Somewhere in Eagan, as he throws another few hundred poor people off of medical assistance, Tim Pawlenty is cackling with maniacal glee. So far in 2009, Bobby Jindal’s done a bad Mr. Rogers impression, Mark Sanford and John Ensign allowed their zippers to do their thinking, and Sarah Palin’s made herself look even more unhinged and unprepared than before. Alone among the second tier, Pawlenty’s managed to keep from imploding.
At the rate the Republicans are going, Pawlenty could win by default. All he needs is a few more scandals to catapult him to the top.
Pawlenty = Last comic Standing?
The only guy too boring for a scandal?
Will the rest of the country see his manner as studly?
And when Bachmann runs for governor, that should be pretty funny & not very good for his national run,
to have his potential replacement come from a loony bin!
Who would Pawlenty run with?
As top of the ticket, or the bottom?
Him running with Palin?
Hey! If Jindahl & Palin run together - they could be The Exorcist Ticket!
They need to create a candidate, from Golem-mud, just to have a running mate!
Golem-mud?, or mixed in a blender:
One chunk Hucklebee, a little Jindahl & Eye of Newt?
Mehhhhh.
Shouldn’t you guys be spending more time talking about the runaway unemployment, record deficits, and upcoming inflation the Democrat party is causing?
Right after you look at history, Yaz.
yaz pull the other one. So the last 8 years of Republican deficit spending and the bank bailout has nothing to do with it? Obama’s been in office all of 6 months but he is the “cause” of this mess? And I thought I was a partisan, sheesh you make rabid Packer Backers look undecided.
For better or worse, Mitt Romney will be the GOP nominee in 2012. He is a one-trick pony. He is stronger on the economy than any candidate we’ve seen in decades.
If, in 2012, the election is still about the economy, Romney has a real shot. We’ll have given Obama 4 years at that point and people will be restless. If the economy is all shored up and this is about domestic policy or foreign relations, then Obama is an automatic 2-term Prez.
And he has magic underwear!
Did anyone even get that reference to especially odd Mormon beliefs?
Yeah.
After Obama we’ll want the Scintillating Mortician: Romney.
Can’t take off enough suit coats & roll up enough sleeves for that. Unless he’s running against Kerry.
Is this a
GOLEM-MUD pie
dtm is trying to bake.
He is stronger on the economy than any candidate we’ve seen in decades.
How so? What credentials does he have or is the statement above just what the GOP wants to say about the candidate? If you repeat it often enough it will become accepted fact. To me, Romney’s economic positions are just warmed over Reagan/Bush economics and we all are experiencing how well that system works. Romney has no core beliefs other then his belief that it is acceptable to say anything, do anything to get elected. It the primaries leading up to the election, he came within a hair’s breath of completely blowing up. When he was falling behind McCain, you could see his positions and statements becoming increasingly viscious.
This will come back over and over in any Republican primary that Romney tries to compete in: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071222/OPINION/712230301
Say it often enough & we’re supposed to stop looking at Romney & just believe?
Why would anyone think Romney has a chance over a christian candidate?
addendum & explanation in advance:
This is not my declaration, only recognizing what other people BELIEVE!
Mormons are not considered CHRISTIANS by many christians. A lot of Charismatic Christians are as suspicious
of Mormons as they are of catholics, perhaps more.
True, the fact he is Mormon will not sit well with some more ignorant partisans, and they are probably already supporting Huckabee, the other GOP retread who is a frontrunner.
Notice in my original post, I said “for better or worse”. Romney has flaws, and on the hipness scale he and his wife get pummeled by Barack and Michelle Obama, the coolest thing to storm this country since the Beatles.
The pros are pretty basic, but important:
- He has governed
- He has governed in an unarguably bi-partisan way, something that Huckabee has not
- You won’t see him be caught in a South American love scandal. He is Mr. Clean
- He is strong on the economy
Why is he strong on the economy? He used a Harvard Law and Business education to spend the first 50 years of his life leading private-sector organizations, including Bain. At Bain, he rescued them from the brink of bankrupcty, and was a pioneer in restructing a company without doing layoffs and while increasing fiscal transparency. What would we give for more of that today? Fewer layoffs and more fiscal transparency. He was 20 years ahead of his time.
He then ran a state who was facing severe budget shortages, and balanced the budget through spending cuts (supported by his legislature — in Massachusetts, not exactly a group of GOP buddies) and closing tax loopholes. What would many of you give for a bipartisan way of solving a state budget crisis?
He has bits of Supply Side economic priniciples, but with a much more progressive slant than Reagan. His favorite tax cuts are for the bottom tax bracket, senior citizens, and families making less than $200,000.
How many Presidential candidates have spent four decades creating jobs for Americans without using tax money? Few.
When it comes to the economy and job creation, it is a no-brainer. Obama, the man who has yet to hold a private sector job, will still be a economic neophyte after four years in the Presidency, and Romney will be the old pro waiting to fix the mess.
Obama is light years ahead of where Romney is or every will be on the economy, because Romney supports to the same old failed Republican policies. In case you missed it, the economy by every measure performs much better under Democratic presidents than Republicans presidents.
.
Why are you trying to polish a rotten apple?
You are missing the point of “Golem-mud”:
You should be creating a NEW candidate, NOT grave rob for Frankenstein.
.
“STRONG ON THE ECONOMY?” is what has gone before.
But if we did a 180 and nominated someone weak on the economy, there would be no contrast with the Democratic candidate in 2012.
We need to be able to show a contrast.
Not to mention that Romney LOST TO McCAIN!!!!!
Operative words are “Mormon” and “the Base.” To be the candidate you need to get through the Party Faithful and the large, influential Religious Fundamentalist Right has already decided that Rommney ain’t it. Losing to McCain puts him in further as many in the base think McCain is a RINO.
Mockingbird would you quit with the good advice to these charlatans. The last thing we need is a new competent non-crazy Republican candidate for President. Let them continue on with Huckaby, Rommney and as the sort of sane moderate one Gimmicky Timmy. For all we know they have a moderate non-whackjob locked up in the attic that they actually could release.
dtm needs help.
Its like Roadside Assistance.
Yes. PALIN-BACHMANN 2012 has a ring to it.
Gosh, I really, really hope they don’t run Palin-Bachmann!!!
Don’t forget the alteration aspect…
Bachmann-Buchanan 2012
When White isn’t White enough!
Republicans really have no idea how very lost they are, do they? There is a reason Mitt Romney lost to John McCain, and it has nothing to do with McCain’s savvy campaign style.
amuseinc has a good point:
Should we help the right fix their 4 flat tires?
They haven’t done us much good down that road. They didn’t listen to advice.
Let them create their own magic potions to fabricate a new candidate. A new conjob.
LOL.
You are saying that Buchanan will give up his paramour, Sarah?
The right is rocking on their heels. They deserve it for what they wrought.
The left needs to shore up as well. I’m not totally ecstatic there either.
Status quo needs to go. A replacement for Reid.
Holding actions are not daring & we need daring to break the rowing chains of the Bush administration.
You don’t go boldly & meekly at the same time.