|
Sunday, 12 June 2016
quote [ Mitt Romney Trashes Trump: "He doesn't pay taxes. He doesn't have much income. He's receiving income from unsavory sources...There's something in those taxes that's even worse than shooting someone on Fifth Avenue" ]
What the hell is going on? This is unheard of in modern politics. The past nominee of the party trashing the presumptive nominee of his party...in the press.
There is something afoot here and I can't figure it out. I'm not sure if the elites are planing a back room maneuver at the convention or a third party run but something is going on. Maybe Mitt is planing on the VP slot on the Clinton ticket not at all sure, but there is some kind of scheme here and it is far from obvious what it is.
PARK CITY, Utah ? Mitt Romney warned that a Donald Trump presidency could normalize racism, misogyny and bigotry in the national conscience. Romney loyalists? divisions over Trump spill out into the open at Utah summit The Clinton campaign is following their Standard playbook and doing their best to define the opponent before the convention. They firmly believe this is where an election is won or lost. They have had the surrogates out and have started with supperpac ads Trump University Informercial | The Briefing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0ei2h-0QDU And they think they have found a soft spot with Trump U. And maybe they have... Donald Trump moves to block the release of his video testimony in university lawsuit It will be interesting to see how the unqualified Mexican judge rules. But the thing with Romney is really interesting...partly because the only kind of person who would stand a chance as a third party candidate would have to be wealthy and able to partly fund their own campaign and have 100% name Recognition... I wonder who that would be?
|
Comments
 |
sanepride said @ 4:32am GMT on 12th Jun
[Score:1 Interesting]
I don't think there's any duplicity here on Mitt's part. I doubt he's after any office or personal agenda. He could have launched a credible challenge to Trump but clearly he's just not interested, I don't think he wanted to be president that badly in 2012. Basically he's just acting as the conscience of the Republican establishment, trying to be a voice of sanity in clearly insane political scenario. Maybe he feels some responsibility for the failures that led the GOP to this point. Also, he has the luxury of speaking his mind without worrying about holding office or saving his legacy. Good for him for pointing out that the bandwagon is really the crazy train, that the emperor has no clothes. The big problem of course is that Trump's base doesn't give a fuck what Romney has to say. The guy's a loser after all.
|
|
Kama-Kiri said @ 3:23pm GMT on 12th Jun
"Basically he's just acting as the conscience of the Republican establishment"
If we for a second entertain the idea that the Republican establishment has a conscience... That's a tall order, but okay... still, party discipline has very clear rules, as bbqkink was hinting at: Mitt is basically going out and helping Hillary at this point. Ordinarily that would be political suicide plain and simple. Romney is your traditionalist, fiscal conservative Republican. Your money manager type. Jeb Bush, or John Kasich supporter. It was predicted that the most ideologically opposed to the populist, tea party side of the party would rather go to the wall (and have Hillary as president) than endorse Trump. I didn't think it would come to that, but, hey I was wrong. Come to think of it, has any of the candidates outside of Christie and Carson endorsed Trump? Looks like Rubio, Bush, Cruz won't, at least. |
|
sanepride said[1] @ 3:46pm GMT on 12th Jun
Of course the GOP establishment has a conscience in the sense of caring about what happens to their party and their ideology. Beyond that, I don't believe that Mitt Romney is necessarily a bad person, he just has views that are skewed by his insular, 1%er perspective.
And in fact Rubio has endorsed Trump, as have former candidates Paul, Perry, Jindal, Huckabee, and Santorum. Bush has emphatically stated he won't, but I expect Kasich and Cruz to fall in line by convention time (both promised to support the nominee). The full list of Trump endorsements has no shortage of your traditionalist, fiscal conservative Republicans. |
|
HP Lovekraftwerk said @ 2:00am GMT on 12th Jun
I'm trying to figure out what's motivating Romney. He seems to be about as bland as plain oatmeal with all the ambition of someone planning a getaway for a bunch of CPA's. Maybe he hopes to take another stab at the Presidency, but with a little more energy stapled onto his campaign?
|
|
papango said @ 2:04am GMT on 12th Jun
[Score:1 Insightful]
Maybe he's just had enough. I think of him like the jilted wife in a lifetime movie who devotes herself to her family and then husband leaves for a younger fun-er woman and her kids think she's old and boring, and she is just not taking it anymore and throws off the expectations she lived up to and becomes her own person. He did everything right (one wife, family, no drugs off strippers asses), and the Republicans went after that hussy Trump. I think Mitt's trying to get his groove back.
|
|
lilmookieesquire said @ 4:27am GMT on 12th Jun
[Score:1 Classy Pr0n]
Kind of a jilted "I hope you're happy with your new whore-of-a-girlfriend" vibe?
|
|
papango said @ 4:28am GMT on 12th Jun
[Score:1 Insightful]
Exactly! All he needs now is a wild best friend from college to come along and show him what a strong independent woman he can be!
|
|
lilmookieesquire said[1] @ 6:40am GMT on 12th Jun
I'm thinking a kind of Thelma and Lousie meets Tom-Cruise-Vampire meets Fear and Loathing in Los Vegas kind of thing.
|
|
papango said @ 6:51am GMT on 12th Jun
[Score:1 Classy Pr0n]
It features a cover of 'Born to be Wild' by whoever is this year's poor mans Sheryl Crow.
|
|
lilmookieesquire said[1] @ 6:52am GMT on 12th Jun
I smell a hit!!!!!!
Think we can have Tom Selic drop in towards the end to offer some folksy wisdom/insights? |
|
Taleweaver said @ 4:34pm GMT on 12th Jun
[Score:1 Classy Pr0n]
 Tom Selic? |
|
lilmookieesquire said[1] @ 8:01pm GMT on 12th Jun
Opps. Burt Reynolds!!
 |
|
Anti_fuites said @ 2:42pm GMT on 12th Jun
Ron Paul maybe?
|
|
Bob Denver said @ 6:51pm GMT on 12th Jun
But the party i.e. the car, is already driving off the cliff.
|
|
HP Lovekraftwerk said @ 2:11am GMT on 12th Jun
He does have that "47% speech" problem to overcome if he ever wants to win over the general electorate, though.
|
|
papango said @ 2:13am GMT on 12th Jun
I don't think he's got a chance, I think he's just pissed with the Republicans.
|
|
Headlessfriar said @ 3:06am GMT on 12th Jun
I hope he runs & splits Trumps votes.
|
|
zarathustra said @ 4:23am GMT on 12th Jun
I don't know. Looking at the broad statistics, it doesn't seenm like Trump has a snowballs chance and he may cost the GOP the senate ( likely) and the house (long shot but proportions will change) as well. A third party republican might increase turnout and wipe out those gains in the legislature or, horrors, create a situation where no one ( Since Hillary is also ridiculously unpopular) where enough are bled off from her in swing states that no one has a majority.
|
|
Headlessfriar said @ 6:11am GMT on 12th Jun
Just I've been hearing that Trump is almost finished since the R field still had a half dozen contenders. The fact that he's still around has been showing all those predictions wrong so far, I'm loathe to take more "Trump is going to fizzle out" predictions seriously. I think there's cause for worry.
|
|
zarathustra said @ 6:19am GMT on 12th Jun
The issue is the electoral college rather than his popular appeal. In the absence of a seismic shift ( like Sanders running as a third party candidate) the states firmly in the blue camp represent so many electoral votes that Hillary will only need to win one or the large swing states or a couple of the small ones. Trump would need to win them all.
|
|
papango said @ 6:30am GMT on 12th Jun
I've been hearing it, too. And while I always thought he might get the nomination, I assumed he would then lose in a landslide. But the number of 'Bernie or Bust' posts I've been seeing, pushing the message that the country (especially liberals) need to be 'punished' for not picking their guy leads me to think Trump could in fact take it. I don't think it's very likely, but it's certainly not impossible.
|
|
zarathustra said @ 6:46am GMT on 12th Jun
I would be more concerned about that if the GOP would get off their assess and appoint a Supreme Court Justice. As it is, even Sander's dumbest supporter should realize what is at stake if they make Hillary loose and we get another Scalia next term.
|
|
lilmookieesquire said[1] @ 6:49am GMT on 12th Jun
Well Hillary may be the right choice, but I can't recall any part of her platform besides carrying on Obama's legacy. Wheither or not one thinks that's good or bad, she isn't exactly motivating the political base, and Bernie did have quite a few libertarians under his belt.
I think Hillary will win, but I could see depressed voter turnout letting Hillary pull an Al Gore. But really, the real election time spending hasn't even started yet. The Kochs don't start spending until the actual election and I'm not sure how many debates Hillary and Trump can keep avoiding. Hillary is an uncharismatic policy wonk and Trump is keeping it simple-stupid. I think this election will kind of be a litmus test for the New Left. This is really Hillary's election to lose by any measure- but Al Gore jaded me way too much to let my guard down. |
|
midden said @ 5:59pm GMT on 12th Jun
[Score:1 Insightful]
I'm guessing the Kochs won't be spending much on the presidential election, focussing their efforts instead on congressional seats where they can actually promote their agenda and expect a return on their investment.
|
|
sanepride said @ 3:26pm GMT on 12th Jun
You're a sensible enough person to know that noise on the internet =/= actual political clout. I'm not concerned about the 'Bernie or Bust' crowd as a spoiler element. Once Bernie officially concedes they'll probably quiet down. Democrats will unite behind Hillary, independent Bernie supporters could go either way, but the disillusioned millennials (who likely make up the bulk of the 'Bernie or Busters') probably wouldn't have voted anyway. Few if any will vote for Trump- in fact a lot more Republicans may sit this one out than Democrats.
|
|
lilmookieesquire said @ 7:56pm GMT on 12th Jun
Ya, but they will vote, in the future. And that might become very important in the next decade or so. And I want them to, because mostly, it's a good crop of people.
|
|
sanepride said @ 8:54pm GMT on 12th Jun
Sure, I agree. For those that invested all their hopes in Bernie, I hope the takeaway in the end is how well he did against expectations as opposed to not winning. I think this will help influence future participation.
|
|
bbqkink said @ 9:26pm GMT on 12th Jun
Robert Reich
Like This Page · 2 hrs · Regardless of what Bernie decides to do over the next month, several of you have suggested that he establish a third party -- the New Progressive Party -- that would continue to build the movement to reclaim our democracy and economy from the moneyed interests. It would recruit and support Senate and House candidates for the 2018 midterms, and run a presidential candidate in 2020. It would be a membership organization based on small contributions -- and would continue to mobilize, organize, and energize the political revolution Bernie began. What do you think? |
|
HoZay said @ 12:53am GMT on 13th Jun
[Score:1 Insightful]
It would be easier to build a tea-party-like progressive movement and take over the Democratic party. Elect a few committed members to House of Representatives, form a Berner caucus that votes in unison, convert less progressive Democrats with primary challenges. It's totally doable. Then you'd have access to the party machinery, instead of having to fight it.
|
|
bbqkink said @ 10:29am GMT on 13th Jun
My thought exactly.
|
|
sanepride said @ 12:04am GMT on 13th Jun
Hey I'm always up for a viable alternative party, especially if there's already a solid base of support. I think they'd be better off concentrating on legislative offices, not just Congress but at the sate level as well. Hard to see them having much shot at a 2020 presidential run, but maybe if they make some inroads then down the road a bit...
|
|
Ankylosaur said @ 5:54pm GMT on 12th Jun
Breaking news: Trump announces his running mate is the American Flag.
 |
|
bbqkink said @ 9:00pm GMT on 12th Jun
Speaking of which...who ...who would be his running mate?
I'm not even sure Christie wants this job. |
|
arrowhen said @ 9:08pm GMT on 12th Jun
[Score:1 Funny]
Ted Nugent?
|
|
bbqkink said @ 9:46pm GMT on 12th Jun
Bob Shrum, Democratic strategist who advised the Kerry and Gore campaigns, talks with Rachel Maddow about the considerations that go into a candidate selecting a running mate. Duration: 10:13
How running mates are vetted |
|
HoZay said @ 12:55am GMT on 13th Jun
There's an impressive list of horrible choices. Joe Biden should be Vice President for life.
|
Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment,
then click the reply link on that comment instead]You must be logged in to comment on posts.
