[Antoninus]

I do believe, however, that you are not politically realistic.

And you're supporting a guy that has spent $70 million and can't beat John McCain, who most conservatives despise, despite outspending him over 3-1.

Face it. Romney isn't getting traction because of Lincoln's old adage--"You can't fool all the people all the time."

Fact: During Mitt Romney's tenure as governor, Catholic Charities in Massachusetts was forced out of the adoption business because they wouldn't give babies to homosexuals.

Fact: During Mitt Romney's tenure as governor, Catholic hospitals were forced to start distributing "emergency contraception".

Face it. The man is not going to win because he's a phony and too many people know it. And if, by some freak chance, the media conservatives are able to stampede enough sheeple into voting for this fraud and dragging him across the finish line, he's going to get his butt handed to him in November by Hillbama.

How is helping a crypto-liberal Republican score a crushing defeat "politically realistic"?

[SoConPubbie]

Who would you prefer?

McCrazy the moderate Democrat Lover or Recent Conservative Convert and former Liberal Mitt?

Which one are you willing to take a chance on and gamble the GOP's, not to mention the Country's future on?

I am afraid that is what it has come to.

What is your choice?

[TAdams8591]

My guy has been the one to beat in every primary thus far, and therefore my calculations were on target. He has a more difficult road to go now, but he may still get the nomination.

Unfortunately, conservatives are fractured among all the candidates, and are not the reason for McCain's victory. In fact, one of the reasons a McCain victory is so frightening is that if he does it, it will be without most conservatives, and he will owe us nothing. BTW, Romney actually garnered more of the conservative vote, than McCain.

McCain has far greater notoriety at the moment, because he's been in Washington SO LONG and already ran for president, which is the reason Romney has had to spend so much, but all that will change if Mitt wins the nomination.

But let's get back to your original point. Stop insisting that because someone supports a different candidate or strategy than you, (in most cases a more realistic strategy), that it means a person isn't a conservative.

[sand88]

Antoninus, you are being a bit disingenuous about Romneys roll in the Catholic charity adoption issue.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/03/10/catholic_charities_to_halt_adoptions_over_issue_involving_gays/

from the above article, Within an hour of Catholic Charities' announcement, Gov. Mitt Romney said he planned to file a bill that would allow religious organizations to seek an exemption from the state's anti-discrimination laws to provide adoption services. .... "While I respect the board's decision to stay true to their principles, I find the current state of the law deeply disturbing and a threat to religious freedom," he said

[Brandie]

"And you're supporting a guy that has spent $70 million and can't beat John McCain, who most conservatives despise, despite outspending him over 3-1."

LMAO you know when you or anyone else uses the money thing to try and prove a point you might want to rethink that. It only mkaes you look jealous. So obviously you hate anyone that has a lot of money, the super rich. How sad, do you realize the rich are the ones that make it possible for people to have jobs?

Huckabee was always beinging up Romney's money, what a jealous little man he is. And now traitor McCain brings it up too and he comes off the same way.

And as far as McCain winning Florida, he never would have won if they hadn't allowed the Independents to vote and mess it up.