Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
What were the moments you remember from tonight's debate? For me, it was when Mitt Romney responded to Rick Santorum's rather effective breakdown of some of the flaws in Romneycare. Among other problems that he cited with what became the blueprint for Obamacare was the individual mandate:
“In Massachusetts, everybody is mandated as a condition of breathing to buy health insurance,” Mr. Santorum said. “And if you don’t, you have to pay a fine.”
Mr. Romney sought to brush back his opponent, saying, “It’s not worth getting angry about.”
Up to that point, Romney was having an amazing debate. He recently hired Michele Bachmann's old debate coach and boy did it show. He was passionate and knowledgeable. He was pummeling Newt Gingrich to a bloody pulp. He did say a few things that were incorrect (he said he hadn't put out a particular ad, he said he never voted for a Democrat when he could have voted for a Republican and he said his Fannie and Freddie investments were in a blind trust), but overall he was doing great.
But not only do I know that issues of liberty are worth getting angry about, I want my presidential candidates to know that, too. That Romney doesn't is a huge flaw, even if destroying Obamacare weren't the one issue that unites much of the country.
What were the moments that stuck out for you?
- Comment (80)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
Comments :
Nov '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
It's evillllllllllll that Newt sat on the couch with Pelosi, because she's an evillllllll liberallllllllllll. But hey, we should listen to her when she says bad things about Newt. Huh? I don't get it. I get the criticism of Newt's global warming lovefest with Pelosi; stick with that.
Nov '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
I think that is what he was trying to say. And to be fair, of course the guy doesn't think his own policy is an attack on liberty. But for all intents and purposes he said that the individual mandate isn't worth getting angry about. Wrong, and stupid.
Ad coming out tomorrow: "Unlike Mitt Romney, I think Obamacare is worth getting angry about."
May '10
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
Romney says we should listen to Nancy Pelosi. I can't imagine any primary voters seeing this ad and being affected by it, given how deeply Pelosi is despised; if anything, it will help Newt.
I'm sorry, but you are failing to see the bigger picture. The issue isn't loyalty to the GOP v. a despicable Democrat. The issue is the ability of a potential GOP candidate to be sunk by the enemy by some now-secret info: a bribe, some deal, an affair, whatever.
Edited on Jan 26 at 8:55pmMay '10
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
ParisParamus: If Mitt Romney can't get angry about any of these, what WILL he get angry about?
Romney gets more disgusted than angry. If you think overt anger is going to win in November, you are mistaken. This is going to be a Big Team election. You'll get plenty of anger from Senators and Congressmen, and some from the VP Romney picks (hopefully, Rubio or West). But you don't want an angry President, and you don't want an angry candidate for President. · 37 minutes ago
Excellent way to put it. Anger can rile up the conservative base (as Newt knows), but in the long run it is not going to win you the nomination. Mitt understands this. South Carolinians apparently don't.
Having said that, I admit that I did cringe when Mitt said those words. I knew that the base wouldn't like it. But I understand why he said it. We need an adult again in the White House, not another angry, petulant ideologue. That is what Mitt is projecting to the American people.
Nov '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
ParisParamus: Romney says we should listen to Nancy Pelosi. I can't imagine any primary voters seeing this ad and being affected by it, given how deeply Pelosi is despised; if anything, it will help Newt.
I'm sorry, but you are failing to see the bigger picture. The issue isn't loyalty to the GOP v. a despicable Democrat. The issue is the ability of a potential GOP candidate to be blackmailed by the enemy. · 2 minutes ago
Edited 1 minute ago
I don't like the ad and I don't think it's smart, but it's true that Romney is only making the argument that the others did about his tax returns and to an extent (even more lamely) about Bain Capital.
Jul '10
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.: He did say a few things that were incorrect (... he said his Fannie and Freddie investments were in a blind trust)
I don't think the link disproves Mitt's claim. It says: "And unlike most of Romney’s financial holdings, which are held in a blind trust that is overseen by a trustee and not known to Romney, this particular investment was among those that would have been known to Romney."
Mitt was pretty clear: "First of all, my investments are not made by me. My investments for the last ten years have been in a blind trust."
Not some, or many, or those investments.
I think all his investments are in a blind trust, and overseen by a trustee. I think Viser's claim is that Romney was aware of the investment, anyway.
I suspect that this is where the story's other source: "documents compiled by American Bridge, one of several Democratic groups in Washington formed to back the election campaigns of Obama and other Democrats" come into the picture.
I'd like to see more. If he has anything, I expect Viser will show it tomorrow.
Edited on Jan 26 at 9:07pmApr '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
Crossposted from Peter Robinson's.
James Of England
Peter Robinson
So Mitt clinched the nomination? Or are we still in for a long, enervating fight--only between Mitt and Rick, not Mitt and Newt?
Your graphics are works of genius, EJ. Now I'd like to see a few of your predictions. · 9 minutes ago
As a Santorum fan, I would love it if that were true, and it might be. It might also be over.
Sadly, the only bit of this I know to be true is the EJ genius bit.
Tonight, the story was that Newt needed a knockout. If there was a knockout, it did involve Newt, but not the way he hoped. Maybe that's right, and Newt will lose Florida, come third (or fourth) in Nevada, get worn down by continual debate free defeats in February (until 1, Feb 22nd, before Michigan and Arizona), lose on Super Tuesday (other than the three southern states, AK if Palin swings it, and maybe Montana (one poll suggests this)). At that point, I think Newt has to drop out. Maybe he stays for the final debate and an Illinois upset, but eventually he achieves dignity. ·
Feb '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
My takeaway - if Santorum and Romney had conducted themselves (in the main) as they did this evening, they would be the only two on that stage. I kept wanting Newt to shed his former hyperbolic-self and instead he appeared diminished in the face of his SC victory. I suppose Mary Chestnut is still correct, lo these many years.
Santorum has been steadily growing on me, but I have grave reservations about him. I've never liked Romney, but I was impressed this evening, and I thought for the 1st half, he might be able to take Obama down, but then I thought the opposite the second half.
If nothing else, if Newt continues to shrink, whoever becomes the candidate will be well tested, if the whole process hasn't sunk us already.
Ron Paul - makes so much sense on topic A and then drives off the cliff on topic B.
Mrs. Salieri's comments tonight (and she's not a follower of politics and has avoided the debates heretofore):
At 10 minutes in: "Now I see why you don't like any of them"
At 50 minutes in: "I like that RS, but he's too wordy"
Nov '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
ParisParamus: Romney says we should listen to Nancy Pelosi. I can't imagine any primary voters seeing this ad and being affected by it, given how deeply Pelosi is despised; if anything, it will help Newt.
I'm sorry, but you are failing to see the bigger picture. The issue isn't loyalty to the GOP v. a despicable Democrat. The issue is the ability of a potential GOP candidate to be blackmailed by the enemy. · 0 minutes ago
Who said anything about loyalty to the GOP? It's about not pretending that Nancy Pelosi is trustworthy. It's as if some Massachusetts Democrat came forward and said "I know what Mitt did last Summer!", and then Newt started running ads saying "See! You can't trust him, look what Democrats are saying!" Completely absurd. There are plenty of valid ways to attack Newt. He has an extensive record of being on many sides of many issues. He's arrogant, and he has made many enemies. But Nancy Pelosi's word against his? Come on.
Oct '10
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
Romney won the debate, he will probably win Florida and the nomination. And he will get his butt kicked in November. Ryan/Rubio 2016! This is a lot like being a Mets fan.
Here's an interesting article by Evan Sayet on why moderate Republicans don't win elections. Basically, he contends that conventional wisdom with regard to registered Republicans is wrong; since there are far more conservatives than there are registered Republicans, it follows that a majority of independents are more conservative than registered Republicans. Conservative independents are 'the base' for Republicans, and they stay home when a moderate is running. The registered Republicans are the ones that will vote for anybody with an (R) next to his name.
Edited on Jan 26 at 9:05pmMay '10
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
Is it me or is CNN jumping the Pander Shark?
May '10
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
They soon shall be, I'll wager.
Then we'll have a proper race.
May '10
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
It's about not pretending that Nancy Pelosi is trustworthy
The question isn't whether she is believed by Republicans but whether she is credible, to any extent, in the eyes of anyone who might vote for Newt as GOP nominee.
Nov '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
ParisParamus: It's about not pretending that Nancy Pelosi is trustworthy
The question isn't whether she is believed by Republicans but whether she is credible, to any extent, in the eyes of anyone who might vote for Newt as GOP nominee. · 0 minutes ago
Well, if it's just about playing a political game, then how about this:
It's a dumb commercial.
Apr '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
concerned citizen
I admit that I did cringe when Mitt said those words. I knew that the base wouldn't like it. But I understand why he said it. We need an adult again in the White House, not another angry, petulant ideologue.
Hence I'm still concerned. 4 days is a heck of a long time in this cycle, and Mitt's going to be under heavy fire from an enraged Newt, a buoyant Santorum, and various Democrat supporting forces. They all have different stories, but I think that Santorum, as he did in South Carolina, will focus his fire exclusively on Mitt.
Mitt gets one good news cycle out of the debate, and even that may be covered by the stupid suggestion that Mitt should investigate all government debt holdings in his mutual funds (combined with a genuine clerical error in the debate), the stupid claim that there was a genuine republican primary on Super Tuesday in 1992, after Bush had won all 11 previous states, and the legitimate complaint about the Spanish language radio ad.
Santorum's ads become the story on Saturday, and focus attention on Romneycare. Upset is still possible. Still need a Primary focus.
Oct '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
Wonderful sip, thanks a bunch. I really thought Rick won this one with his heart and his head.
May '10
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
It's not a dumb commercial. It plants a seed of doubt and concern.
Nov '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
Is Romney going to win votes in the Florida primary from the 26% of people who have a favorable view of Pelosi, who are almost all on the far left? No. If Obama ran it in the general, it still wouldn't make sense, because of Pelosi's low approval. It's dumb. Admit it and move on.
Apr '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
katievs
They soon shall be, I'll wager.
Then we'll have a proper race. · 5 minutes ago
I really hope you're right. That primary would be great for the party, whoever won. A solid series of explanations of conservative principles and Republican success between two honorable and decent men.
Nov '11
Re: Actually, Some Things Are Worth Getting Angry About
I'll have to walk away from my keyboard on that one.