The bluebloods did that very thing in 1976 and 1980.
And what did Reagan do? Picked HW Bush....
And that's the kind of compromise that is getting the vicious reaction to Rubio and Ryan for endorsing Romney....and will go nuclear when Palin endorses him.
Reagan used to have happy hours with his opponents in Congress.
Reagan wasn't a purist, which makes him appear perfect now in hindsight.
You’re right about ‘76 and ‘80 attacks on Reagan. But I don’t recall the huge sums of money being spent by Nelson Rockefeller that Romney has spent trashing the other more conservative candidates. I don’t recall the so called conservative media backing Rockefeller and calling him a conservative. Can you imagine William F. Buckley touting Rockefeller’s conservatism? You can’t. Well just take a look at his long running publication the National Review. They’ve come a long way to become full fledged RINO supporters.
Reagan picked GHW Bush but he also made sure the RINOs knew their place. GHW Bush was vice president but neither he nor the other RINOs were allowed to dictate to Reagan. While Reagan may have given RINOs like Sununu too much trust, I see that as a loyalty problem. Which is the same thing I see out of Palin.
It won’t matter to me if she endorses uber RINO Romney, she already supported RINO McCain. But I would still vote for her over all of them in a heartbeat.
Reagan was being a pragmatist. The dems and RINOs owned Washington DC when he was president. Now that we have the House with TEA party elected officials, we don’t have to pander anywhere near as much. Plus it’s been shown time and again that the more liberal the republican candidate, the less chance we have in the general election. Yet the unbelieving RINOs disagree and want even more pandering to the libs. They have not learned a single thing since 2008 but how to trash conservatives.
There is nothing pragmatic about that.