Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    All the king’s horses may not be enough for Romney

    All the king’s horses may not be enough for Romney

    Mitt Romney had a disastrous interview with Bret Baier the other night, compounded by Romney complaining about the interview to Baier (video via Right Scoop h/t HotAir):

    As bad as the original interview was, Romney’s reaction simply confirms the perception that Romney will have trouble in a general election.  If he can’t handle totally legitimate questions from Baier, and his team will not let him appear before the Center Seat panel, then how will he hold up when the media and Team Obama gang up on him?

    Newt Gingrich, by contrast, had a great interview on Hannity last night.  (Newt previously appeared on Center Seat.) It’s well worth watching the whole thing (video at bottom of post).

    There simply is no other candidate running who has the command of the issues, the vision of how to take on Obama, and the ability to communicate a positive message.  On Hannity, Newt gave a commanding performance before an audience of two million people, plus a lot more when the interview is run in pieces on news shows.

    Mitt Romney’s campaign is planning it’s attack on Newt, figuring its bank account and organization will prevail:

    Romney’s strategists are gaming out scenarios. They say they understand the risk that, in a multi-candidate field, any attack they make against Gingrich could boomerang to hurt Romney and help a third candidate.

    Taking on Gingrich is “going to be a process,” one adviser said. “It’s not going to be an overnight kind of a thing, unless he steps in it. But he seems less likely than the others to do that.”

    Across the country, many of Romney’s donors and political supporters said there is no sense of panic over Gingrich. Romney’s network takes comfort in the great financial and organizational advantages that he has amassed to help him survive a potentially grueling nomination fight.

    All the king’s horses and all the king’s men may not be enough for Romney.

    Video of Newt’s interview on Hannity via Right Scoop.

    Update:  Considering Romney’s refusal to appear on Center Seat and moaning about the questions about his record, this headline is particularly ironic – Romney: Obama will ‘cower’ from debating his record

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Comments


    Newt may hang on and win this thing, but I would be very cautious about viewing him as the presumptive nominee based on his current position at the top of the heap and one bad interview by Romney. This race has seen too many ups and downs already to suddenly decide it’s in the bag. Moreover, Newt’s impressive and surprising ascent has been fueled in large part by other non-Mitt candidates’ having successively flamed out over the last few months. Newt himself is hardly immune from that same phenomenon. As a matter of fact, he already flamed out once in this race (i.e., at its inception); he’s in it now because, rather than drop out, he hung around long enough to get a second look from conservatives hungering for a better alternative to Mitt. Newt has plenty of baggage and it’s entirely possible those same voters will decide they were right the first time, and give some other non-Romney-potential-nom’nee (just wanted to say that) a second or third look, too.


       
       0 
       
       0
      Neo in reply to Conrad. | December 1, 2011 at 10:59 am

      .. and we shouldn’t expect the media to lay down and let somebody, that they don’t like, ruin their narrative.


         
         0 
         
         0
        JayDick in reply to Neo. | December 1, 2011 at 3:58 pm

        That’s one possibility. Another one is that since Obama seems to fear Romney the most, they’ll promote Newt because they think he is the easier candidate for Obama.

        I think that is folly; I think Newt would be just as formidable as Romney. Both have different strengths and weaknesses, but Newt seems to deal with his weaknesses better when someone attacks them.

    I just couldn’t listen to O’BOR more than a couple of minutes. I so want to stuff his mouth with dirty gym socks. But the Newt interview is great.


     
     0 
     
     0
    littlebeartoe | December 1, 2011 at 10:08 am

    So the news inside baseball is that Mitt didn’t want to play with Brett?

    I’m a big fan of Brett Baier and FNC, and I’m not fond of Mitt. But Professor, your analysis is weak. Mitt performed well on Baier’s show (as did Baier), where the questions were tough. Hannity is a clown who doesn’t challenge interviewees.

    I’ll take either one: Mitt or Newt.


     
     0 
     
     0
    Jaydee77 | December 1, 2011 at 10:17 am

    The Newt interview with Hannity has pushed me over the edge and I am now settled on him as my candidate. While I believe he will ultimately have some issues with women voters, he is the only person who is willing to go after the Obama Machine the way it needs to be gone after. Plus he would provide much more of a contrast to Obama than would Mitt. Pair him up with Christie and I think you would see a very, very formidable challenge to this president.


       
       0 
       
       0
      Neo in reply to Jaydee77. | December 1, 2011 at 11:02 am

      I don’t see Christie taking a bite.
      Given the general rules for picking a VP (somebody who your worst enemies hate worst than you), Christie would qualify.


         
         0 
         
         0
        JayDick in reply to Neo. | December 1, 2011 at 4:00 pm

        There are lots of good VP possibilities. I even think Romney should be on the list. Christy and Rubio both would be great, but I don’t think they are interested.

    The professor’s daily cheerleading not withstanding, Newt would be nearly as disastrous as Mitt. Both men have a huge “hit me” target on their foreheads.

    Although Hugh Hewitt’s affection for Romney takes him (like Professor Jacobson) of the realm of objectivity, others of influence have weighed it:

    “Which is why when Jim Geraghty, National Review’s highly respected political reporter, expresses doubt about Newt’s past positions, or Mark Steyn does the same on my show or Rush’s, or Charles Krauthammer voices concern over Newt’s “deological heresies,” and the fact that over a long career Newt’s “had a lot of ideas, and some of them are rather heretical,” then you have three of the most influential conservative commentators in the country saying essentially the same, important thing which has to be part of the debate over the next month: Electability will be an issue for Newt.”

    http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/g/bf022dcd-cb83-4e53-bd1e-66b1a62992d9


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend