Too bad the GOP leadership couldn’t capitalize on that low approval rating by the Democratically lead congress and lay out a plan for a sweeping conservative agenda that would re-gain the congress for the GOP.
I can only echo your feelings…It just seems that any action that Congress undertakes is not conducive to public approval. Very often, the elements necessary for successful legislation- time, patience, compromise, debate- are bypassed because the American public only responds to sound bites and swift action. A catch-22 type thing for Congress.
Funny thing is, I’m not sure most people realize that Dems, not Reps, are in control of Congress. If they did, it would start becoming toxic to have a D after your name. If the best you can do is a measley 9% approval, how in the world should you be viable for dog catcher, much less positioned to expand your lead in the House and pick up several Senate seats in the mix?
How come there aren’t any indications of voters’ desire to kick out all of these incumbents from both parties then?
Maybe there is and/or there is still time for that to happen. I am genuinely wondering if anyone has an answer.
This question is intended for anyone who supported McCain during the primaries. If McCain is the “sheriff” when it comes to spending, was he asleep the past 8 years? Why didn’t he try to get President Bush to veto Republican spending bills?
He tried and damaged a lot of relationships while doing it. No one listened to him, until now. I keep reading stories of congressman swearing off pork.
There is a great video on YoutTube of McCain blasting Patty Murray for forcing the Navy to order boats they could not use. These boats were made by a company that contributes to Patty Murray.
Shortly after the boats were delivered, the Navy gave them away for free to various groups.
This new article sure makes it seem like Romney is angling to become the head of the RNC, which is the perfect post for him. He can work to rebuild the indentity and brand of the party. This is the kind of change and leadership he is accustomed to taking on.
I want my money back. I want a full refund of my tax dollars from Ms. Pelosi and Harry Reid for the last two years. With a written apology explaining their ineptitude. Sign a petition anyone?
#13: Horrible news. Romney is the last guy we want branding the Republican party!
He has no idea how to present SoCon ideas in a manner that does not turn off the middle. McCain does, Bush does (sorta), Reagan did, others do. He does not.
This is pretty funny, CNN does this long interview with Romney about the war, spending, taxes, and a brief blip at the end about the Republican Convention and what does CNN title the video? “Romney Dodges Bush question”. Just another great example of media bias.
I just watched the video and there was some good answers there. That does make me chuckle that they came up with that in order to keep people from focusing on the stronger messages in the video.
9% Wow that is worse than a National League pitchers batting average. Pelosi better start bunting and hoping someone will throw the ball away.
Nice job on the title of the article considering in the last 48 hours there have been hundreds and hundreds of comments on this site about Romney and his VP prospects. Clever.
All we’ve been hearing come out of Congress lately is:
1) The fight over child health care (CHIP) for middle-class people.
2) Income Tax Rebates
3) Fighting over FISA - Democrats don’t want to keep the country safe and Republicans don’t care about privacy (these are the arguments being made, not that I endorse both of the arguments).
4) Hearings on every friggin’ teeny tiny little thing President Bush ever did in office as Democrats try to “avenge themselves” of what happened to President Clinton (impeached).
5) “No” - as in “No drilling.” “No nuclear.” “No one should be driving SUV’s or big pickups.”
Also, we’ve heard plenty about personal failings of our supposed leaders in Congress. They can’t keep their pants zipped up. They can’t stop taking bribes. They can’t keep their stories straight. Politicians in general have been one giant bad-news story lately.
The most depressing thing about this survey is even though people disapprove Congress, they approve of the Democrats.
I suspect it might hark back to the fact that Democrats are acting like Democrats and Republicans are acting like Democrats. Given the choice between a real Democrat and a fake Democrat, whom are you going to vote for?
In my opinion — and after all, that’s all it is for everybody, their opinion — McCain will not take Michigan, with or without Romney. In fact, I don’t think McCain will take even one state that Kerry won in 2004. McCain is completely playing defensive — and his goal is — or at least should be — to defend and hold what Bush took in the 2004 election. And again, opinion only, I think McCain will be unsuccessful at that. Iowa is going, as is Colorado and most likely New Mexico; McCain, I think, will keep Nevada, but if he doesn’t hold it on his own, I doubt Romney will pull it over; and, if Romney is on the ticket, McCain stands a good chance losing Ohio and VA. In addition, although more unlikely, the combination of Romney, Barr and potentially Nunn for Obama’s VP could drive GA into Obama’s column. At the very least, GA, VA and a few other southern states become competitive — where McCain will need to spend money (Romney better do lots of fundraising), unless McCain truly wants to play Russian roulette.
Romney would be harmful, Pawlenty will add nothing. (Can’t you just hear the democrats crying out Bush III — even has Bush/Cheney/Rove choice of VP). I know you will all go through the roof, but — to steal a line from Illinoisguy — the field is crying out for Huckabee: Potentially he might hold Iowa, he keeps the south noncompetitive and solid and he plays beautifully to Ohio blue collar workers. The independents that he loses — i.e., the pro-choice, etc crowd and the feminists — are already gone. Oh, yeah, I know he loses you guys — but you are not going to believe this — you don’t make up the total voting constituency. I don’t know if Huckabee could pull it off; frankly I would rather him not on this ticket (a wish I am sure I will be granted).
#27, I disagree. McCain will win NH, no matter what the polls are saying now. A week before the NH primary the voters turned heavily for McCain. At the end of October he will be far ahead in the polls.
McCain is an exact demographic for a NH voter. In December, was McCain not in 3rd or 4th place in some NH polls?
If Romney generates this much controversy that we’re always arguing over him, he may not be a good VP pick. I think McCain will take New Hampshire. I know some of the activists here, and they run a very good GOTV operation. I think it will come down to a couple things. Will there be a Bradley Effect? If so, McCain wins. The other question mark is the cultural conservative but Democratic cities such as Nashua, Manchester, Rochester, Berlin, and Somersworth. All went overwhelmingly for Hillary in the primary. Are these people open to McCain? Some are; some aren’t.
How does Romney hurt the ticket in GA? The guy came with in a few percentage points of winning the primary here plus he’s only added to his conservative creds since exiting the race. This notion that Romney hurts the ticket in the South is bogus and I don’t buy it.
Also not to mention that Romney is nothing like Bush, Bush’s people have have backed Romney but Mitt is to the right of Bush on spending,immigration and does not have the gung-ho approach to foreign policy. Plus he has solid economic cred, plus he actually implemented health care with a conservative approach while reaching across the aisle to work with Dems.
Sean M, Romney was a good Governor, and exceptional business leader, and he saved the state of Utah from embarrassment, when he turned around the SLC Olympics. Romney no doubt is an ethical man, who loves his family.
but…..this is not the VP pick for McCain. The electorate is looking for McCain to pick someone under 55, who had “not been through the ringer”. McCain needs to go outside of the box on this one.
It seems to me that in today’s world a good Governor, exceptional business leader, saviour of the winter olympics, a once married, ethical man with a fantastic family is ‘out of the box’!
I don’t want no rookie politician or some little congressman a heart beat from the Presidency. I want McCain to pick someone who has proven experience.
#32 Romney hurts GA because of the votes Huckabee took, not the votes that Romney took — many of Huck voters refuse to vote for a Romney ticket (and, no, not because he is a Mormon but because he was so negative and hypocrtical). Some, of course, will reluctantly vote, but enough won’t. And all Obama needs is an edge. Obama will keep it competitive, and McCain will be forced to spend money. Likewise with all the southern states. McCain’s campaign realizes that and his advisors note the depressed southern effect as one of Romney’s big negatives. Doesn’t matter if you don’t buy it; it’s not your campaign on the line. The problem for McCain is that he is being improperly advised (as compared to Obama, who is getting excellent advice). For that reason, I do believe that McCain will choose Romney, against his better judgment, and live to regret it. And after the election, the media pundits will rise to tell us all how Romney depressed the evangelicals, how McCain was too tied in to Rove & co., and how Huckabee might have pulled McCain through. Let’s wait and see, okay?
#29 — I agree with you that Huckabee will not be picked, but not because he is a Fox analyst. That contract has a VP out, like any legal contract. He won’t be picked because McCain is surrounded and being out-thought by Romney supporters. Actually McCain probably wants Pawlenty (if his maverick ways win out, that’s how he will go), but Romney establishment is pushing very hard indeed and dangling the dollars, and boy John has gotten very greedy. Since I have contributed to him considerably thus far, I receive at least three requests per week from him. From a comfort level, I believe Pawlenty would be his first choice (out of sheer loyalty), Huck would be his second (they really do like each other) and Romney is his dead last. But I do think Romney will ultimately get the bid.
#41 — the complaint is not pointing out your opponents’ record, but criticizing your opponent (be it Huckabee or McCain) for the very things that you did.
At any rate, we differ in opinion — and these voters differ; but when they pull the lever for Barr, or sit home, their effect is felt the same whether or not you agree with them.
It sounds like you want your cake and eat to. If the Romney camp is allow to point out negative aspects in other candidates (which in deed each of the candidates have at one negative or two aspects) then, they must accept the fact that other will point out the negative aspects of Mr. Romney. It is a two way street. I respect my own local radio host (who supported Romney in the end) because he brought up the Pro and Cons of all the candidates. Many on talk radio attacked some of Mr. Romney’s opponents while ignoring Mr. Romney’s short-comings. This is one of the reasons that many in our party are upset with the Romney camp. In fact I once was so mad at these characters that I told myself that I would vote for Dr. Paul as an Independent in the general should Mr. Romney lead us. Fortunately, these characters have since come back to the mean stream of the party and I have calmed down somewhat (at least until recently when we start hearing some of these concerning items.)
Many on talk radio attacked some of Mr. Romney’s opponents while ignoring Mr. Romney’s short-comings. This is one of the reasons that many in our party are upset with the Romney camp
Why would Ingrahm, Rush, Hannity attack someone that is lined up with them ideologically? Sure they know about his past but they’ve probably forgiven him for it.
They should have been more intellectually honest. It’s dishonest to lambaste McCain as a RINO and point out every deviation from party orthodoxy to drive home that point and then turn a blind eye to the fact that Romney was at least as bad only a short time ago. It’s a slimey way to run a radio program. The corportations and the elites had their guy. So did the Bushies - who by the way are largely responsible for the shell of a party we call the GOP today - who also, by the way, came to power because of Limbaugh and his ilk. Limbaugh and company are just part of the establishment now. That’s why Republicans are losing the working class.
People know full well that the disaster that has been the Bush administration (at least the disaster to the GOP) happened because Limbaugh and company forced him upon us in 2000. Limbaugh and the others got a well-deserved slap down this year.
To further illustrate my point - look at it this way. Rush Limbaugh carried on and on about “comprehensive immigration reform”. He made sure to tell everyone how terrible it is and how it was going to cause the world to end. But why? In 2000 when Bush was kissing up to Vicente Fox and proclaiming that family values don’t end at the Rio Grande and basically winked and nodded and let it be known that all these Mexicans would be welcome in the country under a Bush administration, where was Limbaugh? He was with the rest of the GOP elites in pushing for this guy. Where was all the talk about how Bush was going to sell out the country with this immigration scheme, if that’s what Limbaugh believed?
He surely enjoys holding up immigration as a bogeyman against McCain though, doesn’t he? He sure knows how to stir up a hornet’s nest on that issue when it’s convenient for the party elite and their chosen one, be it Bush or Romney.
And another instance is just a few weeks ago. I was ready to scream. McCain was making a speech and trying to distance himself from the party while Obama was trying to tie McCain to Bush. Limbaugh got his big underwear in a knot over this. He was furious at the fact that McCain was trying to run away from the Republican label and that Obama wasn’t running from being a Democrat. But why did McCain do this? He had to do this. Why? Because George Bush has terrible polling numbers. And we got George Bush because of people like Limbaugh!
17, yeah mccain definetly does. calling socons “agents of intolerance” definetly shows his ability to speak about social issues without offending others.
Romney is not perfect, but he is looking like the best choice.
I think Romney’s main problem is his inabililty to connect with a large amount of the electorate. I think he would be a phenomenal president. extremly competent and articulate with impeccable leadership skills. but his ability to win seems to be limited. as a huge romney fan, this is what makes me doubt his viability.
but as a vp, that criticism is not as relevant. he does have a connection with mi voters that I really do think will seriously help mccaint take michigan. He is also tested and vetted. we already know he can stay on message and be mccain go to guy. He also helps mccain with his money problems, the economy issues, and the age issue. whil not perfect, he is a good choice.
I don’t know why, but Palin keeps growing on me. Although I don’t think she would do as good of a job as Romney, she would create a lot of excitement to the average person. Her abiltiy to connect with voters is her strength I think, Romney’s exact weakness.
July 8th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
If anyone has not been paying attention Romney was the winner of the MSNBC online veepstakes.
July 8th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Those numbers make Bush look like Mr. Popularity
Well, we have gotten to the point where most voters just can’t stand the federal gvt, no matter if the Democrats or Republicans are leading it.
July 8th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Too bad the GOP leadership couldn’t capitalize on that low approval rating by the Democratically lead congress and lay out a plan for a sweeping conservative agenda that would re-gain the congress for the GOP.
July 8th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
I can only echo your feelings…It just seems that any action that Congress undertakes is not conducive to public approval. Very often, the elements necessary for successful legislation- time, patience, compromise, debate- are bypassed because the American public only responds to sound bites and swift action. A catch-22 type thing for Congress.
July 8th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Funny thing is, I’m not sure most people realize that Dems, not Reps, are in control of Congress. If they did, it would start becoming toxic to have a D after your name. If the best you can do is a measley 9% approval, how in the world should you be viable for dog catcher, much less positioned to expand your lead in the House and pick up several Senate seats in the mix?
July 8th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
McCain could run against Congress… “Stop Obama from rubber stamping everything Congress does.”
Oh, wait… I forgot about the last eight years.
Ok, I know… “Hey kids, can you say ‘veto’?”
July 8th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Why again does Obama want someone from congress as his VP?
July 8th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
How come there aren’t any indications of voters’ desire to kick out all of these incumbents from both parties then?
Maybe there is and/or there is still time for that to happen. I am genuinely wondering if anyone has an answer.
July 8th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
This question is intended for anyone who supported McCain during the primaries. If McCain is the “sheriff” when it comes to spending, was he asleep the past 8 years? Why didn’t he try to get President Bush to veto Republican spending bills?
July 8th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
I have NEVER seen so many spineless, brainless, anti-Constitutional two-faced crooks in my life, as I have seen in this Congress.
With the singular exception of the gentleman from Texas’s Fourteenth District–
Worst. Congress. Ever.
July 8th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
8. There are.
July 8th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
#9, Sean M,
He tried and damaged a lot of relationships while doing it. No one listened to him, until now. I keep reading stories of congressman swearing off pork.
There is a great video on YoutTube of McCain blasting Patty Murray for forcing the Navy to order boats they could not use. These boats were made by a company that contributes to Patty Murray.
Shortly after the boats were delivered, the Navy gave them away for free to various groups.
July 8th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
This new article sure makes it seem like Romney is angling to become the head of the RNC, which is the perfect post for him. He can work to rebuild the indentity and brand of the party. This is the kind of change and leadership he is accustomed to taking on.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
July 8th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
#12, I seem to remember a guy named Tom Coburn.
July 8th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
I want my money back. I want a full refund of my tax dollars from Ms. Pelosi and Harry Reid for the last two years. With a written apology explaining their ineptitude. Sign a petition anyone?
July 8th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
#13: Horrible news. Romney is the last guy we want branding the Republican party!
He has no idea how to present SoCon ideas in a manner that does not turn off the middle. McCain does, Bush does (sorta), Reagan did, others do. He does not.
July 8th, 2008 at 5:50 pm
Metro…
McCain does??? Come on….
July 8th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
This is pretty funny, CNN does this long interview with Romney about the war, spending, taxes, and a brief blip at the end about the Republican Convention and what does CNN title the video? “Romney Dodges Bush question”. Just another great example of media bias.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/07/08/romney.tsr.interview.cnn?iref=videosearch
July 8th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
What on Earth does this have to do with Romney’s VP viability?
17 — I think that McCain does.
July 8th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Emtee,
I just watched the video and there was some good answers there. That does make me chuckle that they came up with that in order to keep people from focusing on the stronger messages in the video.
9% Wow that is worse than a National League pitchers batting average. Pelosi better start bunting and hoping someone will throw the ball away.
July 8th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Alex how so? On which issues other than the war!
July 8th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Sean,
Nice job on the title of the article considering in the last 48 hours there have been hundreds and hundreds of comments on this site about Romney and his VP prospects. Clever.
July 8th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
I agree with Case. This was a nice post, Sean.
All we’ve been hearing come out of Congress lately is:
1) The fight over child health care (CHIP) for middle-class people.
2) Income Tax Rebates
3) Fighting over FISA - Democrats don’t want to keep the country safe and Republicans don’t care about privacy (these are the arguments being made, not that I endorse both of the arguments).
4) Hearings on every friggin’ teeny tiny little thing President Bush ever did in office as Democrats try to “avenge themselves” of what happened to President Clinton (impeached).
5) “No” - as in “No drilling.” “No nuclear.” “No one should be driving SUV’s or big pickups.”
Also, we’ve heard plenty about personal failings of our supposed leaders in Congress. They can’t keep their pants zipped up. They can’t stop taking bribes. They can’t keep their stories straight. Politicians in general have been one giant bad-news story lately.
July 8th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
The most depressing thing about this survey is even though people disapprove Congress, they approve of the Democrats.
I suspect it might hark back to the fact that Democrats are acting like Democrats and Republicans are acting like Democrats. Given the choice between a real Democrat and a fake Democrat, whom are you going to vote for?
July 8th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Wow, we just got reminded of how amazingly articulate Mitt is no matter what is being asked. Watch Hannity and C tonight for more!
July 8th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
21 — No, no, re-read what he wrote. He said that McCain presents SO-CON issues to the middle without turning them off, unlike Romney.
July 8th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
In my opinion — and after all, that’s all it is for everybody, their opinion — McCain will not take Michigan, with or without Romney. In fact, I don’t think McCain will take even one state that Kerry won in 2004. McCain is completely playing defensive — and his goal is — or at least should be — to defend and hold what Bush took in the 2004 election. And again, opinion only, I think McCain will be unsuccessful at that. Iowa is going, as is Colorado and most likely New Mexico; McCain, I think, will keep Nevada, but if he doesn’t hold it on his own, I doubt Romney will pull it over; and, if Romney is on the ticket, McCain stands a good chance losing Ohio and VA. In addition, although more unlikely, the combination of Romney, Barr and potentially Nunn for Obama’s VP could drive GA into Obama’s column. At the very least, GA, VA and a few other southern states become competitive — where McCain will need to spend money (Romney better do lots of fundraising), unless McCain truly wants to play Russian roulette.
Romney would be harmful, Pawlenty will add nothing. (Can’t you just hear the democrats crying out Bush III — even has Bush/Cheney/Rove choice of VP). I know you will all go through the roof, but — to steal a line from Illinoisguy — the field is crying out for Huckabee: Potentially he might hold Iowa, he keeps the south noncompetitive and solid and he plays beautifully to Ohio blue collar workers. The independents that he loses — i.e., the pro-choice, etc crowd and the feminists — are already gone. Oh, yeah, I know he loses you guys — but you are not going to believe this — you don’t make up the total voting constituency. I don’t know if Huckabee could pull it off; frankly I would rather him not on this ticket (a wish I am sure I will be granted).
July 8th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
#27, I disagree. McCain will win NH, no matter what the polls are saying now. A week before the NH primary the voters turned heavily for McCain. At the end of October he will be far ahead in the polls.
McCain is an exact demographic for a NH voter. In December, was McCain not in 3rd or 4th place in some NH polls?
July 8th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Huckabee wont be picked, even though I think he’s a good VP pick. He’s gonna be a political analyst on FNC.
July 8th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
NH could go for McCain, but I’m not really sure. Though I don’t think his choice of VP will make a difference in that state.
July 8th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
If Romney generates this much controversy that we’re always arguing over him, he may not be a good VP pick. I think McCain will take New Hampshire. I know some of the activists here, and they run a very good GOTV operation. I think it will come down to a couple things. Will there be a Bradley Effect? If so, McCain wins. The other question mark is the cultural conservative but Democratic cities such as Nashua, Manchester, Rochester, Berlin, and Somersworth. All went overwhelmingly for Hillary in the primary. Are these people open to McCain? Some are; some aren’t.
July 8th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
How does Romney hurt the ticket in GA? The guy came with in a few percentage points of winning the primary here plus he’s only added to his conservative creds since exiting the race. This notion that Romney hurts the ticket in the South is bogus and I don’t buy it.
July 8th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Also not to mention that Romney is nothing like Bush, Bush’s people have have backed Romney but Mitt is to the right of Bush on spending,immigration and does not have the gung-ho approach to foreign policy. Plus he has solid economic cred, plus he actually implemented health care with a conservative approach while reaching across the aisle to work with Dems.
July 8th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Sean M, Romney was a good Governor, and exceptional business leader, and he saved the state of Utah from embarrassment, when he turned around the SLC Olympics. Romney no doubt is an ethical man, who loves his family.
but…..this is not the VP pick for McCain. The electorate is looking for McCain to pick someone under 55, who had “not been through the ringer”. McCain needs to go outside of the box on this one.
July 8th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
It seems to me that in today’s world a good Governor, exceptional business leader, saviour of the winter olympics, a once married, ethical man with a fantastic family is ‘out of the box’!
July 8th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
ha! #35, you may be correct.
July 8th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
I don’t want no rookie politician or some little congressman a heart beat from the Presidency. I want McCain to pick someone who has proven experience.
July 8th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
#37 it must be a Governor.
July 8th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
I agree my first choice would be Romney, then Sanford, Pawlenty and Palin.
July 8th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
#32 Romney hurts GA because of the votes Huckabee took, not the votes that Romney took — many of Huck voters refuse to vote for a Romney ticket (and, no, not because he is a Mormon but because he was so negative and hypocrtical). Some, of course, will reluctantly vote, but enough won’t. And all Obama needs is an edge. Obama will keep it competitive, and McCain will be forced to spend money. Likewise with all the southern states. McCain’s campaign realizes that and his advisors note the depressed southern effect as one of Romney’s big negatives. Doesn’t matter if you don’t buy it; it’s not your campaign on the line. The problem for McCain is that he is being improperly advised (as compared to Obama, who is getting excellent advice). For that reason, I do believe that McCain will choose Romney, against his better judgment, and live to regret it. And after the election, the media pundits will rise to tell us all how Romney depressed the evangelicals, how McCain was too tied in to Rove & co., and how Huckabee might have pulled McCain through. Let’s wait and see, okay?
#29 — I agree with you that Huckabee will not be picked, but not because he is a Fox analyst. That contract has a VP out, like any legal contract. He won’t be picked because McCain is surrounded and being out-thought by Romney supporters. Actually McCain probably wants Pawlenty (if his maverick ways win out, that’s how he will go), but Romney establishment is pushing very hard indeed and dangling the dollars, and boy John has gotten very greedy. Since I have contributed to him considerably thus far, I receive at least three requests per week from him. From a comfort level, I believe Pawlenty would be his first choice (out of sheer loyalty), Huck would be his second (they really do like each other) and Romney is his dead last. But I do think Romney will ultimately get the bid.
July 8th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
Except Romney was never negative, pointing out your opponents record is not going negative, it’s telling the truth.
July 9th, 2008 at 12:04 am
#41 — the complaint is not pointing out your opponents’ record, but criticizing your opponent (be it Huckabee or McCain) for the very things that you did.
At any rate, we differ in opinion — and these voters differ; but when they pull the lever for Barr, or sit home, their effect is felt the same whether or not you agree with them.
July 9th, 2008 at 4:37 am
Sean M,
It sounds like you want your cake and eat to. If the Romney camp is allow to point out negative aspects in other candidates (which in deed each of the candidates have at one negative or two aspects) then, they must accept the fact that other will point out the negative aspects of Mr. Romney. It is a two way street. I respect my own local radio host (who supported Romney in the end) because he brought up the Pro and Cons of all the candidates. Many on talk radio attacked some of Mr. Romney’s opponents while ignoring Mr. Romney’s short-comings. This is one of the reasons that many in our party are upset with the Romney camp. In fact I once was so mad at these characters that I told myself that I would vote for Dr. Paul as an Independent in the general should Mr. Romney lead us. Fortunately, these characters have since come back to the mean stream of the party and I have calmed down somewhat (at least until recently when we start hearing some of these concerning items.)
July 9th, 2008 at 7:47 am
Cough. Gag. Er. Limbaugh. Cough. Cackle. Ingraham. Gag.
Yes - that’s exactly true. I hopped on the Romney for VP train out of pragmatism. But that quote is 100 percent spot on.
July 9th, 2008 at 8:30 am
Why would Ingrahm, Rush, Hannity attack someone that is lined up with them ideologically? Sure they know about his past but they’ve probably forgiven him for it.
July 9th, 2008 at 8:54 am
Sean,
They should have been more intellectually honest. It’s dishonest to lambaste McCain as a RINO and point out every deviation from party orthodoxy to drive home that point and then turn a blind eye to the fact that Romney was at least as bad only a short time ago. It’s a slimey way to run a radio program. The corportations and the elites had their guy. So did the Bushies - who by the way are largely responsible for the shell of a party we call the GOP today - who also, by the way, came to power because of Limbaugh and his ilk. Limbaugh and company are just part of the establishment now. That’s why Republicans are losing the working class.
People know full well that the disaster that has been the Bush administration (at least the disaster to the GOP) happened because Limbaugh and company forced him upon us in 2000. Limbaugh and the others got a well-deserved slap down this year.
July 9th, 2008 at 9:05 am
To further illustrate my point - look at it this way. Rush Limbaugh carried on and on about “comprehensive immigration reform”. He made sure to tell everyone how terrible it is and how it was going to cause the world to end. But why? In 2000 when Bush was kissing up to Vicente Fox and proclaiming that family values don’t end at the Rio Grande and basically winked and nodded and let it be known that all these Mexicans would be welcome in the country under a Bush administration, where was Limbaugh? He was with the rest of the GOP elites in pushing for this guy. Where was all the talk about how Bush was going to sell out the country with this immigration scheme, if that’s what Limbaugh believed?
He surely enjoys holding up immigration as a bogeyman against McCain though, doesn’t he? He sure knows how to stir up a hornet’s nest on that issue when it’s convenient for the party elite and their chosen one, be it Bush or Romney.
And another instance is just a few weeks ago. I was ready to scream. McCain was making a speech and trying to distance himself from the party while Obama was trying to tie McCain to Bush. Limbaugh got his big underwear in a knot over this. He was furious at the fact that McCain was trying to run away from the Republican label and that Obama wasn’t running from being a Democrat. But why did McCain do this? He had to do this. Why? Because George Bush has terrible polling numbers. And we got George Bush because of people like Limbaugh!
Limbaugh is more trouble than he is worth.
July 9th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Except McCain is no better than Bush on immigration so maybe Rush learned his lesson on backing someone who supports that position.
July 9th, 2008 at 9:50 am
Well wouldn’t that be convenient?
July 9th, 2008 at 10:07 am
17, yeah mccain definetly does. calling socons “agents of intolerance” definetly shows his ability to speak about social issues without offending others.
July 9th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Romney is not perfect, but he is looking like the best choice.
I think Romney’s main problem is his inabililty to connect with a large amount of the electorate. I think he would be a phenomenal president. extremly competent and articulate with impeccable leadership skills. but his ability to win seems to be limited. as a huge romney fan, this is what makes me doubt his viability.
but as a vp, that criticism is not as relevant. he does have a connection with mi voters that I really do think will seriously help mccaint take michigan. He is also tested and vetted. we already know he can stay on message and be mccain go to guy. He also helps mccain with his money problems, the economy issues, and the age issue. whil not perfect, he is a good choice.
I don’t know why, but Palin keeps growing on me. Although I don’t think she would do as good of a job as Romney, she would create a lot of excitement to the average person. Her abiltiy to connect with voters is her strength I think, Romney’s exact weakness.
July 9th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Mrs. Palin is not as experience as most candidates, but she is more Conservative than most candidates. Her knowledge of the Energy sector is a plus.
July 9th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Mrs. Palin does not complement McCain’s weaknesses - that’s my primary argument with her. She does not talk effectively about issues.