Posts Tagged ‘mitt romney’

…on the NYT best seller list?

Whenever the NY Times places a “dagger” symbol next to a book, it signifies that “some bookstores report[ed] receiving bulk orders” for the book.

The NY Times placed not just one, but two, daggers next to Romney’s book. You can draw your own conclusion as to who it was that purchased Governor Romney’s book in bulk.

By contrast, the NY Times failed to place the “dagger” symbol next to Governor Palin’s book in any of the weeks she held the top position on the NY Times best-seller list among non-fiction hardcover books. Despite the left’s unsubstantiated theories, bookstores did not report to the NY Times that they received bulk orders for Going Rogue. See week 1, week 2, week 3, week 4, week 5, and week 6. As you can see, in none of these weeks is there a dagger symbol next to her book

I have NEVER heard anyone speak of Mitt Romney with anything resembling excitement and I live in Massachusetts.

BTW it is worth noting that Sarah Palin’s book is STILL on the list (at 34) after 17 weeks.

I take exception to Marc Armbinder’s comparison of Romney to Roger Maris. It is unfair to Maris who actually was able to hit his 61 under normal game conditions and won 3 World Series. Maybe it would be fairer to compare it to McGwire or Barry Bonds instead.

This is amateur night stuff, and this guy wants to be president? The blowback on this is going to be much worse that the positive press he got when the debut first was reported. Bad form Governor, bad form.

Anyone care to make book on how long it takes Romney to fall off?

Update: It is worth noting that Sarah Palin’s book is still ranked in the top 150, 143 at Amazon as of this morning, while Mitt’s newly released book is at 43, only 100 spots ahead.

Mitt Romney on Morning Joe

Posted: March 3, 2010 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: , ,

Mitt Romeny is on Morning Joe right now plugging his book: No Apologies, in likely a more friendly setting than The View was.

I’m very hard on Mitt, at least I was at CPAC. I didn’t like the answers to the softballs I threw him at the Brown Party and I was unhappy at his general inaction as governor here although he did hold the line on the budget as well as one can in Massachusetts.

I would support him over any democrat but on a political level he doesn’t impress me but he is looking good today. (On a personal level he is an excellent example with a fine family meaning he got the most important in life right).

He is making a good case and he is showing a better face than I’ve seen him show. Morning Joe tends to loosen up guys a bit. Maybe he needs more settings like this.

He declared George W. Bush a good president, Sarah Palin Qualified to be president and Mike “dishonorable” Huckabee a conservative.

Pretty good job.

On a side note I REALLY like the photos they go in and out with on the show lately.

Update: Linked by Texas for Sarah Palin. thanks.

…so can someone tell me how they can go sour on her?

This plays to Mitt (Obamacare Massachusetts style) Romney. I’d say it has his name written all over it. In my opinion the Washington establishment so despises Palin that they would gladly push Romney to avoid a chance of a Palin victory in 2012.

They also are aware that Romney’s stint as Governor in Massachusetts was without any real achievement, and furthermore didn’t involve standing for any principle even remotely conservative. (Of course compared to those who ran against or followed him he was practically a Reaganite.) They understand his legacy is Obamacare lite, and a Romney presidency will be a republican version of business as usual.

They can handle that after all with apologies to Grover Cleveland; A republican insider is just as indifferent to the people as democratic one.

Commentator BSR defends Mike Huckabee non-endorsement of Hoffman in comments and links to this post. It is worth quoting:

If Huckabee agrees so much with Hoffman, the conservative bloggers wail, why doesn’t he officially endorse him?

I answer that question with a question of my own. Would these same bloggers be asking that question if it were a Democratic candidate that was the more conservative in this race?

No. They wouldn’t.

Mike Huckabee is the leading contender for the 2012 Republican party nomination. If he officially endorsed a non-Republican candidate he would be running counter to his party – indeed some would say such action serves to legitimize and strengthen a rival party – and you can bet your next paycheck he’d be hearing about it in 2012.

It’s not Huckabee’s fault the party can’t field a respectable candidate in New York. Furthermore, Huckabee is a man of the people who is fully aware that his personal opinion is plenty (heck, it may even be better) to help voters make a decision.

So, the story remains, Mike Huckabee didn’t endorse a non-Republican.

Not a bad point if want to stay in good with the party, Mitt Romney for example is staying out of it, but the party is less popular than conservatism. There is a much better point to be made that my fellow Blue State Republican does NOT make.

The point would be the timing. Any endorsement would be appear to be a “me too” endorsement so at this point it is moot.

A great example is Pawlenty v Palin. When Palin endorsed Hoffman was in 3rd place but showed promise. She was talking a huge political risk, not only in angering the main party but in backing a losing horse and not only a losing horse but a THIRD PLACE horse in a three horse race. If Hoffman came in a poor 3rd the media would be jumping all over her. As I blogged Stephen Stromberger at the Washington post was practically giddy at the possibility. Margaret Carlson gives another example:

Scozzafava fails to meet Palin’s requirements for a good Republican because of her moderate position on gay marriage and abortion. While she says she won’t vote for new taxes, Palin doesn’t believe her. Friending Hoffman on Facebook, Palin wrote that the best thing about him is that he’s “not been anointed by any political machine” and stands for bedrock Republican principles. Invoking Ronald Reagan, Palin added that he knew that “blurring the lines wasn’t an appropriate way to win election.”

Put aside that Palin is violating Reagan’s cardinal rule not to speak ill of a fellow Republican. Palin isn’t a stickler for details. Her incursion into NY-23 puts into stark relief the schism in the party that’s been brewing like a tea bag since the party’s loss in November.

One-time rogue Newt Gingrich, in the midst of his periodic dithering over whether to run for president, went nuclear over her purity test. “This idea that we’re suddenly going to establish litmus tests, and all across the country, we’re going to purge the party of anybody who doesn’t agree with us 100 percent — that guarantees Obama’s reelection. That guarantees Pelosi is speaker for life.”

Yet despite Google’s love of all stories anti Palin Hoffman is now poised to win giving her the rewards from the risk. Pawlenty seeing that the game had changed found himself forced to follow her lead as did other republicans. They became followers. It made him look like Moe pushing Curley and Larry into a room.

Huckabee meanwhile made his preference to Hoffman clear so a official endorsement will only make him weak while his holding back will help him with the establishment. Strategically the status quo is his best move and it is not dishonorable…

…he is still not going to win in 2012 although the MSM will favor him over Palin if she runs, and will favor Romney over him if she doesn’t.

Vote Hoffman!