Friday, March 23, 2012

Continuing Debate on Rick-Mitt Unelectability


Mark America brings up a good point for debate.  Who is more UN-electable?  Mark’s take is this:

PolitiJim, Romney is simply unelectable. See my latest on Suicide by Romneycare. Santorum is at least as able to defeat Obama as Romney, and perhaps more so, precisely because he isn't neutered on the biggest issue Republicans have: Obamacare.

Like you, I think Newt is the best of the three, but until the electorate discovers this, we're in for tough times. I think that "Etch-a-Sketch" did basically ensure an open or "brokered" convention, in which case Santorum will not get the nomination, but there's a fair chance it won't be Romney, either.

In this sense, I look at Santorum as a viable vehicle to a brokered convention where Newt's smarts will serve him well. I remember, for instance, that at CPAC, apart from Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich got the biggest applause and the most enthusiastic response of any of the speakers. In a brokered convention, the ability to deliver like that could be key.

So if some conservatives wish to remain on the Santorum train for now, I don't mind, because a.) I see him as better than Romney, and b.) because he helps prevent Romney from obtaining 1144.

In a complete shock to the 15 people who actually know of PolitiJim in the blogosphere, I have a response to his response.

Hey Mark!  (everyone follow @MarkAmerica and subscribe to - GREAT Patriot!)

In answer to your post, I don't see the evidence support that Santorum is more electable than Romney.  We have to look at this NOT from a conservative perspective - but from an electoral one.

It is the relative strength going into the brokered convention that I am worried about.  A very weak (under 15%) Gingrich doesn’t give him any power.  A strong Santorum (anything above 35%) gives him enough power in my opinion to successfully challenge Romney in a floor fight with the 60% anti-Rom vote.   Romney’s campaign has already conceded they won’t get 1144 so in my opinion we are battling for strength of SANTORUM going in, not strength of Romney.  EtchASketchy’s advisor, I think, guaranteed this and I can’t see Romney galvanizing enough support from those of us that are appalled by who he is and what he would be.

RomneyCare won’t hurt him in a general election since Obama would have to argue AGAINST RomneyCare to make it a negative for him with general electorate.  Romney’s biggest liability will be his Wall Street, Thurston Howell impression which he will combat WITH RomneyCare to show he cares.  I agree it gives him ZERO high ground against Obama on the issue, but I don’t see it as a negative for him as he lies convincingly on the stump it was a “state’s right” issue.

But’s let’s talk about ELECTABILITY of the two.  And as I said, I don’t see the objective basis to think Santorum could beat Obama.  Here’s why:

Money and organization are important.  In comparison to Obama on both, Romney wins hands down.  Even with MONTHS to prepare - Santorum couldn't even qualify for 18 districts in Ohio and I forget how many in Illinois.  Neither will compete on money with the former Illinois Senator Felonious Skunk  - so it comes down to :

Message.  Romney is terrible.  Santorum is worse.  Objectively I don't see how anyone can argue that.  On the unveiling of his economic plan, Santorum had to jump into the contraception thing all over again.  (At least EtchASketch wasn't Romney but an adviser).  And Rick didn’t learn.  Just days ago Rick said “The issue in this race is not the economy.”  And he was kind enough to the Romney campaign (and future Obama campaign) to provide a 2fer, by saying , “I don’t care what the unemployment rate is going to be.  It doesn’t matter to me.”

Put a half a billion dollars in ads (and another $20 billion in free media coverage) behind that clip and the 44% of Americans who have no opinion of Rick Santorum will.  And Rick’s not exactly the guy to create a good second impression.

Gingrich's message carried SC but was buried by Romney money in FL.  Same happened to Santorum in Illinois.  (It only took 7-1 to bury Rick and 22-1 to bury Newt) But at least Romney has a bazillion surrogates to get media attention.    Santorum however is DESPERATELY hopeless of EVER getting off of his ridiculous social issue quicksand and while a few conservatives  who vibe to his shrill judgmentalism thinks he is inspiring NO ONE ELSE does!  In a period where the social issues were forefront and he should have shinned during the Catholic attack by Obama - HE FELL BY 20+ points!  So he couldn't even articulate a message that was IN HIS FAVOR with a mass media that gave him a forum.

Meanwhile (for the record) a third place candidate totally unnerved the White House and set the national discussion on $2.50 gas.  but that's another discussion.

So on message - although neither has ANY real ground breaking platform to push - I'd have to give the edge to Romney because when he screws up, he lies better than more convincingly than Santorum and doesn't have the social lightening rod.

Leadership?  What has Rick done to convince the voters he can lead?  Romney's got MA Gov and Olympics (despite the holes WE are aware of).  Rick's been a historically unpopular legislator, lawyer and lobbyist.  Even my marketing company couldn't make that brand sell.

Which leaves us with actual statistical evidence.  My post earlier showed that while half of the GOP felt there was too much "religion" talk in the campaign, something like 72% of Dems/Independents did.  We can't just brush off his historic 2006 loss.  In a state that knew him publicly for 12 years - he b*tch slapped back to Virginia by PA voters.  Why?  Hypocrisy, Lies, Self-Righteous arrogant....what Dick Morris said was a "uniquely unlikeable personality."

At the end of the day, it is the 20% to 25% of NON religious, NON conservative voters who likely will judge NOT on policy, experience or leadership - but on PERCEPTION.

And Thomas Sowell wouldn't bet "rent money" on the ability for Santorum to distance himself from his extreme religious image of suddenly DOING what he said over the years, and using government to suddenly peep conservatives into everyone’s bedroom.  To me this is why Media Matters is gleeful over Operation Hillarity and why the White House has held their fire from Rick for the most part. 

The enormous open house of Rick lies and hypocrisy would be never ending.  Bush was able to raise his “dumb Texan” barely enough to beat Al Gore only because (I think) people had enough of Bill Clinton.  I’m not so sure with a faked 7% unemployment and faked 4% GDP Obama will have that yet.

So I probably disagree that Romney is more unelectable, but agree that it’s all about the brokered convention.

And in a note of reality to ALL of us Gingrich fans, Newt DOES have a severe woman problem.  The perception in the mainstream of being a philanderer is a very real one and I’ll post the polls next week.  It can not be ignored by the Gingrich campaign.  If the truth about Obama’s gay lifestyle, forging documents and the charges against Obama’s gay sexual harassment at Harvard become widely known it will a non-issue, but Gingrich won’t get himself dirty with it and there is no evidence even the CONSERVATIVE media is willing to touch even OBVIOUS evidence of non-personal issues on Obama.

If those issues are not brought up it IS possible to recover from your negatives as Hillary did during her primary campaign.  She went from high negative 60’s to low 30’s and by every indication since ALL of this is old news to America, he’s got no where to go but up.

And finally on our beloved Sarah, yes.  She is positioned VERY well to step in although don’t count the Romney/RINO machine from beginning to sink those positives back into the 20’s or 30’s if they see her as a threat with an upcoming convention.

I’m finally come to turns that most people don’t have the time, or are too lazy to figure out the REAL story on each of these candidates.  No matter how much you argue how successful Palin was in Alaska there are some that simply won’t take the time to believe it. 

This is why I’m relying primarily on prayer.

And Oh Lord, help us.

Especially from ourselves.


Jim, There is a simple truth in all of this, and you have to see past the fluff. I'm not overstating things when I point out to you that once you strip away the entire issue of Obamacare, it becomes decidedly difficult to defeat Obama, because Obama will do what he can to try to mute the gas price issue, and he's pumping cash as fast as he can to "stimulate" the economy, but the one thing he can't change is the past: 65% of Americans oppose Obamacare. There is only ONE candidate in the GOP who completely yields on the issue. There is only ONE GOP candidate who will not dare make an issue of Obamacare, and this is the one issue apart from the economy that Republicans can rally more than just the Republican base. Think about it.

There are a number of issues, and I admit from the outset that I think Gingrich is the best of the three, but if Gingrich cannot pull it off, what's our next best bet? The guy who will be forced to yield on the Obamacare issue as I explained this morning?

No sir. There are three basic things to examine with respect to any candidate, being their record, their current actions and state of the Union, and the projected future state based on their current actions. The record is the strongest of these, because it is least flexible. It's fixed, propaganda aside, and it is in this area that Romney is absolutely the weakest of the three. Stacked against Obama, he doesn't really seem all that different in terms of his record of governance.

Now, you can say what you want, but the fact is that at this point, the only practical way to get to a non-Romney candidate is via a brokered convention, and that is why I am arguing that rather than bashing Santorum over his remark about Obama v Romney, we conservatives must focus on Romney's miserable record in governing. Fight it out at the convention, but to have that fight, Romney must be stopped from obtaining 1144. And once you realize this, it suddenly seems silly for the Newt crowd and the Santorum crowd to be at war with one another. They are stronger together than apart, but even apart, they are better off focusing on Romney than one another.

I agree entirely with your last three paragraphs... ;)

Very nice. I think it comes down to people simply being too lazy to figure it all out. They turn on the tube and see a 60 second soundbyte and it's all over. There just isn't political junkies like you that even care about digging deep down to get the facts.

And the women problem is a deep one. I'm not sure it even helps for Newt to have Calista standing beside him during his speeches. Some people can forgive Newt, but other will not do it. So, I realize he can only do much.

I don't want to have to compromise myself again in having to vote for Romney. McCain was the last straw and I only was voting for him because of Palin, as was probably a lot of people.

I really do fear that Romney won't make it against Obama. Obama is way too slick and I think he can out-lie Romney. Not only that, but voter fraud is another likely event just like 2008.

I think Divine Intervention is the only thing we now have.

To collapse Romney, you need only expose who he really is and who he represents...

as a tantalizing clue I will tell you it is not us - and follow the money...

expanded here:

Newt won the Baton Rouge TEA Party straw poll with 53%. No one else was close.

Newt is also ahead in the Fox Nation "Who can best defeat Obama?'

I'd simply like to know why we are discussing electability and we're not yet demanding eligibility? Republicans have 2 problems that they are not even considering. In fact they are running from it. This is the +first problem: neither Romney nor Santorum has proven NBC eligibility. Isn't that UN-Constitutional? Isn't that what we need to take care of first? I myself cannot remotely conceive of thinking I can fix the Obama problem by committing the same crime. There are some of us. Those who care more for this document then ourselves. The Constitution is this country's heart, no more no less, but... try living without it. Let me put it in wiser terms: my enemy's enemy is not my friend if he too is my enemy. We cannot allow the republicans to steal into this election with ineligibility. Aren't they betraying us right now with their silence on Obama's eligibility? Hasn't Boehner said hands off? Isn't it made worse by the constant betrayal of silence committed in our face with a chuckle and a wink or worse an insult? Ask yourself have you ever seen anything more obvious then the nose on your face, then this? And they pretend we're crazy to our faces. And that's our side. Our side? It just amazes me that anyone is discussing electability about any republican that is not vetted for NBC. But still we have this cowardice of silence from all candidates, they are complicit. They must take or have taken the Oath, that stupid one that doesn't matter any more.. to uphold, to protect and defend against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Did they do that? Will they honor that with an NBC ineligible candidate? Have any of the combined cornucopia of republicans from elected officials, officers of law and court, public officials, military officers save a sacred few... Col. Lakin, Sheriff Joe a few? Will you betray them by even discussing electability of anyone not pure NBC and vetted? You think that's not a problem for the ticket? Aren't they doing exactly what Obama is doing? Aren't they betraying what makes us different? How many VIP's and talking radio and TV mouths does it take to baptize Marco Rubio VP? If this really great guy Rubio (who while silent on NBC says he won't be VP, but there was that denial by Caesar and we know how that turned out) Or Jindal how many times has he been mentioned? Why are they ignoring Obama's eligibility pumping 2 completely blatantly ineligible VP's up our butt and running 2 candidates that haven't proven eligibility? While calling us crazy. Are you crazy? Are you a coward? Has Obama's eligibility been an issue for you? Will you now betray your own principles just to get rid of Obama? Remember the Constitution is the heart of this country, and it's dead if they rip it out, and it's dead if you rip it out. And we're considering the electability of 2 cowardly, betraying, oath breakers, who say we're crazy. Not just to hide their cowardice and complicity, but now so they can commit the same grave crime whether by choosing the un-vetted Romney or Santorum, but for sure with Rubio or Jindal. continued


And they do it despite us and in-spite of us and there is still room for discussing electability? Listen: your enemy's enemy can still be your enemy. If a thief robbed a thief and then the 2 thieves crossed paths by accident while robbing you which one is your friend? These republicans are taking your sacred honor for granted with a nod and a wink. That's their second problem: How many loyal true believers are out here like Col. Lakin? I'm guessing enough to hurt the election. I'm thinking at least 5% I'm praying that patriots would not vote in % numbers like some voted for Obama in the high 90%. That is their problem. I've made my choice and I pledge I will not rip the heart of my country out and let it die. I will not vote for any ticket that is not NBC guaranteed. I will not be complicit. I am not crazy and I am not anybodies fool.I didn't imagine these bizarre anomalies with Obama. And I'm not crazy enough to think Rubio or Jindal are remotely eligible. Romney and Santorum need to put up or shut up. Prove it or lose it republicans. We may be able to save our country if we do the right thing, but I promise you if the republicans cross that line like they're bragging and advertising and getting damn well ready to do I won't cross it with them and kill my country. I'd sooner vote for a 3rd party Sheriff Joe/ Lakin ticket(who else can we trust?) and fight another day. What if we prove this Obama thing before the election and the republican ticket is guilty of the same thing? Really if it breaks wide open and we're doing the same thing what do you think will happen? Do you really believe that the dems aren't ready to use ineligible against the republican hypocrites? They're stirring up race over an Hispanic shooting a black kid almost like the Media and French said a right wing radical killed 4 Jews and 3 soldiers. They will do anything and if there is exposure of Obama and the republicans are doing the same thing there will be all hell breaking loose enough to declare martial law and suspend elections maybe. We need to fix our problem now. We need all to pledge not to let an ineligible ticket get out of the convention. If we do our country will have it's heart ripped out and the America we love will die. If republicans were honorable at all don't you think they would have gone out of their way to quietly vet and endorse and recommend authentic NBC candidates? In the midst of this test our country is going through? But no they rub our faces in it like we're puppies who crapped on the carpet. And you Newt and Paul people, well they've been silent on Obama and the eligibility of their own competitors. I call this treason in my house. I'm Bob M. from Ohio

First to ae0d414e-755c-11e1-b3d8-000bcdcb2996 (Really? you can't get a shorter Blogger ID?) hehe

Romney HAS proven his eligibility as far as he can. Some want to debate whether his great grandfather lost his citizenship on the move to Mexico, but his father clearly was a US citizen and Romney was born to two US citizen on US soil. Romney HAS provided his birth cert. That is a very "iffy" one.

Santorum is much different. He has NEVER produced documents proving that ALDO (Father) was a citizen when Rick was born. I believe - like Obama - he hasn't because he either doesn't have it, or he's hiding it.

We got us a GOP Obama - go figure.

Rubio is also HIGHLY unlikely to be eligible although some believe the blanket amnesty for Cuban exiles would automatically include Marco.

Why the heck can't the GOP run some HOME GROWN CANDIDATES??

We do have Newt and Paul with ZERO issues...

Mark America. you make a very good point (I think I made it too) that gas/economy/unemployment will all be faked to look good by election time.

Santorum ALSO supported mandates in 1994 AND STILL DOES ON THINGS LIKE ULTRASOUNDS, but all his Medicare D and running up deficit as #3 Senate leader without addressing Freddie/Fannie crisis will be used to mute the whole issue. WORSE - the indication from his track record is that he will alientate the average voter who won't even LISTEN to his argument.

Thomas Sowell makes this point this way:

Rick Santorum has possibilities, but can he survive the media's constant attempts to paint him as some kind of religious nut who would use the government to impose his views on others? And, if he can, will he also be able to go toe-to-toe with Obama in debates?

I would not bet the rent money on it.

And what is at stake is far bigger than the rent money.
--------------end quote--------

He also goes on to say Romney is a problem (like the EtchASketch issue.

My point is the the GOP will have a lock on 35% of the vote, the Dems (including fraud) likely near the same. The 22% in the middle simply won't UNDERSTAND or parse the nuance of two articulate people talking over each other. Polling science shows these people base their decision on PERCEPTIONS and not ANALYSIS.

So if 7 of the 10 people they think are smart go with Obama - they'll go with Obama. If those people are MSM News anchors they'll trust whatever spin SOUNDS like the person knows what they are talking about. "Information Cascade".

If it is closer - they tend to look at who "LOOKS" like a President. That includes not looking scary (as Santorum can) or sounding scary with his past rhetoric.

Romney is the smoothest of them all but at the end of the day - if he doesn't lay a glove on the REAL OBAMA ISSUE OF CHARACTER - he won't win either.

My personal sense is Romney has a better chance because the MSM and Obama aren't going to attack him on RomneyCare but on putting people out of jobs.

As the new politijim post (just up called Fat Bottom Girl) alludes to - none of this stuff may matter. We may be in for an attempt to STEAL the election regardless of who the nominee is.

It's why I want Newt/Palin. Two strong reformers who won't quit going for the waste juglar.

Santorum's people (for now) seem to be more loyal than Mitt's. So I personally think winning FUTURE delegates (not for first vote but for the second vote) will be the issue.... just a thought...

your comment about the blogger ID, made me think of an encounter i had awhile back with a (pretty sure about her hair color) person who was requesting my e mail name, which is "boojum4". so i began B boy, O oscar, O oscar, J julius, U uncle, M mary. she asked if she could repeat to be sure she had it correct. after she had recited the info she asked, "why is it so long? " true story

Post a Comment


Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More