Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Last Sunday, Tim Pawlenty (or his writers) coined the term Obamneycare to link Mitt Romney in with Obama's national health care plan. At this weeks GOP debate, when given the opportunity to say it face to face to Romney, he waffled, buckled, caved, and weasled his way away from the term, or for criticizing Romney. But now he's back on the attack, calling Romney a "co-conspiritor" in Obamacare. It's fun to watch the GOP eat their own.
Originally Posted By Lisann22 I just read the article about him being on the attack. It was so blatantly obvious at the debate he was doing a back pedal they almost had to clear the stage, give him a sequin glove and blast some Billie Jean.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I think Pawlenty realizes at this point that if something major doesn't change Bachmann will have the tea bagger vote locked up. Although that would not keep Romney from being nominated, it would totally kill any chance Pawlenty has of making an upset. The only way Pawlenty can stay in the race is to convince the baggers that he is just as conservative as Bachmann is.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Yesterday Romney joked that he was "unemployed, too." Somehow, I think the general electorate in this economy isn't chuckling at those kinds of jokes from multi-millionaires. When these guys go off script, they just shoot themselves in the foot every time.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Obamneycare was a brilliant portmanteau and one that could really stick.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Lawrence O'Donnell has theorized that Pawlenty will get the nomination because he's the only one in the field without major baggage or one kind or another, and thus the only one broadly acceptable to the GOP voters. Romney has the health care thing, Bachmann is nuts (and will show it eventually), Huntsman was too effusive with praise for Obama when he worked for him (plus is suspect on social conservative issues), Gingrich has too much baggage of all types, Paul is too libertarian on things like drugs, etc. I thought there was something to that theory. And Pawlenty has been very carefully positioning himself to appeal to both the GOP establishment (and their money) and the far-right base. Trying to be "everyone's second choice," which in a year where the GOP has abandoned their traditional winner-take-all format might be a winning strategy. Only trouble is... he seems to be everybody's fourth or fifth choice. He's stuck in single digits in the polls, and has been so lackluster in the two debates that he hasn't gotten any traction from them whatsoever. I mean, Herman Cain (!) was polling about twice as high based on one better-than-expected debate performance. Which tells you something about how Pawlenty is coming off. And it's hard to see where he can win. Bachmann comes off as much more authentic in her pandering to the extreme right that dominates in Iowa (plus she's originally FROM Iowa), so she's hard to beat there. Romney will be hard to beat in NH. Northerners have a hard time winning SC. So where is Pawlenty supposed to win before he gets that loser stink on him and what establishment money he has starts deserting him (presumably for Romney)?
Originally Posted By Princessjenn5795 I don't see Pawlenty getting the nomination, mainly because it is more interesting to watch a rock than listen to him speak. No one is going to get excited about this guy...even if he had the best ideas in the world he is just boring and uninspiring.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Pawlenty is a classic Minnesotan... he is not real flashy but does the job well. He served well as governor of Minnesota for two terms. The fact that a guy as socially conservative as Pawlenty could be re-elected in traditionally Democrat Minnesota shows that he has good appeal with moderates... an important swing group in the 2012 election. Even though he was considerably too conservative for my taste, I thought he was a good governor. In fact probably one of the best Minnesota has had in last 35 years. Even though he was a strong social conservative he was also a consensus builder, and assumed a considerably more moderate stance on economic issues. I also think he was one of the more honest politicians I've ever seen. Unfortunately, I don't think you will ever take the Minnesota out of Pawlenty. And if you did, he would lose what I see as his greatest assets... his credibility and authenticity. It is very sad that an extremely capable guy like Pawlenty gets tossed aside for a raving lunatic like Bachmann. But I guess that is the state of politics in 2011.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Yep. And although I don't like Pawlenty's pandering to the extreme right, he does seem a capable pol, and well suited to MN. So was Mondale. And we know what happened when he got matched up against a guy with whom he had a significant charisma deficit.
