-->

Conservative Daily News - The best news, analysis and opinion articles written by a collection of citizen journalists. Covering a range of important topics in blogs, op-ed, and news posts, these upstanding patriots are bringing back American exceptionalism with every entry..

Mitt Romney's True Colors

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Mitt Romney's True Colors”.

Conservative Daily News allows a great deal of latitude in the topics contributors choose and their approaches to the content. This is due to our approach that citizens have a voice, not only the mass media. Readers will likely not agree with every contributor or every post, but find reasons to think about the topic and respond with comments. We value differing opinions as well as those that agree. Opinions of contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of CDN, Anomalous Media or staff. Click here if you'd like to write for CDN.
Put This Story in your Circles and Share with your Friends

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments (0)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Larry says:

    Jerry Owens, I hear this a lot about electability. So let’s think about this. On a national level Ron Paul stacked up very well on the issues nearly neck to neck in comparison to Obama so in my mind this would mean Ron Paul would have a very good chance of beating Obama and therefore should be considered one of the ELECTABLES as you have state. The truth is when I hear people mention this it is coming from those who are just trying to control and manipulate the Republican party into siding with the more leftist Republican. At one time being more left might help get the most votes, but today we have definitely got to reverse some things because we can not continue down the path we are going.

    I heard the same argument as to why the conservatives must walk the line and help the other Republican nominees into other seats. But the conservative movement/tea party movement showed both parties that they could make a difference. 87 tea party caucus members at the federal level but thousands on all other levels. So why walk to the line with whom the Republican party says is the most electable when really we should be focused on the person or persons who can change this country and get it back on track.

    I was told by some republicans they could care less whether they got my vote back in 2008 because they would win with the disgruntled Hilary supporters. This showed me that many in the Republican party can care less about the conservatives, tea party principled persons, right-wing, etc…. what ever you want to call the folks. But now that things are so bad the rhetoric is still being thrown around as if the conservatives had not been successful at all.

    I think Michelle Bachman said it best last night at the debate that if Obama must be beat and we must support the other person to beat him then why not nominate the conservative who will bring the best changes to Washington? I hear this too. We must beat Obama… and I agree. We must support who the party nominates…. and I agree. Obama is so bad that anyone can beat him… I agree. Any Republican can be better than Obama…. and I agree. Anyone on that stage is a better person for the job and can beat Obama…. I agree. So with that being said, no reason to not support the best conservative/principled person instead of just supporting what some corrupted Republicans think we must support in order to beat Obama.

  2. e can’t see the future so for someone to declare a year before the election that a certain candidate is electable and another not is purely opinion, a guess. In Florida 2010 it was the forgone conclusion that Crist would be Senator and McCollum would be Governor. I, and others, who backed the more principled conservative candidates were told they had no chance. “Principled” here means conservative/libertarian limited constitutional government views, strongly held. Well, Marco Rubio and Rick Scott who fit that description now hold those positions. My conclusion is, support the man of principle (or as close as you can get in this presidential race) and forget who others tell is “the electable ONE.” As for Romney, this article tells him like he is –unprincipled. Of course, he’s preferable to Obama but so is any name you can pick out of the phone book.

  3. Jerry Owens says:

    The name of the game is ELECTABILITY. So far, only Romney (not my choice) fills this requirement….

    • Michael Raymond says:

      This is where the rubber meets the road, then. The conventional wisdom is that Romney is the only electable candidate. That may not be true. Perry’s stance on illegals and in-state tuition doesn’t play well with Conservatives, but does play well with the all-important Latino vote in the general, so, his performance last night not withstanding, he, too is electable, just by a different measure. Perry also stands by his positions and doesn’t back pedel, like Romney has always done.

      Granted, Romney does look the part, but we must be careful not to pick someone who can talk pretty. That’s what the voters did last time and where did that get us?

      To be clear, there are problems with each and every candidate, and I will support Romney if it comes down to him or Obama, but I think it’s important to look closely at his record and make a wise choice based on values not on some perceived notion of electability.