Let's not forget he was also the man who invented obamacare and had a history of signing AWB. Not to mention dozens of other non-fiscal conservative elements to his voting history.
Then on top of that they made the Massachusetts moderate pander to the American Taliban.
They need a guy who is a true fiscal conservative with principle. Socially he should be for small government.
Originally Posted by stooxie
Help me understand this. Should the Republicans find someone who will step in the social dog sheet of gays and abortion EVEN more? Should the Republicans find someone who will be EVEN more hypocritical, calling for smaller government and less regulation while trying to pass laws (on the above) that have zero to do with running the country?
The Dems seem (operative word there) to be smart enough to avoid the gun issues, at least publicly. I know they are working behind the scenes. Will the Republicans learn to let go some of the issues that have lost them the race now twice? Dunno.
Again, help me out here. I TOTALLY get that Romney was not ideal, but the way I see it, he lost because of the typical Republican right wing religious pandering, not because he was too moderate.
The door was opened during the primaries, with that whole circus about who was more hardcore. Who would follow the bible most closely. Biggest gift that could possibly have been handed the Democrats and they didn't waste an ounce of it.
I guess we'll have to hope for Chris Christie in 2016, or is he not hard core enough? Not worrying about what everyone does in their private lives enough?