Video: Romney rips Obama in Florida victory speech

posted at 10:04 pm on January 31, 2012 by Allahpundit

Full transcript here. Some positive buzz for this on Twitter tonight, probably inevitably given that he’s in “nominee” mode and attacking Obama instead of Gingrich. But watch to the end and you’ll find the standard “believe in America” boilerplate, which I find impossible to listen to ever since Mark Steyn’s pitch-perfect parody.

How did it come to this, my friends?

video platform
video management
video solutions
video player


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

Pre-defeated is so 2008.

profitsbeard on January 31, 2012 at 11:55 PM

I am an old fashioned guy. I do not carry my mobile with me very often, use it about 80 minutes at most a month. Have the same jeans I bought 15 years ago, some of my shoes are older. I have a 1995 auto, and that was after my grandfather’s 1955 Chrysler gave me its last mile (do not trust your oil change people, check the oil level when you get it changed). So, having my position on philosophy go back 4 years does not seem to be all so bad. Then again, I am not pre-defeated. I just see it as another of life’s lessons that Americans need to learn. I thought they would have learned it over the last 3 years, but hey, life goes on.

astonerii on February 1, 2012 at 12:04 AM

flyfisher on February 1, 2012 at 12:03 AM

Steinbeck – probably the most overrated of American authors. Tom Wolfe didn’t even use bankster in The Bonfire of the Vanities. C’mon John!

DHChron on February 1, 2012 at 12:09 AM

SubDoc on February 1, 2012 at 12:00 AM

Salute! Good post; a logical viewpoint presented without rancor.

Oracleforhire on February 1, 2012 at 12:09 AM

Dire Straits

Dire, not sure where you are this evening. No QOTD, but here ya go! : )

Everyone should give this a tumble in honor of Mitts big win!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlyrEyynec0

Bmore on February 1, 2012 at 12:15 AM

Bmore on February 1, 2012 at 12:04 AM

heh. A talking heads link outta left field!

DHChron on February 1, 2012 at 12:16 AM

heh. A talking heads link outta left field!

DHChron on February 1, 2012 at 12:16 AM

A little something I do with Dire, it supposed to reflect the QOTD. There isn’t one so this is for Mitts big win.

Bmore on February 1, 2012 at 12:18 AM

a flip, a flop, a flippy to the floppy an’ you just can’t stoppy.

DHChron on February 1, 2012 at 12:19 AM

flyfisher on February 1, 2012 at 12:03 AM

Steinbeck – probably the most overrated of American authors. Tom Wolfe didn’t even use bankster in The Bonfire of the Vanities. C’mon John!

DHChron on February 1, 2012 at 12:09 AM

I reread all of his books last year and I tend to agree. He was a real good, but not great writer. There were other American writers of his era who deserved the Nobel Prize more. In my estimation, Faulkner and Hemingway were the two greats.

flyfisher on February 1, 2012 at 12:21 AM

Romney / Thune is going to be a killer ticket.

ak90049 on January 31, 2012 at 11:56 PM

Graying Ken Doll / Blondish Ken Doll 2012 ?

You cannot be serious.

Thune is not the guy for VP.

UltimateBob on February 1, 2012 at 12:23 AM

flyfisher on February 1, 2012 at 12:21 AM

how’s about Samuel Langhorne Clemens? He was no slouch.

DHChron on February 1, 2012 at 12:26 AM

Henry David Thoreau?

DHChron on February 1, 2012 at 12:28 AM

Graying Ken Doll / Blondish Ken Doll 2012 ?

You cannot be serious.

Thune is not the guy for VP.

UltimateBob on February 1, 2012 at 12:23 AM

I agree. Thune doesn’t bring much to the ticket at all.

GOPRanknFile on February 1, 2012 at 12:33 AM

Look at all of those “Florida Believes” signs. Everything about this guy reminds me of Obama, even his slogans.

besser tot als rot on February 1, 2012 at 12:36 AM

HAH! He mocks the “Hope” slogan, but surrounds himself with “Believe”. Hilarious.

besser tot als rot on February 1, 2012 at 12:39 AM

How is that possible when the common people in these states are doing the actual voting? The winner isn’t chosen behind closed doors by a small cadre of party bosses. No, each candidate wins because registered voters in these states are chooseing the candidates in the polling booth!

SubDoc on February 1, 2012 at 12:00 AM

The voters chose to have school kids require 20k per year to educate.
The voters chose to shut down the keystone pipeline.
The voters chose to bail out GM and Chrysler.
The voters chose quite a few things.
Why did they do this? How many of them really wanted that?

The unnamed establishment in your argument is what we call a straw man. It is not what people mean when they talk about establishment. It is not a conspiracy as you try to make it out to be. That is your straw man so you can take it to the shed and rape it repeatedly without it being able to fight back.

The establishment is individuals that are established in power position or other positions that benefit from the current direction of government and want it to continue so they continue to benefit. The only changes they want are those changes that gain them more benefit. They do not have to talk to each other to individually make the same decisions on what to promote and what to demote. Romney offers them the choice of same old same old Obama or same old same as Obama. Mission accomplished. Status quo reigns supreme for the next 4 years.

So these individuals in established positions change the tone of the debate. Every attack newt made was instantly vilified well beyond reasonable discussion. Anti-capitalism! What the hell is Anti-capitalism? Is calling out companies that pollute the ground water anti-capitalist? Really? Newt went for specific aspects of Romney’s past, and instead of answering those questions the debate was over, all you anti-science neanderthals anti-capitalism people need to shut up NOW! What did all the posters do on HA? They went right along with it. What do you think the voters with little information did? Yup, they followed the tone of the debate. Everything Newt said was attacked and ridiculed by pretty close to everyone.

Well, we are now Obamafied. I appreciate having the Republican party being the party of the debate is over we won, now shut the F^CK up. It works pretty well. The Democrats have transformed this nation with that debate to one of welfare and dependence. The Republican party will no longer serve its purpose.

astonerii on February 1, 2012 at 12:39 AM

How did it come to this, my friends?

AllahPundit, Allahpundit, remember your de Toqueville! We are but poor humans: We elect the one who will do the least damage, not the one we believe is a demi god…Or should I say, The One?

PattyJ on February 1, 2012 at 12:52 AM

How did it come to this, my friends?

AllahPundit, Allahpundit, remember your de Toqueville! We are but poor humans: We elect the one who will do the least damage, not the one we believe is a demi god…Or should I say, The One?

PattyJ on February 1, 2012 at 12:52 AM

I just sit here flabbergasted and can see the decline of the Roman Empire once again. I so thought Barry would come through for us.//

arnold ziffel on February 1, 2012 at 12:55 AM

I’m sorry, if you dont love that speech you just are not a conservative. Just admit it ya’ll like it, you just dont want to give up your grumpiness to Romney yet, I know, you are still a little bit sore from the Gingrich ass whooping. Its okay, you will get over it soon enough.

kmalkows on February 1, 2012 at 12:57 AM

flyfisher on February 1, 2012 at 12:21 AM

how’s about Samuel Langhorne Clemens? He was no slouch.

DHChron on February 1, 2012 at 12:26 AM

I meant they were the two great American writers of the 20th century. I believe Flannery O’Conner was likely third. She was certainly more talented than Steinbeck, as were Thomas Wolfe and Fitzgerald. Cormac McCarthy is our best today.

My father grew up in Hannibal, so I have much affection for Clemens, but I don’t consider him a great writer. I consider him a very good writer, a great entertainer, and a highly fascinating human being.

flyfisher on February 1, 2012 at 1:03 AM

So we expect to put this man with no charisma and robotic personality against a man who can give speeches to perfection?

social-justice on January 31, 2012 at 10:22 PM

I am guessing you didnt see the state of the union. Its a little harder to blow hope and change up everyones ass when you are running on a crappy record rather than no record. I am also you didnt click on the victory speech, one of the best speeches by a conservative leader in a long time! Not sure why people keep saying Romney doesnt give good speeches…

kmalkows on February 1, 2012 at 1:13 AM

flyfisher on February 1, 2012 at 1:03 AM

Cormac! I’m a big border trilogy fan.

Twain was a great humorist, I’ll take Hemingway over Faulkner, and the letter Z for 2000 Alex :)

DHChron on February 1, 2012 at 1:26 AM

I am also you didnt click on the victory teleprompter speech, one of the best poll-driven speeches by a conservative leader Massachusetts politician in a long time! Not sure why people keep saying Romney doesnt give good poll-driven speeches…

kmalkows on February 1, 2012 at 1:13 AM

If Romney could give a great speech with conviction like Gingrich did, he’d truly be locking up the vote by 80% or more. We’re screwed with Romney.

Lower turnout because of the Romney campaign and the establishment’s war on the conservative grassroots means there won’t be party unity in November. I can predict Romney and the establishment will claim that the base of the party will have to make peace with THEM. Which is sad, because its not going to happen.

Romney has to make peace with the base, make a token selection for Veep that the base will support (which I highly doubt Romney will do, because that would mean he’s admitting he did something wrong the the primaries) if he wants to stand even a chance at beating Obama in the general.

And, oh yea, as Romney carpet-bombed Newt, Obama will carper-bomb Romney in the general. So Romney needs to man up and realize he needs us more than we need him.

Jurisprudence on February 1, 2012 at 1:37 AM

Please don’t get me wrong fellow posters…….I’m confident I could find a clothespin beefy enough for my nose to vote for even PeeWee freakin Herman vs. the current pathetic caricature of a POTUS………but I really struggle with ole Mittens – he got BEAT by “McCompromise” fer goodness sakes!

Mittens strikes me as believing he can win the R nomination – but he’ll be so shocked when he actually DOES he won’t be NEARLY vicious (read truthful) enough to take on the POTUS/MSM/welfare patrol……

Katfish on February 1, 2012 at 1:42 AM

ROBOT is the word that comes to mind. He has zero charisma

social-justice on January 31, 2012 at 10:07 PM

If you want a “charismatic” president then vote for Obama again. Of course, charisma is useless in the role of president. Again, see Obama as an example: lost of charisma- zero qualities as a leader.

ptcamn on February 1, 2012 at 1:43 AM

I’m sorry, if you dont love that speech you just are not a conservative. Just admit it ya’ll like it, you just dont want to give up your grumpiness to Romney yet, I know, you are still a little bit sore from the Gingrich ass whooping. Its okay, you will get over it soon enough.

kmalkows on February 1, 2012 at 12:57 AM

I never supported Newt or anything but nothing Mitt said here makes me want to vote for him. I mean, it was just his standard “I believe in America” BS stump speech. He didn’t really say anything specific that he would actually do, except repeal obamacare, which anyone can see is the same as romneycare. I guess I am to believe that Romneycare is good and Obamacare is bad because Romneycare has the great name “Romney” in it. Or maybe he really means what he says this time but is simply just too darn proud to admit that Romneycare was a huge mistake. In any case, I simply can’t tell you have terribly reassured this makes me feel.

Dollayo on February 1, 2012 at 1:53 AM

If you want a “charismatic” president then vote for Obama again. Of course, charisma is useless in the role of president. Again, see Obama as an example: lost of charisma- zero qualities as a leader.

ptcamn on February 1, 2012 at 1:43 AM

That’s nice and all, but charisma breeds enthusiasm and is often a shining point to have in a politician on your side. At least the ones who plan on actually winning…

As you yourself state Obama has it – whomever is against him will look small and petty if they lack it by comparison. Which is what helped get him to where he is now.

The point is, you need a laser like personality these days to stand out. A politician with no hook is likely not going to have a job.

Sharr on February 1, 2012 at 1:54 AM

I am also you didnt click on the victory speech, one of the best speeches by a conservative leader in a long time! Not sure why people keep saying Romney doesnt give good speeches…

kmalkows on February 1, 2012 at 1:13 AM

I dont know where that would come from. I think the problem he had was debating and he’s seemed to have shorn that up. Speach wise I aways though he was fine and this one was pretty good.

Sultanofsham on February 1, 2012 at 2:17 AM

If you want a “charismatic” president then vote for Obama again. Of course, charisma is useless in the role of president.

ptcamn

Obtuse much?

xblade on February 1, 2012 at 2:51 AM

Everything Newt said was attacked and ridiculed by pretty close to everyone.

astonerii on February 1, 2012 at 12:39 AM

Something similar happened to Palin as well. Basically they took some innocuous statement or standard campaign boilerplate from every speech he made and turned it into a “gaffe.” It amazes me he did as well as he did for as long he did under that kind of assault.

Doomberg on February 1, 2012 at 2:53 AM

But what will you try to cut my brother Mitt? Yeah, exactly.

racquetballer on February 1, 2012 at 3:48 AM

Indeed. I just don’t see how people can keep thinking he’s going to have a cakewalk defeating Obama. I can come up with 10 devastating ads against him right off the top of my head, and I’m not nearly as invested in doing so as the Obama camp will be. I fear for the future of my country.

cynccook

Who is saying it will be a cakewalk, other than maybe the most deranged mittbots? By the way, how many devastating ads can you come with against Obama? Our side does have a say too you know.

Florida voters are stupid. Plain stupid.
They just voted for the man who birthed ObamaCare.

JellyToast

They did? I thought Newt lost?

You know who really birthed Obamacare? Obama.

xblade on February 1, 2012 at 3:53 AM

hugely depressing. newt theatrics could not save him this time. he did not shine in the debates and was outspent 2 to 1 in ads.
i hope now there is going to be more focus on ron paul. the ugly florida campaign just made me tune off

nathor on February 1, 2012 at 6:08 AM

How did it come to this, my friends?

What is the defining feature of conservatism?

The want and ability to listen to political philosophy, take in and understand political ideology, to utilize solid and permanent reference points for human liberty and freedom, to understand the role of government and the duties of individuals within Nations and to then put a finger on the source of all government as starting from self-government. From this you would expect that conservatives would demand, indeed make the first barrier to entry to politics, that candidates must discuss their background in the works of the philosophy of government, its sources and which portion of the sky contain the constant stars of human liberty and freedom.

I have heard scads this election season about personality traits, hubris, and past records of candidates, and in that last part which should be the major validation point for a candidate who has run and held office before, there has been no… ZERO… discussion about the policy points of the candidates and where they come from in the philosophy of government created by man.

The start of any campaign season in which conservatism is upheld should rightly start at those points of philosophy, historical understanding of human nature and what the functions of government are, and then proceed to policy points that are rooted in these things. I cannot tell you the philosophy of government that Newt Gingrich follows, or Mitt Romney, or Rick Santorum and of those left only Ron Paul can even begin to answer this sort of question and, in my eyes, gets it wrong more than half the time just on historical grounding. If you can’t state what your philosophy is, how your policy points come from them and then how your actual time served in office aligns or mis-aligns with those things, then how is ANYONE supposed to be able to judge if someone is any GOOD as a candidate?

This new century, for good or ill, will offer unmatched opportunity for human liberty and freedom… or for tyranny and repression… but you would never, ever know that from this campaign and the platitudes spewed by all sides. By and large conservatives have fallen into the comfortable coffin arranged by the progressives of arguing over minutia while leaving the great mountain ranges of the rational for government unobserved: for the love of this piece of sand over that one, the mountain that is the source of the sand is ignored.

I have been advocating for this for YEARS and have promised an ill result if conservatives do not ACT and THINK like conservatives actually rooted in a culture that has given us the pathways to peace and human prosperity and that does not ignore human nature and that the civil sword must be bloodied for civilization to survive. That requires that you, as an individual, do those things necessary to support that culture, that system of understanding that yields Nations, States and government, and then actually judge candidates by those standards. That is to say a SET STANDARD that one applies to ALL candidates, putting personal likes and dislikes aside and judging a man by the standards that have been set BY YOU that you can understand and espouse.

That hasn’t happened.

This road has been warned about, foretold, and pointed out at each and every signpost along the way.

Where this road ends is with red and blood.

How did we get here?

Conservatives refused to act and uphold conservative understanding and APPLY IT.

Easiest road to hell is to take your eyes off the stars and follow the road to where it goes, don’t mind the huge clang of the gates behind you once you can no longer follow the path of liberty and freedom set in the constant heavens. When you choose to pay attention to the paving of the road and then as that cracks and becomes broken up until it is sand and gravel and then dirt and then a path meandering into a desert that gets hotter… the blame for following that road falls upon those who take their eyes from the constant starts and refuse to tear their eyes from the road going in the wrong damn direction. You are only hearing the squeaking of the gates right now.

Conservatives can still uphold conservatism, but that means having an open and honest discussion not about candidates but what the purpose of government is and then looking for a candidate who understands that and will follow it because they agree with it.

Our time is running very short.

Conservatives don’t practice conservatism because it is easy, but because it is hard and the right way to counter human nature. I’m not seeing any standard bearer for that and so the gates squeak close to the horrible clang and then we shall be in hell thanks to those watching the road, and not the hard and constant path of the stars.

ajacksonian on February 1, 2012 at 6:25 AM

Maybe this was Newt’s plan all along, knowing he never had a chance but nonetheless doing everything he could to save the republic from an unprepared, arrogant Mitt Romney.

BKennedy on February 1, 2012 at 12:01 AM

In no way do I think that this is Newt’s plan. He just didn’t read the book to the end so he could find out that the white whale wins.

However, I have never objected to a tough primary fight for Mitt. Newt is standing in for the PBHO attack machine and it’s a pale comparison to what Mitt will see in the general election.

As Mitt said last night, a competitive primary does not divide us, it prepares us!

Gloat.

MJBrutus on February 1, 2012 at 6:40 AM

So, Romney won Florida. Is it because he added Charlie Black to his staff?

kingsjester on February 1, 2012 at 7:03 AM

Why does the Republican party continually pick losers like McLame and Romneypuke? Must have a death wish, that’s all I can say. Romney will lose because the base can’t get jazzed up for a phony like him.

Conservchik on February 1, 2012 at 7:04 AM

All that is left is to sit back and wait for Romney to lose and then watch all the “moderate republicans” once again blame everyone else for their stupidity.

I will of course vote for Romney but I also know when he loses NO moderate republican will own it, they will once again blame conservatives even though conservatives turn out every election.

The center right independents will once again vote for Obama as they are not going to be given any significant difference between him and the republican nominee. Which mean independents will default to the safe vote of not rocking the boat and stay with the incumbent.

Skwor on February 1, 2012 at 7:08 AM

Conservchik on February 1, 2012 at 7:04 AM

Clue in Chik, Mitt is the real deal. He spent years in the real world, not cloistered inside of the friendly confines of DC. While there he made his way to the top of the food chain, saving businesses via his superior knowledge and skill.

The phonies are those beltway bandits who pretend that they know squat about our economy because some lobbyist told them about it.

MJBrutus on February 1, 2012 at 7:10 AM

Why does the Republican party continually pick losers like McLame and Romneypuke? Must have a death wish, that’s all I can say. Romney will lose because the base can’t get jazzed up for a phony like him.

Conservchik on February 1, 2012 at 7:04 AM

will this go down like 2008 and mitt will have to pick some VP to give some jazz to the base? who is it going to be this time?

nathor on February 1, 2012 at 7:11 AM

I’m sorry, if you dont love that speech you just are not a conservative. Just admit it ya’ll like it, you just dont want to give up your grumpiness to Romney yet, I know, you are still a little bit sore from the Gingrich ass whooping. Its okay, you will get over it soon enough.

kmalkows on February 1, 2012 at 12:57 AM

As said before, Romney supporters cause Romney to lose votes.

The quote above is a picture perfect example of how to win a nomination and at the same time lose even more votes going into a general election.

Good luck turning out the base with that mentality. I am sure everyone loves to hear “you lost so shut up and vote how you are told to.”

Skwor on February 1, 2012 at 7:13 AM

nathor on February 1, 2012 at 7:11 AM

You naysayers are all the same. You think that Mitt is stupid enough to go the way of some idiot like Sarah just to get some cheap thrills from the wingnuts. Well he’s a brilliant guy and won’t make a mistake that stupid, which is why you will once again be shown to be so completely wrong in your predictions.

MJBrutus on February 1, 2012 at 7:15 AM

will this go down like 2008 and mitt will have to pick some VP to give some jazz to the base? who is it going to be this time?

nathor on February 1, 2012 at 7:11 AM

If he does it will be more likely for a scapegoat so moderate republicans can again blame an under ticket person for losing the election instead of the lead candidate.

Skwor on February 1, 2012 at 7:15 AM

You naysayers are all the same. You think that Mitt is stupid enough to go the way of some idiot like Sarah just to get some cheap thrills from the wingnuts. Well he’s a brilliant guy and won’t make a mistake that stupid, which is why you will once again be shown to be so completely wrong in your predictions.

MJBrutus on February 1, 2012 at 7:15 AM

HAHAH ya again great way to pick up voters on the republican side, insults always work.

You just proved my post right above. It never can be your guy *cough*McCain*cough* who loses it had to be the under ticket choice, we all know that is way more important to voters than actually voting for the top of the ticket presidential choice. Why Biden proved that, obviously everyone was voting for Biden over Obama… oh wait that sort shows your reasoning is weapons grade stupid actually.

Skwor on February 1, 2012 at 7:19 AM

Hey look. I can see the end of America from here.

lm10001 on February 1, 2012 at 7:19 AM

HAHAH ya again great way to pick up voters on the republican side, insults always work.

Skwor on February 1, 2012 at 7:19 AM

I did the open hand, closed fist thing with you h8r’s. You don’t learn and never will, so why bother?

And McCain did lose it because of McCain. His Veep choice was just one moronic act our of many, but it’s the one you predicted Mitt of making. Mitt is no McCain and won’t be doing stupid things like pick some dumb harpy out of the chorus line just to get a rise out of the loonies.

MJBrutus on February 1, 2012 at 7:23 AM

How did it come to this, my friends?

Your desperate shilling for Newt failed epically, that’s how.

itsnotaboutme on February 1, 2012 at 7:23 AM

Romney supporters…………..you have some visionary company!!!

George Soros!

He said there is no difference between Obama and Romney.

Let that sink in……….

God help us.

PappyD61 on February 1, 2012 at 7:31 AM

given that he’s in “nominee” mode and attacking Obama instead of Gingrich.

You know what? At some point all this internal attacking has to morph into the real goal- defeating the jug-eared coward in November. Do any of you crybabies who are lamenting the defeat of Newt really want another four years of Obama???

Happy Nomad on February 1, 2012 at 7:31 AM

PappyD61 on February 1, 2012 at 7:31 AM

With all due respect to you, George Soros is wrong. Any of the Republican candidates are vastly different from the jug-eared coward.

Happy Nomad on February 1, 2012 at 7:33 AM

Romney supporters…………..you have some visionary company!!!

George Soros!

He said there is no difference between Obama and Romney.

Let that sink in……….

God help us.

PappyD61 on February 1, 2012 at 7:31 AM

All of a sudden taking what Soros is saying seriously?

I guess his words are having the desired effect with some….

Zybalto on February 1, 2012 at 7:34 AM

Doesn’t surprise me, this is basically the same group who chose McCain…why would they change their habits?
A “soft”,moderate, left leaning candidate is who, it seems, the majority want as their candidate.
Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
…but I am afraid the results will be the same…

right2bright on February 1, 2012 at 7:48 AM

I did the open hand, closed fist thing with you h8r’s. You don’t learn and never will, so why bother?

And McCain did lose it because of McCain. His Veep choice was just one moronic act our of many, but it’s the one you predicted Mitt of making. Mitt is no McCain and won’t be doing stupid things like pick some dumb harpy out of the chorus line just to get a rise out of the loonies.

MJBrutus on February 1, 2012 at 7:23 AM

You know there is absolutely no evidence to support your accusations about Palin, Look at her actual record of governance and you find an amazing conservative, law focused stewardship, all the ethics charges occurred after her VP nomination and have been shown to be political mechanisms. Her big flaw imo was quitting the governorship.

Yet here we are you a member of the same party feel no shame tossing out ridicule and derision upon a person who has experienced the mantel of leadership and performed it well, even worse you dismiss such a record out of hand in the same blind hate and ignorance that you would accuse the left of demonstrating.

I have accused Romney of being many things but all of them have been based on his past and none would rise to the level of personal insults, unfortunately republican moderates apparently feel no civil compunction to behave similarly.

The quality and caliber of Romney supporters leaves much to be desired indeed.

Skwor on February 1, 2012 at 7:52 AM

Clue in Chik, Mitt is the real deal. He spent years in the real world, not cloistered inside of the friendly confines of DC. While there he made his way to the top of the food chain, saving businesses via his superior knowledge and skill.

The phonies are those beltway bandits who pretend that they know squat about our economy because some lobbyist told them about it.

MJBrutus on February 1, 2012 at 7:10 AM

The “real world” is he being raised in a privileged family, dodging the draft while living in France, and being handed a plum job as a “consultant”…and being “cloistered” among wall street elites, who fed off his support of TARP…everyone of his top supporters were at his trough consuming our bailout money.
Yeah, he is “one of the people”…just like you and the rest of us.

right2bright on February 1, 2012 at 7:54 AM

The still photo for this video shows the same creepy looking guy with big teeth standing to the left of Romney as I saw earlier in the primaries.

WhatNot on February 1, 2012 at 7:55 AM

You know what? At some point all this internal attacking has to morph into the real goal- defeating the jug-eared coward in November. Do any of you crybabies who are lamenting the defeat of Newt really want another four years of Obama???

Happy Nomad on February 1, 2012 at 7:31 AM

So far Romney supporters have called everyone else on this thread:
stupid
ignorant
but hurt
whiners
losers
oh and crybabies
to name a few but definitely not all the insults. Then the same Romney supporters demand everyone else vote as they are told and for their candidate. Who exactly is being unreasonable and “crybabies?”

At this rate the base will turn out in the tens easily. Way to motivate the base for the nominee!

Skwor on February 1, 2012 at 7:58 AM

I did the open hand, closed fist thing with you h8r’s. You don’t learn and never will, so why bother?

And McCain did lose it because of McCain. His Veep choice was just one moronic act our of many, but it’s the one you predicted Mitt of making. Mitt is no McCain and won’t be doing stupid things like pick some dumb harpy out of the chorus line just to get a rise out of the loonies.

MJBrutus on February 1, 2012 at 7:23 AM

No, instead Mitt will now become the “conservative” at times…from liberal to conservative, take your pick, he will be whatever he needs to be…such is his moral compass.
Abortion, wonderful, let’s keep it going, won’t touch it…Abortion, horrible, I will work to ban it or something.
Health Care, mandates, force it upon the people, they have to have it, fine them if they do not comply…Health Care, why I will push to have it removed, struck from our memories…and so it goes, on and on, and on…whatever someone wants that has a vote in their pocket.
Some of us want a leader, not a panderer in chief…

right2bright on February 1, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Sorry, but I can’t take any more than about 30 seconds of Romney’s Liberace-like voice anymore.

ddrintn on February 1, 2012 at 8:00 AM

You know what? At some point all this internal attacking has to morph into the real goal- defeating the jug-eared coward in November. Do any of you crybabies who are lamenting the defeat of Newt really want another four years of Obama???

Happy Nomad on February 1, 2012 at 7:31 AM

You and others don’t get it…it’s not the defeat of Newt…it’s the defeat and the turning of the back on conservationism.
The statists in Washington want Mitt because he will keep the government robust and growing…and they will continue with their power and flow of money.
He won’t upset the status, the elite, he will embolden them.
No, it’s not the defeat of Newt…it’s the continued establishment of the Washington elite, Republican or dems.
Mitt was the furthest candidate from conservative politics, further left than McCain…

right2bright on February 1, 2012 at 8:02 AM

Then the same Romney supporters demand everyone else vote as they are told and for their candidate. Who exactly is being unreasonable and “crybabies?”

Skwor on February 1, 2012 at 7:58 AM

If you’ll notice Skwor, I never said I supported Romney. In fact I’m hoping against hope for a Santorum win. That being said at some point you haters will have to decide what is more important to you. The defeat of Obama or the election of somebody who you think is ideologically unpure for your conservative sensitivities.

Mitt was the furthest candidate from conservative politics, further left than McCain…

right2bright on February 1, 2012 at 8:02 AM

Oh I disagree that Romney is more liberal than McCain. But more to the point, what you complain is statist protectionism could also be construed as somebody more able to govern from the center.

Happy Nomad on February 1, 2012 at 8:12 AM

Alright, enough of this nonsense, let’s quickly pick a contender and go after the real problem . . . Obama.

rplat on February 1, 2012 at 8:15 AM

Oh I disagree that Romney is more liberal than McCain. But more to the point, what you complain is statist protectionism could also be construed as somebody more able to govern from the center.

Happy Nomad on February 1, 2012 at 8:12 AM

I don’t consider the support of health mandates, abortion, strict gun laws, Gov. takeover of business, to be “moderate” or the “center”.
Do you? Is that the new meaning of “moderate”, an abortion advocate? A gun law advocate? Someone who raised taxes 500 times when they were governor? That’s the new conservative standard?
Maybe it is, at least to voters like you it is…how things have changed.

right2bright on February 1, 2012 at 8:18 AM

Alright, enough of this nonsense, let’s quickly pick a contender and go after the real problem . . . Obama.

rplat on February 1, 2012 at 8:15 AM

Is it Obama, or his policies…because Mitt’s policies are not that much different from Obama’s.
Abortion, TARP, Gov. bailouts, Gov takeover of biz, gun laws, taxes, mandates…it’s pretty darn close. They may differ on energy, I am not sure since Mitt has said so little about issues, and more about personal attacks.

right2bright on February 1, 2012 at 8:20 AM

James Taranto had a good piece in his column in the WSJ yesterday, laying out the argument as to why Romney is the most electable (or, more accurately, rebutting the argument that he’s not). I urge all you skeptics to read it. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204740904577195172485772932.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion

Syzygy on February 1, 2012 at 8:30 AM

right2bright on February 1, 2012 at 8:18 AM

Got it. You are perfectly content with four more years of Obama because the GOP can’t come up with a candidate ideologically pure enough for ya.

Happy Nomad on February 1, 2012 at 8:30 AM

Mitt, you just spent $17M to win Fla. This is not a pillow fight. Gear up, dude.

Kissmygrits on February 1, 2012 at 8:50 AM

They may differ on energy, I am not sure since Mitt has said so little about issues, and more about personal attacks.

right2bright on February 1, 2012 at 8:20 AM

Romney called coal plants people killers. Stopped an energy project because it would ruin rich people’s view of the water. Caved to environmentalists many times. Would force coal companies to sequester CO2 instead of allowing it to feed plants so we can eat and so forth. There may be a thin dimes worth of difference between the two, but Romney will not win an ad war on it with Obama.

astonerii on February 1, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Bow to your Mormon Overlord!

Wags on February 1, 2012 at 10:26 AM

This scumbag reads all platitudes, doesn’t say a word from the heart. He’s the devil you don’t know.

Western_Civ on February 1, 2012 at 11:38 AM

<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeach091898.htm”>Clinton on Impeachment</a>

<a href=“URL”>Link Title or Phrase</a>

INC on October 11, 2012 at 12:14 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3