Mitt Romney for President My Man Mitt: California Blue

Giuliani had this to say in California recently:

"We need a candidate who can compete in New York, who can compete in California. Just like Ronald Reagan, we need a candidate who can win."

The only problem is, I don't think I want a candidate who can compete in California. A lot has changed since Ronald Reagan. California is now a bastion of democrat policies. California has a constitutional right to conduct human embryonic stem cell research. Domestic Partnerships provide registered gay couples with all of the incidents of marriage, minus the name only. The state has liberal abortion laws and recently rejected the chance to pass a parental notification law for when doctors perform abortions on minors.

California is a great place to live in many ways, but it is certainly not very friendly to social conservatives. I would be disappointed if the rest of the country went our direction on these issues. So, when Giuliani says he can compete in blue California, remember the "R" by his name doesn't necessarily stand for red America.

I want a candidate who can win the country, while continuing the progress we have made on social issues. Romney can and will win the country if nominated.


	6 Comments: Whatever you are smoking, I want some of it. Mitt is going to finish 3rd in Iowa. Mitt is going to finish 3rd or 4th in NH. And Mitt is going to finish 4th or 5th in SC. How does that make Mitt the President? It doesn't. You are setting yourself up for a major letdown. Just remember, you hear it from me first. By Anonymous, at August 25, 2007 at 9:22 PM fanhitter- Again, you make claims w/o any basis in data; w/o any evidence to support them. The last 5-6 polls out of Iowa & NH have Mitt up 12-17%. He's had a double-digit lead in both states for over two months. In SC & FL his numbers have gone from single digits to 17% in the latest couple of polls. In Nevada he's gone from being even w/Thompson & Rudy to now having a double-digit lead. All of these statements are based in fact. These are the actual numbers coming from the states. This does not mean Romney is a sure thing. However, claiming that Romney will lose in these states (when all evidence says he will win) requires extra evidence. If you don't sustain the burden of proof required by your position you come off looking like an ignoramus. As always. By Slick-Willy, at August 25, 2007 at 11:14 PM Mitt bought that silly straw poll election in Iowa and everyone knows it. He spent a ton of money in Iowa and it will continue to get him some popularity vots for another week of two. Rudy G. will start the real campaign in Iowa in another month. Rudy will blow Mitt's name and face off the front pages. Thus the beginning of the end for Mitt. Mitt had a nice run but now it's all over except for the crying. And if Fred Thompson announces this week that he is running they will be asking, "Mitt who?" By Anonymous, at August 26, 2007 at 6:15 PM Then we can respond, you remember, Mitt Romney, the one who actually knows what he's talking about. By Anonymous, at August 26, 2007 at 10:03 PM Mitt bought the straw poll... blah blah blah... losers usually have an excuse. Yea, he spent near $5M in Iowa. It wasn't all for the straw poll though. It was for support generally, which he now has. Romney is currently polling more than double Rudy's numbers: latest poll has Romney up 31% to 15% over Rudy. Say what you wish about spending $$$ in Iowa, but analysts say winning Iowa is worth at least $50M in free national advertising. That $5M was a solid investment. If Rudy could have won the straw poll he would have spent the necessary $$$ to do so. In Iowa and NH (unlike the vast majority of states) 80%+ are well informed about the candidates and have made up their minds already. Rudy's $$$ will not change minds. It was bad public policy + sickening personal history that made Rudy uncompetitive in Iowa. By Slick-Willy, at August 27, 2007 at 10:46 AM MHTF, I appreciate your comments. How is the openly pro-choice, pro-civil union, pro-sanctuary city former Mayor of New York City going to get the GOP nomination when it has been in direct opposition to all of his social policies. He rightly deserves credit for his heroic response on 9/11, and his crackdown on crime in the city. National polls continue to show him leading Romney and the other GOP candidates, but the presidential election process is not a national primary, but rather a state-by-state primary/caucus. Romney is pro-life, anti-illegal immigration, and has tremendous experience in the private sector as an expert on turning around financially mismanaged companies and add incredible value to what they do. I think Mitt Romney has a much better shot at being the GOP nominee than Rudy because Mitt is more socially conservative than Rudy and has the fiscal conservative credentials. He has national security experience with managing the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics, and can add a VP to the ticket who has Dick Cheney-like national security experience. Rudy adding a social conservative is not going to mitigate his policies that are welcome to mainstream Democrats, but an anathema to mainstream Republicans. By Steve, at August 27, 2007 at 5:21 PM Post a Comment