With the debate raging in Washington over the debt-ceiling, it’s not surprising that the declared Republican candidates for President are being asked what they think. Jon Huntsman supports the Boehner Plan, while the Dueling Minnesotans are united in opposing it. So what about Governor Romney? The frontrunner for the Republican nomination has himself said absolutely nothing. The best we’ve got out of Governor Romney is this from his spokeswoman, applauding the Speaker for being firm versus President Obama.
Okay, I think every Republican except David Frum is siding with the Speaker against the President. But what about Boehner’s Plan? Nothing, nada, not a thing.
This isn’t an isolated incident on Romney’s part. If you go to the Issue’s section of the Governor’s website, it’s nothing but bare boiler-plate stuff. No links to speeches, no videos of him doing interviews, and almost nothing specific. For instance, under “foreign policy” there is absolutely nothing about Afghanistan, or Libya or the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, all very important foreign policy issues. I’d even settle for a section about the Middle East in general. Nothing. Congresswoman Bachmann, Governor Pawlenty, Governor Huntsman, Gary Johnson, Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain all have specific information on their websites about their stances on the issues, or at least ways of helping you understand their positions. Not Mitt Romney. All a web-browser gets from his site is bland Republican generalities. I know “Generic Republican” is polling very well against President Obama, but having a website with “Generic Republican” position-stances does not inspire.
Supporters of the man from Massachusetts will contend that it’s too early to be putting up detailed policy proposals. All the easier for his opponents to attack him. To an extent yes that is true, but having almost nothing at all isn’t better. However, the first excuse doesn’t really fly with Romney. Besides Ron Paul (and say what you want about the Congressman everybody knows his positions on the issues) Romney is the only one running for a second time. Most Republican voters know at least the bare details of who he is. This cycle isn’t the time for “Who is Mitt?” We found that out last time. But rather now it’s about “What does Mitt stand for?”
Governor Romney remains the frontrunner for the Republican nomination. Being the frontrunner, there is no doubt a certain caution in his campaign, which is fine. But he also needs to spell out exactly where he would take this country if elected President. His record, while nice is not enough. After all, if I were an undecided Republican primary voter (which I am by the way), and I want a candidate with business experience, why not Herman Cain? If I want a jobs Governor why not Rick Perry? Or a Governor of a blue state; what about Tim Pawlenty? How about a candidate with foreign policy experience? Jon Huntsman’s out there too. In other words, Romney is not on paper offering anything that any of the other candidates aren’t offering.
The former Massachusetts Governor has a story to tell, about his success in the private sector, his running of the Salt Lake Olympics, his governorship of Massachusetts, etc. What voters need, and indeed have a right to see are how those experiences have translated into Romney’s stances on the issues. Right now though, they would be hard-pressed to find it.
(Note: in the comments please, don’t point to Romney’s book from several years ago and say “there are his positions”. A voter shouldn’t have to buy a person’s book to find out what they believe if that person wants to be their President. Just saying.)
July 27th, 2011 at 4:38 pm
Romney made it clear he favored the Cut, Cap and Balance. He thought the president ought to have signed it and Romney would have if he were president. What more do you want?
July 27th, 2011 at 4:43 pm
As everybody well knows, Romney said” You will not hear much from me until after labor Day.” Also, from a practical point of view, the last thing John Boehner needs is for candidates to start commenting on his plan, or the GOP positions, or whatever. This can only add politics to a non political debt crisis. It is kind of mature to stay out of this tangled negotiation. Except, of course, for Michelle Bachmann, who is, after all, IN THE CONGRESS.
CraigS
July 27th, 2011 at 4:43 pm
Romney is for jobs.
Duh!
July 27th, 2011 at 4:44 pm
Oh, and he thinks Obama sucks.
Other than that, I’m not sure what Romney stands for this election.
Of all the candidates, it’s most important for him to keep voters up to speed on where he’s at with the issues, with each new election.
July 27th, 2011 at 4:48 pm
#2:
I’m sure the Speaker would love to hear that our would-be nominee supports his plan.
And saying that this is non-political is absurd. Of course this is a political issue. This has been a political issue for at least the last few weeks.
July 27th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
If Romney feels like his voice would act as a tipping point to advert a catastrophic outcome he should go in. But as an outsider not privy to the private negotiations he should stay out.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Romney isn’t saying anything for the same reason he always seems to be “on the fence” or ready to rhetorically change tacks.
It’s too much of a risk.
It’s easier for Romney and far less risky for him to just sit back and hope that his money can work its magic.
If Romney supports Boehner vocally and the Republicans get blamed for a default then Romney knows he’ll never be president – even if such a move would probably give him cred with the Tea Partiers. The irony of this is that taking such a risk would be something you never expect to hear about Romney…..it’s too rich for his blood.
If Romney opposes Boehner then it just infuriates Tea Partiers even more to oppose him.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:16 pm
“But what about Boehner’s Plan? ”
What plan? It changes every day. Last time I checked a half hour ago, they were rewriting it again.
If Romney says something, and then Boehner rewrites it, Romney looks like a flip-flopper. If Romney doesn’t say something he’s “sitting on the fence”. Romney just can’t win when haters are gonna hate.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:19 pm
I’ll readily concede that at this point if I were Romney I wouldn’t say a thing. Opening his mouth now will only get him into trouble.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
The dirty little secret is that both Obama and the Republicans are afraid of getting blamed for this and thus losing power. Because of that, SOMETHING is going to be ironed out. And then, a couple months from now, the discussion will be about something else.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
I heard Hannity on yesterday trying to figure what the heck the plan even was. He kept getting confused about how many billions or trillions it was cutting, when it started, how much each year, etc. If most people don’t even know what it means, what good does it do to say something about it?
July 27th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
I think some of you all are mising the point. I’m using the Boehner Plan as an illustration of a rather unfortunate pattern by the Governor of not getting specific about pretty much anything. When talking about the issues there just hasn’t been anything to distinguish Governor Romney from anyone.
I don’t expect the Governor to be on Capitol Hill lobbying for the Boehner Plan, but mealy-mouthed generalities are not what I want in candidate or a President.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:25 pm
7 Adam
Actually, that sums it up pretty well. You see, Mitt does not want to squander his chances at being president by being tied to a catastrophe and/or default.
However, he DID say emphatically that he supports Cut, Cap, and Balance. He said it is the “line in the sand.”
July 27th, 2011 at 5:25 pm
8
Great point. Well played.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
CF,
Do you really think the fact that Romney closed tax loopholes makes him a Marxist Socialist?
July 27th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
12
I think you’re just blowing hot air, which is typical when the front-runner is the topic.
Candidates who DO speak out on specifics on every little topic seem to get just as much of a bad rap as those who don’t. Think Donald Trump.
A couple months ago Romney was VERY specific on MassCare, and how he’d fix the US HC system. He did a PowerPoint presentation and several Op-Eds on the topic. Did that make people respect him any more? NO.
Romney was specific on the START Treat. He was specific on his support for his support for Cut Cap and Balance just a few days ago. Romney’s been very specific on some policies, and more vague on others.
That you would claim “he does not get specific about pretty much anything” is an outright misrepresentation. He’s simply choosing his battles wisely, a good sign he understands how to wade politics.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:31 pm
15
Definitely Matt. Wow, you just totally got me on that one. Everybody give a round of applause for Matt!
July 27th, 2011 at 5:32 pm
It is cowardly that Romney hasn’t taken a stand on the debt ceiling. And yes, he is probably both for and against raising it, cutting spending, raising taxes…But I honestly can’t work up to much angst over Romney’s silence on this.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:34 pm
An Important Rule of Life: Do not let someone drag you into someone else’s cowpie. Mitt has stated his position, he’s not part of the negotiations, nothing more he says will help anything. The most salient thing he could say is this entire fiasco is why we need a different POTUS. Nothing good is going to happen until Obama is gone.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:36 pm
#16:
And Romney was impressive when he was talking about START or the specifics of his health-care plan. Where’s that now?
July 27th, 2011 at 5:37 pm
dude, why dont you just buy his book from several years ago? that contains his positions
July 27th, 2011 at 5:38 pm
Jonathan is completely on target here. This is the biggest debate since healthcare and frankly should concern every American, but especially anyone who seeks the presidency since he or she would have to deal with this same issue.
I compare it to the financial crisis in 2008. Every candidate was talking about it – including Romney – and what should be done. I think Adam has it right when he says its too much of a risk. Romney’s strategy is to lay low, launch attacks on Obama from an undisclosed location and then emerge after the smoke clears in Iowa. The irony is that this take no risks strategy is itself a risk.
And saying he supported cut, cap and balance is basically taking a pass. That bill already went nowhere. The question is, what now?
July 27th, 2011 at 5:38 pm
18 What is it about supporting Cut the Crap and Balance you don’t understand? It’s “courageous” to jump into a big fat fluid mess over which you have no control? Not unless you spell “courage” S-T-U-P-I-D.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:38 pm
#12. Jonathan, it sure seems like you are moving the goal post where Romney is concerned. He applauds Boehner on standing fast on not raising taxes, he supports cut, cap, and balance… I hear nothing from the other candidates with regards to the specifics you are demanding from Romney.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:44 pm
#24 – Its funny. Rombots keep pointing to polls showing Romney is leading, etc., which is obviously intended to project that he will be the nominee. And he has been acting, presumptively, as if he has already got it. But when someone asks, “well tell us what you think about x” suddenly we shouldn’t treat Romney any different from Cain or Gingrich, who have no chance of being the nominee.
I think Jonathan was trying to do Romney a favor because there are already media reports asking the same question. And eventually instead of just asking, “where’s Romney” they will ask, “why is he hiding?” It always turns negative. Always.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:49 pm
CF,
“Definitely Matt. Wow, you just totally got me on that one. Everybody give a round of applause for Matt!”
Is that your insecure way of apologizing for calling me a socialist and a Marxist, and telling me to get lost and that I don’t know what I’m talking about, all because I support “closing loopholes” just like Mitt?
July 27th, 2011 at 5:50 pm
I knew this would happen (nitpicking about one point rather than looking at the whole post).
The point of this post is Romney’s general lack of specificity. Like I said in the 2nd to last paragraph, Romney’s doing little to show what policy he would implement as President. I like the attacks on Obama as much as any Republican, but that’s not enough. Republicans know they don’t want to vote for the President, but why should we vote for Romney over say Huntsman or Pawlenty or Perry? I’m not seeing a policy reason from Romney to say that he’s the one to pick.
July 27th, 2011 at 5:57 pm
“The point of this post is Romney’s general lack of specificity”
He thinks Obama sucks.
What more do you need to know?
July 27th, 2011 at 5:57 pm
“Romney’s doing little to show what policy he would implement as President.”
Oh…… that.
Yeah, well……….
July 27th, 2011 at 5:59 pm
He really should at least be setting the table on that score. Because once the debates start he is going to have a lot to fend off from everyone else who will be training their guns on him for his past positions and statements.
Even if he can’t stomach picking a side in the budget battle – he ought to say SOMETHING besides “Obama sucks”.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:01 pm
#29:
I know I’m being rather idealistic in hoping we have some kind of , you know, policy debate for a campaign. But no, it’s going to be about who hates Obama the most and who loves Jesus more than the others. ::Sigh::
July 27th, 2011 at 6:03 pm
Romney has shown zero leadership on this issue.
He can release a statement on the shootings in Norway, but stays quiet on this…when real leadership is needed?
He’s hiding under the bed…the focus groups must be split pretty evenly…what’s a panderer to do?
Meanwhile….in Iowa:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/07/27/palin_to_keynote_tea_party_rally_in_iowa_110734.html
July 27th, 2011 at 6:05 pm
Romney does everything for a reason and this is precisely the type of issue he has strong opinions about. He’s already expressed on this topic. You’ll hear from him when the time is right to do so, not because you felt like knowing today. He has several issues to balance, including not overshadowing or pressuring our Republican Congress who have it rough in Washington right now. The man didn’t get to where he is today because he lacks ideas or actions.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:05 pm
*general topic, not topic
July 27th, 2011 at 6:08 pm
33. Yeah, because the Republicans on the Hill don’t need any encouragement or guidance…
You guys are pathetic in your excuse making for wimpy Willard.
He should standing up for our principles and speaking forcefully right now, not hiding under the bed.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:09 pm
Adam X
This ” Crap” about Romney always being on the fence …..is just that. B.S. I know his book is a year old……but the 64 SPECIFIC recommendations at the end of the book are 64 more than I have heard from anybody else. Let’s hear Bachmann’s position on No. 25 on energy policy. Let’s hear Perry’s position on No. 31 to establish a real benchmark to measure economic growth. How about Palin’s position on No. 38, setting a budget target for defense expenditures ? How about No. 3 ? Actually running the country like an efficient business. Who’s in favor of that ?
Why don’t we have candidate positions on these 64 issues that Mitt published a year ago ??????????
CraigS
July 27th, 2011 at 6:09 pm
The RomNots are out in force today…
July 27th, 2011 at 6:09 pm
It’s simple, Jonathan. Mitt’s thinking ahead to his reelection campaign in 2016. His handlers have instructed him that it’s easier to defend your presidential actions if you haven’t broken any promises. And it’s easiest to avoid breaking promises if you don’t make any in the first place.
Ask me no questions and I’ll tell you no lies, etc., QED.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
Six,
“You’ll hear from him when the time is right to do so”
Like when public opinion is settled?
“not because you felt like knowing today.”
Today’s pretty good. Tomorrow would work too, but there are only so many days left between now and Aug. 2.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
And the remark about “the book doesn’t count”. That’s a rule you made up, because it undoes your whole article and slant.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:11 pm
So, what Mitt should do is announce something like this:
My stance is that we should cut spending by $8.25 trillion within the next five years. We should cap spending at 17% of GDP. We should pass an amendment to balance the budget. Taxes cannot be raised. And finally, the debt-ceiling can be raised if each of the previous points are concretely in place, and if the rating agencies confirm they will maintain current ratings.
Would something like that make everyone happy? Or are people looking for something else?
July 27th, 2011 at 6:12 pm
hamaca,
I’m looking for a new puppy.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:14 pm
42. Matt “MWS”,
LOL…I’ll see what I can do.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:14 pm
#40:
How does it change anything? Unless Romney is going to toss copies of his book out of the window, then that’s not good enough. Like I said, the voters shouldn’t have to buy a book to hear what their would-be President believes.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:15 pm
Six,
“And the remark about “the book doesn’t count”. That’s a rule you made up, because it undoes your whole article and slant.”
No, it doesn’t, because “Read the book” is an easy cop out. Is that what Mitt tells the voters? “If you want to know what I think, jackhole, read my book. Don’t ask me any more stupid questions until you’ve read my book! On sale, $7.95 at Amazon!”
Some of us old fashioned types think a campaign should proudly proclaim what a candidate thinks, without the voters having to work so hard.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:19 pm
#41 – So let me get this straight. By Aug 2 both houses of congress should debate a proposed constitutional amendment and figure out how to cut $2.5 trillion when Boehner could only get to about $1 trillion. It makes amending the Constitutional sound trivial and certainly not something I would want to hear a presidential candidate propose.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:22 pm
44. 45.
I agree that no candidate should ever just state, “Read my book.” And I don’t think any have. I think Rombot comments are not suggesting that, but rather are countering comments from Romnots and others who try to suggest he has never ever stated his opinion on the issues, i.e. that there’s no way to know what he stands for on the issues. Well, that’s not true, because actually putting something in writing like that is taking a very strong stand–it’s in black and white for everyone to see. Whether you agree with the stances is another story, but at least it’s there. But again, that needs to be supplemented by other verbal communication, of course, e.g. townhalls, debates, etc. for people who are not inclined to search out and read someone’s book.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:25 pm
hamaca,
I don’t think Jonathan is suggesting there is no way to know what Mitt thinks about anything (though I would contend it’s impossible to know what he truly thinks about anything…..) I think his point is that his campaign this time is very, very thin on details of how he would go about doing things.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:28 pm
46. Just thought I’d throw an example out there to help people define what it is they’re looking for, since they’re clearly very unhappy that Mitt has not sorted out the whole issue for Obama, Boehner, and the rest, so that they can thank him and carry on with finalizing the package, voting, etc.
Btw, since Mitt is such a weak frontrunner, or not even one at all, perhaps those closest to him, e.g. Perry, Bachmann, et. al, could show us how it’s done. At least Palin has taken a stab at it.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:28 pm
Jonathan, did you not see Mitt’s interview with Hannity a couple of weeks ago? If you want specificity, you may actually have to listen to what Mitt is saying. Nobody else in the media is running around saying that Mitt doesn’t have any positions on current issues. I mean, honestly, this is a post grasping for something that isn’t even there. In fact, this really shouldn’t even be a post. Kavon, can you establish some criteria for people to post on the front page? This post just isn’t worth of the front page. It should just be a comment in a thread somewhere.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:28 pm
#45:
Actually, if Romney ever actually told somebody off using the term jackhole, I might vote for him just for that.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:30 pm
I guess I would agree with this article if I thought any of the other candidates were any better at giving specifics (excluding Ron Paul of course). As has been mentioned, Romney supports cut, cap, and balance. The simple fact of the matter is that Romney is held to a different standard. Part of the reason for this is that he is at least the nominal frontrunner.
If the general election were tomorrow, and Romney was the nominee, I would really want to know what Romney specifically thought about this, and I would want him to have a plan. But the election isn’t for another year. Romney is not privy to the private negotiations, and neither is any other candidate. As such, any statement other than a support of CCB and other generalized statements are pretty useless. Especially in light of the fact that Romney has laid out his specific plan in his book. While I agree that voters shouldn’t have to buy the book to know a candidate’s position, most voters right now are more concerned about the bleak jobs reports than how a candidate addresses the debt ceiling. Romney has played this very well as a campaign. If TPAW gets the balls to actually address Romney in person and asks, “where were you on the debt ceiling?” Romney can point to his support of CCP. 3 months later, most voters won’t care about it.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:31 pm
Mitt’s staffers have reviewed his last campaign fiasco and determined that his competing statements did him no good. So they’re trying to keep him quiet so as to avoid such contradictions this time around.
Either that, or else he figures he’s the next-in-line shoo-in, so he can wait until his competitors have demolished one another and left him standing alone as the nominee. Only then will he roll out his general election makeover as a David Frum moderate — a perch from which he will insult and denounce the conservative activist base, evangelicals, and Tea Partiers.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:32 pm
Agreed, #50. Maybe we should even it out with a post that says Perry is out of touch with normal voters because he was handed his career by his father, because he takes trips all over the world on Texas tax-payer money, because he lobbies to cover up his personal expenses paid for by Texas, etc. That might be equal treatment…
July 27th, 2011 at 6:32 pm
Matt “MWS”,
I think it’s a fine line for any candidate to balance, i.e. giving enough detail about what they’d do and why so we can know they though process and competence vs. giving venturing too much into detail that non-Presidents simply aren’t privy to.
Which campaign is providing the right amount of detail of how their candidate would go about doing things?
July 27th, 2011 at 6:32 pm
#50 “Nobody else in the media is running around saying that Mitt doesn’t have any positions on current issues”
Um, Yesterday MSNBC ran a segment called “silence of the lambs” asking what Romney’s position was on the debt ceiling and today there was a segment on Romney but I didn’t watch. CNN did something similar on Monday I believe. So the media is asking the same question.
And no one said, “read his book.”
July 27th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
47 Hamaca
You are right. I suppose a Town Hall for 10,000 Iowa voters a week ago…….must count as an effective supplement to published positions ???
CraigS
July 27th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
What is the exact purpose of this post? Why is this even a post?
July 27th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
I just heard Boehner changed a few things on his proposal… no budget proposal is set….wait till the final version is put out there for a final vote….wouldn’t that be the most responsible thing?
July 27th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
50. 54.
I strongly disagree. This topic is certainly entitled FPP status, even if I disagree with the premise. It’s a topic worth debating.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:35 pm
#45 When you put that spin on it, the sinister, greedy music plays. But seriously, he went through the trouble of not only putting it down in writing, but to publish it. The book is a a New York Times best seller and you want to convince us that he is silent on the issue? It comes across as a flimsy rule to uphold the tone of your post.
If his book doesn’t count when he has something intelligent and good to say, are you willing to not count it when the book fails in it’s logic sometime down the road (when we all have 20/20 hindsight?) I didn’t think so. You’ll be on here telling us what was poorly said in his book and holding him to the mark.
So what says you today on July, 27, 2011. His book is either evidence of who he is, or completely off limits for good or bad down the road.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:36 pm
56. Fox News had Romney on a couple of weeks ago where he said he was for Cut, Cap & Balance. You should stay away from CNN and MSNBC. THey lean a little to the left.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:38 pm
#55:
Honestly, I think Jon Huntsman and Tim Pawlenty are providing the right balance between the heavy policiy stuff and the lighter stuff. I really like the way the issue pages of their websites are laid out.
(psst… Just between us, I wonder how many all of these new magically appearing Rombots know he’s one of my top 3 choices?)
July 27th, 2011 at 6:40 pm
60. I mean, I could come up with all kinds of weird topics if I wanted. Why has there not been a topic on Pawlenty’s camp leaking the migraine story? Why is there not a topic about the kind of jobs created in Texas? Romney has stated pubclicly so many times that he favors Cut, Cap & Balance. I guess the standard for Romney is just so much higher because people have become accustomed to him outdoing the other candidates when it comes to all current issues.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:41 pm
Is this the same anti-Mitt poster named Jonathan from the 2008 cycle, or is this somebody new?
July 27th, 2011 at 6:42 pm
There was a poster named Jonathan in the 2008 cycle that kind of got his huevos cut off because he was always posting anti-Romney stuff.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:44 pm
Kavon & Company had to delete some of his front-page posts…
July 27th, 2011 at 6:44 pm
63. Good to know re Huntsman and TPaw–my question was genuine.
Ha ha…nothing wrong with being tough on a candidate you might support down the road–it’ll do ‘em good!
July 27th, 2011 at 6:47 pm
64. Think of it this way–this gives us Romney supporters the opportunity to debate an issue, to help keep him relevant, and to counter misinformation. Why is that so bad? Perhaps some of the other candidates wish they could get any kind of publicity at this point!
July 27th, 2011 at 6:47 pm
hamaca,
“I think it’s a fine line for any candidate to balance”
Truly. But I think grossly errs on the side of vagueality (I just invented that). If I go to his website, all I get are reasons Obama sucks, the opportunity to donate to a winning cause, and a coupon for Aquafresh.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:48 pm
#65/#66:
It wasn’t me. I wasn’t a front-page contributor in the 08 cycle.
#68:
Some people here don’t seem to see it that way. Watch, I’ll publish something that says bad things about Rick Perry and they’ll say its brilliant.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:50 pm
Jonathan, you would the first to publish anything negative about Perry. He is a demi-god around here.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:52 pm
#72:
Alright fine:
No way can a secession-supporting, proto-Tea Party candidate who’ll be painted from day one to Election Day as “Bush’s Lieutenant Governor” have a chance of beating President Obama.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:53 pm
Matt “MWS”,
He’ll certainly need to change that going forward to add more specificity (I don’t think I invented that word). Unless the strategy is to blast Obama as step one to get people asking your exact question to then set up phase two being what Mitt will do about it, it won’t work well with others already doing better as mentioned by Jonathan.
July 27th, 2011 at 6:55 pm
Six,
I don’t know if Mitt’s book has anything intelligent or useful to say, because I haven’t read it.
Now, if he could just give me a summation of his plans……. Maybe in an ad, or on his website……….
July 27th, 2011 at 7:05 pm
hamaca,
The more Mitt dillies and dallies regarding his own proposals, the more he opens himself up to charges from cynics (like Marquey Marque) who wonder if he’s avoiding specificity because he lacks core beliefs, and is hoping to set up a run to the middle in the general elections.
Mitt’s advisors might not know this, but he’s sort of vulnerable to accusations of political expediency…..
July 27th, 2011 at 7:07 pm
MWS jokes about Aquafresh, but Mitt has clearly been trying to reverse engineer elements of the Bam campaign, starting with making his initial into some sort of CD branding logo. Other elements that got Bam nominated included remaining vague on as many issues as possible for as long as tolerable, persistently attacking the sitting prez, remaining aloof and hard to access.
But I can’t figure out how Mitt hopes to do the speechifying-before-fainting-multitudes gambit. And I don’t think the conservative activist base goes all weak-kneed for glib and vapid speech-making as a performance art.
July 27th, 2011 at 7:09 pm
Marquey Marque,
The trouble with business consultants is that they’re always fighting the last war.
July 27th, 2011 at 7:11 pm
Great piece Jonathan-hitting the nail on the head.
Romney lacks both conviction and courage.
Can you imagine if Romney had been the one person who stopped Obamacare back in 2009? Can you imagine if he had put his dream of being POTUS on the line, and stood against his own Romneycare? Telling the folks where it failed and how it needed to be improved. Imagine Romney using his PAC dollars to put out commercials against both Obamacare and Romneycare. Can you imagine? Neither can I-because it was probably poll tested and his consultants decided against it. Too risky.
He would have been the GOP hero and leader. But instead, he was MIA. Just like now.
If Romney gets the nomination, as Ann Coulter said, he will lose against Obama.
July 27th, 2011 at 7:11 pm
And so we go from vague and ill defined promises of “Hope” and “Change” to vague and ill defined promises of “Jobs” and “Jobs”.
July 27th, 2011 at 7:18 pm
Strange coincidence?
In September 2007, LDS pedophile-rapist Warren Jeffs went on trial in Utah.
This week, Warren Jeffs’ trial in Texas began.
July 27th, 2011 at 7:21 pm
Pablo,
I’m pretty sure that’s coincidence.
Oddly enough though, this marks the 123rd month since April, 2001.
July 27th, 2011 at 7:22 pm
Nice post, Jon.
So, I need to add T-Paw as pro Boehner plan.
July 27th, 2011 at 7:27 pm
Craig,
No.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59989.html
July 27th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
Any more candidates or possible candidates who may run in ’12 speak out today?
July 27th, 2011 at 7:31 pm
Craig,
Pawlenty said he’s for the Cut, Cap, and Balance or whatever it’s called.
July 27th, 2011 at 7:34 pm
Cut, cap and balance, where have I heard that before?
http://news.yahoo.com/romney-cut-cap-balance-budget-174400413.html
July 27th, 2011 at 7:34 pm
Ok, Matt
WAY TO GO, T-PAW!
As of now..
BACK PLAN
Huntsman
Bolton
DON’T BACK
Bachmann
Paul
Pawlenty
WHAT PLAN?
Romney
July 27th, 2011 at 7:34 pm
81:
That would be FLDS pedophile-rapist not LDS!
July 27th, 2011 at 7:35 pm
Correction please: Warren Jeffs is NOT LDS, at least not in the sense that Mitt Romney is. The FLDS are a total break-off of the main LDS Church. Heck, they do not even practice polygamy in the restrictive way it was practiced over a century ago. Polygamy IS the center of their lives unlike the early Saints when only 3% of the men practiced polygamy.
Please make that distinction next time. WARREN JEFFS IS NOT LDS.
July 27th, 2011 at 7:40 pm
Is everyone jumping on Huck’s star economic proposals, the Fair Tax and Balanced Budget Ammendment train?
Finally, we have adults in DC.
July 27th, 2011 at 7:44 pm
#81 Your true colors.
July 27th, 2011 at 7:46 pm
How is it that T-Paw says cut, cap and balance – Romney says the same thing and they’re in different categories?
Read Romney public statement from #87
July 27th, 2011 at 8:01 pm
OK, Six-Mom
I thought Mitt wasn’t pro or con Boehner’s proposal. Do you have a link where he’s against it or for it?
As of now..
BACK PLAN
Huntsman
Bolton
DON’T BACK BOEHNER’s PLAN
Bachmann
Paul
Pawlenty
???Romney???
Keep ‘em comin’! And state your cases and don’t play coy, wannabe nominees!
July 27th, 2011 at 8:01 pm
Jonathan,
Right Wing Nut (Some old time ROS fans might remember that name) had a post up at Right Speak today, with similiar content, chiding Romney for changing positions on the debt ceiling issue. Obviously he has not.
http://www.rightspeak.net/2011/07/did-mitt-romney-flip-flop-on-debt.html
While he is an outright RomNot, I know, as yuo ststed earlier, Romney has always been a possible contender for you.
So my comments below are directed towards that post, but they could very well apply to yours as well, although I don’t think you wrote this as a “hit piece” they RWN did, but rather to spark a conversation. It also gave the Romnots to emerge and continue thier ankle biting ways.
———————–
From the title to the tone to the content this was designed as a hit piece on Romney.
Now, with the aid of punctuation mark, in this case a question mark, you are trying to spin this entire post as thought provoking essay.
This reminds me of the Clintonian “depends on what the meaning of is is” charade.
Let me clear this up for you:
Romney is against raising taxes in the current economic climate.
Romney believes cutting & capping spending and then enacting a BBA is the best approach, one a President can do a lot to advance through leadership.
He said Ombama’s leadership has been lousy — and he’s right.
He then went on to praise Boehner for not going a long with a tax increase to gain a deal.
That is it.
Now regarding getting out front and huffing and puffing about this issue, I think it’s nonsense. At this juncture he is one of many candidates seeking the nomination, not the nominee.
He’s not at the negotiation table or behind closed doors with GOP leadership, so he has no inside info on what is being bandied about.
So to go out and make grand pronouncements would come off more as political pandering and posturing, simply for publicity’s (or to meet Cable TV news contractual obligations – wink, wink) sake.
As I said before, let the DC insider work out this deal and the 2012ers should move on from there. If I were the GOP leadership and someone runnng for office was trying to butt in, they’d certianly get an earful.
And I think most voters would feel that way as well.
As Jimmy Durante used to say – “Everybody wants to get into the act.”
That’s something we don’t need right now.
July 27th, 2011 at 8:01 pm
PabloZed #81..You seem to know everything…but how is it that you didn’t know Warren Jeffs church has nothing to do with the Mormon Church?…..I’m not a Mormon, but I think you should banned for that intended bigoted comment.
July 27th, 2011 at 8:04 pm
93. It’s the reality when you enter the race42012 zone. Where the Romnots bend and twist like a pretzel–they put their target to shame!
July 27th, 2011 at 8:05 pm
#96 Thank you.
July 27th, 2011 at 8:05 pm
I have backed Romney for years, but switched to Bachmann. I want someone who can sell conservatism. Not someone who just wants to be another G.W. Bush. I hope Romney starts coming out of the closet, so to speak. Too much fence sitting. His pants must be ripped by now. Goldwater didn’t win, but he changed American politics forever.
July 27th, 2011 at 8:06 pm
I think the major reason for Romney to not be super-detailed in policy right now is because of the simple fact that he’s been through this before. He ran hard in 2007 and 2008 and issued extremely detailed policy statements. He lost because he just couldn’t make the sale with enough Republican voters. His record of solving a budget crisis in Massachusetts and leading the 2002 Olympics out of financial and ethical holes didn’t matter when the major issue of the day was the war in Iraq. John McCain had the skill set wanted most by Republican voters for the issue du jour, and, by a hair, Republican Primary voters handed McCain the nomination.
Today’s issue du jour is jobs and the economy. I agree that the debt crisis certainly affects our economic outlook, but most voters don’t understand the whole debt crisis, let alone have strong feelings about how to solve it.
For Mitt to be in a position to lead, he needs to win the nomination. Until then, he’s just a voice in a (VERY large) Republican choir. To win the nomination, he needs to resonate with voters that he can help fix the economy. Trying to lead on the debt crisis when you’re not actually an elected leader is at least presumptuous, and at worst offensive to our Congressmen and women who actually have votes.
July 27th, 2011 at 8:09 pm
Ron Wagner in #99.
Barack Obama has changed American politics forever, too. Is that what you want more of?
July 27th, 2011 at 8:14 pm
Ron Wagner
Goldwater lost. Can we afford to lose the 2012 election to Obama? If he gets re-elected, we’re doomed. Screwed. Gone.
Ottoman Empire.
A blip on the radar of history.
July 27th, 2011 at 8:27 pm
#99 – That is what I like about Ron Paul. But sadly a true constitutional conservative can’t get the nomination. You have to wink and nod too much.
July 27th, 2011 at 8:30 pm
Let’s talk , for just a moment, about ” Core beliefs.” Seems to be a constant theme about Mitt Romney. So, what are Rick Perry’s ” Core Beliefs?”
Rick Perry is planning upon running for President, based upon his ” Core beliefs” and his close ideological association with evangelicals. He certainly isn’t planning on running on the basis of his Texas accomplishments as ” the longest serving Governor in Texas history.” Like…..
Texas is 47 out of 50 in education in the U.S. Perry just cut the Texas education budget by $ 4 Billion
Texas is dead last , 50/50 in % of people over 25 with H.S. Diploma
Texas is dead last in % of women with pre natal health care
Texas is dead last in health care equity
Texas has a $ 25 Billion debt
Texas is FIRST in pollution
Texas is FIRST in uninsured children
Texas is FIRST in Executions
In addition, Perry introduced “Intelligent Design” into Texas Public Schools and believes laws criminalizing gay sex were ” appropriate “, even after Supreme Court overthrew
state law in “Lawrence vs Texas”
But, enough of Perry’s superlatives. I want to get to his ” Core Beliefs.” He is the INITIATOR of The Response, his Houston prayer meeting set for August. His co-sponsor is AFA, the American Family Association.Two of the executives of AFA, including the founder, Don Wildmon. are hosts.. Other national endorsers of The Response, are Dr John Benefiel of Heartland Apostolic Prayer Net, Mike Bickle, Director of International House of Prayer and Dr. Cindy Jacobs of Generals International. Presumably, Rick shares their beliefs or he wouldn’t have them participating in an event he initiated. Right ??
So, what do they believe ? It’s a good question as they have co billing in The Response coming in August.
AFA……..Spokesman Bryan Fischer is quoted as believing
Gays are responsible for the death of Jews in the holocaust
Gays caused the rise of Adolph Hitler
Native Americans deserved to have their land stolen because they were of the ” wrong religion.”
African American women ” rut like rabbits”
Herman Cain is authentically black
Heartland…Director Benefiel believes Statue of Liberty is a ” Demonic Idol.”
General International’s Cindy Jacobs believes natural catastrophes are caused by God’s anger at homosexuality
Intnl. House of Prayer’s Bickle believes Oprah Winfrey will be one of the pastors of the Harlot Babylon and pave the way for the anti- Christ
There are other issues in Perry’s associations that are equally disturbing. Does Perry believe what these folks believe ? I don’t know, but the public needs to know if he doesn’t and why these folks would be invited to Perry’s Prayer meeting. Just like Obama’s problem with Jeremiah Wright, there is a reason why they are invited, but their published and quoted comments are so antithetical to American thought that I would like to hear from Rick Perry before he announces for President , how close his ” core beliefs ” are to these whackos. The Dems could have a true field day with this craziness but its going to be on parade on August 6 with Perry as the ” Initiator ”
CraigS
July 27th, 2011 at 8:31 pm
Ron Wagner, I second/third whatever everyone else has said.
First and foremost, if you support Bachmann you must ask yourself if Bachmann can WIN. That’s means you should study the electoral map of recent elections. If you did you would see that states like FL, OH, VA, NV and CO MUST be won and they are tougher states for hardcore conservatives like Bachmann to win. Winning states like IA, NH, and MI also help to win in a general elections. Remember that independant voters are key to winning elections.
Remember what happened to Buck and Angle in CO and NV? Bachmann is cut from the same cloth as those two. She comes off as an extremist to non-conservatives and she will lose. We CANNOT win 2012 without winning either CO or NV.
If Bachmann is likely to not win in those key states, you should not consider her. Obama MUST be defeated in 2012. MUST! That’s priority #1. Romney is showing repeatedly to be in the strongest position to defeat Obama in 2012 in states like FL, OH, MI, IA, NH, NV, and CO. That should priority number one no matter that Romney is not as conservative as you would like him to be.
July 27th, 2011 at 8:38 pm
Like others have mentioned, this debt debate is a moving target.
Romney has stated his line in the sand.
I suppose if Boehner asks him for his advice, he will give it, but other than what he has stated, maybe Romney is not thrilled with the plan in its current form, and it is pretty hard to come out in support of something that will already have morphed into something else by the time you announce your support.
I remember all the heat Romney has taken from you RomNots over Romney’s early cursory support of John McCain’s plan to deal with illegal immigration that later morphed into something very different that Romney was not for.
But what is the meme?
Romney’s cursory support for an early version is used to attack him as a flip flopper by dishonestly tying that early cursory support to the final version of the bill, which Romney was against.
Say what you want about Romney, but he learns…
July 27th, 2011 at 8:48 pm
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/26/pawlenty-comes-out-against-boehners-plan-romney-not-so-sure/
July 27th, 2011 at 8:50 pm
#105 – Its entirely to early to try to pick a candidate based on how they would perform 15+ months from now. Too many variables.
And no one is ever really happy settling for a candidate. And frankly there is no reason to settle in a primary
July 27th, 2011 at 8:53 pm
Craig, how do I highlight information like you just did in 107?
July 27th, 2011 at 8:56 pm
#107 – If that is all we can get out of these guys its best not to hear from them at all.
July 27th, 2011 at 8:56 pm
Frederick,
That argument doesn’t really sell.
Giuliani was supposedly our best bet against both Democrats in 2008. But the primary voters decided he was too far out of sync with the Republican electorate.
Mitt is better off trying to sell why people should WANT him as their nominee, and not just tell them that he has a better chance of flipping New Hampshire in the general election.
July 27th, 2011 at 8:59 pm
Fredrick (Romney/West) Says:
July 27th, 2011 at 8:31 pm
“First and foremost, if you support Bachmann you must ask yourself if Bachmann can WIN. That’s means you should study the electoral map of recent elections. If you did you would see that states like FL, OH, VA, NV and CO MUST be won and they are tougher states for hardcore conservatives like Bachmann to win. Winning states like IA, NH, and MI also help to win in a general elections.”
===
Bachmann does not have to win NV, CO, MI, OR NH. None of them at all are crucial states to take back the WH from Obama/Biden.
But she and her running mate of Huckabee, Perry, or Romney do have to win IOWA, OHIO, VIRGINIA, and FLORIDA to put Republicans back in the White House asap.
July 27th, 2011 at 9:01 pm
MassCon,
“Ottoman Empire.”
That might be a bit too despondent, don’t you think?
July 27th, 2011 at 9:01 pm
TexCon,
109
Do you mean the blockquote or the bold?
July 27th, 2011 at 9:02 pm
Texas Conservative,
Hi!
I’ll send it over to your mailbox at Huck’s Army.
July 27th, 2011 at 9:12 pm
The blockquote. I know how to bold, just not that blockquote. thanks.
July 27th, 2011 at 9:13 pm
In 1983 Bill Bain offered few of his employees,Mitt was one of them,
to start a spin off Bain Capital as his partners,at the time of full
orgy of LBOs.
LBO= You “buy” the company and finance it with the assets of the same
company,giving corrupt managers millions in “Golden Parachutes” and picking huge assets for pennies on dollar.It was legal until Mitt got
out of business.
Mitt refused out of fear of losing some of his money.
He agreed one year later only after Bill Bain made a contract guaranteeing that no matter what happens Mitt will not lose any money.
This is why Mitt never started a single company in his life,not one.
He benefited from other people’s vision and creations.
So,having finger in the wind and always being scared is Mitt Rockefeller
Romney.
Much more important topic and news is this:
Real Clear Politics
PALIN TO KEYNOTE TEA PARTY RALLY IN IOWA
By Scott Conroy – July 27, 2011
In the latest indication that her sights are still set on a presidential run, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has accepted an invitation to keynote a Tea Party rally in Waukee, Iowa, on Sept. 3, RealClearPolitics has learned.
The Labor Day weekend visit to the nation’s first voting state comes after Palin indicated during an appearance on Fox News earlier this month that she would make her decision about whether to launch a campaign in August or September.
All signs now point to September as the month when Palin would throw her hat into the ring, as logistical concerns ranging from fundraising to getting her name on the ballot in various states would likely preclude further delay.
=====================================
What do yo think?
How big crowd is going to be?
Sarah Palin is getting ready to announce and leave the competition
in a cloud of dust.
July 27th, 2011 at 9:21 pm
TexCon,
Just like bold, except instead of “b” you write “blockquote”
July 27th, 2011 at 9:25 pm
Sorry Tex, if Perry gets in, I think Palin does not. And vice versa. So if they are both playing chicken, one of them has to swerve.
July 27th, 2011 at 9:26 pm
Just trying it out!
July 27th, 2011 at 9:30 pm
How big crowd is going to be? – TEX
Since that’s a new small local Tea Party sub-group that just started up last May of this year, and it’s their very first event in some small dirt field, my guess is about 120 people show up, 20 being reporters.
July 27th, 2011 at 9:30 pm
Watching Paul Ryan on Greta. Wish he would run. Telegenic, can speak like Huckabee , core convictions and courage, leadership in putting out a plan, midwesterner, etc…Only thing he lacks is governing experience.
July 27th, 2011 at 9:35 pm
TC,
Hasn’t Ryan been elected to the federal government multiple times as has Bachmann?
July 27th, 2011 at 9:38 pm
In 1983 Bill Bain offered few of his employees,Mitt was one of them,
Mitt refused out of fear of losing some of his money.
He agreed one year later only after Bill Bain made a contract guaranteeing that no matter what happens Mitt will not lose any money.
=============================
Is there a missing gap in this story? Why didn’t the other employees who were not in fear take off with the idea? Did it have to be Mitt causing Bain to beg for a year and giving Mitt concessions?
July 27th, 2011 at 9:40 pm
32, she’ll get called to jury duty again, or some bogus excuse not to show. Maybe the bus will break down, or the movie thread will break, or the check won’t clear.
July 27th, 2011 at 9:49 pm
124
The only missing thing was and is Mitt’s backbone.
There is none!
July 27th, 2011 at 10:05 pm
Craig For Losers
Since that’s a new small local Tea Party sub-group that just started up last May of this year, and it’s their very first event in some small dirt field, my guess is about 120 people show up, 20 being reporters
==========================================
You’ve been running your …. trap for years,to this day you were never
right on just about anything.
You wasted years of your life talking nonsense about Huckabee.
I TOLD for long time the liberal preacher will be out the door.
So you think there will be 100 people plus 20 reporters to see Sarah
Palin on Labor Day?
Are you that stupid or you just have to show how bitter and nasty
loser you are?
Is it one or both?
July 27th, 2011 at 10:06 pm
Great post, Jonathan.
The Youtube videos of him standing in front of boarded up businesses are well produced, but they don’t tell us HOW he intends to create jobs. Furthermore, he hasn’t weighed in on any issue other than jobs in weeks. Even when he talks about jobs, it’s just canned talking points about how much Obama sucks at creating an environment conducive to job creation.
July 27th, 2011 at 10:09 pm
Tex,
I predict a minimum of 10,000 will attend the rally….especially given that it was announced 5 weeks in advance.
July 27th, 2011 at 10:27 pm
RW,
The Super Star Sarah Palin will create mini Iowa Woodstock of true Iowa
conservatives!!!
Well,I’m sure there will be American patriots from neighboring states too.
The big loud mouth,nut job Bachmann had less than 100 people when she announced in her own town Waterloo,Iowa.
July 27th, 2011 at 10:34 pm
A “mini Woodstock” huh?
Does that mean that there will only be a few people, but they’ll all be naked and smoking pot?
July 27th, 2011 at 10:35 pm
#131:
I didn’t know Gary Johnson’s campaign would be co-hosting it.
July 27th, 2011 at 10:36 pm
Yes, because we have no idea where Romney is on the issues, right? He only ran for President four years ago and wrote a book in the interim about his potential agenda. No one is paying attention right now. There is no need for him to provide a comprehensive outline of his policy points on his website. His positions are quite clear for those that are interested, and as we get closer to the election he will do a better job of publicizing them.
I don’t know why anyone is surprised by this in the least. He has said multiple times he is going to lay low this summer. I think it is smart strategy.
July 27th, 2011 at 10:38 pm
Plus, Romney has been outspoken on many issues, having published detailed statements and Op-Eds on a variety of topics over the last several months. For you to pretend that he doesn’t have any positions is pure politically hackery.
July 27th, 2011 at 10:41 pm
No one has a clue what the damn debt ceiling plan is. How is Romney supposed to endorse a plan that doesn’t exist? This is such a manufactured controversy to begin with, he is smart to avoid it. The focus should be on jobs, not playing chicken with our nations’ credit rating.
July 27th, 2011 at 10:44 pm
Jax,
“His positions are quite clear for those that are interested”
Hey, CF didn’t know Mitt held a position CF considers Marxist.
July 27th, 2011 at 10:44 pm
….I had to break it to him.
July 27th, 2011 at 10:51 pm
135-Jaxemer
He recently said CCB was his “line in the sand” when it comes to raising the debt ceiling. Now, he thinks Boehner is doing a great job. I see troubled waters ahead for him on this issue.
July 27th, 2011 at 10:57 pm
Problem for Romney is that his summer MIA makes for a great ad. Can’t you see Bachmann or Perry making an ad about Romney being MIA during the healthcare debate. And then the debt ceiling debate. And …
Get the picture? Romney sitting on a fence, the wind blowing him back and forth, not sure which way he will land. Then we find him in his house reading his “book” to all his grandkids.
July 27th, 2011 at 11:00 pm
117 – You’re an idiot, and have no idea what you’re talking about. That is all. Have a nice day!
July 27th, 2011 at 11:05 pm
TexCon,
But Mitt knows one thing- Obama Sucks.
July 27th, 2011 at 11:07 pm
138 – You too are an idiot! Stop being a hack.
July 27th, 2011 at 11:08 pm
139 – I can’t see that at all. Who the hell would vote on whether someone campaigned this summer or not?
July 27th, 2011 at 11:08 pm
Jax,
Where’s my love?
July 27th, 2011 at 11:14 pm
139. Fiction and fantasies.
July 27th, 2011 at 11:16 pm
138-Jaxemer.
Hey, dipshit. What did I say that isn’t factual?
You’re falling apart, dude. Chill out!
July 27th, 2011 at 11:20 pm
Mitt Romney ducks debt question
By ALEXANDER BURNS
AP finds a tight-lipped Romney on the campaign trail on Ohio:
While there, Romney declined to comment on the debt limit negotiations in Washington, only saying that he favored a “cut, cap and balance” approach to federal spending, which means cutting and capping spending and passing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.
Romney has picked his targets very selectively so far, focusing on the economy to the exclusion of nearly everything else. That has worked, up to a point, but it’s hard to see the debt ceiling fight as a political sideshow in the way that, say, Sharia law might be.
==========================================
That’s Willard,always scared,always finger in the wind!
July 27th, 2011 at 11:23 pm
Seems like the RomNots were working overtime today trying to manufacture more “Trouble with Romney” LOL
But I can understand.
Pawlenty is scrapping the gutter and nobody even notices.
Bachmann possibly peaking.
Huge expectations building for Perry with increasely less likelihood he can live up to them.
And the Great Palin Fan Dance goes on, and on, and on, and on…
July 27th, 2011 at 11:28 pm
140
The truth about fake,phony and a fraud Willard Rockefeller Romney hearts!
Deal with it or go nuts!
July 27th, 2011 at 11:29 pm
A smarter, more focused Romney this time around. He’s already weighed in on principle with the cut, cap and balance. Nothing he has to say will help with the “crisis” or with his candidacy. With a year to go, there’s no point in blathering on.
July 27th, 2011 at 11:31 pm
Jerald,
“Pawlenty is scrapping the gutter and nobody even notices.”
I’ve noticed. I’m sure his wife has too.
Anyway, we’ll see you all tomorrow.
July 27th, 2011 at 11:33 pm
146 – I don’t respond to classless posts from people like you.
July 27th, 2011 at 11:34 pm
146 – When you can respond like a decent human being, maybe I’ll try having a conversation with you. Otherwise, you can continue your railing and I’ll just ignore you from now on.
July 28th, 2011 at 12:00 am
#153 It helps to not pick up the crazy-making.
July 28th, 2011 at 12:01 am
*their crazy-making…
July 28th, 2011 at 2:37 am
TEX #117…..
You’re just flat out lying about Romney and Bain Capital….
I’m surprised you don’t know the difference between LBO’s and Venture Capital….Your rant made you sound like a moron.
July 28th, 2011 at 2:57 am
Maybe not, Jon. But I know who is out there every day working her tail off
Michele Bachmann: No matter what happens next, Bachmann’s makeover splendid
Standard Times – Jack Cowan – ?8 hours ago?
Michele Bachmann: Who are you, and what have you done with the real Michele Bachmann? The Minnesota congresswoman and Republican presidential candidate has undergone a radical change in the last couple of months.
How attacking Michele Bachmann is making her stronger Washington Post
ABC News Tim Pawlenty struggles to step out of Michele Bachmann’s shadow
Washington Post – Amy Gardner – ?8 hours ago?
Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann are staying true to type in a spat between their presidential campaigns: He offers a cautious slap over her lack of executive experience, and she smacks back with dramatic comparisons between him and President Obama.
Pawlenty, Bachmann take divergent path on the debt Minneapolis Star Tribune
Michele Bachmann Opposes Boehner Debt Plan: ‘The Premise Is Wrong’ ABC News
Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., speaks during a rally Monday at the Delaware County fairgrounds in Iowa. / AP photo WASHINGTON – Rep.
Michele Bachmann has one of those rare opportunities in a presidential campaign to give a solo performance on a national …
GOP Presidential Hopeful Michele Bachmann to Address National Press Club, July 28
Bachmann Content to “Lead” From the Bench FrumForum Political Affairs Magazine
Michele Bachmann slams Boehner’s debt ceiling plan
The State Column – ?12 hours ago?
Michele Bachmann slammed House Speaker John Boehner’s debt plan Tuesday, reiterating her call for Republicans to oppose raising the nation’s borrowing limit.
July 28th, 2011 at 2:58 am
#138 – RWN – Go peddle that dead fish line somewhere else. We proved that argument flase at Right Speak when you first posted it. Don’t ry it here. There was no flip=flop.
You’d be better served trying to explain your Alaskan Queens naive opinions on handling the debt crisis, as I laid to you on your post.
See #95 for link if you would like to read RWN own walkback.
July 28th, 2011 at 3:00 am
The only gap around here is between Tex and truth, especially when it comes to Romney and Palin.
He makes up his own about Romney and refuses to to see the real about Palin.
But he does have a comical macho flamboyance about him though.
July 28th, 2011 at 3:06 am
Ed Rollins has found himself quite a gal
July 28th, 2011 at 3:11 am
I’m not sure Rollins could pull off the same magic with the Sarahcuda. He doesn’t work well with the Ross Perot, let’s go full lazy rogue types.
But with the fightin’ Reagans, Huckabees, and Bachmanns of the world, he is simply amazing.
Which is why I’m headed to Iowa to be part of history next month.
July 28th, 2011 at 5:17 am
Romney is playing the part of the front-runner as that is what he is!
I know most of you guys are new to presidential politics and weren’t here this time 4 years ago. But Heath was and I distinctly recall that Romney implied at the time that he wished he could play the role of front-runner but simply couldn’t then due to being virtually unknown compared to John & Rudy.
He did as well as he could back then with the cards he had. But he knew he was born to play the role of a front-runner, it’s so clear, and was frustrated that he couldn’t. I expect even back then in July 2007 he was thinking forward to this period where he would indeed be the front-runner and make the others panick to try to catch him and make the invariable suff ups.
Go Mitt go! Run your own race old man.
July 28th, 2011 at 5:53 am
It is interesting though that the candidates don’t seem to have web pages this time around? Or if they do they are clearly not making any news and don’t have in depth policy positions. They were all the rage last time.
July 28th, 2011 at 5:56 am
Romney can run, but he can’t hide. What he and Rombots must remember is why he failed last time. It wasn’t because he was “virtually unknown.” He spent millions making himself known. He failed because he was known. Here is a reminder of what people knew:
“The more Mitt Romney speaks, the less believable he becomes. He has spent a year trying to convince Granite Staters that he is trustworthy. It looks like they aren’t buying it. And for good reason.” – the Manchester Union-Leader newspaper, New Hampshire’s most conservative newspaper
“If a candidate is a phony, we (in New Hampshire) assure ourselves and the rest of the world, we’ll know it. Mitt Romney is such a candidate. New Hampshire Republicans and independents must vote no.” — The Concord Monitor, New Hampshire’s most liberal paper
July 28th, 2011 at 6:39 am
158-Doug,
You didn’t prove anything wrong. We just have a difference in opinion.
July 28th, 2011 at 6:41 am
Jaxemer 152 & 153
You may want to consider upping your medication.
July 28th, 2011 at 7:08 am
#95 Doug
LIKE (great analysis)
July 28th, 2011 at 7:20 am
As far as the mud-slinging about Mitt not taking a stand or having opinions or riding the fence…
I went and checked out his book “No Apology” that was unwittingly advertised for him here. Lots of favorable reviews and the man is quite outspoken.
One reviewer wrote:
“I met Mitt Romney at his book signing in May and finally finished his book. The first couple of chapters or so focus on lessons from history, past nations that have flourished and then failed, and how we as Americans can and should learn from their mistakes so that we can continue to be a strong, leading nation. His viewpoint that American strength is essential, not just for Americans but for freedom-loving countries all over the world, resonated with me. He points out that there are four strategies for world leadership that are in competition today to become the world leader/influence (China, Russia, North America, and violent jihad-ism). He goes into great depth about each strategy; their viewpoints, current economic status, what actions they are taking, etc. And out of the four, only one is founded on freedom–economic freedom and political freedom. In his words, “Think of what that means.” “A strong America is good for peace, and it is essential for the spread of freedom.” He warns, however, that the other strategies are aggressively trying to surpass us and even suppress us and what we stand for.
No Apology seems to be an extension to his political campaign from 2008, because he also addresses several of the problems that (he feels) America faces today; namely, health care, education, the economy, the family, national security, etc. He explains his thoughts on why the problems exist, offers in-depth solutions and why he feels that those solutions will work. I found it very interesting and informative; it gave me a better understanding of who Mitt Romney is and where he stands on each issue.”
I will be buying the book for sure!
July 28th, 2011 at 7:23 am
So to answer Jonathan’s original question (although the post was designed to lead you to a derogatory answer, pretty transparent there!)
Governor Romney Are You Out There? Well, yes! He certainly is.
July 28th, 2011 at 8:12 am
Thanks SixMom, appreciate it.
The other side of this “where’s Romney?” argument is, if he was out there issuing all these positions the RomNots are craving, they’d be flip flopping the other way, castigating him for trying to pander to the Tea Party, the Conservative base, etc. etc. etc.
They know the endgame and can’t resolve themselves just yet.
Poor little dears.
July 28th, 2011 at 8:18 am
Doug,
Setting aside the specific (and apparently controversial) example of the debt ceiling, you don’t think Mitt is a touch light on the policy front this year?
July 28th, 2011 at 9:11 am
On Daily Rundown Major Garret said , “Romney is wearing the clothes of a nominal frontrunner.” The panel said, paraphrasing, “you would think a guy who is running as someone who understands finance and budgets would jump at the chance to propose a solution. Romney is showing he is as not comfortable as he says.”
Rombots, instead of thinking for themselves, are merely assuming their anointed one is infallible.
July 28th, 2011 at 9:12 am
Looks like Mitch Daniels is stepping up and making a statement:
July 28th, 2011 at 10:10 am
Pawlenty/Bachmann 2011: the most boring two candidates this country has ever seen.
July 28th, 2011 at 10:30 am
It’s interesting that the poster points out:
For business there is Cain
For blue state there is Pawlenty (What does this really mean, though? Able to strike compromise? Maybe not so much.)
For jobs, Perry (this should really mean business climate)
Only Huntsmans has more hands on foreign policy experience, but for all the other categories, Romney has it covered. What is the issue here?
Do you, Joe voter, want to stake out a single issue (social/economic) that trumps all else and fight (resist) to the death, or do you want someone with demonstrable skills in many areas as your presidential candidate.
Romney is smart, capable, compentent, seeks sound advice and will be able to meet the challenges of the presidency without a steep learning curve in many key ares (we’ve seen how that goes with Obama). All the rest of the republican candidates would do the same, just with more of a learning curve in more necessary areas than Romney (but nowhere near as drastic as Obama’s learning curve was and continues to be).
Of course Romney’s light on policy so far this year. He’s flying low, letting everyone else take the senselss flak that the media is drumming up. I for one welcome a “shortened” cycle. As most regular voters aren’t even close to paying attention yet, there is no reason to provide fodder for everyone else (media, other candidates, Obama) to fabricate opportunities for controversy. The Romney camp is doing well to stay on message. Focus is good.
And specifically regarding the debt ceiling debate: anyone that has ever negotiated anything will know that you don’t do it in front of cameras at press conferences. I, and most watching, think both sides have looked foolish, but more so Obama (the man simply doesn’t know how to lead). Why would Romney want to wade into that?
So whether you like it or not, for those of us who are interested in policy at this early stage of the game, that is what books are for. We aren’t going to get out of this mess Obama has exacerbated by sound bite policy statements.
July 28th, 2011 at 10:37 am
#175 – Romney has certainly sent out his flock of apologists to try to convince us he isn’t actually ducking the issue. Its not working.
July 28th, 2011 at 10:46 am
173 – Moron! Romney already endorsed a plan. You people are hilarious. You think if you just say something people will believe it. You are wrong.
July 28th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Romney gave the most Presidential response to the Boehner/debt ceiling proposal:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/presidential-candidates-dont-sound-so-presidential/2011/03/29/gIQAx51beI_blog.html
July 28th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
You can always tell when a Rombot is losing an argument. He morphs in to a Palinbot. (See TEX, Telly, Frankie, and RWing nuts.)
July 28th, 2011 at 1:01 pm
#178 –
Good article assessment of Mitt.
Also, Rubin hits the nail on the head with this statement:
“As for the rest, they should consider whether the bulk of Republican primary voters really want their president to sound like a second-rate blogger.”
Palin, Perry especially come across as people who sound like they take their talking points from far-right wing blog sites.
July 28th, 2011 at 2:10 pm
I clearly remember seeing Romney on TV supporting the Cut, Cap and Balance plan. I’m not sure where this article is coming from. Do people want Romney to interject himself into the discussions?
July 28th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
Looks like Bob McDonnell has a statement:
July 28th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
Anyone who is truly satisfied with the Boehner plan is nuts. But it has to pass because the Republicans are losing the PR battle.
Is that what Romney to say? Because that is the truth. I believe he said enough yesterday.
Coming all out for this dog of a bill is stupid, and coming out against it, is also stupid.
Mitt Romney is not stupid.
July 29th, 2011 at 2:26 am
is it too much to go to his website? Very detailed on all the issues . . . I’m just saying
July 31st, 2011 at 12:52 pm
[...] own Jonathan wrote about this matter just a few days ago. I agree that Romney risks allowing an unfavorable narrative about him to [...]