This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.


  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:

Mitt Romney
"President Obama is a really nice guy, but his reelection will destroy American civilization"
(Darren Hauck/Reuters)
Mitt Romney yesterday:
Even if you like Barack Obama, we can’t afford Barack Obama
This is a slightly different formulation of an ongoing Romney refrain. In March, he said:
He's a nice guy, but he's in over his head. We need to have a president who understands the economy if we're going to fix the economy.
In January:
We're now on track to retire a guy who's a nice guy but is in over his head.
There's no question that Mitt Romney's "nice guy/but in over his head" formulation is condescending and childish, but conservative James Taranto thinks it's a stroke of political genius:
One advantage an incumbent president has when seeking re-election is that he has already persuaded many voters to cast a ballot for him. That means a challenger--or the incumbent himself, by doing a lousy job--has to convince a substantial number to change their minds. Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum will not become president this November without the support of millions who voted for Barack Obama in 2008. [...] It will be easier for them to change their minds if they believe they overestimated Obama's competence rather than that they supported somebody who posed a "foundational" threat to America.
In Taranto's view, Romney's rhetorical frame is the appropriate way to accomplish that goal:
"He's a nice guy, but . . ." is exquisitely condescending. It's probably not true: Obama strikes us as a petulant narcissist. But calling someone a "nice guy" is rarely a genuine compliment, and it never is when conjoined by "but." As any man who has ever been rejected by a woman knows, describing someone as "a nice guy, but . . ." is another way of saying he's ineffectual. That is exactly the point Romney is making about Obama.
Actually, the phrase "nice guy, but" is anything but exquisite, and using it certainly doesn't reflect a genius political strategy. It's one of the most trite expressions on the planet, and it's hard to see how using it will win Mitt Romney a single vote. It's probably better than calling President Obama an asshole, but that's hardly a powerful argument in its favor.

Nonetheless, Romney (and conservatives) have clearly put a lot of thought into this. For example, Crossroads GPS has come up with a similar formulation, but all that proves is that right-wingers are still world-class overthinkers. If you've convinced yourself that "nice guy, but" is an effective political slogan, then you're probably the kind of person who thinks cutting taxes will balance the budget, that shrinking spending will create jobs, and that attacking Iraq will avenge 9/11.

More than that, however, it suggests that these people are still baffled by Barack Obama. I'll guarantee you that neither Ronald Reagan nor Bill Clinton wasted a moment of time obsessing about something as silly as a "nice guy, but" rhetorical strategy to defeat Jimmy Carter or George H. W. Bush—and neither did their campaign staffs. Yet for some reason, today's conservatives are so bewildered by Obama that they think "nice guy, but" isn't just smart, it's brilliant.

Of course, it's anything but brilliant, especially since it's so transparently insincere. These are guys who hate Barack Obama with such red hot passion that they honestly believe the future of The Republic depends on replacing him with the guy who invented Obamacare. For them, it's not just about what Obama is doing: It's about who he is. And calling him "a nice guy" won't conceal what's truly in their heart.


You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

Extended (Optional)

Originally posted to The Jed Report on Thu Apr 19, 2012 at 01:40 PM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.