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

Hertzberg has a few yuks here.

xxpost

Like, for instance, he pseudo-affably laughed his way through others dogpiling him during the Republican debates in '08, but he always seemed to be one jibe away from blurting, "Hey, fuck you guys, okay?".

an affable flapper!

http://lh4.googleusercontent.com/public/n_fvsnwARat8mSveYOuNzRIQEXNP3lw5t8fkJgs55j3_NNHD0wawGsier5HUerUUx1Xm1HyjLT1tFzsXSeH0O4t9bt6D1x5Fguu9xLnZESM2zYcPBIN-CyqEh7M7AGdFTCjaKxN8P8hk6A

Looks like Rick Perry as Daisy Buchanan.

Romney's heated exchange with a veteran

but he always seemed to be one jibe away from blurting, "Hey, fuck you guys, okay?".

― In Your Velour Slacks (Hairplug Receipts), Monday, 12 December 2011 16:03 (19 minutes ago) Bookmark Permalink

lol, otm. the weirdest thing about the $10000 bet clip is just how much insincere masking of base human emotions is going on; with Perry's weird, smiling attempt to indict Mitt & then Mitt deploying his autochuckle so he can be seen to laugh it off. there's this long silence after Perry says his part, it just hangs in the air. both smiling. so weird.

“He is not going to make it,” he said. “Because you can’t trust him. I just saw it in his eyes. I judge a man by his eyes.”

So, does he agree with Mr. Romney on any issue?

“I kind of liked his health care plan in Massachusetts,” Mr. Garon said.

take this to the zing thread

He seems pretty thoroughly flapped

Love that.

Wow that confrontation between romney and the veteran looked bad for romney. not sure how it played on tv, if it was video-captured, but sounded bad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hRdqGKA782A

ok, idk how to embed youtubes on ilx anymore i guess -- anyway, ron paul continuing to produce high quality production videos that make newt look terrible

reminds me of when gordon brown had to talk to an old lady.

delete the "feature=player_embedded" parameter; the URL needs to look like "watch?v=blahblahblah"

I've had that happen. You can't embed an embed code from somebody's else's site; you've got to go to the original YouTube page.

Paul's going to bring down Newt; Huntsman's going to bring down Romney; Newt and Romney are going to destroy each other. Into the breach, the only man who can truly restore America.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Rick-Perry-3.jpg

it's too bad he's totally insane bc ron paul is clearly the most intelligent dude on the debate stage.

wha? no. (romney)

I'm still cracking up at

PERRY: I'd cut three departments; commerce, education and... uh... help me out here!
PAUL: There's five!

i don't get a sense that romney is particularly smart. i mean, he's not dumb (like Perry or Bachmann)

he's v smart.

The way I read Ron Paul is that his convictions have some very attractive bits, like knowing what torture is and why it is bad, and some bits that are batshit crazy, like a return to the gold standard. When he talks about the attractive bits he sounds intelligent. His greatest strength is that he has convictions, not that he arrived at them by being smart.

No Ayn Randian should ever be considered smart about anything but inanimate objects.

i don't get a sense that romney is particularly smart

His plan is working! The RR base have contempt for anyone who looks or acts smart.

it's easier for ron paul to sound knowledgeable. he occupies an enviable position of ideological purity: everything's reducable to a simple set of libertarian litmus tests. it's harder to be mitt romney, who lives on this planet, and has a pragmatic view of the world.

pity the poor mitt romney.

I think Romney is smart but he's a not very good actor. He seems to be struggling with the role that his political consultants have assigned to him.

i hate to quote Joe Scarborough, but this is OTM:

"If Newt Gingrich is the smartest guy in the room, leave the room."

there's a clarity of speaking that ron paul has that partially comes from ideological purity but also comes from being clear thinking. articulation is a key identifier of intelligence (esp to me). romney may be bundled up by his handlers and struggling to sneak around issues but he's also very difficult to listen to. i often will be listening to him for five minutes and realize that i have no idea what he is talking about. other politicians -even ones who are similarly going the slimly bullshitter route - don't seem to have that effect on me.

eh, i appreciate clear, straightforward thinking and communication, too. i just believe it's a lot easier for paul to do this, given his ideological purity.

If he was any more pragmatic, he'd be.. oh, yeah.

also: ron paul is a loon. the opposition research on his is overwhelming. no-one's bothered to do it, yet, since he is a marginal/vanity candidate. but if and when the other GOP contenders turn on him, his support will evaporate down to his small basic core.

for an example of what i mean, review the articles concerning race in the newsletters affiliated with ron paul.

re Paul's ideological purity: the guy invokes ~The Founders~ every bit as much as he alludes to Randian pablum... which is why his nominal support for Citizens United is a pretty big ideological blind spot imo (as it seems pretty clear to me that those dudes at the Constitutional Convention would have balked at the thought of corporate personhood. maybe i'm wrong?). Also, he supports DOMA under the guise of "states rights", but wouldn't that suggest he could/would support anti-miscegenation laws? doesn't sound very libertarian to me.

lol Gingrich tax plan

agree w/mordy on romney essentially being a bullshit artist and a pandering bore. during the last debate i realized mitt says nothing that isn't thoroughly market-tested and/or a total cliche. even when provoked.

Even his joeks he had to mail order.

i saw the video of the mitt/vet exchange, it actually wasn't bad, he's kinda stuttering & ridiculously not facing the guy while they talk, but being it effectively ends on the "i gave you the answer" thing, seemingly good naturedly

obv he is a terrible robot &c it just wasn't hugely evident there

Like, for instance, he pseudo-affably laughed his way through others dogpiling him during the Republican debates in '08, but he always seemed to be one jibe away from blurting, "Hey, fuck you guys, okay?".

i watched the video of the $10,000 bet and what struck me most about it was the enormous tower of passive-aggressive smiley teeth-gritting both perry and romney were teetering on; it did feel like at any moment one of those guys could just suddenly narrow his eyes, open his mouth and it would be this glistening radioactive maw issuing a digitally sweetened shriek-roar from hades

I realize what my hope that Gingrich will win comes down to: enough Republican voters rising up and saying, "He's a slimebucket, but he's our slimebucket." So I'm a little nervous.

he has a good chance, if only for one reason: there's a significant segment of the GOP that just rejects romney, and they may realize that time is too short to move to another anti-romney. so it may be gingrich, or nothing.

"Gingrich, or Nothing": a winning campaign slogan if I've ever heard one.

I've brought this up before, but I'll never forget the debate disaster Romney had here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qhCO7tBcaY

you can see the rage and resentment that is buried within Willard Romney.

man I forgot about this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-groI7IpExA

mitt is short for willard?

i never knew.

all this time i thought mitt was short for mittens?

Those two clips are great. I was following the Democratic side much more closely at the time, and I knew next to nothing about Romney, but in the couple of debates I did watch, it was clear everyone on stage despised him.

Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani...when giants walked the Earth.

it says a lot about the current republican crop that in 2007 they had guys who reduced Romney to wincing embarrassment but in 2011 they just have gingrich and the kind of candidates who think Solyndra is a country.

Solyndra...President Obama supported the uprising, correct?...I just want to make sure we're talking about the same thing.

didn't somebody make sure Rick Perry passed his vocabulary test over this shit already?

http://m.jumpstart.com/JumpstartNew/uploadedFiles/sne/pdf-screenshots/test-your-word-power-iii.jpg

i see now that schlump has already said what i said, about the weird smiley passive-aggressiveness

my suspicion is that these guys have it drilled into them to always smile no matter what, so 9 out of every 10 still photos and live camera angles will show the candidate appearing "positive" etc

i have no doubt this is based on real research and is probably "good" advice ultimately but man it leads to some weird moments

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/13/michael-tomasky-could-obama-be-headed-for-a-landslide.html

I guess it depends on what you mean by landslide--a landslide like 1980 and 1964, or a landslide like 1996 and 2008?--but this seems highly improbable even if things were going well right now. Aren't there enough electoral votes locked in for the Republicans that a classic landslide would be impossible no matter who the nominee were? And again, 8-9% unemployment producing a landslide...huh? Even if Gingrich were to get the nomination, I think Obama would win a relatively close general; if it's Romney, I think either Obama wins a very close general, or Romney wins going away.