1. Great. We get another installment of the Bataan Debate March tonight. The good news is it won’t be on ABC. I couldn’t stand watching George Stephanopoulos ask more questions about contraception or listening to any of Diane Sawyer’s “I was talking to a hard-pressed barber today” woman-of-the-people anecdotes.
2. Santorum and Romney have a clear job tonight. They need to make the story about Gingrich fighting them rather than Gingrich fighting the moderator. The point isn’t to make people think bad thoughts about Gingrich’s record and character. Most everybody knows Gingrich is basically dishonest. Gingrich’s supporters just think he is the tough, unbeatable, dishonest guy we need to take on the Obama Chicago machine. The key is to get Gingrich into fights he doesn’t decisively win and keep at him. Let’s remember, this was a guy who couldn’t decisively win his encounters against Bachmann (not that it did her campaign any good.) If Gingrich leaves the debate looking no smarter or tougher than Romney and/or Santorum, there isn’t much of a rationale for the Gingrich candidacy. Gingrich’s campaign is built around this fantasy where pedantic, self-righteous bombast = ruff and tuff. Reality will intrude and bring his numbers down. Maybe it will happen in time for the Florida primary (I think probably.) Maybe later.
3. Though who can get really happy about Romney benefiting from Gingrich’s decline (when and how it happens)? It reminds me of that comment about the Iran-Iraq War. Too bad both of them can’t lose. Well maybe both can.
4. I really want someone else, and I wish I could see a realistic way for a Daniels or a Jindal to get the nomination.
5. Romney’s attacks on Gingrich have been too scattershot today. He has a lot of attacks to own up to and he needs to not give an inch and be prepared to unapologetically repeat all of them to Gingrich’s face and make the story the attacks rather than Gingrich’s wounded and dismissive responses.
6. There is room for Santorum to make an impression here. He is being written out of the story by the media, but there are two debates in which the frontrunners are going to be going at each other hard.
January 24th, 2012 | 1:37 pm
I agree with you that Romney is revealing himself as a likely loser in November. But what makes you think Daniels or Jindal would be a viable nominee? They both have their strong points, but neither one strikes me as presidential material. Daniels has no charisma, turns off much of the base, cannot even fake interest in non-economic issues, and (sorry, appearances matter) has a birdlike face. Jindal, however good he’s been as a governor, comes across (from what I’ve seen) as a callow young man with an unpleasantly adenoidal, Louisiana-accented voice, with hints of Santorum-like preachiness, who is unlikely to reach independent voters. Probably these men would do better than Gingrich, but they seem to me to be weaker candidates than Romney.
January 24th, 2012 | 6:24 pm
DJF, Daniels had enough charisma to win reelection in Indiana by 20 points even as Obama was winning it in 2008. You’re right that he would have some explaining to do on social issues, but he actually has a good record there. His face wouldn’t be a problem.
I’m pretty sure that, in a campaign, second-term governor (among his other jobs) Jindal would not come off as callow. I think that the Louisiana Democratic Party would tend to agree which is probably why he was reelected with no serious opposition. If “unpleasantly adenoidal, Louisiana-accented voice” were the sorst of his problems, he would be fine. I expect that if he did run in 2012 (no sign of that), we would find more significant weaknesses.
January 24th, 2012 | 8:04 pm
Unfortunately, Santorum has made a very bad impression. An open letter posted on facebook by a friend:
An Open Letter to Sen. Rick Santorum Regarding a Missed Opportunity
Dear Sen. Santorum:
I feel compelled, as a fellow Christian, to say how disappointed I was to hear your comment that it is not your job to correct blatantly false accusations about President Obama’s faith and citizenship. To ignore the opportunity to address a statement from a person at one of your rallies who said, “I never refer to Obama as President Obama because legally he is not, He constantly says that our constitution is passé, and he ignores it as you know and does what he darn well pleases. He is an avowed Muslim and my question is, why isn’t something being done to get him out of government? He has no legal right to be calling himself president” by replying “Well look, I’m doing my best to get him out of the government right now” is unconscionable and unChristian.
You, as the candidate who claims to take the high moral ground on important issues, missed a teachable opportunity to show how our democracy is about how we differ on issues but do not abide lies nor allow them to be spread on our watch. How could you allow such a lie to stand and not use your very public moral presence to refute the Muslim accusation?
I admit I was disinclined to vote for you before this incident. But I did believe, that no matter how or why I disagreed with you on your issues, that you were sincere in your beliefs and cared deeply about moral issues. I no longer believe that. Integrity and the willingness to defend another (even a person you disagree with) who is falsely accused seem to me go hand in hand. I guess I believe the commandment that says that we are not to bear false witness. I was saddened to see you disregard that commandment today.
Sincerely,
J. Brent Bill
Ploughshares Farm
6960 E. Hendricks County Rd
Mooresville, IN 46158
January 24th, 2012 | 8:18 pm
I am shocked to learn that somebody said something crazy at a political rally and that a candidate ignored the insanity to focus on their own priorities. I don’t know what the world is coming to.
January 24th, 2012 | 10:33 pm
And strictly speaking, there is no evidence at this moment that Obama is not an alien from Mars.
January 25th, 2012 | 6:53 pm
Strictly speaking, there is evidence that he is from Hawaii (as I’m sure you know – I know you’re just trying to make a point.) Someone who asserts other wise (Mars) might have thier expressions of insanity or malice ignored in silence (among other possible sensible reactions.)
January 27th, 2012 | 8:02 pm
[...] think this statement, from just before the Monday debate, holds up pretty well “Gingrich’s campaign is built [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact