Unruly New Hampshire legislators at hearing

Posted on November 29, 2011 by Dr. Conspiracy

I haven’t been watching the footage of Orly Taitz before the New Hampshire Elections Commission, so I don’t know if this is new or old stuff. The video that follows appears to be at the end of the hearing and shows bad-tempered NH representatives insulting the Commission.

About Dr. Conspiracy

I'm not a real doctor, but I have a master's degree.
This entry was posted in 2012 Presidential Election, Birthers, Orly Taitz and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to Unruly New Hampshire legislators at hearing

  1. JoZeppy says:
    November 30, 2011 at 4:37 pm  (Quote)

    As much as it pains me to watch this as a New Hampshire native, at least the Majority Leader of the House (a Republican) has, in no uncertain terms, come down hard on the birthers. As did the Union Leader, probably as far right wing a rag there is of a newspaper. Anyone remotely familiar with the legacy of the Leobs and the Union (Mis)Leader will understand that if a right wing idea is too nutty for them, you’re really strayed off the deep end.

  2. Majority Will says:
    November 30, 2011 at 5:52 pm  (Quote)

    JoZeppy:
    As much as it pains me to watch this as a New Hampshire native, at least the Majority Leader of the House (a Republican) has, in no uncertain terms, come down hard on the birthers.As did the Union Leader, probably as far right wing a rag there is of a newspaper.Anyone remotely familiar with the legacy of the Leobs and the Union (Mis)Leader will understand that if a right wing idea is too nutty for them, you’re really strayed off the deep end.

    From what I read, D.J. Bettencourt blasted Taitz in a letter to her and birtherism in general as “gobbledygook” but I saw no statement from him calling out the despicable state Reps by name. And there’s no mention of it at all on his Facebook page.

    Do you have a source citing him rebuking his members for threats and calling for them to take responsibility for their vile and puerile behavior?

  3. JoZeppy says:
    November 30, 2011 at 6:46 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will: From what I read, D.J. Bettencourt blasted Taitz in a letter to her and birtherism in general as “gobbledygook” but I saw no statement from him calling out the despicable state Reps by name. And there’s no mention of it at all on his Facebook page.Do you have a source citing him rebuking his members for threats and calling for them to take responsibility for their vile and puerile behavior?

    I thought I saw something that he was calling for an investigation of the treats made at the hearing by a certain representative from Laconia.

  4. Sean says:
    November 30, 2011 at 8:26 pm  (Quote)

    If I were one one the people in Orly Taitz’s sites, I would send a letter to her on my letter on my letterhead containing nothing but intentionally meaningless statements like accusing her of holding the pickles, hoarding paint and stealing socks just so Orly can yell publicly “This letter makes no sense whatsoever!!”

    See if the irony sinks in.

  5. bob says:
    November 30, 2011 at 9:30 pm  (Quote)

    From the P&E:

    Dear Representatives Accornero, DeLemus and Baldasaro:

    I have just had a meeting with Attorney General Delaney concerning the Ballot Law Commission hearing on November 18. He is concerned over how members of the House conducted themselves during and following the hearing, as well as for the safety of a member of his office who attended the meeting in an official capacity.
    I am requesting that the Chief of Protective Services, Randy Joyner, conduct an investigation of the incident and provide a written report to me. In addition, I have been informed that the Attorney General has requested that Colonel Quinn of the State Police have his office conduct a review of the incident. Please provide both Protective Services and the State Police your full cooperation and candor should they contact you. I am deferring any meeting concerning the issues underlying the November 18 hearing or the hearing itself until these reviews are completed.
    Sincerely,

    William L. O’Brien
    Speaker of the House

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/11/21/breaking-new-hampshire-speaker-cancels-meeting-with-house-members-launches-investigation-of-reps-at-ballot-commission-meeting/

  6. Arthur says:
    November 30, 2011 at 11:04 pm  (Quote)

    bob:

    I found it interesting that Mr. O’Brien’s letter, which references the threatening behavior of several beligerent legislators, aroused this threatening response in a Post and Email reader:

    “N.H Speaker of the House, William L. O’Brien, is defending an egregious contravention of the Constitution of the United States of America. His attack upon the patriots who demanded that the Constitution be adhered to at the Ballot Commission Hearing on 18, Nov. is unquestionably TREASONOUS . . . Many Americans such as those in New Hampshire who attended the Ballot Commission Meeting on Nov. 18th would like to see a peaceful resolution to this catastrophic contravention of the constitution. The possibility of a peaceful resolution appears less and less likely as further assaults upon our liberty unfold such as Speaker O’Brien’s deplorable, un-American actions. Is there any truth to the rumor that there has been a bounty put on the head of the not-so-honorable Speaker?”

    Way to double-down, grandpa!

  7. G says:
    December 1, 2011 at 1:49 am  (Quote)

    wow…just wow… yeah, talk about doubling down! *sheesh* These birther zealots are truly despicable!

    Arthur: bob:I found it interesting that Mr. O’Brien’s letter, which references the threatening behavior of several beligerent legislators, aroused this threatening response in a Post and Email reader: “N.H Speaker of the House, William L. O’Brien, is defending an egregious contravention of the Constitution of the United States of America. His attack upon the patriots who demanded that the Constitution be adhered to at the Ballot Commission Hearing on 18, Nov. is unquestionably TREASONOUS . . . Many Americans such as those in New Hampshire who attended the Ballot Commission Meeting on Nov. 18th would like to see a peaceful resolution to this catastrophic contravention of the constitution. The possibility of a peaceful resolution appears less and less likely as further assaults upon our liberty unfold such as Speaker O’Brien’s deplorable, un-American actions. Is there any truth to the rumor that there has been a bounty put on the head of the not-so-honorable Speaker?”Way to double-down, grandpa!

  8. Majority Will says:
    December 2, 2011 at 6:37 am  (Quote)

    NH Birther Fanatic Is A Romney Backer

    (excerpt) This September, as Mitt Romney was feverishly toured the key primary state of New Hampshire shaking hands with voters and wooing endorsements, he won the support of New Hampshire state representative William Tobin. But Tobin, it turns out, is a birther’ — or at least sympathetic to the false idea that President Obama was not born in America and thus should not be on the New Hampshire ballot.

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/nh-birther-fanatic-is-a-romney-backer.php

  9. G says:
    December 2, 2011 at 9:58 am  (Quote)

    Well, that is certainly an interesting find!

    One of the things I wanted to track over this coming year, as a fascinating insight into their rationale, was which candidate various BIrthers will end up supporting…

    This is the first open Romney Birther I’ve heard of so far. Then again, it is NH, where Romney’s support numbers have been the strongest.

    Further, Mitt is such an overwhelmingly “say anything” flip-flopping chameleon candidate, that even though he hasn’t shown any indication of entertaining Birtherism, a follower could project any fantasy beliefs they want onto such a candidate who seems to lack any actual principals beyond the desire to be President.

    The final thing I would like to point out is that the GOP field is so weak and the race is still so in flux, that I would also expect to see support allegiences shift around over time…just as they have in the polls. So far, Romney’s the only one whose poll numbers have pretty much been consistent, hovering in the same low 20%’s margin threshhold throughout the year. (The only thing he’s consistent on…LOL.) Although it is a low margin and an indicator that he has trouble gaining further traction, it also so far was an indication that those that support him have stuck with him as well.

    Then again, with the important IA and NH primaries roughly a month away and Newt’s current surge dynamic…if Newt succeeds in not self-destructing long enough to do well enough in IA, that could really pop the bubble of “assumed inevitability” that is really the only thing Romney has going for him. If the group-think consensus building of various GOP circles start gravitating to Newt as the one they feel has a chance against Obama… then we might even see a peeling away of those that have stuck by Romney all this time…even in NH…

    Majority Will: NH Birther Fanatic Is A Romney Backer(excerpt) This September, as Mitt Romney was feverishly toured the key primary state of New Hampshire shaking hands with voters and wooing endorsements, he won the support of New Hampshire state representative William Tobin. But Tobin, it turns out, is a birther’ — or at least sympathetic to the false idea that President Obama was not born in America and thus should not be on the New Hampshire ballot.http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/nh-birther-fanatic-is-a-romney-backer.php

  10. Majority Will says:
    December 2, 2011 at 10:15 am  (Quote)

    G: Further, Mitt is such an overwhelmingly “say anything” flip-flopping chameleon candidate, that even though he hasn’t shown any indication of entertaining Birtherism, a follower could project any fantasy beliefs they want onto such a candidate who seems to lack any actual principals beyond the desire to be President.

    Side note:

    “Mitt Romney’s Son Talks Up Family’s Small’ $12 Million Home”

    (excerpt) The Romneys’ wealth has led to some awkward moments on the trail. Earlier this year, American Bridge captured video of Romney’s wife, Ann, telling a New Hampshire crowd about their “little place in Wolfeboro,” a reported 5,400 square foot, six bedroom mansion that also has a large boathouse and separate guest house.

    Clearly aware of the vulnerabilities created by a fortune pegged as high as $250 million, Romney has been playing up his blue collar style in 2012: flying Southwest, wearing jeans and flannel, etc. A recent e-book by Politico included this anecdote:

    “The candidate himself is a notorious cheapskate. He puts duct tape around the fingers of torn ski gloves and likes to fly JetBlue. When it’s necessary to reroute Romney, he sometimes balks; he doesn’t like the fees imposed by airlines for changed reservations.”

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/exclusive-mitt-romneys-son-talks-up-familys-small-12-million-home.php

    See. He’s a 99 percenter like everyone else.

  11. sfjeff says:
    December 2, 2011 at 12:55 pm  (Quote)

    I have no big issues with Romney- sure he is a flip flopper, but compared to pretty much everyone else in the GOP stable, except for his fellow Mormon, he appears to be relatively ethical and not a total nutjob.

    By rational Republican standards, Mitt should be their candidate- he has executive experience as a governor, business experience, he has strong family values, no scandal attached to him. But the non-rational part hangs over him- his Mormon religion, hints of liberalism as governor.

    Now compare him to Gingrich- Gingrich is smart- but ethics? Family values? Executive experience, business experience? By any ‘rational’ comparison Newt shouldn’t stand a chance.

    But he isn’t a Mormon and he didn’t make the mistake of being governor and making decisions.

  12. G says:
    December 2, 2011 at 2:42 pm  (Quote)

    If “rational Republican standards” still existed, then Jon Huntsman would be their candidate. He’s all the things you mentioned about Mitt below, without the awful sense of extreme fakeness that Romney brings…

    Huntsman at least comes across as a man of principals and not some stiff, bland shameless panderer.

    I have no idea what Romney actually stands for…his flip-flops are so blatent, so common and so frequent that I can’t think of any parallel that comes close. Newt is a horrible, blatent flip-flopper…but it seems his motive is to merely say anything to stroke his own ego.

    Mitt seems to only be about trying to tell whatever audience he is facing what it wants to hear…so I am left after 5 years of watching him desperately try to be President with absolutely NO sense at all of what he actually stands for and a completely uncomfortable feeling that he would easily be owned, bought and sold constantly by whatever special interests gave him attention or wanted to pull the strings on that particular day.

    Also – I at least get a sense of compassion and thoughtfulness when Huntsman gives answers or expresses positions. With Mitt, it comes across fake and over-rehearsed…and sometimes painfully awkward.

    Also, for a man who is so chameleonlike and practiced in his shameless pandering, you would think Mitt would have had time to figure out how to convey some charisma or be able to relate with regular people after all of these years of stumping… instead, any attempts at humor or “relatability” come across stiff, awkward, aloof or fake. And that’s the best face he projects. His only true energy seems to have come with his rallying cry that “corporations are people too!” UGH! All that conveys is more 1% elitist snobbishness and disconnect.

    Further, he seems to have quite a sense of self-entitelment and thin skin. He only comes across ok in the debates so far, because the other goofballs on stage are so bad in comparison and they barely attempt to land a glove on him. The few times he gets a little bit of probing questioning from other candidates, moderators or reporters, he seems to break down into seething and snotty peevishness right away.

    No, Mitt is an extremely weak and unlikeable candidate. He may be very intelligent and a decent family man who’s led a relatively squeeky-clean life, but in terms of presidential character – he’s nothing but a slimy used car salesman and he seems to be made of no sterner stuff than cardboard and cheap, yet overly expensive glass.

    He only comes across as a “credible” candidate because the rest of his competition is so historically and unbelievably weak. If he were facing an actual field of credible or potential candidates of even mild potential, sanity and quality, then he’d have suffered the fate of “T-Paw” Pawlenty long ago and his shameless desperation, yet still bland oatmeal offerning would have been fed to the garbage disposal of consideration long ago.

    sfjeff: By rational Republican standards, Mitt should be their candidate- he has executive experience as a governor, business experience, he has strong family values, no scandal attached to him. But the non-rational part hangs over him- his Mormon religion, hints of liberalism as governor.

  13. Scientist says:
    December 2, 2011 at 3:18 pm  (Quote)

    G: If “rational Republican standards” still existed

    The latest proof of their complete absence is that there will be a “debate” on Dec 27, sponsored by the birther-lite rag NewsMax and “moderated” by guess who? Donald Trump? I truly thought it was an Onion headline when I read it, but it’s real. To Huntsman’s credit, he has declined to attend, but so far as I know, the others (probably minus Cain, who will be out of the race by then) will dutifully troop to receive The Donald’s blessing.

    Speaking of the giant hairpeice, what would anybody with even the slightest moral compass do if they had been caught telling blatant lies, such as “I have people on the ground in Hawaii, and you won’t believe what they are finding. It’s shocking.”? And how can the media continue to pay attention to someone who tells such indisputable lies??

  14. aarrgghh says:
    December 2, 2011 at 5:15 pm  (Quote)

    G:
    Newt is a horrible, blatent flip-flopper…but it seems his motive is to merely say anything to stroke his own ego.

    newt is a demagogue, as defined by h.l. mencken: “… one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots” and as skewered by paul krugman: “… someone said he’s a stupid man’s idea of what a smart person sounds like …”

    newt’s mutant superpower is his ability to dazzle the rubes with bullpoop. but his goal is more than just stroking his own ego. newt’s simply doing what he’s been doing since his humiliating ouster from congress by his own party. his perennial campaigns for the white house are merely another means of keeping his name recognition and prestige high, which translates directly into a-list speaking fees and lobbying fees and board seats and book sales high enough to keep gingrich inc. swimming in green and the missus in diamonds. and note that cain is trying very hard to emulate that success.

  15. Majority Will says:
    December 2, 2011 at 6:11 pm  (Quote)

    aarrgghh: keep gingrich inc. swimming in green and the missus in diamonds

    The current missus for now until it’s time to trade up for one that isn’t damaged goods.

    Newt almost makes Cheney look human by comparison.

  16. sfjeff says:
    December 2, 2011 at 6:29 pm  (Quote)

    “If “rational Republican standards” still existed, then Jon Huntsman would be their candidate. He’s all the things you mentioned about Mitt below, without the awful sense of extreme fakeness that Romney brings…”

    Oh I think Huntsman is even more rationally a Republican candidate, but he is not only tainted by being a Mormon, he also speaks Mandarin, and has lived in foreign countries. We know how xenophobic Republican voters tend to be. They haven’t liked a President who knows anything about foreign affairs since Nixon.

  17. sfjeff says:
    December 2, 2011 at 6:30 pm  (Quote)

    Excuse me- George Bush the elder was more recent- and he actually knew and had experience with foreign affairs(of state)

  18. aarrgghh says:
    December 2, 2011 at 7:49 pm  (Quote)

    sfjeff:
    Huntsman is even more rationally a Republican candidate, but he is not only tainted by being a Mormon, he also speaks Mandarin, and has lived in foreign countries.

    as a former member of the usurper’s administration, huntsman’s candidacy is a complete nonstarter, which his nonexistent polling confirms.

  19. Sean says:
    December 2, 2011 at 7:50 pm  (Quote)

    sfjeff: Now compare him to Gingrich- Gingrich is smart- but ethics? Family values? Executive experience, business experience? By any rational’ comparison Newt shouldn’t stand a chance.

    In Newt’s case, none of that matters. In 2011, someone like Newt can shrug that off. He has what conservative voters want. He’s mean and nasty and can lie like no one else.

    Mitt will never recover. Newt is someone the GOP can rally behind. I knew someone would swoop in and take it from Romney, but I certainly didn’t think it would be Newt.

  20. G says:
    December 2, 2011 at 8:09 pm  (Quote)

    ROTFLMAO!!!

    If anybody still has their head in the sand in denial that the modern GOP has ceased to be a serious political party and has rotted beyond redemption, this really should be the final “Jump the Shark” harbinger to clue them in.

    Personally, as I am not a Democrat, I would prefer a healthy set of choices…but between SANE and reasonable alternatives that can work together to weed out the extreme positions and arrive at pragmatic solutions. However, those days are gone.

    I have to root for and support the Democrats, because the alternatives are just too insane and dangerous for the future of this country. There is no point any longer in even considering to support individual GOP candidates at anything beyond the county level of politics anymore…because the GOP body politic itself holds sway and the irrational cancer at the state level and above completely requires any sane candidate to either become impotent or totally subserviant to the rigid party line nonsense.

    To those still sane GOP / Conservative “loyalists” out there who are able to think beyond just gut-level angry pitchfork wielding mindless drone mentality, I ask you and implore you to do the best thing you can do for your cause and completely ABANDON the GOP. I’m not saying vote for Democrats…just if you hope to EVER have a sane party you can identify with again, you need to stop enabling and propping up this current cancer and embarrassment. You must let this sad debacle finally die off and end up on the trash heap of history, where it now belongs, so a new replacement party phoenix of ideas can rise from the ashes. The longer you prolong this, the more you not only hurt your own causes, but also the country!

    The only value the current GOP serves anymore is as a modicum of entertainment – albeit very, very dark humour of course, due to the stark stakes of what having folks like this actually in positions of power really means.

    So I’ll be marking my calendar to watch ION on Dec 27, as must-see TV purely for the sheer level of over-the-top circus tent comedy gold it represents. I’ll have a bunch of popcorn handy as well as beer…and probably some scotch & whiskey as well to numb away the the moments where between laughter, I am able to reflect upon just how sad, scary and pathetic this “reality” has become to ever come to this…

    Scientist: The latest proof of their complete absence is that there will be a “debate” on Dec 27, sponsored by the birther-lite rag NewsMax and “moderated” by guess who? Donald Trump? I truly thought it was an Onion headline when I read it, but it’s real. To Huntsman’s credit, he has declined to attend, but so far as I know, the others (probably minus Cain, who will be out of the race by then) will dutifully troop to receive The Donald’s blessing.Speaking of the giant hairpeice, what would anybody with even the slightest moral compass do if they had been caught telling blatant lies, such as “I have people on the ground in Hawaii, and you won’t believe what they are finding. It’s shocking.”? And how can the media continue to pay attention to someone who tells such indisputable lies??

  21. G says:
    December 2, 2011 at 8:12 pm  (Quote)

    I completely agree. Especially with the part I highlighted in bold.

    aarrgghh: newt is a demagogue, as defined by h.l. mencken: “… one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots” and as skewered by paul krugman: “… someone said he’s a stupid man’s idea of what a smart person sounds like …”newt’s mutant superpower is his ability to dazzle the rubes with bullpoop. but his goal is more than just stroking his own ego. newt’s simply doing what he’s been doing since his humiliating ouster from congress by his own party. his perennial campaigns for the white house are merely another means of keeping his name recognition and prestige high, which translates directly into a-list speaking fees and lobbying fees and board seats and book sales high enough to keep gingrich inc. swimming in green and the missus in diamonds. and note that cain is trying very hard to emulate that success.

  22. aarrgghh says:
    December 2, 2011 at 8:30 pm  (Quote)

    meanwhile, we can add our own dear utternutter to cain’s ever-growing list of disappointed ladies:

    If Obama wins, we will not have another 17 years. This country’s very existence sits on the edge of a knife. Cain is the one man who understands that we cannot survive this lawlessness in DC.

    The final stroke in Obama’s subversion of everything good in America will be if the only viable candidate opposing him has to give up because the nation can’t believe that somebody so different from DC – somebody who is generous with his own money but protects the taxpayers’ money – is really for real.

    We have to decide: does love exist, or is all of life Axelrod’s Chicago?

    If we decide love doesn’t exist, we will lie down with whoever wants to screw us. And our lives will be less than they could be.

    oh dear, i’m all verklempt. talk amongst yourselves …

  23. G says:
    December 2, 2011 at 8:45 pm  (Quote)

    There is some definite sad truth in that, that I think some folks are too naive to realize or accept – that a certain segment of these knuckle-dragging voters just want an angry and caustic candidate and they like Newt more and more every time they hear him act like a petulant and entitlled egomanic and snipe at the debate moderators, chastise the media and lob viscious anti-Obama slanders.

    Face it, this ugly segment of the population just wants a brash attack dog that they feel is on their side. That is their primary attachment to him and the effect of that “appeal” started to show once the debate schedule increased in late summer/early fall.

    Unlike the previous “not Romney” candidate bubbles we’ve seen, formally left-for-dead Newt’s campaign was actually seeing a slow and steady rise behind the scenes since late summer, even while the other bubble cycles were happening. Particularly in Florida for some reason… and was even breaking the 10% barrier by early Oct in places such as MO, GA (no surprise, a “home state”), CT, NC, MT, WV and NE.

    Sean: In Newt’s case, none of that matters. In 2011, someone like Newt can shrug that off. He has what conservative voters want. He’s mean and nasty and can lie like no one else.

  24. G says:
    December 2, 2011 at 10:15 pm  (Quote)

    Well, his polling (and even potential support) isn’t really as “non-existent” as the mass-media storyline goes. Actually, same can be said about Ron Paul’s number & support trend…but that’s a whole different story and a whole different situation, as the “media” and establishment powers actually like Huntsman, but Ron Paul is a pariah to them.

    But back to Huntsman and 3 points about him.

    1. Of the 8 main candidates in the GOP hunt, he’s the only one who can completely bomb the Iowa caucus and not have it negatively impact his chances in the next contest – NH – which is really his “stand”. In NH, he will either go down like Custer, or muster just enough support (at least 10%+) to soldier onto the NV & FL contests, where he would also need to rate enough of an impact there to continue past that… (SC really doesn’t “count” for him, similar to IA). But what his participation here really gets to is his actual role in this race…

    2. He’s the least likely to “win” the GOP contest, simply because of what the GOP has become. Beyond the whole issue that some religious conservatives have with Mormonism, things like what aarrgghh mentioned as well as his positions being too “sane” and “moderate” for what has become the GOP base, make him pretty much non-viable to obtain sufficient support levels to ever get their nomination. So the role here in 2012 is really as potential “spoiler” for Romney’s chances.

    He’s not the “anti-Romney” in the same way the others are – he’s the “Romney alternative” for those who would prefer a GOP candidate they think is “sane” and could actually compete against Obama.

    As Romeny’s inevitability has been showing “cracks”, some of his potential support *IS* currently giving Huntsman a second look…and there has been a noticeable uptick in Huntsman’s numbers in certain quarters which reflects that. That growth trend really mainly impacts 2 things – if Huntsman can continue to “participate” beyond NH and how much his candidacy wounds and slows Romney down.

    3. Huntsman’s 2012 role as a “spoiler” now has a possibility of living on past the GOP contest. There are several 3rd party movements starting to stir up and trying to get into the 2012 game. Huntsman has some appeal to some of them. Just today, news came out that a former NJ governor (R), was trying to woo Huntsman for a 3rd-party bid…and Huntsman refused to completely rule it out…

    http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/12/02/huntsman_urged_to_make_third_party_bid.html

    aarrgghh: as a former member of the usurper’s administration, huntsman’s candidacy is a complete nonstarter, which his nonexistent polling confirms.

  25. Arthur says:
    December 2, 2011 at 10:23 pm  (Quote)

    aarrgghh: meanwhile, we can add our own dear utternutter to cain’s ever-growing list of disappointed ladies:oh dear, i’m all verklempt. talk amongst yourselves …

    Butteredbun’s comment was priceless! Doesn’t she know that love means never having to tell your wife “Sorry!”

  26. G says:
    December 2, 2011 at 10:39 pm  (Quote)

    For the purposes of the GOP primaries, I completely agree. For winning over a sufficient vote margin in a general election contest…that is a completely different matter. The mean, nasty and blatent lies only work for the portion of the GOP “base” that will be motivated to back him (some will be completely turned off by him, regardless if he is the nominee or not…he’s just that caustic). Some gullible unaffiliated low-info voters or far-right independents might tag along, depending on how slick they can be spun without similarly being sufficiently exposed to all his baggage and hypocricy… (a difficult feat to pull off, for sure)

    But the left will similarly be galvanized against such an ugly and monsterous choice…and the rest of the unaffliated middle will either be similarly horrified or just plain turned off by him.

    Sean: In Newt’s case, none of that matters. In 2011, someone like Newt can shrug that off. He has what conservative voters want. He’s mean and nasty and can lie like no one else.

    In this current weak field… I’m not so sure that the traditional sense of what would constitute a “mortal wound” to one’s campaign applies… Romney’s main “appeal” point for the GOP crown has really been all about him being the inevitable candidate. Even if that bubble is completely burst, he still has the money, organization and desperation motivation to try to limp along and hope to gain enough delegates to eek it out by the end and hope that his opponent(s) self-destruct and he can get back in.

    So the end result is very much up in the air. What I think is likely, regardless is that the longer this goes on, Romeny, Newt or whoever is increasingly laid bare to the public and becomes weaker – NOT stronger – to a general audience as a result. Unlike the 2008 Democratic primaries, “battle hardening” them won’t help, because what we’re dealing with here is really extremely weak and poor candidates, each with multiple and sizeable flaws that are only rendered more visible and glaring with continued exposure.

    What I think Romeny will never recover, regardless if he pulls off the GOP nomination or not, is his “appeal” for a general election audience. It will only trend downwards. Beyond all of his obvious flip-flops and flaws, the very fact that he’s had such a hard time even garnishing support amongst such weak competition only exposes himself as an extremely weak and flimsy candidate…

    I hate to disappoint the ODS crowd and the overall GOP, but simply being the anti-Obama in the race is not enough to pull of a win, regardless of the weakness of the economy. Even if unaffilated folks are unhappy with the economy, the risk for its future is still greater with an untested and weak alternative that provides no viable solutions. Therefore, it is still a safer and more conservative bet to just stick with the incumbent, even if you are unhappy about it.

    Sean: Mitt will never recover. Newt is someone the GOP can rally behind. I knew someone would swoop in and take it from Romney, but I certainly didn’t think it would be Newt.

  27. G says:
    December 2, 2011 at 10:42 pm  (Quote)

    Oy vey! All I can do is roll my eyes, shake my head and laugh…

    aarrgghh: meanwhile, we can add our own dear utternutter to cain’s ever-growing list of disappointed ladies:oh dear, i’m all verklempt. talk amongst yourselves …

  28. G says:
    December 2, 2011 at 10:51 pm  (Quote)

    It will be interesting to see if Cain’s ego wins out and he stays in the race or if he ends up dropping out tomorrow – which truly would be a major impact to the current dynamic of the race.

    If he drops out, I wonder how his ardent supporters will take it… particularly the feverently unstable ones, such as Butter…

    Arthur: Butteredbun’s comment was priceless! Doesn’t she know that love means never having to tell your wife “Sorry!”

  29. Sean says:
    December 2, 2011 at 10:59 pm  (Quote)

    G: For the purposes of the GOP primaries, I completely agree. For winning over a sufficient vote margin in a general election contest…that is a completely different matter. The mean, nasty and blatent lies only work for the portion of the GOP “base” that will be motivated to back him (some will be completely turned off by him, regardless if he is the nominee or not…he’s just that caustic). Some gullible unaffiliated low-info voters or far-right independents might tag along, depending on how slick they can be spun without similarly being sufficiently exposed to all his baggage and hypocricy… (a difficult feat to pull off, for sure)

    But the left will similarly be galvanized against such an ugly and monsterous choice…and the rest of the unaffliated middle will either be similarly horrified or just plain turned off by him.

    The general election is a different story. Anything can happen. The GOP learn from past strategic mistakes and invent new ones. We don’t know what they have in their bag of tricks, but I’m willing to bet voter suppression is one of them. DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE NEWT. He seems to have political super powers like his immunity to hypocrisy and ability to dodge a difficult question. Newt’s ability to lie is second to none.

  30. G says:
    December 2, 2011 at 11:42 pm  (Quote)

    Trust me Sean, I agree with your points. I definitely do not underestimate the GOP, the untraceable moneyed SuperPACs, nor *any* of the candidates – particularly a devious and shameless liar and slime such as Newt.

    However, Newt is totally a Jeckyl/Hyde unstable personality as well. He has moments of coming off calm and professorial and then can flip into full on irresponsible and cranky bomb-thrower at any moment.

    His type of personality and “charisma” has a ceiling in its appeal. He easily repulses and turns off just as many people as he impresses and charms. He shows no ability to improve upon that dynamic over the course of his life, so I expect it to continue and therefore he’ll be limited in how much he can polish his own turds or broaden his own appeal. For every avid supporter he gains, he’s likely created someone equally avid to ensure he doesn’t get elected. Such is the nature of Newt.

    All I’m saying is whoever the GOP candidate is, they will have their work cut out for them too…as just about everything in their past and their own awful words will and should be used against them in a general.

    I expect that we’ll have a pretty brutal negative attack ad campaign on both sides, regardless – as the GOP supporters will be desperate to do anything they can to attack Obama and as the GOP candidates are themselves and endless source of walking talking attack ad material.

    Voter suppression types of bills and efforts are already being pushed since 2010’s elections at an alarming rate in many of the states. That is a huge concern. As is unlimited money. As is, to a lesser extent, some of the redistricting map attempts.

    2012 is definitely going to be a huge battle for both sides. That being said, the GOP presidential candidates are simply their own worst enemies and it will be very hard and require lots of continuous effort to gloss over and spin their glaring flaws away, without those concerns seeping through sufficiently into the general election populace’s consciousness.

    On that note – one of the most damaging impressions a candidate or office holder can face is becoming a Caricature by pop culture comedians. Clever quips and character portrayals by late night comedians or SNL can have huge staying power in the conscious of the populace and so far, the GOP candidates have been an endless source of fodder for these comedy routines. Do not underestimate the impact that will continue to have.

    Sean: The general election is a different story. Anything can happen. The GOP learn from past strategic mistakes and invent new ones. We don’t know what they have in their bag of tricks, but I’m willing to bet voter suppression is one of them. DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE NEWT. He seems to have political super powers like his immunity to hypocrisy and ability to dodge a difficult question. Newt’s ability to lie is second to none.

  31. Majority Will says:
    December 8, 2011 at 9:20 pm  (Quote)

    More outrage:

    Accornero & friends have again embarrassed rational citizens

    http://www.laconiadailysun.com/story/e-scott-cracraft-12-7

  32. Arthur says:
    December 8, 2011 at 9:35 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will: More outrage:Accornero & friends have again embarrassed rational citizenshttp://www.laconiadailysun.com/story/e-scott-cracraft-12-7

    Doesn’t Accornero run the New Hampshire franchise of The Jerk Store?

  33. Majority Will says:
    December 8, 2011 at 9:45 pm  (Quote)

    Arthur: Doesn’t Accornero run the New Hampshire franchise of The Jerk Store?

    Selling sheets, wood planks and rope seems more his style.

  34. Arthur says:
    December 8, 2011 at 10:42 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will: Selling sheets, wood planks and rope seems more his style.

    Don’t forget the kerosene!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.