One of the conspiracy theories floating around the comment section here and elsewhere was that Michele Bachmann served as the attack dog against everyone but Romney in the hope of gaining a VP nod.
The speculation was fueled by Bachmann’s relentless and often inaccurate attacks on everyone who rose to be the lead challenger to Romney, first Pawlenty, then Perry, then Cain, and most recently Newt. Yet Romney was spared the wrath of Bachmann, other than the “Newt Romney” line.
According to Ed Rollins, who Bachmann used to go after Sarah Palin, Bachmann deliberately stayed away from attacking Romney, via Politico (h/t Snookdoodle Wizbang in the Tip Line):
She repeatedly passed up opportunities to ding Mitt Romney in the debates — a product, Rollins said, of preserving her options for sharing a ticket with him.
“There was some talk early on between her and her husband that she could end up as the vice presidential nominee,” Rollins said.
Sometimes conspiracy theories are right. Unless, of course, you believe that Rollins is part of an anti-Bachmann conspiracy.
But since Rollins confirms what was obvious, I’ll take his word on this one.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
The one scenario in which I flat out will not vote for the REP nominee is if Bachmann is on the ticket.
I always considered Bachmann as one of my favorites but I would not vote for a Romney/Bachmann ticket. This is disappointing if this was her ultimate goal.
I’m sure that may have been a consideration, but it is more or less like assuming a drug-addict male prostitute contracted AIDS from an old blood transfusion – think horses, not zebras.
Palin, Perry, Cain, and Newt have all been those who were beating her to be the base’s favorite “not Romney” candidate. Any chance she had of being a real contender had to include taking down the guys in front of her for that slot.
Besides, the book on Romney is well known. RomneyCare, his changes on several positions, running as a moderate in Massachusetts, and the most serious objection which no one has brought up, his corporate-style capitulation to the climate alarmists and environmental extremists generally. Since these people are the ones issuing growth-killing regulations, he should be asked how he will go about weeding them out, and if not, why not. But few seem interested in real issues.
So attacks on Romney in the debates didn’t have much effect, no matter who delivered them. Part of it was his demeanor in answering, but a lot of it was that everyone had already heard these critiques. “Is that all ya got? That old crap?”
I for one would not wager a nickel on anything either Ed Rollins or Michelle Bachmann says. Both have earned their reputation for misrepresentation.
The problem with that analysis is, that could also be said of criticizing people like Obama or Ron Paul. But she has hammered Ron Paul, and she gained popularity for it, even though she isn’t in direct competition for Paul’s votes anymore than she was for Romney’s votes.
And the Newt Romney attack wasn’t really hurtful to Romney as much as it was against Newt. Newt is one of the not-Romneys, so to associate him with Romney hurts Newt. On the other hand. Romney’s supporters are Romney supporters, and they aren’t going to ditch him for others in the primary.
“…those who were beating her to be the base’s favorite “not Romney” candidate. Any chance she had of being a real contender had to include taking down the guys in front of her…”
IIRC, Bachmann was the very first Not Romney, way back when polling of declared candidates first began.
FWIW: Bachmann is losing whatever credibility she had with her current accusation that her former Iowa state campaign head went over to Ron Paul for money. If that’s the case, did she have any hints about the character of that guy previously? If she didn’t, that says quite a bit, perhaps, about her own abilities to select people. This coupled with Ed Rollins’ earlier tirade on Palin is certainly an easy way to judge her personnel judgement as sorely lacking.
Do you think PM Margaret Thatcher, Britain’s conservative Iron Lady, let alone Ronald Reagan himself, would ever become so pathetically weak kneed and grovel for relevancy..
She needs to be more like PM Margaret Thatcher, as a female Head of State role model, and President Ronald Reagan, in leadership quality.. This is why she is not ready for the US Presidency.
The Parliament chooses the Prime Minister not the public.
Different dynamics.
We in Minnesota know of Michelle’s lies. She throws out lies, doesn’t back them up, repeats them, and never admits when she’s caught.
And she’ll do anything and everything to gain power.
Yuck.
Ignore her.
She’s not going to win anything.
She’s not Sarah Palin, but wishes she was.
Yup, that about sums up my analysis of Bachmann, too.
You must be thinking of another. That is not how her name is spelt .
What a wonderfully substantive comment!
A lot of Bachmann bashing but look who else hasn’t really attacked Romney directly (at least not consistently enough or harmfully enough to jeopardize their VP chances):
Tim Pawlenty
Rick Santorum
Herman Cain
Donald Trump
Ron Paul (even though he’s nothing to lose by it)
Newt Gingrich (aside from one really tart remark about Bain Capital, it’s been very mild generic stuff)
Only Rick Perry really went after Romney, but not very effectively. Probably not disqualifying. Heck, if Reagan could pick Bush after “voodoo economics” Romney can forgive Perry for his Mexican gardener attack.
It’s almost like half the field was just hawking books and auditioning for a Fox News show, or was hedging their bets big time. This lack of attacks goes a long way to explaining why Mitt has an 80% chance to be the nominee.
Awwhhh.
Still , she is amazing looking. In the top 1% of all American ladies & ladymen.
Plus just what is wrong with scheming to be VP?
All is fair in Politics.
You know, a presidential nominee would have to be an idiot to not have conversations about being on the second half of the ticket. Aside from actually getting the nomination, being vice president is the best path to the presidency. It’s not evidence that was her plan all along, though; and Ed Rollins wasn’t her campaign manager for all that long, anyway, so he has no way of knowing if she even stuck to that plan. After all, Romney was never really a threat to her candidacy the way the others were. Perry, Cain, Paul, and even Gingrich have been standing in her way in Iowa; Romney’s barely been to Iowa. She could hardly think attacking him would win her votes in the caucus.
And you don’t even like Rollins. Why are you so ready to accept his word as the gospel?
The only way she gets on the ticket as veep is if she changes her name (and everything else about her) to Marco Rubio.
Rubio is wounded & limping. He really ought know his parents were not refugees.
Besides it was Palin who raised 800,000 for the Florida GOP in one night. Rubio nowhere in sight.
[…] wanted to say this for awhile to some people (who likely won’t read this) but…. I TOLD YOU […]
Well, the first thing she did was attack Palin, the very first thing!!! That told us all what this woman was about. Then she made it so obvious she was there to help Romney, he is the chosen one you know. Never have I seen the biggest liar and manipulator besides Obama, I can’t wait for the big arm of Karma to come back at this woman….her and Beck, I don’t know how these people can live with themselves. Pick me, pick me, I want to be the Iron Lady?? How embarrassing can you get.
As I recall, the attack on Palin was Rollins’ idea. So by all means let’s take his word on this.
If Romney is smart, he’ll choose someone from the south for VP and hopefully it won’t be Perry.
With that said, I’ll say no more…
Linked, good find
Of the ‘Santorum Surge’ (and Gingrich Slide) in Iowa…
Just a dumb broad. Did little or no research on her accusations. She just pulled them out of the air to see where they landed. I have thought for some time she had an ulterior motive…VP or cabinet slot. As I have said before, this woman has an ego problem. She thinks she should rise to the top even though she is sorta new at the game like when she thought she should have a chairmanship in the House even though she was a second termer just because she hijacked the tea party movement. I wrote her off when she allowed Rollins to go after Palin. I worte him off at the same time and would not believe him except for Bachmann’s on actions. Both are ignorant fools.
[…] veered into the bizarre notions afloat these days, like the idea that Michele Bachmann was steering clear of Romney attacks in hopes of a VP slot. Stacy suggested that, given the intensity level of Presidential campaigning, […]
[…] A few observations – Michele said she never went against her principles during her run. If she sticks to those, she won’t endorse Mitt. Though I have long thought that she attacked the other second tier candidates because she was eventually angling for some position with Mitt, maybe even a VP slot. I’m not the only one to have theorized this. […]