Skip to comments.The Myth of Romney
Posted on 04/29/2012 1:42:32 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
Myths have this habit of hanging around, growing and even be repeated and believed. Mitt Romney is the center of one of the biggest myths going around.
What is the myth of Romney?
The myth of Romney is that he is electable. It is right up there with the myth he is a conservative.
The headlines for today by the Romney friendly media are that Romney one two states. As always the drive by media does not go into the story the way it should be delved into.
Romney won Arizona handily. He took 47% to Santorums 26%, Gingrichs 16% and Pauls 8%. That sounds impressive until you realize the other three did not challenge Romney in Arizona. Romney had the endorsement of the sitting governor, was not really contested by the other candidates and he still could not break 50% of the vote.
In Michigan, even though Romney won, the results can only be called a disaster. Romney calls Michigan his home state. He was raised there and his father was a popular governor there. He went in, as always out spending his opponents. In this case, he only had one real opponent, Rick Santorum. Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul both passed on Michigan to concentrate on other contests. Once again, Romney one but he only won by three percent and while this time his vote total exceeded what he had four years ago, this is the first contest in a while where that has happened. Even with two candidates basically sitting Michigan out, Romney could only barely break 40%. Almost 60% of the voters of what is allegedly Romneys home state do not want him.
That says something.
There is a trend here that even Myth Romney should be able to figure out.
When Romney wins he must outspend his opponents five or ten to one and he is depressing the Republican voting base. If Romney cannot, even with a huge financial lead, draw more voters than he did four years ago in the primary, what is he going to do this fall when he is the one being outspent five to one?
It is time for the Republican Party to act. It is time for the Party hierarchy to sit down with not only the establishment but with Tea Party and conservative activists to find a consensus candidate who can in fact beat Barack Obama this fall.
Myth Romney is not that candidate. He has proven that repeatedly. The GOP electorate has not really fallen in love with any of the candidates this year. The closest candidate who has excited the GOP base is Newt Gingrich. This is because where Gingrich has won, the voter turnout was up. This is something that will be desperately needed this fall.
Last week I said that I would support the GOP nominee this fall, even if it was Romney because Obama is simply so bad.
I am now rethinking that.
Obama must be beat. I am willing to support almost any Republican who can get in there and beat Obama. But that is the rub. I am willing to support almost any Republican who has a chance to beat Obama.
Romney has no chance.
The Republican Party needs to realize this train is going down the rails and off the cliff.
If the Republican Party wishes to commit ritual political suicide, why should any conservative activist waste their time playing Doctor Kevorkian to the GOP?
Meanwhile, perhaps we conservative activists should be asking the GOP, if you dont want to win, could we borrow your party for a little while?
He is neither.
Why did you pull my comment?
Romney lost the nomination last time to McCain, so why is he the nominee this time?
He is a proven loser.
He generates no excitement. No one will want to work hard for him. We know he has taken opposite positions on crucial issues just a few years ago.
He would certainly do a better job managing the nation that Obama, but we worry he will ever get the chance as the author above argues.
I was at our county GOP convention yesterday and someone asked if I wanted a Romney sticker for my shirt. I declined. The most passionate delegates were the Ron Paul gang. They are still kicking even though he has no chance.
What a weird year to elect a president. Obama is a disaster and we have a dweeb at the head of the ticket.
Hold them horses.
The fact that Candidate A lost the nomination last time to Candidate B, who then went on to lose the election to Candidate C, does not necessarily mean that Candidate A will lose to Candidate C this time. See 1976 and 1980.
It does to those that want candidate A to lose to candidate C. Me not being one of them.
The cognitive dissonance must be excruciating.
We're screwed either way.
ABL Anyone But Liberals
“Romney doesnt have the nomination and I appreciate those who are willing to oppose him and tell the truth about him and reveal his past words and stands on issues.”
I posted this on another thread, It belongs here also.
Finally, the reality of it all has hit the thread!
I’m beginning to like the term “severly Conservative”, I use it now for the Rino Republicans, or RRs, that claim to be Conservative but in truth don’t vote Conservative or do what needs to be done to promote Conservative ideals. I live in Mississippi and although we have the largest % of minority population we are still considered to be one of the most Conservative States yet none of our Congressmen or Senators make the top 10% of Conservatives by their voting record, they just keep telling us they are Conservative, I thik they’re Severly conservative, like their buddy, Mitt. Our newly elected Lt. Governor just turned on Conservatives and arranged for our Illegal-Immigration bill to be killed, he also endorsed Romney early in the process. We may be doomed.
Another term you'll see is "rational conservative" - meaning it's rational to sacrifice conservative principles if they get in the way of promoting the greater good. Situational ethics, don-cha-know...
There is also the myth of the master business builder. Romney’s business experience was as a private equity partner, not the CEO of an operating company or even a venture capitalist. Private equity is all about buying companies for a song, loading them with debt, stripping their assets, assessing them high management fees, cutting their workforces to dress them up to flip. This is pure vulture capitalism, not developing, growing and investing as he is portrayed.
Once he is the nominee expect the airways to be flooded with sad stories featuring single mothers and poor elderly people who lost their jobs and pensions when Bain bought their employer. I can hear the Obama message now — “Bain and Romney made $50 million on XYZ company while only putting up $2 million of Bain’s money. After 25 years of loyal service JIm and Mary, lost their jobs, their health care, and their pensions when Bain took possession of XYZ. Three years later XYZ filed for bankruptcy costing the US economy 2000 more jobs. Mitt Romney, is he the kind of businessman you can afford to have running the country?”
Yeah, that fits better than “severly conservative”, I believe you’ve got it, Romney and his rombots are “Severly, Rational Conservatives”, they can be socially and fiscally conservative or progressive or anything else they want to be depending on what they want to do and what the group they are talking to wants to hear, unless they are talking plain old Conservatives.
As you see I am hardly alone in that sentiment.
Romney can't win!
Good post. I have rarely been more discouraged than with this election, and I suspect it will be the first one in which I will not vote for anyone at the top of the ticket. We had this guy rammed down our throats by the RNC and the “pundits,” although I honestly don’t know why, unless they’re secretly in the pay of Obama.
Romney is unlikeable, ignorant, arrogant, a self-obsessed preener with a Mormon messiah complex, and has a track record that ranges from embarrassingly unscrupulous capitalist in his private business to terrifyingly big government, nanny-state in his brief government career.
The thing that has really disturbed me most, however, is that the one who got closest to him (Santorum) was virtually identical in his big-government, nanny state orientation, differing only in proclaiming some popular social conservative positions and not being a Mormon.
To me, this means the American voter - of either party - is actually just fine with the loss of freedoms, the swollen monster of a government, and the crushing of the individual will and decision making power by the nanny state.
Where did we go wrong?
“MIttbots”, we call them “MIttbots’ ~ not “Rombots” because that’s too close to “Rahmbots” and that batarde would love that!
We let them take over the schools.
You left out the fact that he is the epitome of hateful superiority. I guess that comes from being a god in embryo.
Mitt was that pampered rich guy from the prep school up on the hill who used to drive by your public school during the noon hour with his preppie girlfriend in his new Caddie, both sneering at the commoners.
He's STILL doing it.
We have a dumbed down, media driven electorate, which like to watch polls and listen to media talking heads pontificate about who’s electable and who’s not.
He’s a lot like Obama, in that he doesn’t know how to fit in with everyday people, only Obama does a much better job of faking it.
But Romney’s got what voters crave... He’s got electbility
I’m voting for Newt in the TX primary. Want to let Mittens know that I don’t like much of anything he’s pontificating.
The more I hear about private equity LBOs, the more they sound as if they really are the zero-sum game the Left likes to paint all capitalism as! A twofer for the Dems -- discredit not only Romney, but capitalism as a whole!
Romney-as-business-genius proponents keep pointing to Staples and a few others as Bain success stories, but these were early on in Bain's history when they were doing venture capital.