I’m beginning to wonder just how far back has Romney been, through his operatives, manipulating the Party, press, and other’s campaigns in order to have himself positioned as not only the inevitable candidate but President too. Quotes below from several places that seem to me to point in that direction when taken together.
As an electoral defeat seemed imminent and eventually came to be in 2008, anonymous McCain staffers (many of whom were former Romney staffers) were thought to be the ones who disparaged the Governor–who was a candidate on the very ticket they were working for–by saying she “went rogue” against the McCain campaign’s direction, didn’t know that Africa was a continent, and answered the door of her hotel room with nothing but a towel on during the campaign. All this happened while, as Governor Palin stated in her Facebook post, “[m]any of these same characters sat on their thumbs in ‘08 and let Obama escape unvetted”. Senator McCain’s staff was kneecapping their own candidate while Senator McCain was unwilling to effectively focus on candidate Obama’s associates and lack of a record.
In 2010, anonymous Romney staffers would dismiss Governor Palin as “not a serious human being”, and even as recently as last fall, other anonymous staffers joked that they would be trilled with a Palin (and/or a Bachmann) candidacy because they could run against those “crazy women”. Not juxtaposition of records or ideas, but personal attacks, not by Romney himself, but by anonymous staff. His hands stay clean while his potential opponents get knocked.
At the height of the past week’s Drudge Report punishing of Newt Gingrich, many eyebrows were raised. Drudge seemed to be running an inordinate number of anti-Gingrich hit-pieces, and myself and others began to wonder what might be lurking behind this story. It wasn’t that it was mere bias, something we’ve all learned to expect from all media outlets, but instead an overwhelming sense that Drudge simply wanted to pummel Gingrich into the ground to make way for Mitt Romney
[…]
[T]his afternoon, somebody passed along a story that might help to explain it. I read the article in fascination, and I apologize to my readers for having missed this when it first published. It seems obvious, reading this article in retrospect, with a few more months behind us what had been going on, and now it seems clearer than ever given Drudge’s one man war on Newt Gingrich during the last week.
The article from last November over at DamnDirtyRino.com offers a view of things when Drudge was pummeling Rick Perry, then still in the campaign for the nomination. While not nearly as exhaustive as his most recent slant against Gingrich, what happened was very similar in terms of his approach. A number of harsh anti-Perry headlines appeared prominently, and they served their purpose well. Apparently, back in 2005, RNC operatives arranged a meeting between Drudge and Matt Rhodes, a highly placed operative in the Romney operation. Ever since then, Drudge’s links haven’t included headlines that were negative toward Romney, and what’s more, it seems that whomever challenges Romney gets ripped, ultimately.
[…]
It’s not a new article, published last November, but it made clear allegations about a process of clearly biased smears that had not yet been turned against Newt Gingrich, but at the time, was being fielded against Herman Cain, too, if you’ll remember.
Few conservatives would make a similar miscalculation. Many of the first generation of new media platforms, including Limbaugh’s show and Drudge’s Web site, first flourished because of a conviction among conservatives that old media were unfair.
All this has given Republicans a comfort and skill at using new media to political advantage that most Democrats have not matched. At the Republican National Committee, leaking items to the Drudge Report is an official part of communications strategy.
During the 2004 campaign, current and former RNC staff members said, opposition research nuggets on Kerry were almost always leaked first to the Web site. Sometimes they were trivial — such as the fact that Kerry got expensive haircuts at the Christophe salon — other times they were controversial quotes from his days as a Vietnam War protester. All together, these and other items contributed to Kerry losing control of his public image.
Ken Mehlman, the RNC chairman and head of Bush’s reelection campaign, said his operatives leaked to Drudge because it inevitably drove wider coverage, including to old media organizations: “He puts something up and they have to follow it.”
Last year, a delegation of RNC officials flew to Miami Beach, where Drudge lives, for a dinner at the Forge steakhouse to introduce the Internet maven to Matt Rhodes, the party’s new opposition research director.
Due to Drudge’s now-close friendship with Romney’s chief aide and longtime GOP opposition researcher, it’s a safe bet Perry supporters won’t have many positive headlines to look forward to from the erstwhile gadfly. Having apparently been fully co-opted by the dread Republican Establishment, Drudge has been feeding the conservative online community a steady diet of pro-Romney headlines for years and, more recently, anti-Perry headlines — just to strike a balance, you see.
Just this week, for example, five of six Drudge headlines about Perry include bad news, from polling to policy: “PERRY APOLOGIZES FOR CALLING GOP VOTERS ‘HEARTLESS’… Iowa: Romney 21%, Bachmann 15%, Perry 14%, Paul 12%…POLL: CAIN ON TOP, PERRY PLUMMETS…PERRY: MY WIFE PRODDED ME TO RUN.”
Romney benefited from similar treatment from Drudge during his last run for the White House, when Drudge went hammer-and-tong against each of his opponents — reserving special scrutiny for Mike Huckabee:
A year ago, Rhodes signed on to Romney’s campaign. Since then, Drudge-watchers have noted Drudge’s consistent refusal to hype–and in many cases to even mention–negative stories about Romney. But now Huckabee threatens to blow Romney’s nomination strategy. Since last week, Drudge has unleashed a torrent of screaming, anti-Huckabee headlines, culminating in today’s “exclusive” (which cites one unnamed Democrat) about the Democrats’ supposed hope that Huckabee will emerge as the G.O.P. nominee.
Could it be that Romney has been working a strategy as far back as 2005, or before, to not just position himself as a favored by the establishment candidate but also working to get his people into other campaigns to ensure that they will not gain the Presidency, which would then set his own ambitions into an 8 or more year eclipse, and working to gain a media advantage in the online world similar to that the Democrats have in the dead tree and TV medias? A media advantage which would also work to co-opt the Democrat’s own media as they come more and more to feed off of the online world for stories. I don’t know but it would help explain some of the oddities of both 2008 and this campaign.
[…] homepage « Progressive meme busting | Home | Drudge of all work [guest post by GeoffB] » January 28, 2012 What’s left to […]
a “mitt is an obamahole” bumper sticker might be start
Dede Scozzafazza also comes to mind, Drudge just buried the tidal wave that was NY-26.
With this special skill to imagine facts, can you tell us who really killed JFK.
Newt has risen and fallen and all the time Drudge has hated Obama. I think had Newt focused on Obama and not picked up the Demo talking points on capitalism and envy, he would have won. As it is, to the moon Alice. To the moon.
Based on my Twitter feed, it seems that opinion on this is running against me: Palin is a whiny scrunt who is out of touch with the TEA Party, and Palin / Newt defenders are suckers who don’t know how politics works. Go TEAM!
“Demo talking points on capitalism and envy”
you can’t question mittens track record as a venture capitalist cause that makes you a commie. sure. whatever i don’t care shifting interest in senate and congress races. the fix ain’t in there yet.
It seems to me Geoff provided a number of links. If there’s something you’d like to dispute, kindly do so. But dropping little snide asides is rather useless, and I daresay it will earn you no good will here.
plus Matt is super bffs with slutty romneywhore fag hag Ann Coulter
George Soros: there ‘isn’t all that much difference’ between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama
So Geoff,
Any evidence of Drudge leg sweeping teh Fred. Cus I might just have to pull a crane-kick on him.
There seems to be a pattern.
You have to admire Mitt’s long view determination. I wish Mitt would put as much effort into being a conservative. He might have actually turned into one by now.
I have a hard time commenting on this site from home these days because it crashes or freezes IE 7 on me, as an increasing number of sites now are.
Anyway… if the dreaded prospect of the Romneybot machine assimilating the GOP is not reason to support Newt Gingrich, nothing is.
The guy is White Republican Obama.
We know that espionage, blackmail, double agents are commonplace between nations, even those who are “friends”. When the stakes are high the gloves come off. And between nations they can be the highest.
We know that in the corporate world too that when the stakes get high enough then the standards can be, say loosened, as long as it is kept on the QT.
We see in other nations that the tools of the “intelligence” world are used to obtain and maintain power, political power. More so in the tyrannies but as has been exposed at times even in the democratically elected ones too.
Even here we have seen a Party taken over through the use of agents who were not as they appeared and worked for purposes that were hidden until they had seized control.
Events since then have shown that by using those same intelligence tricks that that same group has expanded their power.
Why should it be a stretch to consider that there are those among the other Party? “Our Party”. After all anyone can simply self-declare themselves to be a member when convenient.
There are many principled people in both Parties but power and all it’s trappings have been the downfall of many a principled person throughout all of human history. Tragedy is an old story form, yet forever new.
I don’t believe the Romney people sabotaged the McCain campaign. I do believe that they wanted to knee-cap Sarah Palin and keep her from emerging as a rival for the 2012 nomination.
Geoff, what worries me most with regard to what you seem to be alluding to, is the degree to which Romneybots seem willing to just stonewall redefine and ‘reframe’ all the issues to favor Romney, including the issues of healthcare. If you talk to most of them, they do really – a great great many of his most avid defenders – betray the fact that they don’t want government out of healthcare, they just want to manage it differently than Obama.
Speak of the devil…
First Norm Coleman now this.
http://tinyurl.com/77xh4mj
No no no no no no no no no!
Well, I’ve just moved from not supporting Romney, should he be the nominee, to actively opposing Romney.
Ernst, welcome.
If the other candidates who I actually like keep screwing up by actively supporting Romney and Newt I’m going to run out of names to write in.
Ann Coulter must be so proud.
She’s on the verge of blowing her reputation to hell an’ gone, that’s for sure.
McGehee, it’s one thing to just plan on not voting for Romney. It’s quite another thing to start contemplating a tactical vote for Obama, just to stop Romney from permanently befouling the Republican nest.
Run Run Rudolph Sarah, save the GOP!
(Hell, who am I kidding? If she get’s back in it, it’ll be because the GOP’s committed suicide.)
Sorta related: Anyone else wonder what kind (if any) of cooperation went on between the White House and the Romney campaign to derail Herman Cain?
@#14,
Since Palin was the one thing that energized the 2008 campaign wouldn’t doing one do both?
And the NYT.
I see your point. Here in Georgia though, even going that far wouldn’t likely have much of an impact, so I’m left voting not so much to affect the outcome as to protect my immortal soul.
Ann Coulter must be so proud.
I never understood the hagiography assigned to Ann Coulter. She has always been unnecessarily abrasive, at least to me. Laura Ingraham makes many of the same points as Coulter without belittling and getting nasty to whomever she is disagreeing with.
She’s a Rockefeller Republican at heart and Mitt is her kind of politician.
She was on O’Reilly last week and totally lost it while defending Mittens to Bill. (I didn’t see it, hubby told me about it.)
If she loses the Sean Hannity crowd (doubtful), she’ll fade into the sunset.
Wait. Wasn’t Mitt running to the RIGHT of Juan McAmnesty McClimateFraud McLame in 2008? And wasn’t Sarah Palin chosen for Veep candidate *after* that dustup was over?
AGAIN, I am less than thrilled with Mitt the RINO (although less of a RINO than McLame, but that’s not saying much). However, saying Mitt’s Operatives were out to destroy Palin in 2008, to pave the way for 2012, comes across as Black Helicopterish. Why not just attack McLame from the Right and do the same thing more effectively?
anonymous McCain staffers (many of whom were former Romney staffers)
Can we name names, please, and let it be known whose former staffers backstabbed Palin? This doesn’t have a lot of credibility. We already know McLame’s staffers were even more RINOey than Romney’s.
It wasn’t that it was mere bias, something we’ve all learned to expect from all media outlets, but instead an overwhelming sense that Drudge simply wanted to pummel Gingrich into the ground to make way for Mitt Romney.
Gee, could it be that many Republicans of good will just KNOW how many skeletons in the closet Newt has, which you just know the Commiecrats will time release for maximum impact? Ockham’s Razor, Simplest Explanation and all that.
A number of harsh anti-Perry headlines appeared prominently, and they served their purpose well.
Perry imploded in the debates. Enough said. “A quick rinse would do”, so to speak, for Perry. Sorry.
Dede Scozzafazza also comes to mind, Drudge just buried the tidal wave that was NY-26.
Gee, where did Newt come down on that one again?
Jeff has a great blog, but this post is leading into Conspiracy Cloud Cookooland.
It seems to me Geoff provided a number of links. If there’s something you’d like to dispute, kindly do so. But dropping little snide asides is rather useless, and I daresay it will earn you no good will here.
Sorry, but MarkO is right. Make the case that (1) Newt can win and (2) Newt is less RINOey than Mitt, and (3) Mitt is being a slime (although Newt’s attack on Bain Capital is also sleazy, and coming from the *Left* at that!)
But this attempt to dig up a Mitt Grand Design as far back as 2005? This reads like Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion (Mormon Zion, that is).
I don’t like Newt. That’s personal.
I’d rather have Mitt than Newt. Personal again. I’m not going to persuade anyone. All I want is to get Allen West heavily involved in the campaign.
Obama said that our military are the greatest people on earth. Let’s go with that, and have Col. West continue to get the spotlight when he tells Obama, Reid, Pelosi and Schultz to “get the hell out of the USA”.
He speaks with moral authority and the blessing of King Barack himself. He’s measured, prepared, and he gets to the point.
More Allen West!!
(West) speaks with moral authority and the blessing of King Barack himself.
Hasn’t he automatically been “Uncle Tommed” by the Commiecrat media apparatchiks?
That said, your approach to focus on Congress is correct.
Oh, that’s been done. Nicolle Wallace and Steve Schmidt were prime offenders. Anyone who hires either of those shitheads for a campaign should be immediately voted off the island.
The wrong side.
#34: Exactly. So let’s not call everyone who has doubts about the mercurial and wonky Newt a Romneybot, OK?
If this pans out, than I’ve went from an ABO position (leans Newt), to a BTDYK (better the devil you know) voter.
…looking more likely lately that I’ll be sitting this one out.
Aargh. What kind of idiot simply thinks this stuff won’t out, sooner or later.
yes if it’s Romney he’s so super-electable a lot of us who aren’t comfortable voting for such a one are off the hook to enjoy tasty pancakes that day instead of waiting in line
you can bet your bippy me at least I’ll be looking for pancake groupons
I thought you were all about repenting of your Romney vote later.
You decide repentance is too churchy or something?
no i change my mind after they propped up poor useless piece of shit Bob Dole and shoved a press release into his poor useless gimpy hand
Well don’t let it bother you. I’m sure you’ll change your mind again.
I’m very mercurial
As in “poisonous in even small amounts”?
Yep.
The big question is whether Romney’s campaign will fight Obama as fiercely as they’re fighting Newt.
Anyone wanna bet?
#43, it usually takes longer than four years for history to repeat itself, but not this time.
I’m very mercurial
Given your proclivity for The Rule Of The Anus, I am not surprised.
For the record, I’m for Santorum at this point.
But hey, he gives you the heebeejeebies too, doesn’t he?
MarkO is a scrunt.
Geoffb,
Looks like teh Fred has picked up the scent as well:
Santorum is just a Romney stalking horse anymore I think
time to go