Romney Can Be the Next Reagan

[Geee]

American Spectator:

I'm hoping Republicans will soon wake up, stop fighting among themselves, and realize that Mitt Romney has the best chance of becoming the nation's next Ronald Reagan.

Everybody remembers Reagan for his single-mindedness in cutting federal spending and taking the government out of the central position in everyone's life. What they forget is that it was Reagan's temperament that made all this possible.

Think back to Reagan's famous rejoinder to Jimmy Carter in their first and only debate, "There you go again!" What was the significance of that? Carter had just finish a long, beady-eyed recitation about national health insurance, which, he said, promised "not inpatient care but outpatient care" with "an emphasis on hospital cost containment," and how Candidate Reagan, of course, was opposed to all this because he had opposed Medicare in 1964. Reagan stood shaking his head and laughing the whole time and when it finally came his turn, he sighed, "There you go again."

The audience laughed and why not? Carter's expressionless, robot-like recitation typified his whole presidency. He was obsessed with details. Reagan's genial response was that when he opposed Medicare in 1964 it was because he favored another piece of congressional legislation that relied less on government. But in a single moment, Reagan had also revealed Carter as a narrow-minded pedant while he was an affable, good-natured leader capable of keeping things in perspective. Voters liked what they saw and that ended Carter's Presidency.

[Valin]

Geee

 

From the comment section

 

Kitty| 2.6.12 @ 6:20AM

 

You have got to be kidding. NO, Romney doesn't have Reagan's temperament. Reagan was a natural; Romney is scripted and seems ill at ease when off script. But more importantly, Romney is a self-professed "moderate" whose ideas and goals are "progressive," the antithesis of President Reagan.

 

 

c. j. acworth| 2.6.12 @ 6:28AM

 

Does the phrase "Triumph of hope over experience" mean anything to Mr. Tucker? I try to remain optimistic, but it's getting harder every day.

 

 

Appleby| 2.6.12 @ 6:44AM

 

I lived in California when Mr. Reagan was govrernor and voted for im for President with great enthusiasm because of what I saw him do. Of course the main thing we liked about Reagan was that he was an adult; after four years of hot dang you all I swan, it was good to have a president we didn't have to apologize for. But Romney is not that man. As a matter of fact, I am tired of him already.

 

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Now it may very well be that Romney will be the GOP nominee, but he should not expect a large part of the party, to get real excited about him.

[Geee]

Well, I don't expect a large part of the party to get excited about ANY of them. I think they MAY have learned their lesson from the last election though. If you don't pick what you may consider the lesser of the TWO evils-you will get the THIRD evil.

 

I am not crazy about any of them, but I would have to hold my nose tighter for Gingrich than Romney. He is still Gingrich. The same Gingrich that we have watched over the years. He has not made a miraculous transformation overnight. He's and excellent speaker. That does not exactly make the best president. Our current resident of the oval office is said to be an excellent speaker also.

[Valin]

Well, I don't expect a large part of the party to get excited about ANY of them. I think they MAY have learned their lesson from the last election though. If you don't pick what you may consider the lesser of the TWO evils-you will get the THIRD evil.

 

I am not crazy about any of them, but I would have to hold my nose tighter for Gingrich than Romney. He is still Gingrich. The same Gingrich that we have watched over the years. He has not made a miraculous transformation overnight. He's and excellent speaker. That does not exactly make the best president. Our current resident of the oval office is said to be an excellent speaker also.

 

Oh yes Romney is safe, and will be a good manager, who will not rock the boat. So a couple of questions...

A. Assume this will be a close hard fought (dirty nasty) election, does Romney make you want to go out and work for his election, or do we see the 2nd coming of Bob Dole?

B. Given the size of the problems coming right around the corner, does Romney have any ideas that will really change Washington DC? Or is he just a place holder? (see Gerald Ford).

C. To quote Billy Joel "You may be right...I may be crazy...But it just may be a lunatic your looking for"

This time I'm going with the loose cannon, who has actually thought about this stuff, and for more than 5 years, after he decided he wanted to be President, and can actually speak in more than 20 second sound bytes. Seriously can you see Romney citing Camus, George Orwell?

[Geee]

A. I don't have to want to work FOR Romney cause I am anxious for the chance to work AGAINST 'He Who Shall Not Be Named.'

 

B. I think that Romney is plenty capable and has proved himself to be capable. I am a sceptic on some of his stances and they would not be mine, but I agree with more of his stances than I agree with the present administration. I believe I can count on him not to be a loose cannon with his administration or with other countries.

C. I believe GWB was perfectly capable and I also didn't agree with him on everything and I also would not call him a great orator-but a great president.

[Valin]

@Geee

 

 

 

 

I'm Smart enough, Good Enough, and darn it people like me.

[pollyannaish]

Well, I don't expect a large part of the party to get excited about ANY of them. I think they MAY have learned their lesson from the last election though. If you don't pick what you may consider the lesser of the TWO evils-you will get the THIRD evil.

 

I am not crazy about any of them, but I would have to hold my nose tighter for Gingrich than Romney. He is still Gingrich. The same Gingrich that we have watched over the years. He has not made a miraculous transformation overnight. He's and excellent speaker. That does not exactly make the best president. Our current resident of the oval office is said to be an excellent speaker also.

 

I completely agree. I honestly could care less about Mitt. He's as about as exciting as a bowl of cold oatmeal. But I dislike Gingrich a LOT. And I mean a LOT. And if it comes down to not caring a lot and hating...I'm going with not caring that much.

 

I am sad this bench has turned out this way. Honestly though, I can't say I'm surprised.

[Argyle58]

Unlike most conservatives, I am not a great Reagan fan, but I admire his accomplishments. His primary attraction, though, aside from his ability to communicate his message, was the consistancy of that message. He started in politics as a Democrat and a Labor activist, but still maintained his vision and goal for America throughout his political career. His participation in the "Democrats for Eisenhower" movement in the 1950's bears out his commitment to the conservative cause.

 

Mitt Romney, on the other hand, has a problem with the consistency of his message. While running for the Governorship of Massechussettes he ran as a RINO, willing to concede to virutually all of the liberal establishment causes. During the 2008 Republican Presidential campaign he ran as a right leaning "moderate" (definition: Moderate: a political fence sitter who refuses to commit to an opinion for fear of offending one side or the other). Today he is promoting himself as the ulitimate conservative; the business savvy politician who can implant his corporate management abilities over the Federal government.

 

Not only do I not buy into the Reagan/Romney comparison, I find it offensive to Ronald Reagan. Mitt Romney typifies the problem with the established Republican doctrine of the past couple of decades......State the Conservative Case during the campaign, than acceed to the status quo after election.

 

Romney is being supported and promoted by the PTB, not as an electible candidate in his own right, but as a spokes model for the Republican Congressional campaigns. The Republican Elite have abandoned hope for the Oval Office for this election cycle, pinning their hopes on a congressional majority this year, and an encumbent free Presidential race in 2016. Historically, this is a poor play at the odds.

[Rokke]

Romney is being supported and promoted by the PTB, not as an electible candidate in his own right, but as a spokes model for the Republican Congressional campaigns. The Republican Elite have abandoned hope for the Oval Office for this election cycle, pinning their hopes on a congressional majority this year, and an encumbent free Presidential race in 2016. Historically, this is a poor play at the odds.

 

I think you nailed it here.

[Evad]

Yikes!

Obama has a miserable record to run on. Are we saying that we have no one that can win against such a travesty?

I confess that I don't have a lot of faith in the American voter but DAMN!!...are they that stupid?

I think my wife summed it up best when she said, "What difference does it make what the unemployment rate is when you can't go out and find a decent job?"

Obama can claim all he wants, and his sycophants and media will back him to the hilt, but when each individual takes a look at his own situation and sees a mess, which one wins out?

I don't trust Mitt, he's pure, unadulterated northern liberal in a bottle, all slicked up and programmed to say whatever he thinks people want to hear.

I don't trust Newt, but he did balance the budget and he did have a contract with American that he lived up to.

hmmm....balance a budget or bankrupt a state. Which one do I vote for?

[Valin]

Yikes!

Obama has a miserable record to run on. Are we saying that we have no one that can win against such a travesty?

 

 

No, what is being said (IMO) is the general election campaign is not going to be a walk in the park.

 

 

I confess that I don't have a lot of faith in the American voter but DAMN!!...are they that stupid?

 

"Always bet on stupidity."

Babylon 5

 

 

I don't trust Mitt, he's pure, unadulterated northern liberal in a bottle, all slicked up and programmed to say whatever he thinks people want to hear.

 

This is the same problem he had last time.

 

I don't trust Newt, but he did balance the budget and he did have a contract with American that he lived up to.

 

IMO only two of the candidates are really talking about, what is coming down the road...and one of them has a foreign policy that is....well insane.