Romney: “It’s very easy to excite the base with incendiary comments”

posted at 3:40 pm on February 28, 2012 by Allahpundit

Via TPM, a valentine from the nominal frontrunner to grassroots conservatives on the day of the big vote in Michigan. On the one hand, it is true that calling the Chinese “motherf***ers” or, say, mumbling about O’s birth certificate can get you traction with some populists who are spoiling for a take-it-to-’em campaign in November. Four words, my friends: “Republican frontrunner Donald Trump.”

On the other hand, John McCormack’s right. The reason we’ve cycled through Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich, and now Santorum as top-tier challengers to Mitt isn’t because they’ve sequentially one-upped each other in how much tasty rhetorical red meat they’re willing to plate. It’s because the base doesn’t trust Romney and will seize on whoever the most viable alternative is at any given moment. (That’s why Newt hasn’t dropped out. He’s one Santorum stumble away from being legit again and he knows it.) Look no further than the trends in national polling: Newt’s decline right after Florida almost perfectly coincides with Santorum’s surge. Anti-Romney voters simply dropped one (comparatively) conservative Not Mitt for another. What’s “exciting” them is their horror at nominating an uncharismatic serial flip-flopper whom they disdain, and who obviously disdains them. And tied up in all of this, of course, is the conventional wisdom that using “incendiary” rhetoric to win primary votes will make the eventual nominee less viable in the general by dragging him further away from the center. Given Romney’s track record of political opportunism, what would happen if you could prove to him statistically that calling Obama a socialist would attract independents in the general election instead of driving them away? Would Mitt still object to using that term on principle or would it be time for a second look at red meat? That is to say, how much of his smugness in the clip is justified by being genuinely above-the-fray and how much of it is just a pose aimed at dismissing Santorum as a cheap rhetorical bottom-feeder?


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

Q: You know what easily excites the base, Mitt?

A: Conservative Candidates.

portlandon on February 28, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Prediction: The anti-Romney punditry among the comments here proves him right.

Red Cloud on February 28, 2012 at 3:43 PM

I hear he has rich buddies that own some hairdressers. Of course, if you WANT him to light his hair on fire to get elected, just wait a week. He’ll surely change his mind and “grow” toward that position.

Warner Todd Huston on February 28, 2012 at 3:43 PM

AWWWW Come on Mitt!!

Light that hair on fire!!!

The sound you would hear is a massive GASP
From the US hair spray industry.

ToddPA on February 28, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Would Mitt still object to using that term on principle? Or would he really say anything to get elected?

So what if he did or not. Using the term, and the subsequently defining how he is a socialist are two different things. He might use it to get a soundbite, but he wouldn’t go full Kid Rock and rock that b!tch up n’ down the coast and really make it stick.

/
oh yeah

ted c on February 28, 2012 at 3:44 PM

Great! Mittens is obviously not a man who learns from history. Unless, the Establishment desires to lose the election again with the McCain strategy.

Don’t dare attack Obama. This seems to stem from Romney’s comments last night on Sean Hannity’s show regarding Santorum’s remark that Obama is a “snob” for wanting all to go to college. “Snob” is incendiary, reallY?

Mitt is the ultimate whiner here.

PuritanD71 on February 28, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Jesus….

therightwinger on February 28, 2012 at 3:45 PM

AP….this is the kind of behavior that’s going to get you strangled by Ann…LEAVE MITT ALONE!!!

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on February 28, 2012 at 3:45 PM

He might just lock the Conservative Michael Jackson groupie vote.

BritCarGuy on February 28, 2012 at 3:46 PM

With a delighted chuckle, the Massachusetts billionaire added, “It’s almost as much fun as throwing a banana into the gorilla enclosure at one of my private zoos!”

cynccook on February 28, 2012 at 3:48 PM

If he lights his hair on fire (while still on his head) I would not only vote for him, I would go knocking door to door saying: “You see what this crazy M-F- did? VOTE FOR HIM!!”

BigGator5 on February 28, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Prediction: The anti-Romney punditry among the comments here proves him right.

Red Cloud on February 28, 2012 at 3:43 PM

I’ll see your anti-Romney punditry, and raise
you with come out of the fields like Locusts,
anti Palin screeching any day of the week.

ToddPA on February 28, 2012 at 3:49 PM

So now asking someone to appeal to the conservative base is equivalent to asking them to light their hair on fire?

Duly noted. I shall not presume to ask that Mitt light his exquisitely coiffed do alite.

Lily on February 28, 2012 at 3:49 PM

What’s “exciting” them is their horror at nominating an uncharismatic serial flip-flopper whom they disdain, and who obviously disdains them.

You have really jumped the shark at this one. I was at the Romney rally last night in Royal Oak with Kid Rock, that place was extremely enthusiastic, and in my opinion Romney is right up there is Charisma with Gingrich with Santorum and Paul way behind.

How can you claim Romney “disdains” a large portion of Republican voters? You have no evidence for this — and you don’t even attempt to back it up. I used to think conservative media was above liberal media, but this goes to show there are plenty of hacks in both.

kmalkows on February 28, 2012 at 3:49 PM

below the belt.

liberal4life on February 28, 2012 at 3:49 PM

(That’s why Newt hasn’t dropped out. He’s one Santorum stumble away from being legit again and he knows it.)

Did you see that, Seven Percent?

cynccook on February 28, 2012 at 3:49 PM

As far as I’m concerned, Mitt’s right, and sites like Hot Air prove him correct and have been since they started up.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 28, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Captain robot is not exciting anyone in the base with these comments

social-justice on February 28, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Translation: Those mouth breathing rubes just don’t understand Beltway nuance.

CurtZHP on February 28, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Can we all just agree that the remaining 4 candidates suck and put forth a candidate the grassroots and establishment can get behind? Say Bobby Jindal? He’s efficient and competent… loves him some constitution too.

dforston on February 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Prediction: The anti-Romney punditry among the comments here proves him right.

Red Cloud on February 28, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Heh. No kidding.

changer1701 on February 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Romney: “It’s very easy to excite the base with incendiary comments”

Appearently not as easy as insulting the base with said comments.

Just go away, Mittens. You will never get my vote.

Norwegian on February 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Translation: “I couldn’t even beat McCain in ’08″

search4truth on February 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM

As far as I’m concerned, Mitt’s right, and sites like Hot Air prove him correct and have been since they started up.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 28, 2012 at 3:50 PM

I’ve got to concur.

How many people on this very site are saying Romney is too weak to win because he – and I quote – “won’t even call Obama a socialist,” or the like?

KingGold on February 28, 2012 at 3:52 PM

It’s very easy to nauseate the base, when you support the unrestrained power of the government, by and through a mandate.

OhEssYouCowboys on February 28, 2012 at 3:53 PM

In the general, how is Gov. Romney going to sell himself to the long termed unemployed and the habitual welfare recipients? I bet he will promote himself as the answer to their chances of moving onward and upward to achieve the American dream. How hard is it to go with the tried and true, if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all? I will never understand this campaign strategy no matter how often it is tried and fails.

Cindy Munford on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Romney doesn’t want to adopt positions that are popular with conservatives but don’t have a snowflakes’s chance in a volcano of ever making it through Congress.

Confutus on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

If red meat has become a derogatory term for conservative principals, I can see why Romney would be so averse to such, um…low brow ideals.

Can’t wait to see him politely take it to Obama.

Dongemaharu on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

So taking it to Obama is out, but insulting the base in. Got it.

dmn1972 on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

“Base” are a bunch of sheep waiting for instructions of who to support next.

I’ve never seen a group of people run from person to person as much as the current “very conservative” base. It’s like they run to and fro from one side of the boat to the other. As soon as Rush, or Sarah, or Sean, or Mark tells them how they should feel or who is “conservative” or not they are on their way.

Sorry if this offends anyone but it is the dynamic I have seen this cycle.

Midwesterner on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

It’s also easy to lose the election by insulting voters…

the_nile on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

kmalkows on February 28, 2012 at 3:49 PM

Did you just completely not watch the video?

BigGator5 on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Q: You know what easily excites the base, Mitt?

A: Conservative Candidates.

portlandon on February 28, 2012 at 3:43 PM

I would agree, I wish we were running one.

Tater Salad on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Q: You know what easily excites the base, Mitt?

A: Conservative Candidates.

portlandon on February 28, 2012 at 3:43 PM

+10

INC on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Calling Obama a socialist an an “incendiary” comment?

social-justice on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Given Romney’s track record of political opportunism, what would happen if you could prove to him statistically that calling Obama a socialist would attract independents in the general election instead of driving them away?

Yeah, it’s a real puzzler why he hasn’t been screaming “You Secret Muslim Marxist From Kenya!!!” toward Obama at every opportunity, it is.

whatcat on February 28, 2012 at 3:55 PM

As far as I’m concerned, Mitt’s right, and sites like Hot Air prove him correct and have been since they started up.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 28, 2012 at 3:50 PM
I’ve got to concur.

How many people on this very site are saying Romney is too weak to win because he – and I quote – “won’t even call Obama a socialist,” or the like?

KingGold on February 28, 2012 at 3:52 PM

So…any discussions of the things Romney actually says are off limits now? Got it. Now if only I can just get my brain to erase the memory of his $10,000 bet, his wife’s “couple of Cadillacs” and the amazing number of friends he has who coincidentally own NASCAR teams, I believe we’d be good to go. Well, except for all the flip flops, of course.

cynccook on February 28, 2012 at 3:56 PM

KingGold on February 28, 2012 at 3:52 PM

Really, you’ve seen this statement or ones like it a lot here? You should be covering the Tea Party for the MSM.

Cindy Munford on February 28, 2012 at 3:56 PM

Mitt……potentially the worst gop nominee since…..

McCain, Bush, Dole, Ford, Dewey, Hoover, Wilkie, etc.

He’s a PROGRESSIVE in his own words people!!!

What part of that do you not understand?

PappyD61 on February 28, 2012 at 3:57 PM

“I will not say anything offensive or incendiary about Obama.” -Mitt Romney, 12/11
… ..

This is so much like another McCain that we are asking for it with this manicured soft-spoken progressive. Don’t go there. Anybody but. For now, it’s Santorum, Newt, or even Paul as a protest vote. Take it to the convention if need be.

anotherJoe on February 28, 2012 at 3:57 PM

At least Romney can afford the gas to ignite his hair.

I kid, I kid.

This is just further proof that Romney has no intention of going after Barack. It’ll be like McCain trembling when the audience is, literally, shouting at him to take on Barack, but he wouldn’t do it.

SouthernGent on February 28, 2012 at 3:57 PM

A very safe statement because Brylcreem is now made with non-flammable ingredients. A little dab’ll do ya

jb34461 on February 28, 2012 at 3:57 PM

ah, hahahahaha
he’s so maladroit, all you can do is laugh

james23 on February 28, 2012 at 3:58 PM

That hair looks like it’s dipped in 90W.

Probably is flammable.

Joe Mama on February 28, 2012 at 3:58 PM

Really, you’ve seen this statement or ones like it a lot here? You should be covering the Tea Party for the MSM.

Cindy Munford on February 28, 2012 at 3:56 PM

Actually, yes I have. Inordinately, considering all the rest of the frivolous anybody-but-Mitt excuses.

That you haven’t should concern you.

KingGold on February 28, 2012 at 3:58 PM

Isn’t Brylcreem highly flammable?

JPeterman on February 28, 2012 at 3:58 PM

Calling Obama a socialist an an “incendiary” comment?

social-justice on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Why yes, of course. Our poor, symphatic Commander-in-Chief is simply in over his head, but he means well. He is a very good person /Mitt Romney

The GOP base is a bunch of disgusting neanderthals /Mitt Romney

Norwegian on February 28, 2012 at 3:58 PM

If he lights his hair on fire, then it proves he is in league with Satan — Rick Santorum

John the Libertarian on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Mitt: “I’m Not A Flamer!”

Joe Mama on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Yeah, it’s a real puzzler why he hasn’t been screaming “You Secret Muslim Marxist From Kenya!!!” toward Obama at every opportunity, it is.

whatcat on February 28, 2012 at 3:55 PM

The ABR crowd still wouldn’t support him, and he knows it…may as well play the long game rather than compete with the red meat tossing.

changer1701 on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Above the fray? We’re in a fray–for the very survival of our republic.

And who is our (mostly) self-appointed front runner? A guy who doesn’t want to get his hair mussed fighting for said republic, and holds us in as much contempt as the guy who called us a bunch of bitter clingers. You know, the guy he’s supposed to be running against.

Ed Snyder on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

The horror of a Mitt Romney nomination is that this is the furthest right he’s willing to go. Once he’s clinched the nomination, he’s going to make RINOs think they’re Barry Goldwater.

JavelinaBomb on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

How can you claim Romney “disdains” a large portion of Republican voters? You have no evidence for this — and you don’t even attempt to back it up. I used to think conservative media was above liberal media, but this goes to show there are plenty of hacks in both.

kmalkows on February 28, 2012 at 3:49 PM

http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2012/01/26/romney-advisor-on-anti-mitt-voters-they-like-preachers/

MontanaMmmm on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

If Mitt lights his hair on fire, he will lose the only asset keeping him alive in the primaries.

It sure isn’t his ideas keeping him competitive.

Valiant on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Santorum IS the flavor of the week. Mr. Pastor in Chief is in way over his head and too emotional and undisciplined to ever be taken seriously. He is a total intellectual lightweight in comparison to Newt.

Santorum has totally derailed this GOP primary and turned it into a one-man religious roadshow. He is the demagoguery candidate.

Santorum is still the same whiny piece of fluff that he was at the beginning of this primary process.

It is the voter whose brains have turned to mush!

Sparky5253 on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Sorry if this offends anyone but it is the dynamic I have seen this cycle.

Midwesterner on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Why would it offend anyone, it’s your interpretation, I see people looking for something they can’t find, some who will promote small government constitutionally based leadership. You, like most politicians, give the people too little credit.

Cindy Munford on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

kmalkows on February 28, 2012 at 3:49 PM

So the base he is talking about in the comment is not really the base, base. If it is really as small as you are inferring why all the bru-ha-ha about them not wanting to vote for him. They won’t make a difference then, will they?

chemman on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

PappyD61 on February 28, 2012 at 3:57 PM

And he is leading the race! Pretty good for such a poor candidate.

Oh I know… All the money… Maybe the other guys would be better off if they had the skills of putting a team together to fundraise and do those things a winning campaign needs to do.

By the way, Santorum declared himself a “Progressive Conservative”. Look it up.

Midwesterner on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

You know who excites me without incendiary comments?
Miss Cupp.

Seth Halpern on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Isn’t Brylcreem highly flammable?

JPeterman on February 28, 2012 at 3:58 PM

I don’t know about that, but horse $hit is flammable…and Romney peddles a lot of it.

search4truth on February 28, 2012 at 4:01 PM

Sorry if this offends anyone but it is the dynamic I have seen this cycle.

Midwesterner on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Agreed. The HA folks love the red meat, but when someone mentions that they do, they get all huffy. Gotta love it.

Priscilla on February 28, 2012 at 4:01 PM

McCain proved that you can win elections by reaching out to your good friends across the aisle.

It’ll be a 2nd term … for a Communist.

America is fallen.

OhEssYouCowboys on February 28, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Calling Obama a socialist an “incendiary” comment?

social-justice on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

It would appear that stating something that is bloody obvious is now “incendiary”.

Recall the following poll:

55 Percent of Likely Voters Find ‘Socialist’ an Accurate Label of Obama?

The latest poll by Democracy Corps, the firm of James Carville and Stan Greenberg,

When asked about “a socialist,” 33 percent of likely voters say it describes Obama “very well,” 22 percent say “well,” 15 percent say “not too well,” and 25 percent say “not well at all.”

In other words, 55 percent of likely voters think “socialist” is a reasonably accurate way of describing Obama.

Q.48 Now, I am going to read you a list of words and phrases which people use to describe
political figures. For each word or phrase, please tell me whether it describes Barack Obama
very well, well, not too well, or not well at all.
Not Not Total Well
Very Too Well DK/ Total Not –
Well Well Well At All Ref Well Well Not
[501 Respondents]

50 A socialist ………………………………………32 23 16 23 6 55 39 15
Likely Voters……………………………………..33 22 15 25 6 55 39 16
Drop-Off Voters …………………………………23 29 27 14 8 52 41 11

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/230874/55-percent-likely-voters-find-socialist-accurate-label-obama

Back then 55% were “incendiary”.

Chip on February 28, 2012 at 4:02 PM

First of all those who think they are the base, aren’t the base. They are a part of the base, predominately the social conservative part of the base, who’s hatred of Obama is so great that their only goal is to discredit him, not just beat him.

Mitt is playing a game based on a winning strategy, while the rest are playing a game of emotions. For all of you who are offended by this look at your self in the mirror, you’ve now been through Trump. Bachman, Perry, Cain, Newt and now Rick, the only thing you believe in is non-Romney.

If you had any principles you would go with Ron Paul. At least he is a conservative.

Tater Salad on February 28, 2012 at 4:02 PM

“I’m not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support.”

I’ll bet you $10k to do that, Mitt.

CorporatePiggy on February 28, 2012 at 4:02 PM

KingGold on February 28, 2012 at 3:58 PM

Right, we all see what we want to see.

Cindy Munford on February 28, 2012 at 4:02 PM

McCain proved that you can win elections by reaching out to your good friends across the aisle.

It’ll be a 2nd term … for a Communist.

America is fallen.

OhEssYouCowboys on February 28, 2012 at 4:02 PM

So your answer would have been to run Mitt in ’08, …..he was considered the conservative alternative?

Tater Salad on February 28, 2012 at 4:03 PM

While the incendiary rhetoric charge could be leveled against Trump, it’s inconceivable that Romney was in any way referring to him. (Trump just endorsed him in Michigan!)

No, he was referring to the mouth breathers Gingrich and Santorum (of course, not Paul). In his stumbles, Romney reveals too much contempt and just as much incompetence.

Here’s what I don’t get. Romney is happy to do a Mexican hat dance around all sorts of issues and can speak out of both sides of both sides of his mouth. Yet, he can’t deign to call Obama a socialist (or whatever outrage has been uttered by his unwashed competitors). He can say he’s for abortion but really against it, for Romneycare but against Obamacare–but he can’t lower himself to calling Obama a Foodstamp President, a snob, an Apologist-in-Chief.

Does this remind anyone of McCain’s “honorable” campaign?

EMD on February 28, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Romney: “It’s very easy to excite the base with incendiary comments”

Meanwhile our dear leader, El Presidente Downgrade and his merry band of National Socialists can say whatever the H%$# they want.

Chip on February 28, 2012 at 4:05 PM

The reason we’ve cycled through Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich, and now Santorum as top-tier challengers to Mitt isn’t because they’ve sequentially one-upped each other in how much tasty rhetorical red meat they’re willing to plate. It’s because . . .

. . . Sarah Palin is not available.

Emperor Norton on February 28, 2012 at 4:06 PM

You, like most politicians, give the people too little credit.

Cindy Munford on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

I give people who think for themselves credit. I have no problem with the talk radio folks. I listen to them and agree with them a majority of the time. It’s those who follow blindly that are as bad as those who pay no attention to politics at all.

Case in point… Mark Lavine humiliates any caller that doesn’t agree with him or present things in “his” logical way. But no one has the guts to call him out on treating people that way and they call in and “worship” him and tell him how great he is.

An he is called “the great one” by the “conservatives.

Go figure.

Midwesterner on February 28, 2012 at 4:06 PM

Don’t dare attack Obama. This seems to stem from Romney’s comments last night on Sean Hannity’s show regarding Santorum’s remark that Obama is a “snob” for wanting all to go to college. “Snob” is incendiary, reallY?

Mitt is the ultimate whiner here.

PuritanD71 on February 28, 2012 at 3:45 PM

‘snob’ isn’t incendiary, but it is entirely idiotic to call Obama a snob for urging young people to get an education, mind you that is something that every parent aspire for when it comes to their children…I’d like to see Santy urging his children to limit themselves to high-school education…besides, Sanatorium is a liar and pretty much mischaracterized O’s comments. In fact, what O did was calling for all Americans to obtain some form of education beyond high school, although not necessarily four-year colleges as Sanitarium has repeatedly implied, and for this country to regain the global lead in those with college degrees by 2020. Many of Obama’s higher-education initiatives, including a proposed $8 billion fund unveiled as part of his budget proposal earlier this month, focus on workforce development at community colleges that award certificates and degrees of less than four years. so yeah, the real problem is all these idiots with cognitive dissonance problems who keep going on and on and on about how China is getting ahead of any other country on earth, etc, so how on earth do you want to compete in a global economy if you don’t educate your youngsters…Obama is dead right on that, and only ignorant and useful idiots would think he is a snob for saying that kids should get educated, and by that I do not mean high-school educated…

jimver on February 28, 2012 at 4:07 PM

Yeah, it’s a real puzzler why he hasn’t been screaming “You Secret Muslim Marxist From Kenya!!!” toward Obama at every opportunity, it is.
whatcat on February 28, 2012 at 3:55 PM

The ABR crowd still wouldn’t support him, and he knows it…may as well play the long game rather than compete with the red meat tossing.
changer1701 on February 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM

That was actually just my sarcasm-dripping take on the topic at hand, changer.
:-)

whatcat on February 28, 2012 at 4:07 PM

Seems like Santorum is really exciting the base…………the Democratic base.

PS. Polls show Romney winning the GOP vote

Tater Salad on February 28, 2012 at 4:07 PM

Where’s Bluegill?

Fuquay Steve on February 28, 2012 at 4:07 PM

How can you claim Romney “disdains” a large portion of Republican voters? You have no evidence for this — and you don’t even attempt to back it up.

Um, saying that we’re ‘easy to excite with incendiary comments’ strikes me as a bit disdainful. It sounds like an echo of Obama’s bitter-clinger comment, and we all know how disdainful Obama is.

Also, his refusal to admit he was wrong about Romneycare…to me that says he doesn’t think we’re smart enough to see through his double talk on the subject. Again, disdainful.

Dee2008 on February 28, 2012 at 4:08 PM

So your answer would have been to run Mitt in ’08, …..he was considered the conservative alternative?

Tater Salad on February 28, 2012 at 4:03 PM

My “answer” is to nominate a Conservative who isn’t afraid to call a Communist a Communist, and who doesn’t provide a Communist with the blueprint for an unrestrained State.

The term, “Conservative,” isn’t relative – you’re either one, or you aren’t.

OhEssYouCowboys on February 28, 2012 at 4:08 PM

Whatevs. When he’s the nominee, ya’ll’ll be pulling the lever for ROMNEY.

lostmotherland on February 28, 2012 at 4:08 PM

I don’t care anymore who our nominee will be. My state already voted, my bit is done until November. Nominate Chuck Norris at a brokered convention for all I care (is he busy?). At this point, I’ll vote for a dirty sock over Obama. I’ll hafta hold my nose anyway…

libertynow on February 28, 2012 at 4:09 PM

Midwesterner on February 28, 2012 at 4:06 PM

So they are only thinking for themselves if they agree with you but if they agree with Levin they “worship” him? Besides, what does any radio show host have to do with Gov. Romney continual foot in mouth problem.

Cindy Munford on February 28, 2012 at 4:10 PM

IMO it’s really gotten under Romney’s skin that he can’t close the deal with the base, and his resentment and contempt just came through.

It certainly looks like the attitude towards the conservative base flows from the top down. Here I thought all this time that it was only some of the Mittens on the internet who were hostile to those who weren’t going to vote for Romney.

I wonder what his inner circle staff meetings are like.

INC on February 28, 2012 at 4:10 PM

So your answer would have been to run Mitt in ’08, …..he was considered the conservative alternative?

Tater Salad on February 28, 2012 at 4:03 PM
My “answer” is to nominate a Conservative who isn’t afraid to call a Communist a Communist, and who doesn’t provide a Communist with the blueprint for an unrestrained State.

The term, “Conservative,” isn’t relative – you’re either one, or you aren’t.

OhEssYouCowboys on February 28, 2012 at 4:08 PM

So if Santorum loses today and loses his momentum, is Paul next? You seem not to care about anyones record as long as it’s not Romney.

Tater Salad on February 28, 2012 at 4:11 PM

maybe he ought to light his hair on fire. it’d add some color to a bland candidate. you gotta stand for somethin’ or you’ll fall for anything. middle of the road is good for gettin’ run over…

YMMV

Dr. Demento on February 28, 2012 at 4:12 PM

We shall meander on the beaches,
we shall meander on the landing grounds,
we shall meander in the fields,
we shall meander in streets and on the hills.
We shall negotiate our surrender
” -Willard Romney.

the_nile on February 28, 2012 at 4:12 PM

Where’s Bluegill?

Fuquay Steve on February 28, 2012 at 4:07 PM

Stocking up on Red Bull for tonight.

And brain storming with csdeven, chupi and the rest of the Romney fluffin’ nutballs. They only have one brain to share.

cozmo on February 28, 2012 at 4:13 PM

I think Mitt can look forward to this soundbite being used in an ad by Newt and/or Santorum.

Did Mitt miss out on taking a Dale Carnegie course on how to win friends and influence people?

INC on February 28, 2012 at 4:13 PM

Can’t wait to see him politely take it to Obama.

Dongemaharu on February 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Then you might as well say you would like to see Mitt lose against Obama.

Obama needs to be “severely” beaten. Not politely neither.

HotAirian on February 28, 2012 at 4:13 PM

Catfish calls other fish bottom-feeders… lol

Y314K on February 28, 2012 at 4:14 PM

When he’s the nominee, ya’ll’ll be pulling the lever for ROMNEY.

lostmotherland on February 28, 2012 at 4:08 PM

What fun is that when they can be fiddling on their purity while Rome burns?

John the Libertarian on February 28, 2012 at 4:14 PM

So if Santorum loses today and loses his momentum, is Paul next? You seem not to care about anyones record as long as it’s not Romney.

Tater Salad on February 28, 2012 at 4:11 PM

I’ve said, numerous times, who I intend to vote for, or not vote for. Unfortunately, for you, I’m not going to repeat myself, so as to enlighten you.j I’m not into ad nauseum posts.

I will tell you this much, I won’t be voting for anybody who’s afraid to call a Communist, a Communist, and who has provided a Communist with the blueprint for an unrestrained State.

I hope that this clears things up for you.

OhEssYouCowboys on February 28, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Nominate Chuck Norris at a brokered convention for all I care (is he busy?).

libertynow on February 28, 2012 at 4:09 PM

Chuck is busy in my home country of Slovakia trying to get a bridge named after himself.

JPeterman on February 28, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Here’s what I don’t get. Romney is happy to do a Mexican hat dance around all sorts of issues and can speak out of both sides of both sides of his mouth. Yet, he can’t deign to call Obama a socialist (or whatever outrage has been uttered by his unwashed competitors). He can say he’s for abortion but really against it, for Romneycare but against Obamacare–but he can’t lower himself to calling Obama a Foodstamp President, a snob, an Apologist-in-Chief.

Does this remind anyone of McCain’s “honorable” campaign?

EMD on February 28, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Yes it does, that is the horrible conclusion a number of us are making.

Chip on February 28, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Romney: “It’s very easy to excite the base with incendiary comments”
Meanwhile our dear leader, El Presidente Downgrade and his merry band of National Socialists can say whatever the H%$# they want.

Chip on February 28, 2012 at 4:05 PM

THIS. well done.

Dr. Demento on February 28, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Mark Lavine humiliates any caller that doesn’t agree with him or present things in “his” logical way. But no one has the guts to call him out on treating people that way and they call in and “worship” him and tell him how great he is.

That’s Levine goofball, and if you had to listen to the total ignorance he does from the “seminar” callers everyday you’d be dismisive of them too…but of course if you want to “call him out” have at it…good luck.

As to the substance of Mitten’s comments…he’s just telegraphing that he’s going to pull a McCain…no badmouthing the One. Alla is wrong though about Newt being one Santorum misstep from being a contender again…Santorum has made several gaffes over the past couple of months but he’s still hanging in…Newt has more than must a couple of verbal missteps to blame for his problems and those who supported him and have abandoned him won’t return unless Santorum completely crashes and burns and I don’t think that is going to happen…

ironmarshal on February 28, 2012 at 4:16 PM

I wonder what his inner circle staff meetings are like.

INC on February 28, 2012 at 4:10 PM

Which quote sounds like another?

Another Romney adviser was more derisive of the Anybody But Mitt Republicans.
“They like preachers,” the adviser said of the tea party demographic. “If you take them to a tent meeting they’ll get whipped into a frenzy. That’s how people like Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich get women

MontanaMmmm on February 28, 2012 at 4:17 PM

“I’m not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support.”

Mitt, admit it, you’d be only too happy to light your hair on fire to support liberal Democrat ideals and policies like “free” healthcare.

It’s only Republican and Conservative ideals and policies where you draw the line of no support.

RJL on February 28, 2012 at 4:18 PM

As a proud member of “the base”, I’m not offended or anything by these comments, I just wince at hearing a McCain 2.0 follow the same failed campaign tactic.

Daemonocracy on February 28, 2012 at 4:18 PM

MontanaMmmm on February 28, 2012 at 4:17 PM

Ah, yes, thanks for the reminder.

INC on February 28, 2012 at 4:18 PM

OhEssYouCowboys on February 28, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Catfish doesn’t need conservatives to win… Catfish just needs severely progressive republicans to win… lol

Y314K on February 28, 2012 at 4:19 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4