1

I don't know why they don't just run an ad that says:  "The best democrat president we've had since GHW Bush."

2 hey dems...tell us something we don't know........

3

A four minute political ad?

I don't even watch pron clips half that length.

4 I hear Romney fucked up health insurance in MA with some half-assed government scheme.

Oh, wait...

5 I don't even watch pron clips half that length. Posted by: ErikW at November 28, 2011 07:27 PM (7/c9/) Your fast forward broken?

6 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

7 After 4 years of effective double digit unemployment, the nation will SCREAM for a Flip Flopping Republican over a Confirmed SOCIALIST.

8 Hugh Hewitt has a new single out: While My Microphone Gently Weeps.

9 If their goal is to lull the viewers to sleep, mission accomplished.

10


I don't even watch pron clips half that length.

Tell me about it.   4:01 is about 3 minutes, 57 seconds longer than your typical "attention span," stud.

(Mitt ... Mitt is the likely nominee .... how can we have fallen so far?)

11 Folks, it isn't how we see this ad. It's how the squishy swing voter will see it or the points it makes. Count on these attacks being made into smaller quick fifteen second ads. Pretty good ammo against Willard. This is only a whiff of a taste of the looming attack.

12 Four minutes? Who the fuck's going to watch that?

13 I hear Romney fucked up health insurance in MA with some half-assed government scheme.

Oh, wait...

The Red Rat Bastards are bold, but not quite that bold, yet.

14

A four minute political ad?

I don't even watch pron clips half that length.

Posted by: ErikW at November 28, 2011 07:27 PM (7/c9/)

Yeah, what the fuck is that? Four minutes?

15 Your fast forward broken?

Posted by: nevergiveup at November 28, 2011 07:28 PM (eCnLg)

No, but my patience for stupid shit is.

16 I don't know why they don't just run an ad that says:  "The best democrat president we've had since GHW Bush."

The fact that they are targeting Mitt before he has the nom says that he is the one they fear most, not Gingrich.  For once, I'm prepared to listen to their opinion. 

17 Mitt Romney is not electable. He's the nice guy who finishes last. He is the guy who tries hard, not the guy who wins the championship and goes home and fucks the prom queen. He's not electable. Not even this year.

18 I think the DNC has heard the comment "they tell us who they fear most" and are putting out this 4 minute snorer to throw us off the scent and convince us conservative losers that the progs don't want Romney as the candidate.

Meed moar wine.

19 This means they fear the Newt.

20 I'm in favor of the guy who is best positioned to beat Obama.  Period.
If that person is Mittens, then (ugh) Mittens it is.
If that person is Newt, then (ugh) Newt it is.

21 *Need*

22 10 dimensional chess

23 18 I think the DNC has heard the comment "they tell us who they fear most" and are putting out this 4 minute snorer to throw us off the scent and convince us conservative losers that the progs don't want Romney as the candidate.

Never argue with a Sicilian when death in on the line. 

24 Mitt Romney has spent years developing a tolerance for Iocane powder.

25 Nobody's going to pay attention to this - at least the crowd they think they're shooting for. The squishy middle is not paying any attention right now, and barely know who Romney is.

Go ahead, waste your money guys. The independent voters won't notice until next fall.

26 We ought to hope Willard is electable, because he's likely to be the last man standing. While Mittsy can't seem to get above 25% roughly in support from Republicans, if no one else gets more, he'll take the convention. How many votes will there be? How much wrangling? The convention this year could be very entertaining. Like watching helplessly as your house burns to the ground.

27 The next time you hear about the weakness of the field, please remind the moron (not in a good way) spouting this nonsense of:

John Edwards
Dennis Kucinich
Mike Gravel
Chris Dodd
Bill Richardson
Wesley Clark

28

 hiring a lawn company isn't hiring illegals

I consider it worse since Windsock Willard's position on it seemed to be "I don't care if you are hiring illegals just make sure none of them are on my property while I'm running for president"

29 Mitt Romney?

He's only mostly dead.

30 something tells me that Mittens would respond with an in-kind flip-flopper ad against Obama

31 as to whom they fear?
anyone that will run against Obama.
i dunno about anyone here, but all I hear when I'm out at the grocers, at a gathering, is How Much Things suck.
so anyone generic republican for the win!

32 Reason #154 on why I Don't Want Romney as my President. Way too much political flipflopping. Way too much ammo fro the other side to use.

33 While Mittsy can't seem to get above 25% roughly in support from Republicans, if no one else gets more, he'll take the convention.

Or, we wind up brokered and can choose from off the board.

Second look at Palin?

34 How can anyone seriously doubt that Willard is electable?

35 Why would the Dems release this ad now? A) turn off the conservative base early and hurt GOP brand for congressional races if Mitts wins the primaries? B) They think they have more chance against other candidates and hope to squash Mitts? C) Insert your own theory here.

36 hiring a lawn company isn't hiring illegals,

Isn't it pretty damn racist to assume every member of a lawn company is an illegal?

37 Go ahead, waste your money guys. The independent voters won't notice until next fall. True enough, but they have mountains of cash to waste. They still count on raising between half a billion and a round billion dollars. They are just warming up, seeing what works. The Demotard campaign won't wait to begin preparing the battlefield.

38

Second look at Palin?

No way the establishment types that attend that fucker would ever consider it.  She didn't even go to VASSAR, darling

39 Is that bad -yeah. But you could easily do a 4 minute commercial of Obama sounding moderate and then present the actual facts with soundbites from himself, his Czars and cabinet members. Mitts a weathervane- no shit.. Obama lied about his real agenda- I know which is worse.

40 Isn't it pretty damn racist to assume every member of a lawn company is an illegal?

Sí.

41

I think we can all agree that it is paramount we nominate the candidate best able to defeat Sir Golfsalot

 

This is Job One- sending Zipperhead home to Chicago in 2013

42 I'm the Republican Chair of a county in Texas that went for Oshito. We are heavily Hispanic and a long time Democrat county, way back to LBJ days..
People come up to me on the street to assure me that they will vote for whoever runs against him. The GOP could run my idiot dog and win this county. 

43 don't think the Democrats and Obama are going to roll over because folks like Jen Rubin swoon over Mitt because he's supposedly the only grown up Republican in the race.

It's less that he's the only adult, and more that Newt will eventually implode, and that the MFM will endlessly run all of the old canards about him.  Admittedly some of them have elements of truth, as do the accusations of Mitt's flipflopping. Neither candidate is perfect, but Mitt seems safe to most people, while Newt takes bigger risks, and risks bigger faceplants.  

44 They still count on raising between half a billion and a round billion dollars.

Considering that Barry has funneled more than a trillion dollars to his cronies, if they can't come up with a billion, they are just too stupid with the skim.

45

The GOP could run my idiot dog and win this county. 

Well, that's one county we've got...

46 Maybe, maybe not? 

Flippity-floppin' RINOs need not apply.  Unless they want to.

47

So the Jackass Party is going to attack Romney on changing positions? Are they serious? If so, the are more ass backwards (pun intended) than even I thought.

This from the party whose leader has changed positions on: renditions, wiretapping, GITMO, trials in NY for barbarians, tax cuts during a recession etc. etc. Moreover, these are flip flops by Obama to the side of Romney.

Please. The Democrats know that Romney will easily take independents away from Obama.

All Romney has to do is continue to point to Obama's terrible record.

Democrats are idiots.

 

 

 

 

48 35 Why would the Dems release this ad now?

A) turn off the conservative base early and hurt GOP brand for congressional races if Mitts wins the primaries?

B) They think they have more chance against other candidates and hope to squash Mitts?

C) Insert your own theory here.

Posted by: palerider at November 28, 2011 07:41 PM (dkExz)

They benefit from having a longer GOP primary season because the candidate will be focused on eachother rather than the eventual nominee being able to fully focus on Obama all summer long.

49 hadn't seen that troll in over a week and then she shows up downstairs.......ugh...... blue bonnet is curious

50 hadn't seen that troll in over a week and then she shows up downstairs.......ugh......

She's drawn to the Cain.

51 Stopped watching.  But he's done.  But isn't that the way all the opponents are handled, get rid of them so you are running alone?   Isn't that, wasn't that, the president's way when he ran for office previously, leopards don't change their spots.  A person can change their mind but some how our citizenry can't pay attention for more than 15 minutes and they will just write him off.  Besides, if BO can just get a few more folks on welfare or food stamps then he'll be able to win just by urging them with a note in their checks to vote or their checks will be taken away by the evil Republicans.

You laugh when I say Rick Santorum will be the nominees, he'll be the "last man standing".

52 blue bonnet is curious

Posted by: phoenixgirl, still for perry at November 28, 2011 07:48 PM (SH3gZ)

Really, since you know me so well, what am I curious about?

53 You laugh when I say Rick Santorum will be the nominees, he'll be the "last man standing".

Finally giving up on Trump?  What does Miss Tabby think about this?

54 All Romney has to do is continue to point to Obama's terrible record. Mittens, or whomever wins the nom, must must must make sure the campaign is a referendum on Dick Soetero and his record. If the campaign becomes about the GOP nominee, kiss your wife and children goodbye.

55 I am so popular and everyone loves me.  That is why I need to constantly change my name to make people read my comments.  And its also why I had to blow those dorky MIT guys again so they could change my hash so no one can figure out it me.  But I get e-mails all the time from people telling me they enjoy my comments.  But they always include a picture of their junk.

56 Who is more uniquely qualified to see and value every side of an argument than Willard Romney?

Now that's something.

57 "BTW-I'm not fond of spreading Democratic propaganda about Republicans" Yeah. We all know what a tough, painful call it is for this site to do stuff like that.

58 Meow Check!

We have voted to Occupy curious' bed until she redistributes more of her wealth in the form of more catnip! 

*up twinkles*

We are the 99%!

Don't check under your pillow, you won't like what you find there

59 toby yep....it loves the cain....

60

If Cain goes, he endorses Gingrich.

If Gingrich goes, he endorses Perry. FTW

61 What?  No thread about trouser snakes on a plane?

http://tinyurl.com/8y83hzp

(may or may not be work safe -- I don't know, I didn't dare click)

If the collective IQ here is rising, then the Moron Lifestyle As We Know It is doomed.  Doomed!

62 Mittens, or whomever wins the nom, must must must make sure the campaign is a referendum on Dick Soetero and his record.

AMEN YES

63 I think its actually living in a fantasy that we don't know who it is.  Its posts are easier to spot than raykon's insane ramblings.

64 (above link came from Drudge)

65 Posted by: The GOP is Probably Running an Idiot Dog at November 28, 2011 07:45 PM (G5JPI)

Do not taunt Happy Fun Alex. 

66 interesting.....it claimed that only romney could win the election....and then backed bachman.....and then backed cain....and now backs santorum.......but what about it's "friends"? they couldn't possibly approve of santorum........

67 58 "BTW-I'm not fond of spreading Democratic propaganda about Republicans"

Yeah. We all know what a tough, painful call it is for this site to do stuff like that.

Posted by: Herman Cain at November 28, 2011 07:55 PM (NfeAS)

I doubted the Ginger White story, until it turns out that she claims the affair began while Cain was at the NRA.  Just like all the other claims, that is right when Cain was spending loooong stretches away from his wife.  So it makes sense that he could have no track record of philandering, except for this narrow window of time when he was looking for one night stands.  Of course this one girl Ginger White turns into a long term thing, and Cain admits he was trying to help her out financially (read, "with the rent" wink wink).... so you know.  The guy is a horn dog who didn't think he was going to become a front runnner, and so he didn't think these shenangians would ever come back to haunt him.

68 Thank you DNC for showing a few of your cards this early.

Romney/West 2012!

69

Mitt Romney is not electable. He's the nice guy who finishes last. He is the guy who tries hard, not the guy who wins the championship and goes home and fucks the prom queen. He's not electable. Not even this year.

 

Then we might as well just tuck tail & go home...then bend over & grab the ankles in anticipation of 4 more Obama years. None of the remaining GOP candidates, with their personal baggage or lack of intellect, debating skills, or accomplishments has a prayer in a general election.

If the best the DNC will offer against is replaying Mitt's position changes over the years since trying to represent Massa-fucking-chusetts, at same time lying about the others like stimulus (NOT Obama's Porkulus) and hiring illegals (sorry, but nobody believes that hiring a lawncare company that had illegals on its crew is Mitt hiring the illegals himself - especially when he fired the company once he found out). If this is the DNC's fall strategery vs nominee Romney, then Obama's not electable. Not even this year.

70 Is anyone else having site loading problems? 

71  Is anyone else having site loading problems? 

Posted by: Y-not at November 28, 2011 08:02 PM (5H6zj)

Yep.

72 y not....... not me

73 Anyone who gets the nod is going to get the democratic version of a Collin exam (as Powell).  I think this is why Barney is retiring - he wants to help administer it.

I'm one of those hiss and byword supporters of Romney.  If Romney makes it through the nomination, I think he has been well served by all the opposition from the not Romney crowd.  Keep the hits coming, I want Romney to win but not in a whimpy never vetted way like Obamanation.

74 I also saw this ad at The Corner this morning.  There is also a 30-minute version of it, suitable for TV.
http://tinyurl.com/7bs8qkc

75 Y-not, the site loads okay for me so far.

76 Bachmann: A Great President and a Great Rack

77 Uh-huh. I'm sure it just pains ya, Drew, to have to spread Dem attacks on one of the only two Republican candidates left standing. You would normally refrain from scouring the internets to find negative Dem tripe on a candidate who may very well end up running on your preferred party ticket, but you'll make a special exception for Mitt Romney. It doesn't even matter that nearly all of those quotes were clipped to give a somewhat misleading sense of Mitt's "flips." And, the Dems could never use charges of flips or flops against our other frontrunner. You know, the one who supported a federal healthcare mandate just earlier THIS YEAR. And, and we could never counter flip-flop attacks against the Dem candidate. It's not like he said a bunch of crap in 2008 and has actually DONE the opposite for the last three years. Maybe you should just dig really deep and find the courage to tell us the real reason why you hate Mitt to the point you're willing to give the enemy all the play he wants to ruin the guy should he get the chance to take on the clean, articulate One.

78 I hope there's a football thread.  I want to soak up Mallamutt's sweet sweet tears tonight! ;-)

79
O'Reilly - "Would you build a fence from Brownsville to San Diego?"

Newt - Yes.

Posted by: Doctor Fish at November 28, 2011 08:07 PM (Lt/Za)

It should be more like a 5 mile wide DMZ, but okay.

80
Ace,

Yes, the DNC ad against Romney is running in battleground States. But its target audience is not general election voters. It's way too early for that. And quite frankly this kind of ad will not be effective in a general election. Here's why: In a general election all of Romney's energy and campaign will be focused against Obama. These "attacks" are not only the sort that most general election voters won't give two hoots about, but as you, Ace, point out, they are fairly easy to parry.

Rather, the target audience is us, conservatives. They can't run it in just the primary States because that would be too blatantly obvious. There best chance of killing Romney off politically is right now - before he secures the nomination. If the DNC can convince conservatives that Romney can be made radioactive, then why shouldn't they just go ahead and nominate Gingrich. But note: ALL of the issues raised in that ad are ones that we as conservatives care more about than the general public. It's directed at us.  

If you think that ad was effective (I don't), you'll be in tears when you see what they do to Gingrich. Here's just one example that the general voting public (not just conservatives) will definitely care about: ETHICS VIOLATIONS.

As in: FIRST AND ONLY SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE IN HISTORY TO HAVE TO PAY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AFTER BEING FOUND GUILTY BY HIS OWN PARTY OF ETHICS VIOLATIONS. So disgraceful were his actions that Newt Gingrich resigned from the House of Representatives. 

How does that sound, sports fans? Any there's a whole lot more from where that came from. And that's before Gingrich inevitably steps on a political landmine with his tongue and implodes before our very eyes.

Hey, if he's our pick, I'll vote for the guy. But it won't be hard to predict who gets reelected for another four years.

What the heck, let's keep the delusional fantasy going that Gingrich is a through and through pure bread conservative who's about as electable as Romney. Yeah, that's the ticket. We won't regret a thing.

 

81 Maybe you should just dig really deep and find the courage to tell us the real reason why you hate Mitt to the point you're willing to give the enemy all the play he wants to ruin the guy should he get the chance to take on the clean, articulate One.

Posted by: RSOTS at November 28, 2011 08:09 PM (0XJKS)

---

Do I sense a Mittbott about to play the "youhateMormons" card?  

82 New from the Perry campaign:  http://tinyurl.com/7ts3uwf

83

Does anyone ever sign open letters/petitions/etc to politicians?

They always feel good, but then, one would hope that our guys would throw them away when they get them from the opposition.

84 Mitt Romney will be our John Kerry.

While the MSM had savaged Bush, the Dems passed on Dean because they didn't find him electable (probably right on that front), so thy went with the guy that would appeal to the independents who agree with those stupid wingnuts on the major issue of the day. Namely, war hero Kerry was for the Iraq war before being against it. Not quite anti-military, just anti wars led by a Republican president. I never really believed Bush would lose, would people really bail on Bush for the guy who was running to be Bush-lite?

Now the major issue of the day is the economy and the government's role in it and the out of control deficit. So here comes Willard, to appeal to the mushy independents. Don't like Obamacare? No problem, Mitt knows how to do government run health care right! Entitlements spiraling out of control? Mitt will solve it the smart way, not by scaring old people with any talk of real reform! Growing evidence of fraud in the global warming scam? No worries, Mittens still believes in it!

So when the choice comes, are people going to go with the guy promising that if he can just have one more term transforming the country, he'll be able to fix it? Or will they go with the guy who's promising to run a broken system competently, and oh yeah, he's not Obama?

I'm not so sure "not Obama" is all it takes, though the Mitt fans seem to think that's all it's gonna take...

85 Clearly you have never seen her in person, she is flat as a rock.

They say the camera adds three cup sizes.

86

OK, fine. So he's electable. But what will he do if elected? Nobody ever answers this question. I will: not a damn thing. He'll leave every far-left policy in place. He won't do anything to force the repeal of Obamacare, he won't do anything to reform the tax code, he won't do anything to rein in the Fed on absurd interest rates, he won't do anything to eliminate the illegitimate delegation of Legislative power to the Executive branch agencies, he won't do anything to eliminate the oppressive regulatory regime, he won't do anything to eliminate subsidies, he won't do anything to eliminate minimum wage.

He. Won't. Do. Anything. And that's just not good enough.

87 << I'm not fond of spreading Democratic propaganda about Republicans but...a lot of the case for Mitt has come down to "he's electable". Maybe, maybe not >> How'd that "electability" work out for John McCain?

88

Do I sense a Mittbott about to play the "youhateMormons" card?

Posted by: Y-not at November 28, 2011 08:10 PM (5H6zj)

Probably.  Its all they've really got.  Its the underlying theme beneath "dislike of Romney is completely irrational."

89

Reason #154 on why I Don't Want Romney as my President. Way too much political flipflopping. Way too much ammo fro the other side to use.

 

Right, 'cause the Dems have absolutely nothing available with which to slam Newt "3 Marriages" Gingrich or Herman "Wanna See My Pepperoni, Ladies?" Cain. These races aren't being run for President of Fantasyland. Somebody is gonna be the nominee, and that person will have some negatives for Team Obama to try to demagogue. Get real, you numbnuts who are seeking the prefect GOP candidate (who is not on the ballot this year). All the eventual nominee can do is limit the level of downside to present to the public, and then take his chances against the SCOAMF in the fall.

90 Posted by: Pecos, All Perry, all the time at November 28, 2011 07:44 PM (2Gb0y) You know, I have yet to see one Obama 2012 bumper sticker, and I live in the pomegranate, cowboy poetry, Dream Act state of the Harry Reid.

91 Clearly you have never seen her in person, she is flat as a rock.

There are rocks and there are rocks.  http://tinyurl.com/7kkmhfb

92 Posted by: Dave at November 28, 2011 08:10 PM (SV650)

There's no doubt Newt is a ripe target as well. And that ethics case is potentially going to be a big problem for him. 

As far as who this ad is for, I don't know that it's aimed at conservatives since there's nothing in it we don't already know. Everything in it's been covered to death by us.

The questions Republicans are going to have to answer is who is best able to absorb the hits, hit back at Obama and have the most upside if they win.

93 The Republican field is designed to fail.  Where is the strong candidate?  And, the debates are only making things worse.  And, keep reading that the convention will nominate Palin, so there goes the election then.

94

So the Jackass Party is going to attack Romney on changing positions? Are they serious? If so, the are more ass backwards (pun intended) than even I thought.

This from the party whose leader has changed positions on: renditions, wiretapping, GITMO, trials in NY for barbarians, tax cuts during a recession etc. etc. Moreover, these are flip flops by Obama to the side of Romney.

Please. The Democrats know that Romney will easily take independents away from Obama.

All Romney has to do is continue to point to Obama's terrible record.

Democrats are idiots.

 

Well said.

95 Posted by: blue bonnet at November 28, 2011 08:20 PM (oZfic)

Shut up curious no one gives a shit what you have to say.

96 : FIRST AND ONLY SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE IN HISTORY TO HAVE TO PAY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AFTER BEING FOUND GUILTY BY HIS OWN PARTY OF ETHICS VIOLATIONS. So disgraceful were his actions that Newt Gingrich resigned from the House of Representatives.  Posted by: Dave

You seem concerned, Dave. Then again, I could be wrong.

Can you pound the keyboard a little harder just so we can be sure?

97 Can you pound the keyboard a little harder just so we can be sure?

Use RED

98 So, it's Romney?

99 So, it's Romney?

Affirmative.

100 If we can't nominate someone who will be attacked by Democrats unfairly, we may as well just pack it in now, right?

Try not to be an idiot.

101

It's nice to see some optimism that we might actually be able to beat the SCOAMF, but right now, I'm not so sure.   And every day that passes, I'm less sure.

If Mitt's the nominee, I hope he beats the fuckstick like a rented mule, but we'll still be boned.

102 a lot of the case for Mitt has come down to "he's electable".

Yes, but if we all flipped over to the D side, suddenly Obama's electable.   I don't think electability is much of anything.

103
  I keep harping on this, but it is damn important. Just as much as electing the President, gaining an unassailable majority in the House and Senate is a priority. To the extent that the Dems can't even play spoiler. Lacking this, any effort to repeal Ocare, or rescind the myriad of regulations strangling business, or defunding agencies isn't going to happen.

  The antipathy toward Romney that I see reflected in the support percentages make me uneasy, that ABO may not work in Romney's case.

  And that would be disaster.

104 Btw, when does the stupid party start running their ads against the SCoaMF?  He's running unopposed, yes?  Might as well get started.

105

Republicans should reintroduce Obama and God Damn America to the voters.

106 So, it's Romney?

Posted by: ErikW

 

Well, that's what SHE said!!

107 "I'm not fond of spreading Democratic propaganda about Republicans but..".
give us a break you two fisted wanker.

108 Dear Y-not, Hmmmm, I didn't say a damn thing about Mormons or hating them. Merely pointed out that the other Rep frontrunner and the Dem have just as many problems, yet Drew bemoans how he just must spread this attack as a friendly warning to save us from nominating the reviled Mitt Romney, and I wondered why. Why he would want to help the Dems destroy, let's be honest, one of the only 2 Rep candidates who can consistently string two coherent sentences together It's interesting how you would jump to such a conclusion though.

109 Lot's of shooting the messenger going on around here.

110 We are ready for some football.

111 Cocksuckers.

112 It's interesting how you would jump to such a conclusion though.

Posted by: RSOTS at November 28, 2011 08:30 PM (0XJKS)

--

Sure, noob, tell me what dark thoughts reside in my soul in addition to DrewM's. 

113 rsots i won't vote for mitt because i don't know who he is.....he says he's one thing and then boom he's another....can you say "flip flopper" i don't put any stock in any position he takes....because tomorrow...he'll change his mind.....

114 How's Houston this time of year?

115 I like Mormons.  I think they are one of the few groups of Americans that really gets it as far as what really is needed for a stable and happy life.  They take care of their families, and even when there are elements of their religion that don't necessarily work for me, when I talk about it with them, they are quick to point to how these are stable families.

Is there anything in Mormonism that would cause an adherent to be a worse President than a protestant?  I really don't that.

So, if we're fair, Mormonism is a complete non issue, just as Cain's skin color is a complete non issue and Bachmann's double X chromosomes are not an issue.

Unfortunately, Mormonism would be an issue if Romney were nominated.  I don't know how to discuss it without coming across as bigoted against Mormons, but the media will be unbelievably unfair about this.  And to some extent, I guess they could be 'fair', but so lopsided in what they actually cover as to be unfair.

For example: Obama attended a pretty racially effed up church for decades that clearly hates America.  Romney volunteered to evangelize Mormonism well before the church came around on racial bigotry against blacks.  the media would only discuss the latter.  Is it fair to hold it against Romney that Mormons had some very misguided views on blacks just before the 1980s?  I don't know.  Personally, I see this as similar to baptists being sexist, and note that Romney was born into the religion, and also that Mormons did indeed come around, and that's what's most important.

But of course this racism that prevails in that religion, and not as a minor issue, when Romney volunteered to go on a mission convincing others to join Mormonism, would be a hefty charge used to rally the democrats to the polls.  That's one of the things Obama needs to prevail in 2012.  He is kinda hard for the left to support these days, but if he's the big victim of a racist, well, they will all turn out.

My gut says this will be damaging, and open the door to treating Mormons like an 'other' even though every Mormon I know, and probably 99% of mormons anyone here knows, are obviously decent people.

I mention this because I see the issue of paranoia about Mormon bigotry discussed above.

Personally, I think Romney should fail because of the decisions he's made that I view as too liberal, but the democrats will fight dirty on this.

And to be fair, they will hit Cain for being a pervert (he's not), Newt for dumping his cancer striken wife (he didn't), and Perry for that rock in Texas (which is silly).  I think Romney is especially vulnerable, though.  He just reeks of fake, so it's hard for him to clear his name.

116 Sad to say (and Jen Rubin aside), Romney is the only grown-up in the race. Pretending otherwise is unlikely to end well.

117 Maybe you should just dig really deep and find the courage to tell us the real reason why you hate Mitt

Don't you have a fucking shinebox to go fetch?

118 I think the major concern for at least some voters is the perception that the Mormon church is incredibly top down controlled. JFK faced the same concerns, and the Roman Catholic Church has no where near the organization and strict control over its individual churches the LDS does.

That's really beside the point, I just don't see Romney getting the nomination. I don't think very many people actually like him personally, religion aside.

119 Just wait until the Newt "I can't keep it in my pants" Gingrich ads start rolling.  Seriously, how can we trust a guy who can't even count on his wives to trust him?  I think its insane we are even having this conversation about Newt being a candidate.  I see the late night tv shows now cracking wise at Newt attempting to impeach Clinton for being unfaithful (I know thats not the real reason but how will the general populace see it?) while getting his own strange on the side.  It is MADNESS to support Newt, I will say this now, the Dems are begging for him to be the nominee.  Think Cain x10 in the media during the General Election and you can imagine how it will play out.

120 123 Sad to say (and Jen Rubin aside), Romney is the only grown-up in the race. Pretending otherwise is unlikely to end well.

Posted by: Mahon at November 28, 2011 08:37 PM (6c8oD)

Is that why he went crying to Anderson Cooper when Perry was being mean to him?

121 ' Why he would want to help the Dems destroy, let's be honest, one of the only 2 Rep candidates who can consistently string two coherent sentences together'

You know that Romney is kinda gaffe prone, right?

The media loves him, and he went to Harvard Law like Obama, but the day after he's nominated they will start covering Mr Asia is a Country and I'm Running for Office for Pete's Sake (to explain why he doesn't want to employ illegals anymore).

122 Romney is the only grown-up in the race.

I can't even imagine what you are trying to say with that.  You'll need to elaborate a bit.

123 Maybe you should just dig really deep and find the courage to tell us the real reason why you hate Mitt

Because he's not a conservative.

124 And you thought I wouldn't be a strong enough candidate against Obama.  I'm looking a little bit more appealing now, aren't I?

125 123 Sad to say (and Jen Rubin aside), Romney is the only grown-up in the race.

It's "grown-up" to waffle on your positions (entitlements) and to let your opponents slide on their positions (Libya)? That more strikes me as a character deficiency - which some might find immature.

(Which is not to say that you are wrong about the other candidates.)

126 sigh.
How has it come to this?
Let's just nominate Bob Fuckin' Dole while we're at it.

127 Unfortunately, Mormonism would be an issue if Romney were nominated.  I don't know how to discuss it without coming across as bigoted against Mormons, but the media will be unbelievably unfair about this.

Which is why the LDS Church has been spending beaucoup bucks on their "I Am a Mormon" campaign and why much of this Fall's General Conference was spent on instructing their members on how to refer to their faith in formal and informal situations. 

It is ludicrous to assert that Mitt has been "vetted" in the way that happens in a general POTUS election.  He hasn't.  It's going to be ugly and it will include smears about his religion.  Accusing conservatives who have solid reasons for preferring another candidate or for opposing Mitt (or both) of being bigoted against him because of his religion is counter-productive.  But that's what we saw after the Repulsive Reverend who was asked (by the organizers) to introduce Perry shot off his mouth.  We saw Romney's camp, Huntsman, and a bunch of Romney backers insisting Rick Perry should apologize for the Reverend's opinion.  Hell, even my best friends here (devout LDS) thought it was ridiculous. 

128

Maybe you should just dig really deep and find the courage to tell us the real reason why you hate Mitt

Because he's not a conservative.

Posted by: nickless will probably get accidentally banned again soon at November 28, 2011 08:39 PM (MMC8r)

 

Uh oh, get ready to be banned again.

129

For a squishy north eastern Republican I could support I would look to Christie.  Brewer just put up a sidebar link where he's asking Obama "What the hell are we paying you for?"  Because while I may not agree with all of his positions I know where he stands and I don't expect to go back over 3 years and hear him giving 4 other opinions on it.

130 I reject amnesty for illegals, even if they've been here 30 years and paid more in the way of federal taxes than I have. I also reject vaccines. I reject bar code scanners. Most of all I reject RINOs. My purity of irrational thought processes is why I voted for Obama back in '08. That's also why the only two Republicans I've voted for at any time over the past two decades are Pat Buchanan and Alan Keyes. Oh, right, and the time in '04 where I wrote in my dog for president over that RINO Bushleague. Look, chumps, we'd be 999 times better off with Obama in office than any RINO. Otherwise we'd only lose more slower. Cain-Bachmann-Bachmann-Cain, '12.

131 it's bob dole's turn now?

132 @133
How did it come to this?  What can men do against such reckless hate?

(Sorry, just in a quote mood tonight)

133 For a squishy north eastern Republican I could support I would look to Christie.

What about us????  We'd make an awesome White House team!

134 Let's just nominate Bob Fuckin' Dole while we're at it.

Posted by: chemjeff-wino at November 28, 2011 08:41 PM (s7mIC)

I was kinda hoping for Fred.

135 For a squishy north eastern Republican I could support I would look to Christie.

And don't forget about me and my hot daughters and my pickup truck!  I'm just what the country asked for!

136 And you thought I wouldn't be a strong enough candidate against Obama.  I'm looking a little bit more appealing now, aren't I?
Posted by: Syphilitic Camel

Get in line, you gangly spit bucket.

137 Posted by: rfichoke at November 28, 2011 08:13 PM (SYhX2)
O'Romney is a tweaker not a doer!

138

That's really beside the point, I just don't see Romney getting the nomination. I don't think very many people actually like him personally, religion aside.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 28, 2011 08:37 PM (r4wIV)

You mean the voters don't like him personally? I don't know about that. I do know besides some conservative blog commenters he isn't hated by most people. Which I think you couldn't say about Newt.

139 erik fred dole? is he bob dole's brother?

140 And don't forget about me and my hot daughters and my pickup truck!  I'm just what the country asked for!

It's a start.

141 427 All of those women lie.  I did not have sex or ask for sex with any of those women, so help me God.

142

What about us???? We'd make an awesome White House team!

Posted by: The Maine Sisters at November 28, 2011 08:44 PM (s7mIC)

You're two of 4 reasons I can immediately think of as an example for telling anyone that accuses dislike of Mitt as a national candidate being because he's a northeastern Republican and that's wrong is perfectly acceptable and they can go fuck themselves.

143

And don't forget about me and my hot daughters and my pickup truck! I'm just what the country asked for!

Posted by: Sen. Scott Brown (R-ish) at November 28, 2011 08:45 PM (s7mIC)

Number 3   Think you can successfully sockpuppet Number 4?

144 O'Romney is a tweaker not a doer!

A guy who built Bain Capital and rescued the Olympics isn't a doer?  Caucasian please. 

145 C'mon, Republican faithful, won't you even give us another look?

We promise to turn the Lincoln Bedroom into a mud wrestling pit, complete with webcams.

Do we have your vote now? 

146 Bottom line: Support Perry. Forget mitt and newt.
Perry all the way.

147 Get in line, you gangly spit bucket.

Posted by: Mangy Hyena at November 28, 2011 08:45 PM (mIucK)

Good Gawd, that was some kind of funny!

148 How did it come to this? What can men do against such reckless hate?

It keeps me warm.

149 142 "For a squishy north eastern Republican I could support I would look to Christie." And don't forget about me and my hot daughters and my pickup truck!  I'm just what the country asked for! Posted by: Sen. Scott Brown (R-ish) at November 28, 2011 08:45 PM (s7mIC) DAD!!!!

150 125  the Roman Catholic Church has no where near the organization and strict control over its individual churches the LDS does.

I heard this from my priest in 2008. It sounded like structurally the Catholic Church is still a lot like the Orthodox Church of the 400s. Local bishops, for better or worse, retain much autonomy. They can't publish a rival Bible or convert to Islam or contradict the Pope's infallible statements, but beyond that they don't bother / bother with the Vatican very much.

151 Thanks for sharing, please keep an update about this info. love to read it more. i like this site too much.

152 fred dole? is he bob dole's brother?

Posted by: bob dole at November 28, 2011 08:45 PM (SH3gZ)

Hell, I don't know. I've been drinking.

153 ...a lot of the case for Mitt has come down to "he's ; font-weight: bold;">electable".

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

154 "For a squishy north eastern Republican I could support I would look to Christie."

And as my wee grannie used to say, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

155 And as my wee grannie used to say, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

If turds were biscuits, we'd eat til we died.

156 fred dole? is he bob dole's brother?

Posted by: bob dole at November 28, 2011 08:45 PM (SH3gZ)

He was bangin' the cocktail waitresses two at a time. The players couldn't get a drink at the tables.

157 152 O'Romney is a tweaker not a doer! I've tweaked a few pairs of rosebuds in my day, IYKWIM.

158 Ya know, I'm not doing anything right now.  Anybody up for some cap-n-trade brownies?  Fresh from the oven

159 I thoroughly expect this race to end up tight and ugly like Minnesota or Florida.

160 163 And as my wee grannie used to say, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

If turds were biscuits, we'd eat til we died.
If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle. 

161 All of those women lie.  I did not have sex or ask for sex with any of those women, so help me God.

But if I did- and I'm not saying I did- it was strictly for medicinal purposes.

Also- speaking purely in the hypothetical- that second woman kinda had a stinky pooter.

162 @168
your wee grannie apparently had quite the mouth on her.

163 163 And as my wee grannie used to say, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride. If turds were biscuits, we'd eat til we died. Posted by: toby928© Perrykrishna with tattooed knuckles at November 28, 2011 08:51 PM (GTbGH) If turds were sugar, we'd be shitting in our coffee.

164 Headline:
DNC Video Ad Attacking Romney

Read Debbie Bad Hair strikes again.

Why fight each other over some crap from her?

165 167 I thoroughly expect this race to end up tight and ugly like Minnesota or Florida. M'chelle's jeans.

fify

166 168 163 And as my wee grannie used to say, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

If turds were biscuits, we'd eat til we died.
If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle.

Posted by: kansas at November 28, 2011 08:52 PM (Xbk9u

 

And if Mitt's multiple positions were dollars he'd have another billion.

167

Mittens, or whomever wins the nom, must must must make sure the campaign is a referendum on Dick Soetero and his record. If the campaign becomes about the GOP nominee, kiss your wife and children goodbye.

This is why the RNC will never get another penny from my house.  Everyone knows the above and, election after election, the Republicans let the left form the election battlefield.  This is the most winnable election since Jimmah's fall from grace but I continue to fear the right will screw it up.  Dole?  McCain, fer cryin' out loud?  Romney is, I fear, way too near the center for what the nation needs at this time.  A large, maybe vast majority of voters and other less concerned citizens want the big changes made but I don't know if Romney is the one to make them even with a solidly R congress.  Is Gingrich the guy?  Doubt it, but he makes more of the right sounds.  Romney is currently running to not lose the nomination, not to win the general.  Gingrich is running to win the Presidency.

This post is too long.  Where we need to invest time and money are in the house and senate races to insure (at least) a theoretical backstop for Obama's lunacy.

168 There will be no personal attacks against Shenator Obama, my fringe.

169 Number 3   Think you can successfully sockpuppet Number 4?

Who, Ayotte?  I can't find any reason to criticize her, actually
I would vote for her if I could

170 169 All of those women lie.  I did not have sex or ask for sex with any of those women, so help me God. But if I did- and I'm not saying I did- it was strictly for medicinal purposes. Also- speaking purely in the hypothetical- that second woman kinda had a stinky pooter. Posted by: Herman Cain at November 28, 2011 08:53 PM (SY2Kh) Eat it or I'll cut you, bitch!

171

IF somehow Obama does win my only hope is that he only wins the electoral vote and he loses the popular vote.  Just because we'd get rid of all those idiots demanding we get rid of the electoral college.  They'd be launched into orbit from the force of their jaws snapping shut.

172 Lot's of shooting the messenger going on around here.

Letting the messenger live is for RINOs.

173 177 Number 3 Think you can successfully sockpuppet Number 4?

Who, Ayotte? I can't find any reason to criticize her, actually
I would vote for her if I could

Posted by: chemjeff-wino at November 28, 2011 08:56 PM (s7mIC)

Nope.  Dede Scuzzybitch or whatever her name was.

174 __________________

Drew,

I agree that the info they're giving us on Romney isn't anything we don't already know. But their goal is to turn what we already know into a scarecrow. To make us imagine those attacks working in a general election. Again, it didn't work on me, especially because none of those issues are going to be relevant in general election.But I'm wondering how many fellow conservatives are like "Oh man, they've really nailed Romney in that ad!" It's only because we already know about Romney's past sins against conservatism that they try to make us fear what other voters think when Romney is finally exposed. Ironically, other voters simply won't care about what we already know. That's why the ad is so transparently lame.


Now, to my fellow commenters who took issue with my using ALL CAPS: the point in that was not to express my own personal concern with Gingrich's past ethics "violations". In truth, I could care less about them. I don't think they disqualify him from the office of president in the slightest. And like I said, if he's our nominee, I'm voting for him. Rather, my point is that general election voters who have never heard of Gingrich or his "complicated" past will care a great deal to learn about Gingrich's ethics violations, especially after Obama drives them home with hard hitting negative ads. And those ads will be a HELL of a lot more effective than ANYTHING they can put together against Romney. (In those last two uses, the caps were expressing (SHOUTING) my sentiment on the issue.)

175 Ayotte supports this shit, alongside Lindsey Graham.

176 "Posted by: toby928©"

Shut up tubby toby.

177

178 I smell cheese.

179 Drew: This video is a good indication of how Democrats would introduce Mitt to the wider electorate. It isn't pretty, is it?

No, this is a good indication of why you, Ace and your arch-conservative friends are f-ing retarded in your little crusade to undermine a fellow Republican who just happens to be the most electable in nearly 100% of the polling and demographic research done to date.

This is a good indication of why you don't start a blood feud with your own side. Reagan understood that, you do not.

You'd rather support a candidate in Mr Perry who doesn't need a DNC hit-piece to get free advertising on supposed "conservative" websites to show failure: his own advertisements do that: "that's what the president think(s) wrong with America?"

No, Rick, but I'll tell you what I know is "wrong with America," or in this case, the Republican party: the fucking blue-on-blue attacks from your supporters.

I could never understand or wrap my head around Republicans who'd claim the party moved away from them. I'm starting to empathize.

180 I'm the true blue conservative, I'm pro-SEIU, pro-amnesty, pro-taxes, and Newt endorsed!

181 @179: you can just imagine all the NYT editorials and columns praising the wisdom of the Founding Fathers.

182 OOooh, off, sinky pooter!

183

For saying Romney's not a conservative? You're joking, right?

Posted by: Soap MacTavish at November 28, 2011 08:47 PM (vbh31)

Um, yes.

184 183 Ayotte supports this shit, alongside Lindsey Graham.

Posted by: Zimriel at November 28, 2011 09:00 PM (6GvAC)

eh - I'm more upset when R's support socialism, so I'm not too terribly bothered by it

185

I could never understand or wrap my head around Republicans who'd claim the party moved away from them. I'm starting to empathize.

Me too. Because it's been moving too far damn left in the last 100 years. So go choke on that.

186 Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 28, 2011 09:00 PM (YW11a)

Translation:

All the other candidates suck!  I can't believe you idiots would consider supporting those other brain dead losers!

Now stop criticizing Romney!  After all, we shouldn't bash fellow Republicans.

187 Caucasian please. 

Posted by: pep at November 28, 2011 08:48 PM (6TB1Z)

Seen, stolen.  :-)

188 Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 28, 2011 09:00 PM (YW11a)

See?  Assimilation isn't so bad after all.  You tell 'em, Uriah.

You too will be assimilated.  Resistance is futile.

189 Giants are on Monday Night Football

That means either Ace doesn't post till 4 pm tomorrow, or he's up all night posting on Giants fan boards and then like the drunk and pissed father who stumbles in the door in the morning, the family gets the wrath ...

190 Giants are on Monday Night Football

That means either Ace doesn't post till 4 pm tomorrow, or he's up all night posting on Giants fan boards and then like the drunk and pissed father who stumbles in the door in the morning, the family gets the wrath ...

That last pic won't help much, will it

191 You really make it seem so uderstandable with your presentation but I find this topic before really hard to understand. It seems too complicated and very broad for me.

192 When your argument for a Romney canidacy is that he might win, your a retard. And that is all his supporters have/

193 If you have Eli Manning on your FF team and you get point for interceptions, you're in luck ...

194 the family gets the wrath ...

We haven't had a lecture on true humor, and how we can't do it, in quite a while.

195

No, Rick, but I'll tell you what I know is "wrong with America," or in this case, the Republican party: the fucking blue-on-blue attacks from your supporters.

IMO, you reinforce my earlier comment about the left forming the debate (literally in the case of this particular primary election).  All these televised debacles do is foment the blue-on-blue you mention.  Who "wins" the debates?  The DNC.  And it isn't costing them a cent. 

I notice we tend to give the DNC a whole lot of credit for "several moves ahead" thinking.  Is it possible the RNC is doing some, too?  Who could they be holding in the wings at the convention?

196 Poll tests.  I'm telling you. That's what we need.  They're like DDT and thalidomide -- highly effective and beneficial for a specific, narrow purpose.  Disastrous when misused. Unfairly reviled because they were misused but are due for a come back.

Q:   Candidate Jones went to Harvard.  Is she qualified to be President?
A:    Yes

rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!

Wrong.  You need to know more about Jones.  Sorry.  You'll have to sit this one out.  Study up and maybe you can vote next time.

Q:  Candidate Smith makes you feel good about yourself.  Should he be elected President?

A:  Yes, he can!!

rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!

Wrong.  Making you feel smug and morally superior is not among the President's constitutional duties.

197

The spam is mailing it in.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at November 28, 2011 09:08 PM

If I send the e-books meant for you to someone else, that's just who I am

198 Damn but there's a lot of humorless people here.

199 The DNC has had a game plan for Romney since 2007; they so want him to be the nominee, for some reason.

The DNC has no similar plan for Gingrich, and they're being caught off guard.

200 O/T: Courtesy Instapundit:
Richmond Tea Party gets a political tax audit
they complained about Occupy Richmond's preferential treatment, so what do they get?  An audit

201 you're*

202 TD Saints

203 Hey Chargers ... Miss Me Yet?

204 Yes, I know we can score on first and goal, but the people watching want compromise. Send in the kicker

205 This is a good indication of why you don't start a blood feud with your own side. Reagan understood that, you do not.
Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 28, 2011 09:00 PM (YW11a)

That is such bullshit.

I'm sure Mitt is a fine fellow, he's just not a conservative.

Tell you what....find me something that Mitt did as governor that was more conservative than what Jon Huntsman did. Not what Mitt has said since leaving MA but what he did when he actually had political power.

206 Brokered convention, Gary Johnson is the nominee. Dems realize they wasted their money on ads like this and commit suicide en masse. Johnson wins in a land slide. Wait, why are looking at me like that? Seriously you're freaking me out, especially the way you run your thumb along that knife edge.

207 @210
I think there's a chance that it's not really political.  They want taxpayer money (a reimbursement of their expenses, iirc).  The audit is of their expenses and was triggered because the city says they had not filed documentation. 

If you want taxpayer money, you should expect to have your books opened up, particularly when your justification is for reimbursement of expenses. Assuming the TP group is running correctly, the audit should be no biggy. 

208 Brokered convention, Gary Johnson is the nominee.

dude, did someone say something?

whoa am I hungry, pass the cheetos

209 We need an NFL thread.  I'm sick of struggling with this wonky video. 

210 195 "Caucasian please."  Posted by: pep at November 28, 2011 08:48 PM (6TB1Z) Seen, stolen.  :-) Posted by: Mary in LA at November 28, 2011 09:04 PM (9wOfB) I don't get the joke - can someone 'splain?

211 Y-not, read the PJ Media article
They are being audited for not paying a category of taxes that they don't even owe
Besides, it is also about the double standard

212 Damn but there's a lot of humorless people here. Posted by: ErikW

yah, Iknowright!

213 I once knocked up 20 womyn by whacking off in the town pool!

214 Mitt has wonderful hair and a rich tan complexion of the most virgin polyvinyl chloride.  If Ken wasn't already dicking me I'd have Willard's magic underwear spinning from the ceiling fan in the Dream House faster than you can say math class is tough.  Just sayin'.

215

I'm sick of watching Mallamutt and DrewM blowing eachother.

216
Wow i really found this to be an interesting read; thanks for sharing

217 chemjeff,

I see room for interpretation in this press account.  The TP guys say that the data requested "doesn't apply" and talks about their treasurer "fill(ing) in zeroes."  It may be that they did not file forms that they needed to file. 

And the stuff being audited are "expenses" that seem to overlap with the types of expenses (including meals) that could certainly be part of the expenses they are claiming they deserve to be reimbursed for. 

I just don't think there's enough information to gauge what the full story is.  And if you ask for money from a government organization with which you maintain a license (which I gather this Richmond TP does), then that's the sort of thing that draws attention to your organization and can trigger an audit. 

The TP's claim seems to be based on some concept of 'fairness' that something is owed to them because of expenses the city incurred by the OWSers.  But that's not what goes into filling that sort of claim, imho.  All that matters is what your organization's claim is, not how the city treated another organization. 

218

I'm sick of watching Mallamutt and DrewM blowing eachother.

Posted by: ErikW at November 28, 2011 09:28 PM (k/eCV)

Would you prefer a threesome?

219 If you want taxpayer money, you should expect to have your books opened up, particularly when your justification is for reimbursement of expenses. Assuming the TP group is running correctly, the audit should be no biggy. 

Posted by: Y-not at November 28, 2011 09:19 PM (5H6zj)

Excuse me?   On this, you are wrong.   They received a letter telling them they are being audited when they asked to be reimbursed for the $8500 they had to pay to have a rally in the same damn place the Ocupissers are being allowed to squat for free.  

They're not asking for taxpayer money.   Good Lord.

220 What is the strategy behind the DNC launching an add now? Why not wait until after the convention?

221 They're not asking for taxpayer money.   Good Lord.

Indeed.  The only expense they are asking for is the permit and cop costs they paid.  That doesn't require a check of their books, just the city's.

222 OT Gruden and Jaworski are awful broadcasters.Like the fact that Obama is a SCoaMF,it cannot be said enough.

223 At this rate the GOP will allow Code Pink to host the next debate.

224 L Rob in OK:  Everyone knows the above and, election after election, the Republicans let the left form the election battlefield.

Hardly. We dominated the decade from 1996 to 2006. Republicans created their own direct communications channels to voters using cable TV and the internet.

It was Republicans in this period, under Rove/W specifically who pushed far ahead in the organizational, demographic and statistical nature of politics. Alex Gage got us into the cluster analysis game far ahead of the democrats.

Don't tell me the democrats "own" anything -- the only time they own anything is when we push weak, old-minded candidates onto the landscape. There is the rational for your Dole in '96, or your McCain in '08 comment.

Hell, McCain was pushing a horizontally integrated campaign with almost no hierarchy until the summer of '08. Ask Steve Schmidt about it, it was atrocious. You think Newt will be any better? Look at where he's been, look at what he has now. Or Herman Cain?

This is the most winnable election since Jimmah's fall from grace but I continue to fear the right will screw it up. 

Of course they'll screw it up, this blog is part of the epicenter of the undoing.

Just sticking with one above point: nobody has the infrastructure, capability or sheer intelligence of Romney's team. That includes the hippie shit-show down the street from me on Michigan Ave. The papers in Boston were just pushing the story that Romney's team bought and destroyed all their hard-drives and SMTP server after leaving office: boo-fucking-hoo, stop crying that you were out-smarted and out-scooped years before you even thought of looking.

Yet, this very blog, a conservative one, posted the story in the frame of a hit piece against Mr. Romney. Honestly? I mean, really?

Elections are won before a vote is cast, it's won by organizations and demographics. There is only one capable of winning.

Romney is, I fear, way too near the center for what the nation needs at this time.  A large, maybe vast majority of voters and other less concerned citizens want the big changes made but I don't know if Romney is the one to make them even with a solidly R congress.

Two points:

(1) Most people don't want another "big change" -- they want their lives to go back to how it was. They want a leader to lead them. That whole "change" crap is dead: bringing America back is the new hotness. The majority of voters are disillusioned.

(2) Look at the state-level polling. The electoral field has attained relative stability over the last decade of partisan sorting elections. We can only continue to make gains by playing in new battlegrounds, given most human (ie. non-Reagan) candidates only appeal to a limited bandwidth, a small cross-section of the population, we must win by sliding just a bit to the center. The idea being to sacrifice just enough in regions we're strong enough in to still win, yet provide us enough coverage in new populations to win. It's the same concept as re-redistricting.

But it only wins if your team plays along. While we can absorb the losses of many (most) here on the right because the south is such a large bastion of R-voters, there is a critical ratio, m, whereby you must 'win' n > m voters in the middle for every one you lose on 'your' side or you lose.

Which is why Ace is a fucking idiot for not having a tighter leash on his site, even if he personally despises Romney or Gingrich or Cain, etc.

225 Chuckie never met a coach or player that wasn't outstanding.  I thought at first he was angling for a coaching job somewhere but apparently that's just how he is.

226 And if you ask for money from a government organization with which you maintain a license (which I gather this Richmond TP does)

They were asking for a refund of money that they already paid.  They weren't asking for some government gravy.

The TP's claim seems to be based on some concept of 'fairness' that something is owed to them because of expenses the city incurred by the OWSers.

No, it is that the TP was required to file permits and pay insurance for their rallies, but that OWS flaunts the law, gets no permits, pays for nothing, and gets off scot free.  The only thing they are owed is equal treatment.

227 oops sock/off

228 They received a letter telling them they are being audited when they asked to be reimbursed for the $8500 they had to pay to have a rally in the same damn place the Ocupissers are being allowed to squat for free.

I didn't see any report of how they itemized their expenses.  And, given that those expenses could also fall into general organizational expenses (not related to the rally for which they paid a fee -- which I don't see evidence of being a reimbursable fee, btw), it could just be the the city went to check their monthly reports of expenses and found they hadn't filed some required paperwork.   

I'm just saying it's possible that it is not political. 

If the Richmond TP group has a case, they can certainly pursue it.  It will be easy enough to determine if the city was conducting routine reviews as the city asserts. 

229 Which is why Ace is a fucking idiot for not having a tighter leash on his site, even if he personally despises Romney or Gingrich or Cain, etc.

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 28, 2011 09:34 PM (YW11a)

Thanks for the report Romneybot 69, go back to headquarters to learn your new mission.

230 228 I'm sick of watching Mallamutt and DrewM blowing eachother.

Whut? Mallamutt addressed Drew once here. Drew didn't say shit to Mallamutt as of #228. The only blowing going on is in the slash\fic you're composing in your head. I'm sure it's very sexy though; the literotica guys will want to read it

231 What is the strategy behind the DNC launching an add now? Why not wait until after the convention? Define your enemy before he (or she) defines himself . See : Things that happen to repubs ( by the media ) when they're leading .

232 Bullshit roughing call

233 In fairness to Willard, I was for Willard before I was against him - at least three times, and I'll probably be for him again before it's all over.

234 117.  We are ready for some football.
Posted by: The Mittens Collective, engaging Sports Appreciation Algorithm 51.622

Laughed my ass off at this and I'm a Romneybot.

Not going to argue about supporting him either, because the science is settled.  (j/k)

235 Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 28, 2011 09:34 PM (YW11a)

Mom?

236 >>They want a leader to lead them.

How has Mitt led?  Honestly, we're told he was pushed around by the Massachusetts Democrats which is how they got stuck with Masscare, so it can't be that.  And aside from doling out some PAC money, he has not exactly been front and center on pushing conservative principles or candidates. 

Are we electing him POTUS because he was a businessman and worked on the Olympics a decade ago? 

237 "even if he personally despises Romney or Gingrich or Cain, etc.

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 28, 2011 09:34 PM (YW11a)"

Dude, it's seriously not personal.  Romney is probably a decent person and everything, but he's ideologically to the left of a lot of people who are worried about the spending crisis.

Romneycare is a drain on the federal government, and thus on your children, even if you're in Indiana or Ohio.  Romney himself praised that big government aspect.  There are so many examples where he's clearly not particularly conservative, but rather particularly liberal.

If you can't understand the criticism of Romney as something other than 'oh you personally despise him', that's on you.

238 Wait, Ace is an arch-conservative now?

239 Basta! I've been hanging out here for two straight days waiting to find out how gushie is holding up. This fighting is getting in the way.
Knock it off.

240

Our local news media just played that ad - ON THE NEWS! With commentary that basically took sides with the democrats. Then, they mentioned Barney Frank, and said how wonderful he was - with his financial reforms and gay rights issues. No mention of Barney's connections with mega failures Fannie and Freddie.

 

241 Are we electing him POTUS because he was a businessman and worked on the Olympics a decade ago? 
Posted by: Y-not at November 28, 2011 09:39 PM (5H6zj)

I thought we were supposed to nominate him because of his hair and it's his turn but mostly it's his turn.

242

Y-not, you posted a link to an article that had this in the text...

The group has had a business license with the city since 2010 so it can hold its Tax Day rallies and other events, she said. She said the groupÂ’s treasurer reported to the city each month that it had no meals, lodging or admissions taxes to pay.

“He just fills in zeroes,” Owens said. “None of that applies to the Tax Day rally.”

That is what they are being audited for...

The political organization was told to provide tax records related to its meals, admissions and personal property, and warned to take the notice seriously.

They have no meals, admissions, or personal property to file.   They sent the froms monthly, as required, that stated they had no meals, admission, or personal property.

You are being obtuse.

 

 

243

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 28, 2011 09:34 PM (YW11a)

You are arguing strategy vs. tactics.

I think we all here can agree with tactical maneuvers to outfox the liberals and trick & fool the mindless idiot independents into voting for our team.

But I for one would also have a strategy that sees more conservative policies and values implemented.  None of the candidates really fit that strategy.

I'm actually one of the few people here who is open to Mittens.  But I don't do it because I like the guy.  No, he's a flip-flopper.  But I do it only because I want to see Obama out.  In my ideal world, though, Mittens wouldn't even be in the picture because he's just too liberal.

244 223 195 "Caucasian please." 
Posted by: pep at November 28, 2011 08:48 PM (6TB1Z)
Seen, stolen.  :-)
Posted by: Mary in LA at November 28, 2011 09:04 PM (9wOfB)
I don't get the joke - can someone 'splain?

There is an old saying in the AA community, which in the polite version goes "negro please".  It conveys skepticism and the fact that you are not fooled by something the other person said.  I first heard the expression on Sanford and Son and it provoked a huge controversy.  Redd Foxx, of course, didn't care and said it anyway.  When you hear folks around here say "ninja please" it's also a play on that. 

245 " That whole "change" crap is dead:"

LOL.  Romney and Obama had nearly identical "change starts with you" slogans four years ago. 

If you're not looking for change crap, you should reject Romney.

And he's not much of a leader.  Obviously.  We've had Perry, Palin, and many others, taking hits and doling out arguments against federal Romneycare at Tea Parties while Romney shivers in his mommy's arms at home.

They guy was always last to endorse if there was any controversy.  He's a follower.

246 Hey Dems? Can you do one of these hit jobs on me too? I could use some cred with the base and I'm a real threat to Obama, honest I am. Hello?

247 If Romney is the nominee,I will support him to the best of my ability.Obama must go.MUST.That is all that matters.

248 Dustin 263 nailed it. Romney if elected will serve one term and be remembered as Chester Arthur is remembered, if he's lucky.

249

Did I mention that Mitt sux?

250 Time to cut defense and the war on drugs. We can no longer afford either.

251

I don't think Obama wants to run against romney. Best to take romney out now.

Romney knows business.Obama knows nothing but socialism.

252 Obtuse is one word for it. 

253

ChemJeff: You are arguing strategy vs. tactics.

But I for one would also have a strategy that sees more conservative policies and values implemented.  None of the candidates really fit that strategy.

Good points and I'd have to agree. Where we differ is in my belief that we need to hold the office to actually enact (or eliminate) anything of utility to our ultimate cause. Controlling 1/2 of 1/3 of the government will not suffice.

I'm a believer that the era of large scale changes, especially social, being enacted by presidential fiat are over. With the dispersal of media, it's much too hard to get a plurality of sufficient size for these issues: W squandered his capital on SS reform and tax reform. Obama lite his capital and the country on fire with Obamacare. The days of this are over.

Want conservative politics? It's from the judiciary and congress. We need the presidency, we need to stop spreading around DNC hit-videos against our own guys, and we need to stop filling the fucking sidebar with the same.

Jen Rubin's Kids: Mom?

Haha! Well played!

254 Or urine. Hell, I can't remember....cause it sucked so much my brain, in a defensive move, blocked it out from the memory.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at November 28, 2011 09:46 PM (OWjjx)

Uh huh.

255

(1) Most people don't want another "big change" -- they want their lives to go back to how it was.

From my viewpoint, it'll take a big change to get anywhere near "how it was". 

 We dominated the decade from 1996 to 2006.

And in '96, Clinton essentially highjacked the Republican platform as his own, "moving to the center" and right around/past who again? 

In general, I agree with your follow-up, but I don't think you'll find a lot of the posters here staying home on election day just to prove a point about which nominee is the most perfect.  Obama isn't gaining any votes here, nor is the eventual nominee losing any.

The only concern I have with running nearer the center is that over the past 4+ decades of my political experience, the center has crept farther left.  My yellow dog D father sounded more like a Republican before he died than any D.

256 Sorry about the formatting; I messed that up! First two sections are ChemJeff's, rest is response.

257 I feel like my time at Ace of Spades is coming to an end.  For the past 4 years I have been a daily lurker and infrequent poster so I know I won't be missed, but I feel increasingly more and more unwelcome as I view this website. 

This might be due to the fact that Romney is my candidate of choice, but the discussions and postings on the main page, which were once limited to a few postings buried in the comments section, have become increasingly hostile and polarizing.

While the purpose of the blog isn't to be impartial, I always felt there was some balance.  I feel that balance has been lost over the last few months and I'm increasingly finding myself on the wrong side of the divide (atleast in the eyes of this blog). 

Maybe I'm being overly sensitive?  But I don't think that is it, I feel as if Ace of Spades has fallen down a slippery slope and I have my doubts of recovery.  So I will take my leave, good luck everyone in whatever endeavor you choose to pursue.

258 I love God as much as the next con, but I also believe in freedom, so I will not cram my God down others throats. That is my pledge.

259

Maybe I'm being overly sensitive? 

Posted by: westerncon at November 28, 2011 09:58 PM (6J0bw)

Ayup, adios.

260 276  - you mad bro?

261 This line of attack has all been predicted here and given as the reason why Romney cannot and will not win. Either head these warnings of suffer great disappointment in the coming election.

There is a  reason ALL the MSM and non conservative pundits like Romney and here is a hint, it is the exact opposite of electability.

262 L Rob in OK, good points all around. Especially with the relative position of the "center."

For the past 4 years I have been a daily lurker and infrequent poster so I know I won't be missed, but I feel increasingly more and more unwelcome as I view this website.

You will, stick around! If we survived the last 3 years, we can survive this...

263 "This might be due to the fact that Romney is my candidate of choice,"

Without referring to electability circular stuff, what leadership has Romney shown that lead you to think he'd make a good president, or is even intellectually qualified to be president?

Personally, I find the constant flip flopping and dopey memorization to suggest he's a bit stupid.

But I have a deep bias against polished politicians, so this is unfair of me.  I don't think I'm unfair to note Romney has the worst record of any real contender in the GOP.

264 And if you hate it here, you'll love Frum forum.  Just some friendly advice!

265 Not mad, just not willing to stay somewhere I'm not welcome.  Its like being in an abusive relationship.  I'm sure people have to have noticed the exodus of frequent Romney supporters over the last few months.  People I remember  frequently posting during the last election cycle are now gone.

This isn't an issue of people changing their mind often times, but just those choosing not to engage the anti-romney mob which has formed on this site.  They have either gone elsewhere or regulated themselves to lurker status.

Snarky mob attack sequence begin...

266 Maybe I'm being overly sensitive?  Posted by: westerncon

Yes.

267 Snarky mob attack sequence begin...

Posted by: westerncon at November 28, 2011 10:09 PM (6J0bw)

We're on our way

268 Posted by: westerncon at November 28, 2011 10:09 PM (6J0bw)

Sorry you feel that way but it's understandable. There's simply no front page poster here who supports your guy.

I think we've been fair to him (Look at this post, I defend him from some of the lies. Also, follow the auto bailout link, it's a post I wrote complimenting him) but actual support? That's going to be tough to come by here.

I'm not sure what the solution to that is.

Are there actually conservative blogs supporting Romney?

269 What do you do when you can't defend something?  Change the argument about how mean the HATERS are.

270 287 Posted by: westerncon at November 28, 2011 10:09 PM (6J0bw)

Sorry you feel that way but it's understandable. There's simply no front page poster here who supports your guy.

I think we've been fair to him (Look at this post, I defend him from some of the lies. Also, follow the auto bailout link, it's a post I wrote complimenting him) but actual support? That's going to be tough to come by here.

I'm not sure what the solution to that is.

Are there actually conservative blogs supporting Romney?

Posted by: DrewM. at November 28, 2011 10:13 PM (dw7rB)

I bet he wasn't complaing about the lack of support for McCain on this site back in November 2007.

271 I say reality has finally slapped Ace upside the head so hard that he took notice. Like the little green football guy.

272 Dude... when you're saying "goodbye" to a bunch of strangers in a comments section who don't even know you by your internet handle...? Get some fresh air. I'm saying this as a friend.

273 "Without referring to electability circular stuff, what leadership has Romney shown that lead you to think he'd make a good president, or is even intellectually qualified to be president?"

I tend to look at things first from a morality perspective first, there is a difference between changing your mind on a given subject (which is normal for most people, but death in politics apparently) and being a man with a complete lack of morals (I'm looking straight at you Newt and Herman).

I can not trust a man who even his wife can not trust.  Personal habits are bound to at least some degree slip into their professional habits.  If they were not elected officials there is not a chance in hell they would have a shot at any type of military clearance with that kind of background.  To much of a liability in terms of risk exposure to blackmail and the sort.

Cain I was a moderate fan of given his business background but when the womanizing came out he lost any chance of my vote.  Newt never had that chance, given his past history of womanizing and the fact he has never dealt with a budget that wasn't on the taxpayers dime.

274

Posted by: westerncon at November 28, 2011 10:17 PM (6J0bw)

But a man that changes his so-called convictions back and forth...back and forth is virtuous...or something?

275 Cain I was a moderate fan of given his business background but when the womanizing came out he lost any chance of my vote.  Newt never had that chance, given his past history of womanizing and the fact he has never dealt with a budget that wasn't on the taxpayers dime.

Posted by: westerncon at November 28, 2011 10:17 PM (6J0bw)

Throw the stone, you non-womanizer. And check your so-called "fact".

276 I was pro-choice so I could win in Massachusetts and had an epiphany that I had to be pro-life to win in the national GOP. I'm running for president, for Pete's sake!

277 Ron Paul for president. Time to take care of our selves.

278 " Not mad, just not willing to stay somewhere I'm not welcome. "

There are a few Romney supporters around.  They aren't all that bad.

If we all agreed on everything, there's be nothing to discuss and it would be boring. 

279 "
I tend to look at things first from a morality perspective first, there is a difference between changing your mind on a given subject (which is normal for most people, but death in politics apparently) and being a man with a complete lack of morals (I'm looking straight at you Newt and Herman)."

I find some of Romney's shifts to not be honest changes of his mind, but rather too plainly politically expedient on matters of core principle, which yes, I do find immoral and showing of a character problem.

No, it's not normal for someone to change their minds like Romney does unless they have some kind of mental illness.

280 This is the first appearance of "6J0bw" in minx.cc. I do sometimes see "westerncon" in the past comments from 2009 on.

He seems to be a legitimate AoSHQ lurker - not a Greg concern-troll, nor a Dan Mitt-shill. So I don't comprehend this meltdown here and now. Of all the hills to die on... Romney?

281 Sock.

282 Double sock

283 Anyway, I don't see why Newt's ancient problems would be particularly relevant in today's world, but I understand why a Romney supporter would fail (no disrespect) to grasp what I find to be so obvious. 

This MSM generated scandal stuff is so minor compared to politicians trying to fix problems with government spending.  That's the basic reason I don't support Romney in the primary.  He was fine with extremely excessive spending levels in MA.  He even proposed tremendous additional spending for health care 'reform'. 

That's the big issue.

It is no surprise to me that all these egomaniac politicians are sinful, and that's usually not an issue I'm going to concern myself too much over even though I do think it's a fair thing to bring up so long as the facts are handled fairly.

284

Good Grief. A preventative, preemptive preliminary deterrent attack on a presumptive potential candidate.

No games this time around. No quarter. 

A Coup de Main opening salvo in what will be a bloody campaign.

Against racists, of course.

285 Romney was OK with abortion for 37 years of his life.  I mean, he frowns when it happens like Hillary Clinton does, but he promises to fight to preserve the right to commit abortion...  You know, safe and legal.

and someone is championing Romney on moral conservative grounds?  I don't know about you, but I think having a marriage fall apart or an infidelity is not as bad.

But that's just me.

Romney has the most pro choice record of any GOP contender in history.  Does he look down on Newt Gingrich for divorces?

286 298. Dustin - No, it's not normal for someone to change their minds like Romney does unless they have some kind of mental illness.

The clip was a vehicle designed to sell the idea that he flips a lot.  I'm not about to fact-check the whole thing but one stood out:  global warming.  He believes the world is getting warmer and that humans contribute to that - so do I.  He doesn't go along with the whole AGW/Kyoto agenda or believe that decarbonization plans have any merit - I don't either.  There is no conflict there.  I spotted other things but Ace mentioned them already, and in the abortion part i saw one statement as governor and another of personal belief.  Not impressed by the Democratic effort here, except by the amount and quality of mixing and editing.  Which should tell you something in itself.

What bugs me is that Rick Perry was a Democrat until he was 40 and among the same people, it's a non-issue.  I have no idea how that's even possible.

287 Tee, the wall street journal said "Speaking to voters in Pittsburgh, Mr. Romney said, “My view is that we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet."

And yet you say Romney says global warming is caused by people.

One of Romney's worst flip flops is his cap and trade crap.  He supported it in 2005.

"What bugs me is that Rick Perry was a Democrat until he was 40 and among the same people, it's a non-issue.  I have no idea how that's even possible."

I don't understand what your problem with this is.

Explain.  Perry was a fiscal conservative in Texas.  Of course he was a democrat in the mid 1980s.  Almost all fiscal conservative texans were.

I don't give a crap about partisanship.  I care about leaders with a real record, like Perry's 20 year record of fiscal conservative leadership, often when it takes a spine, such as cuts to education spending.

While Mitt Romney was whining about how he is damn sure he isn't going to return to Reagan style leadership, you care that he's got an (R)?  I don't care about that.  Reagan was a democrat too.  The democrats have gotten much more liberal in the past 25 years or so since Perry was a democrat.

This really does sound like a very shallow way to forgive Romney for his shameless flip flops on global warming.

288 oh yeah, and Romney did recently say he doesn't support cap and tax despite being one of the party's most prominent supporters of cap and tax.

It's just shameless.

The guy always is outspoken about whichever side of the flip flop he's on.  Either he's DAMN SURE man is causing global warming and it's so damn bad the government needs to take jobs away, or he's DAMN SURE cap and trade is something he just plain can't support. 

He's a great liar, as his wife attested.  He can argue a position and even she has no idea if he really means it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BpgLYryI8g

289 "in the abortion part i saw one statement as governor and another of personal belief. "

Tee, you should google Romney's 1994 debate on abortion.  Youtube has a ton of commentary showing huge flip flops on the issue.  Romney is usually somewhat slick, but in this case, there is no wiggle room at all.  HE says Roe v Wade must be overturned, yet he said at a different time it's good law he will "never waver" in supporting.

Also sounds like you're not very familiar with Romney's global warming hysterics.

It's just amazing to me that anyone would seriously question the idea that Mitt flips a lot, but that appears to be what you're saying... that it's somehow dishonest to note that plain point about Mitt. 

290 306.  And yet you say Romney says global warming is caused by people.

No, humans contribute to it.  Via industry.  That's not even in dispute.  But I don't think humans are responsible for this little warming trend/climate change we're having; nobody does.  And I'm not convinced it's a bad thing, either.

Explain.  Perry was a fiscal conservative in Texas.  Of course he was a democrat in the mid 1980s.  Almost all fiscal conservative texans were.

I'm sorry, but that's the most nonsensical thing I've heard yet.  The man ran Al Gore's campaign for President - Al Gore, High Priest of Global Warming.  Gore wrote Earth in the Balance in '92.  Perry has more a nodding acquaintance with this topic - he's just given a pass, or it just doesn't matter because he's a Texan and therefore a more  "correct" candidate. Or, he flipped.  Totally.

291 All the GOP candidates have flaws and problems. Some of them are so deeply flawed I'd never vote for them (Paul, Bachmann, Romney, Huntsman) and some are bad enough I'd be very reluctant to vote for them (Cain, Perry). The thing is, aside from Huntsman who's plainly a Democrat in all but name, running as a Republican only because he couldn't as a Democrat this time around, they're all at least marginally better than President Obama.

The trick is to discuss and deal with these guys as if they're on our team, rather than the enemy we hate. And sometimes it seems an awful lot like people have the latter approach more than the former.

I agree that a Romney presidency would be a lot like an Obama presidency, but slower. I agree that Herman Cain seems to be not quite ready for prime time. I agree that Perry's immigration policy and attitude seems painfully close to President Bush the Younger.

But none of them are Obama. Even Huntsman wouldn't be as bad as president Obama has been. He'd never roll back anything Obama did, but he wouldn't keep doing it and a strong GOP majority might keep him in line.

292 No, humans contribute to it.  Via industry.  That's not even in dispute.

I dispute it like a sonofabitch.  The notion is total nonsense, flim-flammery, boob bait.

293 Incidentally, Al Gore in 92 wasn't Al Gore of today, not even close. He was anti abortion practically until he got nominated for the VP. His wife was behind the parents against naughty lyrics push. He was much more conservative then. Its a bit misguided, to say the least, to act like fat loony Al Gore today is what Perry was backing twenty years ago.

294 And yeah, its heavily disputed that humans cause global climate change. Its not even scientifically demonstrable or supported by evidence.

295 Al Gore in 92 wasn't Al Gore of today

And it was '88 anyway, not '92.  In '89, Perry became a Republican. 

296 "No, humans contribute to it.  Via industry.  That's not even in dispute.  But I don't think humans are responsible for this little warming trend/climate change we're having; nobody does.  And I'm not convinced it's a bad thing, either."

Nobody thinks humans are responsible for the climate change we're having?

You aren't making any sense.

Anyway, isn't Romney being incredibly hysterical here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BpgLYryI8g ?

"I'm sorry, but that's the most nonsensical thing I've heard yet.  The man ran Al Gore's campaign for President - Al Gore, High Priest of Global Warming.  Gore wrote Earth in the Balance in '92."

You do realize that Perry did not run Al Gore's presidential campaign, right?  He was chairman for a state effort in 1988.  That's not nearly the same as running the presidential campaign.  You do realize that Al Gore was the most conservative contender for the 1988 democrat nomination, right?  Perry switched to the Republican party in 1989, probably because it was obvious there was very little room left in the democrat party for a conservative.

His record is pretty damn consistent on spending.  He's a fiscal conservative to the bone, touching the issue on practically every side of Texas law, and thus quite responsible for Texas's current policies.

It's true that conservatives in Texas were democrats for a long time.  You find this nonsensical?  Why?  You then bash Perry because someone he supported later wrote a book saying stuff about the environment?  And yet you're supporting this guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BpgLYryI8g ?

297 You do realize that Perry did not run Al Gore's presidential campaign, right?  He was chairman for a state effort in 1988.  That's not nearly the same as running the presidential campaign.

Ssh.  He's rolling.

298 Al Gore is a hysterical nut.  But he didn't seem to be in 1988.  To a democrat conservative, Al Gore seemed like the best choice available.

Of course, Perry was just some state legislator back then.  He was well liked for being one of the top ten bulldogs on keeping spending low, and made his way up to appropriations, and then ag commish, ousting an incumbent democrat if I recall correctly.  Perry was the first GOP Lt Governor in Texas history.  That's how late Texas was to join the GOP.

And I don't think Texas was misguided here.  The GOP is, at best, very inconsistent on the policies that matter.  The democrats happen to be a lot worse today, but Texans love their state, and do not love anti federalists.  They do not love Richard Nixon or RINOs who want to run Texas from DC.

If the Republican party wants loyalty from federalist minded fiscal conservatives, it needs to earn it. 

Tee finds this all nonsensical, but is she seriously disputing that Perry is conservative?  Or that Romney didn't flip flop on cap and trade and abortion?  He's got a record.  It's very liberal.  Perry's got a record, and it's very conservative, albeit 90%.

299 "I dispute it like a sonofabitch.  The notion is total nonsense, flim-flammery, boob bait.

Posted by: toby928© at November 28, 2011 11:54 PM (GTbGH)"

No kidding.  Sheesh.  Let's see Tee prove this that she or he calls indisputable.

I think there's no justification for cap and trade.  I think weather is always changing, and Romney was dead wrong to scream about his willingness to kill jobs over this kind of issue.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BpgLYryI8g  (same link as before).

But then, I think Tee realizes the weakness of her claims.  That's why she says the things in most controversy are not even in dispute.  That's why she dismisses as nonsense that conservatives were in the democrat party in 1988, which is obviously exactly true in Perry's case.

It was a quarter century ago.  Much farther back than most of Romney's liberal record.

300 Perry was a state legislator from 1984 to 1989.  Those are the only years he was a democrat.

The 39 year old Gore was unable to succeed outside the south in his 1988 presidential campaign.  It's amazing to me that he had a four year state legislator from the middle of nowhere, with no money or family, chair his efforts.  Perry explained that he changed parties just after this election because of the experience he had chairing the state operation.

However, it's informative to note that Perry supported Gore over Biden, Dukakis and Jesse Jackson.  It is pretty damn clear Perry was supporting the most conservative of the crew.  Gore's campaign platform included a moment for prayer in schools, banning funding for abortions, opposition to gun control, and support for Israel over Palestine, something Gore and Jesse Jackson argued about during the 1988 debates.

Gore won Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and North Carolina.  He was endorsed by Buddy Roemer.

A lot of trolls have tried to suggest that Perry was, in fact, Gore's national campaign manager.  This is just dishonest.  Some have tried to suggest Gore was the kook he is now, but that's also BS. 

301 In fact, if 1988 Al Gore was running in the 2012 GOP primary, the MSM would insist he was one of the most conservative candidates.

That's how far this country has slipped.  Yeah, Al Gore is a hard left nut now, but a loud Israel supporter calling for school prayer and opposing Romney style gun control?

Frankly, this is why we should insist on a record of conservative leadership in office before we trust a candidate.  It's too easy for these people to 'evolve'. 

302 315.  Dustin

Well, clearly I have to proof-read myself.

One sentence above should read "But I don't know that humans are responsible for this little warming trend/climate change we're having; nobody does." 

Re: Perry:  I got this from Wikipedia, "Perry supported Al Gore in the 1988 Presidential Primaries and chaired the Gore campaign in Texas. In 1989, Perry announced that he was switching parties, becoming a Republican."  Mind you I did not come here to bash Perry and i haven't; I'm merely asking why no one has explored that particular gigantic flip.  And maybe it makes perfect sense to Texans and/or people who don't realize that Gore has always been a global warming freak along with other world agendas - fine.  I won't question Perry's fiscal conservatism just like I'm not going to question Romney's personal belief about abortion.  To believe he isn't against abortion requires a greater leap of logic.



 

303 "Well, clearly I have to proof-read myself."

You and me both.  No sweat.

" I'm merely asking why no one has explored that particular gigantic flip."

It's been discussed an awful, awful lot.

But like I said, what specifically is the flip?  I see no problem at all with Perry being a consistent conservative who did not yet decide to be a Republican until he had been in politics for... five years.  He was already very conservative in the legislature.

A lot of people went from democrat to Republican, and in Texas and some of the south, this happened later because of federalism and states rights concerns.  Of course, Perry has always made a major issue of states rights. 

A lot of these folks did not like Nixon and George Romney style Republicans very much.  Even today, a lot of conservatives are wary of the GOP, but realize the democrats are worse.

304 "I'm not going to question Romney's personal belief about abortion.  To believe he isn't against abortion requires a greater leap of logic."

?

Romney said Roe v Wade is good law.  He promised never to waver in supporting abortion rights.  What leap of logic am I making, exactly? 

Romney has also said Roe v Wade must be overturned and he does not support the right to abortion.  These are strict and incontrovertible flip flops on policy.  Romney has a Harvard law degree like Obama's.  He should realize just how awful the jurisprudence is in Roe v Wade, but when it was convenient to Romney, he said it was good law.

Of course I do not know what Romney's personal view on abortion is.  I also don't care, because it's plain that this has zero impact on Romney's 'leadership'.  What I do know of Romney is that he will contradict his personal beliefs for power.

305 1988 saw a lot of party flux.  Many conservatives supported democrat Lieberman over Republican liberal Lowell Weickler, a Nixon liberal like Mitt Romney's father who is now an environmental zealot.

In fact, the liberal Rockefeller Republican movement (social welfare via taxation) is thought to have really died in 1988 when George H W Bush was nominated.  Yet George H W Bush was also hardly more conservative than moderate.  As late as 1995 Colin Powell actually boasted of being a Rockefeller Republican.  Even today, there are a few vestiges of the Rockefeller liberals in the North East.  Some would even say Mitt Romney is an example.

So I'm just not getting this idea that it is abhorrent not to be a Republican in 1988.  A lot of Republicans were more liberal than Al Gore in 1988.

Even today, I can see tons of Republicans thinking Al Gore's 1988 views of school prayer, no to gun control, and overtly preferring Israel as to their right.

306 324.  So I'm just not getting this idea that it is abhorrent not to be a Republican in 1988.  A lot of Republicans were more liberal than Al Gore in 1988.

Does it help if I say I'm from Mass.?  If you think our Republicans are liberal, you oughtta see the Democrats.  In fact there's a good example in the news today.  (I will not retract my belief that Al Gore has always been a barking moonbat - only maybe back then he wasn't really good at it.)

That ad nails Romney for not signing a tax pledge as Governor in 2002 and then signing one as Pres. candidate in 2011.  Whoopdee-do.  (List is here:   http://nvrdc.wordpress.com/tag/tax-pledge/)  I will concede that I have no idea where he is on gay marriage and that cap-and-trade is a wash:  he set MA up with state emission controls while keeping it out of the Northeastern RGGI greenhouse gas initiative (of 10 states) at the same time.  Slick. 

That's all I've got for now, I do appreciate the debate.
 

307 Tee, since you are from the northeast and not from Appalachia - where the Gore family is based - your opinions as to whether "Al Gore has always been a barking moonbat" pull no weight with me. You might be right or you might be wrong. But you have about as much knowledge on this as I do, which is to say exactly none except what we read here.

Anyway Perry and Glenn Reynolds and several other libertarian activists were for Gore in 1988. And in 2000, one reason Gore lost votes to Nader is that the HARD Left maintained a grudge. So this all seems to go the same way: that Gore in 1988 was a conservative, by Democrat standards, and certainly to the Right of me at least on school prayer.

308 I think Romneycare is far stupider than anything Al Gore ever enacted.  I mean, one could say cap and tax stuff is almost as bad, but Romney dry humped that policy too.

Romney's a shameless flip flopper and obviously more liberal than Perry.  If all one has is Perry supporting Al Gore over Jesse Jackson in 1988, I'm afraid all one has is practically nothing.

Please show me something Al Gore said prior to the 1988 election that is truly unacceptable.  I bet nothing Al Gore said is more liberal than something I could find Mitt Romney saying on the same issue much more recently.

Anyone care to take this challenge?

Not that it's even very fair, given that Perry has over 20 years of record making votes and decisions.  He's gotten all but a handful right.  That's why we're left with this proxy thing.  Perry has a great record.

309 I was here disputing a short film of unflattering clips of a current GOP candidate, now getting crap for casting aspersions on Al freaking Gore.  Really?

Gore's biography is at a few places on the web - he's a product of Washington DC as much as Tennessee.  He served in the House first and then the Senate;
he "held the first congressional hearings on the climate change, and co-sponsor[ed] hearings on toxic waste and global warming," in the late 70s.  He helped his father write his anti-war speech for the DNC in '68.  I haven't found anything that looks like fiscal conservatism in his whole record; it could have been just granted because he made the right calls on guns, abortion, and school prayer.  That's nice, but it does not equal fiscal conservatism and doesn't prove anything except that he knew how to get elected.

310 Thank you for the good writeup. It in fact was a amusement account it. Look advanced to more added agreeable from you! However, how could we communicate?

311 Thank you for the good writeup. It in fact was a amusement account it. Look advanced to more added agreeable from you! mtv downloader  flv to dvd converter  dvd creator
  amv converter

312 I don't think the flip flops play as poorly to the general electorate as they do to GOP primary voters.

313 OK, I can see this is going to be the next OMG!-defeat-is-going-to-be-snatched-from-the-jaws-of-victory! hysteria until Hillary speculation returns, and like always it’s being pushed by the blogs. AOSHQ and Hotair have basically spent the last year making fun of "RINO hunters" and people who want a "TRUE CONSERVATIVE!!!111," echoing media talking points, trying to delegitimize every GOP candidate to Romney’s right as either too “extreme“ or too “inexperienced” or not “polished” enough or in some other way unelectable; so, unless y'all have been tacitly rooting for Huntsman all this time, isn’t Romney who you *wanted*? Well, guess what? In all probability, YOU GOT HIM! So, like him.

Anyway, I'm usually up for a good anti Romney meme, but this isÂ… well, kinda stupid. There are legitimate reasons to suspect that RomneyÂ’s electability is over-hyped, but being a flip-floppper really isnÂ’t one of them. The reasons why are as easy as ABC.

A: Obama is at least as big a flip-flopper as Romney. For every “flip-flopper” ad Obama runs, Romney can run a more damaging one back. Obama has flip-flopped on the individual mandate, presidential signing statements, the Patriot Act, having lobbyists in his administration, military tribunals, and DOMA (just to name a few).

B: Who cares if Mitt Romney is a flip-flopper? If people perceive Obama as ineffective, incompetent on the economy, and too liberal; and Romney as a flip-flopper, Romney wins--and not by a little. All Romney has to do to beat Obama is make the election *about Obama* (which it rightly should be). If he canÂ’t do that then he loses anyway, whether heÂ’s tagged as a flip-flopper, a meanie face, or an apple farmer. And thatÂ’s the legitimate concern about Romney--whether or not heÂ’s too cautious and defensive to be able to define the debate in a general election--not whether he can be pigeonholed as a flip-flopper.

C: “Flip-flopper” is an old-hat charge that people *already* associate with Mitt Romney. Saying Romney is a flip-flopper and hoping it gets traction would be like if Bill Clinton got back into politics, and then the GOP tried to bludgeon him over the head with the fact that he‘s a whore.

I should also addÂ…

D: For better or for worse, people generally don’t care that much about whether a politician is labeled as a flip-flopper even if they perceive it to be true. Case in point: Charlie Crist. Charlie Crist is a more transparent flip-flopper than Obama and Romney combined. In fact, he may be the most transparent flip-flopper in the history of politics. Yet had Kendrick Meek dropped out of the election last year, Charlie Crist would be Florida‘s junior Senator (albeit by only a one or two percent margin).

E: The ad itself is fucking weaksauce, both substantively and stylistically. If this is a preview of the general election then I'm feelin' pretty upbeat. Good LordÂ…

314

Remember that Reagan was a dem, before he was repub.  Still the best Prez I've voted for in.  Too bad he didn't have the kids that Bush's had. 

 

315 Bottom line: Support Perry. Forget mitt and newt.
Perry all the way.

There's 3 good reasons to support Perry (I know everyone can see what's coming):
1) He's one of the original not Romney's - why settle for one of the late Redjacks.
2) If you don't support him, you don't have a heart!
3)uhhh... umm.   errr.... 

oh EPA!

316 Unfortunately, Mormonism would be an issue if Romney were nominated.  I don't know how to discuss it without coming across as bigoted against Mormons, but the media will be unbelievably unfair about this.

I think that this may be the one thing that Harry Reid is good for, he would very likely throw a fit if Obamanation used this tactic.  Being one of "those" myself I never understood Reid's politics - they are very antithetical to LDS doctrine in many ways.  But I hear Reid is still active and loyal to the church.  If the Dems start the "Mormons are evil" thing Reid will likely pull his weight against his own party.  This tactic may backfire as well since it would be clear religious bigotry.  That may work with the lefty atheist and the right wing evangelicals - but most americans would be turned off by this type of politics.

Second - if they really do try and do a smack down of Mitt's faith, reverend Wright's church becomes open game.  McLame ignored it in 08, I don't think it will be ignored this go around if it comes up again. 

317 He. Won't. Do. Anything. And that's just not good enough.

There are a couple of folks here that have no clue as to Mitt Romney's abilities.  This is not a nice guy that never wins, Romney is a hard core type A workaholic that is used to taking on problems and fixing them.  A nice guy who can't win or get anything done does not become governer of blue state as a republican (yes - political pander was involved).  Then he took on that tiny 3 billion debt and in 4 years made it a 2 billion surpluss.  He got the dems to agree to get the freeloaders to start paying for there health care and worked to make it a private market solution and not gov. - the dreaded Romneycare.  Heritage inspired, bipartisan support, popular with MA voters, MA constituion approved and lauded by many conservative pundits in '08.  Disagree with it, but it was not a "do nothing" deal.  He saved the 2002 Olympics from debt and scandal and turned it around into one of the most successful Olympics ever (opinion of olympic commitee).  He has done the same thing for many failing companies - that is what does is turn things around for the better.

Mitt is not perfect. I like him but I am not a blinders on fanboy.  Saying he is a do nothing candidate, though, that's pure stupid.  Even Rick Perry is smarter than that!

318 Flip-Flopper, that would be Romney, Newt and Obama.

They have all done it.  If you look at the records, Obama is probably the worst of the three.