Mittens to the GOP Rescue??????

This mornings political musings find that the Washington Post has a decent length article detailing the anguish that establishment GOP leaders are going through as both Donald Trump and Ben Carson continue to lead the polls as favorites for the GOP presidential nomination. And the Post speculates that it is possible that some of the party leaders may go to the man who lost for them last time - Mitt Romney - in a draft movement. Apparently they feel that either Trump or Carson would be a disaster and cause a loss not only of the White House, but of the Senate as well.

Less than three months before the kickoff Iowa caucuses, there is growing anxiety bordering on panic among Republican elites about the dominance and durability of Donald Trump and Ben Carson and widespread bewilderment over how to defeat them.

Party leaders and donors fear that nominating either man would have negative ramifications for the GOP ticket up and down the ballot, virtually ensuring a Hillary Rodham Clinton presidency and increasing the odds that the Senate falls into Democratic hands.

Said Austin Barbour, a veteran operative and fundraiser now advising former Florida governor Jeb Bush: “If we don’t have the right [nominee], we could lose the Senate, and we could face losses in the House. Those are very, very real concerns. If we’re not careful and we nominate Trump, we’re looking at a race like Barry Goldwater in 1964 or George McGovern in 1972, getting beat up across the board because of our nominee.”

Click to expand...

The result of this hand wringing and gnashing of teeth is to hope Mitt Romney can ride in like the Lone Ranger and save the day.

According to other Republicans, some in the party establishment are so desperate to change the dynamic that they are talking anew about drafting Romney — despite his insistence that he will not run again. Friends have mapped out a strategy for a late entry to pick up delegates and vie for the nomination in a convention fight, according to the Republicans who were briefed on the talks, though Romney has shown no indication of reviving his interest.

Click to expand...

The problem is compounded by the rise of Ted Cruz - while not an outsider like the previous two - he is generally not liked by party elders and even by many of his fellow Senators.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ea88a6-895b-11e5-be8b-1ae2e4f50f76_story.html

Lets us say that the party unites to stop Trump or Carson and gets an insider to carry their party standard next summer. What do you think would be the reaction among those who have supported Trump and Carson?

And is that strategy even possible to succeed?

:lamo no.

1. Romney doesn't have time to win the nomination.
2. Romney doesn't have the organization to win the nomination.
3. Romney doesn't have the desire to win the nomination.
4. Romney doesn't have the support to win the nomination.

Click Bait "News" Story.

That piece of **** RINO can go **** himself.Considering the fact he governed as a liberal he should change his R to a D.

You have got to be kidding me...

OrphanSlug said:

You have got to be kidding me...

Click to expand...

That was also one of my early reactions. But when you read the article and the thoughts and fears of party insiders - you begin to understand how some see a tsunami on the horizon and it could spell disaster for the GOP.

Why would they call on Mitt, knowing they have the perfect RINO-in-waiting JB?

haymarket said:

That was also one of my early reactions. But when you read the article and the thoughts and fears of party insiders - you begin to understand how some see a tsunami on the horizon and it could spell disaster for the GOP.

Click to expand...

GOP is looking for new blood; the dems - same old tired, worn out, and divisive :bs

Drudge led with this article last night in lurid red, and I wondered why. "Some" Republicans thinking about drafting Romney seems pretty weak to me. I think those same Republicans should be looking at a realistic alternative to Trump and Carson such as Rubio.

Meanwhile, if the college kids keep up their protests, won't Bernie Sanders profit from their votes?

This will never happen. The NH primary is in less than 90 days. It's too late for Romney to even get in it. He would need to win NH again to have a chance. The filing deadline for primary candidates is one week from today.

The "Republican establishment" fielded two weak and uninspiring candidates the last two POTUS elections and they were disasters each time. Especially Romney in 2012: he couldn't even beat a sitting POTUS who garnered fewer votes in his reelection than in his initial election. That hadn't happened since before ww2. So, thinking an "establishment" candidate gives a better chance of wresting control from the socialists is prima facie absurd and contray to recent history.

It is too late for a Lone Ranger on a white stallion to come riding in onto the stage of either Reps or Dems. And one can forget about any possible Third Party coming up to save us.

What we have is two buckets of vomit and we need to swish around in them and find a piece that is somewhat palatable.

There already is a wide variety of selection in the current field: establishment like kaisch, christie, and bush, libertarians cruz and paul, populists trump and carson, as well as crossovers like rubio who walks a line between establishment/libertarian. I don't see what romney would bring to the table ideologically other than democrat-lite, personality-wise, or enthusiasm.

I think the best shot the pubs have is a kaisch-rubio ticket. This would not be my first choice but, assuming they can each deliver their home states, it gives the pubs the best chance of regaining the WH. Note also that was something neither Gore nor Romney were able to do.

Citizen.Seven said:

There already is a wide variety of selection in the current field: establishment like kaisch, christie, and bush, libertarians cruz and paul, populists trump and carson, as well as crossovers like rubio who walks a line between establishment/libertarian. I don't see what romney would bring to the table ideologically other than democrat-lite, personality-wise, or enthusiasm.

I think the best shot the pubs have is a kaisch-rubio ticket. This would not be my first choice but, assuming they can each deliver their home states, it gives the pubs the best chance of regaining the WH. Note also that was something neither Gore nor Romney were able to do.

Click to expand...

Judging from my conversations with other voters (and folks on this forum) and the current make-up of congress critters it seems that demorat-lite (a centrist?) is what is electable on a national level. There is no small federal government method of increasing defense (to include playing world policeman and nation builder), funding (and expanding) federal entitlements and enforcing immigration law.

With the republicants moving (or at least promising to) further right (at a higher cost) and the demorats moving (or at least promising to) move further left (at a higher cost) it leaves many without a choice that fits their own vision of what should be happening at the federal level. The new reality in DC is simply more borrow (from future generations) and spend (on all manner of stuff) with constant promises to stop doing so. We now celebrate slow econimc growth (including near zero returns on savings accounts), fully accept being in a constant state of almost war and ever expanding federal entitlements to help make life more "fair".

Μολὼν λαβέ;1065244371 said:

GOP is looking for new blood; the dems - same old tired, worn out, and divisive :bs

Click to expand...

They seriously need new blood, but Romney? How is he new?

The Republicans had a viable, electable candidate last time around, and still lost. This time, they seem determined to elect a nutter of one stripe or another, thus assuring a Democrat victory.

Perhaps Romney could have saved the party last time around. This time, it's too late. The fears of losing both the WH and the Senate could well be realized.

It's time for a new party anyway. Maybe the Pragmatist Party, with a platform of doing what actually works instead of clinging to a strategy of doing anything and everything to make the other party look even worse than they do themselves.

Dittohead not! said:

They seriously need new blood, but Romney? How is he new?

The Republicans had a viable, electable candidate last time around, and still lost. This time, they seem determined to elect a nutter of one stripe or another, thus assuring a Democrat victory.

Perhaps Romney could have saved the party last time around. This time, it's too late. The fears of losing both the WH and the Senate could well be realized.

It's time for a new party anyway. Maybe the Pragmatist Party, with a platform of doing what actually works instead of clinging to a strategy of doing anything and everything to make the other party look even worse than they do themselves.

Click to expand...

Not really. They had a candidate that nobody liked or was enthusiastic about, given his record in MA and him personally. That's what allowed B.O. to be be the first POTUS since before WW2 to be re-elected with fewer votes than his initial victory. That performance usually makes POTUSes one termers, like Carter and Bush I, but the weakness of Romney let him slide. And that's because Romney wasn't that different than B.O.: mandatory health care, gun control, higher taxes during his stint as governor as MA. Hence, democrat lite. He couldn't even carry his home state, so that's not a viable candidate, no matter how much the republican establishment backed him.

Citizen.Seven said:

Not really. They had a candidate that nobody liked or was enthusiastic about, given his record in MA and him personally. That's what allowed B.O. to be be the first POTUS since before WW2 to be re-elected with fewer votes than his initial victory. That performance usually makes POTUSes one termers, like Carter and Bush I, but the weakness of Romney let him slide. And that's because Romney wasn't that different than B.O.: mandatory health care, gun control, higher taxes during his stint as governor as MA. Hence, democrat lite. He couldn't even carry his home state, so that's not a viable candidate, no matter how much the republican establishment backed him.

Click to expand...

Let's see... who could have beaten Obama in '12:
Santorum?
Bachmann?
Cain?
Perry?
Gingrich?

Who?

Dittohead not! said:

Let's see... who could have beaten Obama in '12:
Santorum?
Bachmann?
Cain?
Perry?
Gingrich?

Who?

Click to expand...

Nixon. United States Senate election in Missouri, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The republican field is filled with great candidates this election. I think they many would rival romney in 2012. I dont understand the pessimism among republicans when looking at the candidates offered. I think one poster described it as a mouthful of vomit. Its seems to me these types are never satisfied. We have 5 successful governors who all lowered taxes, created jobs, and reduced spending in some cases. We have successful executives who know how to make a deal. Senators who know the game.

Unfortunately for the party many are focusing on rhetoric more than record of success. Which exactly what the democrazies do.

I dont expect carson to get the nomination. People love his story and it is admirable, but when it comes to their ballot i think their sense will prevail. Trump isnt carson, he has a better record of success, but again, i dont see him getting the votes. Polls are cheap. On game day i see the establishment candidates winning

But if they dont, i will cast my vote for trump or carson or cruz or whoever rather than hillary

Does the GOP need rescuing ?

After 2010, 2014 and the recent elections it would seem they're doing just fine without " Mittens " help.