SUDDENLY, MANY WAYS FOR ROMNEY TO REACH 270 ELECTORAL VOTES

Big Government ^ | June 10, 2012 | by JOEL B. POLLAK

[SMGFan]

The Obama campaign wants to make the 2012 contest a “choice” between its candidate and the Republican party; the Romney campaign wants to make the vote a referendum on Barack Obama. Mitt Romney is laying low, letting the election revolve around Obama--and winning. While his campaign pushes back against Obama and the mainstream media, Romney is shaking hands on the trail--and winning support in key swing states.

At the outset, Romney’s path to victory seemed a narrow one. It was universally agreed that the 2012 contest would be fought in roughly ten swing states. But Obama’s weak economic performance, and Romney’s quietly effective campaign, has narrowed the field of play. It is now reasonable to imagine that Romney will win in North Carolina and Florida--two states that Obama won in 2008 and that he will likely lose this time around.

[ansel12]

Yes, I was impressed with Mitten’s debating style in 2008 as compared to McCain. So I posted here that he’d make mincemeat out of Obama back then.

I said that I didn't bother to go back to 2008 and 2007, I said that I only looked at you pushing Romney and attacking Palin, (and Reagan) in 2009 and 2010.

[pistolpackinpapa]

Well then, that does not leave too many choices. Got any suggestions? Jim DeMint (maybe)? Condoleeza Rice???? John Bolton? Man, I dunno.

[unkus]

You’re exactly right.

My God, can’t they see how utterly evil 0bama is?

[ansel12]

For five years Mitt Romney has been struggling to create the myth and historical revision that the conservative who he despised, Ronald Reagan, was “adamantly” pro-abortion.

Being a true romneybot, AlanGreenSpam has promoted Reagan as someone who used to be pro-abortion and then changed, just like his man, pro-abortion proselytizer, and Planned Parenthood supporter and fund raiser, Mitt Romney.

[mkjessup]

In the coming months, we will witness alleged conservatives twist themselves into unimaginable, nearly obscene shapes as they attempt to justify their support for the anti-Reagan, i.e., Mitt Romney, and as I have stated many times, while 0bama is a goddamned Communist pouring socialism down America's throat, Romney has shown no indication that he intends to do anything less, unless it is to serve up that socialist swill in fine, ornate crystal goblets befitting someone of his stature.

Here is what Romney would have to do to get me to even consider supporting him, which is to state, in unequivocal terms, that if elected President, he will defund and disassemble the following fascist entities operating with the authority of the U.S. Government,

- Department of Homeland Security/TSA

- Department of Education

- Department of Energy

Those departments are among the most useless and money wasting abominations ever seen from the federal behemoth in Washington. There is nothing the Department of Education can "teach" our children that our local schools cannot. There is nothing the Department of Energy can do that the private sector cannot.

And above all, in an alleged free society, there is absolutely no place for the jackboots, thugs and goons inhabiting the Department of Homeland Security, especially their BSD (Brown Shirt Division) aka the TSA.

When Romney shows any sign of recognizing the need to eliminate such offensive agencies, I might give him a second look.

Naturally, I'm not holding my breath for that. Romney is a big government statist, by his own admission he "likes" mandates, and that is why the imperial-federal empire in Washington will only continue to grow and expand it's infernal reach into our lives under a Romney Administration.

[samtheman]

So whatever happened to Virgil Goode? Last week’s flavor, eh?

Who will it be next week, Jeff Block? Lester Byerley? (And if not Lester, why not? And if not now, when?)

(Get 2 conservatives in a room for an evening’s discussion and before the sun goes down they’ll be divided into 3 factions.)

[mkjessup]

(Get 2 conservatives in a room for an evening’s discussion and before the sun goes down they’ll be divided into 3 factions.)

You'll never have to worry about being included in such a discussion.

[EDINVA]

I do have a few favs based only on the need for some federal govt experience. There’s always Newt, who knows the govt inside out, more than anyone I can think of. Not sure he has the temperament to be VPOTUS, and he does bring certain baggage (not to mention serious animosity w/Romney).

I’d most like to see John Kasich. He was Chmn of the Budget Committee when the R’s controlled the Congress in the mid-late 90s and achieved balanced budgets. He is now gov of a swing state. He’s media savvy, having had his own show at Fox between elective offices. He is attractive without being a glamor boy, more like boy next door, has a nice family, etc.

My reservation about both Rubio and West is that their sum total federal govt experience is from January 2011 to date. They need some seasoning. McDonnell has no fed govt experience and, let’s be frank, is ‘another white guy,’ without the offsetting federal experience one candidate on the national ticket has to have.

[okie01]

Therefore, I have to wonder if the same sort of “racial pride” might not influence a big percentage of Mexican-American voters. A useful impact wouldn’t even require an actual majority. So if for example Rubio could draw in something like 30 to 40% of the Mex-Am voters, then they might give the GOP the margin of victory in a few swing states like NM, NV and CO.

A Romney-Rubio ticket may well draw 30-40% of Mex-Am voters.

But it won't do it out of "racial pride". That's not the kind of thing that moves conservatively inclined Hispanic voters.

Please dissuade yourself of the notion that Hispanic voters are akin to black voters.

[pistolpackinpapa]

You make good points. Didn’t think about John Kasich. Hmmmmmmmm...... possibility. But, he really needs to finish the job in OH, like Scott Walker does in WI.

[MSF BU]

Because the demographics have changed and places like Illinois, California & New Jersey which were once in play politically are now sewers of immigration, illegal and legal.

[kevkrom]

Mr. RomneyCARE is “laying low” because he is a coward AND has no arguments.

Romney, for his massive collection of faults, is a very savvy politician. He's making the election a referendum on Obama for the very reasons you cite, plus, he's adhering to the adage of staying out of the way when your enemy is destroying himself.

The flip side of this savvy, however, is that all of the people saying, "we'll just primary him in 2016" are out of their minds. When was the last time a sitting President was even seriously tested in a primary, let alone losing one? Romney's organization makes him less likely, not more likely, to laugh off a primary challenge.

No, if Romney does win, you need to start planning for 2020, not 2016.