Oh yes, I do indeed.
For one thing, it is inconceivable that Romney thought that he, as president, could "rule alone." For another, there is nothing in his personal background to suggest that he was an implacable, full-bore enemy of the U.S. Constitution.
To me, Romney was most definitely "the lesser of two weevils" in the last presidential go-round.
Now, we live with the consequences of that national vote....
Wise up, dear friend. Sometimes, "we don't always get what we want"; but we have to do the best we can with what we are given.
I agree with that sentiment. I did vote for Romney despite my misgivings which I could detail some other time.
I hear your point that we need to rally around, not a perfect candidate, but a decent one in order to save the republic.
There is no perfect; if you can find decent combined with courage you should back that man with everything you have.
But I will repeat what I have said elsewhere at least a couple of times. If GOP chooses to run an open-borders candidate they will break this party.
They believe that enough conservatives will make the "lesser of evil" calculation, that conservatives have nowhere else to go and will be on board. Many will, many will not and it will split this party. Your point may be that, if conservatives care about this country they should unite with the so-called moderates behind their moderate candidate.
I say the opposite; if the moderates care about this country they had better rally around a constitutionalist candidate. They had better stand loyal to their supposed convictions for at least once in their moderate lives. If they insist on anything else they will break this party. If they abandon their supposed convictions yet again its a dark road ahead as far as the eye can see.