I guess there was a little time-delay in this becoming news, but it is one more reminder that it is going to be painful to watch Mitt Romney try to rally the conservative movement to his side during the convention in August and throughout the fall. The people just don’t like him.
But at a June 30 fundraiser in Wheeling, W.Va., Speaker John Boehner offered a surprisingly frank assessment of the dynamic that surprised some in the audience.
Aside from Romney’s “friends, relatives and fellow Mormons,” Boehner said, most people will be motivated to vote for him in opposition to Obama.
The Ohio Republican made the remarks when an unidentified woman asked during a question-and-answer session: “Can you make me love Mitt Romney?”
“No,” Boehner said. “Listen, we’re just politicians. I wasn’t elected to play God. The American people probably aren’t going to fall in love with Mitt Romney. I’ll tell you this: 95 percent of the people that show up to vote in November are going to show up in that voting booth, and they are going to vote for or against Barack Obama.
“Mitt Romney has some friends, relatives and fellow Mormons … some people that are going to vote for him. But that’s not what this election is about. This election is going to be a referendum on the president’s failed economic policies.
First of all, could it be any clearer that Speaker Boehner has absolutely no interest in doing anything that will improve the economy?
Second, by suggesting that no more than five percent of the electorate is going to show up to vote for Romney, and that most of that five percent will either be Romney’s coreligionists and/or members of his extended family, Boehner is basically saying that no one likes the guy.
Republicans generally don’t like their presidential candidates (Reagan and the younger Bush being the exceptions), but then Republicans are also consistent failures at electing candidates that they don’t like.
I have this recurring image of Romney as the Chevy Chase character in National Lampoon’s Vacation. But, if Clark Griswold hadn’t chugged beers with his son and chased Christie Brinkley around, if he’d strapped a dog to the roof of his car instead of his dead Aunt Edna, I don’t think anyone would have watched.
Booman,
You got the emPHAsis on the wrong sylLABle.
I don’t think much of most of the R “politicians”. They are either whiny little bitches that got elected during a period of artificial boom economics on platforms ranging from “I got mine, screw you” to “just plain screw you” OR they got elected when the old white people got mad that a ni uhhhhhh BLACK guy got elected. They have no political sense.
Having said that, there are exceptions. Two of which are John Boehner and Mitch McConnell. That both of these guys think it will hurt nothing to say these things is indicative that it WON’T. Which I happen to believe.
My opinion now (and in the past) is that barring an economic meltdown the election is essentially set. Most of the sites that I have seen show pretty much that Romney has to run the table of not “strong or heavily leans to” to defeat Obama and that that probably won’t happen.
that would make: facile.
Golly gee, if it’s that much of a sure thing, why bother to vote.
Golly, geewhiz, I’m not sure, TarHeel, maybe just to piss off the right?
Give me a break. You look at the maps, you look at the polls and you say what is obvious: Without a significant change in the playing field, Obama wins. I assure you complacency in the D column would be a significant change.
Sheesh. Grow up.
I just want to discourage complacency both at the top and the bottom of the ballot. Obama could win but complacency could mean an even more ungovernable Congress.
I’ve grown up. So accuse me of being in my dotage.
There was nothing I or you could do about complacency of the liberal “don’t worry, we’ve got the courts” assholes when I was in Mississippi/Texas/Alabama for 24 years. There just isn’t much you can do about complancency, period. Certainly not on a blog.
I can, however, show some good news so that types like you (and I used to be) who are up to their eyebrows in lying pigshit reactionary fundies can maybe prevent the doom and gloom types from causing a depressed complacency: it’ll all turn out bad no matter what you try to do.
I can’t tell if you’re in your dotage, but then I’ve lived in NC, also. Its enough to make you old quick.
Where in NC. IMHO the top candidate for “make you old quick” is Fort Bragg.
Raleigh. The first time I got thrown out of a house for miscegination was in Raleigh. I admitted to dating a woman of chinese descent.
And also a 12 week sojourn in hell called Camp Swampy (Geiger).
You might find Raleigh and Durham more congenial now. In fact, in most areas of NC interracial dating is no longer a big deal. There are a few diehard landlords here and there who won’t rent to inter-racial couples but even those folks are much older than me. Most corporate rentals like the color green.
North Carolina is a very diverse state now. What you experience depends on where you are. All of the major urban areas are congenial. And the backwater and backwoods rural areas that aren’t are identifiable (local folks in cities in the various regions of NC can tell you where the bigot nests are) and relatively few–even though most rural counties vote for dingbat Republicans.
Don’t know about Camp Swampy; skeeters and humidity in that area don’t change much. And it’s definitely hotter.
Polls are too close in most swing states, and it’s still too far out from election day to get complacent about O’s chances.
Complacency and apathy are what helped give us the current House that we have. So anyone who expresses anything that encourages an overly optimistic view at this juncture should expect a certain degree of chastising.
Nothing is written. The election has not occurred. Romney can easily run the table if people believe that he must run the table and get complacent. We could be attacked. Gas could be driven up up up by speculative efforts of the Kochs and their fascist buddies. Much can and will happen.
Probabilistic scenarios only hold if conditions do not change, and conditions will change. Who would ever have believed that Roberts would uphold the mandate by calling it a tax?
I don’t see where you get the idea that Romney would have to run the table to win.
I was looking at the Real Clear Politics election map the other day. They have 11 states as toss-ups, and I decided to try their interactive map and assign the states according to my gut feelings, and Romney ends up winning.
There is one toss-up in the Northeast, which is New Hampshire. I gave it to Obama.
There are three toss-ups in the South, Florida, NC, and VA. I gave FL and NC to Romney and VA to Obama.
There are two toss-ups in the West, NM and CO. I gave them both to Obama.
There are five toss-ups in the Midwest — MO, OH, WI, MI, and IA. I gave Michigan to Obama, and the rest to Romney.
So, I ended up splitting the states 6 to Romney, 5 to Obama, and that was enough for Romney to win.
In deference to the avoid complacency at all costs crowd, I will caveat the comment by saying that all politics is local and things can change swiftly … but I will add that they don’t HAVE to change quickly.
First off, RCP is the worst map of the lot. It is, however, the easiest to mess with so all else being equal:
I agree with you. NH, CO, NV are pretty well considered Obama safe for now.
Obama is slightly ahead currently in VA, FL, and slightly behind in NC according to the HuffPo average of the polls of June. It is not unreasonable to think that Obama will pull one of the lot out.
I disagree with your analysis of Wisconsin. I think it is pretty safe Obama (all else being equal) especially since about 18% of the people who voted for Scott said they would be voting for Obama.
If I have the map correct, by adding Wisconsin to your Obama side, Obama wins.
NH, WI, MI, VA — its all Obama needs.
This totally ignores Ohio where Obama is still slightly ahead in the aggregate polls even ignoring the Quipinniac poll puttting him 14 points ahead.
All the rest is not enough for Romney, He needs to convert one of the four.
As with the caveat at the top, things can change and can change fast. But remember, things can change for the better, also. Especially with Romney and Co. being forced to open their mouths for more than breathing.
I live in Wisconsin, and I don’t think Obama will carry the state, though if he does, and all my other hunches are correct, Obama would win the election.
The Democrats have lost every statewide election (and there have been a lot of them) in Wisconsin in the last two years. The whole state outside of Milwaukee and Madison is seriously trending red. The outlook for Tammy Baldwin’s senate race is bleak. I just don’t believe that voters will suddenly flip in the Presidential race.
There are other reasons to think that 2012 will continue the Republican streak in Wisconsin. Unless voter ID is blocked by the courts, there are going to be depressed numbers for minority and student voters. Given how Obama stiffed the state in the recall election, I can’t imagine enthusiasm is going to be very high for Obama among Democratic volunteers. Obama better win in Ohio, because if he’s counting on Wisconsin to put him over the top, he’s in trouble.
I believe Griswold’s dog, Dinky, would rather have been strapped to the roof of the car, rather than tied to the rear bumper and dragged along behind the car to the point only the collar was left.
That wasn’t Griswold’s dog; it was Aunt Edna’s.
A significant portion of whom are Mormons that are accustomed to tithing. The remainder are generally well-heeled and will benefit further from Romneyomics. Monetizing this enthusiastic support base at a mere $200/head is $1.5 billion. Not enough to make Romney likeable, but …
Wow. What on earth was Boehner elected for? The party of No is going all out to lose with statements like that. AG’s “the fix is in” rings truer every day.