Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« Constantine Announces Gun Safety, H… | It Gets Better—Science Says S… »

Monday, February 4, 2013

Political Suicide Ann Romney for Senate?

Posted by Paul Constant on Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Wonkette says it all, in a post titled "Yes, Please." Here's a quote from the conservative Boston Herald:

Massachusetts Republicans are desperately scrambling to find a strong Senate candidate to replace Scott Brown, with some even trying to persuade Mitt Romney’s wife or son to jump into the race to avert another electoral disaster. [...]
“I’ve had several people call me and ask about Ann Romney,” Ron Kaufman, a longtime friend and aide to the former Massachusetts governor and 2012 presidential candidate nominee, told the Herald.

This would make me so happy. I would travel to Boston with my own money and follow Ann Romney's senatorial campaign around. It would be the most entertaining three months of my life. Unfortunately, it's just not going to happen, because Ann Romney doesn't give a shit. Tagg Romney is a much more likely prospect, but I have a feeling he wants to wait for some of the loser stench to wash off the Romney name before he runs for office. I think we're still maybe four years away from Peak Tagg.

FacebookShare

Comments (20) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

Don't underestimate Tagg's arrogance. Although if you are such a poor loser that you say your dad didn't care about being President anyway, that should raise a serious questions your dedication to public service.

Posted by biffp on February 4, 2013 at 10:23 AM

Tagg wouldn't want to be a Senator anyway, even if he ran. Just like his old man.

Posted by Gern Blanston on February 4, 2013 at 10:23 AM

So the republican's plan to get Scott Brown back in MA by heaping praise on John Kerry for Sec. State backfired, eh?

Sucks to be them.

Posted by Urgutha Forka on February 4, 2013 at 10:26 AM

What is it with these GOP people and their weird kids' names? Tagg, Track, Trig. Which reminds me of the Italian horror film with its star "Gin Mart".

Posted by --MC on February 4, 2013 at 10:29 AM

@4: you forgot "Mitt". He's somebody's kid.

Posted by originalcinner on February 4, 2013 at 10:39 AM

@5 Technically Willard, though Mitt is an unusual middle name too. Tagg is just short for Taggart (see Dagny). It would be like naming your son Granger or Everdeen.

They start establishing their brands young.

Posted by dirge on February 4, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Ann Romney running for Senate would be the most entertaining months of your life? That is so sad.

Posted by ian on February 4, 2013 at 10:55 AM

#5, but Mitt's real name is .. is ... shit, I have to google for it. Willard. Wow, I used to know this by heart.

Posted by --MC on February 4, 2013 at 10:57 AM

No Rommey would get elected in Massachusetts again. Independents won't go for them any longer, and Republicans won't bother in an election they know they're going to lose. It'd take a fuck up on the level of Martha Coakley to lose that election, and I think the Dems have learned after that fiasco. Hope so, anyway.

Posted by NateMan on February 4, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Damn it. I had just forgotten that Ann Romney existed.

Posted by jzimbert on February 4, 2013 at 11:06 AM

IF WE IGNORE THE ROMNEYS THEY WILL EVENTUALLY GO AWAY.

Posted by bleedingheartlibertarian on February 4, 2013 at 11:38 AM

What I find interesting about the weird Romney names is that everything else about the Romneys is insanely (small 'c') conservative. Look at the Bushes for an example of how you name filthy rich Republican children.

The Palins, on the other hand, those names are completely normal, even obligatory, for lower middle class Americans, which they were until they got rich by bilking Wasilla taxpayers and then hitching their wagon to wingnut welfare.

Posted by keshmeshi on February 4, 2013 at 11:42 AM

Why would she even answer questions from You People?

Posted by Original Andrew on February 4, 2013 at 11:45 AM

@9 never, ever underestimate the MA Democratic Party's ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of certain victory. The party that nominated Steven Silber and Martha Coakley for higher office is going to require close adult supervision for well into our grandchildren's lifetimes.

Posted by Doctor Memory

on February 4, 2013 at 11:56 AM

It's not that she doesn't give a shit, it's simply that no way is she interested.Please stop randomizing us Paul.

Posted by Phoebe in Wallingford on February 4, 2013 at 12:19 PM

@15, Bring on the Dancing Horses? Is it the importance of dressage or how revolting the peasants are?.

Posted by biffp on February 4, 2013 at 12:29 PM

She looks fun.

Posted by very bad homo on February 4, 2013 at 12:55 PM

@14 I thought Ed Markey was a mortal lock to be the D nominee; there's no way he loses to - well, anyone, really. Ed knows WTF he's doing (unlike Ms. Coakley, for instance).

Now, if it's NOT Markey, you may yet prove to be right.

Posted by Catherwood on February 4, 2013 at 1:07 PM

I would love to watch Ann Romney run her entire Senate campaign on horseback.

Posted by Fnarf

on February 4, 2013 at 1:55 PM

Look, people bitch about Martha Coakley but she's been a bloody STELLAR attorney general after her defeat from the senate race. And MA Democratic Party is not the only one to lose like loser hose bags. Also can you see Ann Romney ('this is hard, wah') really running when she's got MS? Someone on a Boston chat thread said "If Tagg runs, he will not be itt."

Posted by sheiler