Mitt Romney's political future

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Don't doubt Mitt for a second. Had Huckabee dropped out back in January 2007 when people kept telling him to, Mitt would have won Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, and quite possibly South Carolina then Florida and had unstoppable momentum. With his economic credentials and executive experience against Barack Obama...and his good debating skills...with the economic meltdown...we could well have had a President Mitt Romney right now.

Until late 2007, no one expected him to come even close to winning in IA. Given his stronger than expected showing there, there was no reason for Huckabee to drop out in January 2007 2008.

If anything, it was Romney who prevented Huckabee from getting the nomination, not the other way around.

Back then he was actually doing better than Romney, so the only "people" who "kept telling him" to drop out were hardcore Romney supporters who became bitter toward Huckabee because he is a genuine conservative (as opposed to Romney) and was doing better than him.

And LOL at his having "economic credentials"--he has none.

You are simply trying to make Huckabee a scapegoat for everything.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Don't doubt Mitt for a second. Had Huckabee dropped out back in January 2007 when people kept telling him to, Mitt would have won Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, and quite possibly South Carolina then Florida and had unstoppable momentum. With his economic credentials and executive experience against Barack Obama...and his good debating skills...with the economic meltdown...we could well have had a President Mitt Romney right now.

Until late 2007, no one expected him to come even close to winning in IA. Given his stronger than expected showing there, there was no reason for Huckabee to drop out in January 2007 2008.

If anything, it was Romney who prevented Huckabee from getting the nomination, not the other way around.

Back then he was actually doing better than Romney, so the only "people" who "kept telling him" to drop out were hardcore Romney supporters who became bitter toward Huckabee because he is a genuine conservative (as opposed to Romney) and was doing better than him.

And LOL at his having "economic credentials"--he has none.

You are simply trying to make Huckabee a scapegoat for everything.

This has to be a joke.

It does not "have" to be a "joke". Nor is it, for that matter. I was absolutely serious when I said it, just like I am absolutely serious right now. If anything, your disrespect for criticism of Romney (and support of Huckabee) serves only to prove my point--like many Romney supporters, you are intolerant toward any suggestion that Romney is not the best.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Another person now proves my point. "Unsubstantiated BS" is just a pejorative that you use to dismiss my negative opinion of Romney/positive opinion of Huckabee.

Usually the spoiler is the guy in third place who is farthest away from winning of the three candidates but takes enough of a certain electorate away to prevent one member of the top two from winning. Of course you may still beleive Huck was second. He wasn't, as Paul pointed out, on 2/7/08 the day Romney got out Romney had 100 more delegates then Huck. Romney also beat Huck in the nationwide primary popular vote even counting the states after Romney got out.

If it was Romney who was in second place, then why did he drop out before Huckabee? Further, you are intentionally using the results as of February 7 just so that you can put Romney ahead of Huckabee. You should be looking at the results when the winner (McCain) receieved the delegates necessary to get the nomination. The delegate counts at the end (which is what really matters) has nothing to do with the delegate counts in an intermediate stage such as February 7. Also, your use of the word "usually" suggests that Huckabee was not necessarily the spoiler, even if he was indeed in third place as you claim. Like the Democrats when their own candidate lost in 2000, you also are disregarding the fact that, like in the general election, popular vote does not matter; delegates (primaries)/electoral votes (general election) do.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Having religion as part of the reason for one's opposition to the stimulus does not equal lack of economic credentials and to suggest that it does is being at least as anti religious as the stimulus.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, that is not "the best he's got". You are suggesting that his only talking point is opposition to the stimulus because of religion, which is obviously false. Plus, your claim that "Middle Class suburbanites aren't going to lose any sleep over a stimulus package being un-religious" does not make the stimulus's religious stance irrelevant, nor does it make it any more acceptable. I must also note that your use of the term "wedge issues" leads me to question if you are really a conservative as your PM score suggests (especially on social issues), though now I understand why you hate Huckabee.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Those traits of the stimulus being facts does not mean that the stimulus's anti religious stance is not a fact. You are also suggesting that, just because Huckabee notes the anti religious stance of the stimulus, he must be OK with the rest of what you mentioned, which is false. You are arguing that they are mutually exclusive: either one criticizes the stimulus for its anti religious stance, or for the rest of what you mentioned, but not both.

Also, your claim that "Huck was jawing away about nonsense on his show and wrote one bone headed Op-ed" again proves my claim.

Plus, having an MBA (or a college degree in general) does not make Romney (or anyone) "qualified to be dog catcher" either. For example, Obama, too, graduated from Harvard and even chaired the Harvard Law Review (or at least that is what most people think of him), but that does not make him a good president. So, I will move on now to your claims of Romney cleaning up corruption (which for the record has nothing to do with economics, but whatever) and deficit to surplus; Huckabee did both while being a governor himself. And lastly, you mention "a real health care plan", which is certainly irrelevant; you have not even explained what you consider to be "real"! (Plenty of your other claims in that paragraph require explanation as well.)

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Well, I certainly say that even if Huckabee did cost Romney the nomination and cause McCain to win it, I would rather have that than Romney himself being the nominee.