Now that Romney has released a statement to his supporters announcing that he won’t be running in 2016, the next question is, to whom will he throw his support and his proven ability to raise money?
Many conservatives have long excoriated Romney for not being conservative enough—or not being conservative at all. But I’ve long thought that his instincts were actually more conservative than he allowed himself to be while the governor of the deep blue state of Massachusetts (although I agree that he’s certainly not as conservative as someone like Ted Cruz.) But those wondering about Romney’s present intentions might want to pay particular attention to this part of his message:
I believe that one of our next generation of Republican leaders, one who may not be as well known as I am today, one who has not yet taken their message across the country, one who is just getting started, may well emerge as being better able to defeat the Democrat nominee. In fact, I expect and hope that to be the case.
I feel that it is critical that America elect a conservative leader to become our next president. You know that I have wanted to be that president. But I do not want to make it more difficult for someone else to emerge who may have a better chance of becoming that president. You can’t imagine how hard it is for Ann and me to step aside, especially knowing of your support and the support of so many people across the country. But we believe it is for the best of the Party and the nation…
I believe a Republican winning back the White House is essential for our country, and I will do whatever I can to make that happen…
I wish (and “wish” is not really a strong enough word) that Romney won in 2012. It would have made our country and the world a safer and saner place, and would have forestalled some of the awful consequences we’ve seen from the continuation of the Obama presidency (and sometimes I think we ain’t seen nothin’ yet compared to what the next two years will bring.) But 2016 is not Romney’s “time,” and he has had the smarts and the decency to realize it and act on it. It will be interesting to see who he ends up supporting, but I will go out on a limb and say it won’t be Jeb Bush. I entertain a hope that it will be my number one candidate at the moment, Wisconsin’s Scott Walker, who neatly fits Romney’s description of “one who may not be as well known as I am today, one who has not yet taken their message across the country, one who is just getting started…”
[Neo-neocon is a writer with degrees in law and family therapy, who blogs at neo-neocon.]
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
It will be interesting to see who he ends up supporting, but I will go out on a limb and say it won’t be Jeb Bush.
I hate to disagree Neo, but it will be Jeb Bush. It’s all but certain. Mittens is bowing out because the Establishment donor brigade is already lining up behind Bush III (God help us).
It had been my (unevidenced) suspicion that Bush and Romney, in cahoots with the GOP leadership, were intending to present a false dichotomy, the idea that it’s going to be Romney or Bush and that would freeze out younger, newer moderate rivals like Christie and Rubio. Then Romney would pull out to leave it to the GOP leadership’s candidate all along – Jeb Bush.
If so, they erred. Romney’s current polling is name recognition, as it is for all candidates, both parties, this early in a cycle. Jeb’s recent polling has been rather abysmal for a putative ringer for the GOP leadership.
Mostly, I think they underestimated Scott Walker’s quick ascension to the number one or two spot already, especially among conservatives, whom Bush has not only dismissed, but actually insulted many times. Very dumb move, that. It alone will certainly cost him the election, and likely the GOP nomination.
Spiny Norman:
I have no doubt that some of the big Republican money will line up behind Bush. It is inevitable. But Romney’s quote makes it fairly clear that he is not advocating that, nor is he going to work for that himself. What part of “one who may not be as well known as I am today, one who has not yet taken their message across the country, one who is just getting started…” and ” a conservative leader” translates into “Jeb Bush”?
I have seen doom-mongers predicting that he’s going to endorse either Bush or Christie, but like you, the way I read his words here pretty much precludes either of those scenarios.
Scott Walker, middle class mid-west personified. He is even-keeled, tested by fire and well-respected. He has earned the nomination in my mind. He would do the most good for this country.
I would never vote for Jeb Bush or Chris Christie.
I would fly over Karl Rove and his grease board.
Walker is a very good guy. If he is the candidate, I will be happy to vote for him. But he has apparently recently turned his back on social conservatives, and regardless of your social politics, that is a fatal mistake,
I am a social conservative. My blog makes that clear.
I’m not sure what you are referring to but I trust Walker, a family man who keeps his word, to make good base line judgments regarding our civil liberties.
I heard on Limbaugh [or was it Levin] that Walker had walked away from social conservative issues. After reading your reply, I searched for corroboration that Walker has done so, and cannot find such corroboration. Limbaugh [or Levin] may have been mistaken. Apologies.
Not sure about Levin, but Rush has said that Walker has avoided talking about social conservative issues in any depth as yet, but that it wasn’t a bad idea so early on in the cycle. Sort of like how Walker is obviously a budget cutter, but it’s too soon to talk any real numbers about entitlements. The MSM awaits his every utterance now that he’s surging, there to immediately attack him.
I predict that if Bush or Christie is the nominee, you and I and all of us will hold our noses and vote for him because the alternative will be unbearable, just as we voted for W Bush and for McCain and for Romney because the alternative was unbearable (and it was). The last time I actually didn’t care whether the Republican won or lost was in 1996. (Even in hindsight I have not changed my mind; I do not believe Dole would have been any better than Clinton, and would not lift a finger to change that result.)
No. many of us will not. In obola’s last election he received LESS votes than the first time around. But, many more conservatives did not vote for Romney. I didn’t nor for McCain before that. I simply chose not to vote for president. if the R’s want my vote they will have to nominate someone I will vote for. D light doesn’t cut it.
That’s exactly the kind of thinking that cost the GOP the last two presidential elections.
If the republicans want my vote then they need to nominate a candidate that is not a democrat in every way except party affiliation.
As long as you will vote for any shit sandwich the republican will nominate, then that is what you will always get from the republicans.
look at the most recent election. Do you believe the republicans are going to do anything to stop illegal immigration, obamacare, the list is so looooong. No, they will do nothing about anything. No need to elect a R president that has the same views as the democrats.
For crying out loud, the guy recently announced that man-made climate change was true. Amazing how stupid someone can be and still be rich.
The problem with Romney wasn’t knowing, it was doing. He is not fighter and did not show resolve to do what needed to be done to win. Which is likely a reflection of his presidency would have been. Having all the answers is great, but can you put them into practice and have the fortitude to stick to it when the dems or media call you bad things? He did not, he folded.
He seems like a great guy, but he would not have been a great president. He would have been orders of magnitude better than the current office holder, but that ship sailed long ago.
Mitt is competent. Even if he is not a scrapper. We need a fighter who stands up for Americans, IMO. But I would hope and expect that Mitt could serve in a key position of a future Repub Administration.
Romney just volunteered his belief in, or acquiescence to, the climate change hysteria, the sort of unnecessary blunder a cautious man like him wouldn’t make if running was a serious consideration.
I hope he’s serious about service, he seems to be. He would make the best Chief of Staff in history, and would be a great guy to have around when we pare down the federal workforce. President Walker should reach out to him.
Bye, Mitt. 2012 was the first time in my adult life I did not vote for the Republican candidate for president. Of course, if Christie or Jeb is the nominee it won’t be the last. ‘Better than the Democrat’ is no longer good enough. Not nearly good enough.
So, your effective choice was: 1) a far-left, deeply dishonest Islamophilic Democrat who prefers to rule by decree and strengthens our enemies while weakening us; or 2) a centrist Republican who’s closer to correct on some crucial issues and a vastly more competent administrator and decent human being — and you were happy to let #1 win reelection just because #2 was “not nearly good enough.”
Well, thanks for nothing. When you — and all the rest of us — are going to have either a horrible president or a better but “not nearly good enough” one, it’s really childish to sit back and do nothing to stop horrible from winning because it makes you feel superior.
Same BS false dichotomy rantings that got us into this mess in the first place. If all they have to do to win your vote is produce someone marginally better than the Democrat, then that’s all you’ll ever get.
B.S. There’s not a dimes worth of difference between the “centrist republican” and the far left D in the office.
Is Romney a better man? Yes, of course he is. But the outcome in government would just occur slower. We need a conservative, not someone content to embrace the slavery of socialism at a slower pace than the left wing lunatics.
Not superior, just right. Math doesn’t care, and eventually this country will get a big enough cluebat to realize it. If all we have to vote for is Democrats, then vote for a real one and get the crash over.
It will be grimly amusing to see the NYT and its MSM followers execute their normal strategy of first doing their utmost to knock Scott Walker out of the race, then pivot to ‘support’, by neutrally treating, whichever Republican nebbish next appears likely, and finally pivot again to savage the surviving candidate in favor of whichever raving Democrat he/she’s running against.
It would be a breathtaking new day to see and hear a Republican candidate who clearly articulates principles and policies, and demonstrates without Boehnerian doubletalk the benefits of those policies and principles to the country at large. I can hope, can’t I?
One who’s prepared, as Romney was not, to instantly rebut any poisoned debate ‘moderators’ from the MSM who pulls a Candy Crowley in 2016. That’s a talent of Newt Gingrich’s that I wish were contagious.
Romney’s team was vicious with other GOP contenders in the primary. His team was below tepid in the Presidential race. They counted on the media’s support as they destroyed the other GOP candidates. Then they destroyed Romney by trying to play nicey-nicey with Obama as the media eviscerated Romney anyway. Just as the media had done to McCain in 2008. Any doubt that scenario will change in 2016. The GOP cannot win with the media and the sooner they wake up to that fact the better off they will be. I don’t see that happening soon.
But he was/is wrong in so many other ways.
And it turns out important ways.
We’re getting trolled by millionaires.
But I’ve long thought that his instincts were actually more conservative than he allowed himself to be while the governor of the deep blue state of Massachusetts
Well, he certainly kept them well hidden.
For an example of a Republican governor of MA who occasionally did something conservative, look to Weld, not Romney.
tom swift:
During the presidential campaign of 2012, I wrote many many articles on Romney and contended that he was more conservative than people thought. The evidence was there, but it was not widely publicized.
If you want to take a look at the sort of thing I wrote back in 2012 about Romney as more conservative than people generally thought, take a look at this post, for example (please make sure you read the entire post, including the “NOTE” towards the end).
I wrote many many articles on Romney and contended that he was more conservative than people thought.
That could well be true, and if elected he might have governed that way. But he sure didn’t campaign that way, and neither did he campaign as if there were some urgency to the choice between him and Obama. He campaigned more like a parson, and not enough like a general.
“How do we decide whether people are believable or not when they are speaking? For the artificial purposes of this discussion, let’s take away consideration of their past actions.”
Neo-Neocon
I guess if one ignores history, one can believe anything. Even that Romney is a conservative…
Some of us told you he didn’t have a chance, didn’t understand the Left, wouldn’t fight them, wouldn’t challenge the media — in short, was a loser. How many times now has he proven it? Oh, but he was “a good man.” I’m so tired of this meaningless sop. Despite the fact I don’t even believe it, who the hell cares except his wife and children? We needed a warrior. He had four years to prepare his race against Obama, four years to build a case against the most corrupt, predatory and incompetent President in our history, and he fired blanks out of the gate. He ran the most astoundingly defensive and feeble campaign in memory. It was surreal. Did we even have a race at all? He was even bi*ch-slapped by Candy Crowley. But the painful part was that he left decades of clues to his haplessness, and yet still was nominated.
Pitiful. Good riddance.