Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) talked on Friday to National Review, a leading conservative publication, and fielded a pretty straightforward question, "So, why Romney?"
Rubio responded with a lengthy, 325-word answer, which spanned 16 sentences. And in that 325-word, 16-sentence response, the high-profile senator, who may very well end up as his party's vice presidential nominee, managed to say exactly zero nice things about Mitt Romney.
I'm being entirely literal. Rubio was asked, "So, why Romney?" and he responded by talking at length about how awful he thinks President Obama is and how bad it would be for the Republican Party to have an extended floor fight at the convention. The closest thing to a compliment was when Rubio said, "Romney is winning the primary fair and square."
But that's not praise, and it's certainly not an explanation for why one person wants another person to be president of the United States.
In fairness to Rubio, when pressed further by National Review, the senator came up with a couple of positive things to say about Romney, but remember, that took prompting -- and this is one of Romney's most notable supporters and potential running mates.
With this in mind, Jon Stewart had a segment last night, summarizing the Republican Party's awkward and underwhelming embrace of their near-certain presidential nominee.
"It's like a proposal on a football scoreboard reading, 'Look, Deborah, we both know we're not each other's first choice, but I don't want to pay for another month of e-harmony and you're a worthy companion, so c'mon, settle for me.'"
We had a segment on Friday along similar lines, noting that even the Romney campaign's own surrogates don't seem to like, or even agree with, their own candidate.
This isn't altogether normal, and winning campaigns generally thrive because a party actually likes its presidential nominee, rather than just finding the other party's candidate repulsive. But Romney appears to be little more than an uninspiring placeholder, filling a blank slot on a ballot.
In other words, in 2008, Democrats backed Obama because they liked Obama. In 2012, Republicans are backing Romney because they hate Obama.
Leave a Comment:
Well...the Republicans would have a hard time changing their 'meme' after 3.5 years of whining and sniveling about the President. They haven't come up with any true policies, they don't do their job in Congress...the only thing they DO is attack, attack, attack.
Republicans are backing Romney because they have no choice. Losers can't be choosers...
I disagree. They have a choice. They could go with someone who personifies the party base's philosophies.
We would then have debates about whether the country wants to move in the moderately progressive direction, or go toward the extreme right.
The problem Republicans have is that they know, deep down inside, how unpopular their real agenda is. They're afraid to have the debate, so they use some excuse like "electability," hold their noses, and go with someone like Romney.
If Republicans truly believe what they say, they would pick Santorum or some other candidate more in line with their way of thinking and not worry about whether or not they would lose the election.
I can tell a lot about someones' character by asking myself if I would trust this person to babysit my children or watch over my Gramma for a while. Remember his dog? He didn't do such a good job taking care of his dog.....how will he do looking after The people who depend on him each day? From what I can tell he does a lot of lieing and he refuses to answer questions. I think he also may believe in the old adage "You may speak only if you are being spoken to".
Who is this Schimdt guy (Yes, I saw who he is..) and what is up with the vocals, demeanor, ambiance? I guess that's what happens when you run the McLame/Painlin ticket.. And as usual, Rachel re-overstates (?) the obvious.. Love the blog, can't watch the show.. I'll save my eyes and snickering for Jon Stewart.
Romney was the next guy in line. I think it is time to call it: Santorum has won "next guy in line status" for the 2016 GOP Presidential Primary.
I think you're unfortunately correct about Santorum in 2016. Unless Romney wins this year, oy oy oy! If Obama wins a second term, it'll drive the GOP to mad frothing in more ways than one.
And in 2004 Democrats voted for John Kerry because he wasn't George Bush.
C'mon. Admit it. No one was excited about John Kerry, he was simply the alternative to a man ill equipped to lead, suffering from embarrassing language skills, and a child-like sense of ethics.
Ya know, Marco Rubio might look like a guy that a pretty little Republican gal might think is "really cute" and maybe even have a day-dream about...
You know, in a kinda' 60's "Mystery Date" scenario...
But I'm betting they wouldn't even date him in a day-dream about him without using contraception...
I wonder if Mitty knows that?
Someone asked the father of the bride why she's marrying "Spike".
She's pregnant, stupid. Don't make me SAY it.