About that Romney job creation record
posted at 8:45 am on September 6, 2011 by Jazz Shaw
Anyone who wants to be president in January 2013 is talking about jobs, and for good reason. President Obama will unveil his new “plan” on Thursday night. Some candidates like Michele Bachmann and Ron Paul have a harder time, aside from the employees of their medical clinics. Herman Cain can certainly take credit for a fair number of them, but they mostly involve pizza. Rick Perry has a somewhat shorter speech on the subject, where he smiles, points a thumb over his shoulder and says, “Texas.”
But Matt Lewis at the Daily Caller points out that Mitt Romney may have a bit more complicated job if he wants to claim the mantle of job creation.
The central premise of former-Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign is that he is a job creator whose private sector success demonstrates his expertise on the economy. “From my first day in office, my No. 1 job will be to see that America once again is No. 1 in job creation,” Romney said on Friday after another dismal U.S. jobs report. It was a line he had also delivered nearly three months earlier — the day he launched his presidential campaign…
But an analysis of available jobs data for Massachusetts under Romney’s tenure as governor shows Romney may have difficulty selling himself as a job creator at a time when out of work Americans are looking for results.
When Romney took office, there were 3,224,600 nonfarm seasonally adjusted jobs in Massachusetts. When he left office, there were 3,270,400, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (xls).
That means under Romney’s economic policies Massachusetts saw a net gain of only 45,800 jobs; a growth rate of 1.42 percent. Other estimates vary. For example, the Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development estimates job growth of 51,400 over that period. But in another analysis by Moody’s Economy.com, the number was lower: only 24,400.
That placed Massachusetts 47th among all states in job creation from January 2003 to January 2007. Nonfarm seasonally adjusted jobs across the United States grew by 5.265 percent throughout the entire U.S. The Romney economy in Massachusetts significantly underperformed compared to other states in terms of job creation.
Expect those numbers to come up over and over again in the primary debates. (And in the general as well if Romney winds up winning the nomination.) Creating jobs in a company that you own and operate is serious, real world experience to be sure. But employees are, by definition, part of a company. Making the magic work to attract jobs when you’re a chief executive (e.g. governor of a state) is a feat which translates much more directly to the role of president.
Of course, will Rick Perry even need to open up this line of attack on Romney? Given the latest poll numbers for the Texas governor (including the “intensity quotient“) how much time will he spend going after his primary opponents and how much will he simply steal Romney’s schtick and go directly after Obama like he’s already got the nomination in the bag?
UPDATE: Here’s a video clip of Jon Huntsman hitting Romney on just this point.
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
What was Bain’s impact on jobs?
O.T. I hear corn can be dangerous. It’s a good thing Romney wore those safety glasses.
Stayright on September 6, 2011 at 8:53 AM
First!
/Bishop
Lanceman on September 6, 2011 at 8:53 AM
Romney predecessor and successor in MA both lost jobs.
Romney was spoiled with the luxury of governing a conservative state like Utah or Texas. He governed a state where liberal Dems control 85% of the seats in both houses and has a radical court.
Yet, he still produced. Rather amazing, when one honestly looks at the circumstances.
Plus no mention of the hundreds of thousands of privates sector jobs created by companies that Romney’s Bain help save or build.
swamp_yankee on September 6, 2011 at 8:53 AM
Dangit!
Lanceman on September 6, 2011 at 8:53 AM
There is plenty of targets and ammo to go after Obama’s record. No need for Republicans to be sniping at each other. Each should lay out why they would be the best one to do the job and not why the other candidates would be the wrong one.
Obama is going to run an incredibly nasty and negative campaign. He has no other choice. On the other hand, I think a positive campaign that focused on the issues and the solutions would be a great counter to that negative campaign. An even more negative campaign is just going to get the center to throw up their hands and say “A pox on both their houses”.
yetanotherjohn on September 6, 2011 at 8:56 AM
Under Perry, Texas added 794,500 net new private-sector jobs.
publiuspen on September 6, 2011 at 8:57 AM
1.42% is probably pretty good considering its the People’s Republic of Taxachussetts.
maineconservative on September 6, 2011 at 9:04 AM
Jimmy Hoffa JR responds to Romney/Perry Jobs war:
“No matter how many “jobs” the Republicans lie that they created……they’re lying m——- sons of—–and we’re going to take out the —– sorry —– pieces of —–. And we’re gonna take you OUUUUUUUTTTTT”
PappyD61 on September 6, 2011 at 9:05 AM
Conservatives complain about the NLRB and the SC/Boeing decision. That’s a cakewalk compared to navigating Boston/MA labor laws, unions, trial lawyers and liberal academics.
Anyone trying to compare governing MA to governing UT or TX is a little rahtarded.
swamp_yankee on September 6, 2011 at 9:09 AM
Plus no mention of the hundreds of thousands of privates sector jobs created by companies that Romney’s Bain help save or build.
swamp_yankee on September 6, 2011 at 8:53 AM
Got any data on that? It’s hard to find solid information about Bain.
flyfisher on September 6, 2011 at 9:11 AM
Intensity quotient = fervor with which their supporters back the candidate.
And Perry’s is higher than Palin’s or Paul’s? LOL.
Marcus on September 6, 2011 at 9:14 AM
At this point, if Perry doesn’t show up in a 10 gallon hat, strapping a sidearm and sporting spurs at the debate… he’s in.
In fact, he can do all three and still lead the rest of this pack by 10 points.
Sugar Land on September 6, 2011 at 9:16 AM
Anyone trying to compare governing MA to governing UT or TX is a little rahtarded.
swamp_yankee on September 6, 2011 at 9:09 AM
Fair enough. Everyone knows Massaschusetts is a nutter state. But you also have to consider what was going on nationally in our economy during the years he was governor. Perry has been adding jobs in Texas while Obama flushes our economy downt he toilet. To me that’s much more impressive than adding some meager jobs during the height of the real estate boom under GWB.
Plus, ROMNEYCARE ROMNEYCARE ROMNEYCARE ROMNEYCARE ROMNEYCARE
Stayright on September 6, 2011 at 9:16 AM
Funny how everyone is now jumping on the bash Romney train. Where were you people in 2007-2008? Oh yeah, that’s right, you were supporting him.
jparks1972 on September 6, 2011 at 9:17 AM
Some liberals like to talk about the cuts Bain made, but as a private equity firm they invested in a lot of struggling businesses that were going to fail anyway. More often than not they saved and built hundreds of key American companies.
I’m sure you’ve heard the anti-Romney hype. Here is the other side:
http://americaneedsmitt.com/blog/2011/08/14/depend-romneys-bain-capital-day/#.TmUqaigGlIM.twitter
Bain companies:
•1-800-Dentist
•ABILITY Network
•Accelecare Wound Centers
•Accellent •Acord Holdings
•AdReady •Affordable Interior Systems AIS
•Air Medical Group Holdings
•Airvana
•AKW
•AMC Entertainment
•American Institute of Gastric Banding AIGB
•Ameritox
•AppAssure Software
•Applied Systems
•AppNeta
•Appriss
•aPriori
•Archer Technologies
•Arts Alliance Media
•Asiakastieto
•ASIMCO
• Aspect Development
•Auction Broadcasting Company
•Augusta Lumber
•Bellsystem24
•Bertucci’s
•Biffa
•Blip tv
•BloomReach
•Bluestem Brands
•Bombardier Recreational Products
•Bon-Ton
•Boston Heart Diagnostics
•Brakes Group
•Brenntag
•Bright Horizons
•Broder Bros
•Brontes Technologies
•Burlington Coat Factory
•BuyWithMe
And that’s just the first TWO letters of the alphabet.
swamp_yankee on September 6, 2011 at 9:22 AM
I believe Bain’s most successful years was after Romney quit Bain to run for office.
During the 70′s and the dot.com boom it did great…in the 80′s, under Mitt’s guidance they defaulted on loans, causing at least one bank to go bankrupt.
Bain’s company’s were known to merge and lay off people, like most companies like Bain, they don’t care about jobs, just what stock options can they receive, drive up the price of the stock, sell the stock, and let the company suffer….but they made their money, and Mitt was good at it.
Mitt knows how to make money, but the government isn’t created to “make money”, it isn’t a business, it doesn’t create jobs, and it doesn’t (until recently) force mergers.
Mitt is out of his league, but if you want the IRS to make money, than Mitt is your man…
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 9:24 AM
A problem I have with Perry is he didn’t get in until Obama looked easily beatable- hardly the fighter we need. We don’t need a loudmouth. I hope Perry is more than he appears. Romney’s been fighting for it for a long time.
drballard on September 6, 2011 at 9:24 AM
No, most thought he would be a good VP or cabinet member, few (obviously by his results) thought he could be president.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 9:26 AM
ahh, right on time right2bright. How can anyone take a person like you seriously? There are things I like about Perry, and if he gets the nod, I hope he wins. Can u say the same of Romney? I think I know the answer, so you’re just hating. No one can take a hater seriously
drballard on September 6, 2011 at 9:27 AM
This isn’t a union job, seniority is of little consequence.
Mitt has been trying and failing for a long time.
How many failures does it take to convince people he won’t be able to win a national election…that being said, this may be his best chance since Obama is so miserable.
But it hardly is a vote of confidence to say that Mitt might be able to win against one of the worst records for a president in recent history.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 9:29 AM
Perry got in aft Barbour and Daniels both declined to run. He would have been happy to support either of them, but then he saw an opening and felt he should when they didn’t.
MJBrutus on September 6, 2011 at 9:29 AM
So let’s get this straight, if someone thinks that Mitt cannot win the presidential election, that person is a hater?
If a person has consistently, for years, stated that Mitt would be a good VP, or a high ranking cabinet member, than that person is a hater?
Choosing someone for the second most powerful position in the world, or one of the most powerful positions in America…that makes me a “hater”.
drballard, you have a very high standard…one that so far includes most of America as a “hater”…
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 9:32 AM
That support was based on him being the lesser of the evils. If we had nominated Romney, Obama would be just another failed presidential candidate.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 9:33 AM
Another misperception about Romney is that he was just some CEO. He founded Bain. It was his baby.
But if you want specific decisions involving Romney, here’s his top five moves at Bain determined by The Street :
http://www.thestreet.com/story/11138475/1/5-of-mitt-romneys-best-bain-capital-buys.html
swamp_yankee on September 6, 2011 at 9:34 AM
Really, how difficult is it to come up with a plan to turn private enterprises loose without counter-productive government regulations fighting every business, while feeding every public entity as if it modeled the U.S. Postal Service? The liberal politicians, (Obama, Pelosi, Reid), have pumped billions into the public jobs sector—99% UNIONS— for the past three years, not to produce JOBS, but to assure this union structure remained committed to re-electing only liberal Democrats. The result has been that private corporations and small businesses, (the life-blood of American production), have been purposely choked off from remaining competitive nationally or globally. Add this disastrous health care mandate burden along with an EPA totally out of control, the private business sector doesn’t stand a chance. The only plan any Republican Presidential candidate can present to the American public is to promise to reverse this government sponsored power structure, (funded by taxpayer dollars), and to send this current President back to Chicago with his socialist policies, and his tail tucked firmly between his legs.
Rovin on September 6, 2011 at 9:35 AM
You have been proven to play fast and loose with your “facts” in the past. Until you start providing credible links to your claims, they will be ignored by most of us. Provide the links and I’ll be more than pleased to check them out. Remember, I said CREDIBLE links.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 9:36 AM
Common useage is that growth rate is per year. Using the common meaning the growth rate is 0.36%.
burt on September 6, 2011 at 9:37 AM
Nonsense. Romney is a solid 2nd choice candidate when we don’t have an electable conservative running. Until Perry got in, Romney led the pack. And if Perry falters, Romney will lead the pack again, win the nomination, and beat Obama in 2012.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 9:39 AM
Huntsman comes off like a pretentious jerk everytime I see him. What was with that ghostly baseball theme in the ad? Lose the dirt bike and stop referring to yourself as having the “right temperament” for the job because it sounds like a thinly veiled jab at Tea Party protests as well as hypocritical considering the snarky response you gave to Perry on Evoltution and science.
Anyways, it’s good to see Huntsman targeting Romney because that is clearly where he can gain the most ground and Romney needs the criticism. I like the line about creating jobs VS attracting jobs, Romney has much explaining to do.
Daemonocracy on September 6, 2011 at 9:44 AM
Romney left office with 4.7% unemployment rate. Looks mighty good to me.
Lori on September 6, 2011 at 9:46 AM
Here is what I want to know about Perry, Romney, and Huntsman.
1) As governor, how did these candidates create jobs?
2) How does Romney’s private sector experience give him a leg up on the other governors? (I know the answer to this)
3) Do they believe they can create the jobs or do they realize that they should simply get out of the way?
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 9:48 AM
Exactly. 5% is considered full employment. When you have less to fix, there is much less room to improve. And Romney didn’t lose jobs as governor. Clearly he stayed out of the way of the free market. And even in the case of Romneycare, free market principles were utilized to a certain extent.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 9:50 AM
You check me out? You the guy who swore that the short form of the Hawaiian BC would not allow you to legally drive…so millions of drivers in Hawaii should be ticketed, fined….yeah, you have a real solid background of being “logical”.
No one has ever proved me wrong on any substantial issue, they have hated what I have posted, despised what I have posted, but never found them to be in error.
Since you accused me, let’s see your proof of my “fast and loose with your facts”…I made a generic statement about Mitt, a candidate, you made a personal attack…so let’s see you come up with the “links”.
Now which part of my post do you think is wrong, and I will provide the appropriate links.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 9:51 AM
OK, that is a fair and strong rebuttal the Romney campaign could use. I suppose one could probe deeper and ask about population growth and if job creation (private sector) was keeping pace when Romney left office, but that would probably be getting too deep in details for most of the electorate.
Daemonocracy on September 6, 2011 at 9:55 AM
I was never a birther.
Your accusations that Mitt made his fortune off his dad was never proven by you. Your accusations that he was responsible for the accident during his mission were proven wrong by every news source. Your accusation that he used influence to get his initial job was never proven.
So, you provide the links. Until you do, most of us will continue to ignore your assertions.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 9:56 AM
Just a note: Cain’s jobs may have been those that “mostly involve pizza” WTFTM, but he is the only guy who created jobs without the ability to put his thumb on the scale the way a Governor or Congressman could.
None of these governors actually created jobs. They either did or did not maintain a job-friendly environment. Nothing to sneeze at, surely, but not the same thing as actually running a business. Which, I guess, helps Romney a little too, since he has run businesses.
A Balrog of Morgoth on September 6, 2011 at 9:57 AM
You are getting carried away with your visions of grandeur…
Romney did not “found” Bain.
I believe it was Bill Bain, Arther D. Little and one other man I believe was Hendrikson, or something similar, from an old Boston consulting firm.
Mitt was a bright guy, with a lot of political contacts from his fathers extraordinary power base. He was a natural to bring in.
Intelligent, but more importantly, deeply connected because of his father.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 9:58 AM
in the last decade Texas population has grown at a 20% rate, Mass by 3.1%,
chasdal on September 6, 2011 at 9:58 AM
Aside from Muslim bashing, the only idea that I have heard from Cain is the Fair Tax. Now I like the Fair Tax, but it isn’t going to happen. We aren’t going to amend the Constitution for it in one year, or two or ten.
MJBrutus on September 6, 2011 at 10:04 AM
Well, I noticed you dodged the drivers license fiasco you were convinced of…one of the funnier moments in HA history.
I never said Mitt was responsible for the death, I stated one of his biggest supporters Bechtel was responsible, and was fined the maximum penalty for that…of course the next year Bechtel was then rewarded with a multi-million dollar contract, just a coincidence.
You have such a good memory, you can follow my links.
And I have always said, if you don’t think his fathers influence and power, had anything to do with Mitt’s success…than you are naive.
Bechtel, Marriot, a myriad of large supporters, donors, friends of his father, also coincidentally followed Mitt.
His father was the chairman of the committee that petitioned the Selective Service to not draft Mormon’s who were on a mission…and Mitt was chosen to got to France on a Mormon mission the year after that bill was passed…just a coincidence, again.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 10:04 AM
In all fairness to Romney, that was probably an impossible job in MA while he was governor. In a state with high taxes and a far left legislature, I don’t think there was much that Romney could have done to improve job creation in MA.
And, I say this as someone who doesn’t support Romney. First, I don’t think he is even remotely conservative.
Second, I don’t think he would beat Obama if he is the nominee. Obamacare, his multitude of flip-flops, and the fact that he is a lousy campaigner would likely doom him. Everyone knows his name, but nobody knows what Romney stands for. After more than 4 years of constant running for president, that doesn’t bode well. It makes him seem sleazy, like he’ll say anything to get elected.
Don’t get me wrong, I’ll pull the lever for Romney if he is the nominee. But he won’t get the base excited, he won’t raise even 1/2 as much $$ as Obama, and he will run a milquetoast campaign that will make McCain’s campiagn look aggressive. I just don’t see Romney beating Obama. I see Romney as Dole v. Clinton. It may sound good in theory (generic republican against semi-unpopular president), but will never work out in practice.
Monkeytoe on September 6, 2011 at 10:04 AM
what a sorry@ss ad from team huntsman… i hope he stays in for a long time as his comedy hits keep on coming… can the narrator speak slower? what’s up with the baseball symbolism? slideshow of the candidate? Sheesh, that is pol ad 101… video of your candidate, scary looking still shots of the competition… and how long was that thing, felt like lord of the rings length
gatorboy on September 6, 2011 at 10:05 AM
Funny how everyone is now jumping on the bash Romney train. Where were you people in 2007-2008? Oh yeah, that’s right, you were supporting him.
jparks1972 on September 6, 2011 at 9:17 AM
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I was bashing Romney and supporting Fred. When Fred dropped out, I supported McCain because I wasn’t going to vote for Huck and there were no other choices. I have spent more than two decades fighting socialized medicine (and my father has spent fifty years fighting it). So for me, RomneyCare is reason enough for me to not vote for him. I am genuinely interested in the rest of his record because he may be the GOP nominee, but I will never vote for him in a primary and I remain unconvinced he can win in the general.
flyfisher on September 6, 2011 at 10:05 AM
Provide the link.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 10:08 AM
Which was about the national average(4.8%)…so he was “average”.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 10:12 AM
Bottom line: Obama is an economic disaster, and Romney created jobs while a Republican governor of liberal Massachusetts.
ABO!
profitsbeard on September 6, 2011 at 10:12 AM
csdeven’s “I’m not a Romney supporter, I swear!” mask is slipping. In fact, I think it’s fallen to the ground and shattered into a thousand pieces.
steebo77 on September 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM
Provide the link.
Provide the link.
Provide the link.
More speculation. Provide the link that proves it.
Again, more speculation. Provide the link that proves it.
lol
You can state your opinion all day long. But when you present it as fact, it should be able to be proven. If you can’t prove it, few will give your “facts” any credibility at all.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM
Romney founded and built Bain Capital, the private equity firm. Some people just refuse to give him credot for anything. The other Bain had nothing to do with th private equity firm
swamp_yankee on September 6, 2011 at 10:15 AM
I don’t know if that was why he was brought in to Bain, but you don’t need evidence to know that it is true that Romney had deep connections b/c of his father – just look at all the children of big time politicians who go on to use the parent’s machine to get elected themselves – Bushes, Cuomos, Kennedies, Daleys, and the list goes on and on (how many sitting governors, reps, and senators are chilren of former big-time politicians in their state?). I think it would be naive to claim Romney did not have deep connections because of his father.
How or if those connections were helpful in venture capital investing, I don’t know, but I would surmise that they were helpful.
Monkeytoe on September 6, 2011 at 10:16 AM
Also, according to Wikipedia “Bain Capital was founded in 1984 by Bain & Company partners Mitt Romney, T. Coleman Andrews III, and Eric Kriss. In addition to the three founding partners, the early team included Fraser Bullock, Robert F. White, Joshua Bekenstein, Adam Kirsch, and Geoffrey S. Rehnert. Bain Capital’s original $37 million fund was raised entirely from private individuals in mid-1984.”
So, it appears that Mitt did found Bain Capital (as opposed to Bain & Company) as someone claimed above.
Monkeytoe on September 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM
steebo77 on September 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM
Heh. Keep it coming, Stardust. Way to hammer Mittness so that the conservative candidates don’t have to. Love it.
AH_C on September 6, 2011 at 10:21 AM
I’d like to see the proof. Especially when it is presented in a negative context.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 10:24 AM
Look at the contributors to his fathers campaign, and compare them to Mitt’s.
Easy for you to do, you, after all, found out that the short form BC in Hawaii can’t be used for driving.
Anything I link or post, you will ignore…no one with a logical mind, would not think that his father was a powerful man, with powerful contacts, and his son would benefit.
Just look at Bechtel alone, and you will see the connection…but you won’t.
There is nothing wrong, just a fact…want to know some other with father/son relationships.
Kennedy’s, Gore, Bush, Rockefeller, Forbes Clinton…want more? I could list dozens more. That’s how the world of politics and business works. If you want to pretend that in this one case, that his father did not assist his son, live in that world.
I don’t see the offense in it…father loves son, you seem to think that is wrong.
Just like his brother just happened to be chosen to work for Sullivan & Cromwell right out of law school…nothing wrong, just a fact. People hire other people with influence.
I doubt if you asked Mitt straight up if his father was helpful in his career, he would not deny it…think, his father was one of the most powerful politicians in the U.S…
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 10:26 AM
Hahahahaha!!!!
No one is taking you seriously, so rock on with your fantasy world.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 10:29 AM
Since you know what you post…if I come up with the link, will you promise not to post on HA for 6 months?
You know what you posted and what you didn’t…so that should be an easy call.
The others I provided links multiple times…I get tired of educating you guys…and when I do you just ignore them.
If I provide the links to the rest of these, you will refer to me as the “Always right2bright, the one that should never be questioned, and I bow to his knowledge”, before each time you post.
Then I will provide the links.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 10:31 AM
So you are saying that a powerful father won’t help his son?
Okay…if you think that…you are probably the only one, but okay.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 10:33 AM
Perry has good points. He has bad points. Right2bright, what are Romney’s good points?
drballard on September 6, 2011 at 10:40 AM
I’m not a big fan of Romney, but this is a horribly misleading argument. Massachusetts is a small state with a very strong economy. If there were not a lot of new jobs created while Romney was governor, it’s likely because the state was already at or near full employment at the time.
rockmom on September 6, 2011 at 10:44 AM
I’m not saying that using the network he had from his father is a bad thing – everyone who can does it (whether it is getting a job, getting into a college, getting out of a speeding ticket or obtaining political office). I’m not even saying that such connections are responsible for his success with Bain. I’m just sayting that to claim he did not have or use such connections seems odd. Everyone is a product of their parents to a large extent – W would never have been governor, let alone president, were GHWB not his father. Trump wouldn’t be Trump if his father didn’t leave him $$ and real etate. Sure, there are some entirely self-made people who had no connections or anything but managed to build a company, etc, but I doubt even Mitt himself would claim that his family connections did not help him in his various endeavors. To me that is not a knock on anyone – it is what you do with those connections that matter. I’m not trying to knock Romney for having the connections, I’m just saying I think it is not credible to claim he did not have such connections.
I don’t like Romney for a host of reasons, but I don’t doubt that he was a successful businessman or that Bain Capital was successful or that he is a smart guy. I believe all those things to be true.
I just don’t think Romney is conservative and I don’t think he would win the general, for reasons I stated in an earlier comment.
I would, however, definitely vote for Romney over Obaman every day of the week. I just hope he is not the nominee.
Monkeytoe on September 6, 2011 at 10:46 AM
I don’t make internet wagers. Especially with people like you.
You are the one who accused Romney of getting his dads help. I simply asked for the proof.
You accused me of being a birther, provide the link.
See, this is your problem, you present your opinions as facts, but can’t back them up. The worst part is that since you can’t back them up, you wont admit they are simply your opinion.
But rock on dude! There is no requirement that your claims be verifiable to comment on HA.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 10:46 AM
Intelligent, with his degrees (real degrees), and his law degree from Harvard (a real law degree), he is a team builder, great family, as strong of ethics as you can have in politics (not unblemished, just strong), understands business, has a great amount of influence with some very large companies that have been loyal to him and his father.
He has all the strengths needed to be a great cabinet member, and with his financial ties and great money earner for whatever ticket he is on…with all that, he can’t and hasn’t connected with the people, they won’t elect him, they just don’t see him as “one of them”.
And unfortunately, personality has a huge influence in politics.
Also remembering that being a great businessman and being a great politician are two totally different animals.
Perot, Forbes, Rockefeller, many others who were business geniuses, failed miserable at politics.
The two skill sets are not interchangeable…
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 10:50 AM
I have verified them, several times, I just don’t want to do it again, and again, you will just ignore them, again.
But if you think his dad had no influence on his success…nothing will convince you.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 10:52 AM
I knew that. I thought about making that clear when I responded, but I forgot. It is that other guy who uses it to disparage Romney.
I don’t agree that everyone who has the opportunity to peddle influence will do so. Some people want to make it on their own. Romney may or may not have been that person. I believe that in the absence of proof, he wanted to succeed on his own and has done just that.
Considering Romney’s success, I suspect that others would like to have Romney in their network. I’d like to see how his sons deal with it.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 10:52 AM
Bwahahahahahaha!!!!
Links to more speculative accusations aren’t proof.And that is all you have ever done!
lol
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 10:54 AM
See, this is a great example…show me where I accused you of being a birther.
I stated a specific incident, you are saying that wasn’t you?
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 10:54 AM
That’s a good point also – Romney was governor during boom times when unemployment nationally was pretty low.
I think the whole “create jobs” argument misses the point anyway. Politicians can’t create jobs, all they can do is keep gov’t from destroying jobs by high tax burdens or over-regulation.
While I currently support Perry, Perry wasn’t “creating jobs” in Texas – he merely did not do anything to destroy a good business environment in Texas.
Perry / Texas may have brought in some businesses with various incentives, but again – he was not creating jobs, but enticing business to move to Texas with gov’t $$ give-aways (which all states do, I’m not necessarily knocking Perry’s doing it). Those are jobs that were going to be created in one state or another regardless – Texas just managed to lure them their through low taxes, low regulation and other incentives.
Which is why this whole “jobs speech” idea is nonsense. Gov’t cannot create any jobs other than gov’t jobs. Conservatives should be careful about talking about gov’t “creating jobs” b/c it falls into the trap of reinforcing to the less informed that gov’t can and does “create jobs” which in turn reinforces a belief in big/all-encompassing gov’t that takes care of everyone.
Monkeytoe on September 6, 2011 at 10:55 AM
the damage he did to the state by just signing romenycare into law like a useless gelding . the amount of jobs lost – the people and businesses that fled the state to escape it’s negative impact. i would love to see honest numbers accessing the damage of ted and willard’s excellent socialist experiment upon job creation in MA.
there is that thick layer of insurance industry hacks that got to populate a whole new byzantine totalitarian health bureaucracy. give willard credit- he did give us those high paying jobs along with the political capitol to allow bambi to pass obamacare so the rest of the country can enjoy out failed experiment in job killing tyranny.
mittens on September 6, 2011 at 10:57 AM
When you call it “peddling influence” I see what you mean. That is not the way I am thinking of it.
Monkeytoe on September 6, 2011 at 10:58 AM
excellent points, monkeytoe
drballard on September 6, 2011 at 10:58 AM
They can’t “create” jobs, but they can sure destroy them…Perry and Romney should focus on who is destroying jobs and forget the “who created the most”.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 11:07 AM
End it right there. It’s Massachusetts. He may have been a [nominally] Republican Governor, but it’s still a state strangled by idiot-leftist thinking at every single level of government, media, and educatism, from the local newspaper, township office and pre-school to Harvard, MIT, the Boston Globe, and the state legislaughter.
One silly Governor is not going to change that. I give Romney a pass for Massachusetts.
Jaibones on September 6, 2011 at 11:07 AM
Just to make sure everyone understands, it is not a bad thing, not a good thing, it is something that happens…and to deny that it happens is naive.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 11:14 AM
Huntsmann makes the worse commercials He has to be a joke candidate.
mizflame98 on September 6, 2011 at 11:14 AM
Everything but RomneyCare, and on the Big Dig, he did a good job straightening out the mess, but still showed the influence some of this heavy hitter have on him.
But the jobs thing is foolish, he had 4.7% unemployment, the national average was 4.8%, we were in a book cycle, it’s just a non-issue.
It’s not who has created jobs, it’s who has destroyed jobs, which should be the focus.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM
Agreed – and focus on Obama/Dems destroying jobs in particular.
To me, both Romney or Perry would be far better than Obama. the question, however, is who would be more visionary/aggressive?
Who is more likely to tackle entitlement reform, to bring down spending, to reform the tax code and reduce taxes, to accomplish significant and serious deregulation and perhaps reform the various agenicies and how regulations are promulgated?
In my mind, I see Romney as more businesss as usual (elite, old school northeastern republican seeking to work well with democrats) – he will do a little around the edges but will mostly keep things the same as they are.
Perry, I’m not sure about but am hopeful he would seek real change. Worst case, he will just do the same as Romeny would, but best case he would take on some of the issues in a significant way.
Monkeytoe on September 6, 2011 at 11:20 AM
We will see, Romney has a 59 point plan for the economy…first on the list should be cutting government regulations, and dismantling the EPA, OSHA, and other agencies…we will see if he is truly a small government guy, or just add more programs.
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 11:36 AM
I just read about this. I’m glad to see he is putting a plan out ahead of PBHO. Like you, I’m anxious to see what his proposals are. He’s talking a good talk so far but as you know, that isn’t enough. Tomorrow will be a big day :-)
MJBrutus on September 6, 2011 at 12:13 PM
Good point.
Might I add that the past three years, not only the stimulus money is there to continue to prop up the union jobs (union bosses, more correctly), they were used to ‘punish’ their political foes.
We have instances that GOP-supporting car dealers were shut down, etc. I am sure folks can dig up even more of the Us-vs.-Them type of story.
Remember the whole pot of stimulus money comes from each and every one of us, yet it is their pocket money to be rewareded or punished to the public.
Sir Napsalot on September 6, 2011 at 1:21 PM
Jazz…
Romney has always implied, inferred, insinuated, etc etc that his job creation experience is in the private sector. I believe any Governor cannot or should not take the credit for job growth or failure in a state because he is not a one man/woman show. He or she has to rely on his State Legislature to make sure the priorities (i.e. taxes) are right to attract business into said state. So to blame or even to give credit to Romney or Perry or Huntsman is wrong. Can they show leadership in directing that state? Yes. I believe Romney did that despite being in the overwhelming minority trying to get things done. He will make a great president and did a great job with the 2002 Olympic fiasco and turned that around.
g2825m on September 6, 2011 at 1:32 PM
We all need to be realistic when examining the jobs creation records of the candidates. Romney undoubtedly had a tough row to how in MA with the legislature as far left as any state in the union. When we look at Perry we need to recognize what provided wind at his back – like a resurgent fossil fuel industry, and semi-socialist states like CA imposing heavier taxes and regs on businesses making them prime candidates to recruit to move to TX.
What matters to me are the conditions the candidates espoused and/or brought to life that nuture job development and a healthy economy. There is no fair apples to apples comparison between MA and TX. We can point to the policies of the candidates and make judgments.
in_awe on September 6, 2011 at 1:42 PM
I have several problems with Romney, but attacking him on ‘jobs lost because of Bain’ is pitifully weak. In saving a company, of course jobs might be lost, but there’s still a net save through saving the company, or merging it with another, etc. Your choice might be to cut headcount drastically or lose the entire company.
Romney should not fear this angle of attack, because what is needed for the federal government is just the kind of recovery plan that Romney might have put together for a corporation. Yes the federal government needs to cut headcount, cut budgets, reorganize, and even outsource some functions. Do you really think the Social Security Administration is more efficient at sending out checks than a company like ADP would be?
slickwillie2001 on September 6, 2011 at 1:55 PM
Provide the link.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 2:49 PM
I understand.
csdeven on September 6, 2011 at 2:50 PM
You want links that George Romney was a powerful politician, that he had a son named Mitt (nickname at least), and that because of that companies would be interested in.
A bright young man
An MBA and a law degree from Harvard
His father one of the most powerful Politicians in America
And you think that a company would not be interested in that package…over someone exactly the same without the name that could open doors?
Really? Really? That’s the world you live in?
So you think Chelsea Clinton was offered her job for big bucks per year out of school because she was such a good and outstanding student, and then hired away by a hedge fund for more money, because she was so outstanding…..HAHAHAHAHA! So naive, so very very naive…
right2bright on September 6, 2011 at 5:27 PM
Huntsman actually has the best record of anyone in the field creating jobs, and establishing conditions for business prosperity in his state. The gross numbers favor Perry, but Texas is A LOT bigger than Utah. Huntsman wins on % when you break out the details.
In Romney’s defense, Mass is an outlier. They are a very educated populace with already low unemployment when he was governor. I’m not sure I would criticize Romney for having low net job creation, just as I wouldn’t criticize Perry because Texas’ unemployment % is not stellar at all. Texas and Mass are completely different states.
BocaJuniors on September 6, 2011 at 7:30 PM
Romney’s record as a lib in a liberal state isn’t exactly something to brag about:
The point is that this lib is complaining about Romney being too conservative, especially on stem cell research, and renewable energy.
ghostwriter on January 29, 2012 at 3:14 PM