Righties Rejecting Romney?

-->
Obama Administration

Following up yesterday’s refusal by Mitt Romney to sign a “pro life” pledge — Mitt has issued a statement that affirms his pro-criminalization position on abortion and explains why he didn’t sign the pledge —

As much as I share the goals of the Susan B. Anthony List, its well-meaning pledge is overly broad and would have unintended consequences. That is why I could not sign it. It is one thing to end federal funding for an organization like Planned Parenthood; it is entirely another to end all federal funding for thousands of hospitals across America. That is precisely what the pledge would demand and require of a president who signed it.

The pledge also unduly burdens a president’s ability to appoint the most qualified individuals to a broad array of key positions in the federal government. I would expect every one of my appointees to carry out my policies on abortion and every other issue, irrespective of their personal views.

Mitt apparently is making the critical error of anticipating that he might actually have to govern. Today’s Republicans don’t do “govern.” Mitt’s explanation for why he didn’t sign the pledge fell on deaf ears. All the righties know is that he didn’t sign the pledge, so he can’t be trusted.

In his explanation of why Romney’s position is a mistake, a rightie blogger at Datechguy’s Blog writes,

One factor in the Deval Patrick victory of 2010 where he received less that 50% of the vote was social conservatives.

No they didn’t vote for Patrick, but given the choice between a candidate who declared himself pro-life and one who didn’t. These voters abandoned Charlie Baker and made up part of the nearly 8% of the Vote that Tim Cahill secured in the last election.

For those of us who weren’t following the Massachusetts governor’s race: Charlie Baker was the Republican nominee in the last Massachusetts gubernatorial election; Tim Cahill ran as an independent. The Democrat, Patrick, won.

Datechguy continues by reminding his readers that Mitt has also abandoned right-wing orthodoxy on climate change. He concludes,

As a primary strategy to win with the 30% of the liberal republican vote it is a sound strategy. As a general election strategy it is disaster waiting to happen.

Um, does that make sense to anybody? Show of hands?

The GOP’s problem, which it refuses to admit to itself, is that it has wandered so far right of center that any candidate who is radical enough to win the loyalty of the base is likely to scare the bejeezus out of a significant majority of general election voters.

Datechguy’s argument is that a candidate who is not ready to turn America into Womb Gestapo Nation would lose some part of the base in the general election and thus would lose a close election. But I think a larger percentage of “swing” voters would gravitate to the Dems if the GOP candidate spouted, say, Rick Santorum’s views on abortion and other social issues. The nation as a whole is way more moderate than that. A majority may favor some restriction on abortion, but going back many years only about 20 percent, give or take, are as extreme as the Susan B. Anthony list people.

Of course, the Left has its ideological zealots, also, and there are those who say that Obama is no better than Romney, so let’s punish Obama by voting for Romney. Tbogg explains why this is stupid. I believe I have an even stronger argument for why it is a bad idea but I am out of blogging time. I’ll pick this up later.

Elsewhere: Why Republicans keep losing the African-American vote.

Share
18 Comments

17 Comments

  1. c u n d gulag  •  Jun 19, 2011 @9:19 am

    One wonders what these Conservative religious zealots bathe with?

    I mean, even Ivory Soap is ONLY 99 44/100th’s percent pure.

  2. buckyblue  •  Jun 19, 2011 @10:13 am

    Sully makes the point that modern republicanism is not a political party as much as a religion, and I would agree with that to a degree. Having grown up as a evangelical christian there was the constant pressure to ‘believe’ in something. You had to adopt a particular set of beliefs and you would often see the spiral into more and more lunatic beliefs as it went along. It was, ‘who could be the best christian’ competition. I spent two hours praying last night; no, I spent four hours praying last night. And so on. There was never, though, a question of practicality. I know one family that divorced because the husband felt ‘called’ to go to the mission field, but the mother did not. Made no sense to me. You can see the parallel, if a 50% reduction in taxes is great, then a 75% reduction is even better. Despite what empirical evidence there is to the contrary, you’ve just gotta believe.

    For my money, Mitt’s making a lot of sense, which scares me. Lets hope that the republicans are smart enough to nominate a true believer and thus, ensure four more years of Obama.

  3. c u n d gulag  •  Jun 19, 2011 @10:34 am

    Oh, and far as the Obama impersonator, according to Steve Benen, they didn’t pull the plug on him until he started to make jokes about Bachmann and other Republicans.

    “By the time he took aim at Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), event organizers decided they’d seen enough. Music started playing, the impersonator’s microphone was cut off, and a GOP official escorted the man from the stage, well before the end of his not-at-all-funny act.”
    Read it for yourselves:

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_06/humor_is_hard030355.php

    If they were so offended, why didn’t they cut him off WHEN he was making tasteless black jokes about Obama and his family?
    I think they liked the black impersonator making race jokes about the black President.
    But when he went off that topic, they cut his mic.
    Especially if he was going to poke some fun at the Republicans.
    They only like humor that belittles and denigrates their opponents.
    As we all know, Conservatives suffer from a broken humor bone, and have an ‘Irony Deficiency.”

    They don’t laugh at word play, or subtle humor. Now, if you showed them a little old lady rushing to the polls with a ballot marked “Democrat,” and had her slip on a banana peel and get run over by the Republican candidates campaign Hummer, THAT would bring down the house.
    Remember, these are the same people who supported a guy who didn’t finish his National Guard duty, but belittled a decorated Vietnam veteran who got a Purple Heart, among other medals, by wearing purple Band-aids.
    That’s the level of humor that they appreciate.
    Or, a black impersonator making fun of a Democratic black President.

  4. tom b  •  Jun 19, 2011 @11:11 am

    It’s great news if Romney is in trouble; he’s the only one of the pigmies (Huntsman has not announced) with a chance in the general election.

    _________________________

    The GOP favors small Government, in the sense they want totalitarian control over every aspect of life, down the smallest single-cell embryo.

  5. Swami  •  Jun 19, 2011 @12:13 pm

    I want to feed my family, I want to keep my home, I want just a modicum of financial security. The least of my concerns is over turning Roe V. Wade or promoting intelligent design. And I don’t think that I’m alone in my desires. There comes a point where the humor of watching this political sideshow is no longer funny and the seriousness of the threat to my existence becomes evident. The Repuglican with all their nonsense have become a bigger and a more dangerous threat to me than any force or issue I have ever encountered in my life.

    Like Dalton Trumbo wrote in Johnny got his gun…” they put me back in the womb”. I feel the same sense of desperation regarding these repuglican scumbags.

  6. Dolorous Stroke  •  Jun 19, 2011 @12:14 pm

    I watched the impersonator’s performance online, and the WaPo article is just awful. The first sentence implies that he was pulled off stage for the racial stuff, but it was pretty clear from watching it that it was jokes about the Republican candidates that got him in trouble.

    I disagree with Benen about the quality of the perfomance. I thought it was fantastic. The guy, Reggie Brown, looks a great deal like Obama, but it was the impression – the voice and speech patterns – that blew me away. His big smile looks exactly like Obama’s great smile.

    And he was funny, too. It was a long set, and there were some jokes that weren’t great, but for the most part he was killing it. I don’t think the jokes that are being called controversial were all that bad, but I tend to give comedians pretty wide latitude in this regard. I LOLed at the one in which the “after” picture of Barack and Michelle was actually Fred and Aunt Esther from Sanford and Son.

    The audience also loved him, for the most part. He made a few jokes that seemed to me to be poking fun at the birthers, and the audience laughed along. I don’t know if that’s to their credit for being self-deprecating, or if they didn’t understand he was making fun. He got booed for a joke about Barbara Bush, and, near the end, there were some unfavorable reactions to jokes about George W., Newt and Tim Pawlenty.

    In fact, at times I thought the impersonator had punked the Republicans and that he was about to really let them have it. I imagine people backstage thought the same thing. So, when, as Benen noted, he turned his attention to Michelle Bachmann, he got the hook.

  7. Dolorous Stroke  •  Jun 19, 2011 @12:27 pm

    For my money, Mitt’s making a lot of sense, which scares me. Lets hope that the republicans are smart enough to nominate a true believer and thus, ensure four more years of Obama.

    Bucky, I think that if Mitt, or anybody who occasionally makes sense, wins the nomination, then a Tea Party candidate will also run. They have zero tolerance for sense-making.

  8. Swami  •  Jun 19, 2011 @12:34 pm

    So, when, as Benen noted, he turned his attention to Michelle Bachmann, he got the hook.

    So therefore we can conclude that Paulie Ryan and Michelle Bachmann are protected species ? The Americans with Disabilities Act?

  9. moonbat  •  Jun 19, 2011 @3:12 pm

    The GOP’s problem, in a nutshell is the same thing we’ve been seeing in California. The crackpots they keep coming up with have no chance in the general. There are a number of moderate Republicans here but they can’t get any significant traction within their own party. It puts a smile on my face. CA probably has a safer margin of left leaning voters than nationwide, which certainly helps.

    Swami wrote: …The least of my concerns is over turning Roe V. Wade or promoting intelligent design. And I don’t think that I’m alone in my desires. There comes a point where the humor of watching this political sideshow is no longer funny and the seriousness of the threat to my existence becomes evident. The Repuglican with all their nonsense have become a bigger and a more dangerous threat to me than any force or issue I have ever encountered in my life.

    You guys in Florida are seeing it up close and personal. I’m real curious about the backlash I hope is forming in FL and other states. Wisconsin’s out there and in the news and is very evident, but I’m sure there’s a lot of anger building up, that I hope gets directed properly.

  10. erinyes  •  Jun 19, 2011 @3:37 pm

    “Mitt’s making a lot of sense, which scares me”
    He is making sense because he is one of the paleocon country club Republicans, NOT one of these crazy-assed Palinesque screech owl fire’n brimstone neo-con talkin’ in tongues lock ‘n load jaysus dipshits.
    If he pulls it off and gets the cat bird seat, so be it.I could even live under Romney for 4 years; Bachmann would drive me into deep substance abuse, like dropping acid ( sulfuric, not LSD).

    Swami, I agree.

  11. Swami  •  Jun 20, 2011 @1:38 am

    Off topic…but just to illustrate what we are dealing with in conservative/ repuglican/ teabagger mind..it’s so typical of their overt racism.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/19/john-mccain-illegal-immigration-arizona-wildfires_n_880145.html
    I bet McCain longs for the good old days when you could blame it on a niggra.Now he’s got to settle for wetbacks.

  12. Pat  •  Jun 20, 2011 @6:46 am

    After voting Democratic for forty years, I must say that President Obama has confirmed my suspicions that the Democrats are no better (although not worse!) than Republicans. Both parties work very, very hard to maintain the “status quo”, which has increasingly become the rich get richer and the middle class gets eliminated while the poor population takes on more and more suffering.

    I don’t know how many more elections I’ll be around for, but my feeling is that the vast majority of Americans are doomed no matter who sits in the White House because both parties are one in the same.

    Bernie Sanders 2012.

  13. maha  •  Jun 20, 2011 @8:23 am

    because both parties are one in the same

    Thinking like that is digging the hole deeper. Yes, both parties are way too pro-corporate, but not to equal degrees. Yes, the Dems altogether do not push nearly hard enough for progressivism and economic justice, but they are not in the same league with Republicans for being bare-assed tools of the mega-wealthy. And no, they are not one and the same.

  14. c u n d gulag  •  Jun 20, 2011 @9:08 am

    Pat,
    So, Gore=Bush?

    Kerry=Bush?

    Obama/Biden=McCain/Palin?

    Reid/Schumer=McConnel/DeMint?

    Pelosi=Boehner?

    Yup, they’re all the same.

    Do you suppose you’ll be saying they’re all the same after a Romney/Bachmann or Rubio administration? And, of all of the clowns running, Romney is the least certifiably insane one.

    Oh, and a Republican President with the House, led my Boehner/Cantor, the Senate, led by McConnell/DeMint, and With a Conservative majority SCOTUS, will be completely indistiguishable from Obama’s first couple of years when he had Pelosi leading the House, and Reid the Senate, with a Conservative majority on the SCOTUS.

    Thinking like that is what will lead this country further into 3rd World Banana Republican-hood.

    Uhm, the two parties may be like 2nd cousins, but they’re hardly twins.

  15. chris  •  Jun 20, 2011 @10:17 am

    FYI regarding the Obama impersonator: He was on local TV this morning saying he was not taken off stage for his comments but rather his performance was going over his given time limit. To further that thought, he said he was invited to an after party where many of the people told him they enjoyed his performance.

  16. jamie  •  Jun 20, 2011 @11:23 am

    Pat: You are seeing with clear eyes. What we desperately need is a new party with the old Democrat standards but with the method of financing campaigns we have , that just doesn’t seem possible. After 55 years of voting I think I will just sit back and let you younger folk fight it out. IMO it’s going to have to crash like hell before you get enough people to understand what is happening to really make a difference.

  17. c u n d gulag  •  Jun 20, 2011 @12:31 pm

    jamie,
    I hope you’re not saying that you won’t vote anymore.
    You need to vote.
    EVERY time!
    Sitting it out is NOT an option.
    Holding off the not-inevitable crash gives us more time to come up with solutions, or to change people minds.
    In 2000, did you, or anyone, really think that within 8 years we’d see an African American President? Or even in our lifetimes?
    Times change. People change. That’s why we need MORE people voting, not less.

    Think of all the knowledge of those 55 years years that you could share with younger folks in a local, state, or national Democratic candidates office from now until November, 2012!

1 Trackback



    About this blog



    About Maha
    Comment Policy

    Vintage Mahablog
    Email Me


















    Support This Site







    eXTReMe Tracker













      Technorati Profile