October 4, 2011

Mitt for President

  12:19 pm

Just to be clear, I do not think that divulging who I will vote for in my state caucus is any big deal. Mainly, I just wish to be upfront about it in the interest of full disclosure. However,  the decision to formally announce which candidate I will support for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination was a difficult one for me to make due to my position as Managing Editor of this site. I have always wanted Race42012.com to be a forum where all Republican presidential candidates are treated equally and fairly, and where the supporters of all candidates feel welcome. I realize that I have achieved varying degrees of success in this regard throughout the years. However, I can honestly say that this has not been the case due to a lack of effort or commitment on my part. So I am fully aware that the act of publicly endorsing a candidate comes with the risk of appearing to undermine one of the core principles which has guided me in managing this site.

So why announce my decision now? Mainly because I feel that I owe it to the readers of Race42012 to be honest regarding where I stand. I feel that it would be wrong for me to continue to manage Race, claiming to be undecided, but knowing full well who I will vote for in the Minnesota Republican Caucuses come February 7th, 2012. From the beginning of the 2008 cycle, I made it clear that I was a supporter of Rudy Giuliani, and I believe that my decision to be upfront with about it was the correct one. My public support of Hizzoner did not prevent me from being invited to travel with the campaigns of Gov. Mike Huckabee and then Sen. Sam Brownback, nor did it inhibit Race42008 from becoming one of the most vibrant and intellectually diverse political communities in the Blogosphere.

I am now able to wholeheartedly endorse Mitt Romney because the two obstacles which have always prevented me from supporting him: the scorched-earth, negative campaign tactics that were employed against his fellow Republican candidates in the 2008 cycle, and the insufficient detail as to exactly how he would repeal and replace Obamacare as President, have been addressed to my satisfaction. Also, I wanted to wait to make my decision until the field was set and I had given enough time for each candidate to make their case.

It has been clear from the outset of the campaign that Gov. Romney will, as Michael Medved often says, focus like a laser beam on Barack Obama’s extremely poor economic record as President. It is now evident that Romney has learned a crucial lesson from his last campaign, namely, that you do not win the GOP presidential nomination by infuriating the supporters of other candidates whose votes you will need when their chosen candidate drops out of the race. This, of course, is exactly what happened the last time and is one of the primary reasons why John McCain won the nomination rather than Mitt; as every time a candidate dropped out of the race, his supporters flocked to the candidate who they felt would have the best chance of “stopping Romney.”

When I see the way in which Gov. Romney is conducting his current campaign, where his focus is on the President’s record and not on his GOP competitors, I see a frontrunner, a nominee, and a President. I have full confidence that Gov. Romney and his team understands that this election will be a referendum on the economic record of Barack Obama, and have no fear that Romney will be side-tracked into territory where he is clearly not a good fit. There will be no calls for V-chips in personal computers or anti-pornography web ads this time around. Romney is committed to hammering President Obama on the main concern of the vast majority of Americans: jobs.

Regarding Obamacare, the release of Romney’s health care reform plan assuaged my concerns that Gov. Romney did not intend to do away with the most onerous aspects of PPACA (Obamacare’s legal name). You may remember that about a year-and-a-half ago, my story on a question I posed to Gov. Romney at a booksigning in Bloomington, MN made national headlines when I reported that Mitt told me that his newly announced initiative to “Repeal and Replace” the “worst aspects of Obamacare” did not include the repeal of the Individual Mandate/Pre-existing Exclusion in the act. These provisions form the heart-and-soul of PPACA, and any legislation which did not include the repeal of both of these elements would amount to mere window dressing.

Romney’s new repeal initiative does away with the Individual Mandate completely and provides for reasonable Pre-existing Exclusions; ones which will allow people with pre-existing conditions to obtain health insurance coverage without destroying the private health insurance market.  The plan is also market-based and pro-growth. Upon close inspection, it does not differ in any substantial way from the reforms I have suggested that Republicans propose since the passage of PPACA.

Of the other Republican presidential candidates, I have nothing but good things to say. Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann,  Jon Huntsman, et al…, would all make excellent presidents – and I would proudly vote for any of them against Barack Obama. But it is clear to me that Mitt Romney has learned much from his 2008 campaign and fully understands how to mount a successful primary and general election campaign this time around. Perhaps the insight which comes from running and losing once before is the real reason why Republicans always seem to nominate the guy who “came in 2nd the last time”? The experience undoubtedly helped Romney, who is running a truly “First-Class” Republican presidential campaign. In the end, I have no doubt that Gov. Romney can form a coalition of Republican, Independent, and “moderate” voters that is necessary to defeat Barack Obama come November, 2012.

Perhaps the most common theme espoused by candidates in U.S. Presidential elections is that Americans face a choice between preserving the greatness of our nation or enabling its inevitable decline. Rarely have these claims held any truth. However, Barack Obama’s ideology and conception of America’s place in the world is unique among the historical offerings of Democratic Party. The American Dream is indeed on life support and cannot withstand four more years of an Obama presidency.

Of all the available choices, I believe that Mitt Romney stands the best chance of defeating Barack Obama and preserving the promise of America for generations to come.  Mitt Romney has asked all of us to “believe in America” once again. In the end, I must admit that I believe in Mitt and his ability to return our nation to greatness.



by Oldest
by Best by Newest by Oldest

This bold post will disappear in 3...2....1...


I've got a feeling that there are a lot of people out there today who are finally saying to themselves, "Romney's not exactly the guy I wanted, but it's time to get behind him".

You're also going to see the big money start to roll in to camp Romney as well. It's about time.


Anyone else think Romney ran a "scorched earth" campaign the first round? Sheeesh. Lightweights. I don't think you've seen anything yet. What I liked about Romney's direct campaign was that he stuck to the issues. No floating crosses, no split screens with Hitler, etc. Just the facts, man. Romney is one of the few candidates that I don't think has a mean streak.

Masscare is another reason I support Mitt Romney. Rather than being an ideologue like Ron Paul or Obama who adheres to a hardcore philosophy no matter what the people they serve want, Romney is service oriented. He listens, then DOES what the people want using the constitution, free market principles, American values and natural law as his only parameters. He gets things done that the people he serves want done, not what his political agenda dictates. How refreshing that would be right about now - leadership that listens to the people.

Finally, Romney admits mistakes but doesn't wallow in them. He SO moves on. Combine this with the fact that he actually possesses a proven skill set, unlike a Perry, or Cain who talks a lot about doing certain things, but does not have the education, practical experience, discipline or drive to actually achieve it.

I hope America is done with mediocrity, and pathetic superficiality. It's already been a long, hard learning process. Romney is competence and excellence embodied this cycle. Let's move into the next century with American values and in a position of strength.


I also endorse Romney --

For Ambassador to the Cayman Islands. 😉

Conservative Gladiator

Your support and reasons for supporting Romney are what he needs. As one of his supporters, I appreciate the due diligence you took to come to your conclusion. Everyone has a choice to make and if everyone does the work that you've done in your decision making process and comes to the same conclusions you and others like us have, we will come together and the fight and movement of conservatism and capitalism won't be stopped.


I'm a little verklempt right now


yeah at this point I think it's Mitt's to lose.

But I think there is room for maybe one more "flavor of the month" infatuation as well.


I'm waiting for Palin's latest book, DVD, or TV show before I make a decision. I want to see all of a candidate's commercial products before I pull the lever.


I'll probably be banned for this...


the Romney Coronation will be interrupted

I really am sorry Kavon, please don't take this as a personal affront)

Sarah Palin-affiliated law firm made early-state deadline inquiries


Ken Vogel and I both have sources telling us that calls were made on behalf of a mystery candidate to various early states to determine presidential filing deadlines.

Continue Reading

The calls were made by representatives of the law firm Baker Hostetler - a firm that employs lawyer Mark Braden, who represents Sarah PAC, her political action committee.

As Ken notes, while he nor representatives of Palin’s campaign would comment on the calls, Palin is the only GOP politician eying the presidential race who is represented by the firm.


Kavon, I appreciate your candor and honesty and the way you have always treated all the candidates and their supporters fairly.

Thank you.


Deja vu? I could swear I read this same post a couple months back . . .



While I agree that Romney's campaign was not extreme or negative in '08, he's been much more careful this time.

In '08 Huckabee attacked Romney from several angles--most of them dirty--and no one cared. McCain, via his PACs, attacked Romney dishonestly in a big way & no one cared. When Romney retaliated McCain effectively painted Romney as the one who had gone negative first even though McCain's people were clearly the first to do so. The MSM backing is powerful & McCain came away looking clean.

This time Romney entered knowing the MSM wanted anyone but him to win the nomination. So he completely avoided negativity against other candidates. The one exception was Perry, but he only went negative after Perry attacked him first in the debates and at speaking engagements and also produced 2 deceitful videos about what Romney said in his book. Romney's two ads were on highly researched facts and were right on point.

Romney has been playing it more carefully than others because he knows he will get no free pass. Other GOP candidates can be less measured in their statements since the MSM wants them. I believe this is one reason Romney has seemed stiff at times and failed to be exciting. He knows that any stupid statement could do serious damage to him, so he chooses his words very carefully.


Inquirey and actually DOING are two different kettles of fish, Teledulsional. But heck, send her your cash anyway. It's too late, baby. It's too late.


9, if she is only making calls NOW, that shows just how unserious she really is.

These are things you have to know waaaaaay in advance. This is nothing but rumor fodder, and probably designed to keep acolytes like you on the hook.


Why did you delete this post before? Did you buy into the Christie hype for a while?


#9 Telly, you say Sarah has been running a stealth campaign for how many years?

And they are just now getting around to checking the filing deadlines?

And this is a good thing?


Teledude #9,

Why would I ban you for that? You tick people off when you call us idiots. Informative and cordial posts are always welcome.


Teledude, I hope you are right.


#13.....Nope Telly, that's how I really feel.

I've never felt any different about Kavon...


#10 That is how us "Rombots" saw it coming together.

Still, the votes have to be cast and counted, so there is still much work to do...



I thought you were right a month ago. Palin was definitely egging her followers on. But I don't see it anymore. The filing deadlines are just too close now. I don't think she ever would have been a viable candidate. However, I thought she was going to run. I really don't see it happening at all now.


Sarah, come on in, the water's fine.


Kavon, welcome on board. And at the risk of being accused of sucking up, this is the best political site out there.



Think about it. If Sarah Palin weren't going to run, don't you think she would have bowed out of the race by now. Remember unlike Christie, she never, never said she was not going to run.

Of course if you believe the celebrity diva meme and that all Sarah Palin lives for is to crave attention or be a "tease" then you'll stay stupid. But if you can somehow get beyond that garbage, the only only conclusion you can come out with is that she has decided or decided to be the last person to enter the race come hell or high water.


At this point I'd welcome some Palin rumors. Anything to finally bury the dead horse that has been dead for weeks that is a Christie run.

I think Palin is about a 85/15 on not getting in. But that 15% is just fertile grounds for rumors. Just ask the 1% chance goers for the recruit Christie campaign.

Is Giuliani just not of the Anti-Mitt mold for there to be heavy rumors around him? I hear something here and there but it seems the past Giuliani supporters have moved on and don't hold any hope of him jumping in.


10. Great article--makes Mitt sound invincible.


Kavon: Since it seems likely that Romney will be the nominee, and my expectation is that whoever is the nominee will win, I very much hope your faith in Romney is justified.

Perhaps as president he will show the sort of political courage he has never demonstrated in the past and will fearlessly attack the entitlement mess, without concerning himself with popularity or re-election -- because that's what it will take to fix the problem.


Slippery Mitt will continue to pander to every conceivable interest group. He will make decisions according to what is politically expedient, unlike other candidates who actually have principles to guide their positions, like Paul, Johnson, Gingrich, Santorum...

Thanks, but no thanks.

I'm Not Ready To Be President christie

No worries Bob. He will fix the problem!!!


26. "If Sarah Palin weren’t going to run, don’t you think she would have bowed out of the race by now. Remember unlike Christie, she never, never said she was not going to run."

Maybe. I also thought Palin was a LOT smarter than Katie Couric. I suppose I still do, but sometimes people employ less predictable strategies.

"...then you’ll stay stupid..."

Really? You need to call people stupid if they disagree with your point of view? Mature.

"...the only only conclusion you can come out with is that she has decided or decided to be the last person to enter the race come hell or high water."

Actually, there are a number of conclusions one could come to. Your conclusion is one possibility in many and many people have posted other plausible conclusions on this thread.


29. Bob...just wanted to let you know that jaxemer11 is whining about you in another thread (http://race42012.com/2011/10/04/sources-christie-to-announce-he-will-not-seek-presidency-at-1pm-press-conference/#comment-949157)


Ben (27): A week or so ago, I was having an email conversation with a few of the others from this site and we came up with a list of those who could still get in and have a credible chance of winning. It consisted of Christie, Daniels, Giuliani, Palin, and Huckabee.



I disagree w/everything you said about Mitt, but I appreciate you didn't add Perry to your list of the "principled." Q: Why didn't you add Cain?


AJR (32): "Bob…just wanted to let you know that jaxemer11 is whining about you in another thread"

That's OK.



Kudos. I've been working to get Mitt nominated, and hopefully elected, since early in 2007. I've sent him money. I've made thousands of comments on several sites, albeit more on this one and ROS than others. I've personally campaigned for him with people in most of the states in the nation. But the last couple of weeks have moved Mitt farther along than I would have expected.

The big money on the sidelines, and many of the big endorsements, are now going to start coming Mitt's way. The path is now open for a sweep of the early contests, and the next Iowa polls will be indicative of what we can expect along these lines.

The knock on Mitt that he has a ceiling of 25 or 26% will be disposed of, as he starts to move into the 30's. In short, Romney will rise in October. The prize could materialize quickly.

Obama should be afraid. VERY afraid.

Thunder (Romney/Huckabee)

Welcome aboard the Romney good ship, the water is just fine.



Time to revamp that list. Daniels is a less electable Christie & donors are tired of waiting. I think you can remove both of them from your list. Giuliani never had a ground game and, despite leading national polls, was really never a major contender in '08. Huckabee has stated clearly that he doesn't see a road for him to get to the nomination just last week. Judging by his weight gain, I'd say he's not ready to start a tough national campaign this week.

Palin could still join. She has certainly left the door open--the reason for it is unknown. Maybe she's stringing her followers & the media along for ratings/book sales? Or, she's planning to enter late and avoid as much scrutiny as possible? Or, maybe she thinks she has the best chance of being a king maker by not announcing one way or another yet? Or, is she waiting to back the winning candidate in a big way in exchange for favors & is just waiting for the obvious victor to emerge before jumping in on it?



Any other conclusion shows ignorance of who Sarah Palin is and how serious a person sshe is.

If you believe the 100 or show memes concocted by media about her go right ahead and stay stupid.

"She's a tease...she's craving attention...she just wants to sell more books.

You know that could be true if not for one fact: Sarah Palin put her heart and soul into helping the GOP win the greatest Congressional result since 1938.

Why did Sarah Palin do that? Because she had nothing better to do with her time and energy?

Or is it that she only became a celebrity diva post-2010?

And if you believe that then you also must believe she is totally schizophrenic and even her worst critics have not accused her of being that.


The best way for Mitt to gain more supporters is for the Rombots to STFU.

Matthew Miller and Kavon can have an influence on the rest of us, but the Rombots push us away every time the open their mouths and reveal themselves to be thorough supporters of the leftwing welfare state.


When I heard about Christie's decision this morning I resolved to support Mitt Romney.

There's a simple reason: the western economy is at a tipping point, which threatens to wipe out 65 years of steady progress. Now's hardly the time to go chasing after ideological purity. All the talk about RINOs, flip-flops, tea party and elites really pales in comparison to the crisis we're in right now.

They're symptoms of a broader and legitimate anxiety, that something indefinable is slipping away. And it's not abstract notions of "freedom" - it's our assumption that our children will lead better lives than us.

These aren't easy times, and sweepingly disruptive, ideologically-driven solutions will only make matters worse. What's needed is leadership that can preserve our economic stability while putting us on a new, more conservatively-driven footing. It's not glamorous work, but it's the kind of work that's never been more important.

Mitt Romney seems to really WANT the job - no small matter - and more importantly, seems to have given some real thought to what he'd do if he actually got it.

I'm a conservative, in the purest sense of the world, and in these times there's really only one choice.

Mitt Romney for President.


Have I said something offensive to you Metro?


Tele, I love your enthusiasm for Palin, but I really think you'd de a great service to yourself if you start to prepare your mind and heart for her not running, rather than seeking for and hanging to 'the smallest glimmers of hope. Just realize that there is a VERY good chance she is NOT running and prepare yourself either way.



I believe Palin is a bit of a diva, craves attention and wants to sell more books. I also believe she's a patriot, a conservative and an intelligent person with good principles. I believe she helps the conservative cause because she believes in the conservative cause and realizes she has great influence.

None of those things eliminate the dozens of reasons Palin may have withheld her decision to jump into the race at this point. I'm not sure which reason(s) are accurate yet. We'll probably know within 1-2 weeks.


David, that was very eloquent. I hope most can follow your example of logical thinking. With Perry sinking in the polls I think all the money will start flowing to Mitt.

I think Huck will endorse Mitt which will help him possibly win Iowa. Hopefully we can have our nominee earlier rather than later so this can be a complete "vs Obama" race by the end of February.

AJNolte (executive experience in 2012, please).

I've been moving Romneyward since Pawlenty dropped out. I'm pretty comfortable supporting him at this point; I think he can win, will be a good President, and is capable of fixing the problems we're facing. So, well said, Kavon.


Bundlsers are nothing but influence peddlers. The fact that they are going with Romney shows that Romney is not change we can believe in and the only change is the names of the special interests.

Worth noting that the Politico story does not say when the filing deadlines were looked at. It could have been several months ago. I've found with Palin

when there is a leak, that she wants it leaked.

Out of curiosity, I looked up the filing deadlines and the methods in every primary. There are 15 where a list is produced of generally recognized candidates. In another 5 you file a intent to run. 6 states require a filing fee. 5 states are petition only. 1 is a combination of petition and filing fee and there are 3 loophole primaries.


Metro, you have no business, credibility, or authority to tell us WHAT we BELIEVE, or WHAT we SAY.

Get off your high horse and stop being a whiner.


#48 - thanks. What I dislike most about the process is that it focuses most on sweeping policy/ideological generalizations. However, what's most critical to a successful presidency is how the President organizes the office and the executive branch. But that doesn't make for good 'copy' after a debate.

I get the sense Romney knows exactly how he'd approach the job. Not so much for the others.


I believe Palin is a bit of a diva, craves attention and wants to sell more books.


Who is selling book at this time? It turns out Cain is going on a book tour until Oct 22. Till then if you want to see Cain, you'll have to buy a book.


David (44): I very much agree with your comment, especially this part: "There’s a simple reason: the western economy is at a tipping point, which threatens to wipe out 65 years of steady progress."

What, however, gives you confidence that Mitt Romney will have the political courage to take the steps necessary to fix the problem?

I don't question that he knows what needs to be done. My question is whether he'll do it.

Sojourner Truth (Give 'em hell, Cain!)


At this point I just hope that Perry implodes. That way all of the ample anti-Mitt vote consolidates around one candidate.

The Democrats nominated the first black president. Maybe we can nominate the first black president with a clue.

And yeah. Anyone but Mitt. Rah rah.

Sojourner Truth (Give 'em hell, Cain!)

Washington Post/ABC Poll

Romney 25

Perry 17

Cain 17

Gingrich 9

Paul 9

If Perry contiues to tank then it's quite possible Cain hops into the lead.


I love Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin, but that still doesn't make them good presidential candidates. It has been pretty obvious since being harassed out of office by liberal or Murkowski supporter's lawsuit abuse, that since she chose "aggressive" punditry as her profession, she isn't really that much more electable than the previously mentioned. There are just certain styles of punditry which will prevent you from seriously running for presidency. Sure she was unfairly ripped in pieces by mainstream media, but frankly if you are skilled enough, mainstream media can't bring you down. Somehow Reagan managed to handle them in times when there was no Fox News or many conservative talk radio shows.

Sojourner Truth (Give 'em hell, Cain!)

Who is selling book at this time? It turns out Cain is going on a book tour until Oct 22. Till then if you want to see Cain, you’ll have to buy a book.

So what? Cain needs money to run a viable campaign.

Not to buy fancy new clothes and take shots from the sidelines like Sarah.


In Gov Romney’s opinion, America cannot continue to be the hope of the earth and a fighter for freedom and human rights if we allow the country to fall from grace. I agree.

THIS is the central issue of our time. America is on the way out unless we take drastic action, my friends. Look at the Romans. Look at the Weimar Republic. Look at the Ottoman Empire. Look at the British Empire.

We are in decline now, folks.

This is serious business. This isn’t a silly game. The fate of the world – whether Chinese authoritarianism – or American freedom – will be the driving force over the next century – is on the line.

This isn’t time for games.



If you think I'm less committed to dismantling the "leftwing welfare state" than you are.....an endeavor I've spent my whole life working on......you are wrong.

Mitt will make more progress toward this than most suspect, and it is necessary to reach his primary objectives of achieving American exceptionalism in our time.

BTW, Nobody is going to do away with Social Security in America.


#54 - Frankly, it's for the very reasons that the purists hate Romney: he's not so ideologically blinkered that he won't make compromises and forge a consensus.

I look at some of the most successful examples of conservative global economic policymaking from 1981-1993, and it was collaboratively-driven non-ideological work (check out what Nicholas Brady did for the Latin American debt crisis as Bush 1's Treasury Secretary.) Romney's made for that.

Oddly enough, my concern would be more about blowback - that he becomes so worried about proving his ideological bona fides that he ignores his essential technocratic political persona.

But that's a risk I'll take.


Rombots, DON'T start attacking Cain. Please.

He is not so bad, plus, he's not going anywhere.

Just please don't damage our brand attacking a nice fellow like Cain.




Maybe we can nominate the first black president with a clue.

Lol. :)

Sojourner Truth (Give 'em hell, Cain!)

Rombots, DON’T start attacking Cain. Please.

He is not so bad, plus, he’s not going anywhere.

Just please don’t damage our brand attacking a nice fellow like Cain.


I'm bookmarking this page. Perry can't talk, and you know as well as I do that there is a AMPLE anti-Mitt contingent within the GOP, that is bigger than the bloc of Romney supporters.

The big question now is whether all of this anti-Mittens segment goes to one candidate.

If it does, and that candidate is Cain (Perry totally and utterly disappointed and will have a tough tme bouncing back) then I guarantee that the Choir Rombotic sings songs of hatred all over Cain.


Rombots, DON’T start attacking Cain. Please.

He is not so bad, plus, he’s not going anywhere.

Just please don’t damage our brand attacking a nice fellow like Cain.




64, but I also think that now that Christie is out (110% out), many more will also decide on Romney. Just look at how many people in this thread just decided to finally support Mitt. His numbers will see an increase, too.

Sojourner Truth (Give 'em hell, Cain!)

66 - Maybe. But the WaPo poll didn't include Cain.

And Mitt was still only at his highwater mrk of 25.

We'll see.

Sojourner Truth (Give 'em hell, Cain!)

Correction - the WaPo poll didn't include Christie*


#60: You're the only Rombot on here I agree with politically.

But the only reason you support Mitt is because you converted to Mormonism.

There is nobody else on earth who shares your libertarian views and supports Mitt Romney who is not a Mormon.


Romney is far to my left. But he is the best candidate.


My politics are: Ron Paul domestically, Romney abroad.


David (64): I'm afraid you've done little to assuage my concern -- which is that he lacks political courage.

Again: I don't doubt that he knows what to do. What I doubt is that he'll do it if it makes him unpopular.


Palin’s continuing (real) threat to go 3rd party while simultaneously making all filing deadlines and running in the GOP primaries — more than assures she’ll trounce Mitt.

Again, Palin v. Romney!

Bring it ON!!!



#70: I've never heard you say anything about being a fan of Hayek or Von Mises or Hazlitt or Rand.

Sojourner Truth (Give 'em hell, Cain!)

74 - Give it up, man. Even the RedStaters have.



And your point is?

I don't have to boisterously proclaim to be the biggest fan of Hayek all across the land to earn respect from stiffs like you.

And I don't much respect your disparaging remarks, casting all Romney fans as liberals and Mormons.

And frankly, you're not qualified to talk about this, since you supported Rudy in 2008.


Thanks, Kavon.

You've created a wonderful site here that I continue to enjoy, year after year.


#73 - It's a fair question, and one that's unknowable.

You're really asking for examples of real political courage. Mitt isn't a Christie-like politician; he's more technocratic at heart.

I guess I'd say that the times make the man. Courage on behalf of bad policy is empty, good policy without courage is the same.

But you go to war with the candidates you have. It's a time for choosing and I think Mitt's the best choice right now.


#77: Well this is the first we've heard that you're far to the right of the candidate you support. Seems odd.

Rudy was the best choice for anyone who was far to the right on economics, far to the right on foreign policy, and far to the left on social issues.



Well, it's not the first time I've said it.

Maybe you ought to pay more attention before you insult everyone.

You know, it's funny. You clowns like to whine about Rombots being vicious and holier-than-thou, but then you turn around and say WORSE things than you CLAIM we say.

Cobra Commander



Cobra Commander may run again himself:


AND he's REAL black man! Ha ha! Cain, he no vanila/chocolate man, he a REAL brotha!


Metro, none of the candidates except, perahps, Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, has a Randian worldview. Perry gave some lip service to it, by calling SS an unconstitutional ponzi scheme, but in the same breath he promised to preserve this entitlement for generations to come - he was just pandering to libertarian/reactionary crowd with some red meat rhetoric. None of our candidates are going to persue the reactionary/libertarian agenda because anybody smart enough to read a poll knows only 15% of this country comes close to supporting it and that's being generous. Unfortunately for the GOP they may destroy themselves in an attempt to win this group in the primary.


David (79): Thanks -- fair answer. My reading of Romney's career is that he has always taken the popular course -- telling people what he thinks they want to hear and doing what is expedient.

This is what feeds my worry that he will not do the very unpopular things that need doing to fix entitlements.

I agree that Romney may be the best of a bad lot, but there's no rush about deciding.


#85: To quote Christie from the Reagan Library: "Real leaders, they don't read polls—they change polls."


#85: If you were to convince me that Republicans would never roll back the welfare state (which wouldn't be that hard to do), I'd immediately start voting Democratic for progress on gay marriage, to protect abortion rights, etc.



Here's the thing: I believe Romney wants to go down in history as a great president.

How does he do it? By getting the economy back on track and solving the debt crisis.

I don't think polling numbers matter as much to him as history books.

Just my opinion.


85. Exactly.

If you haven't read Hayek/Rand, you're probably not a conservative. If you are, you probably don't really understand why.

However, if you try to perfectly re-align the USA to their version of Utopia, you are not pragmatic and you will never be successful in modern politics. Victories can only realistically be achieved incrementally.


I think Romney will care more about economic numbers over poll numbers. He wants to get elected so he can do the job. The problem is the presidency is a political office.

I'm not sure America is fixable. Too many ignorant, indolent, self-indulgent "citizens."


#90: I am also an incrementalist and realist. Hence supporting candidates like Giuliani and Christie rather than Paul or Johnson.


MC (89):"I don’t think polling numbers matter as much to him as history books."

If he wins, which seems likely at this moment, I hope you're right.


It's telling that you use the word "utopia" to mean an unachievable fantasy, to describe the realty that actually built this nation in the 19th century.


Thank you for your honest assessment, Kavon. We all may disagree with you - but you're running a well rounded site with supporters from a number of candidates. You have inspired me to put together my own assessment post as well.


Didn't mean to imply everyone disagreed with you, just saying that some may...some.

Not Your Promiscuous Daddy

Cain is awesome and I wish him the best of luck. If he were the nominee I would be happy to vote for him. I prefer Romney, but can still respect Cain.


Kavon my friend, excellent post, you articulated your points very well. I agree that Romney has run a first class campaign and as you stated, he probably has learned a lot from the last cycle. You brought back so many 2008 memories and while reading your article I kept shaking my head in agreement. Welcome aboard!

Matthew E. Miller

Bob Hovic,

My read on Romney has always been this: Mitt wants to be President. I don't think we know yet how much of his "pragmatism" and "lack of courage" has been shaped by an unwillingness to damage his Presidential prospects, and how much has been shaped by a desire to be popular. Two very different goals, by the way, with different implications for a Romney presidency. I will say though that I don't get the sense that I got from Obama and Clinton that Mitt has a fundamental need to be liked. Instead, I tend to think he realizes the utility of being liked and wants to use it instrumentally to further his goals.


"If you haven’t read Hayek/Rand, you’re probably not a conservative."

Rand was far far far from a conservative. She proposed revolutionizing the world and creating a utopian society based on her own theories - theories which harshly rejected Christianity - the greatest tradition of western civilization. That Randian philosophy would be called conservative shows the mangling to ideological terms that occurs as a result of political coalition building in a two party system.


If Rand was a conservative, Darwin was a Young Earth fundamentalist.


John Mark,

On the Palin thread, I suggested we might form a 3rd party, once you are properly baptised Catholic.

R42012 Groupie (formerly Joe Hanna, Joe for Mitch)

Less than a year after the 2010 elections, no politician has worked so hard to get the nomination and experienced so much luck along the way, as Mitt Romney.

Now the primary calendar wars threaten to have a real nominee wrapped up before end of Feb. Another amazing stroke of luck. From Mar 1 the presumptive nominee can focus 8 months on waging the most intense shadow govt/air war ever imagined against the Obama billion dollar machine.

This morning I went to mittromney.com and read through the various things he said he would do and execute on January 20th, 2013. Its extensive, effective, impactful and pretty darn substantive. And....ITS ALL THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

I'm R42012 Groupie (formerly Joe Hanna, Formerly that Joe guy who spent 2 years waiting for my man Mitch). I believe in America. I believe Mitt Romney does to and I endorse him for President



"#85: To quote Christie from the Reagan Library: “Real leaders, they don’t read polls—they change polls.”

"#85: If you were to convince me that Republicans would never roll back the welfare state (which wouldn’t be that hard to do), I’d immediately start voting Democratic for progress on gay marriage, to protect abortion rights, etc."

Republicans leaders may (and hopefuly do) convince Americans to make necessary cuts to entitlements programs to make them fiscally sustainable. That will require changing the polls, as people currently oppose any cuts whatsoever to SS. However, it would be in line with the underlying principles people have about government - it just requires political leaders convincing the public of the fiscal reality that the course needs to be changed in order for government to fulfil the role they believe it should fill. However, a politician is not going to change the underlying principles and presuppositions that the public holds. The public will allow the GOP to fix entitlements, they will not allow the GOP to destroy entitlements and bring us back to the pre new deal world you dream about.


102, Yes or you could abandon pursuit of Catholic Monarchism and I would fit right in. :-)


MEM (99): I agree with your comment, especially the opening line: "My read on Romney has always been this: Mitt wants to be President."

My concern about his political courage is based on his wanting it so badly that I question whether having landed in the White House, he will be willing to move back out again quickly.

The next president will need to be willing to serve one term, because what needs doing will be very painful and may well not fix things fast enough to get him re-elected.

I don't see Romney as willing to do that.


John Mark,

"Yes or you could abandon pursuit of Catholic Monarchism and I would fit right in"

ummmmm nah. I'd rather you get baptised....


Finally, would have been more meaningful months ago but thanks.

Pragmatic & Conservative

9. teledude, why would Palin need a law firm to ask when filing deadlines are?

The Debate Calendar on this site lists a Nevada GOP Straw Poll in Las Vegas during the week of Oct 17, but I could not find anything on the Internet about it, so I looked up the number and called the Nevada GOP headquarters. There is no Straw Poll taking place.

Using a law firm allows for a leak that the calls have been made, whereas if Palin did it herself, she would have to spill the beans for people to know she had done it.

This “leak” of client-attorney information does not seem to have upset Palin.

Palin is getting all the attention that a candidate would get even though she is not running, which makes her a force in GOP circles and will result in higher speaking fees in the future.

Sarah Palin is an intelligent and principled woman, but she also has a career in promoting the GOP agenda. That career comes to an end if she runs for the GOP nomination.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Dave for the General Republican Candidate

Bob #86: Amen. I'm still not impressed much by any of the remaining candidates. Perry is out completely. Now that there isn't a hope for Christie, I want to wait and see what Cain does the remaining three months and try to gage what kind of a President he would be and what kind of an administration he could put together. To gage if he would beat the learning curve and get the right expertise needed where he lacks it. That is part of what helped Reagan be such a good president. If not, I think I may have to hold my nose and support Romney.

Bloodshy #90: I don't know what planet you are from, but Libertarianism of that kind does not overlap so much with today's Conservatism as in the William Buckley / Ronald Reagan kind. The only good overlap is the Fiscal arm of conservatism. True libertarians will always have problems with some social conservative issues like abortion and gay rights because the government shouldn't interfere in these things to tell people what they should or shouldn't do. Also, the foreign policy arm of conservatism very hawkish whereas true libertarians are much more isolationists because the government should only be their to maintain our rights.

Pragmatic & Conservative

...comes to an end if she runs for the GOP nomination AND LOSES.


#64 attack Cain? Why? ROMNEY/CAIN 2012

Even Cain would vote Romney.

Pragmatic & Conservative

42. Bob

You know that could be true if not for one fact: Sarah Palin put her heart and soul into helping the GOP win the greatest Congressional result since 1938.

Why did Sarah Palin do that? Because she had nothing better to do with her time and energy?

As I stated in post 110, she has a career in promoting the GOP agenda. That career is over if she gets trounced in the GOP Primary. By not declaring that she is not running, she actually enhances her ability to promote the GOP agenda.


Obama has alianated working america. He has made entire segments of US citizens feel helpless as he rammed his socialist agenda down our throats. Romney will reach out to all americans and start the mending, if not, we will become Europe.



Thanks for the disclosure and of course, I personally believe you've made an excellent choice.

Something you said though is quite profound. You stated:

"Americans face a choice between preserving the greatness of our nation or enabling its inevitable decline....The American Dream is indeed on life support and cannot withstand four more years of an Obama presidency".

Those words, decline and life support, should be a rallying cry for every American. For most of us, we were born into a land with great opportunity and promise but what we inherited didn't come about by chance; it was forged by great men who fought heroic struggles to establish this republic. Because of their struggles, we exist in a land of peace and opportunity and safe from fear.

Each of us should commit ourselves to the cause of preserving America and the quest that we will not let her fail without one helluva fight.

Maybe that’s populist rhetoric but whoever our nominee is, I wish they’d frame the discussion as the choice between managing an American decline and a genuine fight to restore and preserve America’s role as the ‘hope of the earth’.


Sarah Palin is the only one talking about the crony capitalism that pervades both parties. There is a reason that bundlers and big money people

are going with Romney. The same reason that Merck didn't bother trying to buy influence in Alaska. They know they can't buy Palin off. The real question is at what price do these big contributions come with?


#44 David,

Great post. You outline what I've felt for some time. These are not times to elect leaders based on who we'd feel comfortable having a beer with. Rather, we need the most capable and competent of leaders. We need leaders that maybe, just maybe, with luck and the hand of providence will be able to turn America around and in doing so, turn the world around. In these times, we need to stop looking for the common man and take note of our founders. It was uncommon men who founded this land and we should seek men of uncommon intellect and ability to save it now.


One thing about Romney that I don't hear much about is very significant, imo, is his incredible work ethic. In his down time, he's often found working on his land. Last election, a reporter noted this and asked his sons "well, what dies your dad do to relax?"

They answered, I think that IS him relaxing. I don't think he knows how to sit back and do nothing. He ENJOYS work.

And, the people who worked with him as he turned around the Olympics have commented on how long and hard he worked.

I think Mitt will make an excellent president. And, I think he'll do whatever is in his power to fulfill his promises.

What many purists don't seem to accept is that we are a slightly Right-Center nation. And, even if we manage to capture both chambers of congress, no president is going to be able to implement pure Right policies.

This is a man who will work with democrats to save our nation. That's going to mean some level of compromise.

To believe anyone can do that WITHOUT that is, imo, deluding themselves.

But, I cannot think of another candidate who is capable of pulling this off.

I will say, however, that I'm kind of glad we had Obama this term. It has provided a stark slap of reality of the results that occur with socialistic policies.

Reading back, my post is a bit rambling, but I think it carries my intent well enough.



It looks more and more inevitable that Romney will sweep the nominations. Cain has also injected some great energy into the race as well, and it will be exciting to watch.


It's about time - Cain & Christie has created some thinking....BUT, 2008 was a lesson learned - His GOP peers are not his beef. It will be Obama v/s the best choice... Mitt!


Keith (120) Right On!!


It was uncommon men who founded this land and we should seek men of uncommon intellect and ability to save it now.

Ci2EYE - exactly

Comments are closed.

Recent Posts

Tweets by @Racefour

Search R4'16