Mitt’s Inglorious Shuffle Off the National Stage

[DonViejo]

JOSH MARSHALL NOVEMBER 15, 2012, 2:35 PM 10866
In 1952 Adlai Stevenson was the presidential nominee of the Democratic party and lost. He was renominated in 1956 to face Dwight Eisenhower again. And again he lost. There are some other cases like this in American history. Grover Cleveland actually won two non-consecutive terms in office. William Jennings Bryant was nominated multiple times.

But on balance America has never had party leaders in the way that is natural in parliamentary systems. And in recent years, with nominees usually having little organic connection to party infrastructure or deep base of support, the pattern has become even more merciless and total.

Michael Dukakis is perhaps the most glaring example since he had so little national profile to return to and was viewed as such a poor candidate. But something similar, if less extreme, can be said of John Kerry and Walter Mondale and Bob Dole and John McCain.

But I think we may be in even new territory with Mitt Romney’s shuffle off the national stage. It’s not too much to say that Romney is now uniting the country across party lines that he’s someone who should leave as soon as possible and not say anything publicly again. Actually scratch that. Democrats are starting to think that having Romney around and continuing to dump on a broad range of Americans might be pretty awesome.

More seriously, it goes without saying that Romney was never more than a tolerated transplant among professional conservatives. His bonafides were doubted. We know all this. So it’s ironic that Republicans are uniting in calls to get off the national stage once and for all precisely because he’s continuing to make the kind of makers-and-takers type statements you might hear on a particularly feral and untethered rightwing blog.

It’s an amazing denouement. It puts the whole race in a new, if not surprising, perspective.

-30-

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/11/mitts_inglorious_shuffle_off_the_national_stage.php?ref=fpblg

[C_U_L8R]

1. The Stench

Sure seems like Mitt's crapped his
magic underpants on the national stage.
Doesn't he have any friends to keep him
from making such a disgrace of himself?

[unblock]

2. i think it was apparent early on that if and when he lost, he would be treated worse than dukakis.

for all the fun had at sarah palin's expense, she at least had a small group of fanatics behind her. in fact, her conduct in that entire campaign was arguably laying the groundwork for something lucrative to fall back on after defeat.

rmoney really had nothing. he was widely viewed as a loser who was less of a loser than anyone else in the republican field and then ran a general campaign trying to sell the idea that he was less of a loser than obama.

that was never gonna fly, and now he's just a loser.

dukakis at least was viewed as a very successful governor, winning three terms. rmoney was viewed as a terrible, one-term governor.

[Freddie]

3. Willard Mitt Romney, Won't You Please Go Now

Apologies to Dr. Seuss

[Dubster]

4. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[tanyev]

5. Look out, Mitt! They're getting the hook!

[Cha]

6. mittLies will be mittLies to the end..

WheneverTF that is.

However Senator John Kerry is a shining example of what amazing accomplishments can be made after you lose the election for US President. As is Jimmy Carter for the second term..gotta give props to his grandson, James CarterIV, here too for being such an Asset in our current WIN.

Good Piece from Josh Marshall.. thanks DonViejo

[Norrin Radd]

7. Why are we still hearing from him?

Please go away.

[Jennicut]

8. I say keep Mittens around as long as possible...he just makes the Republicans look worse.

That guy was the best they could come up with this year. What a disastrous field of candidates they had when Mitt Romney was the best thing going.

[Liberal_in_LA]

9. ...