Quotes of the day

posted at 10:46 pm on December 16, 2011 by Allahpundit

“Romney seemed energized by the political coup, telling the Greenville audience: ‘Today I woke up with a big smile on my face.’”

***

“Tea party leaders in the state suggested that Haley will pay for Friday’s move with a primary in 2014 – provided she doesn’t win herself a spot on the ticket or another post in a Romney administration, as tea partiers and Republican operatives say must be the explanation for the decision.

“‘The overwhelming sense that I get from talking to people is deep betrayal,’ said Karen Martin, the founder and organizer of the Spartanburg tea party, who has not endorsed a candidate. ‘She’s not going to be able to come back from this with the tea party. If there’s anybody credible who will run against her, I believe the tea party will support them whole-heartedly.’

“Martin predicted that Haley will face trouble even before then in trying to push through a governing agenda that’s already put her at odds with her former colleagues in the GOP-controlled legislature.

“‘She’s just lost her credibility,’ she said. ‘Anything that she tries to propose, most people in the past might not have looked too carefully at her, believing that she is a credible conservative. We’ve given her a pass on a few things, but that won’t happen any more.’”

***

“I hope Governor Christie doesn’t get mad and call me again over this but it’s the same thing. It’s why he’s endorsing Romney. That’s the party’s choice and if you’re gonna be in the party, it’s just like I told you. When you are newly elected to Congress when you’re freshman, Republican or Democrat, the leadership brings you in and they tell you, “Okay, here’s the lay of the land. You want to go places here? You want to someday be a chairman of a committee? You want to have help with your reelection? Fine. You’ll vote the way we ask you to when we ask you to. If you want to be a maverick and a rogue and go off on your own, you’re more than welcome to do that but we’re not gonna send any Dole pineapple money you’re way when you’re in New York…

“She ran as a Republican. There’s no question, the Tea Party was instrumental, and she sought their help. She cultivated their support. She unquestionably took their financial contributions and support. But the election’s over, she won as a Republican. She has, obviously, perspirations to advance higher in the Republican Party. Now, next time you hear anybody tell you there isn’t a Republican establishment, just look at this instance here with Nikki Haley if she wants to be vice president.

“If she wants to be in somebody’s cabinet someday — a Republican — she’s going to have to do what the Republicans want her to do. If you are a mid-level sales manager for the XYZ Widget Company and you want to someday be in the executive suite, you are damn well going to do what the XYZ executive suite people tell you to do. (interruption) But no, but no. (interruption) Snerdley says I didn’t, but I created my own executive suite, see? I did not try to take over anybody else’s. That’s not realistic. We’re not gonna create a new party. We don’t even want to try to do that. That’s wilderness time. The Republican Party is something that’s gonna have to fought for and taken over by the Tea Party. It’s gonna be an active political objective and process.”

***

“The grassroots conservative movement has yet to throw its support behind a Republican presidential candidate because ‘we don’t have the female Ronald Reagan running — and that’s Sarah Palin,’ said Amy Kremer, chairwoman of the Tea Party Express.

“‘We haven’t engaged in presidential politics yet because the movement hasn’t coalesced around anybody, so we’re just sitting back and waiting,’ Kremer added.

“Predicting that a good slice of the country’s conservatives will not make up their minds until they are standing in front of the ballot box, Kremer singled out the former Alaska governor as ‘the only person out there right now that can truly excite the base.’”

***

Click the image to listen.

***


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 4 5 6

Adiós, Governess Haley – obviously we hardly knew ye.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on December 17, 2011 at 11:40 AM

Also let me remind you about something. 4 years ago Barry swore up and down he wasn’t going to be a radical no matter what his history said. How did that turn out? And in my opinion ole Mitt won’t be much different. It isn’t what he is promising it is what you know he will do which is stab you in the back. The sad thing is you repubs know that he is going to destroy your party because he will flop and the press will be on him 24/7 not like the kid gloves that Barry is. Just my opinion.

bbinfl on December 17, 2011 at 11:19 AM

Obama could have sworn on somebody’s grave, no one would have cared or listened to the exact words. He got into office for four reasons: George Bush, amazing social media campaign, historic placement, and his good friend, the liberal media.

Fast forward to today: He did not turn the economy around, he is sly, he is weak, he pushed the envelope, he wasted zillions of dollars. People have suffered greatly under his leadership.

The voter’s gamble in 2012: Risk your livelihood, security and future on four more years of Obama or give the reins over to another president who can make life better for millions of Americans.

It’s a simple choice on the surface. There are those who will pour over the ramifications of Romney, Gingrich, etc. as president and then there are those who want a better future and keeping Obama in the WH until 2016 does not work for them.

salem on December 17, 2011 at 11:41 AM

As I have said, there was no TEA Party when we settled for McCain. The difference is that now we have a plan and can elect a Romney type as a stopgap until we can get an experienced TEA Party candidate elected to the presidency. It is going to take time and we must be patient.

csdeven on December 17, 2011 at 8:19 AM

THIS.

A movement that began in 2010 was not going to produce a qualified candidate for President to start running in 2011. That is just a fact.

What America needs more than anything right now is jobs and an economy that is growing again. Americans want the high-school food fighting in Washington to stop. They want some grownups in charge who know what the hell they are doing.

rockmom on December 17, 2011 at 11:48 AM

I’m not a fan of Romney but this is a wild exaggeration. A conservative (socially and fiscally) businessman with no core political convictions cannot possibly unleash as much destruction as a driven Marxist radical with Islamic sympathies partially controlled by Soros.

Igor R. on December 17, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Excuse me but both are non principle politicians that will lie and do whatever they have to to attain the office of the president. Both of them say they stand for everything yet they stand for nothing but themselves. Both of their beliefs change with whatever the poll of the day says. I’m sorry but yes Romney is a copy of the current liar we have in office. And who do you really think Romney will stand for when the rubber hits the road? Americans? Republicans? Conservatives? or Mitt himself? I would love to be proven wrong and that he has conviction and character to do the right thing when it matters but I just don’t see Mitt the leopard changing his spots.

bbinfl on December 17, 2011 at 11:49 AM

She’s got to do a lot worse than endorsing Romney to lose the TEA party. It’s how she governs that matters between now and the next time there’s a primary for her.

And believe it or not, the TEA partiers I know in Tennessee, myself included, held our nose and voted for Romney in the last primary here. We didn’t have any other “conservative” choice.

PS…ddrintn, I thought you knew not to feed the deven.

Tennman on December 17, 2011 at 11:51 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeTzGLCvf4g

Back in the day…….April 2010.

I think it happens after this event when the reporter corners her and she responds that either a PALIN/ROMNEY or ROMNEY/PALIN ticket sounded good.

PappyD61 on December 17, 2011 at 11:52 AM

by the way..

…save the insults for the politicians that deserve them, not for fellow citizens of Hotairopolis.

PappyD61 on December 17, 2011 at 11:55 AM

The voter’s gamble in 2012: Risk your livelihood, security and future on four more years of Obama or give the reins over to another president who can make life better for millions of Americans.

It’s a simple choice on the surface. There are those who will pour over the ramifications of Romney, Gingrich, etc. as president and then there are those who want a better future and keeping Obama in the WH until 2016 does not work for them.

salem on December 17, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Good analysis.

It is hard for the “true believers” on either side to understand that they are not a majority of voters, and probably not a majority even inside their own party. There is nothing wrong with primary fights, and platform fights at the convention. But in the end people need to shake hands and get together to win the bigger battle.

Most people think primary fights are good, because they do tend to send the message to the eventual nominee that you had better pay attention to the part of the Party that did not want you. I’m actually a little surprised that Obama did not get a primary opponent, because the true believers on the Left are screamingly mad at him. Of course taking on an incumbent, and especially the First Black President, would have been very hard for a progressive Democrat to do.

So if Romney or Gingrich is the next President, it is our job to keep on him and remind him how many people are ready to primary him in 2016 if he doesn’t govern as a conservative. It is our job to elect more conservatives to the House and Senate so Congress will send conservative legislation to the President.

rockmom on December 17, 2011 at 11:56 AM

The voter’s gamble in 2012: Risk your livelihood, security and future on four more years of Obama or give the reins over to another president who can make life better for millions of Americans.

It’s a simple choice on the surface. There are those who will pour over the ramifications of Romney, Gingrich, etc. as president and then there are those who want a better future and keeping Obama in the WH until 2016 does not work for them.

salem on December 17, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Well we just have to agree to disagree then because I’m telling you playing the anyone but Obama card will backfire. You have to give those people that do not hardly pay attention to politics a reason to pick your guy over that scumbag and saying “Well he isn’t Obama” is not going to get it. There are numerous people in this country who will go with the devil they do know than the one they don’t simply because they are too lazy to do their homework. While you and I and others on this board follow politics there are many people in this country who really do not and if the TV is telling them the repubs are evil and the cause of why they don’t have a job they believe it. You just can’t fix stupid with that type of people. As long as it doesn’t affect their PS3 game or Xbox they don’t care.

You also have to overcome the fact that one race of people will vote almost 95% for him simply because he is the same color as them and that anyone else that says otherwise is racist and that doesn’t even take into consideration the considerable vote fraud machine they have going and the illegals.

Now do you get what I am trying to get at? This is why there needs to be someone you can believe in and in this current group of repubs I just don’t see it. All I know when I go into that voting booth next November is that I will not vote for one stinking dimtard but don’t confuse that with that I would vote automatically for the repub because I won’t.

bbinfl on December 17, 2011 at 12:01 PM

All the true believers here freaking out because another Tea Party member thought rationally and didn’t mindlessly back Newt?

Check.

Ruiner on December 17, 2011 at 12:03 PM

What irks many conservatives is that he is acting as if conservatives have no other choice but to select him.

I think that is exactly what he is doing because the polling shows we are willing to nominate him because he can beat Obama. If the polling showed that Santorum had the best shot at beating Obama, he would be more focused on the general and therefore the indies. It is simply smart politics to use whatever advantage you have to win the general. Knowing that the huge majority of the GOP base will vote for you because they want Obama gone frees one up to focus on the general election. Don’t hold that against any politician.

It is that same arrogance that the Republican party has towards its base of on-the-ground worker bees.

onlineanalyst on December 17, 2011 at 11:24 AM

The polling shows that most of those people don’t see it as arrogance, but rather as a singular focus on beating Obama.

csdeven on December 17, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Should Romney win the nomination as the GOP contender, he had better balance the ticket with a solid conservative in order to sweep Obama out of the WH. (And, no, Huckabee is definitely not the one to select.)

I did not want huckabee in 2008 but he has grown on me while i watch the fox news channel.

My feeling is Huckabee will enthuse the conservative base and he doesn’t have the baggage of Newt.

Gerry-moderate republican=mittbot(because mittbot takes fewer letters than typing Romney supporter)

gerrym51 on December 17, 2011 at 12:09 PM

The War Planner on December 17, 2011 at 11:09 AM

Kind.

Also, aside, I was one uncertain moment from “or Madam”-ing my Sir, but it seemed to diminish the tone :) Brevity made demands.

Anyway, Happy Hunting.

Oh, and Cheers :)

Axe on December 17, 2011 at 12:12 PM

With this endorsement, Nikki Haley has forfeited her Tea Party reform credentials. She should relocate to Massachusetts where she’ll fit right in with Northeast establishment Romney progressives like Chris Christie.

Tripwhipper on December 17, 2011 at 12:20 PM

The polling shows that most of those people don’t see it as arrogance, but rather as a singular focus on beating Obama.

csdeven on December 17, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Still, some of us can see it, and it’s bitter.

All I know when I go into that voting booth next November is that I will not vote for one stinking dimtard but don’t confuse that with that I would vote automatically for the repub because I won’t.

bbinfl on December 17, 2011 at 12:01 PM

I’m actually with you. I don’t want to be treated by R the same way black Americans (corporate) are treated by D.

But — At the very end of the day, it might all be academic. Do you really think Romney is as purely progressive as McCain? I won’t vote for McCain. I can vote for Romney.

Axe on December 17, 2011 at 12:20 PM

In Nevada, and other states I am told, stealth progressives ran as TEA Party candidates to dilute the TEA Party vote in favor of the dem candidate. I don’t remember if it worked, but that is just one example of how out of their league the TEA Party is right now. That person is ill equipped to handle even that tactic. The dems and the GOP were taken by surprise in 2010, but I can assure you that they are taking the long view on this and are already grooming people to infiltrate the TEA Party in order to weaken their influence in Washington. The deleterious effect this will have on the uninitiated Americans, whom we desperately need to get this movement a good head of steam, cannot be underestimated.

csdeven on December 17, 2011 at 9:06 AM

The guy’s name was Scott Ashjian in Nevada, whom the Dems were backing to undermine Sharon Angle.

It is true, in my opinion, that the Tea Party does need to learn to take the long view. This is exactly what the Left and the Communists have done and are doing. They are playing chess while some would say the Tea Party is playing checkers. So what we have here are actually two adversaries: the Dems/Left and the establishment GOP. Neither can stand the Tea Party and neither want the its candidates to succeed. They will do anything to co-opt and sabotage the movement, and that’s what every Tea Party group and candidate needs to be aware of.

PatriotGal2257 on December 17, 2011 at 12:34 PM

I’m not a fan of Romney but this is a wild exaggeration. A conservative (socially and fiscally) businessman with no core political convictions cannot possibly unleash as much destruction as a driven Marxist radical with Islamic sympathies partially controlled by Soros.

Igor R. on December 17, 2011 at 11:23 AM

..you know, Igor, I think I am warming up to you. Objectivity is all one can ask for. You display a lot of it.

;-)

The War Planner on December 17, 2011 at 12:44 PM

Anyway, Happy Hunting.

Oh, and Cheers :)

Axe on December 17, 2011 at 12:12 PM

You were correct in your original assumption. I’m totin’ one of each chromosome.

Merry Kwaaaaaaanzaaaa back at you!

The War Planner on December 17, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Again, your opinion has no basis in fact. The fact is that the GOP will vote in droves simply because they want Obama out of office and they don’t care who the nominee is.

csdeven on December 17, 2011 at 10:40 AM

I have recent past experience to back me up: that anti-Clinton vote in 1992 and 1996 and that anti-Bush vote from the Dems in 2004 AND that anti-Obama vote in 2008. You have nothing BUT your opinion.

ddrintn on December 17, 2011 at 12:59 PM

But — At the very end of the day, it might all be academic. Do you really think Romney is as purely progressive as McCain? I won’t vote for McCain. I can vote for Romney.

Axe on December 17, 2011 at 12:20 PM

The problem is I don’t know exactly WHAT Romney is. Everyone knew McCain was a moderate and he didn’t try all that much to hide it or to sail with the prevailing winds. Plus, McCain did have his war record and his selection of Palin. Romney isn’t going to have either, whether he chooses a Haley or Rubio or not. It won’t be the same.

ddrintn on December 17, 2011 at 1:03 PM

KickandSwimMom is correct in the history of the 2008 election after all of the candidates had winnowed themselves out. Limbaugh reached the conclusion you cite because Mitt was running as a conservative during that cycle. Currently, he is trying to appeal more toward the centrists and independents while thumbing his nose towards conservative voters. What irks many conservatives is that he is acting as if conservatives have no other choice but to select him. It is that same arrogance that the Republican party has towards its base of on-the-ground worker bees.

onlineanalyst on December 17, 2011 at 11:24 AM

Sorry, you are bending over backwards to try to explain it away, but Rush flip flopped on his endorsement of Romney. The transcript doesn’t lie. It’s clear as day. I guess Rush is a flip flopper… and perhaps a closeted RINO?

I think you are hallucinating if you think Romney is thumbing his nose at anyone. And how on earth is Romney acting as if conservatives have no choice but to vote for Romney? You can vote for anyone you want. If you want to throw your vote away on pompous, liberal Newt and help Obama get reelected, then go for it. Sometimes I wonder if you people actually listen to the candidates for yourselves, or if you just listen to what other people tell you about the candidates.

bluegill on December 17, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Rush did support Romney in 2008 when it got to the point that only Romney was left to stop McCain

gerrym51 on December 17, 2011 at 1:21 PM

Now do you get what I am trying to get at? This is why there needs to be someone you can believe in and in this current group of repubs I just don’t see it. All I know when I go into that voting booth next November is that I will not vote for one stinking dimtard but don’t confuse that with that I would vote automatically for the repub because I won’t.bbinfl on December 17, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Then that’s a shame. If you keep looking for perfection, you may never vote again in your lifetime.

I’m not sure what you need to believe in. I’m looking for action based upon competence, the ability to lead, direct and make judicious decisions for the better of the country, strong positions regarding international relations, and the knowledge to hire and consult with people who are able to pull this country of its economic misery.

Obama can’t make any of the above claims. If you don’t think any of the republican candidates are able to perform the above duties, then you must be looking at their negatives and not their positives.

salem on December 17, 2011 at 1:23 PM

People seem to be forgetting that Romney endorsed Nikki Haley months before Sarah Palin ever did. It’s obvious she’s returning the gesture.

SouthernGent on December 16, 2011 at 11:22 PM

And she languished in the middle of the Republican pack for months after this, but she took off in the polls after Palin’s.

RickB on December 17, 2011 at 1:24 PM

Sorry, you are bending over backwards to try to explain it away, but Rush flip flopped on his endorsement of Romney. The transcript doesn’t lie. It’s clear as day. I guess Rush is a flip flopper… and perhaps a closeted RINO?

bluegill on December 17, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Oh, that settles it! I’m a big Romney fan now! The man can do no wrong since Limbaugh endorsed him in 2008!

Come on. It’s a dishonest argument, and I suspect you know it. Limbaugh (like a lot of conservatives) saw Romney as simply the most palatable of 3 unpalatable alternatives.

ddrintn on December 17, 2011 at 1:25 PM

So if Romney or Gingrich is the next President, it is our job to keep on him and remind him how many people are ready to primary him in 2016 if he doesn’t govern as a conservative. It is our job to elect more conservatives to the House and Senate so Congress will send conservative legislation to the President.

rockmom on December 17, 2011 at 11:56 AM

Absolutely. I already know what Obama will attempt to do for four more years. We need a new face with a new agenda and if they fail, we have the power to make necessary changes. Well that is only if everyone votes. It baffles me when people claim they may sit out the vote. They have absolutely no other way to make effective change.

salem on December 17, 2011 at 1:28 PM

In a race of supposed conservatives only one is conservative in more than pretty words. Only one walks the lonely walk of a conservative.

Mitt Romney. Go Mitt!

Hayley is now genuinely conservative. She is walking the walk rather than making nice words pass her lips about it, meanwhile betraying the standards of conservatism.

petunia on December 17, 2011 at 5:25 AM

Conservatism, delusions and reality are all indignant.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2011 at 1:40 PM

These aren’t adults. They are bitter former St Palin the victimized worshipers who just recently learned about politics. They stupidly believe that a ideological candidate can win a general election. They are recalcitrant spoiled rotten brats who are stomping their feet and holding their breath until they get their way.

rotflmmfao! Stomp away you whiny cry babies!

csdeven on December 16, 2011 at 11:37 PM

I see that you are still “Winning friends and influencing people”.
Dale Carnegie would be so proud.

RickB on December 17, 2011 at 1:59 PM

I have recent past experience to back me up: that anti-Clinton vote in 1992 and 1996 and that anti-Bush vote from the Dems in 2004 AND that anti-Obama vote in 2008. You have nothing BUT your opinion.

ddrintn on December 17, 2011 at 12:59 PM

\

So all you have is old data from previous elections. That data is not valid during this election cycle. I on the other hand have current data for this election cycle.

Provide the current data to back up your opinion and the group will consider it. If you refuse to provide the data, then rational folks will go with the current data.

csdeven on December 17, 2011 at 2:09 PM

I see that you are still “Winning friends and influencing people”.

RickB on December 17, 2011 at 1:59 PM

I don’t need recalcitrant children as my friends.

csdeven on December 17, 2011 at 2:13 PM

I see that you are still “Winning friends and influencing people”.

RickB on December 17, 2011 at 1:59 PM
I don’t need recalcitrant children as my friends.

csdeven on December 17, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Yet, you have to act just like them. Don’t I’m “obssessing” over you like you do to Palin.

RickB on December 17, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Yet, you have to act just like them. Don’t I’m “obssessing” over you like you do to Palin.

RickB on December 17, 2011 at 2:23 PM

S/B Don’t worry I’m not

RickB on December 17, 2011 at 2:25 PM

The War Planner on December 17, 2011 at 12:44 PM

Thanks!

Igor R. on December 17, 2011 at 2:40 PM

I guess Rush is a flip flopper… and perhaps a closeted RINO?

bluegill on December 17, 2011 at 1:06 PM

I remember that time period..A lot of folks jumped on the Romney bandwagon because they did not want McCain..:)

PS..I was a Fred Head but after that blew up I was jumping on the Romney bandwagon..:)

Dire Straits on December 17, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Oh, that settles it! I’m a big Romney fan now! The man can do no wrong since Limbaugh endorsed him in 2008!

Come on. It’s a dishonest argument, and I suspect you know it. Limbaugh (like a lot of conservatives) saw Romney as simply the most palatable of 3 unpalatable alternatives.

ddrintn on December 17, 2011 at 1:25 PM

Ugh. The point wasn’t to say that Rush’s endorsement is important (but if it means a lot to you, then great). The point was just to point out how silly it is to throw around the “RINO” label so easily, and also to point out that some of you aren’t being very consistent in who you are calling flip floppers and who you are making excuses for.

As others have pointed out, Rush and Palin have both offered Romney endorsements of sorts. Hmm… are Rush and Palin RINOS too? Should they be burned at the stake, so to speak? Well, and them to the list!

If you Romney-bashers want to go with someone arguably more conservative, then pick between Bachmann and Perry. But neither Bachmann nor Perry would have much chance of beating Obama, and I don’t feel like getitng into why again. As for Gingrich, if you Romney-bashers go for him, then you are a bunch of hypocrites because Gingrich is the least conservative of them all. It’s really not that complicated, which is why I’d be surprised if someone who had been following all this wasn’t already strongly leaning in one direction.

But then I think… why should anyone try to please you people. You make no sense and probably aren’t even worth the energy.

bluegill on December 17, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Who can really predict what Romney will do?

Igor R. on December 17, 2011 at 11:07 AM

History is a good indicator. Thus far his recent history is intransigent progressive who like to argue that his progressive policies are really the most conservative.

astonerii on December 17, 2011 at 3:21 PM

bluegill on December 17, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Just be glad you missed Gary4205..:)

Dire Straits on December 17, 2011 at 3:21 PM

Ugh. The point wasn’t to say that Rush’s endorsement is important (but if it means a lot to you, then great). The point was just to point out how silly it is to throw around the “RINO” label so easily, and also to point out that some of you aren’t being very consistent in who you are calling flip floppers and who you are making excuses for.

As others have pointed out, Rush and Palin have both offered Romney endorsements of sorts. Hmm… are Rush and Palin RINOS too? Should they be burned at the stake, so to speak? Well, and them to the list!

bluegill on December 17, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Ugh. No. My argument is that if it comes down to Obama vs Romney, or Romney vs Huntsman, or Romney vs Paul, I’ll choose the lesser of two evils and go with Romney. That doesn’t make me a RINO. It means I have been given sucky choices.

ddrintn on December 17, 2011 at 3:38 PM

If you Romney-bashers want to go with someone arguably more conservative, then pick between Bachmann and Perry. But neither Bachmann nor Perry would have much chance of beating Obama

bluegill on December 17, 2011 at 2:59 PM

So we’re left with the same old unprovable “only Romney can beat Obama” selling/talking point. I don’t buy it.

ddrintn on December 17, 2011 at 3:42 PM

So we’re left with the same old unprovable “only Romney can beat Obama” selling/talking point. I don’t buy it.

And its provable that any of the others can. the only actual evidence that he is the best options are polls.

Now polls can be interpreted and analyzed many ways.

but if your going to use polls then Romney is the clear best

chance.

Any other position is strictly “gut feelings” or anecdotal.

gerry-moderate republican-mittbot-know it all

ps gallup 5 day average tracing poll for today is Gingrich 28
romney 24. a week ago it was gingrich 37 romney 21

gerrym51 on December 17, 2011 at 4:50 PM

So we’re left with the same old unprovable “only Romney can beat Obama” selling/talking point. I don’t buy it.

ddrintn on December 17, 2011 at 3:42 PM

I still love the one someone posted z few days ago about this: “So the dude that lost to the dude that lost to the dude we’re trying to beat is the only one who can beat the dude?”

Who is John Galt on December 17, 2011 at 8:21 PM

Yet, you have to act just like them. Don’t I’m “obssessing” over you like you do to Palin.

RickB on December 17, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Yet here you are unable to let it go. It doesn’t concern you unless you think you are one of those recalcitrant children. If you know you are in that group, why should anyone argue with you about it?

csdeven on December 18, 2011 at 12:01 AM

Then that’s a shame. If you keep looking for perfection, you may never vote again in your lifetime.

salem on December 17, 2011 at 1:23 PM

First of all not looking for perfection just competence. Second of all I always vote just not always for the cowardly dogs your party puts out or a dimtard.

bbinfl on December 18, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6