Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

If Romney loses to Obama, it will be because of his supporters not his opponents

If Romney loses to Obama, it will be because of his supporters not his opponents

You knew this was coming, the attempt to blame a Romney loss to Obama on comments made about Romney by other candidates.

Jamie Weinstein at The Daily Caller (via HotAir) writes that Newt’s legacy will be that his criticisms of Romney will be featured in Obama ads:

If Gingrich’s White House run is to harm his legacy, it won’t be because he  stayed in the race too long. It will be from starring in Democratic attack ads  this fall that hurt the Republican presidential nominee as well as House members  running for re-election. I bet he will star in two such ads.

The first will attack House members for supporting Paul Ryan’s budget plan  that courageously attempts to put our fiscal house in order. Gingrich called it “radical” on “Meet the Press” at the very start of his campaign. Democrats will  surely use Gingrich’s words to slam Republican House members. You can just hear  the ad declaring over ominous music: ”Even Newt Gingrich called  the plan ‘radical.’”

The second ad will likely focus on Mitt Romney’s business experience, using  Gingrich and the pro-Gingrich super PAC Winning the Future’s outrageous Michael  Moore-style attacks against Romney’s business career earlier in the race to  highlight that even Republicans said Romney’s business practices were rapacious  and unseemly. Or as Newt himself suggested during the campaign, Romney engaged in “looting” as head of Bain Capital.

This is a bunch of nonsense.

Newt’s comments about the Ryan Plan were taken grossly out of context by Romney supporters, including in the conservative media, and Ryan has ended up moving to Newt’s position on Medicare reform.  So Romney and much of the conservative media misrepresented Newt’s statements, and now will complain when Obama takes the same tack?

As to Bain, the attacks were legitimate, but the conservative media shut down the inquiry.  So we don’t really know how bad the Bain problem will be in the general election.  And who produced that film?  It wasn’t Gingrich’s campaign, but a former Romney advisor who shopped it around.  Maybe he knows something the rest of us don’t.

No, the problem Romney faces is that his campaign and his supporters have run such a foul campaign.

Think of all the negative things said against other candidates by Romney and his supporters.  Did they give a damn how their words would be played back against Newt or Santorum if either of them were the nominee?

Did the editors of National Review worry in December about the Marvin the Martian cover being used against Newt?  Did the Romney campaign worry how its attempt to portray Newt as crazy would be used against Newt?

And how did Romney get to this point that he is the presumptive nominee?

By going massively negative on everyone else and using his campaign wealth to smother others.  His carpet bombing of Newt in Iowa and Florida is the only thing that kept Romney from the abyss.  I still see non-stop anti-Santorum ads on TV.

Romney has embittered a large segment of the people he will need to rally around him.  Profound and historic dislike of Obama is the only thing that will prevent a third party movement or a massive stay-at-home movement.

And it hasn’t stopped.  Romney supporters have shown themselves to be sore winners, and there’s nothing worse than sore winners heading into a general election.

Just in the past few days Ann Coulter needlessly attacked Sarah Palin, and Jennifer Rubin compared conservatives who still don’t support Romney to “birthers.”  With vocal and visible supporters like this, Romney doesn’t need enemies.

Back in December Jeff Emanuel nailed it:

If Romney loses to Obama, it will not because of Newt, or the Ricks, or anyone else other than the Romney campaign and its supporters, who won the wrong way and are sore winners.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

“You knew this was coming,”…

In fact, the narrative has been forming for months. It’s as if they’re readying themselves for defeat.

Awe-inspiring confidence!

    Karl Rogue in reply to raven. | April 4, 2012 at 9:42 pm

    Yeah, this is some kind of record. The blame game and butt covering didn’t start up in earnest in the McLame Campaign until September, as I recall. And that campaign was brutal.

      Same Same in reply to Karl Rogue. | April 4, 2012 at 10:40 pm

      Makes you wonder who will sign on as the VP candidate. It’s like volunteering to take some of the blame for the Exxon Valdez.

    WoodnWorld in reply to raven. | April 5, 2012 at 7:20 am

    Honestly, why would a Romney supporter feel anything other than derision for a cohort such as this? Most of you have had nothing but contempt for him from the beginning and are not in the least bit objective about anything other than your own endlessly “echo chambered” perspectives. “I just bitterly and viciously attacked him for (allegedly) bitterly and viciously attacking someone else and he STILL won’t woo me!” The nerve…

    In addition to openly hoping he does lose to Obama in November (if for no other reason than to finally prove you right after having been so wrong about Romney and the primary so many other times before) most of you are now just looking for an excuse, a compelling argument not to vote for him in the fall. (e.g. MOMMMMMM! Jennifer Roooobin said some mean things…) Seriously. Give me a break, we are not setting the stage for an eventual loss, you are setting the stage for your long-planned and eagerly awaited defections. “We’ll show them!”

    Newsflash: There is a reason his campaign is not kissing your Pretenda-Right asses. No one cares. True story. If the threat Obama poses to this nation is not enough to get the sand out of your panties then the “real” Right does not need you. Stay home. Whine all you want. We will win without you.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to WoodnWorld. | April 5, 2012 at 7:45 am

      Derision for Romney was not unearned or irrational, rather, it has been derision well-grounded with whole lists of facts and evidence.

      Eight lies, documented, in the last two debates alone in front of millions of people. One proven on stage by Wolf Blitzer, while we waited.

      Campaign tactics that would have made Hitler and Stalin proud.

      Business practices, liberal record, government practices and results that should preclude a run for presidency, especially on a Republican ticket.

      The more we learned, the less we liked. So derision and disgust for Romney and telling the truth about him, was no longer a choice, but a duty.

      The truth is, like Obama, from earliest childhood, Romney was born into an environment of lies, nurtured in those lies, brought up to sell that lie, and cannot
      detect truth from lie.

      For Romney, like Obama, the only truth he seeks is his election and the furtherance of his deceptive ideology.

      Romney’s aim, like Obama’s, is vindicating the lies of his ideology (Romney: Mormonism, Obama: Mohammedanism, Marxism) and the failed lives and lies of his spiritual father, (Romney: Joseph Smith, Obama: Marx and Mohammed) and of his own biological father (Romney: George Romney, Obama: Malcolm X and his adoptive fathers, Obama and Soetero).

        Quite right, Uncle.

        “According to the Washington Post, Romney’s super PAC has spent nearly $30 million on advertising, 91 percent of it on negative ads aimed at either Gingrich or Santorum. By some estimates, the Romney campaign is spending at a rate of more than $15 per vote, compared to less than $6 per vote for Santorum.”
        http://spectator.org/archives/2012/04/04/predictably-predictable

        WoodnWorld in reply to Uncle Samuel. | April 5, 2012 at 4:34 pm

        Of course, that makes perfect sense. So, it’s derision for derision then? You, and all too many like you, never had any intentions of working with Romney and me, and all too many like me, will lose no sleep trying to soothe your bruised egos or smooth your ruffled feathers because of it.

        You are content not to vote for the man and I am more than content knowing that your voice and the rationale that supports it will not be relevant or necessary in the coming months.

        As long as you despise Romney more than you do Obama, I have nothing but contempt and, yes, derision for you.

      Excellent question: Honestly, why would a Romney supporter feel anything other than derision for a cohort such as this?

      Seminal reply: Derision is the display of ignorant short sighted thinking that Rominac voters by themselves can win the general election without those who disagree with Obama’s head long rush to Socialism. This false correlation comes from confusing the primaries with the general election.

      History: A Rino led Congress in the 2006 election cycle was turned out because they presumed that conservatives and libertarians had only two voting options: vote GOP or vote Democrat. They chose a third alternative: not voting. Romney is perceived as a Rino. Do you really want a repeat of the 2006 election cycle? IF NOT, then change your attitude.

        WoodnWorld in reply to dscott. | April 5, 2012 at 4:25 pm

        *yawn*

        It’s amazing how often “history” has been invoked to support so many false predictions.

        The study of history offers no manual of instructions that can be applied automatically; history teaches by analogy, shedding light on likely consequences or comparable situations. But each generation must determine for itself which circumstances are in fact comparable.

        Henry Kissinger

        You, and far too many like you, seem to be entirely incapable of determining/predicting which circumstances from yesterday’s passed are comparable to today’s situation.

        Case in point: Your (collective) abysmal track record in picking Winners/outcomes/results over the last few months…

      SmokeVanThorn in reply to WoodnWorld. | April 5, 2012 at 1:29 pm

      Are you so lacking in self awareness that you don’t realize that you are demonstrating the very traits that have alienated conservatives?

        WoodnWorld in reply to SmokeVanThorn. | April 5, 2012 at 4:12 pm

        No one, including myself, is capable of alienating you. You alienate yourself. If all it takes is a comment or a handful of comments (whatever), a column or series of columns in the Washington Post (of all places) to alienate you, your resolve was never that strong in the first place.

        Real “conservatives” will be better off with committed supporters who will stick this out over the long haul. Supporters who don’t whine and cry every time things don’t go the way they want. Supporters who understand this isn’t (entirely) about them. Supporters who offer solutions rather than problems. Supporters who aren’t fair weather activists.

        Sure, you were all happy to ride the bandwagon when things seemed to be going your way. Hit one bump in the road and some of you are all too ready to bail. Fine, be alienated. I really don’t care. Good riddance. I suspect there are a number of other Americans/Republicans who feel the exact same way. We have much bigger problems than your feelings or (increasingly reflexive and erroneous) opinions.

        Join the team or get off the field Champ.

        Perhaps he’s so lacking in self-awareness that he doesn’t realize that “yawn” is juvenile.

      No one is listening.

      Romney and his supporters are leftists. The campaign run by Romney was right out of Axelrods 2008 playbook including calling us bigots, the new raaaaaaacist, because we refuse to vote for a leftist.
      There are plenty of videos on youtube of Romney calling himself a progressive. Go educate yourself.

        WoodnWorld in reply to JRD. | April 6, 2012 at 3:27 am

        We agree then, no one of import is listening to you. Many of the remaining (read: increasingly shrinking) ABR types ARE bigots (not racists) who had no problem openly admitting their narrow anti-Mormon biases just a few months ago.

        The only thing that has changed since then is many ABRs have only now learned how to mask their blatant bigotry with latent “evidence” gained from a “YouTube Education.”

        Speaking of teaching tools and the relative value of your continuing “education” compared to mine, you can keep the fluff and bubblegum propaganda videos JRD; I will stick to books, journals, treatises, magazines, newspapers, analysis and real research.

      vladdy in reply to WoodnWorld. | April 12, 2012 at 6:22 pm

      And if there was any doubt about the truth of this article, it has just been proved. The ugly, contemptuous tone of the mittbots is too close to that of the obots (not to mention the pautards) to make us want to have anything to do with their candidate. Why, oh why, do mitt and his people only work in one mode: scorn? Is it supposed to win friends and influence people? It doesn’t. Remember that old nursery rhyme about “I’m rubber and you’re glue?”

      Mitt is like the candidate for prom queen that everybody hates because she’s such a total b***, but might vote for just because the other candidate is currently in the process of burning down the high school gymnasium, so voting for the b**** may the only way they can continue to have proms in the future at all.

“the problem Romney faces is that his campaign and his supporters have run such a foul campaign.”

I disagree. I would say the problem Romney faces is that he’s a terrible candidate. His side has gone negative so heavily because there really isn’t much of anything positive you can say about the guy.

Even so, if the price of gas keeps going up, his chances of being the next president look pretty good.

    vladdy in reply to irv. | April 12, 2012 at 6:32 pm

    Sigh. I hope you’re right, but it seems like all the obama administration needs to do is have free, special showings of “Wall Street” (original version) in every city and town in lieu of a campaign, and it’s all over. So many of us were flabbergasted when even stalwarts like Levin shut down the effective “Mitt is Gordon Gekko” thing that Gingrich started. We knew that if Newt didn’t use it, obama would.

    That said, there are 3 things mitt has over obama: he doesn’t hang out with caliphate-pushing muslim revolutionaries, invite thugs and cop-killer-praising rappers to the White House, or appoint marxists and communists as assistants. So if people aren’t totally hypnotized by the slighly coffee-with-milk tinge of obama’s skin (and I think they are), they may realize that there IS a difference and vote for mitt anyway.

    I just hope he picks another muslim-a**-kissing guy, Christie, for vp, ‘cos he’s the only one with the nastinesss to take on obama face-to-face.

Odd. I initially read the heading as saying: If Obama loses to Romney blame his supporters …

1. Romney reminds me of Robert S. McNamara. The latter had the sense not to run for public office.

My sense is that somebody, presumably Etch-A-Sketch Fehrnstrom, gave Romney a Powerpoint briefing about various campaign styles, and going negative had the highest effectiveness score wrt short-term outcomes. Whereupon Romney selected that mode without having a clue about the longer-term effects.

2. A pet conjecture of mine: The GOP Establishment supports the Romney candidacy in order to keep the party machinery in the hands of the Bushes and their allies. To that end, the excuses for Romney, months before he’s even nominated, are really excuses for the RINO wing. Those excuses are intended to remove obstacles and pave the way for Jeb 2016.

I am hopeful but not confident that if Obama is reelected, which I view as probable but not foregone, Jeb 2016 will be averted by the GOP’s up-and-coming generations.

    9thDistrictNeighbor in reply to gs. | April 4, 2012 at 10:38 pm

    Fascinating thought, that…

    Bill Clinton–the Focus Group candidate
    Mitt Romney–the PowerPoint candidate
    Barack Obama–the Manchurian candidate

    What we really need is someone who can give the Etch-a-sketch shake to the past 3+ years. I fear we’ll end up with a place holder at best and, well I can’t think about the worst…

huskers-for-palin | April 4, 2012 at 8:21 pm

They will chant: “BLAME PALIN, BLAME PALIN, BLAME PALIN”!!!

They will scream: “Blame Tea Party!!! Blame Tea Party!!! Blame Tea Party!!!”

And in the depths of hell, they will moan: “Damn us, damn us, damn us!!!”

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | April 4, 2012 at 8:30 pm

I don’t think Romney can win regardless of how Newt campaigned. Gary Johnson will siphon votes from both parties and unregistered voters. But since he initially ran as a Republican he’ll probably get much of the Ron Paul vote. If he can persuade a high percentage (say 50%) of those who voted for Ron Paul in key swing states during the primaries to vote for him on the Libertarian Party ticket, he’d be siphoning off about 4% of the Republican vote. That’s likely game over for Willard.

On top of that, whoever runs on the “Americans Elect” ticket will be completely unscathed from all the mud slinging that has gone on in the Republican primaries. Since they profess to want to advance a centrist platform I think it’s unlikely they’ll run anybody to the left of Obama. If they did run to the left of Obama, it may hurt Obama more than Romney. But since that’s not likely to happen, whoever runs on “Americans Elect” ticket may hurt Romney more than it hurts the sitting incumbent president.

All bets are off if Israel and Iran go to war or if Europe unravels again (which may be starting to happen now in Spain).

    “All bets are off if Israel and Iran go to war or if Europe unravels again (which may be starting to happen now in Spain).”

    I think we need to factor in the “all bets are off” quotient across the board. It would be interesting to consider all the possible “surprises” which may arise (as best we can, of course), and to assess their political repercussions to either side. But this may not be possible, as everything has an “unintended consequences” potential.

    I’ve considered other “crises” which Obama may stir or instigate. (E.g., border war with Mexican cartels, cyber-security threat that shuts down the internet.) I do this because I believe there is NOTHING Obama will not do if, come October, he is trailing.

    The LP candidate’s high point was Ed Clark in 1980, who won 1% of the popular vote. Since then, NO LP candidate has won as much as 0.5% of the vote, including Ron Paul. I expect Johnson will not set a record.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to MaggotAtBroadAndWall. | April 5, 2012 at 8:04 am

    Americans Elect was well-funded from the beginning with millions of dollars.

    Where GOP candidates struggled to even get on the ballot, AE was immediately on the ballots of all fifty states without the name of a candidate.

    Americans Elect is probably Soros/Obama election insurance – their ace in the hole.

    Obama and his machine, helped by Holder, have at least 12 win strategies, some legal, some not. They don’t care about mere laws.

    Obama’s machine out-strategized, out-Alinskied and out-ruthlessed even the Clintons in the last election. One of the Clintons’ best friends and campaign leaders was murdered. Another worker died execution-style. It is rumored that finally, Chelsea was threatened, so that the ‘birther’ revelations were not utilized.

    In a battle between Mormons and Mohammedans, you can easily predict which will be the most ruthless, relentless and fight to the death.

    Obama has turned America’s election into guerilla warfare. Let’s hope the spirit of Francis Marion and George Washington lives among the warriors of truth, love and life, freedom and peace.

    This is a battle between good and evil, truth and lie, love and lust, freedom and oppression, darkness and light. Between two false books distorting and defiling the Truth of God, and the True Book of God, the Bible.

      Scorpio51 in reply to Uncle Samuel. | April 5, 2012 at 8:20 am

      “This is a battle between good and evil, truth and lie, love and lust, freedom and oppression, darkness and light. Between two false books distorting and defiling the Truth of God, and the True Book of God, the Bible.”

      Uncle Samuel if I could punch the “like” button a 100 times I would. You nailed it, my friend.

      lichau in reply to Uncle Samuel. | April 5, 2012 at 8:58 am

      Uncle Sam:

      “In a battle between Mormons and Mohammedans, you can easily predict which will be the most ruthless, relentless and fight to the death.”

      I grew up in >75 percent Mormon country. I concede your point, but it wouldn’t be a first round knock out. My problem with the LDS has nothing to do with theology–I am an atheist–but a lot to do with behavior. They were a persecuted minority (for some good reasons) 100-150 years ago. They retain an general “us vs them” attitude. Screwing a “gentile” (literally or figuratively) is no biggie.

      The Mormons that I have known are generally decent people, as individuals. I would go so far to say a bit more so than the run of the mill non-Mormon. But, the Church, IMO is another matter altogether. Kind of a shadowy presence.

      Example: In almost any smallish Western US town–go find the local high school. There will be a Mormon church within a couple blocks. Where I grew up, it was across the street.

      How do they get that property/zoning? They do.

      vladdy in reply to Uncle Samuel. | April 12, 2012 at 7:25 pm

      Excellent post. Reminds me of the two “passport” deaths (those who got into obama’s mother’s files), the two, gay choir member deaths (of right’s church), all 4 documented but hushed up, and most of all — no questioning or investigation of Breitbart, who died just hours before he was to present info with Sherrif Joe. Lotsa coincidences where the obamas are concerned.

we could always blame bush. seems to work wonders for some.
maybe we deserve 4 more yrs of this abortion of an administration, may teach some people a damn lesson.

Well I guess its a good thing Obama hasn’t used Newt’s words about the Ryan budget against it…oh wait. Even at the end you cant take your lips of Newt’s rotund butt.
Oh and I’m also glad the people who keep saying “Your guy only won because he spent more money” are the good winners.

Professor,
For the record: your greatest blogging mistake was the day you channeled your inner Al Sharpton and condemned NASCAR fans for being racist based entirely on the fact that they booed Michelle Obama.

Mark Levin just got done eviscerating Romney for his scorched Earth carpet-bombing of his fellow republicans-

Apparently, he’s doing it again in Pennsylvania.

‘Romney’s only getting 41% of the republican vote–and he’s doing it to himself’

This is still going on with CA where the GOP establishment imposed on CA Republicans to run two liberal Democrats, Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina, who got crushed by the two most unpopular politicians in the state, Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer. To this day, Ann Coulter mouths the lie that this only proves how “even moderates like Whitman and Fiorina are too conservative” to win in CA. That is pure weapons-grade bolognium. They lost because there was no reason for the many, many conservatives and Republicans in CA to vote. We aren’t stupid.

The GOP goal in 2012 is to defeat the conservatives so as to clear the decks for Jebbie in 2016. Knowing how bad the economy will be after November and into next year when Congress will be forced to act in a way that will make everyone angry, they would rather leave Obama in power to take the hit.

I just hope Rombama doesn’t take a conservative VP down with him. Please, pick McCain for VP. Or Dick Lugar.

    Karl Rogue in reply to Pasadena Phil. | April 4, 2012 at 9:47 pm

    “weapons-grade bolognium”

    May I steal that?

    huskers-for-palin in reply to Pasadena Phil. | April 4, 2012 at 10:37 pm

    If they ask Palin for the VP pick, Palin should just flip them the bird and run far, far away from that ambush. Can you say “Game Change 2” ?

    Agreed. Any hopeful conservative should just stay away from that pile of poop (West, Rubio, Walker, etc.,). It’s a sure-fire way to kill a career.

    If they think that Jebbie will be the white knight on shining armor, they gotta another think coming. STAY OUT OF THE BUSHES!!!

The GOP will blame the conservatives all day long because we didn’t rally around Willard.

They may also try to blame Newt, which won’t work because we Newt supporters know the Bain attacks were actually true and the “right wing social engineering” attack was taken out of context.

What infuriates me, people believed the lies. I actually believe Newt would have won Florida, but I guess it’s all moot now.

What Romney has to do now, is actually sell himself. All he does in a campaign rally is slogans and platitudes. I don’t know how anyone can buy into that.

I am very, very, concerned that if Mitt is the nominee, we are going to lose. We cannot do that because it will be tyranny for sure, and I don’t think Mitt or his supporters even have a clue about this.

    alwaysfiredup in reply to Scorpio51. | April 4, 2012 at 9:37 pm

    I don’t think there’s much choice at this point. The Washington and New York Republicans threw their hissyfit and got their way, Romney will be the nominee. And yes, he will lose. I don’t really give a crap what they say anymore. They certainly don’t care what I say.

for all the lip-service the candidates paid to supporting the eventual candidate ‘whomever that may be’, there has been far too much invective spouted by gingrich and santorum. airing out differences is one thing but the nasty jabs made, and continuing to be made, by these two cross the line into stabbing their own party in the back.
what is the point of their incessant tearing down of the other candidate in theor party and feeding into this whining about so-called ‘rinos’ and all of that nonsense? isn’t the whole point of this upcoming election to put forth the candidate who is winning the most votes(and delegates) and then getting obama out of office? have all the fears expressed regarding another term of obama’s presidency just been a bunch of hot air or are we serious about winning the whitehouse?
it sickens me to hear republicans say that they would rather sit this election out rather than vote for someone who was not ‘their candidate’ during the primaries or who doesn’t pass their personal, rigid litmus test. come november, there will be two choices: obama and, as is increasingly likely, romney. either the republicans win and we clean out the executive branch of our government of all the socialists/commies/marxists/progressives infesting it or we decide that things are just swell the way they are and let these people have another four years of an un-checked reign to ‘fundamentally change’ our country. there will be no voting ‘present’ in november nor ‘teaching a lesson’ to anybody by foregoing our responsibilty to vote. more than ever, it will come down to us versus them. will we show that we are a serious people or will we not?

    alwaysfiredup in reply to el polacko. | April 4, 2012 at 9:47 pm

    Romney made his bed by being relentlessly negative and misleading on Gingrich and Santorum. It’s karma.

    9thDistrictNeighbor in reply to el polacko. | April 4, 2012 at 10:41 pm

    I’m sorry, but would you kindly use capital letters to begin your sentences?

    I find it odd to see so many people checking the ‘dislike’ on your post. What is this election all about, anyway?

    In my way of thinking, it is about having all the candidates go through the gauntlet of criticism, which is foisted on to each other, and their familiar, during this grueling event called a primary. The so-called ‘winner’ is then considered the strongest, and people marginalize their myriad of differences, circling their wagons around this person.

    What I am still seeing here, though, are continuing pot-shots at the candidate having the organization and tenacity to be garnering most of the delegates. Condemnation and excuses, as to why pet candidates weren’t deemed good enough, continues to languish in peoples’ minds producing the sour grapes denoted here. Thus, the goal of the 2012 general election lapses, preempted by what appears to be human petulance of not getting what you want.

    If Romney is the nominee, despite all the negatives here, and if he wins, it will be because of his ability to attract 50 + percent of the votes, including different fractions of the GOP being able to come together, voting Obama out of office as a common good.

    However, if Romney is defeated, it will be because he is unable to attract 50 + percent of the vote, including different fractions of the GOP who are unable to put aside their piqued preferences, declining to vote for the common good because it isn’t their preferred candidate.

      alwaysfiredup in reply to tsr. | April 4, 2012 at 11:33 pm

      So yet again, if he wins it’s because he’s awesome, and if he loses it’s because of us bitter-clingers.

      Got it.

      SmokeVanThorn in reply to tsr. | April 5, 2012 at 1:35 pm

      I can see why you find Romney attractive – you and he have the same arrogant contempt for those who dare criticize him.

      And I will ask again the question that has gone unanswered for months: what conservative accomplishment can Mitt Romney legitimately claim?

        WoodnWorld in reply to SmokeVanThorn. | April 6, 2012 at 11:23 am

        You have contempt for Romney and his supporters, his supporters have contempt for you. Seems legit to me…

        As far as “the question” is concerned Smoke, give it another month or so and the only “conservative accomplishment” that will really matter is the one that formally confirms Romney sewed this up without your help and in spite of your contempt and derision.

    vladdy in reply to el polacko. | April 12, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    Yeah, the problem is definitely the rigidity of conservatives, along with the nastiness of Santorum and Gingrich against Romney. Damn. The point of getting obama out is a good one — why spoil it with the insults and false narratives? (And surely Romneyites can understand the anger of being insulted, ‘dissed, and blamed for everything this whole election season, only to end up with Romney pused into our faces when we didn’t want him.)

The Romney people are already blaming others for their anticipated loss. On another blog just tonight I read the following from Romney supporters:
–Obama will suspend elections after winning, therefore opponents of Mitt are to blame fr the end of democracy in the US;
–If I don’t support Mitt, then I am voting for Obama;
–Opponents of Mitt are like the voters of Germany who elected Hitler; and my favorite
–people who don’t vote for Mitt are responsible for all of the bad things he will do if elected (because we did not force him to be conservative by voting for him)

Willard is a terrible candidate, with a lot of baggage from his Massachusetts days. Add to that the super negative campaigning, and the result is, I can’t support the guy. period.

Hope Change | April 4, 2012 at 9:43 pm

Professor, you are right as usual. Amen.

Someone with guts needs to step up and produce some political ads for Romney and Republican candidates running for office in November. Someone must sit Romney down –MUST–and get him to commit to being a full fledged participant in the nastiest fight of his life, he’s going to get dirty, and he is going to have to fight. The party cannot permit another gentlemen’s campaign like we got from McCain. Obama’s primary campaign in 2008 produced some atrocious slurs, innuendo, and cheap shots at his opponents; it’s not just Republicans. Obama’s general election campaign included borderline financing and voter criminal activity that was never pursued. Dig them out, run them, over and over. Then, there’s the past three years of Obama, his administration, his policies, the Democrats, the Senate, the 111th Congress, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, a country and a world awash in scandal, mismanagement, fixes, corruption, insider deals, the UN, and the media. If Republicans can’t put together a slew of hard hitting thirty and sixty second spots out of that mother lode of material it should (and may) disappear. It needn’t be cheap, there is an unlimited supply facts to use. The continuously running score of cheap shots by all the candidates during the primary being kept by conservative pundits is long, tiring, and frankly, getting boring. The whole thing has been a little bit like going through boot camp with your mother watching. Romney and his staff should decide before the convention–really decide–if he is up to it. Faint hearted wussies and gentlemen must stay at home for this one.

    Operation Counterweight. We stop talking about the Obama vs Rombama race and focus on electing more Tea Party conservatives to help The Twenty that stood the entire government on its head when the GOP leadership was whining about being “powerless”. Being 1/2 of 1/3 of government is “powerless” yet one tenth of that 1/2 of 1/3 now represents the “radical wing” of the GOP that is obstructing progress(iveness) in America according to the one-party establishment. Something doesn’t square.

    Hope Change in reply to Owego. | April 4, 2012 at 10:38 pm

    Owego, putting the label “bulldog” around the neck of a whippet doesn’t make the whippet a bulldog.

    The problem with Romney is Romney — who Romney is. That’s why the GOPE want him.

    Romney does not have a “message” problem. Romney IS the problem.

No matter how he wants to spin it, Romney cannot convincingly condemn Obamacare with his own Massachusetts Mandate weighing him down. And I imagine Obama will stick with this issue, as it is his administration’s only “success”.

Then there’s Obama’s relentless class warfare to deal with, tagging Romney as the wealthy elitist he truly is.

In Romney’s favor, there are plenty of other avenues for attack, areas where Obama has been proven himself incompetent. I only hope he doesn’t shoot himself in the foot, as he did so many times during that embarrassing series of GOP “debates”.

Although I doubt Romney can defeat the ignorance that put Obama in the White House, he will receive my vote. Romney doesn’t inspire a lot of excitement, but the thought of Obama (possibly) having three more Supreme Court assignments should frighten the bejesus out of anyone stupid enough to even consider giving Obama another term.

    9thDistrictNeighbor in reply to IrateNate. | April 4, 2012 at 10:47 pm

    My impression has been that Mitt wanted to run as the manager who could “do” Obamacare better. If the SCOTUS throws out the law passed in the dark of night, Mitt’s raison d’etre might just vanish before our eyes.

    Still have many months to find the self-contained-breathing-apparatus I will so desperately need to be able to vote; a clothes pin just won’t do it.

    Hope Change in reply to IrateNate. | April 4, 2012 at 10:49 pm

    Yes, it should, IrateNate, which is why all the VERY, VERY SMART people in the GOPE should THINK ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE DOING by pushing Romney this way —

    Because Romney is weak, weak, weak and likely to lose to Obama and will be THEIR FAULT.

    We’re sending the strongest message we know how and these selfish, power-hungry buffoons just keep right on.

    Their selfish desire for the status quo makes them push ANOTHER Dole, McCain, H.W. Bush or worse, and they ALREADY KNOW that Romney is likely to lose.

    They KNOW they’re pushing a LOSER and they’re preparing the narrative for why wasn’t their fault.

    I support Newt because Newt is a mortal threat to the GOPE and these cheating, small-minded, manipulative, wealthy, powerful, obfuscating prevaricators.

NC Mountain Girl | April 4, 2012 at 10:09 pm

If Obama wins again it will be because he has had the incredible luck to run against two people who managed to enter one of the biggest political arenas in the world while possessing minimal skills at connecting with voters- Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney.

I used to say Hillary had all the political instincts of a stone but compared to Romney she’s almost a political genius. As Stu Rothenberg recently noted

“The bottom line, of course, is that nobody — not his critics and not his allies — really believes Mitt Romney.”

http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.com/news/article/mitt-romneys-weakness-is-also-strength-or-is-it

I have come to see that in statewide and national races the key is not where a candidate falls on any particular issue but whether or not voters trust that candidate to try and do the right thing. Lack of trust in both candidates equals low turnout, a situation made to order for the Democrats and their tendencies towards ballot box hanky panky.

    Hope Change in reply to NC Mountain Girl. | April 4, 2012 at 11:14 pm

    NC Mountain Girl – love your screen name, btw. It feels like clean, fresh air and beauty.

    You said — “… the key is not where a candidate falls on any particular issue but whether or not voters trust that candidate to try and do the right thing.”

    Yes. I so agree. That’s the key. A person can say anything. But who ARE they? What will they do when the unexpected happens? Will they try to do the right thing — that’s the key.

      NC Mountain Girl in reply to Hope Change. | April 5, 2012 at 12:24 am

      Trust almost always trumps the issues. Three examples are how the state of my birth voted first for Paul Wellstone and then for Rod Grams for the US Senate. Consider also how Illinois where I lived for many years elected both Dick Durbin and Peter Fitzgerald to the US Senate. Today as a resident of far western North Carolina my two Senators are Richard Burr and Kay Hagen. If stands on the issues were all that mattered you’d never see such odd couples in the Senate delegations.

I absolutely agree the short-sighted strategy will hurt in the long run. Note to the Romney campaign: It’s not just judges that have long memories. Even if Romney becomes the GOP candidate and wins in November, how much trust of the electorate has he squandered?

Sadly, this reminds me of the interview he had with Chris Wallace, and was absolutely clueless that he might have done anything wrong when he strapped his dog to the top of his car, and had his luggage in the station wagon. I think he insisted the dog was in an air tight kennel.

Seriously Mitt? Then why didn’t the dog suffocate over a 12 hour trip? And if it didn’t bother the dog, why did your boys have to tell you there was a problem? Why was your solution to stop at a gas station only long enough to borrow a hose to clean the mess on your car? What kind of ads is PETA already preparing for the fall?

On the other hand, Newt’s daughters tell a story of him as a child jumping in a frozen river to save his beloved dog. The dog got out of the river before Newt. He apparently says the lesson he learned was not to panic (when his head was under the ice). His daughters said they learned how much he loved animals.

Which one do I trust more as president? No contest.

    Hope Change in reply to EmmasMom. | April 4, 2012 at 11:00 pm

    EmmasMom — He had room for luggage in the car? Do we know this for sure? Luggage IN the car, DOG outside the car?

    If this is true, it won’t be just PETA.

      EmmasMom in reply to Hope Change. | April 4, 2012 at 11:57 pm

      Hi Hope Change,

      Just looked at the older news stories and I can’t confirm the luggage was inside the car. Some authors suggest it was, but I don’t know if anyone knows for sure. There is no indication in the articles I saw that the luggage was also attached to the luggage rack, only mention is made of the dog carrier and an improvised “windshield” for the dog carrier.

      It appear as though the major source for the original story was one of Romney’s sons who was reportedly 13 during the trip.

      My apologies.

      There is now a Super PAC “Animal Lovers Against Romney.”

      http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/03/seamus-inspires-new-antimitt-super-pac-118979.html

    9thDistrictNeighbor in reply to EmmasMom. | April 4, 2012 at 11:05 pm

    Then they trotted out a story about Mitt and a son using jet skis to get some people whose boat took on water in New Hampshire. I just think of the image of John Kerry windsurfing….

    Never underestimate the impact the story about the dog on the roof will have; Dukakis in a tank pales in comparison. A Facebook group “Dogs against Romney” already has 44,000+ likes. http://www.dogsagainstromney.com/

TeaPartyPatriot4ever | April 4, 2012 at 11:05 pm

Here’s a question for the Republican Obama- Mr Romney, and more so to the Republican electorate-

How does one defend forced mandated substandard inferior State Socialized Medicine that bankrupts the residents, citizens, and Independent businesses and companies in the Free Market Capitalist Free Enterprise system of a State, let alone the Nation, but then turns around and argues that he must repeal Obamacare, the very same thing he implemented and refuses to refute and repeal in his own State called Romneycare..  

And people actually buy this BS horse manure..  It’s no wonder why Obama was elected in the first place. How easily the people are fooled..

The people who voted for Obama, are the same people with the same mentality and attitude of apathy and indifference to what and who they are electing, are the same people voting for Romney, which is what got them into this mess in the first place.

They want to replace one radical progressive liberal, with a moderate progressive liberal.. Well, that makes sense.. No it doesn’t..
 
Just because someone is deemed electable by the media and the GOP RINO establishment, does mean they are the best person to lead our Nation. Thus also why Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan have done a great disservice to the Tea Party Constitutional Reagan Conservatives, and Conservatism itself.
 
In other words, how and where do we get to a point that abandoning our Principles for political electable convenience, is best for the Nation.. It is NOT, and is why we stand by the US Constitution, and NOT by the politicians, as Freedom and Liberty are forever, not these fraudulent politically electable politicians.

What this means is that with the election of Romney, there will be no real change from the liberal agenda, only the person at the helm will be different, but the direction will be the same. Like Liberals Jews who actually are defeating their own race, religion, and State of Nation Israel, intentionally or unintentionally, for some perverse Freudian Psychological reason to be accepted by their enemies, the Republican electorate, aka so called moderate Republicans, as well as Independents, are choosing the same path as Obama, but because the person has an “R” next to their name, believe that they are the opposite of Obama and the Democratic Party of Progressive Liberalism. How truly wrong and stupid they are, as they drive the Constitutional Freedom and Liberty car straight off the cliff.

This is why Conservatives are not necessarily Republicans, and Republicans are not necessarily Conservatives.

    Hope Change in reply to TeaPartyPatriot4ever. | April 4, 2012 at 11:24 pm

    TeaPartyPatriot4ever – I absolutely agree that Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio have done a terrible disservice to our nation by succumbing to the GOPE machine. What were they promised?

    As Newt has said, he’ll defeat Obama — that’s not the hard part — it’s getting past the GOPE!

    Hope Change in reply to Kevin Forrester. | April 4, 2012 at 11:59 pm

    Oh yes, Rich Lowry, one of the three unsigned “editors” at NRO who did the unbalanced, amateurish hit piece on Newt in December, when Newt was some 20 points ahead?

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/23/inside-game/

    Matt Lewis (and the News) at the Daily Caller wrote about it:

    “Long-time supporters of National Review, the venerable conservative publication founded by the late William F. Buckley, have grown increasingly worried the outlet is becoming the house organ of the Republican establishment. This has been a long time coming, but concerns — expressed both publicly and privately — reached a fever pitch when the magazine surprised even close NR insiders by publishing what can only be described as an unusual editorial.

    Officially titled ”Winnowing the Field” (the headline on National Review Online’s front page was simply: “Against Gingrich”), the December 14 editorial bashed former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, but stopped short of explicitly endorsing Mitt Romney (as the magazine did in 2008). It sparked an immediate backlash from observers — some of whom are closely connected to the magazine.”

    Yes, and one of whom, at least, is gone from this mortal coil and not able to tell Rich Lowry what he thinks of him.

    The whole thing is well worth reading.

      The article that I posted is an example of “a support-generating tactic other than derision this primary season”. Do you have a comment on the article I posted?

      (Yes, I read your Daily Caller article and, yes, I recall the National Review article to which it refers, and I remember thinking at the time that it was a little over the top, but I guess I’ve gotten over it.)

A profound post, thank you professor.

Here’s a new shovelful in your face. Romney panders to liberal journo audience by lamenting lack of editorial control in new media. Because the old media does it so well, you well.

“GOP candidate Mitt Romney was taking on new media (blogs and Twitter) for its lack of “quality control” in front of the liberal-leaning NAA/American Society of Newspaper Editors.”

http://twitchy.com/2012/04/05/romney-slams-new-media-at-liberal-journo-event-conservative-new-media-slams-back/

“But I do know this: You will continue to find ways to provide the American people with reliable information that is vital to our lives and to our nation.”

What a buffoon.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to raven. | April 5, 2012 at 8:46 am

    Funny about Romney complaining about the media – since he owns a chunk of it. Not as much as Soros, maybe.

    Romney’s Bain owns Clear Channel/Premier to which even Hannity, Rush, Drudge are connected.

    Beck is a Mormon – so connected with Romney. Beck was in debt starting his GBTV, but since the election began has suddenly ‘come into big cash money’ and bought a huge studio complex in TX, furnished it with the best equipment and loads of antiques.

    We’ve seen the media from Townhall to Coulter to National Review kiss Romney’s back side for no real reason. He was even invited to speak at CPAC despite his liberalism – which made an invitation to address CPAC as worthless as a Nobel Prize.

    Romney has cost CPAC, Coulter, Drudge and a whole lot of Republicans their credibility.

Richard Blaine | April 5, 2012 at 4:02 am

Romney is McCain lite. There are no serious Republican candidates because the Republicans don’t want to win. They like being the out-of-power party. All the perks and none of the responsibility. The GOP must die in order for a real conservative party to rise.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Richard Blaine. | April 5, 2012 at 8:37 am

    Romney is the Republican lie…not McCain lite.

    Candidates are a symptom of the party and the culture.

    Newt is the serious candidate with the serious solutions, who has been willing to tell the truth, put truth to lie.

    He as challenged every PC lie that has been fomented by the media and agenda groups over the last half century…from abortion to global warming.

    He has shown he is willing to tackle even the biggest wrongs (the FED, currency manipulations) and meanest wrongdoers, Islam, Big Labor, Big Politics, Big Oil, etc.

    Sarah Palin did the same at the state level with the crooks running Alaska and Oil.

    It would be a great joy to see them both do what they do best, starting in 2013.

    My advice to Ryan and Rubio – jump ship – Now!
    Get over Romney, the crook and liar.
    Get over the Bushes, the Clintons and Obama.
    Get over the RNC.
    They are death itself.

[…] I think it will be because of himself… […]

I honestly don’t remember ever feeling that previously the supporters of the eventual candidate took the route of guilting me into voting for their choice rather than selling me on why I should vote for him.

I recall months of people telling me that I should throw Palin under that bus because ” people wouldn’t support her, she only appealed to her core base, she’d divide the party, etc.” I have to wonder why the Romney supporters can’t imagine that people may feel the same way about their choice.

It’s been pretty clear from the beginning of the campaign that Romney didn’t appeal to many conservatives. But his money and the constant drum beat of attacks from the GOP center hs worn down the others.
Money for ads will do that.

But now that he’s looking like the “last man standing” the people who have ignored his lack of support from the Conservatives have dragged out the “IF HE LOSES IT WILL BE YOUR FAULT, NEWT’S FAULT FOR TALKING NASTY, SANTORUM’S FAULT FOR NOTDROPPING OUT, THE CONSERVATIVES FAULT FOR NOT SINGING HOSANNAS ABOUT HIM. Apparently the concept that he was not the good candidate, not he candidate the majority of the voters wanted will just not occur to the Romneybots.

And another well used line from the Rombots “conservatives are bigots.”

Sure makes the Professors case that it will be Romney supporters that cause his downfall.

If Romney becomes the choice for the 2012 GOP, then I will have no problem voting for him. Don’t like him, but as the saying goes, Anyone But obama. The only problem or concern I have is that Ron Paul will break off and run as a libertarian. This tactic will surely split the vote, giving obama another 4 years for completing his plans for the destruction of the United States.

[…] I mostly don’t agree with what Gingrich supporter William Jacobson writes, he does make one point that is spot-on [tip of the fedora to the Evil Blogger Lady]: Romney has embittered a large segment of the people […]

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend