AbortedWalrusFetus
Member
I agree. The state is very liberal and it is far from a guarantee. That said, he does have pretty high approval ratings.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
US PoliGAF 2012 | The Romney VeepStakes: Waiting for Chris Christie to Sing
- Thread starter Invisible_Insane
- Start date
- Status
I agree. The state is very liberal and it is far from a guarantee. That said, he does have pretty high approval ratings.
In terms of accomplishments as governor, you're really not going to find much.
Invisible_Insane
Member
I thought about including her, but her approval ratings are pretty low in SC and I don't see Romney wanting to elevate someone unpopular in her own state with a couple of scandals brewing.
It looks a lot like Sarah Palin but with better academic credentials. Out of the box female candidate with slow-burning but multiple mnini-scandals waiting to surface. Not a CHANCE she gets the veep nod.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Agreed, he's still building a record; NJ's unemployment is still 9% and he has said he doesn't want to leave the state until it's fixed. Obviously if Romney asks him that might change things but why accept the vp spot when you could have run for president and probably won
Skiptastic
Member
I can't imagine My Man Mitch taking the VP spot. He had his chance to challenge for president and passed it up. Accepting the VP spot would make no sense to me. Plus, why would you want to play second fiddle after a long political career and being a successful governor?
EDIT: Same thinking as PD, just got around to reading what he said lol.
EDIT: Same thinking as PD, just got around to reading what he said lol.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Christie would be a nonstarter in New Jersey. Just like Pawlenty losing in Minnesota.
I'm loving Romney's gaffe implosion over the past couple of days. The pink slips comment, "I love being able to fire people," saying he hasn't seen any of his super PAC ads but then immediately describing one of them, etc. I know the fire comment is taken out of context, but holy shit bad word choice for someone who (to quote Daily Show) reminds you of the guy who laid off your dad.
Like I said in the last thread, if Obama loses to Romney, it means shit has gotten really bad. Romney as a candidate is inherently flawed and if this election were in a neutral environment, would get his ass spanked by Obama.
ed: One more.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/updates/3809
He gets thrown off really easily. He's probably not used to being challenged - contrary to Obama, who came out ahead in a debate with the entire GOP House caucus in 2010.
I'm loving Romney's gaffe implosion over the past couple of days. The pink slips comment, "I love being able to fire people," saying he hasn't seen any of his super PAC ads but then immediately describing one of them, etc. I know the fire comment is taken out of context, but holy shit bad word choice for someone who (to quote Daily Show) reminds you of the guy who laid off your dad.
Like I said in the last thread, if Obama loses to Romney, it means shit has gotten really bad. Romney as a candidate is inherently flawed and if this election were in a neutral environment, would get his ass spanked by Obama.
ed: One more.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/updates/3809
He gets thrown off really easily. He's probably not used to being challenged - contrary to Obama, who came out ahead in a debate with the entire GOP House caucus in 2010.
el retorno
Member
Hey are there any sites that compile political ads?
Definitely. This has been made abundantly clear in the GOP debates. He gets flustered real quick when someone actually challenges him on something. And you can usually see his face get red as he's put on the spot.
Is there some unwritten rule with the parties where you don't run again if you win a nomination? I was thinking that Romney could easliy run again in 2016 if he barely loses to Obama. Yet, Kerry nor Gore ran again even though they lost by a small margin.
Maybe the process is so long and draining that it scares people away from trying again.
Maybe the process is so long and draining that it scares people away from trying again.
It's happened in the past, but, at the Presidential level these days, no. You just get one shot.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Eh, being out of office for so long couldn't be a good idea or platform to run on. He is already out of touch with 90% of the country, if he is out of office for another 4 years and continues to do nothing in the business world, he might become even moreso with the business side. This is him at his best, whether he likes it or not.
el retorno
Member
Wait he's now saying the president did what he said? I thought he didn't aprove of the bailout?
I've seriously never see a more dishonest candidate in my life.
AbortedWalrusFetus
Member
I always sort of thought it was more fundraising fatigue. Harder to get people to donate to a candidates campaign that they already have given to in the past, and seen it go to nothing. In Romney's case that's probably not such a huge issue because of his access to capital.
el retorno
Member
Long time ago but Nixon.
Who are these people who are voting for Romney in the primaries?
I can "understand" other candidates getting votes:
Santorum because God-fearing or homophobic people get out and support him
Paul because Libertarians and the youth get out and support him
Perry because he's charming in that mentally retarded kind of way
Huntsman because he's got a really good resume and is a good diplomat
Gingrich because of old, angry white people
I just don't know who's like "OH YEAH, STOKED TO GO VOTE FOR ROMNEY! I LOVE CORPORATIONS AND PEOPLE WHO BANKRUPT COMPANIES!"
I can "understand" other candidates getting votes:
Santorum because God-fearing or homophobic people get out and support him
Paul because Libertarians and the youth get out and support him
Perry because he's charming in that mentally retarded kind of way
Huntsman because he's got a really good resume and is a good diplomat
Gingrich because of old, angry white people
I just don't know who's like "OH YEAH, STOKED TO GO VOTE FOR ROMNEY! I LOVE CORPORATIONS AND PEOPLE WHO BANKRUPT COMPANIES!"
Invisible_Insane
Member
Because he has the best chance to win.
I just don't buy that. I'd say that Huntsman has a better chance of winning, or is at least equal.
Invisible_Insane
Member
As long as you're just not buying that, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
He broke even with Santorum in a notoriously, outrageously conservative state.
He's running away with New Hampshire.
He's ahead in South Carolina, which is also famously conservative.
The last polls in Florida had Gingrich winning. They were taken a month ago. You think he's still up?
There's no reason to think that anyone else has a reasonable chance at capturing the nomination.
Salvor.Hardin
Banned
In a world full of all-too-eager arm chair analysts, losing to a candidate from the opposing party breeds too much ill-will for the loser from his own base. Defeat in the context of modern American politics has been treated as a deficiency of self rather than the strength of the opponent. Even post-2008, despite everything going for the Dems, Republican voters started dumping on McCain, when in reality, he could never have won. It galvanized the party, the Republicans went vampiric, inflicting virulent extreme conservative views among the base because they perceived McCain as being too soft.
Only if I can pay in installments of $9.95 per day for 1,000,000 years.
Yep, agreed. Mitch Daniels and Chris Christie would both have a pretty good shot at the presidency in 2016 (and probably wouldn't be bad presidents), so I don't think either will accept a VP nomination. I imagine whichever one of them gets a nomination in 2016 will be the favorite in the general, since I don't see any Dems that would be very clear choices to run after Obama (granted, it is over 4 years away, which is forever in politics).
I also don't want Mitch to leave Indiana right now, since I don't see us getting a Dem governor any time soon and Mitch is actually one of the few reasonable and sane Republicans out there. I'd rather have him than some far-right tea party type as governor.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Pretty much.
Was he a good governor? I am wondering if the Massachusetts people liked him. I guess it wouldn't really matter what kind of piece of crap he is personally and in business, if he can lead with integrity (once again, I do not know if he was or not) then who cares.
I'd probably agree, but you're forgetting that the entire republican passion now is built upon getting Obama out. Everything and anything Obama has done, is doing, or will ever do is bad to them. Huntsman worked under Obama's administration. Sure to logical people that doesn't mean anything, and I take offense to the fact that Romney attacked him on that, but that does mean something to this base that just blindly hates Obama for even so much as literally breathing. Romney knows this. That's why everything that escapes his mouth seems to be against anything Obama did. The only candidate that seemed to do that more was Bachmann, and she was coo-coo and pretty much unelectable.
So, yeah, while being unexciting, Romney has this odd quality where he sort of fills the anti-Obama quota while also seeming sort of electable.
I can't imagine Romney would do that.The only reason he's doing so well right now is because of how comically bad the rest of the field is. Well, that and oodles of $$$.
Then again, he seems like he wants to be president more than anything in the world, so who knows.
I agree, in the general Huntsman would be a more appealing candidate. Romney is the nexus between electable and appealing enough to the GOP base to get by.
If the last week is a preview of how he'll fare in the general, he's in for a rough ride.
Speaking of electability. I'm deliberately not following the polls closely at this point, since it's still early and I'm stressed out enough at work these days. But one I do look at every couple weeks is Gallup's tracker on the direction the economy is moving in. It's well established that the absolute level of the economy is important, but the direction people perceive it moving in is much more important in an election year, and very predictive of whether incumbents get re-elected. If people see things getting better, Obama will get the credit and that will improve his election chances significantly.
Here's the tracker. Note the collapse around the time of the debt ceiling shutdown threats, and the gradual recovery. On that front it is somewhat mirroring the consumer confidence measures. But note the strong swing in December, and the net 10-point after Friday's jobs report. That's coincided with a boost in Obama's approval rating and is probably one of the main drivers behind it.
Which is what the GOP is worried about. (That article paints too rosy a picture, IMO, but gets the general thrust right.)
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
Conservatives have a soft spot for 'Party before Country' schtick. It's a message that's firing up Republican primary voters who have the pulse of the current political climate.
Huntsman has no chance. As much as we hate sympathizers of the French, we hate those of the Chinese more. They took r jerbs. But seriously, Americans will not vote for someone that was ambassador of China, which many still look at suspciously.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
?? If anything, they would be going for people other than Romney if that were the truth. If anything, people are voting for Romney because he sounds like he knows what he is talking about, looks presidential, has stayed above most of the debate carnage, and...oh yeah, has tons of money and an amazing ground support. Anyone can win with the right amount of focus and money. Look at Santorum spending months in Iowa, or Huntsman in New Hampshire. Given more time for either one and they both could win. Romney can put in an above-average showing in every state without flinching. he is pressing the flesh and kissing more babies in more states than any other candidate.
PhoenixDark
Banned
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/updates/3813?ref=fpb
I guess Pete Rouse really doesn't want to be chief of staff. Jack Lew was a policy adviser to Tip O'Neill so he has congressional experience, but I wonder how he'll work out. It seems like the only decent CoS Obama has had is Rouse.
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
You must have missed the NBC debate.
Yeah that New Hampshire, going their own way and showing what a real maverickey state they are in the primaries.
Republicans care about one thing: beating Obama. And that's because Republicans care about one thing: winning elections. Platform, values, ideas, etc- that's not what's important. That can all be spun any which way. It's about who has the best chance to win.
Skiptastic
Member
Bad news, bro. His second term is over after 2012 and he can't run again. Get ready for fucking Mike Pence as governor. :ugh:
Christine O'Donnell = combo breaker?
Normally, you would be right. Huntsman is a much better candidate, and a better human being. His defense of his decision to become the ambassador to China against Romney on Sunday is a perfect example of that.
But the GOP today is not what the GOP was even 3 years ago. They have been radicalized, so the only way they can win is if they have a candidate that can lie through his teeth to appeal to the base, while the actual moderates in the country still think he is one of them. Romney can do that.
I'd say it's a mix. Dismissing Iowa is a sure way to lose Iowa, he never recovered from that. But the GOP base - especially this GOP base - is never, ever going to nominate a former member of the Obama administration, no matter how well he served (and my understanding is he was a good ambassador). Unless you include doing so under the decisions he's made, in which case we agree.
Meh, cry more. I don't think Christie should apologize to people that would never vote for him.
Anyways I'm a big believer in Hayley Barbour for VP.
I've been thinking about this a lot. The change is really quite dramatic. What do you think has caused this? You can still find some reasonable people who lean Republican, like skiptastic or cooter. But a quick trip through the online political world reveals that many of today's GOP supporters are very hateful, spiteful people. They don't operate on logic so much as on rage.
Is it just racism? Or are there other factors involved?
el retorno
Member
I don't think its Obama by himself. I think its the dying gasps of an outdated idology.
Huntsman serving as an ambassador is no more embarrassing than Romney's health care plan.
Huntsman would have been better served running to the right of Romney from the start. His remarks about evolution and global warming were pointless (as they serve no real purpose in policy discussion that Republicans care about) and scored no points with anyone. He instead should have pounded his record in Utah as better than Romney's in Mass., and highlighting the areas he was more conservative about (EPA, Paul Ryan plan, Flatter Tax, etc.)
Not that it really matters. Republicans aren't going to elect someone without any name recognition their first time running.
It's because 2008 scared the hell out of them. They saw the landslide and made a decision then: the only way to get back into power was to make the other side look as bad as possible. And so that has become the only motivation for most of their actions over the last few years. It dosen't matter what the administration does, it has to be wrong, period. Even if the idea was a Republican one in the first place. And because the very nature of conservatism makes the rank and file excellent at following the party line, this strategy worked, probably better then anyone could have imagined.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
I don't know if that was intended to be sexual or just "Obama is GOING DOWN!" sort of phrase, but dumb nonetheless. I really don't like hecklers no matter what.
First of all, him being ambassador shouldn't be an issue AT ALL. He served his country.
As for everything else you said, it's amazing how someone telling the truth about how they feel about a topic is considered a flaw, not because of the merit of how he feels, but because it didn't cater to a base.
He said tonight. then called her sweetheart. Doesn't matter if she's a heckler it just shows the kinda asshole that Christie is.
So, if someone is not going to vote for a particular politician, then that politician has the right to treat that person however they want?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked