Pawlenty: Let’s face it, Bachmann hasn’t accomplished much while in Congress

posted at 5:00 pm on July 8, 2011 by Allahpundit

It’s a fair cop. Her four and a half years in Congress are notably thin on bills passed and committees chaired and thicker than expected on earmarks. There are ways to spin that — “I went to Washington to stop runaway government, not enable it,” etc — but if/when Palin and Perry get into the race, this’ll be their chief line of attack on her too. They’ve governed states. What has Bachmann done except cast marginal dissenting votes and wave the Gadsden flag?

Now, show of hands. How many people expected three months ago that Michele Bachmann, not Mitt Romney, would be Pawlenty’s prime target weeks before the Ames straw poll? Yeesh.

Asked about Bachmann, who in last month’s Des Moines Register Iowa Poll was sitting at 22 percent in Iowa among likely Republican caucusgoers versus his own 6 percent, Pawlenty said: “Each candidate brings some different strengths to the table, and mine include having been an executive of a large public enterprise in a difficult environment and actually getting things proposed and results to conclusion. I’m not sure what she would say in that regard. … She’s been in the legislative arena, as to specific results that have been achieved, I’m not sure what they would be.”

Pawlenty said he’s confident his poll numbers will rise.

Said one commenter in this morning’s Headlines thread, remembering T-Paw’s debate whiff on RomneyCare, “Will he say that when she’s present?” Damn. What’s interesting about this criticism is that, while Palin and Perry can also use it, Romney really can’t. If he starts needling Bachmann about how thin her record is, we all know what the response will be. And it won’t be good. So Pawlenty, of necessity, is inadvertently doing Mitt a favor by weakening Romney’s chief rival for the nomination in a way that’s unavailable to Romney himself. And Bachmann, also of necessity, is doing Mitt an inadvertent favor by signing an elaborate pro-marriage pledge being pushed by a prominent Iowa social con. That’s a smart way of solidifying support among the state’s Huckabee voters, which she needs to do with Palin and Perry looming and T-Paw having just hired Huck’s daughter as a top consultant. But it also gives centrists, libertarians, and the media ammo to attack her later if/when she ends up in a two-man race with Romney. The left’s already trying to claim that the pledge commits her to, er, banning pornography — it doesn’t — but there’s lots of other attack-ad fruit in there for the picking. Lucky for Mitt — especially since T-Paw, Palin, and Perry will be under intense pressure to sign the pledge too.

Here’s the latest campaign premortem postmortem for Pawlenty, this time courtesy of the Times. Exit question: Should I back him in the name of beta-male solidarity? The betas, united, can never be defeated. (Actually, they can. That’s what makes them betas.)

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

As far as MB record as a Congresswoman, what should we expect?

Gohawgs on July 8, 2011 at 8:58 PM

So why vote for her over Pawlenty? Because she’s been on Hardball more often?

ddrintn on July 8, 2011 at 9:15 PM

All of these “pledges” are stupid and irrelevant. The candidates need to clearly state what their position is on abortion, gay marriage, etc. If conservatives are not happy with that, too bad. These pledges mean nothing anyway. They are no different than the promises all politicians make and then quickly forget about once in office.

I think all candidates need to make a pledge not to sign these stupid pledges. it boxes them in and like it or not, successful politicians who accomplish the work you want done are politically savvy and don’t sign stupid pledges. They hedge around the controversial issues and get either part of what they want or all of what they want. By signing these stupid pledges, they have already put themselves on the defense and are guaranteed to get NOTHING of what they want. They lose before even getting out of the gate.

This is the problem I have with Bachmann. She doesn’t seem to have any political savvy about her…which is probably why she couldn’t get the leadership of her own party to support her in a leadership position.

I know people hate the political speak coming from politicians, but this is how you get things done. You give the appearance of being willing to compromise, then when you go to negotiate, you put everything you want + 50% on the table and negotiate down 50%. This way you end up with everything you wanted to begin with. The 50% you negotiated away is stuff you never really wanted in the first place.

By signing these pledges, you have cornered yourself in and already given away your bargaining chips.

They are dumb, dumb, dumb. And the candidates who agree to sign them will not get my support. Because that tells me all I need to know about their ability to maneuver, negotiate, and manipulate to achieve their goals. (and i don’t mean manipulate in a bad way…I mean manipulate a situation to your favor – such as not signing stupid pledges to begin with). You have to have political savvy to succeed in washington. Did Reagan or clinton (two master politicians) sign dopey pledges?

ramrants on July 8, 2011 at 9:21 PM

Pawlenty is going about this the wrong way. Maybe he just doesn’t know better. He seems convinced that the only way to raise his profile is by attacking others on the same team. If you’re going to put others down to raise yourself up, Obama is the one you want to go after, TPaw.

BruthaMan on July 8, 2011 at 9:53 PM

Pawlenty is going about this the wrong way. Maybe he just doesn’t know better. He seems convinced that the only way to raise his profile is by attacking others on the same team. If you’re going to put others down to raise yourself up, Obama is the one you want to go after, TPaw.

BruthaMan on July 8, 2011 at 9:53 PM

At the moment, politically speaking, Bachmann is his opponent not Obama. If he doesn’t throw any punches people will assume he is weak. It’s already happening.

alwaysfiredup on July 8, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Jeee-zus! This guy is like the old fool you invite over for a holiday dinner. He eats your roast beef and potatoes, drinks your ale, then dozes off by the fire, interminably passing gas. Then, when you do wake him up, he makes some off color comment about one of your teen-age nieces.

Try bagging on Obama, Pawlenty, you jerk.

I am so-o-o-o-o over this guy.

The War Planner on July 8, 2011 at 10:25 PM

windansea on July 8, 2011 at 5:54 PM

we’ll see.

That’s the funniest thing I’ve read here in a long time. Thanks for chuckle.

Eyeroll.

Knucklehead on July 8, 2011 at 6:22 PM

Well, KH, you make me LMAO every time you post so I’m glad I could reciprocate (though I’d better get busy since you’re waaaaaaaay ahead of me).

*double eyeroll with exasperated sigh*

Please, you go out of your way to make little digs at Palin and her supporters … not to mention the fact you follow unseen around like some kinda cyber stalker.

darwin on July 8, 2011 at 7:17 PM

Ditto that, darwin.

greeneyedconservative on July 8, 2011 at 10:45 PM

Pawlenty is going about this the wrong way. Maybe he just doesn’t know better. He seems convinced that the only way to raise his profile is by attacking others on the same team. If you’re going to put others down to raise yourself up, Obama is the one you want to go after, TPaw.

BruthaMan on July 8, 2011 at 9:53 PM

He tried that in the last debate, and it didn’t work out so well.

That his slight dig at Bachmann got play doesn’t mean he hasn’t been hitting Obama, which he has been.

Hollowpoint on July 8, 2011 at 10:50 PM

“Let’s face it, Bachmann hasn’t accomplished much while in Congress”

“Her four and a half years in Congress are notably thin on bills passed and committees chaired and thicker than expected on earmarks.”

“There are ways to spin that — ‘I went to Washington to stop runaway government, not enable it,’ etc — but if/when Palin and Perry get into the race… They’ve governed states”.

“What has Bachmann done except cast marginal dissenting votes and wave the Gadsden flag?”

Seems like a perfectly legitimate question to ask. I zapped the snark.

Geochelone on July 8, 2011 at 10:51 PM

…This entire “she has to wait for the statute of limitations to run out” meme sounds suspiciously like baseless speculation used by her supporters to justify to each other why she’s being a tease instead of running

Hollowpoint on July 8, 2011 at 8:08 PM

From what I’ve observed, HP, it doesn’t much matter what the Palin supporters say ~ you don’t like her ~ so why not just be honest about that instead of continually smacking down every reason we’re ALL surmising as to why she hasn’t announced yet. None of us are mind-readers and all the Palin supporters I know feel confident she’s running. Just because she’s not fitting your timetable doesn’t mean she’s teasing her supporters. But thanks for your concern. Personally, I’d be happy if she waited until the very last possible minute to announce. I have patience and it would be so entertaining to watch the epic PDS crowd implode.

greeneyedconservative on July 8, 2011 at 10:52 PM

Stay away from the social issues.

txag92 on July 8, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Like same-sex marriage?

There Goes The Neighborhood on July 9, 2011 at 12:21 AM

So why vote for her over Pawlenty? Because she’s been on Hardball more often?

ddrintn on July 8, 2011 at 9:15 PM

Has she, I don’t watch?…What was your point supposed to be?…

Gohawgs on July 9, 2011 at 12:31 AM

Being anti-Establishment is a credibility all its own. Of course she doesn’t have committee chairmanships or thick legislative accomplishments. If she was a leadership stooge, she’d be picked on for being a leadership stooge. When she has no leadership positions because the leadership choose not to empower her, she’s attacked for not being in a leadership position.

knob on July 9, 2011 at 12:38 AM

So why vote for her over Pawlenty? Because she’s been on Hardball more often?

ddrintn on July 8, 2011 at 9:15 PM

Has she, I don’t watch?…What was your point supposed to be?…

Gohawgs on July 9, 2011 at 12:31 AM

It wasn’t a point, it was a question. Why vote for Bachmann instead of Pawlenty?

ddrintn on July 9, 2011 at 12:43 AM

I know people hate the political speak coming from politicians, but this is how you get things done. You give the appearance of being willing to compromise, then when you go to negotiate, you put everything you want + 50% on the table and negotiate down 50%. This way you end up with everything you wanted to begin with. The 50% you negotiated away is stuff you never really wanted in the first place.

ramrants on July 8, 2011 at 9:21 PM

That sounds great. When was the last time our side actually did this? Reagan?

Kataklysmic on July 9, 2011 at 12:49 AM

STOP.SHOOTING.EACH.OTHER.DAMMIT.

Won’t vote for any who give fodder to the Dems to attack a potential nominee.

Drop dead, T-Paw.

mankai on July 9, 2011 at 12:52 AM

It wasn’t a point, it was a question. Why vote for Bachmann instead of Pawlenty?

ddrintn on July 9, 2011 at 12:43 AM

Ohh…Well T-Paw has that governing as a CINO before changing his policy positions in order to run for higher office Mitt-like flip flop down pat. So, he’s got that going for him…

Still pondering on MB…

Gohawgs on July 9, 2011 at 1:06 AM

Obama must be defeated. I’m prepared to even vote for Mittens if I must.

There is a an avowed Maoist in the White House who is systematically destroying this nation and T-Paw goes after Bachmann? Show some balls and turn your wrath on Obama… you won’t need to try and chop down the other Republicans.

Only a small man tries to make himself look bigger by hacking away at the knees of those around him.

mankai on July 9, 2011 at 1:14 AM

If Alaskan lefties are chomping at the bit to file ethics charges… why aren’t they doing so now? Why haven’t they been filing them for the last three years since she resigned? Wouldn’t they want to try and kill any chances of her running by bogging her down with more ethics charges? Why wait until she announces?

Hollowpoint on July 8, 2011 at 8:08 PM

Yeah, I’ve asked that question a dozen times and have never gotten an answer. This is just more of the loony conspiracy theory stuff designed to keep the money flowing from their pockets to Palins PAC. St Palin the Victimized must have a conspiracy going against her or her support drops off.

csdeven on July 9, 2011 at 1:27 AM

csdeven on July 9, 2011 at 1:27 AM

They have…But, you knew that…

Gohawgs on July 9, 2011 at 1:32 AM

Bachmann isn’t an unlikely nominee because of her thin resume in the House. She’s unlikely because her resume is thin, mainly being a tax lawyer and House member. It wouldn’t matter if she HAD been influential in legislating, without any meaningful management experience, but her lack of even that is noteworthy.

Palin isn’t running. Those who believe she has “her own timetable” are fooling themselves. To be competitive you need money and organization, you need the volunteers and staffers who bring others with them, you need the top people to get top results. Perry may be able to harvest the desertions from Gingrich, but there aren’t many more qualified people available.

Palin has magic, all right, but not that much magic. She’s taking a pass, will stay active, and in four or eight years when even Piper and Willow are long out of the household and out of the crosshairs, she may do it. But she won’t this time. Get over it.

Adjoran on July 9, 2011 at 2:23 AM

Palin isn’t running. Those who believe she has “her own timetable” are fooling themselves. To be competitive you need money and organization, you need the volunteers and staffers who bring others with them, you need the top people to get top results. Perry may be able to harvest the desertions from Gingrich, but there aren’t many more qualified people available.

Adjoran on July 9, 2011 at 2:23 AM

Believe what you want…

Gohawgs on July 9, 2011 at 2:35 AM

How on earth was Bachmann supposed to pass any legislation in a Democrat controlled Congress? How much legislation did any Republican get to pass?

Personally I’d rather have a principled conservative with a thin resume than someone like Romney whose principles on certain conservative principles (Second Amendment, Romneycare, abortion, etc) are highly suspect and yet who can say he’s governed a state.

Just look at Obama- anyone with half a brain cell could see that despite his thin record he was a radical leftist who would transform America beyond all recognition. His lack of leadership ability hasn’t exactly slowed down his plan to change America into a bankrupt, socialist state.

Bachmann might have a thin resume but we know what she stands for.

What America needs come 2012 is a tough conservative who will fight tooth and nail to roll back the damage Obama and his Democrat buddies have done to America over the past few years. And it will be a fight. I have my doubts that Pawlenty has the sort of grit needed to stand up to Democrats and the media.

Jay Mac on July 9, 2011 at 5:17 AM

Not picking on Rahm-ney huh? Maybe he want’s the VP slot with the finger-wetting flip-flopper de jour?

Rahm-ney and T-Paw: Is a vote for no hope or GOP change!

Don L on July 9, 2011 at 5:41 AM

Palin isn’t running. Those who believe she has “her own timetable” are fooling themselves. To be competitive you need money and organization, you need the volunteers and staffers who bring others with them, you need the top people to get top results…
Adjoran on July 9, 2011 at 2:23 AM

Gosh, perfect thoughts of the King of England 1775 about those colonists not revolting.

Reasons and argument(not to mention wishing) don’t predicate the future – people do. Sarah’s running and it’s as transparent as was Obama’s Marxism.

Don L on July 9, 2011 at 5:46 AM

another Bachmann thread that ends in a Palin thread. more evidence that the vast majority of people see Bachmann as a Palin clone. Bachmann couldn’t stand on the stage if she was not trying to be a Palin clone. If Palin doesn’t get into the race Bachmann will quickly become a backbencher again.

unseen on July 9, 2011 at 7:39 AM

So why vote for her over Pawlenty? Because she’s been on Hardball more often?

ddrintn on July 8, 2011 at 9:15 PM

She shows more of a sign of having a pair than does TPaw. If it came down to the two of them, I’d vote for her. Here is the big question. Where were any of these Republican men, when the women of the party were both kicking azz and getting kicked back? They were hiding behind their safe political messages and hoping the media would ignore them.

Give me the fire of the Republican women any day of the week.

hawkdriver on July 9, 2011 at 8:24 AM

She shows more of a sign of having a pair than does TPaw. If it came down to the two of them, I’d vote for her.

hawkdriver on July 9, 2011 at 8:24 AM

I’d have to go with Pawlenty. It’s a lot easier for Bachmann to throw out that red meat from a relatively safe distance than it was for Pawlenty to govern a blue state.

ddrintn on July 9, 2011 at 9:00 AM

Pawlenty is licking Mitt’s corporatist boots, taking on the Tea Party Woman rather than Pawlenty’s competitor with “shared values”.

Pawlenty’s argument infers that the executive branch matters more than the legislative branch, a very unconstitutional argument to throw at the constitutional conservative candidate.

The Republican establishment candidate is stuck on stupid with the “More Is Better” argument; as if Americans want more laws and more programs to burden our tax payer lives. Congressional Members, “More, please.

Do you want Constitutional Governance? Or is it just another round of who plays king of the mountain?

Build the Tea Party platform.
Have the goods, and stay on target.
Thwart distractions from infiltrating your forces.
Voters Promote “constitutional governance”.
Candidates, care more for the Tea Party movement’s victory than taking your own blue ribbon out of 2012.

maverick muse on July 9, 2011 at 9:06 AM

If you’re going to put others down to raise yourself up, Obama is the one you want to go after, TPaw.

BruthaMan on July 8, 2011 at 9:53 PM

Yep, it’s a big strike against TPaw in my book too. With so much depending on the next election, the last thing we need is to cannibalize each other, especially so early in the campaign.

petefrt on July 9, 2011 at 9:23 AM

Hollowpoint on July 8, 2011 at 8:08 PM

I too would like some answers to those questions, but nobody I’ve ever asked has them.

Uncle Sams Nephew on July 9, 2011 at 9:35 AM

Give me the fire of the Republican women any day of the week.

hawkdriver on July 9, 2011 at 8:24 AM

good points.

unseen on July 9, 2011 at 9:48 AM

It’s a lot easier for Bachmann to throw out that red meat from a relatively safe distance than it was for Pawlenty to govern a blue state.

Even more so, it is easy for private citizen Palin to say whatever she wants about whatever.

Face it, Bachmann is basically running for VP. And, Palin isn’t running.

Moesart on July 9, 2011 at 10:46 AM

Personally I’d rather have a principled conservative with a thin resume than someone like Romney whose principles on certain conservative principles (Second Amendment, Romneycare, abortion, etc) are highly suspect and yet who can say he’s governed a state.

Jay Mac on July 9, 2011 at 5:17 AM

This is it. T-Paw once supported Cap and trade. That is a reason to vote for her over him. If Nixon were still alive and he said he regrets creating the EPA would that make that huge problem all better? I just want someone who will make the correct choice not one that may be popular at the time.

clement on July 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Conservatives love Bachmann, for the same reason why liberals love Obama (at least the 2007 version). Both are smart, charismatic/likable, showed great political activism (Tea Party for Michele, Barry for community organizer), and represent something different than we normally see coming through the pike.

T-Paw has better presidential qualifications than Bachmann, and has shown he can attract the indies and Dems to his side, but what is missing is personality. When John King gave him two opportunities to attack Romney on his health-care plan, he decided to take a pass. The August presidential debate will be crucial to him. He’s needs to show Iowans that he’s not “Minnesota nice” and can actually control the tempo of a room. In the NH, we saw Bachmann and Romney come out to play and dominate the conversations. Now, it is his turn. If T-Paw wants to be competitive in Iowa, he needs to place in the top three at Ames. Otherwise, he needs to drop out or adopt the Romney-Huntsman strategy.

Frank T.J Mackey on July 9, 2011 at 1:12 PM

This is it. T-Paw once supported Cap and trade. That is a reason to vote for her over him.

clement on July 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Well didn’t Bachmann once support Jimmy Carter?

ddrintn on July 9, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Each candidate brings some different strengths to the table, and mine include having been an executive of a large public enterprise in a difficult environment and actually getting things proposed and results to conclusion.

If you are so accomplished, how come you can’t speak English?

mockmook on July 9, 2011 at 6:54 PM

There’s a big difference between flapping your jaw and getting stuff done.

Thomas Paine begs to differ.

——-

Thomas Jefferson’s executive experience before the Declaration of Independence?

mockmook on July 9, 2011 at 7:59 PM

We’ve complained for years how little executive experience The One had and she’s the same place he was 3 years ago.

davek70

His lack of experience isn’t the problem, being a marxist is the problem. We wouldn’t be better off if only he was a more experienced marxist.

xblade on July 9, 2011 at 9:50 PM

Pawlenty muffs it again!
Time to take his silly act back to Minisoda —
where women are women, and men wish they were too!

“Let’s Roll”

On Watch on July 9, 2011 at 11:06 PM

We are currently in three wars, the country is broke beyond belief, our government is very top heavy, the media keeps saying 9.6% unemployment while the country knows better. Congress is deaf to Americans and I’m reading posts complaining about abortion, homosexuals and many things that don’t have anything to do with running the government. Where are the intelligent questions?

mixplix on July 10, 2011 at 7:16 PM

If Michele Bachmann failed to get things done, at least she was trying to do good in the face of battle hardened Democrats.

Those of us in Minnesota and the surrounding states can be thankful that Pawlenty was impotent in his attempt to implement his regional Cap & Trade plan. Success there would have been disastrous!

RJL on July 10, 2011 at 8:43 PM

when you go to negotiate, you put everything you want + 50% on the table and negotiate down 50%. This way you end up with everything you wanted to begin with.

ramrants on July 8, 2011 at 9:21 PM

you put everything you want + 50% on the table

So you start at 150%… gotcha.

and negotiate down 50%

So half of 150%…

This way you end up with everything you wanted to begin with.

So you really wanted 75% to start with?

Let me guess, not a math major?

gekkobear on July 11, 2011 at 11:13 AM