Romney may run in 2016

[Sandy]

http://www.msnbc.com/weekends-with-alex ... 2719043864

Is the third time the charm?

From my perspective, it's not just about the name recognition. Romney's 2012 campaign gave a lot of information about the kind of president he would be, and the voters said, "No thank you." It would be hard for him to convince a larger group of voters that he's the man for the job. I sure don't think so.

The Clintons must be quite ecstatic over this possibility.

[Dave Roberts]

Surely, there must be someone out there to consider for 2016. I'm already hoping for a fresh face. Wooden Romney, no thanks. Hillary--isn't there a stronger option? Jeb--mama was right. Huckabee--surely you jest. The rest of the pack--Ho Hum.

[Mrs Haruo]

I would be so happy to see someone running for President that I could actually get excited about. It's been a long time since I felt I had a choice between "You have got to be kidding" or "Do we have any Tums in the house?"

[William Thornton]

Voted for Romney in 2008 (primary) and 2012 (primary and general) and think he would have been a good president, much better than what we have had. But I don't see another run and think the stuff he faced earlier would still be present now. A considerable chunk of evangelicals will not vote for a Mormon (I call that predictable religious bigotry) and I don't imagine he has acquired anything that will make him more attractive.

Forum mod/libs, the bulk of folks here, will quickly fall behind Hil or whichever Dem class warfare activist is nominated but will offer scathing commentary on the GOP candidates. I have no idea who will emerge. I like Scott Walker and the way he took on the greedy unions as governor. Huckabee is more attuned to keeping his earning power high rather than actually being elected to anything. I don't know that the country needs a kick-butt rust belt governor like Christie as president. Paul the Younger isn't as moon baying as the Elder but I'll wait to see more from him. Bush 3.0 looks as good or better than any in the lot at this stage.

[Dave Roberts]

William, what I read between the lines is that you aren't excited about any of the prospective candidates. Neither party seems poised to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Jeb has a lot of baggage from his days as Florida's governor that could haunt him and a lot of dumb statements that I'm certain still exist in every FL TV stations vault. That should make it interesting in primary season.

[KeithE]

Whichever candidate who best addresses:



gets my vote.

Right now only Sanders and Warren are addressing that (but they are not yet running.

[William Thornton]

[Haruo]

Based on what I've read so far, I'd support Sanders or Warren over any other serious potential candidates I've heard of.

[Tim Bonney]

[Sandy]

Aside from the major doctrinal differences between Mormons and Evangelical Christians, the worldviews are significantly and substantially different. If its not "religious bigotry" for Evangelical Christians to avoid voting for Democrats on political and philosophical grounds, or because they do not see the Democratic candidate as "one of them" in terms of Christian faith, then it is certainly not religious bigotry to determine not to vote for someone because their Mormon faith puts them at odds on almost every point of their respective worldview. Well beyond his Mormon faith, however, the majority of American voters said "No, thank you" to Mitt, correctly discerning that his opponent, despite his known flaws and failings, would make a much better chief executive. I see no avenue through which Mitt could even match his vote total of 2012, much less increase it, which would be a necessity to win in 2016.

The kind of candidate the Republicans need to win in 2016, at least, as things now seem to indicate, is a dynamic centrist, someone who is articulate, can appeal to the majority of independent voters, and to a segment of conservative Democrats. They need the kind of candidate that the Tea Party wing will never let them nominate, at least, not in the immediate future. I don't think they're farsighted enough to realize that the turnout will be much larger in 2016 than it was last year, and if they don't win that top of the ticket, they're not going anywhere else either.

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: First Sandy, what makes you think the 2016 turnout will be much greater than the 2012 turnout?

2nd, as you see it what are at least three differences in the Mormon World view and the Christian would view? And how do each of those impact Romney's qualifications for the Presidency? At this point in time as a registered republican, I have little hope that Romey could overcome the far Right Wing religious prejudices that was his major reason for his first loss. If he is the Republican nominee I would probably vote for Hillary. But I have nearly 22 months to make up my mind.

[Tim Bonney]

I thought Sandy was referring to the poor turnout in 2014 not 2012. As is often the case, the midterm turnout was very poor. It seriously effects the midterm elections. Sadly for Dems it is often their constituancy that fail to show up. The party needs to do a lot of work to convince people that midterm elections are important.

[Sandy]

Mormon worldview includes the belief that they are ordained and destined by God to rule the world, and will do so via the United States government, in order to advance the Mormon gospel. I'd be reluctant to contribute to their confirmation of that view by voting to put a Mormon in any public office, particularly the Presidency. The view of human rights that is expressed in American government, and which comes from a Christian influence, is also at odds with Mormon doctrine. They believe that each human does not have a "soul" per-se, but is connected to the collective consciousness of a god who comes from the planet Kolob, and that all humans are the "spirit children" of these Kolob gods. The implications of that view are pretty obvious. Romney is a member of the Mormon priesthood, thus he does believe these things.

I said that turnout In 2016 will be significantly larger than it was in 2014. Republicans are talking like 2014 was some kind of turning point. But with less than half the turnout, I don't think so.

[Haruo]

My impression is that while what Sandy is calling the Mormon worldview may be believed in in a literalistic "this is a fact" fundamentalist way by some Mormons, for many, perhaps most, Mormons the stories of Kolob and whatnot are taken in a more mythic way. And a Mormon man is almost by definition a member of the priesthood, and will remain so unless he does something to get kicked out. Like support ordaining women or gay marriage. Whether he "believes" (and if so in what sense) is a moot point unless he publically denies the story.

[Ed Pettibone]

[ET]

[Sandy]

[Haruo]

The Mormon priesthood is not an elite group, Sandy, it is a normal and nearly universal part of being a Mormon adolescent-or-older male.Of course it used to be a core teaching that certain racial groups were excluded, but in the fullness of time, progressive revelation modified that.

[Haruo]

[Tim Bonney]

For me my vote for someone other than Romney had nothing to do with his being a Mormon.

[Haruo]

[Sandy]

[Tim Bonney]