Unfortunately, Dave Weigel Is Right

Posted on | November 23, 2011 | 38 Comments

This should make you as sad as it makes me:

There are 10 Republican candidates for president running in two campaigns. In Campaign No. 1, the nominee will be chosen in a matter of months, starting with caucuses in Iowa, then a primary in New Hampshire, then primaries in South Carolina, Florida, and so on—boring stuff, we’re all used to it. Mitt Romney is dully, ploddingly doing exactly what he needs to win this campaign. And then we have campaign No. 2. A tag team of quotable, viral-video-ready TV stars are taking turns as frontrunners. The press stages rigorous guessing games about which of them is going to surge next.
Campaign No. 2 is suspenseful and entertaining. Sexual harassment! Migraines! Ellis the Elephant! Donald Trump’s hair! Campaign No. 1 is as boring as the second draft of a Henry James novel. So it’s been a really long time since we paid attention to campaign No. 1. . . .

Go read the whole thing and try to tell me Dave is wrong, especially about the ridiculously implausible “Gingrich surge.” Anybody who thinks Newt’s going to be the Republican nominee should be sure and bring a hat to the GOP convention next August, because I will be glad to eat your hat — and my hat, and every damned hat in Tampa — if Newt wins.

Of all the headlines I can guarantee you’ll never see, “Newt Wins Republican Nomination” is at the top of the list, or at least a close second to, “Tabitha Hale Puts Stacy McCain on BlogCon Panel.”

UPDATE: I’m laughing at this part of Dave’s article:

Prefab Newtmania reached its dizzy heights on Monday night, when Monica Crowley got a chance to interview the man on Fox News.
“So, I am looking at these polls,” said Crowley, “and you are enjoying something of a surge. To what do you attribute that uptick?”
Tough question. “I think part of it is just substance and real solutions,” explained Gingrich.
“You are such a serious conservative intellectual,” challenged Crowley.

It’s like Chris Matthews interviewing Obama or something.

Category: Dave Weigel, Election 2012

Comments

38 Responses to “Unfortunately, Dave Weigel Is Right”

Professor Why
November 23rd, 2011 @ 6:47 pm

I’m SO pushing for Newt to win now, if only to see you eat a roomful of hats… LOL
Catholics4Cain
November 23rd, 2011 @ 6:48 pm

if dave thinks we’re voting for Mittens he’s dead wrong. Dave overlooked something very important. The pundits pick theirs-we pick ours and we count.
Klejdys aka Gamblor
November 23rd, 2011 @ 6:48 pm

“Anybody who thinks Newt’s going to be the Republican nominee should be
sure and bring a hat to the GOP convention next August, because I will
be glad to eat your hat — and my hat, and every damned hat in Tampa — if
Newt wins.”

Shutdown the internet. Stacy wins. Who actually believes Gingrich the Professor has a shot? No one. This is insane.
smitty
November 23rd, 2011 @ 6:53 pm

Some might be tempted to say Crowley is far more masculine than Matthews.
Anonymous
November 23rd, 2011 @ 7:24 pm

Anyone who thinks ANY of these people are going to beat Obama or–if they do–will be different enough to get us off the track of national suicide that we are on is fooling themselves. As a nation we have become far to selfish, lazy and government dependent ( and our legislators too corrupt and power hungry) to do anything but muddle through, lose our global dominance, and engage in a long France-style period of delusions of grandeur. Better learn Mandarin soon.
Anonymous
November 23rd, 2011 @ 7:27 pm

My brain tells me that Newt Gingrich doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of being the nominee (although it wouldn’t surprise me to see him as veep to Romney or, if he hadn’t tanked with no obvious route back up top, Perry).

My gut continues to agree with my brain.

But my sphincter is nervous, because it senses no obvious or plausible explanation for his recent surge in the polls that accords with the brain/gut position.

Can someone please soothe my sphincter’s anxiety?
ThePaganTemple
November 23rd, 2011 @ 7:50 pm

The first woman President should be a conservative woman and there’s no time like the present, unless you’d prefer the first woman President be a woman named Hillary in 2016. Just sayin’ first woman President beats second black president hands down, but then again, Bachmann beats Cain hands down anyway regardless of race or gender. And she beats everybody else in this motley crew of poseurs.
richard mcenroe
November 23rd, 2011 @ 7:55 pm

Mila Kunis could fit that description. Low bar.
richard mcenroe
November 23rd, 2011 @ 7:57 pm

I’d be worried except 1) It’s Dave Weigel and 2) Even if his scenario is correct what could the RNC POSSIBLY do to ernergize the 75% of their voters who DON’T WANT MITT? They have to be crapping themselves over that.
Anonymous
November 23rd, 2011 @ 8:16 pm

For you, maybe. She makes my skin crawl. I propose–admittedly without supporting evidence except her lousy polling even among the Republican electorate–that she makes the skin of a majority of voters crawl too. Then again, I returned my Social Conservative membership card a long time ago, so maybe that explains it 🙂
smitty
November 23rd, 2011 @ 8:23 pm

Can someone please soothe my sphincter’s anxiety?

Working to ignore that request. . .
Newt does a good job of sounding like he has a clue.
Nothing going on here except the same unicorn of rational ignorance that BHO previously rode to election, before coming to a jarring halt in what sounds like a location that may have been uncomfortable for you.
intuitivereason
November 23rd, 2011 @ 8:33 pm

Interesting premise. I’d say Dave’s not paying attention, and not telling the whole story.

Race 1 has been and remains between Romney and Paul, with probably a 70/30 split between the two.

Race 2 is the race to displace Romney. Bachmann failed. Perry failed. Cain failed. Gingrich is the first who is even making Romney work for his position; he certainly hasn’t failed yet and may yet move into Race 1.

Huntsman and Santorum are stuck in Race 3, building up recognition for either a VP position or another election cycle.
ThePaganTemple
November 23rd, 2011 @ 9:09 pm

I’ll vote for him if I got no other choice. Of course that goes for any of them. I just won’t sit this election out and willingly allow Obama to appoint two or three more SC justices. There’s too much at stake. If it wasn’t for that one thing I’d say fuck it, any bad law can be overturned, but when you end up with five or six leftist black robed freaks finding a constitutional right for kids to be supplied free pony rides and lollipops at taxpayer expense, come back then and tell me how badly you feel about voting for “Mittens”.
Andrew Patrick
November 23rd, 2011 @ 9:09 pm

So it’s all about the Mitt train then?

I mean, until Sarah Palin comes back and says “Just kidding! I’m totally running LOL!”

Or, you know, something else that won’t happen.

I seem to recall this blog was rather fond of a Hermann fellow. Can’t remember the last time I saw a post about him.
ThePaganTemple
November 23rd, 2011 @ 9:12 pm

She does somewhat put one in mind of a Valkyrie, but I wouldn’t kick her out of bed for eating crackers, or raw meat.
Info
November 23rd, 2011 @ 9:41 pm

You seem to imply that the RNC would rather win than put “those TEA Party hicks” in their place.
Info
November 23rd, 2011 @ 9:48 pm

Interesting article in Salon (yeah, I could hardly believe it either) about the new rules this cycle. http://www.salon.com/2011/11/23/the_gop_needs_a_brokered_convention/ I think it’s great because Mitt can’t do what John McCain did in 2008 on Super Tuesday, and we might genuinely get someone good in the process. Think of all the people you wish had gotten in…
MrPaulRevere
November 23rd, 2011 @ 10:09 pm

” I’ll vote for him if I got no other choice. Of course that goes for any of them.” Bingo! I had this exact conversation with my little brother who tends to be a ‘utopian conservative’ the other day. I asked him whom he would rather appoint as the successor to Justice Scalia if God forbid he should pass in the summer of 2013. For that reason alone Obama must be replaced.
John Crofts
November 23rd, 2011 @ 10:49 pm

Knappster- your gut has it right. The 45% of Republican caucus vote in Iowa is Evangelical Christian. They don’t want a Mormon as President. There was a meeting on Monday this week and another scheduled for next Monday to figure out how to stop Romney. They stopped Romney four years ago on a dime and swung the caucuses to Huckabee. Then they worked to get all their coreligionists in New Hampshire to vote for McCain. Same thing all through the South. They were responsible for the destruction of four year of Obama and are trying to pull the same trick again this election cycle. The only vessel they can use is Newt-with incredible baggage and one of the most politically and ethically damaged politicians in the country. Anybody but a Mormon-
ThePaganTemple
November 23rd, 2011 @ 11:14 pm

I do know where your little brother’s coming from. I get that way myself. I even did a blog post swearing I’d never vote for Mitt, and now I’m stuck with it (because I have this hang-up about not whitewashing the history of my blog). But bottom line is, its just too important to let this election pass without participating. I have to vote against Obama, and I have to vote Republican, no matter who they nominate, because that’s the only way to beat him. Sure, I’ll say shit like “if you don’t vote you don’t have a right to bitch but you do have a right to laugh” but if Obama is re-elected I don’t think there’ll be much laughter from anybody.
Charles
November 23rd, 2011 @ 11:20 pm

Assuming Weigel is right, there is exactly one strategy that would defeat Mitt Romney. Get the ABR vote out for Ron Paul in the early states (IA, NH, SC, NV). If Ron Paul beats Romney in the early contests, the establishment would have to withdraw Romney and find someone else.

So any blogger who is not giving Ron Paul a second look is implicitly endorsing Mitt Romney.
ThePaganTemple
November 23rd, 2011 @ 11:23 pm

So since she makes your skin crawl I take it you’re one of these who vote for the guy you’d most like to have a beer with. Frankly, I look for the one most likely to make our enemies skin crawl, and by enemies I mean both those foreign and domestic. And I think she fits the bill nicely. I wouldn’t advise any of our enemies to test her, though I’m sure somebody will. Then again, somebody will test any one of them, and I’m reasonably sure Bachmann would be as good in dealing with them as Gingrich or Santorum, and better than any of the others.
Sapwolf
November 23rd, 2011 @ 11:48 pm

When I read Campaign No. 2, I instinctively assumed it was the 2016 Presidential Campaign. (no not a typo)

Wow, ….I better get some sleep
Anonymous
November 23rd, 2011 @ 11:48 pm

Hardly. I would *prefer* to vote for someone who doesn’t sound like a Sean Hannity parrot. While I’m sure she would bomb the sh!t out of every muslim in the known world (with our military and it’s backlog of maintenance on its aging equipment) I still can’t throw a vote in her direction. Barack Obama is just the worst of a long line of elitist scum who have taken us far from where we started as a nation. So spare me the “have a beer with” BS. When the entire western world has no money because we have spent ourselves into oblivion, it won’t matter who we want to bomb, because we won’t have any food for our own people as the economy crumbles. I would prefer to vote for someone who will put us on a path to some kind of financial sanity. But the only candidates who will do so have little chance of winning. IMHO. In case you wondered, no, I can’t stand Obama. Or 90% of the Republicrats in DC.
Bob Belvedere
November 23rd, 2011 @ 11:55 pm

Can’t help with your specific problem there, Knappster, but try some bourbon – it might not help, but it sure as Hell can’t hurt.

I gave up trying to predict how this GOP Primary Season is going to go. It’s the damndest thing I’ve ever seen in my nearly forty years of following politics.
Bob Belvedere
November 23rd, 2011 @ 11:56 pm

I’m writing in Sarah.
Bob Belvedere
November 23rd, 2011 @ 11:57 pm

You also seem to apply that the RNC has a frickin’ clue.
higgins1990
November 24th, 2011 @ 12:11 am

I won’t vote for Mitt, period. Compromise is what got us into this mess. Only fiscal conservatism will get us out. And Mitt loves government.
tranquil.night
November 24th, 2011 @ 12:33 am

This tune’s getting stale Stacy. Maybe if you asked Allahpundit for the Eeyore costume it’d be a bit more amusing.
ThePaganTemple
November 24th, 2011 @ 8:00 am

And if you do that you’ll be contributing to Mitt getting the nomination, because let’s face it, a Mitt supporter is not going to write in Palin. I’m as pro-Palin as anybody here, and probably more so than most, but she took the time to think it through and decided against it. I have to respect her wishes. I realize you’re doing that to make a statement, of course, but how loud do you think that statement is going to be? It might be a lot louder than you think it will be, only it might not sound so good. I’m telling you, I don’t know where you live or when your state’s primary is, but if Bachmann is still in it by then, she’s the best of this bunch. Otherwise, we’re probably stuck with Mitt. And frankly, Cain and Newt wouldn’t be much better, conservative speaking wise. Santorum would be in some regards, unfortunately he’s a big government conservative just like Newt. Bachmann is the only one of the bunch who is a true Tea Party conservative and the most likely to mean what she says when she talks about cutting government. Well, her and maybe Perry, but Perry brings a lot of other question marks candidate performance wise. Paul is just too far out there. Bachmann is not perfect, but then again, nobody is, including Palin. Bachmann is the best of this bunch if you are really looking for a small government conservative with heart and brains.
ThePaganTemple
November 24th, 2011 @ 8:05 am

So you make a habit of coming on conservative blogs pretending to be a conservative while parroting MSM and DNC talking points against our candidates, I see. There’s no reason to believe she would “bomb the shit out of every Muslim in the known world” though I believe she would bomb the shit out of any country we were at war with, which is what she would be supposed to do. She has said or done absolutely nothing to warrant that line of attack or opposition, though of course I’m sure she’s a little too direct and non-politically correct to suit the average leftist that trolls conservative blogs. Enjoy your tofurkey, dude.
Anonymous
November 24th, 2011 @ 11:21 am

I find it so interesting that you feel that way. It just proves that we in the “right wing” can be as dogmatic as the Left are. Free thought just isn’t encouraged on either side, I suppose. I don’t care a whit about political correctness, so she doesn’t bother me there. I also have to say that I don’t 100% believe the government about anything including the actual amount of current terrorist threat to the US. I get a terrible vibe from her, and many other GOP candidates, when it comes to their deep desire to impose a social agenda on the country with which I don’t agree. They seem that they are all against government power except when it comes to imposing morals and values that they hold as “traditional.” So many on the Right seem to think that this country was morally perfect in about 1956 and want to return us there. I also oppose a lot of the foreign interventions in which we engage as a nation–I’m not quite all the way to Ron Paul on that issue, but I’m pretty close. So prior to calling me a faux-conservative, maybe take a breath, OK?

p.s. no tofurkey here at my house…real turkey. That I bought, proudly, at Walmart.
Anonymous
November 24th, 2011 @ 11:24 am

I think you are dead on about the evangelicals.
Bob Belvedere
November 24th, 2011 @ 12:18 pm

Only somewhat – you’re right. Having seen Die Valkyrie earlier this year at The Met [it was magnificent], I would say Mrs. Palin is our Brunnhilde.
Bob Belvedere
November 24th, 2011 @ 12:24 pm

I’m not doing it to make a statement, Pagan. It’s been so long since I voted for someone where I didn’t have to hold my nose while doing it that I want to be able to walk out of the booth with my head held high.

Enough is enough.

NO COMPROMISE
NO QUARTER
NO RETREAT
NO SURRENDER
WOLVERINES!
ThePaganTemple
November 24th, 2011 @ 4:29 pm

One of these days I’m going to have to try to get into opera.
ThePaganTemple
November 24th, 2011 @ 4:34 pm

If I don’t like the choices I’m left with by the time the Kentucky primary comes along, I might write her in myself, if I can. But when that general election time comes along, I’m voting for the Republican candidate, even if its Romney, Huntsman, or Paul. I’d rather hold my nose than have to deal with the guilt of not lifting my hand to oppose a second Obama term.
ThePaganTemple
November 24th, 2011 @ 4:45 pm

@polipolitical you call me dogmatic, but you’re the one repeating the DNC and MSN talking points against Bachmann. If you had read many of my comments here on TOM you’d know I’m not the best example of a doctrinaire, down the line conservative. My screen name should give you a clue I’m damn sure not a Christian conservative, not that there’s anything wrong with them. But all that to the side, what exactly has she done that has got you so anxious about the possibility she might try to impose social conservative values through the government? I’m sorry, I don’t see that. I see a woman who is a devout Christian (the best kind) sure. I see her appointing conservative judges who will overturn Roe v Wade, and I see her protecting the rights of Christians, and everybody else, to not have to sit idly by while they and their children are subjected to homosexual activists in their schools, or other forms of leftist indoctrinations they don’t agree with. I see a woman who will support our military and fight wars WHEN NECESSARY, meaning I don’t see her going off half cocked into some foreign adventure without damn good reason, and without giving it a lot of thought and calling on the best military advice she has available to her, and also not before she exhausts all other options. So I just don’t see where all this is coming from. Bachmann is a very intelligent woman, very learned, and reasoned. Don’t swallow the lies fed you by the MSM. They aren’t interested in portraying our candidates in a fair and balanced manner. I’ve given a lot of thought to these candidates, and while there is some things where I disagree with Bachmann (I’m dead set against a “fence” on the Mexican border) on balance she is closest to the small government conservative there is running. I encourage you to give her a second, objective look.