Quotes of the day

posted at 10:41 pm on December 6, 2011 by Allahpundit

“The Mitt Romney campaign is making an immediate shift in tactics, a move that is necessary because, as one Republican close the campaign put it, ‘What they are doing now isn’t working.’

“At an event in Arizona, Romney himself said you will see more ads, you will see him making sure the contrasts between himself and Newt Gingrich are ‘loud and clear.’ And Romney himself said you will be seeing more interviews and press conferences…

“When former Vice President Dan Quayle spoke about the importance of Romney’s integrity ‘when he’s in public life. When he’s in private life,’ that was no accident. Romney will not go after Gingrich on personal issues, but ABC News has learned that you can expect to see Romney surrogates making fairly direct references to Gingrich’s tumultuous past, in the vein of what Quayle did. You can also expect to see Ann Romney and the Romney family on the trail much more, especially in South Carolina, to create a visual contrast. Their presence on the trail ‘speaks for itself.’…

“The Romney campaign is not said to be running around scared, but as one Republican put it, ‘They know Newt Gingrich is someone who can win elections.’”

***

“Romney’s pivot toward a more forward-leaning approach comes as some of his closest advisers have expressed serious concerns to both the candidate and his high command about the state of his campaign, POLITICO has learned.

“Some of his backers also privately conceded that it may now be hard to stop Gingrich’s burst of momentum in advance of the caucuses, stressing that Romney’s candidacy was always built to survive the long haul…

“A Romney insider, who asked not to be identified, said the campaign is aware that something must be done to stop Gingrich’s rise and that a series meetings about how to proceed were held over the weekend.

“‘They know he has to hit Newt,’ said the insider. ‘The campaign thought somebody else would have done it by now. They’re now of the view that none of the others will do it or none of the others are effective at doing it so he’s going to have to do it.’”

***

“Much of the pro-Romney Republican donor and operative class has been taken aback by Gingrich’s rise, mystified as to why conservative activists would want to nominate a candidate they view as a sure-fire loser against President Barack Obama. The GOP conversation now in New York and Washington is ablaze with talk of the former speaker’s 1968-style Nixon comeback and whether it will last…

“‘If Newt is the nominee, he’ll hurt our chances everywhere — House, Senate, etc.,’ said a Republican lobbyist who is backing Romney. ‘Everyone thinks Romney hangs on [and still wins the nomination]. I’m not so sure.’

“This Romney supporter’s idea for pushback? ‘Marianne Gingrich needs to cut an ad in Iowa and South Carolina.’…

“‘I do know that the message is coming through to them that, ‘You need to have a third party going after Newt, and if you can’t do it that way, you’ve got to do it yourself,” said [a former RNC] chair.”

***

“The consternation in Romney circles—one large donor frets that the race could end with a brokered Republican convention next August— comes as Mr. Gingrich continues to gain momentum in a flurry of national polls and surveys in early-voting states…

“At bottom, though, Mr. Romney’s team remains confident he will win what could become a protracted, state-by-state war for convention delegates, even without igniting excitement among Republican voters. Part of that gamble is a belief that the Gingrich campaign won’t survive the long fight.

“‘When you look at Newt, there’s just not a lot of root structure there to hold up his campaign,’ said Brian Ballard, Mr. Romney’s Florida finance chairman. ‘Newt is a bit of a hot-house flower in that way.’…

“‘This last-man-standing strategy of the Romney campaign strikes me as profoundly cynical,’ said Bruce Keough, a New Hampshire businessman who was chairman of the 2008 Romney campaign in that state, but isn’t involved in the 2012 race. ‘Voters want and need to be inspired, and Romney is simply not delivering an inspiring message,’ he said.”

***

“‘You’ll see me campaigning aggressively,’ said Romney, estimating that he has only seven more days of fundraising before he can focus solely on campaign events. ‘I’ll be on the air a good deal more than in the past, doing our very best to communicate to the American people why I’m running for president and hopefully getting their support.’

“‘I know the beginning will be what, January 3rd, but this will probably take longer than a week or two to sort out,’ predicted Romney.

“‘My expectation is this campaign that’s going to go on for a while and I expect to win it,’ said Romney. ‘I need to get something over 1,000 delegates and we’re just getting started. I’m pleased with where we are right now, and anticipate getting the nomination if I do my job right.’”

***

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

“This Romney supporter’s idea for pushback? ‘Marianne Gingrich needs to cut an ad in Iowa and South Carolina.’…

Please, please don’t do this.

Cindy Munford on December 7, 2011 at 8:45 AM

After all these years of Romney running for president I still
don’t have a clear sense of what he stands for.

Amjean on December 7, 2011 at 8:51 AM

There’s going to be an Open Registration today?

Cindy Munford on December 7, 2011 at 8:56 AM

…going after Gingrich’s personal life is WEAK

deadrody on December 7, 2011 at 8:13 AM

Going after a candidate’s personal life is justifiable, especially when it comes to an amoral slimeball like Gingrich. Actions are an expression of character. A married guy who sleeps around speaks to honesty and fidelity, and shows how lightly he regards taking an oath or a vow. A guy who does all he can to evade the draft during wartime because he’s afraid of getting hurt shows he is a physical coward, unfit to be Commander-in-Chief. A guy who supports the impeachment of a sitting president while doing pretty much the same thing demonstrates hypocrisy. And so on.

Character counts. Morality matters. Newt’s recent lie about his role as a lobbyist for Freddie Mac shows he hasn’t changed: still the same old Newt.

And do any of you Newt supporters honestly believe his past actions aren’t going to have an affect on the independent vote in the general election, should Gingrich win the GOP nomination? Anthony Weiner, Facebook flasher and now-former congressman from New York, was far less morally compromised than Gingrich and he was pressured into resigning from a seat in one of the bluest states in the country.

You’re engaging in magical thinking. You play out a fantasy debate in your head between Gingrich and Obama and imagine Obama humiliated by Newt’s intellect, grasp of the issues, and rhetorical prowess–forgetting, of course, that Obama may be a terrible president but he’s one of the best debaters and campaigners in modern history. You’re also forgetting that Newt is a big government Washington insider, and–most importantly–is emphatically not a conservative. No conservative would’ve shared that divan with Nancy Pelosi.

And knowing all this, you still support the guy? Amazing.

troyriser_gopftw on December 7, 2011 at 8:57 AM

Rush said something I’ve been saying for a while. This whole OWS thing of the Dems was a set-up to fight Mitt in the general election. Mitt’s seven houses will be on tv every night. His four or five sons who never served in the military will be highlighted with frequency on every news show imaginable.

He will become the Wall-Street poster boy. Mark it !

stenwin77 on December 7, 2011 at 8:30 AM

Yes! I agree.

tinkerthinker on December 7, 2011 at 8:58 AM

Well said. When it was shaping up to be Mitt v Perry a while back I thought it was very positive. But at the time I considered Perry to be viable.

MJBrutus on December 7, 2011 at 7:09 AM

Yeah, and we know what a great judge of viability you are.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 8:59 AM

You’re engaging in magical thinking.

Well, to repeat the point I made earlier, they’re not necessarily supporting Gingrich for his own sake. They’re anti-Romney, anti-Obama.

You play out a fantasy debate in your head between Gingrich and Obama and imagine Obama humiliated by Newt’s intellect, grasp of the issues, and rhetorical prowess–forgetting, of course, that Obama may be a terrible president but he’s one of the best debaters and campaigners in modern history. You’re also forgetting that Newt is a big government Washington insider, and–most importantly–is emphatically not a conservative. No conservative would’ve shared that divan with Nancy Pelosi.

And knowing all this, you still support the guy? Amazing.

troyriser_gopftw on December 7, 2011 at 8:57 AM

OK. So which of these other candidates in the field do you see doing any better against Obama? There aren’t any.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 9:03 AM

You’re right on target except that Newt is no more conservative than Romney. It’s just that he is so personally damaged, corrupt and obnoxious that he has no chance to win over indies.

MJBrutus on December 7, 2011 at 7:11 AM

\

Absolutely correct.

csdeven on December 7, 2011 at 9:05 AM

Both of those will only make me want to vote against Romney even more.

deadrody on December 7, 2011 at 8:13 AM

Your act of hacking off your nose to spite America is humorous. Please send a photo of the act so we can get a good laugh!

lol

csdeven on December 7, 2011 at 9:07 AM

He will become the Wall-Street poster boy. Mark it !

stenwin77 on December 7, 2011 at 8:30 AM

I hope they do. Romney will point out that he didn’t bail out failing companies. He will also point to his huge successes in creating companies that are still operating today and employ tens of thousands of Americans.

Wall street, used properly is a blessing to America. Romney will restore the confidence that Americans should have in it.

csdeven on December 7, 2011 at 9:10 AM

Yeah, and we know what a great judge of viability you are.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 8:59 AM

Speaks the drooling worshiper of St Palin the Victimized.

csdeven on December 7, 2011 at 9:12 AM

Yeah, and we know what a great judge of viability you are.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 8:59 AM

Speaks the drooling worshiper of St Palin the Victimized.

csdeven on December 7, 2011 at 9:12 AM

If she had run, she’d be leading your man Mitt right now as well. That’s how non-viable she was. LOL…Mitt’s supposed to be able to beat Obama but yet he’s having trouble with baggage-laden Gingrich. That’s hilarious.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 9:15 AM

Are all these ‘experts’ who think that Newt can’t win, the same ‘experts’ who thought McLame would be elected? In that case, I’ll go with my gut next Nov.

Kissmygrits on December 7, 2011 at 9:19 AM

If she had run, she’d be leading your man Mitt right now as well. That’s how non-viable she was.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 9:15 AM

Bwahahahahahaha!!!

You confirm your epic failure with your idiotic comment. Palin had 70% DISAPPROVAL among the GOP. Romney has NEVER been that high!

csdeven on December 7, 2011 at 9:34 AM

This is why Newt is rolling (should have been Perry)- Romney and his “brain trust” are programmed to run a certain way.
Think about it- the guy we need to win is terrified of tough one on one interviews.
Craven weasel doesn’t begin to describe this guy- and believe me, the base now knows it.
I’ve gone from grudging acceptance to outright hostility after reading the opening story.

jjshaka on December 7, 2011 at 9:36 AM

You confirm your epic failure with your idiotic comment. Palin had 70% DISAPPROVAL among the GOP. Romney has NEVER been that high!

csdeven on December 7, 2011 at 9:34 AM

Wrong. In approval, I don’t know if Romney ever surpassed Palin. The 70%+ figure was those who didn’t want her to run. I’ll remind you that 6 months ago, Newt was utterly unelectable as well. Romney can never get above his little 20%.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 9:37 AM

OK. So which of these other candidates in the field do you see doing any better against Obama? There aren’t any.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 9:03 AM

Yes, there are viable candidates. Let’s start by eliminating the hopelessly unelectable fringe, vanity, and novelty campaigns, to include Ron Paul, Buddy Roemer, Gary Johnson, and Rick Santorum. (Santorum, Johnson, and Roemer are very principled conservatives but truthfully don’t have a chance.) I’m eliminating Gingrich, too, for reasons already outlined; i.e., because he’s a sleazy, corrupt, amoral windbag.

So we have Bachmann, Huntsman, Perry, and Romney.

People support Newt largely because of his debating skills, I think, which begs the question: how important are debates in the general election? Answer: not as important as they are in the primaries. Winning or losing in 2012 will come down to organizational superiority, not so much power of personalities.

Huntsman thought his conservative credentials as Governor of Utah would allow him to play to the moderate middle. As a strategy, it’s terrible. No one remembers his time as as a conservative governor. Everyone remembers his China ambassadorship for the Obama Administration. Huntsman is unelectable this time around although he could be just generating name recognition for 2016. Besides, his admiration for President Obama is well-known. He probably thinks Obama 2012 is a sure thing. Forget Huntsman this year.

Bachmann, Perry, Romney: Bachmann has strong conservative credentials but no executive experience. Perry has strong executive experience and conservative credentials but is inexperienced at national-level politics and possesses Bush-like communication skills. Romney has executive experience, middling communication skills, and a superb national organization.

History and probability are against Bachmann, but if GOP primary voters want an undiluted conservative, she’s it. Her problem would be independent voter appeal; hence, electability. As a conservative, I like the lady a great deal but don’t think she can win the middle in a general election.

Either Perry or Romney would be a strong contender against Obama, and either could beat him if the economy remains moribund and the scandals simmering in the background finally come to a boil. Whatever happens with the economy or foreign policy, the presidential election is going to be close, a statistical dead heat.

troyriser_gopftw on December 7, 2011 at 9:42 AM

I think, which begs the question: how important are debates in the general election? Answer: not as important as they are in the primaries.

troyriser_gopftw on December 7, 2011 at 9:42 AM

Carter-Reagan 1980, Bush-Gore 2000 refute that pretty well. They are important.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 9:45 AM

Wrong. In approval, I don’t know if Romney ever surpassed Palin. The 70%+ figure was those who didn’t want her to run. I’ll remind you that 6 months ago, Newt was utterly unelectable as well. Romney can never get above his little 20%.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 9:37 AM

Bwahahaha!!

Yeah, you keep doubling down on the stupidity! Romney and Gingrich are the only two candidates above 50% seen as qualified. Palin was NEVER seen as qualified by anywhere near that many folks!

Hahahahaha! You Palin worshipers are a precious bunch!

csdeven on December 7, 2011 at 9:46 AM

I think, which begs the question: how important are debates in the general election? Answer: not as important as they are in the primaries.

troyriser_gopftw on December 7, 2011 at 9:42 AM
Carter-Reagan 1980, Bush-Gore 2000 refute that pretty well. They are important.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 9:45 AM

Didn’t say they weren’t important, but aside from cherry-picking meaning from a fairly clearly written statement, you still didn’t refute what I wrote. Making a world-class gaffe on live national television is always a disastrous move, whatever the setting. In a debate, however, the best strategy against a reasonably strong opponent is not so much delivering a strong rhetorical performance; rather, don’t screw up. Witness Romney’s debate performances so far. He doesn’t set the night on fire but he doesn’t make a memorable mistake, either. The Gadrisil gaffe dropped Bachmann into the second tier. Herman Cain’s ‘Apples and oranges! Apples and oranges!’ meltdown diminished his credibility even further, especially when it became clear he didn’t know very much about the 9-9-9 plan he was so heavily promoting. Perry…well, you saw what happened to Perry. If he can come back from that, he can come back from anything.

Everyone’s hot for Gingrich largely because he can talk a good game–witness how smoothly he lied about his lobbying gig for Freddie Mac. The problem for Gingrich is that lies are cumulative. Keep telling blatant untruths and people are going to start keeping count, and the biggest takeaway from any Newt Gingrich speech or debate is that he is a convincing, accomplished liar. Good luck selling that particular trait to independent voters.

troyriser_gopftw on December 7, 2011 at 11:47 AM

ABOOR

Anybody but Obama or Romney.

Jason Coleman on December 7, 2011 at 12:21 PM

And do any of you Newt supporters honestly believe his past actions aren’t going to have an affect on the independent vote in the general election, should Gingrich win the GOP nomination?

Actually, I think most independents would be less concerned with “personal” matters than conservatives are. (i.e., Bill Clinton)

stenwin77 on December 7, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Carter-Reagan 1980, Bush-Gore 2000 refute that pretty well. They are important.

ddrintn on December 7, 2011 at 9:45 AM

Don’t forget Nixon-Kennedy, and Reagan-Mondale.

Debates are ever more important now with the constant instant video replays. Anyone who thinks debates are insignificant are living on a certain River…

stenwin77 on December 7, 2011 at 12:29 PM

And do any of you Newt supporters honestly believe his past actions aren’t going to have an affect on the independent vote in the general election, should Gingrich win the GOP nomination?

Actually, I think most independents would be less concerned with “personal” matters than conservatives are. (i.e., Bill Clinton)

stenwin77 on December 7, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Wait until they get into Newt’s FIRST marriage and how that all came about.

I expect more than a few “in a pe_____ic relationship with a teacher” headlines.

Jason Coleman on December 7, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3