Newt Gingrich suspended his campaign today and although it won’t be “official” at today’s event, reports are he will endorse Mitt Romney at some point in the near future.
Wishing for a different result never accomplishes anything toward changing the result we got, but didn’t want – so speculating on whether or not Rick Santorum would still be in the race fighting for the conservative agenda if Newt had gotten out and cleared the field for him two months ago is not a constructive exercise.
However, what is both constructive and interesting is asking why two other conservative candidates who have dropped out haven’t yet endorsed Mitt Romney.
Rick Santorum has yet to endorse Mitt Romney, neither has Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, who won last year’s Ames, Iowa straw poll on a strong conservative message only to see her campaign wilt when it fell afoul of organizational and staffing difficulties.
Going back to when he first entered politics in the 1990s, Mitt Romney has been no friend to the conservative movement – this has left him with not just a hill, but with a mountain to climb to gain the support of many grassroots conservative activists and leaders.
It would make sense for Romney to make the first move – or better yet, the first six moves – to extend a hand to his rivals to try to heal some of the wounds his relentlessly negative campaign opened, and to show that he intends to govern as a conservative.
Endorsements from Santorum and Bachmann would be a good sign, but would not be enough by themselves to get conservatives on board – what is needed to calm conservative concerns about Romney is concrete action on the conservative agenda.
However, as of right now, no concrete action has come from the presumptive nominee or his campaign to prove to conservatives that Romney even wants, let alone merits, their support.
If Newt had quit two months ago, would Santorum still be in and perhaps even be besting Romney? No one will ever know.
One thing we do know is that, despite the overwhelming advantage in money and organization Romney has, and the millions of dollars in negative advertising he spent to destroy Newt Gingrich, thousands of conservative voters still turned out to support the former Speaker well after his campaign began to look hopeless.
Gingrich undoubtedly needs the good will of the Romney campaign and the establishment GOP to help pay-off his substantial campaign debt, but his endorsement alone isn’t going to bring the thousands of anti-Romney conservatives that stuck by him to the bitter end into the Romney camp. To get their support, Mitt Romney must take concrete action to show he will actually produce the conservative government that Gingrich advocated.
What if Newt Had Quit Two months Ago?
It would still be Mitt Romney and Ron Paul,as I predicted before January.Sorry to rub it in,but ask a ?,get an answer.
This whole game of ...
... "what if" isn't only meaningless, it's ridiculous. Polls consistently showed that if Newt were out of the race, Santorum still didn't beat Romney in enough places to make a real difference. Why Mr. VIguerie is so high on Santorum I simply can't understand. To try fighting the Washington establishment with someone who's spent almost his entire adult life there is ridiculous.
Speaking of ....
Robert Costa of the National Review Online is reporting that:
Bachmann to Endorse Romney
National Review Online has confirmed that Representative Michele Bachmann will endorse Mitt Romney tomorrow at a campaign event in Virginia.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/298751/bachmann-endorse-romney-robe...
Deeply dissapointing, given that Romney has yet to take the steps recommended by Mr. Viguerie to earn the support of conservatives.
May God have mercy on us
If our choices in November come down to Obama and Romney, that tells me one thing: God has withdrawn his hand of protection from the United States of America.
I supported Ron Paul in the primary, a man of true Christian principles and integrity. I pray he does well at the convention.
Newt, the Great Saboteur of the Conservative Movement
2012 should have been the year of the conservative. We swim in the utter incredulity that, given the animosity against Obama, Republicans are stuck with a Massachusetts moderate. Newt is single-handedly responsible for the conservative movement's implosion. It is not so much that he prevented the conservative Santorum from defeating Romney. Rather, no matter who else might have been the top choice of conservatives in this election (whether Bachmann, Pawlenty, or Perry), Newt would have split the conservative vote to assure a Romney victory.
Conservatives should see to it that Newt is a persona non grata at the convention. If he does get a speaking slot, conservatives should boo him off stage.
Disagree ...
One could just as easily argue that Santorum's refusal to suspend his campaign when Gingrich was leading is the reason we find ourselves with a Massachusetts moderate as the presumptive nominee.
Logical arguments....
Obviously, as the way that things progressed proved, there was no logical reason for Santorum to drop out of the race until after Wisconsin. As things actually played out, Newt should have dropped out after losing Oklahoma and Tennessee since Rick's Hat-trick Tuesday wins thwarted Newt's "Southern Strategy." And if Newt wanted to hold out a little longer, then he should have at least dropped out after Mississippi and Alabama. Newt's suicide-in-the-bunker mentality assured Romney wins in Illinois and Wisconsin, and the defeat of conservatism in 2012. Newt will be remember for nothing else than his role in giving us Romney. Worse, if Romney loses, Newt will be remembered for giving us for more years of Obama.
And yet Newt is on the radio
And yet Newt is on the radio right now endorsing Romney, by framing it as a choice between Obama and, for lack of a description so eloquent as Newt's, a highly maleable ham sandwich.
Conservatives still have a choice, Romney isn't the only man still running for the republican nomination. The man who is running against him is drawing crowds of thousands, compared to Mitt's might-make-it-to-100. Why aren't we seeing more debates? Why is the media so quiet? Why if Romney gets his delegates playing by the same rules it is called "winning" and his competitor wins it is called "exploiting"? Does a poker player who plays the best he can with the hand he is dealt somehow "exploiting" the rules of poker and "stealing" from the pot?
In November, this constitutional conservative is not making a choice between two Obamas by different names. God help us for the next 4 years, because we're going to need it.
No More Godless Government, Please.....
No Christian should ever vote for, or even support, a candidate for public office who does not believe that Jesus is Who He says He is --- God the Son. Mormonism does NOT believe Jesus is God the Son. Thus, a Mormon candidate is not qualified to hold one of God's civil government offices.
John Lofton, Recovering Republican
JohnLofton.co
Acgtive Facebook Wall
JLof@aol.com
So you're saying...
... that Thomas Jefferson should never have been President?
What?
Excuse me. Where does it say in the Constitution that to be eligible to be President one must believe that Jesus is the son of G_d? It does not. Frankly, this position would preclude a Jew, or Hindu from being President. Strongly disagree.
Mitt Romney
OK people let's get one thing straight. It doesn't matter if the GOP candidate is a pineapple, we need to get this idiot out of office. The right needs to quit whinning and saying Romney is not conservative enough and the independents need to quit makeing comparisons with Regan. You all need to start rallying behind the GOP candidate and helping to defeat this lying Democrat who is out to destroy this country. If you do not then you can expect four more years and might I say the final straw that will bring this country to its knees. Obama is the worst President in the history of this country and it does not matter who is running against him, we need to come togeather with one thought in mind this November and that is to defeat BHO at any cost.
You are exactly right...
You are right - the main goal needs to be to beat Obama. And to do that, we need to rally around the one person who more often than not BEATS Mitt Romney in polls against Obama. Nothing would be worse than 4 more years of Obama, so we need to elect Ron Paul, who has a clear (and different) message against Obama, unlike Romney who will have a very hard time differentiating himself other than as a 1%-er.
The process is not over ...
When did Mitt Romney win the support of the needed number of delegates to win the nomination?
There is another candidate still in the race.
Many Conservatives have no interest in rallying around Romney until he takes the steps outlined by Mr. Viguerie.
Response to JL
I'm with you, JL. No Romney/no way. When I vote, I stand before God, my country and my family. And I will not cast my ballot for this unscrupulous RINO: Bishop Willard.
Does being a conservative mean ...
When conservatives say they will not vote for Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon, what are we saying?
A couple of Sunday's ago, Cardinal Dolan was on CBS's Face The Nation. As the National Journal reports:
Cardinal Dolan: Mormon Faith No Reason to Vote Against Romney
The archbishop says religious prejudice should not be part of the presidential campaign.
"Cardinal Timothy Dolan said Sunday that Republican front-runner Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith should not be an issue in the presidential campaign.
'There may be reasons not to vote for Mitt Romney as president of the United States,' Dolan said during an appearance on CBS’s Face the Nation. 'That he’s a Mormon cannot be one of them.'
Dolan, who is archbishop of the New York diocese, later added: 'I don’t think Catholics would have any problem voting for a Mormon at all.'
Dolan told host Bob Schieffer that he brought up Romney’s religion a couple of months ago in a speech to the Jewish Anti-Defamation League when he was asked how the Jewish and Catholic communities could cooperate better.
He said he told the audience that 'we Catholics and we Jews have felt the sting of the other side. And now, one of the ways we can cooperate is to see that religious prejudice, religious bigotry doesn’t enter the campaign.' Dolan said the remarks drew a standing ovation.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/cardinal-dolan-mormon-faith-no-reason-to-vote-against-romney-20120408
Don't want to vote for Mitt Romney should he be the Republican Presidential nominee because he is a a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
Fine, but first ask yourself a few questions:
- Where does it state in the Constitution that someone is not eligible to be President because that individual is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? It does not. In fact, article 1 of our Charter of Liberties states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
- What does it say about conservatives when we state that we can not vote for someone because that person is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Is that position not religious prejudice? Does that also mean that conservatives can not vote for someone who is a Jew, Hindu or Buddhist? Is that what it means to be a conservative?
- How can conservatives hold the position tht we can not vote for someone because that individual is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or because that individual is a Jew, Hindu or Buddhist and at the same time profess acceptance and belief in the Declaration of Independence, our Charter of Liberties as enshrined in the Constitution and the proposition that America is a "shining city on a hill, a beacon of Liberty?"
It's not conservatism
John, refusing to vote for Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon is not about conservatism. Rather, these people have an interpretation of Christianity which precludes supporting political leaders who are not Christian (or who they interpret to be Christian). I do not agree with the view, but as you pointed out they are entitled to it under the Constitution. It'ts the same reason many Southerners would refuse to support a Catholic like Santorum, which is part of what Cardinal Dolan refers to in his comments.
So this has nothing to do with conservatism in general, this is has to do with a specific Biblical interpreation.
Anybody but Obama
I do not share many of Mitt Romney's values. I do not share ANY of Obama's values.
I would sooner walk on hot coals than vote for Obama. Mitt Romney is probably not in my top 100 list for President, but I will vote for him. In fact, I will pray that he wins.
4 more years of Obama could result in changes to our United States that would destroy us by 2020. He MUST be defeated at any cost!
It's Over
Newt, Santorum, and Romney are not Conservatives. The liberal establishment has won and it's over. It's not OK but, it's over. The people at fault are the American people and they are going to get what they deserve. It's not the RINOs, the GOP, or the Socialists. It's the people and it's over. America is no more.
As I said before...
Romney will not utter the word "conservative" unless he's prompted to. Even then, he will do his best find another word to express himself. I'll bet you $10,000, so to speak. Personally, I don't think Santorum, or Gingerich should do more than say "I'll vote for Romney." The carpet bomb smear campaign, that Romney conducted against them, was so opposite of Reagan's 11th Commandment, I don't think it's politically forgiveable.