Scott Brown: Romney’s much cooler now than he used to be

posted at 8:25 pm on January 29, 2010 by Allahpundit

Thus prompting the question: How uncool did he used to be?

He’s changed, he’s changed. You know, he’s actually — before he was an outsider coming in and he was, you know, kind of, you know, stiff. But he’s actually, like, funny, he’s like — when he was at my events he was cracking jokes, when we were on the bus — I was like, who is this guy? He’s really kind of, I think, settled into his role kind of being the elder statesman of the party and everything he went through as president. It’s kind of, and once again it’s my opinion but he’s really a different guy than I knew when he was here, and I certainly appreciate everything he did for me. And it wasn’t a lot, he was just there as the initial — you know, ‘here’s a check, go get em!’ And that says a lot, you know, when I signed my contract with the team, you know — I worried about, how am I gonna pay for this? And he was one of the first guys that helped me towards that obligation. And I remember those people who took a chance.

Not only did Mitt help bankroll him, but a lot of the Brown campaign staff overlaps with the Romney campaign staff. Meanwhile, a new PPP poll shows Palin’s favorables down to 47/45 — in Alaska. Via the Right Scoop, here are KP and Krauthammer from tonight’s “Special Report” both listing Mitt as the man to beat on the Republican side. Exit question: If ObamaCare goes down and Mitt pledges, as he can and must, that he’d never support a RomneyCare program for the entire United States, is it time for a second look at Romney?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3 4 5

She had been one of 50 governors. Now she is one of 300 million Facebook posters. She’s an effective voice, but she’ll have a tough sell running for office again, after resigning from her previous job. It will be especially difficult if that run is for the country’s top job.

dedalus on January 30, 2010 at 6:12 PM

And Romney had been one of 50 governors; now he’s just another fundraiser. Palin’s quitting is no more problematic than Romney’s record and lack of an enthusiastic following.

Ah, so it’s the era of the pit bull with lipstick. Being incredibly competent and statesmanlike is not enough if you’re not “ferocious”.

Buy Danish on January 30, 2010 at 5:48 PM

That is correct.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 6:48 PM

I don’t get it.

The United States future is at stake under Obama and all the Repulicans can do is squabble amongst themselves. Ridiculous.

If the posters at HA is representative of America as a whole then God help America.

Crux Australis on January 30, 2010 at 6:50 PM

is=are

Crux Australis on January 30, 2010 at 6:51 PM

She had been one of 50 governors. Now she is one of 300 million Facebook posters. She’s an effective voice, but she’ll have a tough sell running for office again, after resigning from her previous job. It will be especially difficult if that run is for the country’s top job.

dedalus on January 30, 2010 at 6:12 PM

Not quite….nimrod.

Name me one of the current 50 governors (or any former one still living) who commands the attention Sarah Palin does.

Same goes for the other Facebook posters…..

The other governors may talk, and the other Facebook posters may post…but literally ever word Sarah speaks is picked up and quoted world wide.

Her Facebook posts are quoted favorably in publications like the London Financial Times (on energy and monetary policy) and Investor’s Business Daily (on pretty much everything)

No one else on the planet gets the kind of mileage she does out of a single and simple Facebook post.

Romney could freakin’ BUY Facebook and no one would care!

Mitt Romney has been AWOL?!

I seem to remember seeing him in MA a little over a week ago after having helped elect Scott Brown.

The Proof.

Mitt Romney and his team have been busy running Scott Brown’s campaign for the last few months.

“Romneycare” beat “Obamacare” those are the facts here in MA.

SED on January 30, 2010 at 6:31 PM

Yeah…Romney has been AWOL. When the big battles over ObamaCare were flying, he was hiding under his desk hoping no one looked his way.

Oh, he and another couple of RINOs went out and tried to hold a “town hall meeting” at some pizza parlor. Couldn’t even get people to show up when free pizza and beer were on the line!!

Oh, and a former governor should have had some pull up there in Massachusetts! Big deal. It’s funny though, as Scotty Brown was very quick to credit John McCain.

Brown also describes himself as a “John McCain” kind of Senator. Nary a mention of Willard! If Romney was all of the Scotty Brown might have called himself a Mitt Romney kind of Senator.

Look, I don’t dislike Romney, so much as I just think he wouldn’t be worth a damn as POTUS. Romney is no different that any other opportunist/politician. He’s nothing special. He brings nothing to the table anyone else wouldn’t.

He’s just another D.C. insider hack.

I want a leader. I want someone who has a proven record of taking on all comers and taking down corruption, no matter which party the offender belongs to.

I want someone who understands how to lead. I want someone who understands how business works, and how to work with business.

Past that, I want someone with a 10 pound set of balls! Someone who won’t let anyone get over on her, or the nation.

That someone is Sarah Palin.

All the rest pale in comparison.

She will be the next President!

gary4205 on January 30, 2010 at 7:11 PM

rrpjr on January 30, 2010 at 12:31 PM

Well, while I don’t agree with everything you said I did enjoy reading your post. It was thought provoking; more so than 90% of what passes for analysis these days from the pundit-sphere.

Geochelone on January 30, 2010 at 7:12 PM

Being incredibly competent and statesmanlike is not enough if you’re not “ferocious”.
Buy Danish on January 30, 2010 at 5:48 PM

Correct, it’s not.

The Left will eat Romney alive. It’s why they want to run against him so much. Palin, on the other hand, both baffles and maddens them.

Her “ferocity” is paradoxical — cheerful and vital. She has a natural immunity to them. And she won’t “engage” them in the old ways they know so well and which they use to bleed opponents to death. She will break the paradigm. They’re scared of her.

rrpjr on January 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM

I had problems with Romney as a candidate, and I still have them today.

He was, at best, a lackluster governor. And while he did try to keep taxes within reason, government ‘fees’ started to abound. That is when you pay for something from government that you hadn’t paid for before… a tax on actually using your government services, thereby. And also closing tax ‘loopholes’.

For his business acumen, he doesn’t understand his own taxes or tax laws. He was clueless why MA couldn’t tax off-shore accounts… while for years he had used off-shore accounts, himself, to shelter his money. I have a problem with that… a deep and serious problem.

Then the guy has problems explaining venture capital investment and taxation… while being a venture capitalist. Something is not adding up with ‘Romney the business wiz’.

Romneycare and small government – nope, sorry, the two don’t go together. Plus never start a small program that anyone can expand after you leave office, because they will.

And then the guy he chose to manage his capital assets company… what was he thinking? Getting in bed with one of the most rapacious Chinese firms around… if that is representative of choosing someone to take care of his business, I have problems seeing how he will find someone decent to take care of, say, HHS or Federal Reserve.

I don’t have problems with Romney’s religion, could care less as one of the greatest weapons designers was a Mormon and any religion having John Moses Browning in it can’t be all bad. Like the Moonies and Kahr Arms. Damn we could use more good weapons designers in odd-ball religions…

No my problem with Mitt Romney is as a businessman and governor. And being unable to figure out off-shore taxation and tax shelters… why that puts him right up there with Timmy Geithner! In any event, I can’t say I can even get lukewarm about a Romney candidacy. We have done a whole lot worse as a Nation… and that isn’t saying much.

ajacksonian on January 30, 2010 at 7:16 PM

freeus on January 30, 2010 at 3:29 PM

Jindal is very appealing and likable. Those are his strong points. If given a chance, I think he could connect with voters nation wide as he did in his own state. He just dropped the ball, along with whoever selected that setting for him. Having said that, he still would need someone to fire up the base like Sarah Palin can.

Narutoboy on January 30, 2010 at 7:25 PM

gary4205 on January 30, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Palin attracts attention, unfortunately attention is an index of celebrity not credibility. The attention she does generate is a polarized mix of adoring and derisive. Her ability to get to the White House won’t be a function of making her supporters more enthusiastic, but by persuading those not already in her camp.

Also, IBD isn’t a serious publication. The FT, though, is.

dedalus on January 30, 2010 at 7:49 PM

gary4205 -

I’m sorry, but the last time I checked John McCain was the Senator and Mitt Romney was a governor. Why would Scott Brown relate himself to a governor? Also, note how Brown specifically called out Mitt Romney as the man that led his campaign towards success in the link that I attached earlier.

I respectfully think you’ve either been hiding under a rock or are only following Sarah Palin news. Mitt Romney has been on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, and Fox news for months now speaking on healthcare. This doesn’t even account for the op-eds he written and radio shows that he’s done. Speaking out on healthcare and providing solutions to them is hardly being AWOL. This very site among others has noted Romney discussions on the healthcare debate many times.

Also, a man who has made his life’s work in turning around institutions either be it in the private or public sector cannot be construed to be another political hack. Especially, since Romney’s only public service was one term as the governor of my state.

SED on January 30, 2010 at 7:50 PM

And Romney had been one of 50 governors; now he’s just another fundraiser. Palin’s quitting is no more problematic than Romney’s record and lack of an enthusiastic following.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Who was the last politician to make a serious run at the White House after resigning from a first term in their one major elected office?

The governorship was key to Palin because she didn’t have the educational, corporate or military accomplishments that others contending for the White House have had.

dedalus on January 30, 2010 at 7:57 PM

He’s been AWOL.

Look, this guy was a so-so manager. His only real big claim to success was turning the Olympics around a few years back. That’s commendable. But past that, he’s just another mediocre politician.

gary4205 on January 30, 2010 at 6:02 PM

Romney hasn’t been awol at all.

In addition to helping Scott Brown win MA, Mitt Romney was also busy helping Chris Christie win in NJ and helping Bob McDonnell win VA.

Romney and his political team are still working behind the scenes to help Republicans win in 2010. Here are the following conservatives Romney is helping:

1) He’s helping Tom Foley (R), who is running in a competitive primary to face Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.)

2) He’s helping Rick Lazio (R), who is running for governor of New York.

3) He’s helping Meg Whitman (R) become the next governor of California.

4) He’s helping Ovide Lamontagne (R) to replace the retiring Sen. Judd Gregg’s (R-N.H.)

I dare YOU or anyone else to name me one conservative who is helping Republicans win political offices across this nation as much as Mitt Romney has.

Finally, consider this question: If you were a Republican candidate for running for Congress in 2010, who would you like to have to campaign and raise funds for you: Romney, Huckabee, Palin or the Tea Party movement?

If were smart, you’d be asking for Romney’s help to win 2010.

When Mitt Romney resigned in the Presidential Primaries, he promised he would help Republicans/Conservatives win in 2008, 2010 and beyond.

Mitt is actually keeping his promise and is following through with it by getting conservatives in high offices so that we can put this country back on the right track.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 7:58 PM

Romney is just the same old GOP stuff served up over and over.

Ain’t gonna work with this Independent, anyway.

AnninCA on January 30, 2010 at 8:05 PM

The problem with Mitt Romney – and I say this as one who actively supported him – is that he NOT, unfortunately, someone you would want to have a beer and shoot the breeze with. He is lacking the “everyman” appeal.

KickandSwimMom on January 30, 2010 at 8:08 PM

Please excuse the grammar – had a few wines :)

KickandSwimMom on January 30, 2010 at 8:09 PM

The bottom line is Newt Gingrich is the smartest person who should be running for president for the R party in 2012. He has the ideas. He has the legislative experience. He has the capacity to decimate all takers in a idea/policy debate. He would make all opponents look foolish in the extreme.

However, Newt–as we all know–has a lot of baggage. And that will give the Dems/Libs a ton of material to work with, which will become a personal attack on Newt rather than having to address him on his ideas. They don’t want to go toe-to-toe with him on the ideas because they will lose. Therefore, personal/character attacks will dominate the campaign.

IMO, Newt is better off in an advisory and advocate role — being out there selling the ideas and dismantling the house of cards the Dems/Libs are building…

eanax on January 30, 2010 at 8:15 PM

Please excuse the grammar – had a few wines :)

KickandSwimMom on January 30, 2010 at 8:09 PM

He just seems like Bush Redux to me. I wouldn’t vote for him. Too many ties to the insiders.

AnninCA on January 30, 2010 at 8:16 PM

The bottom line is Newt Gingrich is the smartest person who should be running for president for the R party in 2012. He has the ideas. He has the legislative experience. He has the capacity to decimate all takers in a idea/policy debate. He would make all opponents look foolish in the extreme.

However, Newt–as we all know–has a lot of baggage. And that will give the Dems/Libs a ton of material to work with, which will become a personal attack on Newt rather than having to address him on his ideas. They don’t want to go toe-to-toe with him on the ideas because they will lose. Therefore, personal/character attacks will dominate the campaign.

IMO, Newt is better off in an advisory and advocate role — being out there selling the ideas and dismantling the house of cards the Dems/Libs are building…

eanax on January 30, 2010 at 8:15 PM

I like Newt’s brain, for sure.

AnninCA on January 30, 2010 at 8:17 PM

eanax on January 30, 2010 at 8:15 PM

Totally agree about Newt. My husband and I admire him a great deal, but his baggage is weighty!

KickandSwimMom on January 30, 2010 at 8:19 PM

AnninCA on January 30, 2010 at 8:16 PM

I agree Romney has MANY ties to insiders which is part of the reason he lacks that “every man” appeal.

KickandSwimMom on January 30, 2010 at 8:21 PM

Newt is bright as heck. So is Rove. I enjoy listening to both of them from an analytical point of view.

Neither probably have the kind of “leadership” gene, though.

AnninCA on January 30, 2010 at 8:24 PM

Rove is also extremely bright. I disagree with him some on policy. The fact that he is like Satan to the left tickles me to no end!

KickandSwimMom on January 30, 2010 at 8:26 PM

Rove is also extremely bright. I disagree with him some on policy. The fact that he is like Satan to the left tickles me to no end!

KickandSwimMom on January 30, 2010 at 8:26 PM

He just has a knack for identifying the weaknesses in an opponent’s stance and building on that.

That ability always annoys others. *haha

AnninCA on January 30, 2010 at 8:31 PM

Who was the last politician to make a serious run at the White House after resigning from a first term in their one major elected office?

Meaningless. What was the last Mormon to win the White House? Before Obama, the last black? When was the last time a woman won the presidency?

The governorship was key to Palin because she didn’t have the educational, corporate or military accomplishments that others contending for the White House have had.

dedalus on January 30, 2010 at 7:57 PM

Educational, corporate and military accomplishments don’t mean squat without charisma and ideological grounding. And that grounding isn’t dependent on a resume (which most voters couldn’t care less about anyway).

But that’s what primaries are for.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 8:33 PM

Whoever the next POTUS is they will have a sweetheart deal. It will be impossible to look bad if you are replacing Obama. People are way to critical of Palin and worry to much about Mitt’s religion. However, 2012 is a long way off and someone else may well be the republican candidate. The democratic candidate will probably not be Obama. It might be Hillary but who can guess at this point.

duff65 on January 30, 2010 at 8:35 PM

If were smart, you’d be asking for Romney’s help to win 2010.

When Mitt Romney resigned in the Presidential Primaries, he promised he would help Republicans/Conservatives win in 2008, 2010 and beyond.

Mitt is actually keeping his promise and is following through with it by getting conservatives in high offices so that we can put this country back on the right track.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 7:58 PM

Great. You’ve made a good case for Romney as RNC chairman.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 8:35 PM

The democratic candidate will probably not be Obama. It might be Hillary but who can guess at this point.

duff65 on January 30, 2010 at 8:35 PM

I’d be shocked if it weren’t Obama. I just can’t see that happening.

AnninCA on January 30, 2010 at 8:43 PM

Romney is just the same old GOP stuff served up over and over.

Ain’t gonna work with this Independent, anyway.

AnninCA on January 30, 2010 at 8:05 PM

Of course not, Dear leader wants you to support a loser like Huckabee…That’s what you get paid for isn’t it??? Your troll mask is slipping…Especially when you regale us with your love of Hillary…Sec of state who lets her philandering husband go to Korea to free journalists…Sec of State asleep at the wheel while the father of the Christmas bomber turns his radical son into the US Embassy in Nigeria, twice, and yet the State department fails to pull the wannabe bombers visa. The former Sen from New York whose husband pardoned Puerto Rican terrorists and closed Vieques Island to the US Navy to appease Puerto Ricans who by the way are a large voting block in NYC. The former first lady who lied about dodging sniper fire, FBI files found in the whitehouse, the firing of long-term civil service employees at the Whitehouse travel office. Who lied about her role in Whitewater while Jim Macdougal died in prison. The former first lady who employed military officers to serve as waitstaff at a State dinner. The former first lady who tried to bring an early version of Hillarycare…The former first lady who happened to intern for the law firm that defended black panthers for murder…The former first lady whose husband left office ten years ago flat broke and owing millions in legal fees who now declares a net worth of around 50 million…

Nozzle on January 30, 2010 at 8:45 PM

He’s really kind of, I think, settled into his role kind of being the elder statesman of the party and everything he went through as president.

Blech. Sounds like Scotty is aligning himself with “It’s my turn Romney.” Yet another epic fail of the GOP.

Palin 2012!

sabu on January 30, 2010 at 8:47 PM

I’d be shocked if it weren’t Obama. I just can’t see that happening.

AnninCA on January 30, 2010 at 8:43 PM

I’ll be more shocked if he isn’t forced to resign before his first term ends.

duff65 on January 30, 2010 at 8:50 PM

Especially when you regale us with your love of Hillary…Sec of state who lets her philandering husband

LOL*

We were talking about NEWT GINGRICH, weren’t we? I’d hardly hold him up as the paragon of male virtue in that arena.

I like Huckabee. As presidential material? Hmmmmm*

That’s a stretch.

AnninCA on January 30, 2010 at 8:52 PM

But that’s what primaries are for.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 8:33 PM

Historically, there has been discrimination against women, blacks and Mormons. At some point there is a “first” following changes that take place in society. However, cultures throughout history have always valued accomplishment as a measure for leadership. Insurmountable on her part? No. Difficult? Very much so.

Her natural calling may be more in the broadcast realm anyway. I’ve commented favorably about her statements–most recently her criticisms of NOW. I hope she continues. Is she the person to manage the executive branch day-to-day or to deal with the 535 members of congress? Maybe, but it doesn’t seem to be her core skill set.

dedalus on January 30, 2010 at 8:53 PM

AnninCA on January 30, 2010 at 8:52 PM

How about peddle your bull$hit somewhere else…

Nozzle on January 30, 2010 at 9:01 PM

anninca is such a helpful 11,000 posts at Huffpo die hard shillary diehard independent isn’t she?

windansea on January 30, 2010 at 9:21 PM

However, cultures throughout history have always valued accomplishment as a measure for leadership. Insurmountable on her part? No. Difficult? Very much so.

The difficulties she’d face if she were to run would be no greater than those facing Romney, except maybe the fact that the bar has been set higher for Palin.

Her natural calling may be more in the broadcast realm anyway. I’ve commented favorably about her statements–most recently her criticisms of NOW. I hope she continues. Is she the person to manage the executive branch day-to-day or to deal with the 535 members of congress? Maybe, but it doesn’t seem to be her core skill set.

dedalus on January 30, 2010 at 8:53 PM

But then Romney’s experience in dealing with the Mass legislature doesn’t exactly say he’s a whiz in that area either.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 9:49 PM

That is correct.
ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Did Scott Brown, Bob McDonnell and Chris Christie win because they were “ferocious”?

They’re scared of her.
rrpjr on January 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM

No they’re not. They believe in their heart of hearts that she’s a joke and an idiot. Not that it matters much what they think. It is largely irrelevant (and so are they).

Buy Danish on January 30, 2010 at 9:57 PM

That is correct.
ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 6:48 PM
Did Scott Brown, Bob McDonnell and Chris Christie win because they were “ferocious”?

Is Romney going to win the presidency on the basis of votes in 3 states? Don’t think so. State campaigns aren’t national campaigns.

They’re scared of her.
rrpjr on January 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM
No they’re not. They believe in their heart of hearts that she’s a joke and an idiot. Not that it matters much what they think. It is largely irrelevant (and so are they).

Buy Danish on January 30, 2010 at 9:57 PM

So they’ve held that opinion ever since August 29, 2008? That’s when the slime operation began.

They’re afraid of her charisma and ability to connect with people. Deny it all you want, it doesn’t change the fact.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:01 PM

That the GOP and their media mouthpieces are going to line up behind Mitt Romneycare is all the proof you need that nothing has changed in the GOP. All big government, all of the time. They are certain they can ride revulsion with Maobama back into power, and go back to spending us into oblivion. No changes necessary!

Only the Stupid Party, or Jay Leno’s jaywalking allstars, would propose to replace Obamacare with Romneycare.

james23 on January 30, 2010 at 10:06 PM

. Not that it matters much what they think. It is largely irrelevant (and so are they).

Buy Danish on January 30, 2010 at 9:57 PM

By the way, it does matter what they think, considering that so many on “our side” are all too willing to buy into whatever memes they want to peddle.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:07 PM

Palin is way to young and way to inexperienced to be an effective POTUS. There are a handful of people who are actually capable of becoming an effective POTUS under the age of 55, and none of them are going to be running for that office. I would vote for her over Obama and other leftist candidates, but that’s about it. The last thing we need is another effective campaigner and rabble-rouser with near zero experience in the White House.

ray on January 30, 2010 at 10:14 PM

The last thing we need is another effective campaigner and rabble-rouser with near zero experience in the White House.

ray on January 30, 2010 at 10:14 PM

No, the LAST thing we need is some other bland machine apparatchik representing more friggin’ status quo, with just enough Ivy League folderol to keep the peasants enthralled.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:17 PM

Buy Danish on January 30, 2010 at 9:57 PM

I would say that Brown at least was “ferocious”, in his own way, and in a good way. Ferocity is a matter of spirit, a willingness and even joy in the fight. In Brown’s case, he was absolutely on top of every attack, redirecting the energy in smart ways. Yes, he was ferocious. I’m not as familiar with Christie and McDonnell’s campaign, but my guess is they conducted theirs similarly.

I have no dislike of Romney and think he’d make a terrific cabinet appointment. But I watched his campaign closely and never felt the stirrings of leadership. He comes from the mold of the benign patriachal Republican figure. And his effort to duplicate Reagan’s “sunniness” always felt strained and monotonous to me. There was no edge to it. Yes, Reagan was sunny, but he also had bite and edge. Romney has no bite, no edge, no flint. He’s terrifically articulate, intelligent, probably even over-qualified if that’s possible, but I get no sense that he’s willing to lose himself in the meaning of this whole thing, to dig down into the guts of what’s going on in America and the threat we face from the Left.

That’s what I mean by ferocity.

And you’re wrong about the Left not fearing Palin. I was a leftist, hardcore. And they fear her. This fear may be at some subconscious level, in which they can maintain that she’s a “joke.” But they fear her.

rrpjr on January 30, 2010 at 10:23 PM

Palin is popular with the conservative base and populists. She, though, does not have the same pull with actual independents.

This is where she will falter in a general election, IMO. She might be able to get the nomination, but I do not believe she would be able to win a General Election against Obama — even at this point.

A lot of Independents do not have as much faith in her as the base. And that’s just the way things stand right now, regardless of what Palinites believe…

eanax on January 30, 2010 at 10:24 PM

He comes from the mold of the benign patriachal Republican figure. And his effort to duplicate Reagan’s “sunniness” always felt strained and monotonous to me. There was no edge to it. Yes, Reagan was sunny, but he also had bite and edge. Romney has no bite, no edge, no flint. He’s terrifically articulate, intelligent, probably even over-qualified if that’s possible, but I get no sense that he’s willing to lose himself in the meaning of this whole thing, to dig down into the guts of what’s going on in America and the threat we face from the Left.

rrpjr on January 30, 2010 at 10:23 PM

Bullseye.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:25 PM

A lot of Independents do not have as much faith in her as the base. And that’s just the way things stand right now, regardless of what Palinites believe…

eanax on January 30, 2010 at 10:24 PM

Better to try to work with the base first and work outwarfd, than looking for a candidate ONLY on the basis of how “indpendents” feel about him/her. That’s a recipe for decades of lib rule.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:27 PM

If the GOP wants another bailouts and big government guy, then Mitt Romneycare is the man. His big gov’t credentials are impecable, and it is his turn. And Jeb has that toxic name.

On the other hand, should the GOP decide its time to extract its head from its butt, they will select a small government candidate. Palin is the strongest of that group.

Me, I expect the Stupid Party to push Romneycare and gets its butt kicked, again. Conservatives will ignore Mitt in droves.

james23 on January 30, 2010 at 10:28 PM

LOL, I always think about an article J. R. Dunn wrote in the AT several months back. Here’s a quote from it which I’ve repeated again and again:

She will be back. Not for 2012. The GOP has its plans already worked out. Very clever ones, too. The Republicans will do what they always do when they’re up against it: grab an empty suit and run around shaking it in people’s faces while shouting, “Here’s the man!” By 2012, after his policies really hit home, as gas and home fuel prices triple and quadruple, as medical rationing begins, as the renewed Axis of Evil runs wild across Eurasia, Obama will be ready to drop. At that point he could be defeated by a ticket consisting of Charley Manson and Jojo the Dogface Boy. But the GOP will blow it all the same. Exactly as the party did in ’96, following the same script to the letter. They will, to coin a phrase, Mitt it up.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:33 PM

The problem with Mitt Romney – and I say this as one who actively supported him – is that he NOT, unfortunately, someone you would want to have a beer and shoot the breeze with. He is lacking the “everyman” appeal.

KickandSwimMom on January 30, 2010 at 8:08 PM

And that’s what people wanted in Obama. Someone to drink beer with. And that’s what we got with Obama’s beer summit.

And people said that Bush Jr. had that kind of quality too. He was a guy you could have beer with.

Personally, picking a president as someone you’d want to have beer with is a bad way to choose a President.

Great. You’ve made a good case for Romney as RNC chairman.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 8:35 PM

LOL.

Although I prefer Romney in 2012 (unless someone better pops up), Romney would make a better RNC Chairman than Micheal Steele.

Is Romney going to win the presidency on the basis of votes in 3 states?

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:01 PM

I wrote a blog about how Romney helping 3 people (and more in the future) win political offices is part of his larger strategy to win the Presidential race in 2012.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 10:34 PM

I wrote a blog about how Romney helping 3 people (and more in the future) win political offices is part of his larger strategy to win the Presidential race in 2012.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 10:34 PM

Oh, he’ll get the nomination. He’s getting his blessed machinery in place. But he’ll never be elected.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:37 PM

Nominating Palin would be like selecting a surgeon for your operation who didn’t finish their internship and has never actually completed a surgery before… but they sounded like they understood the situation pretty well, reminded you of the type of people you trust, and seemed much better than that other inexperienced doctor who also didn’t finish anything and failed when he operated on your sibling.

ray on January 30, 2010 at 10:40 PM

And you’re wrong about the Left not fearing Palin. I was a leftist, hardcore. And they fear her. This fear may be at some subconscious level, in which they can maintain that she’s a “joke.” But they fear her.
rrpjr on January 30, 2010 at 10:23 PM

They fear her because they believe she’s an ooga booga Christian who will ban books, burst into their bedrooms to persecute homosexuals, kill the planet by doing horrible things like opening up ANWR to drilling, and every other ridiculous, irrational fear the Left is consumed with. That is not the same thing as fearing her because they think she’s a winner.

Buy Danish on January 30, 2010 at 10:41 PM

By the way, Conservative Samizdat, this is from your blog post you mentioned:

There’s also a second point to make about the NY-23 election. Although Romney was supporting the candidates in the Virginia and New Jersey election, he could have supported Hoffman but he didn’t. The point here is to look at the difference between a candidate who rode completely on the Tea Party wave and those candidates who were backed by Romney.

The lesson is clear: Politicians who rely only on the support of the Tea Party movement have yet to win an election. Politicians who receive the support of Mitt Romney, have always won.

The score is pretty clear: Tea Party 0, Romney 3.

So, sticking a finger in the eye of the Tea Party movement is more important than getting Hoffman elected? That’s not the sort of “leadership” we need, if that’s the case.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:42 PM

Oh, he’ll get the nomination. He’s getting his blessed machinery in place. But he’ll never be elected.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:37 PM

I disagree. I think he will win in 2012. But we’ll have to wait and see. Its too early to tell now.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 10:43 PM

They fear her because they believe she’s an ooga booga Christian who will ban books, burst into their bedrooms to persecute homosexuals, kill the planet by doing horrible things like opening up ANWR to drilling, and every other ridiculous, irrational fear the Left is consumed with. That is not the same thing as fearing her because they think she’s a winner.

Buy Danish on January 30, 2010 at 10:41 PM

You contradict yourself. They wouldn’t be afriad of her “ooga booganess” if they thought she’s an abject loser.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:44 PM

I disagree. I think he will win in 2012. But we’ll have to wait and see. Its too early to tell now.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 10:43 PM

No, he won’t.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:45 PM

So when does Romney talk of liberty and freedom. Must be in the shower because I’ve never heard it. The smart people have got us into this mess. Common sense will get us out if it’s still possible. Romney speaks of what government can and will do for us like the rest of the elite. We need someone that will go to washington to cut the head off the snake.

wheelgun on January 30, 2010 at 10:45 PM

So, sticking a finger in the eye of the Tea Party movement is more important than getting Hoffman elected? That’s not the sort of “leadership” we need, if that’s the case.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:42 PM

I’m glad you read the blog.

My point isn’t that Romney isn’t sticking a finger in the eye of the tea party.

My point is that the Tea party can’t seem to stick a finger in the eye of Obama but Romney can. Three times. Obama has stumped for three candidates and lost all three whereas Romney supported the three candidates and won.

Hence, Obama 0, Romney 3.

Secondly, Tea party’s main strength is grass root political activism. They are very good at preventing horrible legislation from getting passed by keeping constant pressure on the politicians through political activism.

However, the Tea Party’s weakness is that the tea party movement hasn’t been able to influence a single election…even in an election like NY-23.

My point is that Romney has the political muscle that the tea party doesn’t have. Maybe they’ll be able to flex it in the 2010 elections and I’m open to seeing that happen.

But so far, Romney has done more to influence the elections than the tea party political movement has. In contrast, the tea party movement has been very effective in preventing Cap and Trade, ObamaCare and other horrible government legislation.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 10:56 PM

Missed this:

The problem with Mitt Romney – and I say this as one who actively supported him – is that he NOT, unfortunately, someone you would want to have a beer and shoot the breeze with. He is lacking the “everyman” appeal.
KickandSwimMom on January 30, 2010 at 8:08 PM

You’re not going to have a beer with him because he doesn’t drink. But speaking for myself, I’d very much enjoy “shooting the breeze with him”. If I were looking for a night in Dullsville I’d pick Barry “Beer Summit” Obama.

You contradict yourself. They wouldn’t be afriad of her “ooga booganess” if they thought she’s an abject loser.
ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:44 PM

They fear everyone who fits into that imaginary stereotype. Do they think that all of them are running for higher office? She is just a more prominent manifestation of their fears.

Have to run, so any more responses will have to wait until tomorrow…

Buy Danish on January 30, 2010 at 11:01 PM

So when does Romney talk of liberty and freedom. Must be in the shower because I’ve never heard it.

wheelgun on January 30, 2010 at 10:45 PM

He has been speaking of Freedom and Liberty. I suggest you go here, here, here (or see the video here) and here.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 11:08 PM

The Romneycare architect is a massive fraud who deserves zero support from actual conservatives, but unsurprisingly the sheep will line up in droves once he declares for 2012. More debt and more social spending is his national game-plan.

The Dean on January 30, 2010 at 11:17 PM

Whether Mitt runs or not and frankly I have my reasons I hope he stays behind the scenes….

Reguardles of what happens in the future, we owe Mitt a whole lot NOW!

He backed Scott Brown. He understood the politics of MA. He took advantage of it. He saved us from Obamacare.

This is huge. He has effected our lives for the better. While every other politician is busy promoting their own career… Mitt took his loss like a man and followed up with continuing to help the country!

Imagine if Mitt hadn’t gotten involved and Brown had lost. Where would we be right now?

Some people said above that Mitt doesn’t have fight. Maybe not, but he has something better.

The ability to put aside his ego and work for the good of the nation.

Have we ever had a politician who would do that before? He didn’t ask anyone to recognize what he did. In fact he kept it pretty hush hush. That is a patriot of the truest order.

petunia on January 30, 2010 at 11:34 PM

You contradict yourself. They wouldn’t be afriad of her “ooga booganess” if they thought she’s an abject loser.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:44 PM

Remember who we are talking about here… THEY WERE AFRAID OF SCOTT BROWN’S PICK-UP TRUCK!!!!

All it takes to scare the left is to be normal. Common Sense totally terrifies them. After all what is more common sense than a pick-up truck? Such a useful vehicle.

petunia on January 30, 2010 at 11:40 PM

The Romneycare architect is a massive fraud who deserves zero support from actual conservatives, but unsurprisingly the sheep will line up in droves once he declares for 2012. More debt and more social spending is his national game-plan.

The Dean on January 30, 2010 at 11:17 PM

You are seeing the world upside down here. This description bears no resemblance to a real person named Mitt Romney. I think you are fighting against a phantom that is as false as the tooth fairy.

You need to find out who the man really is. And let me give you a hint… don’t ask Huck.

petunia on January 30, 2010 at 11:43 PM

They fear everyone who fits into that imaginary stereotype. Do they think that all of them are running for higher office? She is just a more prominent manifestation of their fears.

Buy Danish on January 30, 2010 at 11:01 PM

Alan Keyes fits the description as well. They pretty much leave Keyes alone because they know he’s not going anywhere. I couldn’t tell you a thing about Keyes’ family, sex life, academic record etc.

However, the Tea Party’s weakness is that the tea party movement hasn’t been able to influence a single election…even in an election like NY-23.

My point is that Romney has the political muscle that the tea party doesn’t have. Maybe they’ll be able to flex it in the 2010 elections and I’m open to seeing that happen.

But so far, Romney has done more to influence the elections than the tea party political movement has.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 10:56 PM

So why didn’t Romney pitch in and help Hoffman, rather than concentrate on a guy who was already 20 points ahead in the polls?

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 11:50 PM

So why didn’t Romney pitch in and help Hoffman, rather than concentrate on a guy who was already 20 points ahead in the polls?

Ummm Scott said Romney was the first one to support his candidacy not that he came in at the last minute.

Maybe a lone house seat in NY wouldn’t make the big difference that two liberal state governors and Teddy Kennedy’s seat would make. Mitt picked his (our) battles well and wow what a difference he made in the county!

petunia on January 30, 2010 at 11:57 PM

Maybe a lone house seat in NY wouldn’t make the big difference that two liberal state governors and Teddy Kennedy’s seat would make. Mitt picked his (our) battles well and wow what a difference he made in the county!

petunia on January 30, 2010 at 11:57 PM

Well, it could lead someone to think that Mitt’s picking the battles that have a better chance of resounding to Mitt’s greater glory. Legislatively, a representative right now trumps any two governors. Endorsing Hoffman would’ve meant 1. going against the GOP establishment and 2. risking a tarnishing of the image in case Hoffman lost (as he did).

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 12:04 AM

*redounding to Mitt’s greater glory, that is

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 12:05 AM

Secondly, Tea party’s main strength is grass root political activism. They are very good at preventing horrible legislation from getting passed by keeping constant pressure on the politicians through political activism.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 10:56 PM

That’s far more important right now than a campaign-influence tally sheet.

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 12:09 AM

He has been speaking of Freedom and Liberty. I suggest you go here, here, here (or see the video here) and here.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 11:08 PM

Maybe you can post something more substantial than just a few speeches. Maybe like something from his big government days as governor. I have a feeling we have a different view on what liberty and freedom is. In your first link he talks about romney care and proceeds to tell us this is how you solve the issue of insuring people without big government. That’s reaching into a bag of bullshit pretty deep.

wheelgun on January 31, 2010 at 12:15 AM

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 4:49 PM

I am serious Conservative, I gave to Mitt’s campaign when Fred dropped out, and I would campaign like mad for Mitt IF he won the primary. But I worry that other Conservatives would not. This next campaign is going to be the campaign for our very lives. Mitt may not be my favorite, but Conservatives would be very foolish indeed if they did not elect at least a man with tremendous character. Like I said, anybody but Huckahu Akbar. I am down for a steel cage death match to keep him as far away from the primaries, or a possibility of becoming POTUS.

Narutoboy on January 30, 2010 at 7:25 PM

Agreed. My state neighbors his state, and we have friends which work on his staff. I believe him to be an incredibly intelligent man, strong Conservative, and he would be just what this country needs as President. Alas, not many voters will ever be able to get past what the idiots at the RNC did with his intro to the nation. So many of those shallow voters will never hear the words coming out of the man’s mouth. His wife is not so keen on him running either. I would one day love to see him run. He is a true asset to the GOP.

**For those saying Mitt has been AWOL and such nonsense, you might want to consider the fact that his wife Ann was reported to have a relapse of her illness, and some have said this is why Mitt might not seem so aggressive about running at this time. They also spent a good bit of their own money during the past primary season. I believe they were trying to sell their home in Colorado. Perhaps Mitt believes his family is more important than his political aspirations. How refreshing!

freeus on January 31, 2010 at 12:35 AM

Romney isn’t the answer, but someone LIKE Romney and less like Palin will be able to beat Maobama. I know we all deny this, but Palin lost McCain a lot of people who were wavering on voting for the inexperienced guy until the experienced but frail guy picked someone even less experienced than him. My dream would be someone with Ronald Reagan’s political outlook and George W. Bush’s family life.

Speedwagon82 on January 31, 2010 at 1:46 AM

Exit question: If ObamaCare goes down and Mitt pledges, as he can and must, that he’d never support a RomneyCare program for the entire United States, is it time for a second look at Romney?

You forgot the part about he hasn’t. And didn’t. In fact his public statements on Romneycare were exactly the opposite– “Hey Mr. President, ask me! I know how!”

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/07/mr-president-whats-the-rush.html

He’s been busy, he’s been taking care of family…what’s the truth? Of course–it’s whatever you need to believe to support Mitt Romney. Meanwhile, apart from that disastrous outburst the guy is keeping a very low profile. You’ll be hard pressed in 2011 to quote a policy statement from Mitt Romney in 2010.

Chris_Balsz on January 31, 2010 at 1:55 AM

I like Romney and I like Palin.

Romney is very good one on one. Romney did really well in the Michigan primary. I agree with his remark that any general health reform should be state based.

We need to return to the idea of state control. Some states are liberal, some are conservative. Health care is tied in to a lot of moral decisions like abortion, and it is better if insurance politicies reflect regional differences, and regional priorities

Romney was dishing out to Massachusetts, what that liberal state wanted – a big fat expensive safety net

He is the only politician I have heard take a credible stand in favor of American manufacturing. Most of them are like McCain, who in the Michigan primary made a comment these jobs are never coming back. Romney was asked the same question about exported jobs, and his reply was “Of course they can come back’. Our state governor acts like such manufacturing is extinct, and talks endlessly about windmills and the jobs of the future. That is why I like Romney. He does not seem to be a jackass.

I saw Romney on one of the weekend shows recently and he was great. He was in control. I think if Romney has more exposure than just a debate, he wins converts

Brown’s comments about Romney were, stupid. Now this is interesting to me. He was in the legislature, so had to have some understanding of Romney the Governor.

once again it’s my opinion but he’s really a different guy than I knew when he was here

I’d like a few seconds with Brown to clarify that statement. Perhaps Romney was a dang fool as Governor but usually people do not suddenly loosen up, unless they are medicated. Did Romney change, or did Brown meet the guy he heard about from others? It doesn’t add up. Especially with Romney giving the long friendly intro to Brown at the victory speech. And Brown spending his time praising McCain

entagor on January 31, 2010 at 2:05 AM

You contradict yourself. They wouldn’t be afriad of her “ooga booganess” if they thought she’s an abject loser.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:44 PM

The Left feels obligated to act like anyone with ooga bogga Christian views is the next Hitler. They did the same thing to Falwell and now Pat Robertson even though they had less power than Palin.

Speedwagon82 on January 31, 2010 at 2:23 AM

Palin attracts attention, unfortunately attention is an index of celebrity not credibility. The attention she does generate is a polarized mix of adoring and derisive. Her ability to get to the White House won’t be a function of making her supporters more enthusiastic, but by persuading those not already in her camp.

Also, IBD isn’t a serious publication. The FT, though, is.

dedalus on January 30, 2010 at 7:49 PM

IDB isn’t a serious publication? REALLY?

You have a seriously poor ability to accept reality. Plain connects with people. ALL people. She’ll do better than anyone else at attracting “independents”

Remember, she had an almost 90 percent approval rating as Governor. And most Alaskans are registered as independents. Hell, even Todd is! If you can please that bunch, you can please anyone.

This Fox gig will be good for her. She’ll be more visible and get the word out, her word.

But Sarah’s main strength is she’s one of us, not a lifelong party hack like RomneyCare.

I’m sorry, but the last time I checked John McCain was the Senator and Mitt Romney was a governor. Why would Scott Brown relate himself to a governor? Also, note how Brown specifically called out Mitt Romney as the man that led his campaign towards success in the link that I attached earlier.

I respectfully think you’ve either been hiding under a rock or are only following Sarah Palin news. Mitt Romney has been on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, and Fox news for months now speaking on healthcare. This doesn’t even account for the op-eds he written and radio shows that he’s done. Speaking out on healthcare and providing solutions to them is hardly being AWOL. This very site among others has noted Romney discussions on the healthcare debate many times.

Also, a man who has made his life’s work in turning around institutions either be it in the private or public sector cannot be construed to be another political hack. Especially, since Romney’s only public service was one term as the governor of my state.

SED on January 30, 2010 at 7:50 PM

Why wouldn’t Scotty say he was a “Mitt Romney” type of leader?

Sarah Palin is most certainly Ronald Reagan reincarnate. She not only follows his path, but quotes him often. She’s never been President…yet…and yet, he’s the one she’s modeled after. (yes, I know he was Governor of California)

It wouldn’t matter if Romney had only been dog catcher, if he was worth following in his footsteps…..

As for the rest, it only goes to show you how little he matters. I read the same stuff most of the rest of us do, and Romney simply never caught mine, or anyone else’s attention.

It was Sarah Palin who singlehandedly torpedoed ObamaCare. “Death Panels” is now a household phrase. And unlike most spineless politicians, when she caught hell for using the phrase, from both sides, she stood her ground, and started using it more often! In the end, she rammed those death panels right up Obama’s ass!

Sarah Palin has balls! No one else does. I want a leader with balls! Sarah Palin is a leader…Mitt Romney, a nice enough guy, is not.

Historically, there has been discrimination against women, blacks and Mormons. At some point there is a “first” following changes that take place in society. However, cultures throughout history have always valued accomplishment as a measure for leadership. Insurmountable on her part? No. Difficult? Very much so.

Her natural calling may be more in the broadcast realm anyway. I’ve commented favorably about her statements–most recently her criticisms of NOW. I hope she continues. Is she the person to manage the executive branch day-to-day or to deal with the 535 members of congress? Maybe, but it doesn’t seem to be her core skill set.

dedalus on January 30, 2010 at 8:53 PM

Man (or woman) you seriously don’t have a clue. Sarah faced a very hostile legislature in Alaska. Remember, when she took power she had just unseated a sitting Republican governor, and sent a bunch of his people to prison! The GOP HATED her. The democrats weren’t much better, and yet, she wore them out and got a lot of big stuff done.

You think Sarah doesn’t know how to handle a legislative body? Put down the crack pipe! She’ll do just fine. Certainly better than anything we’ve seen in the last 25-30 years.

Palin is way to young and way to inexperienced to be an effective POTUS. There are a handful of people who are actually capable of becoming an effective POTUS under the age of 55, and none of them are going to be running for that office. I would vote for her over Obama and other leftist candidates, but that’s about it. The last thing we need is another effective campaigner and rabble-rouser with near zero experience in the White House.

ray on January 30, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Horseshit!

Sarah Palin has TWENTY YEARS worth of executive level experience. That’s more than any so-called front runner out there. Hell, if you add it up, she probably has more real world than all of ‘em put together!

She’s most certainly the most successful Executive of the lot. She’s got the best record, by far, of actually getting positive things done.

She certainly left her state better than she found it. Can’t say that for any other front runner. NONE.

Bottom line, Palin is THE most qualified, period.

They fear her because they believe she’s an ooga booga Christian who will ban books, burst into their bedrooms to persecute homosexuals, kill the planet by doing horrible things like opening up ANWR to drilling, and every other ridiculous, irrational fear the Left is consumed with. That is not the same thing as fearing her because they think she’s a winner.

Buy Danish on January 30, 2010 at 10:41 PM

They wouldn’t fear any of that if they didn’t know she will win. There’s a whole lot of batshit crazies out there, on both sides of the aisle (Ron Paul) but I don’t fear them, because I know they can never win anything of consequence.

Romney hasn’t been awol at all.

In addition to helping Scott Brown win MA, Mitt Romney was also busy helping Chris Christie win in NJ and helping Bob McDonnell win VA.

Romney and his political team are still working behind the scenes to help Republicans win in 2010. Here are the following conservatives Romney is helping:

1) He’s helping Tom Foley (R), who is running in a competitive primary to face Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.)

2) He’s helping Rick Lazio (R), who is running for governor of New York.

3) He’s helping Meg Whitman (R) become the next governor of California.

4) He’s helping Ovide Lamontagne (R) to replace the retiring Sen. Judd Gregg’s (R-N.H.)

I dare YOU or anyone else to name me one conservative who is helping Republicans win political offices across this nation as much as Mitt Romney has.

Finally, consider this question: If you were a Republican candidate for running for Congress in 2010, who would you like to have to campaign and raise funds for you: Romney, Huckabee, Palin or the Tea Party movement?

If were smart, you’d be asking for Romney’s help to win 2010.

When Mitt Romney resigned in the Presidential Primaries, he promised he would help Republicans/Conservatives win in 2008, 2010 and beyond.

Mitt is actually keeping his promise and is following through with it by getting conservatives in high offices so that we can put this country back on the right track.

Conservative Samizdat on January 30, 2010 at 7:58 PM

So far you haven’t mentioned a conservative Romney has helped! Tom Foley? Don’t think so. RINO.

And lets just stop right there at Meg Whitman. This is a loon who believes in global warming, and was praising Van Jones for his “good works.”

Yeah, that’s what we need, more idiots in office. Thanks Mitt, thanks a lot!

I imagine you’ll see Sarah Palin driving the bus on getting REAL conservatives elected. She’s just now kicking that effort off. She’ll be in Texas helping Rick Perry (hopefully her future Vice President) and then she’ll be working with Michelle Bachmann. From there, who know.

Sarah will also follow Reagan’s path, and be going all over spreading the word about conservatism to 100′s of thousands of people in person. Inspiring millions more.

She’ll educate and motivate in ways the people like Romney, or the rest of the establishment people can’t even comprehend.

Ya know, I don’t dislike Mitt as a person, but I don’t want him anywhere the White House. He’s another big Government Nanny Stater. He’s Obama, but with a slower time table.

No thanks.

gary4205 on January 31, 2010 at 3:12 AM

So why didn’t Romney pitch in and help Hoffman, rather than concentrate on a guy who was already 20 points ahead in the polls?

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 11:50 PM

And it doesn’t matter if Mitt had endorsed Hoffman or not. He already received support from Palin and Thompson and Hoffman STILL lost.

Why he didn’t back Hoffman will be up to speculation. My guess is that Romney looked at Hoffman’s poll numbers and probably predicted that Hoffman wasn’t gonna win.

The local GOP in NY-23 botched that election badly and was probably not worth putting money down to help out. I suspect that Owens would have won either way against Dierdre Scozzafava or Hoffman. And Mitt could probably see that coming down the pipe.

Maybe like something from his big government days as governor. I have a feeling we have a different view on what liberty and freedom is. In your first link he talks about romney care and proceeds to tell us this is how you solve the issue of insuring people without big government. That’s reaching into a bag of bullshit pretty deep.

wheelgun on January 31, 2010 at 12:15 AM

Maybe you ought to educate yourself on what federalism means.

I love it when conservatives praise the virtues of federalism, except when the state does something they don’t like…then they get angry for doing what the Constitution allows the states to do which is that every state has a right to make plans for their citizens.

How Utah comes up with a healthcare plan will not be the same as Washington State or Massachusetts.

If you don’t like Utah’s health care plan, you can go to Kansas or any other state where you feel there is a better health care plan.

That’s the beauty of federalism.

Conservative Samizdat on January 31, 2010 at 4:24 AM

I wanted Mitt in 2008. Wouldn’t we be in a much better place now if Huckabee supporters had just shut the hell up instead of handing the election to Obama by getting McCain nominated?

I think the approach for 2012 for Mitt is going have to expound on the theme of small government/states rights which would allow California or Mass. to initiate entitlement programs for healthcare if that is what they want to do.

highhopes on January 29, 2010 at 8:33 PM

I’m with you all the way! The states are allowed to experiment with health care. The Feds are not. Key difference that so many seem to miss.

MJBrutus on January 31, 2010 at 5:51 AM

Sarah Palin has TWENTY YEARS worth of executive level experience.

Yeah, good luck cashing that check and not having it bounce badly. Very, very few believe it, and they never will. A 40 year old hospital orderly may have 20 years experience in the medical industry, but no one is going to select them to perform their surgery.

ray on January 31, 2010 at 7:13 AM

That’s the beauty of federalism.
Conservative Samizdat on January 31, 2010 at 4:24 AM

Exactly. Isn’t it interesting (and amusing) how many commenters who oppose Mitt but don’t live in Massachusetts are so up in arms about what happened in the State of Massachusetts, and make false claims about its implications for the rest of the country, and Mitt’s intentions in that regard.

Buy Danish on January 31, 2010 at 8:33 AM

Why he didn’t back Hoffman will be up to speculation. My guess is that Romney looked at Hoffman’s poll numbers and probably predicted that Hoffman wasn’t gonna win.

Conservative Samizdat on January 31, 2010 at 4:24 AM

So Romney makes the safe bets, wins, and then is praised to the skies for “making the difference”?

Isn’t it interesting (and amusing) how many commenters who oppose Mitt but don’t live in Massachusetts are so up in arms about what happened in the State of Massachusetts, and make false claims about its implications for the rest of the country, and Mitt’s intentions in that regard.

Buy Danish on January 31, 2010 at 8:33 AM

Well then quit using Romney’s term as governor as a qualification for the presidency. You do that, and people won’t complain about his record.

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 8:53 AM

Yeah, good luck cashing that check and not having it bounce badly. Very, very few believe it, and they never will. A 40 year old hospital orderly may have 20 years experience in the medical industry, but no one is going to select them to perform their surgery.

ray on January 31, 2010 at 7:13 AM

Which means no governors except those from NY, CA, IL, MI, FL, and TX will ever be considered to have the requisite “executive experience”. Good luck selling that bullshit.

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 8:59 AM

LOL, you went from me being critical of the comment;

“Sarah Palin has TWENTY YEARS worth of executive level experience.”

to your reply of my critique;

Which means no governors except those from NY, CA, IL, MI, FL, and TX will ever be considered to have the requisite “executive experience”.

How did you come up with that non-sequester?

ray on January 31, 2010 at 9:18 AM

I don’t care how cool Romney appears. If he ends up the GOP nominee, I will not vote for him. I will vote for the undercard.

I’ll write in another name for President if necessary.

dogsoldier on January 31, 2010 at 9:32 AM

Support for Mitt as the Republican candidate? Check!
Gratuitous swipe at Sarah Palin? Check!

Must be Allahpundit.

applebutter on January 31, 2010 at 9:39 AM

mod Dem in da house, would be happy to vote for Romney

would not be able to vote for Newt or Huckabee thought I dont think, too much two faced ness from Newt who I think will cut a deal with anyone, and Huck i dunno his religion seems to get in the way of pragmatism in some instances, the opposite issue I guess, like the paroling of violent felons

Mitt is IMO perfect, economic know how, governor experience, telegenic and not in our face on social issues, he has it all IMO to get the Dem swing vote that is already in the GOP pocket

ginaswo on January 31, 2010 at 9:39 AM

Romneys idea of states rights is correct on healthcare and I applaud him for that. Using the power of the state for the greater good is not what I call freedom and liberty. Your right when you say that I do not have to live in that state, it’s the mindset that is my concern. His second amendment stances are a no go for the south. It’s not that we wouldn’t want a governor from the north, just not a proggresive republican like Romney.

wheelgun on January 31, 2010 at 9:55 AM

Here’s just a week’s worth of Palin’s comments on Obama and the Left. Concise, precise and penetrating hits — all thoughtful, none mean-spirited, most sure to leave a mark. In just one week.

http://www.conservatives4palin.com/

No other Republican comes close to this kind of inspiringly conservative, freedom-based, rapid response.

rrpjr on January 31, 2010 at 10:03 AM

Sarah faced a very hostile legislature in Alaska. Remember, when she took power she had just unseated a sitting Republican governor, and sent a bunch of his people to prison! The GOP HATED her. The democrats weren’t much better, and yet, she wore them out and got a lot of big stuff done.

You think Sarah doesn’t know how to handle a legislative body? Put down the crack pipe! She’ll do just fine. Certainly better than anything we’ve seen in the last 25-30 years.

gary4205 on January 31, 2010 at 3:12 AM

The problem she’ll have in pointing to that record is that it reminds people that she didn’t finish her only term. It is like telling people about good grades through sophomore year. It may be true but it forces the question about giving up the elected job and working instead on Facebook posts and Fox News.

There isn’t a past President who chose a similar path to winning a general election. It’s possible she could be the first, but the odds are longer.

dedalus on January 31, 2010 at 10:06 AM

How did you come up with that non-sequester?

ray on January 31, 2010 at 9:18 AM

The comparison of Palin’s experience with that of a hospital orderly, probably.

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 10:15 AM

No other Republican comes close to this kind of inspiringly conservative, freedom-based, rapid response.

rrpjr on January 31, 2010 at 10:03 AM

They could if they had the gonads (besides Palin and Bachmann — ironic, huh?). None seem to have them, and they won’t have them in 2012 either.

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 10:17 AM

Palin is a leader…Mittens is well…NOT!

gary4205 on January 30, 2010 at 6:02 PM

Then let’s hope she campaigns for him when he wins the primary.

Nalea on January 31, 2010 at 10:23 AM

Palin is a leader…Mittens is well…NOT!

gary4205 on January 30, 2010 at 6:02 PM

Then let’s hope she campaigns for him when he wins the primary.

Nalea on January 31, 2010 at 10:23 AM

Why would irresistable Mitt need the help of some podunk unqualified hick like Palin? Weird.

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 10:28 AM

Better to try to work with the base first and work outwarfd, than looking for a candidate ONLY on the basis of how “indpendents” feel about him/her. That’s a recipe for decades of lib rule.

ddrintn on January 30, 2010 at 10:27 PM

The base gets you the nomination, but it does not get you the election. It’s simple math, folks.

“A recipe for decades of lib rule” is not finding and backing the most competent and articulate candidate of conservative ideas, values, etc. and ensuring that person–regardless of who he/she is–is free of scandal and anything else the Dems/Libs can use against that candidate.

The 2012 election must be solely about ideas. Zero fodder should be available for the Dems/Libs to use against this candidate.

I do not believe this person exists in national politics. And maybe it’s just wishful thinking on my part that someone like this does exist (he/she is most certainly not in the game currently), but unless the conservatives can produce a Reagan-like candidate, they will not retake the oval office in 2012.

And even if Palin were to get the nomination, I do not believe she will win in the General Election. Palin is a great person and a wonderful advocate for conservative values. However, she is not the most competent and articulate person to lead conservatives to victory in 2012. Gingrich is the most competent and articulate, but he has baggage.

Second look at Rick Perry…

eanax on January 31, 2010 at 10:42 AM

The 2012 election must be solely about ideas. Zero fodder should be available for the Dems/Libs to use against this candidate.

eanax on January 31, 2010 at 10:42 AM

That “zero-fodder” candidate is sheer fantasy.

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 10:44 AM

Yeah, good luck cashing that check and not having it bounce badly. Very, very few believe it, and they never will. A 40 year old hospital orderly may have 20 years experience in the medical industry, but no one is going to select them to perform their surgery.

ray on January 31, 2010 at 7:13 AM

LOL! Well played…

eanax on January 31, 2010 at 10:46 AM

That “zero-fodder” candidate is sheer fantasy.

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 10:44 AM

Maybe so, but if we do not start getting serious about pushing candidates of character, ethics and morals, then conservatives will continue to be in the permanent minority at the federal level.

eanax on January 31, 2010 at 10:49 AM

Second look at Rick Perry…

eanax on January 31, 2010 at 10:42 AM

Easily painted as a secessionist wacko. Just sayin’.

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 10:50 AM

Maybe so, but if we do not start getting serious about pushing candidates of character, ethics and morals, then conservatives will continue to be in the permanent minority at the federal level.

eanax on January 31, 2010 at 10:49 AM

Every possible GOP candidate I’ve seen mentioned are people of “character, ethics and morals”. The problem is with the people within the GOP who buy into MSM memes, usually in support of their own pet candidates. Romney’re religion means nothing to me, which is why I’d never object to him on that basis. Yet Romney supporters are all too willing to paint Palin as an idiotic chillbilly hick because it serves their purposes beautifully.

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 10:54 AM

*Romney’s

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 10:54 AM

The base gets you the nomination, but it does not get you the election. It’s simple math, folks.

eanax on January 31, 2010 at 10:42 AM

You have no hope of winning in the general election without support from the base. That’s even simpler math.

ddrintn on January 31, 2010 at 10:59 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5