Wednesday, September 22, 2021
HomeRecommendedMitt Romney's Early Endorsers

Mitt Romney’s Early Endorsers

In 1884, members of the Republican party’s independent wing rejected their party’s presidential candidate, James G. Blaine, to support the Democratic party nominee, Grover Cleveland. Republican loyalists called the insurgents “Mugwumps,” an Algonquian word for “great man,” used in this context to deride the bolters’ claim to moral superiority. Most Mugwumps were college-educated business and professional men from New York or New England. During the 1884 campaign, they were often portrayed as “fence-sitters,” with part of their body on the side of the Democrats and the other on the side of the Republicans. (Their “mug” on one side of the fence, and their “wump” [comic mispronunciation of “rump”] on the other.)

Flash forward to 2012, and ask yourself if the same mindset is not still in place. Look at the list of early Mitt Romney supporters, and tell me you don’t see a big collection of Mugwumps. For the most part, these are the ones who had fear and loathing about the spontaneous Tea Party development. They don’t like the local GOP filling in the vacant PC slots and working toward the elimination of the reforms that have weakened the local GOP political machine. They have no problem with tearing apart a Republican opponent, but they themselves prefer to speak in lukewarm mushy sound bites when responding to questions regarding what they’re going to do about an issue.

Here are some pearls of wisdom from Rush on this subject:

Why does the Republican establishment want back in power? Everybody in Washington wants to be in charge of the money. Everybody wants to run the committees and be the chairman. Everybody wants to be in charge of the budget. Everybody wants to have power over it. Do not discount, ever, the money. Folks, another thing not to fall for: Do not think that however wealthy somebody is, they run around thinking they have enough, because nobody ever thinks they have enough. They don’t think that we are at a point of peril. The idea that the national debt is now greater than the economy? No big deal.

They’ve been hearing all their lives how the national debt’s too high, the national debt’s gonna cripple the country, but it never has. While they are hearing all of this horrible stuff about the debt, the deficits, all the tax rates, they look around and they see people doing just fine. They’re living high on the hog, and the national debt’s not hurting anybody.

I’ll tell you what really woke me up to this (and nobody is more cynical than I am when it comes to Congress, including Will Rogers). I don’t know about you, but when I learned along with the rest of you, when I learned that Congress made it legal for themselves to use insider trading, that’s all I needed to know. When they specifically exempted themselves by statute from the insider trading laws — when Congress passed a law saying, “We can use insider trading,” they have a totally different perception of themselves than we do. When it comes to morality, when it comes to ethics, when it comes to why they’re there. When I heard that? You know, you live and learn. Lights still go off, red flags still get raised, but that told me a lot.

Let me explain at the outset what is happening here within the sacred hollows of the establishment, the ruling class. Their objective, since this campaign began, was to make sure a conservative nominee did not get the Republican nomination. That has been the number one objective of the Republican establishment inside the Beltway, the whole Northeastern corridor, to make sure — not to beat Obama, not come up with somebody that can beat Obama despite all this electability talk. The main objective of the establishment has been to see to it that once again a conservative does not get the nomination.

It is one thing to predict who will win the GOP nomination, and it is quite a different thing to make an endorsement. If Mitt Romney is the nominee spare me the “I told you so.” I will never endorse Mitt Romney nor most of his early endorsers. I will just shrug. This mindset reminds me of a Bible passage.

Rev. 3:15-16.

I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

 

Name Heritage Action Score
Sen. Scott Brown (Mass.) 48%
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) 50%
Sen. Mark Kirk (Ill.) 63%
Sen. Thad Cochran (Miss.) 65%
Sen. John Hoeven (N.D.) 65%
Sen. Roy Blunt (Mo.) 66%
Sen. Mike Johanns (NE) 66%
Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) 76%
Sen. John Thune (S.D.) 77%
Sen. Richard Burr (N.C.) 77%
Sen. Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) 80%
Sen. James Risch (Idaho) 88%
Sen. Orrin Hatch (Utah) 90%
Rep. Michael Grimm (N.Y.) 45%
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Fla.) 47%
Rep. Judy Biggert (Ill.) 48%
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (Fla.) 49%
Rep. Robert Dold (Ill.) 49%
Rep. Greg Walden (Ore.) 51%
Rep. Rodney Alexander (La.) 52%
Rep. Jim Gerlach (Pa.) 52%
Rep. Ed Whitfield (Ky.) 53%
Rep. Charles Bass (N.H.) 54%
Rep. Brian Bilbray (Calif.) 55%
Rep. Mike Simpson (Idaho) 55%
Rep. Jerry Lewis (Calif.) 56%
Rep. Joe Heck (Nev.) 56%
Rep. Mark Amodei (Nev.)
Rep. Hal Rogers (Ky.) 56%
Rep. Mike Rogers (Ala.) 56%
Rep. Buck McKeon (Calif.) 56%
Rep. Aaron Schock (Ill.) 56%
Rep. Ander Crenshaw (Fla.) 59%
Rep. Ken Calvert (Calif.) 59%
Rep. Dave Camp (Mich.) 59%
Rep. Jim Renacci (Ohio) 59%
Rep. Lamar Smith (Texas) 59%
Rep. Mike Rogers (Mich.) 60%
Rep. Nan Hayworth (N.Y.) 62%
Rep. Howard Coble (N.C.) 63%
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.) 63%
Rep. Mary Bono Mack (Calif.) 66%
Rep. Tim Griffin (Ark.) 67%
Rep. Diane Black (Tenn.) 69%
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (Mich.) 69%
Rep. Tom Rooney (Fla.) 69%
Rep. Phil Roe (Tenn.) 69%
Rep. John Duncan (Tenn.) 73%
Rep. Rob Bishop (Utah) 75%
Rep. Darrell Issa (Calif.) 75%
Rep. Cynthia Lummis (Wyo.) 77%
Rep. Billy Long (Mo.) 78%
Rep. Patrick McHenry (N.C.) 78%
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (Calif.) 78%
Rep. Wally Herger (Calif.) 80%
Rep. Todd Rokita (Ind.) 80%
Rep. Virginia Foxx (N.C.) 81%
Rep. John Campbell (Calif.) 83%
Rep. Bill Huizenga (Mich.) 86%
Rep. Connie Mack IV (Fla.) 90%
Rep. Jeff Miller (Fla.) 91%
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (Utah) 97%
Rep. Jeff Flake (Ariz.) 97%

 

pilgrim
I am retired after 36 years of being a state of Indiana employee. I enjoy writing and reading conservative blogs.

15 COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

15 COMMENTS

  1. I look at Jason Chaffetz’s score, and I think “How could he endorse Romney” And then I go to wikipedia and read where, well, he used to be a Democrat, but he switched after he met Reagan in ’90. Okay, but still. Then I read how, well, his dad used to be married to Kitty Dukakis, but it was just his stepmother. Okay, but still. And then I read that he became a Mormon. Huntsman’s a Mormon, too, right? So now, I’ve got all these conflicting things in my head, like “Individual mandates” and “religious beliefs” and “conservative pundits” and “excellent adventure capitalism” and I’m thinkin’ “Could I just have a patriot, please?”

    • Well most of the people on the list took the liberal vote about 1/3rd of the times that they voted. I read somewhere that about 90% of these early endorsers were heavily funded by Romney in their own election. What really floored me tonight on Fox Special Report is that a poll indicates that Mitt Romney is the 2nd most “true conservative” candidate.

  2. Amen pil’, as this late endorser of Romney was shrugging while straining on a gnat between he and Santorum when Perry and Newt imploded after NH. As an early endorser of Cain and Perry, I am dumbfounded at who “conspired” to keep better conservative candidates from running in the first place…sad…and more later when it gets even sadder as my shoulders are sore from shrugging…

  3. …as to the temperature of “thy works”. If thy is gamecock, I was hot for Cain and then hot for Perry until they turned cold. I remain hot to defeat Obama. If thy is Romney, he was hot for Bain profits, hot for winter olympics success and seems hot for American Exceptionalism to this day; and when measured on an Obama scale, Mitt is boiling over.

    • Believe what you want, but Mitt is lukewarm to me in every way. Even those defenders of Romney at Bain are using the defense that he was lukewarm instead of a vulture. His face should be in the dictionary beside the word lukewarm.

      • …in every way? I hope you got paid for that research! Remaining choices:

        Cold:

        dead cold: Perry

        Hot:

        Hot for who knows what (could be a Pelosi on a couch): Newt
        Hot for tariffs: Santorum
        Hot for an American exceptionalism akin to Kenyan exceptionalism: Obama

        Lukewarm:

        A Mitt that leads Obama just now in the polls, despite being spued…

        • I don’t understand you rating Perry as Dead Cold.

          Yes, he’s not doing well in the polls, but I’ve never yet based my vote on polling and I am quite certain I’m not going to start at this late date.

          I will vote for the candidate who is the best for the job and I find it hard to believe anyone would argue that it’s not Perry. The only arguments I’ve ever heard against him is that “he can’t win” and criticizing his early debate performances. Granted, his early debates were far from stellar, but I’m not voting for Captain of the debating team and he’s got a proven record as a conservative leader in a conservative state.

          There’s no one else gonna get my vote. Period.

  4. here’s just a few more temperature changers that will hopefully tide a conservative over for awhile until things finalize:
    hot for any plausible explanation on what happened to Perry’s campaign thus far (he had my support from before he actually announced)- the current one getting traction is that Anita is the one who really wanted to do this, Rick’s heart was never in it. Or you tell me…
    hot for some good things Romney as candidate in 2012 means (yes there are a few)
    -Romney is and has always been, a China Hawk. He sees the business and military threat clearly and talks about it in his speeches (I have been visiting YouTube)
    – Romney by virtue of what he represents in voters minds, forces any comparison or debate with Obama back to the subject of the lousy economy, which our Keystone Cops primary candidates took us off subject every chance they get
    -Romney could take Michigan from the unions or at least force the Dems to have to fight for it. If he wins it, he might not have to go through Ohio for a victory road map in the electoral college. This is an electoral college game changer, folks, trust me on this until you can do your own research.
    -if Paul bolts he could cause mischief for the Repubs, maybe even hand victory to Obama. But Paul just doesn’t impact Romney in the general the way he does Gingrich, Santorum, etc.
    -he’s a business man for crying out loud. When/if he gets to the WH he’ll be so stunned at how bad things really are, his instinct will be to get right to the problem and prioritize the others.
    -The man is a demonstrated turnaround artist on things economic. As was his dad in the auto industry in the 1950s. So he comes by this naturally. Maybe a good skill to have…

  5. Stated as well as one can say it, Pilgrim. As usual. Limbaugh also says that Romney can be pushed hard to the right once in office, only I don’t see a Boehner-McConnell led Congress the type to do that.

    The circumstances are perfect for a repeat of the ’80 election, only this time with a better business plan forward, and the media and GOP (for different reasons) have conspired to prevent that from happening.

    The conservative banner has to be flying high at all time, so I really regret watching conservatives try to assassinate one another.

  6. The most salient comment from Mitt Romney in the entire campaign so far: (paraphrasing) “The people of Massachusetts deserved to have the individual mandate, but no way I would put that on the rest of you guys!”

    The most salient comment from Mitt Romney in Myrtle Beach last night: “I know how to get along with the *other guys*, and to …..work with them.”

  7. I am not an early Romney endorser. I am just staying flexible, and getting ready in my mind to vote for him, if it is between him and Obama. And true to our credo: conservative in the primaries, Republican in the general (in which I will be working in the precinct in a heavy Dem district per Catherine Engelbrecht’s epic, local efforts continue). May Perry come back. But Romney over Paul. And what, praytell you ask is wrong with Newt especially after the Juan Williams skewering? I am trying to get there. My problem is no matter how good he is in a debate, I remember him from many past years suddenly turning on a dime and doing incomprehensible things, stunning his supporters. Newt is our Robespierre in this Revolution of ours. Ultra-brilliant. Indispensible in courageously getting things going and shaking up the Old System. Charming at times, especially with the ladies. But – mercurial, changing on a dime, instantly changing friends, enemies, polestar policies – going wherever the next brilliant flash in his mind leads him. Finally – starting the Terror, and dying by it (Robespierre that is). Like I said I am just trying to get used to all this again, give me a while to get him dialed back in our panoply.

  8. This late-tea partier Reagan conservative-endorser of Romney just thought of another response to your rightful and justified Rev. 3:16 lukewarm spue-challenge that was inspired by my immediate revulsion upon hearing Rick Santorum’s class-envy-based attack characterizing Romney’s comment on his speaker fee income. I now move Perry up to #2 since his repugnant vulture attacks against Mitt were longer ago (a few days) and given his, now, adequate debating skills and superior resume. But what my ultimate decisions of the past week show is just how much a I hate class-based political attacks. It is the worst kind of bigotry and plays upon envy and economic ignorance that all conservatives and Republicans know are lies and unfair.

    I am hot against the sin of bigotry, including class envy and gotcha politics. Very fair and appropriate attacks Romney can and should be made based upon his record. But these pre-SC desperation attacks are unacceptable and show character flaws in the candidates that utter them.

    Romney is not Jesus Christ, but I have yet to view, here or read the transcript of any of his utterances that I deemed unfair, much less unjustified. But I don’t claim to have heard them all. I do read voluminous columns and listen to talk radio, and none that I have heard or read of, have been in the same universe of “dirty” as the statements by Perry, Santorum and Newt on the Bain and/or tax issues.

  1. I look at Jason Chaffetz’s score, and I think “How could he endorse Romney” And then I go to wikipedia and read where, well, he used to be a Democrat, but he switched after he met Reagan in ’90. Okay, but still. Then I read how, well, his dad used to be married to Kitty Dukakis, but it was just his stepmother. Okay, but still. And then I read that he became a Mormon. Huntsman’s a Mormon, too, right? So now, I’ve got all these conflicting things in my head, like “Individual mandates” and “religious beliefs” and “conservative pundits” and “excellent adventure capitalism” and I’m thinkin’ “Could I just have a patriot, please?”

    • Well most of the people on the list took the liberal vote about 1/3rd of the times that they voted. I read somewhere that about 90% of these early endorsers were heavily funded by Romney in their own election. What really floored me tonight on Fox Special Report is that a poll indicates that Mitt Romney is the 2nd most “true conservative” candidate.

  2. Amen pil’, as this late endorser of Romney was shrugging while straining on a gnat between he and Santorum when Perry and Newt imploded after NH. As an early endorser of Cain and Perry, I am dumbfounded at who “conspired” to keep better conservative candidates from running in the first place…sad…and more later when it gets even sadder as my shoulders are sore from shrugging…

  3. …as to the temperature of “thy works”. If thy is gamecock, I was hot for Cain and then hot for Perry until they turned cold. I remain hot to defeat Obama. If thy is Romney, he was hot for Bain profits, hot for winter olympics success and seems hot for American Exceptionalism to this day; and when measured on an Obama scale, Mitt is boiling over.

    • Believe what you want, but Mitt is lukewarm to me in every way. Even those defenders of Romney at Bain are using the defense that he was lukewarm instead of a vulture. His face should be in the dictionary beside the word lukewarm.

      • …in every way? I hope you got paid for that research! Remaining choices:

        Cold:

        dead cold: Perry

        Hot:

        Hot for who knows what (could be a Pelosi on a couch): Newt
        Hot for tariffs: Santorum
        Hot for an American exceptionalism akin to Kenyan exceptionalism: Obama

        Lukewarm:

        A Mitt that leads Obama just now in the polls, despite being spued…

        • I don’t understand you rating Perry as Dead Cold.

          Yes, he’s not doing well in the polls, but I’ve never yet based my vote on polling and I am quite certain I’m not going to start at this late date.

          I will vote for the candidate who is the best for the job and I find it hard to believe anyone would argue that it’s not Perry. The only arguments I’ve ever heard against him is that “he can’t win” and criticizing his early debate performances. Granted, his early debates were far from stellar, but I’m not voting for Captain of the debating team and he’s got a proven record as a conservative leader in a conservative state.

          There’s no one else gonna get my vote. Period.

  4. here’s just a few more temperature changers that will hopefully tide a conservative over for awhile until things finalize:
    hot for any plausible explanation on what happened to Perry’s campaign thus far (he had my support from before he actually announced)- the current one getting traction is that Anita is the one who really wanted to do this, Rick’s heart was never in it. Or you tell me…
    hot for some good things Romney as candidate in 2012 means (yes there are a few)
    -Romney is and has always been, a China Hawk. He sees the business and military threat clearly and talks about it in his speeches (I have been visiting YouTube)
    – Romney by virtue of what he represents in voters minds, forces any comparison or debate with Obama back to the subject of the lousy economy, which our Keystone Cops primary candidates took us off subject every chance they get
    -Romney could take Michigan from the unions or at least force the Dems to have to fight for it. If he wins it, he might not have to go through Ohio for a victory road map in the electoral college. This is an electoral college game changer, folks, trust me on this until you can do your own research.
    -if Paul bolts he could cause mischief for the Repubs, maybe even hand victory to Obama. But Paul just doesn’t impact Romney in the general the way he does Gingrich, Santorum, etc.
    -he’s a business man for crying out loud. When/if he gets to the WH he’ll be so stunned at how bad things really are, his instinct will be to get right to the problem and prioritize the others.
    -The man is a demonstrated turnaround artist on things economic. As was his dad in the auto industry in the 1950s. So he comes by this naturally. Maybe a good skill to have…

  5. Stated as well as one can say it, Pilgrim. As usual. Limbaugh also says that Romney can be pushed hard to the right once in office, only I don’t see a Boehner-McConnell led Congress the type to do that.

    The circumstances are perfect for a repeat of the ’80 election, only this time with a better business plan forward, and the media and GOP (for different reasons) have conspired to prevent that from happening.

    The conservative banner has to be flying high at all time, so I really regret watching conservatives try to assassinate one another.

  6. The most salient comment from Mitt Romney in the entire campaign so far: (paraphrasing) “The people of Massachusetts deserved to have the individual mandate, but no way I would put that on the rest of you guys!”

    The most salient comment from Mitt Romney in Myrtle Beach last night: “I know how to get along with the *other guys*, and to …..work with them.”

  7. I am not an early Romney endorser. I am just staying flexible, and getting ready in my mind to vote for him, if it is between him and Obama. And true to our credo: conservative in the primaries, Republican in the general (in which I will be working in the precinct in a heavy Dem district per Catherine Engelbrecht’s epic, local efforts continue). May Perry come back. But Romney over Paul. And what, praytell you ask is wrong with Newt especially after the Juan Williams skewering? I am trying to get there. My problem is no matter how good he is in a debate, I remember him from many past years suddenly turning on a dime and doing incomprehensible things, stunning his supporters. Newt is our Robespierre in this Revolution of ours. Ultra-brilliant. Indispensible in courageously getting things going and shaking up the Old System. Charming at times, especially with the ladies. But – mercurial, changing on a dime, instantly changing friends, enemies, polestar policies – going wherever the next brilliant flash in his mind leads him. Finally – starting the Terror, and dying by it (Robespierre that is). Like I said I am just trying to get used to all this again, give me a while to get him dialed back in our panoply.

  8. This late-tea partier Reagan conservative-endorser of Romney just thought of another response to your rightful and justified Rev. 3:16 lukewarm spue-challenge that was inspired by my immediate revulsion upon hearing Rick Santorum’s class-envy-based attack characterizing Romney’s comment on his speaker fee income. I now move Perry up to #2 since his repugnant vulture attacks against Mitt were longer ago (a few days) and given his, now, adequate debating skills and superior resume. But what my ultimate decisions of the past week show is just how much a I hate class-based political attacks. It is the worst kind of bigotry and plays upon envy and economic ignorance that all conservatives and Republicans know are lies and unfair.

    I am hot against the sin of bigotry, including class envy and gotcha politics. Very fair and appropriate attacks Romney can and should be made based upon his record. But these pre-SC desperation attacks are unacceptable and show character flaws in the candidates that utter them.

    Romney is not Jesus Christ, but I have yet to view, here or read the transcript of any of his utterances that I deemed unfair, much less unjustified. But I don’t claim to have heard them all. I do read voluminous columns and listen to talk radio, and none that I have heard or read of, have been in the same universe of “dirty” as the statements by Perry, Santorum and Newt on the Bain and/or tax issues.

Must Read