Political Animal
Blog
It’s a campaign tactic that’s been around for a long while, but Mitt Romney seems eager to perfect it: identify the candidate’s most damaging flaws, then project those flaws onto the candidate’s rivals. This week offered a classic example.
Mitt Romney on Thursday sought to portray President Barack Obama as out of touch with the struggles of everyday Americans — a charge he himself has often faced — by comparing the president to a former French queen who was overthrown during the French Revolution.
“When the president’s characterization of our economy was, ‘It could be worse,’ it reminded me of Marie Antoinette: ‘Let them eat cake,’” Romney said, referring to the infamously dismissive remark toward the poor attributed to the queen.
As Jon Chait noted, this is “in keeping with his favorite method of deflecting attacks.”
Romney anticipates his greatest vulnerability, then peremptorily lobs the charge against his adversary. That way, when his opponent uses the charge it’s repetitive.
Romney first deployed this technique against New Gingrich. He has deployed a furious assault against what was briefly his chief adversary, painting him as a flip-flopper who has wavered on abortion and even supported health care reform in Massachusetts. Gingrich was left stammering helplessly in response. After sifting through the charges and counter-charges, all the Republican voters knew was that you had two candidates accusing each other of flip-flopping and trying to help sick people get health insurance. The natural next step is to open his general election campaign by portraying Obama as a callous aristocrat.
At this point, anything’s possible.
It takes quite a bit of chutzpah for any candidate to campaign this way. For crying out loud, Romney accused Gingrich of taking both sides of every issue and being an unreliable champion of far-right causes. How does one even intellectually process something like this? Is it the result of a pathological lack of self-awareness, an assumption that voters are idiots, the belief that the media is hopelessly incompetent, or some combination of all of them?
But this Marie Antoinette line is arguably even more beautiful. Romney — who, by the way, speaks fluent French and spent nearly three years in France — amassed an enormous fortune thanks to a vulture-capitalist firm known for breaking apart companies and firing their American workforces. Despite a quarter-billion in the bank, and several mansions (one of which he intends to quadruple in size), Romney is running on a campaign platform that includes slashing public investments that benefit working families (including the total elimination of funding for Planned Parenthood), massive tax breaks for the very wealthy, repealing safeguards that protect the public from Wall Street recklessness, and calling for more foreclosures on those American families struggling to keep their homes.
Two weeks ago, Romney told PBS he’d like to see President Obama stop criticizing “Wall Street” and “insurance company executives” altogether. Yesterday, he debated whether he meets the “classical” definition of “a Wall Street guy.”
Romney thinks it’s funny to joke about being unemployed; he finds it inconvenient when he doesn’t have anything smaller than a $100 bill in his wallet while on the campaign trail; he doesn’t blink when offering to make a $10,000 bet; and he considers a $1,500 a year tax cut for the typical middle-class family to be a meaningless “band aid.”
This guy wants to compare Barack Obama to Marie Antoinette?
If votes are awarded on the basis of audacity, Romney should go ahead and start drafting his inaugural address.
Update: A couple of emailers remind me that Romney also intends to repeal the Affordable Care Act, taking health coverage away from millions. “Let them eat cake,” indeed.
Facebook
Twitter
GA Bubba on December 31, 2011 11:14 AM:
The very sad thing is that the low information voter (and that is most Americans) believe what they hear - if they hear it enough and from the "right" sources. I did not believe it could get worse than the eight Bush-Cheney years - but we could be looking at some horrible years to come; again, thanks to the overall American ignorance. (And I ain't too happy with Obama - his performance over the last 3 years either.)
majun on December 31, 2011 11:16 AM:
The tactic worked so well for Bush in 2004, when his surrogates were able to convince millions of Americans that all of Kerry's war medals were part of a conspiracy to make a craven coward acceptable as a Presidential candidate. So a group of chicken hawks who lied us into a disastrous war managed to convince a majority of Americans that they were more fit to continue the prosecution of that war than a highly decorated veteran.
It is a page out of the Karl Rove playbook that turd blossom has used to such great affect that I am surprised that he hasn't tried to patent it. Of course if he had he would be suing the ass off of Romney right now.
c u n d gulag on December 31, 2011 11:16 AM:
"...identify the candidate’s most damaging flaws, then project those flaws onto the candidate’s rivals."
Mitt's going to accuse Obama of being an uber-Richy-rich, humorless, uncaring French-speaking vulture-capitalist, who debates like he's got a man-sized Popsicle stick firmly up his ass?
This clowns got some CHOOTZ-pah!
This would be like Michele Bachmann saying that Obama's a mentally unstable, gay-hating religious nut, whose family has taken farm subsidies for years.
Alli on December 31, 2011 11:22 AM:
Won't work in Obama's case.
psychobroad on December 31, 2011 11:22 AM:
And if your average low-income or unemployed person votes for this fool, it serves them right. Off topic, glad to have you back, Steve. Ed's o.k., but he ain't you. :)
Gandalf on December 31, 2011 11:25 AM:
That's hilarious! I know when the poor and the middle class look at Mitt and Barack they think you know what that Mitt he's a regular Robin Hood and Barack my god he's just like the sheriff of Nottingham and prince John all rolled into one.
Keeping Track on December 31, 2011 11:26 AM:
The Audacity of Lies
Baud on December 31, 2011 11:41 AM:
The problems won't start for Mitt until he wraps up the nomination and people actually start paying attention to what he says. Hard to believe, but he's actually a worse candidate than McCain was (although I don't think he'll make the same mistake in picking a running mate).
Slideguy on December 31, 2011 11:41 AM:
Unfortunately, "if your average low-income or unemployed person votes for this fool" it doesn't serve me right.
K in VA on December 31, 2011 12:05 PM:
Actually, it's a classic political maneuver developed to perfection by Karl Rove.
In fact, Rove's evil outfit is currently running ads describing Elizabeth Warren as a friend of Wall Street. For low-attention voters (i.e., most voters) it works very well.
jjm on December 31, 2011 12:09 PM:
He can try all he wants but even with low information voters, the idea of a black man being a richy-rich tool of Wall Street acting like Marie Antoinette is just not going to fly with them.
Especially not with those who believe, a la FLA gov. Rick Scott, that all black people are necessarily poor, uneducated, unintelligent, and certainly never clever enough to become rich, like all the smart white people do.
Romney stands for nothing but business, and if that ain't what Wall Street stands for, then what?
Paul (@princejvstin) on December 31, 2011 12:13 PM:
I think people are ignorant enough that it could work, especially if the economy doesn't improve.
President Williard Romney.
Cthulhu help us all.
gregor on December 31, 2011 12:14 PM:
Actually it appeals very well to the people who resent the presence of a black family in the White House.
It works on many levels. Obama is out of touch with common folks. Since he is black, his wealth must have been accumulated by legitimate means. What has this country come to?
Mitt is a lot of things but he is not stupid.
T-Rex on December 31, 2011 12:24 PM:
But Chait's right, it works. By making a pre-emptive "thou too" argument, he makes it sound as though the other guy is saying "thou too," and puts him on the defensive. This wouldn't be a problem if we had a functioning media that would call him on it, of course.
Johnny on December 31, 2011 12:27 PM:
You can't hate your opponent for playing the game better than you. Democrats should be taking careful notes.
Rabbler on December 31, 2011 12:37 PM:
Has there ever been an accurate negative evaluation of the right that they haven't tried to reflect on to the left? It has to be their most frequent and possibly successful ploy. For non-thinkers it creates an equivalence and allows them to indulge their worst prejudices without compunction. Just what they want to do anyway.
LL on December 31, 2011 1:11 PM:
This is what we get when the royalist-party gets completely out of hand, having no morals, no integrity and no shame. When all it wants is power.
American democracy really wasn't designed to work this way, where one major party behaves--essentially--like a sociopath. The founders no doubt assumed national politicians would always have SOME kind of integrity. When one party renounces all honesty, and it has a lot of money, our system breaks down.
Of course, as another poster pointed out, if we had a properly functioning independent media, the royalists would not be able to get away with this. Which is why Rove's stated intent 15 years ago was to undermine the credibility of all media by any and all means. He succeeded brilliantly, with a bit assist from Corporate America, which now owns all of our major media outlets.
We are in very big trouble in this country right now, and the only people who can get us out of this trouble are us. Our leaders won't. Our parties won't, and low-info voters won't. Who does that leave?
g on December 31, 2011 1:12 PM:
The tactic of calling Obama an elitist is likely to be effective, especially since it's been used before (see "arugula") and there's a meme out there in the conservative blogosphere - but you have to agree that Romney's attempt was hamhanded and off-target. Marie Antoinette? Half the boobs he's talking to have no idea who she is - and it seems suspiciously French of him that Romney knows who she is.
Romney can't manage a zinger. He just can't.
Obama doesn't have to counter Romney by saying "you too." He just needs to laugh and go, "Marie Antoinette? SeriouslY? You're kidding, right?" which is pretty much what the DNC did.
g on December 31, 2011 1:19 PM:
Lest we think Romney's NOT as wealthy and as out of touch as the soon to be Widow Capet, take a lot at this article at the NY Times, Homes of the candidates and view the slide show - Romney's homes are the modern version of Versailles.
Gus on December 31, 2011 1:22 PM:
Doesn't matter what Willard says, as long as he is stoking the fire in the belly of the base beast. The republican tribe could care less about honesty. The important thing is to get the black man out of the White House. Every thing that contributes to the death of liberalism is good. Attack from every angle all the time. Attack the Girl Scouts for crying out loud. They are just searching their drawers for poo to fling.
Danp on December 31, 2011 1:26 PM:
You can't hate your opponent for playing the game better than you.
If you think deceiving voters is "playing the game better", you've been watching Chris Matthews too long. To most of us, this isn't just a game.
It also is not about hypocrisy or projection. It's about reinforcing the idea that "everybody does it". If governing doesn't work, and it's everybody's fault, then Republicans are the ones who will lower your taxes. Bad roads? Pollution? Corruption at every level of society? Poor school systems? If it's everybody's fault, why would you want to add higher taxes to the list? Just accept all the other bad things, and be grateful for "less government."
chi res on December 31, 2011 1:49 PM:
This is what they do when they've got nothing else.
Like the kid at the playground yelling, "I know you are, but what am I??!"
What fools say when they got abs'lootly nothin'.
jjm on December 31, 2011 1:55 PM:
The economy will improve, as it already has in California, and my prediction is that the GOP candidate won't have a leg to stand on -- except as an avatar of the 1% rich and their promise of 'Just identify with me, and you too, someday...'.
The very best Democratic strategy is to laugh at the GOP's actual impotence. Even the Wall Street Journal is furiously critical of the GOP for not wringing one policy concession from the Democrats.
They gnash their teeth, lie, foam at the mouth, or like Romney, who does none of these things, say such stupid things that no one on earth could actually believe him.
TCinLA on December 31, 2011 2:00 PM:
If votes are awarded on the basis of audacity, Romney should go ahead and start drafting his inaugural address.
Be careful what you ask for. There has never been a more profligate bullshitter (i.e., a man who doesn't care whether something is true or not) ready to take the national stage as a candidate. No one has ever had to deal with someone like this before. Like you point out, Gingrich was left sputtering and the average bozo reading the so-called "news" written by the usual journalistic tenthwit, got "he said/she said" from it. So long as the political reporters fail to point out when a lie is being told and when bullshit is being manufactured, Romney can get away with this and with the overwhelming political illiteracy of the average voter, he could well bullshit his way straight into the White House. I've seen it already happen with some folks I know who are not as politically aware as they think they are
mr.irony on December 31, 2011 3:58 PM:
Romney to quadruple La Jolla home size - SignOnSanDiego.com 8/20/11
and that home that is too "inadequate" for their "needs" ?
is a $12-million dollar mansion....
marie antionette?
bring it on willard...
Kathryn on December 31, 2011 4:10 PM:
I've seen tape of Romney spouting French, roll the tape, plus the money stuffed in pockets, mouths pics, etc. Since the entitled Mitt gets out sorts in a Fox interview that's unscripted, hopefully he can be rattled by a mildly challenging MSM media questioner, which should happen once he's the nominee, should not will. The free ride he's getting with lying is quite discouraging though. If it were reversed, all hell would have broken loose by now
Who do you bloggers see for V.P.? Will it have to be an evangelical? Nikki Haley, Bob McDonnell, Santorum, Huckaby. Of course there's always Rubio, Christie, I agree he won't make the mistake McCain made, reckless he ain't.
Cha on December 31, 2011 5:00 PM:
mitt prick antoinette.
mitt has to lie about President Obama and he does it with insulting viouciousness to the American People. All the Obama campaign has to do is lay out the facts on the evil Kochead candidate.
David Martin on December 31, 2011 7:09 PM:
As best I can tell, the Florida state government's efforts to not recognize or cooperate with the Affordable Care Act (under the pretense that it's not law until upheld by the Supreme Court) have been popular with people who are likely to vote in the fall. I don't think anyone is expecting the President to carry the state, nor is anyone expecting Tea Party members of the House to lose their seats. Over the past 20 years or so, Florida has gone from political moderation to being a lot like Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas (where the same process seems to have taken place). Obama carrying the state in 2008 was a fluke.
If Florida is anything like other states, it seems that any Republican nominee will do well and most likely win, barring a major last-minute scandal.
exlibra on December 31, 2011 7:13 PM:
Yeah, Obama is *exactly* like Marie Antoinette -- a child of privilege, whose mother spent all her food stamps on cake. She also chose not to have health insurance, so that she could die of cancer and provide her son with a talking point for his campaign.
Mutt Romney isn't just a liar and flip-flopper; he's a despicable human being in a robot's clothing (or, perhaps, the other way 'round)
Craig on January 01, 2012 12:35 AM:
Not only has Romney had multiple Marie Antoinette moments, but each moment has sounded weirdly awkward. Maybe he's consciously taking the Nixon route. Beats me.
But there's one thing sure: pointing a finger at Obama is a bit silly given that Romney owns the cake.
The 1% have their man and it's Romney, the job killer.
MNRD on January 01, 2012 3:22 AM:
I don't think it's a planned tactic - I think it demonstrates a basic lack of self-awareness on the part of Romney. I think that by engaging in this behavior, Romney is doing enormous damage to the Romney brand. To a large extent that damage is being hidden by the weakness of the field - and by the fact that the Republican Establishment basically annihilated Gingrich. My take is that Romney is spending an awful lot of time chasing after fool's gold. At some point in this process, Governor Romney will discover that all that glitters isn't gold.
Texas Aggie on January 01, 2012 1:53 PM:
Does Mitt expect anyone to believe this?
Yesterday I read a report of a research project concerning various aspects of authoritarianism that looked at how people's beliefs in the reality of the Holocaust, attitudes toward gays, and attitudes towards feminists can be manipulated. To his dismay, the researcher found that a gross and obvious lie can significantly alter beliefs and that these beliefs are not restored by telling the truth and by pointing out the fallacies in the lie either before or after telling the lie. He didn't try to see if the effects were long term, but they did exist for several weeks. So it seems like the big lie is a very effective technique and as we've seen, Romney has no problems practicing it.
Maybe what needs to be done is to continue hammering the SOB as a flip flopper and a bald faced liar.