Meeting Mitt
Des Moines, Iowa
I drove 227 miles on Thursday to get from Council Bluffs to the hamlet of Hampton in order to catch an “Ask Mitt Anything” meet and greet with Mitt Romney. In a flyspeck of a northern Iowa town where the only two eateries were a Hardee’s and a Subway, Romney drew a bank basement crowd of about 50 — all-white and decidedly elderly i.e. a very representative cross-cut of the Iowa GOP electorate.
Anyway, please remind me not to do that again!
I’m not really complaining. I readily confess that being able to cover any portion of a presidential campaign is a privilege and a treat. But, damn, it’s hard to take some of this very seriously.
The BS factor is heavy in almost every event of any candidate. But Mitt Romney is in some special category of his own. I had trouble believing that anybody in that room could believe anything he said. Tanned, wonderfully dressed, tall, and enviably fit for a 60 year old, Mitt comes off as too slick by one-half. Someone once said he ought to learn to stammer a bit more, in the posed manner of, say, a Bill Clinton.
Not Mitt. He doesn’t botch a word as he delivers one rehearsed graph after another.  I’ll save you the rhetoric and cut to his main point: “STRENGTH.” A Strong Military. A Strong Economy. Strong Families. A Strong America. Strong. Strong. Strong.
Got the point?
But the shamelessness factor was sort of out of control. He’s the man to bring “change” to Washington, but his stump speech omits any single policy matter on which he differs from Bush. He asks us to thank Bush for keeping us safe for the last six years and goes out of his way to praise the rough treatment of detainees at Gitmo. No cheers for those ideas, not even from the loyal Republicans in the room.
If elected, he says, he would work closely with Democrats by “lowering the rhetoric” but then chides Hillary Clinton for a recent call by her for more emphasis on community needs. “It’s out with Adam Smith and in with Karl Marx,” Romney proclaimed to an audience that seemed to draw a blank on both references. And as to what he called the Democratic plan to impose”government-run” health care, he said: “I don’t want the guys who ran Katrina running our health care.”
Neither does anyone else. Which is one reason those guys — the Republicans– are so likely to lose the next election.
When asked about his background, Romney had the chutzpah to say: “I come out of the private sector. I’ve really only been in politics for four years.” His father, you see, “was in the automobile business.” Well, yes, George Romney was CEO of American Motors. And, um, he was also elected Governor of Michigan three times and also ran for President of the United States if memory serves me. So other than that, yes, his son has has virtually no exposure to politics other than his own tenure as Governor of Massachusetts.
The good news: when asked by a wingnut if he supported the 10th Amendment guaranteeing states’ rights, Romney went way out a limb by affirming: “I support all the amendments.”
Cool.
The lemonade served was nice and cold and the oatmeal cookies were soft and tasty. The audience was polite and courteous in the best tradition of Iowa Nice. But like this reporter, they seemed rather underwhelmed. Most of Mitt’s applause lines fell flat except for the outburst of approval he harvested for supporting teenage celibacy.
Romney’s spending a bundle on Saturday’s Iowa GOP Straw Poll in which he’s the easy favorite. Latest statewide opinion surveys show him running first in the state with about 26% support. That puts him four points behind “undecided” among probable Iowa Republican caucus goers.
No mystery in those stats. Like all of his GOP rivals, Romney still can’t figure out what he’s offering except four more years of what 7 out of 10 Americans now reject. Not an easy task even for a smart aleck like Mitt.
August 9th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
The good news: when asked by a wingnut if he supported the 10th Amendment guaranteeing states’ rights, Romney went way out a limb by affirming: “I support all the amendments.”
Gotcha Bitch….
August 9th, 2007 at 9:30 pm
“Romney still can’t figure out what he’s offering except four more years of what 7 out of 10 Americans now reject.”
Sure, 7 out of 10 Americans reject the Presidency. Now let’s talk about approval for the Democratic Congress and how much better they are.
August 9th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
Sam.. things are a bit more complicated than that and I suspect you know that. You know me:
!) Im no big fan of the Democrats and 2) I have a certain passion for gambling.
In that context: I’d say the current odds for AnY Republican Prez candidate vs Any Democratic rival in the 2008 election are about 40/60 … i.e staggeringly bad. Any action? The book is open for those who wish to put their money in sync with their mouth.
For 20 years beginning with the Reagan Era, Democrats lived in denial regarding their unpopularity. It’s quite amusing to watch the Republicans begin to take their turn wandering in the desert of cluelessness.
In the meantime, remember 40 will get you 60…if you win, that is. LOL.
August 9th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
My favorite polling stat just out from the Iowa race has McCain polling behind Obama…AMONG REPUBLICANS.
August 9th, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Marc,
You apparently mistake me for a Republican partisan.
I merely point out that our Democratic Congress is reviled and is less popular than the President, as well it should be, since it has accomplished zero and has no coherent principles.
Will anyone argue that the Democrats were not elected to correct Bush and the Republicans on their manifestly failed and incoherent foriegn policy?
And what have they given us? The Democrats won’t support this war, they won’t end it, and they won’t dictate, much less suggest, a new way to conduct it. (Here a respectful honorable mention to Senator Obama, who seeks to widen this war in exactly the way I support, not that I think he meant what he said.)
Anyone got the latest figures on Congressional approval ratings? Recently, right-wing blogs were publishing approval ratings around 3 per cent, within the margin of error for zero approval.
Thankfully, most Americans aren’t partisan cranks and so don’t hold hold religious beliefs about the American parties and will elect the most plausible character.
And no, I wouldn’t take the bet you mention. It is looking like Hillary to me, and I think Senator Clinton could do a creditable job. After all, she doesn’t spend all of her time demonizing Republicans, because she understands that America has genuine enemies.
Hillary vs. Rudy at about 50-50.
Hillary vs. any other Republican at your 60-40.
August 9th, 2007 at 10:56 pm
My favorite polling stat just out from the Iowa race has McCain polling behind Obama…AMONG REPUBLICANS.
reg, with regard to Repubs: right or wrong, thanks to his stand on the recent immigration bill that went down in flames, McCain is also polling behind…
- Tommy Thompson.
- Ross Perot.
- Lyndon LaRouche.
- Rosie O’Donnell.
August 9th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
When I think of how much smarter, more accomplished, more articulate and more experienced each and every one of the GOP cadidates is than George W. Bush, I have to wonder whether the Democrats are such a sure thing in 2008.
August 10th, 2007 at 12:33 am
The Department of Defense has identified 3,673 American service members who have died since the start of the Iraq war. It confirmed the deaths of the following Americans yesterday:
ALCANTARA, Juan M., 22, Cpl., Army; New York; Second Infantry Division, Stryker Brigade Combat Team.
GUMMERSALL, Nicholas A., 23, Sgt., Army; Chubbuck, Idaho; Second Infantry Division, Stryker Brigade Combat Team.
KHAN, Kareem R., 20, Specialist, Army; Manahawkin, N.J.; Second Infantry Division, Stryker Brigade Combat Team.
THOMPSON, Jacob M., 26, Staff Sgt., Army; North Mankato, Minn.; Second Infantry Division, Stryker Brigade Combat Team.
YOUNG, Donald M., 19, Specialist, Army; Helena, Mont; First Cavalry Division.
August 10th, 2007 at 12:35 am
I agree with your post, thanks for saying it.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:12 am
Didn’t see what you saw, Marc. Have great faith that what you report is true. Sounded like a real swell time.
A short while ago, Romney got some play with his response to Obama’s comments on Pakistan. Thinking how the U.S. once sicced Perishing on Pancho, and how Austria maybe should’ve whacked Serbia in ’14 instead of standing up on a German flank, wondering what the smartest spot is on fp visa via Mitt v. (take your pick Dem)?
August 10th, 2007 at 5:00 am
Mitt “Headroom” Romney is the John Connally or Phil Gramm of this year’s campaign–the guy who the business Republicans love, raises tons of cash and goes nowhere. He hasn’t broken 11 per cent, although he seems to poll better in Iowa and New Hampshire. Problem is, he’s totally programmed, a mile wide and an inch deep.
Unless they want to repeat the Dole campaign with Fred Thompson, the GOP goes with Rudy. Hillary is unstoppable among the Dems.
Pay yer money and take yer choice.
August 10th, 2007 at 7:14 am
“all-white and decidedly elderly”
“Im no big fan of the Democrats”
Marc’s a Republican!
And, driving 227 miles to cover Mitt Romney in front of a crowd of fifty people?? Tell the truth, you went there for the lemonade and oatmeal cookies, didn’t you?
August 10th, 2007 at 9:40 am
Iowa is a frightful place (I’ve been there, too often.), and to give it national significance in politics is problematic.
I am not enamored of the parochial presidential “system”.
Thanks for the article, Marc.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:43 am
Marc went there for the Hardee’s.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:22 am
First of all can we lose this silly GOP talking point – beloved by a brain dead media that the Dems are less popular than Bush – just look at Congress’ ratings. Look at the numbers. The reason for those low ratings is the opinion of most DEMOCRATS and INDEPENDENTS that the Congress has not been suffiiently challenging to the Bush gang. They want impeachment hearings, they want more all-nighters that force Republicans to vote on the war. In short they want confrontation.
Trouble is Nancy and Harry hear from the Great and the Good in Washington that the last election was about “Bipartisanship” and an end to “Wrangling and bickering” when nothing could be further from the truth. And the data are there. I guess its understable though. When your bubble is composed of the wit and wisdom of Broder and Dowd what can you expect?
August 10th, 2007 at 10:26 am
Mitt really is a clown isn’t he? I’m so glad to hear he likes the Whole Constitution – sure would be sad to learn he wants to repeal the ban on slavery!
And has any Governor bad-mouthed his state more than Romney? (Petey Wilson maybe?). Recently he couldn’t even answer the question of how many counties were in MA! Of course we can all sleep better at night knowing that his five sons are serving the Republic by driving a Winnebago around Iowa to help dear old dad get to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:27 am
Sergio I like Iowa. I’ll go along with Meredith Wilson:
“You ought to give Iowa a try!”
August 10th, 2007 at 10:43 am
Welcome to Hampton, Iowa. Great Shopping, Dining and Fun
Marc understated the town. Their restaurants also include McDonald’s and the Honk ‘n’ Hollar, the shopping includes Radio Shack, and the recreation includes the Frisbee Disc Golf Course. How was the golf, Marc?
Seriously, I can’t see any reason why this event was covered. What’s the next stop on the tour?
August 10th, 2007 at 10:43 am
Thanks rlo. Rightwingers like Woody are in such a state of denial that they think the low Congressional approval ratings are a sign the nation is solidly behind them.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:47 am
The Honk `n’ Hollar? I’m thinking a drive-in with waitresses on roller skates.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:50 am
Sergio: “Iowa is a frightful place”
What an ignorant little shit… Des Moines is a fine town and Iowa City is home to one of the best writers programs in the country.
Keep cruising Wilshire, Sergio. No wonder the provincial “Left” is such a joke.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:08 am
I might add that the Des Moines Register is one of the better newspapers in the country.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:21 am
Two words on Iowa’s “parochialism” – when Californians were electing Reagan as their Governor, Iowans chose Harold Hughes (later their Senator.) That alone should give one pause about the collective political wisdom of (predominantly southern) Californians versus the “parochial” Iowans. Of course the primary system is a bit bizarre, but I’d rather see politicans endure the retail, up-close-and-personal Iowa caucus race as a first round than turn the entire thing into a national, media-driven sweepstakes. There’s something absolutely admirable about the “show up and convince your neighbors” party caucuses that I’d like to see more of injected into the primary system. “Participatory democracy” and all that.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:22 am
The two words were supposed to be “Harold Hughes!”
August 10th, 2007 at 11:35 am
Hey Reg! Don’t knock Wilshire! See ya on the Miracle Mile!
August 10th, 2007 at 11:43 am
I was being “acerbic” – I happen not to be a fan of L.A. Not even a little bit. But I wouldn’t be so arrogant as to write “LA’s a frightful place.” The “gay debate” was hosted there last nite, which I found quite revealing, and I give the town a lot of credit for that.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:51 am
I just realized the link to Hampton didn’t work above, so I’ll try again if anyone cared, which I doubt.
Welcome to Hampton, Iowa. Great Shopping, Dining and Fun
August 10th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
Try driving around La after 2:00 AM with the Door’s “LA Woman” on the CD Player. I Love this town!
August 10th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Check out the serious fawning Chris Matthews did over Bush’s brillent press conference. Could the boys upstairs at G.E. be giving their boy any clearer signals to get with the surge?
Yet this great journalist is approved by this blog. NOW list the recent Iraqi dead…
August 10th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
Richard is right. I can’t help but think that Congress’s current low approval ratings can translate into a potential election year bonanza for Democrats next year. The voters of Maine, for example, may not have a lot of policy arguments against an Olympia Snowe or a Susan Collins relative to many other GOP senators, but I believe that with the Republicans constantly sabotaging legislation through fillibustering or refusals to their president; my bet is that these two otherwise sensible femal senators will be dropping like flies in the next three years.
August 10th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
“refusals to override their president” should have been added there toward the end.
August 10th, 2007 at 2:50 pm
If I were running the campaign of any Democrat running against a Republican incumbent; I would remind the voters of the GOP’s record of obstructionism and the merits of having a fillibuster/veto proof majority.
August 10th, 2007 at 3:05 pm
Woody, thanks for the link to Hampton, IA. Looks like the next big trip will be to Summerfest! in 3 weeks. There will be “inflatable rides” which sound interesting. And of course music from Dow Jones and the Averages.
As for Mitt Romney, I gotta hope he wins the nomination. I can’t recall ever seeing a more transparent phony running for president. Sometimes you had to wonder about Jimmy Carter, but time has shown that he was pretty much who he seemed to be. Romney just doesn’t have an authentic bone in his body.
On the Democratic side, you have to say that Hillary Rodham Clinton (as Margaret Carlson introduced her last night) is taking full advantage of this endless prologue to the campaign to get comfortable in her skin and really establish herself as a future president. Of course the avalanche of attacks will descend as soon as she steps across the threshold with the Democratic nomination (if she does). She was at ease before the gay audience yesterday, as was Barack Obama. But I find myself drawn more and more to the Kucinich campaign.
I have to ask myself, is anything wrong with Kucinich? If he is nuts, he is in a winning sort of way. I can’t think of any issue on which I disagree with him. Of course the answer is that he seems unlikely to win, and one might question his ability to govern. As for the latter, who knows? But not supporting him because the perception that he cannot win seems somehow shallow. As Melissa Ethridge said last night, he is a very evolved human being for a politician.
Still waiting for Gore, though….
August 10th, 2007 at 4:00 pm
MC – if I were looking for a candidate on which there was no issue with whom I would disagree and who has as much chance as Dennis K of making it to the White House, I’d be supporting myself. I too am nuts in a winning (friends, but losing votes) sort of way.
August 10th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
that should have been “with whom there was no issue on which I would disgree…”
August 10th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
One thing about Dennis K I have a problem with – doesn’t spend enough on his haircuts.
August 10th, 2007 at 4:07 pm
This just in from HuffPo – new University of Iowa poll shows “Don’t Know” leading Iowa Republicans with 35 percent.
August 10th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Incidentally, I thought both Obama and Hillary did very, very well at the Logo/Human Rights Campaign forum. Edwards a little less so, and poor Richardson choked on his shoe. Kucinich was his usual slightly odd but fairly likeable self. But Gravel was the guy who really had a bright shining moment of being the truth-teller, particularly given his age and the issue at hand.
August 10th, 2007 at 4:20 pm
Dunno, Reg, this is probably a passing phase on my part, but you gotta wonder whether writing a candidate like Kucinich off is just a self-fulfilling prophecy. What interests me is that his positions seem rooted deeply in a very sane understanding of the world. It just seems that if that’s how I view the guy, maybe I should commit to support him. Not that he or anyone else is beating down my door seeking endorsement….
August 10th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
“reg”, you’re a scarbrous asshole; a bitter, venal, senile and impotent shut-in; a SHillary suckass; and you don’t know where Huntington Beach is, you clueless dessicated eruct.
That you cadged internet access is one of the failings of a democracy, dimwit braying toadstool .Thankfully your neighbors in Oakland (or San Quentin? ) keep you paranoid inside your hovel, so your inability to take responsibility for your drooling OCD idiotismo is not much of a blight on society, huevón mal cagado.
Sadly, pinheaded sociopath internet wanking sycophants like “reg” are imploding the present Democratic Party . Fortunately, relics like scabby “reg” and the Iowa caucuses are on the way out.
Ah,Iowa.
I like some of Iowa (some nice people) but not all of it, especially its lack of a coastline and mountains, and absence of mild weather in December.
I do despise parochial and dated farmer politics (a great grandfather was a corn and soybean farmer, like 90 years ago, folks) dictating to an urban society; a regional or national primary system would be better, or perhaps a national primary with clearly delineated campaign seasons. Iowa’s peculiarities in January are not representative of the future of this nation.
Kucinich get elected by Ohioans. Even though he’s vegan (I love that Iowa pork, yum!), I agree with him more than I do Shillary or AIPAC.
Now get out off the computer. The sun is out in SoCal.
August 10th, 2007 at 7:05 pm
“regâ€, you’re a scarbrous asshole; a bitter, venal, senile and impotent shut-in;
While I’m sure reg is capable of defending himself, is scarbrous someone who watches Scarbrough Country? As for reg being “impotent”, as much as I butt heads with Woody and jcummings here, I would never call them impotent as that would imply a level of intimacy that none of us would want- and this is something Woody, cummings and I could agree on without reservation.
August 10th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
Actually, Randy, “The Surge” makes two good points. I can be an asshole and the sun shines in SoCal. The rest of it I chalk up to my original assertion that he’s an ignorant little shit.
August 10th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
I also have to admit that the asshole in me is in awe.
August 10th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
Thanks for the assurances taht you wouldn’t call me impotent there RP. I would in turn not call you infertile or flaccid, though I think some of your arguments are the latter.
August 10th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Well there it is.
Kucinich “can’t win.”
Wasn’t that what they said about Howard Dean?
And which of us doesn’t wish to our soul that he’d won the nomination?
Sure, he may well have gone down to the mighty W machine–though I doubt it–but at the very least he wouldn’t have soiled himself the way Kerry did with that moronic DLC “I voted for the war before voting against it and would vote for it again, even though I’m against it now, sorta, hey I’m saluting, look I killed some Viet Cong” crapola.
Anyone who doesn’t think Shillary–sorry, but it fits too well–will similarly dirty her undergarments must live face down in a bucket of Hagen Daz or something.
If we can’t think and SPEAK past not voting for people just because the punditocracy and mediocre media say they’ve got no chance, we really don’t deserve anything better than a President Romney.
August 10th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
“Anyone who doesn’t think Shillary–sorry, but it fits too well–will similarly dirty her undergarments”
“will” ????
August 10th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
I would in turn not call you infertile or flaccid, though I think some of your arguments are the latter.
As I would never call you flatulent, although I regard some of your arguments similarly.
)
August 11th, 2007 at 7:58 am
On the other hand, I do find your writing to be somewhat turgid, but not in that way
August 11th, 2007 at 8:28 am
All I hear from you is belching and ejaculation! Make a real point!