New Jersey Governor Chris Christie
In the last few weeks of the campaign for the Republican Presidential nomination, one thing has become perfectly clear, the choice of most conservatives is: Anything but Romney. You may think I’m wrong in this conclusion and reasonable people will have different opinions. However, let me give you a few facts.
Prior to the campaign season really beginning; i.e. before anything in Iowa, the field was two people Romney and the undeclared Palin. All polls showed that Romney was the front runner with Palin a distant second and then the remainder of the field. By the time of the CPAC conference in February, Romney finished second to Ron Paul with 23% of the vote to Paul’s 30%. This should have surprised no one as CPAC is one of the most conservative groups in the country and Paul is clearly their darling. The third place finisher Gary Johnson garnered 3% of the vote. Anyone at this point, would have thought that Romney would glide to the nomination.
After this, things started changing. Michele Bachmann entered the race as the Tea Party darling and started picking up substantial popularity, especially in the state of Iowa which is important because it is the first state to elect delegates to the National Convention. Immediately upon Ms. Bachmann’s emergence, Tim Pawlenty who had some support became an also ran. Ms. Bachmann gave a stunning performance in one of the first debates and immediately shot up to second in the polls. See e.g. “Is Michele Bachmann a Phenomenon About to Happen?”
Then, came the Iowa Straw Polls on August 13. It was expected to be a stronghold of Tim Pawlenty because of his Minnesota roots and was supposed to keep his election hopes alive. It did neither. What it did do, is remove Mitt Romney from the front runner status officially. Michele Bachmann came in first with 29% of the vote. Rick Perry finished ahead of Mitt Romney with 4.3% and Perry was not even in the race yet. In fact, front runner Romney did not even finish in the top five. Again, you can argue this didn’t matter as he didn’t really campaign there or care about Iowa, but let’s continue.
Ex-Front Runner Romney
As a result of this unexpected finish in Iowa, Rick Perry entered the race. A mere two weeks later, a Fox news poll placed Rick Perry as the clear front runner with 26%. Romney finished second in the same national poll. Palin, still undeclared, finished with 8% and Ms. Bachmann only had 4%. Keep in mind that Perry and Bachmann have continued to perform rather dismally in each successive debate since they have entered the race. It began to look very clear that the Republican base was looking for an alternative to Romney.
And since then, it has just gotten clearer. Prior to the September 22 debate, a Gallup poll showed that Perry was the clear front runner with 29%. Romney was a distant second with 17%. Ron Paul had his usual 13% and Michele Bachmann had fallen to 10%. On September 22 at the Fox News/Google debate, Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich gave surprisingly strong performances. Perry and Bachmann both looked ill prepared. The general consensus was that Romney had swept the floor with all of them and was the clear winner. But, there was a stirring and excitement growing about Herman Cain and his 9-9-9 plan.
The New Front Runner?
The stirring proved to be prophetic because out of nowhere Herman Cain won the Florida Straw Poll with a clear majority of 37% of the vote. Perry finished second slightly ahead of Romney with 15.4%. This is more of a shock to Perry than Romney as Perry was beginning to look like he would sweep the south in the primaries based upon national polling data. But, what is shows is that both Perry and Romney are losing momentum at a time when they should be picking it up. My opinion is that Perry’s debate performance and liberal stance on immigration is beginning to hurt him with the base. Again, you can argue that Romney is not strong in the south so this did not matter.
However, Romney is doing everything right and he is still not gaining any momentum or any polling numbers. In fact, he is falling deeper into the pack.
More evidence of this desire for it to be anybody but Romney occurred on Tuesday, September 27. Chris Christie who has been saying ad infinitum that he would not be running for President was giving a speech at the Reagan Center in Southern California. During the question and answer period, a women practically begged Christie to run. A standing ovation ensued. The Twitter world went nuts because for the first time, Christie did not say no. He did not say yes either, but he did not say no. In the ensuing 24 hours, it has been nothing but Christie in the Blogosphere and elsewhere.
One out and the other shortly?
Why?
Because nobody wants Romney; plain and simple. Christie may declare himself and shoot to the top of the polls in the manner of Bachmann, Perry and now Cain. He will then either perform and stay at the top or pull a Perry and/or Bachmann and slowly disappear. Hopefully, it will be the former. But, if it is the latter, it will again make my hypothesis clear: Anybody, but Romney.
Facebook
Twitter
Good article! I hope neither Christie or Huckabee enter. After declaring again and again that they are not going to run, it would be just like a politician to enter themselves into the race. That is what is so refreshing about Cain. He explored and prayed about his run. He has common sense that resonates with Conservatives.
Well written assessment! I cannot even put my finger on it, but always had some resistance to Mitt – Newt is most experienced, and intelligent. Cain and Bachman are bravest! Mitt Econ – Perry charisma – Huntsman, Paul, NM x gov. not the ticket – too weak on nat. security issues for my blood!
Romney – flip-flopper, will say anything to anybody and not care.
Perry – has his Texas style illegal alien tuition reimbursement with a kicker…CITIZENSHIP UPON GRADUATION! An Anchor Baby Program if ever there was one. Have a “heart” Governor? C’mon.
Christie – for Gun Control. A goofball if ever there was one. A shill for We The Elite People in Washington DC. A lawyer by trade, prosecuter by day, and blow hard while at rest.
Bachmann – foot-in-mouth disease.
Paul – a true Libertarian. Sticks to his guns come hell or highwater. Git-R-Dun!
CAin – the only true candidate. Talks on his radio show at WSB-AM 758 giving his diverse thoughts on topics called in and he’ll answer them all, too. No talking points from this candidate…plain, honest to goodness down home reality. You Go Cain!
Cain CAn. God Bless America. Vote 2012.
Nice piece! Suffice it to say, I am far more comfortable in the world of Adam’s and Jefferson than I am in the world of Obama and Clinton.
There is little not to admire in this piece. Will Romney, like so many, exclaim in private, save me from my friends? One might have imagined “Anyone but Lincoln?” in a similar post in 1861.
As the leader of the moderate faction of the Republican party, Lincoln came under attack from all sides. Radical Republicans, those who strongly opposed slavery during the war and after the war distrusted ex-Confederates, demanding harsh policies for “Reconstruction”, primarily the transformation of the Southern United States, they wanted harsher treatment of the South.
War Democrats desired more compromise, and Copperheads, anti-war Democrats, despised him-not to mention irreconcilable secessionists in re-conquered areas.
Politically, Lincoln fought back with patronage. Lincoln opposed the political philosophy of President Andrew Jackson ‘to the victors belong the spoils,’ as the culture of party favoritism and official incompetence, history repeating itself, at the expense of the people.” He pitted his opponents against each other, and by appealing to the American people with his powers of oratory. Any smoke of similarity here?
His Gettysburg Address of 1863 became the most quoted speech in American history. It was an iconic statement of America’s dedication to the principles of nationalism, equal rights, liberty, and democracy. Compare this to today’s vacuum of scholarly erudition, the wedge issues of social justice over equal justice.
At the close of the American Civil war, dare we compare this to America’s conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and Yemen? Lincoln held a moderate view of “Reconstruction”, reconstruction of state and society in the former Confederacy, seeking to speedily reunite the nation through a policy of generous reconciliation in the face of lingering and bitter divisiveness, we know it now as a debilitating redistributive transformation.
However, just six days after the surrender of the confederacy by commanding General Robert E. Lee, Lincoln was shot and killed by Confederate sympathizer John Wilkes Booth at Ford’s Theatre in Washington, D.C. His death marked the first assassination of a U.S. president. Lincoln has been consistently ranked by scholars as one of the greatest U.S. presidents.
And what was asked of Abraham Lincoln? Was it not to secure the sanctity of human life, our national interest in the institution of marriage and family, the free exercise of religion for all people, the moral dignity of each person, the right to own, possess and manage private property, without arbitrary interference from government, the individual right of owning, possessing, and using firearms, a system of checks and balances between the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches within both state and federal governments, to secure our national sovereignty and domestic tranquility by maintaining a strong military; establishing and maintaining secure national borders; participating in international and diplomatic affairs without ceding authority to foreign powers that diminish or interfere with our unalienable rights, and secure a system of fair taxes that are not punitive against the institution of marriage or family and are not progressive in nature, and within a limited government framework to encourage economic opportunity, free enterprise, and free market competition. These are, or were, American “values.”
If our decision isn’t difficult when we become informed, then “reason is not firmly in her seat!” No one wanted Winston Churchill in a leadership role until Hitler made him the least desirable but most indispensable choice to lead the United Kingdom in WWII.
How many would ask the question “Could Lincoln have been elected today?” Or would the moniker have been “Anyone but Lincoln?” and how wrong we would have been.
[...] field argues in favor of ranked or preferential ballotingMy colleague here at Hollywood Republican, Frank DeMartini recently wrote that in this primary season, there seems to be a movement for “anyone but Romney.” Romney, of [...]