Skip to comments.No, no, not again, Mitt Romney says: But supporters and pundits keep chatter of a 2016 run alive
Posted on 02/16/2014 8:11:17 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Ask Mitt Romney if he would run for president a third time, and he will deny it every which way.
Ive had my turn, he told CNN.
Were so ready to watch the next person step up and take that nomination, his wife told Fox News. Oh, no, no, no. No, no, no, no, no. No, no, no, Romney told The New York Times.
But in recent weeks, a strange thing has happened: Some supporters and donors, pollsters and pundits are starting to suggest without irony that the former Massachusetts governor run for president in 2016.
Once a month, someone would e-mail or call and say he should run again, said Ron Kaufman, a longtime Romney adviser. Now I get it every day from the grass roots, and from donors. I get it every day.
Kaufman made clear that there was no behind-the-scenes maneuvering to persuade Romney to run again. A second Romney adviser said he was also approached frequently by former supporters and donors, asking him to persuade Romney to run again in 2016.
Those close to Romney say he is giving the talk little thought, and party operatives in key states and some of his former advisers say they cannot imagine a scenario in which he would run.
Hes made it pretty clear he will strongly support whoever the 2016 nominee is, Romneys oldest son, Tagg, said in an e-mail to the Globe. This isnt something we are spending any time thinking about. Chatter is just chatter.
And yet the former candidate who rarely gave interviews during the 2012 campaign and laid low for the year following his defeat is now suddenly everywhere.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
I agree with Mitt. “Oh, no, no, no. No, no, no, no, no. No, no, no!”
Oh hell, don’t tell me this goober is seriously setting us up for another run.
RE: Oh hell, dont tell me this goober is seriously setting us up for another run.
He thinks he can be Richard Nixon in 1968.
Because Adlai Sevenson was such a smashing success when he did it? And don’t forget WIlliam Jennings Bryan.
“and yet suddenly he seems to be everywhere”. Yup he’s plannin’ sumtin.
My DNC friends tell me John Kerry is planning another run, so why not Mitt too?
He fought against republicans light years harder than he fought against Obama.
He runs again...
...idiots, all of them.
this guy is like the clap’ and no antibiotics can cure it..
In political-speak, that is meaningless.
I respect Mitt Romney for being a decent guy. He’s apparently a good father, a shrewd businessman, and a kind man. Unfortunately, he’s also a product of his environment. I’m not sure he understands a thing about conservative philosophy. He’s a typical moderate Republican who apparently doesn’t realize what we’re dealing with on the left. When they say they want a fundamental transformation, they aren’t kidding (it’s similar to Iran saying they want to destroy the Great Satan...for three decades straight!).
So I’m perfectly happy to have Mitt Romney on our side so long as he’s fighting the left and not us (that’s what “on our side” means, although you wouldn’t know it from the likes of McCain and other moderates). If he wants to contribute money and campaign for Republicans, that’s great, but I hope he never, ever tries to run for president again.
He 0 for 3. That record sucks.
I doubt that anybody who wasn’t willing to vote for him the first time will change their minds. I don’t personally believe most of those who declined to vote for him made that decision along rational lines, but that was their choice to make.
That said, Romney would need to make two crucial changes for 2016: (1) he would have to reach out to the Tea Party and conservatives on a personal and ideological level and seek to unify the GOP; and (2), he would have to develop and campaign for a conservative reform agenda that was sound in principle and poll tested to be politically attractive.
We may get to choose between tow doses of the clap, McCain would like to try again.
One thing I think Romney would be very interested in, at least based on his past comments, is attacking the tax code to make it more tax payer friendly.
That would be a big win for conservatives, even if he did nothing else.
He said he’s not running. The left needs to give it up.
He may be disliked, but almost everything he said was going to happen if Obama was elected has. Right now he looks like ****ing Nostradamus.
The guy has been running for office for 20 years and has a single victory to show for it.
He won that election with under 50% and had to give up running for reelection and left office with 34% approval, he ruined the 2008 election cycle, and then lost to Jimmy Carter the second when we were in a near depression.
He doesn’t even belong in republican politics.
Quite true. I was surprised in 2012 that Romney did not raise the tax simplification and reform issue, even if only as a way of pivoting off the attacks on his personal finances.
You really need to be educated about the guy.
for a guy who is supposedly not going to run again Willard sure does leave home and visit the national media to protest a lot...
seems like OCRA II is well under way...
Once a month, someone would e-mail or call and say he should run again, said Ron Kaufman,
yeah well even a liberal like Willard can learn to send EMail and use a phone...
Hell, maybe that’s what the magic underwear is for.
From the article:
The answers Romney has given more recently are more definitive than the ones he gave last year. He told CNN in June that he would love to run.
I would do it again, but its not my time, he said. Ann might not . . . but I would love to do it again, are you kidding? Id love to do it and win...”
so in June 2013 Willard was yelling “Pick me !!! Pick me !!!”
I have no illusions about Romney, but he would be substantially better than any Democratic nominee. Moreover, Romney could be quite good if he were committed to a conservative reform agenda and had a Republican Congress with conservative fire eaters in charge. Romney’s genial manner and mild personality would do much to diminish and deflect opposition to reforms.
It is silly to list people who would be better than a democrat nominee, and Romney can’t do anything conservative, Romney despises conservative and conservatism and has his entire life, that is what brought him into elective politics.
Romney is the most radical leftist in GOP history to be nominated, and after 20 years, doesn’t someone have to point out that the guy is a lousy political candidate?
What the heck is he doing all over the Sunday shows?
Romney is a liberal, have you not figured that out by now?
(I know—I worked on his one successful campaign for office.)
He’s also older than Hillary.
Exactly. The only thing Romney is not liberal about is keeping his own money.
People don’t realize what his biography reveals about how anti-conservative his life has been, even to leaving the GOP and fund raising as a democrat because of Reagan and the 80s.
This is being pushed by the leftist media. If nominated as the repub nominee, it would assure that Hillary would be elected pre__sent the second.
The repub voters that would not pull the lever for Mitt in 2012 will not pull the lever for him in 2016.
As for age, nature is unkind to women in that they visibly suffer its effects more than men. Romney looks distinguished while Hillary increasingly looks old.
They’re not dragging him into their studios against his will.
Women, however, live longer than men.
Romney is more liberal than many Democrats from less blue states than MA.
Yep. He’s probably out on the left with Jon Huntsman—but he was a far less effective governor.
Dean would probably be more fiscally conservative than Romney—and he was a better governor. He’s also better on Obamacare.
King would then ask if anyone in the audience had that day's newspaper, or any newspaper. On being given a paper, King would turn to the obituaries and start reading them out. The punch line would be that again and again, when a man died old, the obituary described that he was "survived by his widow."
To some degree at least, might Romney have been liberal because that was the price of being governor of Massachusetts? Careerist business types are often like that, putting on their politics like calibrating the right suit for a business occasion. If so, as to Romney, that means getting him pinned down to a conservative reformist platform that he commits to and campaigns on.
That graphic: “If you think everything will be okay once obama is out of office ... you don’t understand the problem,” is RIGHT ON.
He was out there the last couple of weeks for two reasons. One was for his opinion of the Olympics in Sochi, as he did such a great job with the Olympics when he came in and saved ours and actually ended up financially in the black. He also did a fine job with the safety aspects of the U.S. winter Olympics when he ran it, so they were questioning him about Sochi safety. The other reason was because the documentary movie “Mitt” was coming out, so he was around for PR purposes also. So relax folks, he wasn’t out there because he’s running again. Some people can’t take no for an answer.
“He’s also older than Hillary.”
Mitt sure looks a heck of a lot better. Hillary is a dog.
Blow your daddy’s money myth... NEVER AGAIN OLD BOY!
SBVFT are still around and old lurch will not like it.
No, he was a supporter of liberal Democrats before he ran for office and had to paddle vigorously to the right just to run as a GOP candidate in MA. Then, of course, as soon as he was in office he not only did absolutely nothing to support GOP candidates down-ticket from him—he governed as a liberal Democrat while in office.
He tried to enact a couple of rightish-leaning acts that never were even actually implemented before he stepped down in order to help him run as something of a Republican for president.
He was plotting to run for president back from when he first ran for office. He first ran against Teddy Kennedy in a race for which it wasn’t expected he’d win, only that he’d establish name recognition. But MA had a string of three Republicans governors before him, and not only did running against Kennedy give him a chance to have the support of his party, it enabled him to supposedly posture as a more credible eventual national candidate from MA. Then, he was able to run outwardly as a continuation of the string of GOP governors that went back to William Weld.
The dude was a liberal, soulless corpus of ambition through every step of his political (and business) career.
On the other side, he obviously has been a good and dedicated provider to his family and a model citizen within his Mormon community, within which he has done a number of good acts.
You are reminding me in a quite cogent manner of why I had such misgivings about Romney in 2012. Who do you want in 2016? Or at least see as credible conservative candidates?