There are now little over 90 days until the Florida Primary on January 31st. Having watched the race for the Republican nomination since, well, before the race was actually started, I can certainly say that it has not turned out as I expected or in some ways hoped. Candidates I really wanted to run, especially Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, have taken a pass for reasons that are certainly understandable. But politics is about the choices you have, not the ones you want. So with that in mind I’ve decided that the best choice for the Republican nomination and the man who’s best able to be the next President of the United States is Governor Mitt Romney.
Governor Romney has the right experience to be a serious, competent, and effective President; qualities that President Obama has failed to exhibit over the last three years. Having run the state of Massachusetts where the legislature (more formally known as the Massachusetts General Court) is roughly 85% Democrat, Governor Romney has shown the ability to both compromise and cooperate, another essential quality in a President that the incumbent has failed at so disastrously. In addition to governing Massachusetts, Romney has also been a private sector businessman which is yet another contrast to President. Governor Romney has been in government and been in business and he knows the difference between the two.
Governor Romney’s plan for the economy, while not nearly as catchy as Herman Cain’s is also more likely to be accomplished. While I do have some reservations about Governor Romney’s rather belligerent tone on China, perhaps a harder line on the People’s Republic is overdue. On the issue of taxes, Governor Romney talks about both simplifying the tax code which includes removing loopholes and broadening the tax base, all of which are all very critical areas of tax reform. With his experience in both the private sector and in government, Governor Romney knows that government doesn’t create jobs; what it can do is create the environment in which the private sector can create jobs.
On the issue of foreign policy, which is my most important area of concern, Governor Romney has articulated a vision of America’s role in the world that is starkly different than President Obama. The Governor is determined to repair relations with two of our most important allies: Great Britain and Israel that the President has squandered. Governor Romney has also raised the importance of redrawing attention to Latin America, our own international neighborhood and an area where the United States has traditionally played a key role. Above everything else, Governor Romney is no isolationist and he is committed to having America play a critical, important role in the world.
Perhaps most importantly, Governor Romney can win the general election. Beating an incumbent President has historically been very hard and despite the President’s low approval ratings, it would be folly in the extreme to believe he will be easy to defeat. To beat the President, we Republicans will need a candidate who not only has a compelling message, but has also proven that they can effectively get that message out to the American people. So far, the Romney campaign has been extremely well disciplined. Reports of staff infighting simply haven’t occurred. This also points to an added advantage that Governor Romney and his staff has; they’ve been on the presidential campaign trail together, which gives them invaluable experience. As DaveG points out in his very good post, Governor Romney has the unique opportunity to expand the electoral map in a way that none of the other Republican candidates can. I personally think that it would be a refreshing change of pace for the Republican nominee to be putting Democratic states in play, instead of the other way around. Mitt Romney can do that.
The other candidates for President have many fine qualities. Herman Cain has an inspiring story of truly coming up from the bottom to now being a candidate for President. Governor Jon Huntsman has more foreign policy experience than the rest of the field. Governor Perry has been a political survivor of impressive quality. Speaker Gingrich is a man with many good ideas and who has refused to attack his fellow Republicans. However, none of them has shown that they can thread the needle of being acceptable to both the Republican Party and the wider electorate in the general election.
The 2012 Election will be a crucial one. With the national debt spiraling further upward, with the economy not recovering at a proper pace, and with the world experiencing rapid change, America needs a President able to steer the ship of state into calmer waters. The current President, who had inspired millions, has instead been a profound disappointment. What America needs now is not another flashy orator with any experience running. What the country needs right now is a steady, competent, and experienced leader. I believe that the man running now best suited to being that leader is Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:02 am
Amen.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:16 am
My post disappeared into some kind of spam trap?
October 30th, 2011 at 10:18 am
The Tea-Party is living up to every stereo-type the left wing media has tried to pin on them during this primary season – a bunch of angry extremist who want to burn the country down to rebuild it. They are still in search of the perfect candidate to carry their flag – and there is no perfect candidate.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:18 am
#2:
If you put too many links in a post, the site kind of freaks out. If that’s it, try it with less links.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:23 am
Great post! I think we’ll see more and more people getting on the Romney train in the next few weeks. He really is the only one running who has the combination of electability and competence.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:28 am
Sorry folks the race is not over. Romney has not won yet!! There are others in the race , Cain,Perry, Gringrich and Paul. If Perry has no chance then why is the media and Romeny spending time on him.
In the meantime Cain has passed Romney in the straw polls, which was a small amount of people.
Go Perry!!
October 30th, 2011 at 10:32 am
#6 – sorry – straw polls do not mean anything. Mitt won every one last time and McCain got the nom….. And Mitt is just making sure Perry stays down. As far as the media spending time on him is it gives them something to talk about.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:33 am
Gotta love when there are vids out there to watch of Perry – making a complete fool of himself.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:33 am
Rob, Cain is in the train. Mitt is on the JET.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:33 am
Well said. All candidates have their pros and cons, but Romney really is the best choice. You have my vote and admiration sir. Keep up the good fight.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:35 am
Nancy, can you please explain Perry’s latest ‘speech’? And please, don’t tell me it was his ‘enthusiasm’ unless that enthusiasm includes a upper followed by a red bull.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:37 am
There is a difference between the Primary and the General.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:38 am
#6 He needs to sober up first… Looked drunk in that video… Jack Daniels Special????
October 30th, 2011 at 10:47 am
I just want this to be OVER. I want a candidate tht can beat Obama. In my heart, that will not be Cain – - he doesnt have what it takes. Perry or Romney.
And by the way, stop making such a big deal over that video. It was the equivalent of Romney getting all whiny and hot and bothered like he did in the last debate. Give Perry some slack – - he is a human being not a machine.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:48 am
Very well stated. This article shows a lot of political maturity, a trait that I wish most people had.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:50 am
#6 Nancy
“In the meantime Cain has passed Romney in the straw polls”
I like that you’re passionate about your candidate but you might want to do yourself a favor and try not to slant these straw polls to give you false hope. With that thinking Michelle should be up big in Iowa because she won the Aimes straw poll. Herman is not the front runner, most of his support is very soft. Perry has damaged himself beyond repair. I don’t expect you to support Romney but you might want to consider supporting Cain or someone else, accept the fact that Perry has self destructed and move on, you will save yourself a lot of heart ache.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:58 am
I just watched the entire speech of Perry at a fund raising gala for Him, which was spliced and posted on this site .
It was a good speech. The video that was posted only took parts of his speech where he was being humorous . If you bothered to watch the entire speech, you would see the humor parts in context. He was given a standing ovation at the end of his speech. He was not drunk or on meds!!!
Please get it right next time.
You Romney supporters do not convince people to vote for him by being dishonest about Perry.
Romney does not have the social conservative vote and may not get them.
Go Perry!!!
October 30th, 2011 at 11:01 am
Ray I am a huge Perry supporter because I think he has more of a “soul” than Romney. But as I have declared, I will support Romney if necessary, for the sake of the country. While I still believe the man has a hollow soul, I do believe he would be an excellent executive in getting things turned around. I have ignored that fact all along but now I’m ready to give him credit for that.
October 30th, 2011 at 11:04 am
Nancy: You Go Girl!!
October 30th, 2011 at 11:13 am
Great post. We all have the candidate of our choice, but at the end of the day it is all about making Obama a one term president.
Nancy, I don’t need to listen to “lies” about Perry. With his lack of preparation, horrible debate performances, and actions he has proven he is not presidential.
October 30th, 2011 at 11:18 am
Nancy – Perry may have the Socon vote, but we will not get the Independent vote AT ALL, and that mean 4 more years of Obama. So go ahead and cast that vote for Perry, just don’t complain when it’s BHO for 4 more years.
October 30th, 2011 at 11:18 am
A thoughtful essay, Jonathan. I particularly like how you didn’t disparage any of the other candidates to make your point. Personally, I’d rather be caught dead than live up to such an admirable standard.
So with that in mind, allow me to disparage and despair for a moment. Mitt is the probably the easiest candidate in the field for Team O to defeat. The most basic problem is that Mitt fails to energize the conservative base, while he is an almost tailor-made boo-man — a silver-spooned plutocrat and financial wizard — for jazzing the prog/lib base back to vibrant life.
Since el Presidente has low performance ratings, all that is left for OfA to do is to run a campaign of vote suppression aimed squarely at the center. To this end, Mitt’s charisma deficiency will work hand-in-glove with constant reminders of his persistent position shopping. Romney will be made into a frighteningly inconsistent and unpredictable figure — potentially with a secret religious agenda. That last gambit will be pursued through whisper campaigns.
Finally, if Bam’s election demonstrated anything, it is that a centrist GOP candidate cannot defeat the O-man. What sense does it make to heave another supposed centrist at the man?
October 30th, 2011 at 11:19 am
Excellent article on how Romney has been shaped by his faith. I see nothing hollow here. This article helped me appreciate him more. Maybe a little foreign to some people but to say he doesn’t have a soul seems diametrically opposite to what those who seem to know him would say.
October 30th, 2011 at 11:19 am
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/29/the-shaping-of-mitt-romney-a-look-at-his-faith-journey-2/?hpt=hp_c1'%20rel='nofollow
Do I need to know html to post a link?
October 30th, 2011 at 11:20 am
Sorry newbie to posting but long time observer of this blog.
October 30th, 2011 at 11:25 am
Perry, has not cut and spliced tapes of Romney??? Please…You know better…
October 30th, 2011 at 11:27 am
22
Americans don’t vote for centrists. They vote for appealing candidates.
Often, appealing candidates are centrists. But John McCain was an exception. He was an un-appealing centrist.
Romney comes off as bright, sunny, smart, sharp, and prepared. Those are all the qualities swing voters look for.
October 30th, 2011 at 11:56 am
24. Homie: good article! It’s long, but surprisingly fair, considering it’s CNN.
October 30th, 2011 at 12:04 pm
Thanks #24 for the link. Good, balanced article. I enjoyed reading it.
October 30th, 2011 at 12:18 pm
[...] Continue reading here: Mitt Romney for President | Race 4 2012 [...]
October 30th, 2011 at 1:24 pm
I’m backing Romney because I just don’t see a viable alternative. He really is the only one in this race that I can realistically see beating Obama. If someone like a Paul Ryan, Tim Pawlenty, Marco Rubio, etc were in the race, I think you could make a strong case that Romney would be a mistake. The problem is, I just don’t see any other candidate that can win. Period.
I can sympathize with those that have issues with Romney’s tendency to dart to the middle, but I think on the big picture issues that matter, Romney will be a strong ally for the conservative movement, especially with a Conservative Congress sending him up legislation and a very strong “bench” of candidates waiting for the next primary should Romney stray too far off the reservation. I truly believe Romney is far more conservative than he lets on, but he plays it very close to the vest.
Also, the Romney flip flop meme seems really overplayed, especially since the supposed Romney alternative is Perry who I would argue has an even worse history for flip flopping, like being Al Gore’s campaign chairman for President, supporting HillaryCare, being for open borders/amnesty, etc.
Every candidate is going to have their flaws, but the Tea party/movement conservative wing of the Party needs to ask itself would it really be a positive for Obama to win a second term because we insisted on some sort of ideological purity that just doesn’t exist. If a Herman Cain or Rick Perry got the nomination and lost a landslide election against Obama, the Tea Party would die right there. A two term Obama is just not an option, it’s a risk we can’t afford, and I would rather have the headache of a moderate Republican in the White House than a left-wing Democrat that no longer has to face the voters to keep him in check.
October 30th, 2011 at 1:27 pm
22. LOL!
Jonathan, very nice article. I agree that Obama will be tough for any of these candidates to beat. Michelle is deluding herself and her followers to think that this time we can put anyone up there and win.
I, too, like that you were positive on all the candidates, although I got a chuckle out of what appeared to be the only good thing you could think of to say about Perry.
Sort of reminded me of the guy who went on a blind date. Afterwards, his friend asked him how it went. “Awful. I tried to think of something to compliment her on and all I could come up with is, ‘You don’t sweat much for a fat lady’.”
October 30th, 2011 at 1:34 pm
I’ve been talking to quite a few republicans (ok, maybe a dozen) who are pretty upset at how much influence the SoCons have over the party. These republicans like the party view of foreign fiscal policy but don’t want the fed messing in their social lives.
Personally, I like that the republican policies tend to be more in line with my “moral” values than dem policies. But, I’m wondering how much the socon push is hurting our chances.
October 30th, 2011 at 1:35 pm
#32:
Michelle deluding herself is something that happens very frequently. Like when she woke up one day and said “I think I can be President.”
October 30th, 2011 at 1:47 pm
11/10/11 New York Review of Books: “Mitt, We Hardly Knew Ye!”
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/nov/10/mitt-we-hardly-knew-ye/
“When I ask locals about their impressions of Mitt, I get a recurring response: Nixonian. “The overriding passion of his life seems to be to become president,” a conservative economics professor tells me. “I can’t think of a single issue over which Romney would risk reelection in order to stick to a principle.” A University of Massachusetts journalism professor puts it more positively: “He can be as cagey as Nixon, and he can be almost as smarmy, but he is also able to think strategically.””
October 30th, 2011 at 1:49 pm
34.
October 30th, 2011 at 1:50 pm
More from NY Review article:
“Of course, anyone who is aware of his record in Massachusetts knows Romney is a flip-flopper. As Steve Kornacki wrote in Salon, Romney has “changed his tune on abortion multiple times”—always in a way that suited his political needs. Supporting abortion rights in a debate with Ted Kennedy in 1994, he told the story of a relative who died from an illegal abortion, and said, “You will not see me wavering on this.” By 2005, as governor, he had switched, vetoing a contraception bill and saying he was pro-life.”
October 30th, 2011 at 1:53 pm
35. I agree that Mitt seems to really, really want to be president. I agree that he’s trying to be very careful to not make any serious mistakes that could torpedo his campaign (like “you don’t have a heart”).
But, I also believe his REASONS for wanting to be president are that he believes he has what it takes to make America better for his kids and his grandchildren.
I don’t believe he’s on a power trip. I think he sees it as his duty to try to apply his skills to the very big problem that is America.
I sincerely hope he gets his chance.
October 30th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
Jonathan,
As someone who’s read hundreds of your (mostly) anti-Romney comments over the years, let me say that I always knew you’d come around. You’re essentially logical in your approach to politics, and logic as it applies to politics is intrinsically pragmatic…..
There’s really only one candidate out there who can repair the country after defeating Obama….hence your FPP.
October 30th, 2011 at 3:01 pm
I really believe that Romney is just the man we need right now to pull the country together and lead us out of the mess we’re in. I’ve read his book and have followed him since he became a national figure in the 2008. In his book, when he discusses issues, he breaks everything down and explains how different factors impact each other. This latest flap about Romney shifting his position on global warming is really irrelevant to the larger picture. At the end of the day, Romney will never implement environmental policies that will negatively impact our economy. He explains how a weak economy affects our national security and far out weighs the benefits of environmental policies. Benefits that do very little to combat global warming. Some conservatives think that because he doesn’t deny global warming, there is a liberal behind a mask just waiting to come out.
My feeling is that Romney is far more conservative than people realize, but at the same time, he has the ability to articulate how his policies benefit those on the other side of the aisle.
October 30th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
40. Thanks for that, Annette. Good comment.
October 30th, 2011 at 3:13 pm
#35 & 37 point to Romney’s greatest vulnerability. And its not the flip-flopping per se, but rather the flip-flopping for political gain. The Nixon comparison is not apt because Nixon was a crook and a liar but he was at least consistent. There is no way anyone can say with even 50% assurance that Romney will not re-flip-flop and become a Taxachusetts liberal. And so one is forced to ask, is it worth the risk?
October 30th, 2011 at 3:16 pm
Steve Chapman in today’s Chicago Tribune: Romney’s stumbling path:
Can he really manage to kick it away?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-1030-chapman-20111030,0,288495.column
An interesting take on Slippery Mitt. Maybe destined to win as the “least worst” candidate?
“Romney does not aspire to be the fellow at the party who enchants the girls with his dance moves and charm. He’s more like the guy they settle on once all the other guys have passed out drunk, gotten distracted by a ballgame or come on way too strong. He’s not thrilling, but he’s not a disaster.
It would help, though, if he could stop committing inexplicable mistakes. Weeks ago, he praised an Ohio ballot initiative to curb the collective bargaining rights of government employees. Then Wednesday, on a trip to Cincinnati, he declined to take a position. Then, after taking fire, he endorsed it.
All Romney achieved was to remind everyone of his uncanny resemblance to a windsock. In The New York Review of Books, Christopher Benfey writes that when he asks Bay Staters about him, “I get a recurring response: Nixonian.” They see him as slippery, smarmy and void of principles.”
“A Democratic insider told National Journal, “He can talk and chew gum at the same time, which puts him way ahead of the other candidates.” One anonymous GOP bigwig added, “Republicans are beginning to realize that this is a choice between Romney and the unelectable.”
If it hurts to be called Nixonian, Romney has this consolation: Nixon won.”
October 30th, 2011 at 3:29 pm
Here is Jon Stewart’s take on Romney. Why does this matter at all? Because this is just the beginning of what Romney will face in the general. 75-80% of the GOP want Anybody But Romney. Why is that? Could be because they have the same thought process as Jon Stewart on Romney. Afterall, candidates in 2008 thought the same of Mitt. His current GOP opponents are saying it. And now, countless radio show hosts are saying the same.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-october-27-2011/indecision-2012—scared-mittless
As Ann Coulter emphatically stated, If Romney wins the primary nomination, he will lose in the general to Obama
October 30th, 2011 at 3:38 pm
42. You keep using that word, and yet Mitt brought MA from huge deficits to decent surplus WITHOUT raising taxes.
Are you uninformed? Or, purposely spreading lies?
October 30th, 2011 at 3:41 pm
43
Not quite accurate. He declined to RESTATE his position.
But, I agree it was a very rare misstep in a mostly perfect campaign. It’s significant, I think, that a small mistake like this gets so much attention. It shows that so far his opponents haven’t found anything significant to attack him on. So, they’re grasping at anything at all.
October 30th, 2011 at 3:44 pm
Why is Romney avoiding Chris Wallace and the other interview programs? What, is he scared? He would get more than one miniute to answer the questions. If Perry needs to debate, Romney needs to be interviwed before Iowa.
October 30th, 2011 at 3:49 pm
44. At this time 4 years ago, 86% of the party appeared to want anybody but McCain. So, I’m not sure you point has much weight.
October 30th, 2011 at 3:50 pm
From Fox News Sunday:
“[Mitt Romney] has not appeared on this program or any Sunday talk show since March of 2010. We invited Gov. Romney again this week, but his campaign says he’s still not ready to sit down for an interview.”
http://youtu.be/WarFWqK6EeM
Yep, Romney lacks courage and convictions.
October 30th, 2011 at 3:51 pm
47. My personal belief is that he doesn’t really want the spotlight, right now. He doesn’t want the public to get tired of seeing and hearing about Mitt.
As the primaries get closer, we’ll see him going on these shows and making his case.
Blanketing the airwaves right now would be like the marathon runner who starts his final sprint way too soon.
October 30th, 2011 at 3:55 pm
49. Romney showed both courage AND conviction when he told Detroit it was a mistake to bail the auto industry out.
He showed both courage and conviction when he told Iowa farmers that the time for Ethanol subsidies is passed.
Mitt Romney showed courage and conviction when he told hard-hit Nevadans that we should let the market correct the housing crisis and not get the gov involved in another bailout.
He risked their anger by telling them some hard truths.
People keep saying Mitt will say anything to anyone to get elected, but his ACTIONS prove the lie of that attack.
October 30th, 2011 at 3:55 pm
Please, help this Pro-Mitt cartoon GO VIRAL for Halloween!
http://mittfitts.com/2011/10/28/mittfitts-happy-halloween-a-treat-for-america/
October 30th, 2011 at 4:22 pm
Keith Price Said:
“My personal belief is that he doesn’t really want the spotlight, right now. He doesn’t want the public to get tired of seeing and hearing about Mitt.
As the primaries get closer, we’ll see him going on these shows and making his case.
Blanketing the airwaves right now would be like the marathon runner who starts his final sprint way too soon.”
I agree with you completely Keith.
Also, I think Texas conservative works for the Perry campaign. Nice try.
October 30th, 2011 at 4:40 pm
#49 – I was just wondering about that this morn when I saw Cain, Bachmann and Paul on Sunday shows. I don’t think its a big deal, really, but apparently Fox is ready to try to make it one.
October 30th, 2011 at 4:53 pm
50. Time is getting short. About 10 weeks – Christmas, New Years, and Thanksgiving = 7 or 8. (I hope he would not cover it on holiday weekend.) I do not know how he avoids going on several of the shows. I hope you are not saying that he will avoid them till after Iowa and New Hampshire. That is not acceptable and I will become more like Agrippa (He rejected Christ telling Peter he was almost persuaded
He really needs to do it in November. That gives everyone time to ruminate on it. It would be for his good. He can have time to cover any gaffe, if any.
The debates are good to get a view of how a candidates handles himself or herself. An interview makes the candidate defend the substance of his or her views in more detail. Both are necessary.
51 You have to be joking about his ethanol stand. Early this year he was for the subsidies. Then when a bill proceeds through Congress to repeal them, he changes his mind. Be careful that you do not raise issues on which he has clearly waffled.
23. No one is challenging his spiritual soul. The problem is his political soul.
Keith I am retired and 67. Are you employed by Romney? Are you retired? Are you a student? If not one of those, I do not understand how much time you have deal with these comments. I am not criticizing, just wondering.
October 30th, 2011 at 5:16 pm
Well, i’m a ron paul guy. But i have to say….if we don’t nominate either Paul or Romney….i think it will be very difficult to win in november. And since paul is going to have a very difficult time getting the nomination….i really believe we need to be prepared to back Romney. Romney is right for the country. He can win, and he can unite the country again….ala reagan.
October 30th, 2011 at 5:28 pm
PabloZed,
Nixon was consistent? Nixon jumped into the spotlight as the Cold War hawk chairman of the House of Un-American Activities Committee. He was a hero on the right for his masterful handling of Alger Hiss. But he saw the way the wind was blowing and, as everyone else on HUAC became McArthyites, he kept his distance. He ran another hard right campaign for Senate in ’50 but positioned himself as a centrist among the New Right. Which made him an attractive choice for Eisenhower, who needed a running mate with credibility on the right who wouldn’t alienate the center. As Eisenhower’s VP he went from the center of the New Right, to a committed centristy Eisenhower Republican and ran that way in ’60 (the Lodge VP selection is a good example). In ’64, he moved ever so slightly to the right, declaiming the influence of the Goldwaterites, along with fellow centrists like Romney and Rockefeller, but unlike Romney and Rockefeller, sticking with Goldwater. In ’66 he barnstormed the country campaigning for the Goldwaterites and in ’68, used Rockefeller and Romney as foils on the left to transform himself back into a conservative. And then he proceeded to govern as a centrist. Nixon was wildly, absurdly inconsistent. Easily as inconsistent as Romney. But he had the virtue, that often comes to middle-class politicians, of knowing exactly what his electorate wanted and keeping himself close enough to that center that he could find his way back with a few minor contortions.
October 30th, 2011 at 6:14 pm
I would like to talk to Jonathan on a future radio show…..please contact me.
Silvio
scantojr@aol.com
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/cantotalk
October 30th, 2011 at 6:25 pm
55. I really don’t see the Ethanol issue as a flip. The way *I* read it, he had no problems with the past and existing ones and feels like the time may be over where they are needed or a good thing.
I’m 50 and self-employed — and spending WAY too much time on this site (and others) defending against the lies, misrepresentations, and smears against Romney. It is truly like an addiction. I’ll get an hour of billable time in and then, “oh, just a quick check on the race…” It’s not good.
I’m a Mormon and in 2008 I was very disturbed to hear that Mitt was running. I felt it would put my church in a bad light and bring anti-mormon sentiment to a boil. I also didn’t know anything about him, so I started looking into his history.
The flip flop moniker that stuck to him last round really bothered me — partly because I thought it reflected poorly on our shared religion. But, as I dug deeper into the facts behind it, I came to the conclusion that the flipping remarks are mostly wrong.
The only REAL flip was on abortion. He explained it and has been very consistent ever since. Ronald Regan’s son said conservatives should be comfortable with his views.
Also, as a rookie, first dabbling in politics he tried to paint himself as rather centrist. Tried to duck away from the conservative label. Almost all rookies make foolish gaffes when they start. Look at Cain. And, Perry is STILL making them.
But, after that, he’s been very consistent. And every claim of flip flopping that I’ve seen is just his opponents misrepresenting the truth. Gay rights, gun control, global warming, healthcare, I’ve only found consistency in words and action.
I also found amazing stories about him. For example, I have a neighbor who used to babysit for him decades ago. She said he was one of the nicest, kindest, gentle people she’s every known.
And,the way he took over the Olympics was just remarkable. It was rocked by a bribery scandal causing the top two officials to resign. The games were facing a $379 MILLION deficit. Sponsors were pulling out.
Romney was asked to take over due to his reputation as a turnaround artist. He refused the salary and donated $1 million of his own money to the cause. He cut costs and eliminated fancy perks. You may have heard me tell the story about how he stopped having executive meetings catered. He ordered pizza and if you wanted a slice you pitched a dollar.
He also went to work finding new sponsors and broke the record for raising private money for an Olympics -winter or summer. He turned in a $100 million profit.
I also discovered he had a big heart. When, as founder and CEO of Bain Capital, he helped track down his business partner’s missing teen daughter.
He shut down the offices and flew his 50 employees to New York and got 200 others to also help search the streets for two days. They printed and passed out fliers and ultimately found the girl. The father says Mitt saved her life.
I was also very impressed how he poured through the books while MA governor looking for waste and ways of saving and raising funds without raising taxes. Some will argue about taxes vs fees, but he was very methodical and rolled up his sleeves to make stuff happen.
So, yes, I’m taking way too much time in trying to defend and promote Romney because I honestly believe he’s the only one of our options that any reasonable chance of turning things around. And with so much crap being spread about him, it scares me that people will just accept it as truth without checking the facts.
But, I’ll admit, my work life is suffering for it.
October 30th, 2011 at 6:52 pm
58 I appreciate the information. Don’t let your work suffer.
I am sorry we see Romney from different perspectives. But I have been down the centerist road with Nixon and the Bushes. All we have gotten is bigger government and greater debt. Reagan added to the debt, too on the grounds the Democrats would reduce spending in the future. I will never know if, he believed thata.
But this has to stop. I just don’t believe Romney will take the necessary actions,as Kasich, Walker, and Daniels have taken to get their states in order. One exception I do not require him to start a fight with the unions.
October 30th, 2011 at 7:40 pm
Thanks for the support Jonathan.
I think we can break the GOP into 4 camps regarding Romney:
1. People who believe Romney will govern better than he campaigns and that his core values and record are better than the Far Right and Far Left claim.
2. People who have not yet looked into the race and don’t know who they will support.
3. People who believe Romney will govern worse than he campaigns and who believe/want to believe what the Far Right and Far Left claim about Romney.
4. People who won’t vote for Romney for non-political reasons.
Of course, the RomNot claims that “such and such a % of the GOP (usually above 70%) don’t want Romney is just stupid spin. The field currenlty has at least 9 candidates and it’s still 2 months until the first votes are cast. Considering that, having solid support from about a quarter of those polled both nationally and in early states is not bad and, of course, better than everybody else (we’ll see if Cain can solidify his position).
I believe in the next 3 months you will see most of Group No.2 go to Romney. After the first 3 months of primaries, a good block of Group No.3 will be supporting Romney and he will solidfy strong support within the GOP and the GOP Fleet lead by the flagship USS Romney will be under full sail towards Obamaland…
October 30th, 2011 at 7:42 pm
Jonathan,
It’s very good to see you develop as a writer and thinker.
I say that not only as a Romney supporter, glad to see your endorsement, but because you obviously took great care in presenting your reasons.
You were classy in tone regarding the other candidates and very balanced in your assessment of Romney.
Glad to have you on board.
Keep up the great work.
October 30th, 2011 at 7:53 pm
59. Well, it will be interesting to see. It’s a tricky tight rope. Too extreme on one side or the other and you can’t get anything through congress. To central and what does get done isn’t good.
But, I do believe Romney’s history shows he’ll be fighting hard to reduce gov, eliminate inefficiencies, and create a business-friendly environment. That’s just in his DNA.
He WILL compromise with dems, though. He’s good at finding common ground. But, I believe he’ll do things that can make conservatives proud.
I hope he gets the chance to prove it.
October 30th, 2011 at 7:54 pm
49. Romney has done interviews – just not wallace’s show. I guess you forgot that little factoid. And when he gives a speech? He’s coherent.
October 30th, 2011 at 7:59 pm
Romney has been on Huckabee’s show, Hanity Show, O’Riley show,, just not cry baby Wallace,
October 30th, 2011 at 8:16 pm
Chris said that he hasn’t been on any Sunday shows. I am sure he will sometime.
October 30th, 2011 at 8:40 pm
Very true 64. I’m sure he will go on w/ Wallace. It’s all politics, BABY. That is why they all flip flop. And those that get called out on it the most are usually the most feared!
October 30th, 2011 at 9:34 pm
21.
The Socon vote will go to the GOP candidate in the general no matter who he is, but it is VERY doubtful that Perry will get a substantial portion of the Socon vote in the primary. The Socons want Obama out, and they can see that Perry is hardly up to defeating Obama.
October 30th, 2011 at 9:59 pm
38.
I agree. I whole heartedly believe Mitt wants to be President because he sees what has been happening to this country for 40 years and he wants to do something about it.
To those opposing Romney, I have to ask; why is the Obama administration is desperately trying to take Romney out but paying little attention to Perry, Cain, Gingrich, or any of the other GOP candidates?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/30/perry-unlike-romney-dont-have-problem-telling-truth/
October 30th, 2011 at 10:04 pm
@ PabloZed post 42
It is incomprehensible that a Romney opponent such as yourself would actually put forth that Romney would raise taxes.
You have no concept of Mitt Romney and the fact that he knows taxes would hurt the economy.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:06 pm
As a Romney supporter, I always appreciate quality endorsements, so thank you Jonathan. As a person who tries to be fair and reasonably clear thinking, I appreciate the balance with which you present your argument.
I am all in for Romney, as I was in 2008. I recognize, however, that he is not perfect. He is not a perfect man, nor is he a perfect candidate. BUT he is a very good man, and a very good candidate. There are other good men and women (well, one woman anyway) running for the GOP nomination, but I don’t think there is a better candidate out there than Mitt Romney. Furthermore, I believe that if we as a country are fortunate enough, and wise enough, to see Romney elected, he will prove to be a very good president.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:10 pm
71. Here, here!
October 30th, 2011 at 10:18 pm
I’ve been a Romney fan since 2008, even though I thought he tried too hard then to be the Social Conservative Candidate. I liked him because he seemed competent. That’s what we need in DC.
Since I don’t see Christie or Rubio interested in the #2 position, I think a great ticket would be Romney & Jindal. Romney would play to Independents and Jindal to conservatives and especially the south. Romney can say Jindal would have strong mandates on restructuring FEMA and especially Energy Independence. This ticket also have diversity.
A strong Convention would include prime times speeches by all the articulate and diverse GOP members: Keynotes by Marco Rubio and Chris Christie and Herman Cain and Michele Bachman and Eric Cantor.
A good cabinet would look like:
President: Romney
Vice: Jindal
Sec State: Petraeus or McCain
Treasury: Paul Ryan
Defense: Petraeus or McCain
Attorney General: Chris Christie
UN Ambassador: John Bolton
Homeland Security: Rudy Giuliani
Interior: Tim Pawlenty
Trade Representative: Jon Huntsman
Economic Advisor: Glenn Hubbard
Agriculture: Evan Bayh
Labor: Herman Cain
Commerce: Mitch Daniels
Health: Rick Santorum
Housing: Michele Bachman
Education: Jeb Bush
Veteran Affairs: Sarah Palin
Energy: Newt Gingrich
Transportation: Sonunu
EPA:
Treasuser: Ron Paul
October 30th, 2011 at 10:23 pm
51.
Way to go KP!!
October 30th, 2011 at 10:24 pm
Yep. No other real choice, and Romney has all the key stuff and more. I’m happy.
October 30th, 2011 at 10:53 pm
To those who keep saying that Romney has been running for President for 6 years, you should consider that Reagan ran for President for 12 years before winning in 1980. He ran in 1968, 1976, and then 1980.
And to those who keep saying that 75% of Republicans do not want Romney, the 70+ endorsements that he has rolled out thus far, many from high profile conservatives, represent a huge percentage of Republicans. When the voting starts, people will see for themselves how much support Romney has.
October 30th, 2011 at 11:12 pm
76. Kudos on that post!
October 31st, 2011 at 12:58 am
Sorry Nancy but it over for Perry.
October 31st, 2011 at 1:11 am
Craig for Losers has given up on Perry. The only people he has left are emotionally attached to him.
October 31st, 2011 at 4:26 am
If you tell a lie big enough, and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.
Mitt Romney can beat Obama. Chant it with me.
October 31st, 2011 at 2:29 pm
The polls say that Romney is the best candidate to defeat Obama. If, in due time, the polls show that another candidate is clearly the best candidate to defeat Obama, people should vote for that candidate.
October 31st, 2011 at 5:44 pm
Clearly no one in the comments here has done any research Mr. Romney flip floper. Obamacare was based on Romneycare in Massachusetts. Since the bill became law, the state’s total direct health-care spending has increased by a remarkable 52 percent. Medicaid spending has gone from less than $6 billion a year to more the $9 billion. Many consumers have seen double-digit percentage increases in their premiums. Romney raised taxes on businesses by 300 million. Government spending increased in massachusetts 7.6% in 2006 and 10.2% more in 2007. He supports cap and trade.
Boston Herald business reporter:
“During the four years Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts, it had the second worst jobs record of any state in America…it wasn’t a regional issue. The rest of New England created nearly 200,000 jobs.”
Supporter of the bail outs.
Soft on immigration.
Supporter of heavy gun control.
Even his own wife has said.
“He can argue any side of a question. And sometimes you think he’s really believing his argument, but he’s not.”
There’s loads more.
People please research your candidate before you vote. If you do you will find everything posted is true and provable.
October 31st, 2011 at 6:27 pm
82. Yes, I and many here HAVE researched Mitt Romney’s record. Apparently YOU have not. Unless you count a single visit to a single anti-romney site.
Obamacare
Saying the 72 page MassCare is the father of 2700 page ObamaCare is like saying using prescription drugs properly by those with proper symptoms is the father of drug addicts.
spending
How much of any increase was due to MassCare AS IT STOOD when Mitt signed it? Many changes were made since then.
Also, how does that increase compare to the nation’s expenses?
What independent analysis has been done to correlate the additional spending with MassCare?
taxes on businesses
Mitt CLOSED LOOPHOLES, not raise taxes. Many businesses (banks as an example) were getting deductions by using technicalities in the tax law in ways that law was never intended. He stopped that practice. That’s good governing, in my mind.
Gov spending increases
Those numbers are meaningless without comparisons and trends.
cap and trade
You’ll have to provide a citation for me to believe this.
jobs record
That quote in an opinion by a reporter and is misleading. When you ALREADY have very low unemployment 4.x%, job growth is not needed all that much (and much harder to create, btw).
bailouts
Romney as stated that the gov HAD to step in to avoid a catastrophic financial collapse. But, he did not and does not agree with with the way it was implemented. He was and is against picking and choosing winners and losers (i.e. who gets money and who doesn’t).
Immigration
Mitt has one of the most intelligent and fair plans for immigration I’ve ever seen.
He does not believe it’s practical to round up all 12+ million and ship them home.
He wants to cut off the magnets by requiring employers to verify (with eVerify) citizenship (or right to work) before hiring, and having severe penalties for those who fail to comply.
He wants ever illegal immigrant to register so we know who they are.
He wants to give them TEMPORARY legal status to reside and work here.
He wants them to go through the process of getting citizenship, including paying any fines and fees, WITHOUT letting them jump in line ahead of those who are trying it the legal way.
Any that fail to complete the process before there temporary status expires must leave.
That does not sound weak, to me. It seems fair and strong.
Gun Control
Gun control is not the same thing as being against citizens owning guns. He wants to make it hard for criminals to get access to them.
Every year that Gov. Romney was in office he worked for and signed at least one pro-second amendment/pro-sportsmen bill into law. These actions were done in support of and in collaboration with the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), and its affiliate, the Gun Owner’s Action League (GOAL):
Massachusetts — Governor To Sign Inland Fish and Game Fund Bill
Governor Romney issued a proclamation declaring May 7, 2005 as “Right to Bear Arms Day”.
Governor Romney suspended “administrative fees” to the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Fund.
Massachusetts — Firearms Reform Bill Sent to the Governor`s Desk
Massachusetts — S.2255 Signed by Governor Romney!
Massachusetts — Governor Signs Pro-Gun Legislation Into Law!
“The Hunter Education bill, S.469, was signed into law by Governor Mitt Romney on July 6, 2006.
During the Romney Administration, no anti-second amendment or anti-sportsmen legislation made its way to the Governor’s desk…
“His administration also worked with Gun Owners’ Action League and the Democratic leadership of the Massachusetts House and Senate to remove any anti-second amendment language from the Gang Violence bill passed in 2006.
GROVER NORQUIST from the board of directors of the NRA:
“Guns and Romney. Romney’s position on guns is flawless … I went and worked with the governor back when the D’s were planning on passing a restriction on 50 caliber rifles in Massachusetts. And he committed to me that he would oppose any restrictions… his position is fine.”
And, finally, something we can agree on: