Posted on 02/20/2018 5:02:05 AM PST by C19fan
Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in Washington,” he says in announcing his Senate campaign. Maybe.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
He’s a MINO, Mormon in name only. I live in Utah, he’ll be elected by acclamation, what a joke! Believe it or not there are some very sharp people here who would be excellent Senators. He’s not one of them. Oh well, “Hillary II.” Idiot probably thinks this will catapult him into the White House. Yech!
Trump has just endorsed another John McCain, Lyndsey Graham & McConnell clone....
The President has done a terrible job of surrounding himself with staffing and his senatorial endorsements..!
I suspect Romney is already after Mitch’s job and then another run for POTUS.
You sound just like McConnell
Romney is a Satanist and cannot be trusted.
Remember his pathetic “campaign” against Obozzo ? He is a globalist loser
“Electability” is an establishment term intended to keep out candidates who will actually keep their oath of office. It is a self-fulfilling thing when the same establishment attacks candidates chosen by the base.
Did you vote for Hillary? Lots of your buds did.
The author is far too nice. If Romney is the epitome of Utah conservatism we are in big trouble. Romney is about Romney. He was given a chance at leadership and couldn’t carry the ball all the way to the end zone. Less nicely put, he is a loser.
Could you perhaps explain the benefits of nominating a candidate who is then destined to lose the general election?
BTW, accusing of voting for The Hildabeast? You must be kidding. In addition to voting for President Trump, both Mrs. Strac and I maxed out in both the primary and and the general.
But, I digress. Please explain the benefits of nominating losing candidates.
I agree. Can’t stand Romney.
I’m not a Romney fan, but remember, he will be a shoo-in in the general election, and 95% of votes in the Senate are party line votes.... that any Dem elected would vote against us on.
Do I wish for a more conservative electable candidate than Mitt Romney in Utah?
Absolutely!
But do I want Romney over any possible Dem?
Also absolutely!
If he's the nominee you can be sure that his Rat opponent will be chanting exactly that 24/7.
By the way, the concept of ensuring we nominate the most conservative candidate, disregarding their electability, is why Christine O’Donnell, Sharon Angle, of course, Judge Roy “The Groper” Moore are today serving as Republicans in the Senate, from states that should be Republican.
…. Or, remind me, were they defeated by weak Dems in the general elections we should have won easily had we gone with the electable Republican candidates O’Donnell, Angle and Moore defeated in the primary?
Don’t remember O’Donnell and Angle?
No one else does either.
Does Mittens have any opposition in the primary??
No mention in the NR article.
Romney is lost in space; similar to Sessions...
If these are the best USA’s got, we goin down.
Luther Strange would have won the Alabama seat handily.
Trump has changed the game. He is smart and as transparent as a president can get. All of the future phonies running for president better get their game faces on.
Maybe run, but not win. Yes, Obama did it, but that was a one off. Prior to that, Kennedy way back in 1960, and arguably that may have been a one off. Before that you have to go back to Harding. There have been many more losers from the Senate in recent history.
True
But some pols still think it helps but let’s face it
It’s really just a crap shoot
Most elections are outcomed. By massive fraud
Hillary was assured by poppy Bush on election nite that the fraud was going to work
There’s a video that shows B Clinton jumping up and down like a middle school girl
You keep repeating “electability”. That’s liberal establishment code for no strict constitutionalists, no committed Christians, and no one who will buck the political establishment. How about this standard: an attractive, personable, intelligent Christian who is not a scumbag attorney, who commits to strict adherence to the oath of office and the Constitution, especially Article 1 Section 8? That standard would exclude many, many “electable” candidates.
I see you are also agreeing with the GOPe that Moore is a “groper”.
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.