Tough new Gingrich ad: “What kind of man?”

posted at 4:20 pm on January 27, 2012 by Allahpundit

So psyched is Team Newt about this spot that they started pushing it to the media this morning before the vid was even done, sending around the script instead. It’s good, but the image of Romney as a ruthless, slippery politician who’ll say whatever he has to in order to win is, I fear, already priced into his stock. In fact, just as this ad hit YouTube, BuzzFeed came up with yet another example:

The campaign makes a practice of whitewashing transcripts and stories before circulating to the press, a practice that has become familiar to reporters covering the candidate.

For example, last Monday, during a press call with Tim Pawlenty, a Miami Herald reporter asked the campaign surrogate about Romney’s investments in Freddie Mac…

Pawlenty punted on the question–saying that he’d “have to ask the campaign to follow up with you.” But when the Romney press shop e-mailed out a transcript of the call later that day, the exchange was nowhere to be found…

The cherry-picking extends to the news and opinion articles the campaign forwards to reporters as well.

Remember, this is a guy whose very first attack ad against Obama late last year was built around a ridiculously out-of-context quote. If you nominate Romney, that’s what you’re getting. The thing is, conservatives want him to be this way in the general against O, right? One of the sorest spots on the right about the 2008 campaign was the sense that McCain didn’t hit Obama as hard as he could; that fear persists with Mitt because he dutifully concedes The One’s good intentions whenever he’s asked, which irritates the hell out of the “Obama is evil” crowd but is defensible strategy in appealing to undecideds who don’t hate Obama the way many grassroots righties do. Maybe we shouldn’t fear that Romney will go easy on O, though. Like Obama himself, Mitt tends to play the nice guy on the stump while letting his ad team and other surrogates be as cutthroat as they need to be with his opponents. He does what he thinks he needs to do to win, which is alienating if you’re a Newt fan but maybe not so alienating if you’re a Republican who’s most interested in ousting O. All of which is to say, while this spot does a nifty job of making Romney less likable, I’m not sure that the big conclusion on electability is true.

Besides, how receptive are voters really to attacks on a politician’s honesty? It’s like attacking a pol for influence peddling: In exceptional cases it might matter (the Freddie Mac fingerpointing between Mitt and Newt is exceptional because of Freddie’s role in the housing crisis and wider recession), but to some degree voters cynically expect that behavior. Exit question: How much of an effect can any one ad have at this point when Romney’s outspending Newt by this much?


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

I would rather see the, Obama care is not worth getting angry about, ad.

astonerii on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Exactly, and Romney will just stand there with a thumb up his butt because he already passed it.

You all can look at it as a “states rights” thing but in the minds of most people that distinction is irrelevant. Obama passed a mandate. Romney did too.

Only 2 people in the history of the planet who can lay claim to the fact that they passed a law that forces its citizens to buy a product from a private company as a requirement of lawful citizenship.

Rock on conservatism!

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

haner on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

my guess it was a chicago style pizza

runner on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Newtron Bomb, with his 60+ percent negatives by the public at large, is willing to do ANTYHING to make the other GOP candidate with a chance to win the nomination UNELECTABLE to the rest of the country in a general election. That shows you how much this con man cares about Obama being in office another 4 years.

Rockshine on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Time to end this…already.

The Mormon will win

libtard4life on January 27, 2012 at 4:24 PM
You have a problem with him being Mormon?

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Now that you ask the question, yes, I DO. Mormonism is a cult–plain and simple. For Romney to be involved in this further diplays his lack of judgment and character. Have you ever studied just exactly what Mormons believe? If not, I challenge you to do so. After you have, take another look at Romney.

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

I’ve been surprised at the number of GOP voters I’ve spoken to here in Florida who are tired of Romney’s schtick where he acts sweet and innocent and allows his Super-PAC and others to butcher the other candidates.

The one comment everyone is gossiping about from the debate is the “It’s nothing worth getting angry about.” That was a killer even for some of my friends who were leaning toward Romney.

Many folks noticed when all these anti-Gingrich hit pieces came out on the same day.

shannon76 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Fair enough, but who are they going to vote for? Newt? Doubtful with his latest meltdown. Baggage and negative likeability ratings aside, we cannot nominate someone who puts up a hissy fit everytime things don’t exactly according to plan.

So who does that leave? I’m assuming we can throw out Ron Paul as an alternative. Which means Santorum is the only not-Romney candidate left. Now if Newt were to drop out immediately, maybe Rick could consolidate enough of the anti-Romney votes to make this a contest, but it doesn’t help matters that he’s currently polling worse than Newt and apparently just bailed on Florida if the reports are accurate.

Doughboy on January 27, 2012 at 4:47 PM

The moneyt not in a blind trust, it was a charitable trust. Holy Cr-P! How decietful is that.

tbrickert on January 27, 2012 at 4:47 PM

if this is all team Newt has got, its over.

gatorboy on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Put away your pipe, the cigars, the champagne and the crown.

Rick will unite with Newt, likely soon.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:47 PM

So, in principle, you think a government has the power to tell people to enter into contracts with another party?

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

In principle, I think the sovereign Commonwealth of Massachusetts can give itself just about any authority not expressly forbidden it by the US Constitution. Now, there may well be an argument that the US Constitution prohibits MA and the several States such authority.

I just haven’t heard it yet.

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:47 PM

Is talking back to moderaters during debates really that important to you?

kage on January 27, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Only if the audience is stacked for Newt ahead of the time. Otherwise it’s a violation of 1st Amendment rights akin to the Battle of Little Bighorn.

haner on January 27, 2012 at 4:48 PM

The first I heard of this ad was just now on Fox News where Huckabee said that he hadn’t authorized the use of his image by any of the candidates and and asked Newt’s campaign to take him out.

Second, I don’t think this is going to do Newt much good, because he himself is so vulnerable to the same argument. I’m thinking of the clip he made with Nancy Pelosi on the couch, and other statements he’s made that make him sound like a Progressive. http://bit.ly/xRAWGX

What kind of man would promote so many big government ideas then try to tell us that he’s the guy to lead us out of this terrible financial mess?

flataffect on January 27, 2012 at 4:48 PM

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Is Newt’s religion against multiple wives or just at the same time?

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:48 PM

WEll, the truth be told-Romney is a ruthless slippery politician. Good ad. Now Newt needs to run it every 5 minutes here in FL like romney is running his vicious attack ads about Newt.

Bullhead on January 27, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Can we get over “sending messages” and focus on winning?

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Pathetic. Your words are those of a person who cares nothing for ideology, stances, or principles. Your words are those of a person who cares only about the letter after the President’s name. I hope that letter really warms your heart after Mitt or Newt spend their entire term waffling over the dismantling of ObamaCare, leaving it virtually intact by 2016.

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:49 PM

And…this guy (Romney) is the guy many of you on here want to elect? Do you really think he’s the so-called conservative he claims to be? Folks, you’d better re-think this before it’s too late. Remember, the ultimate goal is to remove Obama from office, and Romney is definitely not the one to get that done.

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

As a matter of fact he’s exactly the one to get it done.

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Only 2 people in the history of the planet who can lay claim to the fact that they passed a law that forces its citizens to buy a product from a private company as a requirement of lawful citizenship.

Rock on conservatism!

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Both happen to also be passive-aggressive narcissistic snipers, in this zeitgeist. Good luck to them and the fools who support them. They will scroom them royally.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:49 PM

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:47 PM

That’s a dodge worthy of the matrix. For a yes or no question, that’s a mighty wordy answer.

Does a government have this power to force people into contracts with another party? In principle, does it?

It’s a very basic question.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:49 PM

I don’t follow your logic, AP. You’ve said many times that this field is much weaker than 2008. Yet back then, McCain employed the very same soft strategy against Obama and lost. So how are we supposed to win with that same strategy this time around? Why shouldn’t our guy hit Obama hard?

Weight of Glory on January 27, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Now that you ask the question, yes, I DO. Mormonism is a cult–plain and simple. For Romney to be involved in this further diplays his lack of judgment and character. Have you ever studied just exactly what Mormons believe? If not, I challenge you to do so. After you have, take another look at Romney.

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

For those of you who like to accuse Ron Paul of bigotry, I give you an example of what bigotry really looks like.

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Rick will unite with Newt, likely soon.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:47 PM

And for what? What’s the prize?

I would think Rick Santorum of all people would realize that a Newt nomination would kill family values as a serious platform for the GOP.

haner on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Rick will unite with Newt, likely soon.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:47 PM

.
You gottta love principled evangelicals.

FlaMurph on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

If this ad convinces people Mitts a liar and bad morals I suspect
they would not vote for a liar with bad morals and would vote for santorum not newt

gerrym51 on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:47 PM

If that question is uncomfortable.

How about this one.

Not only can government tax us at 40%, they can also tell us how to spend the other 60%.

This is a position that both Romney and Obama support via their mandates.

Do you agree with them?

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Besides, how receptive are voters really to attacks on a politician’s honesty?

Are you crazy? In the case of Romney? His character and integrity are absolutely essential because voters are supposed to rely on his promise that he’ll repeal Obamacare when, out of the other side of his mouth, he’s telling voters what an awesome job he did with Romneycare.

Screw Romney. He’s the biggest weasel.

BuckeyeSam on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Tough new Gingrich ad: “What kind of man?”

The kind of man who has been married to the same woman for 43 years, raised five sons and gives 16% of his income to charity.

The Ugly American on January 27, 2012 at 4:51 PM

You have a problem with him being Mormon?

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM

You think the MSM will be silent about his faith? The DNC?

Al-Ozarka on January 27, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Can’t have it both ways.

After months of being told by Tea Party types that, essentially, Obama was so vulnerable he’d lose to a ham sandwich (an argument they made in order to prop up their own exceptionally weak candidates like Palin, Bachmann and Cain), they now turn around and say, “but Romney is a sure loser!”

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:37 PM

I’ve never said Mittens was a sure loser. Others on here have made that prediction, but don’t lump me in with them. I do think the electability narrative is way overblown because A)the base either dislikes or distrusts Romney and B)the media hasn’t unleashed their smear campaign on him yet. Does that mean he can’t or won’t win? Not at all. If he runs a competent campaign and stays on message, and a majority of the electorate doesn’t get suckered into thinking that 1.7% growth in 2011 and an 8.5% unemployment rate are acceptable figures, he’ll be the next President. But it’ll be closer than some in the GOP establishment may think.

Doughboy on January 27, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Rick will unite with Newt, likely soon.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:47 PM

Civil union?

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:52 PM

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:49 PM

I know the one candidate who really likes Obamacare and his name is Obama.

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:52 PM

It belies the fact that your “another Obama term will destroy this country” rhetoric gives Obama way too much credit and America way too little.

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

I don’t have a dog in this hunt. The two reasons I am on here:

One is the people I know with small businesses (no, this does not include me) who are getting decimated in this economy. These folks are the engine of growth and recovery. They are falling off the precipice.

The other is my kids and their friends. The ones finishing up two and four year degrees can’t find jobs. The ones who have jobs got them without degrees and are not going anywhere.

Obama is not an evil genius. He is an ideological incompetent backed by the most crooked political machine in American history.

Anyone who thinks this country will survive four more years of Obama is gambling the future of our children and our country.

PolAgnostic on January 27, 2012 at 4:52 PM

I guess I’m a ‘grass roots rightie’…but I’m ‘not for Newt’ yet!

KOOLAID2 on January 27, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Can’t have it both ways.

After months of being told by Tea Party types that, essentially, Obama was so vulnerable he’d lose to a ham sandwich (an argument they made in order to prop up their own exceptionally weak candidates like Palin, Bachmann and Cain), they now turn around and say, “but Romney is a sure loser!”

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:37 PM

+100000

haner on January 27, 2012 at 4:53 PM

For those of you who like to accuse Ron Paul of bigotry, I give you an example of what bigotry really looks like.

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Do you really think his faith would not be an issue in the General election? Dream on.

Al-Ozarka on January 27, 2012 at 4:53 PM

I’ve been surprised at the number of GOP voters I’ve spoken to here in Florida who are tired of Romney’s schtick

shannon76 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Have you heard of Pauline Kael?

galtani on January 27, 2012 at 4:54 PM

What kind of man sells his soul to Freddie Mac for $25,000 a month?

carl todd hand on January 27, 2012 at 4:54 PM

This is how it goes with Newt. Newt thinks he has a vicious ad on the street and the story is going to end up being how Newt tried to falsely imply a Huckster endorsement and how Hucksterbee made Newt pull the ad.

kunegetikos on January 27, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Does a government have this power to force people into contracts with another party? In principle, does it?

It’s a very basic question.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Which government? Our national government? No. It is not in its enumerated powers, and therefore the authority is left to the States, or to the people.

If a State gives itself that authority, then yes, they have the power to force people who reside in that state to enter into third-party contracts, unless their state constitution, or the US Constitution, prohibits it.

Now, I ask again: What part of the US Constitution bars MA from giving itself that authority?

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Rick will unite with Newt, likely soon.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:47 PM

I hope you’re right. That would solidify the anti-Romney vote behind Newt. He needs to do it this weekend.

Maybe while Rick’s home doing his taxes he’ll figure out that he’ll never be in a stronger position to cut a deal. Of course, Romney might be paying him to stay in.

Kaffa on January 27, 2012 at 4:55 PM

PolAgnostic on January 27, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Exactly, the people who can afford to “sit at home” this next election, are people who have only raised dogs, those who have 1,000 cans of beans stacked up in their basement or gold bugs who actually think they’ll be able to get the stuff after the end days.

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Like Obama himself, Mitt tends to play the nice guy on the stump while letting his ad team and other surrogates be as cutthroat as they need to be with his opponents.

Ever heard the expression “fight fire with fire?” Not only is this ad’s conclusion about Romney’s “electability” untrue, it, in fact, makes the case that he has the best shot to go against Obama in the GE. Obama has already proven himself to be the epitome of the guy who will do and say anything to win (see, the 2008 primary and GE and just about every speech he’s given once going to the WH). Seriously, Obama is the guy who threw his own grandmother — the person who raised him — under the bus to get elected. Only someone willing to do the same can win against him.

Dark Star on January 27, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Have you ever studied just exactly what Mormons believe? If not, I challenge you to do so. After you have, take another look at Romney.

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

All religions believe crazy things.

Go RBNY on January 27, 2012 at 4:55 PM

What kind of man would promote so many big government ideas then try to tell us that he’s the guy to lead us out of this terrible financial mess?

flataffect on January 27, 2012 at 4:48 PM

One word: Romneycare.

Game over. Election to Obama. I simply do not want to listen to Romney offer his weak-tea rationale for Romneycare from now until November. And I can’t believe even the spineless members of the GOP establishment aren’t working overtime to find an alternative to Mitt the POS.

BuckeyeSam on January 27, 2012 at 4:55 PM

And for what? What’s the prize?

I would think Rick Santorum of all people would realize that a Newt nomination would kill family values as a serious platform for the GOP.

haner on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

That’s rich coming from the same people who said yesterday that they’re scared of Tea Partiers who see preachers in tents. Now all of a sudden he’s concerned about family values.

Just like Mittens…say anything.

angryed on January 27, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Do you really think his faith would not be an issue in the General election? Dream on.

Al-Ozarka on January 27, 2012 at 4:53 PM

I/when it is, I’d prefer our side have clean hands.

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:56 PM

I do think the electability narrative is way overblown because A)the base either dislikes or distrusts Romney and B)the media hasn’t unleashed their smear campaign on him yet.

Doughboy on January 27, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Of course you think it’s overblown. Because it blows Newty and whoever else you’re supporting out of the water. Naturally you would attack it. Who is “the base” anyway? Can somebody give a credible description of “the base?” All this talk about “the base” being somehow different and separate from “the establishment” is a load of crapola. And Newty is the one that has been getting a free ride from the liberal media because he’s the one they wanted to get the nomination.

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:56 PM

What kind of man sells his soul to Freddie Mac for $25,000 a month?

carl todd hand on January 27, 2012 at 4:54 PM

A man who’s on his third wife, likes to take Greek cruises when he should be working, and has credit lines at Tiffany’s for half a mil.

Doughboy on January 27, 2012 at 4:56 PM

…that fear persists with Mitt because he dutifully concedes The One’s good intentions whenever he’s asked, which irritates the hell out of the “Obama is evil” crowd but is defensible strategy in appealing to undecideds who don’t hate Obama the way many grassroots righties do.

Much of the public thinks President Obama is a nice guy because they don’t know him, not yet, not like we do. The press can block and screen all they want, but some of the truth about this thin-skinned, petty, narcissistic ideologue is bound to get through.

No more nice, please. We need to get personal because politics is personal and the stakes are too high.

troyriser_gopftw on January 27, 2012 at 4:56 PM

You think the MSM will be silent about his faith? The DNC?

Al-Ozarka on January 27, 2012 at 4:51 PM

At the end of the day, conservatives will always pick someone WITH faith than one WITHOUT faith. Any faith.

There will be 5 Democrats in the country who will vote against Romney solely on the basis of his faith.

haner on January 27, 2012 at 4:56 PM

What kind of man wants to put 13,000 people on the moon when we’re running $1.5 trillion dollar deficits?

carl todd hand on January 27, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Most people here have their bowels in an uproar over one candidate or another .What happens when the GOP picks it’s nominee?

Obama is a scum sucking no good piece of excrement that has to be stopped. Keep your eye on the prize,which is our survival.

celtic warrior on January 27, 2012 at 4:57 PM

I hope that letter really warms your heart after Mitt or Newt spend their entire term waffling over the dismantling of ObamaCare, leaving it virtually intact by 2016.

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:49 PM

.
THE REPEAL process is a LEGISLATIVE one. The President ONLY signs the damn repeal or vetoes it – Its an act of congress.(get it?) THE SENATE is the first hurdle for repealing Obiecare- Stop making it sound like its a ONE man show. You have been truly fallen into the lOBAMAtized zone.

FlaMurph on January 27, 2012 at 4:57 PM

You know what bothered me in Thursday’s debate? The moment the question about Freddie’s Fannie and housing collapse came up, Romney , as if waiting for that opening, pounced on Gingrich with that stupid ” Gingrich took money from Frddie” line . Is Romney so delusional that he doesn’t even know what us lowlife cretins know , that it wasn’t Gingrich who caused the housing market collapse ? Did anyone tell Romney about Frank, Dodd, Waters, Frank’s b**tfloss,Raines, Gorelick, ACORN and Obama who not only profited off Fannie and Freddie in it’s good times but profitted off Fannie and Freddie when they went down and then again when they got bailed out ? Has Romney seen reports of how many millions of dollars the execs of these 2 entities made off as bonus after cheating and looting the said 2 entities ?
A person who is so out of it that he blames someone so low in the food chain while having not a word to say about the actual people who caused the collapse of housing market which had it’s effect on the world’s economy has no place in any position related to reviving our country ‘s economy. He has no clue about the problem, he will never be able to solve it.

burrata on January 27, 2012 at 4:57 PM

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:54 PM

By this logic, what is the problem with slavery?

That no piece of paper was signed? Cuz, really, it’s just a difference of degrees now isn’t it?

If government can force you into a contract; they can force you into a very unfavorable contract, can they not? Their power over you. You’ve given it to them.

Seriously. Work this out in your head and tell me seriously that you have no problem with this concept.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:57 PM

This isn’t likely to be effective for a multitude of reasons. First and foremost is the timing issue. People tend to disregard attacks such as these when the candidate making them is on his way down.

Simply put, the timing makes the attack smell desperate, and so most candidates regard them as such. This is a fact that Gingrich himself knows perfectly well, as he used ads in South Carolina that encouraged this behavior in the final days of that campaign.

Second, is simple credibility. Like it or not, Gingrich has lost a lot of credibility in the past week. He’s been caught misleading people numerous times this week, particularly in the first Florida debate. If your credibility is already in question its difficult to win over voters by calling the other candidate dishonest.

Finally, there is the simple fact that Gingrich is being buried in terms of advertising. He’s being outspent by an immense margin, and simply isn’t being heard very often.

This is a good strategy to rile up people who are already in your camp, but its completely ineffectual for winning over people who are not. In fact it could very well backfire by coming across as too desperate. Undecided voters tend to side with the side they believe is winning during the final days of a campaign. If Gingrich makes himself look weak in any way he only increases the chances of being completely crushed next Tuesday.

WolvenOne on January 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Of thin-skinned, this is hilarious.

How long before we see a FLOTUS tarmac tantrum? We did get two divas for the price of one. As longtime observers of the royal Obamas have long observed: Mr. and Mrs. Cranky Pants’ problem has never been the color of their skin. It’s the thinness.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Now that you ask the question, yes, I DO. Mormonism is a cult–plain and simple. For Romney to be involved in this further diplays his lack of judgment and character. Have you ever studied just exactly what Mormons believe? If not, I challenge you to do so. After you have, take another look at Romney.

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM
For those of you who like to accuse Ron Paul of bigotry, I give you an example of what bigotry really looks like.

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Hey, Galt, at least Newt has repented and has asked his God and his fellow man for forgivneness. He’s also now in a committed, stable marriage, and has been for years.

As for Romney, though, he continues to associate himself with the cult called Mormanism. Big difference there.

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM

All religions believe crazy things.

Go RBNY on January 27, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Some are crazier than others… Scientologists for example.

tetriskid on January 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM

+100000

haner on January 27, 2012 at 4:53 PM

But Romney is the ham sandwich consisting of rotten ham and moldy bread.

Romneycare: the millstone around his neck–and our necks, if he’s the nominee.

BuckeyeSam on January 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Pathetic. Your words are those of a person who cares nothing for ideology, stances, or principles. Your words are those of a person who cares only about the letter after the President’s name. I hope that letter really warms your heart after Mitt or Newt spend their entire term waffling over the dismantling of ObamaCare, leaving it virtually intact by 2016.

The truth is that we are being lied to by ALL the candidates. There is no chance of gaining a 60 vote majority in the Senate and that makes it impossible to repeal Obamacare.
The best hope is the Court. Second best is to administratively disable it through waivers, refusing to appoint & hire people etc. …but this is only good as long as Dems are not in charge. We must get a MAJORITY in the Senate this year…and then a super-majority in 2014 if we have any hope of repeal…regardless of who our nominee for Prez is.

camaraderie on January 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

First, explain what “State’s rights” mean so the rest of us can assess if answering your question is worth the time.

Dark Star on January 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM

You gottta love principled evangelicals.

FlaMurph on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Isn’t God great. Rick as VP.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Romney voted for Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale over Reagan

Game over

magic kingdom on January 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Not only can government tax us at 40%, they can also tell us how to spend the other 60%.

This is a position that both Romney and Obama support via their mandates.

Do you agree with them?

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

If the state of MA wants to mandate that you spend the remaining 60% of your income on lottery tickets, then get a-scratching, m’boy!!

Or, do what most sensible people would do, and get the hell out of Massachusetts.

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 5:00 PM

The moment the question about Freddie’s Fannie and housing collapse came up, Romney , as if waiting for that opening, pounced on Gingrich with that stupid ” Gingrich took money from Frddie” line .

Do you remember who set him up for that line?

Go RBNY on January 27, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Who is “the base” anyway? Can somebody give a credible description of “the base?” All this talk about “the base” being somehow different and separate from “the establishment” is a load of crapola. And Newty is the one that has been getting a free ride from the liberal media because he’s the one they wanted to get the nomination.

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:56 PM

The “base” is different in each state. The NH Republican base is nothing like the SC Republican base.

One should distrust anyone who pretends to speak on behalf of the “base” on the national level.

haner on January 27, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Nice of the union to team up with Newt on Mitt.

changer1701 on January 27, 2012 at 4:27 PM

You must not live in FL, because if you did you would know that this ad is patty-cake compared to the ads the Romney team have been hitting Gingrich with almost non-stop for the past week.

Flora Duh on January 27, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Put away your pipe, the cigars, the champagne and the crown.

Rick will unite with Newt, likely soon.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:47 PM

That is a very bad visual

gatorboy on January 27, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Of course you think it’s overblown. Because it blows Newty and whoever else you’re supporting out of the water. Naturally you would attack it. Who is “the base” anyway? Can somebody give a credible description of “the base?” All this talk about “the base” being somehow different and separate from “the establishment” is a load of crapola. And Newty is the one that has been getting a free ride from the liberal media because he’s the one they wanted to get the nomination.

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:56 PM

I’m not supporting Newt. But I don’t think Romney’s doing a good job selling his candidacy. He’s merely doing a good job tearing down Newt. As for your question about “the base”? Those would be the conservatives and Tea Partiers who put the GOP back in control in the House in 2010 and gave them historic victories at the local and state levels. The same people who are so distrustful of Mittens that they’ve been willing to give unvetted neophytes like Herman Cain a sizable lead in the polls for nearly 2 months in a desperate attempt to nominate anyone but him. Romney better not take them for granted come November. It’s possible to run a campaign that targets BOTH right-leaning and moderate voters. I hope that’s his strategery if/when he clinches the nomination.

Doughboy on January 27, 2012 at 5:01 PM

He’s also now in a committed, stable marriage, and has been for years.

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

I’ll give it to ya… that’s a knee-slapper right there!

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 5:01 PM

First, explain what “State’s rights” mean so the rest of us can assess if answering your question is worth the time.

Dark Star on January 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM

In principle do you give any government this power over you?

To force you into a contract with another party?

Again, in principle, would you let someone have this power over you?

Or, do what most sensible people would do, and get the hell out of Massachusetts.

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 5:00 PM

We’re learning a lot here, aren’t we? So it’s fine for someone to force you do this, as long as you have the option to leave?

So, what you are saying is that this concept is okay because you could really just move to Mexico and not be faced with this burden? Really?

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Romney voted for Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale over Reagan

Game over

magic kingdom on January 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Who gives a damn? I voted for Mondale over Reagan too.

Didn’t help Mondale a whole lot.

And it’s not like dumping a wife(s) you vowed before God to be with til death.

Game over.

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 5:02 PM

It’s good, but the image of Romney as a ruthless, slippery politician who’ll say whatever he has to in order to win is, I fear, already priced into his stock.

The question is how many people who live outside of the NE and who are not into politics actually know of Romney’s record in MA.

INC on January 27, 2012 at 5:03 PM

That is a very bad visual

gatorboy on January 27, 2012 at 5:01 PM

.
ooof.

FlaMurph on January 27, 2012 at 5:03 PM

I find it amazing that people are having a hard time saying “no, no one can force into a contract against my will.”

Someone explain to me why this is a hard concept. It’s a very basic freedom would expect in a normal society.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 5:03 PM

I really wish these guys would stop attacking each other and send their collective salvos toward Obowma while they have the money to do it…

… Soften him up a bit, see who can land the biggest blow. Make it a competition, have some fun with it.

Seven Percent Solution on January 27, 2012 at 5:03 PM

By this logic, what is the problem with slavery?

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Uhhh… the Thirteenth Amendment to the US Constitution.

Perhaps you should read up on it.

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

He’s also now in a committed, stable marriage, and has been for years.

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Think of what he’ll trade up to once he becomes POTUS.

That alone may be worth electing him to see.

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:44 PM
Exactly, and Romney will just stand there with a thumb up his butt because he already passed it.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

can someone help me with something. first, i dont give a damn who wins the primary here. i like all of them. and i beleive every one of them takes out oabam. but this mem that IF mittsters makes it to september. and gets the nom. rtomneycare is a strtike against him. ok, so he SAYS he will repeal. he says he WANTS to. in pravtice it will come from the legislature,and the only way he COULDNT repeal it would be to VETO repeal legislation. which i dont think any one beleives he would do. but how exactly, in what kind of logic does romneycare hurt him in november? lets think this thru: we have voters who LIKE obamacare, they go to obama. romney, newt anyone wont get them. that 40% or so. they are lost. ok, so folks who WANT repeal, how exactly does romney hurt our side? will those voters NOT vote for mitt meaning they get obama, and KEEP obamacare? they will vote obama??!! they want obamacare gone, but will voter FOR obama to keep it? isnt the only rational play for those folks to vote FOR romney, hoping he will follow thru? is the argument they then stay home? also by default electing obama, and therefore letting oabamcare stand? i just dont get the logic there. what am i missing. any help at all here would be appreciated. and soesnt the squishy middle/indys/moderates probably gravitate TO romney thinking “well, he says he will repeal it. i dont really like ti to much, but he’s not all mean and angry about it” and draw some of those goofballs in? and again, repeal will come up from the house, be \shoved thru a barely GOP senate with reconcilaition. after epxending that political capital would potus romeny actually VETO IT??? thats seems absurd to me. insane. help me. please.

t8stlikchkn on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Time to end this…already.

The Mormon will win

liberal4life on January 27, 2012 at 4:24 PM

Well, he’s got 5 more years before he has to run again. When Harry Reid won again, we decided to boycott Nevada until he was voted out…or dead (he always looks like he’s dying), whichever was first. I wonder if he sings in the choir?

KOOLAID2 on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Huckabee is calling on Newt to pull the ad. He did not give him permission and he was not talking about Romney when he said what he said.

tbrickert on January 27, 2012 at 4:43

Yeah, if you do not want your statements used by others, do not make them where they are reported or recorded. He also ended up attacking Newt a while back and it ended up in an ad.

astonerii on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Nice to see AFSCME and the Tea Party joining together.

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:32 PM

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Thatisall.

Misha I on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

burrata on January 27, 2012 at 4:57 PM

I ended up watching little of the debate, but I did see the part you described. And from that, I came away with the unalterable conclusion that Mitt is a POS. Perfect opportunity to unload on liberals and communicate a conservative message on housing policy, and he decides to make the unbelieveably laughable argument that Newt was to blame for the subprime debacle.

No wonder Frank got engaged. The Obama administration will never let him get criticized, and Mitt–his MA buddy–will cover Frank’s considerable *ss in the GOP primaries.

Mitt is a total lowlife.

BuckeyeSam on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Newt/Rick

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 5:05 PM

He’s also now in a committed, stable marriage, and has been for years.

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Think of what he’ll trade up to once he becomes POTUS.

That alone may be worth electing him to see.

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Oh, cheerio, old chap!! You’ve earned yourself an indulgence for that one.

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 5:05 PM

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

No, what’s the problem with it?

If you can be forced into a contract, what’s your argument against slavery? Tell me.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Romney voted for Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale over Reagan

Game over

magic kingdom on January 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Oh please! Reagan himself was a Democrat until he was 39 years old. He was a supporter of Roosevelt. He supported Helen Gahagan Douglas in 1950. Look that one up! Reagan didn’t get into Republican politics until Nancy came along in the mid-50s. So…game back on, I guess! lol

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Those would be the conservatives and Tea Partiers who put the GOP back in control in the House in 2010

Doughboy on January 27, 2012 at 5:01 PM

It was Obama and the Democratic Party who put the GOP back in control. We would have a few more Senators if it wasn’t for the tea-party supporting goofballs like O’Donnel and Angle. The guy in AK wasn’t so bad, forget his name.

Go RBNY on January 27, 2012 at 5:05 PM

But it’ll be closer than some in the GOP establishment may think.

Doughboy on January 27, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Agreed. I have believed all along that this election will be close. But I think it is winnable.

It just boils down to who do you think has a better chance of winning, Romney or Gingrich?

For me, I think it’s Romney. I’m not 100% confident he WILL win. I just think he’s got a better shot than Gingrich.

I’m basing my vote on my own sense of pragmatism. Well, that and my imminent desire to see Obama thrown out of office.

What really frustrates me with some of the Newt supporters here is that I feel they’re too easily swayed by Gingrich sudden, new persona as a “Tea Party champion”, and are somewhat gullibly supporting him now under the presumption that “he fights”. That’s at least somewhat understandable, but truly angers me is the intellectual dishonesty and attempts to alter reality and pretend that Gingrich wasn’t espousing the same sort of “Establishment” policy positions and rhetoric that supposedly makes Romney so loathesome, let alone pretend like he wasn’t espousing that rhetoric just WEEKS ago. Not years remotely in the past, we’re talking about a passage of time of DAYS.

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 5:06 PM

gatorboy on January 27, 2012 at 5:01 PM

They are very good friends.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 5:06 PM

I find it amazing that people are having a hard time saying “no, no one can force into a contract against my will.”

Someone explain to me why this is a hard concept. It’s a very basic freedom would expect in a normal society.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 5:03 PM

Then please, point out to us where this guarantee is outlined in the US Constitution.

I’m still waiting…

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 5:06 PM

t8stlikchkn on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

The president has quite a large amount of influence on what gets brought up in the congress. he even has much input into what it should look like coming out. His staff right at this moment is saying that NO Romney will not repeal it. Romney said he would like to get rid of the bad and keep the good. Of course, bad to him is good to me and good to him is bad to me.

astonerii on January 27, 2012 at 5:06 PM

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Thatisall.

Misha I on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Then look at yourself in the mirror if you want to know where the problem lies. It’s not Romney. He wants to beat Obama. The clueless anti-Romney paranoids just want to beat the mysterious “establishment” whatever that is.

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 5:07 PM

gatorboy on January 27, 2012 at 5:01 PM

They are very good friends.

And, both love their country more than themselves, and don’t want Romney.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Then please, point out to us where this guarantee is outlined in the US Constitution.

So now you are not only agreeing that the state mandate (romneycare) is okay, you now agree that the federal one is okay (obamacare).

See how far we’ve come in just a short space of time?

I appreciate it, really.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Alexrod or somebody had in mind a way to play crankypants to advantage?

Here and here.

kunegetikos on January 27, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Romney voted for Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale over Reagan

Game over

magic kingdom on January 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM

So did my mom. She also voted for Dukakis and Clinton(in 1992). And now, she votes Republican, attended a Tea Party rally, despises Obama, and is desperate to see him defeated in November. Full disclosure. She’s not a social conservative. But she is when it comes to fiscal issues. So frankly I don’t care if Mittens voted Democrat nearly 30 years ago. People can change over time.

And BTW, why is Mittens voting for Tsongas in the 1992 Democrat primary so bad? Hell, that’s one of the last Democrat politicians who actually inspired me. Hearing a Dem in this day and age say something like “I’m not going to be Santa Claus” to the entitlement class base of the party would border on a revolutionary act.

Doughboy on January 27, 2012 at 5:08 PM

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 5:08 PM

You caught a whale.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 5:09 PM

They are very good friends.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 5:06 PM

.
Visual still there, only worse now.

FlaMurph on January 27, 2012 at 5:09 PM

No, what’s the problem with it?

If you can be forced into a contract, what’s your argument against slavery? Tell me.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Slavery is de facto, in black letter law, prohibited by the Thirteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land.

Now, where in that document do you read the prohibition on states, through force of law, requiring their citizens from entering into contracts?

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 5:10 PM

He’s also now in a committed, stable marriage, and has been for years.

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Think of what he’ll trade up to once he becomes POTUS.

That alone may be worth electing him to see.

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Oh, cheerio, old chap!! You’ve earned yourself an indulgence for that one.

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Where will Clarista get her pink slip? Does the White House have a Tower Green?

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5