Posted on 12/22/2007 12:18:55 PM PST by Ol' Sparky
YOU'VE SEEN the cover stories. You've heard the jokes. Mitt Romney's flip flops have provided endless fodder for the late night talk show circuit. But just beneath the humorous surface lies the Democratic strategy for defeating a Romney ticket come November, and history shows this strategy works.
American voters don't trust chronic flip floppers. Sure, everyone is free to switch a position here and there, but too many changes of heart and you risk offending the country's sense of integrity and fair play. George Bush's 2004 victory over John Kerry is a great example. My Democratic friends groan when I remind them of this line: "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." Kerry's ability to convincingly connect with average Americans was undermined by their suspicion that today's press release was tomorrow's fish wrap.
More troubling to me, though, is Mitt Romney's denunciation of key political beliefs he professed during his campaigns for public office in Massachusetts. Flash back to 1994 and 2002, and you'll see a very different candidate. Then, he was a typical Massachusetts Republican -- conservative on fiscal issues, progressive on social issues. He pledged to be more effective than Ted Kennedy on gay rights. He backed the Brady Bill Assault Weapons Ban. He even supported the so-called "morning after" pill. Invoking his trailblazing mother, Romney made an ironclad commitment to Roe v. Wade.
But a funny thing has happened on the way to the White House. Today, Mitt Romney is campaigning on his record as governor; yet he has become unrecognizable to the citizens who voted him into office.
I should know. As a Massachusetts state senator, I was one of Mitt's early supporters in his 1994 contested primary for the United States Senate. As acting governor of Massachusetts in 2002, I ended my own campaign for the Republican nomination to give Romney the best opportunity to beat the Democratic candidate that November.
This bluest of blue states had a long, successful string of GOP governors (since broken with the election of Deval Patrick in 2006). Thanks to two-party government, Massachusetts was finally able to shed its "Taxachusetts" label. And despite an economic downturn and the 2001 terrorist attacks, the GOP leadership had laid a strong foundation for growth and recovery. Mitt Romney looked like a winner committed to the principles that had put Massachusetts back on track.
Once elected governor, however, Romney began his transformation of consciousness. His flip flops on social issues are well documented. But Romney also raised taxes -- more than $700 million per year in increased fees and corporate taxes. A 2003 survey by the National Conference of State Legislatures found that Massachusetts imposed the highest fee hikes in the country.
As his national ambitions grew larger, it seems Massachusetts grew smaller in Romney's rearview mirror. The governor who promised to be the salesman-in-chief for his state's economy instead toured the country using us as the butt of his jokes.
It is no surprise, then, that Massachusetts still continues to struggle to reclaim the jobs it lost during the post-9/11 downturn. A recent report published by MassINC, a nonpartisan think tank, revealed that in recent years Massachusetts ranked last in job creation when compared to its 10 economic competitor states. It is the only one of those states not to recover the jobs it had during the 2001 peak business cycle and only one of six states nationally.
Politics is a definition game. If candidates don't successfully define themselves, others will gladly do it for them. Being defined as a chronic flip flopper will make Mitt Romney particularly vulnerable. John McCain -- the candidate I support -- is not. I have great admiration for John McCain because he sticks to his beliefs, even when they are not politically popular. He is defined by his courage. He is respected for his honesty. We disagree on important social issues, but I know where he stands and why. There is no doubt that the John McCain we see today is the same John McCain we will see as the Republican nominee and as President of the United States.
In a Romney-Clinton match-up, Democrats need only take a page from the George W. Bush playbook: Undermine the voters' sense that Romney can be trusted by highlighting the number of times he's conveniently changed his mind. And don't forget: He will have to do some more flipping if he becomes the party's nominee. Romney would have to tack back toward the middle -- where most American voters comfortably sit -- in order to win. That might just be a flip-flop-flap.
Jane Swift served as actring governor of Massachusetts from 2001 to 2003.
The truth is NO ONE knows what is going to happen. Everyone is entitled to give an opinion but that's all it is--an opinion.
Jane Swift wrote this and that is all that one needs to know.
I think that someone less credible than this shameless hack could criticize Romney much more effectively if they only had a brain.
Looks like the same 1/2 dozen or so people on this board that are on a jihad against Mitt. Sometimes you can overplay your hand.
For those interested just do a search on some of them starting with Ol” Sparkey, Liesler and so on. You will find the “Mormon problem” in there postings.
I don’t know much about MA politics but doesn’t this lady (Swift) have some kind of grudge against Mitt? At least that’s what I heard.
Hell hath no fury...
She was "acting governor" prior to the 2001 election. She was passed over in favor of Romney by the state GOP.
There's a well known saying: hell hath no fury...
“Jane Swift served as actring governor of Massachusetts from 2001 to 2003.”
She’s not too swift.
And "President Romney" is carrying ALL the water for RINO, flip flopping, lying, big government, dirtbag politicians every where.
Uh, Jane Swift is the author, not some lib media writer.
John McCain will not be the GOP nominee.
“This shows they are afraid of Romney. And why I support him.”
YEP.
“You’re carrying water for Hillary with your attacks on President Romney.”
It’s called MDS.
Mitt Derangement Syndrome.
“In a Romney-Clinton match-up, Democrats need only take a page from the George W. Bush playbook: Undermine the voters’ sense that Romney can be trusted by highlighting the number of times he’s conveniently changed his mind.”
The writer may have some truth in her assertions, but the idea that anyone would be concerned about Romney flip-flopping as against the terrible ammoral/untruthful record of the Clintons is truly amazing. The news pundits are already talking about Clinton fatigue!
“Looks like the same 1/2 dozen or so people on this board that are on a jihad against Mitt. Sometimes you can overplay your hand.
For those interested just do a search on some of them starting with Ol” Sparkey, Liesler and so on. You will find the “Mormon problem” in there postings.”
It all goes back to bigotry. Pure and simple.
“I don’t know much about MA politics but doesn’t this lady (Swift) have some kind of grudge against Mitt? At least that’s what I heard.”
That’s self evident.
“Looks like the same 1/2 dozen or so people on this board that are on a jihad against Mitt. Sometimes you can overplay your hand.
For those interested just do a search on some of them starting with Ol” Sparkey, Liesler and so on. You will find the “Mormon problem” in there postings.”
It all goes back to bigotry. Pure and simple.”
______________________________________
I’ve come to the same conclusion.
“I’ve come to the same conclusion.”
yep
The Prime Directive of the Romney Sleaze Machine is thus:
When JoeFreeper criticizes Willard, Willard’s fans attack JoeFreeper.
At least when you do this, Checkers, ping those you mention. It’s an unwritten FR rule (and also the courteous and brave thing to do).
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.