Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Arcanaut
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktI’m a lib, so I need help understanding the Anyone But Romney (or Anti-Romney) commentary. Is it just talking heads trying to make a buck, or is there more to it?
A simple web search on ‘anti-Romney’ yields a huge number of articles and blogs. Pat Buchanan talks of a possible third party if Romney wins the GOP presidential nomination. Joe Scarborough claims that, “[c]onservative leaders, this week: it’s like a light switch has come on. And they say: you know what? We would rather lose [than elect Romney].” Margaret Carlson wonders whether Herman Cain is still afloat despite his campaign’s problems because of the strength of ABR sentiment. Ford O’Connell thinks if the Republicans who oppose Romney unite behind a candidate, Romney could well lose. And George Will moans, “Has conservatism come so far, surmounting so many obstacles, to settle, at a moment of economic crisis, for this?”
I view this as general grumping about a candidate whose nomination Republicans view as most likely, but that in the end the GOP will fall in line behind its standard bearer. Am I missing something more substantial?
Filed under: 2012 |
All Things in Moderation 
Perhaps only that "conservative" does not equal "Republican".McCain, who I supported until near the end, was a man with a large personal following and a compelling story. He was not the fave of conservatives, but he was a legitimately popular American, with a strong base in military and former military families, that crossed party lines. I think of a black family who are friends of ours – Sharon's husband is a Colonel at Ft. Hood and her brother is a Marine Captain. And how they anguished over the 2008 election, with both men voting for McC and Sharon voting for BHO.Romney has nothing like that, no loyal cadre, no admirers, no interesting back story, and worse, he has Gore-Kerry-Romney disease.I thought my dumb governor could walk away with the nomination because he actually has an interesting back story and he actually can talk to anyone 1-1. He knows I never support him but he always glad hands me and smiles when he sees me. A street pol. Romney cannot do that. It's not in him. So why would conservatives, as opposed to Rs, think Romney was worth spitting on? I know, I cannot speak for conservatives, and I ask it as a question."Lesser of two evils" could be a Republican response," but not a conservative one, it seems to me. Conservatives always want a "clear choice", just like liberals do.For me and Kevin, BHO is somewhat OK b/c he is not a liberal. So liberals are restive with him now. They invented him as a "clear choice" when both he and HRC ran to the middle away from the scoundrel Edwards, even early on.How could someone who has been on every side of every issue [WMR] be good for conservatives? That is another way to look at it. Again, many R voters, as opposed to conservatives, will vote for him as a possible winner in the GE. But that will not mean conservatives LIKE him.
LikeLike
"Gore-Kerry-Romney disease" there is no cure or vaccine. you have to quarantine them. I'm hopeful that the ABR vote coalesce around Paul*, who seems to be the only other candidate with a base of support, and we have it out on stark policy differences. *or Johnson, but he's invisible.
LikeLike
I have always liked Gary Johnson, since he was Gov. of NM. I wish he were kicking butt in this race, not invisible.
LikeLike
I cannot figure out how Romney is different than Obama. In what action would the two be different?Ultimately for me though, is the fact that Romney nor any of his sons served in the military. I can accept a President who hasn't been in the military, but none of his 5 (I think) sons? Hell, McCain had a son who was an enlisted man in the USMC. He could have been an officer, but chose the toughest path in the toughest branch. I didn't vote for McCain so much as I did The 'Cuda, who also had a son who was an enlisted man in th Army. Heck even slow Joe's son is in the Military, an officer yeah, but at least it's a kind of service.;-)
LikeLike
There's a danger in having a sell out elected in that policy results that you opposed would be enacted because the institutional opposition in divided government would be undermined. I.e. Republicans would never have supported No Child Left Behind or Medicare Part D absent George W. Bush in the White House.
LikeLike
Romney has two strikes against him. He is not doctrinaire enough for the tea party and his funny religion sets off alarm bells among the fundamentalists even though its tenets tend to be as strict or stricter than conventional evangelicalism. What he does have is the backing of the money boys and the neo-cons.See my post on this from a week or two back.
LikeLike
yjkt, neocons are insiders who often used to be Wilsonian Ds. They are like one leadership cadre. As far as I know, there are virtually no neo-con voters as a % of the population, although many hawks will follow a neocon line. The distinction? A hawk simply wants a strong defense posture and the ability to maneuver on the world stage. Neocons actually want to "liberate" other countries by force. They can overlap – but I have been a pro defense hawk my entire voting life and never been a neocon. Ask the question "should we invade X?" And most hawks will say "NO". Ask if we should be prepared to fight in two places at once and all hawks will say "yes".
LikeLike
Mark: I thought my dumb governor could walk away with the nomination because he actually has an interesting back story and he actually can talk to anyone 1-1.I did, too, Mark. It was only his atrocious performance in the debates that made me doubt it. Subsequent strange behavior has simply reinforced that he's not ready for a presidential campaign.
LikeLike
Mark: "For me and Kevin, BHO is somewhat OK b/c he is not a liberal. "I think Obama is a liberal, but a pragmatist first. Wasn't convinced he was a pragmatist first in 2008, but I'm convinced now. He does not govern like a dedicated ideologue (not that anyone with the wrong letter by their name will get credit from the other side for that, but that's my observation). I like Obama because his functional, managerial approach in terms of governing. That may not be what the moment calls for, we may need a stronger leader, but I don't see either side producing one of those in this election cycle.
LikeLike
"Neocons actually want to "liberate" other countries by force."I'm hawkish, generally, but I understand the neocon point of view. Indeed, I'd agree with it, if we had the resources necessary to do it and we could be reasonably assured of a positive post-liberation outcome. I don't think either of those things are true, given the infrastructure demands of even minimal nation building. Like neocons, I do not believe dictators and despots have any sovereign authority, or any real legal protection from invasion, nor do I find the deposing of dictators immoral (nor do I find the propping up of America-friendly dictators morally justifiable). However, I do not think we have the resources to guarantee a desirable post-invasion outcome, nor can we guarantee that the cost in blood and treasure to both us and the liberated nation can be remotely justified. I've become a little more isolationist as time has gone by. I think we should taken care of the Taliban post 9/11, and then gotten out of Afghanistan, and been done with it. I'd prefer we be prepare to fight battles on multiple fronts, but very slow to do it. I think illustrating on the national stage that flying airplanes into our skyscrapers, or protecting those that do, will bring an almost immediate end to your sovereign status (but there's more that could have been done there, too, and taking out Bin Ladin without talking to Pakistan is one of those things, so good on Obama).
LikeLike
"Romney has two strikes against him. He is not doctrinaire enough for the tea party"Which is the primary problem."and his funny religion sets off alarm bells among the fundamentalists even though its tenets tend to be as strict or stricter than conventional evangelicalism. "This simply isn't the problem that it probably would have been 30 or 50 years ago. If he was an atheist, then yes, but most of the base isn't going to have a problem with Romney's mormonism. Romney's healthcare plan, that's something else. Romney disassociating himself from Reagan/Bush when he was campaigning for senator is more damaging that his religious predilections.
LikeLike
McWing: "I cannot figure out how Romney is different than Obama. In what action would the two be different?"If Romney saw an opportunity to win general accolades from the press and the DC intelligentsia for being a maverick and endorsing or forwarding some piece of liberal legislation, I think Romney would do it where Obama might actually not do it. A Romney presidency with more Democrats in the house and senate would be a more liberal administration, on the whole, than the Obama administration. In my opinion.
LikeLike
KW,You just answered MsJ's question. Now, why would you vote for him, if you are inclined to?
LikeLike
I expect conservatives will grumble about Romney, dabble with all the ABRs, then fall into line. Perhaps unenthusiastically, as with JSM.
LikeLike
McWing: "I cannot figure out how Romney is different than Obama. In what action would the two be different?"Let's take the central one. ORomneycare. Romney was the governor of a state in which the Democrats could have easily overridden his veto. So, I think he tacked against the healthcare proposal. There is a zero probability that he would have signed any such law had he won the 2008 election.If Romney had beaten Kennedy for the Senate, he probably would be akin to a Scott Brown or any of the other New England Republicans (Collins, Snowe). That's quite different than Obama.BB
LikeLike
I disagree about romney's Theoretical votes. The Maine Twins voted for the Porkulus a so would have Romney. I think a President Romney, saddled with a Congress Obama had, would have, as KW wrote above, signed a more liberal HCR bill. So, for me, he'd be even worse than Obama. If Romney had an R congress, think Carter.
LikeLike
And if Obama's second term has an all R congress, think Clinton.
LikeLike
Show of hands. put me down as a no vote for Romney.
LikeLike
Ditto, NoVa.
LikeLike
No for me.
LikeLike
No for me, lol.
LikeLike
Lms, who would you trust more, Romney with a D congress or 2nd term Obama with an R Congress?
LikeLike
I'd rather see Obama with an R congress. I like Obama. I also do appreciate gridlock. I'm not included to vote for Romney. If Chris Christie were running, and had managed not to murder his campaign, ala Rick Perry, I'd vote for Christie. I like Ron Paul. I'd vote for him in the primary if he's still in when Tennessee votes.
LikeLike
Obama with and R Congress for me, although I may vote some weird 3rd party candidate or something. Either way we get gridlock but it's much more fun making fun of an R Congress than vice versa………jk. It doesn't really matter that much to me either way, we're stuck with a bunch of millionaires running the country regardless. I liked that petition that was circulating last week re Congress, term limits, no pension, fend for themselves health care, etc. etc.
LikeLike