So, is the VP race down to Portman and Pawlenty? Update: Fewer women considered due to media’s Palin scrutiny?

posted at 4:02 pm on June 19, 2012 by Allahpundit

WaPo follows up on this morning’s bombshell about the non-vetting of Rubio by confirming that (a) indeed, he’s not being vetted at the moment and (b) the two safest picks in the field are.

Other vice presidential candidates, including Sen. Rob Portman (Ohio) and former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, are undergoing a more intensive review, according to two Republicans close to the campaign…

“By the time you apply the gravitas test, which is really 95 percent of what Governor Romney’s looking at — people when introduced to America nobody would think twice about their ability to be president if necessary — that wipes out 90 percent of the field,” said one outside adviser close to the Romney operation who requested anonymity to speak candidly about the selection process.

The adviser said other Republicans once presumed to be contenders, including Sen. Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) and New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez, fall under this same category. More-experienced candidates said to be under consideration include Rep. Paul Ryan, the House Budget Committee chairman, as well as Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.

If Rubio’s too young and too unseasoned, does that mean Christie is too? He’s nine years older than Rubio and holds an executive position but has spent less time in political office than even Rubio has if you include the latter’s tenure in the state legislature. Mitch Daniels is presumably also out since he’s reportedly set to be named the next president of Purdue. So, it seems, is Bob McDonnell, who wasn’t being vetted either as of three weeks ago. What about Paul Ryan? He was coy when asked about this in May and he’s part of Romney’s bus tour featuring a cavalcade of would-be VPs, but he’s also just a year older than Rubio and has no executive experience. What’s the logic at this point for picking him and embracing an all-out “Mediscare” campaign from Democrats when he could go with the far safer/blander Portman or Pawlenty instead? It would excite the base, but Romney’s not worried about the base anymore. If he was, he wouldn’t be dodging questions over whether he’ll rescind Obama’s new DREAM order if elected. In fact, I think the people who see skittishness over immigration in Romney’s decision to pass on Rubio are right: If he picks him or Ryan as VP, then to some extent the election will be about something other than the economy. That’s precisely what Romney’s trying to avoid; it’s Obama who wants a “choice” election, not the GOP.

That leaves Portman, Pawlenty, and maybe Jindal, who does have executive experience, would add diversity to the ticket, and would certainly fire up the base. But Jindal endorsed Perry in the primaries and he’s the same age as Rubio. He’d be an inspired choice but not as safe as Portman or Pawlenty, and if there’s one thing we know about Mitt, he prefers safe to inspired. So that leaves two: The Bush alum from the key swing state or the guy who was vetted four years ago from the unwinnable blue state. I thought Portman was a prohibitive favorite and I still think there’s probably a 75 percent chance that he gets it, but as more polls come out showing how many voters still blame Bush for the economy, Team Mitt must be wondering whether Portman’s record as Bush’s budget chief will become a major liability on their key issue. If it’s true that Romney’s VP credo is “first do no harm,” then Pawlenty really should have the edge. The most damaging soundbite he’s had in the last few years is the one about “ObamneyCare” and I doubt you’ll see Team O want to focus on that.

Exit question: Why would any Republican want to leak the fact that Rubio’s not even being seriously considered for VP, especially at a moment when Obama’s just made a splash with Latino voters via his new DREAM policy? It’s one thing not to choose the guy, it’s another thing to signal that he’s not even worthy of consideration. And no, this isn’t about Romney trying to completely distance himself from Rubio because of the politics of DREAM: Remember, after O made his announcement on Friday, Romney specifically mentioned Rubio in his response. He’s a bona fide conservative rock star with a national future. Why not pay him the minimum respect of vetting him? Or are Ana Navarro and Ben Domenech right in thinking that this is really about the Charlie Crist alums in Romney’s campaign wanting a little payback for what Rubio did to their guy in 2010?


Update: Depressing.

In particular, few women except for New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte – a freshman lawmaker from New England with only scant federal experience – are thought to be under consideration by Romney.

“I think unfortunately, Palin poisoned the well on that,” said one informal Romney adviser, fretting that any woman selected as VP would draw inevitable comparisons to the former Alaska governor. “I would guess if I were inside the Romney mind that they’re worried that any woman chosen will be subjected to a higher level of scrutiny.”

Update: Note that that last quote comes from an “informal advisor” to the campaign, not any of the inner circle, so who knows how much of it is pure speculation versus informed speculation derived from chatting with key players. In fairness to Mitt, there aren’t many woman officeholders who fit his criteria this time around. Ayotte and Martinez are both promising but both new to their current offices. They’d be stronger picks in 2016 than they are now.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Weak possible picks from a weak R nom. Sorry, thats how I see it. I am supporting Rmoney™ either way.

Bmore on June 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Jindal is NOT the best pick out there.
He seems a bow to political correctness, oddly.
Just try a choice that doesn’t seem to indicate a bowing down to political correctness like O bowing to the Saudi king. It’s not that hard. We love Jindal, but most would say he’s too young and experienced, and we can find someone else that fits the bill without causing much of the R voters to shake their heads in disbelief. Pay heed to the often unexpressed feelings of many if not most of the R voters. It’s not Jindal this time.

[anotherJoe on June 19, 2012 at 4:55 PM]

What? I get the impression by this you don’t really live in LA (or the US for that matter) and may be a troll.

No one in LA would say he’s too young and inexperienced. Look at his job experience, especially in the number-crunching and administrative side of field of healthcare. After that look at his success in those positions.

The last thing an R would say about the choice is that it is a nod to political correctness.

Still, I’d prefer to see Jindal stay where he is. I’m still hoping for a shift from fed power to state power and the best way to do that is to have strong governors willing to take on that fight.

Dusty on June 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM

thatsafactjack on June 19, 2012 at 5:22 PM

The iron throne has spoken. Sarah should leave the party.

HerneTheHunter on June 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM

It must just take money and organization and a huge helping hand from conservative media to win the nomination, because that’s how he won it.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:22 PM

Excuses are for losers. And I’m not sure why do you have a problem with people who have the political and organizational skills to run a nation-wide campaign.

joana on June 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:21 PM

sure. He also predated her on the dextrosphere by a decade. She’s doing a bang-up job of helping to continue the work he began, along with many others. She recognizes the value of participating in political pop culture, as do you and as did he. Many, many other GOPers do not, and are missing the boat.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Mike Castle is still the dark horse choice for VP; he’s available, vivacious, and can attract the limp-noodle vote.

Bishop on June 19, 2012 at 4:38 PM

How about Alan Grayson? I heard he’s not working at the moment.

He could be considered “vivacious”.

kim roy on June 19, 2012 at 5:25 PM

The iron throne has spoken. Sarah should leave the party.

HerneTheHunter on June 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM

This is exactly what I’m talking about. Someone decides to not be 100% reverential to Palin and someone overreacts.

Ugh.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:25 PM

jimver on June 19, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Would the just as gutsy Lt. Gov. take his place?

If so, more heads to esplode…

Schadenfreude on June 19, 2012 at 5:

Haha, I didn’t think about that one, oh yeah, they hate her guts, don’t they…the WI left will retaliate by moving en masse to Ontario (wishful thinking, eh :), as in ‘boat people’…btw, is there a way to get from lake michigan into the other one that borders ontario? Huron I think….I lived in toronto for tao years, but the only way I crossed into US was at Niagara/Buffalo…curious if there’s any connection between the two above lakes…too lazy to look it up…

jimver on June 19, 2012 at 5:25 PM

And I’m not sure why do you have a problem with people who have the political and organizational skills to run a nation-wide campaign.

joana on June 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM

I don’t. It doesn’t prevent him from being a fool when it comes to Palin, either.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:25 PM

I have no problem saying that Condi, having spent 8 years in the White House (and actually attended law school, which is the only reason anyone would know much about SCOTUS), was more “up” on national issues than Palin in 2008. Given Palin’s activity and Condi’s lack thereof in the past four years, I no longer believe that to be true.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:16 PM

So, you admit that Palin didn’t know much about national issues when she was running for the second highest office in the land, yet you can’t seem to reconcile that with the blowout loss that we suffered.

Oh, I know – Palin was the only reason why conservatives turned out, so it must have been that she just didn’t motivate enough of them. Perhaps it was because she turned away swing voters in droves? Nah, couldn’t be…

The Count on June 19, 2012 at 5:26 PM

Strange how readily the base is split right here on Hot Air just at the MENTION of Palin. People leap to castigate one another, name calling, replete with personal jibes.

thatsafactjack on June 19, 2012 at 5:22 PM

Try considering that the ongoing rants about her by her lovees is like a dripping faucet. You ignore it, you state a simple disagreement with it, eventually it’s really irritating that it continues.

People in general tolerate if not like and accept Palin. It’s the ongoing “celebrity-push-in-love-with-Palin” chatter that goes on and on by the same handful of users here that eventually gets irritating.

I sometimes wonder if some of you here have other thoughts about other people, at least without some pause in your days/nights to lust and want after a public person like you all do about Palin. It’s not normal.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:26 PM

I like Schadenfreude’s Idea. Of course I too enjoy a nice head explosion once in a while.

Bmore on June 19, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Drunk? That was pure bath salts.

the_nile on June 19, 2012 at 5:22 PM

I stand corrected.

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:23 PM

That means he isn’t as smart as you think he is then?

HerneTheHunter on June 19, 2012 at 5:27 PM

How did this turn into yet another Palin thread? I though t she was irrelevant. At least thats what many of you keep telling me.

Bmore on June 19, 2012 at 5:28 PM

That means he isn’t as smart as you think he is then?

HerneTheHunter on June 19, 2012 at 5:27 PM

No, it means I’m asking you to stop being so defensive about Palin. You don’t have to flip out whenever someone offers criticism.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:28 PM

though t=thought

Bmore on June 19, 2012 at 5:28 PM

How about Alan Grayson? I heard he’s not working at the moment.

He could be considered “vivacious”.

kim roy on June 19, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Nah, Arlen Specter is more in Romney’s style. Plus, he’s got plenty of time on his hands these days.

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:29 PM

If Palin does decide to run for another political office, it will be on her own ticket because, frankly, she causes too much collateral damage WITHIN the base to be chosen as a running mate for a front runner or a confirmed nominee.

thatsafactjack on June 19, 2012 at 5:22 PM

Because people can’t control themselves it’s her fault. I submit that someone sure of their convictions and ideas and comfortable with who they are would do very well on a ticket with her. Someone like West would be just fine.

If that’s a problem for others, then isn’t that THEIR problem? Having to excuse and modify for other people’s issues/lack of control seems to be something liberals preach.

kim roy on June 19, 2012 at 5:29 PM

How did this turn into yet another Palin thread? I though t she was irrelevant. At least thats what many of you keep telling me.

Bmore on June 19, 2012 at 5:28 PM

Same way as always – someone says something that isn’t worshipful of Almighty Sarah, Palinistas flood in with guns blazing.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:26 PM

In Treatment.

HerneTheHunter on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

I don’t. It doesn’t prevent him from being a fool when it comes to Palin, either.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Can you mention a single negative thing Romney said about Palin?

I bet you’ll just punt on this question.

You people are completely paranoiac and creepily obsessed about Palin.

joana on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Palin’s fans are the most paranoiac bunch in American politics. Forget Al Sharpton or Alex Jones followers. They’re not even on the same planet.

joana on June 19, 2012 at 5:07 PM

I’m a big Palin supporter and have been since before McCain put her on the ticket. I would have voted for her had she been in the primary. But instead I voted for Romney.

Please don’t paint with a broad brush. There are plenty of Palin supporters who voted for Romney.

Immolate on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Excuses are for losers. And I’m not sure why do you have a problem with people who have the political and organizational skills to run a nation-wide campaign.

joana on June 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Hey Sparky, Romney lost to McCain in 2008… LOL

He’s must be a loser according to you..:)

idesign on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Jill1066 on June 19, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Cathy McMorris Rodgers meets all of those qualifications. she ought to be on a shortlist.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

All of these names but no Gen. Patraeus. He is the most respected, serious, and accomplished individual out there. The up-sides are too many to list here. I wish it was part of the VP conversation.

Jussi on June 19, 2012 at 5:20 PM

Do you even know his politics? Does he have any sort of political skill? What about Bill Gates, Clint Eastwood or Larry Bird? Very accomplished individuals as well.

So now you are comparing a basketball player to General and CIA Director – okay. I like competance over political skill. I am sure he can give a speech and make Binden look like a clown on tv for one evening. You dont get to where he is being a squishy Liberal – I am sure his politics are good enough.

Jussi on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

The iron throne has spoken. Sarah should leave the party.

HerneTheHunter on June 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM

This is exactly what I’m talking about. Someone decides to not be 100% reverential to Palin and someone overreacts.

Ugh.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Yes, Red Cloud, agreed.

I saw a photo earlier today on the Christian Science Monitor’s site of the faces of females looking, well, hyperexcited and fascinated and idol-worshipping and like that, and when I saw the full photo I saw it was them straining to touch Justin Bieber. Up until I saw the full photo, I thought it looked like a number of the Palin people here straining on the Palin posts.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Lourdes and Red Cloud:
Round of applause for both of you! I agree completely.

thatsafactjack on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

will obamney go rino/rino or rino/conservative. If he goes rino it will probably be a “safe” boring pawlenty. If he goes conservative it could be Newt/Santorum/Palin. If the dunce mitt obamney goes safe, he could lose to a commie usurper anti-American, white hatin’, crossdresser.

Mr. Sun on June 19, 2012 at 5:32 PM

Jussi on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Don’t kid yourself. Petraeous is no conservative. Not even close. He’s more likely to run on a dem ticket.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 19, 2012 at 5:32 PM

switched over to msdnc…tingles is lovin’ him some portman….

all the lsm trying to guess so that they can get ready to palinize them…

cmsinaz on June 19, 2012 at 5:33 PM

Same way as always – someone says something that isn’t worshipful of Almighty Sarah, Palinistas flood in with guns blazing.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Palin’s just a women, but Palin speaks from the heart, while Mitt speaks from the latest polling data..:)

idesign on June 19, 2012 at 5:33 PM

I saw a photo earlier today on the Christian Science Monitor’s site of the faces of females looking, well, hyperexcited and fascinated and idol-worshipping and like that, and when I saw the full photo I saw it was them straining to touch Justin Bieber. Up until I saw the full photo, I thought it looked like a number of the Palin people here straining on the Palin posts.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Wow. Rent free.

How come when I read your Palin posts I hear “Marcia Marcia Marcia”?

This a fun game! Anyone else want to play?

kim roy on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Don’t kid yourself. Petraeous is no conservative. Not even close. He’s more likely to run on a dem ticket.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 19, 2012 at 5:32 PM

So is Romney, come to think of it. Maybe he will pick Petraeous.

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Photo about which I refer is from “Photo of the Day” for June 18, 2012 (yesterday on that site’s lineup)…

http://www.csmonitor.com/content/search?SearchText=justin+%2B+bieber&SearchButton=Search

scroll down to midway on that page, look at righthand side of page at the crowd photo cropped, see it linked to full photo for full affect of before-view and after.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Where is the Mary Fallin talk coming from??? What does Romney have to gain from picking an Oklahoman that makes it worth his having the media dredge up her marital past? Terrible option.

And I’m just inherently wary of picking any married woman that hasn’t taken her husband’s surname. Doesn’t apply to Martinez because conventions are different in Hispanic tradition, but beyond that I have difficulty trusting the conservative cred of anybody willing to latch onto a feminist tendency.

Rell, meh. Again with the northeastern stuff. And not Condi – where does she stand on anything that isn’t foreign policy, and is her foreign policy cred really that good?

We’re at a point here where female candidates are being brought up for no reason other than that they are female, and such identity politics is not a good direction for a campaign. Pick the best possible candidate, best possible resume, and strongest conservative credentials. Fallin, Rell, Ayotte, Rice, even Martinez and Haley don’t fit that bill better than Pawlenty, let alone Ryan and Jindal.

Overall the fact that boring guys like Pawlenty and Portman are being considered is itself a good point. It’s a sign of a standard campaign that wants to maintain a favorable narrative. Whatever one’s opinion of the Palin choice, the method that got McCain there was far from optimal. The search for game-changers is for campaigns that need such to survive. Romney’s campaign isn’t one of those. He could still do better than boring and maximize his advantage with Jindal or Ryan, but if it’s Romney/Pawlenty in the end, then meh. Okay.

Gingotts on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Can you mention a single negative thing Romney said about Palin?

I bet you’ll just punt on this question.

joana on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

I don’t have time to go back and look up quotes for you today. He’s made snide remarks for four years, several while she was considering getting in the race. His people go to campaign fundraisers and specifically hold up Palin as something to avoid. I cannot believe you think we don’t notice.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

So is Romney, come to think of it. Maybe he will pick Petraeous.

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Heh. You have a point.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 19, 2012 at 5:35 PM

most would say he’s too young and experienced

anotherJoe on June 19, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Now this just makes me shake my head.

Jindal has been governor of Louisiana longer than Romeny was Governor of Massachusetts or Tim Pawlenty was in Minnesota. He’s been a Congressman, a businessman, and a parent. He was an all star academic, graduating from Brown (where, in addition to admission as an undergraduate, he was also offered guaranteed admission to Brown’s medical school right out of high school!). He finished college two years early and was off to Oxford as a Rhodes scholar.

Jindal has been an exceptional governor of a famously tough state to run, and a great surrogate on the campaign trail. He’s the very definition of the right choice for VP. The right age; the right experience; the right politics.

If Romney is going to festoon his administration with people like Mike Leavitt, then he almost has to put a prominent conservative into the Veep slot. Jindal would be a great choice.

MTF on June 19, 2012 at 5:35 PM

Cathy McMorris Rodgers meets all of those qualifications. she ought to be on a shortlist.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

I like her, but I forsee a similar media response.

1) Collectively, they howl “WHO?”
2) Agitation from the professional victims on the left unwilling to tolerate an uppity woman who wanders off their intellectual reservation
3) Hordes of media (poop)diggers descend on Spokane to find anything and everything they can to ruin her.
4) Series of episodes where media figures throw (poop) against the wall waiting to find one that will stick.
5) Finding one that sticks (or even only slides down the wall slower than the rest), they use it as a bludgeon until November.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:35 PM

Palin’s just a women, but Palin speaks from the heart, while Mitt speaks from the latest polling data..:)

idesign on June 19, 2012 at 5:33 PM

Therefore, never question her and never ascribe anything negative to her.

Gotcha.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:36 PM

Has the name Condi Rice been floated around anywhere lately? Experience, especially in foreign policy, wouldn’t be an issue with that pick.

UpTheCreek on June 19, 2012 at 5:36 PM

All of these names but no Gen. Patraeus. He is the most respected, serious, and accomplished individual out there. The up-sides are too many to list here. I wish it was part of the VP conversation.

Jussi on June 19, 2012 at 5:20 PM

Do you even know his politics? Does he have any sort of political skill? What about Bill Gates, Clint Eastwood or Larry Bird? Very accomplished individuals as well.

So now you are comparing a basketball player to General and CIA Director – okay. I like competance over political skill. I am sure he can give a speech and make Binden look like a clown on tv for one evening. You dont get to where he is being a squishy Liberal – I am sure his politics are good enough.

Jussi on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Not just a basketball player. He’s won the MVP award as player, the Coach of the Year award as a coach and Executive of the Year as a General Manager. That’s certainly an accomplished individual.

Maybe you’re right and he wouldn’t be able to translated his skills to the political arena – as he did from the hardcourt to the courtside bench and from the bench to the front-oficce.

Of course, that’s exactly my point about Petraeus.

joana on June 19, 2012 at 5:36 PM

Palin’s just a women, but Palin speaks from the heart, while Mitt speaks from the latest polling data..:)

idesign on June 19, 2012 at 5:33 PM

Not quite. Polling data is good and all, but Romney prefers to look in your wallet to decide if you are worth pandering to or not.

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:37 PM

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Oh, carry on I guess, heII of a way to pick a VP for Rmoney™ though. ; )

Bmore on June 19, 2012 at 5:37 PM

We’re at a point here where female candidates are being brought up for no reason other than that they are female, and such identity politics is not a good direction for a campaign. Pick the best possible candidate, best possible resume, and strongest conservative credentials. Fallin, Rell, Ayotte, Rice, even Martinez and Haley don’t fit that bill better than Pawlenty, let alone Ryan and Jindal.

Overall the fact that boring guys like Pawlenty and Portman are being considered is itself a good point. It’s a sign of a standard campaign that wants to maintain a favorable narrative. Whatever one’s opinion of the Palin choice, the method that got McCain there was far from optimal. The search for game-changers is for campaigns that need such to survive. Romney’s campaign isn’t one of those. He could still do better than boring and maximize his advantage with Jindal or Ryan, but if it’s Romney/Pawlenty in the end, then meh. Okay.

Gingotts on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Well said. Paragraph 1 above, same as to race and ethnicity as to gender nowadays: “pick one that’s trendy”…it’s offensive to me, too.

Paragraph 2 above: more voters need to keep focused on what is at stake as they vote and for whom. A second term for Obama would spell doom for us. Romney can do so much better, whoever he selects as V.P. And I well understand Romney’s decision to select someone who shares his views.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:38 PM

Can you mention a single negative thing Romney said about Palin?

I don’t have time to go back and look up quotes for you today. He’s made snide remarks for four years, several while she was considering getting in the race. His people go to campaign fundraisers and specifically hold up Palin as something to avoid. I cannot believe you think we don’t notice.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

I bet you’ll just punt on this question.

joana on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Easy one.

I think some of you might need medical treatment for paranoia.

joana on June 19, 2012 at 5:38 PM

joana on June 19, 2012 at 5:38 PM

You need to lay off the bath salts too.

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Wow. Rent free.

How come when I read your Palin posts I hear “Marcia Marcia Marcia”?

This a fun game! Anyone else want to play?

kim roy on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

LIke I along with many others continue to observe, you Palin people take any and all remarks that are “outside your group margins” to be abnormal.

Which is WHY people outside your group margins stop commenting on the “Palin threads” (which was the reason I originally commented above, in response to that “question”), because whatever anyone says, you and those like you will taunt and ridicule and bully them.

Yes, bully them. You all use the position that you’re “defending Palin from attacks” but what you’re all mostly doing and always have been doing is agitating others and then harassing those who respond. That’s bullying.

You all just have no reality about who you all are to the rest of us, you just can’t view yourselves reasonably.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:43 PM

Palin is NOT running. Why are those who support her so lathered up?

Seems they think its fair to say whatever they like about anyone from GOP politicians to their fellow posters, but NO ONE is allowed to express ANY thought that isn’t completely in the tank for Palin without getting a lot of flack for it.

Sort of reminds me of the blind devotion and mob mentality engendered on the left for the Unicorn Prince.

thatsafactjack on June 19, 2012 at 5:43 PM

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:35 PM

And which one of those points would they not do for a male candidate? Portman can expect the exact same treatment, he’s not a household name.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:45 PM

I saw a photo earlier today on the Christian Science Monitor’s site of the faces of females looking, well, hyperexcited and fascinated and idol-worshipping and like that, and when I saw the full photo I saw it was them straining to touch Justin Bieber. Up until I saw the full photo, I thought it looked like a number of the Palin people here straining on the Palin posts.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Your problem is that Romney doesn’t elicit anything near the same response. It’s not Palin’s fault that Mitt’s a yawn.

Palin’s just a women, but Palin speaks from the heart, while Mitt speaks from the latest polling data..:)

idesign on June 19, 2012 at 5:33 PM

Therefore, never question her and never ascribe anything negative to her.

Gotcha.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:36 PM

That strawman is nearly 4 years now and getting really moldy. Object to an unfair criticism of or cheap shot at Palin, and then it’s “no one can say anything negative about the goddess!” Meanwhile, if you’re anything less than reverential toward Bain and Romney’s role there, you’re an OWS socialist.

ddrintn on June 19, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Whatever one’s opinion of the Palin choice, the method that got McCain there was far from optimal.

Gingotts on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Yeah , who picked McCain?!

the_nile on June 19, 2012 at 5:46 PM

kim roy on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

But, don’t fret, kim roy, you can have this thread now all to yourself so there’s no need to feel threatened any more by “other perspectives.”

One other point I’ve noticed, however, that defies reality is that on those “Palin threads” all you Palin people always complain about “where are the Palin haters” and “Palin trolls” and such so you really are just looking for a fight: you want other opinions to show up so you can poke them. It’s still bullying.

You can relax and have the thread to yourself. I’m OK with that. Just stop asking “why don’t other people comment on the Palin threads” as if it was a genuine curiousity.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Yeah , who picked McCain?!

the_nile on June 19, 2012 at 5:46 PM

No one. He was left on the porch and we had to take him.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 19, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Lourdes:
Well said.

thatsafactjack on June 19, 2012 at 5:48 PM

I’m fed up with this meme of Palin being ‘poison’ to the GOP. McCain’s campaign was on life support when he picked her, and she lit the fire that kept him aloft until he finally killed his own campaign.

The day will come when conservatives realize she is the best hope yet, and the biggest star the GOP could ever have, for winning, if they would just stop sniping at her and fight back when the Left trashes her.

I know, that would require some form of courage and a spine.

Dave in San Diego on June 19, 2012 at 5:48 PM

We’re at a point here where female candidates are being brought up for no reason other than that they are female

Gingotts on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Bullhockey. McMorris Rodgers is a solid choice regardless of gender: conservative, long record, no funny business in her past. She’s being ignored just because she’s female.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:49 PM

Sort of reminds me of the blind devotion and mob mentality engendered on the left for the Unicorn Prince.

thatsafactjack on June 19, 2012 at 5:43 PM

No, that would be the Mittbot Goon Squads running around monitoring threads for anything less than respectful of Our Nominee ™ .

ddrintn on June 19, 2012 at 5:49 PM

That strawman is nearly 4 years now and getting really moldy. Object to an unfair criticism of or cheap shot at Palin, and then it’s “no one can say anything negative about the goddess!” Meanwhile, if you’re anything less than reverential toward Bain and Romney’s role there, you’re an OWS socialist.

ddrintn on June 19, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Not to mention that the Mittbots will attack you if you say you aren’t voting for his Rino-ness. Even if you say you are voting for him, if you aren’t 100% gung-ho about it, the Mittbots will still attack you. They did that to Cosmo, and he’s voting for Mittens.

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:49 PM

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Wow. Rent free.

How come when I read your Palin posts I hear “Marcia Marcia Marcia”?

This a fun game! Anyone else want to play?

kim roy on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

LIke I along with many others continue to observe, you Palin people take any and all remarks that are “outside your group margins” to be abnormal.

Which is WHY people outside your group margins stop commenting on the “Palin threads” (which was the reason I originally commented above, in response to that “question”), because whatever anyone says, you and those like you will taunt and ridicule and bully them.

Yes, bully them. You all use the position that you’re “defending Palin from attacks” but what you’re all mostly doing and always have been doing is agitating others and then harassing those who respond. That’s bullying.

You all just have no reality about who you all are to the rest of us, you just can’t view yourselves reasonably.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:43 PM

Yeah, sure. Said from the person who looks at a pic and the first thought is that it is rabid Palinistas.

*eye roll*

Sorry, but your comment is just plain silly and it shows that Palin lives rent-free in your head.

MARCIA MARCIA MARCIA.

kim roy on June 19, 2012 at 5:49 PM

Your problem is that Romney doesn’t elicit anything near the same response. It’s not Palin’s fault that Mitt’s a yawn.

ddrintn on June 19, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Oops, didn’t see that remark before I wrote my previous comments so I’ll retort to that one quoted here, above:

There is no “problem” held by me or anyone else supporting the GOP ticket/Romney2012 because we aren’t hyperventilating and indicating some sort of cult-like love for Mitt Romney like you all do for Palin.

It’s telling that you’d think that represents a “problem” that there isn’t a group effect bordering on hysteria about him or any other politician, such as you display about Palin.

I’ve read more hatefulness and irrational emotional screed from you over the years as also those like you, your peers here who promote the same irrational resentments and assumptions than I’ve ever read from any Leftwinger anywhere and I’ve read quite a lot of Leftwing hatefulness elsewhere.

Like I said, that you’d consider it a “problem” that there’s not this group adulation of Romney the man as you engage in for Palin the woman is bizarre. It’s abnormal.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:52 PM

kim roy on June 19, 2012 at 5:34 PM

But, don’t fret, kim roy, you can have this thread now all to yourself so there’s no need to feel threatened any more by “other perspectives.”

One other point I’ve noticed, however, that defies reality is that on those “Palin threads” all you Palin people always complain about “where are the Palin haters” and “Palin trolls” and such so you really are just looking for a fight: you want other opinions to show up so you can poke them. It’s still bullying.

You can relax and have the thread to yourself. I’m OK with that. Just stop asking “why don’t other people comment on the Palin threads” as if it was a genuine curiousity.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Oh look! A second response to the same post I made. And you wonder why people think you’re a loon. Are you going to flounce off now?

I don’t think I’ve ever asked those questions because I just don’t care, so not entirely sure why you hang that one on me.

Later, Jan.

kim roy on June 19, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Spot on. I’ve been saying that for several years now.

Mitt/Jindal 2012!

annoyinglittletwerp on June 19, 2012 at 5:53 PM

And, every.single.time there’s a post here about Romney, you Palin people show up and promote Palin and all the rest you’re suggesting, like “don’t vote for the GOP” and similar. You seem to feed on hate.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Therefore, never question her and never ascribe anything negative to her.

Gotcha.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:36 PM

Now, who’s overreacting? I like Sarah because she is so normal. Normal includes strengths and weaknesses, but it’s real.

Fallon on June 19, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Kim’s a good conservative chick-a lot of Palin supporters are good conservatives-but when the subject turns to SP…

annoyinglittletwerp on June 19, 2012 at 5:55 PM

Lourdes and Red Cloud:
Round of applause for both of you! I agree completely.

thatsafactjack

All three of you are raging hypocrites. The second someone says something positive about her you have to smear her or attack the poster.
It’s always the same morons who have a mentally unstable hatred of her that bash her in threads that have nothing to do with her. take your meds and STFU already.

I don’t really care for her much, I’m just tired of the same people whining about being attacked because they bashed her and/or her supporters.
Get a f——g life!

Hard Right on June 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Now, who’s overreacting? I like Sarah because she is so normal. Normal includes strengths and weaknesses, but it’s real.

Fallon on June 19, 2012 at 5:54 PM

You probably missed the sarcasm inherent in the pushback.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Spot on. I’ve been saying that for several years now.

Mitt/Jindal 2012!

annoyinglittletwerp on June 19, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Yes, I know and I wrote as much a while ago, too, before Jindal made several public speeches in which he insisted he was happy as Governor of Louisiana, that he “has the job he wants now” as Governor.

So I stopped pushing Jindal as V.P. out of respect for his wishes. He seems sincere in saying he doesn’t want to make that move, so I’ve tried to respect it.

I agree he’d be a great V.P. I admire his values and intelligence.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:57 PM

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:52 PM

I can understand why a liberal would vote for Romney, but why should an actual conservative voter vote FOR Romney?

Especially given his record in MA, his support of gun control, bailouts, abortion, cap&trade, ethanol subsidies, his continued support of healthcare mandates(tyranny), his endless lying about his record and flip-flopping on every issue.

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:57 PM

So, is the VP race down to Portman and Pawlenty?

…thanks…but no thanks! They make me sleepy.
At least when dimwit daddy picked Palin…I was inspired.
Those 2 could drink a gallon of 5-hour ENERGY while speaking and put hyper Hannity to sleep.

KOOLAID2 on June 19, 2012 at 5:57 PM

(Y)ou Palin people show up and promote Palin and all…

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Okay, that time I heard “Marcia! Marcia! Marcia!” too.

Fallon on June 19, 2012 at 5:58 PM

every.single.time there’s a post here about Romney, you Palin people show up and promote Palin

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Delusional. Half the posts at HA are about Romney. the Palin people stick to articles that refer to Palin.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:58 PM

Object to an unfair criticism of or cheap shot at Palin, and then it’s “no one can say anything negative about the goddess!” Meanwhile, if you’re anything less than reverential toward Bain and Romney’s role there, you’re an OWS socialist.

ddrintn on June 19, 2012 at 5:46 PM

I have yet to see any piece of criticism at all that was ever left alone by the Palinistas.

And which one of those points would they not do for a male candidate? Portman can expect the exact same treatment, he’s not a household name.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Well, that would be #2, actually, which blunts the impact of the remainder of them. I would also argue that Portman or Pawlenty would also not bring about #1, since they are among the ones the media are vetting for the job.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:59 PM

Spot on. I’ve been saying that for several years now.

Mitt/Jindal 2012!

annoyinglittletwerp on June 19, 2012 at 5:53 PM

How about Mitt/Huckabee? Or will you still stay home if that comes to pass?

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:59 PM

As I said (before the primaries) Tpaw is accountant boring and accountant competent… and that’s what the country is looking for… plus he really has talking the economic plan down, better than Mitt in fact…

MN might not go red, but a midwesterner will be helpful in pushing Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio over the finish line

phreshone on June 19, 2012 at 5:59 PM

With all due respect, I think you may be writing off some of the others a bit too cavalierly. A certain Governor checks all of the boxes and comes with a lot less risk than Portman – a guy who makes it easy for Obama to make the ‘Romney = Bush 3rd term’ argument … http://bit.ly/NNGUbZ

ombdz on June 19, 2012 at 5:59 PM

It’s always the same morons who have a mentally unstable hatred of her that bash her in threads that have nothing to do with her. take your meds and STFU already.

IHard Right on June 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Oh, for pity’s sake, give it a rest. Just because someone doesn’t care for in the sense of feeling overwhelmed with her, Palin, doesn’t mean they’re “mentally unstable” engaged in “hatred” for her.

I find it really difficult to accept that there are so many people so emotionally involved “about” her such that anything anyone writes that varies from the group memes gets harassed and called “mentally unstable” “haters”…

For pity’s sake.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 6:00 PM

Perhaps a little fuel for the fire y’all have going here.

Bmore on June 19, 2012 at 6:01 PM

IHard Right on June 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM

People ask questions, so people respond.

They don’t respond the way the question-askers want them to, and, thus, they get maligned. They retort, the question-askers freak out and start biting like grizzly bears.

If you don’t want anyone to respond to a question, don’t ask it.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:59 PM

I’ve said for a long time that Huckabee and Paul would be the candidates that would get me to skip the top race and vote only down ticket.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 19, 2012 at 6:02 PM

I’ve said for a long time that Huckabee and Paul would be the candidates that would get me to skip the top race and vote only down ticket.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 19, 2012 at 6:02 PM

So, would you consider that a vote for Obama then?

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 6:03 PM

I can understand why a liberal would vote for Romney, but why should an actual conservative voter vote FOR Romney?

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:57 PM

To hold his feet to the fire and SCOTUS!!!!!!!! Why do you hate America and want to help the commies?

Even if you say you are voting for him, if you aren’t 100% gung-ho about it, the Mittbots will still attack you. They did that to Cosmo, and he’s voting for Mittens.

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:49 PM

Well, I’d like to be sympathetic, but that jerk had it coming.

ddrintn on June 19, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 6:00 PM

Right on the money. +1

Attention Palinistas: Lourdes does not hate Palin just because he/she does not worship at her altar. Same goes for me. Savvy?

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Every.single.time there’s a post here about Romney, you Palin people show up and promote Palin

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Delusional. Half the posts at HA are about Romney. the Palin people stick to articles that refer to Palin.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:58 PM

Every time you plaster insults, an angel loses it’s wings.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Jindal.

the_nile on June 19, 2012 at 6:03 PM

And, every.single.time there’s a post here about Romney, you Palin people show up and promote Palin and all the rest you’re suggesting, like “don’t vote for the GOP” and similar. You seem to feed on hate.

[Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:54 PM]

Look up in the post. The post is about Palin, too, and in a negative (though bowing to reality) way. They showed up (re: commented on the update) as would be expected of anyone else here.

If you want them to quit feeding on hate, quit serving it up.

Dusty on June 19, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Lourdes, your reading comprehension sucks. You definitely have issues. YOU are one of the ones that feel the need to bash her and her supporters over and over then complain about being attacked.
You bring it on yourself so quit whining and playing the victim.

You left out this part of my post, but I expect nothing less from someone like you.

“I don’t really care for her much, I’m just tired of the same people whining about being attacked because they bashed her and/or her supporters.”

Hard Right on June 19, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Lourdes:
I see the calm that those of us who support the Romney 2012 ticket enjoying coming from the sense of confidence in our candidate that comes from paying careful attention during the earlier stages of the primaries and vetting him thoroughly. Its about his qualifications and experience and the fact that we’re comfortable with that. Its looking at a candidate, not as simply a media sensation or cult of personality, but as a viable candidate who can actually win the election and be a strong, efficient and effective executive. With Romney, for instance, we’ll never have to worry that he’ll leave his post half way through his term to make money.

thatsafactjack on June 19, 2012 at 6:04 PM

If you want them to quit feeding on hate, quit serving it up.

Dusty on June 19, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Somesuch.

the_nile on June 19, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Well, I’d like to be sympathetic, but that jerk had it coming.

ddrintn on June 19, 2012 at 6:03 PM

It was just so odd. Cosmo was supporting Romney, but not quite enough for the Mittbots. I mean, unless you own your very own pair of Rmoney brand kneepads, you get attacked. Even if you are a Rombot yourself. It’s weirdly cultish behavior, but then again the Mittbots are basically just Obamabots with different color uniforms.

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Every time you plaster insults, an angel loses it’s wings.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Every time you abuse bath salts an innocent man loses his face. And pants.

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Buckshot Bill on June 19, 2012 at 5:59 PM

I’ve said for a long time that Huckabee and Paul would be the candidates that would get me to skip the top race and vote only down ticket.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 19, 2012 at 6:02 PM

@ Buckshot Bill: I think I can reasonably forecast that Huckabee and Paul are (neither of them) going to be the V.P. selects to Romney’s Presidential nomination.

So it’s a waste of time to try to deny a negative. Or negatives, as that case may be.

And neither of them can or could win the nomination, so that’s out, too. It’s a waste of time to spend any time thinking about whether or not one would vote for either since neither is going to be available to vote for, not on the Presidential ticket.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Paragraph 2 above: more voters need to keep focused on what is at stake as they vote and for whom. A second term for Obama would spell doom for us. Romney can do so much better, whoever he selects as V.P. And I well understand Romney’s decision to select someone who shares his views.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 5:38 PM

I do agree there. I believe Romney can do better than Portman or Pawlenty by picking Ryan or Jindal. Ryan specifically has worked very well with the campaign. I also believe, though that while Jindal and Ryan would be the best choices and offer the most advantages a Romney/Pawlenty or Romney/Portman ticket can win as well. Its a similar argument as to whether Romney should play for MI, WI, MN, OR, etc… With as important as this election is, why yield anything? Why refuse to maximize every potential advantage?

Bullhockey. McMorris Rodgers is a solid choice regardless of gender: conservative, long record, no funny business in her past. She’s being ignored just because she’s female.

alwaysfiredup on June 19, 2012 at 5:49 PM

Talk about bullhockey. How has McMorris Rodgers been ignored, let alone this ridiculous assertion that it is because she is female. I’ve heard more of her in the past two months than I have in her entire legislative career.

As far as female candidates she is possibly the strongest choice, but in the end she still doesn’t have the executive experience of Pawlenty, Jindal or Portman, or the legislative accomplishments of Paul Ryan. Put her record, minus faces and names against the four front-runners and she just comes up fifth in that group. She’s better than others that have been floated this cycle, but 5th best still means there are four people that deserve consideration first. That said, she has a great opportunity to build her record by working with the Romney administration as House liaison in coming years. She could become the new Paul Ryan if the current Paul Ryan becomes the Vice-President.

Gingotts on June 19, 2012 at 6:08 PM

I’m sticking with Jindal. He’s young, bright, and very experienced at governing a state and in business matters, especially health care administration. Mitt, pick Bobby.

Philly on June 19, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Looks like Rubio is out. Big mistake! We already have a boring no. 1. We shouldn’t compound it with an equally boring number two. Against a sitting (or is it lying?) black president we need somebody with charisma, with pizzazz, a minority, a woman, etc.-not two sleep inducing white guys.

MaiDee on June 19, 2012 at 6:10 PM

I have yet to see any piece of criticism at all that was ever left alone by the Palinistas.

Red Cloud on June 19, 2012 at 5:59 PM

I’ve criticized a lot of things about Palin. I’ve criticized her speaking style, dodging the MSM, personally and publicly taking offense to things like the Family Guy episode or Emanuel’s use of the word “retard”, resigning office, not making her intentions for 2012 clear earlier on, and on and on and on. The thing is, unless everyone agrees that Palin a hopelessly toxic joke, then some must be worshiping her as a goddess.

ddrintn on June 19, 2012 at 6:10 PM

And I double-dog dare Zero and Co. (and slobbering media accomplices) to brand Jindal a racist for disagreeing with the curren’t regime’s policies.

Philly on June 19, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Every time you plaster insults, an angel loses it’s wings.

Lourdes on June 19, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Every time you post, a new Palin supporter gets their wings..:)

idesign on June 19, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6