Comments on: Video: Mitt’s gracious yet awkward concession speech

By: WasatchMan

WasatchMan — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:20:47 +0000

You know, Mitt has this entirely inaccurate reputation of being slick and plastic. But Mormons who have listened to him talk about his religion have been struck about how hesitant and awkward he can be. He obviously believes, but is desperately trying not to offend anyone and it shows. It might have been better for his campaign if he had said essentially “screw you” to the critics and just been himself. I’m sure he would have come off as being the more comfortable and authentic Romney we got to know during the 2002 Olympics.
Because of the Olympics and “Angels In America” and all, there has been a nice kind of edgy hipness about being Mormon for the past few years. If Huckabee and his crowd get in, I guess we can go back to being despised and rejected. But we won’t have any illusions about where we stand, and no one should have any illusions about what the Huckster and his ilk think about people who don’t conform to their standards of righteousness.

By: Jaibones

Jaibones — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:46:40 +0000

It’s interesting to me that a political “almost totally lacking in political instinct” is regarded as a phony, while a candidate who is packaged in the prototype, slickest political wrapping available is regarded as “being comfortable in his own skin”.

We create our own reality, and it seems to be the opposite of … reality. Obama is the phony, here. Not Mitt.

By: Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Letterman on Mitt’s campaign cliches

Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:01:53 +0000

[...] you applied it to the Democrats’ hope/change road show, but as with yesterday’s awkward call and response, it does reveal an essential truth about Mitt’s campaign. A friend who supports him e-mailed [...]

By: HaraldHardrada

HaraldHardrada — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 06:31:07 +0000

While Willard Romney is known for being a brilliant private equity fund manager…..blowing $100 million on a obviously failed presidential bid does not sound like a very good investment!

Here’s some advice for you Willard….drop out and donate your campaign cash to our eventual nominee Mike Huckabee…maybe he’ll give you a cabinet position.

By: theregoestheneighborhood

theregoestheneighborhood — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 02:34:32 +0000

Romney 2002: I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose.

Romney 2007: I came down on the side of life [in] every single instance as governor of Massachusetts.

BKennedy the Oaf.

jaime on January 9, 2008 at 5:58 PM
—-
Neither of those statements are incongruent, especially since upon review of the 2002 tape, Mitt did exactly what he said he would do: not chancge any of the laws either way.
…
…
BKennedy on January 9, 2008 at 6:07 PM

And that is how spin is done.

By: Domino

Domino — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 00:23:15 +0000

Right now, Mitt’s my pick but I also like Fred and Rudy.

Listening to him at times can make me wince, but it’s a whole lot better than reading something (and doing so poorly) like McCain did last night.

PS It kinda makes sense to reference the silver/gold thing since he was involved with the Olympics.

By: Dr B

Dr B — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 00:17:52 +0000

You liked his speech, Allahpundit, admit it.

By: Roger Waters

Roger Waters — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 00:07:26 +0000

I think we can all agree that Mitt rules.

Dumb statement, just mirroring Fagrot.

By: Tzetzes

Tzetzes — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 00:06:31 +0000

every other word the Avatar of America spoke slayed me in the spirit

Keljeck on January 9, 2008 at 4:56 PM

slew

By: Roger Waters

Roger Waters — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 00:06:07 +0000

wo wo wo Jamie’s crying.

So what are we supposed to do? Vote for McCain who promised to act like a republican? Vote for Huck who is more liberal than his predecessor, Bill Clinton? Excluding abortion, Huck is more Jimmy Carter than Bill Clinton was. What is it with these backwood redneck inbred arkansas people?

By: Tzetzes

Tzetzes — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 00:01:26 +0000

I think we can all agree that Mitt Romney is phony.

froghat on January 9, 2008 at 5:22 PM

No, but I think we can agree that froghat is a troll.

Who do you represent, Huckabee or Kos? (Or, is there a difference?)

By: Nineball

Nineball — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:38:45 +0000

Where was the awkward part?

Drunk Report on January 9, 2008 at 5:18 PM

You know that part between 0:00 and 1:15? Yeah, that’d be the awkward part.

By: Buy Danish

Buy Danish — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:26:53 +0000

I liked it. My husband, who is voting for Rudy, liked it…a lot. I don’t mind the gold/silver stuff at all considering the well-deserved reference. In fact, I like that better much than his baseball analogies.

A sharp CEO like Mitt should have finished first by now, or fired everyone who worked for him. If he cannot run a successful campaign you have to question how he would do as President, which is basically running a campaign for 4 years.

rockmom on January 9, 2008 at 4:57 PM

Just out of curiosity, who is your candidate and how’s he doing right now?

McCain has been running for waaaay longer than 4 years. Fred has only been running for a few months but he’s getting nowhere fast. Rudy has been running for awhile. That leaves the Huckster as the only candidate who sort of came out of nowhere.

By: TheBigOldDog

TheBigOldDog — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:14:28 +0000

Hollowpoint on January 9, 2008 at 6:05 PM

You’re like to Obama of HA. All sizzle, no steak.

By: BKennedy

BKennedy — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:07:39 +0000

Romney 2002: I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose.

Romney 2007: I came down on the side of life [in] every single instance as governor of Massachusetts.

BKennedy the Oaf.

jaime on January 9, 2008 at 5:58 PM

Neither of those statements are incongruent, especially since upon review of the 2002 tape, Mitt did exactly what he said he would do: not chancge any of the laws either way.

But again, why confuse you with the facts. Nevermind Romney’s opponent was a complete piece of work. I can’t believe anyone would have made that woman governor. Blech.

Thanks for the Oaf comment, did you think that up yourself or get help?

By: Hollowpoint

Hollowpoint — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:05:03 +0000

So, be specific, which of the “haven’ts” do you take issue with and why or would your prefer to just sling the “founding fathers…constitution” hyperbole around instead?

TheBigOldDog on January 9, 2008 at 5:30 PM

To quote an old Harley Davidson ad: If I have to explain, you wouldn’t understand.

Small federal government and state’s rights are (or at least were until recently) very prominent platforms of conservativism and the Republican party in general. The Founding Fathers laid out those same principles in the Constitution. Principles Romney does not share.

By: jaime

jaime — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:04:23 +0000

What leads you to believe Mitt would betray us and go back to being pro-choice? I don’t get the logic.

krabbas on January 9, 2008 at 5:46 PM

It seems that Romney has a large capacity for adaptive change, but it’s not necessarily limited to the area of abortion. He may very well remain pro-life, but betray us on, say, illegal immigration if he finds it to be convenient.

By: Jaibones

Jaibones — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:03:23 +0000

I make no claim to understand the dynamics of a campaign like this, but here’s my lament: in the GOP, we beating on Mitt — the current delegate leader — because he has been edged out in two dinky little states, by candidates who each did nothing in the other state. And we’re actually wondering if Mitt’s going to drop out because we don’t see his support in other states down the road.

On the Dem side, the talk is of Obama being this and that, and he was down 25% in the national polls just days ago, with no visible support anywhere. I wonder why the disconnect?

By: RobertInAustin

RobertInAustin — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:02:36 +0000

I guess for Mitt to maintain he was pro-life was that from 2002 till 2007 no women in Mass chose to have an abortion. So, he did support a women’s right, but no woman exercised her right.

Fred!

By: RobertInAustin

RobertInAustin — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:00:25 +0000

Romney 2002: I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose.

Romney 2007: I came down on the side of life [in] every single instance as governor of Massachusetts.

I don’t care who you are, thats gotta hurt.

Fred!

By: jaime

jaime — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:58:34 +0000

Romney 2002: I will preserve and protect a woman's right to choose. Romney 2007: I came down on the side of life [in] every single instance as governor of Massachusetts. BKennedy the Oaf.

By: krabbas

krabbas — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:46:30 +0000

Romney promised the voters of Massachusetts that he was pro-abortion. Then, according to his statement at the recent Republican CNN/YouTube debate, Romney claims he came down on the side of life every single time.

Romney betrayed the voters of Massachusetts. If we elect him he’ll betray us, too.

Romney the Betrayer.

jaime on January 9, 2008 at 5:33 PM

What leads you to believe Mitt would betray us and go back to being pro-choice? I don’t get the logic.

By: BKennedy

BKennedy — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:44:20 +0000

Romney is BEHIND Fred! in the RealClear Politics poll

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

Go Fred!

ihasurnominashun on January 9, 2008 at 5:38 PM

And they’re both behind Ron Paul.

By: krabbas

krabbas — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:43:57 +0000

In the language of the federal government, “fix” means “throw lots and lots of money at”. He’s running the same kind of “compassionate conservative” campaign that GW ran, and the result? More government and greatly expanded spending. With Mitt it’s pretty clear that we’d get more of the same in that regard.

Hollowpoint on January 9, 2008 at 5:29 PM

I think Mitt is smarter to know that won’t fix those problems. And based on his record of success in the private sector, it would stand to reason he is. It would seem that you’re jumping to a conclusion that he’s going to be a big spending nanny.

By: BKennedy

BKennedy — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:43:36 +0000

Romney promised the voters of Massachusetts that he was pro-abortion. Then, according to his statement at the recent Republican CNN/YouTube debate, Romney claims he came down on the side of life every single time.

Romney betrayed the voters of Massachusetts. If we elect him he’ll betray us, too.

Romney the Betrayer.

jaime on January 9, 2008 at 5:33 PM

Actually Romney promised voters he would neither expand not limit abortion during his term. He vetoed embryonic stem cell research and all other anti-life measures.

But why conduse you with the facts?

jaime the liar.