Why social conservatives want Romney to run again

[RobDownSouth]

Interesting article over in Salon (which means that query, vetty and the gang won't click it) discussing why social conservatives want Romney to run for president in 2016.

In 2012, the social conservatives basically beat themselves to death, allowing perfumed prince RINO Mitt Romney to claim the Republican nomination.

Now social conservatives are playing a very passive-aggressive game, urging Mitt to run again. Do they want him to be President? Outside of the Mormon High Command, no. They want him to split the ticket (and the fundraising) against Jebbie Bush, which in theory might allow a demagog social conservative to elbow his way in and grab the nomination.

 

[DesEsseintes]

Interesting article over in Salon (which means that query, vetty and the gang won't click it) discussing why social conservatives want Romney to run for president in 2016.

In 2012, the social conservatives basically beat themselves to death, allowing perfumed prince RINO Mitt Romney to claim the Republican nomination.

Now social conservatives are playing a very passive-aggressive game, urging Mitt to run again. Do they want him to be President? Outside of the Mormon High Command, no. They want him to split the ticket (and the fundraising) against Jebbie Bush, which in theory might allow a demagog social conservative to elbow his way in and grab the nomination.

From a UK perspective - and goodness knows we are right-wing by European and even domestic post-war standards - what is astonishing is that someone with Jeb Bush's views is not considered a social conservative in the US. The mind boggles.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Now social conservatives are playing a very passive-aggressive game, urging Mitt to run again. Do they want him to be President? Outside of the Mormon High Command, no. They want him to split the ticket (and the fundraising) against Jebbie Bush, which in theory might allow a demagog social conservative to elbow his way in and grab the nomination.

I want Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders to run for POTUS in 2016, but I don't want them nominated -- they're too progressive to win the general election; the point of their candidacies would, rather, be to provide a nucleus for an insurgent progressive movement to take over the Democratic Party, Tea-Party-style, or at least form a much more influential faction within it than it is now.

Somehow I don't think the thinking of these social conservatives is that nuanced. They seem to think a Ted Cruz or a Mike Huckabee could win the presidency if nominated. That's delusional.

 

[Wrong Element]

I have noticed that the Elite Pundits are talking only about Romney, Jeb, and Christie, as if mentioning any of the other possibilities is a waste of time.

If this was a regular election year I might agree, because GOP voters typically do what the money folks tell them to do. But I can't see the base nominating any of those three -- especially not Mitt Stassen, who is as willing as ever to morph into whatever he thinks Republican voters want him to be, but will never be forgiven for losing to the Great Mulatto Satan.

 

[Wrong Element]

From a UK perspective - and goodness knows we are right-wing by European and even domestic post-war standards - what is astonishing is that someone with Jeb Bush's views is not considered a social conservative in the US. The mind boggles.

I am equally astonished, trust me. I see headlines like "Conservatives upset with John Boehner," which makes as much sense to most people as "Fascists upset with Mussolini."

 

[KingOrfeo]

I am equally astonished, trust me. I see headlines like "Conservatives upset with John Boehner," which makes as much sense to most people as "Fascists upset with Mussolini."

It's because American movement conservatism has been dragging the Overton Window ever-rightward for 35 years now, with not enough pull-back from the left, such as it is.

 

[Curmudgeonly]

I want Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders to run for POTUS in 2016, but I don't want them nominated -- they're too progressive to win the general election; the point of their candidacies would, rather, be to provide a nucleus for an insurgent progressive movement to take over the Democratic Party, Tea-Party-style, or at least form a much more influential faction within it than it is now.

Somehow I don't think the thinking of these social conservatives is that nuanced. They seem to think a Ted Cruz or a Mike Huckabee could win the presidency if nominated. That's delusional.

If there was one adjective that comes to mind...about your "thinking"...

...it would not be "nuanced"....

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

If there was one adjective that comes to mind...about your "thinking"...

...it would not be "nuanced"....

No actual comment on the topic "Eyer the Liar"?
Just personal attacks as per usual.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

I want Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders to run for POTUS in 2016, but I don't want them nominated -- they're too progressive to win the general election; the point of their candidacies would, rather, be to provide a nucleus for an insurgent progressive movement to take over the Democratic Party, Tea-Party-style, or at least form a much more influential faction within it than it is now.

Somehow I don't think the thinking of these social conservatives is that nuanced. They seem to think a Ted Cruz or a Mike Huckabee could win the presidency if nominated. That's delusional.

Unfortunately for the GOP they can't manage to nominate anyone that can appeal to any voter except the hard right. Their alienation of the independent moderates, women, and minority voters cost them last time, it will cost them again.

 

[Que]

#AscriptionAgain

"But, but...That's different!" -BobsDownSouth canned response #7 of 27

 

[KingOrfeo]

Unfortunately for the GOP they can't manage to nominate anyone that can appeal to any voter except the hard right.

Oh, I think both McCain and Romney had such appeal -- and they both came close to winning, as these things go. But the hard-right seems to think a Cruz or a Huckabee could do better. All such a candidacy would do is mobilize the hard-right vote -- while at the same time alienating the mainstream-Pub and moderate-swing votes. That's a recipe for a landslide defeat.

 

[Curmudgeonly]

From a UK perspective - and goodness knows we are right-wing by European and even domestic post-war standards - what is astonishing is that someone with Jeb Bush's views is not considered a social conservative in the US. The mind boggles.

Prepare for a lot of threads like this for the next two years...liberals shaking their heads together in their collective wisdom about what the Republicans should do to appeal to people that would never vote Republican...

...and yes...the Brothers' Bush...other than having a hard-on for Saddam trying to kill their Pappy...are hardly conservatives...Statists, same as it ever was...

...at least the Englishman understands what our resident liberal geniuses cannot grasp...

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Oh, I think both McCain and Romney had such appeal -- and they both came close to winning, as these things go. But the hard-right seems to think a Cruz or a Huckabee could do better. All such a candidacy would do is mobilize the hard-right vote -- while at the same time alienating the mainstream-Pub and moderate-swing votes. That's a recipe for a landslide defeat.

McCain did, until he pulled in Half-Governor Palin as his Vice Presidential candidate. Hell, I considered voting for him right up until then.

Romney never had a chance once he went full Teahadist trying to pull in the far right.

 

[KingOrfeo]

...at least the Englishman understands what our resident liberal geniuses cannot grasp...

You seem to have misunderstood DesEissentes' post.

 

[unregistered]

 

[KingOrfeo]

Prepare for a lot of threads like this for the next two years...liberals shaking their heads together in their collective wisdom about what the Republicans should do to appeal to people that would never vote Republican...

And at the end of those two years, another Democrat will be in the WH, and you, against all evidence, will be screaming that the Pub nominee lost because he wasn't RW enough.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Bullshit! Romney is being urged to run by Rinos, as a sort of guarantee, that either way an establishment Pub gets the nomination.

You do realize that no other kind of Pub can win the general election?

 

[RobDownSouth]

McCain did, until he pulled in Half-Governor Palin as his Vice Presidential candidate. Hell, I considered voting for him right up until then.

Romney never had a chance once he went full Teahadist trying to pull in the far right.

McCain was losing the wingnut vote, he needed a Hail Mary, so he chose the Wasilla Hillbilly. That ended up backfiring spectacularly but it wasn't obvious at the time. It did, however, bring sharp focus to the level of delusion on the fringe social conservative right.

 

[unregistered]

 

[RobDownSouth]

Even if that were true, what does it have to do with the point of my post?

Wait....wait....your post had a point?

STOP TEH PRESSES!

 

[unregistered]

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Yes, but you have to be able to read. Maybe Luke can help.

Help us out here Vette. From what I can tell you expect the GOP to intentionally nominate someone from the fringe far right so that they can lose spectacularly.

 

[unregistered]

 

[KingOrfeo]

Even if that were true, what does it have to do with the point of my post?

"Romney is being urged to run by Rinos, as a sort of guarantee, that either way an establishment Pub gets the nomination" seems to imply that is a bad idea for the GOP. In fact, it is the only idea that gives the party a shot at the WH.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Ronald Reagan was not an establishment candidate, and he won by landslide . . .

But, he'd be a RINO by today's standards.