Sunday, January 08, 2012

Burnett is Correct

Erin Burnett of CNN breaks it down..

Conservatives may not like the way she blasphemes the Gipper with a comparison to Obama but she's correct--if the the unemployment rate falls even a little he'll probably be reelected. And that will occur with no small help from the Erin Burnetts of the media, standing by ready to turn any minor trend into another morning in America (that shining city on a hill).

Such will especially be true if the GOP contender is Romney since Mitt's entire platform is based on fixing the economy.  He's not a strong conservative, hasn't talked as much about debt as the others, and isn't particularly liked by the Tea Party (who faces a conflict in supporting him). Maybe that's why Donna Brazille claimed he was the Dems' candidate of choice. They know if the economy gets better Mitt will be left to twist in the breeze of all his former flip-flops while explaining why only Massachusetts residents deserve Obamneycare.


Yes I know, Romney won and won big. But in coming in second with over 20 percent Ron Paul's performance has to be scored as a victory. This is the guy everybody ignores! Some are saying he was the beneficiary of an 'operation chaos' like effort by liberal-leaning indies and dems to poison the well, but I don't think that accounted for most of his numbers. A lot of conservatives are simply not satisfied and they like Paul's austerity, at least to some degree. Paul's post-election speech got off to a roaring start--certainly more passionate than Romneybott's--with proclamations about saving liberty (good stuff) but true to his enigma he soon veered off into the fiat currency zone and lost me. But he won't lose his rapid supporters.

And that begs a question--does Paul and his increasing following portend any trouble for Mitt? I think it's sizable enough that if he jumped to a third party run he could scuttle the GOP's chances against Obama, so perhaps he might want something. Is it possible Romney would choose a guy like Paul as a VP? Or even Paul's son Rand? That might turn off some indies but how many? As mentioned, a lot will go for Paul if he decides to bail. As to favorables, Romney should do well with women, better than Paul, but so does Obama. If Romney picks a woman we'll see the same gang tackle as with Palin, especially if the woman is more conservative. If he picks a less conservative woman the Tea Party won't like it. They'd rather see Rand Paul. If he picks someone vanilla like Pawlenty they may put half of America to sleep before election day. Something to think about, at least. Paul has so far been awfully nice to Mitt.


Debbie said...

We're told that Romney is the only one who can beat Obama, that Obama doesn't want to run against him. Could be that Obama DOES want to run, that's why they prop up Romney so much

Right Truth

A.C. McCloud said...

Yes, it could. But I can't see any other candidate beating Obama.

Some have mentioned how nice Paul is being to Romney, btw. Wonder if either would ever consider running together on a ticket?

LASunsett said...

I think Gingrich would stomp Obama in the debates, which is how many people make their decisions on who to vote for these days. I don't think Romney's shameless self-promotion will fare well against Obama's attack machine. But let's face it, it's not the party of Reagan anymore and this is what we are going to be stuck with.

I think the Obama camp, DNC, MSM, and the wealthy establishment Republicans have planted the seeds that Romney is the only one who can beat Obama. He'll get nominated by a plurality and yes, the TEA Party will be forced to settle, rather than let Obama be re-elected.

I don't like Romney, I think he's a snake in the grass, and he is as two-faced as they come. But he is still better than Obama and I am prepared to hold my nose as I vote, once again.

A.C. McCloud said...

That's why I think Romney's VP pick might be the most important in our lifetime. If he picks another RINO a lot of people might stay home.