Video: Are you ready for Romney 2012?
posted at 10:51 am on February 11, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Will he be the man to challenge President Huckabee in the primary? Or will it be one last hurrah for 75-year-old Maverick? An anxious Republican Party watches and waits.
This was done by a supporter, of course, not the campaign. An official Romney ad wouldn’t have nearly this much energy.
Exit question: Remind me again, when exactly did the guy who couldn’t beat two RINOs with a huge financial advantage become the great hope of the GOP?
Update: Easy, but cute.
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:
It’ll be the “I told you so” GOP primary. Next time we’ll settle more quickly. Kicking out President Obama will be tough, but we can do it.
AbaddonsReign on February 11, 2008 at 10:54 AM
Gorgeous logo. Who made that?
RushBaby on February 11, 2008 at 10:55 AM
Wow, Hugh Hewitt has some good video editing skills.
BillINDC on February 11, 2008 at 10:56 AM
Heh.
Allah’s right about the Slate video, though. It was cute.
Michelle on February 11, 2008 at 10:58 AM
Exactly. The notion that Romney will be even stronger in 2012 is absurd. He will fade into obscurity.
infidel65 on February 11, 2008 at 11:00 AM
Nice clips.
Mitt’s got four years to solidify his conservative creds.
CliffHanger on February 11, 2008 at 11:01 AM
“Remind me again, when exactly did the guy who couldn’t beat two RINOs with a huge financial advantage become the great hope of the GOP?”
About the time you guys over here revealed your unnatural affection for him as a candidate.
Al-Ozarka on February 11, 2008 at 11:02 AM
I mean… seriously. God help us.
Jindal 2012? Anyone? Help!
Dash on February 11, 2008 at 11:03 AM
I would rather see some nobody who can think on his feet, has little political experiance but is not afraid to ask questions, and is a good judge of character run for President.
If this country ever has another civil war I hope to hell the victors restore the constitution with a few small changes. Notably term limits and restrictions to prevent a political class from forming.
Wyrd on February 11, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Ok, and for you skeptics, Mitt’s got four years to prove he’s a conservative.
CliffHanger on February 11, 2008 at 11:03 AM
“Bring America Back”. I like that alot. Really well-done video. If he wants it, he can earn it over the next four years. I hope to hear from him on radio and in print. He’s got a huge email database, I hope he uses it well.
RushBaby on February 11, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Works for me.
rockmom on February 11, 2008 at 11:06 AM
Jindal 2012: I’m there.
Michelle on February 11, 2008 at 11:09 AM
excellent use of death cab.
locke on February 11, 2008 at 11:12 AM
He became the hope when the idiots on the left side of the party decided to foist social liberals on us as our only options. The whole system was set up to make Rudy the candidate quickly. Then McCain jumped in as the “plan B” guy. All because there is a vocal bitter nasty part of the party who wants to drive out social conservatives and the “Jesus Freaks” and install left-of-center RINOs in place of the traditional GOP principles.
Funny thing, about the conservatives and “Jesus Freaks” They didn’t fall in line and vote for the liberals. They aren’t shutting up and voting for McCain in the name of party unity. Instead they are protest voting Huckabee or otherwise “wasting” their vote instead of actively participating in coronating that vile dinosaur that called us all racist when we opposed his amnesty scheme.
IMO, the McCain strategists made a critical error when they took the attitude that the “Jesus Freaks” would fall in line and vote for the GOP because there is nowhere else for them to go. That hasn’t panned out well and I don’t see how McCain is going to unburn all the bridges he’s torched during his Senate love-fest with Teddy Kennedy, Russ Feingold, and the Junta of 14.
Romney is doing all the right things. He left in a classy way and he can spend the next four years honing his conservative creds. IMO, the momentum was quickly shifting his way and his message simply didn’t get out in time to drown out the Rudy and McCain useless idiots screaming for everybody to shut up, abandon principles, and vote for the candidates that want to destroy unborn life, legalize gay marriage, raise taxes, increase the size of government, and trash the Reagan legacy completely.
highhopes on February 11, 2008 at 11:12 AM
Much like Mitt’s rise to fame, I don’t understand the people backing the Republican party’s very own Barack Obama. The guy hasn’t proven anything yet.
Or am I missing something?
amkun on February 11, 2008 at 11:13 AM
Hope.
petefrt on February 11, 2008 at 11:14 AM
I think the footage in the Slate video would have been good for an actual ad.
CP on February 11, 2008 at 11:17 AM
I would sooo much rather pin my hopes on Fred Thompson running in four years.
JetBoy on February 11, 2008 at 11:17 AM
Jindal will have been a governor for four years. Everyone keeps saying that governors have the best chance. The man is really quite impressive.
Rose on February 11, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Pretty much after Teh Fred called it quits.
NemoParticularis on February 11, 2008 at 11:19 AM
Bobby hasn’t even been Governor for a month yet. I like and admire the man but let’s get real here and see how he does in office before throwing his name out there for 2012.
Besides, doesn’t all this assume that the GOP will lose in 2008? There may not even be a GOP, as we know it, in 2012. Killed by all Rudy/McCain crowd that stacked the deck so that the party’s prsumptive nominee is to the far left of most Democrats on some key issues. Conservatives need a voice and it clearly isn’t with the folks who worked so tirelessly to drive out conservatives and evangelicals from the party’s political process.
highhopes on February 11, 2008 at 11:19 AM
Pres. Bush only won because the strong conservatives supported him and tirelessly worked to get out the vote. That won’t happen with McCain. I don’t see how he can win.
Rose on February 11, 2008 at 11:23 AM
Fred lured the voters into a slumber party, diluting the effect that an earlier move toward a tolerable-compared-to-the-rest Romney campaign might have profited from.
Fred should have withdrawn in June when he had the most momentum, and knew his heart wasn’t going to be in it, instead of teasing but not pleasing.
The SECOND LOOK AT MITT came a second too late.
Now it’s Huckleberry yapping at the heel McShamnesty.
Pray for a miracle.
profitsbeard on February 11, 2008 at 11:24 AM
I like Romney, but each person gets one chance. Then its time to find someone else.
Nosferightu on February 11, 2008 at 11:24 AM
Come on. Someone worth voting for has to emerge in the next four years.
frankj on February 11, 2008 at 11:25 AM
OK, but how?
The soonest he could hold a prominent elected position would be 2010, and he’d have to start his campaign almost immediately after that to get the nomination in 2012.
Hollowpoint on February 11, 2008 at 11:25 AM
If Jindal cleans up that mess, he could be someone worth getting excited over. Seem like very little experience to run for president on, but it’s plenty more than Obama.
frankj on February 11, 2008 at 11:26 AM
Plus, is it racist to say it would be nice if the Republicans had someone who isn’t a white male as a presidential candidate (Alan Keyes doesn’t count). I’m frankly tired of white people.
frankj on February 11, 2008 at 11:29 AM
All this complaining about nothing… you’d think we were going to have an election. Everyone knows that Bush will find a way to evoke emergency powers after another manufactured “terror” event and reorganize the Republic into the North American Empire.
/kos kid
Wineaholic on February 11, 2008 at 11:30 AM
I’m reminded of the saying about people clamoring for leadership.
bj1126 on February 11, 2008 at 11:30 AM
he doesnt need elected office. his prior record is good enough. now he needs to rub elbows with the conservative base, fund raisers and the right conservative events for the next four years.
palefaced on February 11, 2008 at 11:34 AM
“Exit question: Remind me again, when exactly did the guy who couldn’t beat two RINOs with a huge financial advantage become the great hope of the GOP?”
I guess you missed the part where he had more delegates than the Huckster when he dropped out.
Are all of the RINO’s unable to perform basic mathematical computations? Let’s start with this exercise…..2 is larger than 1, 3 is larger than 2, etc., etc.
I believe Romney received approximately 3.5m votes to Huckster’s 2.2m, and Romney had approx 270 delegates to Huckster’s 169…….you may not see it but it looks like Romney’s numbers were larger than Hucks.
David in ATL on February 11, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Given that McCain is a 70-something generationally challenged stubborn old hoot in the mold of Bob Dole and James Stockdale, the mindless masses will elect the charismatic but vapid Barack Obama in 2008. After a multi-year campaign to gather Conservative support Romney will rise again in 2011 to remind the people what the word ‘presidential’ really means.
cannonball on February 11, 2008 at 11:41 AM
Playing the victim card? The only conservative in the race was too normal to endure the indignities of being an enthusiastic candidate, and the only evangelical wasn’t conservative. We weren’t innocent victims in all this, but rather individual oarsmen all pulling in different dirctions and opting not to see where the boat was headed. At present, the tent is too big for all the agendas.
a capella on February 11, 2008 at 11:42 AM
It seems to me between now and 2012 we ought to get behind someone who was conservative before they started running for the presidency, preferably a person with a clear and consistent conservative voting or governing record. Someone who never pandered to the homosexual movement by printing pink fliers and wishing them a Happy Pride weekend. Maybe someone who has always supported the 2nd Amendment, not a fake varmint hunter. Someone who isn’t afraid to take unequivocal positions on national security matters. A person who doesn’t turn to lawyers when evaluating war with Iran. A person who doesn’t pander to Michiganders by promising massive federal spending. Someone who doesn’t bash McCain for voting against Bush’s prescription drug bill, one of the few laudable votes the man has cast in recent years.
Let’s just get behind someone else.
flyfisher on February 11, 2008 at 11:43 AM
What is it that I have said countless times on this site?
Oh yeah…
I’M WITH MITT!
madmonkphotog on February 11, 2008 at 11:44 AM
Dunno if it’s racist, but it is certainly identity politics. I like Jindal because he appears competent and embraces the values I deem important. Could care less about his religion or skin color.
a capella on February 11, 2008 at 11:47 AM
That’s inside the beltway thinking. Romney’s strategy should remain the “DC outsider” who can get things done. He’s already done the public policy thing as a governor. Time to do prominent non-elected things that keeps his name out in front and on the conservative side of the equation. Involvement with the Heritage Foundation, for example.
highhopes on February 11, 2008 at 11:48 AM
OK, so we are talking about ‘conservative’ here right? Conservatives are supposed to be efficient, right? Why don’t we take a look at the ‘efficiency quotient’ when suggesting that these numbers actually mean something. Look at the cost for each delegate between the two candidates. . . then tell me who won and who is ‘conservative’.
Don’t get me wrong. I could have supported Romney even with his flaws. But the exit question is dead on. . . if Romney is the standard bearer for conservatives moving forward, there is no conservative movement in America.
ThackerAgency on February 11, 2008 at 11:50 AM
All of the stuff in this video is from Romney’s website and web ads.
EJDolbow on February 11, 2008 at 11:53 AM
The difference is that he HAS WON a major position in the R party. His character is the important part of Jindal. He won’t have to ‘flip flop’ to run on conservative values and issues. Whereas all the ‘experienced’ Republicans this cycle needed to nuance their ‘conservative’ and ‘principled’ past.
I agree we need to see how he does in Louisiana. However, his character won’t change over the next four years. The push for Jindal is a character push, not an experience or record push.
ThackerAgency on February 11, 2008 at 11:54 AM
Playing the victim card? Hardly. I don’t consider myself a victim as much as one who was duped into thinking that the eltists of the McCain/Rudy wing of the party wouldn’t attempt to hijack the agenda the way they, in fact, have. Now instead of a principled debate about immigration reform, we know that there will be wholesale giveaway of citizenship during the next administration no matter who wins. We know that taxes will increase and so will the size of government. We know that Constitutional rights to free speech will be further abridged in the name of campaign finance reform. All of these are givens because the GOP party elites fixed the system to elevate the most liberal of liberal choices.
John McCain’s primary wins and delegates are in places where he doesn’t stand a chance of winning in November. He has the numbers but he doesn’t have the support of the party. You are absolutely right that there were too many messages out there and the “big tent” ringmasters have decided to make room by kicking out the conservatives and “Jesus Freaks.” In fact, McCain’s CPAC speech shows that he doesn’t even care about the conservative voice in the party. The most telling part was where he essentially said that he’d do whatever he damned well wanted even if conservatives disagreed.
At this point, I honestly doubt that I can vote for the vile man. A lot will depend on the running mate but I have little confidence that McCain will put a conservative on the ticket instead of another bitter nasty liberal who is an echo chamber for the Democrat Party.
highhopes on February 11, 2008 at 11:58 AM
Predicting the future is easy.
Being right is a different matter altogether.
MB4 on February 11, 2008 at 12:00 PM
And that’s different from the campaign he’s run for the past year exactly how? What you’re suggesting is little more than campaigning for the next 4 years, and that ain’t going to cut it.
And his previous record is “good enough”? If it was, he’d be the presumptive nominee right now instead of McCain.
Hollowpoint on February 11, 2008 at 12:07 PM
For the record, I predicted exactly what happened to Mitt. And it was easy.
Oh – and a note to those still smitten with Mittens: watch the “Wonder Years” video and take a good long look at his golf swing. And then please, for the love of God, if he runs for office again … don’t let him claim he’s a “lifelong golfer.”
Mmm-kay?
Yes, you’re welcome.
Professor Blather on February 11, 2008 at 12:10 PM
Excellent insight! I agree completely. Also, as a jew, I don’t really like the Evangelical aspect of Huck being the reason to vote for him. That is identity politics as well and has no place in electing a person to a public office.
ihasurnominashun on February 11, 2008 at 12:10 PM
MB4-
I predict:
that Obama will start talking more “black” as the election nears. (Disappearing “g” endings, etc.)
And his wife will get an Oprah makeover in September.
Hillary will be a lovely Veep.
Unless something happens on the way to the Republican Convention to shake things up, look for President Barack O’Know-nothing and Vice President HillaryYou-Stole-My-Thunder-But-I’ll-Take-My-Chances Rodham (who will divorce Bill in 2009 as useless… and if she had done it last year, she might have won this year).
profitsbeard on February 11, 2008 at 12:11 PM
With Mitt out of the race, all you will be voting for will be a liberal. We as a country are so screwed.
cjs1943 on February 11, 2008 at 12:11 PM
About 30 seconds after Fred went on Leno for the first time and proved he was a paper tiger. I hope paper isn’t too strong a word.
Spirit of 1776 on February 11, 2008 at 12:16 PM
I don’t get it either. Rebound relationship I guess.
Spirit of 1776 on February 11, 2008 at 12:20 PM
I would like to know when a conservative light weight if he is even more conservative than either Hukster or McCain become the Conservatives future hope?
My 2012 would sound more like a Pence, Colburn, or some such that has not just “newly come around to conservatism” now that he is running for pres but has been in trenches fighting. The Conservative 2012 choice needs some scars to prove his conservatism based battles not empty lip service with a liberal track record.
By the way when did Universal health care, mandated (Mitt Romney) or government controlled (X Dem) become a conservative idea? Conservative health care program would be that we are going to shrink government, lower taxes, de-regulate, and then you can IF YOU WANT take your extra money not TAKEN by the Fed to buy your insurance.
F*ck Mitt Romney a luke warm conservative at best. We better have allot better than that after 4 years in the desert.
C-Low on February 11, 2008 at 12:31 PM
Ambassador Romney to Iraq. Once he fixes that mess, he’s a lock for POTUS 2012. And he won’t even take credit for it, he’ll share it with all that worked alongside him.
How’s that for a prediction?
JustTruth101 on February 11, 2008 at 12:32 PM
If Bobby is able to follow through on the ethics reform that he has made a keystone to his administration (even saw an ad about it over the weekend) he can write his own ticket to DC.
highhopes on February 11, 2008 at 12:39 PM
I think that’s already happening (at least in the states with large black populations). At a recent rally, Michelle Obama reportedly intoduced Barack to the crowd as her “baby daddy.”
AZCoyote on February 11, 2008 at 12:51 PM
Heh. Someone should let McCain in on this piece of knowledge.
NTWR on February 11, 2008 at 12:58 PM
I concur that identity politics is a poor way of electing someone. However, as a Jew, you should know that nobody is more staunchly pro-Israel as the Protestant Christian (predominately Southern) community. We’ll stand for Israel if they put us in the gas chambers along side of the Jews.
I don’t think that a Protestant Christian is the enemy of the Jews (the tiny minority ‘Christian’ KKK notwithstanding).
ThackerAgency on February 11, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Huckabee will win re-election in 2012. I know you don’t believe me. Watch and see.
P.S. Just remember that any nasty replies now will have to be eaten later, so keep your words nice and sweet, not bitter.
ITookTheRedPill on February 11, 2008 at 1:00 PM
In Arkansas, I don’t doubt it. We already seen the wisdom of that state a couple times now.
Spirit of 1776 on February 11, 2008 at 1:07 PM
hmmm dont matter WHAT pill yer taking its something causing you halucinations… Huck wont win.
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on February 11, 2008 at 1:08 PM
Mitt was unelectable in 2008, and he will be unelectable in 2012 if he relies on the shtick.
He has 4 years to work as a conservative, a real conservative. Let’s see if he can stick to that, he hasn’t shown any promise of someone who can stick with their beliefs.
*
We need a leadee…an alpha dog, not a poodle.
right2bright on February 11, 2008 at 1:12 PM
And the Little Rock Chamber of Commerce will have made the right choice.
highhopes on February 11, 2008 at 1:15 PM
We have a “leadee” McCain does whatever the Dems want him to.
What we need is another Reagan whose conservative ideology was carefully thought about and refined over decades before he ever took office. Juan McCain’s ideology is nothing more than the same short-sighted poll-centric dogma that the Clintons practice. Truth be told, McCain wouldn’t even be a Republican if he weren’t from Arizona.
highhopes on February 11, 2008 at 1:19 PM
Call me crazy, but what will be left to govern after four years of ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN EDWARDS?
_
Back to the present, please.
_
Wondering about 2012 now is like being trapped on the fourth floor of a burning office building and passing the time by choosing an architect for the rebuilding.
SlimyBill on February 11, 2008 at 1:19 PM
“Are you ready for Romney 2012?”
In a word: NO!
Hillary as VEEP?? Yeah, right; her and Bill. I wouldn’t take out an insurance policy on Barak if that were the case.
Slimey; your analogy is faulty. You might actually survive the jump from 4 floors.
michaelo on February 11, 2008 at 1:25 PM
I do know that, and feel very blessed to live in a country founded on Judeo-Christian values….my problem with Huck is that he is an Evangelical Christian first and foremost and I do not believe he can govern as a conservative.
ihasurnominashun on February 11, 2008 at 2:01 PM
I think he was a better standard bearer than the remaining two. I do agree a better bearer would be preferable….and hopefully we will find one. I plan on spamming JC Watts for the next 2 years. ;)
The bigger picture – I don’t understand how folks on our side can continue to claim Romney lost to the Huckster. Romney has plenty of resources to wait another 4 years so he exited stage right; Huckster doesn’t have a job so he is still in the race working for meals.
David in ATL on February 11, 2008 at 2:01 PM
Has anyone read Freakonomics?
The economists that wrote it theorized (and backed up with some data, though, as a pleasure read, I didn’t bother to delve into the numbers) that spending more money in an election does not buy a candidate a significant number of votes.
In the case of Romney, I’d say that spending more money had the effect of increasing his votes only inasmuch as it exposed him to more people who agreed with what he was saying.
For 2012 (assuming he decides to run again), he will already have the exposure of having been a top-tier candidate in 2008. Additionally, he’ll have (hopefully) had 4 more years worth of exposure in some other prominent role. I imagine he’ll be able to spend much less on his candidacy the second time around.
Huckabee had the same issue as well of not being nationally known. I think he got a good boost from existing networks of Evangelical churches as well as some high profile celeb endorsements (the Chuck/Huck things may have been silly, but, Americans love their celebrities). Assuming he doesn’t win the nomination and the presidency this time around, he’ll also benefit from a raised profile in 2012.
As far as a “real conservative” appearing to save us all….I don’t see it happening. Most conservatives have become more worried about being liked than being right. It’s one thing to talk about shrinking the government and expenditures at a speech to the Heritage Foundation. Where are the Republicans that are brave enough to go to the NAACP and tell them that what’s needed is not more government programs but more personal responsibility? Where’s the conservative that’s going to go to a meeting of the Teacher’s Union and make a case for school choice?
Beyond that, where’s the conservative leader who, like Reagan, can go to those hostile audiences, have everyone disagree with every word he said, but still come out liking him and thinking that maybe they should take another look at what he’s been saying?
As long as we are only (on the whole, I’m sure there are exceptions) preaching to the choir in front of friendly audiences, we will never convince people of the merit of our ideas. We’ll just continue to be able to pat each other on the back, secure in the knowledge that our ideas would work better if they were ever given the chance.
JadeNYU on February 11, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Where was this supporter during the campaign? For $13M, Mitt could have bought 3 minutes of ad time between the 1st and 2nd quarters of the Superbowl and aired this (well-made, inspiring) video. That probably would have been enough to give him the oomph to pass McPain in the ballots 2 days later. Typical of this year’s GOP supporters: too little, too late, every time. If we’ve gotten our arses in gear just a *little* bit quicker this time, the race would be looking very different. Instead we spend all our time looking backwards, which is why the Dems will blow by us in November.
steadyrock on February 11, 2008 at 4:01 PM
I’m ready for Romney now!
4shoes on February 11, 2008 at 4:13 PM
If the Huckster can force a brokered convention …… I say Romney wins, he isn’t releasing his delegates for a very good reson.
David in ATL on February 11, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Exit answer; The Republicans always, but always pick the next guy in line. That’s defined as (a) the sitting President if Constitutionally-eligible, (b) the sitting Vice President, (c) the person who came in second in delegates the last hotly-contested time aroun, (d) an ex-VP, or (e) an immediate blood relative of an ex-President.
Not so coincidentally, that is why Huckabee is still running. He wants to be #2 this time around so he will be the nominee to get waxed by President Hillbama come 2012 (thanks for the name, Rick Moran).
steveegg on February 11, 2008 at 4:36 PM
How does Romney get from something under 200 (remember, take away the ones that he “won” in Maine, Nevada and Iowa; they don’t get locked in until their respective state conventions) to 1,191?
steveegg on February 11, 2008 at 5:04 PM
This site better start trashing him now. It only has 4 years.
Labamigo on February 11, 2008 at 5:21 PM
In a brokered convention all bets are off.
David in ATL on February 11, 2008 at 5:28 PM
It’s not going to a brokered convention.
steveegg on February 11, 2008 at 5:48 PM
HEY!! Death Cap for Cutie!! SWEET!!
Troy Rasmussen on February 11, 2008 at 7:45 PM
Very clever…….and cute.
The Ugly American on February 11, 2008 at 7:53 PM
I mean “Cab”.
Troy Rasmussen on February 11, 2008 at 7:59 PM
That was a great video.
aengus on February 11, 2008 at 8:02 PM
Wow, Romney’s not considered a RINO anymore. I guess the whole flip-flopper thing got placed neatly in the bin sometime in the past few months. The guy did appeal to me, but he still managed to make himself an unknown on many issues thanks to his history, and by the time he started to sound convincing on some of those issues, it was probably too late.
Anyhoo..
VAST LEFT-er..LEFT-RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY!
Reaps on February 12, 2008 at 12:14 AM
Comment pages: