Skip to comments.George Will: Mitt Romney's Problem Is His "Romneyness" (video)
Posted on 01/22/2012 7:36:07 AM PST by i88schwartz
George Will: "Mitt Romney's going in trump card was electability. If you go back now to his 1994 senate primary, he's been in 25 races. His record is six wins and 19 losses. Newt Gingrich won it, it seems at least 43 or 46 counties. He carried women and Evangelical conservative South Carolina. He carried evidently all seven Congressional districts."
"So here's what we now know, we all thought the big problem for Romney might be his mormonism and it might be the Massachusetts healthcare plan. That's not it. Mitt Romney's problem is somehow his 'Romneyness.' That is the fact that people just are notconnecting with him. Not just that he's the first candidate we've ever had from the financial sector, which turns out to be a problem because finances, a, mysterious, and, b, disliked. But there's something about him that is not connecting."
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
I am very glad George Will gets it. He is right on this though he is also very late on getting it.
Will is at least partially right for a change.
His “Romney-ness” is of a piece with “Gore-ness”, “Kerry-ness”, “Dukakis-ness”, and, to be ecumenical about it, “Dole-ness” and “McCain-ness”. They’re all dorks who do not connect because they do not know real Americans [Dole did but he forgot after decades of living in the Watergate].
The line about Romney in 2008 on this was: “people won’t vote for someone who reminds them of their boss”.
The other part is how Massachusetts is ‘over-represented’ in presidential politics because of the bounce the Mass candidates get from New Hampshire primary. Since 1988. you have Dukakis (1988), then Paul Tsongas (1992 winner), then John Kerry (2004), now Mitt.
We all know that there is nothing inherently talented about Mass politicians — just the opposite.
You might add Ford-ness, Dewey-ness, Willkie-ness, Landon-ness, Blaine-ness, etc.
George Will is over-analyzing the Newt vs. Mitt battle. It actually quite simple but the MSM types like Will just won’t acknowledge it.
Mitt is not viewed by the majority of Republicans as conservative. And they are not going to be persuaded that he is. And, at least this year, the Republicans in this country want a real conservative. That’s why they have settled in on Newt, warts and all. He is viewed by those same Republicans as a true conservative and the best of the bunch which, in fact, he is.
That’s it in a nutshell. We don’t need George Will or anyone else telling us that it’s more complicated than that. It isn’t.
So what are the odds the Establishment puts party unity and electability above their adoration of Mitt Romney, and they bring-in a compromise candidate like a George Allen or someone?
His problem is he is the choice of the North East Liberal Elite republicans and they have shown they will ALWAYS pick the wrong candidate.
Good analysis. For the elites to see it at all is remarkable.
Can’t believe I just wasted a minute of my life watching George Will, even if he was somewhat right, sort of.
But, people like George Will do, because they are either from "inside the beltway" or New York City, and they no longer probe the reasons the voters chose Newt. They just disagree.
During the last campaign, who did they not like.....Sarah Palin. The same crowd; Will, Krauthammer, Noonan, etc.
"Flyover Country" has become as foreign to them as any Liberal Democrat.
This is exzctly why the “WAN” wants Romney to win...
Correct! Mass is a small area of the NE and the population is rather homogenous. I used to spend a lot of time in Mass and was impressed that such nice people could be so wrong politically.
It’s more than just about a candidates level of conservatism. Romney is a politician, which means by definition that he’s to some degree an opportunists. If a conservative bill was to roll itself onto a president Romney’s desk he might just go ahead and sign it - especially if his focus group told him to - but that won’t jus happen. We need someone who’s willing to fight a prolonged and vicious legislative battle; and it will be a battle, the moment you start threatening the type of reform we desperately need the special interests will be out in force to stop you - and they won’t be playing nice.
I don’t think I’ve heard Romney on a talk radio show in months”””
Up until the New Hampshire primary, Mitt hadn’t appeared on ANY talk show- radio or TV.
He suddenly was on 2 or 3 in a matter of days.
Doesn’t strike me as sincere in any shape, manner, or form.
There was a seemingly minor incident back in 2008 that has stuck in my craw. Mitt was asked about his five sons, that none of them had served in the military.
The simplest, and best, response would have been for Mitt to remind the questioner that we have an all volunteer force, and they have chosen to follow a different path.
Mitt's answer? "I think my sons are serving their country by helping me get elected President." (paraphrased)
If you observe Mitt's recent gaffes, they all show an aloofness to how Mitt deals with other people, and how out of touch he is with ordinary people.
Don’t know about you, but I see something setting itself up this time.
For so long the people on the right have been held to unreal standards for a candidate. The person has to be totally perfect on all counts. This has created a situation where nobody wants to run anymore unless they never lived before. The majority of people have sinned or screwed up once in awhile, they are good people and conservative if you can forgive their flaws. But the left and the media love to hold our side to unreal standards. The usual people who can pass are elites who have been grooming themselves for the run for years. Romney would be one of those. He is squeaky clean on family and such, but he is liberal on his policy.
Which brings me to Newt. He is about as imperfect as you can get. But...people this time want a person who is tough enough and plain spoken enough to fight back. They will pick him, not perfect in character, because they know that this side can no longer play and win by observing Mr. Nice guy rules.
After 8 years of Bush allowing himself to be trashed and bashed without fighting back, the voters who supported him do not want to sit back and take it anymore.
I hope our side has watched and realized what Obama is going to do. He has spent months, including ousting long time bud Reggie Love, playing up that he and Moochelle are the family values type.
We all know about Larry Sinclair, and the Obama trashy family history. We also know the media will never bring that up and talk about it. In the coming months, Obama family will be the Ward and June Cleaver family. The media spin will make it so as they point out what a scoundrel Newt is.
Expect it people. They can and will proceed to make the next months misery for us.
He’s a little bit country and a little bit rock and roll.Nobody wants an Osmond for president
You summed it up nicely from my point of view. The libs are trying to choose our candidate and it is not going to be that easy. Go Newt
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.