Steady There, Erick

Posted on | August 8, 2012 | 95 Comments

Mitt Romney’s spokeswoman Andrea Saul said something phenomenally stupid on TV today, inspiring Erick Erickson to pronounce doom on the entire Romney campaign.

Needless to say, this strikes me as a bit premature. Grant that such a tactical blunder is not encouraging. Factor in the Romney campaign’s generally standoffish attitude toward much of the conservative movement, including the fact that lots of conservative bloggers are getting jerked around on their requests for Tampa convention credentials.

Still, we’re three months away from Election Day, and there are yet reasons for optimism. If Romney picks Paul Ryan as his VP, it would go a long way toward restoring confidence.

Let’s wait and see what happens going forward.

Category: Uncategorized

Comments

95 Responses to “Steady There, Erick”

ccoffer
August 8th, 2012 @ 10:36 pm

Either that or he refuses to be led.
ccoffer
August 8th, 2012 @ 10:41 pm

Romney is winning. News polls are for news viewers. The real polls are the ones the campaigns do. Brakabama is crapping his skinny little pants right now. Hes not even doing as well as Carter was at this point, and Carter was miles ahead in the news polls.
Beeblebrocs
August 8th, 2012 @ 10:43 pm

Yeah, you’re probably right. No point in criticizing Obama’s totalitarian HHS work waivers when given a perfect opening to do so. Instead, it’s sooo much better to highlight the “bi-partisan welfare reform of Bill Clinton and the Republicans in the 90s”. :rollseyes:
ThomasD
August 8th, 2012 @ 10:52 pm

Forgive me if I find his schtick too over the top.

Although possible, I find it improbable that a a serious Romney supporter would attempt to ‘win’ support among the conservative base by openly denigrating them.

Until proven otherwise I think he’s a false flag operation.

Either that, or his crystalline stupidity is to ordinary stupidity like diamond is to charcoal.
Garym
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:00 pm

I see a lot of this kind of Romney supporter over at Hot Air. They will never agree to disagree with you. Either you bend over for Romney, or you are labeled an Oblameya supporter.
James
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:02 pm

Erickson is a douchebag, he’s still smarting over his buffoonery over Rick Perry.
Evilbloggerlady
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:05 pm

ccoffer, I completely agree with that statement.
Evilbloggerlady
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:08 pm

Ann was a complicated person. She rejected God and had a salon that was as creepy as many cults. But the truth is Ann had some damn good ideas and I will not reject the good over the bad.
ccoffer
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:09 pm

He’s the nominee. Refraining from shitting in your paw and throwing it at him is hardly “bending a knee”. (Unless you’re a monkey) Your hatred does nothing good for your country.
Evilbloggerlady
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:09 pm

Romney will be a weak conservative at best. But he is not Obama, who is a strong cadre progressive.
ccoffer
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:13 pm

You aren’t “the conservative base”, you pathetic jerkoff. You’re some frustrated dickwipe who’s still pissed about his dream date losing in the primaries. The primaries ARE OVER.

Fuck you very much.

I’m a serious America supporter. We have a goddam Communist in the White House.

What the fuck is wrong with you people?
ccoffer
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:15 pm

How have you been asked to “bend over”? You get fucked in your ass if Romney doesn’t lose to a Communist? How does that work exactly?
Lisa Graas
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:17 pm

Ayn Rand was a philosopher. I’m not sure why people want to separate her personal atheism from her philosophy. Atheists don’t generate good philosophy, and her philosophy is a great example of that. The philosophy she professed was anti-Gospel. Her claim is that no one should ever sacrifice for anyone unless they get something in return. This is why so many on the far Right, who have adopted her views, will say that people on welfare are “leeches.” To say that no one should ever sacrifice for anyone unless they pay them something in return, well, that is opposed to the sacrificial love of the Gospel. Many Catholic conservative bloggers have written articles explaining that Ayn Rand’s philosophy (not her personal atheism, her philosophy) is anti-Gospel. Paul Ryan is on video praising her. It would drive a very serious wedge and many Catholics and protestant Christians alike would be appalled. Stacy says Ryan would “restore confidence.” I’m saying, no, it would drive a horrible wedge.
ccoffer
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:23 pm

Don’t vote for the Romney surrogate, dipshit. No matter how distinctly you imagine some low level campaign spokesperson running for President, vote against them.

Fucking Judas. You people make me fucking sick. Your country is being burned to the goddam ground and you rub your fucking hands criticizing the only people willing to help.

Hell awaits you.
justaconservativegirl
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:37 pm

This is exactly the reason he shouldn’t have been the nominee. But lets be honest, our choices sucked.
ccoffer
August 8th, 2012 @ 11:42 pm

Catholics vote for democrats anyway. You plead your case well, but you do it from a purely Catholic position. I’m a Lutheran, so I have the joy of being despised equally by Catholics AND Protestants. (Yay me)

Rand is praiseworthy. She was a child of God whether she knew it or not.(She also rejected Darwinism) She was a very good writer. That, more than anything, gave credence to her philosophy. Her philosophy was very ugly in many ways, but it was benevolent as far as godless philosophies go. I, personally, consider her a horrible human being. An abusive, manipulative hedonist. She did make a great case for the individual though, and did so in a beautiful way.

And now she’s in Hell…or just the ground.
Lisa Graas
August 9th, 2012 @ 12:01 am

LOL! You want to write off ALL the Catholics? LOL. Hmmm.
Lisa Graas
August 9th, 2012 @ 12:03 am

FYI: You might want to go look and see what percentage of voters are Catholic before you go writing off the Catholic vote. Nobody wins the White House without the Catholic vote. And Catholics are not going to run to the polls to vote for Ayn Rand.
Adjoran
August 9th, 2012 @ 12:12 am

Erickson isn’t the brightest bulb on the Christmas Tree, but the easiest thing is to just ignore him. I enjoyed reading a number of the contributors over there, but he and a couple others made it too much of a chore to scroll past them.

Romney was never going to be Reagan Redux, but who the heck EVER was? Maybe Cheney if he had run (anytime from ’88 on), but even he wasn’t the whole package like the Gipper. Romney did however make a personal fortune from the ground up by buying into failing enterprises and turning them around, laying off workers and closing inefficient operations where necessary, to be profitable, and with a very high success rate for that field. He did the same for the Olympics.

No President is going to be able to reform entitlements and cut the waste in the budget; Congress must enact the reforms. Romney is certainly by experience the best man available to carry out cuts and reforms with efficiency.
ccoffer
August 9th, 2012 @ 12:13 am

But Ayn Rand isn’t running. Orwell was a great writer too. Should we attack anyone who agrees with Orwell? Hell, he was a socialist, but he opposed totalitarianism. I wish I cared enough about you to win an argument with you, but I don’t. We apparently have a lot in common though. hehe
Adjoran
August 9th, 2012 @ 12:18 am

And I’d be shocked if he picks Ryan. First of all, Ryan’s whole life has been spent in Congress, first as an aide, he’s never run anything bigger than his office and committee staff. Secondly, he is practically indispensable where he is.

Finally, it is a risky choice. Ryan will be tied both to the unpopular Congress and to his budget plan which, while the best of several insufficient alternatives to our fiscal problem, does indeed “cut” Medicare and Medicaid. So even if he’s never spit on a sidewalk in Kenosha, he comes with big red bulls-eyes on him.

As a manager and investor, Romney took risks all the time, but NEVER unnecessary ones.
Lisa Graas
August 9th, 2012 @ 1:16 am

I’m interested in what’s true, not defeating people in debates. The truth is that Ayn Rand’s philosophy is anti-Gospel and I’m disgusted both by Paul Ryan’s praise of it and then later denial that he praised it.
blueniner
August 9th, 2012 @ 3:06 am

Damn, if only Sarah Palin had run we wouldnt be sweating out this lightweight empty suit Romney…..
Wombat_socho
August 9th, 2012 @ 5:07 am

Well, don’t take it personally. There were a number of people on that proscription list.
Wombat_socho
August 9th, 2012 @ 5:08 am

I’m starting to not like your comments.
Wombat_socho
August 9th, 2012 @ 5:12 am

I don’t even read RS; Moe Lane’s site is good enough for my needs in that department.
McGehee
August 9th, 2012 @ 6:29 am

Has Romney stopped taking credit for it?
McGehee
August 9th, 2012 @ 6:30 am

What he needs is for his supporters to stop berating people for having legitimate reservations about him.

Read some Dale Carnegie, asshole.
Bob Belvedere
August 9th, 2012 @ 8:40 am

I like Mr. West a lot, but my hope is that he and Mrs. Bachmann stage a coup in the House after the election and overthrow Cantor, Boehner, etc.

Fred Thompson is a great idea. We want someone who will not be a contender either in 2016 or 2020, so that people like Mrs. Palin can have a better shot [if there’s anything left of The Republic – and that’s a big ‘if’]. And he’s qualified to step in if something should happen to Willard and he’s got foreign policy experience.
Bob Belvedere
August 9th, 2012 @ 8:51 am

What should also give you [and me] a slight flicker of hope, WarEagle, is the possibilities found in this statement by Milton Friedman:

I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the
right thing either, or if they try, they will shortly be out of office.
Bob Belvedere
August 9th, 2012 @ 8:57 am

Fred Thompson [for the reasons I stated above] or how about Andrew McCarthy – prosecutor of Muslims who has run an office?
Tennwriter
August 9th, 2012 @ 9:49 am

Surely you’re joking when you call Ayn Rand a good writer.
Tennwriter
August 9th, 2012 @ 9:52 am

Why? He’s not a conservative; I am a conservative.

I’m sitting on the sidelines knowing that whoever wins, I lose. But I have to admit its less stressful knowing you’re already doomed.
Tennwriter
August 9th, 2012 @ 9:58 am

Honestly? Palin could have been Reagan.
Beeblebrocs
August 9th, 2012 @ 10:17 am

I don’t see a coup happening. When asked about who they would support this next time around for SotH, I’ve heard conservative Congress members use the phrase, “Boehner is a reflection of the caucus” meaning that the GOP in the House is moderate so that’s why Boehner is. So they think he would be more conservative if the House as a whole was more conservative.

Unseating a Speaker is very difficult because it causes division in the caucus which no party wants. Ideally, someone like Price could make a run and in a spirit of comity, there would be no hard feelings if he lost.

But if Bachman makes a run (and she would be a great Speaker) she would be a bulldog and probably ruffle some feathers in the process. Not good for unity – and we do need unity. This is often why Freshman have a hard time making changes.

Freshman members can’t really change the House in the way that a lot of us would like. They have to vote for things they don’t want to in order to even get a seat at the table or a decent committee assignment. It will take awhile for enough conservative momentum to build in order to get a conservative Speaker.

As for Thompson, I think it is too good of an idea for Mitt to actually follow. I personally think he is going to go for a dull, moderate white guy. Who that will be, I don’t know.
Quartermaster
August 9th, 2012 @ 12:40 pm

The *ONLY* poll that matters takes place on the first Tuesday in November. From what I sense, if that were held now, he wouldn’t do very well.

It would be easier to remove the barriers if he and his staff didn’t keep throwing up new ones.
Quartermaster
August 9th, 2012 @ 12:42 pm

That last sentence is the truly scary part.
Beeblebrocs
August 9th, 2012 @ 12:46 pm

I hear what you’re saying but ask any conservative who they would have preferred in the White House the last 4 years, Obama or Jimmy Carter, and I’m pretty sure that nearly everyone would prefer Carter.

I’ll take a nice incompetent technocrat over a Marxist dictator any day.

But more importantly, I’ll take a COMPETENT technocrat like Romney over Obama any day.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
August 9th, 2012 @ 1:35 pm

Encouraging Romney to pick Ryan over Pawlenty is probably the most important thing conservatives can do right now. Just like conservatives getting Bush to dump Miers for Alito was the right thing to do.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
August 9th, 2012 @ 1:42 pm

??? We are telling him not to pick Pawlenty and choose Ryan instead.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
August 9th, 2012 @ 1:43 pm

Yes when you miss the point entirely and then call us “retarded freaks.” You must have made a right turn and missed “The Raw Story.”
Evi L. Bloggerlady
August 9th, 2012 @ 2:10 pm

I actually would love to see him pick Fred, but I doubt that is going to happen. Fred has the gravitas to lead the fight on budget reform with guys like Ryan.
Dean Moriarty
August 9th, 2012 @ 2:15 pm

if Lugar weren’t 80 years old…maybe
Mike G.
August 9th, 2012 @ 2:40 pm

…And if a frog had wings, he wouldn’t bump his ass when he jumped.
Shawn Gillogly
August 9th, 2012 @ 5:55 pm

As ccoffer said. Romney tried this ad nauseum in the Primaries. It didn’t work then. It won’t work now. States Rights does not excuse Collectivist Thinking.