Skip to comments.Romney tonight in debate: a technocrat spouting lots of platitudes & little specifics
Posted on 01/07/2012 8:32:05 PM PST by Laissez-faire capitalist
Romney has a record where he touted his belief system, policy proposals, etc, when running for U.S. Senator against Ted Kennedy. He has a record as governor. But Romney says ignore THOSE specifics - here is who I claim to be now, and what I claim to stand for. And he says now to take him at his word about who he is and what he stands for.
But he is low on specifics, especially tonight, and throughout the debates, Romney has been heavy on platitudes and speaking moatly in generalities (I will restore America, America can be great again, Obama this, Obama that, etc, etc).
But when Gingrich points out what the Wall Street Journal has to say about Romney's economic/jobs plan, or when Santorum points out (accurately, mind you) that Romney is a top-down pro-banker bailout kind of politician, Romney diverts away to attacking Obama, instead of dealing with the issues raised.
The Romney plan: ignore the specifics of the past that deal with me, and if you try to pin me down on an issue, or a question of character now, I will ignore you or divert attention elsewhere.
The aforementioned are not the characteristic that defines a leader. Period
Huntsman has said recently that Romney is the “status quo” on Wall Street issue, echoed tonight by Santorum.
Romney said in reply to Huntsman that he isn’t tied to Wall Street?
If so, then what about the Washington Post report that Romney raked in over $7 million in campaign cash from Wall Street firms far more than any other GOP candidate for president?
How did Santorum do?
I’m not a Romney supporter, but one good thing I will say about him is that at least he didn’t go to one of the standard overrated east coast liberal universities. Academic inbreeding has led in large measure to the lack of creativity and the idiotic approaches we’ve seen in government and federal economic policy recently.
If that’s the only positive thing it must of been a boring night at the debate.
For the most part, Santorum whined, a couple of good shots but mostly whining..
ABC talking heads afterwards said “no one laid a glove on Mitt”...I can’t stand those pukes but have to admit they’re basically right. I know the real enemy is Obama, but voters in upcoming primaries have to become really convinced that “It’s NOT Mitt!”
He performed beyond expectations, held his ground at key points, laid out areas that he sought to reform in the past, explained where he stood on jobs, the economy, the role of commander-in-chief and how a business leader (like Romney) may not perform well there, dealt with the issue of marriage and several other issues, and did enough to keep surging in NH and SC.
Raise your hand if you thought tonight’s debate was the crappiest so far. I can’t believe the GOP candidates subject themselves to a debate hosted by a bunch of left wing loons like Diane Sawyer and Stephie Steppedalloverit. The questions were insane and nobody shined. I could hardly watch it. I had to even side with Mitt on his perplexed response to the question of whether contraception should be abolished. It was nuts.
They spent way too much time on that hypothetical about the right of states to ban contraception. I think Mitt was right on to repeatedly berate Stephanopolous(sp?) for asking a question like that, when the status of birth control is not going to be an issue in this presidential campaign.
And Steph was idiotic to repeatedly keep the question alive when Mitt first tried to dismiss it.
Raising both hands and feet.
Romney’s little speeches were annoying. He was just trying to eat up the clock. I guess he plans to bore us to death.
Santorum did swimmingly! He was the only one on the stage (speaking on gay marriage) who was applauded t h r o u g h o u t his 60-second rant. Must have driven the ABC crowd bonkers.
The incessant droning on and on about contraceptives was a veiled jab at Santorum.
Your assessment of the debate is spot on. Terrible questions, nothing tough such as the gun walking scandal, green company billions (Solyndra, etc.), the list so long. No question about Santorum declaring an immediate cut should be made in SS benefits! The debate was all potatoes and no meat.
Romney’s MO: present grandiose attacks against Obama, ignore political punches thrown at him by othervGOP candidates, dodge questions to the best of his ability, divert attention away from himself. Rinse. Wash. Repeat.
Huntsman scared the piss out of me when he starting speaking Chinese. That guy sucks.
Andrew Breitbart was giving great post debate analysis with Steve Bannon tonight (Upstream) and he nailed it on Palin.
What we’re seeing with the GOP’s lack of spark is payback for what they did to Palin. After the Giffords shooting, the only one to come to Palin’s help was liberal lawyer Allan Dershawitz. Right now, the RNC farm club system sucks because many don’t want to step into that buzz saw and a fear that no one will come to their defense (like Palin who they could of defended but choose not to).
Andrew predicts that if Romney is the GOP and loses to Obama, there will be a slow coupe de tat by the conservative base against the establishment.
Sawyer and Stephanopolous were horrible and drove the debate instead of just asking the questions. When is the GOP gonna learn that in their own debates, they should get their own GOP friendly commentators and format.
I like Hunts and cringed when he did that. He is done!
Many will just see that as ‘showboating’ rather than being part Chinese in his psyche.
Romney got most time to speak, followed by Huntsman, Paul, and Santorum. Newt and Perry were just there for the ride. ABC did all it could to insure Mittens is the the one to lose to zero.
Pure tedium. I kept flipping back and forth between the debate and the Saints/Lions game. Seemed like every time I came back to the debate, they were STILL discussing that irrelevant topic.
The GOP establishment loves these kinds of debate formats, because they are meant to hurt conservatives and help the RINOs, whom they want to get the nomination.
Harvard doesn’t count?
Romney is the definition of an empty suit. He is full of cliches and socialism.
If the GOP nominates him....they get what they deserve. Unfortunately the rest of us will pay for their sins.
“Im not a Romney supporter, but one good thing I will say about him is that at least he didnt go to one of the standard overrated east coast liberal universities.”
I think you may be partially right in that he went to Stanford and Brigham Young for undergrad but went to Harvard Law for law school
The debate was nothing less than a Romney campaign stump. He had the majority of the time and rambled incessantly without saying anything of value. There seemed to be an intentional plan to direct more questions and responses for the benefit of Romney. It became so blatantly pro-Romney with regard to time that my wife and I could barely contain our rage. We watched the entire debate but it was difficult because bias in favor of Romney.
Sorry. I didn't realize he'd gone to Harvard Law School. As the presidency goes, that's definitely not a plus in my book.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.