Meet the GOP's new "John Kerry"
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
Meet the GOP's new "John Kerry"
You know the story, right? A breakthrough politician from Massachusetts -- the state that's produced so many presidents, from John Adams to John Kennedy, and so many strong candidates over the years. Sure, he's boring at best and annoyingly pompous at worst, and there's something a little fake and a little too blow-dried about him. He's not the firebrand that the base of the party would so desperately love to see in the Oval Office. But the party rank-and-file is also convinced that the incumbent president will destroy the country if given a second term. The nominee has to be the person with the best chance of winning, not the best person.
The primary voters are going to go with their head this time around, not their heart.
It's the story of John Kerry, the Democratic primary voter, and the 2004 election -- and you know how that turned out in the end.
But now it's the story of Mitt Romney, the Republican primary voter, and 2012.
And the story probably ends the same way.
If you haven't noticed, Romney is starting to show a little daylight with the rest of the GOP pack, especially if his bete noir Sarah Palin skips the 2012 race, as may well happen. Check out this brand new poll:
Republicans' support for Mitt Romney as their party's 2012 presidential nominee has increased significantly to 24%, compared with 17% in late May. As a result, Romney has widened his advantage over Sarah Palin in the latest update on rank-and-file Republicans' nomination preferences.
The Gallup poll shows that Romney's support is getting wider but not very deep. His intensity of support, according to the pollster, is nowhere near that for two Tea Party favorites in the race, Herman Cain (who comes in second if Palin doesn't run) and Rep. Michele Bachmann. I flagged these poll numbers after listening a bit this morning to Dom Giordano on WPHT, who's been talking about Romney lately and said he's been surprised by his support from conservative Philadelphia-area callers.
Some Republicans are getting behind Romney, clearly, because right now polls are showing him with the best numbers in a head-to-head matchup with President Obama, who crushes most of the other GOP wannabes.
And so they rally behind Romney even though some leading Tea Party groups have said they will actively work to prevent him from getting the GOP nomination. They rally behind Romney despite the fact that Obama's health care plan that they despise is modelled after "Romneycare." They rally behind Romney even as the candidate draws scorn from Rush Limbaugh (usually the kiss of death in GOP primaries) for being virtually the only GOP hopeful to acknowledge global warming, and despite his flip flops over the years on abortion or even on the effectiveness of Ronald Reagan.
You know, the Democrats had this all figured out in 2004. John Kerry volunteered to go from Yale to Vietnam and won medals for his valor there, while Yalie George W. Bush hid in the Texas Air National Guard -- and so that would neutralize the GOP advantage on defense at a time when the nation was consumed with war and terrorism.
It didn't quite work out that way, did it? Now, you have Romney who's a "successful businessman" when the public is worried about jobs. But just like Karl Rove went right after Kerry's war record, the Democrats wiill relentlessly portray Romney as a job destroyer, not a job creator. And conservative voters won't have the intensity for Romney in November 2012 to overcome that.
So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.*
Thanks for blessing us with your brilliance and misplaced apostrophe, Dave. Good to hear that you are part of the "solution".— RG- Oh DaveAG, don't you dare point out Conservative stupidity, they'll get all frothy. You can attempt to soothsay them but petulance suits them, so you'll end up more frustrated. Mans' natural inkling is hostility, and with Conservatism being the ethic, it turns quickly to delusion. Their principles are DOA, and they hate it. With Mitt, at least their is a sense that privately, he's reasonable, and he understands sensible policies, even if they are totally rejected by the Right (man mande climate changes is not merely unsubstantiated, no, it's a HOAX). Anyway, look at atkins' retort to the post stating that the stimulus was a failure due to a bad initial estimate. Make no mistake about it, the economic team, and Romer in particular, flubbed the estimate. It points more to the depth of the Great Recession than anything. It in no way suggests failure. ATkins then has the temerity to turn this into the idea that the Obama admin. is 'destroying peoples' lives'. It's almost as though he wishes it were the case - peoples' lives must be destroyed. Anyway in my humble estimate Mitt Romney is clearly the most qualified Repub candidate and he wouldn't stand much of a chance in a general election -- Bachmann would garner much more support --- and although totally entertaining she's a disaster.— Murrayman
Comment removed.- Atkins understand I'm not even bothering to attempt to dissuade your utter partisan delusion - I'm concerned neophyte readers may actually dare think anything you posit as being credible. Obviously cutting government waste is a ruse and nothing more. Until defense and entitlements are dealt with and growth climbs back to historical trend the deficit and debt contiue to rise. No amount of cutting waste does anything. But to suggest that every dollar amount of the debt is due to spending OR that there was surplus in Jan 09 is ludicrous and deserves nothing but ridicule. What of course has driven the deficits in Obama's budgets are 1. drop in revenue and 2. increases in MANDATORY spending. Roughly 23% of the deficits in each of the two budgets (not projected, actual) have been due to discretionary spending. Of course this includes discretionary spending needed to have been authorized by Congress on an ongoing basis but initially proposed and legislated upon by the Bush administration. Understand that this does not mean it was unnecessary. In fact, this legislation was warranted, and for the most part has been successful (except the mortage modification program, and aspects of the Fannie takeover).— Murrayman
- Shorter Murray: "The stimulus worked, darn it! Why won't you people believe me? Multipliers! Economic phenomenon!"— RG
- How's bill deluded? You even admit that the president's task force on waste is a ruse. Which means he's deceiving the country instead of dealing with the actual issues.— RG
- Uh oh everyone, it's "I've seen with my own eyes" RG stance. There's no way to argue it! It's the "let me cherry pick some negative data to prove it". "Why don't you people believe me?" - Oh I know why: you're ignorant and delusional. "Economic phenomenon" - yeah, lol, kinda like how a volcano was an angry god mad about the lack of human sacrifice to a race of primitives living in it's shadow? Bill suggests that every dollar of the deficit is due to mandatory spending -- do I need to dumb down my posts and explain everything or do you not read them? I admit that the task force is political nonsense, but it's not deception - anyone with half a brain can see it for what it is. He's coddling his enemies, and flaunting them at the same time. He's in a way showing the nonsense that is the extreme Cut! Cut! Cut! mantra. Atkins also states specifically that passing the stimulus bill has ruined lives. I'll leave it to you to scream 'strawman' and then state "that's not what he said".— Murrayman
So much for the GOP's Tea Party revolt. Looks like the establishment has its man in Romney, who should breeze through the GOP primaries as the only sane choice. I predict we'll see Palin making a bid as a third party "Tea Party" candidate, as it's the kind of ego trip that suits her style. It doesn't have the pressure of winning any primaries, let alone the general election, and it doesn't require raising mega-bucks or state-by-state organizations. All she'll need to do is show up and give speeches wherever she darn well pleases.- MSL Palin has clearly shown that she will shield herself from the (hyper) criticism that would present itself if she were ultimately found to be the nominee. There's good reason for it: she's completely out of her depth when it comes to policy. Sure she loves America, but retreating to platitudes during debate is no way to garner support. She needs to ra-ra, nothing more. Key to learning is knowing your mistakes, and she can't even come clean on her flubs, like the Paul Revere and "I know foreign policy/Russia outside my door" nonsense. Romney would crush her on showing acute knowledge of the specifics, including finance and economics.— Murrayman
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Alot of people believe the stimulus didnt work. Look at the polls and Obamas approval ratings for the economy. Look at unemployment data, look at minimal gdp growth. Its you who lack proof, and its why you have to resort to calling those who dont believe stupid.
BTW, the waste oversight ruse isnt targeted at his enemies, its for his base and independants.— RG - Batty, speaking of oversight boards and such, who's going to account for the biggest "theft" in national history, the $6.6 billion in missing Iraq War funds? Sure, there's no Dems or liberals to blame so you might not really care; but I'm not RG, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and see.
- Atkins you suggested that all 14T of the debt is attributable to spending under Obama. That would mean that there was not debt when Obama took office, which would most likely entail there having been a surplus during the previous administration's last budget (fiscal overlapping calendar year). It's amazing - you make assertions and you don't understand neither the logic nor the mechanisms. What was the debt at the conclusion of the '08 budget? So, yes, you implied that because 14T is attributable to Obama and all of it was spending legislated under his administration. Your are -- AMAZING. Quick, let's test your knowledge so that going forward we can tailor responses that don't tie you up in knots: What are the three ways the Fed affects the money supply?— Murrayman
- Comment removed.
- Andrew Sullivan
- Blinq
- Blogorrhea
- Blonde Sagacity
- Free Republic
- Instapundit
- James Taranto
- ScrappleFace
- The Corner
- Buzzmachine
- Eat the Press
- Editor and Publisher
- Media (Huffington Post)
- Media Bloodhound
- Mickey Kaus
- Pressthink
- Romenesko
- The Inksniffer
- A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
- Above Average Jane
- BlankBaby
- Citizen Mom
- Keystone Blog
- Metroblogging Philadelphia
- Phawker
- Philadelphia - America's Hometown
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philebrity
- Philly Future
- Phillyblog
- Phillyist
- The Clog
- The Next Mayor
- Welcome to Phillyville
- Young Philly Politics
- Afro-Netizen
- All-Spin Zone
- Atrios
- Bad Attitudes
- Billmon
- Booman Tribune
- CorrenteWire
- Fables of the Reconstruction
- iFlipFlop
- Kiko's House
- MyDD
- Philly (Dragonballyee)
- Rowhouse Logic
- Slacktivist
- Suburban Guerilla
- Tattered Coat
- upyernoz
- AmericaBlog
- Andy Borowitz
- BuzzFlash
- Crooks and Liars
- Cursor
- Daily Kos
- David Sirota
- Drudge Report
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Fire Dog Lake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Hullabaloo
- Jesus' General
- Jon Swift
- Josh Marshall
- Juan Cole
- Kevin Drum
- Mad Kane
- Majikthise
- Matthew Yglesias
- Oliver Willis
- Raw Story
- Swing State Project
- Talk Left
- Taylor Marsh
- TBogg
- The Carpetbagger Report
- Think Progress
- War and Piece
- Wonkette
- A Citizen's Blog
- Balls, Sticks and Stuff
- Beer Leaguer
- Dick Polman
- Phillies Nation
- Philling Station
- Shallow Center
- The 700 Level
- The Good Phight
