http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/bachmann-hampshire-staffers-resign-masse-161946711.html Stick a fork in her !!! She's done .... You're supposed to take care of home first honey!!!... These 2000's women...SMH I think she would be a great candidate for impeachment if elected...
As someone who worked in campaigns, it doesn't work like that. If your staff quits you lose. No one good will want to join your organization after something like that
This is weird to me. Bachmann's concentrating on Iowa and not New Hampshire, because New Hampshirites are rural rubes?
wes: I think somehow the editorial was meant to imply Iowans were rural rubes, which within GOP circles there, they are. But I don't get how this story about Bachmann staffers resigning is really even news. This has already happened once before during this campaign and is a hallmark of her career in Congress. I believe she has, on average, had a new chief of staff and a new spokesperson pretty much every year. She has never been able to hold onto staff and former staffers aren't too shy about talking about why. So the NH exodus is "stick a fork in her" time? Perry's entrance into the race took her from contender to pretender and she's never recovered in the slightest. In her must-win state of Iowa she's in 6th place in the latest poll and no recent poll there has her even as high as 4th. Her campaign's been over for some time now. She's Gary Johnson-relevant anymore. I don't even know why the papers are still covering her.
As a post-script though, I think either Bachmann or Santorum has the anti-gay bigotry cred to garner a short-term bounce in the campaign. Not enough to contend, but enough to somewhat change the weather in the primary race. Even though the GOP is desperately trying to keep the focus on the economy and off social issues (most especially gay issues but also abortion surprisingly enough), there are enough social warriors (and especially anti-gay bigots) in the party to give one (not both) a temporary bump if they'd be willing to stand up for their once proudly trumpeted bigoted positions instead of hiding from them. This would, of course, be a boon to Obama and Democrats as the whole field would be forced to go on record with their latest positions on gays and abortion, making them far less palatable to a general election crowd. Does anybody think Romney's sticking with his newly found crazy conservatism if nominated? Not a chance in hell. He'll be Mass. Governor Mitt the day the nomination's locked up. And Perry too, if he were to pull off a miracle, would be crowing about his bi-partisan past, distancing himself further from Bush, distancing himself from the tea party freaks and dropping the birtherism crap. Only Bachmann and Santorum are true believers on these now antiquated social positions. As such, either could rebound for a month or two, getting the third ticket out of Iowa only to crash in NH, if only they would admit who they really are and what really drives them. I expect we're not too far away from their desperation being such they'll be willing to do so. My current (worthless) power rankings (divided by people that could conceivably be nominated and ones that can't) go like this: 1. Romney 2. Perry 3. Gingrich (and he's tied in my estimation with Perry in every area but cash on hand) --- 4. Paul 5. Cain 6. Huntsman 7. Bachmann/Santorum (tie to be broken by whichever comes out strongly against gays first)
Batman, Romney will say whatever it takes to win against Obama. Morphing back to his more moderate self will be a part of that. Your power rankings are dead on except you should end it at #2. None of the others have a chance. If Romney and Perry died this week, the GOP would draft another candidate or two because nobody remaining is remotely acceptable to party bigwigs. In fact, maybe you should just end it at #1 because Perry may have damaged himself beyond repair. Once his 3rd quarter cash haul runs down, he's toast. I imagine his TV ads in Iowa will be very negative.
Thanks. I know this isn't a popular opinion but I think Gingrich is going to get his turn to be the anti-Romney. He seems to be the only one that truly gets that this is a marathon and not a sprint. And he's qualified by the usual standards. Huntsman is too and should probably appear above the line for just that reason. Also, it's not for nothing that in two of the most recent national polls Gingrich is polling third -- behind Cain but ahead of Perry. I think this Cain-Gingrich 'Lincoln-Douglas' debate could be the boost he's been waiting for. Of course I'd still guess Romney will have a hard time losing, but I'm giving Gingrich more of a chance than most as most are giving him none and I'm giving him some. We ought not forget where McCain and Obama were polling at this exact time during the last cycle. Nor where Kerry was. All three were facing deserting donors and premature campaign obits. Normally I'd say anything can happen between now and Super Tuesday, but with so many truly (and obviously) unqualified, unserious candidates, I think Romney, Perry, Gingrich and Huntsman are the only ones to even consider. Pre-convention anyone could still jump in (I was in NY working for Jerry Brown and praying for Mario Cuomo at the DNC in '92) but it would represent a real crisis in the party and the nominating process. And it would take a real collapse on the part of the current candidates. We've already passed some filing deadlines so anyone that gets in now will not be on several ballots. Then you start to think, well who could even conceivably win the nomination? I think when you get it down to that criteria, the four I mentioned all merit consideration regardless of their standings in such early polls.
Also worth mentioning that there is a real chance that this may be the first primary race where that doesn't even matter. That's what the powers that be gave up when they ceded so much leverage to the crazy tea party wing. GOP bigwigs and power brokers haven't just lost their rights to smoke cigars in the rooms in which decisions are made, they may find the locks to the doors of those rooms have been changed and that their knocks to be let in will go unanswered.
I found it interesting that the resigning staffers still remained committed to "making Obama a one term president". Is that the only goal worth committing too? How ridiculous.
