Breaking: Romney’s in

posted at 4:21 pm on April 11, 2011 by Allahpundit

Via his website, which is sporting a spiffy new red, white, and blue “R” logo to match you-know-who. Anyone want to venture a theory on why he’d choose to announce his exploratory committee on the eve of the fifth anniversary of RomneyCare? He told fundraisers a few weeks ago that he was planning an announcement in early April, but that window left him plenty of time to do it last week or even later this week — maybe on Tax Day, after the R-Care reminiscences had come and gone. Is this part of some nascent strategy to tackle his chief political liability head on, by, er, giving the media a new opportunity to remind conservatives about it? I honestly don’t get it.

Quite a contrast here between Romney’s minimalist approach and Pawlenty’s kinetic, melodramatic spot declaring his own candidacy a few weeks ago. T-Paw breaks out the bells and whistles because he needs to get people’s attention, Mitt opts for understatement to convince voters that he’s authentic and sincere. He’s wearing the campaign equivalent of a plaid shirt while Pawlenty’s decked out in a sequined jacket. Eighteen months (and a few weeks) until election day!

Tags: , ,

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 … 5 6 7

You need a “sociological study” to demonstrate the obvious fact that people who come from more privileged backgrounds versus, say, ghetto kidz have a leg up? How much did you waste on your education to come to that brilliant conclusion?

Buy Danish on April 11, 2011 at 10:46 PM

As I said, it’s not rocket science. Yet you were the one denying it.

alwaysfiredup on April 13, 2011 at 2:13 AM

this statement also says a great deal about your resentment of those that are born into wealth. It also ignores the common denominator: the qualities required to build, manage, and grow a business.

Many people grow businesses. I would say someone with Mitt’s background growing up to run a place like Bain is equivalent to a poor “ghetto” kid who grows up to run Domino’s Pizza. It’s definitely a success, not a failure, but it’s not out of the ordinary for Presidential-quality people. And the ad hominem is completely unnecessary. I resent no one.

Are you just as dismissive of those who obtain their seed money from the SBA? How about those that seek out venture capital? Does their success mean more or less to you?

It’s hard to convince strangers to give you money. It’s easy to convince family to give you money. I am more impressed by things that are hard than things that are easy.

There are countless stories of spoiled rich kids that blow their daddy’s fortune. Romney’s not one of them. Nor are the Koch brothers. Do you also hold them in low regard?

I never said I held Romney in low regard. He’s a success by any measure. He’s not a screwup. He seems like a diligent, hardworking, in-bed-by-nine kind of guy. There’s nothing wrong with that.

You’d do better to focus on his shortcomings as a candidate rather than trying to minimize his business experience. As one who has started a business and then struggled to grow it, both for myself and my employees, I admire what he’s accomplished – regardless of where the original capital came from.

Rod on April 11, 2011 at 10:46 PM

Okay. Fine. It’s certainly nothing to be ashamed of. I just don’t think you could accurately call him “self-made”. I like self-made people. I have nothing against Mitt’s background. It simply doesn’t impress me.

alwaysfiredup on April 13, 2011 at 2:22 AM

Progressives who are Red or Blue need not apply.

Badger40 on April 13, 2011 at 9:24 AM

zillionaire declares
a 7 year old dem slogan
who’s gonna notice

Dave Rywall on April 13, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Progressives who are Red or Blue need not apply.

Badger40 on April 13, 2011 at 9:24 AM

Romney is no progressive. And neither is MassCare a socialist health care plan.

Conservative Samizdat on April 13, 2011 at 1:02 PM

“Surprise” is your photo caption, AP? Do you not read Ed’s posts? Correction: Unexpectedly!

FeFe on April 13, 2011 at 2:31 PM

He’s not in my book.

mixplix on April 13, 2011 at 6:32 PM

Except as Governor of Massachusetts, where unemployment outpaced the national average and job creation was 48th in the nation.
steebo77 on April 11, 2011 at 11:55 PM

That is not true.

The unemployment rate had doubled from January 2001 to January 2003 when he took office, and was continuing to increase at a fast rate. He implemented pro-growth policies and programs. By summer the increase in unemployment had stopped and by fall unemployment was dropping. [13] While Massachusetts was 50th, or nearly the worst in the nation in the increase in unemployment rates the year that just ended when he took office, he got it down to 38th place his first year in office. [14] The unemployment rate continued to rapidly drop for nearly two years, hit a plateau for about a year and a half, then started dropping again at the end of his term of office (see chart below). The year he left office (2007), the trend in Massachusetts’ unemployment rate was the 11th best in the nation [15], a big improvement from the 50th place it was in the year he won office.

Source.

All the claims made in the source I cite above are backed up by the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistic. Just click on a footnote and it will take you to the Department of Labor’s website.

Conservative Samizdat on April 14, 2011 at 11:21 AM

My belated two-cents:
Oh goody, he’s in. Who gives a f***?

SKYFOX on April 14, 2011 at 8:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 … 5 6 7