Newsfeed
Printer-Friendly ModeRomney a must for Republicans
January 21, 2008 —
I take some comfort in knowing that Michigan made the right choice in its Jan. 15 Republican presidential primary election. Romney's win on Tuesday was necessary to calm the storm of controversy within the party because of the independent-led New Hampshire McCain victory and the media darling Huckabee surprise in Iowa.
I am a political science major, and as much as I follow politics, I truly do try to be as independent as possible when it comes to political issues and candidates. To me, it's not about what a party or what a candidate says about a particular issue, it's about common sense.
No one can deny that the Democratic party has embraced, and is a leader, in civil rights. As an independent mind, I am able to recognize that fact without producing an emotional response. However, I believe the Republican party to be leaders in financial freedoms. To independents, both parties have trade-offs. A Democratic party that strongly recognizes civil rights can go overboard in applying those rights, infringing upon financial freedoms; and a Republican party that strongly values religion can go overboard in putting those values into public policies, which in turn infringe upon personal freedoms.
Oftentimes, after weighing those issues carefully, I tend to agree more with Republicans. I value limited government, I support expanding economic opportunity, and I believe in a strong national defense. Like I stated above, I appreciate Democrats' leadership when it comes to civil rights, however I believe those rights should not extend past my wallet, in areas such as health care, or extend to where the unborn are ignored and killed in the name of 'women' rights. At the same time, however, I cringe when Republicans become so neck-deep in religion that their concept of limited government almost becomes hypocritical.
I first met Mitt Romney back in 2006, and at the time, the only thing I knew about the governor was that he was running for president. I can remember very clearly the haze that surrounded the then far-off 2008 presidential race and wondering who, if anyone, I should support. After hearing Governor Romney speak, I can definitively say that my mind was made up on the spot. In issue after issue, the governor's words comforted every political concern I had. I couldn't believe that there was a candidate that almost totally agreed with my stances. I also took note of how many other colleagues of mine embraced his message. Soon, in almost every political circle, Governor Romney had tremendous support.
The object of presidential primaries is to weed out all of the hopeless and to find the hopeful. More often than not, the process is automatic. Ideally, it produces the kind of candidate in which you can go to sleep for four months with the comfort that when you wake up, he'll be standing alone alongside the dust that remains of the contest. It happened in 2000 with George W. Bush and again in 2004 with John Kerry. Mitt Romney is that candidate this year. However, media influence along with an enlarged field of second tier candidates is testing my confidence in a usually dependable system. Will the G.O.P. base see past all of the media hype and the rhetoric of John McCain and Rudy Giuliani? A 2008 Republican presidential victory depends on it.