Comments on: Romneyites Are Getting Desperate http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/ n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Sat, 20 Mar 2010 10:47:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: Grumpy Old Man http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5561 Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:29:17 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5561 Yeah, Mo was the Dem. Speedoo was the one who didn't ever take it slow. Yeah, Mo was the Dem.

Speedoo was the one who didn’t ever take it slow.

]]> by: Daniel Larison http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5560 Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:29:06 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5560 Right. Sorry for the confusion there. Right. Sorry for the confusion there.

]]> by: kranza http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5559 Wed, 14 Feb 2007 00:42:34 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5559 He meant that he promoted Rehnquist to Chief. Mo Udall was the one who ran as a Dem. He meant that he promoted Rehnquist to Chief.

Mo Udall was the one who ran as a Dem.

]]> by: John42 http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5558 Tue, 13 Feb 2007 23:54:35 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5558 You gave Reagan too much credit. He only nominated Scalia, not Rehnquist. Nixon nominated Rehnquist. You gave Reagan too much credit. He only nominated Scalia, not Rehnquist. Nixon nominated Rehnquist.

]]> by: Daniel Larison http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5557 Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:43:36 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5557 Good catch on Reagan's first run. That makes sense--1968 was technically almost as open of a race as '08 will be, so Reagan would have had a reason to jump in. From what I understand from what I have read and from what my father has told me, Mormonism was considered a potential problem for the elder Romney, but he had his "brainwashed" moment that ended his campaign before its significance could be put to the test on a national stage. Look at that USA Today poll I cited recently. They claim to have results for the same poll that goes back to 1967, and anti-Mormonism has increased slightly over the last forty years. I assume intensified politically active evangelicalism has a lot to do with the increase. I can only take so much credit. Good catch on Reagan’s first run. That makes sense–1968 was technically almost as open of a race as ‘08 will be, so Reagan would have had a reason to jump in.

From what I understand from what I have read and from what my father has told me, Mormonism was considered a potential problem for the elder Romney, but he had his “brainwashed” moment that ended his campaign before its significance could be put to the test on a national stage. Look at that USA Today poll I cited recently. They claim to have results for the same poll that goes back to 1967, and anti-Mormonism has increased slightly over the last forty years. I assume intensified politically active evangelicalism has a lot to do with the increase. I can only take so much credit.

]]> by: Grumpy Old Man http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5556 Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:14:46 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5556 Was Mormonism discussed as much when George Romney was running for President, and whichever Udall ran as a Democrat? Or is it now because (a) more people think Mitt is a serious candidate; (b) political evangelicalism is more salient recently; or (c) Daniel wasn't born yet? Was Mormonism discussed as much when George Romney was running for President, and whichever Udall ran as a Democrat?

Or is it now because (a) more people think Mitt is a serious candidate; (b) political evangelicalism is more salient recently; or (c) Daniel wasn’t born yet?

]]> by: kranza http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5555 Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:28:33 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5555 Reagan's first run was in 1968. Reagan’s first run was in 1968.

]]> by: razib http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5554 Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:01:39 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5554 Daniel, should you perhaps rename the blog Romneymonomia? ;-) Daniel, should you perhaps rename the blog Romneymonomia? ;-)

]]> by: James Kabala http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5553 Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:00:10 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/02/13/romneyites-are-getting-desperate/#comment-5553 I don't blame Reagan for the Kennedy appointment, since a) He tried to appoint Bork and b) It is now known what was long suspected - that Kennedy voted to overturn Roe in 1992 and flip-flopped at the last moment, something Reagan presumably could not have foreseen. He does deserve blame for O'Connor, however - he wanted a woman, and he made no effort to see if she was really a conservative. I don’t blame Reagan for the Kennedy appointment, since a) He tried to appoint Bork and b) It is now known what was long suspected - that Kennedy voted to overturn Roe in 1992 and flip-flopped at the last moment, something Reagan presumably could not have foreseen. He does deserve blame for O’Connor, however - he wanted a woman, and he made no effort to see if she was really a conservative.

]]>