Personally, though I’ve done my part in contributing to the discussions about Mitt’s presidential run, I am thoroughly sick of it and I look forward to a more varied mix of discussion.

Also, this makes it much easier for me to put up an Obama sign this fall, assuming that he pulls it off.

yep. He will be announcing that today.

Bloggernacle and normalcy. Isn’t that an oxymoron?

Those Romney supporters more interested in good governance and innovative solutions to problems than ideology should turn their attention to Obama now, I would think.

I’m sort of thinking about it. My wife likes Obama and she’s definitely lobbying with me to influence my vote.

Mitt’s speech was amazing. This is not the end for or of Mitt. I’m sure we’ll be seeing lots more from him in some form of presidential politics, and that there will be plenty of fodder for discussion.

Tito,

An amazing speech? Really?

“If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win. And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror.”

What is amazing about that? That’s classless. Can he not withdraw honorably? Can he not just say, I put up a good fight, but came up short. What a loser.

Dan,
You’re turning into what I hate about conservatives, and many Upper West Side liberals—if a person’s a Republican, he or she can do no good. Mitt Romney, imho, was the third-best of the crop running, after Obama and Clinton. But, it appears, you have to see only bad in what he does—even (shock of shocks!) Bush has done some good things. On balance, he’s been a horrible president, but that doesn’t mean, for example, his ideas on immigration were bad. You get a lot more credibility where you give credit for the good, even in those with whom you disagree.

Dan, that’s a mean thing to say, and I don’t think it’s true. I think he would have won enough states in the next month or so to remain competitive–especially as people begin thinking about whether or not they really want McCain, now that Giuliani and Thompson and the others are out. Although the Republican party doesn’t have to deal with the wild card of the super-delegates, things still could have been tight up until the convention, and that would indeed have focused people’s attention (and money) on divides within the Republican party and created further bad feelings which could have affected voter turnout or support of the eventual candidate.

As it was, Romney provided a very reasonable and even gracious reason for dropping out of the race, and I think he was thinking more of his disappointed supporters than himself. Surely it’s not classless to give a sense of dignity to the people who have contributed time and money to your campaign, right?

Having said that, I didn’t listen to the speech and I have no actual opinions about whether or not it was great :).

So is there going to be a mass Mormon defection over to the Democrats?

One more thing, then I’ll stop adding paragraphs: this is my favorite “Farewell to Romney,” of all the ones I’ve read so far. Scroll down–I think it’s the second post.

http://www.rebirthofrenaisauce.blogspot.com/

Bloggernacle and normalcy have no place in the same sentence. We’ll never be normal, you guys.

Oh, Tagore, we are on the same page. Yes, it’s an oxymoron.

Actually, I thought we were being our normal selves obsessing on the election.

Dan,

When Romney comments on the broader principles and ideals, as he did in his Faith in America speech, he’s much more passionate and authentically-perceived. His discussion of the role culture plays in the shaping of a nation’s greatness, he was, imo, right on. I thought it was remarkably well-captured.

However you feel about Romney’s political vision, to question his character I think is misguided. on public perception of Romney captured the way I feel about it.

Dan, the majority of Republicans believe that setting a timetable for withdrawal in Iraq would be to surrender to the terrorists who are terrorizing that country. I think Romney’s comment makes sense given that he is addressing the Republican base and giving them the perfect reason for suspending his campaign — continuing it would assist the Democratic Party in winning the election and therefore bring about a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.

You and many others disagree that setting a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq would support terrorists in their destabilization efforts. But that does not mean that citing that as a reason for suspending his campaign is classless.

With Mitt leaving the race today will the bloggernacle return to normal?

We’ll know for sure when the first gay marriage thread appears.

McCain is our best bet now. He has good economic policies: he supports free trade and free labor markets. Check him out. I will likely support him.

Man you want to talk about not knowing what to do now… I am/was a delegate for Romney here in Nevada and now I am wondering if I can change that to Obama so we only have a Democrat in the White house for 4 years, instead of not having a Republican in there for 8 to 16 years….

DKL,

Dan, the Democratic debates have established the position of the Democratic party on Iraq with great clarity: Get out quickly, before we win.

Dude, we already won. Saddam is dead. Let’s let Iraqis deal with their own country on their own term now.

Dan, that’s a mean thing to say, and I don’t think it’s true. I think he would have won enough states in the next month or so to remain competitive–especially as people begin thinking about whether or not they really want McCain, now that Giuliani and Thompson and the others are out.

I believe it was statistically impossible for Romney to pull off a win, so it wouldn’t be staying competitive, it would be delaying the inevitable.

I wish he was still in the fight, I’d love to see him waste more money, and hopefully scare him away from making another run. Also the bickering between he and McCain was fun to watch during debates.

My condolences to all who wasted their votes on Romney only to have their hero drop out two days later.

Bookslinger pegged it! I was for Romney (He made a brilliant move today) but will more than likely vote Obama come election time. Give the country what they want, and when it is all screwed up we will come back and clean it all up. hehe…IMHO!!!!

Margaret Young,

I’ve also wondered whether Mitt Romney might be back to run for office another day. It seems to me that the issues that were a problem for him during this campaign will not go away. Four or eight years from now, would the South forget its evangelical leanings and vote for a Mormon?

Also, we know he spent many millions from his own pocket to finance this campaign. Would he be willing to do that again?

Maybe in time things will change but I’m feeling a little pessimistic about Mitt Romney running again.

What is the logic behind opposing ethanol subsidies?

John F., that’s exactly the comparison I was thinking of … I knew Reagan had lost races for the presidency before he won and I thought about whether Mitt Romney might think about the same thing and make more attempts.

The major benefit to Romney is that he started the race as a relatively unknown candidate and rose to a position where he was considered a serious contender. He’s not unknown anymore and he wouldn’t have to explain himself to voters in a future election.

Also, this was the first election ever where evangelicals had to come up with their pro and con arguments for Romney. I don’t think America had ever heard the “we’re voting for President, not for a pastor” argument. If there was another round of this in a future election, Romney proponents could be better entrenched, better prepared to argue his case, etc.

So maybe he’ll be back and be able to win in a future election.

What does he do in the meantime? He’s not holding a political office. When Reagan ran for office he was the governor of California. Romney is currently the former governor of Massachussetts. I would expect he would need to find some kind of political position or do something high-profile that would keep him politically relevant. I wonder how tempted he is to return to a business role.

The other thing to think about is whether or not he would play a prominent role in the next Republican administration(?). It seems there was enmity between him and McCain but we also have to remember that Reagan and Bush were bitter rivals for the GOP candidacy and they found a way to work together.

The other thing to think about is whether or not he would play a prominent role in the next Republican administration(?). It seems there was enmity between him and McCain but we also have to remember that Reagan and Bush were bitter rivals for the GOP candidacy and they found a way to work together.

The National Post, a Canadian newspaper, suggests that a McCain-Romney ticket would be stronger than a McCain-Huckabee ticket. Maybe this will be Romney’s opportunity for revenge against his erstwhile social conservative rival. Plus McCain will want to heal a fractured party and putting Romney on the ticket would be a better way to do that than Mike Huckabee.

Thank God (the one and only REAL God, He saw to it that Romney was whipped solidly. As far as your “bloggernacle” getting back to “normal”…..it has been said several times here, and I’ll agree, mormons will NEVER be “normal”, nor will their musings on the internet. I’m sure that you hope sincerely that all us non-mormons will just go away, quietly and otherwise, but my hope is that now that your cult has been opened up to more and more scrutiny in public, more and more of your members will see the One and only light, His name starts with a J, but it’s not Joe….it’s Jesus Christ Himself, your only hope for being saved. But, at least for the time being, the fear of our country being led by a pundit from your “faith” has passed, we OUTSIDE your “bloggernacle” can breathe a HUGE sigh of relief and look forward to someone…ANYONE….else leading our country. We knew this would happen, God wouldn’t stand by and let us be “led” by someone who is so against Him. Prayer DOES get answered.

Ronald P., didn’t those tornados in Arkansas, Alabama and Tennessee teach you anything about how He who controls the winds feels about those who reject His servant Mitt Romney?

Ronald P, that’s funny. I thought the same thing about Huckabee. Anyway, with comments like yours, I wouldn’t be complaining that other people aren’t normal, if I were you.

John Mansfield–how refreshing (and somewhat surprising) to see that you have a sense of humor!

Ronald P., I’m afraid your comment is unChristian. How sadly ironic. In fact, it appears from Christ’s words, that you are damned to Hell.

“Whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire,” MAT 5:22.

Calling Mormons “not normal” fits the bill. Let us know if those are real fires or just a lot of hot gas, okay?

Oh yeah, Prof. Young, just give me dozens of tragic deaths to work into my material, and I’m a barrel of laughs.

I’m just too tired to go through each of Bennett’s points and refute him (would take too long, and there are too many lies). He needs to go away and find a casino floor to darken.

Margaret Young, Tis funny that you folks first claim “the Bible is only correct as far as it’s correctly translated”….then use it any time you want to “put down” some other denomination. Hmmmmmm……seems that by YOUR logic, using the scripture YOU quote, YOU are also putting someone else down????? Pick a belief, pick your “scripture”…and stick to it, silly woman.

Ronald,

Do you mind if I ask you another political question? I once had an interesting conversation with a guy who reminds me of you. He claimed that Ronald Wilson Reagan was obviously the anti-Christ because his name had three words, all with six letters, 6-6-6, just like it says in Revalations. Pretty sneaky, huh?

For all I know, the same think holds true for your name. Are you an anti-Christ?

John Mansfield, you raise an excellent point. God will reach out and smite the wicked, just as he’s done in Arkansas, Huckabee’s home state and the state that gave Huckebee the most support, where there is now an outbreak of leprosy — a sure sign of divine displeasure.

Repent, wayward Arkansans: Vote Romney 2012!

john f. (#39),

The problem with ethanol subsidies is that they are a waste of resources that have all sorts of market distorting effects. Notably, they artificially inflate the price of corn, which causes many to suffer, some rather severely.

There is nothing particularly wrong with the government subsidizing alternative fuel research – but subsidizing the fuels themselves creates a heavy incentive for the production and use of fuels that are less economical than the alternatives – leading to a massive waste of resources. If they weren’t less economical, they wouldn’t need a subsidy.

If Congress wishes to advance national security by reducing foreign oil consumption, there are far better ways that do not waste resources. For example, we could streamline the process for the licensure of new nuclear power plants. Some countries economically produce almost all of their electricity from nuclear power – there is no reason why we couldn’t. No subsidy required.

nacd