Time to take off the gloves and hit Mitt

This post asks a real good question: where are the anti-Romney attack ads?

We're beginning to see them in New Hampshire. Good. Serves "Slick Mitt" right. And just listen to Romney whine when he gets a taste of his own medicine!

Trouble is, in attempting to be the "Christian leader" he's been so abused for claiming to be and turning the other cheek, Mike Huckabee has made himself the Michael Dukakis of 2008.

Being outspent twenty to one will hurt Huck here. And the Romney ground game will be devastating. But in the last analysis, if Huckabee loses in Iowa, it's because he didn't challenge the Romney lies with a negative counterattack pointing them out for the lies they are.

Romney's truthfulness is becoming an issue in this campaign. And if Huckabee doesn't address that issue- as hard is it may be for him on religious and ethical grounds to do unto Romney as Romney has done unto him- he's going to be in trouble on Thursday.

Comments

jarebear35 said…
I just remember like amonth ago, how every Huck supporter was saying that mitt would bury himself with the mudslinging (personally i like the contrast style, used by any candidate) and now y'all are saying that that is the only reason he would lose...you all are hilarous, absolute true comedy.
My friend, first, it's not the contrast that's objectionable. It's misrepresenting the other guy's record and positions- in other words, lying about him. Contrast all you want; just tell the truth.

I can't speak for "every Huck supporter," but I don't think anybody necessarily thought that mudslinging per se is an ineffective tactic. Just that there's a price to be paid for it.
Your candidate is paying that price now, when belatedly Huckabee and McCain are fighting back- and he's hypocritically whining that he's the one being picked on!

There is no question that Romney has isolated himself in the Republican field. The other candidates are beginning to hit back not only with information about his judicial appointments, but the trouble he has with the truth. The prediction you refer to still stands: it hasn't played out yet, but Romney's candidacy has destroyed itself with the mudslinging. He's the one who started it, and whatever happens in Iowa, he's the one who's going to be destroyed by it when the other candidates realize- as they've begun to- what Romney is willing to do to win, and what is historically the only effective way to fight back.

Now. If you seriously doubt that the negative ads are the only reason Romney might win, all you have to do is check out where he was in the polls when he started the negative ads, ponder why
he started them... and ask yourself whether to what degree they worked.

Somehow, your laughter seems a little forced.