Installing Mitt : The Republican Party is scoring an own goal.

[denem]

Suppose the Republicans are headed for a defeat in 2012, or worse, a bad defeat. Consider the candidates:-

1. Newt is nominated, but crashes and burns. The aftermath - 'We chose the wrong guy. With the right candidate we will do better next time' (followed by a quiet purge of the Tea Party).

2. Mitt is nominated but also loses badly. The aftermath - 'The Establishment rammed this guy down our throats. We never wanted him. We never liked him. He didn't share our values. Fuck Swiss Bank accounts, these guys don't represent me.'

Which is worse?

[wandy]

1. Put simpley. Brokered Convention = Jeb Bush. nt.

[denem]

3. 'So the Establishment installed a candidate NONE of us voted for'

the whole contest was a scam.

Not much better IMO.

[Tippy]

4. I see it happening.....

[rhett o rick]

2. The Newt. If The Newt is the challanger he will have lots of exposure to damage

Democrats and Democratic policies. There would be no holds barred. And after we win, we might be saying "we cant afford to win any more battles like that." Which is a terrible misquote from history (I believe Greek).

After defeat the republicon party can be reborn. Purging the clowns and establishing the new moderate (lol) conservative of the 1%. Even tho the republicon masses dont like Mittens, it's because he is a heathen and not because he represents the 1% (0.01%). THe mainstream conservative republicon party what's the support of the Evangelicals, they just dont want one as their leader.

[s-cubed]

5. If there is even a tiny probability that Newt could

get elected, I'm not willing to take the chance.

Right now, Newt looks like the weaker candidate. But, a lot could happen between now and November. The EU could collapse, pulling our fragile recovery with it. The Middle East could erupt in a number of ways. President Obama could be hurt or become sick or worse, assassinated.

Newt, as so many have said, is in this for Newt, period. He is grandiose, egotistic, unstable, irratic, displays many symptoms of bipolar disease, and has crazy ideas about lots of things. Mitt may be egotistic, but he's not any of the the other things.

[quaker bill]

6. The perfect candidate to beat

is not running. It would be best to beat someone they all think is great. I think we would beat Newt by a much larger margin than Romney. Even though Newt isn't a perfect candidate, the size of the beat down would have them thinking for some time to come.

[denem]

7. I disagree. 1984: Mondale was the Establishment candidate, forced on an unhappy party.

That choice proved fatal to the old guard. The sea change began. The DLC was up and running by 1988.

cf: 1972: That was written off as an aberration. Eagleton imploded. The insurgents were purged. And despite his personal demons, Ted Kennedy was serious enough about 1976, and went for it in 1980.

Then came Mondale, and the weakened establishment finally fractured. Al Gore ran in 1988.

The arc IS bending

1984 - Mondale 'I will raise your taxes'
2012 - 15% Mitt: 'I will cut taxes, including some nice goodies for the 1%'

The circle is closing.