Posted on 09/12/2014 10:09:16 AM PDT by C19fan
In early June 1964, a group of Republican governors sought to wrestle control of their party from Barry Goldwater, the Arizona conservative who was about to lead the GOP to one of the most crushing defeats in its history. The governors saw a disaster in the making, and sought a moderate candidate who could capture the imaginations of grassroots Republicans—but also beat President Lyndon Johnson in the general election. Led by Ohio’s James Rhodes—the Republican Governors Association was meeting in Cleveland, and Rhodes was a legendary vote counter—the group included Pennsylvania’s William Scranton and later New York’s Nelson Rockefeller.
........................................................
Couple that interview or statement with the real Mitt Romney—the one from the documentary— speaking to the nation from the heart every day and on every stop. Match that Mitt against the polished and calculating Hillary Clinton. Well then, as Paul Ryan said, the third time really could be the charm. Romney may still do this—2016 needs Mitt even if Mitt doesn’t think he needs it … yet.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/09/mitt-romney-2016-110870.html#ixzz3D7d2GQFj
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
The Candidate is already chosen. Romney or Jeb Bush.
The GOP establishment wants Jeb Bush. He is the presumptive favorite.
Even Reagan didn’t manage to kill programs. Programs, though are not the problem. It is departments. They all need to be killed and 3/4 of bureaucrats disemployed.
It is just bizarre that you would issue support for another Romney run, and then use that lack of "presidential timber" to downplay a possible run by Ted Cruz.
Romney was the epitome of "lack of presidential timbre" by Republican candidates. He was the end result of the downward slide of GOP-e liberal Republican candidates. He was worse than McCain; McCain was worse than GWB; GWB was worse than Dole; Dole was worse than GHWB; GHWB was worse than Ford; Ford was worse than Nixon.
Out of that whole half century of increasingly liberal Republicans, we were blessed, lucky, or whatever, to have the short two terms of Ronald Reagan, the only real Republican candidate of the whole bunch.
Candidate Romney could not, did not, and will never be able to articulate any resemblance of a conservative message. Romney simply has never been a conservative. Romney has no history of ever trying to live by, or understand, conservative principles. He does not understand why or how a free market economy works, or should work; the crony-capitalist-communist market has always worked for him and his inner circle.
Romney may be a fine business administrator or executive, working behind the scenes with a spreadsheet, but he has no capacity for leadership; no understanding of the nation and its people outside his little circle; and no ability to articulate a vision of the USA as a constitutional republic as the founders and framers intended. And where there is no vision, the people perish.
Romney may be a nice guy, good family man, and all that jazz, but he is a liberal -- big intrusive government, nanny state, cronyist, -- just plain liberal.
Ted Cruz is a conservative. He is capable of articulating just what that means. He understands what conservative principles are, and he has a history of living by those principles. Cruz has the courage to speak publicly in support of his principles. That is leadership. Cruz has it; Romney does not.
Not going to happen.
I don’t see a GOP Congress and GOP President killing Obamacare.
William Jennings Bryan
and don't forget noble Henry Clay, a good man and a real statesman, even if I still don't agree with him on everything, nevertheless famous today, more so than for his reasonings on "Internal Improvements," for saying:
"I'd rather be right than be president."
And I guess we shouldn't forget all those Democrats who once we're "Madly for Adali"
If Jeb faces tough sledding.... the establishment may pick Romney as a safe choice.
No way will they go for Cruz.
But I believe if Romany runs again he'll win both the nomination and the election. The Nation would vindicate him as the anti-Obama, partially out of guilt.
And while he would be enormously better than Obama, he'd definitely not be the best the GOP has to offer.
He did all that Congress would allow, not being a king like we have now.
Truth is Reagan was far from perfect, but light years ahead of anything in the present. I had high hopes for Palin, but I think Romney and company really damaged her, maybe beyond repair.
If we have 10 or 12 conservatives(barf) running against one moderate then we will get a moderate. In truth if those 10 or 12 can't align themselves behind the candidate that can win, then I doubt they are conservative in any case.
I was really disappointed in Newt when he could have withdrawn from some races and denied Romney a win which could have derailed the Romney Machine. I have admired Newt since he first became a notable player, but he had zero chance of winning, even if he won the nomination.
The party bosses want someone who won’t rock the boat.
That drives conservatives nuts but I don’t think they will coalesce around a single candidate.
The party nominee will be an inevitable moderate and supposedly electable Republican.
I remember well when they chose GW, he won but we lost.
This is Hugh, but not serious.
Agreed.
The bargaining is likely between Jeb and Mitt.
If Jeb runs, Mitt won’t, if Jeb has to promise Ryan shares the ticket.
The ticket is now or will be negotiated.
What if Romney, or Bush, ran with Cruz? Hmmmm.
Establishment happy, conservative base happy?
I read where Cruz may be positioning for sharing the ticket as VP. (If only conservatives were capable of raising enough hell to pressure the GOP.)
“He could win.”
That’s the scary part.
Romney runs, I vote Libertarian again.
You and I have been at F.R. about the same amount of time. Have you ever seen that happen? I haven't.
NO RINO scum.
It’s interesting to note that Hewitt really downplays George Romney’s role in undermining Goldwater. It was the opening salvo in the long Romney family fight against all things conservative. At least, George Romney was honest enough to admit to his moderate positions and not try to convince people that he is conservative, unlike his son.
There’s a reason the Pubbies are called the STUPID party.
NOOOOoooo! Jeb Bush would be ok out of the starting gate because he’d have to prove himself. He was a good conservative governor of Florida, but his wife is Hispanic and I think a lot of the GOP-e would have problems with that. He probably wouldn’t get the nomination because I think he’d be considered too risky, even though he’s a Bush (he’s the most aggressive of too-gentlemanly bunch).
But the fact that the GOP-e is anointing Romney right now means that he’ll be the candidate and he’s not going to have to prove anything. I honestly don’t believe I could force myself to vote for him again.
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.