Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Recipient of Romney negative ad blitz speaks out

    Recipient of Romney negative ad blitz speaks out

    Things have been ugly on the airwaves in Iowa, and the recipient of those ads is going to start giving some of the ugly back.

    It’s unfortunate that it has come to this, but it fits a pattern which goes back to Iowa in the 2008 cycle. Different recipients, same attacker.

    Update: I’m already beginning to sense whining and a false sense of outrage that Newt and others are going to go negative on Romney, as if going after Romney the way Romney went after Newt is disloyal to the goal of defeating Obama.  Romney and his supporters did not hesitate to try to destroy Newt’s general election prospects with a strategy of crazy and us or no one attitude.

    Keep this in mind:

    But none of Romney’s 2012 rivals ran an ad solely taking on the former Massachusetts governor—a sign that they perhaps underestimated his rise in Iowa.

    Just 20 percent of the negative ads airing in Iowa targeted Romney, even as part of an attack on multiple candidates, according to the Campaign Media Analysis Group. By comparison, 45 percent of the negative spots went after Gingrich—a statistic that explains, in part, why the former House speaker’s poll numbers in the state plunged in the final days of the campaign.

    In hindsight, the decision to leave Romney untouched appears to be a serious miscalculation, one that Romney’s opponents are unlikely to repeat as the focus shifts to New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary and onto other key early voting states, including South Carolina, Florida and Nevada.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    And, now, Newt has apparently breathed new life into “zany.”

    As posted by Tina Korbe at Hot Air:

    Gingrich: On second thought, maybe I will pull off a “great upset” in Iowa

    After, of course, predicting he was going to lose!

    Here was how one commenter there put it:

    Newt had to do just a couple of things to stay viable, and one of them was not revert to type and become flaky. But he couldn’t stop himself. So here he is, being a flake. “We’re gonna lose…we’re gonna win.” Sheesh.

    Rational Thought on January 3, 2012 at 1:08 PM

    Team Romney might come to regret that they picked this bare-knuckles fight with Gingrich… he’ll come out both barrels blazing now, and woe be unto his target. Romney should be easy to shred this way in the south, he’s not their kind of guy and all Newt has to do is remind them just why that is.

    I sure don’t know how anybody can believe Newt didn’t govern as a conservative… balanced budget, immigration reform, etc.

    It doesn’t matter what he says sometimes… he’s a near-genius guy, and likes to explore new ideas… doesn’t mean he’s going to inflict them all on you. That’s why he got along with Clinton, personally- probably enjoyed the debate, so what.

    Mitt, on the other hand (sorry) talks like a conservative and governed like a lib!

    Think about it, what did Gingrich ever do that decreased freedom or increased spending/taxes?

    Short list there

      Yes, I suppose it may be generally true what you say about the importance of the Iowa caucuses over time . . . but, how then to explain an alarmingly intense personal reaction to the contest owing to a disappointing finish by one of the candidates – really just a few rungs down in the pack – but who stormed out of Iowa, vowing all wide-eyed to soldier on?

    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.)

    Send this to a friend