Rob Long, Mitt Man
Peter Robinson ·
February 22, 2012 at 7:45pm
It happened this morning, about 55 minutes into the podcast. Rob--so busy supervising casting and screenwriting for his new show just now that it may take him another day or two to appear here to explain himself--Rob finally came right out and said it:
"I'm for Romney."
- Comment (59)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
Jan '11
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Because...neither...of...them...were...presidents...
Jan '11
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Chris Deleon: I'm not about to engage in another escalating war with you, Tristan, but the idea that Romney is the only candidate who can beat Obama, or is even more electable, is simply not provable.
People on Ricochet will have the debate about it, certainly. I'm convinced the track record favors Santorum in the general election. In the end, only the November elections will tell. · 1 minute ago
Good. I'm comfortable leaving that as the last word between us.
May '10
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Tristan Abbey
Because...neither...of...them...were...presidents... · 4 minutes ago
Exactly. Why?
Jan '11
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Yes, McCain and Dole lost, but your whole point was that Republican "moderates" are less likely to win presidential elections -- which the data pretty much blows out of the water, unless you explain away Eisenhower, Nixon, Bush 41, and Bush 43.
Fire away but I'm done.
May '10
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
I want to be done too, but I can't help but point out that your data set of presidential candidates is incomplete if you leave out two of the most glaring and most recent counter-examples to your thesis, and which help confirm mine.
Edited on February 22, 2012 at 11:20pmFeb '12
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
That's the first step toward getting some help, Rob. Admit that you have a problem.
Unfortunately, there's no good remedy this election cycle.
Apr '11
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
The King Prawn
No one disagrees with beating Obama. Where we disagree is that only Romney is capable of doing it. In fact, some of us think him possibly less capable than the other candidates. · 2 hours ago
Candidates plural? Regarding Santorum, I can see the argument; Santorum would get way less funding and do less well in Florida and the swing West, but, has much better identity politics and would do better in the Mid-West (not generally in polling so far, but he'd do better once he had general election money behind him). I agree with the majority of experts that Romney has the edge, but I'd expect myself to find Romney arguments more appealing.
Paul, though, or Newt? Both make Santorum look like a funding magnet and Mitt an identity politics dream. Adelson can afford to single-handedly fund a primary campaign, but even he couldn't pony up for a general.
Dec '10
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Tristan Abbey: Yes, McCain and Dole lost, but your whole point was that Republican "moderates" are less likely to win presidential elections -- which the data pretty much blows out of the water, unless you explain away Eisenhower, Nixon, Bush 41, and Bush 43.
Fire away but I'm done. · 8 minutes ag
In 1968, Nixon was considered to be quite conservative. Eisenhower was also viewed as a conservative, especially compared to FDR and Adlai Stevenson. Eisenhower's political philosophies had little to do with his election.
Jun '10
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
I don't buy that a Romney choice is only the expedient "he can win" one. That seems to mean that the commenter is standing aloof from the American masses and determining that they feel such-and-such a thing.
I'll speak for myself: Santorum's positions on social issues are to the right of my own. I'm more on the Libertarian side of things (if not all the way to Ron Paul-ville). Does this make me a squish? Then it's a title I'd wear proudly.
I'd note that the others many wish had been in the race (Christie, Daniels) are probably both to the left of the remaining field.
Aug '10
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Pretty obvious that Rob has taken the day off and is working .
May '10
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
The King Prawn
No one disagrees with beating Obama. Where we disagree is that only Romney is capable of doing it. In fact, some of us think him possibly less capable than the other candidates. · 5 hours ago
So I guess you believe that the center, from which the winning margin will come, might go for Gingrich or Santorum? I personally would prefer either over Mitt, but there is not a chance in the world that either one could take as big a chunk of the middle as Romney. You have no idea how I detest that, but I certainly believe it.
Sep '10
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
History and statistics are two different animals. Goldwater, Ford, Dole and McCain could not be more different. The reason that each of them lost is unique. The social strata, the voter-mix and the media coverage are not constants in this equation. However, JFK, Carter, Clinton and Obama are constants. They are narcissistic, sociopathic and desperate for approval. They are all mama's boys of dad's that were either absent, uninvolved or domineering. They all feel/felt that they weren't loved enough, understood enough or accepted enough. They are jealous, they lack empathy and are predatory. Think of "Iago" in Shakespeare's "Othello." They see "trust" as a weapon to be used against the trusting. They coerce and bully and create toxic groups that adopt the morals of their leader "Lord of the Flies" comes to mind. Just ask Piggy. How do you beat these kind of people? You expose them. You torment them. You confront them. You lay siege to them without reservation. They have thin skin. They will shed their deceit willingly if you can stand their fury. Sociopaths follow a script. Blame and victimization exist as their final veils. We must take no prisoners.
Jun '10
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Evil wins every time righteous men settle for compromise. If we do not defend the high ground based on principle, we will suffocate in the swamps of compromise. It's now or never, brothers and sisters. The fate of our republic is at stake.
May '10
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Inspiring in the abstract, Paules -- but then I start guessing which of these compromised human beings you have in mind and I don't know which way to charge.
Apr '11
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Scott Reusser
Inspiring in the abstract, Paules -- but then I start guessing which of these compromised human beings you have in mind and I don't know which way to charge.
· 9 minutes ago
If memory serves me correctly, Paules supports Santorum, who would never, ever, settle for compromise. Unless that's what his team was doing.
Dec '11
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Mike Murphy was on one of the recent Ricochet podcast and his support of Romney was refreshing. He knows Romney, well apparently, and his endorsement of him smacked of a good friend comfortable in the knowledge that his opinion rooted in that friendship does not harm his professional reputation. It brought Romney down to earth a bit for me.
Can Santorum flip the moderates' opinion of him? I don't know.
Do I love Newt? I do, I really do, especially after debates. I just wish I saw "discipline" and "consistency" in his actions and rhetoric off the debate stage.
Dec '11
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Tom Westberg: I don't buy that a Romney choice is only the expedient "he can win" one. That seems to mean that the commenter is standing aloof from the American masses and determining that they feel such-and-such a thing.
I'll speak for myself: Santorum's positions on social issues are to the right of my own. I'm more on the Libertarian side of things (if not all the way to Ron Paul-ville). Does this make me a squish? Then it's a title I'd wear proudly.
I'd note that the others many wish had been in the race (Christie, Daniels) are probably both to the left of the remaining field. · 17 hours ago
I know, I was actually relieved when Daniels called a truce on social issues. His words reflected the mood that I saw at Tea Party rallies - if the fiscal house isn't in order, debating social issues is a distraction. Lo and behold: here we are with the CBO reckoning unemployment at 15%, gas prices rising, the value of the dollar falling and Obama and the media have us debating social issues.
May '10
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
You have fallen for the myth that only the middle determines the election. Yes, it is repeated endlessly, but it's wrong just like static analysis of tax policy is wrong.
If candidate X loses a certain portion of the middle but fires up the base more than enough to compensate, he can still win.
And the opinion of the middle is always dynamic and fluid, subject to influence. If the base is more fired up for candidate X, they volunteer in greater numbers, and work harder to persuade their independent friends. Whether they succeed is always a question, but that dynamic certainly comes into play.
A candidate who doesn't turn off the middle, but doesn't turn on very many people of any political persuasion, may have more difficulty.
May '10
Re: Rob Long, Mitt Man
Many Tea Partiers actually think much the reverse. Yes, fiscal issues are our most pressing immediate problem. BUT-- they are largely caused by or at least very intertwined with the much deeper, more long-term social problems we face. If we cannot address the latter, the former will never be truly solved either. In reality, the two are intertwined, and we must fight on both fronts simultaneously to see lasting success on either front.
Mitch Daniels' declaration shows he truly doesn't get it.
Edited on February 24, 2012 at 9:28pm