Quotes of the day

posted at 9:00 pm on April 30, 2011 by Allahpundit

“Republican leaders, activists and donors, anxious that the party’s initial presidential field could squander a chance to capture grass-roots energy and build a strong case against President Obama at the outset of the 2012 race, are stepping up appeals for additional candidates to jump in, starting with Gov. Mitch Daniels of Indiana…

“The first contests of the primary are at least eight months away, and most of the candidates have yet to fully open their campaigns, but some party leaders worry that Republicans are making a bad first impression by appearing tentative about their prospects against Mr. Obama and allowing Donald J. Trump to grab headlines in the news vacuum of the race’s early stages.

“‘The race needs more responsible adults who can actually do the job,’ said Fergus Cullen, a former chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party…

“To some degree the disquiet about the field reflects tensions between the party establishment and the Tea Party movement about substance and style, with the newly influential grass-roots conservatives more comfortable with provocative messages, unconventional approaches and new faces than their establishment counterparts.”

***
“A ‘fringe’ nominee is unlikely. Democrats are hoping that the Republicans nominate somebody like Barry Goldwater, who satisfied the right wing but alienated independent and moderately Republican voters in 1964. However, that has not happened since the AuH2O candidacy, in large part because primaries now dominate the nomination process. That tends to reduce the influence of the most ideologically committed voters, as a broader cross-section of the electorate participates in primaries than party caucuses. Goldwater – who won the nomination in 1964 because of depth of support, rather than breadth – would probably not have been able to pull it out if the rules of today had been in place back then. His victory depended on his loyal supporters taking control of state and local party organizations, but these units are no longer in charge of the nomination.

“This is why, since the party reforms of the 1970s, most Republican nominees have been downright ‘boring.’ George H. W. Bush, Bob Dole, George W. Bush, and John McCain have been the selections in the last 20 years – and even Ronald Reagan was not really an insurgent in 1980. By that point, he had served for two terms as governor of the largest state in the union, and had stood for the GOP nomination twice already. In all likelihood, the nominee in 2012 will be similar to the ones we’ve seen over the last 30 years.”

***
“Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) would be the ‘perfect pick’ for the Republican presidential nominee in 2012, said Tea Party figurehead and former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas).

“Armey, in a video posted Friday to the website of the conservative magazine Newsmax, effused praise for Daniels and expressed a preference for one of the other former governors expected to join the race as a possible alternative

“‘I do think we have to look to the governors,’ he said. ‘But once again, the experience of the governors that have really grappled with budgets and dealt with them — right now I think is what we’re looking for.’”

***
“Asked in a public question-and-answer session about his past support for a cap-and-trade-like program limiting carbon emissions, Pawlenty answered: ‘It was a mistake, it was stupid and I’m sorry.’…

“‘I don’t try to defend it. Everybody’s got a couple of clunkers in their record,’ Pawlenty continued, repeating: ‘I don’t try to defend it. It was dumb.’

“To the audience in Manchester, the maneuver was obvious. Pawlenty wasn’t just offering one more recanting of his past support for an environmental policy that’s unpopular with conservatives. He also was preemptively drawing a contrast with Mitt Romney, who has declined to apologize for signing a universal health care law as governor of Massachusetts.”

Via Gateway Pundit:

***
“Romney remains an exceptionally unnatural public speaker. To convey passion and excitement, he raises the pitch of his voice and imbues it with urgency. But it never quite clicks. His tone and affect are like that of an adult doing a dramatic reading of a pirate story to a wide-eyed three year old. It doesn’t help that he speaks too quickly and often trips over his lines. At points during his speech, Romney seemed to slip into a frenzy and start madly free associating economic buzzwords…

“Romney seemed so panicked by the slip up that he rushed ahead to explain how gas prices were set, and briefly and inadvertently shed his ‘candidate’ persona and reverted to ‘businessman’–and then he gave a cogent and authoritative mini-briefing on how prices are set by the expectation of future supply and demand, and thus could be brought down with the right energy policy. No pandering, no buzzword, no mawkish invocation of American exceptionalism. If that Romney were ever to emerge for a sustained period, it’s hard to imagine who could challenge him for the nomination.”

***


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

How the whole issue of how the Trooper-in-law and the Chief-of-Police wife-beater was handled.

AshleyTKing on May 1, 2011 at 12:59 AM

bw222 on May 1, 2011 at 1:09 AM

That’s what I don’t understand. Even Ayn Rand and Objectivists supported Ford over Reagan and they were never enthused by Reagan. Even today, they seem to be more opposed to Palin than any of the RINOs. Why is that? Why are the libertarians aligning with moderate republicans who are always statists than with the small government types? What I find most perplexing is that Palin is even libertarian, not even full on social conservative like Bush or Huckabee. And yet, they find her more objectionable than Romney or Daniels. Why is that?

promachus on April 30, 2011 at 10:29 PM

I have told you several times. It is not Palin’s politics.

It is a combination of three things: the fact that she was only governor for less than one term.

And that she left under less than pristine conditions.

And third her abrasive and attactk dog style.

Most of what you like about Palin is a turn off to the majority of others.

She is great as an Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity type of figure, because they do the same thing, but as a leader it is just not what most poeple want.

In short… Palin is not very politic. She is no diplomat.

I am not a Palin hater so don’t start. If she is the nominee I will vote for her.

You said you didn’t get it. You probably still won’t because you see her so differently, but that is how most of us see her.

petunia on May 1, 2011 at 1:13 AM

So, pray tell Petunia, who are the nominees you would vote for?

bw222 on May 1, 2011 at 1:18 AM

West/Ryan 2012…!!!

… Palin can be Sec. of Energy, Bolten Sec. of State, Paul can take on the Fed, T-Paw can control the Interior, Newt can control the Borders, and Trump can battle the Unions.

It’s a start…

Seven Percent Solution on May 1, 2011 at 1:23 AM

How the whole issue of how the Trooper-in-law and the Chief-of-Police was handled.

AshleyTKing on May 1, 2011 at 12:59 AM

You mean where the trooper is still a trooper and the State Police chief was releaved of his duties, the events that were found not to be illegal or unethical? I’m fine with it, as was the Dept of Law in Alaska…

Anything else to throw out as an abuse of power while Palin was Governor?

Gohawgs on May 1, 2011 at 1:25 AM

I am not a Palin hater…
petunia on May 1, 2011 at 1:13 AM

No, of course not.

You defend a shallow welter of hateful and recycled charges as reasonable critique — or “real hesitance” — then accuse those who offer actual substantiated rebuttal as irrational idolizers of Palin and loiterers at lefty sites (incoherence, anyone?). For good measure, you toss in your own moldy croutons to the word salad of Palin slurs.

But let’s not “get you started.”

rrpjr on May 1, 2011 at 1:29 AM

Funny, I don’t recall Palin being mentioned in the post.

2ipa on May 1, 2011 at 1:45 AM

I used to be a big Goldwater fan, but the more I learn about the man. . .

Is nothing sacred?

Emperor Norton on May 1, 2011 at 1:50 AM

I think that guy Jack Daniels is looking better and better for 2012!

sharrukin on April 30, 2011 at 9:18 PM

Heh, ^this!

Who is John Galt on May 1, 2011 at 2:27 AM

And yet, they find her more objectionable than Romney or Daniels. Why is that?

promachus on April 30, 2011 at 10:29 PM

Death Wish?

Who is John Galt on May 1, 2011 at 2:49 AM

said Tea Party figurehead and former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas).

Dick Armey?

“Former” failure. TP Usurper-wannabe. Go away, all you “former” failures. Retire already. You “former” f-ups brought us to where we are now.

STFU, you failures!

Who is John Galt on May 1, 2011 at 2:56 AM

No, of course not.

You defend a shallow welter of hateful and recycled charges as reasonable critique — or “real hesitance” — then accuse those who offer actual substantiated rebuttal as irrational idolizers of Palin and loiterers at lefty sites (incoherence, anyone?). For good measure, you toss in your own moldy croutons to the word salad of Palin slurs.

But let’s not “get you started.”

rrpjr on May 1, 2011 at 1:29 AM

You said it my friend. I’ve had it up to here with the damned Palin bashing. If she weren’t a broad and most likely better looking than the attacker(such as petunia here) you’d not hear word one.
All I hear is idiotic accolades of the milquetoasts like Romney, Daniels, Pawlenty, et al. If they were half the man Palin is, you’d be saying “Sarah Palin who?”
Get bent, petunia, and take your Palin bashing somewhere else like D Koz or HuffPo.

Lanceman on May 1, 2011 at 3:16 AM

petunia on May 1, 2011 at 1:13 AM

Thanks for venting out your spleen, petunia but my question was not about your opinion about Palin but why libertarians disliked both Palin and Reagan. I know your idiotic brain wouldn’t be able to elucidate much on anything but thanks for playing.

promachus on May 1, 2011 at 3:17 AM

Pawlenty/Rubio

BadgerHawk on May 1, 2011 at 3:36 AM

“Asked in a public question-and-answer session about his past support for a cap-and-trade-like program limiting carbon emissions, Pawlenty answered: ‘It was a mistake, it was stupid and I’m sorry.’…

Pawlenty better be called a “flip flopper” from here on out or the Hot Air crowd loses all credibility.

scotash on May 1, 2011 at 6:08 AM

Mitch Daniels is our savior 2012 Mitch Daniels screw ever one else.

Romney – RomneyCare and a bunch flip flops

Huck – Can only win the south and is seen as a religious extremist

Tim Paw – Cap and Trade

Huntsman – Worked for the traitor. unforgivable

Palin – polling numbers are disastrous doesn’t have a real fiscal conservative track record. Seen as way over her head for the presidency by many Americans.

Trump – the electoral doesn’t elect clowns

TimeTraveler on May 1, 2011 at 6:09 AM

Field would probably look something like this:

Mitt Romney, Mitch Daniels, Jon Huntsman, Tim Pawlenty…

What the hell does this tell us? There is an opening for Mike Huckabee… Oh boy… I think he is running because of this.

Unless Palin would do us a favor and get in the race to block off Huckabee..

TimeTraveler on May 1, 2011 at 6:13 AM

petunia on May 1, 2011 at 12:33 AM

Thank you, oh sweet flower!

AshleyTKing on May 1, 2011 at 12:36 AM

Gag worthy…I think I just threw up a little in my mouth. Two Palin trolls patting each other on the back…

lovingmyUSA on May 1, 2011 at 6:57 AM

How the whole issue of how the Trooper-in-law and the Chief-of-Police was handled.

AshleyTKing on May 1, 2011 at 12:59 AM

By your use of Baily and Devon as your source for saying she “abused” her power as governor–you have forfeited any credible belief we would have in your “opinion”. Because that is what it is, an opinion based on factless inuendo, with NO BASIS in evidence. Like your little noxious weed friend, Petunia, you like to throw out comments without any backup as to why you formed an opinion. Bailey and Devon…REALLY?

lovingmyUSA on May 1, 2011 at 7:05 AM

Daniels, Pawlenty, Romney, give me a break. Why don’t you gutless moderates just take the Roman way out and slit your wrists in a hot bath. You’d rather sit through another Bob Dole campaign?

I do think the Presidency is a stretch for Sarah Palin but I’d much rather have someone with her character and honesty over any of those professional liars on the short list. I expect a war with Obama. A lot of blood and anger. I’m don’t have confidence that even one of those gutless clowns will have the stones to stand up to the media onslaught.

So, if we don’t draft LTC West or Gov. Perry or if Herman doesn’t catch fire then it’s got to be Sarah. I’m not voting for another back-stabbing phony conservative.

rcl on May 1, 2011 at 7:55 AM

What makes Mitch Daniels a gutless moderate? He actually did more truly conservative things as Governor than Sarah Palin did, and he served two terms. Just because he suggested a truce on social issues? How much have you heard Sarah Palin talking about abortion or gay marriage lately?

rockmom on May 1, 2011 at 8:50 AM

How much have you heard Sarah Palin talking about abortion or gay marriage lately?

rockmom on May 1, 2011 at 8:50 AM

hmm…she gave a pro-life speech last night instead of going to the WHCD.

unseen on May 1, 2011 at 8:59 AM

rcl on May 1, 2011 at 7:55 AM

THIS…

lovingmyUSA on May 1, 2011 at 9:54 AM

rockmom on May 1, 2011 at 8:50 AM

Where was he when Sarah and the Tea Party were being pillaried for the Arizona shootings? What have we heard about his objection to Oclueless’s economic and energy policies lately?

lovingmyUSA on May 1, 2011 at 9:57 AM

How much have you heard Sarah Palin talking about abortion or gay marriage lately?

rockmom on May 1, 2011 at 8:50 AM

More than you have, apparently. Unlike many other commenters here apparently, I didn’t bother with the White House Correspondants’ Dinner last night.

gryphon202 on May 1, 2011 at 10:55 AM

I don’t want a candidate to talk about social issues. And yes, that includes Daniels when he suggested his “truce.” Leave the social issues up to the states. Trig Palin is a stronger endorsement of pro-life views than any words Sarah Palin could have ever uttered.

gryphon202 on May 1, 2011 at 11:02 AM

Romney will never make it.
For one, RomneyCare is the elephant in the room that will never go away.
And 2: there’s too many Mormon-bashers out there.

Badger40 on May 1, 2011 at 11:24 AM

Leave the social issues up to the states.

gryphon202 on May 1, 2011 at 11:02 AM

Yes. I agree.
If so many busy bodies want to control lives by micromanaging our every move, then do it at the state level.
Like here in ND Bismarck voted by like 60% to ban smoking in all restaurants,bars, & tobacco shops (no kidding).
Effing retarded.
But that’s what they want evidently.
Each sovereign state=independent government experiment.
That is the way it was intended to be.

Badger40 on May 1, 2011 at 11:26 AM

Comment pages: 1 2