Posted on 01/22/2012 3:42:26 PM PST by mandaladon
On a Sunday morning appearance on “Fox & Friends,” conservative columnist Ann Coulter explained why Romney fell short in the South Carolina GOP presidential primary, blaming the priorities of South Carolina voters for Gingrich’s success.
“Apparently, South Carolinians would rather have the emotional satisfaction of a snotty remark toward the president than to beat Obama in the fall,” Coulter, the author of “Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America,” said. “We saw it in the debates when Gingrich would say things that didn’t really make sense. That is what you usually associate with Democrats, which I described in my last book, ‘Demonic,’ how mobs behave.”
Some of what Gingrich has said might appear to make sense, she said, but should be analyzed more closely.
“Something that sounds like it makes sense like, ‘Mitt Romney doesn’t have influence over his super PAC — that makes you wonder if he’ll have influence as president,’” she continued. “How many times does Mitt Romney have to say it is illegal for a candidate to have influence on the super PAC. It is not, interestingly, though, for a president to have influence. So it makes no sense if you think about it for all of three seconds, but it sounds like it makes sense. It is just like what you get from liberals most of the time and the cheers and yahoos, and that is what we kept getting from this audience.”
Coulter, who has been a Romney supporter since New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said he would not be seeking the Republican nomination, was asked if Romney should change his strategy now that he suffered a defeat in South Carolina, and perhaps go on the offensive with “fire in the belly.”
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Ann is acting like Michelle Obama. She thinks she can tell us what to do, not to do and how to think. Sorry Ann, we are not democrats, we can think for ourselves.
Other “conservatives” from northeastern states are saying similar things. As one example, Howie Carr continues to disappoint conservatives on a variety of issues, while being pro-Romney and “pro-other RINO politicians” all of the way, during the ‘12 GOP POTUS race.
I prefer to think South Carolina circumcised the baby and changed its diaper..
powdered it with baby powder and armed it with a Glock..
Anne “Natalie Mains” Coulter
Anne “Natalie Mains” Coulter
Wonder why these Beltway Big-mouth Broads despise the very voters they expect to vote for their ‘special’ Mittens!
How about a big FU Coulter, you’re a bimbo!
I Disagree. Newt, Michelle, and the two Ricks do not “Suck,” as you term it. you are a Conservative; so, you are too intelligent to use the word,”Suck,” as well.
Understand this. Mitt Romney has been a gun grabber for the greater extent of his life. He joined the NRA for the first time in 2008. He did it for electability.
I am not buying it.
Romney=Gun Grabber.
Your endorsement confounds me and lessens my respect for you.
Regards,
JJ
Regards
You and a lot of other Freepers. Me? I have always been kind of puzzled by those who make her out to be some sort of Conservative demigoddess.
She’s always been too much of an East-Coast cocktail party set type to me. She writes a good column, and she can be witty, but she’s not as smart, not as sharp and certainly not as hot as a lot of people seem to think.
The issue is the rank an file republicans dont like Newt. He does not use his last name on banners. He talks down to people and he is pissed at where we are in this country.
I agree with him and yes Mitt is just a lap dog for Rove and the rest of washington. I really dont care what the insiders are saying. They had their chance with Bush and look what we got, Obama. This is just like where we where in 1980.
Newt will make it all over and no one will put Mitt in the presidency. If Mitt is forced upon us I look forward to third party.
SC voter
For instance her almost blinding loyalty to Christie and now mittens. Neither is pro life in my book.
Her one agenda is promoting Ann Coulter the female Karl Rove.
I think you put your finger on it there. Also, the professional political types, who include the pundits, are invested simply in winning the election, without regard to Win How or Win For What. They've selected their Winner - Romney - and the fact that he's the Business As Usual Candidate who will probably just be the Designated Gentleman Loser in this cycle matters less to them than that he's the plausible, pragmatic choice. In other words, their asses are covered, they went along with the conventional wisdom, and nobody can blame them when he loses in November.
The rest of us want to win for a reason other than keeping Boehner as Speaker and making Mitch the Senate Majority Leader, and moving a few deckchairs around on the Titanic.
Considering your entire schtick used to be based on "snotty remarks", that's rich.
Dear Ann....wrong.
Since the leaders of that PAC are folks known to Romney, then of course he should be able to influence them. And, just as Gingrich said, if Mitt’s wringing his hands lamenting their woeful ways, yet at the same time knowing exactly who they are, then one does have to wonder what’s wrong with Mitt that doesn’t have a clue how publicly to express his displeasure with their ads. Nor does he have any idea how to speak to friends jointly known to both parties expressing his dismay at behavior he doesn’t want.
Ann should practice the logic she laments others lacking.
Coulter is just plain wrong. It makes me sick to listen to her. I have always admired and respected her.
Ann you are wrong this time and it deeply saddens me. Either you don’t get it or you have been “gotten to”.
You need to go to the light...follow the light!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.