2012 GOP Presidential Campaign -- "This individual's going to accuse me of an affair for an extended period of time."

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (2147 of them)

I hope he uses "Breakfast at Tiffany's" as his campaign song.

Nicole, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 19:10 (twelve years ago) link

The Freddie Mac thing has got to be thrown in his face. Perry is a ham-fisted hypocrite about the 'napkin diagram' but Newt is the ultimate Beltway insider and the Teabaggers and the Base have to decide whether even a shred of coherence is important to them. Personally, I'd like to see all their heads explode Scanners-style at the multitude of contradictions they presently contain.

M. White, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 19:14 (twelve years ago) link

Frum's head has already exploded, evidently (that was a great piece btw, thx for the link upthread)

Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 19:19 (twelve years ago) link

The Freddie Mac thing has got to be thrown in his face

don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes (i.e., general election v. newt gingrich).

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 20:55 (twelve years ago) link

Bobby Moynihan is probably out distributing Newt fliers as we speak

OH NOES, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 20:57 (twelve years ago) link

How can you not love him?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UU72izvZVRA

"I can't tell you what Speaker Gingrich is saying." I can only tell you what Speaker Gingrich is saying.

clemenza, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 20:58 (twelve years ago) link

I love how the de facto GOP position is "round em up and deport em" as if that is a) moral, b) simple, c) inexpensive and d) a net benefit for the economy

Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:10 (twelve years ago) link

their old position was "let them fry on an electrified fence with an alligator-infested moat dug around it," so this is an improvement.

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:11 (twelve years ago) link

in that it's only slightly less feasible eh I guess so

Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:17 (twelve years ago) link

Josh Marshall thinks Newt-mentum may have legs:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/11/mitts_darkening_horizon.php

o. nate, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:18 (twelve years ago) link

don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes (i.e., general election v. newt gingrich).

I said this not as a partisan but as general advice. S/he who is (relatively, to him) w/o sin cast some mf'ing stones ppl!

M. White, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:23 (twelve years ago) link

lol how badly did romney screw-up that FOX News interview?

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:28 (twelve years ago) link

Bring in the clowns...

M. White, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:30 (twelve years ago) link

the clip above seems like yr standard Romney performance to me, but maybe I'm missing something.

Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:32 (twelve years ago) link

Bring in the clowns...

they're ... all... rea...dy... heeeeeere

Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:32 (twelve years ago) link

lol romney's answer on immigration question:

talk talk talk talk talk talk talk maybe he'll move on to something else talk talk talk talk talk talk talk

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:57 (twelve years ago) link

talk talk uh . . . you know . . . (nervous laughter) . . . uh talk talk

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:58 (twelve years ago) link

the lolsome part is that uh, aren't people who are here illegally already at the "back of the line" re: becoming legal

Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 21:59 (twelve years ago) link

anyway, gingrich has a chance, because (a) he's an angry white guy who knows how to dog-whistle to his reactionary constituency (i.e., the GOP base) and (b) romney's No. 1 asset was the total, utter inability of his opponents to speak in coherent sentences and discuss even rudimentary policy, and -- as wrong as gingrich is on most issues -- he can speak full sentences and discuss policy.

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:00 (twelve years ago) link

basically, i'm willing to give amnesty to any undocumented person who can speak english better than rick perry.

which means amnesty for almost all of america's 11M undocumented persons.

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:01 (twelve years ago) link

anyway, gingrich has a chance, because (a) he's an angry white guy who knows how to dog-whistle to his reactionary constituency (i.e., the GOP base)

which means he has no chance of gaining independents, therefore he's lost the primaries.

Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:23 (twelve years ago) link

let me put it the way my favorite candidate, herman cain, would put it: I'M SORRY BUT YOU ARE WRONG..

I still think Mitt Romney is the likely Republican presidential nominee. But I don’t think, in the way I did a few months ago, that he’s the inevitable Republican nominee.

Can Romney, under the right conditions, break out of the 20s, where he’s been stuck for almost the entire campaign? Sure. Jonathan Bernstein is persuasive on this point: Polls of Republicans show that Romney has low negatives and he performs well in hypothetical match-ups against other Republicans. But what if Romney faces the wrong conditions?

The central mystery of the Republican primary is this: How can Romney’s support be so stable in a primary that’s so volatile? So far, we’ve seen a boom-and-bust cycle take Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry and Herman Cain from candidate to frontrunner to not-gonna-happen. But after each bust, Romney’s support was unchanged. He picked up none of their disappointed supporters. Now he’s trailing Newt Gingrich in the polls. Here, via TPM, is what that’s looked like in Iowa:

(chart i can't print here)

Ron Brownstein has come up with perhaps the best explanation for this. The Republican primary, he writes, has “become two races running along parallel but very distinct tracks.” One is the non-tea party primary. There, Romney is winning, and easily. The other is the tea party primary. There, Romney is losing, and big. Here’s the graph, which was published before Gingrich’s surge:

(chart i can't print here)

But ultimately, there’s really only one primary, and Romney needs more supporters if he’s going to win. And though Romney does not have a low ceiling, he clearly has a sticky floor. Republicans may not refuse to support him, but there’s strong evidence that a substantial number don’t want to support him. If Romney is inevitable, they’ll come around. But what if, at the wrong moment, Romney is not inevitable?

Last night, Romney sat down for one of the first televised interviews he’s given in this campaign cycle. It was with a fairly friendly audience: Bret Baier of Fox News. And it was such a disaster that this morning, the Democratic National Committee released a video splicing together the reviews — many of them from Fox.

(video i can't print here)

Debates are a format that suits Romney well and his competitors poorly. So far, Romney hasn’t even stumbled. But eventually, he will stumble. Nobody runs a truly perfect campaign. So imagine Romney loses Iowa, as is very possible. And, under the strain of the loss, he gives a bad interview, or has a testy debate performance, right before New Hampshire. That might be all the excuse a critical number of New Hampshire voters need to coalesce around Gingrich, or perhaps the excuse that some resigned Romney supporters need to jump ship to Huntsman. And so Romney either loses New Hampshire or barely wins. And then he loses South Carolina.

To be sure, Romney could, even under those circumstances, mount a comeback. As Nate Silver points out, there are eight weeks separating the New Hampshire primary from Super Tuesday. In 2008, there were merely three weeks. The 2008 calendar favored a momentum candidate like Gingrich, while the 2012 calendar favors a fundamentals candidate like Romney.

Even so, Romney is having enough trouble adding supporters that he’s clearly vulnerable to a run of bad luck or bad news coming at the wrong time. And thus far, the primary has been so focused on a medium in which he shines — debates —that his flaws in interviews, his vulnerability to ads portraying him as a flip-flopper, and his weaknesses as a retail politician haven’t really been tested. Romney has looked so strong that even a slight stumble could be significant for a media that wants a horserace and voters who clearly want to support another candidate. So is Romney the likely nominee? Sure. Inevitable? No.

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:28 (twelve years ago) link

it's true that Romney and Gingrich are the only two candidates that can, how you say, talk good

Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:28 (twelve years ago) link

that's how i say.

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:29 (twelve years ago) link

actually, santorum can talk good. he's just lol.

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:30 (twelve years ago) link

Debates are a format that suits Romney well and his competitors poorly. So far, Romney hasn’t even stumbled. But eventually, he will stumble. Nobody runs a truly perfect campaign. So imagine Romney loses Iowa, as is very possible. And, under the strain of the loss, he gives a bad interview, or has a testy debate performance, right before New Hampshire. That might be all the excuse a critical number of New Hampshire voters need to coalesce around Gingrich, or perhaps the excuse that some resigned Romney supporters need to jump ship to Huntsman. And so Romney either loses New Hampshire or barely wins. And then he loses South Carolina.

this is all sort of ridiculous since a) Gingrich is the one more likely to stumble/give bad interview/have a testy debate performance. and Gingrich is the one with the weaker ground campaign. also Gingrich has less money. the deck is way stacked against him.

Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:30 (twelve years ago) link

wait 'till FOXNews becomes gingrich's ground campaign.

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:31 (twelve years ago) link

WAIT 'TILL GINGRICH CO-OPTS ALL OF FORMER CANDIDATE HERMAN CAIN'S GROUND CAMPAIGN

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:31 (twelve years ago) link

the cain campaign is a moving train

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:31 (twelve years ago) link

Monk, keep flagellating yourself into excitement.

Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:35 (twelve years ago) link

I think the Marshall and Klein pieces have it exactly right: there's no logical reason why this is happening (and 20 logical reasons why it shouldn't be happening), I don't think it's going to last, but I'm a lot less sure of that today than I was three weeks ago. I'm assuming that Alfred and Shakey Mo Collier don't view Marshall and Klein the same way they would, say, Cokie Roberts or David Gregory. So where do they get the certainty that Marshall and Klein don't have?

clemenza, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:40 (twelve years ago) link

Klein's field is economics and economics policy, in which he is expert. At campaign analysis he's as helpless as Cokie and Gregory, and thanks to deadlines and the internet cycle yesterday's "blunder" by Romney gets more discussion than it deserves.

Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:43 (twelve years ago) link

the GOP wants to win, and with Romney they have a chance. Plus: a President Romney can nominate all manner of conservative horrors as Cabinet members, judges, and SCOTUS justices. That's how he mitigates conservative dissatisfaction.

Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:45 (twelve years ago) link

the fox interview doesn't have one really horrible moment for mitt, but in general it was a disaster. Seemed petulant, manic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26ePA49HLes

Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:45 (twelve years ago) link

Okay--I've found him pretty smart on politics, too. Anyway, I guess we'll see. (The reasons you cite for Romney are the reasons I was citing months ago; like everyone, I'm mystified as to why the needle never budges an inch for him.)

clemenza, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:47 (twelve years ago) link

because he sucks! and is a robot!

Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:48 (twelve years ago) link

the simple fact is the GOP is in complete disarray, and contrary to what others have argued here, are no more prone to "fall in line" than Democrats are. the party is fundamentally dysfunctional at the moment.

Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:49 (twelve years ago) link

BAIER: What was the last book you read or are reading?

ROMNEY: I’m reading sort of a fun one right now, so I’ll skip that. But I just read “Decision Points” by President Bush.

Ugh. This highlights one of Romney’s biggest problems: He’s a stiff who doesn’t really understand how he’s perceived. Of all the candidates, he’s the one who needs to tell people about the “fun” book he’s reading! It would have helped him enormously if he said John Grisham or Brad Thor’s latest thriller.

caek, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:49 (twelve years ago) link

It's not like Mitt is some obviously electable candidate. Primary voters may have been told that he's the most electable but then they turn on the debate and Newt (and Cain!) run circles around him.

Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:51 (twelve years ago) link

Gingrich and Cain haven't run circles 'round him in debates!

Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:52 (twelve years ago) link

see, everyone agrees: romney is a petulant, manic, sucky robot.

BTW, romney's really reading the red-jaime series from diana gabaldon. it is his secret shame.

Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:53 (twelve years ago) link

In reference to something earlier today, I thought the Frum piece was excellent too. I don't think he's saying anything that Sullivan hasn't been hammering away at for months, but obviously it carries extra weight coming from someone who actually worked for W.

Mitt's fun book was probably either Chuck Eddy's Stairway to Hell or something from the Goosebumps series.

clemenza, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:53 (twelve years ago) link

they (and Bachmann and Perry) have benefited from Romney fatigue.

Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:53 (twelve years ago) link

"I’m reading sort of a fun one right now, so I’ll skip that."

Just to get really pointlessly analytical, what's weird about that is "so" instead of "but." "But" I probably wouldn't notice; "so" = fun is something you should never discuss?

clemenza, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 22:56 (twelve years ago) link

"Decision Points" = not a fun read

Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 23:04 (twelve years ago) link

the GOP wants to win, and with Romney they have a chance.

Facts not at all in evidence

M. White, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 23:11 (twelve years ago) link

http://www.landmarkaudio.com/productimages/111462.jpg

when Newt wins the nom I'll liveblog this for your pleasure

by (mennen), Wednesday, 30 November 2011 23:12 (twelve years ago) link

Facts not at all in evidence

the GOP mantra since '94.

Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 23:13 (twelve years ago) link

If they wanted to win they'd circle their wagons round Huntsman. He's Republican lite like Obama and he's new and the country is mighty dissatisfied in an inchoate (stupid) way

M. White, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 23:13 (twelve years ago) link

Herman is still convinced "the other side" is behind his woes: "Once I moved into the top tier, I think they became threatened. My star was shining and rising too fast...they wanted to take that shine away." It's really too bad that he will never get to apply his detective skills to the intricacies of geopolitical maneuvering.

clemenza, Wednesday, 30 November 2011 23:14 (twelve years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.