Your claims that the “silent majority” of FR members said “no” to Mitt is unfounded & not backed up by posts here other than the loons previously mentioned. He has gained a lot of traction here & among other conservative circles. You, on the other hand haven't answered why the leaders of the conservative movement haven't come around to your line of thinking. Even in the primaries, where one would think some of these folks might fall in line for the good of the party, folks like Rush, Ingraham, Coulter, etc., excoriated McCain. They never did so w/ Mitt.
Why do you think that was/is? Do you really feel you know more than they? Have you had more access to the man & his past & associations than they?
Again, I'm not trying to tear you down unnecessarily, just trying to have you see things as they seem to many of us conservatives. Your alignments w/ the libs & MSM in reference to Romney are alarming, as are the distancing yourself from the conservatives afore mentioned on this issue. You talk a good game on other conservative issues. That's what's mystifying. why not hold the same standard for Romney as you have for Reagan? Perhaps then, you may come across as more sincere rather than someone w/ an Ax to grind.
You're a bright mind, but this is befuddling. You're a conservative brother w/ this one exception, & maybe the religious one(not your acceptance of Mitt, but the hypocrisy & vitriol for which you state that difference)& I shall stand by you in your conservative beliefs. Perhaps someday you your attitude will change. My best to you & yours for a wonderful weekend.
The question of the “MSM” bit has been answered tirelessly by me and others. It has become trite to
Facts is facts, if you cannot argue for the conservative stance of Romneycare, his weakness on guns,numerous DIRECT quotes from Mitt and hiss staff etc. on abortion, his own statements about not wanting to follow Reagan Bush many years ago, the whole “Reagan was adamantly pro choice” fiasco, etc. etc. etc. and want to blame it on the MSM that is just fine, but expect to be called on it. The man's history goes back much further than this election cycle and even that has had its moments.
As far as the silent majority, it is VERY WELL DOCUMENTED, and has been posted here time and time again. Wanting to cover it yet again almost smacks of masochism. Numerous polls were done here on FR during the primary hunt and Mitt never reached 15% support while real conservatives were in the race.
It also seems we have picked a few new “haters” along the way, so your “he has gained support on FR” is questionable at best. How about getting a new poll going, I am sure TBTB will be happy to set it up.
I love our Conservative pundits but they have to play on a field than I and many others here do not, they have to cheer lead, We don't. I do find it funny that again, if he was the be all and end all of Conservative stalwarts, “Reagan's heir apparent” as he was present by his faithful followers, his support was so tepid for the most part. There were occasional fits ans swoons but no real advocacy for his effort for the most part.
As far as McCain vs Romney, no contest, Mitt was much better overall, that is why I would have voted for Mitt over McCain given the chance, which I wasn't. However I also prefer to fall only two stories off a building instead of 20, but really prefer neither.
I will not answer your “align with libs” tripe, since it should be nominated along with the “you guys elected Obama” meme in the Non Sequitir hall of fame. Nor will I even discuss Reagan beyond a mere mention in the same post as Romney any more, the constant comparing of the two by Romneyphiles made me ill...