"A telling moment occurred when Sarah Palin stole the spotlight by taking her bus tour to New Hampshire on the day that Romney was officially kicking off his candidacy there. He lost the battle of the headlines as the Manchester Union Leader splashed Palin on the front page and ran Romney’s announcement inside the paper. But he remains the front-runner—though his staff recoils from the term—and she remains a long-shot celebrity with high negatives."
Howard Kurtz. The article is called "Mitt Romney, Boring Genius?" I think the suggestion is not that Romney is a genius but he's boring. It's that he's a genius at being boring.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
९४ टिप्पण्या:
Oh yeah. Nine percent unemployment, soaring gas prices, kinetic military actions, crippling debt, that's the exciting stuff.
Obama! Obama!
Mitt has no shot. Fake Conservative. Romneycare will not be tolerated.
If Romney is a genius at being boring, what is Palin a genius at?
Can you be a "polarizing genius?"
Palin is a genius at setting the agenda in the political arena.
Drill, baby, drill! is a powerful statement that will win the battle over the long haul. Americans aren't too keen on being poor or on abandoning the mobility of gas powered cars.
(The Crypto Jew)
Can you be a "polarizing genius?"
Gee, PB& J: Karl Marx, Mao Tse Tung, Jesus Christ all come to mind quickly…how about Copernicus or Newton? Or Einstein or Max Planck? Or is your definition of “genius” that the preachments are SO “obviously” true, that there is no debate…Get a clue.
Just remember Mitt, like McCain is “Electable.”
(The Crypto Jew)
Can you be a "polarizing genius?"
At least Mitt is a “Natural Born Citizen.” Of course ANYONE will beat Obama, because he won’t be on the ballot in 2012, because there is a sooper-sekrit plan to dis-allow his candidacy…be vewy, vewy kwiet ‘bout this though…..
I just have the feeling that over the long haul Palin will figure out how to counter the hatred of the press and that she will win.
The press is employing a "Brer Rabbit" strategy in trying to force Republicans to nominate a candidate acceptable to the press.
"Don't you dare nominate a real conservative, or you'll be trounced!" the press keeps saying.
Palin or Bachmann, or somebody, is eventually going to figure out how to defeat this strategy.
The press said the same thing about Reagan. He was supposed to be unelectable because the press hated him. I'm old enough to remember.
Romney isn't unpopular because of his boringness, but rather his continued adherence to the socialist/environmental shibboleths of taxpayer funded medical care and global warming.
While this is mentioned in the article, it is waved away by both Romeny operatives and the Kurtz.
They are misreading center-right opinion on this matter, especially concerning what has transpired under President Obama and the negative reaction to it, especially by centrists who were taken in by Obamas above-it-all bullshit ridden Presidential campaign.
Romneys continuing support for those two leftwing ideas is a huge issue with a huge swath of his potential voters, as the crossover of the GOP "big tent" risides in the fiscal realm, which are being negatively impacted by the implementation of both recently. Thats why no one is excited about him.
Is Romney from the same town as John Wayne?
(The Crypto Jew)
Is Romney from the same town as John Wayne?
Do you want him to be? If there’s a significant amount of polling data suggesting that “John Wayne” is popular Romney will tell you he’s from there….
If Romney is a genius at being boring, what is Palin a genius at?
Even if I have serious problems with her electability, you have to give her credit for keeping the administration on their rhetorical heals during the Obamacare months. Right or wrong, she kept the initiative on her side.
Romney is a Republican successful in a very blue state and his background reflects the choices necessary for a Republican to win under those circumstances.
Unfortunately for him, the choices that were necessary for him to win in Massachusetts will prevent him from winning nationally.
Nothing will change that. Republicans will not repeat the McCain mistake.
I thought Pawlenty was the boring one and Romney was--oh, which one was he again? It's so hard keeping the media memes on Republican candidates straight. Bachmann is the crazy one. Cain is the black and therefore marginal one. Oh, and Hunstman is the serious one: a true maverick, unencumbered by party ideology. The media hasn't swooned for a Republican like that since...well, since John McCain!
Romney is a believer in the 1980s when the USA was still the global Hegemon and the only safe place in the world to buy assets in strong dollars where they would not be stolen. The times they have changed, Mr. Mitt. Why don't you go and run for Premier of China now? In the meantime let Americans elect us a fighter as our President after four years with an anti-American fighting against us from within the White House we need a big change...not just a small compromised improvement.
I'm also troubled by the subtle injection of race into this profile on Romney. "Plain-vanilla." That's code for "white." It'd be like calling Obama "exotic-chocolate." The last straw will be any mention of Romney's ears. Then we'll know Kurtz is pandering to the knuckle-dragging factions of the Democratic party that is terrified to see another white man as President.
Sorry to go all Carol Herman on you guys.
Using that same construct, is Obama the plain chocolate candidate?
RACIST!!!
WV: drove - yep, right off the cliff...
pbAndj said...
If Romney is a genius at being boring, what is Palin a genius at?
Can you be a "polarizing genius?"
6/28/11 11:48 AM
Obama. A polarizing moron. Compared to Obama Palin is a genius. Compared to Obama Bozo The Clown is a genius. Hell compared to Obama you're a genius.
Republicans will not repeat the McCain mistake.
Romney is not nearly as bad as McCain (altho granted, that's a low bar). That's why most conservatives supported him over McCain in 2008.
Lest we be reminded, Romney ran last time and lost. To a dead in water McCain.
His only shot is to appeal to liberals.
Knock yourself out-
"Hey, I'm similar to Obama, in a good way-...but, I'm not like Obama....in a good way"
Good luck, champ.
I love the cartoon that shows Mitt speaking out of 7 mouths on his head, and it is captioned, "Stop me if I say anything you like."
Tim Pawlenty is thinking about calling a press conference to assert that he's more boring than Romney. But that would draw attention to himself, so he'll decide not to.
Three days later, he'll tell an interviewer that he really wished he had called that press conference.
Is Romney from the same town as John Wayne?
The question is, does he have a 6th Sense
Especially when handing out this nation's highest award...
That is Tim Pawlenty's problem. He is one of the most competent Republicans running, yet it's hard to get excited about him.
That is one advantage Democrats have. Their highest profile people are the ones who make loud speeches talking about how they are going to get the corporations and will send more money and free stuff to everyone.
It's a lot harder to make a firery speach about reforming the tax system and businesses regulation.
Now the Michelle Bachmann is getting a little traction in her quest (not that it will get that far), the MSM is upped their war on her.
CBS News is going after the 23 foster children she took in.
Other than Pat Buchanan or possibly Ron Paul there is no conceivable candidate that the republicans can nominate that would be as bad a president never mind worse than Obama. Not possible. So no matter who gets the nomination the republican candidate has a better than even chance of winning. And this time the conservatives who sat out the 2008 election won't make that mistake again.
cuban..good point. First, yes Pat B and Ron Paul would be disasters.
I am rather conservative, but even I have to draw the line at some point.
I'll take vanilla over the current serving of Rocky Road.
Howard Kurtz cannot be taken seriously when writing about politics.
Mitt is exactly what a lot of us are tired of - beta conservative.
I'll vote for him if I have to. That's his ticket.
Romney is probably a great CEO but he is not a great politician. He is okay (he did manage to get elected in Massachusetts which took some Scott Brownish talent, but like Scott Brown it is hard to be even a mainstream Republican in a very left state.
So running for national office as a Republican from that experience background just forces one to look like a flip floppin fish at the bottom of the boat.
I look forward to seeing Herman Cain appearing on a debate stage with Mittie. Cain says what he says with an enthusiasm that makes Mittie sound like he is asleep. Once Palin gets on the stage, then Romney's act will fade away.
The point is not excitement. The point is clarity. Romney is neither fish nor fowl. The Republican establishment probably wants a nominee who is a smear instead of an exclamation point but only a Palin! or a Bachmann! will win because only they will oppose the current disaster CLEARLY!
Palin = Genius at making liberals look like fools.
She gets their full attention, their enthusiastic cooperation, and they don't even know it happened.
Genius!
Sorry to go all Carol Herman on you guys.
Nah, you actually made sense.
A lot of people see Romney as a Trojan horse, like McCain was. Wheeled up to the door by the liberal media.
He is every liberal's favorite Republican. Remind you of anyone?
I don't know in what universe cubanbob lives but Ron Paul would make a great president because constitutional governance would FINALLY be back in a Paul administration.
I think that Romney could win the general election, but doubt his ability to win the nomination.
In the end, I think that the Tea Party elements will kill his candidacy. They can never trust him - except as the lesser of two evils compared with Obama.
What is too bad is that the Republicans did their normal thing in 2008, and nominated the guy who ran before - McCain. And, 2008 was the election where Romney would have done fairly well. He had everything that Obama had, except for half his ancestry being black, and then better - two Harvard graduate degrees instead of one, real understanding of economics, real jobs, plenty of crony capitalism friends, probably as tall, etc.
So, having come decently close last time, it would seem to be Romney's turn (Huckleberry came closer, but that was because Romney did the right thing and bowed out when it looked like McCain was inevitable, and Huckleberry stuck in after that quite a bit picking up the not-McCain votes).
But this isn't going to be a normal election. I expect that the fiscal conservatives and Tea Partiers will determine the nominee because of their fervor, and their choice is not going to be Romney.
I don't know in what universe cubanbob lives but Ron Paul would make a great president because constitutional governance would FINALLY be back in a Paul administration.
Only with a like-minded Congress. Give him Pelosi/Reid and he'd be hamstrung as he wouldn't have much support on the RINO side either.
I'll vote for him if I have to. That's his ticket.
It's "Get Drunk and Vote for McCain" all over again. No support from the conservative base--which spelled McCain's doom almost immediately.
When, in September of 2008, I noticed more Bush/Cheney 2004 bumper stickers than McCain 2008 stickers, I knew he lost. If we pick another stinker of a candidate it'll be a 2008 repeat.
If the stupid party is still picking candidates, the way they picked McCain, god help them.
On the other hand, given that Sarah Palin resonates with a goodly number of voters who have no powers within the elites country club tent) ... I'll venture to guess we've seen "ONE NATION" ... as a flag that could become an Independent party ticket?
Nobody thought Ross Perot could form a UNITED WE STAND ticket ... in all 50 states. But he did!
So many of today's candidates are just like Anthony Weiner. They stand for election because they've got the insider's ability to get themselves nominated.
Sheep vote.
But sometimes?
Those sheep don't vote.
Sometimes? People just sit on their hands.
2012 won't be like that, though!
Both the democrapic party and the stupid party should all just go and plotz!
I would not trust Kurtz's genius-detector. He and his MSM pals thought candidate Obama was a sooper genius.
I don't care about exciting. I care about fiscal conservatism and electability. In this particular election, that's all I care about.
I take that back. I care equally about the ability to communicate fiscal conservatism.
This election should be about two messages:
1) I'm gonna take care of you.
OR
2) I'm gonna set you free.
Problem we have as a nation is that the first one is very attractive to too many Americans. More than ever.
Of course they are both lies in reality, but as principles they result in very different government and a very different people.
I know which people I want to share a nation with.
I am tired of Howard Kurtz and others like him asserting that Palin has "high negatives". Perhaps she does among those at their cocktail parties, but not among the throngs of voters at her every stop.
Howard, how has the largest crowds today in Pella, Iowa? Wouldn't a person with "high negatives" drive people away? And be ignored by the media?
Instead of boasting about how well he can work with Democrats, Romney needs to start assuring Republican primary voters that he's prepared to implement the policies necessary to forestall and reverse economic disaster in the face of Democratic opposition. And he for sure needs to stop bragging about working with Ted Kennedy on RomneyCare. Talk about a twofer guaranteed to set a conservative's teeth on edge.
And, yeah, he's pretty boring, but I don't really care about that.
This is a quandary. Palin has something of the quality of a four-car accident. Everybody rubbernecks. Romney is a safe driver.
Huckabee is a safe driver even though he's chatty. It makes the time go faster and you don't know how short and (increasingly) round he is.
Willard Mitt Romney, the media's favorite Republican? Yet another collaborationist jackwagon who's going around the country bragging about how he can "work with Democrats?" No, no, a thousand times no.
Forget "get drunk and vote for McCain." If Romney gets the nod, I'll vote for Little Black Jesus, because if the GOP is hell-bent on driving the country off a cliff, then I'll help jam my foot down on the accelerator.
Mitt ain't out because he's boring. He's out because he thinks governing is putting your finger to the wind.
Now comes the question I've asked a billion times:
How is it possible that so many writers who can't see the obvious (like this one) have jobs "informing" us?
If you ask me, there's more than one kind of Affirmative-Action we need to eliminate around here.
Romney is neither cold nor hot. So because he is lukewarm, I will spew him out of my mouth. You can build your filthy world without me.
"Even though Palin hasn’t been to Iowa since last November, she’s had an unofficial presence in the state for months now. Led by Peter Singleton, a California native, a group of Palin supporters have traveled all across the state meeting with county Republican officials and other GOP activists.
Singleton insists that he has no connection to Palin, but one cannot overlook what he and the others who are touting Palin across the state have done for her in Iowa. Singleton has crisscrossed the state meeting with activists and operatives alike. I chatted with him months ago and came away impressed. His understanding of Iowa and the caucus process here is impressive for an outsider.
Singleton and his team of Palin organizers have personally met with most of the county GOP chairs across the state. That is something that none of the current presidential campaigns can say that they have done. Instead of selling Iowa activists on Palin, they instead make sure that people understand that there is a possibility that Palin will run.
The Palin organizers also soak up any Iowa political knowledge they can get. A couple of weeks ago, I was speaking to a conservative breakfast club in western Iowa. After conversing with those in attendance for an hour or so, I noticed that one of the women was taking extensive notes. I was worried that I might have missed the fact that a reporter was present at the meeting. It wasn’t a reporter. It was a Palin organizer who I had yet to meet."
"In many ways, I think that Palin is probably more organized in Iowa in terms of grassroots communication than most of the current field."
"If I’ve learned one thing during my political career, it’s that nothing is a coincidence in politics. Grassroots organizers, a movie premier, and a visit by Palin herself to Iowa makes this feel more like the start of presidential campaign than just a random visit."
The Iowa Republican
Craig Robinson serves as the founder and Editor-in-Chief of TheIowaRepublican.com. Prior to founding Iowa's largest conservative news site, Robinson served as the Political Director of the Republican Party of Iowa during the 2008 Iowa Caucuses
That was the Book of Revelations via "Gangs of New York", BTW.
(The Crypto Jew)
Mitt ain't out because he's boring. He's out because he thinks governing is putting your finger to the wind.
To illuminate not castigate…”not entirely.” Romney says that he got together with the best brains he could find, examined Massachusetts’s Health Care “Problems” and the result was “ObamneyCare.” Romney is a Technocrat, who falls for the Technocratic/Keynesian Conventional Wisdom of the Day. It was NOT “obvious” to the best and brightest that the Individual Mandate was necessary, but to a CERTAIN SET of the best and Brightest it was….and Romney’s “thinking” on this issue is what I object to.
Romney wants “to do something” about problems, and believes that the Government is the Agent to “do” those things….the answer to the problem is some kind of “efficient” or “effective” government action…Sorry Willard, not buying that World View.
Lastly, Romney won’t forsake RomneyCare…THIS is the Hill he’s gonna die on? His ego says this is the issue he can’t flip-flop on? There’s great discernment and judgment.
bagoh20: A lot of people see Romney as a Trojan horse, like McCain was. Wheeled up to the door by the liberal media.
I suppose the liberal media has been donating money to his campaign, too, eh?
"Gangs of New York." Great book, lousy movie, despite Daniel Day-Lewis. And I say this as a Scorsese fan.
"I suppose the liberal media has been donating money to his campaign, too?"
Don't underestimate the number of spineless milquetoasts in the GOP who apologize for being icky conservatives - "no, I'm a Rockefeller Republican, not some teabagger hillbilly."
"I suppose the liberal media has been donating money to his campaign, too, eh?"
In-kind contributions, mostly.
Free propaganda to nudge the elephant towards Mitt.
Romney is going after the disenchanted Obama voter, and that may be a winning strategy.
"I suppose the liberal media has been donating money to his campaign, too, eh?"
Of course not. Why would you donate money to pay for what you can give for free.
Joe said:
"Lastly, Romney won’t forsake RomneyCare…THIS is the Hill he’s gonna die on? His ego says this is the issue he can’t flip-flop on? There’s great discernment and judgment."
I think this is half true. He has not disavowed all of it, but he did say something like that Obama should have talked to him and asked what worked and what didn't in MA. I think a better tack for Mitt would be the truth: The MA statehouse would have passed something even worse without his input and it would have been veto proof.
Michael Haz
I am tired of Howard Kurtz and others like him asserting that Palin has "high negatives".
He doesn't assert it. It's simply true. All poling data show this trend with Palin. The only people who like her are right wing conservative Republicans. That is not a very big demographic.
Most Americans are moderate leaning at any one time one way or another. Hence the reason Romney has a better chance against Obama if he could get past the primary.
Michael;
I am tired of Howard Kurtz and others like him asserting that Palin has "high negatives". Perhaps she does among those at their cocktail parties, but not among the throngs of voters at her every stop.
Would you expect those who are non-plussed by her to show up at her bus stops?
I know her followers have great enthusiasm but that will IMHO not overcome the strong "mixed emotions" of many Republicans and many independants.
And can we discuss the Palin candidacy only at that point in time when she actually declares.
This is starting to take on a Mario Cuomo vibe.
(The Crypto Jew)
like that Obama should have talked to him and asked what worked and what didn't in MA. I think a better tack for Mitt would be the truth: The MA statehouse would have passed something even worse without his input and it would have been veto proof.
1) Very D@mned little of RomneyCare has “worked”, the number of uninsured isn’t drastically smaller, the costs are dramatically greater and the waiting times to see a physician have skyrocketed.
2) So, in order to “do” something, Romney is going to argue, “Well Romney cares S*cks, but General Assembly Care would s*ck worse!”? Really that’s a selling point, Pelosi and Reid would have done worse, so I’ll substitute a LESS WORSE ALTERNATIVE? How about this instead, Romney proposes a REAL solution, The MA GA over-rides him, and then it’s not his hot potato it’s the General Assembly’s? But instead, Romney has to show he can “reach across the aisle” and ”get things done” even if in reaching across the aisle and “doing things” he bankrupts MA. Well then sign me up for this Campaign and Presidency.
But Thank Yhwh he’s “Electable”!
If Rick Perry does jump in, Milton, Last Of The RINOs, is headed back for SLC, or Baaston, wherever he lives these days.
As for Miss Sarah's electability, if we're in the same boat we are a year from now - and that's the good scenario - a lot of people will be surprised how electable she became.
(again, I don't think she'll go. I think she'll wait until all the girls are out of high school)
Palin's got to overcome those high negative favorability ratings to prove that she is electable.
Matt said: The only people who like her are right wing conservative Republicans. That is not a very big demographic.
It was sufficient toe elect Roanld Reagan twice, his "high negatives" notwithstanding.
But then, I still don't think she's running this time.
*to* not *toe*
Does Howard Kurtz ever talk about Barack Obama's "high negatives"?
In 1979, Reagan was at 38 favorable/39 unfavorable. Palin's at 52-59, depending on the pollster.
Also, Reagan was Reagan, and Palin is Palin.
Oops, sorry. 52-59 unfavorable. 21-38 favorable.
I like Palin a lot, but Reagan was one of the most brilliant orators of the 20th century. There is no comparison.
There is no comparison.
They are both bipeds, not that there's anything wrong with that.
Yes, I admit to scrolling past some of Carol Herman's longer comments; but, I think she has been receiving some ungentlemanly characterizations the past few days. I say this as I believe she does offer the occasional unique insight to the conversation and deserves respect in having her voice heard much as any other.
Yeah, I know, who the hell am I.
Joe, from a tactical point of view there is no flaw to your analysis. Romney would be in great shape if he had done that.
The problem with Romney is that he actually cares about Massachusetts. Sure, it would be great for him and Republicans in the state to be able to blame the Democrats for a monstrous healthcare plan, but then MASS would be stuck with that plan. Bad as the current plan is, it is not as bad as it could have been.
This may kill his chances for the presidency, but he at least slightly decreased the speed at which this state is circling the drain.
Out of those who are officially in the race now, if not Romney, who?
Though one is not officially in it yet.
Perry/Bachmann.
Not saying that's my pick. But I do think it would be a strong ticket that would draw independents.
Hoosier - "Oh yeah. Nine percent unemployment, soaring gas prices, kinetic military actions, crippling debt, that's the exciting stuff.
Obama! Obama!"
Echo Hoosier. The last thing the Republicans need is an inexperienced exciting candidate that throws out red meat to the true believers - but doesn't have a clue on how to lead a nation as it's chief executive.
The media pines for a quotable "New Obama" to come out of the Republican ranks, and Romney is not that.
But I think the mood of the country is they want a Fixer, not another empty suit or empty skirt "Inspirer" that wants to doubledown on Bush foreign policy and Bush supply side economics/grow government...debt is irrelevant...sort of leader.
I think Americans are ready for a guy that says he will keep an open mind about global warming and doesn't take the stance that it is all a hoax and even if it isn't Jesus will intervene and keep us cool - or the Green Nazi opposite that it is a Catastrophy that justified imposing socialist controls over anything the masses decide to do.
They are ready for someone that will think and change a position if they were wrong to start with - rather than insist that anyone who was not locked into their beliefs and policies back in grade school days is a "Flip Flopper".
And challenge sacred cows like American health care, and health insurance industry, and Big Pharma is perfect and nothing needs to be changed other than "tort reform"
Though neither one is officially in it yet.
Goldwater/Reagan.
They clearly demonstrated their conservative bona fides at the convention in '64
Challenge for Republicans...how to get the zealots to understand electable is better than a losing "Right of Goldwater& Jerry Falwell True Believer who SENDS a MESSAGE to Obama!!" (before his next 4 years as President starts).
(See the impact of the Messages!! Sharron Angle and Perky Christine O'Donnell delivered.)
That was well said Luther. Thanks for sticking up for another commenter.
I usually end up doing that so it is great to see someone else do it.
Michael Haz
Palin is no Reagan. First, she is further to the right and seems less capable of engaging the media. Say what you want by Reagan engaged the media - they didn't love him as they did Clinton but they after a while they accepted his avuncular personality.
Second, Palin only has the aww-shucks-I'm-just-a-regular-American-mom thing but it doesn't work for most Americans who see her as not too bright and appealing to only a very few.
Also the media was not harsh on Reagan until after he was elected. By then it didn't matter. Also note Reagan was much closer to a Rino then most conservatives will ever admit.
Luther...Aren't you that troublesome monk from Wittenberg? We are going to have to burn you and Carol Herman at the stake for posts with two many theses.
Ok, Luther... If Trooper likes you then you can't be all that bad...but don't let York know if you are a reporter or a lawyer, or God Forbid... a reporter who practices law.
I'm loath to agree with Mick, *Spit* *Spit*
Romney's has no shot. The media will launch a vicious attack against Mormonism to take him out when they sense he's the front runner.
btw- Did you see Stephanopoulos threaten Michele Bachmann?
Stephanopoulos "Finally one—one final question. I think one of the most impressive things that people find in your background is the fact that you and your husband have helped raise 23 foster children and I know you want to shield them but are they prepared and are you prepared for the loss of privacy that comes with the president campaign? And is that something you are concerned about for them?"
Nice family you got there lady, pity if something were to happen to them...Goon journalism at its finest.
@Matt
...seems less capable of engaging the media.
What? Palin can't fart without the media "engaging".
Do you really think they wouldn't cover her 24x7 if she were the nominee? Palin is probably the only potential candidate who could eclipse Obama in the media.
Thanks Trooper. I once had the good fortune to shake Mr. Wayne's' hand. A big man he. Fingers big around as a silver dollar, all else to match.
TG. That might be a step too far, like. But a thanks is plenty enough. And no, not a lawyer or a reporter, nor a reporter who practices law... but you left one out, how about a lawyer who practices reporting.
Oh, in the world of ideas the more theses the better I think. To hell with that stake.
Mitt will be nominated. He's the the Republican party's dream candidate. Its his turn. He's both pro-life AND pro-choice. He's for Obama care and against it. He's for Amnesty and against it.
He's boring and has no charisma. But he's not 'extreme'. He's safe. He's got executive hair. He's so gosh darn moderate.
He's Jerry Ford II. He will be nominated.
Its funny how even a Romney post turns into a debate over Palin. But don't worry Romney fans. The idea that the party of Jerry Ford, Bush I, McCain, and Bob "where's the outrage" Dole will nominate someone as popular as Palin is laughable.
People forget that 45 percent of Republicans didn't want Reagan in 1980, they wanted Bush I or Jerry Ford.
"First, she is further to the right and seems less capable of engaging the media. Say what you want by Reagan engaged the media - "
I don't think Palin is nearly as conservative as many think. She's definitely on the right, but she's not extreme or anything.
And she engages the media all the time. Facebook, twitter, op eds. It's not 1979 anymore, and the way Reagan or Clinton did it is not the way to do it anymore. Palin is one of a few candidates who get that.
Over and over, she just tweets her point and the media has to fall over itself.
And let me be clear: I'm not a Palin voter. But I do think she gets the media a hell of a lot better than even more of the media get it. She's not bothering with battles she can't possibly win, which serve entirely to establish the establishment. She's just talking to people.
Vanilla is still the most popular flavor of ice cream.
All the people claiming he's a RINO or not conservative are ignoring his record in favor of two claims:
1. That he flipped on abortion; and
2. That he favors Obamacare or something like it.
The first claim is vexed and largely irrelevant and the second is just false.
The main thing to remember about him is that he's one of the best managers in the country and that he knows how to cut spending and reorganize organizations to eliminate deficits, waste and restore them to a sound financial basis.
Personally, I think that fixing this mess will only come about if there's a fundamental change in the attitude of the American people toward the federal government changes permanently. If we elect leaders who change things, but don't stay behind them, it won't matter in the long run.
Of the current field, Romney has the best shot because he's been organizing and laying the foundation for a successful campaign for four years, and he has a big lead in fund raising. I think all the sourpusses on the right ought to start thinking about how best to get rid of Obama and Harry Reid rather than applying litmus tests that exclude all but the ones who will worry independents and swing voters.
The idea is to win an election in a highly diverse population, not to take over the government for Evangelicals.
Right AST. What the USA needs is a good "Manager". Someone who'll stop all this nonsense, reduce domestic spending, cut the capital gains tax & not talk about social issues. We need a boring, don't rock the boat, status quo, more of the same, Jerry Ford Part II.
Someone who'll bail out Goldman Sachs if they get in trouble, or cut social security in the name of fiscal responsibility. We need someone who's too responsible to get elected. We need someone who won't demagogue the issues and get along with Harry Reid.
Y'know, there's nothing wrong with this country except the high minimum wage and high corporate taxes.
Freeman Hunt,
Palin's got to overcome those high negative favorability ratings to prove that she is electable.
Bullshit. All she's gotta do is win the nomination to make it a two-man race. That'll lock the fence sitters into choosing between her and more of the same. She can't lose that contest - nobody can.
BTW - I was going to put this on another thread but, since it was mentioned here, I'll fess up as well:
I, too, use to flinch (or avoid her altogether) whenever I first saw Carol Herman's name, but, over time, she has also won me over as an astute observer, and I happily welcome her into the LWWC (The League of Women Without Cooties).
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा