"If you are a Democrat or independent who has lost confidence in Mr. Obama, what might you like about Mr. Romney?"

"You might like that he's proved himself successful in business. You might find that especially attractive if you are someone who has lost your job or worry that you might lose your job."

William McGurn, in the WSJ, commenting on Obama's supposed abandonment of the working class.

Romney has got to be lying...

... when he says he doesn't use any "product" to hold his hair in place.

ADDED: Actually, it's only his hairstylist who says there's no product. Romney's not on record with this denial.

Presmittdent.

I just wanted to be the first person on the internet to write that word.

"Key social conservatives secretly meet to stop Romney in Iowa."

CNN reports:

One attendee at the meeting earlier this week told CNN they wanted "to see if they could come to a consensus of who they might endorse."...

"If you want to stop Romney you're probably going to have to have some organization [and] some money," the source said. "Somebody who's at 5% or 6% in the polls, and they endorse, I don't think that does any good."...

Participants were said to have narrowed their focus down to four candidates: Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.

That leaves our Ron Paul and Herman Cain.

Social conservatives will have the best chance of success if they pick:
	Michele Bachmann
	Rick Perry
	Newt Gingrich
	Rick Santorum
pollcode.com free polls

The idea of social conservatives backing one of those 4 is:
	Good, because it's the best way to stop Romney, who is bad on social conservative issues.
	Good, because it helps stop Romney, who just isn't my favorite candidate.
	Good, because it helps stop Romney, the best GOP candidate, and I'm for Obama.
	Bad, because it might stop Romney, the GOP candidate most able to stop Obama.
	Bad, because it might stop Romney, and I'm for Romney for a number of reasons.
	Bad, because it will help the social conservatism cause, which I oppose.
pollcode.com free polls

"GOP voters know exactly who they want... and it is... NOT MITT ROMNEY."

"Unfortunately, he does not have corporeal form..."

Put Mitt In Our Mitts... Put Mitt In Our Midst...

I'm working on a slogan for Mitt Romney.

There's something I like about Newt Gingrich.

He reminds me of a law professor....



Most of the candidates will listen to a question and then answer some question they wish they'd been asked. This is a standard approach to answering questions on television. It's a way to avoid letting the questioner control you, and you create an opportunity to say what you want to say.

That's not what Newt does. He listens to the precise question asked and examines it, then works out, before our eyes, what is wrong with that question and what the real issue is. He has a depth of understanding and flexibility of mind that allows him to do that, he cares about doing that accurately and well, and he has the style to want to perform reasoning for us. I like that. I try to do that all the time in class, and I know how hard it is, what presence of mind and grasp of the material it takes.

For example, in that little clip, the moderator Scott Pelley asks:

As president of the United States, would you sign that death warrant for an American citizen overseas who you believe is a terrorist suspect?

Pelley has framed a yes-or-know question, and instead of saying "yes" (or "absolutely" as Mitt Romney just did), Newt says:

Well, he's not a terrorist suspect. He's a person who was found guilty under review of actively seeking the death of Americans. 

Newt says that in a puzzled and slightly peeved way that creates drama about whether he might be confused or combative. It puts us on edge. And Pelley is now required to speak again. Newt didn't launch into a lecture. He even ceded some time to Pelley, who says:

Not found guilty by a court, sir. 

Gingrich doles out a dollop of information:

He was found guilty by a panel that looked at it and reported to the president. 

Pelley is now put in the role of the student in a dialogue:

Well, that's extrajudicial. (CROSSTALK)  It's not the rule of law. (APPLAUSE) 

Look at Pelley at this point — 0:32 — he's smiling and glowing, thinking (perhaps) that he's doing well in class, and the audience applauds for him. Gingrich swoops in:

It is the rule of law. That is explicitly false. It is the rule of law. If you engage in war against the United States, you are an enemy combatant. You have none of the civil liberties of the United States. You cannot go to court. 

Now, the applause is for Newt. The dramatic moment has happened, and now the professor makes it all very clear with an instant, crisp mini-lecture on the dimensions of the rule of law:

No, let me be -- let me be very clear about this on two levels. There is a huge gap here that, frankly, far too many people get confused over. Civil defense, criminal defense is a function of being within the American law. Waging war on the United States is outside criminal law. It is an act of war and should be dealt with as an act of war, and the correct thing in an act of war is to kill people who are trying to kill you.

There's more applause. We hear one of the other candidates say "Well said. Well said." I think it was Mitt — Mitt, who had just been asked the same question. Mitt answered the question clearly and cleanly. ("If there's someone
that's going to join with a group like Al Qaida that declares war on America,
and we're in a war with that entity, then, of course, anyone who is
bearing arms with that entity is fair game for the United States of America.") Credit to Mitt for openly admiring the style and substance of Professor Gingrich.

IN THE COMMENTS: John Althouse Cohen said:

It sounds to me like Perry is the one who said, "Well said, well said."

On another relistening, I agree.

Peggy Noonan found Rick Perry's "brain freeze" "endearing."

I see the point:

Rick Perry's candidacy wasn't going anywhere before the famous 53-second brain freeze. Now it's official. To me it was the first thing he's done that was endearing. You're out there live in front of six million people, they're watching closely, you're under the lights, every word counts—and you blank. You forget the third element of your robotic soundbite. This is human. But we don't want our presidents to be human, we want them to be perfectly prepped and drilled so we can make fun of their inauthenticity.

Ha. Exactly. Speaking of which:

Mitt Romney, of course, did well, and continues to deserve an award for Heroic Self Discipline in the Cutaway Shot. He looks at the other candidates with a benign, encouraging look, as if he'll take no pleasure in it at all when he squashes them like bugs.

Oh, yeah, the split screens with Romney looking on completely crack me up. I've been wracking my brains trying to come up with the right description, and Peggy's take is just perfect.

"Will GOP debate be sidetracked by Herman Cain sexual harassment allegations?"

"The Republican debate Wednesday is supposed to focus on the economy. It’s likely, though, that Herman Cain's sexual assault allegations will dog him throughout the debate."

Well, that's absurd. Cain's troubles are playing out in the public arena. We've heard his defense: He didn't do it. I don't want to hear more of that. I want all the candidates to have their shot at distinguishing themselves on the merits. That's especially important if Cain's candidacy is collapsing. I am satisfied with Romney getting the nomination, but I know a lot of people want another option. Tonight is an important opportunity for someone who isn't Cain (or Romney) to move forward.

I'll be covering the debate after some time lag, because I've got an appointment that cuts into the first hour. Please use the comments on this post to talk about the debate when it starts in a couple hours, and I will join you later.

ADDED: Sexual assault allegations?

"Yes, nothing goes better with a brutal political attack than acoustic guitars and whistling."

That's sarcasm, but I actually think incongruously lighthearted music is captivating.



Can you think of some examples of incongruously lighthearted music accompanying a brutal attack? The "Singin' in the Rain" scene in "Clockwork Orange" comes to mind.

But come on, Jon Huntsman on Mitt Romney is a far cry from ultraviolence.

AND: As for whistling and violence... don't forget "M"!

"Mitt Romney will be the nominee because the other candidates, right now, are a pretty pathetic lot."

Says Erick Erickson, crabbily conceding what everyone basically knows but might like to pretend not to know. The column goes on and on. Conservatism will die, etc. etc.

Why is Perry but not Romney or Cain beating Obama in the Rasmussen poll of Wisconsin voters?

Perry beats Obama, 46%/54%, but Obama beats Romney, 45%/41%, and Cain, 47%/42%.

I just don't get it. What's getting Perry those extra 4 or 5 percentage points here? Something about the empathy toward immigrants? The HPV vaccine? Is Wisconsin harboring some anti-Mormon or anti-black folks?

I genuinely don't know, and I also wonder what it might say about the recall effort against Scott Walker.

ADDED: Rasmussen has a new poll about Walker:

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Wisconsin Voters shows that 38% Strongly Approve of the job Walker is doing, while the same number (38%) Strongly Disapproves. Overall, the Republican governor earns positive reviews from 49% and negative grades from 49%....

Walker’s overall ratings have improved since March, when 43% approved of his performance and 57% disapproved.  At that time, 34% Strongly Approved of the job he was doing and 48% Strongly Disapproved....

While 55% of male voters in the state like the job the governor's doing, 55% of female voters disapprove of his performance. 

What's with the sex divide? Well, that's not special to Wisconsin, is it? The Perry thing... that's what's puzzling.

Most voters under 40 disapprove of Walker, while the majority of their elders approve. Married voters and those with children in the home are more likely to approve of the governor's performance than are unmarrieds and those without children. 

These kids today!

Now, here is the most interesting statistic:

Just four percent (4%) of Wisconsin voters rate the U.S. economy as good or excellent, while 60% describe it as poor. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of those who think the economy is poor give Walker favorable marks.

Iowa poll: Cain 23, Romney 22, Paul 12... Perry 7.

Fascinating.

What's the most interesting thing about this new poll?
	Cain's on top.
	Romney's doing so well when he's eschewed campaigning in Iowa.
	Paul in the double digits.
	Perry's tanking.
	Whatever happened to Bachmann, who won the Iowa straw poll?
pollcode.com free polls

"I don’t know whose bright idea is was to send Romney to Ohio, have him rally the troops at a call center..."

"... and then refuse to support the policy they’re fighting for, but one thing appears certain: this unforced error is going to leave a mark."

That's the thing. It's good for Romney to stand aloof from Ohio's overheated collective bargaining mess, especially if the side he'd have to take is about to acquire the stink of losing. But do that standing somewhere where aloofness looks prettier.

UPDATE: Romney clarifies:

"I fully support Gov. Kasich's Question 2 in Ohio... I'm sorry if I created any confusion there."

He claims he was being careful not to seem to be saying anything about some other issues also on the ballot which he wasn't familiar with.

Romney: "President Obama’s astonishing failure to secure an orderly transition in Iraq..."

"... has unnecessarily put at risk the victories that were won through the blood and sacrifice of thousands of American men and women."

Obama campaign answers: "Mitt Romney didn't lay out a plan to end the war in Iraq in his foreign policy agenda - he barely even mentioned Iraq - but he is apparently willing to leave American troops there without identifying a new mission."

ADDED: Spencer Ackerman: "But the fact is America’s military efforts in Iraq aren’t coming to an end. They are instead entering a new phase. On January 1, 2012, the State Department will command a hired army of about 5,500 security contractors, all to protect the largest U.S. diplomatic presence anywhere overseas."

"As I name a few Republican candidates for president please tell me the ONE word that comes to mind..."

It's a WaPo-Pew poll, eliciting the first reaction to the names Herman Cain, Rick Perry, and Mitt Romney. For each man, there is one word that clearly comes out on top. Can you guess?

I feel like I'm supposed to talk about this.

Eh. What's the big deal? Some overtalking. Men get slightly irritated at each other. So what? The CNN commentators prompted us to think about whether this means one or both of these guys is "unlikable." It's meaningless.

"The White House knows that if Republican voter enthusiasm is suppressed, then The One has a chance."

Rush Limbaugh, working a theory yesterday:

And they rightly conclude that Romney might depress or suppress Republican enthusiasm. Now, the GOP establishment, their thinking is that Romney is electable in a general...

I'm skeptical! This premise has Obama's people and establishment Republicans on the same page!

... but the base, the Republican base is not jazzed. Turnout is obviously gonna be crucial....

His point — which he's been making elsewhere on the program — is that Romney isn't a good conservative, and the GOP establishment, which lacks confidence in real conservatism, is pushing Romney. The establishment thinks that's the way to win, but in fact, according to Limbaugh, it's staunch Reaganesque conservatism that wins for Republicans. You need to jazz up the base and pump up turnout. Oddly, in this monologue, the Obama White House understands what the GOP establishment doesn't — that Romney won't inspire enthusiasm.

Earlier in the show, Rush noted that the White House chose the day of the debate to dump records showing — I'm quoting trom the Michael Isikoff's story — that "senior Obama administration officials used Mitt Romney’s landmark health-care law in Massachusetts as a model for the new federal law, including recruiting some of Romney’s own health care advisers and experts to help craft the act now derided by Republicans as 'Obamacare.'" Rush saw that move — correctly, I'd say — as evidence that the White House wants to stop Romney.

So is Romney the strongest candidate for the Republicans or not? If the GOP establishment wants him and the White House doesn't, that is overwhelming evidence that Romney is the strongest. But that conclusion conflicts with Rush's dearest belief: that we need a strong conservative. So Rush was desperate yesterday.

And he was just getting the information that Chris Christie was going to endorse Romney. He shifted to that topic (right after the material quoted above):

Now, just as an aside, why would Governor Christie spend a year going back and forth publicly, privately, on and on about whether he would run for president or not; only a week after saying no, run up to Romney's side? What's changed? I mean if in the past year you're thinking you might run, part of that is that whoever else is running isn't the answer. If Romney is the obvious superior candidate, why go through the rigmarole of considering whether to run yourself for a whole year? But you know the story's gonna -- it's already the headline on Drudge, "Christie to Endorse Romney" -- that's gonna be a bigger story than what comes out of the debate tonight. Christie's endorsement is already the story. No matter what happens in the debate tonight, when it's all over, no matter who does what, the story, "Christie Endorses Romney." 

We heard the desperation yesterday, as Rush Limbaugh struggled to fit his template onto the news that poured out over him. Occam's Razor says Mitt Romney is the strongest candidate for the Republicans, but Rush says nooooooo!

ADDED: Later in the show, Rush assures us that if Romney is the candidate, he "is gonna have my full support because of what we're up against." He's simply trying to take advantage of the opportunity to get a more conservative candidate. And — let's face it — he's got a radio show to do. If Romney has it locked up now, there's a lot less for Rush to rant about 3 hours a day, 5 days a week, for the next 6 months.

Tonight's Republican debate.

Is it only on line? I see it here, but I can't find it on TV. Feel free to discuss it in the comments. I'm not really live-blogging — because it's not on TV! — but I'll talk about it if the spirit moves me.

ADDED: If it's not on TV, I don't want to watch. The streaming on-line is too tedious. I'll wait for the transcript. And read what Jaltcoh has to say.

AND: Thanks to Rob in the comments for giving me the channel number. That was really hard to find! Okay, I'm watching now.

ALSO: I realize I've just written the most boring debate live-blog of all time.

PLUS: The Wall Street Journal's conclusion:

Herman Cain and his 9-9-9 plan were front-and-center all night, while Rick Perry, who many considered the frontrunner just a few weeks ago, was something of an after-thought in the debate. He hit a few bloop singles when a lot of people thought he needed clear home runs. Mitt Romney showed a little more verve than he has in previous debates and seemed perfectly comfortable defending his record and showed a knack for the counterpunch (particularly with regard to Cain's 9-9-9 plan). If he and Cain are one and two, voters will have a VERY clear choice between the maverick and the manager.

MORE: Power Line says:

Mitt Romney did very well again. He comes across as strong, reassuring, articulate, experienced, knowledgeable. At one point, other candidates peppered him with questions. That helped Romney, I think–he came across as the candidate who matters. He also defended Romneycare more passionately than I have seen before. His pitch in his closing statement for a strong America was powerful, given the breaking news on Iran’s apparent terrorist plot inside the U.S.

"New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie will endorse Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney at an event today in New Hampshire..."

An emailed news alert from CNN, citing "multiple sources."