I remember seeing Mitt’s first appearance at CPAC on C-SPAN last year, where he was politely received. By his second speech, when he dropped out, he had won the crowd over.
He’s on a good trajectory with that convention’s attendees.
Watch Romney and Palin try to walk back their support of the bailout over the next few years.
Actually, the GOP campaigners were put in this bind by the sitting president from their own party. Aggressively opposing the president would have meant offending his supporters within the party — a significant proportion.
#9 yeap that is why i think huck has a shot if things really go south…hit the theme the US govt was basically overthrown by the wall street interests or boston-dc power axis to back up their loses and huck has a gold mine of resentment to tap into if things fall apart between now and 2012…romney has the angle of turning around the olympics but he can’t hit the populist chord like huckabbee.
I was glad to see he covered a lot of territory. Good job. It was hard for him to have a great cadence because the applause interupted him like a hundred times.
Conservatives really messed up in the Primary’s –
Mitt Romney should’ve been our guy! I believe he would have edged out Obama.
What a GREAT AMERICAN – hopefully they know it now.
Most importantly – hopefully he will still be interested in the job – because we need Mitt.
Romney/Palin 2012
Nancy S.
Lol too true. This was soo much different than Huckabee’s feel good, jokethon. Talk about a lot of meat in there. Romney is the only candidate capable of giving meat and not just feel good rhetoric.
Lol I’m waiting for Adam G to comment on here. Romney’s speech had way more crowd involvement. Heck he had them chanting “USA” and randomly yelling out in support of his speech. All Huckabee had was laughing and mostly light applause.
Another excellent speech by Mitt. A great line up for 2012 would be Romney, Sanford and Mitch Daniels. People of great competence and intellect need to the standard bearers of the GOP.
This is another example of the stark differences between Palin/Huck and Romney. Palin and Huck are both an inch deep. People like Adam G say they have charisma. So what? I don’t buy they have any more than Romney, but even if they do, neither could write or deliver a speech like this. These are not just words, this is a blueprint that Romney believes in and can execute. I just cannot see either one of them being as serious or as capable as Romney is.
Off topic: Any guesses where the Dow’s low will be before things turn around? I’m guessing it’ll test the 6000 barrier — maybe closing in on 5500 at the worst.
We have some good options for our future. Heres to 2012. I predict Obama’s policies will not hlep anythign and will just anger most Americans by spending our way into an even bigger mess. There will be a big place for a competent problem solver. Mitt has the edge right now.
You can tell he’s running. If th economy stays bad or keeps getting worse, expect his stock to keep risin gand hte odds of a gop challenger winning the election keep getting better.
I don’t like Huckabee ever since he cost the primary for Romney. That fancy footwork in West VA w/ McCain really botched things up. His show is goofy and he always sounds like he’s giving a sermon.
That my 2cents.
If th economy stays bad or keeps getting worse, expect his stock to keep risin gand hte odds of a gop challenger winning the election keep getting better.
He sounded quite confident that the bad economy will be the predominant issue in four years — with national security a close second.
He’s in a good place to stay on message in the meantime, if he can just get himself on the biggest public podiums in front of the right crowds at regular intervals.
Speeches, news, and editorials. Every time Romney gives his opinion in public it is news. And every time he does, the message and delivery is superb. I fully expect him to stay in the public spotlight. I just wish we could promote the Romney, Sanfords, Jindals, and Newts instead of constantly pandering to the populist Huckabee/Palin wing of the party. Populism is great for rhetoric but not for grown ups who are in charge of things.
Whomever we put on the ticket as VP, I want them time tested through and through by running in the primary. Without that vetting, we won’t know what we’re going to get. So, imho, I want them to run for the PResidency, or not be vp.
We should make sure Romney picks Palin as VP so we can ruin our shot at 2012 and give Obama another 4 years…. Give me a break. Romney/Jindal, Romney/Sanford, hell, Romney/ANYBODY but Palin or Huckabee.
GetReal, Palin has an uphill battle now since she failed so miserably last time. Considering her for VP again would be very risky. It’s that one shot to make a good first impression thing. Her base loves her, but most Americans don’t. She’s very polarizing and I don’t see that changing.
Reading the above comments, I feel like I’m living in an alternate fantasy universe — Romneyland, where people actually consider him a great candidate. I guess Romneyland is better than Palinland, but not by much.
The GOP will lose by over ten points if they nominate this flip-flopper in 2012.
43 – Even if Romney actually had flip-flopped as much as you say he has, which isn’t true, Obama will have no room to criticize him for it, especially by 2012. Obama campaigned pretty far left in the Dem Primary, centrist in the general election, and seems to be flipping between the two in these first 30 days. He’s the guy who said he would pull all our troops out of Iraq his first day in office. I don’t think hammering Mitt for becoming pro life 7 years earlier is going to stick in the 2012 campaign.
45 – None of the candidates are flawless. I think you greatly exaggerate Mitt’s “flip-flopping” but I’m just saying, better someone with a flaw Obama won’t have room to criticize than a flaw he can really nail them with.
Great speech! It is a positive sign that Mr. Romney may becoming a charismatic speaker and appearing able to relate to the voters. If he keeps this up, many of us will at least be able to feel much more at ease with him in that regard.
My, my Martha, it seems as if the Adam boys have failed to find their way to the threads this evening. I so much hope to hear them agree that Mitt is in a class of his own when it comes to articulating conservative principles.
With respect IllinoisGuy, Adam has the same right to his opinion of the speeches as the rest of us and if he chooses to hold his tongue (or keyboard) that is his right.
I thought he said what he said well, but, of course, I didn’t believe a word of it — and I even got some fans of Mittens who were with me to understand where I was coming from and concede that we could do a lot better.
Mr. I Wish I Could Have Served In Vietnam
Mr. My Kids Serve My Country by Working for My Campaign
Mr. That’s Some Nice Bling Bling You’ve Got There
Mr. I Like Mandates
Mr. McCain’s Immigration Plan Is Reasonable, Wait, No, It’s Amnesty
Mr. I Don’t Want to Support or Oppose the Bush Tax Cuts
Mr. Better On Gay Rights Than Ted Kennedy, Wait, Never Mind
Mr. Pro-Choice, Wait, No, Pro-Life
Mr. I’m Not the Most Conservative On Every Issue, Wait, They Go After Me Because I’m the Conservative One
I like Palin, but after Obama’s media cleaned her clock in the general, how does she stand a chance three years from now. Great conservatibe principles; but this girl could not hold a candle to an Obama in a debate. If you are going to take the Presidency away from Obama, you will have to beat him silly in nationally televised presidential debates. The only guy who will have command enough of the facts combined with the eloquence to take Obama down is Romney. Palin doesn’t have the brain power, Huckabee is just a late night comedian, and Jindal–well, you saw his performance the other night. The only guy who has the ability to do his homework, prepare, have command of the facts, think on his feet and get the message out in an verbal contest with Obama is Romney. Our candidate will have to do that, or no White House in 2012. Period!
Alex Knepper, I do not really want to get into the middle of this contest, but in # 53, I do think that you are taking a bit of a cheap shop at Mr. Romney’s children. Yes, to a degree, he is fair game, but I do think that family should be left out of it.
David, you certainly have the right to support and promote who you think is the best candidate, but you are a bit over the top to suggest that Mrs. alin lacks brain power.
Ohio Joe: You reference “Mrs.” Palin. Please follow David’s lead and refer to her as a “girl” in the future. Girls aren’t old enough to be married, so you must be mistaken in your use of “Mrs.”
There was another Rombot who liked to refer to Palin as a “girl” — can’t remember who it was now. It reflects worse on the speaker than on Palin.
Haha, I think that Governors are generally due a bit more respect than just boys and girls, but haha, what do I know, I am just a simpleton living in the hills in Ohio.
I thought the substance of Mitt’s speech was great but the delivery was a little dry.
He also seems to be having trouble getting people to understand the difference between not letting the banking system collapse and just bailing out companies in general as well as the difference between TARP and the “Stimulus” Plan. And it doesn’t seem to be widely known that while Romney understands the need to keep the financial system operative, he has been critical of the many missteps in which the TARP money has been used.
In regards to Huckabee’s speech, I think he started really bad but he got better as he went on and it got pretty good. Although I’m not so sure the Fair Tax wouldn’t be a disaster, most of the other things Huckabee talked about are spot on. I especially appreciated his comments about having to let poorly managed companies fail and letting the market right itself. That’s a long shot from his “you don’t want the man who laid you off…” rhetoric during the primary.
Republicans are going to have to work together rather than cannibalize each other if we are going to rebuild the party into what it should be.
Alex, you have some points about Romney, other stuff was long ago shown to be more fabricated spin than substance. We could all do what you do to most of the Republican candidates from 2008 and Palin as well.
Where is that going to take us? Republicans cannibalize each other using gotta logic and give lots of ammunition to the liberals.
GEEZE…Anyone will be better than BHO!
Do you see what is happening here – This Country has fallen. The morons that voted this geek in have really been duped. In 5 weeks look at the damage he has done.
One can only look forward to what the GOP has for us.Who ever it will be – stand behind them and don’t screw this one up too. Get out the vote – everyone counts. Too many lazy people decided their vote would not count and it would have. It was closer than everybody thinks.
Re: Palin… cut the trash talking about this woman.It’s McCain you should be mad at.
69 – So nothing to your liking in the speech Adam?
1. So you would advise Romney to change positions? What would your response have been if he had (like we don’t already know)?
2. Sure you can. It was reasonably successful during his time in office, Deval Patrick changed it and its been less so ever since. If Obama somehow bungles the War on Terror would you blame it on Bush?
69-If the concept is sound but the implementation is a failure do you blame the concept or try to improve on the implementation?
Also, only an idiot would say the Mass. health plan is a complete success or a complete failure. The correct question is whether it improved on the situation while avoiding as many of the socialist medicine problems as possible? What can we learn from it? What can be improved? What should be done differently?
I think it is disengineous to just declare it an unmitagatged failure especially in view of the Liberal environment in Mass.
One mark of sucessful people is they undertake difficult tasks and then keep tweeking things to make them better while learning as they go.
It’s the people with their hind ends planted in armchairs that always know exactly what to do in advance and have perfect insight on what should have been done after the fact.
It was a prett good speech. As far as the Health Care plan in Mass. Less people are going to the emergency room now because they have coverage and that’s a good thing.
What I find funny is Huckabee and this writer Adam Graham acting as if they know womething about whether TARP was necessary or not. They haven’t the foggiest idea! What we know is given its implementation (lack of accountability and oversight), it was insufficient. We also don’t know what would have happened if they had not done what they did. If Mitt Romney would have been President, it would have had the necessary oversight and proper implementation. The fact is that Adam Grah am his idol know absolutely nothing about the subject matter. I don’t either. Probably none of you do either. All we know is that it was not a complete success. We don’t know what would have happened if it had not been put in place.
Illinoisguy, we do have some idea what could have happened. The other major banks and insurance companies in the US would have went under taking the entire banking system and insurance systems with them not to mention the stock market. Everybody’s retirement would go up in smoke. The domino effect would start taking down company after company, unemployment and crime would skyrocket. As the ripple effect swept through Europe we would see the strengthening of socialist and nationalist tendencies there, trade protectionism would rise…
You can see where this is going and it sounds very familiar to the very elderly and students of history and economics…
That doesn’t mean we should let the people who caused the problem off the hook, but there is oh so much blame to go around. It would be better to spend our time and resources putting the economy back together rather than going head hunting…
I believe what you say is true Jerald, but since I’m admitting I don’t know, I’ll leave that up to you to present. I would love to see Huckabee, Mitt, and Adam Graham on stage for a solid 1/2 hour arguing about the merits, wouldn’t you? That would be soooooooooo fun to watch!!
Yes, a debate might watch, but at the end of the day, I am more interested in results than watch people debate (fun or no fun.) I admit that I do not know the intricate details of our banking system and where the money lies and so forth, but I certainly am not an total idiot when it comes to finance, budget, money, banking and so forth, but I for one am not going to get into a debate contest per se. However, that is not the point. I do not know Adam Graham’s expertise, but he has demonstrated his political knowledge to me (not saying I agree with him 100% or even 94% of the time) and I will assume until, I find out differently that he certainly in no dummy in financial matters. After all, he has demonstrated economic knowledge and I thus think that perhaps he would be an OK debater.
My personal feeling on TARP is that it probably was necessary, but that, it should not have been nearly as big as it was. Yes, Mr. Romney know better than I, but he is not the only person that knows better than I. I have not totally decided what my exact feeling is that Mr. Romney supported TARP. He is in a no win situation on TARP because if he comes out later and say that he was partially wrong on it or slightly tweaks his assessment, than the anti-Romney extremists will unfairly criticize him of being a Flipper.
With respect Jerald, I do not know your area of expertise, so I will have to assume that you are at least as smart as me in economics. However, I must take issue with your Chicken Little attitude that the sky is falling, banks would have collapsed and we’d have trade war and so on. Even with TARP we are having a few of these things come to pass. On the other side of the coin, it is this attitude that is in part (certainly not all be any means) responsible for the mess we are in. Up north, Socialist Canada has not fallen as fast as other countries in many respects, because their Prime Minister, Mr. Harper is calm and collected and not crying Chicken Little and bailing out Banks.
79 – Romney has already said if it were his call, TARP would have been much smaller. He didn’t say it in this speech, probably because it would come across as pandering and disingenuous, and he’s already accused of that enough.
Thanks for clarifying that GetReal, in this case, I thus have little if any disagreement with him on this issue. In fact, it is a feather in Mr. Romney’s cap.
I just think Adam Graham is hilarious. He cannot bring himself to say Romney gave a great speech yesterday. Adam, you’re in the minority.
I finally listened to Huck last night. He had some good moments, but a lot of the speech was about – you guessed it – Huck. Lots of silly jokes – in fact the first full 3.5 minutes were dumb jokes, and he threw in some snarky stuff, too. That’s just not what we need right now. Not only that, it was way too long. The laborious story of keeping a boat in the warehouse was painful to sit through. If Huck could stop making everything about himself all the time, he would do better. And if he would get a little more serious on substance. We don’t need a comedian, we need someone who has a plan to get us out of the fix we’re in. Huck’s fair tax is pie in the sky and not a serious possibility. It just sounds good to crowds.
Really, there is no comparison between the 2 speeches. Romney instills a lot more confidence than Huck, I’m afraid.
I listened to Romney’s speech. It was capably delivered, but there was no personality or charisma. It wasn’t much different from his stump speeches on the trail.
If Romney runs in 2012, I’m guessing he will finish 2nd or third in most of the primary states.
Martha given that you’re guy’s in 3rd place right now with only 22% of Republicans supporting him, perhaps it’s time to own up to the fact that how you view things isn’t necessarily how American Republic views them.
Secondly, I followed how the TARP has rolled out and it has been a disaster. What it’s provided is bandaid relief. We still have the problem of toxic assets on bank’s balance sheets. With the Capital Purchase program that Mr. Paulson proposed we did a lot of things that didn’t help. We injected money into sound financial institutions like Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan that didn’t need money, but had to make it look like taking federal money was okay.
TARP money helped facilitate the takeover of National City Corporation by PNC Bank which would not have happened without TARP. This resulted in massive job losses in the Pittsburgh Area where the two institutions overlapped and in Cleveland where NCC was headquartered.
We’ve also bought a huge chunk of Citibank and Bank of America. The hit to taxpayers on this has been huge. With the conversion from Preferred to Common Shares that leaves the U.S. owning 36% of Citi’s common stock, it has been a huge hit for taxpayers, with us losing somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of our investment.
We’ve also used the TARP money for things like the bailout of the auto industry.
How much good has this money done? In many cases, I think it’s only delayed the inevitable. I think Citibank is probably truly a Zombie Bank that is going to continue to require more and more taxpayer money. I’m not certain with Bank of America, but Citi will continue to milk taxpayers.I just don’t think with their P and L numbers they’re going to be on their feet anytime soon.
But yeah, the common person is too dumb to know how this money works and we need to rely on our betters like Mr. Romney to tell us what’s right./sarcasm off.
Of course, we might say, “Well Romney didn’t know how it would be spent.” Largely, though the TARP program gave broad discretionary to the Treasury Secretary regarding the spending of the money. In essence to support the TARP was to have faith that Treasury Secretary Paulson was going to spend the money appropriately. It was the wrong decision, the money was not spent how it was promised.
And what I think issue that can be learned from both the Massachusetts health care issue and the TARP debacle is that Romney has questionable judgment on making big economic decision. It wasn’t that no one warned Mr. Romney that the costs of his Massachusetts health care plan could escalate out of control, he was warned. He ignored the warning.
It wasn’t because no one predicted that the TARP could be misused. Romney ignored the warning. This is one of the hazards of being a so-called expert. You put so much faith in your expert opinion that you disregard legitimate issues raised by others.
Also I would not say that Romney didn’t give a good speech, but the issue of TARP is huge. Across America, “Tea Parties” are being held in protest of the massive rise of government largesse at the expense of our children and grandchildren. The TARP program amounted to little more than Wall Street Welfare that Mr. Romney backed. And it is an issue as is the health care plan, and a good speech is not going to get around the anger of the American people on this point.
The best defense of the pro tarpers is maybe you need to view the folks who demolished the economic system, name your bank, company, brokerage house, etc… dc insider…say phil graham :
as sorta being = to German after WWI and instead of going for a pound flesh, that didn’t work out too well, its more important to fix the system basically i guess by throwing $’s at the problem instead of doing nothing, who knows if it will work or what would happen if it wasn’t tried:
Adam, so you thought it was a good speech. Thank you. Wow, that was like pulling teeth.
BTW – Romney’s not responsible for TARP failures. It’s easy to Monday-morning quarterback, though isn’t it? The American people are more angry about what’s happened since TARP.
Healthcare in Mass has improved – 40% less free ER visits. It’s private, and it’s a far cry better than what the leg. would have done. Romney isn’t responsible for what happened after, either.
Romney doesn’t have a magic wand, Adam. Your thoughts, (which took all day yesterday and part of today to come up with) show just how bereft of true criticisms of Romney you really are.
Martha, in your world, I’ve been thinking about how to respond to your message which I just read this morning, all day Friday and all day Saturday until finally responding…
In the real world, I have a life. I work 8 hours a day, I went to a meeting of my local Pachyderm club, and I’m a student at University of Phoenix.
If I’m understanding your reasoning, Romney is a brilliant man who is responsible for every success that comes from policies he supports, but responsible for no failure or mass cost overrun that comes from the policies he supports. How can this possibly be true?
By the way, people are not happy about the $700 billion bailout either, they weren’t happy with it when it first passed and as people become aware of how it was squandered, they’re going to become less happy with it in general.
Another point, Adam. Romney was right to support TARP based on the info available, (no one knows what would have happened had it not been passed. Yes, it didn’t help, and it was managed poorly) and on the fact that to come out against it a few weeks before the election – it would have hurt McCain. He was doing everything he could to help elect McCain. No one blames Romney for doing what he did – I haven’t seen any criticism of Romney over it. You’re grasping at straws to find a flaw where none exists. Yesterday, I didn’t detect that anyone cared – when Romney mentioned TARP in his speech.
89 – No. I don’t think that at all. But he’s not responsible for the failure of TARP. You can’t credibly pin that on him.
If you’re busy, fine. I apologize for saying you took too long to respond to Romney. It’s your reluctance to say anything positive about him that makes you suspect.
Forgot, Adam. Romney’s healthcare plan is not a failure, it is a success. Romney is not respobsible for cost overruns, or what the gov and leg have changed in the past 3 years. Romney has not distanced himself from it because it’s working, and it’s not socialized medicine. He’s right that we needed to do something about healthcare before in truly does become socialized. Now it appears too late.
Romney seems to be loathed by the far left (Huffinton post types) and the far right (Redstate types). I think this puts him in a
very good position for 2012. I’ve noticed (from blog comments espeically) that moderate Democrats and Independents are far
more reasonable about Romney than the extremely ideological on both sides. Romney will have some difficulty getting through the
Republican primary again, but I believe he will win big aganist Obama. I think over the next few years, he’ll continue to hammer
home the same conservative message we heard at CPAC. Hopefully his book coming out on policy will help get the conversation ging
on Republican’s alternative plans. Mike Pence said that we have to win the argument first before we can win an election. I think
Mitt Romney understands that.
Taylor. I look forward to Romney’s book about ideas to get the party back on track.
What did Huck write about? Himself and his failed campaign. He used it to take shots at Romney and others. What is Palin going to write about? Her failed campaign, and it will probably be all about her, personally.
We can predict that Romney’s book will look to the future with concrete ideas, sound policy, and he won’t trash anyone in the process.
86 – Adam, you are a fan of Sarah Palin and she supported TARP as well. I’m sure both could have found plenty to criticize with it but were trying to get McCain elected so as to avoid the huge disaster our country is now facing at the inexperienced hands of President Obama. Romney can hardly take back his support now, the man can’t change his shirt without being accused of flip-flopping by certain people. So either pin some of the blame on Sarah or admit this isn’t Romney’s fault either.
Adam, when you first appeared on Race I decided to look you up and find out more about you. It didn’t take long to see where you stand. Your article “The Man With No Core” told me all I needed to know. You wrote it when you feared Romney would be chosen for VP. You were in the same pathetic mindest as the people who signed the vicious anti-Mitt ad petition designed to scare McCain, and who sent the threatening letter to McCain not to choose Romney. (BTW – I’ll bet you signed both.) Your article was filled with the same lies and blatant misrepresentations about his record and history. Truth doesn’t matter when you need to oppose someone does it? But in retrospect, choosing Romney would have really helped McCain at a critical moment.
After that, I waited for you to be fair and say something objective about him. I waited for you to write a post about him, since he is the frontrunner. You wrote about everyone and their dog, but nothing on Romney’s 2012 prospects. Nothing reasonable came, just a lot of posts suspiciously written with the objective to make Romney look bad. Yes, Adam, we know you think Romney is undeserving of his position in life, you are suspicious of his education, wealth, success! We get you, completely.
Now, after Romney gives an excellent speech at CPAC, you cannot give him an ounce of credit. Just manufactured problems. I can’t say I’m the least bit surprised.
GetReal, you’re right. I’m not really trashing it, though. I think I did read that it would be about her. I’ll buy it and probably enjoy it. She’s an interesting character to say the least.
102 – all I’m saying Martha, is that people already accuse you of being unfair to Palin. I think you alternate between being reasonable and very unreasonable concerning the Alaskan governor, but that’s just my opinion. Just be careful not to criticize her over something even you agree is unfair. Not only have none of us read her book, it hasn’t even been written yet. We can hardly judge its merit at this point. If you want anyone to listen to your criticisms when they are legitimate, be cautious not to take meaningless shots. That’s why nobody takes Knickers or Flip seriously.
Actually, I have to confess you harden my opinion against Romney is hardening because you are incredibly arrogant. Probably not fair to him, but it’s human psychology.
Mitt Romney was an economic adviser to John McCain, he was in the room of advisor that McCain listened before McCain endorsed TARP. He called Congressmen and told them to vote for the TARP. Sarah Palin wasn’t an economic adviser, and she was bound to be loyal as the #2. And party loyalty didn’t make Mitt Romney call members of Congress up and tell them to vote for the TARP. And if you’re willing to sell out future generations and for the sake of the party, then you have no business leading our nation.
Romney is not the frontrunner, Palin is, Romney is #3. I’m saving my fire on Romney. I hope he doesn’t run. I’ve written my analysis of whether he’ll run. You didn’t like it. Too bad.
Like any speech, there is the contents of the speech and there is the delivery of the speech. Generally, there is very little objectionable points the Mr. Romney made during the speech in my opinion. He sounded mostly like a mainstream Conservative which is good. Adam Graham, you make some excellent points on TARP stating that “he was warned” I have mixed feelings on this. Yes, he was warned, but so was I. I never really liked the idea of TARP (in its current form at least) in the first place, but at first to be honest I did not hate it either (unlike some of my friends and family.) As the cookie continues to crumble, I am less happy with TARP as time goes on. I have the luxury of not running for office so it matters little what I say. I think it is a little harsh to Mr. Romney for TARP’s failures since he really has no control as to how TARP is being administered. Yes, he was warned, but in fairness so was I warned and even though I did not like TARP, I did not speak against it really at the time. So I in turn must cut him some slack.
As to the delivery of Mr. Romney’s speech, I was pleasantly surprised. While his speech was not quite as charismatic as the other two of the big three or Mr. Obama, it was a great step in the right direction. Often when the rest of us raise concerns about Mr. Romney’s speaking style and or his likability, we either get accused of being at least mildly bigoted or we are accused of being idiots (yes, it is often put much more politely to be fair) for seeming to favor style over substance. To be clear, I for one care most about policy. I further realize that likability is not a major qualification for the job. However, there is no getting around the fact that likability can translate into electability. I am in no way saying that Mr. Romney (or any other non-Palin person) is a bad person or an unlikable guy, but persona counts rightly or wrongly.
Am I politically in love with Mr. Romney all of a sudden because of his speech? No. Do I agree with him 100% because of his speech? No. Am I going to join his camp today because of this speech? Certainly not necessarily, but I am not going to join any camp on good speeches alone. Regardless of which camp I join, I am very happy that Mr. Romney gave a great speech. We need as many electable candidates as possible. Mr. Obama won in part because he is a likable charming charismatic guy. Yes, Mr. Obama is a Socialistic Community Organizing idiot, but it is not easy to hate such a likable guy. Is it possible for a non-likable person to beat a likable person such as Mr. Obama? Certainly, but it is also much more challenging. I doubt that Mr. Romney will ever be as likable or as charismatic as Mr. Obama, but he is closing the gap with yesterday’s speech. One speech at CPAC no less does not change one’s persona overnight, but I suspect that if he can keep up such performances and continue to improve, he will make many of us feel easier and he will convince some swing voters concerned about his electability that he is the person.
In short, Congratulations Mr. Romney on a great speech. I believe that you will need these types of speech to convince swing voters that you can relate to them and thus defeat Mr. Obama should you be our candidate.
“Actually, I have to confess you harden my opinion against Romney is hardening because you are incredibly arrogant. Probably not fair to him, but it’s human psychology.” All I can say, Martha, is that you were not wise in my opinion to get Adam Graham to state his opinion.
105 – Why was that diatribe on my incredible arrogance in response to my comment #100 that Martha shouldn’t criticize Palin’s book which she hasn’t read and isn’t finished yet? You are right in one area though, Romney’s fingerprints were clearly all over McCain’s campaign, I’m sure McCain listened to everything Romney said to him in that room and did everything Romney suggested. He then proceeded to ride a flying pig to victory!
105 – You’re acting as though TARP were a convicted rapist and Romney was trying to get him paroled, and congress was the parole board! Would you really hold Romney responsible for TARPs actions thereafter if that were the case?
105 – Oh Adam, you expect us to believe that Romney gave the go-ahead for McCain to vote for TARP? Ha. When questioned by Laura Ingraham during the meltdown about whether McCain was asking for his advice on the economy, Romney said that he hadn’t spoken to McCain in a long time. Now, I don’t know if that was before or after the meeting you talked about, but it’s very difficult to believe McCain puts much stock in anything Romney says.
Besides, I don’t think Romney was wrong to do what he did! It was one of those things that was seen as necessary, but didn’t turn out right – through no fault of anyone who saw the need to shore up the financial system. Romney didn’t bungle it. You are seeking to lay the whole entire thing on Romney’s shoulders and that’s just ridiculous. Plenty of respected conservatives believed it was the right thing to do. It’s not going to hurt Romney, as you see from the vote today.
You can try to argue that Romney is not the frontrunner, but you’ll be going against what is commonly accepted. But what does it matter? Romney is doing well, won CPAC for the 3rd time today. Conservatives know who they want now more than ever. His speech was solid, inspiring and comprehensive. He’s nothing if not consistent. (Yeah that’s going to get some response, hehe.)
Now Adam, if you are worth your salt as a voter, you will not let some poster on a website keep you from supporting the right candidate, or at least fairly judging him. After all, I don’t lay your ineptitude upon Huck.
What does it matter? Romney is doing well, won CPAC for the 3rd time today.
Yeah, the first two times it did him a heck of lot of good. Also, I have to say the CNN poll shows the difference between the grassroots of the Republican Party and the folks who either live in the beltway or can afford to plop down $250 for airline tickets and $125 a day for a conference during a recession.
You’re not paying attention to the world going around you. People are mad. Mad Dog mad about the debt. The idea that $700 billion is an “oopsie” that we can forgive is not going to wash with the people who work and are worried about our nation’s future.
Adam, the bailout is not Romney’s fault, and I don’t see it as a oopsie. As I said before, many conservatives were convinced it was the right thing to do at the time. Is this your main beef with him for 2012? Because it’s not going to matter to conservatives. Better find another beef. I’m mad, too. That’s why I support Romney! He’s the most credible guy to take on the mess Obama and the dems are making. We talking pragmatism here. No one else comes close.
Trying to say that CPAC does not represent the grassroots just isn’t accurate, either. I think they do. They sound and look just like the regular conservatives we always see at rallies and such. I mean come on, they even chant USA! USA! USA! ~ That’s not exactly elite behavior.
Bush and the Republicans helped create the mess with TARP, and Romney helped. His office called Congressmen to get them to vote for TARP.
Romney won CPAC in 2007 and he lost nationwide. Steve Forbes won CPAC and lost. George Allen won this thing two years in a row. It’s practically meaningless.
#114, I think you really nail the difference between CPAC attendees and the grass roots.
I would not underestimate the importance of TARP and how Romney’s support of it will undermine his candidacy. The grassroots hate TARP, and Romney’s lame justifications will not hold water with them. It will hurt Palin too, if she chooses to run.
Adam, I’m sure you would be happy if Huck did better today! I wouldn’t call it exactly meaningless, but one measure of the way typical conservatives are feeling right now. I’m more inclined to trust a CPAC poll of over 1700, than one conducted by CNN of 400 voters with a sampling error of 4-5. Even CNN says it’s meaningless.
CNN doesn’t say it’s meaningless. I would agree the margin’s kind of high.
The problem is CPAC’s sample is off because it’s Economically not representative of the population because 52% of the people voting are college students and 56% are 18-25 and 59% male. Could you tell me what state or region of the country has demographics like that?
It’s not representative by age. It’s not regionally representative, it’s DC, Virginia, Maryland heavy vote. And those people who aren’t college students are disproportionately wealthy or higher middle class. There’s no way you can make it to DC if you’re not fairly well off.
How many folks were there from Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina who are middle income.
“The true value of this poll? None. Even CNN’s polling director called it worthless. “So many things will happen between now and 2012 that this poll has no real predictive value,” said Keating Holland.”
For whatever that’s worth.
CPAC doesn’t claim to represent anyone but conservative activists. I don’t agree with you that everyone who goes to the conference is well off, either. I almost went, but decided to go next year and take my 3 daughters. I’m not wealthy by any stretch.
I think it is in line with the exit polls from the primary. Romney consistently won among conservatives.
CNN said the poll was worthless because it’s so early.
I tend to agree with this, but it’s a useful snapshot of what Republicans are thinking at the moment. And right now, 80% of them don’t have Romney as their first choice, despite all the hype and money he’s spent.
The problem is CPAC’s sample is off because it’s Economically not representative of the population because 52% of the people voting are college students and 56% are 18-25 and 59% male. Could you tell me what state or region of the country has demographics like that?
Could you tell me if the conservative movement is 52% College Students, and 56% people 18-25? Could you tell me a state where that’s the case.
The polling director is not saying it’s meaningless in terms of the state of the GOP’s mind right now but in terms of predicting who will walk away with the 2012 nomination.
You’re probably earning somewhere in 6-figures as a household income. You’re not earning $40,000 or $50,000 and thinking about this trip, certainly unless you’re making this a priority to save up for it. And if it is, I applaud you for that.
February 27th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
C-Span is running it now.
February 27th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
I remember seeing Mitt’s first appearance at CPAC on C-SPAN last year, where he was politely received. By his second speech, when he dropped out, he had won the crowd over.
He’s on a good trajectory with that convention’s attendees.
February 27th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Romney…I’m still uneasy about him. Let’s see how this goes.
U2? Isn’t that Obama’s song?
February 27th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
I’m still waiting for the moment when Romney throws a big bag of money into the audience…
February 27th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
He’s not that good. Better than Jindal, but nowhere near Palin…
February 27th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
I think an eggplant would be better than Jindal, so that’s not saying very much.
February 27th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
He sounds like a guy who is running.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
Did I hear Mitt try to redefine his support for the Bailout?
February 27th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Watch Romney and Palin try to walk back their support of the bailout over the next few years.
This is the one thing that Huckabee has going for him. He opposed the bailout from the beginning.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Actually, the GOP campaigners were put in this bind by the sitting president from their own party. Aggressively opposing the president would have meant offending his supporters within the party — a significant proportion.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Did Romney just bash law school professors and editorial board writers? So he’s not going for the “intellectual class”?
February 27th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
#9 yeap that is why i think huck has a shot if things really go south…hit the theme the US govt was basically overthrown by the wall street interests or boston-dc power axis to back up their loses and huck has a gold mine of resentment to tap into if things fall apart between now and 2012…romney has the angle of turning around the olympics but he can’t hit the populist chord like huckabbee.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
This is true leadership. Excellent speech. This man inspires more confidence than anyone else out there – no contest.
Good job, Mitt. America needs you.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
I was glad to see he covered a lot of territory. Good job. It was hard for him to have a great cadence because the applause interupted him like a hundred times.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Conservatives really messed up in the Primary’s –
Mitt Romney should’ve been our guy! I believe he would have edged out Obama.
What a GREAT AMERICAN – hopefully they know it now.
Most importantly – hopefully he will still be interested in the job – because we need Mitt.
Romney/Palin 2012
Nancy S.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
This was a really excellent speech. Mitt really is in a class of his own when it comes to effectively communicating conservative ideals.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
14,
Lol too true. This was soo much different than Huckabee’s feel good, jokethon. Talk about a lot of meat in there. Romney is the only candidate capable of giving meat and not just feel good rhetoric.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
this is the battle brewing in the GOP:
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090226_robin-hood_republicanism/
February 27th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
I get excited when I hear Mitt speak and think about how great a country this could be with his great leadership.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Lol I’m waiting for Adam G to comment on here. Romney’s speech had way more crowd involvement. Heck he had them chanting “USA” and randomly yelling out in support of his speech. All Huckabee had was laughing and mostly light applause.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
I think he did a good job. He seemed less tense than he did during much of the primary.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Another excellent speech by Mitt. A great line up for 2012 would be Romney, Sanford and Mitch Daniels. People of great competence and intellect need to the standard bearers of the GOP.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
This is another example of the stark differences between Palin/Huck and Romney. Palin and Huck are both an inch deep. People like Adam G say they have charisma. So what? I don’t buy they have any more than Romney, but even if they do, neither could write or deliver a speech like this. These are not just words, this is a blueprint that Romney believes in and can execute. I just cannot see either one of them being as serious or as capable as Romney is.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Off topic: Any guesses where the Dow’s low will be before things turn around? I’m guessing it’ll test the 6000 barrier — maybe closing in on 5500 at the worst.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Nice speech. Mitt is so good at communicating.
We have some good options for our future. Heres to 2012. I predict Obama’s policies will not hlep anythign and will just anger most Americans by spending our way into an even bigger mess. There will be a big place for a competent problem solver. Mitt has the edge right now.
You can tell he’s running. If th economy stays bad or keeps getting worse, expect his stock to keep risin gand hte odds of a gop challenger winning the election keep getting better.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Oh my goodness. Sorry for that, you can’t even read that. My browser doesn’t let me see my whole post. Its realy annoying.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
I can read it, John and you are exactly right.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Can we just unite in our convservatism instead of bashing each other’s candidates this CPAC weekend
Palin, Huck, and Romney all have their strong points and contribute to conservatism in their own way.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
I don’t like Huckabee ever since he cost the primary for Romney. That fancy footwork in West VA w/ McCain really botched things up. His show is goofy and he always sounds like he’s giving a sermon.
That my 2cents.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
He sounded quite confident that the bad economy will be the predominant issue in four years — with national security a close second.
He’s in a good place to stay on message in the meantime, if he can just get himself on the biggest public podiums in front of the right crowds at regular intervals.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
I think a Romney/Huck or Romney/Palin Tickets is what we need for 2012.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Speeches, news, and editorials. Every time Romney gives his opinion in public it is news. And every time he does, the message and delivery is superb. I fully expect him to stay in the public spotlight. I just wish we could promote the Romney, Sanfords, Jindals, and Newts instead of constantly pandering to the populist Huckabee/Palin wing of the party. Populism is great for rhetoric but not for grown ups who are in charge of things.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
I like these 4 tickets at the moment but 2012 is a long ways away:
Romney/huckabee
Romney/heather wilson
Huckabee/huntsman
Huckabee/heather wilson
February 27th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Whomever we put on the ticket as VP, I want them time tested through and through by running in the primary. Without that vetting, we won’t know what we’re going to get. So, imho, I want them to run for the PResidency, or not be vp.
February 27th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Good Point Illinoisguy.
February 27th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Really good speech. There is no “perfect” candidate but I’m happy I supported him.
34 – I definitely think its better to have a VP that’s already been through the ringer so there are no unfortunate surprises.
February 27th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
We should make sure Romney picks Palin as VP so we can ruin our shot at 2012 and give Obama another 4 years…. Give me a break. Romney/Jindal, Romney/Sanford, hell, Romney/ANYBODY but Palin or Huckabee.
February 27th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
ROMNEY!!! He’s my pick- I just love listening to him eloquently lay out conservative priciples.
February 27th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
OhioRepub – yes, exactly.
February 27th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
37 – She may be better prepared in 2012 than she was this time. I wouldn’t write her off as a VP pick this early.
February 27th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
GetReal, Palin has an uphill battle now since she failed so miserably last time. Considering her for VP again would be very risky. It’s that one shot to make a good first impression thing. Her base loves her, but most Americans don’t. She’s very polarizing and I don’t see that changing.
February 27th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
Reading the above comments, I feel like I’m living in an alternate fantasy universe — Romneyland, where people actually consider him a great candidate. I guess Romneyland is better than Palinland, but not by much.
The GOP will lose by over ten points if they nominate this flip-flopper in 2012.
February 27th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
43 – Even if Romney actually had flip-flopped as much as you say he has, which isn’t true, Obama will have no room to criticize him for it, especially by 2012. Obama campaigned pretty far left in the Dem Primary, centrist in the general election, and seems to be flipping between the two in these first 30 days. He’s the guy who said he would pull all our troops out of Iraq his first day in office. I don’t think hammering Mitt for becoming pro life 7 years earlier is going to stick in the 2012 campaign.
February 27th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
GetReal, two wrongs don’t make a right. Just because Obama is a flip-flopper and an opportunist doesn’t mean that we have to nominate one too.
February 27th, 2009 at 8:38 pm
45 – None of the candidates are flawless. I think you greatly exaggerate Mitt’s “flip-flopping” but I’m just saying, better someone with a flaw Obama won’t have room to criticize than a flaw he can really nail them with.
February 27th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
Great speech! It is a positive sign that Mr. Romney may becoming a charismatic speaker and appearing able to relate to the voters. If he keeps this up, many of us will at least be able to feel much more at ease with him in that regard.
February 27th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
My, my Martha, it seems as if the Adam boys have failed to find their way to the threads this evening. I so much hope to hear them agree that Mitt is in a class of his own when it comes to articulating conservative principles.
February 27th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
With respect IllinoisGuy, Adam has the same right to his opinion of the speeches as the rest of us and if he chooses to hold his tongue (or keyboard) that is his right.
February 27th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
But I truly wanted their honest opinion Ohio Joe.
February 27th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
I fell asleep after the first three guys, when does Mitt get on?
February 27th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
Mitt was on this afternoon Liz. He was great.
February 27th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
I was there for this.
I thought he said what he said well, but, of course, I didn’t believe a word of it — and I even got some fans of Mittens who were with me to understand where I was coming from and concede that we could do a lot better.
February 27th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Mr. I Wish I Could Have Served In Vietnam
Mr. My Kids Serve My Country by Working for My Campaign
Mr. That’s Some Nice Bling Bling You’ve Got There
Mr. I Like Mandates
February 27th, 2009 at 9:23 pm
Mr. Secret Timetables
Mr. Mandated Healthcare is “Fabulous”
Mr. “I Don’t Lose Sleep at Night Thinking About What the Rich Pay in Taxes”
February 27th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Mr. McCain’s Immigration Plan Is Reasonable, Wait, No, It’s Amnesty
Mr. I Don’t Want to Support or Oppose the Bush Tax Cuts
Mr. Better On Gay Rights Than Ted Kennedy, Wait, Never Mind
Mr. Pro-Choice, Wait, No, Pro-Life
Mr. I’m Not the Most Conservative On Every Issue, Wait, They Go After Me Because I’m the Conservative One
February 27th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Mr. R Stands for Reform, Wait, I Represent the Republican Wing of the Republican Party
February 27th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
Mr. I Believe Tough Gun Laws Help Provide for Our Safety
Mr. Varmint Hunter
February 27th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Why did Kavon ever let you come back? I’ll never know!
February 27th, 2009 at 9:39 pm
I like Palin, but after Obama’s media cleaned her clock in the general, how does she stand a chance three years from now. Great conservatibe principles; but this girl could not hold a candle to an Obama in a debate. If you are going to take the Presidency away from Obama, you will have to beat him silly in nationally televised presidential debates. The only guy who will have command enough of the facts combined with the eloquence to take Obama down is Romney. Palin doesn’t have the brain power, Huckabee is just a late night comedian, and Jindal–well, you saw his performance the other night. The only guy who has the ability to do his homework, prepare, have command of the facts, think on his feet and get the message out in an verbal contest with Obama is Romney. Our candidate will have to do that, or no White House in 2012. Period!
February 27th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
Alex Knepper, I do not really want to get into the middle of this contest, but in # 53, I do think that you are taking a bit of a cheap shop at Mr. Romney’s children. Yes, to a degree, he is fair game, but I do think that family should be left out of it.
February 27th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
David, you certainly have the right to support and promote who you think is the best candidate, but you are a bit over the top to suggest that Mrs. alin lacks brain power.
February 27th, 2009 at 9:49 pm
Sorry alin should be Palin.
February 27th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Ohio Joe: You reference “Mrs.” Palin. Please follow David’s lead and refer to her as a “girl” in the future. Girls aren’t old enough to be married, so you must be mistaken in your use of “Mrs.”
There was another Rombot who liked to refer to Palin as a “girl” — can’t remember who it was now. It reflects worse on the speaker than on Palin.
February 27th, 2009 at 10:00 pm
Haha, I think that Governors are generally due a bit more respect than just boys and girls, but haha, what do I know, I am just a simpleton living in the hills in Ohio.
February 27th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
I thought the substance of Mitt’s speech was great but the delivery was a little dry.
He also seems to be having trouble getting people to understand the difference between not letting the banking system collapse and just bailing out companies in general as well as the difference between TARP and the “Stimulus” Plan. And it doesn’t seem to be widely known that while Romney understands the need to keep the financial system operative, he has been critical of the many missteps in which the TARP money has been used.
In regards to Huckabee’s speech, I think he started really bad but he got better as he went on and it got pretty good. Although I’m not so sure the Fair Tax wouldn’t be a disaster, most of the other things Huckabee talked about are spot on. I especially appreciated his comments about having to let poorly managed companies fail and letting the market right itself. That’s a long shot from his “you don’t want the man who laid you off…” rhetoric during the primary.
Republicans are going to have to work together rather than cannibalize each other if we are going to rebuild the party into what it should be.
February 27th, 2009 at 11:10 pm
Alex, you have some points about Romney, other stuff was long ago shown to be more fabricated spin than substance. We could all do what you do to most of the Republican candidates from 2008 and Palin as well.
Where is that going to take us? Republicans cannibalize each other using gotta logic and give lots of ammunition to the liberals.
Great way to deal with the issues at hand…
February 27th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
I wasn’t able to watch the speech. Does anyone know where I can view a replay online?
February 27th, 2009 at 11:34 pm
GEEZE…Anyone will be better than BHO!
Do you see what is happening here – This Country has fallen. The morons that voted this geek in have really been duped. In 5 weeks look at the damage he has done.
One can only look forward to what the GOP has for us.Who ever it will be – stand behind them and don’t screw this one up too. Get out the vote – everyone counts. Too many lazy people decided their vote would not count and it would have. It was closer than everybody thinks.
Re: Palin… cut the trash talking about this woman.It’s McCain you should be mad at.
February 28th, 2009 at 1:54 am
Two things…
TARP is a big issue with the American people. It didn’t work and he’s still standing by it.
Secondly, you cannot claim credit for the Massachusetts health care “success” without taking responsibility for its failure.
February 28th, 2009 at 2:22 am
69 – So nothing to your liking in the speech Adam?
1. So you would advise Romney to change positions? What would your response have been if he had (like we don’t already know)?
2. Sure you can. It was reasonably successful during his time in office, Deval Patrick changed it and its been less so ever since. If Obama somehow bungles the War on Terror would you blame it on Bush?
February 28th, 2009 at 2:37 am
69-If the concept is sound but the implementation is a failure do you blame the concept or try to improve on the implementation?
Also, only an idiot would say the Mass. health plan is a complete success or a complete failure. The correct question is whether it improved on the situation while avoiding as many of the socialist medicine problems as possible? What can we learn from it? What can be improved? What should be done differently?
I think it is disengineous to just declare it an unmitagatged failure especially in view of the Liberal environment in Mass.
One mark of sucessful people is they undertake difficult tasks and then keep tweeking things to make them better while learning as they go.
It’s the people with their hind ends planted in armchairs that always know exactly what to do in advance and have perfect insight on what should have been done after the fact.
Problem is, it’s all talk.
February 28th, 2009 at 5:19 am
It was a prett good speech. As far as the Health Care plan in Mass. Less people are going to the emergency room now because they have coverage and that’s a good thing.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:42 am
69,
Absolutely hilarious Adam. I mean really flat out funny who biased you really are.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:29 am
What I find funny is Huckabee and this writer Adam Graham acting as if they know womething about whether TARP was necessary or not. They haven’t the foggiest idea! What we know is given its implementation (lack of accountability and oversight), it was insufficient. We also don’t know what would have happened if they had not done what they did. If Mitt Romney would have been President, it would have had the necessary oversight and proper implementation. The fact is that Adam Grah am his idol know absolutely nothing about the subject matter. I don’t either. Probably none of you do either. All we know is that it was not a complete success. We don’t know what would have happened if it had not been put in place.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:30 am
Adam Graham and his idol*
February 28th, 2009 at 8:45 am
Illinoisguy, we do have some idea what could have happened. The other major banks and insurance companies in the US would have went under taking the entire banking system and insurance systems with them not to mention the stock market. Everybody’s retirement would go up in smoke. The domino effect would start taking down company after company, unemployment and crime would skyrocket. As the ripple effect swept through Europe we would see the strengthening of socialist and nationalist tendencies there, trade protectionism would rise…
You can see where this is going and it sounds very familiar to the very elderly and students of history and economics…
That doesn’t mean we should let the people who caused the problem off the hook, but there is oh so much blame to go around. It would be better to spend our time and resources putting the economy back together rather than going head hunting…
February 28th, 2009 at 9:04 am
I believe what you say is true Jerald, but since I’m admitting I don’t know, I’ll leave that up to you to present. I would love to see Huckabee, Mitt, and Adam Graham on stage for a solid 1/2 hour arguing about the merits, wouldn’t you? That would be soooooooooo fun to watch!!
February 28th, 2009 at 9:29 am
Alex you are being juvenile.
The fact is that the nominee is going to be Romney, Huckabee or Palin.
So what is your point on here if you hate all three?
You have to decide which one you can live with if you are going to have any influence/relevance for the next 4 years.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:43 am
Yes, a debate might watch, but at the end of the day, I am more interested in results than watch people debate (fun or no fun.) I admit that I do not know the intricate details of our banking system and where the money lies and so forth, but I certainly am not an total idiot when it comes to finance, budget, money, banking and so forth, but I for one am not going to get into a debate contest per se. However, that is not the point. I do not know Adam Graham’s expertise, but he has demonstrated his political knowledge to me (not saying I agree with him 100% or even 94% of the time) and I will assume until, I find out differently that he certainly in no dummy in financial matters. After all, he has demonstrated economic knowledge and I thus think that perhaps he would be an OK debater.
My personal feeling on TARP is that it probably was necessary, but that, it should not have been nearly as big as it was. Yes, Mr. Romney know better than I, but he is not the only person that knows better than I. I have not totally decided what my exact feeling is that Mr. Romney supported TARP. He is in a no win situation on TARP because if he comes out later and say that he was partially wrong on it or slightly tweaks his assessment, than the anti-Romney extremists will unfairly criticize him of being a Flipper.
With respect Jerald, I do not know your area of expertise, so I will have to assume that you are at least as smart as me in economics. However, I must take issue with your Chicken Little attitude that the sky is falling, banks would have collapsed and we’d have trade war and so on. Even with TARP we are having a few of these things come to pass. On the other side of the coin, it is this attitude that is in part (certainly not all be any means) responsible for the mess we are in. Up north, Socialist Canada has not fallen as fast as other countries in many respects, because their Prime Minister, Mr. Harper is calm and collected and not crying Chicken Little and bailing out Banks.
February 28th, 2009 at 10:02 am
With respect Ohio Joe, Jerald used the word ‘could’, not ‘would’. From what I understand, it would have been a huge gamble to not step in.
February 28th, 2009 at 10:48 am
The problem is the hotshots on wall street pretty much F’d the whole system + throw a bone to phil graham…better hope china doesn’t walk away:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/28/business/28nocera.html?_r=1&ref=business
February 28th, 2009 at 11:00 am
79 – Romney has already said if it were his call, TARP would have been much smaller. He didn’t say it in this speech, probably because it would come across as pandering and disingenuous, and he’s already accused of that enough.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:03 am
Thanks for clarifying that GetReal, in this case, I thus have little if any disagreement with him on this issue. In fact, it is a feather in Mr. Romney’s cap.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:21 am
I just think Adam Graham is hilarious. He cannot bring himself to say Romney gave a great speech yesterday. Adam, you’re in the minority.
I finally listened to Huck last night. He had some good moments, but a lot of the speech was about – you guessed it – Huck. Lots of silly jokes – in fact the first full 3.5 minutes were dumb jokes, and he threw in some snarky stuff, too. That’s just not what we need right now. Not only that, it was way too long. The laborious story of keeping a boat in the warehouse was painful to sit through. If Huck could stop making everything about himself all the time, he would do better. And if he would get a little more serious on substance. We don’t need a comedian, we need someone who has a plan to get us out of the fix we’re in. Huck’s fair tax is pie in the sky and not a serious possibility. It just sounds good to crowds.
Really, there is no comparison between the 2 speeches. Romney instills a lot more confidence than Huck, I’m afraid.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:26 am
I listened to Romney’s speech. It was capably delivered, but there was no personality or charisma. It wasn’t much different from his stump speeches on the trail.
If Romney runs in 2012, I’m guessing he will finish 2nd or third in most of the primary states.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:50 am
#84:
Martha given that you’re guy’s in 3rd place right now with only 22% of Republicans supporting him, perhaps it’s time to own up to the fact that how you view things isn’t necessarily how American Republic views them.
Secondly, I followed how the TARP has rolled out and it has been a disaster. What it’s provided is bandaid relief. We still have the problem of toxic assets on bank’s balance sheets. With the Capital Purchase program that Mr. Paulson proposed we did a lot of things that didn’t help. We injected money into sound financial institutions like Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan that didn’t need money, but had to make it look like taking federal money was okay.
TARP money helped facilitate the takeover of National City Corporation by PNC Bank which would not have happened without TARP. This resulted in massive job losses in the Pittsburgh Area where the two institutions overlapped and in Cleveland where NCC was headquartered.
We’ve also bought a huge chunk of Citibank and Bank of America. The hit to taxpayers on this has been huge. With the conversion from Preferred to Common Shares that leaves the U.S. owning 36% of Citi’s common stock, it has been a huge hit for taxpayers, with us losing somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of our investment.
We’ve also used the TARP money for things like the bailout of the auto industry.
How much good has this money done? In many cases, I think it’s only delayed the inevitable. I think Citibank is probably truly a Zombie Bank that is going to continue to require more and more taxpayer money. I’m not certain with Bank of America, but Citi will continue to milk taxpayers.I just don’t think with their P and L numbers they’re going to be on their feet anytime soon.
But yeah, the common person is too dumb to know how this money works and we need to rely on our betters like Mr. Romney to tell us what’s right./sarcasm off.
Of course, we might say, “Well Romney didn’t know how it would be spent.” Largely, though the TARP program gave broad discretionary to the Treasury Secretary regarding the spending of the money. In essence to support the TARP was to have faith that Treasury Secretary Paulson was going to spend the money appropriately. It was the wrong decision, the money was not spent how it was promised.
And what I think issue that can be learned from both the Massachusetts health care issue and the TARP debacle is that Romney has questionable judgment on making big economic decision. It wasn’t that no one warned Mr. Romney that the costs of his Massachusetts health care plan could escalate out of control, he was warned. He ignored the warning.
It wasn’t because no one predicted that the TARP could be misused. Romney ignored the warning. This is one of the hazards of being a so-called expert. You put so much faith in your expert opinion that you disregard legitimate issues raised by others.
Also I would not say that Romney didn’t give a good speech, but the issue of TARP is huge. Across America, “Tea Parties” are being held in protest of the massive rise of government largesse at the expense of our children and grandchildren. The TARP program amounted to little more than Wall Street Welfare that Mr. Romney backed. And it is an issue as is the health care plan, and a good speech is not going to get around the anger of the American people on this point.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:54 am
#85:
If Romney runs in 2012, I’m guessing he will finish 2nd or third in most of the primary states.
Actually, the Romney Campaign would say he’ll get Silver Medals and Bronze Medals….
February 28th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
The best defense of the pro tarpers is maybe you need to view the folks who demolished the economic system, name your bank, company, brokerage house, etc… dc insider…say phil graham :
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2008/05/foreclosure-phil?#comment-form
as sorta being = to German after WWI and instead of going for a pound flesh, that didn’t work out too well, its more important to fix the system basically i guess by throwing $’s at the problem instead of doing nothing, who knows if it will work or what would happen if it wasn’t tried:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/books/review/Nocera-t.html?pagewanted=2&ref=review
Politically, its a fine line to walk in trying to tap into the anger and fix the problem.
February 28th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Adam, so you thought it was a good speech. Thank you. Wow, that was like pulling teeth.
BTW – Romney’s not responsible for TARP failures. It’s easy to Monday-morning quarterback, though isn’t it? The American people are more angry about what’s happened since TARP.
Healthcare in Mass has improved – 40% less free ER visits. It’s private, and it’s a far cry better than what the leg. would have done. Romney isn’t responsible for what happened after, either.
Romney doesn’t have a magic wand, Adam. Your thoughts, (which took all day yesterday and part of today to come up with) show just how bereft of true criticisms of Romney you really are.
But thanks for finally weighing in.
February 28th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
#88:
Martha, in your world, I’ve been thinking about how to respond to your message which I just read this morning, all day Friday and all day Saturday until finally responding…
In the real world, I have a life. I work 8 hours a day, I went to a meeting of my local Pachyderm club, and I’m a student at University of Phoenix.
If I’m understanding your reasoning, Romney is a brilliant man who is responsible for every success that comes from policies he supports, but responsible for no failure or mass cost overrun that comes from the policies he supports. How can this possibly be true?
February 28th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
By the way, people are not happy about the $700 billion bailout either, they weren’t happy with it when it first passed and as people become aware of how it was squandered, they’re going to become less happy with it in general.
February 28th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Another point, Adam. Romney was right to support TARP based on the info available, (no one knows what would have happened had it not been passed. Yes, it didn’t help, and it was managed poorly) and on the fact that to come out against it a few weeks before the election – it would have hurt McCain. He was doing everything he could to help elect McCain. No one blames Romney for doing what he did – I haven’t seen any criticism of Romney over it. You’re grasping at straws to find a flaw where none exists. Yesterday, I didn’t detect that anyone cared – when Romney mentioned TARP in his speech.
February 28th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
89 – No. I don’t think that at all. But he’s not responsible for the failure of TARP. You can’t credibly pin that on him.
If you’re busy, fine. I apologize for saying you took too long to respond to Romney. It’s your reluctance to say anything positive about him that makes you suspect.
February 28th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Forgot, Adam. Romney’s healthcare plan is not a failure, it is a success. Romney is not respobsible for cost overruns, or what the gov and leg have changed in the past 3 years. Romney has not distanced himself from it because it’s working, and it’s not socialized medicine. He’s right that we needed to do something about healthcare before in truly does become socialized. Now it appears too late.
Another reason we should have elected Romney.
February 28th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
#91:
It is never right to spend $700 billion of your great-grandchildren’s money to avoid responsibility for your own actions.
#93:
The cost overruns began in 2007, the problems began in ’07, and they were all predictable.
February 28th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Romney seems to be loathed by the far left (Huffinton post types) and the far right (Redstate types). I think this puts him in a
very good position for 2012. I’ve noticed (from blog comments espeically) that moderate Democrats and Independents are far
more reasonable about Romney than the extremely ideological on both sides. Romney will have some difficulty getting through the
Republican primary again, but I believe he will win big aganist Obama. I think over the next few years, he’ll continue to hammer
home the same conservative message we heard at CPAC. Hopefully his book coming out on policy will help get the conversation ging
on Republican’s alternative plans. Mike Pence said that we have to win the argument first before we can win an election. I think
Mitt Romney understands that.
February 28th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
So, somehow TARP is Romney’s fault…how laughably pathetic.
February 28th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Taylor. I look forward to Romney’s book about ideas to get the party back on track.
What did Huck write about? Himself and his failed campaign. He used it to take shots at Romney and others. What is Palin going to write about? Her failed campaign, and it will probably be all about her, personally.
We can predict that Romney’s book will look to the future with concrete ideas, sound policy, and he won’t trash anyone in the process.
February 28th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
86 – Adam, you are a fan of Sarah Palin and she supported TARP as well. I’m sure both could have found plenty to criticize with it but were trying to get McCain elected so as to avoid the huge disaster our country is now facing at the inexperienced hands of President Obama. Romney can hardly take back his support now, the man can’t change his shirt without being accused of flip-flopping by certain people. So either pin some of the blame on Sarah or admit this isn’t Romney’s fault either.
February 28th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
97 – You really shouldn’t trash Sarah’s book until its published. We don’t know what the content will be.
February 28th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Adam, when you first appeared on Race I decided to look you up and find out more about you. It didn’t take long to see where you stand. Your article “The Man With No Core” told me all I needed to know. You wrote it when you feared Romney would be chosen for VP. You were in the same pathetic mindest as the people who signed the vicious anti-Mitt ad petition designed to scare McCain, and who sent the threatening letter to McCain not to choose Romney. (BTW – I’ll bet you signed both.) Your article was filled with the same lies and blatant misrepresentations about his record and history. Truth doesn’t matter when you need to oppose someone does it? But in retrospect, choosing Romney would have really helped McCain at a critical moment.
After that, I waited for you to be fair and say something objective about him. I waited for you to write a post about him, since he is the frontrunner. You wrote about everyone and their dog, but nothing on Romney’s 2012 prospects. Nothing reasonable came, just a lot of posts suspiciously written with the objective to make Romney look bad. Yes, Adam, we know you think Romney is undeserving of his position in life, you are suspicious of his education, wealth, success! We get you, completely.
Now, after Romney gives an excellent speech at CPAC, you cannot give him an ounce of credit. Just manufactured problems. I can’t say I’m the least bit surprised.
February 28th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
GetReal, you’re right. I’m not really trashing it, though. I think I did read that it would be about her. I’ll buy it and probably enjoy it. She’s an interesting character to say the least.
February 28th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
102 – all I’m saying Martha, is that people already accuse you of being unfair to Palin. I think you alternate between being reasonable and very unreasonable concerning the Alaskan governor, but that’s just my opinion. Just be careful not to criticize her over something even you agree is unfair. Not only have none of us read her book, it hasn’t even been written yet. We can hardly judge its merit at this point. If you want anyone to listen to your criticisms when they are legitimate, be cautious not to take meaningless shots. That’s why nobody takes Knickers or Flip seriously.
February 28th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
When is the cpac vote announced?
February 28th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
#100:
Actually, I have to confess you harden my opinion against Romney is hardening because you are incredibly arrogant. Probably not fair to him, but it’s human psychology.
Mitt Romney was an economic adviser to John McCain, he was in the room of advisor that McCain listened before McCain endorsed TARP. He called Congressmen and told them to vote for the TARP. Sarah Palin wasn’t an economic adviser, and she was bound to be loyal as the #2. And party loyalty didn’t make Mitt Romney call members of Congress up and tell them to vote for the TARP. And if you’re willing to sell out future generations and for the sake of the party, then you have no business leading our nation.
Romney is not the frontrunner, Palin is, Romney is #3. I’m saving my fire on Romney. I hope he doesn’t run. I’ve written my analysis of whether he’ll run. You didn’t like it. Too bad.
I also signed no petitions regarding McCain’s VP.
February 28th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
103 – I don’t know, but I’m hoping Mitt pulls off the threepeat!
February 28th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Like any speech, there is the contents of the speech and there is the delivery of the speech. Generally, there is very little objectionable points the Mr. Romney made during the speech in my opinion. He sounded mostly like a mainstream Conservative which is good. Adam Graham, you make some excellent points on TARP stating that “he was warned” I have mixed feelings on this. Yes, he was warned, but so was I. I never really liked the idea of TARP (in its current form at least) in the first place, but at first to be honest I did not hate it either (unlike some of my friends and family.) As the cookie continues to crumble, I am less happy with TARP as time goes on. I have the luxury of not running for office so it matters little what I say. I think it is a little harsh to Mr. Romney for TARP’s failures since he really has no control as to how TARP is being administered. Yes, he was warned, but in fairness so was I warned and even though I did not like TARP, I did not speak against it really at the time. So I in turn must cut him some slack.
As to the delivery of Mr. Romney’s speech, I was pleasantly surprised. While his speech was not quite as charismatic as the other two of the big three or Mr. Obama, it was a great step in the right direction. Often when the rest of us raise concerns about Mr. Romney’s speaking style and or his likability, we either get accused of being at least mildly bigoted or we are accused of being idiots (yes, it is often put much more politely to be fair) for seeming to favor style over substance. To be clear, I for one care most about policy. I further realize that likability is not a major qualification for the job. However, there is no getting around the fact that likability can translate into electability. I am in no way saying that Mr. Romney (or any other non-Palin person) is a bad person or an unlikable guy, but persona counts rightly or wrongly.
Am I politically in love with Mr. Romney all of a sudden because of his speech? No. Do I agree with him 100% because of his speech? No. Am I going to join his camp today because of this speech? Certainly not necessarily, but I am not going to join any camp on good speeches alone. Regardless of which camp I join, I am very happy that Mr. Romney gave a great speech. We need as many electable candidates as possible. Mr. Obama won in part because he is a likable charming charismatic guy. Yes, Mr. Obama is a Socialistic Community Organizing idiot, but it is not easy to hate such a likable guy. Is it possible for a non-likable person to beat a likable person such as Mr. Obama? Certainly, but it is also much more challenging. I doubt that Mr. Romney will ever be as likable or as charismatic as Mr. Obama, but he is closing the gap with yesterday’s speech. One speech at CPAC no less does not change one’s persona overnight, but I suspect that if he can keep up such performances and continue to improve, he will make many of us feel easier and he will convince some swing voters concerned about his electability that he is the person.
In short, Congratulations Mr. Romney on a great speech. I believe that you will need these types of speech to convince swing voters that you can relate to them and thus defeat Mr. Obama should you be our candidate.
February 28th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
“Actually, I have to confess you harden my opinion against Romney is hardening because you are incredibly arrogant. Probably not fair to him, but it’s human psychology.” All I can say, Martha, is that you were not wise in my opinion to get Adam Graham to state his opinion.
February 28th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
105 – Why was that diatribe on my incredible arrogance in response to my comment #100 that Martha shouldn’t criticize Palin’s book which she hasn’t read and isn’t finished yet? You are right in one area though, Romney’s fingerprints were clearly all over McCain’s campaign, I’m sure McCain listened to everything Romney said to him in that room and did everything Romney suggested. He then proceeded to ride a flying pig to victory!
February 28th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
105 – You’re acting as though TARP were a convicted rapist and Romney was trying to get him paroled, and congress was the parole board! Would you really hold Romney responsible for TARPs actions thereafter if that were the case?
February 28th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
#109
My apologies, that was in response to 101.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
105 – Oh Adam, you expect us to believe that Romney gave the go-ahead for McCain to vote for TARP? Ha. When questioned by Laura Ingraham during the meltdown about whether McCain was asking for his advice on the economy, Romney said that he hadn’t spoken to McCain in a long time. Now, I don’t know if that was before or after the meeting you talked about, but it’s very difficult to believe McCain puts much stock in anything Romney says.
Besides, I don’t think Romney was wrong to do what he did! It was one of those things that was seen as necessary, but didn’t turn out right – through no fault of anyone who saw the need to shore up the financial system. Romney didn’t bungle it. You are seeking to lay the whole entire thing on Romney’s shoulders and that’s just ridiculous. Plenty of respected conservatives believed it was the right thing to do. It’s not going to hurt Romney, as you see from the vote today.
You can try to argue that Romney is not the frontrunner, but you’ll be going against what is commonly accepted. But what does it matter? Romney is doing well, won CPAC for the 3rd time today. Conservatives know who they want now more than ever. His speech was solid, inspiring and comprehensive. He’s nothing if not consistent. (Yeah that’s going to get some response, hehe.)
Now Adam, if you are worth your salt as a voter, you will not let some poster on a website keep you from supporting the right candidate, or at least fairly judging him. After all, I don’t lay your ineptitude upon Huck.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
Oh ok. In that case, I apologize too, thinking you called me incredibly arrogant caused me to be harsher than necessary in my second post.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
#112:
What does it matter? Romney is doing well, won CPAC for the 3rd time today.
Yeah, the first two times it did him a heck of lot of good. Also, I have to say the CNN poll shows the difference between the grassroots of the Republican Party and the folks who either live in the beltway or can afford to plop down $250 for airline tickets and $125 a day for a conference during a recession.
You’re not paying attention to the world going around you. People are mad. Mad Dog mad about the debt. The idea that $700 billion is an “oopsie” that we can forgive is not going to wash with the people who work and are worried about our nation’s future.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Adam, the bailout is not Romney’s fault, and I don’t see it as a oopsie. As I said before, many conservatives were convinced it was the right thing to do at the time. Is this your main beef with him for 2012? Because it’s not going to matter to conservatives. Better find another beef. I’m mad, too. That’s why I support Romney! He’s the most credible guy to take on the mess Obama and the dems are making. We talking pragmatism here. No one else comes close.
Trying to say that CPAC does not represent the grassroots just isn’t accurate, either. I think they do. They sound and look just like the regular conservatives we always see at rallies and such. I mean come on, they even chant USA! USA! USA! ~ That’s not exactly elite behavior.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
#115
Bush and the Republicans helped create the mess with TARP, and Romney helped. His office called Congressmen to get them to vote for TARP.
Romney won CPAC in 2007 and he lost nationwide. Steve Forbes won CPAC and lost. George Allen won this thing two years in a row. It’s practically meaningless.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:27 pm
#114, I think you really nail the difference between CPAC attendees and the grass roots.
I would not underestimate the importance of TARP and how Romney’s support of it will undermine his candidacy. The grassroots hate TARP, and Romney’s lame justifications will not hold water with them. It will hurt Palin too, if she chooses to run.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
Adam, I’m sure you would be happy if Huck did better today! I wouldn’t call it exactly meaningless, but one measure of the way typical conservatives are feeling right now. I’m more inclined to trust a CPAC poll of over 1700, than one conducted by CNN of 400 voters with a sampling error of 4-5. Even CNN says it’s meaningless.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Adam – I suppose you’re going to pin TARP on Romney for the next 4 years. Good luck with that.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
#118:
CNN doesn’t say it’s meaningless. I would agree the margin’s kind of high.
The problem is CPAC’s sample is off because it’s Economically not representative of the population because 52% of the people voting are college students and 56% are 18-25 and 59% male. Could you tell me what state or region of the country has demographics like that?
It’s not representative by age. It’s not regionally representative, it’s DC, Virginia, Maryland heavy vote. And those people who aren’t college students are disproportionately wealthy or higher middle class. There’s no way you can make it to DC if you’re not fairly well off.
How many folks were there from Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina who are middle income.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/02/27/poll-palin-gop-favorite-in-2012-but-pollster-says-poll-has-no-value/
“The true value of this poll? None. Even CNN’s polling director called it worthless. “So many things will happen between now and 2012 that this poll has no real predictive value,” said Keating Holland.”
For whatever that’s worth.
CPAC doesn’t claim to represent anyone but conservative activists. I don’t agree with you that everyone who goes to the conference is well off, either. I almost went, but decided to go next year and take my 3 daughters. I’m not wealthy by any stretch.
I think it is in line with the exit polls from the primary. Romney consistently won among conservatives.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
CNN said the poll was worthless because it’s so early.
I tend to agree with this, but it’s a useful snapshot of what Republicans are thinking at the moment. And right now, 80% of them don’t have Romney as their first choice, despite all the hype and money he’s spent.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
#121:
Martha, you didn’t answer my question:
The problem is CPAC’s sample is off because it’s Economically not representative of the population because 52% of the people voting are college students and 56% are 18-25 and 59% male. Could you tell me what state or region of the country has demographics like that?
Could you tell me if the conservative movement is 52% College Students, and 56% people 18-25? Could you tell me a state where that’s the case.
The polling director is not saying it’s meaningless in terms of the state of the GOP’s mind right now but in terms of predicting who will walk away with the 2012 nomination.
You’re probably earning somewhere in 6-figures as a household income. You’re not earning $40,000 or $50,000 and thinking about this trip, certainly unless you’re making this a priority to save up for it. And if it is, I applaud you for that.
March 1st, 2009 at 12:17 am
Of course, there’s no states in that demo. I just simple said that CPAC is representative of conservative activists in general.