A Powerful Metaphor
Mitt Romney has a new book called “No Apology.” I was not aware that people were demanding apologies from Mitt Romney, but apparently he will not give them the satisfaction.
I first see the Mitt Romney book in the “New Releases” section with all the other new books that have grand hopes of gracing the New York Times best-seller list. Later, I see “No Apology” again … in the bargain books section. Here it is selling for $5.98. This feels like some sort of grand mistake, but apparently it is not because there are a half dozen there, all marked down. It is, the first straight to bargain section book I can ever remember.
Maybe the title refers to the publisher’s official stance about people who paid full price.
His trip to the proverbial remainder table of the 2012 GOP primary figures to be equally instantaneous.
It is not, in fact, a new book. I know this because at some point I came across a rather humorous blog post making the point that Mitt, whose firmly held positions are in any case rather somewhat flexible, in the sense that water is somewhat wet, had made significant changes to the book for the new edition, so as to better conform to Teabagger rhetoric. Not a new chapter or anything – actually changing the previous text of his book, in good ‘ol “we have always been at war with Eastasia” fashion.
Anyway, good to hear it’s not selling.
Maybe you’re seeing the revised copy. He rewrote a few sections for some reason.
Likely, what’s going on is that the revised version is in “new arrivals,” and the old version is on the remainder table. That’s not as funny, though, and poor Mitt richly deserves to be laughed at, in a rueful sort of way.
Is this the political equivalent of direct-to-video?
I think it is more “shot-on-videotape,” with all that that phrase historically implied.
Blair Witch 3: The Mittening
…for the win.
It’s never going to happen for Mittens, for mostly the same reasons it didn’t happen last time, but I take no joy in that. Too many people are trying to size up the 2012 race based on the strength of the opposition, rather than on the weaknesses of the incumbent, and this worries me a good deal.
“No Apology.”
The only thing I feel confident about right now, knowing Mitt Romney, is that he is going to start issuing apologies in a year or two.
I immediately got hung up on the Mystery of the Bargain Bird Books, though I think it is easily solved: there are a few field guides among which serious birders generally choose, depending largely on personal taste. Other guides, published by hopefuls, quickly end up on the bargain shelves. The other thing driving bird books to the bargain shelf is the proliferation of online databases and ebooks, although I still don’t know of one that is as easy or quick to search as a good paper field guide.
I expect him to apologize sometime next week.
Well, he should at leas apologize to his dog…
Poor Mitt.
The party’s gonna strap him to the roof and let someone else drive.
I am actually pretty sure that – if there is no surprise candidate until easter or so -Romney is the candidate. He has name recognition, a machine, money, establishment support. The rest of the field is even weaker and most stronger candidates won’t run.
The fact that a lot of political junkies thinks he is a flip-flopper of unusual magnitude is neither here nor there.
The media who informs the voters who are not political junkies will keep quit on his weather vane qualities. After all he is exactly the plutocrat they like. It will be successful businessman here and bipartisan governor there. And did you know he rescued the Salt Lake olympics?
You just wait.
I am actually pretty sure that – if there is no surprise candidate until easter or so -Romney is the candidate. He has name recognition, a machine, money, establishment support. The rest of the field is even weaker and most stronger candidates won’t run.
I’ve said it before, and I will keep saying it – while Mittens is an awful, awful person, he is the least awful person the Republicans can possibly nominate. Since there is always a chance a Republican can win, I hope Mitt does get the nod. Better a President Mittens than a President Palin.
The fact that a lot of political junkies thinks he is a flip-flopper of unusual magnitude is neither here nor there.
True. On the other hand, the fact that he signed a law that virtually the entire Republican base now considers Stalinist tyranny is both here and there. He has no chance.
If it was anyone else, it would be possible to pull of a nuanced repudiation of signing that bill. “I got the best deal I could from those DFHs in Massachusetts. You should have seen what they really wanted to do!”
Something like that. It would be a tough maneuver, but within the range of a skilled politician.
But Mitt has used up his flip-flop cards, and then some.
Even the republican base has to vote for somebody else over Romney. I don’t see this person yet.
What’s the reason again that the Republican establishment doesn’t like Huckabee? He’s saner than Palin and more ideologically reliable than Romney. And none of the other candidates inspire anyone except a few pundits. In retrospect, it seems that in 2008 the GOP winner was whichever of Giulliani or McCain was stronger a month before the New Hampshire primary. At the moment, Huckabee seems to benefit from the logic of elimination.
During the 2007-2008 primaries, Mike Huckabee acted like there was a distinction to be made between what was right and what was profitable for large corporations. He backed this talk up with absolutely no policy substance, but it was enough for him to be cut off from the money spigot. He was terribly underfunded.
This time around, Republican elites recognize that Huckabee steals 30-50% of Palin’s support, so they’ll keep supporting him until they know Palin isn’t running or can’t win.
Huckabee wanted to raise taxes as Governor of Arkansas. As it turns out, being 49th in education and other public services isn’t good for economic development, even when taxes are low.
Burn the heretic! Burn him!
Goldstein and the far right weirdos hated him because he raised taxes as Governor and no one, except Reagan, can raise taxes and not be a tyrant
I think it’s foolish to be confident in any judgment about who’ll win this far out, but if you really are certain (and are correct in your certainty) you could make a ton of money. Romney’s currently trading at 2 cents on the dollar.
The reasons I’m not bullish on Romney are pretty straightforward–his legacy in Mass. becomes a huge liability in the wake of the demonization of the ACA, and more fundamentally, whenever he showed up to campaign in 2012, his support went down. I don’t know what, if anything, he’s overcome his basic problems.
That said, I think Romney at 2% is a strong buy–there’s a good chance that at some point in 2011 CW will make him look viable enough to get into low double digits, if nothing else.
Ack, scratch that. I was looking at VP odds. Romney is actually trading at 24%, which seems too high to me.
Is there an options market? I’d short Romney at those rates.
Yeah, you can short. I shorted both Giuliani and Clinton at different points in time in the last primary season.
I looked at some other available markets. Sarah Palin for VP again at ~9%? Have to short that one, too… no chance any participant likes that outcome.
http://intrade.com/v4/markets/?eventGroupId=8628
Let’s not forget the Mormon problem.
Private Eye magazine in the UK has an occasional amusing feature called “Remainders of the Day”; this would be a perfect entry for it.
What’s the political candidate version of stripping off the cover and sending it back?
Making him the VP nomination.
Pawlenty’s the one!
Until someone starts showing the pictures of the I-35 bridge collapse and blaming it on him.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
There is, at this point, no over- (or under-) estimating the nuttery of the GOBP primary electorate. Remember that primaries (especially the early, winnowing-out ones) are often decided by a very small minority of a very small minority. The calculus isn’t : who can beat a somewhat-vulnerable incumbent. Its: Who is the craziest, tea-partiest, piss-off-the-libruls-the-mostest person.
Plus, while the MSM will largely leave the issue unaddressed, can the fundies outside of Utah and maybe Nevada actually vote for a Mormon?
Well, that’s the problem: he’s too Mormon for the conservatives, and not conservative enough for the Mormons.
There was a lot of speculation about his Mormonism in the run up to the campaign last time, but as soon as he started losing, everyone stopped talking about it.
get with the truethink, Citizen; it’s unpossible that The One True Reagan raised taxes. Or increased the deficit, or negotiated with terrorists, or sold WMD to Iraq, or sold arms to Iran, etc, etc …