DeMinty Fresh Mitt

David Weigel | January 9, 2007

I've had my fun with Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, but this is a hell of an endorsement.

Sen. Jim DeMint has endorsed former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in the 2008 presidential race, according to a letter the South Carolina senator is sending to state Republicans.

...

"I'm writing to ask for your support of Gov. Mitt Romney for President," DeMint says in the four-page letter. "We must elect a President in 2008 who is up to the task, and I need you to encourage Mitt to run."

DeMint's split is seen by some as a move to find a conservative alternative to McCain, but it's not that much of a surprise.

Obviously the endorsement of a South Carolina senator will help Romney in the South Carolina primary, which in 2000 became McCain's Gallipolli. More interestingly, DeMint is one of the staunchest fiscal conservatives in the Senate, and after Tom Coburn probably the best Republican crusader against earmarks. These are issues that, as a rising star in the 1990s, Sen. MCain used to be great on. This seems like another signal that Reformer McCain is mutating fast into Bush II, and his colleagues have noticed.

Comments

Jennifer|1.9.07 @ 1:59PM|#

Wasn't DeMint also the guy who said that gay people and single mothers should be banned from becoming teachers?

David Weigel|1.9.07 @ 1:59PM|#

Nobody's perfect.

|1.9.07 @ 2:00PM|#

Romney has been avoiding commentary on the Iraq War for the past five, because he is so plainly on the opposite side from his constituents on the issue.

Which is turning out to be a good thing for his ambitions. No tagging him with this disaster.

|1.9.07 @ 2:05PM|#

There will be no Mormon President any time soon. Liberals are not voting for him, and when the conservative evangelicals get in the voting booth, they will genuinely fear they are aiding the antichrist in disguise. Sounds ridiculous, I know, but that is all the analysis you need.

Ain't happening.

Jennifer|1.9.07 @ 2:05PM|#

Endorsement by a bigot is not in itself a reason to vote against the guy, but it's certainly a reason to take a skeptical look at him.

|1.9.07 @ 2:06PM|#

Reformer McCain is mutating fast into Bush II

Frankly, I view this as progress.

|1.9.07 @ 4:04PM|#

There will be no Mormon President any time soon. Liberals are not voting for him, and when the conservative evangelicals get in the voting booth, they will genuinely fear they are aiding the antichrist in disguise. Sounds ridiculous, I know, but that is all the analysis you need.

So if liberals won't vote for him, and conservatives won't either, how then did he ever get elected as Governor of Massachusetts?

Jennifer|1.9.07 @ 4:18PM|#

Massachusetts is an odd state, Holly.

|1.9.07 @ 4:49PM|#

I think that would be a good evidence of electability. He obviously appeals to a large amount of moderate voters.

I doubt most southern Evangelicals would hesitate to vote for Romney if he were running against Hillary.

Interestingly enough, if Evangelicals do consider Romney to be the personal representative of the Antichrist, it will allow many of them to fulfill their private vow that they would "rather vote for the Devil himself than for Hillary Clinton".

|1.9.07 @ 5:19PM|#

"DeMint is one of the staunchest fiscal conservatives in the Senate, and after Tom Coburn probably the best Republican crusader against earmarks."

Is DeMint also a lunatic?

|1.9.07 @ 5:23PM|#

After reading up on Romney, I'd vote for him.

He's the only candidate I've seen so far who's demonstrated any success in the private sector.

He graduated from Harvard Business School, interned at Boston Consulting Group, was hired by Bain & Company, rose to VP, co-founded private equity powerhouse Bain Capital, and realized a 113% annual rate of return during his tenure as CEO.

What have any of the others done?

|1.9.07 @ 6:03PM|#

After watching the DeMint/Inez Senate election in 04 I'd be hard pressed to not do the exact opposite of what DeMint does. It also doesn't help that in the 2 speeches I've heard him give made me wonder how he ties his shoes in the morning.

Of course Inez is even more of an idiot so I guess we are less worse off than we could be here in SC.

|1.9.07 @ 10:51PM|#

Captain Holly,

Massachusetts is a funny state. The Democratic Party is so dominant that a veto-proof majority in both chambers is a given ever single election. Because of this, the House and Senate Democratic leadership pretty much run the show. The Governor is an important figure, sure, but only one of many.

As a result, people in Massachusetts pick a governor primarily based on his perceived ability to stand up to the Beacon Hill Democrat legislative leadership - urban white ethnics from eastern Mass, pretty much.

Obviously, we the center-left majority would prefer to have a moderately liberal Democrat in that role, but we keep running into the problem of the Democratic candidates either being too close to that faction (Shannon O'Brien in 2002, James Roosevelt in 1994), too wimpy (Scott Harshbarger in 1998), or too unappealing to the public (John Silber in 1990) to trust them to maintain an effective, independent voice. So we're willing to elect Republicans with whom we disagree - because we know they won't be able to accomplish a Republican agenda, but they'll act a check on the legislative branch. They just have to put on an adequate show of symbolically distancing themselves from the hillbilly fanatics who run the national party. So that's how Mitt Romney got elected in Massachusetts.

Now, this year, we got Deval Patrick, a Washington Clintonite Democrat, and a black guy from Chicago, as the Democratic nominee - a guy who isn't part of the Beacon Hill machine, and who has enough of a base of his own to stand up to them. And he proved himself a tough enough fighter once the Republican launched a fairly nasty campaign that we decided we could trust him to show some cojones in standing up to the legislature. So that's how the second black governor in American history got elected in Massachusetts.

|1.9.07 @ 11:32PM|#

Look libertarians,

You can either have homophobic bigoted Jesus freaks who will allow for greater prosperity and economic freedom or you can have socialists who want to micromanage your life for your own good.

Go out tommorrow and count how many times you face a business restriction, have to pay a toll road or an excessive traffic ticket, not be able to purchase something you want due to some beauract looking out for your health, get stopped at some random bullshit checkpoint and how many tax dollars you spend. At the same time, count how many times government's views on homosexuality or aborition influence you.

I'm going with the Jesus freaks.

Eric Dondero|1.10.07 @ 8:13AM|#

Grand Chalupa, that was classic. LOL.

Seriously, I'm impressed with this DeMint endorsement of Romney. I like Romney, don't love him. He's acceptable to me.

Here's a little secret, that I shouldn't be saying, but what they hey.

Let's just say I personally witnessed Romney making a big effort to reach out to a semi-famous elected libertarian Republican in a northern Great Lakes State. He went out of his way to support this libertarian Republican for reelection. And this libertarian Republican won with the slimest of margins after a huge Democrat attack against him for his libertarian views. So you could make the argument that Romney helped put him over the top.

I'm still hoping Wayne Ally Root, the Sports Betting guy runs for President as a Libertarian Republican. And indications are he is seriously considering it. Saving that, I'll support Giuliani, who the London Times just called a "libertarian conservative."

But if I have to settle for Romney, that'll work.

Eric Dondero, CEO
www.mainstreamlibertarian.com

Andrew Ian Dodge|1.10.07 @ 8:24AM|#

Grand Chulupa...like the comment.

Oh a betting guy running for President that would give some of the Bible-bashers a bit of a problem.

I am so pleased to see McCain losing his lustre. Big tip...if the BBC loves you and you are running for President of the US...as a Republican...you are in trouble.

|1.10.07 @ 3:40PM|#

"Go out tommorrow and count how many times you face a business restriction, have to pay a toll road or an excessive traffic ticket, not be able to purchase something you want due to some beauract looking out for your health, get stopped at some random bullshit checkpoint and how many tax dollars you spend. At the same time, count how many times government's views on homosexuality or aborition influence you."

With the emphasis on you.

Hell, I'm not in Gitmo.

Brian E|1.10.07 @ 8:03PM|#

I wasn't at Waco, either. Nor am I in jail for the crime of possession. (Yes, that's bipartisan folly.)

Gitmo is not some unique horror of this current administration. It's not even unique within the context of the past few administrations, and there's little reason to believe that the next president from either major party won't have equal problems.