Posted on 10/17/2013 6:47:01 AM PDT by jimbo123
-snip-
On Monday, conservative provocateur Ann Coulter visited Sean Hannity for a plug-her-latest-book sitdown, during which her host tossed out what he no doubt assumed would a typical conservative-colleagues-in-arms softball: “Establishment Republicans are at war with the Tea Party base, and I’m angry about it!” But Coulter slammed it, so to speak, to the opposite field, going on a tear against Newt Gingrich, Todd Akin, Mark Sanford, and Liz Cheney, whom she declared to be “hucksters, shysters, and people ripping off the Republican Party for their own self-aggrandizement, for their own egos, to make money.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
That's honorable of you, Kristinn, but Ann no longer speaks for our camp. At best, she's now a centrist-moderate who's only nominally connected to the true right.
She burned her bridge with me when she began attacking Sarah Palin and started promoting worthless squishes like Christie and Romney. No thanks, Ann. I can get that sort of crap from the New York Times.
If you honestly believe that Romney would have held the line against amnesty for illegals as President, I've got a bridge to sell you.
He's as on board with 'comprehensive immigration reform' as Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio.
What on earth is the point of 'winning' if your guy is indistinguishable from the enemy? Did you honestly buy his "severely conservative" bullcrap?
Keep in mind Amazon is not the only one selling her books, and of course it’s a certainty you don’t know the terms of her Regnery contract.
The 200 books per day is not just Amazon, it’s all channels. And you can bet Renergy is not happy that her book is bombing after all the money they paid her.
So, according to you, in 3 days she has sold 600 books. On this you presume to predict the future. What do you even base that figure on?
We’ll need about two months worth of ASR’s to begin to get even a ball park idea of her sales.
Just noticed she’s moved from #92 to #89 on Amazon.
Oh, alright, then. It's a relative flop.
Most authors would kill to be in Amazon's Top 100.
Now she’s moved from #89 to #87. Oh my, will this upward movement never cease?
:-)
I'd sooner say they were gloating.
I heard her interview with Hannity and Beck. She is collapsing into incoherence.
The point of the article was that she has lost audience.....so relative is the proper measurement.
If Alabama goes 7-5, no one is happy.....
“She was defending McConnell on Glenn Beck’s show a few days ago.”
Not at all surprised about that.
The last time I listened to Glenn Beck, he was still on the radio and Ann was his guest. They were making fun of Sarah Palin, and they seemed oblivious to the fact that they had an audience. Very disappointing.
Why all the hostility directed at me for stating two facts, which none of you can refute?
1) Only governors and senators have a chance to win the presidency. Romney was the only governor running after the shake-out.
2) Romney won 49 percent of the vote. He nearly pulled it out.
GINGRICH was gonna do better than Romney? Win the presidency? Make me laugh.
She is wrong on Sanford. Sanford opposed the amnesty bill when he ran and won. He spooked the GOP leadership in the house.This was when Rubio pulled out his amnesty bill language the first major time. Also with Sanford you wonder if his Evangelical opponet would have sided with the Evangelical leaders supporting amnesty reform.
The Akin saga proved that some people should drop out for the greater good instead of pushing a 3 way primary. They wasted ads on attacking Akin’s earmarks. Then he retorted that they were for something good. They pale in comparison to trillion dollar amnesty bills. Akin was with Steve King and Tancredo on immigration. That is part of the reason for his primary victory. Also got Karl Rove to come out openly as a thug.
I brought this up to Roy Blunt in an email when he was deciding to vote on amnesty.
I wonder about the different theories on the GOP House dealing with Romney. Some say they would have been more likely to support amnesty with Romney as president. I think in some ways they would have revolted against Romney and pointed out the obvious he was a RINO. Whereas when Obama won they may have decide they lost and cave on everything. But the Sandy Hook shooting distracted Obama. It was horrible that 26 people were shot but it had happened before it just so happened that madman shot small children who would have been dead with any caliber.
Maybe Romney would have secured the border to a degree larger than Obama making amnesty more likely.
Perry, Gingrich and Paul deserved to be pounded for their weak Immigration stances. Paul thought that he could solve the illegal alien problem by opposing Everify, speaking out against the property bubble and welfare state.
Romney got points for palling around with Kobach and losing to McCain.
If Romney ran in 2008 I think there would have been a continuos flow of 41 Senate votes to block Obamacare. Also If Romney won in 2008 I think he would have been more confident about attacking any Democrat on immigration. He still would have lost big and the open borders lobby would have had a better argument for amnesty. Having McCain with 31% of the hispanic vote and the GOP losing millions of whites to Obama was a huge victory for opposition to amnesty. In 2008, Lou Barletta outperformed the national GOP in his swing district that also went for Obama nationally.
But then the backlash of 2010 may have been weaker if Romney’s 2008 campaign helped more people to elect Republican Senators.
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.