Erick Erickson's Blog, page 88
December 6, 2011
Nancy Pelosi and David Axelrod Open Their Mouths and We Make It Too Complex
I don't want to offend any of my friends or colleagues, all of whom I have a great deal of respect for, who are positing various theories on why Nancy Pelosi or David Axelrod are saying things about Romney or Newt.
Everyone seems intend on making it a conspiracy or about reverse psychology or something.
I don't see it that way. I am perfectly happy to admit I could be wrong, but I don't see it that way. I do not think the Democrats are intentionally trying to bait us into picking their preferred candidate by attacking that candidate now and I do not think Nancy Pelosi is bashing Newt with gnostic knowledge of prior bad deeds because she fears him as the nominee.
For starters, Republicans have largely concluded that America's Mother-In-Law is a bit daft. Consistency requires that we not now view her as machiavellian enough to suddenly angle the GOP nomination in Newt's favor or let slip some level of fear about him by attacking him.
The simple answer seems to me to be the right one — Nancy Pelosi just can't help but run her mouth on stuff like that. It also fits a long recurring pattern about Nancy Pelosi mouthing off about various matters when asked by reporters. For the first time this year she finds herself the center of attention. Additionally, because the events must be kept confidential and because the events are long forgotten, raising it now gives it time to start percolating with the press.
As for the Democrats continuing to bash Mitt Romney above all others, I really and truly do not think it means they are scared of Romney. I really and truly do not believe it means that they really want Mitt Romney as the nominee and think bashing him will make the GOP support him. If anything, that sure has not worked yet.
No, I think again the simple answer is the right answer. The Democrats are convinced Romney is the nominee and they are going to go on now and define him, consistent with how his Republicans rivals are defining him, so when he gets to the general they can shift their attacks on him and any backtrack will be viewed through the prism of a known flip-flopper.
It is largely what the GOP did to John Kerry in 2004.
I am largely tired of the conspiracy theories that the Democrats took out Herman Cain or what not. No they didn't.
The Democrats of 2011/2012 are the most arrogant they have ever been. They absolutely are convinced they will be able to win re-election next year. They learned nothing from 2010 and see the Occupy crowd as a superior intellectual match to the tea party movement. They have no reason to try to pick or kill any Republican nominee. They think none of them can beat Obama.
And that, by the way, is precisely why the GOP will beat Barack Obama in 2012.
Will Iowa Be the GOP's Version of Gephardt vs. Dean?
Mitt Romney has to win New Hampshire. His own campaign has set those expectations. If he does not win New Hampshire it is game over for Mitt.
Unfortunately for Mitt Romney, expectations have been set so high for him in New Hampshire, a win might not be enough if the win is close. And right now Newt Gingrich is surging in New Hampshire. He has gone up dramatically now within 14 points of Romney. Likewise, Huntsman is going up too. Both are cutting into the numbers of other candidates, including MItt Romney.
If Newt Gingrich does as polls are suggesting in Iowa — a big win — he will have big momentum going into New Hampshire, but not just New Hampshire, South Carolina too. Winning two out of the first three races and then going to Florida where Newt is also ahead will pretty much destroy the inevitability argument Romney has had.
In other words, Romney needs to stop Gingrich in Iowa. But about the only way to do that with one month to go is to unleash hell on Gingrich. That brings us to Dick Gephardt and Howard Dean.
In 2004, Dean was surging and Gephardt had Iowa as a must win state. They went nuclear on each other, wiping each other out in Iowa. It opened the door to John Kerry's campaign, which everyone had written off for dead and also John Edwards. It was a game changer that could happen again.
The real irony here for Romney is that throughout the campaign season, all the candidates have been fighting each other while Romney has stayed safely above the fray letting the others either implode or slay each other. Now he is in the position of having to get his hands dirty against Gingrich while all the other candidates can just sit back and fight for the crumbs.
Morning Briefing for December 6, 2011
RedState Morning Briefing
December 6, 2011
Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.
1. Will Iowa Be the GOP's Version of Gephardt vs. Dean?
2. Nancy Pelosi and David Axelrod Open Their Mouths and We Make It Too Complex
3. Anti-Pipeline Dave Heineman Should Not Run for Senate in Nebraska
———————————————————————-
1. Will Iowa Be the GOP's Version of Gephardt vs. Dean?
Mitt Romney has to win New Hampshire. His own campaign has set those expectations. If he does not win New Hampshire it is game over for Mitt.
Unfortunately for Mitt Romney, expectations have been set so high for him in New Hampshire, a win might not be enough if the win is close. And right now Newt Gingrich is surging in New Hampshire. He has gone up dramatically now within 14 points of Romney. Likewise, Huntsman is going up too. Both are cutting into the numbers of other candidates, including MItt Romney.
If Newt Gingrich does as polls are suggesting in Iowa — a big win — he will have big momentum going into New Hampshire, but not just New Hampshire, South Carolina too. Winning two out of the first three races and then going to Florida where Newt is also ahead will pretty much destroy the inevitability argument Romney has had.
In other words, Romney needs to stop Gingrich in Iowa. But about the only way to do that with one month to go is to unleash hell on Gingrich. That brings us to Dick Gephardt and Howard Dean.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
2. Nancy Pelosi and David Axelrod Open Their Mouths and We Make It Too Complex
I don't want to offend any of my friends or colleagues, all of whom I have a great deal of respect for, who are positing various theories on why Nancy Pelosi or David Axelrod are saying things about Romney or Newt.
Everyone seems intend on making it a conspiracy or about reverse psychology or something.
I don't see it that way. I am perfectly happy to admit I could be wrong, but I don't see it that way. I do not think the Democrats are intentionally trying to bait us into picking their preferred candidate by attacking that candidate now and I do not think Nancy Pelosi is bashing Newt with gnostic knowledge of prior bad deeds because she fears him as the nominee.
For starters, Republicans have largely concluded that America's Mother-In-Law is a bit daft. Consistency requires that we not now view her as machiavellian enough to suddenly angle the GOP nomination in Newt's favor or let slip some level of fear about him by attacking him.
The simple answer seems to me to be the right one — Nancy Pelosi just can't help but run her mouth on stuff like that. It also fits a long recurring pattern about Nancy Pelosi mouthing off about various matters when asked by reporters. For the first time this year she finds herself the center of attention. Additionally, because the events must be kept confidential and because the events are long forgotten, raising it now gives it time to start percolating with the press.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
3. Anti-Pipeline Dave Heineman Should Not Run for Senate in Nebraska
One of the biggest political and policy winners for Republicans is their strong support for expeditious approval of the Keystone Pipeline. Their unified support for this propitious project has provided voters with a sharp contrast to Obama's casual disregard for private-sector job creation and cheap energy for consumers. Hence, it is a no-brainer that the pipeline issue should be used as a rallying cry for all Republicans running for elected office in 2012.
In that vein, Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman would be wise to remain in Lincoln, and discard any aspirations to run for Senate.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
December 5, 2011
Newt Gingrich Has a New Ad
When I have written repeatedly that the GOP candidates need to capture an optimist feeling about a positive future for the country, this is exactly what I'm talking about:
Evolving Patterns of Browser Usage
Just out of curiosity, I thought I'd look at RedState users' browsers over the past three years. Like with so many other sites, even here at RedState we can see the decline in the Blackberry as a browser. It was only 1% of our traffic in 2009, but is just about at zero now. Also, Safari has become huge. Of all our mobile traffic, Safari is absolutely dominant.
The most notable bit of information is the continued collapse of Internet Explorer market share, a trend that has been occurring on this site since we began keeping analytical data going back to 2005.
Donald Trump's Time to Get Tough
Our sister company within the Eagle Publishing, Inc. family, Regnery Publishing, has released a new book by Donald Trump. It comes out this morning.
The book is Time to Get Tough: Making America #1 Again. In it, Trump goes on the warpath against the Obama Administration and pretty much everyone he thinks is dragging the country down.
The Politico notes one of the coolest bits of the book:
Trump wraps the book with an afterward on "The Press and the Presidency," in which he lambastes by name reporters he felt were dishonest, recaps some of the more notable moments of his exploratory effort and evaluates the GOP hopefuls who had come to meet with him prior to the book going to press.
Trump also takes some create for Lady Gaga's success. That's unfortunate. Heh.
In any event, there are lots of write ups around the web on the book. I haven't had a chance to read it yet, but I did want to tip the hat to Regnery for getting the Donald to write this book.
For more on the book you can check out the Politico story linked above or the Wall Street Journal or even USA Today.
Morning Briefing for December 5, 2011
RedState Morning Briefing
December 5, 2011
Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.
1. We Need Employment Benefits, Not Another Permanent Welfare Program
2. Rick Perry's Second Time At Bat
3. Friday's Fast & Furious Fallout: Fatal Falsehoods From Feds?
4. In Defense of a Democrat
5. TDU's New $150,000 Club Shows Teamster Bosses Still Doing Well Despite Recessionn
6. Help Halt the NLRB's Assault On America's Union-Free Workplace
———————————————————————-
1. We Need Employment Benefits, Not Another Permanent Welfare Program
Here we go again. After a full year of grandstanding against another extension of unemployment benefits, some Republicans are ready to cave.
If you ever wondered why it is so hard to cut spending, and more importantly, to downsize government, look no further than the fight over extending unemployment benefits.
Despite a year full of political parlance concerning budget austerity, many have forgotten that we have only cut $6.67 billion from the FY 2011 $1.049 trillion discretionary budget authority. Even this miniscule cut might be cancelled out by up to $11 billion in emergency disaster spending, which is not subject to the spending caps. Moreover, after just one year of cuts, discretionary spending will steadily rise during each subsequent year, albeit at a slower rate than originally proposed by Obama.
But there is a more salient observation that must be publicized. These miniscule cuts, including the faux baseline cuts, are only applied to 28% of the budget – the part that is funded through the congressional appropriations process. The other parts of the budget are virtually unscathed, even from baseline cuts. To that end, even as we cut a few billion from baseline discretionary spending, we will still add hundreds of billions more in mandatory spending for each subsequent year.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
2. Rick Perry's Second Time At Bat
Saturday night on Fox News' candidate forum, Governor MItt Romney defaulted to quoting David Brooks from the New York Times. There's why Herman Cain's supporters will be looking at Gingrich and Perry.
In fact, a number of Cain's Iowa staff moved to Rick Perry after Cain's campaign suspension on Saturday.
Rick Perry will get another look. He will get another look because while the grassroots and Republican voters in general are moving to Gingrich, conservative leaders around the country are rapidly running up their watch towers to light fires against Gingrich. They remember him from the 90?s and they don't trust him.
Rick Perry is going to get a second look. Jon Huntsman made the fatal mistake of branding himself too moderate. He'll get a look if people don't like what they see in Rick Perry.
This now raises a huge red flag: is Rick Perry ready for his second chance?
Please click here for the rest of the post.
3. Friday's Fast & Furious Fallout: Fatal Falsehoods From Feds?
To give a quick background: Operation Fast & Furious, of course, was an incredibly botched government program where federal law enforcement agencies handed over firearms willy-nilly to Mexican narco-terrorists and then lost track of the weapons… no, really, that's what they did, and the next person who comes up with a legitimate and/or sane reason for them doing that will be the first. As you might imagine, Congressional watchdogs – Republican ones; the Democrats are largely hiding from this one – are a bit perturbed about this, not least because it turns out that the Justice Department gave out patently false information when asked about it the first time. Which is to say, DoJ denied that it handed over firearms willy-nilly to Mexican narco-terrorists and then lost track of the weapons.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
4. In Defense of a Democrat
In its never-ending quest to stop the peril this country faces from natural gas, the New York Times takes on Rep. Dan Boren, the sole Democrat in Oklahoma's congressional delegation. He co-chairs the House Natural Gas Caucus and serves as a member of the House Natural Resources Committee. As a representative of the #3 gas-producing state, it's not surprising that his voting record is decidedly pro-industry, and specifically, pro-fracking. (Boren, one of the more conservative Democrats in the House, has announced that he will not be seeking reelection in 2012.)
Of course, the Times tries to portray the Congressman's voting record as corrupt, since he has income from a (silent) interest in a family enterprise (on the order of $100K/year). Added to that, his father, former U.S. Sen. David Boren (D-OK) receives compensation for his service on the board of a successful oil company. (David Boren, as the Times chooses not to report, is president of the University of Oklahoma since 1994, and a member of several corporate boards.)
Please click here for the rest of the post.
5. TDU's New $150,000 Club Shows Teamster Bosses Still Doing Well Despite Recessionn
Every year, the Teamsters for a Democratic Union compiles the list of Teamster bosses earning six-figure salaries.
The 2011 $150,000 Club was released on Friday and shows, unlike many of their members who have suffered job and pay cuts, Teamster bosses are still doing quite well for themselves.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
6. Help Halt the NLRB's Assault On America's Union-Free Workplace
Last week's NLRB vote to give unions the ability to ambush union-free workers and the companies that employ them, as well as to deny due process on bargaining unit issues, is only the latest in a long line of attacks on America's union-free workforce by the union extremists controlling Barack Obama's National Labor Relations Board.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
December 4, 2011
Your non-political post of the day: The BCS Championship
Rick Perry's Second Time At Bat
Last night on Fox News' candidate forum, Governor MItt Romney defaulted to quoting David Brooks from the New York Times. There's why Herman Cain's supporters will be looking at Gingrich and Perry.
In fact, last night a number of Cain's Iowa staff moved to Rick Perry.
Rick Perry will get another look. He will get another look because while the grassroots and Republican voters in general are moving to Gingrich, conservative leaders around the country are rapidly running up their watch towers to light fires against Gingrich. They remember him from the 90′s and they don't trust him.
Rick Perry is going to get a second look. Jon Huntsman made the fatal mistake of branding himself too moderate. He'll get a look if people don't like what they see in Rick Perry.
This now raises a huge red flag: is Rick Perry ready for his second chance?
I'm not sure Perry is ready. His debate performances have steadily improved. But there is a real problem for Perry. He needs to run a really flawless race and his campaign needs to send out some strong signals that they get it and will perform.
Rightly or, I hope, wrongly, I get the impression they still think it is their race. I think they still think they are biding their time. I think they still think they are fighting Kay Bailey Hutchison. I think if they don't wake up soon and shake up, they are toast.
Rick Perry is going to get a second look. He is the most consistent conservative in the race. In fact, this should be his race to lose given his positioning.
I hope his campaign realizes just how close they are to losing it.
Oh, and if Perry does lose, he is going to be in for a rude awakening in Texas. Look what happened when people realized Mitt Romney was vulnerable. The pile on has come swiftly.
If Rick Perry loses and goes back to Texas as its Governor, the man who has stood dominant in Texas for a decade will be seen as a loser for the first time — and not just a loser, but a fool too. The pile on against a Governor who is constitutionally weak, but made strong through a decade of appointments, will be swift.
Is Rick Perry ready to win? If not, the nomination won't be all he loses. He'll lose Texas too.
His campaign staff better get a clue pretty damn quick.
December 3, 2011
Herman Cain's Campaign Suspended
By suspending his campaign instead of quitting his campaign, Herman can still get federal matching funds in 2012.
But the campaign is over. Even had it continued, it was over.
I had thought and expected that Cain would continue until Iowa. He had enough money. Dropping out after losing in Iowa would have distracted from the present issues.
Dropping out now will be viewed by a great many as an admission against interests that Herman Cain did have a 13 year affair.
But let's be real clear here. Herman Cain did not get wiped out by an affair or allegations of sexual harassment, frivolous or otherwise. He got wiped out because those allegations threw him off his game and then he kept stumbling through attacks on his 999 plan, his foreign policy issues, and his campaign staff generally beclowning themselves with allegations, retracted allegations, and retracted retractions of allegations, etc.
A lot of people will see this as a sign that amateurs cannot run for office. Perhaps. I actually see it more as another failure of the professional political class. I'll have more thoughts on that later.
In any event, Cain is out. The size of the debates will suddenly become more manageable. Most of Cain's support will go to Gingrich. Some will go back to Rick Perry. And soon Cain will be forgotten.
It is a sad ending for a good man.
Erick Erickson's Blog
- Erick Erickson's profile
- 12 followers
