Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
At least according to this painfully honest statement from New Hampshire State Senator Gary Lambert, a Romney campaign surrogate.
"I'd like to get right to the point. ... Look, we know how this movie is going to end. Mitt Romney's gonna be the nominee. Forgive me and with all due respect to all my friends out there -- so that's gonna happen...
"I don't get it. This is not about picking a favorite, it's not about picking someone you like. It's not about picking someone even with your own beliefs and principles. This is about picking a person who can beat Barack Obama, period."
Video here:
I'm intrigued by Lambert's argument perhaps because of the rare honesty if offers about political parties and the dividing lines between them. This goes beyond the 2012 field, of course. We all have our own approaches to voting, but for my part, I always ask myself: would I vote for this guy if he had a different letter after his name?
As Jerry Seinfeld pointed out:
There's of course an opposing view on this - that building a large elected team for one party is the only way to achieve dramatic change, and that this moment demands such change. But the American experience indicates that once voting stops being about picking people who share your beliefs and principles, and starts being only about an Al Davis inspired "just win, baby" approach, the inevitable consequence is two parties which seek only to further their own power for power's sake.
Once that takes hold, you're back to two parties who trade off picking winners and losers from government, on the right or the left - just different winners and different losers - instead of freeing the people and the marketplace to decide such things for themselves.
- Comment (45)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Dec '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
This is why I am not a Republican. Because to guys like this, principles, beliefs and values are just "...the blah, blah, blah...".
This is where the GOP has been ever since George H.W. Bush disparaged "...the vision thing...".
Apr '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
Do you think that Gary Lambert has any doubt about whether he'd be voting for Romney or Obama if it was a non-partisan race? He's making the electability argument here, but you must be aware that he has other reasons for supporting Romney, which are easy to google.
I recall your suggestion (via the USA Today gimmick) that you'd prefer Obama to Romney, mostly because Obama agreed with you that we should cut defense and that we should have more civil unions.
Would you care to make that explicit?
Oct '10
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
Isn’t the thesis that Romney is more electable ludicrous on its face? A patrician, multimillionaire vulture capitalist, one-term moderate/liberal Republican Governor from Massachusetts, last elected a decade ago, is the sure-thing candidate against a Leftist ideologue who plays the class and race card at every opportunity and has the media in his pocket? Really? Why? I see Romney and I think McCain/Dole/Bush 41, certainly not Reagan or even Bush 43, the incumbent two-term Texas governor. Who can take seriously someone claiming Romney is “a person who can beat Barack Obama, period"?
Aug '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
It's stuff like this that makes my head explode.
So I am supposed to be distracted by the guys dangling the keys long enough that I am supposed to forget the reasons I (the voter) use to choose my candidate. As long as the White House is secured than nothing else matters, is that it? Sorry, can't do it this year. It's important to win the WH again and it's important to win the Senate back but for the right reasons and with the right people. Romney still hasn't won my vote and if he expects to be the nominee, he'd better start working harder at it. Sitting on the fence, minding your manners, and waiting for it all to be handed to him because he thinks "it's his time" is not going to do it for me.
Apr '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
The polls show him to be clearly better than any other candidate by huge margins. There's a ton of experts who strongly believe this. Neither of these things are determinative proof, but they're stronger than "I, personally, associate this candidate with losers (assuming you're associating Bush 41 with '92, not his '88 landslide)".
They're certainly strong enough to suggest that the argument is not ludicrous on its face.
Dec '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
Although Lambert's point was certainly a valid one, I do wish he'd emphasized Romney's unique financial skill-sets (as did a previous speaker at this event).
As an aside, HoA, Romney has never waited for anything to be "handed" to him in his life. He has been working for this nomination since 2008 and his $250 million dollar net worth was hardly a gimme.
May '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
Lambert says he talked to a Paul supporter that said he knows Paul is going to lose but the guy is backing him anyway. Then Lambert says, "I just don't get it."
That's the problem! Too many of these guys don't get it. They don't understand that principles and values matter. That maybe backing another guy in the primaries will cause the "next one" to move toward their values. That it will send a message.
Of course, once the "next guy" is in office here comes the same old cronyism. And the values voter is left twisting in the wind.
I firmly believe that if the republican doesn't beat Obama, the Tea Party will split from the Republicans and form a 3rd party. This will likely mean the end of the Republican party. Why? Look who is left...RINOs. They might as well go Democrat and get it over with.
Dec '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
Since, I am a man of my word. If Romney wins the primary I am voting libertarian in the general. If the republican party offers me nothing of value, well than they are worthless to me as an organization.
Jun '10
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
We'll see. It's not bragging if you can do it. It's just sharing a fact. :)
Edited on Jan 7 at 3:14pmJan '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
I'll say it again - Romney cannot win the national election. He's running against someone who'll take him to the cleaners in a debate, his religion is, regrettably, going to cost him votes, and for many conservatives the Romneycare hurdle is just too high to clear. One Obama every two and a half centuries is one too many - a second would just finalize the disaster.
All this irrespective of what sage Lambert tells us, although I'd like to have been there when he spilled the chicken bones on the floor.
Edited on Jan 7 at 3:19pmJul '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
There was some discussion a year or more ago about who the Democrats would most like to see running against Obama, either here or on another site (might have been PJTV). I believe the consensus was Romney, because it'll be easy to run against him for several reasons:
1. Can be easily demonized as Rich White Guy.
2. Can be easily demonized as a servant to the Republican party if he starts to attack Obamacare or any health care reform, because of his record.
3. Has a very short political record (ignore the consistent two-faced approach on this vis-a-vis President Barry).
4. Doesn't really believe in the Republican party or agenda, based on his record - which makes it easier to paint him as squishy, in general.
Not that I think any of these things is right or wrong, but that's how it's going to shake out. In the same way that people predicted Obama would start to dismantle the DoD in his last year of his presidency, one does not have to have a PhD in the Science of Rockets to see the obvious.
Dec '10
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
The calculus should be a lot easier this year. ANY candidate should find Obama eminently beatable, and fretting over electability is idiotic.
So says Michael Barone:
Apr '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
Oct '10
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
James Of England
The polls show him to be clearly better than any other candidate by huge margins. There's a ton of experts who strongly believe this. Neither of these things are determinative proof, but they're stronger than "I, personally, associate this candidate with losers (assuming you're associating Bush 41 with '92, not his '88 landslide)".
They're certainly strong enough to suggest that the argument is not ludicrous on its face.
What did the ‘polls and experts’ say about Santorum a month before the Iowa caucuses? Yet I should believe in their predictive ability concerning a general election being held in 11 months? Come to think of it, yes, "I personally associate this candidate with losers" is probably just as scientifically significant as the ‘polls and experts’ are at this point in time. It would be very interesting to see the record of how accurate ‘polls and experts’ sampled in the first week of January have been in, say, the last five to ten US general elections.
Aug '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
EThompson: Although Lambert's point was certainly a valid one, I do wish he'd emphasized Romney's unique financial skill-sets (as did a previous speaker at this event).
As an aside, HoA, Romney has never waited for anything to be "handed" to him in his life. He has been working for this nomination since 2008 and his $250 million dollar net worth was hardly a gimme. · Jan 7 at 2:47pm
There is no doubt that Romney is an astute businessman as well has having formed a solid campaign organization. I would have expected nothing less. But my position regarding his nomination hasn't changed. In my eyes, he's the last man standing NOT because he's the best choice, but because the better choices chose not to run.
Aug '10
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
What about voters who don't think Romney can beat Obama, or who think that one of the other candidates is more electable?
Dec '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
HeartofAmerica
EThompson:
As an aside, HoA, Romney has never waited for anything to be "handed" to him in his life. He has been working for this nomination since 2008 and his $250 million dollar net worth was hardly a gimme.
There is no doubt that Romney is an astute businessman as well has having formed a solid campaign organization. I would have expected nothing less. But my position regarding his nomination hasn't changed. In my eyes, he's the last man standing NOT because he's the best choice, but because the better choices chose not to run.
Some of those other (I wouldn't use the term "better") choices are, thankfully, serving in the House and Senate and in state capitals. Voters tend to overlook the significance of state and local government; as a current Floridian and former resident of CA and NY, I wouldn't make such an oversight.
I think about the possibilities a Romney-Rubio-Ryan 'triangulation' would present and ask you; what's not to like?
Oct '10
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
EThompson
I think about the possibilities a Romney-Rubio-Ryan 'triangulation' would present and ask you; what's not to like? · Jan 7 at 4:54pm
The Romney part of that equation.
Aug '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
HVTs
EThompson
I think about the possibilities a Romney-Rubio-Ryan 'triangulation' would present and ask you; what's not to like? · Jan 7 at 4:54pm
The Romney part of that equation. · Jan 7 at 5:03pm
My sentiments exactly.
Apr '11
Re: Is Voting Just Rooting for Laundry?
Putting to one side those voters who believe that no Republican can win against Obama, the remaining voters would fall into two categories. One believes that there is another candidate more electable, but that Romney would make a better President. They would have to weigh up whether to vote pragmatically or idealistically.
The other believes that Romney is less electable and that a different, more electable candidate would also make a better president. They would have an easy choice, at least with regards to Romney (they might have a difficult choice with regards to which superior ABR they support).
Fortunately, we have an electoral process that allows both camps to have their say, along with those (to fill out the matrix) who believe Romney to be more electable, but a less good future president, and those who believe him to be more electable and a better future president.
Hurrah democracy!