Romney Supporters from 2008 Jumping Ship

Before the candidates started announcing for the 2012 Republican Primary, I joined others in the Conservative Republican community saying we didn't want anyone to run in 2012 who had run in 2008.  That meant none of the candidates we had supported.  We knew McCain was not running so it was conventional wisdom if they could not beat McCain, they had no business running.

Rudy, who I supported in 2008, took a long time to declare he wasn't running but he is smart enough to know in some of the early primary states, he might not do as well which would tank his election.  Then Huckabee decided not to run which was another plus along Fred Thompson saying he wasn't running.

Then Romney announces and all I can think of is he will spend millions to destroy anyone in his way.  His campaign will be dropping stories that are not factual against other candidates, attacking other candidates knowing it is a lie, and bullying endorsements from people he helped in the campaigns like he did in 2008.  This time it is much worse as the Super PACs were unleashed by the Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United.  The Romney Super PAC, Restore our Future,  has just dropped more millions in attack ads in the last week is a major part of the 'scorched earth' Romney policy.  The Super PAC was not factored into the equation when a lot of us said he shouldn't run.  I have never seen such a negative, unethical campaign as Romney's campaign which speaks volumes.

Big mistake for him to run because a lot of us worked in campaigns that just wanted him defeated in 2008 because of his flip flops and no core values but we didn't have the Super PACs like we do this year which are not a plus.  It has allowed billionaire's to have too much say in the races.  In fact, without the Super PACs and all the debates arranged by the RNC with liberal moderators, the landscape of the Republican primary might be looking much different.  Gov Pawlenty's endorsement was bought and paid for by Romney with agreeing to pay off his campaign debts because he doesn't share Romney's values and he actually stands for something. Pawlenty could not stand up against the attack dog Michelle Bachmann who obviously cut a deal to be the attack dog in exchange for owing nothing and have money to run again for the House this time is the best guess.  Pawlenty didn't have the backbone to run and Romney took full advantage.

Now we are learning that Romney doesn't even have the support he had in 2008 in most states.  Sitting here shaking my head and asking again why he ran when he could not beat McCain.  The 2008 primary became 'anyone but Romney' and looks like 2012 has now turned into 'anyone but Romeny' who has a problem clearing 50% unless it is crooked like the Nevada caucus where it took them several days to count caucus ballots.  During that time, we learned that people supporting other candidates were turned away from the polls.  That is one way to get to 50% when you have the Chair of the Nevada GOP who is a big Romney supporter along with a heavy Mormon state.

The clearest voice against Romney came when MO, MN, and CO voted with Romney losing all three when he had won two of them, MN and CO, by big numbers in 2008.  I hear more people say they don't like the Romney 'scorched earth' policy and that he is not a nice guy.  His stiffness around regular people has not gone unnoticed and frankly his flip flops are even worse this time.  Bush 41 and that rich group of Rockefeller, establishment types should have known better than support Romney by pushing him at conservatives as the ONLY candidate who could beat Obama.  Romney is Obama lite on steroids and no one who thinks for themselves expects him to govern as a conservative when there is little about him that is conservative.

Now there is a Dogs against Romney group for his mistreatment of his dog, Seamus, by putting him on top of the car and refusing to make stops for his dog in an 11 hour trip.  What is so disgusting about the Romney dog story is that he may not be telling the truth but what's new -- why should the family dog be any different than his about where he stands on issues on any given day:

According to Hunter Walker, writing for the Politicker NY, a blog of the New York Observer, Mitt Romney “may not have told the whole truth about the scandalous tale.”

According to a “trusted Politicker tipster,” Walker says, “two of Romney’s sons had an off-the-record conversation with reporters” in which they revealed that Seamus actually “ran away when they reached their destination” in Canada.

No one could blame Seamus for running away from such a cruel owner -- hope he never got any more pets.    You can tell a lot about people by the way they take care of their pets and Romney gets an "F" for his mistreatment of Seamus.

Dog owners of America need to unite to defeat Romney.  Maybe that is why some people are deserting Romney this time around:

Romney shows trouble keeping supporters from 2008 

Posts weaker finishes in six of nine states 

By Stephen Dinan

February 19, 2012
The Washington Times

Mitt Romney’s second go-round at a presidential run is not going so well.
Nine states have voted so far, and in six of them the former Massachusetts governor has shed supporters who voted for him in 2008, winning fewer votes in each of those states than he did last time. 

It’s the latest signal that this year’s race is unlike any other in recent memory, even though it follows the familiar Republican pattern of an heir apparent and a set of credible but outmatched challengers. 

“Romney doesn’t seem to have a cause,” said John J. Pitney Jr., a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College in California. “There’s no Romney faction in the Republican Party. John McCain was able to present himself as the champion of political reform. [Ronald] Reagan was the champion of conservatives. Romney is trying to portray himself as a generic Republican, and I think a lot of Republicans regard him as a resident alien in the conservative movement, not as a full-fledged citizen.” 

The Republican Party has had an affinity for nominating do-over candidates. Five of the past six non-incumbent nominees were repeat contenders: Richard M. Nixon, Reagan, Bob Dole, Mr. McCain and George H.W. Bush. The only exception in the past 50 years was Mr. Bush’s son, George W. Bush, in 2000. 

Each of those previous do-overs did much better in their final campaigns: Reagan in 1980 and the elder Mr. Bush in 1988 improved their counts over their previous runs in every one of the first eight states to vote. Mr. Dole did better in all but one of the first eight, and Mr. McCain did better in six of the first eight races in 2008.

Mr. Romney has done worse in caucuses in Iowa, Nevada, Colorado, Minnesota and Maine, and also in Missouri’s primary — though that contest was nonbinding. In Minnesota, Mr. Romney won less than a third of the votes he won there in 2008, while in Colorado he won 30 percent fewer votes. 

Excerpt:  Read More at Washington Times