I'll get right to the point. I am supporting Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination and for President in 2012. I have gone back and forth, supported Cain, supported Newt, always liked Ron Paul - but at the end of the day (the day being Nov 6, 2012), Mitt Romney stands the greatest chance of securing the 270 electoral college votes necessary to gain the White House. Anyone with a casual interest in what I think can stop here. Anyone who cares to understand more...keep reading.
First of all, I still love Herman Cain. I still believe him to be the most capable man of actually changing the way our government operates and I believe he offers the American people the greatest chance of regaining the power that was entrusted to them by the Constitution, but has been slowly and methodically transferred from them to the government over the past 60-70 years. Unfortunately, the American people will never realize what Cain had to offer America - Jerry Springer politics, the media and an establishment in Washington determined to maintain the status quo will not allow it.
Newt. Just the name brings about much discussion and debate. Many love him, many more hate him. What I see in Newt is a powerfully brilliant mind, capable of taking on all challengers with his wit and wisdom. What I also see is the same thing Ann Coulter sees, the same thing many other republicans see...a polarizing figure, removed from public office for over a decade (some say that may be a good thing), with a less than clean resume (ethics violations began within a year of his taking the office of Speaker), and an even less clean personal life (you think Herman was attacked? Wait until the full weight of the Obama campaign machine begins their assault on Newt's less-than-spectacular record in dealing with his marriages). None of this matters you say...perhaps it doesn't, but perhaps it does. Can Newt ride into the White House and save us all from Obamacare, Cap & Trade, the flood of illegal immigration, rising unemployment, economic recession, escalating joblessness, and an increasingly burdensome tax code? Sure he could. But his record does not reflect his desire or ability to do any of those things. Because for all of Newt's brilliance, political savvy and experience, he has very few specific examples of conservative legislation with his name on it. As hollow as Obama's legislative record may be, Newt's may be just as empty. Obama can point to his only serving 3 years in the Senate to explain his lack of a legislative resume, but in 20 years in the House, what did Newt do? His main claim to fame is helping to author and presiding over the House during the Contract with America - a very worthwhile and successful undertaking. But don't be surprised when the Obama campaign machine reminds us all that the majority of the Contract with America was simply excerpts from Reagan's 1985 State of the Union speech. You could also point to welfare reform, and balancing the budget as a few of Newt's most notable accomplishments as Speaker. But what you will hear about, and often, and loud...are the 84 charges of ethics violations in his 4 years as Speaker. 84. Not a few offhanded comments to a few woman about how they were the same height as his wife. Not a few women at a press conference standing next to Gloria Allred. 84 ethics violations. $300,000 fine. And the distinction of being the only Speaker in US House history to be disciplined for violating House Ethics rules. I love Newt, but Newt simply has not lived his life in anticipation or preparation of being the President of the United States. Personally, or professionally.
This leads me to Mitt Romney. The most moderate, experienced, polished, prepared, and groomed candidate in the Republican stable. On the other hand, he is also the most moderate, experienced, polished, prepared, and groomed candidate in the Republican stable. But he can gain 270 electoral college votes on November 6, 2012. Additionally, his record shows a history of moderate policy and an ability to lead and govern. Categorically do I want a former Massachusetts governor to be President? Umm, no. Do I want any politician from the historically liberal northeast to be President? Not usually. Do I even want a politician to be President? Nope. But I (and we) cannot have Herman Cain, we have established that. So we must choose from the best available candidate, and I believe Mitt Romney is that candidate.
This country is in trouble. Economically, morally, at home, abroad...you name it. Decades of poor decisions and corrupt policymakers have shaped legislation and the tax code to favor special interest at the expense of the common American citizen and specifically, at the expense of the American taxpayer (as few of us as there seem to be anymore). As much as I would love to counter the Obama presidency with a strong conservative Republican, I simply don't believe that is what is best for America right now. It is not the time to further polarize this country by electing the anti-obama, and attempting to counter his 4 years of leftist social engineering with 4 years of rightist social engineering. The House is majority Republican, the Senate may well be next year, and the Supreme Court leans to the right by a vote of 5-4. In other words, the leftist swing of the Obama Presidency can be shifted towards the middle without the election of a far right candidate who may or may not be capable of obtaining enough moderate votes in swing states to ensure victory in November. Romney can win, and only through a Republican victory can this country begin to shift towards a more conservative fiscal environment and perhaps a less burdensome tax code. This election isn't about me. It isn't about my family. It's about the entire country. If it were about me, Herman Cain would have my vote and would be President. But since it is about all of us, I believe the Republicans must nominate a candidate with a record of moderate/right policy who can win Ohio, Florida, NC, Virginia, Indiana, and Colorado...states that Obama won in 2008, but have historically gone red when offered the choice a strong Republican candidate. I'm not settling for Romney, I believe he is the best candidate to ensure a Republican victory and the candidate who gives this country the best chance at lessening the division that is crippling our government today. Conservatives preach moderation - it's time to vote that way.
First of all, I still love Herman Cain. I still believe him to be the most capable man of actually changing the way our government operates and I believe he offers the American people the greatest chance of regaining the power that was entrusted to them by the Constitution, but has been slowly and methodically transferred from them to the government over the past 60-70 years. Unfortunately, the American people will never realize what Cain had to offer America - Jerry Springer politics, the media and an establishment in Washington determined to maintain the status quo will not allow it.
Newt. Just the name brings about much discussion and debate. Many love him, many more hate him. What I see in Newt is a powerfully brilliant mind, capable of taking on all challengers with his wit and wisdom. What I also see is the same thing Ann Coulter sees, the same thing many other republicans see...a polarizing figure, removed from public office for over a decade (some say that may be a good thing), with a less than clean resume (ethics violations began within a year of his taking the office of Speaker), and an even less clean personal life (you think Herman was attacked? Wait until the full weight of the Obama campaign machine begins their assault on Newt's less-than-spectacular record in dealing with his marriages). None of this matters you say...perhaps it doesn't, but perhaps it does. Can Newt ride into the White House and save us all from Obamacare, Cap & Trade, the flood of illegal immigration, rising unemployment, economic recession, escalating joblessness, and an increasingly burdensome tax code? Sure he could. But his record does not reflect his desire or ability to do any of those things. Because for all of Newt's brilliance, political savvy and experience, he has very few specific examples of conservative legislation with his name on it. As hollow as Obama's legislative record may be, Newt's may be just as empty. Obama can point to his only serving 3 years in the Senate to explain his lack of a legislative resume, but in 20 years in the House, what did Newt do? His main claim to fame is helping to author and presiding over the House during the Contract with America - a very worthwhile and successful undertaking. But don't be surprised when the Obama campaign machine reminds us all that the majority of the Contract with America was simply excerpts from Reagan's 1985 State of the Union speech. You could also point to welfare reform, and balancing the budget as a few of Newt's most notable accomplishments as Speaker. But what you will hear about, and often, and loud...are the 84 charges of ethics violations in his 4 years as Speaker. 84. Not a few offhanded comments to a few woman about how they were the same height as his wife. Not a few women at a press conference standing next to Gloria Allred. 84 ethics violations. $300,000 fine. And the distinction of being the only Speaker in US House history to be disciplined for violating House Ethics rules. I love Newt, but Newt simply has not lived his life in anticipation or preparation of being the President of the United States. Personally, or professionally.
This leads me to Mitt Romney. The most moderate, experienced, polished, prepared, and groomed candidate in the Republican stable. On the other hand, he is also the most moderate, experienced, polished, prepared, and groomed candidate in the Republican stable. But he can gain 270 electoral college votes on November 6, 2012. Additionally, his record shows a history of moderate policy and an ability to lead and govern. Categorically do I want a former Massachusetts governor to be President? Umm, no. Do I want any politician from the historically liberal northeast to be President? Not usually. Do I even want a politician to be President? Nope. But I (and we) cannot have Herman Cain, we have established that. So we must choose from the best available candidate, and I believe Mitt Romney is that candidate.
This country is in trouble. Economically, morally, at home, abroad...you name it. Decades of poor decisions and corrupt policymakers have shaped legislation and the tax code to favor special interest at the expense of the common American citizen and specifically, at the expense of the American taxpayer (as few of us as there seem to be anymore). As much as I would love to counter the Obama presidency with a strong conservative Republican, I simply don't believe that is what is best for America right now. It is not the time to further polarize this country by electing the anti-obama, and attempting to counter his 4 years of leftist social engineering with 4 years of rightist social engineering. The House is majority Republican, the Senate may well be next year, and the Supreme Court leans to the right by a vote of 5-4. In other words, the leftist swing of the Obama Presidency can be shifted towards the middle without the election of a far right candidate who may or may not be capable of obtaining enough moderate votes in swing states to ensure victory in November. Romney can win, and only through a Republican victory can this country begin to shift towards a more conservative fiscal environment and perhaps a less burdensome tax code. This election isn't about me. It isn't about my family. It's about the entire country. If it were about me, Herman Cain would have my vote and would be President. But since it is about all of us, I believe the Republicans must nominate a candidate with a record of moderate/right policy who can win Ohio, Florida, NC, Virginia, Indiana, and Colorado...states that Obama won in 2008, but have historically gone red when offered the choice a strong Republican candidate. I'm not settling for Romney, I believe he is the best candidate to ensure a Republican victory and the candidate who gives this country the best chance at lessening the division that is crippling our government today. Conservatives preach moderation - it's time to vote that way.
No comments:
Post a Comment