Does America need candidates' email panhandling and backstabbing political consultants?
Posted on 06/06/2011 12:20:58 PM PDT by Al B.
As she prepares to enter the race in Iowa later this month, Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann has signed on high-profile political strategist Ed Rollins to run her presidential campaign, according to two sources close to Bachmann.
Rollins, who was Mike Huckabee's national campaign director in the 2008 campaign, is an experienced political operative with a well-earned reputation for his tough tactics and willingness to play hardball.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
"No one, and I mean no one..."...emphasis added
I was hoping the bold would improve your eyesight, or perhaps your reading comprehension, since he stated unequivocally that no one with minimal achievement had attained the White House. I pointed out some one who, in fact, had.
You don't have to like it.
Well, he did set a record for voting "present" and no one will ever be able to take that from him.
As far as being "elected" to state-wide office is concerned: I thought his M.O. was to have his opponents eliminated by TKO.
What is the bad judgement? She’s concerned about the future of this country and thinks she has a shot at taking out Obama. Let her get in and give it her best shot. The idea that she has to sit on the sidelines because Palin might decide to jump in is ludicrous. Should Herman Cain have stayed out? He’s coveting the same voters Palin would.
Palin has to get in for anyone to have a shot at whipping her. What is she waiting for? I mean if she gets in now she could save people a lot of time and money as we wouldn’t need the prmaries, right? Just skip right to the general election with her as the nominee. We don’t need debates, we don’t need to let the voters decide, just crown her queen today and be done with it.
Excellent.
As soon as I saw her ethanol statement along with the bus tour, I knew right there she was adapting and updating Gingrich’s old 1994 50 state strategy (back when he was worth something) and also Reagan’s 1976 effort. She wasn’t putting all her eggs into Iowa and she’s banking on the South and West, minus the Mormon states.
This is smart as Iowa is very hit and miss picking the nominee. A win there can be pyrrhic like it was for Huck. We certainly don’t have the delegates anymore, those obviously are in the South and West. With NH assumed to be Romney’s, who cares if she comes in 2nd there either? She just needs to be in the top three and close behind the leader if she’s not 1st.
South Carolina and Florida in particular is where she needs to hit her stride. Ironically the old bastard McCain might pay off for her there being she was his VP pick and he both those states last time due to retired military and seniors.
The only real danger for her in Iowa is a big Romney or Cain win. I will say I’m worried about Cain being a threat to Palin more than you are. I personally predict a tight pack with Palin as 1st or 2nd, maybe 3rd. There will be no clear victor I think coming out of Iowa regardless.
Cain is the lynch pin. He got a big bump in the Fox News debate, but I sense only enthusiasm but no ground game yet. If he doesn’t get money and workers going by the Straw Poll or shortly thereafter he’ll fizzle unless he manages to capture Huck’s network when Bachmann likely folds after Iowa, or ignites the Tea Party. He has chops but I don’t think he can win it on that alone. He is the only one who may knock out Palin by being a spoiler and give it to Romney.
If Cain folds at any point, Romney’s toast. Pawlenty is already trying to work the Straw Poll but I see nowhere to go for him. He has no base. Gingrish, Huntsman, or any other forseeable candidate will only take from Romney.
This thing is, and always has been, Sarah Palin’s to win if she wants it.
Thinking further, I have one followup. What’s really bugging me is the Huck block. He lead in many state polls before he bowed out. They could make it troublesome for Palin if she can’t crack off a significant percentage of them. That’s why Bachmann is desperate to land them. They are her only chance of getting any legs in this race. The Tea Party isn’t nearly as monolithic that she can count on them.
Uh, no. Wrong again. The person George Bush and Carl Rove insisted handle all money for the California GOP, Gerry Parsky, stipulated that Simon take Rollins or no Party money. Simon was a neophyte, but his selection of Russo-Marsh for the primary had him overcoming a nine point deficit in two weeks to win the primary by 14 points over a well-known anointed RINO and former mayor of Los Angeles, Dick Riordan.
Might I suggest confining the source of your speculations to facts instead of shooting from the hip?
Then Simon was a fool and should have stood his ground. Even if I’d bowed to pressure to take someone, my first statement behind closed doors would be ‘do it my way or the highway’.
You NEVER let the threat of no party money intimidate you into letting your campaign manager be a loose cannon and turn your campaign into something that’s not you. Better to lose on a shoestring doing it your way than lose by getting pwned.
The bad judgment is hiring Ed Rollins. The bad judgment is failing to perceive or recognize those interests who are merely using her for their own purposes.
There is nothing wrong with Bachmann or Cain taking their shot. Genuine principled competition is healthy and good for the country. Let them make their case and let the people decide.
However, allowing those who are enemies of the principles she professes, e.g. Rollins and his ilk, to be in charge of her campaign is not good.
The thing to remember is after the first batch of primaries the allocation becomes proportional thus stretching out the primary battle. In theory the battle should be over by super Tuesday. This plays to Gov. Palin’s strengths.
should= Shouldn’t to over.
I really don't care about your opinion. So far, you've shown yourself to be nothing more than a loudmouth.
Even if I’d bowed to pressure to take someone, my first statement behind closed doors would be ‘do it my way or the highway’.
I see. So why aren't you governor of your State? Sheesh.
You NEVER let the threat of no party money intimidate you into letting your campaign manager be a loose cannon and turn your campaign into something that’s not you.
Well that's what Tom McClintock did in the same election. He was outspent 5:1 and lost, narrowly. That loss was held against him when he ran for governor in the recall election a year later. It was the opening Schwarzenegger needed. Despite the fact that Tom was held in higher regard than any other candidate, Republicans defected to Arnold because "he can win."
Better to lose on a shoestring doing it your way than lose by getting pwned.
I'll remember your sage advice as California sinks into bankruptcy as a consequence of doing it your way.
Here’s the deal: if you need party money, then you got structural fundraising problems that party money isn’t going to fix. You should always be able to raise 10X what the party donates. Party money should be unexpected bonus money. If you need it, then your campaign is flawed out the door and likely to lose.
I know this because I’ve been running campaigns for 10 years. The last time I worked at the congressional level. For a good candidate party money is an afterthought. It should be because I’ve played the party money game. First rule is that they take care of incumbents first. That’s because the GOP has been getting less and less money from donors, who prefer to give it directly to candidates or issue groups.
They don’t tell you that though. They woo, they promise, they make you jump thru hoops. The money never shows, shows up too late, too little, or they do things like run ads without your approval that are the wrong issue at the wrong time, said the wrong way that costs you votes.
I bet if you look at Simon’s disclosure, that party money was a pittance. He’d have been better off without it. You can be sure McClintock wouldn’t have seen that money if he played the game or would have had to sell out to get it.
The party rarely delivers on it’s promises and if they do then they try to make you a moderate a la the Rove strategy. Either the candidate loses anyway, or conservatives lose because he’s compromised. You cannot win the party money game.
All the more reason to be your own man. McClintock did that and went on to better things. That the voters were too stupid to figure that out and voted for Arnold doesn’t make the principle invalid.
I have no problem with Bachmann hiring Rollins because of his history, if she properly contains him and stays true to herself. He obviously knew how to get a win for Huck so he apparently has organizational value. She just needs him to stay away from message.
My worry is that Bachmann doesn’t have the force of personality to contain him. A Palin or Romney would, but Michelle may be in over her head. We shall see.
“His previous
clients seem RINOish.”
However he wants to win, and so does Bachmann, of course, which is why she picked him.
You’re acting as though Cain is the enemy.
Read my post, drapes. I weclome Bachmann to the race. I acknowledge the obvious, though. She is not stiff competition for Palin. But neither are the rest.
The transparency of her mission (to assist TEA Party ‘s bete noir Mitt Romney) will further marginalize her. She starts 10 furlongs behind and she will slip further back.
Nonetheless, I am glad she is in there because Palin needs to beat someone for the nomination. There is not currently any gifted politician who stalks abroad, no Reagan or FDR or JFK. The likes of Romney and Bachmann, mediocre thought they be, will have to do. It will be less entertaining, certainly not an epic struggle, but Palin will win. And she will win easily. Bachamnn will never even rise to the level of trivia question.
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.