The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Spilled Milk and Misplaced Anger: Political Psychotherapy Session

Posted on | March 27, 2012 | 97 Comments

Newt Gingrich in Fort Myers, Florida, Monday, Jan. 30, 2012

“Somebody in the Newt camp tossed an ‘internal memo’ over the fence to Matt Lewis. Long story short, they’re lowering expectations in Florida. And as I pointed out in my American Spectator column, second place in Florida is worthless — it’s winner-take-all. Team Gingrich just blew through about $2 million for nothing.”
Robert Stacy McCain, Jan. 30

In a comment on Smitty’s post this morning, Pagan Temple begins his complaint with these two hypothetical regrets:

“If Palin hadn’t been run out of the race, or if conservatives could have gotten behind Bachmann . . .”

Thus our friend expresses a common misunderstanding about politics, namely that candidates are not responsible for their own fates.

First, ask yourself, “By whom was Palin ‘run out of the race’?”

She decided herself not to run, and it seems to have been a sort of slow-motion process. While I hate to imply that I have any special kind of inside information (which displeases Governor Palin and her aides), my first inquiries into Palin’s 2012 intentions led me to the belief that she was in wait-and-see mode.

One reason I jumped on the Cain Train early was that I felt we needed a populist outsider to carry the Tea Party momentum from the 2010 mid-term campaign into 2012. Cain’s people were flashing the green light, while we were seeing mixed signals from Wasilla, so I got on board with Herman and figured that if Governor Palin decided to get in later, nobody would blame me for any choice I made between the two. But I was pretty sure I’d have a few months before I had to worry about such a choice, because there were many reasons to suspect that Palin would be in wait-and-see mode for a while.

As the Republican field took shape, trying to read the tea leaves as to Team Sarah’s plans became quite a widespread hobby amongst political observers. By the time I went to Iowa for the run-up to the Ames straw poll, it seemed obvious to me that she’d decided to sit this one out. Back in June, Palin had made a point of praising Rick Perry, whom she had endorsed in his 2010 primary against Kay Bailey Hutchison, and by August, he was getting ready to make his big entrance into the campaign. If Palin really liked Perry, it didn’t make sense to think she would jump into the GOP race against him.

That’s one reason I was so skeptical when Peter Singleton and Michelle McCormick insisted on buying me lunch in Des Moines and telling me about their volunteer Iowa for Palin efforts. (See my Aug. 22 American Spectator column, “Still Waiting for Sarah.”) Everybody became frustrated as the will-she-or-won’t-she speculation dragged on, all the way into October, and I developed a private theory about why Palin dragged her feet so long.

Who was advising her? Who had her ear? That was a question I decided to research, and thus I came to focus on Michael Glassner, who had been hired in February 2011 as chief of staff to SarahPAC:

It now falls on the shoulders of Glassner, a veteran of Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign and a long-time aide to former Sen. Bob Dole, to professionalize Team Palin.
“Governor Palin’s done incredibly well flying by the seat of her pants,” said Glassner’s friend Scott Reed, a former presidential campaign manager for Sen. Bob Dole. “But Michael will be trying to get a semblance of a structure in place so they can operate better and service her better.”

Whoa. I’d never heard of Michael Glassner, but I have long regarded Bob Dole’s 1996 presidential campaign as one of the most cynical swindles in American political history, a bogus GOP Establishment con job of epic proportions, the perfect model of how Republican operatives can get rich by running a losing campaign.

For a natural-born populist like Sarah Palin to get herself mixed up with someone so closely associated with the Great Fraud of ’96 was, to my mind, a telltale clue about why Governor Palin had dragged her feet so long. My private theory was that Glassner had somehow been planted in the Palin camp in order to make sure she stayed on the sidelines in 2012.

That sounds like a crazy paranoid conspiracy theory, I know. But the GOP Establishment is a many-tentacled creature, and I’ve observed its habits long enough at close range that I’m always deeply suspicious when I see things happening in exactly such a way as to favor the Establishment.

While I don’t want to make any accusations, if it were to be revealed that Michael Glassner spent the past year exchanging e-mails and phone calls with people close to Romney’s campaign, I wouldn’t be surprised.

And you know who’s “close to Romney’s campaign”? John McCain.

Just sayin’ . . .

Friends of “Mike the Mole” Glassner may be outraged at these baseless insinuations, and admirers of Sarah Palin will angrily deny that she would be so foolish as to trust someone who might be a spy for her enemies, but I’m just telling you the kind of gut-hunch suspicions that crossed my mind during those agonizing weeks from August to October when all of Palin’s fans were hoping she’d get into the race. Whether or not my private theory was paranoid (and because it seemed so crazy, I only half-believed it myself) it was nonetheless obvious that if she had this Dole guy as her top adviser, she wasn’t running.

So we return to Pagan Temple’s complaint about Palin being “run out of the race.” Ultimately, this was her own decision. If Sarah Palin had been determined to run in 2012, nothing — not even the influence of a highly-placed undercover agent of the GOP Establishment — could have stopped her from running. If anyone is disappointed that Palin didn’t get in, they need to address their complaints to the Governor herself, rather than scapegoating Palin’s critics and opponents.

OK, so what about Pagan Temple’s regretful remark, “if conservatives could have gotten behind Bachmann”? Again I say, who is to blame for this? Whose job is it to get conservatives “behind” any candidate? Isn’t it ultimately the job of the candidate to rally conservative support, rather than any duty of conservatives to support any particular candidate?

I like Michele Bachmann. I admire Michele Bachmann. But everybody who knows anything about politics knows that it’s almost impossible for a sitting member of the House of Representatives to run for president. The enormous demands on the time of a congressman (or congresswoman) are simply incompatible with the similarly enormous demands on the time of a presidential candidate.

There is a reason, after all, why the top three finalists for the 2012 GOP nomination are a former governor, a former senator, and a former Speaker of the House. Beyond the requirement that representatives run for re-election every two years, there is also the fact that even a popular and nationally known member of the House like Bachmann is at an automatic disadvantage in comparison to a senator or governor, who necessarily must have experience running a statewide campaign. Until you’ve run a statewide operation, you will have likely have difficulty organizing a national campaign, and so Bachmann began her 2012 race with very long odds against her.

Could I nitpick everything that Bachmann did wrong in her campaign? Sure. Could I point out instances where Bachmann was unfairly mistreated? Sure.

But why bother?  The odds against her success were overwhelming, and there is no need to blame conservatives — or blame anyone else, including Bachmann herself — for the failure of Bachmann’s campaign.

Attempting to externalize blame, scapegoating a nameless and amorphous “Them” for our political disappointments is as useless as it is psychologically unhealthy. This is one reason I’ve been so harshly critical of Newt Gingrich in recent weeks.

I never thought Newt had any realistic chance of winning the nomination and, even though it was wrong and unfair for Team Mitt to unload millions of dollars in attack advertising against Gingrich, whose fault was it that Newt couldn’t afford to reply effectively? Gingrich raised more than $12 million in 2011, despite being thrown under the bus in June by his original campaign staff. If he didn’t have enough money to fire back against Romney with a TV ad campaign, maybe Newt should have thought twice before running up a million-dollar account with Tiffany’s and sailing off on an Aegean luxury cruise with his third wife. (“Several advisers pleaded with Mr. Gingrich not to go on the trip, an aide said, but Mrs. Gingrich wanted to go. ‘We have a spouse who controls the schedule,’ said the aide …”)

Yet it was predictable that World-Historical Newt could never accept responsibility for his own screw-ups and when I saw him Fort Myers, Florida, blaming his problems on “money power” and Goldman Sachsnudge, nudge — I was dismayed without really being surprised.

And I knew Newt was doomed.

The Gingrichites hate me for that, as if I somehow had more to do with Newt’s downfall than did Newt himself, and all I can do is shake my head at their misplaced wrath. It’s a lot easier for Newt’s admirers to hate me than it is for them to re-evaluate their high opinion of His Newtness, because such a re-evaluation would require them to consider the possibility that I was right and they were wrong.

Pagan Temple is filled with hindsight regrets about 2012, as are nearly all conservatives, and if it makes you feel better, go ahead and blame me.

Mea culpa.

If I’m right, and you still think I’m wrong, then obviously the blame is all mine, for having failed to persuade you. Remember: I’m a professional journalist who has been in this racket more than a quarter-century. It would be utter folly if, having exerted all my skill in making an argument, I were to blame you for not agreeing with me.

Either I’m wrong (a hypothetical proposition I offer only for the sake of argument) or else, being right, I have proven an unworthy advocate for my cause.

The only other possibility is that people who disagree with me are just ignorant assholes, a possibility that must be ruled out automatically, considering how often Mrs. Other McCain disagrees with me.

Therefore, if I can be of no other service to the conservative cause, I will cheerfully accept the role of Universal Scapegoat.

Also: If Tabitha Hale gets a big pimple on her nose? My fault.

UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers!


97 Responses to “Spilled Milk and Misplaced Anger: Political Psychotherapy Session”

  1. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 1:51 am

     Andy was trying to miss, but missed.

  2. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 1:54 am

     Obama appreciates your support, and would like his shoes polished as soon as possible.

  3. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 1:57 am

     The situation we face in fiscal terms is such that if we cannot elect a Republican Congress AND President, or if we do but they fail to take a meat-ax to the budget right away, I’d be on board – but first I will have stockpiled ammunition, seeds, and canned goods.

  4. Denverwindowwashing
    March 28th, 2012 @ 2:23 am

    “First, ask yourself, “By whom was Palin ‘run out of the race’?”

    As it happens, I was the one.

    I thought it was here.

    If not, I don’t remember where else it woulda been.

    But she toyed with running; unBuckley that.  Like nearly always, more so than any politician but Reagan in my memory, and Scott Klug, Sarah Palin made the right choices at the right time.  

    Regardless of the merits 2012 was simply not the Year of Palin.

    I will vow $1000 to defeat Mitt in 2016 if Sarah Palin runs against him.  

    I will vow to find 10 people to think about maybe sometime somehow doing something similar.

    I will vote for Mitt Romney and support him as I would a conference rival against an unmitigated ass of an opponent like Obama.

    I once gave a copy of The Unmaking of a Mayor to a man running in a 2 to 1 democrat district.  Simply impeccable credentials, and perhaps the single finest husband/father/man I’ve ever witnessed (a glimpse:  his apology over a trivial manner exposed his empathy, which is the most powerful a human can exercise in my, flawed, judgement, considering the risk of failure means loss of life and more.


    Years in the E.R.

    As Buckleyesque as I”ve ever come across.

  5. Denverwindowwashing
    March 28th, 2012 @ 2:31 am


    By “First, ask yourself…” you didn’t mean I should write “I…I…I..I..I..I..I..I.”


    Because for a moment I thought you did, then I….I….I…I…I…I….I…

  6. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:12 am

     Naturally, it is your decision, and your indisputable right to make it for yourself.

    If you don’t like “negative campaigning,” how do you propose to run against Obama – with Santorum or anyone?  Can we afford NOT to point out the weaknesses of the opponent?  Is the record not fair game?  Mind you, Obama will claim we “distort” his record, too.

    Bottom line is:  without a Republican Congress AND President, there is no practical chance of salvaging our fiscal situation.  A Republican Congress might close down the government for a bit, but either public outrage or an Obama emboldened by reelection might just bypass that.  You vote for our nominee, the fair winner of the most open process on Earth, or you in effect help Obama to a second term.

    Your choice.  Your responsibility.

  7. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:14 am

     I’m not ready to go to the barricades just yet.  Time is short, but it is still possible to straighten out this mess, if we have the will.

  8. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:15 am

     Agree to at least enough of that to block implementation of the grand scheme.

  9. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:18 am

     Before all that except Maryland and Wisconsin will come the March fundraising reports.  I’m sure that after his performance of the Happy Dance over Newt’s March figures, Stacy will be trumpeting Santorum’s April reporting numbers to us.

  10. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:21 am

     Wow, I voted in the primary in my state and you know what?  There weren’t any scary Establishment dudes with their hooded robes and vague incantations telling me how to vote.  Did they force you to vote for someone?

    Do you have any evidence of “the Establishment” forcing ANY voter in ANY Republican primary to vote for or against anyone?  Or is it just the imaginary ghosts you strike at futilely – damn them!  damn them!

    Do we need to call an orderly?  Got meds?

  11. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:24 am

     Except Romney’s money base wasn’t “the Establishment” GOP base, it was his Bain connections, and the people whose companies he saved, and those whose butts he saved from ruin in the 2002 Olympics.  His money came from outside “the Establishment” at least until he “established” himself as the likely winner.

    Well written post – accuracy aside, of course.

  12. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:32 am

     There was a time in this country when a man who earned his own money and got rich, and made many others rich in the process, was a man respected for his achievements, admired, honored, a man young people sought to be like.

    And if he decided he had made enough money for himself, and to devote himself to public service, and did so with success, well, that was admired as well.

    What sort of laggards and louts have we become when we respect the influence-peddlers and hucksters for sale to the highest bidder with more regard than such men?  What hope is there for the future when organizing protests or being in Congress are considered accomplishments or any sort of merit?

    Tsk, tsk, tsk.

  13. tranquil.night
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:33 am

    “So you are saying Palin was suckered into hiring this guy?”

    No, to the extent I can speculate, I think Sarah hired him probably knowing full well his background.  Reagan had moderate/establishmentarian advisers and workers, and occasionally found their perspectives reasonable enough to influence his thinking.  She knows the cynical, power-grubbing ways of the inside Republican network better than just about anyone – she fought it in Alaska and was backstabbed by it nationally.  Her unique experience and awareness of the GOP establishment was why I really thought she was a very uniquely equipped candidate with the credentials to lead a grassroots insurgent candidacy capable of matching the Establishment organization.  Alas, spilled milk.

    I actually do personally disagree with Stacy if he’s suggesting she was in any way tricked, per se, into not running by Glassner.  However, I’m not going to angrily deny that it isn’t a possibility.

    I just genuinely got the sense the reasons she gave for not running were the actual reasons.  There’s no personal animus about it or that Glassner works for her, as I’d submit her organizational prowess has steadily and dramatically improved (don’t know how much that’s attributable to Glassner). However I also have been minorly irked by her playing along with the brokered convention meme, despite whether she’s just messing with the media.  Still love and appreciate her effective voice out there though.

    “‘Political espionage’ goes on, of course – how does it relate to this case, specifically?”

    Well light espionage.. surveillance, subtly inserting yourself into influencing public and strategic operations. “Moderate yourself just a little here.. you don’t have to give up your principles.. just recognize your limits and the current political environment.”

    I don’t know if that’s the case, but I do believe that if the situations were reversed and Conservatives had someone inside the Romney camp whom we could coax to urge him that it’s best he withdraw, or at least think, debate and campaign more conservatively, we’d do so.

  14. tranquil.night
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:34 am

    Err.. replied above

  15. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:35 am

     It isn’t easy to take over an existing Party, but it can be done – just ask the Communists, who over the last three or four decades acquired a controlling interest in a major political party which shall remain nameless.  It’s much harder to start a new party from scratch, as you have to build support in local offices and then statewide and Congress to have any effect nationally.

    Ask the LP about that.

  16. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:37 am

     When you talk so freely about leaving the GOP, doesn’t that really make YOU the real “RINO”?

  17. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:42 am

     Actually, Romney has been winning the “Tea Party supporters” in most of the primaries – the Deep South is the exception.  He’s also won self-described “conservatives.”  It is only among “strong supporters” of the Tea Party and “very conservative” voters that he has trailed.

    Palin had the contacts and could have set up the organization – with very little money, her support is enthusiastic and would have inspired a lot of volunteer work – IF she had started doing it.  She never did.  That more than anything else was the signal she wasn’t going to run.

  18. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:44 am

     Dude – we prefer more uplifting stuff around here – you know, like Sylvia Plath or Dylan Thomas.

  19. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:47 am

     And how many millions of votes does that translate to?  Man, if only I had known my buddies could have been taken care of, too . . .

    Who do you expect is behind all this?  Bilderbergers?  Damn them! damn them!

  20. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:50 am

     Wow, some serious accusations there – beaten like a rented mule, whisperers getting Perry in, blackballing state GOP people, moving Florida up (curse you Marco!  Villain!).

    Do you have any, like, EVIDENCE of these charges, or are they just the hallucinations of a severely disturbed mind?

    Did you miss your electroshock session?

  21. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:53 am

     Alaska law allowed anyone to bring ethics charges, and prohibited raising money for legal fees to fight them.  If she stayed on, she would have been personally bankrupt and the state paralyzed by the idiotic and baseless complaints brought by a single Democratic idiot.

    Unfortunately, Palin had supported that very law as part of the “reform” package, so what was she going to do?

  22. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:59 am

     Crazy Train, right?


  23. Bob Belvedere
    March 28th, 2012 @ 9:18 am

    Unlike Mrs. Palin, John Adams, Sam Adams, George Washington, et. al. knew that if they were captured they would hang from a British rope.

  24. Bob Belvedere
    March 28th, 2012 @ 9:32 am

    Indeed, but the GOP apparatus can be seized on the local level and renamed/reconstituted.  This is what essentially happened in the 1850’s.

    May I suggest to all of you an informative lecture I just watched on C-SPAN3: 1850s Collapse Of The Second Party System.

  25. Bob Belvedere
    March 28th, 2012 @ 9:33 am

    Back in the days of Andy Jackson and Henry Clay, I would have had to consider calling you out for that insult, Suuh!

  26. Bob Belvedere
    March 28th, 2012 @ 9:35 am

     Or musically Joy Division [right Stace?].

  27. Bob Belvedere
    March 28th, 2012 @ 9:36 am

    The Illuminati, actually.

  28. Bob Belvedere
    March 28th, 2012 @ 9:39 am

    Interesting that you bring up her support for that ‘reform’ package: it’s the one area where I have my greatest concerns about Mrs. Palin.

    Maybe it’s because I’m an old Tory, but I instinctively cringe whenever I hear the word ‘reform’  [it’s bad enough I had to support Magna Charta!].

  29. Garym
    March 28th, 2012 @ 10:25 am

    Are you chaaaalenging me to a dual?
    ; )

  30. Garym
    March 28th, 2012 @ 10:27 am


  31. ThePaganTemple
    March 28th, 2012 @ 10:41 am

     Well you’re talking about the war, which is still a uniquely different scenario. When things come to that much of a head, then you don’t have that much choice, you have to stand your ground and hope for the best. Either that, or you keep putting up with an oppressive government.

    Now who’s going to take up arms to defend the Palin’s if they are assaulted, kidnapped, raped, murdered, etc? Who would protect them from that happening until they qualify for Secret Service protection, assuming they ever did? And if it did happen, who would you go after? Even if you apprehended the immediate perpetrators, the damage has been done, and for what?

    I’ve got to be frank, if I were advising her, knowing what I know about these leftist goons, I would advise her to do just what she did. Family comes first to me, and it should to her as well.

    What pisses me off is how she was assaulted and maligned to the extent she was compelled to make that decision, and the fact there were way too many in the GOP who were all too happy to add fuel to the fire, both in the party establishment and the worthless jackals in the conservative punditry, whose names I need not mention here.

    Why in the hell should she take that kind of chance?

  32. ThePaganTemple
    March 28th, 2012 @ 10:45 am

     Somehow in all this angry, petulant whining of a post you seem to have forgotten that GHW Bush also appointed Clarence Thomas. What do you think are the chances of Obama appointing a conservative Justice like that if he is reelected?

  33. ThePaganTemple
    March 28th, 2012 @ 10:54 am

     Actually, I’m not so much talking about “taking over” the party in the sense of an insurrection as I am encouraging conservatives to reach out and try to do a better job at selling conservative principles and philosophies, especially FEDERALIST ones. If they could do that, then over time their numbers would grow, and as their number grew so would their influence. It still wouldn’t be easy, and it would take a lot of time and effort, but it could be done.

  34. tranquil.night
    March 28th, 2012 @ 11:31 am

    Well, the bulk of Romney’s voters say they are selecting him primarily because of the PERCEPTION that’s been created by Republican opinion shapers that he is the most ‘electable’, a quality that NOBODY CAN KNOW FOR SURE!

  35. tranquil.night
    March 28th, 2012 @ 11:39 am

    No, actually a lot of those connections are within the establishment.  Nor are they the entirety of Mitt Romney’s coalition.  Romney has his own money base and organization, which is why the establishment found him such an attractive candidate to line up behind.  The Republican establishment is the political power base, the Republican media: Fox/WSJ/NYP (w/some of the national Conservative Intelligentsia writers).  They all carry their pro-Romney bias and argument into their punditry where the conventional wisdom is spun.

    It is a much smaller and weaker apparatus than the Liberal Establishment.  That’s what worries me.  They are beating the grassroots on the strength of their organization alone, their ability to weave political perception into reality, plus the fact the grassroots don’t have an exceptional leader behind whom generates enough confidence to unite people in bucking the “safe” candidate.

    Romney is actually a very weak candidate.  When and if he wins the nomination, everybody is going to find that out.  But it will be too late, and it’s going to fall on the people who never wanted him to carry him across the finish line because we lose our country if not.

  36. ThePaganTemple
    March 28th, 2012 @ 12:03 pm

     By the time the vote totals of Maryland and Wisconsin come in, I think the fundraising reports for Santorum are probably going to be irrelevant anyway. If Santorum loses both states, as I suspect he will, not even RSM will be able to deny the obvious, inescapable conclusion that his campaign is doomed. As far as I’m concerned, it was doomed with the Ohio results.

  37. Bob Belvedere
    March 28th, 2012 @ 1:32 pm

    Arrest orders were out for John Hancock and Sam Adams before the War For Independence started.

  38. ThePaganTemple
    March 28th, 2012 @ 2:26 pm

    @Bob Belvedere-
    Arrest orders, from government officials, on Hancock and Adams. Not an insane leftist mob saying, “let’s snatch up Hancock’s and Adam’s wives and daughters, torture, humiliate and kill them and in the meantime publish all kinds of vile shit about them to make as many people as possible hate and revile them.”

    Sorry Bob, I wouldn’t put my family through that and I wouldn’t expect anyone else to put theirs through it either. 

  39. JRD1
    March 28th, 2012 @ 2:47 pm

     I am totally fed up with the GOP. They have pushed conservatives over the limit. You can call this post whiny all you want.
    It’s way past time to let these elitists know we aren’t supporting their BS any longer.
    I commend you that you are able to still support them but I know that I am not alone.

    Obama was so beatable by anybody except Etch-a-sketch.  Your 90 year old grandmother could have beaten Obama. Axelrod is just salivating to campaign against Wall Street and hang that millstone around Romney’s neck. America needs to smack Wall Street for the mortgage backed securities debacle and will relish voting against Romney.

    Very, very stupid unless the GOP’s intention is to lose. It doesn’t get any dumber than this!

  40. Tparker602
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:03 pm

    If we accept the reported math… (which may be a little skewed ..) in order to achieve 1144 delegates… Santorum would have to win approx 75 % of the remaining… not likely… Romney would have to win approx 51.5 %… very possible… but not guaranteed… (especially if true conservatives avoid the establishment pressure to concede to Romney… and instead unite in support of Santorum… to deny Romney from clinching the nomination…). In reality Romney has achieved less than 40 % of the vote in GOP primaries and caucuses. A brokered convention might be just what we need this year…!

  41. Tparker602
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:26 pm

    In case you may have missed it… be sure to read Robert Stacy McCain’s 3/26 post to the American Spectator… “The Politics of Demoralization”. It speaks volumes!

    By the way… I was particularly impressed with Rick’s answer Tuesday in front of the Supreme Court… when he was asked what he thought about how the significant Republicans… Jeb Bush, Jim Dement, etc. calling for the Republican party to unite for Romney… and he said, I guess we’ll just have to let the “insignificant” voters decide…

  42. ThePaganTemple
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:39 pm


    The problem isn’t just the delegate count thus far if that’s all it was I would concede Romney’s lead might not be insurmountable, though still daunting. The major problem in addition to the delegate count is the nature of the electorate in the up-coming primaries. California. Maryland. New York. New Jersey. Probably Wisconsin you can add to that mix, and I promise you, if Santorum loses that one, that’s the icing on the cake.

    The cake was Ohio.

  43. Tennwriter
    March 28th, 2012 @ 5:13 pm

    Lots of people.

  44. Tennwriter
    March 28th, 2012 @ 5:21 pm

    It is angry.  It is not petulant or whining.

  45. Tennwriter
    March 28th, 2012 @ 5:46 pm

    Sure.  But at least I’m not a liberal.If RINO offends you that much I could switch to ‘Gutless Useless Establisment Semi-Secret Squaddie’ or GUESSS.  Perhaps instead  Lame Overbearing Spineless Establishment Regime for LOSER.Or Terrible Yapping Repulsive Anti-Constitutional Nutbar Thugs for TYRANT.Or Monied Ennervated Dummies Immoral Overcharging Can’t-Do’s Rats and Exfluent for MEDIOCRE.Pagan,
    I agree about the need for agreement.  But I’m seeing more Libertarians slamming Santorum than Romney even tho’ obviously Romney is more damaging to liberty.So, basically what we have is that the Libertarians are the enemy already, we just don’t want to admit it.This requires a bigger movement (I’ve said before that the Tea Party should not be the final iteration with Town Halls being a previous iteration.  The TP as great as it is, is not big enough.)It requires boldly facing the truth.  Truth is…no one is going to allow a real conservative anywhere near power, and even our supposed allies are going to betray us….unless we’re so strong they’re scared too.  And then they will gather around and pretend to be us and our bestest friends.You can’t sell Conservatism to Libertarians.  You can get Libertarians to vote for Conservatives but logic and charm are not the persuading factors.  I wish it were not so, because really Libertarians are a minor wing of Conservatism, and should agree with Conservatives about 85% of the time.

  46. Tennwriter
    March 28th, 2012 @ 5:53 pm

    How many ‘low information moderates’, ‘rationally ignorant’, ‘I always pull for the R’, and ‘ooooh, let me join the bandwagon’ voters are out there?

    Easily tens of millions.

  47. Adobe_Walls
    March 28th, 2012 @ 11:22 pm

    I believe we have run out of time. It is usually the case that the point when time ran out is only known in hindsight.