Des Moines, Iowa (CNN) - Representatives for leading social conservative groups in Iowa held a secret meeting Monday as part of an effort with one main goal: find and support a Republican presidential candidate who can stop Mitt Romney in Iowa.
The idea: avoid splintering the conservative vote in the state by rallying around one GOP rival who could win Iowa's Jan. 3 caucus and then challenge Romney in New Hampshire and the other early voting states.
Of course, religion of the candidate should have no bearing but the moral majority, which is neither, needs to find somebody who is as bat **it crazy as they are. Wasn't one of this guys from one od these religious groups caught in Italy with a boy helper? Maybe I have the wrong association since they all sound the same!
The teapublikans have no liable candidate. They don't have a chance in 2012 and if they keep trying to ram their so called christian hate and bigotry "values" down our throats no chance for many more years to come.
Those social conservatives are just as sneaky as Mittens is.
►...held a secret meeting Monday as part of an effort with one main goal: find and support a Republican presidential candidate who can stop Mitt Romney in Iowa...◄
It's NOT secret if you know that it happened and where and the content of what was said?? In addition, who cares because Romney had no intentions on winning IA.
That would be a good idea if there were alternatives that appealed to the hard right wing. Liberals will start doing cartwheels if they follow through on this strategy and find any degree of success.
I do agree that a Mittens presidency would be disasterous, only for different reasons.
These Iowans do not appear to be happy. They do look like most Floridians after we learned that Rick Scott, unconvicted criminal. was elected governor.
Go and get him. This man must be stopped immediately. He is bringing the shame to the country. Hearing him calling the current President "foolish" in last night debate, really made me had a goose skin. What kind of diplomacy is that? Is he a person the rest of world will take seriously and respect?? People must send him back home as they did in 2008.
Sounds like something Democrats would do! Iowans are smart people and will vote for who they believe is the best candidate to replace "The Campaigner in Chief".
By the way, as our Nation continues to divide under Obama's left-wing policies, it was no wonder that our President showed up in New Hampshire yesterday (next GOP Primary State after IOWA) campaigning again, when he SHOULD be LEADING the Nation. The Oval Office should have the letters; AWOL written on the door and the book "Where's Waldo" on his desk!
Iowa really has a bloated concept of their own importance.
I listened to a focus group in Iowa, after last night's debate, and i was not at all impressed with their reasons for their preferences, nor their ability to explain why they made the choices they did. We should NOT be giving that must importance to what Iowans have to say. They really are NOT that informed, nor do they articulate well, on why they support any candidate.
Iowa is just grandstanding........and it is time to call them out for it.
They should focus their attention on helping President Obama win re-election. The current field of candidates are a disaster.
I hope they do stop Romney. I couldn't listen to that tool for 4 years.
Ouch... That is kind of harsh isn't it?
Can they rally around Newt ??? After all the compassion he showed for illegal families, not wanting to tear them apart and all!! Boy that throws a monkey wrench at those "Christian" conservatives!! That Newt went off and played to the middle....What do you expect from a Washington insider!!
Willard hasn't spent enough time in Iowa. He's going to lose their. But the big upset for Willard is going to be in New Hampshire. Huntsman is going to beat him in his own backyard.
Look like Bachmann wins Iowa!! They must be Soooo proud!!
from the article:
Participants were said to have narrowed their focus down to four candidates: Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.
"My best recollection is that there were some issues about states' rights, as they pertained to the sanctity of human life and marriage," Hurley said, although he could not recall specific arguments against the two candidates. "I think that was more Ron Paul."
"I think with Mr. Cain there was some concern he's maybe not quite experienced enough in civics... And maybe not quite ready for that number one job," Hurley added.
"Somebody who's at 5% or 6% in the polls, and they endorse, I don't think that does any good."
I think that last quote was a reference to Huntsman. The first four names mentioned have all had their day and faded. They do not like Paul because he wants too much for States Rights, instead of controlling the population from a central government. They know Cain doesn't have the right stuff. They have already eliminated every alternative choice out there.
What is really going on is that they want someone out there that will push their social agenda. Liberals need to hope that they don't figure out how to raise enough money to get Romney to do it for them.