Wednesday, January 02, 2008
|
|
Romney and the Al Davis Republicans
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
9:40 AM
|
There are lots of Republicans who will vote for the candidate they think can beat either Senator Clinton or Obama in November. "Just win, baby," is Al Davis' memorable phrase, and the need to keep the White House in center-right hands during the war and as four to six Supreme Court vacancies looms matters more than any particular issue.
Geraghty the Indispensable summarizes a CNN interview with Romney that must influence every Al Davis Republican who sees it:
Mitt Romney Talks to CNN in a Diner
Romney, appearing in an almost Lamar Alexander-esque plaid shirt, appeared on CNN, moments ago.
"I was 22 points behind just a few weeks ago. I was pleased to see your poll which has me in the lead here. Polls are all over the place, we'll see what finally happens."
"There are three tickets out of Iowa, two tickets out of New Hampshire. I'm the only guy playing in both markets, and who has potential to do well in both."
CNN shows the McCain web ad, charging he said the next president doesn't need foreign policy experience.
"It's very helpful for the next president to be like Ronald Reagan. Someone who can provide a fresh start, who isn't tied to score-settlting in Washington... Somebody who's spend their whole carer in Washington is not what America needs."
"John McCain is an honorbale person, but he's proving you can be an honorable person and still be wrong."
He's asked about yesterday's comment, that "Ann and I will never embarrass you in the White House."
"I'm not referring to anybody, we're referring to ourselves... We can't be perfect, but we'll try to be an example for the kinds of values Americans expect in their leaders."
Asked about a poll that indicates voters find Huckabee more likeable: "Mike's a likeable guy. I like him as well. But I'm glad that poll also shows me leading."
The GOP voter who wanst the best shot looks at McCain and Thompson and thinks "Bob Dole." They look at Huck and think "We'd lose 45 states, maybe more."
They wonder where Rudy went and if he'll be back.
In Iowa and New Hampshire, the Al Davis Republicans will be voting for Romney.
|
|
|
to our credibility? I'm just not sure if I can stomach the Clintonian Romney championing our cause. I hope I'm wrong and Hugh is right because I want to like Romney but his character flaw of exageration makes it hard for me to trust him. |
|
That's a very nice summation of the sole principle the GOP still clings to: Just win.
Smaller government, restraints on power, ethics, trust, and fiscal responsibility be darned. |
|
Romney has the highest negatives of any of the major GOP candidates, and does the worst against the Dems in head-to-head polls.
How does this make him the candiate of the pragmatics?
He's a dog (book royalties and administration position coveting notwithstanding).
+ + + |
|
Nobody that I know looks at McCain or Thompson and thinks "Bob Dole". There are no similarities whatsoever, aside from serving in the Senate.
If a logical Al Davis Republican is trying to win, he will look at who can pick up the most independents, not the most Republicans. Romney is a Country Club Republican's dream, but he's got nothing for the middle-class independent.
McCain has cred with independents. Thompson has star power, even if some of that has worn off. Ron Paul has the issues (75% of independents want out of Iraq, and are concerned about the economy) that can win those votes. Romney has none of those things. If Chuck Hagel were running, he'd pick up the Al Davis vote. As it is, it splits 3 ways, between Paul, McCain, and Thompson, with maybe a smidge going to Giuliani before he falls apart. NONE will go to Romney. To say otherwise is disingenuous. |
|
Take a look at the actual polls:
McCain +5.0% over Clinton
Clinton +1.8% over Giuliani
Clinton +4.8% over Huckabee
Clinton +4.8% over Romney
Clinton +7.5% over Thompson
McCain & Obama TIED
Obama +5.7% over Giuliani
Obama +10.4% over Huckabee
Obama +11.8% over Romney
Obama +12.0% over Thompson
Edwards +2.7% over Giuliani
Edwards +3.7% over McCain
Edwards +13.3% over Thompson
Edwards +14.3% over Huckabee
Edwards +16.5% over Romney
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nati onal.html
Everyone knows that McCain and Giuliani are the two viable candidates for the general election. We've all been hoping that a more conservative but still electable alternative would arise, but as Iowa prepares to vote, we’ve all had to accept the fact that this isn’t going to happen. We’re stuck with the six choices we have, and only two of those can win the general.
This is a key to McCain’s rise, BTW. As polls have consistently shown him as even more electable than Giuliani, the pragmatists have migrated from Rudy to John. There are still some narrow-issue voters out there counterproductively supporting Paul, Hunter, Huckabee, etc., but the “just win” crowd is increasingly trending toward McCain. |
|
|
Huckabee is basically tied for first but who knows, the polls are all over the place. Romney is the most likely to lose in a national election, tieing with Hillary for that honor. Give up Hugh. |
|
|
He's far from the "just win baby" candidate on our side. He probably has a good shot against Hillary, but he'll get beat fairly soundly against Obama or Edwards, unless one of them makes some fairly huge mistakes. Again, I like him and would vote for him easily, but he just seems to rub a lot of people the wrong way, particularly independents who really should like him more based on his policies. |
|
To quote Al Davis, affiliating him in any way to make your point about republican aspirations is feckless. Al Davis is an A$$.
Here's a guy who has littlest value for his team players as evidenced by the behavior he exhibited towards Marcus Allen.
Al Davis, the promoter of "gang culture" by supporting the sales of his team Logo, as it appears on clothing sold to inner city gang culture in Los Angeles and Oakland and other large cities.
HE DID NOTHING TO COUNTER THIS IMAGE! Nothing. And he was fully aware of it being used for this thug mentality.
He never said "squat".
Never came out against gang behavior. He never made a single comment to this issue. "Raider Nation" thrived, lived, breathed, continues to, within thug circles.
****AL DAVIS pocketed a $10 million dollar "good faith" deposit paid by the city of Irwindale in southern California in attempt to attract the Raiders to that area.
Al Davis is scum. To affiliate his name with republican party is a disservice to the latter. |
|
|
Perhaps many voters are still waiting for the 'just waiting' guy. Say, after Feb. 5. If the poll is correct that many are sick and tired of Iowa and NH determining the Pub guy, my guess is wait till after Feb. 5. |
|
Winner of 2008 Republican Iowa Caucus
Wednesday 1pm Eastern
MR appears in free fall on InTrade - looks like a great bet
REP.IOWA.HUCKABEE
Mike Huckabee to Win M 60.0 69.8 70.0 2088 +17.5
REP.IOWA.ROMNEY
Mitt Romney to Win M 33.5 35.0 35.1 2497 -3.4 |
|
|
|
Didn't know who Al Davis was,so thanks for filling in the info gap for me. "Just win, baby" is the Clinton campaign philosophy and hopefully we (Republicans) will always want to "win, rightly!"
Have you ever asked Hugh if you could replace Dean??? |
|
Fred is right and I love him personally, but his speeches do not inspire. Actually they bore to tears (I listened intently yesterday to him in Iowa on C-span)and I was very disappointed with him.
Sorry. |
|
"Just Win" is an apt summary of today's Repubs. Principle be damned. Philosophy be damned. Just win. And you guys are good at it too.
Another apt element, since Hugh brought it up, is the fact "the winningnest franchise is sports" (remember that moniker?) is no longer so "winningnest." Al Davis was great once, but the game has passed him by. Clarityseeker is right to be steamed. I would be too. But from where I sit, once in awhile, Hugh blurts out some sweet truths.. |
|
Seehawk ~
I appreciate your comments. As a suggestion, you might want to watch Fred's "Message to Iowa Voters" if you have not done so. Personaly, presidential oratory skills do not rank anywhere near character and policy positions. The 17-minute message can be viewed at http://www.fred08.com
|
|
Seehawk ~
I appreciate your comments.
Personally, presidential oratory skills are not nearly as important as character and policy positions.
You may wish to view Fred's "Message to Iowa Voters" available at his web site. |
|
"The GOP voter who wanst the best shot looks at McCain and Thompson and thinks "Bob Dole.""
Hugh, you've become a laughingstock out in the rest of the world. This is a completely deranged post. Mitt is mathematically the worst candidate from either party when it comes to electability. Rasmussen has shown that conclusively. 47% will not vote for him under any circumstance and only 18% will. That's worse than Hillary.
This blog has gone past the train wreck stage and has entered the "homeless guy talking to himself on a street corner" stage.
It's sick. |
|
Do not need your affirmation.
After all, it was you, who, on December 30th, 2007 (12:32 PM) said the following about your Liberal side of the aisle:
"As for my Dems performance in Congress, that's life."
YEP, there are no faults within the democrat party-----none to focus upon, none worthy of admitting to, none worthy of broaching on this site (particularly when all the Pathetic Liberals can do is focus their distaste, chagrin, vitriol, hate, towards conservative issues) inside the Liberal movement, among the Lefty crowd.
Brad Miner's new book, "Smear Tactics: The Liberal campaign to Defame America", is a perfect example of what the Pathetic Liberals need to keep ignoring.
Mr. Miner's book spells out with great clarity exactly how the democrats behave---with consistency, persistent purpose.
Patriotic Liberal ignores such books. Pathetic Liberal considers any such book which sheds light on the vast UGLINESS perpetrated by the democrat party as "unfounded". These are not books written by profound and academically sound sources---rather they're from "hate-mongerers", "ne'er-do-wells", and the like... |
|
Do not need your affirmation.
After all, it was you, who, on December 30th, 2007 (12:32 PM) said the following about your Liberal side of the aisle:
"As for my Dems performance in Congress, that's life." YEEEEEEHAAAAAAAAAWWW!!!
What an incredibly transparent and telling comment; willingness to accept whatever it is coming from the Left, while, "niggling" (PL's own favorite word) over his own accusations of the right----PURELY PATHETIC.
YEP, there are no faults within the democrat party-----none to focus upon, none worthy of admitting to, none worthy of broaching on this site (particularly when all the Pathetic Liberals can do is focus their distaste, chagrin, vitriol, hate, towards conservative issues) inside the Liberal movement, among the Lefty crowd.
Brad Miner's new book, "Smear Tactics: The Liberal campaign to Defame America", is a perfect example of what the Pathetic Liberals need to keep ignoring.
Mr. Miner's book spells out with great clarity exactly how the democrats behave---with consistency, persistent purpose.
Patriotic Liberal ignores such books. Pathetic Liberal considers any such book which sheds light on the vast UGLINESS perpetrated by the democrat party as "unfounded". These are not books written by profound and academically sound sources---rather they're from "hate-mongerers", "ne'er-do-wells", and the like... |
|
No one in politics plays the "just Win" song better then the Clintons.
From the nefarious sources of funding her campaign to her ADMITTED involvement with scumbag tactics with, "MediaMatters" crapola.
From her made-up moniker of, "Vast-Right-Wing-Conspiracy" (in 1993), in attempt to SMEAR anyone, anyone, anyone, who dared to disagree with her agenda, her style, her message, her husband.
George Stephanopoulos even confirmed, for himself, the lengths at which she was willing to go to destroy her detractors. PBS aired a program titled, "The Clinton Years" in 2001. It included interviews with Stephanopoulos making these comments. DeeDee Meyers made similar comments. This program was a rarity in what PBS was willing to feature in the reality of the "Just Win" attitude of the democrats vis a Mrs. Clinton and Bill Clinton. |
|
|
|
|
Sorry to disturb you. I forgot that your panties are in a bunch. Carry on, you foamer.. |
|
|
You can come by my blog and comment any time, amigo. I don't doubt your sincerity even if I don't necessarily agree with your views. |
|
|
is right. Fred's the guy. I just hope he can stay in it long enough for me to get to vote for him. Unfortunately the party seems to be drawn to style over substance. |
|
If your guy, Obama, gets beat by the Clintons and, assuming she doesn't ask him aboard as VP Candidate, who are you going to vote for in a:
Romney v Hillary race?
Rudy v Hillary race?
Now, if my buddy, Clarity, were answering for you, I'd know the response: Hillary.
Do you figure 30+ years of counter signing endless infidelities is good psychological underpinnings for a Commander-in-Chief? Do you see Queen Bee Syndrome appointing anyone but Testicularly Concave Drones on the Male side and yessum Mam on the Female side? Stuff like that?
Curious. |
|
I'd vote for Hillary. I honestly don't mind her much.
I don't know about "testicularly concave drones" and "yessum Mam" ladies, but it's pretty funny, I must admit. And I'm looking forward to you footing the bill at Pie and Burger (or some such place).. |
|
|
Judging from his post above, I rather doubt "Clarity" wants to be associated with the likes of us. He prefers to exercise his God-given right to be graceless.. |
|
Your premise as to "more democrats" than republicans is suspect at best.
Show me your back up?---from neutral source, rather than the hillary-organized "media matters" cabal, or, the "moveon.org" gargoyles, or, the guttersnipe over at "dailykos", etc.
It is my understanding there is a fairly even dist'n. of democrats and republicans.
To:
bRoberta and Pathetic Liberal.
You've still not commented on the quote from Pathetic Liberal:
"As for my Dems performance in Congress, that's life."
Your lack of response to this and other substantive comments I made speak volumes.
Let's see, Pathetic Liberal mentioned something about my underwear----Ooooooooh, there's intelligent banter. So fittingly
"Pathetic Liberal".
|
|
the democrat party does at those immigration "sign-ups". I recall one prior to Bill Clinton's second administration. They set up tables outside the L.A. Convention Center following ceremonies to legalize thousands of hispanics---not long before the 1996 general election. Yep, remember it well. Thousands of "new democrats".
That about sizes up the techniques, tactics of the democrat party as it shores up its numbers. |
|
I don't know the exact context of my comment about "that's life," but I think it may have had to do with their ineffectual performance. Basically, there are limits to Congressional power, especially in this day and age, where Americans seem to have an instinct for authoritarianism. When I said "that's life," I was probably acknowledging my awareness of the limits of their power against an obdurate and lawless executive, and a Congressional minority that thinks it can run on Democratic "do-nothingism." Or was it some other context? Maybe you can direct me to the thread and the time stamp. For the life of me, I don't know what you are pissing and moaning about..
And by the way, we Democrats are a proper noun, with a capital "D". And we are the Democratic party, with an "ic." I don't care about your lack of respect for me and for my fellow Democrats, but show a little respect to the party of Jefferson and Jackson. I do the same for the party of Lincoln. |
|
Recruiting Techniques.
It's consistent with that little kerfuffle where Tim Russert pushed Mrs. Clinton on her position, "for" or "against" governor Spitzer's issuing of licenses for "illegals" in New York state.
Although she could never answer the question---gave incredibly weak response, we all know she was in total support of it----all those newly minted "democrat" voters.
It is mind-boggling, the consistent aberrant techniques utilized by the, "JUST WIN" democrat party |
|
Ussins are grateful for your input. Last 10-15 books you've read, lil'Bug? You do read...right?
Always interested what, if any, self described "centrists" like Brobster read of the book variety. Novels & poetry are allowed on the list Brob, without shame. Still waiting for the list from Peaky. |
|
PL+LP..Warning, Boy-yo. Brobster is saying nice things about'cha and assuming you're on board his lithium deprived Titanic.
"..lawless executive." ;-) |
|
So very thankful to be in the company of fine, honorable, upright,& learned men!And put there by pondscum,(Broberta)no less! I guess PL is just sore cause the panties I sent him for Christmas didn't fit (he never would give me his size so I had to guess;-) He just sounds like the most prissy little weanie man........yicks!Not low down and mean like Broberta, just very feminine and wonkish.
Neo, I'm currently reading "What's so Great about Christianity" by Denish D'Souza
Must finish it quickly to get to the "Kite Runner" My husband reads two books a week and he put down "Kite Runner" and said, "you have to read that." We've been married 25 years and he has only said that about a couple of books! |
|
You're a girl?!? Jeez, I had no idea. I was teed off at your goading because I thought you were a guy. But since you don't know what the hell you're talking about where men, manhood, and being a prissy little weenie is concerned, it all makes sense now.
Sorry, Ma'am. Stupid me thought you were just some idiot guy.
|
|
|
...and to think I once thought you had some smarts. You're semi-functioning. Those comments above are borderline sane. |
|
...and to think I once thought you never fully realized what a smartass you are.
Those comments to SEEHAWK above prove me wrong.
You're not only fully aware, you are even more of one than I realized. Frankly, it is a personal trait only eclipsed by your arrogance; underscored by your above comment to Neo:
"Neo
I'd vote for Hillary. I honestly don't mind her much."
Can't even approach dignity with a response to that.
|
|
|
For your info, I have the right to vote for whom I wish. And yes, I know I'm a smartass. What about it?! |
|
I've been married 25 years to a man who has a pure compassionate heart, great sense of humor, extremely strong arms,takes tender care of his own family, and many others in need, and loves his wife and his Lord.....so I am fully aware of traits that make up either great or small men. You are a small man.
And condolences to your little woman, if there is one. |
|
It is now you who insist on exhibiting your lack of "smarts" as you quip.
Of course you've the right to vote for who you wish. I've not challenged that, for your info. But then, a smart person would know that. You've also the right to shout at the moon, as you regularly do.
Your comment about Mrs. Clinton, is simply laughable. Without dissecting her myriad character flaws; not here. No mention with specifics as to her plethora of highly questionable behaviors. Not here. Ignoring her socialistic motivations for the time being.
Simply put, you have what you believe to be 20/20 vision as to what you think is wrong with the condition of the present conservative movement. You've blathered endlessly on that which bugs the crap out of you about conservatives; ideologically, practically, morally. You've chimed in with regularity, replete with your focused resentment.
However, your 20/20 vision turns myopic when viewing Liberal issues.
Only one suffering from cataracts could quip about Mrs. Clinton, "I honestly don't mind her much".
And that, ma'am, is arrogance personified (unless, of course, you are prepared to plead ignorance)
"I honestly don't mind her much".
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. What a hoot! |
|
One thing we will never hear from the silly Kos Kids (Broberta and Pathetic Libel)is what books they've read lately.
Pl read some Greek philosophy in HS and became Plato.Boberta reads democrat pollsters prn and spouts what they say daily. Guess he slept through all the wrong polls they've taken for the last 10 years!
Thanks for always giving them a hard time. |
|
The Sean Hannity poll is currently as follows:
Thompson - 61%
Romney - 20%
Huckabee - 9%
Giuliani - 7%
McCain - 3%
Fred Thompson is the only consistent conservative candidate, with a voting record as such. He says what he means, and means what he says--period! If you want a phoney, Reagan-pretend-to-be, vote for Romney. |
|
|
|