Mitt Romney would be a good candidate, because he stands a chance at winning. Sure, he's reversed himself on a lot of positions... America is a country of 300,000,000 people, and political divides are great. Consequently, any viable candidate has to be some sort of centrist. Idealists, like Ron Paul, Ralph Nader and Dennis Kucinich, although well recognized and often amongst the better financed candidates very early in the primaries, never so much as stand a chance at garnering more than 10% of the Republican or Democrat party vote.
JTF needs to support a candidate who has a chance, not tilt at windmills like Don Quixote. This nonsense of supporting Palin for president has been a complete waste of time and effort, plus she's not supported by brilliant Jews who know how to get someone into office. They were too busy supporting a drug abusing chain smoking black muslim Chicago street activist and THAT'S how Obongo made it into office. The evidence is overwhelming.
It's all about the economy, and Jimmy Carter is the model we should look toward as Obongo is the black Carter. America will be so f**ked up by the time the baboon in chief leaves office that we will be desperate to go back to a Ronald Regan-like president and the only candidate who will offer such a "morning in America" is Mitt Romney. Supporting any other candidate is a waste of time, in my opinion.
In this reply, I'll just focus on Mitt Romney. While all of us want the best for the United States, Israel, and good people everywhere, we have some differences of opinions. Which is fine.
I'm far from convinced that Mitt Romney has a realistic chance of being elected President. Entering the 2008 Primary/ Caucus season, Mitt Romney had a major advantage in terms of funds for his campaign. John McCain's campaign was very short of funds. A loss in New Hampshire would have VERY likely ended McCain's campaign. Rudy Giuliani's funds were low enough to the point that he decided to put all of his political eggs in the Florida primary. Which was several weeks after the Iowa and New Hampshire contests. The early voting results doomed Giuliani by the time the Florida contest took place. Mike Huckabee certainly didn't have many funds. Yet, despite the huge advantages Romney had in terms of being able to spend in Iowa and New Hampshire, he lost both races. Giving Huckabee and McCain life. McCain especially was able to build up his funds as a result. Despite winning Michigan, a state in which Romney's father was the Governor, Romney's subpar performances in the first two contests eventually doomed him.
I realize that each of us see different things in various candidates. For me though, Mitt Romney doesn't seem like someone who will get people motivated to support his campaign. Romney doesn't seem to have the " it factor ". Tragically, Barack Hussein Obama has the " it factor" with Democrats and even a significant amount of " moderate Republicans", who are really Republicans in name only. Hopefully Obama will be so flawed by 2012 that enough people will vote for his opponent, even if the opponent isn't someone they are enthusiastic. However, I think it would be a mistake if people who want Obama defeated in the worst way, depend on Obama being very vulnerable. Especially with the media on his side.
Even assuming that Mitt Romney would win the 2012 Republican Nomination, the Democrats and the media ( basically the same thing ) will have a field day pointing out Romney's 180 degrees flip flops. Even with plenty of money, which Romney has, I'm concerned that he would have the personality to overcome the attacks against him. From the standpoint of rallying support from voters looking for someone who they want to support, not a lesser of the choices.
