Romney fundraiser to rich donors: You don’t want a Huckabee/Palin ticket at a brokered convention, do you?

posted at 4:35 pm on April 3, 2012 by Allahpundit

Are New York’s Republican glitterati really such panicky chumps that this longer-than-longshot scenario was enough to get them to toss bags of money at Mitt? C’mon.

[O]n March 14 and 15, Romney had raised over $3 million in New York and Connecticut. … The Romney campaign had a clever pitch for the event. Schmoozing with his money pals before the events, a Romney fund-raiser pointed out that “slightly more than half the delegates” to the GOP convention at Tampa “are evangelicals.” These true-believer conservatives are averse not only to Romney but to semi-reasonable types like Chris Christie and Mitch Daniels. As a result, said this fund-raiser, the “responsible Republican guys” are “starting to realize” that at a brokered convention “it’s not going to be Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio or Jeb Bush and Paul Ryan, a ticket they could really love. It’s probably Huckabee-Palin or Palin-Huckabee.” That was enough to scare the Wall Street crowd into getting out their checkbooks.

That’s from the new Mike Allen/Evan Thomas e-book on the campaign. Point one: Why would evangelicals demand Huckabee or Palin when they could nominate Santorum? Given the odds against him now, it’d be a genuine accomplishment if he managed to hold Romney below a clear majority of delegates before the convention. He’ll be debate-tested and trail-honed, and needless to say, he’s the gold standard on “values” for social cons. Why jettison him for Huck or Sarahcuda, each of whom is more of a media presence at this point than a political one?

Point two: Last I checked, evangelicals want to beat Obama as badly as non-evangelicals do. They’re not going to roll the dice on anyone whose electability is questionable, especially since a dark-horse nominee would have just two months to boost his/her favorables before election day. That’s a major obstacle for Palin even though she remains very popular within the party. It’s less of a problem for Huckabee, who’s also popular among Republicans and came out of the 2008 campaign with far less media damage to his image than Palin. Popular or no, though, he has no campaign operation and famously doesn’t enjoy raising money. On what planet does it make more sense for an Obama-hating Christian delegate to hand him the keys to the campaign instead of holding their nose and taking their chances with Romney? Maybe, if there was some sort of serious floor revolt in Tampa, Mitt could be pressured to put Huck on the ticket — that’d actually be a nice regional/religious/class balance — but the only reason to gamble hugely on a dark-horse nominee would be if the convention wanted to bet the election on a supremely important principle like entitlement reform and balancing the budget. That might justify nominating Christie or Ryan or Daniels. But Huck?

Never mind all that, though. The piece you need to read to polish this off is Ryan Lizza’s delegate model for the rest of the GOP primaries. According to his calculations, with Romney needing 1,144 for a clear majority, he should finish June with … 1,122. Good news for Huck? Not quite: There’ll be 598 unbound delegates in Tampa, only 22 of whom would have to break for Mitt to wrap thinks up. Exit question: Huckabee/Palin 2016?


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 5

Oh, yeah. Us mouth-breathing rubes are really jonesing for Huckabee.

/doIreallyhaveto?

CurtZHP on April 3, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Everyone has the right to say something stupid. This was a prime example.

DVPTexFla on April 3, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Huckabee/Palin ticket?
No thank you.
Brokered convention?
No thank you.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 3, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Romney fundraiser to rich donors: You don’t want a Huckabee/Palin ticket at a brokered convention, do you?

Actually yes, yes I do.

Stoic Patriot on April 3, 2012 at 4:39 PM

It’s probably Huckabee-Palin or Palin-Huckabee.

I’m OK with this.

Mr. Prodigy on April 3, 2012 at 4:39 PM

what a stupid comment.

rob verdi on April 3, 2012 at 4:40 PM

When was the last brokered convention?

mythicknight on April 3, 2012 at 4:41 PM

You don’t want a Huckabee/Palin ticket at a brokered convention, do you?

Good God, absolutely not, I want a Palin/West Ticket at a brokered Convention…

SWalker on April 3, 2012 at 4:41 PM

I have to chuckle.

Palin did say on the “Today” show that the eventual nominee needs to pick a VP who can help usher in suddden and relentless reform!

WisRich on April 3, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Exit question: Huckabee/Palin 2016?

Huckabee, Palin, Santorum, Jindal. I’d take a ticket from that group in any combination.

Stoic Patriot on April 3, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Exit question: Huckabee/Palin 2016?

Turn that around: Palin/Huckabee 2016

Bitter Clinger on April 3, 2012 at 4:42 PM

This has got to be Thomas/Allen b.s., considering tepid response Gov. Romney gets, would he or his minions really insult so many right out loud?

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Kooks 2012

0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 3, 2012 at 4:43 PM

There are only four people who could win the nomination in a brokered convention outside of Romney: Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan (Who I think would win), and Mitch Daniels.

Huckabee wouldn’t even be mentioned and Palin would be the power broker, probably for Ryan as she’s basically endorsed everything he’s done. Who woldn’t love to see Ryan go against Obama in 3 debates?

cpaulus on April 3, 2012 at 4:43 PM

You don’t want a Huckabee/Palin ticket at a brokered convention, do you?

Oh, yes I do. That ticket will be just fine with me.

You ever notice how Willard’s whole electoral strategery is “You don’t want _______ , do you?” As in “YOU don’t want Obama to be elected, do you?” Of course you’ve noticed. Because Willard has nothing else going for him.

I mean, besides the hair.

Dump Willard.

Emperor Norton on April 3, 2012 at 4:43 PM

Everyone has the right to say something stupid. This was a prime example.

DVPTexFla on April 3, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Etch-a-sketch has a top notch team working for him.

They know this PR thingy.

the_nile on April 3, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Kooks 2012

0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 3, 2012 at 4:43 PM

Do you always have to interject yourself into the conversation?

tom daschle concerned on April 3, 2012 at 4:44 PM

This has got to be Thomas/Allen b.s., considering tepid response Gov. Romney gets, would he or his minions really insult so many right out loud?

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:42 PM

A Romney fundraiser just might.

Bitter Clinger on April 3, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Brilliant pitch by Mitt’s fundraiser. Because if there’s one thing Mitt needs it’s to get his skeptics in the base even less enthused about him. Maybe in a final push to finish with 1144 instead of 1122 he can hire a dream team of Schmidt/Wallace/Rollins for base outreach and then kick a puppy on live TV or something.

Kataklysmic on April 3, 2012 at 4:44 PM

OMG Mitts greatest comment ever. Sucks he did not mean it.

Huckabee is cool. got a little Newt got a little Santo. is only mean when he has to be.on T.V he looks like he means every word he speaks.

and of course Palin is Palin, she just calls it like she sees it. no holds barred.

boogaleesnots on April 3, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Mitt could be pressured to put Huck on the ticket — that’d actually be a nice regional/religious/class balance — but the only reason to gamble hugely on a dark-horse nominee would be if the convention wanted to bet the election on a supremely important principle like entitlement reform and balancing the budget. That might justify nominating Christie or Ryan or Daniels. But Huck?

Or if the establishment wants to keep Social Conservatives on board.

I’ll spare Mitt the effort thinking about Huckabee as a VP pick to win people like me over: no it won’t. I still won’t vote for you.

Your mockery of Huckabee and Palin communicates contempt for Social Conservatives once again. You’ve been arrogant and dismissive towards us this entire campaign cycle, and called our issues a “distraction”. You’ve said we don’t matter. So go win on your own, and if you lose, don’t complain about how we cost you the election. Remember, we’re irrelevant.

Stoic Patriot on April 3, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Huck you!

KOOLAID2 on April 3, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Stupid comment. Stupid piece to run with. What’s the point?

minnesoter on April 3, 2012 at 4:45 PM

When was the last brokered convention?

mythicknight on April 3, 2012 at 4:41 PM

This kind of remark is more likely to encourage this highly unlikely prospect which is why I’m not buying.

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:45 PM

These true-believer conservatives are averse not only to Romney but to semi-reasonable types like Chris Christie and Mitch Daniels.

Not really. I’m just adverse to big government statists. Like Romney and Huckabee. And to a greater extent, Obama.

besser tot als rot on April 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Huckabee? That wouldn’t happen.

However, it does seem that the Romney campaign (and Romney, because I don’t believe for a minute they went rogue on this) has a view of evangelicals that is similar to Obama’s.

This is a Dem tactic–at least I thought it was–to demonize a group to raise money. There’s a clear inference that we’re considered to be unreasonable and irresponsible.

INC on April 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Exit question: Huckabee/Palin 2016?

A. So you agree Romney will probably lose the general too, eh?

/s

B. 2016- Palin/Ryan or Palin/West is much more likely IMO…

(For the record- I don’t expect a brokered convention, think Romney has the nomination, suspect Palin et al are simply trying to move the platform right at this point, and will vote for Romney over Obama. Hope he can pull out a win- but doubt it…)

cs89 on April 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Why don’t we make a list of how many times Palin employees at C4P have insulted Mitt Romney. Has to be a thousand blog posts from her workers there, and a few lines from a Romney employee gets Palin lovers in an uproar.

Mormontheman on April 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Brilliant pitch by Mitt’s fundraiser. Because if there’s one thing Mitt needs it’s to get his skeptics in the base even less enthused about him. Maybe in a final push to finish with 1144 instead of 1122 he can hire a dream team of Schmidt/Wallace/Rollins for base outreach and then kick a puppy on live TV or something.

Kataklysmic on April 3, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Careful. Don’t mention dogs to Romney supporters.

Bitter Clinger on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

A Romney fundraiser just might.

Bitter Clinger on April 3, 2012 at 4:44 PM

You wouldn’t think stupid would be an asset to that position but what do I know?

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

Romney fundraiser to rich donors: You don’t want a Huckabee/Palin ticket at a brokered convention, do you?

It’s like you read my mind.

I know many will take offense to this. Mainly because the painful truth can be painfully painful.

rogaineguy on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

Romney is unbelievably arrogant and tone deaf – much like the guy he dreams of replacing.

Pork-Chop on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

These true-believer conservatives are averse not only to Romney but to semi-reasonable types like Chris Christie and Mitch Daniels.

In other words, Christie and Daniels are also unreasonable?

I happen to agree. There’s no way I’d support Mr. “Truce” either.

Stoic Patriot on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

Yesterday Coultergeist insults TEA parties.

Today this.

Ron Paul is playing “I’m taking my toys and going home” and

…you tell me that Mitt is a great leader.

If I were Mitt, I’d fire my advisors and adherents, incl. a few/many from this board.

Schadenfreude on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

Maurice Clemmons killed four cops and Huckabee’s political career.

Capp on April 3, 2012 at 4:48 PM

When was the last brokered convention?

mythicknight on April 3, 2012 at 4:41 PM

1948.

JPeterman on April 3, 2012 at 4:48 PM

I would take Palin over anyone running now! A Palin/West ticket works for me. Just think of Palin debating bho? Just think of West debating joe? Those two could fund their campaign with a pay per view on the debates, IMO!
L

letget on April 3, 2012 at 4:48 PM

the_nile on April 3, 2012 at 4:44 PM

If true, they sound like the dummies Obama surrounds himself with.

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Good God, absolutely not, I want a Palin/West Ticket at a brokered Convention…

SWalker on April 3, 2012 at 4:41 PM

DING DING!! THREAD WINNAH!!

ToddPA on April 3, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Kooks 2012

0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 3, 2012 at 4:43 PM

You’re talking about Obama and Romney, right?

besser tot als rot on April 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Why don’t we make a list of how many times Palin employees at C4P have insulted Mitt Romney. Has to be a thousand blog posts from her workers there, and a few lines from a Romney employee gets Palin lovers in an uproar.

Mormontheman on April 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Better yet, why don’t we make a timeline of who took first blood.

Kataklysmic on April 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM

I’ll spare Mitt the effort thinking about Huckabee as a VP pick to win people like me over: no it won’t. I still won’t vote for you.

Sit at home and whine to yourself, then.

The rest of us will go about the business of getting rid of President Downgrade.

Good Lt on April 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM

The party should nominate some combination of Palin and Huckabee. After the big lose to Obama, the GOP would nominate moderate conservatives fo the next 20 years.

cd98 on April 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Mormontheman on April 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM

This was the Romney campaign raising money by labeling evangelicals as undesirables, i.e., the clear inference that they’s unreasonable and irresponsible, and using fear tactics to get donations.

Palin hasn’t done so.

INC on April 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM

I would take Palin over anyone running now! A Palin/West ticket works for me. Just think of Palin debating bho? Just think of West debating joe? Those two could fund their campaign with a pay per view on the debates, IMO!
L

letget on April 3, 2012 at 4:48 PM

No kidding, heck I would pay as much as $100.00 to see that Texas No Rules Cage Match…

SWalker on April 3, 2012 at 4:50 PM

@Kataklysmic on April 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM

McCain employees drew first blood.

Mormontheman on April 3, 2012 at 4:50 PM

It would have to be Palin/Huckabee 2020
Since it will be Romney/Rubio Re-Election 2016

Natebo on April 3, 2012 at 4:50 PM

rogaineguy on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

Many things thought about are better left unsaid. I am sticking with my belief that Gov. Romney and his supporters are smarter than to denigrate a large block of people that will need to vote for him.

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:50 PM

The last brokered major party convention was the Democratic convention of 1952, where Stevenson won, but on the third ballot.

The Democratic nomination for vice-president in 1956 was thrown open to the convention, and Senator Estes Kefauver (kee-FAW-ver) beat Senator John F. Kennedy for the slot on the second ballot.

Emperor Norton on April 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM

They’re not going to roll the dice on anyone whose electability is questionable,

Senators O’Donnell, Buck, and Angle would like a word with you on that point.

KingGold on April 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM

DING DING!! THREAD WINNAH!!

ToddPA on April 3, 2012 at 4:48 PM

I don’t see myself supporting a nominee that was unwilling to throw their hat in the ring prior to the primaries.

You don’t get the brass ring when you chose not to enter the competition.
NO.BROKERED. CONVENTION!

annoyinglittletwerp on April 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Meanwhile…

… just out of sight of Mitten’s main force, there is a small band of rebels that will not surrender.

There hope is for a platform at the convention to ensure a true Conservative message, and to take the attack to Obowma…

… There leader, although down, is highly motivated to the cause.

Each and every night, Newt ends his day with a proclamation to Mittens…

:)

Seven Percent Solution on April 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Are New York’s Republican glitterati really such panicky chumps that this longer-than-longshot scenario was enough to get them to toss bags of money at Mitt? C’mon.

I dunno about New York’s Republican glitterati, but the rombots who post comments here? YUP.

gryphon202 on April 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM

The only thing stupider than the comment itself is anyone picking up on it and reporting it like it has any significance whatsoever.

alchemist19 on April 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM

I am sticking with my belief that Gov. Romney and his supporters are smarter than to denigrate a large block of people that will need to vote for him.

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Evidence not withstanding of course…

SWalker on April 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Romney is unbelievably arrogant and tone deaf – much like the guy he dreams of replacing.

Pork-Chop on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

Which is why so many of us see no point in voting for him.

Romney = The White Obama

Norwegian on April 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM

In 2016 I wanna see the party reap what was sown in 2010. The first Tea Party Republicans will have enough of a record in major offices by then to run for potus. Cant say how much I look foward to the day when we finally leave Bush era, compassionate conservative Repbublicanism left overs like Willard or Saintorum or Huckabee behind for good.

Valkyriepundit on April 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM

That’s from the new Mike Allen/Evan Thomas e-book on the campaign.

Uh-huh. A couple of hard-core Obamabots.

“Let’s see, what can we make up that will really piss off the Republican base?”

“Let’s have a Romney guy dissing Palin?”

“Why just Palin? Why not Palin and Huckabee?”

“Sweeeet. That’ll work! Should we have them bad-mouthing Reagan, too?”

“Um…nah. That’s probably going too far.”

Rational Thought on April 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Why do Willard and his ilk hate Republicans so much?

steebo77 on April 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM

I’m neither a bible thumper or a country clubber, or a libertarian. Normal conservatives ftw

therightwinger on April 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Romney fundraiser to rich donors: You don’t want a Huckabee/Palin ticket at a brokered convention, do you?

It’s like you read my mind.
I know many will take offense to this. Mainly because the painful truth can be painfully painful.
rogaineguy on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

You’re right. But only marginally more painful than Romney/Anyone.

besser tot als rot on April 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Romney and this campaign are evidently doing it behind the scenes.

His supporters do it openly—for example, here.

INC on April 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM

McCain employees drew first blood.

Mormontheman on April 3, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Not that it matters, but I’m referring to the chilly relationship between the Romney and Palin camps.

Kataklysmic on April 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM

They’re not going to roll the dice on anyone whose electability is questionable,

Senators O’Donnell, Buck, and Angle would like a word with you on that point.

KingGold on April 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Oh, and the Newt Gingrich 2012 presidential campaign as well.

KingGold on April 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM

You don’t get the brass ring when you chose not to enter the competition.
NO.BROKERED. CONVENTION!

annoyinglittletwerp on April 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Except that there’s no way to vote against one. Just as surely as there is no way to vote for a brokered convention, either. Mitt’s nomination isn’t the end of the world. If he can pull it off without the pre-convention support of those such as myself who detest him and think he doesn’t deserve it, I doff my hat to him and will proceed to the general election accordingly.

gryphon202 on April 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM

therightwinger on April 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM

I don’t think normal conservatives use the pejorative phrase Bible thumper.

INC on April 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Why do Willard and his ilk hate Republicans so much?

steebo77 on April 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Well, they hate Conservatives, first and foremost.

Republicans are fine per se, as long as they come in the NE RINO variety.

Norwegian on April 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM

This was the Romney campaign raising money by labeling evangelicals as undesirables, i.e., the clear inference that they’s unreasonable and irresponsible, and using fear tactics to get donations.

Palin hasn’t done so.

INC on April 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM

In fairness to Romney, most of the evangelicals have thumbed their nose at him this entire primary. They also dissed him for the most part the first time he ran. I can totally see why he or his supporters would not think that highly of catering to them.

That said, I imagine Romney will continue to court evangelicals even as they thumb their noses at him.

cd98 on April 3, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Team Romney uses fear to get $$$? Shocker.

McDuck on April 3, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Dont get your panties in a bunch- Mittens is gonna drive liberal propagandists crazy with this moving target gimmick.

What war on women ? we don’t know nuthin about a stinkin war on women. Thats those other guys.

Let the NY slimes carp about evangelicals – let Mittens be free of the smear of the social issues card that inevitably will morph into the race card. Lose lose scenario if he has to fight media perceptions and distortions.

Make them go after the “Moderate”- Let Mittens stay focused on Ocommie.

FlaMurph on April 3, 2012 at 4:55 PM

A Romney fundraiser just might.

Bitter Clinger on April 3, 2012 at 4:44 PM

You wouldn’t think stupid would be an asset to that position but what do I know?

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

This was a fundraiser in New York. The fundraiser figured he knew his crowd — Wall Street types — and figured this would be a good way to scare them into opening up their wallets a little wider. I’m sure the fundraiser didn’t expect the word to get out about his foot-in-mouth issue.

Bitter Clinger on April 3, 2012 at 4:56 PM

This Code word (Huck/Palin) is precisely why the GOP selected, protected, the Etch-a sketch candidate and shot down Palin. Can’t have any of that God talk when this is about our 30 pieces of silver.

Facts are that the GOP is the party of social liberals – the full enchelada.

Don L on April 3, 2012 at 4:56 PM

This was the Romney campaign raising money by labeling evangelicals as undesirables, i.e., the clear inference that they’s unreasonable and irresponsible, and using fear tactics to get donations.
Palin hasn’t done so.

INC on April 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Good thing he doesn’t need their votes to win. They only make up, what, 25% of the electorate? I’m sure he’ll make that up with moderates and liberals, no problem.

besser tot als rot on April 3, 2012 at 4:56 PM

You don’t get the brass ring when you chose not to enter the competition.
NO.BROKERED. CONVENTION!

annoyinglittletwerp on April 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Except that there’s no way to vote against one. Just as surely as there is no way to vote for a brokered convention, either. Mitt’s nomination isn’t the end of the world. If he can pull it off without the pre-convention support of those such as myself who detest him and think he doesn’t deserve it, I doff my hat to him and will proceed to the general election accordingly.

gryphon202 on April 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Some people just hate that constitution thingie… It’s sooo… Messy and unpredictable.

SWalker on April 3, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Romney is unbelievably arrogant and tone deaf

Good. Left wing media narrative is working perfectly.

cd98 on April 3, 2012 at 4:57 PM

KingGold on April 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Senators Jim Buckley and Al D’Amato would like a word with you on that point.

Emperor Norton on April 3, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Obama <<< Bush < Santorum < Huckabee < Romney < Gingrich < Palin < Everyone else

Archivarix on April 3, 2012 at 4:57 PM

They’re not going to roll the dice on anyone whose electability is questionable

Have ya visited Hot Air lately?

Ronnie on April 3, 2012 at 4:57 PM

INC on April 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Yes, I know, I have been on the receiving end of their “encouragement” and persuasion promoting their candidate. I think if it had been another source besides Thomas/Allen I might be more annoyed. I still believe that this campaign strategy fails every time it is tried, so color me shocked when it is rolled out……again.

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Some people just hate that constitution thingie… It’s sooo… Messy and unpredictable.

SWalker on April 3, 2012 at 4:56 PM

What on earth does the Constitution have to do with the nominating process, an internal party decision?

KingGold on April 3, 2012 at 4:58 PM

I don’t see myself supporting a nominee that was unwilling to throw their hat in the ring prior to the primaries.

You don’t get the brass ring when you chose not to enter the competition.
NO.BROKERED. CONVENTION!

annoyinglittletwerp on April 3, 2012 at 4:51

Yes, I agree…I’m just in my “Can’t Always Get What You Want”
Rolling Stones kind of mood these days….before Reality hits.
And I have to drag a soggy azz, spineless, gutless wonder
across the finish line in November….

ToddPA on April 3, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Romney = The White Obama

Norwegian on April 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM

And Obama, as far as I know, doesn’t torture dogs either.

angryed on April 3, 2012 at 4:58 PM

In fairness to Romney, most of the evangelicals have thumbed their nose at him this entire primary. They also dissed him for the most part the first time he ran. I can totally see why he or his supporters would not think that highly of catering to them.

That said, I imagine Romney will continue to court evangelicals even as they thumb their noses at him.

cd98 on April 3, 2012 at 4:55 PM

I’m not an evangelical. Just a garden-variety Lutheran. I will vote for Romney even as I thumb my nose at him.

ABO

(Then primary Romney in 2016)

Bitter Clinger on April 3, 2012 at 4:59 PM

The only thing stupider than the comment itself is anyone picking up on it and reporting it like it has any significance whatsoever.

alchemist19 on April 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Why? Because it makes Romney look bad? Some of his ardent supporters have already done that on this blog. Don’t blame Tina for something that candidate said…in public, if you will…

kingsjester on April 3, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Don L on April 3, 2012 at 4:56 PM
You’re ignoring the fact that said ticket is UNELECTABLE.

Many of us don’t like Huck-and BOTH of them chose NOT TO RUN.
I’m still pushing Mitt/Ryan or Mitt/Jindal.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 3, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Fair enough. But sometimes it’s time for a reality check. It wouldn’t be a strong ticket, and the man makes a good point. It really is the ticket many in the party would like to see come out of a brokered convention. And it wouldn’t last one week before falling apart.

besser tot als rot on April 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Yeah. It’s a little discouraging to vote for the least bad, but that’s where we are.

rogaineguy on April 3, 2012 at 4:59 PM

In fairness to Romney, most of the evangelicals have thumbed their nose at him this entire primary. They also dissed him for the most part the first time he ran. I can totally see why he or his supporters would not think that highly of catering to them.

cd98 on April 3, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Does that mean there any chance he wins without their massive turnout and margin? No. There is not. None whatsoever.

besser tot als rot on April 3, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Some people just hate that constitution thingie… It’s sooo… Messy and unpredictable.

SWalker on April 3, 2012 at 4:56 PM

The constitution doesn’t say anything about the nominating process, or political parties at all for that matter. It merely states that for a presidential election, states may choose electors in “whatsoever manner” they see fit. Personally I think that drawing out the process will redound to the benefit of the nation, if not necessarily the Republican party, but I know there will be many people who don’t share that opinion with me.

gryphon202 on April 3, 2012 at 4:59 PM

What on earth does the Constitution have to do with the nominating process, an internal party decision?

KingGold on April 3, 2012 at 4:58 PM

I’m going to pretend you didn’t ask that…

SWalker on April 3, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Nice. Insult the base-est of your base.

Are New York’s Republican glitterati really such panicky chumps that this longer-than-longshot scenario was enough to get them to toss bags of money at Mitt?

New Yorkers are scared of some hicks? Wow.

SouthernGent on April 3, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Which is why so many of us see no point in voting for him.

Romney = The White Obama

Norwegian on April 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Here’s one: The next president is going to replace Ginsburg for sure, maybe Scalia and Kennedy on the court. You really think Romney is going to pick a Kagan? If you do you’re lying to yourself.

cpaulus on April 3, 2012 at 4:59 PM

The rest of us will go about the business of getting rid of President Downgrade.

Good Lt on April 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM

That’s a lot harder without enthusiasm for the nominee though.

Esthier on April 3, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Senators Jim Buckley and Al D’Amato would like a word with you on that point.

Emperor Norton on April 3, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Both of those men won elected office. The former was actually a fantastic conservative senator, even if the latter was a squish.

KingGold on April 3, 2012 at 5:00 PM

ToddPA on April 3, 2012 at 4:58 PM

I’m not thrilled with Mitt either-but it is what it is.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 3, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Bitter Clinger on April 3, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Same group that didn’t know anyone who voted for Nixon when he won, I guess. And people wonder why flyover country is so dismissive of the elites.

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 5:00 PM

In fairness to Romney, most of the evangelicals have thumbed their nose at him this entire primary. They also dissed him for the most part the first time he ran. I can totally see why he or his supporters would not think that highly of catering to them.

That said, I imagine Romney will continue to court evangelicals even as they thumb their noses at him.

cd98 on April 3, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Romney tells them to go f**k themselves on the hour, every hour of the day. And yet they’re the bad guys for shunning him? Come on dude.

angryed on April 3, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Well he has a point, the woman is not smart.

In fact I will go a little bit far ahead and say she is stupid

liberal4life on April 3, 2012 at 5:00 PM

cd98 on April 3, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Have they voted for others? Some have and some have not. Does voting for someone else mean you thumb your nose or does it mean you think the other guy will do the job you want done?

Even if they did, is it wise or right for Romney to use divisive terms like this? Again, this is a Dem tactic.

But then, a pundit did write that Romney campaigns like a Dem.

INC on April 3, 2012 at 5:01 PM

You wouldn’t think stupid would be an asset to that position but what do I know?

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

Well, the campaign COULD announce another Car elevator to
be built..that’ll show em!!

ToddPA on April 3, 2012 at 5:01 PM

That’s from the new Mike Allen/Evan Thomas e-book on the campaign.
Uh-huh. A couple of hard-core Obamabots.

“Let’s see, what can we make up that will really piss off the Republican base?”

“Let’s have a Romney guy dissing Palin?”

“Why just Palin? Why not Palin and Huckabee?”

“Sweeeet. That’ll work! Should we have them bad-mouthing Reagan, too?”

“Um…nah. That’s probably going too far.”

Rational Thought on April 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Face it, this was Mr GOP etch-a-sketch’s open mic moment.The worker bees do whatever the queen bee wants.

Clarification, denial and personal attack from Acid-Ann Coulter coming here…1,…2,…3…

Don L on April 3, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 5