Tag: 2012 election

Tim Pawlenty to make 3PM Facebook announcement…

…I can’t begin to imagine what it could possibly be.

Seriously, at this point in the game Governor Pawlenty’s my first choice: he’s got the right credentials (two-term Republican governor in a Blue State), there’s no scandal attached to him, his major problem policy-wise (cap-and-trade) is not really a game-breaker for me*, and he lacks drama.  I am done with drama, thank you.  I’m putting this in RedState’s diary section because the site itself is not endorsing a Tim Pawlenty run, of course; it’s far too early for that and we haven’t really made up our own minds, yet.

At any rate, the announcement will be at 3 PM EST, on Facebook.  Friend Tim Pawlenty to see it.  And I suspect that this site will be getting a major update soon.

Continue reading Tim Pawlenty to make 3PM Facebook announcement…

Cook gets two out of three right.

Which is not bad for a political prognosticator, actually. Charlie Cook is arguing in his latest column that the President must be hoping that one or more of the following things happen:

  1. Unemployment goes down;
  2. We not lose the war in Afghanistan; and/or
  3. THAT WOMAN gets the Presidential nomination.

…if the President wants to be reelected. First off: amazing what two years of institutionalized blithering incompetence will do to a man’s public perception, isn’t it? Seriously, Barack Obama should have taken four years off to go be Governor of Illinois, or something: because he’s got pretty much none of the life skills that we expect from chief executives these days. Second: let’s look at Charlie’s points, more or less out of order.

Continue reading Cook gets two out of three right.

Enemy of my enemy watch: Hillbuzz has a plan.

And you can believe their intentions as much – or as little – as you like; speaking as an incorrigible giver of advice that I know darn well to be ignored, their cheerful “forget all of this when we get a Democrat that we like running for office” attitude is an argument in favor of it being honestly meant advice. The short version? Don’t go after the current Democratic President the way that the last Democratic President was gone after.

Yeah, some of you don’t want to hear that; personally, I’m more interested in the 2010 election than I am the 2012 one anyway. I figure that the White House can find it just as easy to try to claim credit for everything that a GOP-dominated Congress does and call it a domestic policy as he currently does now for a Democratic-dominated one.  Besides, there’s a need for local support in elections.  There’s always a need for local support in elections.  There’s always going to be a need for local support in elections.

H/T A Conservative Lesbian, whose major problem with the advice is that it implies keeping Michael Steele as RNC Chair.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.