Sunday, February 19, 2012


I've said it before, he's a terrible politician and a terrible candidate.

Ben Domenech:
In reality, it’s those who demanded conservatives get in line ages in advance who made a fundamental mistake in how they approached this election. By demanding an ideological shift from a more populist, more fiscally conservative base they no longer direct or control, Romney’s most prominent backers failed to learn any of the right lessons from what led to the 2009-2010 cycles. They failed to realize that the base expected more from a candidate, from a leader, than the politics and policy of the past.
Most pols like to pose with their family and dog. Mitt can't even do that. And that's his major claim to conservatism.

He's Dukakis without a helmet. "Competence" won't cut it. Cuz he's not competent enough.


LibertyAtStake said...

I've been pushing Newt (I think you have, too, if I remember right). And I still stand by that recommendation - as he is best equipped intellectually to (in order of tactical importance) wipe the floor with Obama in open debate, push back effectively against the corrupt and biased MSM, govern with big idea reforms (we saw him do it in '94-95, remember?). However, if it has to be Santorum, I am heartened lately by how I've seen him perform on points one and 2 at least. And it doesn't hurt that he was one of Newt's foot soldiers on point 3. I would like to see the Arizona debate result in a two man race going forward - the two not named Mittens. I would rest much easier that way.

"Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive"

Anne said...

I am totally with you