How can Mitt Romney credibly launch another presidential bid? [Details]?

Money talks and Mitt has plenty.

I don’t think he can.

@talljasperman :: Here is the thing, I doubt he is using his own money.

That’s right. He doesn’t want to run for President, which is why he’s gearing up to run for a third time.

I think his son must be as dishonest as his father.

The magic underpants believing, vulture capitalist will be a credible candidate by yet again appearing to be the least insane of whatever line-up of demented candidates the GOP wheel out.

Lincoln said.
You can fool some the people all the time.
You can fool all the people some of the time.
But you can’t fool all the people all the time.

Romney is going for option 2. The problem is that it is even harder the second time.

He won’t get very far, the Koch Brothers didn’t invite him to the planning session this weekend.

Mitt is out of touch with reality. It was evident in 2012, it is even more evident now.

Maybe this time around he’ll only tell 45% of the voters to fuck off.

Sure he can launch one. Does he have a chance in Hell in getting the nomination? Probably not.

I can’t imagine he would run again.

I don’t think his own party would want it.

Credibility depends on the stupidity of his target demographics.
So, yes, he can ‘credibly’ launch another campaign.

Let us not forget Bain Capital, Romney’s old company, is the owner of iHeart Communications, formally ClearChannel Communications.
They are the nations largest owner of radio stations and can reach up to 245 million listeners each month.
Owning a large portion of media like that and running for president, I am surprised he is not already President.

Most of US politics is a side-show to distract people from actual issues that we might otherwise use our resources on.

For example, here we are discussing this absurd red herring, instead of figuring out how to get rid of Citizens United, which the people overwhelmingly disapprove of.

Even from within the tragicomedy of “Republican party strategy”, both parties always field a parade of candidates, many of whom have no real chance, mainly to legitimize the whole process, have fall guys, make the eventual choice look better by comparison, and distract us from the actual lack of choice we have in our supposed democracy.

It worked for Richard Nixon.

GA, Zaku.

Reminds me of the Carol Quigley quote:
“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy.”

- Carrol Quigley, Tragedy and Hope