...

And a lot are making noises like they'll do it again if Romney is the nominee. They're contenting themselves that a GOP House and Senate will be an effective counterfoil, but it's not enough.

If Obama's re-elected because of Republican apathy, he will get to name a couple SCOTUS judges, his EPA will continue to shut down our energy production, Holder will still be at Justice, the disastrous Panetta will run the military, and countless thousands of faceless Obama-appointed bureaucrats will be doing their damage in small ways every day.

[Carry_Okie]

Enthusiasm saved for Obama ouster

Is that what it is? Could'a fooled me.

[Windflier]

"As Romney nears nod, GOP base nods off..."

I don't think it's so much a case of 'nodding off', as it is a case of throwing up our hands in disgust, and disengaging from the process.

We know that we've been had yet again by the elites, and this is our initial reaction. There may yet be others.

[Windflier]

If Obama's re-elected because of Republican apathy, he will get to name a couple SCOTUS judges, his EPA will continue to shut down our energy production, Holder will still be at Justice, the disastrous Panetta will run the military, and countless thousands of faceless Obama-appointed bureaucrats will be doing their damage in small ways every day.

Don't tell me that you honestly believe that Willard is going do anything substantially different than Obama has. If you honestly do believe that, then you haven't read his record.

I wouldn't vote for Obama with your hand, but I won't give my precious vote to Willard Romney, either. I refuse to give up my last shred of self integrity by willingly choosing to vote for a man who is nothing more than a liberal Democrat posing as a Republican.

Put your thinking cap on, man. We're going to have a Republican dominated Congress, no matter what happens in the presidential election. If Obama is re-elected, the Congress will oppose him tooth and nail. If Romney is elected, they're much more likely to 'go along to get along' with the de facto leader of their party. That means signing off on damn near every quisling liberal thing he wants.

I know it's a raw deal all around, but we've got to look at this with logic and reason. I still have hope that somehow Newt will pull off a miracle in a brokered convention, but that's just a slim hope at best. If he can't, the above calculus is what we have to face, and it ain't pretty.

I know. It makes me want to scream too.

[Sirius Lee]

Nobody trusts a lying backstabber like Mittes. If the GOPe chooses Obamney then it's Constitution party for real Conservatives.

McStain was the RINO that broke the camel's back.

[BfloGuy]

Put your thinking cap on, man. We're going to have a Republican dominated Congress, no matter what happens in the presidential election. If Obama is re-elected, the Congress will oppose him tooth and nail.

Are you seriously trying to convince me that I shouldn't vote for Romney instead of sitting home? Put your thinking cap on, man. If you bothered to read my post, I explained all the things a president Obama could accomplish even with a Republican congress -- namely the cabinet departments and the bureaucracy.

And I do not, for a moment, buy your opinion that there is no difference between Romney and Obama. There is. Romney doesn't hate his country. He may be too liberal for our tastes, but he doesn't hate the United States.

It's a sad reason, perhaps, to vote for him. But it's enough.

[Cato in PA]

The problem is that all of these candidate are terrible and need to be swept under the carpet at a contested convention. That won’t happen, unfortunately.

Romney is John Kerry with less spray tan.

Santorum is weak aside from abortion.

Newt has baggage that people apparently aren’t willing to let go of.

Paul is a kook.

If Romney gets the nomination, all bets are off. The GOP’s usual scare tactics and paid endorsements won’t help Romney overcome the enthusiasm gap any more than they did for McCain in ‘08.

But if it’s someone else, there’s still hope. It will be up to people like us, because the establishment is completely clueless about what appeals to people.

[DaxtonBrown]

[If this polling data is correct, we have a horrible problem,]

What you mean we, Quimosabi?
Some of us have been fighting Romney tooth and nail for six years, the GOPe reaps what it sows. And we haven’t even gotten to the ‘crazy Mormon’ stuff, which Republicans were too delicate to address but are ball breakers.
ike Mary being baptised. “What do you think of that, Mr. President?”

[Windflier]

I do not, for a moment, buy your opinion that there is no difference between Romney and Obama. There is. Romney doesn't hate his country. He may be too liberal for our tastes, but he doesn't hate the United States.

That's alright. We're still free to disagree about known pandering, elitist, liberal Republican quislings :-)

Actually, Freeper Verginius Rufus just pointed out the first sound reasoning I've seen for giving ones vote to Romney.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2867134/posts?page=150#150

It's pretty convincing, and I'm sure you'll agree with it.

[WOSG]

“all three of the remaining Republican candidates fare **WORSE** than John McCain did four years ago on the percentage who considered themselves “enthusiastic” supporters.”

This is odd, because John McCain was a horrible candidate, worse than Newt would be, Santorum would be, or even Romney would be.

I can only conclude that GOP stalwarts like veterans a lot, even when they are RINOs.

Certainly we should be more motivated and energized to stop Obama than in 2008.

[darrellmaurina]

Valid question, Daxton.

By “we,” I mean Republicans.

I live in the South and I am very much aware that there are still a few conservative Democrats left, but realistically, at this point, being consistently conservative at the national level means being Republican. While there are small numbers of conservatives in various third-party groups, I will consider third parties as a viable option when they show some significant success at getting candidates elected to local, state and national office.

Unfortunately, while conservatives have little choice today except to be Republicans because there is no viable alternative on the national level, the reverse is not true. Being Republican is no guarantee of being a consistent conservative on all three pillars of the conservative agenda — economic, social issues, and national defense — or even being a conservative on **ANY** of those three issues.

If the underlying question is whether I support Romney, the answer is absolutely not. I've had a problem with John McCain since the 2000 elections when he deliberately antagonized Christian conservatives, and I voted for Huckabee in the 2008 Missouri race because by that time my only choices were McCain, Romney or Huckabee. I had initially been willing to consider Romney but became strongly opposed to Romney later on when Free Republic woke me up to just how bad his flip-flopping really was, especially on abortion which is a no-go issue for me.

[LomanBill]

"The [my] only connection [to the Republican Party]is I'm registered as a Republican"

--Mitt RRRRRomney

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNbXdOCQQMs

[darrellmaurina]

12 posted on Mon Apr 02 2012 18:02:28 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by Sirius Lee: “Nobody trusts a lying backstabber like Mittes. If the GOPe chooses Obamney then it's Constitution party for real Conservatives. McStain was the RINO that broke the camel's back.”

I'm not interested in running a crusade against the Constitution Party for three reasons:

First, I'm extremely unhappy with the direction the Republican Party seems to be going,

Second, I'm a conservative Christian and I have strong sympathy for the core convictions of many of the Constitution Party's leaders, and

Third, I'm quite aware of the precedent of the Whig Party and I don't want to totally rule out the possibility of a third party destroying one of the two existing parties of American politics.

However, for those who are prepared to jump ship and vote not only against Romney but also against the whole Republican ticket, read these two posts and then take a second and third look at what you're doing: http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/2865260/posts?page=162#162
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/2867079/posts?page=44#44

Counting the cost before starting a project is a biblical imperative.

As I said in the post referenced above: “Here's the main problem with applying that precedent to the Constitution Party: single-member winner-take-all voting districts... The problem in the United States is that in most state and local elections (West Virginia's multimember districts being an important exception) the only thing that counts is having enough votes to get to 50 percent of the voters, or in some cases not even an absolute majority is needed and all a candidate needs is to get the largest number of votes... If we as conservatives are going to talk third-party, recognize that we need to count the cost. That cost is very steep, and while some argue it could be a good idea long-term, for the short- and medium-term, it could easily get President Obama re-elected, turn the House of Representatives back over to the control of the Democratic Party, and cost numerous Republican senators their seats.”