Is Michigan Mitt’s last stand?
posted at 10:01 am on January 9, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
That’s the buzz this morning but for once Hewitt’s spin is closer to the truth. As Ambinder notes, Romney’s got a devil’s triangle shaping up against him in Michigan: Huck will pull the evangelical social cons, McCain will pull the hawks and the independents (who get to skip the Democratic race because Obama’s not on the ballot), which leaves Mitt with the Fredhead “true conservative” vote. Are there enough of those in Michigan to win? I’m skeptical, but the numbers are amazingly close: If you can believe it, except for one typically crappy ARG outlier poll from September, no GOP candidate has exceeded so much as 30 percent since February. No one’s got even as much as 20 percent in the RCP average, and of the last four polls taken, no one’s topped 21 percent — with each of the big three winning at least one of those polls.
So if Mitt craters, he’s out, right? No, for reasons best explained by this short but shrewd John Ellis column. So long as there are two or more anti-Hucks competing in any primary, they split the vote and give Huckabee a fighting chance to win and build momentum. With his money and organization, Romney may hang on until Super Ultra Mega Tuesday in the hope that he’ll be the only anti-Huck left standing and the base will have no choice but to line up behind him. The problem is that Giuliani’s likely to be left standing too; like Ellis says, Huck may actually want to lose to Rudy in Florida simply to guarantee his participation on Big Tuesday. If all three are still in it come Florida, the pressure on the third-place finisher to get out and make Tuesday a head-to-head to simplify things for anti-Huck voters will be tremendous.
Needless to say, if McCain and Rudy crumble in Florida and we really are left with serial loser Mitt as the Great Hope, it’s going to be an historic fiasco. Exit question: Assuming Mitt does get out, who does he endorse? Huck and McCain seem to hate him and he’s tangled with Rudy in somewhat nasty ways at the debates. He ain’t throwing his endorsement away on ol’ Fred either. Would he politely decline to endorse anyone? Or does he make a deal with the frontrunner for some kind of cabinet position?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
As a lifelong (except grad school) Michigan resident and politico, I’m confident in saying that McCain or Huckabee will win Michigan, and Mitt will keep on flip-flopping to the next state. I’ll be posting my analysis on Michigan on my site, later today.
Debbie Schlussel on January 9, 2008 at 11:49 AM
right2bright,
Actually, it was 74,439 votes. http://ronrox.com/paulstats.php
You don’t seem to be any better at accurate numbers than you are with accurate quotes.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/07/video-mitt-makes-his-case-to-new-hampshire/
EyeSurgeon on January 9, 2008 at 11:50 AM
RobTN on January 9, 2008 at 11:50 AM
DS,
Even Maha’Rushbo knows better than to predict elections with such confidence.
Rush is a master at intuitive and experienced intelligence, and not so much an election pundit.
I guess election pundits haven’t learned from last night, so since I have nothing to lose from making confident election predictions, I predict that your reputation as an election pundit is going down the tubes.
My respect for your tenacity in pointing out the other candidate’s judgment notwithstanding, my respect for your prediction is absolutely zilch.
I don’t think you know jack.
Mcguyver on January 9, 2008 at 12:17 PM
I keep wondering how Mitt is at his end here…
He’s stayed in a consistent 2nd place, and has won more delegates than anyone else, so isn’t he really in 1st place when all is said and done?
Mitt: 24 Delegates
Huck: 18 Delegates
McCain: 10 Delegates
I’m not even a Mitt supporter (wish Fred wasn’t a cadaver), but from what I’ve seen Mitt’s the only one who’s been able to be consistently high without severely trailing in one state or another so far, once all is said and done.
-yok
yokumo on January 9, 2008 at 12:18 PM
I am a Fredhead (and a Christian), and I would much rather see Mitt succeed than Baptist Huckabee. Huckabee is a prolife liberal. He is Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton meshed into one IMO. I do believe that Fred is the most conservative and is the best person to lead our country at this time. He is strong on all three legs of the conservative “stool” — fiscal conservatism, national security conservatism and social conservatism. I wouldn’t mind seeing a Thompson/Romney ticket at all. Those two are the only ones who are running on all three aspects of conservatism… And 4-8 years of working with Fred would give Mitt the conservative bonafides that would make him unstoppable. I think it would be a win/win for everyone.
We need a strong conservative ticket. I will be absolutely crestfallen if we have to choose from a liberal republican and a liberal dem. I just wish Huckabee had never taken off like he has. That has really turned this race upside down.
As far as religions go, Mcguyver, why is everyone so focused on Romney’s mormonism when Obama never gets questioned about his radical church? THAT annoys me to no end.
squeek71 on January 9, 2008 at 12:19 PM
Why wouldn’t he endorse Huckabee?
Isn’t this question asking if “not voting for a mormon candidate for precisely that reason” is biased or not?
In that case, yes I believe that would be biased.
But pointing out that “Mormons” are not “Christians” because they don’t believe the same thing is not biased (or bigotry, As Mitt once implied), it is stating facts. But using that difference to disqualify Mitt would be wrong, as stated above. Just as using deception (ie. leaving certian inconvienient facts out when comparing the faiths) to try to confuse the electorate that they are the same is also wrong.
BTW, I could vote for Mitt against “christians” like Obama (UCC) and Hillary (Baptist?) because his values derived from his faith more closely resemble my values derived from my faith, even though the faiths are different.
AverageJoe on January 9, 2008 at 12:20 PM
If Fred livened up and teamed with Mitt, we’d prolly have a pretty strong ticket I’d say. That’d be a fun one.
yokumo on January 9, 2008 at 12:24 PM
Mitt is in it for the long haul. He doesn’t even need to think about endorsing anyone. Also, he stand a VERY good chance at winning in a general. I’m not sure why anyone would even suggest that he wouldn’t. He would eat Hillary or Obama alive in a debate.
davenp35 on January 9, 2008 at 12:41 PM
I wasn’t real keen on Mitt at first, but the more I see him the more I like him. I think he’s a for real “convert” to conservativism and he understands the economy. I think he’ll protect us and choose good, quality advisors.
GO MITT!!
Eclectic on January 9, 2008 at 12:42 PM
How so?
May I infer from your “flip-flopping” remark that you are hopelessly devoted to Fred?
The only other alternative is Rudy, who you may like for his willingness to remain on offense against Jihadis, but can’t he be accused of flip-flopping too?
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 12:43 PM
BTW DS.
Facts are annoying to election pundits aren’t they?
“most ardent advocate of the war—attracts the votes of those who oppose it”
Why is this, in independent NH no less?
I can tell you my friends.
People as indicated amidst the Obama surge, truly do not want to vote-in the “old guard”.
The pundits “say” Mitt flip flops but the electorate knows McCain is not to be trusted and will cave in to the libs, visa vi his support for banning water boarding.
Again, any questions that the electorate can see through bullshit?
Mcguyver on January 9, 2008 at 12:43 PM
Why does that automatically make one a Fred supporter? Is it because Fred doesn’t? Or do you just assume that any criticism of Mitt comes from Fred supporters and only Fred supporters?
And do your homework before making such a silly observation.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 12:47 PM
I’m sorry DS is up first for the Fredhead detoxification program.
My bad.
To show just how intoxicating the Fredhead koolaide is, remember DS slamming Fred for his judgment on Spencer Abraham?
Enough said.
[Dialing Dr. Phil]
“Yes ahh.. Dr. Phil we have a real big problem over here at HA”.
What’s that?
“Well is seems some have been drinking law and order koolaide.”
Yeah.
“Yes. What can we do?”
In what country are the victims?
“Ahhh.. good question. I don’t remember how to pronounce it… it’s.. it’s aahhh… gosh darn it.”
Mcguyver on January 9, 2008 at 12:54 PM
the reason for those reminders is that many of you have been writing Mitt’s epitaph while he leads in delegates. As long as he is leading in delegates, why get out?
You Fredheads should understand that since your incessant claims how Fred is going to get the nomination and he hasn’t even placed 2nd in an event, he has no money, and he is third in delegates. A very weak third at that.
So please spare us the political punditry that dooms other candidates who are in way better shape than Fred.
csdeven on January 9, 2008 at 1:25 PM
Clearly there are a lot of Idgits out there. I heard that McCain beat Romney on handling the economy.
Could you let DS respond for herself?
My point had to do with what I took to be a dismissive remark about three candidates in contention in Michigan, and the use of the hackneyed phrase “flip flopper”. Or perhaps I misunderstood and she likes McCain? He never flip flops after all, and still refuses to back the Bush tax cuts.
I’d like to see a moratorium on that phrase “flip flop” and proceed to a more productive discussions, such as how we can achieve the ultimate goal of defeating the Dems.
I’d like to throw “man-crush” in there also.
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 1:38 PM
Apparently DS doesn’t like Fred either. And he’s a flip flopper too on McCain-Feingold. There are a whole lot of flip-floppers out there except McCain who is intransigent to the end.
Once in awhile he gets it right, admirably so with the War in Iraq, but sticking to positions is overrated. It is worrisome when candidates do things like change positions during the same debate, or rewrite history to pretend they took a position they actually didn’t.
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 1:46 PM
Come on Mitt! Just get up there on stage and cry like a little girl! You’ll take the primary in a landslide!
pilamaye on January 9, 2008 at 1:51 PM
Do you prefer Hillary or Obama? I ask because this sort of juvenile comment does nothing but help their candidacies in the long run.
It also does not accurately convey how Mitt handled the results of the NH primary.
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 2:05 PM
What’s up with this?
Mitt not re-upping his S.C. and Fla. TV time
bnelson44 on January 9, 2008 at 2:09 PM
Go re-read my post. I did nothing of the sort. I don’t know how badly Mitt’s showing in IA and NH will affect his candidacy any more than you or anyone else does. However there’s little question that he was hurt to some degree by not winning either one.
Hollowpoint on January 9, 2008 at 2:11 PM
Mitt thowing the towel in Florida according to Politico. Here comes the Rudy surge!!! lol Mitt is falling apart!
froghat on January 9, 2008 at 2:15 PM
they’re going to focus on earned media. Also known as free media.
That’s smart.
Mcguyver on January 9, 2008 at 2:16 PM
If Mitt get the Repub nomination he wil lose. The guy has no chemistry unless you belong to his country club.
georgealbert on January 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM
I’m not sure, but I think it may have something to do with this:
Super Tuesday is where it’s at when it comes to numbers.
This is a good website to track delegate counts.
Here is a another useful link from the same source.
I haven’t had a chance to examine the minutiae of what terms like “hard” and “soft” delegates mean…
/later.
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM
Mcguyver, why didn’t he use that strategy in Iowa and NH instead of spending 20 million dollars and losing? lol
froghat on January 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM
Question: Who is leading in the Delegate race right now?
Answer: Mitt Romney
Question: Who is the most endorsed, best financed presidential candidate on the republican side?
Answer: Mitt Romney
Question: Why does the title of this article sound so ridiculous?
Answer: Because it is not backed by fact or logic.
Rightly, things have not gone as well for Romney as he had hoped, however, he is currenetly “winning” the race to the nomination. There is no reason to think that his team can not tweak the few problems they have had, and get this tank rolling on again and over the competition again.
paulsur on January 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM
Are you saying he’s skipping SC and FLA? But his strategy from the get go was to build momentum for super Tuesday by winning the early states. How does he build momentum if he skips states?
bnelson44 on January 9, 2008 at 2:21 PM
OMG, I’m so sick of the phrase flip flopper….all politicans can be proved to be flip floppers for heavens sake. Lets move on Debbie and others, this moniker is really only becoming a sign of someone’s intellectual laziness.
I’m a Mitt girl until the end and even then I think he should run as an Independent. I’ll happily leave the GOP for him (actually I’m going to anyway if Huck gets any part of the GOP nod Prez or VP). I’m so sick of the GOP and the state it’s in, we’ve been completely infested with pastors and their flock.
With Huckabee, we are seeing a re-run of what happened when pastors “got out the vote” for Mel Gibson’s The Passion. This grassroots effort is going to get us either the GOP’s first Jimmy Carter or John McCain which is going to look Bob Dole redux.
Plus I just don’t like that every sterotype about the GOP being the party of grumpy old white men and overly religious zealots to come to fruition. Sorry I’m not staying around to see every far left Daily Kos/Huffington Post/Media Matter group thinkers biased about my party come true.
sheryl on January 9, 2008 at 2:21 PM
Percent of delegates needed to win:
You do know that is only a 1% difference, right?
bnelson44 on January 9, 2008 at 2:24 PM
so he paid, $116.87 per vote…
I’m Mitt Romney I’ll give you $116.87 of my own money to vote for me.
(was that a bribe?) LOL
Chakra Hammer on January 9, 2008 at 2:26 PM
You do know he is a multi-billionare. He can aford it.
bnelson44 on January 9, 2008 at 2:31 PM
Mitt’s biggest problem is that he is not anyone’s second choice and Fred’s greatest asset, if he can survive, is that he is. If Mitt or McCain or Huckabee dropped out where do you think their supporters would end up? Most likely with Fred.
You Rombots out there need to realize that Mitt is not going to win and that your man is the reason McCain and Huckabee are so strong.
Bill C on January 9, 2008 at 2:33 PM
If Huckabee or McCain become the GOP nominee, it will be due to Fred Thompson.
Had Fred either stayed out of the race or fully gotten IN the race, neither of these men would be sitting where they are today.
EJDolbow on January 9, 2008 at 2:34 PM
I’m sure it’s because of
dumb little shitsHuckabee campaigners implanted into Romney’s camp like you, giving Romney wrong advice.Mcguyver on January 9, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Didn’t McCain advocate a comprehensive immigration reform as the only way to do it. Now he says we have to secure the borders first. Of course, he’s saying he “learned his lesson.” When every one else changes their position it’s a flip-flop? Come on.
Spolitics on January 9, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Mitt is Winning with 24 delegates.
What place and how many delegates does your candidate have?
paulsur on January 9, 2008 at 2:45 PM
With all due respect, no. If you’re so opposed to it that you don’t want to hear it, it’s that your candidate has a problem with it, and it will be heard a lot more if they make it to the general.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 2:54 PM
He’s claiming he never supported amnesty. Technically, that’s not a flip-flop, it’s an outright lie, but I figure we might as well accept it.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Mitt is 1,167 delegates short of the win.
Hollowpoint on January 9, 2008 at 2:57 PM
so it was only 100 bucks a vote, add the other 100 mil and it is what per vote? So he has how many 8 probable delegate votes, and he has spent $160 mil (you will tell me it is only $147,500,487), so what is that per delegate? $20 mil per delegate? Let me see, at 2,488 delegates and 20 mil per, thats close to $6 billion (1964 cost for both parties–1.2 billion). Gee, you sure won that debate.
Oh yeah, that’s a good deal (sorry about dropping the 0).
Aren’t you the guy who argued when I said “Joseph Smith” and you came back and said I was wrong because the quote was actually “he” (and it was written by Smith). Are you going to be one of those guys, “it”, “saw”, “with”…outspending his opponents by 20,,,no no only 18%. Get the point, he is buying votes…
So I guess it depends on what you think a vote is worth? $100 or $1,000 or $10,000? Either way, he has outspent his rivals by, you name it, 5, 10, 20,times?
If he was such a great leader, don’t you think some would have caught on by now…
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 3:04 PM
It’s a MITTALANCHE! ™
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 3:09 PM
(and for you EyeSurgeon on January 9, 2008 at 11:50 AM)
I know the 8 was for Wyoming only…jerking your chain…so you will say…you are wrong he has 24 (or so)… so it will only be $3 billion…what a bargain.
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 3:09 PM
georgealbert,
He must belong to a very large country club, if it has 74,439 members in New Hampshire.
If you’re referring obliquely to the Mormons in New Hampshire, there are 8,034:
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/contact-us/usa-new-hampshire
Even if every Mormon in the state were of voting age (unlikely), Republican or Independent (somewhat more likely), and voted for him (possibly), that still leaves 66,405 votes. It seems he must have some chemistry outside his “country club”–whichever definition you choose.
EyeSurgeon on January 9, 2008 at 3:09 PM
I think it’s time the Fredheads line up behind someone new so we can be sure the Huckster doesnt get the nod.
The Hayekian on January 9, 2008 at 3:22 PM
It’s because it is an empty, “intellectually lazy” phrase*. Every.single.candidate.is.a.flip flopper! Every one of them have changed positions on issues at one time or another.
Romney can handle this in the general. His opponents will have flip flopped too!
By the way, since DS is in tune with what’s going on on the ground in Michigan, I hope she will report back if Mitt actually changes a position on something while he’s there. Strategy adjustments don’t count.
*hat tip sheryl on January 9, 2008 at 2:21 PM
Wrong on the facts. Why do you care so much, anyway? Did he not work hard enough for you? This class-envy/money is eeeevil business is unbecoming to conservatives.
He is adjusting his strategy.. Let me guess! That makes him a flip flopper! Maybe it would be better if he just plodded on with a losing strategy?
Thanks for proving my point. He did not change his position when the entire country (and most of his party) was up in arms opposing it As I recall (I may be wrong on this but don’t think so) they tried to keep the details of the bill under wraps and push it through in the dead of night.. Is it better to be intransigent, or is it better to re-evaluate one’s position on issues from time to time?
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 3:25 PM
I’ve always maintained that if it really came down to it, I’d vote for Romney in the general. I think most Fredheads would too, especially considering Tanc’s endorsement. There’s reason to believe he knows more than we do.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Beats your guy, dude!
No comment :-)
And don’t forget Sheriff Joe endorsed Romney also.
If you all keep yapping about how much money Mitt has spent, muttering about his hair, and so forth y’all just might end up with Huck to vote for.
Huck was a po boy who doesn’t have much hair. Is that a reason to vote against him?
Time for an intellectually industrious argument.
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 3:36 PM
right2bright,
Jerk away!
EyeSurgeon on January 9, 2008 at 3:37 PM
Nobody is this stupid…Romney is closing in on spending $200 mill on a this race, and the real race hasn’t started. No one has ever spent more money then Romney…no one at this point in the game. Why did he spend that money? to get votes…get it? That is the proof, he has spent record money for your (generic) vote. Stop with the accusations, what a foolish statement…don’t try to play the “gotcha” card with me, and don’t you think Vanceone can speak for himself?
You sat on the bench of the debate team, right?
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 3:38 PM
Let’s not call this horse race as we head into the first turn. Lots of time left. Mitt’s dad was Governor of Michigan, and Mitt is the top candidate when it comes to financial experience. If he talks economy with the confidence he has on the subject he will do well.
This ain’t over by any means. I’m sticking to Mitt vs. Hillary as my prediction.
cannonball on January 9, 2008 at 3:40 PM
Now is that jerk away or jerk a way…you see it makes a difference to people like you.
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 3:43 PM
r2b,
Jerk…away!
EyeSurgeon on January 9, 2008 at 3:47 PM
This makes no sense. How is Mitt any more of a “serial loser” than the others? Mitt leads in delegates, and he ranks somewhere between first & second in the latest RCP national poll average. Don’t hate him just because he’s a Mormon with great hair who dares to take his opponents to task on the basis of their publicly-verifiable records! Sheeesh! Cut the man some slack. He has run a consistent and civil campaign. He’s highly qualified. He is better than most at facing the issues. He supports the troops as well as their current CiC. He “gets” the illegal immigration issue. He is as fiscally conservative as anyone in the field. He’s a good family man. His morals are not known or suspected of being any less than respectable. He’s in the prime of his life. I mean, what the HELL do you
steel-clawed harpies people want?argos on January 9, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Mitt needs to run the Asian Tiger ad in Michigan. This won Luntz’s focus groups.
Are you sure about that?
As for your “debating skills”, what is there about yours that we should be admiring exactly?
csdeven just eliminated you from the competition with a K.O. punch.
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 3:53 PM
I think it’s time the Mittbots stop making this stupid demand. Fred most likely wouldn’t even be running if not for the lack of acceptably conservative candidates- Mitt included.
Hollowpoint on January 9, 2008 at 3:55 PM
I cited the same paragraph. Allah is not partisan and doesn’t shill for any candidate, but I don’t understand that reasoning either.
Awwwwww. How sweet of him. If you’re right though, this could explain why his heart doesn’t seem to be in it.
I look forward to tomorrow night’s debates. Fred better aim his fire at Huck if he wants to make any headway in SC.
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 4:03 PM
1) He closed his office to look for his partners daughter…who had gone to a rock concert and was staying with a friend. Next time call some friends, and don’t make a campaign out of finding a spoiled brat.
2)Most of the big donors were his clients, and became his clients (and are contributors now)…some sacrifice
3)He served in France, so he didn’t have to fight in Vietnam. The Mormon church set up a deal with the selective service not to draft missionary’s during the Vietnam war.
4)He probably is a fantastic father and husband…like about 25 million other men.
5)He kept his promises, because he changed his positions…or this, instead of raising taxes he raised “fees”. He has a way with words, doesn’t he…no taxes, just fees. And did he promise he was not a conservative? Then I guess he kept that promise also, anyway he stated that to Teddy in a debate. I am no Reagan conservative as he cowered before Teddy.
And here is one more promise he kept…I will not help elect any Republican to an office in Mass.
Oh, wait, that wasn’t a promise, it just came naturally.
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Fred probably wouldn’t be running if it wern’t for his trophy wife’s insistence on being first lady.
All Fred does is serve up red meat to the base, but he demands you come to the table he has set up in the bed of his red pick-up truck as he moves away from you at a steadily increasing rate.
Man can’t even read the ballot rules. He’s a joke.
As to being perpetually second, the difference is that Romney aims for 1st and has thus far succeeded once and caught the second rung twice, while Fred jumps for 3rd in most places and is now considering lowering his expectations on his supposed stronghold state from 1st to 2nd.
Jog, Fred, Jog! (Because running is apparently too difficult)
BKennedy on January 9, 2008 at 4:05 PM
I’m so glad you were so geographically centered twenty years ago. Gotta keep that California riff-raff like Reagan out, doncha’ know? Get a nice Southern boy like Carter.
BKennedy on January 9, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Maybe I’m missing something here… Fred hasn’t won anything, Romney’s won Wyoming (which you completely ignored), and you are wondering whether Romney will pull out and back Fred?
Maybe it’s time to stop acting like a Blame-Bush liberal and actually listen to Hue Hewitt some time.
Dr B on January 9, 2008 at 4:08 PM
Total Vote Totals So Far:
NOT COUNTING WYOMING (ROMNEY WON 8 DELEGATES, FRED WON 3)
Mitt Romney: 103,755
John McCain: 102,361
Mike Huckabee: 66,876
Yeah, and Mitt should drop out…..
malan89 on January 9, 2008 at 4:15 PM
Right back at ya.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 4:16 PM
Nice job of slander. You stay classy.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 4:17 PM
WTF?
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 4:18 PM
You’re new I assume so I’ll explain right2bright for you.
Wonderful person, really top notch.
Until r2b starts talking about Romney.
Between echoing class warfare arguments that could have come from Huckabee (like Daddy bought Mitt everything), accusing Mitt of dodging the draft because he had a high draft number and went on a religious mission (on which she claims Mitt was boozing around living a Parisian high life, despite the fact he was in a completely different area of France, likely slummy, and Mormons are prohibited from drinking), and in general making veiled attacks on Mormonism, r2b is not someone you should give much weight to in a discussion on Romney. The RDS is strong with this one.
BKennedy on January 9, 2008 at 4:20 PM
Give it up, man. Some people, like csdeven, discuss Fred.
BKennedy HATES him. With a passion. Partly because he’s from the south, partly because he doesn’t exude that metropolitan class that BKennedy prides himself and his boy Mitt on, and partly other reasons I won’t go into.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 4:21 PM
Hey, Fred’s the one who called her that, not me. Blame him.
Oh, you mean he was snarking the media when he said that? The media he constantly whines about not giving him enough attention? I wonder why that would be…
BKennedy on January 9, 2008 at 4:23 PM
And you’re calling Fred an idiot and claiming he’s in the race because of his wife. That about makes you FDS^10.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 4:23 PM
You can call her a trophy wife all you like. You making the assertion that he’s running because she’s got delusions of grandeur is despicable.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 4:24 PM
Honey, you have been stalking me for months…please do not respond to me.
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 4:25 PM
You too? And doriangrey?
Awww…we’re all just paranoid, like she says.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Yeah, but I love to hear them bark…they are so easy to train.
CSDeven, months ago…Fred put his kid on the payroll, Fred rented a red truck…he is disgusting.
Now:
Mitt: Buys an RV for his 5 kids to drive across country to campaign, and puts them on the payroll…not a peep from CSDeven.
For months we heard…Fred rented a red truck, Fred rented a red truck…last laugh is what they call it, or Karma.
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Actually Fred is my second choice, but don’t let the facts confuse you. I don’t like Fred right now because he’s incompetent, as can clearly be shown by his failure to get enough signatures for the Delaware primary, I don’t like Fred because he’s got a lot of white papers but no battle scars fighting for the contents of them, and I don’t like Fred because he constantly lowers his expectations.
If Fred: 1. Got his ground act together. 2. Spent more time telling us about how he fought for what’s in his white papers than directing us to read them. 3. Stopped saying “We’re shooting for #3! We’re shooting for #2!” and focused on exuding the American spirit of optimism and victory. I’d probably vote for him over Romney.
As it stands though, he’s not willing to check ballot rules to enter a primary, he’s more interested in giving sermons then delivering a single solid, concise message at a time, and he’s exuding an aura of mediocrity.
Fred is going to kick terrorist ass? Yeah, cause he’s been soooo busy wiping the floor with Maverick, Manic Minister, Rudy Tooty, and Mr. Clean.
I guess taking a nap on the trail is kind of an action, but it doesn’t inspire confidence.
BKennedy on January 9, 2008 at 4:30 PM
I seriously doubt that Mitt would accept a cabinet post. He is a leader, not a support staff kind of guy. The notion of him being in the cabinet of a McCain or a Huck presidency seems absurd to me. Not that any of the pretend-a-republicans have a chance in hell in the general anyway.
Dude has too much going for him…unlike most of those flubbers, he doesnt need politics to validate his ego. He will have opportunities in the real world….or the LDS church will call him to be an apostle which would be cool too.
Roger Waters on January 9, 2008 at 4:34 PM
Do you really want to go there?
r2b is bragging about his debating skills. It is farcical, and he opened the door very wide for a response.
By the way, did you notice that r2b said WTF? Time for a reprimand!
You may want to drop that line of argument.
I’m not defending Bkennedy here (au contraire) but why is it okay to claim a candidate is running just because they are “rich and ego-driven” to paraphrase that super duper debating star, r2b.
Isn’t that despicable too? Or is this just a case you playing the role of knight in shining armor saving the damsel in distress?
That hypocrisy thing is rearing it’s ugly head again.
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 4:38 PM
Ok, slimeball, you show me the quote where I ever said Romney was boozing around. You show me a post where I ever mentioned Romney was not a faithful Mormon.
*
He was in France doing his mission, just like he was called to do. It just “happened” that it was during the Vietnam war, and that he was “chosen” for France (maybe a slum or maybe the wine country, I and you don’t know). And it just happened that his father was one of the people who brokered the deal with the Selective Service, to exclude a certain number of missionaries from the draft. All this done before his draft number was drawn…his father left nothing to chance. Where did his father serve?
*
Now show me where I ever, ever, said Mitt drank or did not follow the tenants of his faith. He is a faithful Mormon, to a fault. I have never questioned his commitment to his faith.
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 4:40 PM
What’s wrong with calling someone rich? And what’s wrong with calling them ego-driven? Most rich, successful people have big egos, and they earned them. It often helped them get where they are. I don’t necessarily see that as an insult. By the way, careful there asking straightforward questions. You might actually allow us to carry on like this.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 4:44 PM
I missed that you were pathetic enough to bring that up. Forget it. I keep trying, and it comes to naught.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 4:46 PM
I was being facetious about Fred’s wife being the sole reason he is running in order to snark him on his ingenious “poke the media dragon in the eye” marketing plan.
Its cool and all that Fred wants to show the 15% votership of the hardcore Republican base he’s really committed to slaying the evil media dragon.
Fred made only a minor miscalculation in the fact that while poking the media in the eye makes you the champion of the blogosphere, it’s also a surefire way to make sure independents and moderate-leaning republicans (yes, I know, evil RINO heretics… without which a Republicans can’t win, btw.) hear his message.
Just one of his more idiotic campaign moves. He’s not an outsider and he’s not Huck. His only connections to anyone are through Washington, and all they know are big media types. “God’s own endorsement” won’t save Fred like it saved Huck. The Hollyweird tabloid types are the same way: its either no-credibility rags or big media outlets.
Fred has never harnessed any of his natural advantages. He’s basically praying the fiscal and foreign policy cons (and the social cons who dispise Huck) bail him out, but unfortunately for him he’s destroyed his media ability and they’ve flocked to Romney and McCain. Johhny Mac can be a prick to the media because he’s been in politics forever and they like that he stabs Republicans in the back. Fred thought he could be JMac-lite, and it blew up in his face.
Which is why some are saying Fred is dead. It isn’t just that he’s now getting squashed by everyone except Hunter and Paul, it’s also that he has wasted all his capital (political and monetary) where Guiliani and Romney haven’t.
BKennedy on January 9, 2008 at 4:48 PM
A lesson to all of you newbies. Don’t add things to posts that don’t exist. Like I “r2b is bragging about his debating skills”, where did I brag? Maybe dragged someone down. See it makes you look stupid, like the person who posted that.
Or that I claimed Mitt was “boozing”, I never even came close to that, but it made them look stupid. What they will do now is throw out some strawman argument, and try to deflect their lie.
*
Debate the subject, or the person, but don’t add things that are not there. It shows your argument is weak, and you may think it is “cool” but others see it as being a loser.
*
Two cases in point were just posted. Thanks to BKennedy and Buy Danish, for their examples.
*
Class is over, you may go home now.
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 4:50 PM
Giuliani’s squashing Fred? Is that why he finished three places behind Fred in Iowa and he only finished two places ahead of him in New Hampshire(4th)? Oh, and Rudy got zero delegates in Wyoming. Fred got three.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 4:53 PM
Ah, my bad. The whole “Romney dodged the draft because he was in France on a mission” was actually an extention of the “Mitt’s daddy did everything for him” argument.
And don’t play coy on the Paris part, it was likely in one of the Fred thread’s months ago, but you did seem to mention Paris and its lifestyle quite a few times.
BKennedy on January 9, 2008 at 4:55 PM
I think Guiliani’s strategy is also fairly craptacular, but as far as I’m aware Guiles still has cash on hand and has been working on FL.
BKennedy on January 9, 2008 at 4:56 PM
Yea, so could his clone John Kerry..
Chakra Hammer on January 9, 2008 at 5:05 PM
Okay…say Rudy takes Florida. For the sake of argument, and because there is a lot of belief that it will happen, say Fred takes South Carolina. Then each major candidate will have a victory, though I’m sure Florida will mean more in the general. Then is Fred an idiot, when he’s on the level with all the others? Remember, in the major primaries, Mitt hasn’t won one yet. He took Wyoming with Fred at his heels.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 5:07 PM
He’ll still be low on money, and it requires him to win SC. Not second, win. I repeat: not second, he must win SC. Fred can’t just keep blowing off states like they’re no big deal. Fact is, now he has to fight with Huck and while I suppose Huck is in a similar money position, be basically clobbers Freds evangelical vote.
And again, Fred has no media presense because he’s spent the last few months poking them in the eye, so don’t expect much favorability to slice his way. Fred has already been dabotaging his own momentum.
Basically, If Fred doesn’t win SC, he’s dead. That he still doesn’t see that and thinks second is good enough is folly, especially if Romney beats him.
BKennedy on January 9, 2008 at 5:29 PM
I never questioned his faith, or that he was drinking. Just say you goofed and move on no big deal, unless you want to keep trying to defend your mistake at my cost.
But thanks acknowledgment of a goof…although it got caught in your throat. It not that hard, I have had to do it a few times myself…others never do.
BTW, just to show that you aren’t totally nuts. I did respond to one person who begin calling me names and personal insults, so I jerked their chain (once) and said “maybe Mitt was there to party and didn’t invite you, and you feel insulted…nothing more exciting to a French Woman than an “untouchable” man” or something to that effect, not those exact words but it sure got them going.
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 5:32 PM
Then Rudy is the nominee. FL is winner take all and even with the penalty is worth 57 delegates. Rudy is a shoe in to win the other 2/5 winner take all states NY, NJ, CONN and PENN worth another 201 delegates. He’ll get the lions share in CA as well. He will have a big lead on 2/6.
tommylotto on January 9, 2008 at 5:35 PM
There are no shoe-ins in politics, and that’s not the question I asked.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 5:51 PM
Could you make a more dunce-like remark? I have been stalking doriengrey? Does that make sense to you?
If you want to align yourself with r2b, go right ahead. Clearly the two of you are two peas in a pod.
*groan*
It’s called “inference”. If you assail someone else’s debating skills we are left to infer that you think yours are superior.
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 5:58 PM
John Kerry: Never worked a day in his life outside the Senate halls. Married Teresa Heinz Kerry who inherited her wealth from her husband.
Mitt Romney: He did it the old-fashioned way, he earned it.
We have Chakra Hammer, r2b, MadisonC, and possibly bnelson44 firmly in the class envy/class warfare camp. Anyone else want to join their team?
And you call yourselves “conservatives”?
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 6:04 PM
You must lay awake at night and infer…
*
And a note about conservatives: Mitt stated he was not a conservative when pressured by Kennedy…and you call Mitt a conservative? Maybe a wimp…and by his own admission, in debate, not a conservative.
right2bright on January 9, 2008 at 6:13 PM
Inference? You mean like armchair psychology? Claiming to know someone by what they post? The same crap you ascribed to others, but claiming they were silly to do it? Is there a double standard you won’t live by? Oh, forgot:
You have no double standard about personal insults. Oh, wait, you did. And then you acted like you didn’t. Just like you take what people like doriangrey say about you very personally in one thread (and defend doing so), then in another thread claim not to take this seriously, and accuse others of doing so.
No wonder you don’t like the term flip-flopper. You’re the biggest flip-flopping hypocrite here. Kerry would be so proud.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 6:24 PM
Nice touch, by the way. Challenge our conservatism because we disagree with you and won’t shut up and support Mitt without question.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 6:25 PM
Still waiting. What did Mitt promise him? You said he bought his vote. What did Mitt promise Vanceone for his vote? The money had to buy something. Did Mitt give Vanceone a cash payment? The promise of a future stock option?
If you can’t support your accusation then you owe him an apology.
csdeven on January 9, 2008 at 6:34 PM
Best advertising money could buy. Admit it, we still judge the quality of ads when we see them on here. So far, Romney’s have been the most effective. The backyard ones, the attack ads that have garnered plenty of airplay in pointing out the flaws of the other candidates.
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2008 at 6:42 PM
You fell apart here. You are playing an infantile game, whining that I’m not taking your prissy little punches lying down.. Note the time of your final breakdown – it began at 4:13 PM. Note the time of my response there- 5:42 PM. Note the time when I finally took my glove off here – 5:58.
Which came first? Your 4:13 or my 5:42?
/rq
Back to the subject at hand:
I’m challenging your conservatism because you engage in class warfare and class envy like a whiny liberal.
I am challenging your intellect because you say one idiotic thing after another, like claiming that “inference” is the same thing as “arm chair psychology”.
Congratulations are in order though! When I asked if you could make a more dunce-like statement, you did.
Buy Danish on January 9, 2008 at 6:47 PM
But did it buy vanceone’s support? Do you know? I don’t know. And I’m certain r2b doesn’t have a clue (nor does she care).
Vanceone may have been aware of Mitt from MA or the Olympics.
If she cannot produce the reason why, then she made an unfair accusation and owes Vanceone an apology.
csdeven on January 9, 2008 at 6:49 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »