New Hampshire Debate Thread
By Anne Laurie January 7th, 2012
Sponsored by ABC and Yahoo, if anyone’s looking for a livestream. Richard Adams’ invaluable Guardian liveblog here.
Charlie Pierce at Esquire is already cueing up for tomorrow morning:
Willard must be destroyed.
Seriously, isn’t that what we’re all hoping for this weekend, when the 10,987th and 10,988th of 12,322 scheduled debates between the Republican presidential contenders are held? First, ABC will have them all on stage and then, on Sunday, they will all appear on Meet The Press with David Gregory, onetime star of the short-lived Beltway reality show, Dancing With The Truly Revolting Bastards. I suspect the Saturday show will be the real visit to the Octagon for Willard Romney because whatever happens on Saturday likely will be all that they talk about on Sunday…
***************
From the Guardian:
Oh here’s Rick Santorum and the war against “radical Islam”. And Rick Perry pops up to say he would send troops back into Iraq right away. Now there’s a vote-winning platform. Vote winning in 2003.
Bonus points to Newt Gingrich for claiming he created the “strategy to defeat Soviet communism”.
The foreign policy parts of these debates are easily the most depressing. If you believe the non-Ron Paul candidates – and we should assume they are just nakedly pandering – then war with Iran is just around the corner. Can the Democrats just re-use that 1964 “Daisy” ad that LBJ used against Goldwater?
***********
Switched over to Dave Weigel at Slate:
9:26: Awfully nice of WMUR’s moderator to remind everyone that Paul, Perry, and no one else served in the military.
9:33: About that “chickenhawk” exchange. In 17 debates or forums, it was the angriest I’ve ever seen Gingrich get. On emotional points, it was unfair, and maybe unwinnable. How it ended:
PAUL: I need one quick follow-up. When I was drafting, I was married and had two kids, and I went.
GINGRICH: I wasn’t eligible for the draft. I wasn’t eligible for the draft.
Anybody catch the Newt’s “eligibility” argument? Pilonoidal cycst, or just the risk to his squadron fellows?
Posted in Election 2012, Republican Stupidity
Didn’t see a livestream link, but there should be one here:
http://www.wmur.com/new-hampsh.....etail.html
January 7th, 2012 at 8:52 pm
Dancin’ Dave.
There is no death slow enough or painful enough for this one.
January 7th, 2012 at 8:52 pm
Romney’s actually had a pretty easy ride in the debates so far; most of the not-Romneys have been concentrating on each other, trying to become the one NotRomney.
And the ABC talking heads are basically calling Perry irrelevant right now. Hah. “There is kind of a zombie quality to Rick Perry.”
January 7th, 2012 at 8:54 pm
@MildlyAmusedRainbowPerson: ABC has one: http://abcnews.go.com/politics
January 7th, 2012 at 8:54 pm
In a country that’s 50% female and 34% nonwhite/hispanic, the GOP fields 6 white guys, 4 over 60.
January 7th, 2012 at 8:55 pm
@dmsilev:
Yes – I listed the WMUR link location. Although I have trouble thinking that watching the Corrupt Bastardocracy on parade is better than the Lions/Saints game.
January 7th, 2012 at 8:56 pm
OT..Buchanan indefinitely out at MSNBC..link
I’m sure Fox will hire him cuz what’s one more racist.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:00 pm
What? All they’re going to say is Obama this, Obama that, Obama blah, blah, blah.
Oops. I misspoke. I meant they’ll say Obama black, black, black.
My bad.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:01 pm
And, here’s the candidates. We have OtherMormon, Mad Dwarf, Replicant, UnfortunateGoogleProblem, FootInMouth, and OverInflated Ego. CrazyEyes, you’ll be missed.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:03 pm
I made it through Willard’s first couple of sentences, then I turned it off and put on some music. Ugh.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:05 pm
Diane Sawyer: Santorum, is that attack directed at Romney?
Santorum: Hell, yes.
Give him credit, Pawlenty totally whiffed that sort of question.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:05 pm
Santorum:
I think, with a President Santorum, our enemies would collapse in laughter every time they googled him.
In other words, Ricky Santorum lacks credibility when making a ‘respect’ argument. He can’t even get advice columnists to respect him, much less foreign leaders.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:06 pm
Mittens has his obsequious werewolf child-molester look on tonight. Strange to see someone out-Santoruming the Fecal One.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:06 pm
@dmsilev:
If Perry lays off on Willard, it furthers my theory that his handlers have told him to start campaigning for VP slot under Romney. Doubly so if he actually goes after any of the other Not-Mitts.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:07 pm
Aw, shucks, I have to go out to dinner with my husband instead of staying home to watch the debate.
I’m convinced that not only is Romney going to be the nominee (because the big money boys know that none of the other contenders can make it to November), but it’s going to cause a big breach between the big money boys who actually run everything and the fundamentalists who’ve been fooling themselves that they were in charge.
It’s gonna get ugly, and I can’t wait.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:07 pm
And Mittens moves into innocent little vulture capitalist mode. Of course the NYT and Obama are sliming him. Oh the sorrow that his own colleagues should join with evil libruls!
January 7th, 2012 at 9:09 pm
There’s the Romney 100,000 jobs lie again.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:09 pm
It always “pains” Romney that there might be layoffs in his businesses.
And Stephanopolous flat-out calls Romney a liar re: “I created 100K jobs”.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:09 pm
Ohh, Mittens, Staples and Sports Authority! Retail jobs. What, $9/hr?
After destroying manufacturing jobs that paid 3X that.
Nice.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:10 pm
When I think of ‘passion’, I think of Mitt Romney.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:10 pm
Of course Mittens laid
illegalworkers off. He was running for office for Pete’s sake!January 7th, 2012 at 9:10 pm
@dmsilev:
A/k/a, Dog in Stew, Small Gubmint Dog, Dog on Roof, Man on Dog, Not As Smart As Dog, and Tail-Chasing Dog… with Sunglasses on Dog and Canine-Nine-Nine as mere memories.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:10 pm
I was amused to see Romney acknowledging recovery but saying that Obama deserved no credit. Sounds like a touch of panic.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:12 pm
@RalfW:
Willard Master-of-the-Universe Romney knows that if you pay the peasants more than a pittance, they get all uppity and opinionated.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:13 pm
Hey, Mittens, what do you say to people who point out that our last MBA president was George W. Bush, who led us into the greatest economic crash since The Great Depression?
.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:13 pm
@dmsilev:
The Passion of the Crisco.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:13 pm
TPM:
January 7th, 2012 at 9:13 pm
@RalfW: to say nothing of benefits
Looks like Ron Paul’s brow-toupe is coming off again
January 7th, 2012 at 9:13 pm
Shorter Ron Paul:
YOU IS ALL CORRUPT BITCHEZ EXCEPT LE MOI!
January 7th, 2012 at 9:14 pm
It is awesome Ron Paul had a microphone mishap, because this will send Paulites spiraling into rabid conspiracy fantasies.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:14 pm
Oh look – a reference to Evil George Soros.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:15 pm
@JPL: I am in shock—I must have written (I’m not kidding) something like 50 letters to MSNBC asking them why they gave a pulpit to a guy with a Holocaust -deniers forum on his website.
Can’t wait to see where asshole Uncle Pat surfaces from the slimy deep this time.
And just the sight of Mittens makes me sick—what an unctuous shell.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:15 pm
Jeepers. Man On Dog is really defensive. I wonder how much of the audience tuned out of that rant after 10 seconds.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:16 pm
Rick Santorum proclaims that he was a voluntary whore – which makes it all A-OK!
January 7th, 2012 at 9:16 pm
FYI folks: We’re well through the Looking Glass here.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:17 pm
So far, they are attacking each other.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:17 pm
Mitt Romney must be secretly funding the Ron Paul campaign to sabotage all of the vaguely plausible not-Romneys.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:17 pm
Ron Paul brings out the Big Government Conservative Sword of Smiting + 10.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:17 pm
17 minutes in before anyone remembers that Perry is on the stage.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:18 pm
Rick Perry has become an OWWTTSAAIIIDURRRR.
Yeah, right.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:18 pm
Wait, Perry is running against insiders on Wall Street?
Is that even slightly credible? (uhh, noooo).
January 7th, 2012 at 9:19 pm
@JGabriel: Have I missed the deadline for filing the formal petition to change Dog in Stew to That Dog Don’t Huntsman? I need, what, 50 signatures, one from a BJer in each state?
January 7th, 2012 at 9:20 pm
How the hell does anyone find Ron Paul attractive? He sounds half-senile and half-paranoid. And that’s just his tone of voice, without actually listening to what he’s saying.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:20 pm
@Linda Featheringill:
It’s like a velvet painting of dogs pointing guns at each other in a circular firing squad.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:20 pm
@JPL: Wondered where that ol’ rascal got off to.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:21 pm
This is pathetic. Amateur hour. I miss 2008 and slum-lord Rezko and serving on the board of Walmart and two Americas.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:21 pm
@Linda Featheringill: Yep, 20 minutes in and only Mittens has landed one little, tiny ding on Obama, and that was in answer to the good jobs news.
Otherwise, they’re all mad at each other. Time for popcorn!
January 7th, 2012 at 9:21 pm
from The Guardian’s blog: “Meanwhile, Mitt Romney’s evil twin is sitting in his underground lair stroking a white cat and smiling. It’s all going to plan.”
January 7th, 2012 at 9:23 pm
Mitt is smirking. I’m sure MSM will lead with this tomorrow..
January 7th, 2012 at 9:23 pm
Huntsman tries the novel strategy of “vote for me, I’m vaguely sane”. So far, not working.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:23 pm
Mitt says that Obama has a failed presidency because he hasn’t invaded Iran.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:25 pm
@SIA: A Fox News contract is my guess.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:25 pm
These questions are so dumb.
“hey Perry, do you think it’s good that you served your country?”
January 7th, 2012 at 9:25 pm
@WaterGirl:
Heh. I’m calling the man Dog Stew. All y’all are free to call him whatever else ya want.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:26 pm
Ohh, Newt grew up in a military family. So he’s not a coward. Really.
And he explicitly, detailedly panders to N.H. veterans!
January 7th, 2012 at 9:26 pm
I don’t get Huntsman’s alleged attraction. He’s a weaselly 98-lb. weakling and I want to kick sand in his face.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:27 pm
27 minutes in and we have the first New Hampshire mention. (Gingrich, talking about VA Hospitals, and actually sounding reasonable)
January 7th, 2012 at 9:27 pm
Newt has military experience via watching his father!
January 7th, 2012 at 9:28 pm
Paul is not backing off his “chickenhawk” Newt comment.
Impressive. /vader
January 7th, 2012 at 9:28 pm
@Anne Laurie:
Somebody should cue up George Clinton’s “Atomic Dog.”
Why should I be like that?
Why must I chase the cat?
January 7th, 2012 at 9:29 pm
Newt’s head is going to explode.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:29 pm
Did Dumb Dawg just wake up?
January 7th, 2012 at 9:30 pm
But I do like the way Crazy Ron Paul is slapping Lizard around on military service. SNAP!
January 7th, 2012 at 9:30 pm
@JPL:
Good to see that Nazi-apologist Pat Buchanan is no longer stinking up the airwaves. Now if only he’d go to Germany to give a speech or two we’d never see him back.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:30 pm
Ooh, the newsletter question.
Ron Paul goes with the Chewbacca Defense.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:31 pm
richard adams at guardian
January 7th, 2012 at 9:31 pm
Ron Paul just nailed Newt.
Newtie said he had a kid so he didn’t get drafted. Paul said, “I had a wife and two kids, and I went” and had steeley-eyed anger.
.
Meanwhile, in more surreal news, Ron Paul is now talking about racism and how he likes MLK.
Paul is right that blacks are in jail way more. Cna’t argue that, but it does seem odd coming from him given his past newsletters…
January 7th, 2012 at 9:31 pm
Mad Dwarf praises Dr. King as his blackity-black model for libertarian principles.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:32 pm
@handy:
One can only hope.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:32 pm
And a commercial break and gay rights is next.
I’ll be tuning out now because, as a gay person, it is an act of self-violence to listen to these whack-jobs talk their ignorant hate about me and my peeps.
Later, GOP. Much. Later.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:33 pm
@SIA: Apparently, GOP voters want to kick sand in his face too. Save the 2% or so who think he’s nice. Or nifty. Or something.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:35 pm
@SIA: Me too, and he’s as big a flipper as Mitt—he’s been on four sides of climate change just since joining the campaign, and has anyone asked him if he still thinks the Stimulus was too small?
January 7th, 2012 at 9:36 pm
Mitt must of loved the Newt/Paul chicken hawk discussion cuz he knew he would not be touched. What a lucky dog.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:36 pm
The dogs are back!
.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:38 pm
@JPL:
Is he strapped to the roof of a car?
January 7th, 2012 at 9:39 pm
Q to Romney: Should states have the right to ban contraception?
A: Babble. I think RombotOS just blue-screened.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:39 pm
@dmsilev: @dmsilev:
he hit newt pretty good with 5 deferments. Ron is a great spoiler telling republicans. Right now he is getting all the fire.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:39 pm
@JPL: yeah, heaven forfend one of the brainless talking heads asked Mittens why he thinks living in a mansion in France = service.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:40 pm
Admittedly a dumb question, but Mittens can’t even give a straight answer about whether states can ban jimmyhats.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:40 pm
holy crap..is Romney a coward..
January 7th, 2012 at 9:40 pm
@dmsilev:
But he managed to make George Snuffleupagus look confused and abashed for a second there. And that gives me a little smile.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:41 pm
You might want to check out Dogs Against Romney as a stress reliever during the debate. I thought it was just a funny one-page website, but then i noticed the link to Older Posts at the bottom of the page.
Oh, and there’s a debate thread for Dogs Against Romney on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/DogsAgainstRomney
January 7th, 2012 at 9:42 pm
@RalfW: Think it’s spiffy you’re looking for. Go enjoy your evening and I’ll scream at the TV as your representative.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I was actually worried about Huntsman at first. Thought it was pretty slimy to quit his administration post and then run against the guy who gave it to him. A pox on all their houses.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:42 pm
@handy: Actually not a dumb question. The GOP today is whacked enough that some of them do want to repeal Griswold, which was the underpinning for both contraception and for Roe v. Wade.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:42 pm
Earlier Guardian report from Ewan MacAskill:
Miserable prick just can’t help showing his withered little soul, can he? With any luck, Santorum will manage to crater his own campaign AND take the “resurgent” Bauer with him as well.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:43 pm
@MildlyAmusedRainbowPerson: It’s not. Go to the thread downstairs.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:43 pm
Why not propose an amendment to the Constitution that says that says there is no right to privacy?
Settles all the issues with one amendment.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:43 pm
Is anybody planning on attacking RoboMitt tonight? This looks like a coronation.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:43 pm
Santorum pivots from condoms and the PATRIOT act to abortion. Wow.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:44 pm
Here we go. The “get your gay hate on” section of the evening.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:44 pm
@SIA:
Thank you. Watching HGTV now. Not that that’s stereotypical! (Meh, the BF is out of town at grad school J-term).
Still reading the liveblogs. Safe distance.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:45 pm
Newt, sacraments are Catholic dogma, not US statute.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:45 pm
Newt talking on a subject he’s an expert on, the sanctity of marriage.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:45 pm
Goddammit, Newt, a sacrament is a religious concept. Don’t be talking sacrament in a discussion of the role of government.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:46 pm
Newt said that marriage has been a sacrament for 3,000 years. Hmmmm.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:46 pm
@amk:
So Newt can see military service from his house?
January 7th, 2012 at 9:46 pm
@handy: Practice makes perfect.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:47 pm
wow, an actual funny on contraception from huntsman.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:47 pm
@Shawn in ShowMe:
‘Cause he’s blah-ity blah-ity blah, y’all ?
January 7th, 2012 at 9:47 pm
Question for the GOP candidates: Several of you keep calling marriage a “foundational” issue in the country’s founding. If that’s the case, why is never mentioned in the constitution?
.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:48 pm
@craigie: Ha!
January 7th, 2012 at 9:49 pm
Q to Romney: “In human terms, what would you say”
A: “Explain terminology ‘human terms’. Terminology not located in internal dictionary. Error -2343.”
January 7th, 2012 at 9:49 pm
anybody notice the picture of Flotus on the ABC live stream website and the small picture underneath which states the following:
Each tree had 56 oranges. If 8 slaves pick them equally,
then how much would each slave pick.
It links to a story about a question asked in a Georgia school, but seemed a bit much to me to have it listed directly under her photo.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:49 pm
@craigie: niiiiiice
January 7th, 2012 at 9:49 pm
@JGabriel: Yes, and why do the debate moderators not call them on it?
January 7th, 2012 at 9:50 pm
Newt: It’s not fair to call the Catholic Church bigotted when it’s being bigotted.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:50 pm
Poor widdle Catholic Church.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:51 pm
Gingrich did not just say that there’s more bias against Christians than there is against any other self-identifying group.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:51 pm
Dear Mitt Romney: Please don’t compare yourself, even implicitly, to John Adams.
Sincerely, every person who lives or ever used to live in Massachusetts.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:51 pm
Newt says there is a lot more anti-Christian bigotry than vice versa. Which explains the huge followings that Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett have in this country. Rock stars those guys.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:51 pm
@JPL:
Yes he is. And one of the many reasons he must be defeated if he gets the nomination.
Cowards will always do crazy shit to try to prove themselves to be other than what they are. Problem is, they will drag others into their shit. You simply cannot have this in a president.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:52 pm
@Shawn in ShowMe:
America says, “Who?”
January 7th, 2012 at 9:53 pm
@elftx: I read that horrifying story earlier today. (Yes, it was on ABL’s blog.) there was another question on the same test, or homework or whatever, that had the kids calculating how many times a week a slave would be whipped if he went under the lash twice a day.
That school is less than five miles from where I live. I weep for this country.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:53 pm
@dmsilev: LOL
January 7th, 2012 at 9:55 pm
Still waiting for these clowns to go after Romney.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:55 pm
@Anne Laurie:
That’s interesting. Almost two weeks till South Carolina, maybe Romney doesn’t have this quite as sewn up as we thought.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:57 pm
RoboMitt agrees with Obama’s handling of Afghanistan without mentioning his name.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:58 pm
Ohh, Andrew. It’s just so predictable and, sadly, trite.
The slightest bit of kindness, from a candidate garnering low single-digits, makes him flutter with tragically naive hope
Um, Andrew? Dignity will not be entering the GOP lexicon any time soon, bless your Tory heart.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:58 pm
@Brachiator:
For proof of this, look to 2001-2009.
Two cowardly sacks of shit, two wars to prove how tuff they were.
January 7th, 2012 at 9:58 pm
Man, you are just on fire lately!
Thanks for everone’s Twitter advice, I got snockered and picked fights because it works so well for our beloved host, John Cole. Got nine new Followers!
January 7th, 2012 at 9:59 pm
Perry: Re-invade Iraq!
January 7th, 2012 at 10:00 pm
Frothy Mix says that Iraqis will be sorry they ever called us mean names.
Perry says we should re-invade to protect Iraqis from Iranian stormtroopers.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:01 pm
Rick Perry would send troops back into Eye-rack. Just wow.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:01 pm
Santorum: Obama doesn’t hate Muslims enough.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:01 pm
Willard’s own frigging grandfather moved to Mexico rather than give up his
female serfssister-wives. (Then he scampered back across the border when it looked like the Mexican government might nationalize his assets.) C’mon, fellow debaters, you can’t all get offered Mitt’s VP slot!January 7th, 2012 at 10:02 pm
@handy: And you know why that is, right? Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:04 pm
So obvious the Negro Prez has screwed up the Economy & The Entire Middle East. I hate white GOP candidates bashing my prez.
The prez is going to cut $468B from Military Spending so he’s a Negro Chickenhawk!
January 7th, 2012 at 10:05 pm
@Anne Laurie:
I’m glad I’m only experiencing this through BJ comments, because the stupid would make me catatonic if I observed it directly.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:05 pm
What the hell is Paul rambling about?
January 7th, 2012 at 10:06 pm
@Anne Laurie: During the last commercial break, one of ABC’s talking heads accused all of the campaign managers of malpractice for not having the candidates go hard after the Mittbot. Hard to argue with that.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:06 pm
ABC Question:
Po’ Rick Perry. No one gives a fuck what he thinks anymore.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:07 pm
@RalfW:
Maybe Huntsman figures Teh Gheys can use the “dignity” which his fellow GOP candidates have been so eager to discard.
Apparently there are already jokes on the Twitter about “Huntsman now starting his 2016 campaign“.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:07 pm
Frothy Santorum, standing right next to Mittens, instead picks a fight with St. Paul of Crazystine.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:07 pm
Santorum: Obama doesn’t like Muslims enough.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:07 pm
@JGabriel: Thus, 27% say yes. Holy fuck.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:08 pm
@handy:
Santorum has officially become the DougJ of this debate.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:08 pm
@dmsilev: John Rogers and his friend Tyrone are fuckin’ geniuses.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:11 pm
@Villago Delenda Est:
Ditto that. It’s kind of fun to watch the football game, and go back and forth from this blog’s comments to Sullivan’s live-blog.
I don’t understand how anyone could watch it live, but I don’t like slasher movies, either.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:12 pm
@JGabriel: Ayup. Downright scary how often that number comes up.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:12 pm
From Sully’s live blog:
“The Dish stood side by side, day by day, with the heroes of the Green Revolution.”
Keyboard Kommandos UNITE
January 7th, 2012 at 10:13 pm
“Willard must be destroyed”
Sounds like a GWAR album.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:13 pm
@Villago Delenda Est: Mitt always reminds me of the weasel played so well by Billy Bob Thorton in “Tombstone.”
January 7th, 2012 at 10:16 pm
George lobs it right up there to Newt to tee off on Mittens, and he whiffs. Clearly the marching orders have been heard.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:17 pm
Newt all of a sudden seems to be mumbling and slurring or tripping on his words just a little bit. Nothing major but I haven’t heard this before. Did he take a pill during the break that’s just kicking in? Or am I imagining it all?
January 7th, 2012 at 10:17 pm
Romney was asked about investing in infrastructure, and he went on an abstract GOP-bullet-points rant.
Why do the moderators even bother asking questions?
January 7th, 2012 at 10:17 pm
@SiubhanDuinne:
No. Dude is totally off his game.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:18 pm
Q:Newt, how is your ideas from improving infrastructure different from Gov. Romney’s?
A: They aren’t, but allow me to bloviate anyway.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:19 pm
Romney wants to help poor people save money by getting rid of the capital gains tax?
Let ‘em eat cake, Mitt.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:21 pm
God, Perry sounds like a fucking moron.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:22 pm
does anyone notice that each candidate’s shirts are off-white…
doubtful they are actually off-white…
in other words—abcnews is filtering the lights/camera to make the candidates LESS FUCKING WHITE AND PASTY than they are…
January 7th, 2012 at 10:23 pm
I’m not watching this. I’m reading a book and listening to Beethoven.
Have they reattached Paul’s errant supercilium?
January 7th, 2012 at 10:24 pm
Jon Hunstman lands the only blow on Mitt all night, noting that he was #47 in creating jobs among governors.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:24 pm
@WereBear (itouch):
There you go! I knew it would work.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:24 pm
@SensesFail:
Well then there’s one person on stage who’s being honest about what he is.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:25 pm
@SensesFail:
You’re welcome.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:26 pm
@JGabriel: Brilliant! Next Mitt will explain to poor people why they shouldn’t hire illegal workers to landscape their yards and clean their pool.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:27 pm
Mitt: I believe in the myth of American exceptionalism and the Kenyan Muslim doesn’t! Yells “Sexual Chocolate” and drops the mic.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:28 pm
It is soooo funny that Romney pronounces entrepreneurial the freaking French way. He so swallows that first R. Just an incredible affectation.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:28 pm
Double post…
January 7th, 2012 at 10:28 pm
Santorum: I’ll bring people together. Except for the gays; they’re icky.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:29 pm
Much better to watch the game and read reportage on the debate. The game is far more fun – actually, quite a good one, and I don’t know who to root for. Though I’m sort of leaning towards Detroit – if only because the Lions, and the whole damn city, have been Hapless for so long.
(I know who to root for in the GOP debate: a bolt of lightning to hit everyone on stage.)
January 7th, 2012 at 10:29 pm
@RossInDetroit:
Well, pince my nez and lah-dee-da.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:30 pm
@ChrisNYC:
The meaning of entrepreneur has changed over the years. It used to mean someone dodgy. Just short of an outright swindler.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:30 pm
Rick Santorum: “I’ll use the language of bringing people together, except for gays and radical muslims and liberals and socia1ists and people who want european-style gov’t and …”
.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:31 pm
Well, seein’ as I’m “workin’ in the coal fields, if you will”, I’d say this is a stage of charlatans and outlaws.
Get some rope.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:31 pm
Suggested question from someone on the guardian live blog:
That’s just so sad. I really wanted this to play out over the next month, at least.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:32 pm
If lowering taxes on the top 1% actually created jobs, we’d be importing workers from sub-Saharan Africa right now to keep up with the demand, and the minimum wage for the most unskilled jobs would be $20/hr due to the labor shortage.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:32 pm
@becca:
Emperor Concerto on the radio-set. I wouldn’t interrupt this for tea with the Queen.
I watched one debate. I’ve done my duty and haven’t got the stomach for another.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:33 pm
OneTrueMormon accuses TooNiceMormon of working for the Chinese.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:33 pm
@JGabriel:
...anyone who thinks that the icky sex thing is actually fun.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:33 pm
@Villago Delenda Est: I was so happy to hear Obama say “trickle down economics” in that Kansas speech. The Dems need to keep that phrase alive
January 7th, 2012 at 10:33 pm
Good lord that debate is dull. Back to football.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:34 pm
@Shawn in ShowMe: So the Paulites were correct. That ad was done by Romney to make both Paul and Huntsman look bad.
So are Republican Ambassadors all supposed to go Bolton now? I can see that becoming a problem.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:35 pm
Mitt keeps stepping on applause lines. Shut the fug up ‘man, you’ve got the nomination sewed up by default. Tonight was an audition for the Real ‘Murican VP slot.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:36 pm
Ok, this is actually the first GOP debate I’ve actually watched (I usually just read a live blog) and I just have to ask….....the fuck?
Really? Willard is going to get destroyed in the general.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:38 pm
@DCLaw1: Yeah, it’s been pretty flat. I only hope that some of them will be sufficiently sleep-deprived tomorrow morning that they make the kind of asses of themselves we’ve come to expect.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:40 pm
@Darnell From LA: One benefit of the really long 2008 Obama/Clinton primary was that we had two very skilled opponents going after each other, and they both had to up their game to survive. Romney, on the other hand, is facing a bunch of clowns and is virtually coasting.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:40 pm
Ooh Newt doesn’t know the diff between basketball and football. Very nice.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:41 pm
@Shawn in ShowMe:
How’d we get from “Romney is widely despised” to “Romney has the nom sewn up”? How is it possible for him to have the nom sewn up this fast when 75% of the primary voters can’t stand him? I honestly don’t understand why the anti-Romney voters haven’t coalesced behind one of the other candidates.
Oh, and NO has scored again. I think that’s it; I think Detroit doesn’t have the oomph needed to come back from 10 points down this late.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:42 pm
@SiubhanDuinne:
No, it’s OK. Yesterday Mitt was endorsed by a guy who doesn’t know the difference between him and Obama.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:42 pm
A few nice things that came out of the primary—Perry’s incompetent showing. Newt’s humiliation (that chicken hawk exchange was satisfying). Santorum’s Google searches. And Romney, a bad bad candidate. Plus a deadly dull nominating contest. Have fun engaging the Obama machine over the next TEN months Mitt!
January 7th, 2012 at 10:43 pm
Perry stop trying to awe-shucks ‘em. You’re not as good as Shrubbie at that and you never will be.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:43 pm
@SiubhanDuinne: Yeah, I’m pretty damn disappointed in Newt’s failure to deliver on his promise of creating a shit-flinging spectacle for our amusement.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:44 pm
@Darnell From LA: I’m looking forward to BHO doing that Secrit Muslin Ninja Mojo Technique on Willard that drives his opponents insane while BO looks on kinda calm and nerdy.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:44 pm
Actually, I think he’s bringng the A game, as pathetic as that may be.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:46 pm
@CaseyL: Whatever ideological beliefs and revulsion toward Romney GOP base voters might have had, their authoritarian reflex to support the duly-crowned leader – however uninspiring – is simply too strong.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:46 pm
Bonus points to Newt Gingrich for claiming he created the “strategy to defeat Soviet communism”.
Gingrich was Gorbachev’s father? Who knew.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:49 pm
Post debate analysis consensus:
We were expecting these men to gun for Mittens and everybody kept their guns in their holsters.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:49 pm
ABC must have had a hard time selling ad time for this thing. Fred Thompson keeps shilling for aag on every commercial break, and then there’s the sleep number bed ad on every time too. Are these are national ads or only here in my DC market? Not sure how much a 30 sec ad goes for on this sat night, ratings will prob be very low.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:49 pm
Not that I feel bad for them but GOP voters have a right to be pissed. Their guys are such c—kteasers. All that bluster. All that chest beating. All that froth (!) they work up. Then, when it comes down to it, they slink away, looking at their shoes and for the next payday, busily slapping Romney 2012 stickers on their lapels. No wonder GOPers are psychotic with rage.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:50 pm
@DCLaw1: Exactly. Frozen-egg-ZACK-ly.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:50 pm
Why you should follow this on the Guardian:
January 7th, 2012 at 10:52 pm
Oh gawd, I didn’t cut off the teevee quickly enough, and was just treated to Mary Matalin telling me that Newt did “very, very well tonight.”
January 7th, 2012 at 10:52 pm
@SIA: Willard is the least amiable politician I have ever seen. I mean, he makes John Kerry look like JFK, for FSM’s sake.
Meanwhile, the way Mitt stands sideways, smirking at his opponent while they are speaking is thoroughly repellent. Mitt can’t connect with people, much less work a rope-line. (not that any voters, GOP or otherwise, will be pressing against a rope-line straining to touch Willard’s hand)
January 7th, 2012 at 10:53 pm
Maybe the non-Romney’s were saving their attacks for tomorrow. Only one of these ‘debates’ was bound to get any news coverage during the week. Why use your best stuff in the first, more likely to be forgotten one?
January 7th, 2012 at 10:54 pm
@noodler: There was an ad on at one point, I think for insurance or something, what I most noticed was that the TV pitchman bore an uncanny resemblance to Mittens. Which is pretty telling right there.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:54 pm
@dmsilev:
“Romney, on the other hand, is facing a bunch of clowns and is virtually coasting.”
Clown coasting, that might make a nice new fad, or at least a drinking game. It’ll help out with the clown unemployment problem.
Mitt will finally be hip. Bad news for Democrats.
BTW: not watching the debate, just skimming a few live blogs for lowlights. Who many will follow the Perrydoodle in calling for reoccupation of Iraq? That sounds like a very bad idea, so I guess the 27 percenters will love it.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:55 pm
@dmsilev:
Jake Tapper just made the same exact point in post-debate analysis (I flipped back from football, because the game had also become boringly one-sided!).
January 7th, 2012 at 10:56 pm
Diane Sawyer asks the obvious question: Why didn’t these candidates attack Romney? Some nonsense ensues about Huntman’s heart not being in it and the rest trying to prove they’re electable.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:59 pm
@jl:
Why yes, as a matter of fact.
January 7th, 2012 at 10:59 pm
@SiubhanDuinne: If you ever see Mary Matalin in person, tell her to go toward the light.
Maybe Newtie’s waiting for tomorrow to go Newt-clear on Romney, when people aren’t distracted by all this March Madness.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:00 pm
@dmsilev: No doubt. Willard is like a lamb to slaughter, and he doesn’t even know it.
The underlying theme of every debate has been “anyone on this stage would be better than Obama.” And Mitt has been rarely, if ever challenged. And Mitt’s achilles heel, being called on his flip-flopping, has almost never been touched by his opponents. That and the lack of ads attacking Mitt for flip-flopping and, well, just being Willard.
Meanwhile, the problem with past Democratic candidates has been refusing to go negative until it’s too late.This IS NOT something Obama’s camp suffers from. Willard isn’t even the nominee and Obama’s team has been eviscerating him for months.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:02 pm
As debates go, this was atrocious. The hateful, ignorant, war-mongering nonsense might have flown in 2012 BC. Now, not so much.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:02 pm
@DCLaw1: This is true. Remember at the Al Smith dinner before the 08 election, Obama said to McCain, sarcastically, “Tough primary there, John. Congratulations.” That pitiful crew were like Churchills compared to the current crop.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:03 pm
I know I read a blog post sometime this week that cited the statistic of only 33% of Medicaid recipients are black. Can someone point me to it so I can bludgeon someone spewing over how great drug testing for welfare benefits is, please?
January 7th, 2012 at 11:04 pm
@Darnell From LA: Tweety showed a really hard-hitting ad on Romney’s abortion flip-floppery. It includes a clip of Romeny saying “you can look up what I really said on youtube!” Unfortunately, if you enter Romney abortion on youtube, you find him declaring his devotion to Roe v Wade, dedicating his commitment to his mother. I swear Tweety said it was Gingrich’s ad, but like a black fly in your chardonnay, I couldn’t find it on you tube.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:06 pm
I did not know that. And I love it!
January 7th, 2012 at 11:10 pm
@RossInDetroit: Nice one.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:13 pm
@noodler:
Worse than it sounds. When you see an 800 number on an ad, there’s a very good chance that most of the payment comes on a “PI” or “per inquiry” basis. Which often means they run for nothing.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:15 pm
@Thatgaljill:
You couldn’t just Romney the statistics with an expression of wounded virtue?
January 7th, 2012 at 11:17 pm
This year’s Al Smith dinner is going to be fuckin AWESOME. The idea of Mittens doing ten minutes of scripted jokes in a dinner jacket has me ordering up the popcorn now.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:18 pm
McCain comes to his senses, at last.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:18 pm
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I did not know you could not find a fly in chardonnay. I don’t know much about wine, and will remember that.
I read on TOM that Rih Ahnoramh said there were no classes in America. Is that something he said but didn’t say, or that he did not go to school much and is making hasty generalizations?
January 7th, 2012 at 11:18 pm
Andrew Astonished:
Your continued wonderment at GOP gibberish is adorable, Andrew. It’s almost like you still expect Republicans to make sense.
.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:20 pm
@MikeJ: I dunno, from what I have read about the pure horribleness and boringness of this debate, the Sleep Number people might have reason to pay a high price for their time.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:20 pm
Really? What branch did Perry serve in?
January 7th, 2012 at 11:20 pm
@CaseyL:
Because they are all incompetent and can’t run campaigns and aren’t in fact actually running. I honestly think they are being paid by Romney at this point to make him look presidential by comparison. Romney bought anyone with any competence at planning. (Remember how Newt’s advisers all quit and went to work for Perry? It would appear that they weren’t actually very good.)
George Pataki will save us.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:21 pm
@EriktheRed:
The Underpants Gnome Brigade?
January 7th, 2012 at 11:21 pm
@JGabriel: That figures. Thanks.
But, for you liberals drunk on hatred, this does prove that Rih was telling the truth, he has no idea at all what words are coming out of his mouth or what they mean.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:22 pm
@SiubhanDuinne: And the next day Obama will topple the Iranian theocracy single-handedly (single-handed??) :-)
January 7th, 2012 at 11:25 pm
@WereBear (itouch): Well then. Here’s the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?N.....kBQf4FJi-o
Starts around 0:50. The lead in is “Who would have thought that a cross-dressing mayor from New York City would have run in the Republican primary…”
January 7th, 2012 at 11:26 pm
Rick Perry was an Air Force pilot I believe.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:27 pm
@dmsilev:
I recall Obama as being skilled. That Clinton was equally skilled is kind hearted revisionism .
But yeah, Romney is not even in Clinton’s league.
However, I do not count him out yet. Even though the debating season has seemingly gone on forever, the primaries are just getting started.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:28 pm
“Um, Mr. Gingrich? The very pissed shade of George Kennan on line 2 for you.”
January 7th, 2012 at 11:29 pm
@JGabriel: Here, currently on Rick Santorum’s own website: “Santorum Hopes to Rebuild Middle Class.”
Wow. Just wow.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:30 pm
@SIA: Have you heard that republicans are already calling “treason!” because Kathryn Bigelow has a movie about getting bin Laden, which is proof that Obama personally sat down with her and gave her the names and home addresses of each member of the SEAL team, along with information on each of the agents who discovered bin Laden. Also too, be prepared for them to scream about how the movie is just a campaign commercial for Obama, even though it won’t be released until December 19.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:30 pm
@Darnell From LA: Following through on that logic. There is no middle class. There is no economic inequality. Therefore we are all rich. Santorum plans to rebuild the middle class by making some of us rich bastards poorer. Preferably those of us who are in fact bastards, cause that’s how he rolls.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:34 pm
Well, let’s just hope Americans Elect can save us with a George Pataki / Blanche Lincoln – Unity 12’ ticket.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:35 pm
Willard is the next in line for the mantle of “forgetable Massachusetts politician who’s going to lose.” The difference between him and his forebears Kerry and Dukakis is that Willard has an R after his name.
Obama’s going to kick this guy’s ass up onto his shoulder blades.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:35 pm
@Thatgaljill:
Maybe not helpful, but Medicaid is not the same thing as welfare. (And they’re calling welfare something different now, but I can’t remember what.)
January 7th, 2012 at 11:36 pm
@MikeJ: There’s a DOD OIG investigation of it. I think that part is a smart move. Do the interviews, look at the docs, get a report and shut them up.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:36 pm
@Cacti: Personally I have taken to calling Romney “Republican Mondale.” It has a certain ring to it.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:37 pm
@Darnell From LA: Except Mondale was a good senator, a good veep, and a decent human being.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:39 pm
@Steeplejack:
I think there are several terms: collective bargaining, minimum wage, 40 hour work week, time and a half for overtime, living wage, child labor laws…
January 7th, 2012 at 11:40 pm
@Brachiator: Are you joking? Bill Clinton was the most skilled politician of his generation.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:42 pm
@SIA: Oh, thank goodness! I was really hoping someone with mad vid skillz would do that.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:43 pm
@xian:
Yeah, he just couldn’t keep his dick in his pants.
Try again.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:43 pm
@ChrisNYC: Thanks!
January 7th, 2012 at 11:44 pm
@CaseyL:
Three polls from SC in quick succession showing Willard ahead. Gingrich was ahead three weeks ago, when the last poll was taken, and it’s the first indication that the Romneybot might be able to crack Lesser Carolina, land of godbotherers, good ol’boys and Birchers.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:45 pm
@Cacti:
please, please…....I HATE it when people do that.
It is SO unfair to Dukakis and Kerry to compare this vacuity of a human being to them.
They may have been losers, but at least they are actual people, and very decent ones at that.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:48 pm
@MikeJ: Par for the course, all of it. Hot Air is my wingnut go-to blog to see what the Lizard People are up to. Oh my, the screams for impeachment coming out of there the other night after O’s recess appointment of Cordray. Doesn’t take much to stir the up the Fearful Ones, I’m afraid. Bless their hearts.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:50 pm
@Darnell From LA:
Never underestimate the stupidity of the American people.
It ought to be an easy win for Obama if all that matters is the objective qualities of the two candidates. But that isn’t all that matters and Mitt will be in full-blown lying his ass off mode and with the help of a well-financed Swift Boat Style smear campaign, Obama will probably have his hands full.
Republicans have to resort to smears and voter suppression because there is no way they can win an honest election. But the American people fall for that kind of crap all the time. Plus, the MSM will be in their own full-on false equivalence mode always seeking to prove they’re not liberal by doing a lot of heavy lifting for the GOP.
This figures to be the ugliest campaign in a long, long time.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:52 pm
@pseudonymous in nc: There’s also underground stuff.
Michael Steele said on MSNBC that Perry did his weird I’m getting out/no, on to SC! switch because there was a deal between Perry and Romney. Romney would pay Perry campaign debts if Perry stayed in the race to split the not Romney vote. He (Steele) also said that Romney paid Pawlenty’s debts when HE dropped out. I didn’t know that. But, I think Romney is all about the underground stuff.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:55 pm
I read this:
And the possibility occurred to me – perhaps off-base – that Obama is starting to look stronger than first expected, especially due to the new unemployment report, and perhaps that explains the other candidates’ sudden lassitude (besides Ron Paul)?
I realize that, if it’s a reason, it can’t possibly be the only reason. But one wonders how much the non-Romney field is beginning to realize the general election will be a lost cause. Just ruminating.
January 7th, 2012 at 11:56 pm
Republicans have been stuck with Mitt from the get go. The rest of the pack was just too crazy. I for one am pretty happy with that. It would have been fun to run against someone totally unelectable and crazy like Bachmann or Santorum, but that’s too easy. I will take great pleasure in watching a smug, elitist asshole like Mitt Romney get taken out,
January 7th, 2012 at 11:58 pm
From the same National Journal post I linked above:
Abject resignation followed by the feeblest call for optimism I have ever read.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:01 am
@MikeJ: All true. To me however, “Republican Mondale” simply refers to the running of a terribly inept campaign combined with the utter electoral wipeout that follows.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:04 am
@DCLaw1: It’s also that the others don’t actually want to be Prez. Too much work. They really have hollowed out that party. Not one of them is interested in governing or, of course, in their alleged principles or in the party. It’s every man for the wingnut welfare dollar, which is WAY WAY easier.
Mondale is a good contrast. Mondale ran for Dems. He sort of put himself up for a 49 state (!) loss. He had no chance of winning. But he did it anyway. Then look at GOPers this year. They have NOT ONE person who is willing to make a similar sacrifice.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:08 am
@DCLaw1: True. Think about it; with the economy recovering Romney could end up without a campaign message in the 3 months leading up to election day. If unemployment is dropping and he can’t bitch about the economy, what does he have left to say? “War with Iran, vote for me!”
January 8th, 2012 at 12:10 am
@ChrisNYC:
That’s definitely true of Gingrich, Perry, Bachmann (while she was running), and perhaps Paul and Huntsman, but I think Santorum genuinely wants it and would (if he could) work for it.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:11 am
@Brachiator:
I’m going to disagree with you here. I actually supported Obama in the ‘08 primaries, but Hillary Clinton ran a very good campaign overall. She was a very good candidate. And yes, she was highly skilled. Certainly she made mistakes and got outfoxed by the Obama people in terms of delegate count, but she wasn’t incompetent by any stretch of the imagination. I remember watching the 2 of them duke it out in the spring, thinking that there wasn’t a republican who could touch either one of them in terms of skill and organization. You don’t get the number of votes she got if you don’t have something going for you.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:13 am
@Darnell From LA: He’ll do what he did tonight-talk about how the economy improved despite Obama’s policies. And War with Iran.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:17 am
@dogwood:
I think Clinton might well have won the nomination, if she hadn’t listened to the imbecilic Mark Penn. He bungled what should have been a win. I am glad things worked out for the best, but I am also reasonably sure that Clinton would have beaten McCain.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:18 am
@eemom: right on. none of these motherfuckers are good enough even to lick the boots of dukakis and kerry.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:21 am
People watched this thing? Didn’t you have guinea pigs to bathe or something?
January 8th, 2012 at 12:21 am
@DCLaw1: I don’t think Santorum wants it. I mean, a Senator who lost by 18 points years ago is going to win? He’s been rejected soundly by the people of PA. He knows that. Who goes from losing an election for Senate (even by a small margin) to winning the presidency? Nobody. His whole history is go along to get along. Maybe in his feverish twerpy dreams he sees himself in the Oval Office but the guy’s whole thing is “Where’s the dollar? Tell me what I have to say to get the dollar.”
I think Santorum saw a chance to raise his profile, raise his price, make himself relevant (how long can he trade on his outdated Senate career?) and got in. That’s why he has no organization.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:22 am
I wonder what Mitt’s VP selection will be about. Let’s face it, he’s not gonna be drawing big crowds, and in a month or so he won’t be compared to that GOP clowncar that’s been trailing behind him. He’ll be compared to Obama, who we have to admit can still draw a crowd. Maybe he’ll make his decision early if he picks someone that jazzes up the base. Of course that just gives ordinary folks more time to realize how crazy the pick was. He’s in a bit of a bind here.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:23 am
@MildlyAmusedRainbowPerson: Her husband’s first campaign team was legendary. But they moved to DC with him, married into the cesspool, and became pretty worthless. The Clinton team gave us Dick Morris (who has written a children’s book if I remember correctly). The cream from that machine has not been rising to the top.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:24 am
@eemom: They lost an election; they are not losers.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:26 am
@Suffern ACE:
No, it hasn’t. Which, to be fair about this, might be the biggest strike against HRC - although her remarks about Zimbabwe during the primary were pretty close to weapons-grade stupidity. That said, she was a tough candidate overall and made Obama earn it. Good for him in the general against McCain. Romney’s coasted a little too easily and I don’t see him being tough enough to beat Obama, even if the economy doesn’t improve much by November.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:28 am
@Suffern ACE: I think that’s a loser. It didn’t work for Mondale in 84’ when unemployment was dropping. Plus, in the GOP primary he has not had to answer for Bain Capital, his “let Detroit go bankrupt” plan, or his stance on letting foreclosures “take their course.”
And on war and peace, at least Obama will have some experience as Commander in Chief to stand on. Mitt, on the other hand, will be the first GOP nominee without military experience since Dewey in 1948.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:29 am
It’s hilarious that that GOP thinks that “let’s go to war” is a winner. War weary. We are war weary. Past the point of scare tactics.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:34 am
@Darnell From LA:
I think service in the culture wars counts for GOP good boy points these days. After all, that’s where Gingrich made Wingnut Colonel when his impacted nose hair prevented him from following his world-historical genius onto the field of battle.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:36 am
@MildlyAmusedRainbowPerson: It is perhaps for the best. Some say that Napoleon was not at his best and lost Waterloo because of piles.(FN1)
(FN1) I think Wellington and Blucher (Neigh!) simply kicked his ass on that occasion.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:41 am
@Darnell From LA: Obama on foreign policy is hugely dangerous for the GOP. I’m sort of surprised that Romney is even approaching it. Obama’s resume is cleaning up the GWB messes—Iraq and OBL. That’s what it is. There’s no changing that and people love BOTH. Even mentioning it, seems to me, is a reminder of the tragedy and failure before. And then Romney doubles down and starts talking about MORE WAR.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:41 am
@ChrisNYC: That “Swinging a big dick and hope no one cuts it off” plays well with their base who hate “leading from behind.” Or even “Leading by example.” It’s really a loser’s version of what a leader needs to look like. It plays extremely well with establishment pundits as well for that reason.
ETA: And pledging to go to war at least makes more sense than locking world leaders in a room and telling them to “stop the bullshit.” I believe that was McCain’s solution to most world problems.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:45 am
@Darnell From LA:
Santorum Style & Usage Guide Fail. Though, to be fair, one can hardly blame Man On Dog’s ghostwriters for failing to adhere to his style guide. I mean, seriously, would you read The Santorum Style & Usage Guide?
Yeah, me neither.
.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:49 am
@JGabriel:
Hard to imagine using santorum for anything, let alone for stylistic purposes. Still, those wingnut boys have their own peculiar ways.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:57 am
@dogwood:
Mrs Clinton committed a huge blunder out of the gate by believing in the myth of her inevitability, and in the stupid, romance novel lie, that just because she was the spouse of a skilled politician, that she also magically possessed the same mad, crazy skills.
She was playing catch up from the jump, and resorted to desperate measures and silly math games to try to delay the inevitable.
I didn’t say that Hillary Clinton was incompetent. I said that she wasn’t skilled. She was undone by her own hubris, and a team of lousy political strategists. And she was also undone by the arrogance of one of her chief advisors, her husband Bill, who lost his shit when he found that he could not make black voters love his wife like they loved him.
Her lack of sharp political instincts makes her a lot more like Mitt than people are willing to admit.
She was a good, hard working senator, and a hard working Secretary of State.
But that’s about it.
January 8th, 2012 at 12:59 am
@Suffern ACE: Agree. But I think their base (e.g., Erick Erickson, another grifter) is sort of time warped. Maybe they won’t reckon with how changing the 2001-2008 period was for the country and how really desolate and traumatic GWB was for most people.
I mean, and I know I don’t have to tell anyone here, it was failure after failure. Abu Ghraib, the contractors’ bodies hung on that bridge, mounting casualties, soldiers now with prostheses, Katrina, the financial meltdown. All of it. In 2003, the country’s recent memory of war was Desert Storm. Quick and successful. So changed now. I think there has (to our credit) been a huge humbling.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:00 am
@Darnell From LA:
I predict there will be a pretty big moment in the Commander in Chief debate where the POTUS goes after Romney for saying nothing when a gay soldier got booed at one of the early Republican debates. That ain’t gonna make Romney look like CiC material.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:00 am
@Shawn in ShowMe:
Because his SuperPAC just cut them a bunch of 7 figure checks?
January 8th, 2012 at 1:01 am
@xian:
Bill Clinton, yes. Hillary Clinton, not even close.
And even here, Bill Clinton’s weak spot was his vanity, which almost brought him down during his own presidency, and which hobbled him when he tried to help his wife during her campaign.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:08 am
@Shawn in ShowMe:
Because life is too short to experiment with fucking an elephant in the ass?
January 8th, 2012 at 1:10 am
I love where Mittens says he’ll just order China to stop taking our jerbs, and Huntsman replies to him in Chinese. You’ve got to wonder whether his translation was a more genteel version of what he actually said. Sure, Huntsman scored no favors at all with the knuckle-dragging base, but you have to admit it’s some of the most delightfully absurd theater we’ve ever gotten to witness in political debates.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:12 am
@ChrisNYC: Yes. It was a disaster. But then in 2000 Bush very much did not run on going to war, but ran “To the left” of Obama. I don’t have the same faith that you do that large numbers of Americans learned a damned thing. I am guessing what the base of that party wants is to talk about war and never do anything about it. Also, there is a large contingent who hates the idea of having a UN, or agreements with allies. It actually takes quite a bit of negotiating to get countries to agree to sanction Iran. A lot easier to pretend that all you have to do is threaten to drop bombs on Russia and China and South Korea and they’ll give up the thousands of jobs and billions of dollars they get each year from trade with Iran.
We aren’t collectively bright and we are rather mean…because…hostages in 1979…we’ll do it again if we get the chance.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:13 am
@MildlyAmusedRainbowPerson: Puritan!
January 8th, 2012 at 1:13 am
@Omnes Omnibus:
Episco-fucking-palian to you, buddy.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:17 am
@ChrisNYC: Very true. I remember Mondale saying in an interview that he considered his role as the 1984 nominee to be the most important position he had attained in public life—i.e., more important than the vice-presidency. He saw himself as the spokesman for tens of millions of Americans whose views were being ignored—or worse, mocked—during the Reagan re-election lovefest, and he resolved to speak his mind, articulate the views of the opposition as best he could, and suffer the political and historical consequences, come what may. A good man who deserved better than what he got in return.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:18 am
@MildlyAmusedRainbowPerson: Okay, my people were the Puritans. W’evs. We bred tolerant liberals. And if the candidate and the elephant are willing participant, it is no concern of ours.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:20 am
@Thatgaljill:
I may have something even better: in Florida, where they now require a drug test before allowing temporary cash assistance, 96% of the applicants pass the drug test. (Of the remainder, 2% fail and 2% withdraw their applications for other reasons.)
January 8th, 2012 at 1:25 am
New theory before I crash: because the central animating “principle” in Republican politics is to piss off liberals, Gingrich and the other non-Romneys would happily have gone after him in this debate, but they got wind of the fact that liberals were avidly in favor of such a prospect. Accordingly, in order to piss off (or at least disappoint) liberals, they were compelled to do the opposite.
Discuss. Good night.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:26 am
@Darnell From LA: @Darnell From LA:
If “Middle Class” was the little house for the dog in the backyard that got crushed by the falling tree limb in a storm, okey dokey. Otherwise, fail.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:28 am
@Shawn in ShowMe:
Daniel Dennett is #1 on my rock star list.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:29 am
@Suffern ACE:
This is probably true, but how does catering to that base in terms of foreign policy pay dividends in a general election? Romney’s got a lot of work to do. The pundits seem to think every election is only about Ohio and Florida, but Romney’s gotta flip more states than that to even think about winning. I doubt war with Iran plays well in Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico. I imagine when the primaries are over there will be little talk about foreign policy from the Romney camp, and the Obama camp will be reminding the voters daily about Romney’s war with Iran nonsense.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:31 am
@DCLaw1:
If this is the most effective method for controlling them, so be it. It really pisses me off when Republicans insist on jumping OFF the ledge, and NOT staying put. Really. Just chaps, it does.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:31 am
@Omnes Omnibus:
Well, I emphasize the fucking over the Episco and palian parts of my denomination. Elephants, camels, whatever small frightened chihuahuas Rick Santorum can scrounge up. It’s all good, sick fun.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:32 am
@dogwood:
I’d have thought the demand to march back into Iraq would be an interesting sell for a lot of people. If ever a politician threw away victory by running his mouth, that politician was Mittens the LoveGlove tonight. I’ve never seen a politician so obviously running away from answering a question. I mean, you can’t even give a coherent, quick response on contraception being legal?
January 8th, 2012 at 1:34 am
@Suffern ACE:
Let’s say that Romney is the nominee. Or even Newt or Santorum. It don’t matter. The GOP tactic of not giving Obama credit for any foreign policy success will bite them in the butt.
Obama got bin Laden. What is Mitt gonna say if it comes up in a debate? That he would have got him faster? Even if Mitt lies that Obama was only following Bush administration policy, how does this help Mitt show that he has any independent skills?
If Mitt or any other GOP dope promises to put troops back into Iraq, they will instantly self destruct.
This leaves Iran and a staunch defense of Israeli hard liners (which is not the same thing as a defense of Israel).
And maybe North Korea.
Here the GOP will have to count on either the North Koreans or the Iranians doing something incredibly stupid. I expect Israeli hard liners to double down on the “Obama is not a friend to Israel card,” but to otherwise act prudently.
The GOP may try to work some crap over Pakistan, but there is not much to work with here.
And Obama could shut their crap down in a heartbeat in a debate by asking the GOP nominee exactly how he will pay for all the wars and crap that they want.
I am SO looking forward to the general election. It promises to be more fun than the 2012 Olympics.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:35 am
@MildlyAmusedRainbowPerson: One hesitates to comment. this is an unusual situation as one generally is prepared to comment upon anything.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:37 am
@Mnemosyne:
But since one failed test disqualifies an applicant for a full year’s worth of benefits, the state could save $32,200-$48,200 annually on the applicants rejected in a single month.
Net savings to the state—$3,400 to $8,200 annually on one month’s worth of rejected applicants. Over 12 months, the money saved on all rejected applicants would add up to $40,800-$98,400 for the cash assistance program that state analysts have predicted will cost $178 million this fiscal year.
Now, if I put $40,800 into $178,000,000 I get – a very small percentage. The point, however, was never the cost savings to the program. The point was humiliating welfare patients to score political points and making money for a drug testing company.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:40 am
I think it’s all moot. Obama will not be beaten by any of the GOP clowns, let alone Willard.
Looking at the electoral map at the states Obama won in 2008, he could afford to give back: Nevada, Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, AND Florida….and he would still have over 270 electoral votes to win.
And somehow I think Mitt “I will Veto the Dream Act” Romney will have a tough time winning states that have large Hispanic voting blocs.
January 8th, 2012 at 1:58 am
@Suffern ACE:
IIRC Bush ran simultaneously to the “left” and “right” of Clinton/Gore on military matters. He was expressly against “nation-building” but made a big point about how the purpose of the military was to fight and in wars. He also made hay of Clinton supposedly making X number of divisions “not ready to report, sir.”. And he also said he’d take ‘im out, or take ‘em out, when asked about Saddam Hussein and WMDs.
January 8th, 2012 at 2:02 am
@Brachiator:
I think if nothing terrible happens between now and November it probably will be rather fun. And don’t kid yourself, there will be plenty of powerful Republicans who will get a bit of a kick seeing Mittens lose if that be the case.
What’s going to be interesting is seeing the types of attacks against the President that the SuperPac’s produce. Those types of ads are really only effective if they are personal in nature. When they challenge the character of the target they get tongues wagging. But to challenge someone’s character the person has to be relatively unknown, or there has to be some whiff of personal scandal about them that makes the ads believable. Personal character just isn’t one of the president’s vulnerabilities, however.
January 8th, 2012 at 2:08 am
@suffern ACE: When you subtract the cost of the drug tests, most of which are negative, the program is a net money-loser. But as long as you get to humiliate welfare recipients, it’s all good.
@MildlyAmusedRainbowPerson: exactly. Especially since Santorum has been going around all week saying that states should be allowed to outlaw contraception, because it allows sexual things to happen that he doesn’t approve of. I was aware of that, as a random political observer. But Romney had never heard of the idea, despite being in competition with this person for the nomination? What does that say about his organization’s skills?
January 8th, 2012 at 2:13 am
Note to ChrisNYC: entrepreneur is a French word that has a well defined use in English. There is no Anglo-Saxon or Germanic equivalent——the German word is “unternehmer” which is literally “undertaker”—-one who undertakes a venture. The correct English pronunciation of entrepreneur happens to be the French pronunciation. Anyone who speaks French at all (as does Mitt) is likely to do a better approximation of the French pronunciation than a non French speaker. I don’t think much of Mittens as a Presidential candidate, but think it is way off base to criticize him for pronouncing a word more accurately than would, say, George W Bush.
January 8th, 2012 at 2:28 am
@FlipYrWhig:
Yeah, that was an indicator that he’d never filled out a Unit Status Report and understood precisely what those reports measure, and how they measure them.
One of the nice little catches is that if you’re too ready, you don’t get priority for training and funding for training. Which means your readiness will degrade if you’re overly optimistic about your readiness status. So, there’s a very fine line between being “unready” and “ready” the way the reporting system works.
Having spent a couple years as the unit readiness officer for a brigade sized unit (the 9th Infantry Division Artillery) I learned the fine art of saying we’re pretty ready, but we’re not totally ready. Because there are ALWAYS things you can’t get around to doing in peacetime that really would put you over the top as being ready. For example, getting priority for something as simple as time on the rifle range to get every last soldier current with their weapons qualification. Ammunition and range time are not infinite resources. You have to share with every other outfit on the installation. So to some extent you won’t be “ready” according to the USR simply because you’re waiting your turn to use the ranges.
I wouldn’t expect a flyboy who deserted to understand any of this, but that’s C-minus Augustus for you.
January 8th, 2012 at 2:29 am
@Mnemosyne:
The important thing is a cash register rings at Rick Scott Drug Testing, Inc.
January 8th, 2012 at 2:33 am
@dogwood:
I don’t agree with you here. The Republicans will put the full force of their support behind Romney. The GOP have convinced themselves that they are the only legitimate party in the US, and that the Democrats are inherently illegitimate.
Liberals who think that the GOP will easily yield the floor to the Democrats and simply hold off until 2016 simply have not been paying attention.
If Obama wins in 2012, Republican obstructionism will be working overtime, especially since Supreme Court nominations will be in play.
Also, I like to take a long view. If a second Obama administration is even moderately successful, then Obama, still a young man, will not simply be an elder statesman former president. He will be in line to be nominated to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
So, from my perspective, I think it essential that the Democrats press every advantage, now and ongoing. If the GOP is foolish enough to sacrifice Mitt and look ahead to a comeback in 2016, this only means that we need to kick their butts hard in 2012, and crush them in the 2014 mid terms, and crush them again in 2016 and beyond.
January 8th, 2012 at 2:53 am
@Brachiator:
Geez, I didn’t say they wouldn’t support him, but if you think some good old boys like McCain, and the other who ran against him last time and this time won’t get a bit of a kick out of seeing Mitt lose, you don’t understand human nature. Those guys really loathe Mittens. Anyway, it’s frustrating to write a comment and then have the crux of it ignored. You cherry pick a throw-away line that had little to do with my point and then decide to lecture me as if I were an idiot. I ignored your lecturing response to me about the Clinton campaign. I mean come on, a tutorial about Mark Penn and the strategic failures of Clinton? This is Balloon Juice not some teenager’s Facebook page.
January 8th, 2012 at 3:18 am
It would be amazing to see Obama as Chief Justice.
January 8th, 2012 at 3:39 am
@ChrisNYC:
In a sane world with even moderately honest discourse and responsible media, I’d have to agree with you. But we don’t live in that world and I have little doubt that Romney will take a page from the Swift Boater’s handbook and spew one whopper after another. It worked in 2004. We’d better hope it doesn’t work in 2012. I expect Obama to respond to that kind of lying more effectively than Kerry did, but the people are unreliable.
January 8th, 2012 at 4:18 am
@Gretchen:
I’d prefer Supreme Court justices with less affection for unbridled executive power. Given the nature of the American presidency in 2012, I’m not sure I’d want to see any ex-president sitting on the SCOTUS. Ideally, we want the high court to begin to rein in executive power, not expand it. Or at least that’s what I want.
January 8th, 2012 at 4:24 am
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
As a wealthy industrialist, he must have looked at the businitz and econmiks paperz.
January 8th, 2012 at 6:30 am
@JGabriel:
Holy shit, 27%
January 8th, 2012 at 6:38 am
@SIA: One thing is for sure, huntsman is never gonna be prezinent, let alone 2016. politico has a puff piece on him right now, which is laughable. He is more of bureaucratic type and ambassadorship will probably be his highest calling ever. Pity he fucked that one up too royally.
January 8th, 2012 at 6:52 am
@Ian: teh permanent rethug base.
January 8th, 2012 at 7:01 am
via charles johnson at lgf, a hilarious ‘innernet, debate.
January 8th, 2012 at 7:08 am
@dogwood:
I understand human nature and the Republican Party. They will all fall in line and back him as strongly as they can. That they won’t see him as their Best Friend Ever and will secretly loath him is indeed trivia that belongs on a teenager’s FaceBook page.
January 8th, 2012 at 9:10 am
@Triassic Sands:
Swiftboating Kerry worked because he was basically an unknown quantity to the national audience, which made it a lot easier to build up a tissue of lies about him.
Obama has been president for almost four years, and even people who hate him have a pretty good idea of who he is. Trying to bring something in out of left field like they did with Kerry is going to be very, very difficult. You can’t use the same techniques against an incumbent that you can against a challenger.
January 8th, 2012 at 10:45 am
@Brachiator:
You really can’t stop being condescending can you?
January 8th, 2012 at 11:13 am
@vhh: Wow, thanks for the lecture! You should write a letter to Noter Dame and tell them that they are pronouncing the name of their school incorrectly. Tut tut. Tsk tsk.
I think it’s a ridiculous affectation.
January 8th, 2012 at 7:27 pm