I hate to annoy my exceedingly loyal readers, many of whom clearly do not agree with me on this. But I’m interested in how political battles play out. I get hunches. Then write about them. My hunch about the Bain attacks is they are working to a greater degree than many understand. As I said yesterday they are obnoxious and often dishonest. This doesn’t mean they aren’t working. Romney’s response baffled me last week. It baffles me this week. Charlie Cook, who knows a thing or two about politics, chimed in Monday…
Cook makes a very salient point about a tactical decision by the Romney campaign:
The strategic decision by the Romney campaign not to define him personally—not to inoculate him from inevitable attacks—seems a perverse one. Given his campaign’s ample financial resources, the decision not to run biographical or testimonial ads, in effect to do nothing to establish him as a three-dimensional person, has left him open to the inevitable attacks for his work at Bain Capital, on outsourcing, and on his investments. It’s all rather inexplicable.
Cook’s word is inexplicable. Mine is baffled. Romney is being defined in the public mind right now. He’s responding to the attacks, but not powerfully. This is odd given his resources and, I believe, a strategic error that is larger than he seems to understand. It’s difficult to come back after you’ve been dismissed. Romney’s in danger of being dismissed by the exact voters he needs to win.
And yet Romney will travel to the Olympics then the Middle East shortly – creating further distance. Perhaps he’ll announce his choice for VEEP before he goes. This will change the subject for about 2 days. We’re then likely to see a strange dynamic in which we are introduced to his 2nd in command before he’s fully introduced himself.
Much of the country is now being handed a thousand reasons why Romney should not be President. The central reason he’s promoted as to why he should be President is under assault. His response isn’t non existent. It is weak.
This is odd. I really do not understand Presidential candidates from Massachusetts. Both Kerry and Dukakis were afflicted with midsummer malaise. As far as I can tell, Romney is too.
Now tell me why I’m wrong. I certainly could be.
I’m not sure the problem is that his response is weak but that he’s responding. By that I mean he’s on the defense rather than offense. The reason candidates do attack ads is because they work, and they work because they convey a message of strength about the attacker. Romney waded into the attack stuff with Solyndra, and I thought it was working for him, but then backed off and then the Obama attacks against Romney took the position of strength. That’s how it looks to me anyway. Romney’s campaign, at this point, is more what I expected it’d be.
I disagree that these Bain attacks are working. Obamanation and the media (but I repeat myself) are attacking like a pack of angry chihuahuas. That is something Romney has no control over but he’s not in danger either. It’s just a bunch of yapping and ankle biting.
BTW – Nobody is talking about the NAACP anymore, are they?
The fun thing about setting up an echo chamber the way you have, making people like me unwelcome, is you all get to feel very smart and self satisfied with agreement and flattery boomeranging all over the place; the bad thing is you come to believe the echo is a range of voices and viewpoints when in truth it’s just your own circling back from where it starts.
The Bain attacks –which actually isn’t about Bain specifically but part of a larger strategy defining Romney as head of The Dreaded 1% while Obama identifies himself as Superior Victim doing battle for the 99%– is gaining traction. I didn’t think it would but it has because of the dogged consistent droning by the ObamaMedia connecting Bain and Felony and Tax Returns and variations on the same theme. Like Kerry, elitism is Romney’s achilles heel and, like Kerry, he failed to take control of creating a self-identifying narrative before his opponent grabbed it from him. Obama doesn’t have to be a champion of the 99%, he’s black and has that phony folksy speech pattern, and to question his 99% bona fides is racist.
Pop your head outside your tower of babel and listen to those you don’t want to hear. The trolling that Lola and her minions do, supposedly to bring down Obama, is nothing more than play acting; you’re fooling yourselves if you think it’ll move the direction of events in any meaningful way. It’s much less effective than OWS and Arab Spring, both of which have resulted in no movement at all in the direction those people wanted and claimed would happen.
zal, FTR, TCH is one of the few blogs that hasn’t banned me (yet) for speaking my contrarian mind. Heck, I got booted off another blog I used to send money to for being pro-single-payer and posting a link to Jill Stein’s website. It’s crazy; it’s 2008 all over again. Regardless, I’m not voting uni-party and I think this Bain nonsense is just that: nonsense. Who the hell cares? If an extreme “eat the rich” liberal like myself is unfazed by the Bain attacks, I have a hard time believing the independent middle is taking the bait. But who knows maybe that’s all they’re talking about in Everytown, USA. Ya think?
I don’t think they’re talking much about it in Everytown USA, but they don’t have to for the identifier campaign to be worthwhile to ObamaCo. Especially if it’s broad enough; as I said, I think Bain itself isn’t the primary identifier they’re going for but is a component of a larger identifier: Romney as the 1%. And as opponent identifier, that’s something Obama can work with, come autumn.
It’s summer and, except for political junkies like us, people aren’t all that interested. But if there’s enough pounding away with the meme, hour after day after week, it can percolate into conventional “wisdom.” What this campaign would be doing, if it’s effective, is laying the foundation for context in the fall. Taking control of the narrative that defines your opponent is invaluable if you can pull it off. Obama has nothing to lose with this, it’s costing practically nothing and if it sticks it’ll be worth its weight in gold to his case for re-election (be afraid of the other guy: he’s worse).
And FTR, TCH didn’t ban me; the clown put my posts in moderation so he -or whomever- could pick and choose which of my posts to show. Riverdaughter threatened to do that once, Taylor Marsh did it; others, too. Much as I enjoy posting, I don’t let my posts be used that way. As Elliesmom showed here just yesterday, some people will claim you’ve said things you did not; so giving them the chance to re-context my posts is a trap I’m not tempted to fall into.
@ zaladonis-
I’m very touched by your concern
Please do go on…..
If Zal is an obama troll, then he’s spent the past two years slowly laying his snare.
I disagree with Zal more often than not, but he truly doesn’t support obama.
Again, I’ll reiterate that the problem is the media who only cover or report what they want to report. And the media is getting more and more lousy every day with Obama bundlers and major supporters. Vivian what’s her face who fired Juan Williams from NPR has now been hired by the new and improved NOTMSNBC (since Gates got out). The brainy lady behind Google’s G-Mail, Google maps, etc., just quit to go head up Yahoo!. She gave over $50k to Obama funds in 2011. Yahoo! is the #1 news distributor in the World.
I can go round the dial and find no one but Fox talking at any length about O’s remarks in Roanoke. The MSM has done the same non-reporting with Fast & Furious and other things that would have the country calling for O’s impeachment if the people were just made aware. So they are not made aware. This is a dangerous time in our country akin to the 1930s when everyone thought Hitler was a-ok right up until he invaded the Sudetenlands (sp?), The movie censorship board kept making the Hollywood studios take out any alllusions to the ongoing mistreatment, marginalization, and then exterminations of Jews, Gays, and minorities. People revered as heroes like Lucky Lindy were promoting Hitler’s vision in America.
How many people have heard of the LOST treaty? Or know we are quite possibly going to sign away our gun rights to international authority within the next week? They may have heard of the DISCLOSE Act but the MSM reporting only gives the “sunlight” side of things and not the fact that an amendment was stuck into it that would allow unions to no longer have to identify that they were the ones who paid for ads on the TV (no longer have to say “this ad was paid for by the SEIU” for example). Does anyone know that DISCLOSE would actually get rid of law that was enacted to protect donors to the NAACP back in the day because people who monetarily supported the organization would be harassed or worse if their identities were known? How many people are aware of all the executive orders O has signed or why? Or that HHS just ostensibly gutted “welfare to work”? How in the world is the US going to support even more people than it currently is with so many people out of work, thus not making money, thus not paying taxes? And since Obama was against “welfare to work” way back when he was in the Illinois State legislature, and he takes delight in skewering Bill Clinton while getting Bill to do his dirty work, this particular EO must be delicious for him. Of course, it also moves the needle that much closer to over 50% of peeps getting some kind of gov’t assistance provided by Obama thus plucking off their votes.
Everyone saw the booing of Romney at NAACP but who saw that he received a standing ovation at the end? But they were surely treated to Nancy Pelosi’s claim that Romney just went there to get booed??? Yeah . . . sigh.
So, Charlie Cook says Romney hasn’t put out anything about him, personally. I guess he missed this which came out for Father’s Day: http://bit.ly/L8jFK6
I agree that Romney has to hit back harder but if he does, will it just be spun as unfair attacks against President ONEderful?
Tis a puzzlement.
obama is a despot, a tyrant. If he is not defeated this November, our Republic is lost.
I tend to agree with greyledgegal. MR is suffering under the illusion that if he fights back hard in the Fall that most of the media will bother to report it. They’ll ignore every bit of a Romney attack that’s possible to ignore – even if it hits the mark.
Grey, My thoughts exactly, but you said it far better than I could. In reading John’s post, my thought was that Romney is fighting on two fronts, Romney vs. Obama, and Romney vs the Media..Perhaps he is thinking that eventually , vicious attack ads turn people off. That’s true up to a point, but we have become like Romans in the Coliseum, in our love of violence and bloodshed.
Romney will never appeal to the Roman in some of us.
It has reached the point where all I can watch on tv is cooking shows and PBS, I now know more about the Channel Island’s form of govt than anyone needs to, but it’s still better than watching our own system disintegrate.
Agree with both you and Grey. I’ve been watching the most absurd shows just to avoid the MSM Romney bashing. Only thing is it s not working as well as they’d like it to….
Most people I listen to are not interested in Bain at all. Bill Clinton’s endorsement of Romney’s tenure has stuck with them, and they see this for what it is: desperation.
Expect Sununu (or another ballsy surrogate) to roll out Fast & Furious, Solyndra and Rezko in three…. two….. one…..
Agreed, that most people “aren’t interested in Bain” (and probably haven’t heard about it). The narrative that sticks is that Romney is very wealthy, but that’s not viewed as a bad thing in America (far from it). Maybe in a better economy, O could make the case that he’s earned a 2nd term or that R’s too risky, but not in this sputtering-to-declining one.
Islands’ duh.
The Bain stuff is sticking largely because the media is piling on the glue. Plus it is an almost seamless extension of the narrative that has been building over the past year or so of rich vs poor, haves vs. have-nots. It’s actually a theme I could support if it meant anything. So Romney is a rich heartless ass? Okay, how is Obama not? What has Obama DONE (not said) that amounts to any action that would seriously address the inequities that he decries on the stump? Nada.
Honestly, when I hear/see excerpts of Obama at campign rallies I can’t believe how gullible people are. They seem to accept the idea that if not for those nasty republicans, Obama would have us all on a unicorn with a full benefits package by now. They never think about what his administration has done to prop up and shield Wall Street, not punish it and bring it under control. They cheer “health care reform”, ignoring the fact that Obama took single payer and a public option off the table at the get-go and instead sent the poor back to beg at the doorsteps of the insurance companies. And of course the press never brings up such inconvenient facts. All the sudden, they’re out of glue.
I maintain that Obama has been pre-selected to win this election so he can continue his “work” uninterrupted by liberals and progressives who would fierecly oppose his actions if anyone else did them. He knows it’s in the bag for him and so does Romney. That’s why Romney lets a punch land when he could avoid it and why Obama always has that cocky attitude . Think professional wrestling. It will be up and down (gotta make it look convincing), but Obama will win. This view makes Romney’s lapses in political fortitude much less baffling. And all of the nastiness deployed in this charade? So much the better, because when the election is over we’ll be even more divided as a people and therefore easier to keep on the reservation.
Term limits, campaign finance reform, a constitutional convention? Not a chance in hell for any of it. The system is too rotten, too compromised, and too corrupt, with too few good people left inside.
It’s got nothing to do with Massachusetts. It’s all about where the real power lies and how easily many everyday people are manipulated into going along with the script. Real “change” can now only come from outside the system and can actually be accomplished at the local and community level, both politically and in everyday life choices.
Spot on, Kim.
I disagree about the powers that be. I think Obama will lose precisely because they fear what he’ll do in an unfettered second term. What if he was telling the truth about what he believed all those years as a community organizer? What if he decides to just blow the whole thing up thinking that’s the way to deliver his version of “social justice?” Thing is, I don’t think he even has very good ideas about how to deliver that justice, so it would just end up destroying the whole system.
He can’t be trusted either way. The rich will fear what he’ll when there are no consequences left, and the rest of us fear that he’ll actually deliver what Wall Street wants: access to that big Social Security booty. He’s sunk either way. That’s the thing about Obama. He’s done something I never predicted: united Main Street and Wall Street in opposition to him. Let’s face it, we were at each others throats 4 years ago.
Really good point Lola. If Mitt wants a good ad, just keep playing that clip of Barry whispering to Medevev that “I’ll have more flexibility in my second term.”
John, I agree that Romney should define himself in short order. But, don’t know if it has to be now, while Obama’s blitzkrieg of negative ads is blanketing the battleground states. The optimal time may be just after Obama blows his wad. After that wad is blown, what does O have short of the economic numbers improving? Pretty much nothing, and reportedly not much cash either.
Also I’ve heard reports that a lot of Romney’s cash can only be spent after he accepts the nomination. Don’t know how true that is. The SuperPacs seem committed solely to the negative-ads game, and they can’t be commandeered by R’s campaign.
At bottom. I believe the knock on R as being an outsourced and having offshore accounts is greatly exaggerated by a left-leaning liberal bias against wealth when it’s held by righties. I continue to believe that Americans admire success in business and aren’t repulsed by wealth, and that most of them would love a Swiss or other tax-shelter bank account if they could afford afford one.
Erratum: “…being an outsourcer….”
Ugh, erratum no. 2!: “…is greatly exaggerated by a left-leaning liberal MEDIA bias against wealth when it’s held by righties.”
Romney’s already late with this. Soon as your opponent’s defining you and it’s sticking at all, you’re behind the eight ball. Ask John Kerry. It doesn’t have to be true, it just has to stick. And Romney = 1% is sticky as velcro.
I’ve been wondering why Romney stopped the roll he was on during that brief Solyndra period. He surprised me with that, it was potentially really effective I thought, but then he reverted back to form and has stayed there since. He doesn’t need big money to grab hold of the identity narrative, not with the Internet and YouTube and the media’s penchant for free video to air, especially in summer; he could barrage with a series of videos creating at least a new buzz.
“shoots his rod”
NES, I believe that Romney is engaged in a rope-a-dope strategy and is waiting until the convention with his attack. The funding issue makes sense. I don’t think that most Americans would love a Swiss bank account, but when they start seeing the TV ads about Dem pols who have offshore accounts, like the DNC chair, Wasserman-Shultz, it will become more of a dead issue for the independents.
I agree that R is late, Zal. Not clear if it’s too late though. Also, I think the 1% meme has run it’s course (as Occupy has). No question R defines the 1%. But, if that’s all O accomplished with a 100 million in negative ads, he wasted his money. There’s more to R than merely the 1% tag, of course — he was in equity finance — but I’m not sure that’s not a big ‘duh, so what?’ kind of fact.
“shoots his rod”
Hahahaha
Great points Kim, but your pov begs the question, of why Romney would agree to be the punching bag for the Chicago machine, if this is all pre-ordained.?
Join in that question. It’s the type of query conspiracy theorists can never answer.
“raises the question”
Tam’s on a grammar kick!
Wasn’t Welch an Obama supporter at one time ? Things change:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303740704577524823306803692.html?mod=opinion_newsreel
Oh Mr Policeman give me another chance..please.. I can’t afford an F in blogging.
I don’t know. Obama and Romney are in a dead heat in the polls, most of which are over-sampling Democrats, and the needle hasn’t moved in weeks despite all of the anti-Romney attack ads. Where’s the evidence (not anecdotes) that the Bain ads are hurting Romney?
Good question, El. (Latest poll I saw, btw, was RVs & oversampled Dems by 7)
Obama certainly has been looking like someone who has been preselected – happy and confident. However, it is entirely within the realm of possibilities that the player is being played.
I think Romney is in it to win it. Definitely don’t get the impression that he’s just along for the ride.
It seems you can’t turn around without bumping into another Obama ad. But the poll numbers are looking good considering that O is, IMO, oversaturating the market. So I have to agree that Romney is using rope-a-dope tactics. Let ObamaNation run around like yipping chihuahuas, let Americans become fed up with listening to its noise, and then hit heavy in late summer/early fall. I’m guessing Romney has a handsome war chest at the ready that will be used later rather than sooner. Just a guess. We’ll see how it all plays out. Right now, I give this round to Romney. IMO, I think the whole family man brand has been much more effective than the Bain attacks. And I hate that maudlin shit, but it’s the picture I’m remembering (aren’t his grandkids just adorable??? gah!). I can only guess that average America is eating it up.
IMO, Obama needs to dial it back, way back. He is a fad whose time has passed and glutting the market with his mug is just going to remind people how sick they are of him. All Romney needs to do is let O wear himself out. And spend a small fortune on advertising, but something tells me that won’t be a problem.
Jill Stein. 2012. Believe!
NES, that comment was meant to be nested further downstream, where zal made a couple of nasty remarks about my character. I respond to written words; I don’t post my musings about the character of a person I don’t know and I will defend myself any time someone does that to me. It is a lesson that some should take to heart.
So YOU’RE the new target. Sorry. Got your back, though.
I did a check on the Kerry swiftboat issue to see how it compares to Romney in terms to a timeline, the start date and end date and Kerry’s response time. According to Wiki, the first public press announcement of the creation of the group occurred May 4, 2004 and the first ad appeared August 5, 2004. Kerry didn’t respond to their attacks for almost 4 months!
It’s taken Romney what a few weeks to respond to the Bain attacks, and each time he is getting more forceful with the attacks and placing the blame on Obama. Considering that Bain has been around for something like a month during the political offseason, I’m hardly worried that this issue will gain serious traction with anyone but the diehard Obama supporters, just like Romney is the 1% meme.
Sorry Zal, but when I’m talking with unemployed union-Dems who still think Obama is the biggest threat to their livelihood because of his lack of a jobs plan, that’s telling me something other than what you’re seeing. They are more concerned that they might lose their extended unemployment bennies because of the Obama’s admin ineptitude overpaid millions of unemployment benefit, and they have choice words for Obama rescinding welfare to work programs as well as the attacks on Az for its immigration enforcement. They aren’t particularly supportive of the Palermo Pizza strike either. A surprising reality.
Do you hear unemployed union-Dems saying they’ll vote for Romney? Because being unhappy with Obama and voting for Romney are two different things – especially in a population as politically polarized as the US.
If unemployed union-Dems think venture-capitalist-born-to-the-manor-conservative Romney will come up with a jobs plan that’ll help them, or be supportive of unions or better unemployment benefits than Obama, they’re cuckoo. Obama’s a wild card but Romney’s a trump for wealthy interests. It should be pretty obvious that nobody who makes a fortune in private equity deals is sympathetic about worker benefits.
Recognizing what a disaster Obama is as a Democratic President is clear sighted; believing Romney will be on the side of workers and unions and the middle class is as delusional as Obamabots were about The One in 2008.
I’m not saying anybody should vote for Obama and I’m not championing Romney; I have the advantage of having no horse in this race. I can’t stand either of them and I know no matter which of them is in the White House it’s going to be disastrous for us.
Whether they are cuckoo or not, they have an ABO attitude.
You didn’t answer my question. Are these people, unemployed union-Dems, telling you they’re going to vote for Romney?
There’s anecdotal evidence that some union members are planning to vote for Romney, and anecdotal evidence that some of them are not planning to vote. But I haven’t found a poll which has posted union membership as one of the crosstabs. I think that union members, while not low-hanging fruit, may be a group where Romney can make some inroads. If nothing else, lack of enthusiasm to support Obama will cut into his ground game, and the lack of enthusiasm goes all the way from the ground troops to the highest level of the unions. See lack of union support for the Democratic National Convention for evidence.
@ zaladonis –
your “Concern Trolling” just isn’t hitting the mark. You don’t know a thing about me or how much money I make, so your assumptions about me are laughable, as is your (phony?) diatribe about the protests of the 60′s etc. It sounds like you may be a bit jealous of people who have enjoyed success and have enough resources to enjoy a comfortable life.
Most Americans don’t need to “see” themselves in any one political candidate. That phenomenon seems to be peculiar to the Obots (you know who they are, don’t you?)
Your assertion that one should be ashamed of what they’ve earned and your affinity for OWS is very telling. I don’t think I need to say more.
Anthony, I’m in agreement with your arguments/statements on Romney vs. Obama. I think they’re sound and will carry the day. Like you, I’m an Indy and will vote for Romney over Obama any day of the week. November 6 can’t come soon enough for me.
We part company, however, on your accusing Zal of being a ‘concern troll’ sympathetic to BO or OWS. It’s true he thinks BO will win, but I believe he’s amply made clear his basis for thinking that and his disgust with the underlying phenomenon. Also, he was one of the early and consistently harsh critics of OWS. Seems to me like he’s always been consistent in his positions — and none of them would win an OFA seal of approval.
My hunch is that all this 1% vs. 99% stuff is to motivate obama’s base.
Bingo. And concern trolls the world over are bashing “venture capitalist born-to-the-manor conservatives, the “rich” (whatever that means anymore) and doing their best to convince us that Romney and Obama are one and the same.
Since when is working your ass off to do better (i.e. taking a shot at The American Dream), forfeiting your inheritance and running for public office a crime? (Answer: When you’re a petrified concern troll for Obama)
I’m an Independent recently turned RINO (Rmoney Is Nto Obama) who has the advantage of having no horse in this race. Writing in a candidate or voting for a third party in a corrupt two party system will do nothing other than guarantee another four years of Obama. Thoughts to the contrary are either benignly naive or just delusional.
What we need right now is damage control, and all the concern trolling in the world will not change the fact that at this juncture, Romney (the candidate from the other side of the sleazy aisle) is the most sure way to get off the Titanic
Good point Anthony. If I was on the Titanic and Romney was the rich guy (and smart guy) who brought his own lifeboat….I wouldn’t be saying, “Sorry, I’m not getting in that boat, your rich!” Heck no! I’d say, “Scootch over! I’m comin’ in!”
Assuming Romney would scooch over and say, “Sure, Anonymous, come on in!” is what I’m trying to point out is unsupported by Romney’s history, the same kind of unsupported assumptions Obamabots made about Obama.
Romney already has friends on the ship, people who’ve done him favors and made money for him and for whom he’s demonstrated loyalty and made money; he’s saving the seats on his lifeboat for them, not scooching over for anonymous passengers from steerage.
But at least Romney would let me keep my own lifeboat if I was smart enough to bring one along. Obama would fill my boat with his cronies, too.
Actually, Zalado…..saving people from drowning IS a part of Romney’s history.
http://www.dailynewstranscript.com/news/x1128483358?zc_p=0#axzz1l9jpsMrS
Good point; I agree.
Don’t hate – looks ugly. I seriously doubt Romney “owes” any friends for their favors. He makes more than $20M a year in interest from investments (bet you wish you did – I know I do) which is nothing to be ashamed of. Hard work definitely pays off. That also means he will not be “owned” by anyone.
Anthony, I never said he “owes” anybody. If you don’t understand the human nature of bonded relationships and loyalty, I can’t help you.
No I do not wish I collected more than $20 million a year in interest. That is an obscene amount of unearned income and it indicates extreme greed and hoarding on the part of whomever holds onto those investments.
I worked at Goldman Sachs for a number of years in the 1990s, I’m familiar with that culture, and I made a lot of money, enough to buy comfortable homes and accessories for my husband and I, and have plenty left over. It was by no means a huge fortune like Romney’s but it was much more than enough for us, and we’ve turned over what we don’t need to help others in ways they need. As I’ve written here before, the notion of “enough” in Americans has been replaced with greed and gluttony. That’s ruinous to individuals and to societies. Romney, who’s wealthy, suffers from it and you, who apparently are not wealthy, suffer from it. I do not want $20 million a year in interest income because I do not need anywhere near that amount, nevermind the vast investments required to generate that amount in interest, to live a very comfortable and materially satisfied, even lush, life. There is something very wrong with the thought process of people who wish they had more than they need; it’s obscenely greedy and it distorts judgment in lots of ways.
Earning $25,000 or $50,000 a year or $100,000 or $300,000 a year can be from hard work. Or even a huge amount like $10 million earned from the creation of some real product like a best selling book or movie or computer program could be characterized as hard work paying off. $20 million in unearned income for one human being is not “hard work paying off,” it’s the ill gotten gains of immoral choices.
However, you illustrate a point I’ve made repeatedly, and I appreciate that. The primary reason Americans in general, and Occupy Wall Street as a movement, are so ambivalent about holding Wall Street and corrupt politicians and corporations and other culprits of our financial mess accountable is because they (average Americans like you) see yourselves in them; you want their riches and you hope you might someday be able to have riches like theirs. So you help them steal from us because that’s what you’d do and you understand and sympathize with it. That’s a big change in Americans these past 30 years. See, the protesters of the 1960s and 70s, even the 80s, wanted out of the systems we protested against, and the protesters of today want in.
Oh. And yes that is something to be ashamed of.
Anthony,
Just asking if you’re calling me a concern troll because I think Romney would be as bad as Obama? Just curious. I know you called Zal one which I thought was unfair because I think Zal contributes a lot to the dialogue here at John’s site.
As for being politically naive – I’ve been in politics most of my life, worked on dozens and dozens of campaigns and was president of a state-wide PAC for years.
I believe it is time to “just say no” to both parties and vote third party this time. If enough of us decide to do so and concentrate on one candidate, like Dr. Jill Stein, then maybe we would have a chance. It’s a long shot, but neither of the candidates presented by the two parties care about the middle classes or the poor. There has to be a point when “we, the people” decide to opt out of these insane political non-contests that don’t represent our interests.
Senneth, I’m not calling you anything. I was referring to someone else whose comments mimic or mirror (your choice) typical concern trolling.
The term I used was “benignly naive” and I say that because I once was with respect to 3rd party candidates and write in votes. In some states, write in votes go to the person who carries the delegates, and in New York, any write in votes would go to Obama. There is no way NY is going to go red, so that’s what happens. It varies from state to state, as each have their own rules re: write-ins.
I don’t like the 2 party system anymore than many others here, and this is why I wrote what I did. If that’s the only shot we have, then voting out someone who imo will continue doing harm is the only choice I have. Add to that that I do not have a the same problem with Romney that you do.
No offense intended, and I hope none was taken after this explanation
Senneth, this is the definition of a “concern troll” from the urban dictionary:
concern troll 494 up, 80 down
In an argument (usually a political debate), a concern troll is someone who is on one side of the discussion, but pretends to be a supporter of the other side with “concerns”. The idea behind this is that your opponents will take your arguments more seriously if they think you’re an ally. Concern trolls who use fake identities are sometimes known as sockpuppets.
In the 2006 election, an aide to Congressman Charlie Bass (R-NH) was caught concern trolling the opposition on local blogs. While pretending to support Bass’s opponent, Paul Hodes, the aide argued that Hodes couldn’t win because Bass was an unbeatable candidate. Hodes won the election.
I do! I do! I want to make $20 million a year in interest. Think of all the poor people I could help with that! Think of all the single moms I could educate, or the poor illiterate students of Highland Park I could send to a shiny new school with great, non-unionized teachers I built. I would LOVE it.
BTW, Romney does that. He’s given away over $4 million this year already.
That’s exactly what Lola boasted she does, and at Crawdad tried to convince others to do the same. I was not among those who cheered or defended what she was doing, nor among those who said I’d go to her website and join her in trolling.
I, on the other hand, have been consistently opposed to Obama, from his primary candidacy in 2008 through the general election in 2008, through his presidency and his current re-election campaign. Voted for Hillary then McCain in 2008 and will vote for someone other than Obama this year.
I also have been consistent about my criticism, and occasional defense, of Mitt Romney.
And I have posted as zaladonis and only zaladonis since the late 1990s.
Agree with my opinions and observations or disagree, my principles and positions have been consistent, are true to my beliefs, and I never pretend to believe something I do not.
So tell me: do you support concern trolling or do you think it’s something people should be attacked for doing? I ask because you appear to support Lola and yet have attacked me for being a concern troll, which makes no sense at all.
Oh you’re so good, Lola, so benevolent.
I’ll tell you what’s wrong with this thinking, what’s wrong with Soros that’s equally wrong with the Koch brothers, who also give away millions.
If the goal is equal opportunity and access, poor people and single moms and illiterate students shouldn’t have to be dependent on the whims of individuals with great wealth for their access to education and food and shelter and other needs and comforts. It shouldn’t be up to George Soros or Mitt Romney or Lolita to give them those things. As Fran Lebowitz once said when someone defends Soros by saying he gives back I say why take it to begin with?
I see you’d “LOVE” to play benevolent master to those enslaved by poverty but that’s a bad paradigm. The poor, the single parent, the illiterate should have a right to, access to, decent housing and education without your getting your kicks from “giving” it to them — they should have the choice of where and how to live and be educated and raise their children by virtue of money they earn at working. That’s freedom. Depending on super wealthy individuals to toss them tokens, rather than having jobs where they can earn their support themselves, is enslavement, and it’s grotesque to “LOVE” the idea of playing master that way.
Being successful and wealthy is a fine goal and it can be satisfying and delightful to achieve and share, but there is a difference between reasonable wealth and sitting on two hundred million dollars accruing $20 million more in interest every year when the middle class is disappearing into poverty and young people starting out can’t get a decent job with good prospects for their own future. Nobody in America should, year after year, sit on that kind of wealth, it indicates a greedy, hoarding, selfish, manipulative and controlling character.
But thanks for helping to prove my point that it’s not only the super rich and corporate elite who have made this problem in America; this greedy entitled thought process crosses class and socio-economic lines and that’s the reason it’s taking us down.
Thank you for your response, Anthony. No offense taken.
Ellie’smom, thank you for the definition of concern trolling, I did already know it, which is why I asked Anthony to clarify.
I guess we each need to follow our own path in this selection, let the chips fall where they may.
Expect a black swan.
I agree with Kim. Only I think both candidates have been assured of a win. Which candidate are they lying to?
This is where my opinion would have gone if I had one.
Rofl!
I KNEW Romney read this blog!
I tend to agree –
Oh yeah baby! Loving that RNC ad.
I agree that Romney’s response to the Bain attacks has been sluggish, but I don’t think his campaign has been irreparably harmed. I do think Romney should think twice about going overseas. He will get zero media coverage from it. People will think he has dropped off the face of the earth. Look at how the media didn’t cover Hillary’s recent mega-trip, except for that nasty tomato-throwing incident in Egypt.
Regardless of who wins in November, I believe it will be the final chapter of corporate-owned government. We simply cannot sustain this level of corporate welfare.
All this talk about success has been most interesting. But for the fact that no two people measure success in the same way. In our family alone, we have 4 working artists who earn their living through their endeavors. It’s been a bit of a feast or famine situation, but all of them seem successful to me, because they do work they would otherwise do for free, it’s their passion. No one gets passion delivered from the gov’t.
\
Well that right there shows you how much Charlie Cooks knows or is paying attention. Romney has wads of cash that he can’t use right now. He’s running on leftover primary funds and will be until the convention. That’s the law.
You might see the strategy as baffling, but you’ve let the fear the media is using and the noise machine you live in (LA is SUCH a Democratic noise machine) get to you. And the Olympic thing you don’t understand, I think already have that one figured out. Here’s what I said at Romney Democrats today:
It’s not going to be any of the regulars on the VP talking train. It’s going to be somebody he can trust to unleash on Obama while he’s gone making positive media stories happen elsewhere. He has a record to stand on and he will stand on it. Right now he’s navigating a land-mine-laden political landscape without being able to call upon the resources he has in reserve. And he’s doing spectacularly well at it so far. Even through all this noise some people keep listening to, for example, the race in NH has tightened up four more points in his favor. He’s cut Obama’s lead in half. It might not be the fight you want to see, or that others want to see, but it will be the fight that ultimately prevails. My 2 cents, anyway, USD.
Good points, Lola. However, I do think I’m largely immune to the Los Angeles Dem tidal wave, except to note that the enthusiasm is way down this year compared to 08. Last time one could not drive 20 feet without seeing an Obama sign or sticker. Now they are here and there at best.
Good point on the Olympics connection. My question is: who will MR pick for veep.. if he’s going to choose someone other than those we keep hearing about?
Now that I do not know. My dream pick would be Artur Davis, but I think that’s a pipe dream. Maybe not though. Romney has quite a bipartisan record (he appointed Democrats to his MA administration), and maybe a newly minted GOP guy, and former Dem, would be right up his ally. It would depend on how well they’ve been able to prep him, IF he’s even been considered.
I wondered about Marsha Blackburn recently, but she’s not pit bull enough to handle it solo, I don’t think. Because I think this is his strategy now, I doubt it will be a woman at all. It’s not going to be someone the Obama team can take down easily, that’s for sure.
Oh yeah, and Romney has increased his lead among independents by 14 points. The race there now stands at 53-39, Romney.
saw this poll. BUT it was released on the 10th. I’m waiting to see a more recent one to make an assessment. Then again, Obama handed Mitt R. a gem with the “you didn’t build that” remark.
Yes, Obama did. Did you see Romney’s response to it today?
And I now see you did see it. Sorry for the double post. BTW, I emailed you. On board with Thursday.