Romney's nothing but a liberal in disguise.

why did they pick him in the first place?. Rand Paul is where it's at, or Ben Carson, preferably both

 

Rand Paul and Ben Carson would be a pretty strong ticket.

 

He was picked because he had enough conservative credibility to bring out the base. It didn't hurt that his biggest competitors were considered extreme (whether they were or not). The media only hit Romney as an extremist once he won the nomination.

And let's be real - Romney isn't a liberal, but he isn't very conservative, either. He's center-right, and he's establishment center-right. He also had the leadership experience, and is experienced in working with the other side.

He probably had the best chance of winning, and he would have been a better President than most GOP candidates who ran against him. He had some real misfortune - the 47% clip hurt him, the Hurricane hurt him (by helping Obama), the debate moderators favored Obama (particularly in the one case where the moderator said Romney was wrong - she later corrected herself, after the election if I remember, but most voters just watched the debate and didn't hear the correction). He was also outspent by Obama (so much for "the party of the rich").

 

Romney sure as heck would have been better than Obama.

 

Anyone can have an opinion, but is it informed.

Romney said some really idiotic and moronic things during the campaign. It is doubtful things would be much different.

 

yeah, that 47% video was a killer, you can't put down almost 50% of the country and expect to win

 

That was a gaff for sure but the true idiocy of the Romney clown show was his comments in relation to the economy. Comments by self proclaimed "business candidate.

Given what happened:

Housing market crash
Stock market crash - Dow 14000 to 6500.
Financial system on verge of collapse (Commercial paper markets froze)
Deficit of 1.4 Trillion
Federal revenue dropped from 2.7 Trillion to 2.1 Trillion.

Now even the "average Joe" can figure out that after that scenario there is going to be massive job losses for years to come. Not Mitt though apparently ?

Somehow the self proclaimed "Business Candidate" figured there should be no Job losses. In reality of course Romney knows full well the answer to the question.

He is a disingenuous clown. I expect politicians to embellish , stretch the truth and even lie. This was over the top even for a politician.

 

No Romney isn't a Liberal. He wanted to get rid of tax loopholes. That's something a Democrat would never do.

That's one of the reasons why I voted for Obama.

 

Mitt is not a liberal. He's a Republican with a few liberal tendancies. I think if he ran a little more moderately, he'd destroy anyone in a campaign. I like a lot of his policies. I just think he catered too much to conservatives and not the trending Republican platform.

 

That's amazing...you've picked two of the three guys that will NEVER be the GOP Nominee for President (Cruz is the third).

 

Romney is the best candidate in the world and I would kiss the ground he walked in if my choice for president were between him, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz. I'd even throw a daily knob job in for good measure if it meant keeping crazy kooks like Paul and Cruz away from the most powerful chair in the world.

 

As Senate Majority leader, don't scuff your ugly-arse Bruno Maglis kicking that residue of repugnant TP snivelers senseless. No need.

Meanwhile, it looks as if the GOP establishment may well be going with Mr "Individual Mandate," ol' Landslide Willard!, yet again!

His very skimpy elective resumé ended circa 2006, but he's still sitting by his beeper!

 

You are 100+ correct and I will never, ever vote for him.

 

Romney's a moderate Republican, not a conservative, but not a liberal either. He's a moderate who sold himself to the right, because in order to get elected you need to be part of one of the two parties. He's also extremely bright and a very successful businessman. I think he would have made a pretty good president, certainly much better than either Obama or Bush.

 

I'm afraid that neither Benny "Bones" Carson, the political ingénue with his socialized medicine scheme, would be allowed anywhere near the nomination by the GOP's corporate overlords, and Randy is far too suspect by Carrot Top Adelson and AIPAC to be taken seriously by the party's king makers.

It's either Willard Redux or Jebby What's His Name?

 

We've got to get over the idea that voting liberal-light beats voting liberal. It does but not enough.

Gov. Romney's mistake was not realizing that the media is a branch of the DNC. They have been for years but people are beginning to figure it out.

 

I disagree. Romney simply spoke the truth, except he was off by about 4%. Say it or not say it, the result is the same.

 

I was always of the opinion that Ron Paul + Dennis Kucinich would have been. A left + right libertarian ticket would clean up.

 

Willard is well-rested, his skimpy resumé attesting to his single stint in political office that ended long ago, circa 2006.

His signal achievement during that brief flirtation with elective office was individually-mandated, universal health coverage, placing him in a unique position as Obama's opponent in 2012. He challenged the man who stole his plan.

As Republicans contemplate the quadrennial follies of '16, and Hillary Clinton gives them the jim jams (especially after the collapse of their scheme to contrive a Benghazi scandal), they look around and, Lo and Behold! there's old Willard. Still loitering.

Hey, he's the only prospect older than Mrs C, and since Turdblossom Rove gave indications that the GOP strategy may be casting her as being as senile as Reagan, what better choice than the senior Romney?

It would recapture that old "Pot Calls Kettle Black" Magic of '12 back when Landslide Willard was young!

Mitt Romney still favorite of GOP voters for 2016!


Who knows? One more presidential run could be a stepping stone to GOP leadership - as yet another radio entertainer!

​

 

Clear up a few things...

1. 99% of the Right who complain about Romney today....even LIE and say they "stayed home".....voted for Romney and in the Fall of 2012 were defending and supporting him, even praising him. All the Post-Election CYA is just so they can act self-righteous and be Monday morning quarterbacks.

2. Mitt Romney was chosen the GOP Nominee.....by REPUBLICAN voters. Ergo, those REPUBLICAN voters felt that he best represented their Party as its Presidential candidate, among those who ran. If he was a "RINO"...it's because a majority of the GOP is "RINO".

Or if you don't like that theory, it's because Republican voters felt that ALL THE OTHER candidates running in 2012...were idiots or losers. Which goes to show that state of the Republican Party.


3. Despite the Far Right's fantasy, a "pure conservative" will NOT be the GOP in 2016. Even a "purer than most" guy like Scott Walker (my bet) will "move to the Center" on many issues, especially after he wins the Nomination....thus showing that a GOP Candidate can NOT win by being a "pure conservative" in a General Election......the entire premise of the "Reagan did it" revisionist history and again RW fantasy.

4. If it's Walker (or Jeb or Christie or even Romney again)....and the GOP Candidate begins to "move away from the Right" after locking up the Nomination?......virtually NONE of the Right will criticize him for doing so....because THEY KNOW that a "pure conservative" cannot win in the General Election running as such....

and thus prove their own claim....false.

 

Whoever the Republican nominee is, I will support. The worst would still be better than any democrat!

Mitt would have been a far better President than the lying scumbucket we have now! I still believe that anyone who voted for Obama needs to apologize to the rest of us.

 

It looks as if old Willard may have a viable challenger!

As the TPs get all verklempt, Jebby Bush who has actually been unemployed for two days longer than Willard - since January 2, 2007 - has described foreigners sneaking into the US as "an act of love." He has a Mexican wife with whom he has reproduced, three siblings that Pappy Bush described as "the little brown ones." This could give Jebby a distinct advantage in attracting the Hispanic vote if he could squeeze through the TP gauntlet to the nomination. (Willard could only manage a dismal 27% amongst that demographic in '12.)

Exemplifying the GOP's slow creep back to the political centre where the American electorate resides, both these traditional Republicans - "RINOs!" as perceived from the Party's febrile fringe - are simpatico with the corporate elites' toadies who will run Congress for the next two years and whose stated intent regarding the TPs is to "crush them everywhere!"

Might Turtle et al collude with Jebby by pushing rational governance, including comprehensive immigration reform?


Stay tuned!

 

Wonderful statement. I made a very similar comment on another thread about Romney. I don't know why the left hates him so much. He's the closest thing to a fair compromise that we can have. If he catered less to conservatives, he'd be a really great President.

 

birddog is more honest than most of the self-righteous "I'll NEVER vote for a RINO" rightwingers.

He admits he'll support any Republican....they try to pretend they wouldn't.

 

Since "liberal" Massachusetts gave him his only shot at political office and the opportunity to enact his individually-mandated universal health coverage model for the nation, this is a peculiar thing for you to imagine. Besides which, such positions as minimizing government intrusion into the womb and support for gun control endeared him to many progressives.

Surely, it is the rightist TP fringe who kvetch incessantly about RINO! Willard.