Posted on 11/21/2007 6:06:37 AM PST by Reaganesque
So this is probably the last thing I saw myself doing nine or ten months ago when I first started seriously following the 2008 race and committed to support Sam Brownback. But here I find myself doing it nonetheless. So I suppose a little bit of explanation here is in order.
In the first place, I want to rehash something I said a long time ago (Nov. 27, 2006 to be exact) about a three-way race between Romney, Rudy, and McCain:
More below...
As I said several months ago - in a three-way race between Romney, Giuliani, and McCain, I'd vote for Romney. Apart from Brownback (who can't win, however much I like him), there are no personally committed pro-lifers on the 2008 slate. While a committed pro-lifer would certainly be the most desirable choice, the second choice would be a guy who knows which side his bread is buttered on. So, if faced with a choice between a guy like McCain, who has a pretty good pro-life voting record, but recently joined Christine Todd-Whitman's "We hate the religious right" PAC, his voting record is less important than the fact that he's historically shown a willingness to spit in the eye of social conservatives just for kicks and press accolades. Mitt, on the other hand, can apparently be trusted to pander to the voters he needs, which in this case is us.
That analysis still stands. For a while, the Fred Thompson campaign gave me hope for someone who might be a little more solid on the issue, but looking at the polling right now leads me inescapably to the conclusion that Fred Thompson is toast. He's not polling any higher than third in any state right now, and Romney has even moved into second in the crucial state of Florida. I just don't know that Thompson has what it takes to get back up off the mat right now. And while I feel a lot better about supporting McCain than I did a year ago, I still just can't make myself trust him at all. I made it a special point to get on McCain's conference call last week so that I could hopefully get just that little assurance I needed to sway me into his camp - and in my estimation, he blew the question. Like I said, I could get behind McCain a lot more easily than I could at this point last year, but he still isn't my first choice. As for Huckabee? Well, let's just say that I lived in Arkansas while he was governor, and my state tax burden was higher than my federal tax burden. And also that I worked on Jim Holt's 2004 campaign. I hope that explains why I have never seriously considered voting for him.
So what about Romney? Well, you know what? I'm going to maintain some intellectual honesty about all of this. I think a lot of his positions are staked out based on his estimation of what the voters he needs want. That's not exacctly the most comforting feeling in the world, even if you're in the group he needs at the moment (as us SoCons are). But I have to think at this point that, at least on abortion, he doesn't have another flip left in him, and I think he knows it. So that's good enough for me.
As for the rest, there's a lot to like about Mitt Romney (Crank's excellent and well-researched series on his weaknesses notwithstanding). The guy, I think, did a good-faith job of governing as a conservative in a liberal state. He's shown a real competence at managing organizations - which, let's face it, is a welcome change of pace after the last four years. His personal history is squeaky clean - absolutely no skeletons in the closet. And I think his health plan will be hated enough by both sides of the aisle that we won't see any national healthcare plan passed during his tenure in office, which is a victory in and of itself. In all other areas, I don't seriously doubt that he'll govern as a conservative. I have, in all honesty, a *lot* less doubt about that than I had about Bush in 1999.
You know, I think one of the things about blogs and the internet is that it's made it a lot easier to go back and nitpick what people have said and that doesn't always do us a service. We're not always going to get a guy who's been a doctrinaire conservative from birth, although the internet has made it so that we expect that. And if it appears at times that Romney is a relentless triangulator - well, for Pete's sake, he's a freaking politician. That's what politicians do. And if the end result of their triangulation is that they pretty consistently come down where you are, then I guess it's time to be happy about that.
The bottom line for me right now is that for all my personal naysaying and doubting, I have to admit in the end that Romney has worked the hardest, run the smartest campaign, and outlasted all other Republican comers save Rudy, and we all know how I feel about Rudy. In the end, if I had to choose between seeing Romney and Rudy standing, it wouldn't even be a close call. When I examine the field, I see only one candidate left standing with a reasonable shot of winning the White House who would govern as a conservative, and that candidate is Mitt Romney. So from now on, I'm tossing in with him, for better or worse.
In closing, let me say a few things that I hope some Romney supporters will take to heart. It doesn't really do a lot of good to pretend that Romney is perfect, or that he hasn't made a mistake, or that his positions on certain things haven't changed. That's just insulting to people's intelligence and it turns people off from the candidate. May I humbly suggest that the better way to convince skeptical Republican voters that Romney is someone they could support is to encourage them to ask themselves, "Will he govern as a conservative?" I know that part of the reason it took me so long to come around to this position is that I heard too many people saying the former, and not enough repeatedly asking me the latter.
However it looks like you are splitting minimum percentage here on the level of “conservatism” between Mitt and Rudy, I am starting to see less and less of a difference, but a least Rudy is up front about it.
As for Fred, please count him out, you’ll feel better for it.
And Romney acquiesced. Even though he had federal law on his saide.
Nuff said.
Thomas Paine
‘Voters’ Who Broke Story on Romney Calls On Romney Payroll
Sleaze will out.
Not so fast with this checkmate stuff. Post #67 sheds a little more light on that issue. On the bottom line, a "conservative" politician from the most radically liberal state in the union will never be accepted as a true conservative. He can only win in a "hate election" where he is painted as an alternative to the hated hillary. That seems to be the strategy in this election. The major parties offer unwanted candidates who fan the hate flames distracting voters from the real issues that the massive financial syndicates are slipping past us.
“And if it appears at times that Romney is a relentless triangulator - well, for Pete’s sake, he’s a freaking politician. That’s what politicians do. And if the end result of their triangulation is that they pretty consistently come down where you are, then I guess it’s time to be happy about that.
Words of wisdom. But they will no doubt be lost on the single-issue voters who frequent this forum.”
***************
Triangulation is an issue unto itself, its about character.
Another one of your famous reading and comprehension skills deliberately or not making things up on your own, I never said Mitt is not conservative.
He is conservative enough for me to support him, he is not conservative enough for the purists, well thats their problems.
Fred is a lazy man who does not have the skills in a tough game of politics, thats the reality of American Presidential politics which you may find it tough to accept.
“And Romney acquiesced. Even though he had federal law on his saide.
Nuff said.”
He did not acquiesce. Duval overturned it when he became Governor after Romney. What part of that don’t you understand?
Ya still always have to have a middle though, regardless of whether it’s good or bad.
Also on trackrecord ,capability and leadership,Mitt is more conservative than Fred and he has the achievements to prove it.
"Mitt is the one whe can stop Rudy. If you want a more solid conservative who can also win,"
I just calls em as I sees 'em, I try and keep it simple, just what is written...
Also on trackrecord ,capability and leadership,Mitt is more conservative than Fred and he has the achievements to prove it.
A more solid conservative does not mean the other is NOT a conservative.
If you say person A is more capable than person B, then it does not mean that person B is incompetent.
It is clear that you seriously need to consider attending some English language and comprehension classes.
“But at some point you need to consider voting for the most conservative candidate who actually has a chance of winning.”
**********
I’d rather vote for a 3rd party.
So, and again I am just reading what you say, 54% of the Conservatives here see Fred as more conservative and 86.4% of the members of one of the premier Conservative forums on the web seem to not see Mitt as much of a Conservative.
BUT...
They all all wrong and you are right.
Wow, I am glad you straightened us out...
Just looking at what you say. No need for insults there, my reading is just fine.
“The major parties offer unwanted candidates who fan the hate flames distracting voters from the real issues that the massive financial syndicates are slipping past us.”
Huh? I think people make the assumption that because he was elected in a liberal state he must be a RINO. He governed as a conservative - and that’s why I like him. Under this line of thinking Ronald Reagan wouldn’t get elected today because he was Governor from a state of fruits and nuts. I judge the man and not the state.
FR polls are not real or representative of the Republican conservative voters.
A recent rasmussen polls shows Mitt and Huckabee considered the most conservative among Republican nominees.
He did not authorize the state troopers until near the end of his term as governor, however. I suppose better late than never but he seemed to shift his position after sensing that the country is fed up with illegal immigration.
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.