I know that Mitt Romney looks like a weak candidate right now, but he’s still awfully close to Obama even in that new Public Policy Polling survey, and I think even people who see him as hopeless and pathetic will agree that he’s the most electable candidate the Republicans have. (No, I’m not counting Ron Paul because I think the vast majority of Americans don’t know how many government programs he’d like to eliminate and what was written in his newsletters.) My point is that if the Republicans want to win, you’d think they’d be be circling the wagons around him, maximizing his strengths, working to downplay his weaknesses, and attacking his critics. (And, while they’re at it, putting a stop to the endless series of debates.)
But they’re not doing any of this. Sarah Palin, as you probably know, wants the GOP fight to continue:
“I want to see this thing continue because iron sharpens iron, steel sharpens steel,” Ms. Palin said…. “These guys are getting better in their debates, they’re getting more concise, they’re getting more grounded in what their beliefs are and articulating what their ideas are to get the country back on the right track and get Americans working again.”
Rupert Murdoch publicly vented his frustration with Romney in a tweet after Monday’s debate:
@rupertmurdoch: When will Romney get a manager to prepare him? Fancy not being ready for questions about taxes or felons! Damaging.
That’s mild — but should the de facto head of the GOP’s media office say such things out loud?
And the rubes may be responding:
It’s one poll from a short time period, but a new Rasmussen national survey shows former House Speaker Newt Gingrich making a big move in the Republican primary race compared to his latest performances in public polls. The new Ras, a snap poll conducted Tuesday, shows Gingrich just three points behind former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who leads the sample with 30 percent.
The one major change in the race was Gingrich’s impressive performance in Monday night’s debate in South Carolina….
A couple of things are going on. One is that Republicans really do believe their own BS: Rush Limbaugh says on a regular basis that it’s hardcore conservatism that wins elections, and I guess a lot of Republicans actually believe it. They fear Romney can’t win because he’s not wingnutty enough. (Maybe they think the public would prefer Gingrich, notwithstanding the 60% unfavorable rating he has in that PPP poll.)
Another factor, I think, is that Republicans simply enjoy conflict. We’ve seen this from the new teabaggers in the House this past year: Democrats have tried to compromise with them, but they don’t seem to want to take yes for an answer. Part of this is ideological purism, obviously, but I think to some extent they just like fighting.
This is almost a powdered-drug way of thinking: It’s as if the Republicans like the rush so much (Newt just said “food stamps” again! Booyah!) that they don’t care if the end result in November is a nasty crash.
(X-posted at No More Mister Nice Blog.)
I think they care deeply, they just don’t believe it. They can’t imagine that if the “free market” Aynal ideology just got the nomination, nobody could possibly resist the Truth of it all. Kinda like I just couldn’t believe that even Americans could possibly elect Bush, even once.
You said what I was going to say. They do care, it’s just that part of the enjoyment of the rush is that they can’t conceive of not winning. for them the rush is it;s own guarantee of victory. It’s the binge mentality, is what it is.
Or perhaps what I should say is that it’s really the Calvinist certainty of personal salvation. Which fundamentally shapes that culture.
well, we didn’t.
I think a lot of progressives crave conflict, too, and pay more attention to rhetoric (or the lack of it) than results. A candidate could come along tomorrow to challenge Obama promising progressive ponies and rainbows and many people would follow them just because they liked the words, without any regard for how they’d get Congress to do any of it.
Right.
I’ve had the unfortunate opportunity to deal with a man who is the father of my granddaughter and is impossible to deal with. In researching the laws regarding child custody and parenting rights I ran across the concept of a high conflict personality. The descriptions of this borderline personality disorder perfectly describe the Republican Party.
Driven by fear, the issue isn’t the issue, winning is; everything is all or nothing, there are no gray areas; unwilling to take responsibility, everything is someone else’s fault.
It’s maddening in dealing with an individual let alone an entire political party.
BULLSHIT.
Sorry man, but you said it.
Here’s the deal, Steve. You are right…most Americans do not “know how many government programs he’d like to eliminate and what was written in his newsletters.” And you’d better hope that they don’t learn more about Ron Paul because if they do…and spouting this kind of mainstream media propaganda is the only remaining effective way to stop them from knowing more about him…because if they do then he will be elected President of the United States in November.
“Most Americans” do not really care what was written in his newsletters…stuff that he has clearly and repeatedly repudiated many time over both in word and in deed…and they also would like nothing better than to shut down large parts of this thoroughly corrupt government/corporate/media/military apparatus.
You and the other sympathizers with our current rightiness/centrist/leftiness Uniparty Coalition For Permanent War keep right on spewing the same line. It’s worked so far, although not really as well as you might have hoped. Shine your lame talking points on up because brother…he’s not going away any time soon.
Bet on it.
AG
Did you see his performance in the most recent debate?
He tried to argue that we should have called Pakistan and asked permission to politely arrest the world’s most wanted man who had been living in Pakistan’s West Point for years.
And you think he’s on the cusp of a breakthrough?
Give it a rest.
I think that Ron Paul was right.
“The world’s most wanted man,” eh?
Which world?
Your world, that’s which one.
The rest of the world? Bush II and Cheney are much more “wanted” than is bin Laden.
If he was even real.
If he wasn’t a double or even triple agent.
If he was really killed and buried in such a hideously, blatantly secretive suspicious manner.
If he didn’t write the following words:
What happened to you, Booman?
No more worldwide sense of the morality of things?
Really.
AG
P.S. No, I didn’t see his “performance.” I am tired of the whole reality show scam. He is too, I imagine.
You write:
CBS News says:
Hmmmmm…
And it’s not even February yet.
HMMMMMmmmmm…
I’m telling you…one serious misstep by Romney and it’s Paul vs. Obama.
Or…Paul vs. Obama vs. Romney.
Either way…it’s gonna get interesting.
Soon.
Watch.
AG
Even the execrable Washitclean Post is hedging its bets.
Stalemate.
And of the three possible candidates, who is the least stale?
The one who has been the least overexposed, and the one who has also been most consistent and truthful.
Bet on it.
AG
Quoting the WaPo to support your point now? Hmm…
Only one solution…
NEWSTRIKE!!! MEDIASTRIKE!!!
Come on.
Wake the fuck up.
Even your own sources are cutting their corners. But you guys? You just hold onto your original trance state. I don’t read that shit for content, I simply skim it when an argument erupts. You? It’s your fucking lifeblood.
AG
Haha, yes, it is clearly my lifeblood – that’s why you’ll find so many comments and diaries that I’ve posted where I quote WaPo, NYT, etc. If you’re skimming them, you’re giving them more patronage than me. Maybe I’ve taken the lessons you used to preach more to heart than you have.
I’ve defended you in the past on this site because I appreciate your viewpoint and the way you express your opinion, but you’ve become a parody of yourself with your Ron Paul evangelism. There’s a reason people don’t listen to broken records.
I am repeating myself because this is what I really believe. I have never in my life seen a possible presidential candidate who so agreed with many of my own positions. Not even close. And I have never seen one so dissed by so many areas of the system, either. Coincidence? I think not. You do not like what he is saying? What I am saying? Then you are totally without moral compass or authority as far as I am concerned. You can assuage yourself in the knowledge that you are in the majority here in the United Staes of Omertica, but I’ll say it again…the bad karma that the U.S. has accumulated (and is continuing to accumulate at an exponentially greater and greater rate under the rule of Barack O’Bomber) is eventually going to bring this great nation down.
You can either be part of this process or fight it. I choose to fight. Sue me. You’d probably win because the judiciary is as crooked as is every other part of this system, but I refuse to be a willing part of this destructive course.
Don’t try this at home. Your results may differ, but I flat out guarantee that the end result of this ongoing economic imperialist activity and kleptocratic rule is going to be failure. Just as it has always been, from Egypt right on through all of human history. Empires rise, decay and then fall of their own internal contradictions.
We’re next if we don’t wise up.
So it goes.
Wake the fuck up nor not, as you must. You’ve been warned. Repeatedly. That’s the best that I can do. You either hear it or you don’t, and we will all suffer from your tone deafness eventually. Yourself and your loved ones included.
I recently posted some pictures of maimed Middle Eastern children and asked Booman how he would react to activities of that sort if it was his child in those pictures. I received no answer. That is moral cowardice at the highest level as far as I am concerned. Now I am asking you. How can you support any present candidate except Ron Paul when confronted with the terrible price in that is being paid in human lives across a great swath of North Africa, the Middle East and the rest of the Islamic world? How can you support any candidate for president who himself supports the continuation of that set of policies? It is beyond my comprehension.
At long last, have you no shame?
Guess not.
You’re not alone.
So it goes.
Just as it has always gone.
Down like a motherfucker.
Bet on it.
AG
I can’t speak for anyone else, but my biggest problem with your approach is that you refuse to accept that there is any nuance involved in anything, and claim that everyone else is blind for not seeing things your way. This makes your comments come across as propagandistic zealoutry instead of honest advocacy.
I would be surprised if there is a single person reading this blog who believes that there is ANYONE (let alone out of the current crop of politicians) who could step into the Presidency and take down every issue facing us while also maintaining the highest moral standard. This isn’t just a reflection of the quality of individuals, but a recognition that the world is a complex place.
I suspect that the reason BooMan didn’t respond to your pictures of maimed Middle Eastern children is because the answer is completely obvious; of course everyone thinks that is a terrible thing. Would it be great if someone could throttle down the American empire to the point where this was not happening? Again, of course.
But there are honest questions about a Ron Paul Presidency that need to be weighed against that. Consider that in Ron Paul’s views, just about everything the Federal Government does boils down to stealing from We The People. In a Ron Paul foreign policy, does our funding to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa dry up? The US government is the single largest force in the fight against that terrible epidemic. That is an important question – and if so, begs the further question: would I rather have a President who allows our policy of bombing people in the Middle East to continue, or one that through government cuts allows HIV/AIDS to skyrocket in Africa? That is obviously a much murkier question.
One of the biggest issues that the left seems to have in common with Ron Paul is the drug war. But there are honest questions about that – such as, is scrapping the federal drug war in exchange for 50 different drug policies, some of which will inevitably be even more Draconian in nature, really a good exchange? Maybe yes, maybe no – but it is still a valid question that deserves examination.
These are the types of things I would like to see you honestly address, since you have obviously done your research on Paul. Additionally, I would ask you to consider not just Ron Paul’s positions but how he comes to his conclusions, because while he does have a lot of positions I agree with, I consider his solutions completely unacceptable.
A Response To A Question From ejmw.
Read it and think.
Please.
AG
Cowards all.
Wake the fuck up.
AG
Arthur, you are among the worst advocates for Ron Paul that I have come across on the internet.
Go read YouTube.
Which one(s)?
AG
He said you’re among the worst advocates for RP. While I think that’s true, I believe YouTube has far worse advocates because they can all collectively wank off in every YouTube comment section echo-chamber — even videos having nothing to do with Ron Paul.
I take that as a compliment from a leftiness shmoo.
I really do.
AG
Wow, Arthur, I see you drank a whole pitcher of the Kool-Aid.
I think you need to get out and spend some time with people who aren’t in the cult. Do you a world of good.
I spend all of my time with people who aren’t in any cult, Steve…rightiness, centrist, libertarianism or lefties. I have drunk no Kool -Aid for decades. It’s people who think for themselves rather than swallowing the mass media drivel hook, line and stinker who are propelling the Paulist movement, and it is you who should “get out” more. In the beginning I was astonished to see the breadth and depth of the anti-corporate government movement in the streets, bars, dance halls, stores and restaurants of NYC where I spend much of my time, and I was even more astonished to find it happening in the 20-ish year old group to which my son belongs, in the military and in the working class black and working class white societies as well. In Maine, where I have family? Ron Paul is the only candidate generally being given some respect among many working class people. Bet on it. I have sat around the fire, at the dinner table and at the bar and listened to the discussions.
Get out yourself. Out away from the mass media and out away from your fellow leftiness drones and clones.
You be bettah off.
I am not saying that Ron Paul will necessarily “win” here, just that he has a lot better shot at it than most mainstream Dems give him credit for having, and the movement that he represents will…unless something drastic happens like military rule or a radical upturn in the economy…be an increasingly important part of the political sphere for years to come.
Let the UniParty continue to fuck up, administration after administration no matter what “party” they claim to represent. Keep deluding yourself that someone who signed the NDAA is a “liberal.” The chickens will eventually come home to roost. Bet on it.
Just as they always have.
Just as they always have.
Bet on it.
Later…
AG
I’m not deluding myself about anything. Unlike you, I don’t think an inerrant, perfect person walks among us, or that any particular ideology can bring about utopia. I also know that more kids were sleeping under bridges when we had Paul-style economics in the Gilded Age than have been sleeping under bridges in my lifetime.
But I’m through trying to communicate with your closed mind. I know you’re going to write a long response to this, possibly including another overly large piece of art, but I won’t answer it. At my end, this discussion is over.
No piece of art is “overly” large, Steve.
Bet on it.
AG
Which one(s)?
AG
Everyone is going around saying Romney is a lock for the nomination. To me this is just like the pre-Sunday NFL chatter: a few plausible heuristics and a lot of hot air. We’re talking about South Carolina here. I’ve always thought some buck nasty campaigning from one of Romney’s rivals could turn the race against him. And the best person to do that was always gonna be Newt from just down the road in Georgia. Not saying this will happen, but it’s certainly more likely than most people are allowing. In an extraordinarily weak field, Romney has profited from the feebleness and division of his opponents.
If it is Romney, I remain totally unclear what his path to victory is. Perhaps state by state breakdowns are premature, and 10 months is an eternity, and yes an avalanche of third party spending blah blah blah. But the republican platform is an imploding fail parade, personally Mitt is an self-centered, broad shouldered corporate titan (empty suit syndrome), and his pitch is devoid of any substance other than watered-down teapartyisms or security state blather (a bit like GWB huh). And he’s not facing Gore. He’s facing Barack Obama. Non-crazy people like and respect Obama. And all the money in the world won’t turn new coke into something people want. People can smell crap precisely in its being oversold.
To me it seems like Romney’s strategy has been to campaign less, to say less than nothing about most immediate issues, let the other candidates get a reputation for extremity. I mean every time Mitt weighs in on something he either sounds like an extremist or a gutless waffler. And this Romney will get known through a presidential campaign. The more people see the less they will want whatever mush he’s pushing. Obviously a three sided pincer of vote suppression, unlimited corporate agitprop, and congressional economic sabotage could be fatal to Obama’s campaign. But nobody knows if that will really work. As far as straight-up campaigning Obama will have considerably more energy. And I’m just convinced that the American people know this isn’t an election about nothing like 2000. Their welfare is on the line. And I just don’t believe people will fall for this” small business/free enterprise” rag if that is so. Republicans would like to think people have forgotten all about private gentlemen G. W. Bush. I don’t think they have.
The same thing it was yesterday, a week ago, and six months ago.
Winning everywhere that isn’t the South.
If you’re a voter in Nevada or Michigan or New Jersey, who are you going with one-on-one, Romney or Newt Gingrich? Or Romney vs. Santorum?
Romney is not the base candidate. He won’t win the base states. He will win because his true base opponents are uniformly terrible, managerially incompetent, viscerally unpleasant to be around, and toxic outside the south.
I’m sorry, I meant in the general election.
Oh. Well, your first paragraph was all about the primary.
The answer is that Romney doesn’t have a path to win the general. He doesn’t even have an electoral path to replicating McCain’s performance in 2008.
Barring unforeseen exigencies, Obama is likely to win all of his swing states from 2008, plus seriously contend in Mississippi, Missouri, and Georgia, and be outright favored to win Arizona. Right now, if Romney can hold Obama to under 400 EV in November, he will have outperformed what his party should theoretically be capable of given their complete antipathy towards people of color.
Mississippi? Really? Not asking that to mock your statement – I hadn’t heard that and am genuinely curious.
I don’t remember where I saw the analysis, but McCain only got 54% of the vote in Mississippi in 08.
I believe Obama lost the white vote there 90-10. Seriously. 90-10. So if I remember right, if he can win only 1 out 6 white votes, instead of 1 out 10, the election becomes almost 50/50.
MS is a tiny state with a humongous black minority. It may not happen, but it’s doable.
Wow. I never doubted a black person could become President in my lifetime, but… a black person winning Mississippi???? Now that’s something!
Georgia, maybe; I haven’t seen how many voters have been registered since ’08. Missouri will definitely be in play. But Mississippi? I’d say Obama is much more likely to win in Montana than Mississippi. He didn’t do that bad in ’08 there, and for a while I thought he might steal it.
I also don’t think Obama will win Indiana this year.
Republicans would like to think people have forgotten all about private gentlemen G. W. Bush. I don’t think they have.
Well, they did in 2010.
Mid-terms are a different electorate sadly.
This deserves to be repeated. In spite of all the crap that’s been thrown at him, Obama is the most popular politician in the country.
Actually think I recently read that the most popular politician in the country is Hillary Clinton.
Hillary Clinton isn’t a politician right now. She is in a non-partisan role as Secretary of State. If she got back into the political arena, her approval ratings would drop like a rock.
The point is not how Romney gets there, the point is that no one else appears to have a reasonable path to victory. He wins by simply standing around long enough.
Are Repubs so delusional that they think Obama will just sit and take it from Romney in the general debates???
I know, I know…SATSQ but still!
Here’s Obama in TIME talking to Fareed Zakaria.
President Obama: Romney Foreign Policy Attacks Will Wither in `Serious Debate’
“they just like fighting.”
It’s the Scots-Irish in ’em.