You have an opportunity in 2012. You are running against the weakest President since Carter. He has to run on his record, now, and there’s an awful lot of easy ammunition there.
Yet the best you can apparently do is Mitt Romney, and you are considering Rick Santorum?
I think Mitt can win. I don’t think there are significant differences between his positions and those of The One, but he’s probably marginally better.
Santorum? No. Have you learned nothing from the strength of the Ron Paul support? Do you understand that support will line up behind Gary Johnson as soon as the Republican primary race is over if Santorum is the nominee?
I think Gary Johnson could be the difference in a couple of states regardless of the nominee, but you all best realize how many people in your ranks lean towards Libertarianism. Sure, some on the Left will place a protest vote for Johnson as well, but the real alignment is with some of your ranks.
Just letting you know.
Don’t worry about me, though. I’m voting for Johnson regardless.
Or, at least, match their desire to take responsibility. According to Politico, many prominent Republicans are turning down the opportunity to serve on the House Appropriations committee, where they would presumably be casting votes to cut spending.
“Anybody who’s a Republican right now, come June, is going to be accused of hating seniors, hating education, hating children, hating clean air and probably hating the military and farmers, too,” said Jack Kingston (R-Ga.), a fiscal conservative who is lobbying to become chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. “So much of the work is going to be appropriations related. There’s going to be a lot of tough votes. So some people may want to shy away from the committee. I understand it.”
Kingston said he’s approached Bachmann, King and Westmoreland about the committee, and they all told him they weren’t interested.
That leaves Republican leaders in a dilemma: How do they live up to the tea-party-driven effort to slash spending if the committee that controls the purse is still dominated by old bulls and senior lawmakers who are only grudgingly giving up earmarks?
Answer: They won’t. Because while there’s big talk about responsibility and cost containment, the real goal is power. New boss, old boss, etc. I’ll believe different when I see different. Hopefully they’ll prove me wrong, but I think it’s more likely we’ll see a lot of gridlock, and the same ‘blame the other party’ strategy the Democrats used while they had an overwhelming majority.
Sarah Palin says she’s “willing” to take on President Obama in 2012.
If she wins your primary elections, you all better be willing to have another 4 years of President Obama. He might be a lot like Carter, but she’s not anything like Reagan.
Oh, and to folks calling themselves members of the “Tea Party” movement: chanting “Run Sarah, Run” doesn’t give you much credibility. That she endorsed Rand Paul is nice, but doesn’t absolve her.
Steve Schmidt, McCain’s campaign manager, doesn’t think a Palin nomination would be a good thing for the 2012 election.
“I think that she has talents,” Steve Schmidt, the former campaign manager of McCain’s failed presidential bid, told CNN’s John King. “But my honest view is that she would not be a winning candidate for the Republican Party in 2012, and in fact, were she the nominee, we could have a catastrophic election result.”
The comments came during The Atlantic Magazine’s First Draft of History Conferece, held at the Newseum in Washington, DC.
“I don’t think it’s inconceivable that she could be the Republican nominee for President of the United States,” added Schmidt — who, among others in the McCain campaign, butted heads behind the scenes with Palin in the weeks leading up to Election Day. “I do think it’s fairly inconceivable that she could be elected President of the United States.”
Ya think? We’ve seen the Republicans implode before (I honestly think if they had any sense, we would have a President Romney right now); they might just do it again. She isn’t Reagan. So get it out of your heads that she’s a viable candidate. Maybe a very nice person, maybe very smart, but she will not be President.