From CNN
GOP’s Romney surges in early voting states
BOSTON, Massachusetts — Forget the national polls for Mitt Romney.
Slowly, methodically, the Republican presidential contender has seized the advantage in the early states that count, relying on a solid organization, $4 million in advertising and an aggressive approach.
It’s propelled him to the top of polls in the caucus and primary sites of Iowa and New Hampshire, and laid the foundation for what some analysts argue is greater success.
“Mitt Romney is now positioned as the front-runner for the nomination,” said Scott Reed, who managed Bob Dole’s 1996 presidential campaign. “There’s a long way to go, but to date he’s running the most logical, thought-out, structured campaign. He’s marching in the right cadence, he’s raising the money, he’s spending it wiser and he seems to be on track.”
I have to confess, I’m sort of fascinated by Mitt Romney and his campaign.
It’s not just that he belongs to a particularly loony religion. He does, but that’s not it. All religions are loony (did Blake beat me to that observation?), and if Mitt’s is based in an angelic apparition who delivered a set of golden plates engraved in an “unreadable language” to a farm kid in 1827 (which the kid transcribed by putting a hat on his face and subsequently returned to the angel…), well, it’s not necessarily fair to deduct points just for being a newer brand of Loony. If a farm boy came running out of the Vermont woods in 1827 claiming to have had a decent conversation with an ordinary-looking piece of shrubbery that had recently been on fire, and then convinced all his friends and family to follow the bush’s instructions for living…. I’m not sure that’d seem any saner.
And it’s not that I’m compelled by his “outsider” or “underdog” status. “Outsiders” who walk the straight and narrow of their party’s platform, are governors of their own states, and raise millions of dollars from party loyalists… those are the “outsiders” and “underdogs” who win elections, and they only get those labels put on them by their own camps and a complicit media who, a year before the first primary, consistently confuse “people who people have heard of” with “front-runners.” [It’s worth remembering too that a certain President’s son, presidential campaign manager, and two-term governor… also ran as an outsider who was not like “those politicians in Worshington.”]
No, it’s not that.
It has more to do with the flavor of bullshit coming out of the Romney camp. Go ahead, cruise his website. Today’s biggest issue might be the war in Iraq, but you have to really hunt around for any reference to it. And when you find it, it’s nice and general and vague - stuff about “winning” and “supporting the troops” and “not being all negative like the Democrats…” but with a couple of handy caveats that read something like “…until we’re sure that we ARE getting our asses kicked.” Romney’s actual plan for Iraq? I couldn’t find one.
Head to today’s big issue #2, immigration, and you’ll find a man who steadfastly opposes “amnesty” and wants “current laws enforced.” It’s an idea that might have occurred to other people, but the big difference is that Romney’s got a plan for a way to enforce those la- no, wait, he doesn’t.
Across the board, you will find that same miasma of unspecified “ideas” surrounding a well-put-together “values” candidate. A “plainspoken” guy who invites you too look into his heart, taste the Likability, and let him go to Washington to fixify all the stuff that needs fixin’.
What’s easy to find on his website? The man believes in the American Family (though he doesn’t specify the number of wives per family). Gay marriage? Not a fan. The economy and the military? He likes ‘em. Doesn’t want to see Democrats destroy ‘em.
So I’m thinking - given all that’s going on, given all we’ve been through, will voters actually fall for this kind of thing and elect a guy based on his ability to emit a generalized fog of “leadership qualities?” Can this particular brand of bullshit work on the American public again?
And what fascinates me, and kind of terrifies me, is that the answer I keep giving back to myself is, “Yeah. It probably can.”





26 comments
dee
June 18, 2007 at 11:34 am
1Adam, you’re just going to hurt yourself if you go looking for specifics from candidates. If any of them have an actual plan, good luck figuring out how they’re going to pay for these Bold Initiatives.
The one thing that’s going to save us from Mitt Romney is his loony religion. It precludes the “Who would you rather have a beer with?” question. It will again be style over substance, for which we have the hot media to thank. (If Marshall McLuhan weren’t already dead, the internets would have killed him) So get ready for President Thompson. I just wonder if they’ll replace Hail to the Chief with the Law and Order Da - DUM
theophylact
June 18, 2007 at 12:13 pm
2And the fact that Romney, as a Mormon, doesn’t drink beer won’t help any more than it did with Bush.
nato
June 18, 2007 at 1:32 pm
3“Romney went after… Harry Reid with both rhetorical barrels…”
Were those rhetorical rum barrels? Tar? Whiskey? Inquiring minds want to know! His site’s almost as purty as the Presidential Prayer Team site: http://www.presidentialprayerteam.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ppt_hom epage
Okay, that was a digression. Something I noticed right away is his slogan “TRUE STRENGTH FOR AMERICA’S FUTURE.” Something that was always stressed in elder’s quorum (hell, pretty much everywhere) in the church was the differences between TRUTH and truth. TRUTH is from God, and therefore infallible. truth is all that science crap, like evolution, global warming and gravity, and therefore something to be viewed with a high degree of suspicion, if not rejected outright. So, it may just be that he likes capital letters, but most likely he’s once again reminding us that not only is he the best candidate, but he’s also got Jesus (and Joseph) on speed-dial.
Fran
June 18, 2007 at 2:03 pm
4I agree, Mitt’s religion is gonna be his downfall.
Fred Dalton Thompson, though, scares the living daylights out of me. He’s a fanatic, he’s ultra-conservative right wing lunatic, and he’s an actor (in addition to being a sometime politician) so he knows how to deliver his lines so that the gullible public will accept them. Which has been done before, by the way. And he’s got face recognition, which will help because people will say, “Hey, I remember him! He’s on the side of (all the powers help us here) law and order!”
And they’ll vote for his sorry butt.
SeattleDan
June 18, 2007 at 2:13 pm
5It makes me feel old that I remember Thompson as the minority counsel for the Senate Watergate Committee. He scares me, too, but all the GOP candidates scare me.
M. McLuhan
June 18, 2007 at 2:38 pm
6“The Media is the Massage” is what I meant to say. And now I’m dead. Damn the luck…
Alexander
June 18, 2007 at 3:12 pm
7A good observation very well stated.
Thanks, Adam.
becca (and brian)
June 18, 2007 at 5:12 pm
8Along the lines of what Adam was saying, one person’s view of what we ought to expect our candidates to be talking about:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1632649,00.html
Doesn’t sounds like Mitt’s giving us much of that.
And then the following profile on the govenator and Bloomberg. From the outside they certainly seem like they are making things happen while Washington dithers, but I’d be interested in hearing from any CA or NYC fanappers what the impression is from folks actually being governed by them:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1632736-1,00.html
gillian
June 18, 2007 at 5:54 pm
9Are we running out of options?
cooper
June 18, 2007 at 6:19 pm
10I don’t know about being governed by Arnold and Bloomberg, but I will tell you this, our governor can put the pedal to the metal with the worst of them.
http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/story/575448.html
I’ve always thought the South has the most colorful politicians.
Maximum Bob
June 18, 2007 at 6:26 pm
11His Mormonism is fine with me; Romney is hands-down the guy I’d want to not have a beer with.
Ann
June 18, 2007 at 10:41 pm
12Sure, we’ll elect a Mormon. But what about a disciple of the Great Lobster, or even a Pastafarian?
Murray
June 19, 2007 at 4:40 am
13Americans always have and always will vote for the most popular person for all the wrong reasons, even good presidents like, Jack, Bill, and Jimmy. They will vote for the person with the most hair, taller, the one who doesn’t talk down to them, would be fun to have a beer or 10 with, doesn’t look like my brother-in-law, etc. If you are looking to get Americans to vote for someone because of ACTUAL character and specific plans to address the problems we face, sadly you are dropping your bucket down a dry well.
I think all religions have some bizarre “miracle” at their center. It requires followers to believe rather than just agree. It also sets them apart from others who claim to see through the “miracle”.
Although, most religions do a better job of avoiding easily proven wrong tenants, such as American Indians being the lost tribes of Israel. But then again DNA tests are part of that science thing.
NASCAR David
June 19, 2007 at 4:59 am
14The answer probably lies in figuring out how he could win the governorship of Massachusetts, but at least they came back to their senses after that exercise in whatever it was. If America in general were to follow the Massachusetts example, Barack Obama would be the next president. But only a fool now trusts the behavior of American voters in presidential elections, and Karl Rove figured out some time back what fools these voters be. He has also pretty much perfected the long-standing arts of voter disenfranchisement and voter fraud, while effectively setting in motion such things as voter picture ids to “stop voter fraud.” Georgia loves it.
Meanwhile, Mike Easley bangin’ around Lowe’s Motor Speedway at at least 130, the breaking point for regular folk….gotta love it. That’s a Hendrick car, isn’t it, possibly the one Junior will be driving next year if not the 5 or Hendrick can’t entice Theresa to let the 8 go with Junior, maybe in a trade for Kyle Busch and the 5. Inquiring Junior fans want to know.
Truly totally off topic except for NASCAR old timers - after Junior Johnson, chicken farmer and race driver, won the 1960 Daytona 500 in a ‘59 Chevrolet after all the faster cars wrecked or blew up, when asked his racing strategy said: “I just floored it and turned left for 500 miles.” Ah, the earthy wisdom of a North Carolina chicken farmer. The number 8 in that race was a Ford from Jacksonville. After the race, the driver loaded his wife and child in the car and headed back up US 1 to Jacksonville. He did not have a trailer or a tow vehicle. It was a different nation - a nation that could elect John Kennedy, who luckily had brains and the ability to evolve in a better direction as president, as did the nation momentarily in spite of itself.
Chris Regan, I’m still waiting for the post you promised, and I now know that you have a good one in mind.
Mike Z
June 19, 2007 at 8:01 am
15Specifically, Romney is doing well in polls of Republican primary voters in early primary states. Perhaps these are the people most likely to get suckered in by the style of bs Romney is emitting. Not that others are immune or anything…but I’m just sayin’….
drsue
June 19, 2007 at 8:44 am
16I live in Utah, and am no fan of the LDS (mormon) religion. However, I think it would be a shame for Mitt to lose because of his religion when there are so many other reasons that he should lose the election. I know politicians are the master panderers to the section of whackjobs they think they need to win the election, but the man will say ANYTHING to sway the religious right, short of converting to a new religion.
My favorites to date, him saying he was a lifelong hunter when he has hunted precisely twice, once then he was a teenager and once last year, becoming a “lifetime” member of the NRA….last year, his complete 180 on several social issues such as abortion and gay marriage. I am sure that there will be more.
I also am not saying that a person can’t change his mind, we have seen what happens when a president is incapable of doing so with the current white house occupant, I just find it odd that he would have such a complete reversal on so many topics in such a short span of time. I also resent the implication that anyone who still holds his older views is somehow misguided and just hasn’t thought enough about these issues.
Maximum Bob
June 19, 2007 at 11:41 am
17Sorry to go off-topic, but this was too funny to pass up.
Talk-show host Michael Savage is apparently upset that CSPAN failed to cover one of his speeches, and asked his listeners to express their displeasure to CSPAN with e-mails, etc. CSPAN host Mike Lamb read a number of the e-mails on the air in a businesslike monotone that just made them seem even crazier than they are, if that’s possible. (Try saying, “Have a nice day, dickhead” in a monotone and you’ll see what I mean.) You can find the video here:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/06/19/savages-assault-cspan/
OK, back to Mr. Mitt…
cooper
June 19, 2007 at 3:25 pm
18MaxBob, thanks for the link to the Michael Savage/CSPAN kerfuffle. Mike Lamb chose the best method to respond to all those critical e-mails by simply reading some of them on air. I liked his admonition to not believe everything said on TV. Apparently it’s still necessary to remind the little people of that from time to time. BTW, can you really say “Dickhead” on TV now?
siobhan
June 19, 2007 at 4:17 pm
19Cooper, I think CSpan is cable, so they can say whatever they want. Apparently, they got no stinkin rat to stop ‘em.
drsue - my favorite observation about Romney, the Great (very) White Hunter was from Harry Reid: Rudy Guiliani has been married more times than Mitt Romney has been hunting.
gillian
June 19, 2007 at 6:27 pm
20We all know about being a wannabe; but what’s a Yoostabee?
David
June 19, 2007 at 7:02 pm
21Good one, gillian. Special thanks for that link.
TV Ditz
June 22, 2007 at 11:33 am
22He sounds good, he looks good, and he smells good.
Chris Viens
June 29, 2007 at 4:03 am
23As a Massachusetts resident, I can tell you that The Haircut (Romney) is very good at appearing to be in charge without actually doing anything. As our governor, his one big political idea was a republican take over of the state legislature. He tried to accomplish this by importing candidates into districts he perceived as vulnerable and conducting very flashy smear campaigns against the sitting legislator. When that was resoundingly rejected by the voters, he focused most of his enery on traveling around the country ridiculing Massachusetts.
David
June 29, 2007 at 7:22 am
24Chris, how in Lobster’s name did he ever get himself elected governor of one of the generally most enlightened states? Also, how stands it with the new governor?
Chris Viens
June 29, 2007 at 7:43 am
25David, that year the Democratic candidates were a mixed bag, a bunch of old party hands and Robert Reich. The outgoing republican governer, Jane Swift, was WILDLY unpopular. The Haircut was a known commoditity, haven given Ted Kennedy his only real challange in years back in 94. Fresh from saving the Salt Lake City games, The Haircut swooped into town to save the gop. Dispite every pole saying that Robert Reich could beat The Haircut, Democrats chose Shannon O’Brien, a party loyalist who had “earned” the chance to run. Now, Shannon is a fine person and an outstanding public servant, but she’s about as exciting as watching mold grow. We were promised the CEO Governor, we got an absentee land-lord.
David
July 3, 2007 at 7:36 pm
26Thanks, Chris, for the explanation. What is your take on the new governor at this point?