How Do You Solve A Problem Like Mitt Romney?

Damn if I know, but this article is pretty damn fascinating:

Romney’s advisers insisted that he would keep his inner circle intact amid growing concerns about the Republican presidential candidate and his campaign. The tempest began with a weekend tweet from media tycoon Rupert Murdoch and burst Thursday onto the pages of his newspaper the Wall Street Journal, as its conservative editorial board opined that Romney’s advisers were “slowly squandering an historic opportunity” to beat President Obama.

By day’s end, talk radio host Laura Ingraham had asked listeners whether the vacationing candidate should “get off the jet ski,” and influential commentator William Kristol, who recently returned from a private retreat with Romney and his senior strategists, had bemoaned the campaign’s “dangerous self-delusion.” Without a course correction, Kristol posited, Romney would suffer the same fate as the last two presidential nominees from Massachusetts, Michael Dukakis and John F. Kerry, both Democrats.

Romney’s advisers strongly rejected the course-correction suggestion but said they have been in the process of recruiting more political muscle to his Boston-based headquarters.

The campaign plans to bolster its rapid response and overall messaging operations and to assemble a senior staff for the eventual vice presidential running mate, according to strategists close to the campaign. They said some Republicans who have been informally advising the campaign may assume more official duties, including appearing as surrogates on television. The strategists said the moves could be announced as early as next week.

Up for a game of musical deck chairs on the SS Titanic, anyone?

As might be fitting to a meditation on the relative merits of Romney as candidate, I am of several minds regarding what the GOP candidate and/or his staff is doing wrong. For one thing, access to the mainstream media is really essential—they don’t mind being nicknamed and fed turkey and whatnot, so long as they get the odd quote—oh wait. Sometimes Mitt gives the very odd quote. That might not be so ideal. For another, they might want to dial back on relying on Ann Romney as a surrogate to “humanize” Mitt. Seriously, whenever she comes out to make Mitt seem more sympathetic, I actually find myself wondering what her deal is.

I guess they could give more policy specifics out, if their plans weren’t one part what the swine bathed in and one part what the cattle rancher stepped in. Then again, Romney could run on his record as a public figure, if the GOP didn’t hate everything he did and said back then. Or maybe run on Romney’s career as a successful businessman, if he wasn’t a vulture-capitalist job-outsourcing probable tax cheat.

Is the problem really the staff? Or could we safely call it the candidate by this point?

(X-posted at Strangely Blogged)

Posted by Vixen Strangely on 07/05/12 at 10:18 PM • Permalink

Categories: PoliticsElection '12MittensNuttersOur Stupid Media

Share this post:  Share via Twitter   Share via BlinkList   Share via del.icio.us   Share via Digg   Share via Email   Share via Facebook   Share via Fark   Share via NewsVine   Share via Propeller   Share via Reddit   Share via StumbleUpon   Share via Technorati  

Is the problem really the staff? Or could we safely call it the candidate by this point?

Yes.

Having had the opportunity to study the candidate’s musings, his spousal unit’s surrogacy, and the output of his “campaign team,”
I’ve concluded that the entire cult suffer from too heavy a reliance on magical thinking and reality avoidance.  Willard is too weird for Americans to take seriously . . . and that’s saying something!

Romney’s advisers strongly rejected the course-correction suggestion but said they have been in the process of recruiting more political muscle to his Boston-based headquarters.

That really is the corporate leech way, isn’t it. When in doubt, amend your charter to say how REALLY REALLY important you are and add another layer of middle management.

recruiting more political muscle

WTF does this even mean? Are we meant to believe there’s a reserve of “political muscle” out there sitting idle during the most cash spendingist campaigns in history? Bullshit. Xecky’s right, this is pure craven corporate-speak.

Not that I’m eager to see Romney’s campaign get a clue.

The Romneybot 2.0 might be suffering from business tycoon’s disease. Which is to say he’s recruited people that believe in his awesomeness at the expense of people who can tell him he’s a chronic fuck-up. Mitt’s a chronic fuck-up, btw, and I’m counting on that getting me affordable insurance in 2014.

“Recruiting more political muscle” sounds to my ears like “bringing in some leg-breakers from back East”—but it probably means flaks without conscience, spinners without fear, slick smiling motherjumpers who would lie to their own grandmothers about Medicare as easily as you’d eat a biscuit. I’m guessing the dirty part of the campaign is afoot.

Up for a game of musical deck chairs on the SS Titanic, anyone?

In the words of Stephen Colbert “Some may say they’re rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, but we know they’re soaring majestically, rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg.”

but it probably means flaks without conscience, spinners without fear

You’re probably right. I think that also in the mix is the Libertarian conceit that there’s an infinite amount of talent sort of swirling around out there that can turn into whatever employees you need as soon as you flash some money. Schrodinger’s Human Resources, kind of thing.

Page 1 of 1 pages

Sorry, commenting is closed for this post.

<< Back to main