search
top

Election 2012 Quote of the Day

Jennifer has a long post on how she feels about this election:

Romney is a long way from who I want in office.  But he’s not running for a single term.  He doesn’t want to piss the rest of us off before his re-election. I don’t think he’s stupid either.  He’ll pander, but I think we can be the people he panders to.  And the more crap the left throws at him, the less I dislike him.

My decision isn’t set. I may find myself in agreement before November.  But for now, I think the RINO is preferable.

I do not have high expectations of Romney, but he only needs to do a few things. My anxieties about him are my overall anxieties about the things Republican tend to do when they are in power. Romney, being an excellent vessel for the same people that George W. Bush was a vessel for, did a lot of things that pissed me off, but putting Roberts and Alito on the Court were not among them.

I can understand where Jennifer is coming from. The mandate that begins in 2014, absent intervention from the Court, creeps ever closer. Most of us are not better off than we were financially four years ago, myself included. Hell, I was better off ten years ago than now. While most of that would have happened no matter who was President, this President decided to stomp his foot on the accelerator on the road that takes us off the cliff. I don’t have high expectations of Romney, but I think on fiscal issues, I wouldn’t be surprised if he does better than many would give him credit for now. If he doesn’t? We can always give him the Dick Lugar treatment in 4 years.

9 Responses to “Election 2012 Quote of the Day”

  1. Oliver Perry says:

    I’m in NY, so my vote won’t matter. Looks like a vote for Johnson!

    • Richard says:

      Well, I am in NV which is a swing state and there is no way I am voting for Romney. The Republican party has got to be taught that they shouldn’t nominate liberals and there is no better way than to lose a winnable election. As for this being the most important election ever, I call BS. Obama is within the mainstream of the Dem party while Romney is way outside the mainstream of the Rep party. So in the unlikely event that Romney wins, his timidity leads to failure and another Dem who will be indistinguishable from Obama, except maybe being more competent. So for me, it comes down to going to a lot of hassle to cast a meaningless protest vote for Johnson and voting for other candidates or staying home. The serial violations of the no new tax pledge by the Rep governor has me inclined to stay home but I am still evaluating.

      • Ian Argent says:

        The presidential general election is a terrible time and place to “send a message,” and, for that matter, allowing Obama to be elected chances the wrong message being sent; IE the republican candidate wasn’t “center” ENOUGH.

        Clayton Cramer had an interesting analogy – Romney is a trim tab. By himself, he’s not going to change things. But he reduces the flow pressure…

        Defeating Obama sends a loud and clear message to politicians: we won’t re-elect a president who appoints openly crooked cronies to positions of power, who blatantly ignore Congress, and who ignore the Constitutional separation of powers. That strikes me as more important that “Romney is a politician, and we don’t like them.” We’re only going to get politicians running for President in the foreseeable future, and no amount of holding your breath until you turn blue is going to change that.

      • What makes you think that “they shouldn’t nominate liberals” will be the actual message the Republican establishment receives if Romney loses? Democrats and the MSM will spend the next six months demonizing Romney as the second coming of Jesse Helms. The message the Republican establishment may think they’re receiving might be “We need to nominate someone more centrist, someone not pumped up by National Review. Maybe Jon Huntsman.” Or maybe they’ll think “We need to nominate someone even richer.” Like Michael Bloomberg.

        In the meantime, Obama may nominate enough Supreme Court justices to overturn Heller, not to mention all the lower level courts just itching to “return” the 2nd Amendment to a collective right.

        And with Obama as President, he may find a way to replace you bitter old gun and religion clingers with a new electorate. Illegal alien amnesty, anyone?

        And if you think that “pro-gun Democrats” will stop him should Democrats regain control of the House and Senate in 2014 (stranger things have happened), just remember how quickly the anti-abortion Stupak bloc flipped over to let Nancy Pelosi rub their furry yellow bellies when they needed the votes to pass ObamaCare. I’m sure the pro-gun Democrats are every bit as stalwart in their cause as the Stupak bloc flippers were against abortion…right up liberals snapped their fingers.

        And just imagine what Obama will do when he doesn’t have to face voters ever again…

        • Richard says:

          Well, you have a point about the ability to the Republican establishment to misinterpret their constituents. However, I am not a Republican. My loyalty is to a set of issues and principles. And the Republicans don’t appear to be interested. It’s not like I have impossibly high standards. I voted for Bush, Dole and McCain. Democrats don’t have those principles either but I never considered voting for them.

  2. Ian Argent says:

    Romney has to do one thing to make me happy – appoint less outwardly and openly corrupt officials…

  3. persiflage says:

    Mr. Romney seems sufficiently malleable that if we surround him with a center-right-conservative legislature, he will do as they instruct, in order to gain the approval of his “peers” in government. As one pundit said, the real prize in this election is control of the congress – the Presidency is merely a dramatic distraction.

  4. Ken Rihanek says:

    And when Romney disappoints we send him packing after 4 years. Why reward Obama with 4 more after what he’s done.

  5. BornLib says:

    On a related note, I was treated to quite the laugh just now when I loaded up your blog to see a big “Defeat Scott Walker” banner at the top from the Tom Barrett for Governor campaign.

    I know you can block it, but why bother? Nobody who reads your blog is going to vote against the man who signed shall-issue concealed carry into law in Wisconsin. And that’s to say nothing of all the public union crook ball-busting he has done. I say let them waste their money.

top