Romney: "No" to Santorum as a running mate. He "isn't conservative enough."

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Romney is far to the right of where a lot of people think he is. Santorum is actually to Romney's left on economic issues. Let's not kid ourselves into thinking that any of these extremists are at all moderate.

[LINCOLN REPUBLICAN]

Why would Romney pick Santorum for VP when there are plenty of better, more likeable, more qualified candidates for the job.

Didn't Danica Patrick support him? She'd be perfect. Young, Southern, poor and a woman.

So what you're saying is that Danica Patrick (I don't know her) is better, more likeable, and more qualified to be VP than is Santorum.

[Torie]

Mittens actually is more consistently "conservative" on economic issues. Among other things, he doesn't want to single out manufacturing for subsidies via the tax code. Rick is also rather more moderate on illegal immigration. It is on social issues, where Rick ratchets up the rhetoric. Of course, both are actually overall quite conservative. So yes, the whole thing is a joke ... Romney is a moderate, Rick isn't conservative, blah, blah, blah.

Mittens just wanted to get a dig in, because I suspect he has had it up to here with Rick's Romney is a moderate meme.

Oh yes, I think making folks have medical insurance (obviously Mittens has now cut that way back due to all the demagoguery on this matter), rather than just going to the emergency room, and leaching off the state, even if they could have afforded health insurance, is "conservative" too. It is all about the moral hazard principle.

Thank you.

[IDS Speaker Ben Kenobi]

Of course, both are actually overall quite conservative

Not when you're supporting Obamacare. Maybe in California supporting key Obama administration policies makes you conservative. Not here.

[Svensson]

What is he going to do? Romney/Hitler 2012?

That would be redundant.

[IDS Speaker Ben Kenobi]

So what you're saying is that Danica Patrick (I don't know her) is better, more likeable, and more qualified to be VP than is Santorum.

No, I'm saying that Danica Patrick is more qualified to be Romney's running mate than Santorum, yes.

[BigSkyBob]

Mittens actually is more consistently "conservative" on economic issues.

Um, support for cap-and-trade carbon schemes and Obamacare lite.  Those two alone place Romney well to the left of Santorum.

[Tidewater_Wave]

Look at it this way. Romney and Santorum are about the biggest mismatch ever. They come from opposite conservative backgrounds too. Romney would be best suited with another governor who is popular and/or from a battleground state; Chris Christie, Bob McDonnell, John Kasich, or the party's new star Marco Rubio. It's unforseeable that they'd be on the ticket together. Saying Santorum "isn't conservative enough" was just a chance to throw an easy punch and nothing more.

[True Federalist]

Why would Romney pick Santorum for VP when there are plenty of better, more likeable, more qualified candidates for the job.

Didn't Danica Patrick support him? She'd be perfect. Young, Southern, poor and a woman.

Wisconsin is part of the South now?

In any case, she's too young, as she turns 30 later this month.

[IDS Speaker Ben Kenobi]

Apparently the joke went over your head...

[True Federalist]

Too many people tend to think you have be from the South to drive a stock car, so I reacted to that first.

[Torie]

Mittens actually is more consistently "conservative" on economic issues.

Um, support for cap-and-trade carbon schemes and Obamacare lite.  Those two alone place Romney well to the left of Santorum.

If you like Mittens think the planet is warming, then carbon emissions is a negative externality that needs to be internalized into the price system to increase economic efficiency, and Mittens has been careful to say it needs to be done on a global basis, rather than unilaterally. That is an empirical issue in short, rather than an ideological one. It is "conservative" to internalize negative externalities into the price system. It makes the market work better.  And being a pragmatist who takes cognizance of the empirical data, and intelligently balances the competing considerations, is not a character flaw - either.

Yes, I am doing a full court press now against this Mittens is a wet meme. I'm tired of it. I'm a wet, Mittens isn't. Thank you.

[BigSkyBob]

Mittens actually is more consistently "conservative" on economic issues.

Um, support for cap-and-trade carbon schemes and Obamacare lite.  Those two alone place Romney well to the left of Santorum.

If you like Mittens think the planet is warming, then carbon emissions is a negative externality that needs to be internalized into the price system to increase economic efficiency, and Mittens has been careful to say it needs to be done on a global basis, rather than unilaterally. That is an empirical issue in short, rather than an ideological one. It is "conservative" to internalize negative externalities into the price system. It makes the market work better.  And being a pragmatist who takes cognizance of the empirical data, and intelligently balances the competing considerations, is not a character flaw - either.

Yes, I am doing a full court press now against this Mittens is a wet meme. I'm tired of it. I'm a wet, Mittens isn't. Thank you.

No matter how much you protest it, eco-religion is a liberal ideology and not an "empirical matter." Empirically, atmospheric CO2 levels exhibit a cyclic pattern. A probable cause is the cyclical desertification of Northern Africa. What nature has done for Northern Africa, human beings have done to the Amazon basin. The burning of fossil fuels is an asterisk compared to these forces, yet, because of an ideological hatred of the techological system by the left cap-and-trade schemes have targeted fossil fuel consumption.

I understand that you are a moderate, and, therefore, have a strong ideological preference for Romney. That's okay. That's how elections work. What you don't have is the right to claim night is day, black is white, or Romney is the conservative in the race.

[Torie]

Mittens actually is more consistently "conservative" on economic issues.

Um, support for cap-and-trade carbon schemes and Obamacare lite.  Those two alone place Romney well to the left of Santorum.

If you like Mittens think the planet is warming, then carbon emissions is a negative externality that needs to be internalized into the price system to increase economic efficiency, and Mittens has been careful to say it needs to be done on a global basis, rather than unilaterally. That is an empirical issue in short, rather than an ideological one. It is "conservative" to internalize negative externalities into the price system. It makes the market work better.  And being a pragmatist who takes cognizance of the empirical data, and intelligently balances the competing considerations, is not a character flaw - either.

Yes, I am doing a full court press now against this Mittens is a wet meme. I'm tired of it. I'm a wet, Mittens isn't. Thank you.

No matter how much you protest it, eco-religion is a liberal ideology and not an "empirical matter." Empirically, atmospheric CO2 levels exhibit a cyclic pattern. A probable cause is the cyclical desertification of Northern Africa. What nature has done for Northern Africa, human beings have done to the Amazon basin. The burning of fossil fuels is an asterisk compared to these forces, yet, because of an ideological hatred of the techological system by the left cap-and-trade schemes have targeted fossil fuel consumption.

I understand that you are a moderate, and, therefore, have a strong ideological preference for Romney. That's okay. That's how elections work. What you don't have is the right to claim night is day, black is white, or Romney is the conservative in the race.

You write your briefs with your opinions, and I will write mine, and we will let the public square decide. How about that?  Just a thought.

[TheGlobalizer]

This is the worst of the bad Atlas Forum threads.  I'd shoot myself, but what's the point?  I've already died on the inside reading this stupidity.

[ZuWo]

Romney shouldn't go there. He should not make this race about who is the most conservative candidate because he will obviously never be considered more conservative than either Santorum or Gingrich by the GOP electorate. The more this primary is about "who is the most conservative candidate" rather than "who has the best shot at defeating Obama", the worse is the outlook for Romney.

[redcommander]

Preach it Romney! Preach it!

[BigSkyBob]

Mittens actually is more consistently "conservative" on economic issues.

Um, support for cap-and-trade carbon schemes and Obamacare lite.  Those two alone place Romney well to the left of Santorum.

If you like Mittens think the planet is warming, then carbon emissions is a negative externality that needs to be internalized into the price system to increase economic efficiency, and Mittens has been careful to say it needs to be done on a global basis, rather than unilaterally. That is an empirical issue in short, rather than an ideological one. It is "conservative" to internalize negative externalities into the price system. It makes the market work better.  And being a pragmatist who takes cognizance of the empirical data, and intelligently balances the competing considerations, is not a character flaw - either.

Yes, I am doing a full court press now against this Mittens is a wet meme. I'm tired of it. I'm a wet, Mittens isn't. Thank you.

No matter how much you protest it, eco-religion is a liberal ideology and not an "empirical matter." Empirically, atmospheric CO2 levels exhibit a cyclic pattern. A probable cause is the cyclical desertification of Northern Africa. What nature has done for Northern Africa, human beings have done to the Amazon basin. The burning of fossil fuels is an asterisk compared to these forces, yet, because of an ideological hatred of the technological system by the left cap-and-trade schemes have targeted fossil fuel consumption.

I understand that you are a moderate, and, therefore, have a strong ideological preference for Romney. That's okay. That's how elections work. What you don't have is the right to claim night is day, black is white, or Romney is the conservative in the race.

You write your briefs with your opinions, and I will write mine, and we will let the public square decide. How about that?  Just a thought.

Well, part-and-parcel of my brief is the fact that you are arguing in bad faith. If you want to restrict both you and I to writing our briefs and letting the public decide why don't you honestly come forward and say, "I'm a moderate.  I have an ideological preference for Romney over his opponents. Therefore, given Torie's personal weighting of the various issues, Romney is the more moderate candidate." And, I will say, "I'm a conservative. I have an ideological preference for either Santorum or Gingrich over Romney. Therefore, by my personal weighting of the various issues, Romney is the more moderate candidate." What I find dishonest is your arguing that others should weight the various issues in a way other than you do.

Nor, can I let pass without notice your ex cathedra pronouncement that Gingrich and Santorum are "unfit" for the Presidency. Notions of "fitness" for the Presidency are so inherently subjective to the individual that making such a sweeping condemnation is antithetical to any commitment to stating your case and letting the voters sort these things out for themselves. Personally, I give great weight to fidelity to your campaign promises and forthrightness about your agenda. I think it is important that folks know whom they are voting for, and, knowing that what they intended to vote for is what they will actually receive.  On those counts I find Romney singularly "unfit" to be President. I think he basic character is to say anything to win regardless of whether, or not, it is true. However, I wouldn't make such sweeping judgement that Romney is unfit. That is for folks to sort out for themselves.

[milhouse24]

I think Jeb Bush or Rubio wold be good VP picks.

[Tidewater_Wave]

Choosing a VP that can bring states to the ticket is an outdated strategy but in this particular case Rubio brings FL, CO, NM, and NV. The best chance Obama could possibly have then is for it to come down to OH.

[Big Wiggly Style]

I think Jeb Bush or Rubio wold be good VP picks.

Jeb Bush being on any GOP ticket would sink it.

[Tidewater_Wave]

Yea it's gonna take 20 years before a Bush can be on any ticket.

[True Federalist]

Choosing a VP that can bring states to the ticket is an outdated strategy but in this particular case Rubio brings FL, CO, NM, and NV. The best chance Obama could possibly have then is for it to come down to OH.

The idea that Rubio would be a benefit in bringing non-Cuban Hispanics into the Republican fold is ludicrous, so he would be of absolutely no help compared to a generic running-mate in CO, NM, or NV.  He might help in Florida some, but if the condition of the race is such that the GOP needs the help of its VP selection to win Florida, then they will lose the general election.  There are far too many other states likely to go to Obama in the event that Florida is that close.

[King]

Some Cuban guy does not make Mexican-Americans want to vote for Mitt Romney. Mitt of course could mention he's a Mexican-American, but that would drive the white turnout so low that Obama would win SC.