Wake up call to the Republicans

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

and a 0% chance at winning the GE

First, Romney isn't unelectable. He is very smart, even if he has negatives, and people probably thought what you thought in 2002 when it wasn't clear if he was a resident of MA, he had chosen Muffy as his running mate and faced off against Shannon O'Brien (who, interestingly, had fellow 2008er Hillary Clinton campaign for her prominently) for the chance to replace a total failure of a Republican executive, in Swift (sound familiar?).  Romney has run this same race before (replacing failure Bush to keep the GOP in control, despite that failure, against a woman who wasn't an inconsequential opponent) and pulled it off in MA, which is more liberal than the US at large. 

If you win the nomination for the GOP, because unexpected things can happen in a campaign, Romney will have a much higher chance of winning the WH than 0%, I assure you. Hell, it was amazing Bush beat Gore in 2000, but it happened!

Bush lead Gore by a solid margin all the way through until the DUI came out. Only then did it become competitive. I've yet to see a poll with Romney comfortably ahead of Clinton or Obama. In fact, I have yet to find a poll where Romney is competitive with anyone in a general.

[Dave from Michigan]

yeah what the Hell Michigan.  I hope Romney isn't uor nomminee. Although i don't despise Romney and would vote for him over any democrat.  I though McCain would win (who i voted for).   Fro some reason my grandparents who are very conservative, supported romney.  Romney ran a whole lot more ads here. I'm not sure i even saw a McCain ad.  we only got mail from McCain. I hope it wasn't the businessman crap and helping michigan with it's recession ads he ran.

[Lincoln Republican]

Methinks most of you protesteth too much.

Your nervous nellie comments border on hysteria.

If Romney becomes the Republican nominee, and I am not saying he will become the Republican nominee, but if he is the nominee, make no mistake, he will be competitive.  The course of the campaign will see the election tighten considerably.

Hillary Clinton is the most polarizing figure in national politics the nation has ever seen.  Her negatives are very high.  Romney is completely capable of mixing it up with anyone, including the Clintons.

Romney will portray himself as the best one to fix the economy.  The economy will dominate the campaign.  His impressive record as a CEO will back this up, and voters will be impressed. 

You may not like Romney, but he does have a certain appeal and charisma, and he is a candidate to be reckoned with.   

[Keystone Phil]

Methinks most of you protesteth too much.

Your nervous nellie comments border on hysteria.

If Romney becomes the Republican nominee, and I am not saying he will become the Republican nominee, but if he is the nominee, make no mistake, he will be competitive.  The course of the campaign will see the election tighten considerably.

Hillary Clinton is the most polarizing figure in national politics the nation has ever seen.  Her negatives are very high.  Romney is completely capable of mixing it up with anyone, including the Clintons.

Romney will portray himself as the best one to fix the economy.  The economy will dominate the campaign.  His impressive record as a CEO will back this up, and voters will be impressed. 

You may not like Romney, but he does have a certain appeal and charisma, and he is a candidate to be reckoned with.   

Ok that's great that you think he's a great candidate and that he can win but some of us dislike this man based on his lack of principles, the complete ideology change, the "say anything" factor, etc.

[Torie]

Republican voters are dealing with a flawed deck and doing the best they can, overall.  The divisions within the ranks are oversold. But each of the candidates presents problems.

While Romney just isn't my bag, there is no shining white knight who  justifies some call to arms to slay the Mitt dragon per se.

[Reaganfan]

Mitt would be competitive in the fall against Hillary because he would represent something "new and fresh"....but I can already see the anti-Romney ads about his faith and past change of positions.

Let's get behind better bets like McCain and Huckabee.

[Gustaf]

Methinks most of you protesteth too much.

Your nervous nellie comments border on hysteria.

If Romney becomes the Republican nominee, and I am not saying he will become the Republican nominee, but if he is the nominee, make no mistake, he will be competitive.  The course of the campaign will see the election tighten considerably.

Hillary Clinton is the most polarizing figure in national politics the nation has ever seen.  Her negatives are very high.  Romney is completely capable of mixing it up with anyone, including the Clintons.

Romney will portray himself as the best one to fix the economy.  The economy will dominate the campaign.  His impressive record as a CEO will back this up, and voters will be impressed. 

You may not like Romney, but he does have a certain appeal and charisma, and he is a candidate to be reckoned with.   

Rasmussen poll of core opposition/support: (taken in mid-December before Romney was hit by even more trouble)

(Definitely for-Definitely Against-Net balance)
Romney (19     47      -28)
Clinton ( 30      47      -17)

Now, I guess you can say that Romney is less polarizing than Clinton because fewer people actually like him so that the country is pretty much universally united against him, but...

Oh, and FYI,

McCain (22    33    -11)

[NHPolitico]

Rasmussen poll of core opposition/support: (taken in mid-December before Romney was hit by even more trouble)

(Definitely for-Definitely Against-Net balance)
Romney (19     47      -28)
Clinton ( 30      47      -17)

Now, I guess you can say that Romney is less polarizing than Clinton because fewer people actually like him so that the country is pretty much universally united against him, but...

Oh, and FYI,

McCain (22    33    -11)

I don't see how those poll numbers are useful for measuring anything about a guy that is still not very well known at all, especially before 2008 got underway with the Iowa caucus. You can get readings on Hillary and they'd be much more reliable.

[Gustaf]

Rasmussen poll of core opposition/support: (taken in mid-December before Romney was hit by even more trouble)

(Definitely for-Definitely Against-Net balance)
Romney (19     47      -28)
Clinton ( 30      47      -17)

Now, I guess you can say that Romney is less polarizing than Clinton because fewer people actually like him so that the country is pretty much universally united against him, but...

Oh, and FYI,

McCain (22    33    -11)

I don't see how those poll numbers are useful for measuring anything about a guy that is still not very well known at all, especially before 2008 got underway with the Iowa caucus. You can get readings on Hillary and they'd be much more reliable.

Romney has consistently proven that he is despised by a large part of the general public. Hell, he's running as the conservative candidate in the Republican primary and he is struggling to win THERE despite all his money.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Romney apparently did quite well in Michigan, partly, because he was the most skilled at pandering.

Specifically, writing all sorts of checks to out-of-work auto workers that the U.S. economy could never cash.  Free jobs for everyone!  Goodbye fuel economy standards—THEY'RE clearly why Americans are looking to Honda and Toyota for our next cars.  We want cars with painfully low fuel economies right now, and only Japan has had the courage to give us the gas-guzzlers we're clamoring for!

One of McCain's problems, or so HardRCafe and I were discussing last night, is that he's just not doing the same pandering—he's against ethanol subsidies, for example.

[NHPolitico]

Romney has consistently proven that he is despised by a large part of the general public. Hell, he's running as the conservative candidate in the Republican primary and he is struggling to win THERE despite all his money.

The problem is that Mitt Romney wasn't despised enough to lose in 2002 in a race to govern a liberal state like Massachusetts. He wasn't despised enough to come in 1st or 2nd among registered Republicans in the 3 elections so far. He was endorsed by National Review. Rush Limbaugh has praised him.  If Mitt were to win, he'd have far fewer problems getting the base on board than McCain would.  Mitt is a lot of Republicans' second choice if he's not their first. McCain is at the bottom of the list for a lot of Republican voters. A large part of the general public barely knows him.  The only person I see really struggling to win in a general election is Huckabee. Mitt would have a very good chance of being competitive or even winning. I think people underestimate him at their own peril.   

[NHPolitico]

Romney apparently did quite well in Michigan, partly, because he was the most skilled at pandering.

Specifically, writing all sorts of checks to out-of-work auto workers that the U.S. economy could never cash.  Free jobs for everyone!  Goodbye fuel economy standards—THEY'RE clearly why Americans are looking to Honda and Toyota for our next cars.  We want cars with painfully low fuel economies right now, and only Japan has had the courage to give us the gas-guzzlers we're clamoring for!

One of McCain's problems, or so HardRCafe and I were discussing last night, is that he's just not doing the same pandering—he's against ethanol subsidies, for example.

Fred Thompson called Romney out for pandering, but history is written by the victors, so it's probably plenty of sour grapes on his part: "Everybody was flocking up there to Michigan and promising, in effect, the federal government was going to come in there and bail the entire state out.... Now they say that with a straight face, and apparently it worked for some of them.... Governor Romney was the most successful in doing it."

This is part of the reason that Romney shouldn't be taken lightly. He cares more about winning than making his opponents feel warm and fuzzy. Bush used the same go for the jugular strategy in 2000, and it worked for him.

[Gustaf]

Romney has consistently proven that he is despised by a large part of the general public. Hell, he's running as the conservative candidate in the Republican primary and he is struggling to win THERE despite all his money.

The problem is that Mitt Romney wasn't despised enough to lose in 2002 in a race to govern a liberal state like Massachusetts. He wasn't despised enough to come in 1st or 2nd among registered Republicans in the 3 elections so far. He was endorsed by National Review. Rush Limbaugh has praised him.  If Mitt were to win, he'd have far fewer problems getting the base on board than McCain would.  Mitt is a lot of Republicans' second choice if he's not their first. McCain is at the bottom of the list for a lot of Republican voters. A large part of the general public barely knows him.  The only person I see really struggling to win in a general election is Huckabee. Mitt would have a very good chance of being competitive or even winning. I think people underestimate him at their own peril.   

He got elected by a small margin with a Green candidate taking votes. And the GOP was coming off 3 straight wins in MA Gubernatorial elections when Romney entered the stage. He did get himself despised enough that he couldn't get reelected.

And I still maintain that given his cash advantage and the fact that he's running as the real conservative against tax-raiser Huckabee and moderate maveric McCain he shouldn't be losing every primary that isn't his home state or filled with mormons. Nationally, I don't think he's ever gotten above 20% which is pretty remarkable. He has spent and pandered his way to frontrunner status and is STILL having trouble in the GOP primary. I don't see how he has any chance in the general.