Mitt Romney Will Be the 2012 GOP Nominee, and He Will Be A Formidable Opponent for Obama

[Yavin4]

Take heed. Romney will be difficult for Obama to defeat in 2012. He can appear reasonable enough to the independent voters, and with a terrible economy, he may seem to be a decent alternative to Obama.

2012 will be no cakewalk. We have to work twice as hard as we did in 2008 in order for the Dems to hold onto the Whitehouse.

[Vincardog]

1. Obama needs to start fighting for MY interests if he wants me to fight for him.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Vanje]

13. Be careful what you wish for.

[CakeGrrl]

18. President Obama doesn't need you to fight for HIM at all

But if you think Romney and his backers will do equal or better for the average American, hang back and help him win.

[Fearless]

31. Fear is a great force isn't it.

[Vincardog]

45. How do you read my wanting Obama to do BETTER as support for the lunatic right?

[RBInMaine]

25. YouTube Maddow and get the accomplishments list. Then get real.

[Fearless]

30. +1

[Eagle Mall]

49. who cares about the millions of others he's helping. You want yours, right?

[Vanje]

50. Millionaires and bankers, and oil companies have certainly got THEIRS

I think it really IS Vincardog's turn!

Maybe mine too, and my neighbors, and my sisters, and my mothers,and my brohers, and my neices, and my nephews, and my cousins, and my co-workers, and my friends, and my schools, and my small rural towns..........
and the poor, and the jobless, and those who cant afford both food and gas, and the sick, and the upside-down home-owners, and the foreclosed upon.........
Yeah. We want our interests addressed too. That makes us selfish self-centered pouters?

[thanks_imjustlurking]

72. I want everybody's.

At least of the meat people, not corporations.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[totodeinhere]

57. What if your interests do not conform with what is good for the country overall?

That's the problem we have now. With too many people it's all about "me" and not about the greater good for all of us.

[Vanje]

68. "What if your interests do not conform with what is good for the country overall?

The I guess you'd be a Republican , would'nt you.
Or a Bank-owner, or a Wall-Street big wig, or an Oil Company CEO , or an Insurance executive.....

These guys interests have been pretty nicely served by the current administration. Would'nt you say?

[totodeinhere]

74. I was responding to what the poster at DU said. But you put it nicely.

This just goes to show that not only Republicans put their selfish interests first and the rest of us be damned.

[thanks_imjustlurking]

73. As long as the "greater good"

does not involve denying people their civil rights. I'm afraid I draw the line there.

[TheCowsCameHome]

2. So far he's the only half sane body in the GOP clown car.

But he's got a ton of explainin' to do to get the baggers and kooks on board.

[BlueIris]

3. As I've posted before: if it IS Romney, we're screwed.

Totally and completely screwed.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Beaverhausen]

4. if Romney is the GOP candidate there will be a third "tea" party candidate...

...who will split the votes on the right.

He is too "liberal" for many to vote for.

My two cents

[skepticscott]

6. Very possibly

There are just too many of the Palin or Paul-loving ilk out there that would be desperate for anyone to vote for besides Romney.

[TheCowsCameHome]

10. That's my best guess.

The kooks will never back Romney, and they will crack the GOP into little pieces.

[n2doc]

14. The fundies will never support a Mormon

So yes, they will go with a Ron Paul or other 3rd party candidate.

Mittens is not a significant threat, IMHO.

[customerserviceguy]

19. True

Which is why he'll never get the nomination. You can't get 50% of the GOP delegates without the fundies in the base. Oh, he'll get 20-25% from the country-clubbers in the Northeast, and some Western Repubs, but that's as far as he'll go.

I can see a situation where nobody has a clear majority going into the convention, and the danger is that they'll nominate some dark horse on the 33rd ballot. That could be Christie or some other reich winger who's decided to sit it out until 2016.

[Solomon]

69. I think you guys are underestimating the objection to Obama's

skin color. People who would not ordinarily vote for a Mormon will cling to him to stop Obama from getting back in there. Mormonism will not be a factor as long as the Mormon is white.

[Vanje]

71. True. ..and remember...

These nuts think Obama is a Muslim .

[namahage]

77. Absolutely.

Being Mormon didn't exactly hurt Glenn Beck.

[Dark]

81. I disagree. The authoritarians will do as they're told.

But, a tea party candidate would probably siphon off maybe 2-5% in a few states.

[skepticscott]

5. His problem is not the independents, but

the fact that the far right 27%ers would rather drink their own vomit than vote for a Mormon RINO. A Romney candidacy might very well split the GOP. It's hard to see folks like Palin and Gingrich getting behind him, and right-wing talk radio is death on him.

[DCBob]

7. Romney might be Obama's easiest opponent..

-- The Obamacare talking point is pretty much dead since Mittens loved it back in Mass.
-- Teabaggers can stand him so they probably wont be showing up to campaign, donate or vote.
-- Obama is a radical Muslim talking point might not play very well considering Mittens is Mormon.
-- Mittens has been too liberal in the past so the conservatives dont trust him so they wont be inspired to vote.
-- Mittens is boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooring so Obama wins the debates by just showing up and smiling.

[dennis4868]

12. Also

Mass was 48th in job creation under Romney so it's not like he seriously claim that he can come in and create jobs...

[DCBob]

17. But Romney ran the Olympics so..

clearly he can run the country.. :eyes:

[TheCowsCameHome]

21. ...with government money.

But that's a secret. Shhh.

[GoCubsGo]

24. And, he was a corporate raider during the 1990s.

He spent his time buying up companies, and shipping all their jobs overseas. That should go over really well with the teabaggers, dontcha think?

[AlinPA]

8. Palin is sucking all the oxygen out of the media coverage - consider the wall-to-wall

coverage she will get when she actually announces her run on Fox "news". The others are toast. The media controls the republican primary now.

[FrenchieCat]

11. Why?

Cause he's a tall White boy with grey around the temple
who fired more than he hired? Cause otherwise, I don't see it.

[Vicar In A Tutu]

16. Indeed. He's fucking hopeless.

He couldn't get near a 97 year old, clapped out McCain in 2008 - this wasn't like finishing runner up to JFK in a squeaker of an election or losing the primary to Ronald Reagan. This is a man who was WIPED OUT by a past- it John McCain. Wiped out.

He's also boring, uninspiring, with a delicious track record of little achievement and a mind bending, unprecedented array of 'multiple choice-isms'. Far from being "screwed", he's exactly the sort of candidate who'll fill the Bob Dole / Walter Mondale role. Above all else, all three were just fucking drab, reheated characters who'd been around for a long time and got their turn by default.

Besides, it's looking almost impossible for Obama to lose regardless of who the GOP nominee ends up being. Lichtman's keys are looking very, very good for the incumbent.

[Yavin4]

22. No, Because He Has Money and Lots of It

And in the end, money talks and the GOP will fall in line behind Mitt.

[Hippo_Tron]

33. He had lots of money last time and it didn't do jack shit

The McCain campaign went broke, Huckabee never had anything close to Romney's money, and Giulianni pissed all of his resources away on the failed Florida strategy. If Mittens' money were a guarantor of success, he would've been the nominee in 2008. Money correlates with victory, but the correlation isn't strong enough to be able to predict a winner a year ahead of time.

[Vanje]

15. I think Romney hired Palin to do her media bus-extravaganza

.....so that Romney with look stone cold sane in comparison.

Maybe Trump is working for the Mittster's campaign as well,

[customerserviceguy]

20. The thing that's wrong with your theory

is that Palin's bus tour sucked all the media oxygen out of the room the day that Mitt announced.

Of course, you could be right, and Romney was the one who miscalculated spectacularly...

[krawhitham]

23. the religious right will not vote for a mormon PERIOD

and neither will the TEA baggers

That is more than 50% of the GOP vote

[Vanje]

51. They will

The wacky religious right will vote for a Mormon over a "Muslim" .

[RBInMaine]

27. Mittens would be a GIFT to us ! Here is why:

1) He will be forced to go to the hard right in the primaries which will make him look like a worse flip flopper than he already is. In the primary, the real hardcore hard-righters will lambaste him day in and day out as a "RINO" flip flopper whose "ROMNEY CARE" plan and past views on abortion and other issues are "LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL". If he got the nomination, he'd come out with DEEP battle scars and the RePUKE party will be deeply split. His only hope to unite the party will be to have a hardcore right winger as a running mate. Another Palin type. Then he'd look like a real douche of an asshat idiot among indies for doing so. His hard right primary turn will haunt him bigtime in the general election as he tries to flip back to the center. And this will piss off the right wingers all over again. There will be no hard right base enthusiasm for Romney. THEIR PRIMARY IS GOING TO BE FUN FUN FUN TO WATCH.

2) The tea nut right wingers will beat on him so hard in the primary over ROMNEYCARE and his other "RINO" positions and they'll be so pissed if he gets the ultimate nod that they will abandon him in the general and may even go to a THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE.

3) The religious fundies won't want a Mormon. They think it's a cult.

4) Obama and Dems will smash on him as a corporate-loving worker-firing flip-flopping boring-ass creep of an asshole.

I WELCOME ROMNEY. This corporate job-killer will be CRUSHED.

[Top Cat]

44. Kick

[davidpdx]

56. Hell I'm not a religious fundy and I think Mormons are a cult

I've seen polls recently that say that a large number of people wouldn't vote for a Mormon (can't remember exactly how many).

[golfguru]

75. Will they prefer a Muslim over a Mormon?

[AtomicKitten]

28. I think it will be Romney too but he's got nothing but weaksauce.

1) RomneyCare cancels out any leverage on the Affordable Care Act.

2) Romney is the Mayor of Flip Flop.

3) The teabaggers hate Romney and have pledged to go Nader on his ass.

So, there's that.

[The Unawriter]

29. 1) Probably

2) No. With Romney as the nom, the President wins 304 electoral votes.

[pstokely]

32. Any Repuke opponent will be formidable with a shitty economy

People will vote for Satan if they think he'll fix the economy. They'll toast if the economy dramatically improvements in the next year.

[steve2470]

34. Absolutely everything hinges on the perceived state of the economy in late October/early November of

2012.

If people THINK the economy is good or improving, then President Obama stands an excellent chance of being re-elected.

If the economy is perceived to be bad and/or declining, then President Obama MIGHT lose to even a nutjob like Palin.

Yeah, she's a nutjob but many, if not most, voters vote their bank account.

[SkyDaddy7]

35. I agree & disagree...

I agree Romney or any GOP nominee will be a very tough opponent for Obama in 2012...However, I do not agree Romney will automatically be the GOP nominee. He has huge hills to climb when it comes to the Religious Right & the fact he use to support gun control, gay rights & women's rights.

Regardless I have a really sick feeling that the Republicans are going to win back control of the entire government in 2012.

[RBInMaine]

38. Please, enough typical far left dooming and glooming. The Pukes WILL NOT win in 2012.

What is it with the far-left psyche? Is depression, doom, and gloom in the bloodstream? Is it viral? The economy IS improving, the Pubs have ZERO decent candidates, we just WON a DEEP RED district in NY, and we will have VOUCHER-CARE around their necks like a fucking millstone. So buck up, PLEASE.

[SkyDaddy7]

53. LOVE your positive attitude but...

your reply tells me that you do have problems paying attention to detail when it comes to me, the special election in NY's 26th District & the 2012 Presidential Race...And at the same time your reply was a bit snarky to say the least.

Let me point out some very important details you seem not to be aware of...

...We, the Democratic Party, only won the special election in New York's 26th District because the "Republican vote" was split between two candidates, "GOP" candidate Jane Corwin got 43%, and “Tea Party” candidate Jack Davis got 9% allowing Democratic Party candidate Kathy Hochul to win with only 47%...In reality it was 52% Republican & 47% Democrat.

...You, like so many others, either fell for the press narrative that Kathy Hochul won due to what you call "Voucher-Care" when in reality she, we, the Democratic Party won due to the Tea Party sucking votes off the GOP...OR you simply failed on your own to pay attention to the details much like the majority of the press did.

That failure to pay attention to detail may be why you think President Obama has very little to no chance at all of losing the 2012 Presidential Election. According to what you said you seem to think "Voucher-Care" will kill the Republicans chances regardless of the candidate, correct? However, my guess is judging by your assessment of the NY special election you have not even considered what HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS that will be spent on selling "Voucher-Care" to the public could/will do to public opinion over the next year & half? YES, thanks to "Citizens United" there will be HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS spent ONLY on changing public opinion when it comes to Paul Ryan's Medicare Plan.

If there is one thing the Republican Party can do & do VERY WELL that is convince enough of the public to vote against their own well being! The GOP turned public opinion on Health Care Reform, Public Option, Democrats destroying Medicare, Financial Reform, etc.,) ...Except now they will have UNLIMITED AMOUNTS OF MONEY TO WORK WITH!

Finally, the "Far Left" hates President Obama & has vowed not to vote for him in 2012 & this FACT is made very clear on a daily basis here on DU & across the "Far Left" blogosphere...So, again you failed to failed to pay attention to this detail as well when writing your snarky reply. And I bet you have not even considered what the impact would be in 2012 if the "Far Left" holds true to their word & stays home on election day?

Feel free to think 2012 will be nothing short of a "Cake Walk" for President Obama & the Democrats...However, I plan to volunteer once again for the Obama Campaign except this time to help get President Obama re-elected. I can GUARANTEE you President Obama knows this election WILL NOT BE A CAKE WALK & I can GUARANTEE you those of us who will be working to get President Obama reelected will be giving 110% just like we did in 2008!

I think it is you who needs to "Buck Up, Please" by paying attention to the nasty fight that lies ahead in 2012...You can "Buck Up" here: http://www.barackobama.com/get-involved

PLEASE!?!?

[polmaven]

36. Which Mitt Romney?

:shrug:

[RedSpartan]

39. I agree.

Anyone who thinks that the fundies or tea party nuts will not vote for Romney is kidding themselves. They will hold their nose and do so because a vote for Romney is a vote AGAINST Obama. THAT is their driving force. The GOP nominee could literally be a rodeo clown and he/she will have the base behind him/her in full force because their ONLY goal is to get that durn black mooslem socialist out of the White House.

And Romney can seem pretty reasonable if he chooses (see: several of his previous positions before he flip-flopped on, well, everything). He's no fool. He's been a politician, and campaigned, for a long time and learned his lesson in 2008. He's doing what he needs to do to play to the base and get the nomination. Then he can back off and play to the center, where elections are won.

He is without question the most formidable threat to Obama. Not saying he'll win, but he absolutely could, and we would be foolish to take him lightly.

[Harmony Blue]

40. Tea Party is fueled by seeing the world in black and white

Romney made a major miscalculation trying to move to a centrist position when he hasn't even won the nomination yet.

Romeny has Romney Care, Pro Climate change, and other issues he has been straddling the fence on. In other words, he has not shot now that he has fired up the rabid Tea Party base in opposition to him.

[RedSpartan]

41. They will oppose him during the primaries, to be sure.

But if he wins the nomination, they will not turn their back on him. The fundies and Teahadists will vote, passionately, AGAINST Obama -- who they are actually voting for is secondary. (As an aside, this is, of course, what the GOP is all about -- being against things, not for things.)

[BklnDem75]

42. After 2008 with McCain...

The tea party isn't gonna let the establishment repukes choose their candidate for them again. If Romney is the guy, count on it that there's going to be a third party candidate to split their votes. That assumes Romney becomes the nominee at all. In the post-Bush climate, blue state conservatives rarely do well during the primaries. Ask Giuliani who polled well until the primaries started.

[olegramps]

43. She appeals to the working class NASCAR, macho NRA racists.

It doesn't matter to them that they are their own worst enemy by supporting charlatans. There is a lot of latent racist resentment coupled with the inability to turn the economy around that could be a big problem for Obama. I feel that the Democrats have once again allowed the Republicans to define them.

Obama has failed to delivery a clear concise message that he is determined to defeat the oligarchs who have absolute control of the economy. Everything that is wrong with this country can be attributed to the massive out-sourcing of jobs by greedy capitalists with the blessings of congress that has resulted in the massive transfer of wealth. Every empire has had its crucial periods and have more often than not resorted to extremism in a futile attempt to regain its former glory. Obama has done a lot of great things, but he has absolutely failed to take a strong stance on a number of critical issues. In stead of being perceived as a strong leader he appears to be wishy-washy at best. There is no doubt who is the more intelligent. It doesn't matter that Plain acts like she's dimwit that just fell off a turnip truck. Unfortunately, the brightest bulb doesn't always prevail during difficult times. It is the demagogues appealing to people's prejudices and spewing half-truths and out right lies who often prevail during stressful times. Sara Palin is the ultimate demagogue and is appealing to the worst aspects of our society. It requires someone of the nature of FDR who said he welcomed the oligarchs hated because he was determined to defeat them or a Harry that told them to their face that they were damn liars.

[whistler162]

46. Drunk again! You need to get help with that problem!

[Politicalboi]

47. People need to associate the saving of

Medicare and Social Security with the Dems. They need to explain to the younger people why these programs are VITAL to our survival. If we can get the truth out about what the Repukes want to do with those programs, I think it should be clear. I don't think the fundies cult will ever vote for a Mormon cult.

[Eagle Mall]

48. just like Hillary was. Yet she lost. So will Romney or any other clown they put up.

[JAnthony]

54. Romney will only be supported by Bush Republicans, idiot Republicans in Mass, and

a few people who don't know how to deal with a black man in the White House.

Romney is fake and his fake-ness will show through. It was there for Republicans in 2008, with no one more intelligent, more good looking, more accomplished in a political sense, having hoodwinked Mass independents into voting for him against a strong accomplished Democratic woman. He hoodwinked Mass people once, he knew he couldn't win a second term and bowed out, his ONLY political accomplishment in his life.
Remember, he lost to Kennedy in 1994 for Senator.

People in Mass are not that stupid, but neither are Republicans and independents in other states.. they smell a flip-flopper, a face without anything on his record except Romneycare. He left Mass 2 Billion in debt..he just left town, and retreated to Republican speaking engagements and to his NH and Utah vacation lodges. He cares so little for the state he once governed that he owns no property there now.

His recipe for success as a businessman:? Inherit 400 million in the 1980's

[cottonseed]

55. It will be Reasonable vs Reasonable

If the unemployment rate is still heading downward come election time, you go with the Reasonable you know.

[totodeinhere]

58. There are two many people in this thread who already seem to "know" what is going to happen.

But the fact is that nobody can predict with certainty what the political situation will be in this country in November 2012. It is way too early to be making any definitive political predictions.

[quaker bill]

59. Mitt cannot run on his accomplishments

as he will not win the nomination if he tries. Regardless of the person they pick, republicans will run as tea party - all government is bad, any government = less freedom. To his credit, his past actions indicate that Mitt doesn't actually believe this. However, the way he will be forced to run to get the nomination will leave a gaping hole between his rhetoric and his record of service.

He does look the part and speaks pretty well, but he does not win.

[nod factor]

60. Bush-Kerry

is what Obama-Romney will be like and that scares me because Bush barely won and I still question Blackwell's shenanigans.
I volunteered for moveon in 2004 in a deep red county in Florida and just like the prevailing sentiment on this board, at the time, we were not happy with Kerry we all thought he was a turncoat, after all he voted for the IWR.
In the end it didn't matter because we believed Bush-Cheney to be so pure evil we could have nominated a robot with a (D) on its chest and I still would have voted.
I think the tea party, republicans, and republican-leaning "independents" feel the same way about Obama.
So unless there is an independent, Perot-esque spoiler candidate they will vote for Romney and enthusiastically so, just as we did Kerry.
I think what is worse for us is the possibility of troops still being killed in Afghanistan in summer '12.
I don't live mainland anymore and vote absentee now and I cannot imagine how supporters will garner the strength to knock on doors and car pool if that is the case.
My partner may be on tour around that time and that will be an emotional conflict for me especially.

[karynnj]

62. Kerry was in no way a "turncoat" and many Democrats

I know proudly voted for him. There were many of us proudly for him in the primary. I liked Dean as well, but the more I learned of Kerry, the more impressed I was.

I realize that Dean was the "internet" favorite, but, it was Kerry, who won twice as many Iowans to caucus for him - largely as a result of retail politicking. Kerry meeting face to face with people in Iowa convinced more voters. This in spite of being grossly overspent. Dean raised $40 million in the 4th quarter of 2003 - at a time where Kerry loaned his campaign $6 million. In addition, the media pushed Dean, Edwards, Clark and even in a few instances Gephardt, but not Kerry. Dean also had more party support, including the endorsements of both Gore and Harkin. (Clark had an unofficial, but publicized Bill Clinton endorsement.)

Kerry won all but VT (Dean), OK (Clark) and SC (Edwards) (and the NC caucus after Kerry was the defacto nominee.) This was a more conclusive win than nearly any open primary in my life.

I think one factor of some people like you, supporting the nominee, but holding on to the negative primary narrative might be the internet, which provided support for people feeling that. I know that that did not happen in 1992, where all of us - even people like me for whom Bill Clinton was very far down my list, rallied behind him with enthusiasm, in spite of his flaws.

I suspect that Kerry having beaten Dean still hurts to many - just as there are Clinton supporters still upset that Obama beat her. In 2004, one way this was evident was that some media Dean supporters shifted to Edwards, rather than Kerry after Dean was out - eve though Kerry was more liberal than both and was far more anti-war - speaking out before the war to not rush to war vs being a co-sponsor of the IWR. John Nichols of the Nation went further actually saying that he "thought" Edwards was better on the environment - ignoring that Kerry, with a 96% LCV score was the League of Conservation Voters' PRIMARY endorsement (something they never did before - even in 2000).

[nod factor]

64. Don't be so defensive.

At the time many of the volunteers I worked with and many on this board erroneously thought he was.
He voted for the IWR and the anti-war bloc, which is somewhat akin to what the tea party is for the GOP, were single-issue voters.
My message is don't take for granted the level of hatred that approximately 40% of the likely voter has for Obama.
They are energized; we are not.
We were promised a pie in the sky and got grounded by politics on earth.
It is what it is.

[karynnj]

66. I agree with your point on the fact that there is about 40% that are highly

likely to vote for each party.

But, in Iowa, KERRY won more of the "antiwar" vote than Dean did per studies of Iowa caucus goers.

This gets to my point that starting in 2004, the internet created the ability of people to create groups where most of the voices they listened to agreed only with them. The fact is that in fall 2002, the PUBLIC comments of Kerry and Dean were not that different. In fact, Dean attacked Kerry in mid 2002 when Kerry decried Bush handing the capture of OBL over to Afghan warlords, who were allied with the Taliban weeks before. Dean said he was for Biden/Lugar, the SFRC resolution that Kerry preferred as well.

Here is what he said on Face the Nation on September 29, 2002, shortly before the IWR vote.

HOWARD DEAN: It’s very simple. Here’s what we ought to have done. We should have gone to the UN Security Council. We should have asked for a resolution to allow the inspectors back in with no pre-conditions. And then we should have given them a deadline, saying, ‘If you don’t do this, say, within 60 days, we will reserve our right as Americans to defend ourselves and we will go into Iraq.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/1879

(I can't find the FTN interview as it appears to no longer be on line. This is a link to David Swanson's post of many Dean statements. Swanson was a co-founder of AfterDowningStreet.org - so this should be an acceptable source for a quote that was in the mainstream media back in 2002. Note that ALL of the summer/fall talk show interviews are not on any Dean site that I ca find.)

Dean's ideal resolution, would have been as bad as the IWR - if not worse.

However, Dean did not have to vote. In politics, it is completely fair to use any difference from your opponents that helps you and all politicians will. So, it was fair for Dean to use Kerry's vote to define him as prowar, ignoring that Kerry in late 2002 and through the start of the was was routinely described as anti war. (In fact, David Frum, a former Bush speech writer, attacked Kerry in the National Review as someone who would never think it time to go to war - after Kerry said that Bush should not rush to war.

Now, I am not saying that Kerry was a pacifist - he never has been, nor has Dean. Many of us, in 2004, saw Dean AND Kerry as not having been for going to war. Dean's campaign worked hard to define Kerry differently - and Trippi was FAR worse than Dean himself in this effort. Kerry should not have voted as he did, but his reasons were not political - they actually nearly lost him the nomination that otherwise would have clearly been his. In his speech, he points out that they persuaded Bush to go to the UN and to Congress, I suspect that he thought that they might have a chance to push to a non-military solution. The error was that the resolution gave consent to war if Bush thought certain things were met. The fact is they were not met, but it was up to the Bush administration only to determine that. (Kerry might have thought that others in Congress and the military would object as he did when Bush ignored things he agreed to, but very very few did.)

[karynnj]

61. As my college age daughter said, "He put his dog on the top of the car for a long ride"

Now, before anyone mock her, her reasons why this is important do make sense. The first reason is that we know this story because the Romney sons told it and thought it made their father more likable and "like us". It doesn't.

Although dogs don't vote, the fact that even after the fact the Romneys did not see this as abusive, or near abusive, or even unintentionally, but a funny humanizing story suggests that they can not become what they might need to be to beat President Obama.

That is someone who cares for people in need who have the least voice in things that affect their life. The second is that it fits with how Bain Capital made its millions - by buying companies and in most cases keeping the profitable parts, while firing everyone else, people might come to see that if they are not the wealthy and powerful, they will be on the roof.

Though he did not win, consider the impact that Alexandra Kerry's story of "Licorice, the unlucky hamster" had in humanizing John Kerry (when the media was working overtime to prevent that). Seeing him as a man who would jump in the water to save a hamster - probably to keep his daughters from suffering the pain of seeing him drown, echoing his saving lives in Vietnam, suggested a man who cared deeply for others. The Romney story suggests someone who was uncaring enough not to think of the obvious possible suffering of the dog. Note that this story hurts Romney more than most as it confirms possible Romney negatives.

[cherish44]

63. Americans have the attention span of a goldfish with ADD

what's going to decide the election is what the economy is like about a week before the election

[Thrill]

65. Some of you just don't realize how much him being a Mormon

matters in VA and NC. I don't think he will win either state. They'll stay at home before voting for a Mormon as the leader of the country

[RedSpartan]

67. I see a Romney/Rubio ticket

as the best the GOP can come up with at this point, and a tough one at that. I still think that the President can and will win, but it will be a fight.

[wiggs]

70. Any gop candidate will be formidable because they aren't about the issues or the

person...they are about tactics. Depressing the vote, caging, smearing, lying, huge anonymous campaign contributions, polarization, hate, fear, running fake dems, cutting off traditional dem labor support...etc etc. These all work and they have no shame. There will be new swiftboating, new Rev Wright stuff, new Bill Ayers, new socialism, new teleprompter scandals...all of that and more. Probably some very hateful propositions and measures on the ballot to make sure the narrow-minded come out to vote.

[Creideiki]

76. And the red-blue summer camp color war.

The only real things that Obama is offering the progressive part of his base are Elizabeth Warren and potential Supreme Court nominees.

I still don't know that the conservative Democrats will do anything to get the Unions back, especially the government employees Obama has stabbed in the back.

All one has to say to the Hispanic part of the base is "Safe Communities".

The GLBT community still has people getting kicked out of the military.

One might have thought that 2010 would be a wake up call to the DLC-DNC borg that they are only part of the Democratic Coalition. Sadly, like the Republican conservatives, they think that they're the only ones that matter.

[ThoughtCriminal]

78. If he gets nominated, He'll have to pick a real looney of Veep

to try an inspire and appease the religious/KKK/teabag wing. I don't think Palin ar Bachmann are likely after the 2008 disaster. I'm guessing Huckabee.

[Bake]

79. I honestly don't see Mittens getting through the Pug Primaries.

He might be a tough opponent in the general election, but he's not conservative enough for the primaries.

And if he IS the nominee, we've got PLENTY to hammer him with: he was against saving the jobs of the auto industry. He was a freakin' WALL STREETER, fer cryin' out loud. And he's a Mormon (no, Obama won't stoop to that, but plenty of others will, and that's all it will take).

Bake

[tjl148]

80. How about...

If we are going to throw out some names one that would worry me is Herman Cain.

[wisteria]

82. Romney is a phony and people will see through him right away.

Does anyone even really like this guy?