We all know that what happened in the past is water under the bridge…

Let’s just focus on Newt’s past shall we and ignore Romney’s.

Uh huh.

Maybe Axlerod really meant to comment on Romney and not Gingrich vis-a-vis animals, trees and rear0ends.

Sigh.

You redstate opinion writers are all the same… Trying to scare conservatives away from Romney – the only candidate that has a serious chance against Obama.

I seriously can’t wait to hear all your whining when Newt loses Iowa…. Who will you jump to next as your savior? You are a fickle bunch of writers…

is perfectly appropriate. He’s not shown conservatism in many of his political stances. That is fair criticism.

However, Newt is no conservative and what’s worse, he’s a power monger, ego-centric sob who can’t get along with anyone for an extended period.

What I’d like is for you or Eric, mostly, to tell us what they know about Newt’s m.o. when he was on the Hill. I have two contacts, neither of which can be considered anything more than lower-level Hill workers, who told me lots of things about Newt’s personality, the most disturbing, from the perspective of hiring a President, concern his inability to work with people who wanted him to be successful and wanted the GOP to be successful. They weren’t enemies, IOW.

These two are as ffar from establishment types” as one can get—they are worker bees in the maze of employees, both women, both not even interested in philosophical discussions of anything political, yet both more loyal to any GOP candidate than to a Democratic one. Both say, “Hell, no, I can’t possibly vote for Gingrich and don’t you either. He will always have us in a state of chaos.”

What say you, Erick?

that he has identified himself as a conservative. For most of his life apart from some economic issues he has held mostly liberal positions.

Honestly, Democrats like Ben Nelson and Mary Landreiu have a demonstrably more conservative track record than Romney. You can’t deny that fact. So it is bizarre that some people in the Republican party would want someone decidedly to the left of many Democrats to be our nominee.

“I’m not gonna go back to Reagan/Bush.” – Willard Mitt Romney.

no matter how much him and his supporters scream and shout. It is over for him. It is either Perry or Gingrich.

I’m Moderate and Progressive, Not a Wingnut

Thanks Mitt – Now tell us something we don’t already know.

would have to come from Congress and the states. That might not be bad. Even those we would consider rinos or squishes in the minority may be effective conservatives when that is the path of least resistence. I am thinking of Orrin Hatch, Bob Dole, and many others. I don’t think Romney would fight conservative initiatives or even drag his feet.

If he is the nominee, voters. on a variant of the divided government theme, might be more inclined to elect tea party types in other races.

With solidly conservative Senate, House and statehouses, I would most like to see Gingrich as President, but Romney might do about as well. Paul is the only one I can see siding with Democrats (on foreign policy and defense issues, of course).

I still prefer Gingrich, but I might well change if I saw good evidence of something I suspect, that Romney would be significantly better for the election of conservatives in other races.

Mitt’s changed positions on too many things. That’s why I’m switching to Newt. He takes a position and sticks to it.

Suggested by logic, illustrated by examples and confirmed by experience is the fact the political system is controlled by the elites, they use big media as their henchman and those elites would rather lose an election than lose control of their party. In the democrat primary, Hillary’s argument to the superdelegates was if you elect Obama you will lose the election, and the response of the radical left which supported Obama that is fine as long as we can take control of the party. Thanks to the timing of the financial crisis they got both.

Romney is an easy target for the Obama Machine to destroy, and I find it distressing that many people fail to see this. He is the epitome of a country club Republican, and that is not a winning brand in a depression. He claims to be a business man, but he made his money by taking apart companies and he grew rich in the process. He is like Obama in that sense–Obama threw his constituents to the wolves–to Rezko and later to major corporations and Romney would do the same. And, contrary to the meme that he is a good debater–the truth is he is a sub standard debater and Obama will best him with the help of big media. In fact, what this is McCain redux wherein big media gets him the nomination so they can destroy him in the general election.

Romney cannot beat Obama. It is just that simple. The best hope we have to defeat Obama is Gingrich. Unfortunately, people who think they are smart are induced by big media into throwing brickbats. They are behaving stupidly saying if he gets the nomination they will stay home. That is a losers strategy.

I think what some folks object to is that basic fairness on this site is lacking in that trashing Romney from every whcih way (even if taken out of context or an attack from the Left) is tolerated and promoted, without the same standard being applied to everyone else.

Yesterday’s hit piece was siding against Romney for being successful in the private sector, which would seem to fly in the place of the supposed free market conservatives here.

Today its a silly video, Romney is running in the state of Massachusetts – where about 13% of the voters are registered Republicans. At the end of the day, winning is what matters – sorry but Sharon Angle and Christine O’Donnell aren’t doing anything for the conservative cause after first embarassing us with their awful, inept campaigns (yeah but they were conservative on paper, right) and secondly for enabling weak, liberal Democrats to survive (including Harry Reid – most awful of all) and continue to wreck havoc in the U.S. Senate.

However, fairness would be for us to debate Newt’s idea for Puerto Rican Statehood or harken back to the days when he made Republicans look awful by carrying on an afair during Clinton’s impeachment – not sure which is worse, that or bringing wife to his bed-ridden cancer stricken first wife. What is it that social conservatives want – someone who has actually lived a good, clean, life (Romney, Perry) or some preachy do as I say, not as I do “conservative”?

Again – I think its fair to criticize Romney for Romneycare or for his Roe v Wade stance at one point, but the daily bashing and gothc videos doesn’t do a lot to elevate conservatism. Let me ask the front page moderators, where has the intelligent debates about tax plans, entitlement reforms, and foreign policy on Iran/Israel/Russia gone? Is this what RedState is now a site that doesn’t debate these issues, but instead debates a 9 year old clip of Romney campaigning in Massachusetts and not proclaiming himself a right-winger?

I guess I’ll head over to National Review – they still do policy over there.

Perry’s a wreck. Cain’s gone. Bachmann’s flailing. Huntsman or Paul? What?

It seems as if right now there’s only Newt or Romney. They are one in the same. Newt’s a top-down, Cap & Trade, Mr. Ethanol, big government and nationalized health care supporter! Do we have that short of a memory?

You just can’t win.

So tell me who is more “progressive, Romney or Newt”?

Newt: FDR the greatest President – in his own words:

Perry’s a wreck. Cain’s gone. Bachmann’s flailing. Huntsman or Paul? What?

Neither Perry, Romney nor Perry has been a ‘tried and true’ conservative. Newt’s a top-down, Cap & Trade, Mr. Ethanol, nationalized health care, big government type! Do we have that short of a memory?

The only thing I can say about Romney is that he’s a successful businessman. And at the bare minimum Romney is running on the Ryan plan. I can’t find a better choice. :/ … Just can’t win.

Or astounding that conservatives now have a choice in the republican primaries between a northeastern liberal and a big-government, cap and trade, pro-gov’t health care bureaucrat.

Republicans en masse rejected conservatism in this primary. Can’t blame moderates and RINO’s, it was all of you. Most of you anyways.

I weep for the future.

How did it come to this?

Christine O’Donnell endorsed him.

…it’s just not safe to admit this in 2011 to the Republican base, who knows this and can’t trust his ‘conversion.’

Ladies and Gentleman, time to stop the Romney pledge of support if he wins the nomination because this story is a candidacy killer and we all know most RS members will support the nominee even if the DIME STORE REPUBLICAN ROMNEY WINS. Romney wears the GOP label as cheaply as a pimp wears a Zoot Suit!!!

No need to say I’ll support Romney anymore because there’s no fear to fear except the end of conservatism itself. Romney will turn the party for the worst and he won’t give a damn what you think.

More to read at CBS. Good post Streiff the video speaks for itself. Moderates must fail for conservatism to succeed.

Clearly Romney is too partisan and out to fight liberal like fights because he’s a weak candidate.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57342286-503544/romney-in-2002-called-his-views-progressive/

“I think the old standby definitions of who votes for which party have been blown away in this campaign,” Romney says on camera. “I think people recognize that I’m not a partisan Republican, that I’m someone who is moderate, and that my views are progressive.”

As liberal journalist David Corn points out, Romney decried progressivism in his 2010 book “No Apology: The Case for American Greatness.” Romney writes, “progressives…rejected the notion of universal truths, objective judgments, and, ironically, progress itself.”

“This is a man who, if elected, will throw conservatives and conservatism under the bus …”
*************************************
Yet, when I made a casual “prediction,” you wrote this:

“well, since you have a crystal ball”
streiff (Diary) Thursday, December 1st at 4:22PM EST (link)
“don’t keep us in suspense…”

I can’t post he link because I’m on my Droid and I’m lazy. But its Berry tellingand if you read it make sure you read the whole thing. The whole thing was unknown to me but it really shows that Newt was very progressive in some important areas like the social safety. Net and moderate on others. I feel that the majority of the voters yet to know a lot about him. I can see why Beck feels the Tea Party is portraying. Their beliefs by supporting him. Now I’m no O’Donnell there’s no way Romney is anti establishment. I think she is trying to get in good with the establishment. After her loss she had to do something. Now that Perry is on the rise they will go after him because if he ever goes into the lead again he will be hard to beat.