Mitt Romney: Sauce for the Goose

Last week, Mittens’ campaign set the tone for its coming campaign with a somewhat misleading ad, as Washington Examiner‘s Campaign 2012 blog notes:

The ad quotes Obama saying, “If we keep talking about the economy, we’re going to lose.” Obama did say that during an October 2008 campaign appearance in New Hampshire, but he was quoting an anonymous McCain aide, quoted in the press: “Senator McCain’s campaign actually said, and I quote, ‘if we keep talking about the economy, we’re going to lose,’” Obama said.

Romney isn’t even the GOP candidate (yet), so the Examiner interprets this as Mittens’ team wanting to make it plain that he’s willing to play hardball, and the truth be damned—which in this Still Rovian era is what’s really important in a Republican candidate, after all—and quotes some gloating in the Romney camp:

Romney aides know some Republicans fear that if Romney is the GOP presidential nominee, he might run a cautious, measured campaign against Obama like John McCain’s losing effort of 2008. They know Republicans want to see a fearless, all-out campaign against the president. In that sense, the first ad was an effort to show Republicans that Romney will be as tough as he needs to be.
...
But one Romney adviser calls it “incredibly telling” that Democratic criticism focused almost entirely on the use of the soundbite, and not on the substance of the ad itself, which was high unemployment. “This is how these guys operate,” the aide says of Team Obama. “This is how they shamelessly reduced Bill Clinton to sputtering that he wasn’t a racist. This is how they attacked Hillary for not having a core, for saying anything to get elected—the same Hillary who hosted Senator Obama’s largest fundraiser.”

“We get that and get how to get under their skin,” the aide continued. That fact that not just Obama campaign aides in Chicago but White House spokesman Carney joined in the pushback was, to Team Romney, a sign the Obama team was “rattled.”

“We get it,” said the aide. “We will tie them in knots.”

Heh. Well, two can play at that game.

h/t zerostress

P.S. Do click through to the YouTube comments, where some Mittenites are in a grave state of confusion. Sample:

I’d like to hear from Buzzfeed about if this is real or not.. hearing more and more its fake

Minor update: Col. Mustard (a Newtite) ~~shrugs~~ tuts.

While Team Romney is claiming some sort of victory from getting Obama’s attention, I’m not so sure a misleading ad is needed or warranted against Obama — there’s plenty of real material from which to draw.

He thinks it would be a much better idea to revive the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Hey, it worked last time!

Meanwhile, some of his commenters may not be helping:

It’s time to break out of the debate cycle, and Mitt’s move here is good. I think he’s Obama’s worst nightmare as a candidate because he’s as proabortion and pro-gay as Hillary Clinton, he won top office in a very liberal state, he actually governed, he out-ObamaCared Obama, and he’s endured more bashing in campaigns over a much longer time.

Honk honk!

Posted by YAFB on 11/27/11 at 11:49 AM • Permalink

Categories: I Don't Know Much About Art, But I Know What I Like • Politics • Election '12 • Mittens • Barack Obama • Our Stupid Media • Skull Hampers •

Share this post:

Only people deluded enough to think that Mitt doesn’t have six tons of exploitable baggage would be on his campaign team in the first place.

(I’m videoless out here - what does Mitt say? The comments look like a ton of delusion and really low budget ratfucking.)

Comment by Xecky Gilchrist on 11/27/11 at 12:22 PM

what does Mitt say?

Basically, he’s in full Obot mode. Obama 2012!!!!

Comment by YAFB on 11/27/11 at 12:24 PM

I’m videoless out here - what does Mitt say?

Somebody did an editing job on Mitt similar to the one he did on Obama. He tells us that Obama’s policies are the best thing for the country.

Comment by MikeJ on 11/27/11 at 01:13 PM

I can’t decide who has the biggest Samsonite factory full of exploitable baggage, but since it looks like it will be either Robo-Mitt or Lyin’ Newt I’d say it is going to a season of goodies for Obama’s ad campaign one way or the other. It is truly an embarassment of riches.

I grew up in heavily Mormon territory, and I can guarantee that the entire faith is on tenterhooks with the hope that a very active member of the faith could gain the ultimate legitimacy of being elected US president. They’d love to leave that “cult” label to the Scientologists and move fully into the mainstream.

Newt’s just a sleazy grifter with a titanic ego, so no matter what happens he gains more political pull, gets his ego futher stroked (beware Callista, a younger drawn-to-power version of you is no doubt circling even now), and sells a ton more of his crap books. Win-win for Newt, even if he doesn’t win the presidency.

Comment by StringOnAStick on 11/27/11 at 01:28 PM

Will Romney’s VP pick “balance” the ticket with someone Teabaggy and more exciting than he is? It worked for McCain.

I’m hoping he shuts out the Wingnuts this election.

Comment by Bob Stanley on 11/27/11 at 02:24 PM

Will turds be in full blossom this year? I wonder if the collapse of old media* will affect the Rovian model.

*a collapse, I think that’s not total but significant.

Comment by Jewish Steel on 11/27/11 at 02:44 PM

Will Romney’s VP pick “balance” the ticket with someone Teabaggy and more exciting than he is? It worked for McCain.

I’m rooting for Bachmann. Plenty of excitement there, I’d imagine, and some RW pundits (like Smitty at Stacy McCain’s) seem to be enthused by the idea of somebody of the female persuasion (bonus: fundy) being on the ticket.

Either that, or it’s on with the drag for Romney, as we discussed earlier, or Cain goes and gets gender reassignment, killing two birds with one stone, so to speak.