Replies

I don't think there's any “convincing” you, because you're basing your judgment about Romney on his history. And that's not an illogical thing to do. My point, however, is that if you're going to go by history you would have had plenty of “ammo” to argue that Reagan really wasn't a true conservative when he ran for POTUS, either. And that's where I think you're just plain wrong.

You could have easily argued that Reagan was pro-union, pro-abortion, pro-welfare, and an advocate of the big government approach to every problem. Certainly, he invited such comments right up to when he was in his 60s.

I think Reagan would even agree that he was still evolving into the conservative Reagan we knew right up to that last year or two prior to his election.

Some might make a strong argument that in consideration of the amnesty bill he signed in the White House he never was a true conservative.

I don't think there's any “convincing” you, because you're basing your judgment about Romney on his history. And that's not an illogical thing to do.

You also don't have to convince me because at this point, anyone is better than Obama.

I only want you and the GOPe to see the risk in nominating Romney, which is that the MSM will have a field day with his religion. Fair or not, that's how it will be. If we're going with Romney, then we need to be ready to defend him against attacks we know are coming. If we can't defend him...

Agree or not, thanks for the civil discussion.