Victor Davis Hanson: Why Romney Has a Real Chance (It's more like ABO!)

National Review Online ^ | April 18, 2012 | Victor Davis Hanson

[neverdem]

My last choices were between Romney and Ron Paul. Maybe Newt can pull a miracle, or there's a brokered convention. I'm still ABO!

[Steely Tom]

McCain ran more effectively in the primaries in 2008 than he did in 2000.

That's not saying much. I didn't even know he was a candidate in 2000.

[JRandomFreeper]

I will never vote for a liberal. And that includes Romney. In fact I am/will actively campaign against him.

/johnny

[Dr. Pritchett]

Hanson says this “recovery is anemic.”

I’ve been wondering for a while now why everyone keeps calling it a “recovery” at all!!?

[Buckeye McFrog]

11. Obama and the Democrats are so completely self-deluded inside the bubble that they continue to campaign as if OWS actually did represent “the 99%”.

12. And even if they believe that balls-to-the-wall Socialism is a winning formula, they are offering a half-assed, bolluxed-up version that will never convince the true believers.

[Haiku Guy]

Call me crazy, but I think if Obama is on the ballot in November, it will be a blowout of epic proportions, that makes the Democrat losses in 2010 look like nothing but a Preview of Coming Attrations.

Far more likely, IMHO, the Democrats pull a Torricelli Switch and get Obama off the ballot. Nobody is going to want to ride his coat-tails to defeat.

[Retired Greyhound]

I predict a big Obama loss. Romney just needs to remain an “acceptable” candidate and point out what a bad job Obama has done, and he should win easily.

Romney will win all of the Bush states, plus PA and WI, and will challenge in many other blue states. He should win comfortably.

It would be unprecedented for Obama to win. No president has ever been re-elected with such poor support numbers. It seems that much of America has Obama-fatigue.

In 2008, there were at least plausible reasons for the average sheeple American to take a gamble on Mr. Hope-n-Change. He ran on the heels of an unpopular incumbent, an unpopular war, an economic collapse, an incompetent GOP opponent, and a fawning, adoring media that refused to vet him and actively promoted him. He ran as a movement, and a lot of suckers bought it.

He can’t hide this time. Granted, the American electorate is capable of being stupid (that’s how we ended up with this clown in the first place). But we usually self-correct.

That’s why Romney was not necessary. We should have nominated a true conservative. This was the year to do it.

[OSHA]

Obama thanks you!

[Reily]

The problem is if Zero is off the Rat ballot a certain demographic will have a depressed turnout.

1. If Zero is forced off, then that demographic turnout will be very low and very bitter. It may depress their turn out for future elections also.

2. If Zero leaves voluntarily say to ‘spend more time with his family’ then the turn out will still be suppressed. Depending on how its spun will depend on the level of suppression.

Both of the above options are very bad for the Rats, it could cost them some more legislative seats, maybe a governorship or two, some state legislators, etc in swing districts. That's why I don't think it will happen. Also Zero's ego wouldn't let him do that! They are stuck with him, all they can do is pray for a miracle. (Like a huge GOP gaffe, something Romney (if its Romney!) could easily do!) I think they will just ride out this storm and blame his defeat on racist America.

[Typical_Whitey]

If the trend continues and Romney is leading the polls by the time their convention rolls around I will gurantee that Biden gets his walking papers and Hilary is brought out to save them.....

[Tau Food]

President Romney would be far worse than Obama. At least, the RINO’s won’t support Obama’s programs. The RINO’s will support Obama-like programs pushed by a President Romney.

Romney must be defeated at all costs.

[Agamemnon]

Far more likely, IMHO, the Democrats pull a Torricelli Switch and get Obama off the ballot. Nobody is going to want to ride his coat-tails to defeat.

So, is that going to happen inside the next ~60 days before the USSC rules on Obamacare or in the 120 days before the election and after the USSC votes down Obamacare?

If he's off the ballot and it gets to linked to a consequence of his defeat at USSC, I'd dare any (D) to slink their ass on to that ballot.

I ask you what could any other (D) possibly run on and cull together an ample-enough following and media push for in just 120 days?

Assuming defeat in the USSC, holding the (D) nomination for any one this time around will be radioactive.

If USSC upholds it, you'll have no greater motivator to get (R)'s to the polls to make sure Obamacare dies in 2013.

FReegards!

[JRandomFreeper]

Thank the dirty tricks department of the GOP-E and the media. They went all out to get your boy through the nomination. But he won't make it through the election. Any better than McLame or Dole did. We've seen this movie before.

/johnny

[GlockThe Vote]

I agree. As obama gets more divisive and petulant - he is going to turn off even more people.

At this point the midterms are going to look like NOTHING compared to what is coming as the economy goes back in the toilet.

[Elsie]

1) Romney is a more experienced and better candidate than he was in 2008. That often happens after a run or two.

Yeah!

He don't have that hard hitting McCain to bedevil him THIS time!

[af_vet_rr]

Call me crazy, but I think if Obama is on the ballot in November, it will be a blowout of epic proportions, that makes the Democrat losses in 2010 look like nothing but a Preview of Coming Attrations.

Not a blowout, not even close.

People knew exactly what kind of person Obama was, where he was lacking, and exactly what kind of President he would be in 2008, and he still won.

In fact, Romney is even less inspiring than McCain/Palin, and he's got so much baggage, the media cannot wait to unload on him. It's going to be brutal, plus Romney does best when he can outspend his opponents, and he won't be able to outspend Obama.

[neverdem]

I agree with both of your comments.

That’s why Romney was not necessary. We should have nominated a true conservative. This was the year to do it.

What an understatement! I think the fear of another Obama administration caused too many to play it safe with Romney. If Romney wins, he won't be trusted, at least by anyone to the right of McCain, and that's most of the party.

[qman]

Sadly it looks like Romney’s it! Being here in New England for the last 30 years, Romney is the most conservative that could get elected in Mass for any job, he is in fact more conservative than Scott Brown, which most here understand isn’t saying much. I can’t in good concience give him money, or advance him to anyone. I will do what I did when McCain won the primary, I voted for Sarah Palin not John McCain! Here’s hoping Romney pick’s a real conservative as VP. I will vote for the VP instead of Romney.

[neverdem]

People knew exactly what kind of person Obama was, where he was lacking, and exactly what kind of President he would be in 2008, and he still won.

We in this forum knew, but there are the great unwashed who only get their news from the lame stream media that didn't vet Obama. There's a whole bunch of moderates and independents who don't think about politics until the last few weeks before an election.

[dirtboy]

I think the fear of another Obama administration caused too many to play it safe with Romney.

I disagree. Fear of the Tea Party caused the GOP-E to push Romney. They'd rather lose with a RINO than win with a Tea Party conservative.