Mar
07
2016

Mitt Romney drops in with some anti-Trump robocalls in tomorrow’s primary states.

I don’t think that this is an endorsement of, say, Marco Rubio (Rubio for President is mentioned in the call).

I think that this is a test*. I’m gonna commit heresy, here: unlike apparently the entire Internet, I don’t think Mitt Romney is a net negative for either a specific campaign, or the anybody-but-Trump people (hi). Dude got almost 61 million votes in 2012; and while that wasn’t enough for the general election it’s still nothing to sneeze at when we’re talking about a primary.

So what I think is happening here is that the Romney folks think that they have a pretty good baseline for how the four races tomorrow are going to go, so they’ve decided to drop last-minute robocalls in and see if that moves the needle any. If it does, they’ll keep doing it. If it doesn’t, they’ll try something else. And the way the call is structured: if it convinces a Ted Cruz supporter in Mississippi or a John Kasich supporter in Michigan to go in and vote for their guy, Romney’s team will probably still score that as a win.

Moe Lane

*Which may yet, indeed, end in an endorsement. But they were careful to make sure that nothing’s been committed and formalized. I should note, though: if Romney’s giving Marco Rubio any access to his donor network then any money problems that Rubio may be having will not be around for much longer.

20 Comments

  • YeaVerily says:

    with the current delegate count, the Last Thing we need is Rubio with more donor money!
    (and he was my guy in this debacle, up until Tuesday)

  • Luke says:

    The thing is, if Romney gets too aggressive, it will beg the question of why he has sharp elbows when battling other Republicans, but much less gumption when going after Democrats.

    • acat says:

      His elbows were plenty sharp in 2011 … just not pointed at Obama.
      .
      Mew

      • Luke says:

        I was leaving those memories as an unstated subtext.
        😉 I didn’t think many of us had actually forgotten. We hang out at a political blog for fun, after all.

        • acat says:

          I believe in stating the obvious- because what’s obvious to this cat may not be so clear to others.
          .
          I apologize for stepping on your subtext.
          .
          Mew

          • Luke says:

            No worries. You didn’t say anything that’s not true. I was just trying to chart a path between laying down the marker, and not unnecessarily needling our host.

    • nicklevi86 says:

      I wonder if it’s just a sort of family dynamic*, where there is a comfort level to the hostility because we’ve been stuck together for so long. There is more motivation to be nice to people who have wider range of a choice to associate with us.

    • Robert Mitchell Jr. says:

      First, he showed plenty of gumption when going after Democrats, it was just covered by the Press. On the other hand, the Press loves it when Republicans attack Republicans, so that gets extra press. The Media still has lots of power. It’s why we are trying to fight off Trump’s hostile takeover now, right?

      Second, remember how Hillary! got her Senate seat? We looked to be a lock to get that seat, and then our candidate crossed the stage…. And all we heard the rest of the campaign was how “mean” we had been to her…….

      • acat says:

        I am reminded of the tale of the fox and the scorpion…
        .
        Anyone running for a statewide GOP slot anywhere outside an Oklahoma-grade red state *knows* the media’s a scorpion.
        .
        Crafting a campaign strategy that *depends* on the media carrying it .. is like offering to carry a scorpion across the river…. *deadly* stupid.. as you point out.
        .
        So .. maybe you’re right, maybe Romney did go at the Dems .. but *part of getting elected* is getting that in front of the voters *depsite* the media.
        .
        I’d say, in fact, that’s *exactly* what Donald Trump is teaching a masters-level class in how to achieve – to those Repubs who aren’t so closed-minded that they can follow along, eh?
        .
        Mew

        • Robert Mitchell Jr. says:

          I have my doubts. We shall see what Mr. Trump does when the Press goes after him…..

  • Catseyes says:

    So, how are things going on the Dem primary front? I am still hoping that the Dem convention can be turned into a dumpster fire at least as big as the Republican Convention will be. I know Sanders won 2 of 3 on Saturday and kept Hillary from a sweep on Super Tuesday but what’s the delegate count Sans the super delegates?

  • Skip says:

    I have to disagree, Romney didn’t get 61 million votes, ‘Not Obama’ got 61 million votes. Probably something around a third of those votes were actually affirmatively for Romney. The dude managed to lose a very winnable race.

  • acat says:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/03/08/new-poll-shows-romney-speech-reinforced-trump-support/
    .
    So .. according to polling .. Romney’s speech moved the needle .. the wrong way.
    .
    It’ll be interesting to see how his robocalls do.
    .
    Mew

    • Moe_Lane says:

      Well, that net +4 less likely to vote for Trump among all voters is going to help, though. Remember all the grief we’re getting from open primary states? 🙂

RSS feed for comments on this post.



Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com