dagblog - Comments for "Romney hands Gingrich a populist platform." http://dagblog.com/reader-blogs/romney-hands-gingrich-populist-platform-12640 Comments for "Romney hands Gingrich a populist platform." en I think McCain actually http://dagblog.com/comment/145720#comment-145720 <a id="comment-145720"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/145432#comment-145432">Fleeing denotes leaving in</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><span style="font-size: 13px">I think McCain actually helped Gingrich more than he helped Romney. McCain blasted Citizens United and the amount of money coming in through Super PAC's. If Gingrich plays off of McCain's remarks, he, Gingrich looks less like a whiner and complainer. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: 13px">Romney would respond with something like, "This is politics, if you can't take the heat, etc"</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: 13px">That sets up Gingrich. "Like your surrogate said, it's a bad law."</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: 13px">Romney "I don't agree with everything McCain says".  Gingrich: "It's a bad law, but it is a law. The point is that your PAC consists of people close to you and Bain Capital. How could anyone be so naive as to think the PAC is making independent decisions? </span></p> <p> </p> </div></div></div> Thu, 05 Jan 2012 18:27:34 +0000 Oxy Mora comment 145720 at http://dagblog.com Fleeing denotes leaving in http://dagblog.com/comment/145432#comment-145432 <a id="comment-145432"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/145427#comment-145427">And Perry is out, like I said</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Fleeing denotes leaving in haste. Perry's folks actually just got fired. Haven't seen any reports of Huntsman's guys leaving?</p> <p>I saw someone mentioned (I think it was here, but I don't recall who) the thought that both Santorum and Huntsman were likely motivated by wanting marker placed for 2016 (assuming an Obama win ... 2020 otherwise). I think that's probably right; Romney can't be Romney anymore, Huck's done. It makes sense. In that case, the point of their candidacy and the view of success could be rather different. And the motivations of the supporters as well ... it becomes a case of forgoing crummy alternatives to make an investment in a leader who will potentially provide larger returns on your goals in the future. There are all sorts of reasons for supporting and voting for politicians beyond a binary metric hate thing ... our society and political milieu would be the richer for it if more people would bear that in mind.</p> <p>SC should be interesting. You are probably right about Gingrich going after Romney in the debates. Going negative on Romney in NH drives up Gingrich's negatives in SC, Santorum just has to look presidential and not step on his willy so he can play nice guy while the ad wars crank up down South. Santorum really fixes Gingrich's wagon something awful ... he get money out of this win ... Newt really doesn't. Paul *hates* Gingrich - I guarantee he'd prefer Obama, I'm betting he'll mostly leave Santorum alone. Romney's out of the picture ... unless his SuperPAC keeps hammering Gingrich (which would leave Gingrich having to attack Romney while Santorum plays nice guy ... dunno if Romney would really want to help Santorum like that though). Yeah that one will be fun.</p> <p>On the Obama side, I disagree with Gore. Until a clear frontrunner emerges, he can't really launch his campaign. Romney has been ignoring everyone and focusing on Obama - if Obama turns to him as a challenger it solidifies his image as the one taking on the President, and I'm pretty sure Obama would rather face any other member of the field besides Romney. So he's still pounding sand trying to figure out stuff to do that breaks through the noise while all of the Republicans are taking turns framing him in various unflattering ways.</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 04 Jan 2012 05:57:17 +0000 kgb999 comment 145432 at http://dagblog.com And Perry is out, like I said http://dagblog.com/comment/145427#comment-145427 <a id="comment-145427"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/reader-blogs/romney-hands-gingrich-populist-platform-12640">Romney hands Gingrich a populist platform.</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>And Perry is out, like I said campaign workers are fleeing the Perry, Bachmann, Gingrich and Huntsman campaigns, (Huntsman doesn't stand a chance in NH either) and that helps Rick Santorum the most.  And now it is after 9:00 and Santorum continues to lead, if only by 37 votes now with 97% of the vote counted.</p> <p>South Carolina is going to be interesting. And this primary season is going to be a rollicking rodeo of confusion and I for one intend to sit here on the sidelines with my popcorn to watch and tweet the circus.</p> <p>There is another debate this week, and rest assured Newt Gingrich will not only participate in this debate, he will use his debate time to attack Mitt Romney relentlessly.</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 04 Jan 2012 05:11:26 +0000 tmccarthy0 comment 145427 at http://dagblog.com Isn't everyone aimed at http://dagblog.com/comment/145426#comment-145426 <a id="comment-145426"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/145406#comment-145406">Great analysis and assessment</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Isn't everyone aimed at keeping Mitt Romney from getting the nomination?</p> <p>Maybe Paul will be happy to settle for Veep.</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 04 Jan 2012 05:02:17 +0000 kgb999 comment 145426 at http://dagblog.com Yeah. I'm sure the guy who http://dagblog.com/comment/145425#comment-145425 <a id="comment-145425"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/145424#comment-145424">Rick Santorum now leads by 79</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Yeah. I'm sure the guy who skipped the Ames Straw Poll is crying in his beer about tying for first in Iowa.</p> <p>Huntsman didn't campaign in Iowa at all. His play is for NH. His reputation is fine.</p> <p>Santorum ... unquestioned big winner of the night.</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 04 Jan 2012 04:59:52 +0000 kgb999 comment 145425 at http://dagblog.com Rick Santorum now leads by 79 http://dagblog.com/comment/145424#comment-145424 <a id="comment-145424"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/reader-blogs/romney-hands-gingrich-populist-platform-12640">Romney hands Gingrich a populist platform.</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Rick Santorum now leads by 79 votes, it is 8:41 pm PST.  This does not bode well overall for Mitt Romney and now he also has an avowed enemy in Newt who I think is going to kamikaze Mitt! This could be a Republican bloodbath. Why it was just yesterday when Mitt announced they were winning Iowa! Woops... I wonder if he will win Iowa?</p> <p>With Ron Paul out there soaking up 20% of the vote, this is probably going to remain constant, he has a hard core following, and the Not-Mitt, Rick S, not to be confused with Rick P, with 25%, Gingrich basically endorsing Santorum, and South Carolina is on the way, a place where Mitt Romney might not stand a chance.</p> <p>One thing for certain, Rick Santorum is pro-life, and in South Carolina that means something. Rick S. got lucky, candidate after candidate flaming out on their own accord. If he makes few mistakes he has a good chance of attracting a bigger organization from the establishment, they will raise big money quickly. Campaign folks are currently fleeing the Bachmann, Huntsman, Perry and probably Gingrich campaigns, they have a place to go, the Rick Santorum Campaign.</p> <p>Here is one other thing I know,  Huntsman is out, he needs to quit before he damages his reputation any further.</p> <p>What a long strange trip this has been indeed.</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 04 Jan 2012 04:43:09 +0000 tmccarthy0 comment 145424 at http://dagblog.com Great analysis and assessment http://dagblog.com/comment/145406#comment-145406 <a id="comment-145406"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/reader-blogs/romney-hands-gingrich-populist-platform-12640">Romney hands Gingrich a populist platform.</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Great analysis and assessment of potential outcomes. </p> <p>The one thing missing element is Ron Paul who it seems is aimed at keeping Mitt from getting the nomination.  So he could be using his war chest to attack Romney in the next few weeks in a manner that reinforces Newt's attacks.  If Santorum joins in, Romney could do pretty poorly in SC and Florida (where Romney is already starting his advertisement).  And this could seriously damage his ability to sweep through Super Tuesday.</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 04 Jan 2012 02:53:15 +0000 Elusive Trope comment 145406 at http://dagblog.com No mud-wrestling? http://dagblog.com/comment/145378#comment-145378 <a id="comment-145378"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/145374#comment-145374">Oh, come on ... it&#039;s gonna be</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>No mud-wrestling?</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 04 Jan 2012 00:27:37 +0000 PeraclesPlease comment 145378 at http://dagblog.com Oh, come on ... it's gonna be http://dagblog.com/comment/145374#comment-145374 <a id="comment-145374"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/145360#comment-145360">No drama Obama - his idea of</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Oh, come on ... it's gonna be great. First Romney will attack over Obamacare ... then Obama will counter-attack on Romneycare. Then we'll move on to the next issue where there is zero difference between the candidates.</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 04 Jan 2012 00:02:32 +0000 kgb999 comment 145374 at http://dagblog.com Personally not seeing much http://dagblog.com/comment/145372#comment-145372 <a id="comment-145372"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/145364#comment-145364">Thanks. As far as Newt&#039;s own</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Personally not seeing much evidence for "loathing" directed at Romney, my guess that may end up one of the more over-hyped narratives of the cycle. The only candidate that appears to produce a genuinely visceral negative reaction in other Republicans is honestly Newt (and in a totally different way, Ron Paul).</p> <p>Can't decide what impact I think switching Veeps mid-stream might have. It doesn't seem like a move an administration projecting a "happy with the team and our accomplishments" aura would be expected to make. Biden has pretty strong ties in Ohio ... no idea about Pa. The more I think about it, the more I think maybe Obama's hands might be tied even if Hillary would technically be a stronger running mate. Dunno. When would Obama have to decide that stuff .... the convention?</p> </div></div></div> Tue, 03 Jan 2012 23:57:56 +0000 kgb999 comment 145372 at http://dagblog.com