Discussion for article #224105
Takes a politician of rare gifts to simultaneously insult both gay men and southern white conservative men.
Wolf killer!
âThey just have effeminate mannerisms. If you were just a regular person, you turned on the TV, and you saw Eric Cantor talking, I would sayâand Iâm fine with gay people, thatâs all rightâbut my gaydar is 60-70 percent. But heâs not, I think, so I donât know.â
Bloody hell Eric.
Just killed any shot you had at riding the K Street gravy train.
jw1
Holy crap.
This guy do speak his mind.
He can expect to get that âgaydarâ comment thrown back at him in the futureâŚ
I love the guy, and would vote for him in a second, but he will never be POTUS.
Iâm not saying I always agree with him; I donât. A successful national candidate has to avoid conflict that the beltway stenographers can latch onto (the conflicts they ignore are A-OK, as conservatives demonstrate every day).
Anyone who says what they really think ensures that they canât be elected.
The more this guy talks, the more I dislike him.
âBut heâs not, I think, so I donât know.â
But not knowing will be no hindrance to me babbling on and inferring that he is gay.
I am sorry, I just donât see this guy as a serious contender for the nomination. Easily could have won the Senate seat in MT this year, but the Dem nomination for the President? Not gonna happen.
Stay in Montana.
This guy is never getting anywhere near the Dem nomination. Heâs a climate change denier too.
The bolo ties werenât enough?
Once upon a time, several years ago, I had become a fan of then-Governor Schweitzer based on his record in the Montana statehouse, especially his enthusiastic willingness to pound Republicans in humorous ways while making a political point. I even thought that he had bona fide national potential in the party, as a wisecracking western populist who would be very difficult for Republicans to pigeonhole as an effete, arugula-eating Dem.
Fast forward to today, and itâs evident that either I am guilty of completely deluding myself about what kind of person he actually has been all along, or he is suffering from some sort of mental decline. Seriously, what politician with realistic national aspirations will babble incoherently in public about his âgaydarâ telling him that Southern politicians are gay? What Democrat with a tiny particle of common sense attends a Republican gathering and tells Mitt Romney heâs a boatload of fun while saying that the leader of his own party is stiff as a board?
Whether Schweitzer realizes it or not, he is finished as a politician with any real influence in the Democratic Party.
He needs to stay in Montana. Nowhere near ready for primetime
Sounds more like heâs running for the Republican nomination.
Ok, I love that he is trolling southern white twits, but to do it in such a hackneyed, distasteful way is a testament to his lack of imagination and political skills as much as it shows that he is incredibly out of touch with the people he is courting for votes.
And come to think of it, I imagine white southern gay men, both out and closeted conservatives, arenât going to be inclined to say âhey, thatâs the guy I want in the White Houseâ now . . .
Right there with you.
PARK CITY, Utah â For a Democrat toying with waging a presidential primary challenge against Hillary Rodham Clinton from the populist left, the exclusive confab of chief executives and Republican donors hosted by Mitt Romney is a most unlikely place to campaign.
But thatâs precisely what Brian Schweitzer did this week.
The former Montana governor, MSNBC contributor and 2016 hopeful delivered a stem-winder of a speech to some 300 Republican elites assembled here in a theater-in-the-round setting at a luxury mountaintop resort.
Schweitzerâs remarks Friday afternoon were all over the map â from life lessons he learned as a boy leading his steer at 4-H club showings to his disagreements with the Affordable Care Act and the war in Iraq to sharp criticism of President Obamaâs energy policy. And he said the one elected official with whom he agrees on some issues is Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).
During a question-and-answer session, Republican strategist Ana Navarro asked Schweitzer whether he was more relatable to average voters than Clinton is. The rancher-politician said he is, but quickly segued to a diagnosis of Romney and Obamaâs likability in the 2012 election.
âI donât know why you lost the election, Mitt, but I know this: I was watching you on TV and I didnât see the Mitt Romney that I knew,â Schweitzer said. âYou are a fun guy and youâre easy-going and Obama is not. Iâve been in the room with him a little, too. Heâs stiff as a board and youâve got it going on.â
He pretty much torched his future in the Democratic party when he refused to run for the Senate this year, and instead started making plans for running for President.
Because the two are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, a Senate seat would have provided a much better platform to launch a campaign for president. And he was about the only real chance we had at holding that seat.
I suspect he is in it for the money, and he receives a great deal of personal pleasure from the attention these sort of half cocked statements bring him.