Could Mitt Romney be the next president?

[RBInMaine]

I have a right winger acquaintance with whom I spar politically and who absolutely insists that Mitt Romney will win his party's presidential nomination and will be elected handily on Nov. 7th 2012. He is willing to make a bet on it. He says that in 2012 once they have their nominee, which will be Romney, the R's will "circle their wagons" while Indies stand "dizzy" and "Democrats stand in a circular firing squad." (Does anyone out there honestly think there is a real chance of this happening? Tell me what you think, with some reasoning please. Thanks.)

Here was my reply: 1) Romney is too "liberal" for today's Republican primary base which will be flooded by racist TeaPublicans who hate Obama to the core. Circular firing squad? Wait until the TeaPubs get ahold of Mittens, and he is a Mormon which the Christian Right doesn't like at all. The TeaPubs will chew him up and spit him out as a "RINO" while they throw all their support either behind Huckabee, Barbour, Gingrich, or Bachman, all of whom will probably run. (Palin will probably not run given her crosshairs website baggage and the money she is making off the idiots who watch her tv show.) Also, if a somewhat reasonable RePUB emerges, don't count out Pawlenty or Daniels. Pawlenty will most likely run, has turned hard right on religion and other issues, and is a major player in that party. Daniels may or may not run, but he would be formidable too. Also don't forget Chris Christie, the new darling of the right wing. There is a LOT unsettled there, but make no mistake, as much as the hard right base hates Obama, ANY "moderate" RePUB will have a very hard time winning that primary.

2) The TeaPubs, again, will split that party all over the map especially where TeaPub indies can vote in primaries. In caucus states, those motivated TeaPubs will flood the halls. Look at who they put up this last time for Senate in Alaska, Nevada, and Delaware. The hard right whacko TeaPub base is gonna be HIGHLY motivated, and they will not put up a moderate.

3) ALL the RePUB "moderates" will have to TURN hard right to win the primary. And they will propose policy ideas to pander to the hard right base. They will be on record with statements they can't walk back from even when they try to move to the center IF they win the primary.

4) The D's will NOT be in a circular firing squad, and there will be NO credible challenger to Obama. D's will in fact be VERY united and MOTIVATED this time as the economy continues to make gains and as the TeaPubs in DC and elsewere who won in Nov. continue to sink into crazy land with trying to privatize Medicare and SS, etc. (which also too, by the way, will give many older 2010 voters pause and buyers remorse for voting for the Pubs).

5) If the economy continues to improve even moderately as predicted, and given the strength of incumbency, Obama will win with 53% to 55% of the vote. Even Charles Krauthammer is already predicting that as a likely scenario.

[elocs]

1. There is a big chunk of the religiously conservative Evangelicals who will NOT vote for a Morman.

They fervently believe that Mormonism is a cult of the devil. That does not mean they would vote for Obama, but nationwide they will not vote for Romney either and Republicans need every one of those votes that they can get.

No matter all the quibbling and complaining we hear from Democrats about Obama, when push comes to shove they will vote for him because the alternative, another Republican president with a Republican congress, is too horrible to consider. Just as long as we don't have too many who would ordinarily vote Democratic that have a snit and don't support Obama and make the race close enough to steal.

[RBInMaine]

2. You make a good point which I have updated in my OP because I also mentioned that in my response to

the right winger. THANKS.

[JoePhilly]

12. From a tactical perspective, the Mormon issuse is a good one for dividing the right ...

The far right wing fundie base hates pretty much all of the other, "non-fundie" Christians "sects". But they intentionally avoid saying this out loud because they want all of those "false Christians" to keep voting for "Christian Conservatives" (code for Fundie).

There is a reason that John McCain claimed to be a Baptist during the last GOP primaries even though he'd been an Episcopalian for many years. Its also why he spent a lot of time getting the endorsement of Rev Hagee ... a far right wing nut who calls the pope an agent of the anti-Christ. When tapes of Hagee saying such things hit the press, McCain quietly dropped Hagee.

During the GOP primaries, it would be great fun to ask all of the GOP candidates if Mormons are "real Christians" because none of the GOP candidates (other than Romney) will be able to answer that question directly. During the last primary, Wolf Blitzer asked James Carville and Ralph Reed that exact question. Carville said "sure" ... Reed stuttered like a fool for 5 minutes trying to not answer the question.

The wild card in this is Glen Beck. My suspicion is that Fox will keep him on in an attempt to get the fundies who love Beck's show to be willing to vote for Romney. My sense is that Fox will back Romney because he is the most corporate of the GOP candidates out there. So, Fox will attempt to quiet the evangelicals who would be outspoken against Mormons, and give more time to those who look past that.

So forcing the fundies to declare their position on Mormonism creates some interesting discussions that I don;t think the right wants to have.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

20. How open is Glenn Beck about being a Mormon?

My son is a real fundamentalist, he attends Liberty U, and was a big fan of Beck until I told him that Beck was a Mormon. He dropped him immediately. He spouts the line that Mormons are a cult and not Christians and he also said that no way would he vote for Mitts.

[JoePhilly]

24. Beck brings it up from time to time, but keeps most of his rhetoric "generic Christian"

for that reason, but I think his (Beck's)long term intent is to get as many of his fundie followers to "accept" Romney.

It won't be easy, and I think ultimately Beck will fail because the fundie's are who they are. But I still think this is the general plan. Mitt is the biggest corpratist running at this point, and that is what the GOP's owners want.

[davidpdx]

60. Wow

I have the same opinion about Mormons as your son even through I'm not very religious at all.

[slackmaster]

15. They probably would be even less likely to vote for a Morwoman

:nuke:

[GSLevel9]

21. if it's Obama vs. the mormon, they vote Romney. nt

[marlakay]

26. Have you ever been part of the religious right?

Many many years ago in my 20's (I am in 50's now) I was very religious and even voted repub a few times....I shudder to think of it now!!!

But my years in being one of them has given me many insights to how they think and what they believe in. One of the things they believe in is that the Mormon Religion is a cult.

While they don't like Obama what he believes in is not a cult. I don't think they would vote for Obama, but it would be like McCain, just not vote at all. I know many religious people here in my small town that refused to vote because McCain didn't go to church and had affairs.

[elocs]

51. Your experience nearly exactly reflects mine.

I was in a very strict Pentecostal church when I was in my late twenties, 30 years ago. Very conservatively religious and Mormonism was definitely considered to be a cult of the Devil. Those of us who have been there (in the religious right) know of what we speak.

[Tesha]

55. If the choice is a "Demoncrat" versus a Mormon, they'll vote for the Mormon. (NT)

[elocs]

56. I believe that to be wrong and that is based upon my experience with the religious right.

They won't vote for either because they believe they will have to answer to their god for that choice. To them a choice between 2 sinful wrongs cannot be made. This does not apply to every single religious right voter, but for every one who makes that decision not to vote means one less vote for the Republicans.

[nxylas]

62. I think they'd vote for a Satanist if he had an (R) after his name

They'd have some reservations at first, but after a couple of reassuring sermons from their suburban megachurch pastor about how at least the Satanist is a person of faith, and a rousing speech from the candidate about how he wants to protect the unborn so that he has more children to sacrifice to Satan, they'd come round.

[Arkana]

64. Eh, I dunno.

Didn't work with McCain and he wasn't a Mormon. People stayed home on Election Day--no reason to think they wouldn't do it again.

[elocs]

28. Nope, and I know that from experience. They wouldn't vote for either one. n/t

[Ter]

49. Not THIS Mormon (Romney)

They would have no problem voting for Sen. Mike Lee.

[laugle]

50. What if

you add Sarah Palin to the equation as VP................???

[the other one]

3. Romney WILL be the nominee

He will be slaughtered by Obama.

The GOP knows it can't win in 2012; they are clearing a path for Jeb in 2016.

[RBInMaine]

4. Why are you so convinced Romney will be the nominee given that he is "moderate"?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

58. he will be a candidate but they are more likely to pick one of the Raving Loonies

[RBInMaine]

5. Why do you think Obama would "slaughter" Romney? Could Romney get enough Indies?

[RBInMaine]

6. I think the Bushies are bushed out. The 2012 crop + Palin in '16.

[Moral_Imagination]

35. Absurd.

Mormon and RomneyCare will kill him. Not to mention he comes across as phony to many people. He is like a Republican John Edwards.

[Thrill]

7. If I were a political strategist. I would love for him

to be the nominee. That guy is the gift that keeps on giving. You could basically just run Ted Kennedy's campaign against him. He's the same arrogant jackass as he was back then. You just have more ammo now. Dude has a long history of buying companies and getting rid of the workers. Not to mention there isn't a politician out there that the term flip flopper fits more. And he would also struggle really bad to try to look like a regular guy. So many ways to tear him down. He's going to run because he has so much money he doesn't know what to do with. But my guess is he would struggle to win a primary especially if Palin, Hukabee, or Newt run.

[RBInMaine]

8. Thanks. I was wondering how he could be attacked. I know he was bigtime against helping the car co's

[RBInMaine]

9. Palin won't run. Too much baggage & she makes too much $. Bachman is the new Palin. She will run.

[Moral_Imagination]

36. Everything you call "baggage"

are advantages in the bizarro world of the GOP.

[Dawgs]

10. You're nuts if you think Palin isn't running.

She thinks she's the victim and she craves power. Money will never be a problem for her.

[RBInMaine]

11. She may, but doubtful. She's making plenty of bucks, and even she knows she can't win.

[verges]

16. I think Palin will run

with no intention of winnin. She will use her attempt to re-establish her credibility with the loonies and renew her 15 minutes in order to keep her speaking fees up. She wll withdraw after bad showings after the first three primaries.

[zulchzulu]

13. Romney will not be the nominee. Huckabee will.

The major part of the Republican base are Christian extremists. They will never vote for a Mormon from Massachusetts. They would vote for Huckabee though.

Huckabee would then lose to Obama by 6-7 points.

[RBInMaine]

14. If Huckabee runs, I do agree he'd be their first choice over Romney in that base.

[Sheepshank]

25. I'm not so sure about Huckabee getting the final nod

As much as the fundies hate Romeny, there is an equal number of non-fundie conservatives that dislike fundies...well represented by Huckabee.

[bluescribbler]

17. Here's what you do.

In the primaries, show clips from his failed Senate campaign when he said that he'd be a better friend to gays than Kennedy was. Then, should he win the nomination, show clips of his reaction to the Massachusetts SJC decision allowing same sex marriage.

[otohara]

18. The Kids Won't Vote

for either one of the too-much-religion candidates

[LeftyAndProud60]

19. Romney reminds me of a conservative John Kerry w/o the war record. But his buisiness

record could be like Kerry's war record. Kerry saw that as a strength, but Bush made it into a weakness. Maybe Obama will do that w/ Romney's business record.

Romney seems too phony and is constantly changing positions on key issues. I can't imagine him beating Huckabee in a GOP primary. Huck has Chuck Norris on his side after all.

[karynnj]

23. Other than being a MA elected official and having good hair, there is no similarity

unless you are buying RW talking points - that were repeated by Democrats allied with other candidates. Kerry's war record's true value was what it said of his character and integrity - and that is why the RW lied about it and the media helped them - it showed Kerry to be the strong leader that people were looking for in a troubled time. But, it was his about 30 year record of public service and his vision that made John Kerry a worthy nominee.

Romney's business record is not equivalent (something that takes a D advantage and makes it potentially a Republican one.)

[LeftyAndProud60]

31. THey're both from Mass and change their positions frequently. Kerry w/ Iraq and Romney w/ Health

care.

[karynnj]

32. Kerry NEVER changed his position on Iraq - like I said you bought the RW lies

Kerry spoke against rushing to war in January 2003 - saying that it would not be a war of last resort and that they had not exhausted diplomacy and that the inspectors were still working. These comments reflected his comments when he voted for the the IWR.

The fact is that Dean - fairly used the fact that Kerry voted for the IWR, even though in September 2002, Dean said he would vote for the Biden/Lugar resolution - the one Kerry too preferred. This was used to label Dean as the only viable anti-war candidate - even though Kerry was labeled so in 2002 and the first half of 2003.

Through 2003 and 2004, Kerry consistently spoke of "not last resort (to a Catholic that means not a just war), and a long list of things Bush did not do before going to war.

The Republicans (and unfortunately some Democrats) distorted Kerry's position - which was that he was NEVER in favor of going to war.

His Iraq speech at NYU in September 2004 laid out what he would do - and emphasized that he would not have started the war.

(Before you respond with it - the Grand Canyon was a media hit piece - where the questioned asked is not available. Kerry's response was his constant response explaining his vote - the media then said this was Kerry's response if he knew there were no WMD. Note that AFTER the election this became a bigger issue than in 2004 - as a Clinton ally hit piece.

At the time, Fox was more honest than some others - and Candy Crowley started it - http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh081204.shtml

[Jennicut]

22. No and us fellow New Englanders know why. Romney is

from New England and basically we are hated by the Repub party (except parts of New Hampshire of course).

[beltanefauve]

57. Actually,

Romney is a carpetbagger from Michigan. But your point about today's GOP and New Englanders is well taken.

[Enrique]

27. Romney is the frontrunner for the nomination

the GOP primary voters know all about him, they know all that stuff you posted, and he still polls well among them.

[jenmito]

29. Not if freepers and the rest of the Repub. base have their way. They don't trust a word he says

about ANYTHING. The freepers have a video of him talking about his pro-choice stance on abortion, let alone "Romneycare" and everything else he now distances himself from.

[golfguru]

30. I will never vote for a Mormon

Can you imagine having to put up with nagging from multiple wives?
No way Jose!

[BlueIris]

33. As I've posted before, I feel the next GOP ticket will be Lieberman/Rice. So the neocons

can take one last, desperate shot at Iran.

But runner up would be either Romney/Rice, or Romney/Bloomberg. Either one of those tickets is competitive with anything we could put up. In fact, I feel that if it's Romney/Bloomberg, we will almost assuredly lose.

[Safetykitten]

34. Yes, and so could a ham sandwich at this point. Kinda early for this.

Of course I will stick to my prediction that President Obama will not be re-elected. It's just that we have no clue what republican will beat him.

[rbilancia]

41. It is likely right now he WILL be re-elected and here is why:

1) Improving economy 2) Strength of incumbency 3) Chances are Pubs go too far right in congressional policies and in their nominee
4) Motivated and united Dem base vs. fractured TeaPub base (if Romney is by some miracle nominated, TeaPubs and many Christian Righters will abstain) 5) If the economy feels like it is getting better, Indies will stay the course

[Dawson Leery]

68. As you said. So far, there are many similarties between

2010-2012 and 1946-1948.

[Drunken Irishman]

37. My guess is that Romney will NOT win the nomination...

And I'm going more on history than anything else.

His path to the nomination has been altered since 2008. Instead of focusing on Iowa, Romney has decided to forgo that state and emphasize New Hampshire. This was a similar path that Joe Lieberman took in 2004 and it failed miserably. It failed because Iowa will remain the first primary of the season and from November until the caucus in January, all media attention will be focused on that state and its contenders - not New Hampshire.

If Romney is seriously skipping Iowa, he will become an afterthought at the most important moment of the race.

This was also a similar strategy employed by Giuliani in 2008. He skipped Iowa, put more of his resources into New Hampshire & Florida and because of that, he was off the media map for two months.

It cost him.

NOW that's not to say it doesn't work. McCain essentially skipped Iowa and won New Hampshire. However, McCain was helped solely because Romney LOST Iowa. Had Romney won Iowa, he would've won New Hampshire and most likely the nomination.

So Romney's plan pretty much relies on the favored in Iowa, who instantly becomes one of the frontrunners, losing.

Even then, as 2004 proved with Kerry, Edwards, Dean and Lieberman - it's no guarantee. Dean and Gephardt led in early Iowa polls and even as late as December, it was an essential tie between those two and Kerry. When Dean was upset in Iowa by Kerry, it vaulted Kerry to the top of the polls in New Hampshire and he won their primary a couple weeks later. Lieberman was a distant fourth.

[tammywammy]

40. Giuliani skipped Iowa and NH and went straight to Florida

Loosing strategy from the get-go.

I wouldn't rule out someone like Pawlenty making a strong push.

[Drunken Irishman]

47. He didn't technically skip New Hampshire...

He made the second most visits to the state behind Romney and spent the third most there behind Romney and McCain.

Of course, it was a horribly run campaign anyway and Giuliani didn't put nearly as much energy into NH as he did Florida. With that said, he had no choice but to go to Florida in 2008 because after the Iowa Caucus, the numbers showed he wasn't going to place anywhere near the top in the New Hampshire primary.

So he hedged his bets and left for Florida.

But I suspect the campaign had earlier committed to New Hampshire in hopes of placing 1st or 2nd after the Iowa Caucus, but the poor attention he received nationally killed his polling in the state (in December, prior to Iowa, he had been 2nd in NH behind Romney).

[Mopar151]

45. Rommney will not win NH, regardless of Iowa

We remember him here, and not well..... He has a summer house on Winnepausakee - and his MA State Police goon squad ran off swimmers and boaters anywhere near his dock - in contravention of well-known state law.
Last time he ran here, he had to hire crowds so someone would hear him speak.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[stevenleser]

39. There is nothing that supports that opinion. All the polls of Democrats are against you. n/t

[NYC Liberal]

42. Deserted its base? Riiiight.

84 percent of all Democrats support President Obama. 88 percent of liberal Democrats support him. His lowest approval rating within the party is among conservative Democrats.

"In talking with my political activist friends of the middle and left, I find that most feel the same as I do"

You and your friends generally agree? Shocking.

"I have pledged not to volunteer, give money, or vote for Obama in 2012, even if he is running against the devil himself"

What a moronic position.

[Arkana]

65. I love people like this.

"MY CATS AND I AREN'T VOTING FOR OBUMMER SO HE'S GUNNA LOOSE"

[rbilancia]

43. Sorry, but this is a CENTRIST nation overall whether you like it or not. Your attitude is wrong.

You don't win nationally on the fringes. You win with support from your mainstream base AND the political center. Moderate swing voters decide presidential elections, and an effective president in today's world MUST govern largely from the center. Obama governs from the pragmatic center-left as he damn well should. He is a progressive on balance, but also a pragmatist. And he knows how to win. If you would rather sit home and bemoan the world for not being pure enough for you, then more shame on you.

[jenmito]

44. That's YOUR opinion and certainly NOT the one of the majority of us Dems.

[MasonJar]

46. No way a Mormon gets the GOPer nod

[Skittles]

48. well the nominee has to be someone

between the vapid Mitt and the vapid Sarah, I'd bet on Mitt

[elocs]

52. Well, you are right. The nominee has to be "someone". All else is speculation.

Although not all speculation is created equal.

[Hestia]

53. No, not at all. Why ask that question on a Democratic site? Shouldn't that be for the FP?

[rbilancia]

54. Obviously you didn't read the entire OP. If you did, you'd see I am just asking the question to

start a discussion about his viability as the opposition candidates, something we are SUPPOSED to discuss here on DU and which is actually a fresh departure from much of the crazy Obama bashing that goes on here and is often celebrated by ultra-ideological far-left purists. THOSE are the posts that should be in Freepland. Read my entire OP, and also note my response to the right winger who asserted that Mitt would be the next president. Moral of the story: Read ENTIRE OP's and become informed before responding. You know, the kind of thing we expect from voters.

[yellowcanine]

59. Mormanism may not help Mitt. It may hurt him with evangelicals. Also if health care is still

being debated, you can bet his primary opponents are going to point out that Mitt's Massachusetts plan included mandatory coverage - which is one of the main talking points the Republicans are using against health care reform. With Mitt as the candidate their anti HCR spear would be blunted.
Finally I have anecdotal evidence that Mitt may not be all that popular with his fellow Mormans either. A colleague of mine is Morman and while he usually votes Republican, he is dead set against Mitt - sees him as a two faced opportunist. Which of course he is and this is likely the real reason he is unlikely to be the nominee and if he is, will lose a lot of the independent vote and a significant part of the base will sit out the election. I also don't see many Democrats voting for Mitt either.

[davidpdx]

61. Give me the guy's email address

I'd LOVE to make a bet with him. I've got 1000 large that says Obama will win.

[Arkana]

63. When over 40% of the country says that they won't vote for you

because of your religion you have less hope of becoming President than a ham sandwich.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

66. As ignorant as the average American is, they'll vote him because he's tall and attractive. n/t

[craigmatic]

67. Nope he's too moderate and MA healthcare will stop him.

[Hawaii Hiker]

69. Talk about a flip flopper - Romney attended Planned Parenthood fundraiser in 1994

He ran a pro-life platform in 2008...

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/12/romney-attended.html

[BlueMTexpat]

70. Anything is possible.

But it's not probable, at least not for 2012, not against President Obama.

If it ever does become probable after 2012, then this country really will be on its way down the tubes and that's the truth.

I am not one who holds Romney's religion against him, although I have enough personal knowledge of and experience with RW religious hypocrites to know that he will NOT receive their votes because of it alone. If anything, his religion is one of his more attractive attributes, IMO, although he himself is a hypocrite. I have known plenty of Mormons who are genuinely decent human beings even though I do not - and never will - share their beliefs.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

71. In a word, no.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

72. What does he run/win on?

:shrug:

[Yavin4]

73. If Romney Wins, We'll Have 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Ladies

Whitehouse sister wives. How fun!