Romney’s business experience a curse?

posted at 9:50 am on January 31, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Republicans often laud private-sector experience as a key quality for chief executives, but Byron York throws a little cold water on the notion in an excellent column for armchair historians today.  In his estimation, neither the GOP nor the Democratic Party have won with a true businessman-as-leader nominee in decades:

The last president elected as a businessman was Herbert Hoover in 1928. “Hoover’s appeal, before his reputation became tarnished by the Depression, was as a problem solver and a solid businessman,” says Princeton University historian Fred Greenstein. “Someone who was not erratic — to the point of being dull.”

Certainly businessmen have tried to win the presidency. Ross Perot ran on his business experience and won 19 percent of the popular vote in 1992. Wall Streeter Wendell Willkie made a strong run against Roosevelt in 1940. But it’s safe to say that running as a businessman has not been a sure-fire route to the White House.

“Business skill and political skill are qualitatively different,” says Steven Hayward, author of the two-volume biography “The Age of Reagan. “They do not transfer well into the other domain.”

However, that’s not exactly a clear analogy to today, either.  York gives short shrift to both Bushes, who combined private-sector experience with varying degrees of public-sector work (the younger Bush only worked in the public sector for less than 15 years combined between two offices).  He also overrates Hoover as a businessman; Hoover certainly did well as a mining engineer, but made more of a name for himself as a relief organizer and humanitarian, and then spent more than a decade in and out of the public sector.  Hoover ran for President in 1920 in one of the GOP’s last brokered conventions (the last was in 1948), losing out early to Warren Harding, and then served as Secretary of Commerce from 1921 until he successfully ran for the Presidency in 1928.

Greg Sargent points to a new poll from WaPo/ABC that bolsters the albatross argument:

If Mitt Romney wins the GOP nomination, as seems increasingly likely, he will have plenty of time to reintroduce himself to national swing voters on his own terms. But in the short term, the evidence is mounting that the bruising GOP primary, and the bipartisan attacks on Romney’s corporate background, low millionaire tax rate, caginess about his tax returns, and his offshoring, are damaging him among the broader electorate.

The Post has just released the first national polling that directly asks about Romney’s corporate past. The results:

Overall, do you have a favorable or unfavorable impression of Romney’s work buying and restructuring companies before he went into politics?

  • Favorable 35
  • Unfavorable 40
  • No opinion 25

Among independents, 36 percent view Romney’s work favorably, versus 37 percent who view it unfavorably. [bullet format added for clarity — Ed]

Interestingly, that problem isn’t alleviated by substituting Newt Gingrich for Romney.  In the same poll snippet linked by Sargent, the survey asked about “Gingrich’s work, since leaving elective office, as a consultant for companies with an interest in federal policymaking,” and found that among all adults (not registered or likely voters), it got a 24/54 favorability rating — far below Romney’s.  It’s also important to note that this poll doesn’t have any information about its sample composition, and given the lengthy history of seriously skewed partisan splits in this series, this may not be the most reliable representation of an actual problem.  It’s worth noting that those leaning Republican like Romney’s experience a lot more than Gingrich’s, 58/24 to 44/40.

In Florida, at least, the news is a lot more sunny about business experience, even for Romney.  This is a poll taken of likely general-election voters in one of the most important swing states for November:

In the battleground state of Florida, a Mason-Dixon poll conducted for the Tampa Times and Miami Herald, showed favorable results for Romney. Nearly half (46 percent) of Florida voters viewed Romney’s business background positively, while just 30 percent negatively.  This is despite lots of scrutiny in the news media about Romney’s record at Bain over the last several weeks.

The numbers suggest that Romney’s work at Bain and his wealth are vulnerabilities, but hardly a silver bullet that will significantly hurt his general election prospects against President Obama.  It’s useful to think about Romney’s vulnerabilities in comparison to other presidential nominees.  Reports on Bill Clinton’s philandering were arguably much more damaging than Romney’s business track record in 1992; his net fav/unfav dropped to negative double-digits in April of that year.   And Ronald Reagan’s outspoken conservatism – including his past opposition to Medicare – was a glaring vulnerability in polls back in 1980.

Like George W. Bush, Romney combines his business experience with at least a short stint as a chief executive in a populous state, regardless of what one thinks of his track record there.  Will Obama make his private-equity experience an issue if Romney wins the nomination?  He’ll certainly try, but after all of the scrutiny and fact-checking done on claims in the GOP fight, it might be old news with few new angles by the time it gets to September.  Meanwhile, we can agree that business success isn’t a be-all, end-all for presidential success, but it won’t be an albatross, either.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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 2 3 4

After an administration that pointedly overlooked anyone with private sector experience, it’s obvious that some private sector experience is a good thing.

beatcanvas on January 31, 2012 at 9:52 AM

The last president elected as a businessman was Herbert Hoover in 1928. “Hoover’s appeal, before his reputation became tarnished by the Depression, was as a problem solver and a solid businessman,” says Princeton University historian Fred Greenstein. “Someone who was not erratic — to the point of being dull.”

Romney will lose in 2012 about as badly as Hoover lost in 1932.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 9:55 AM

Byron’s just gunning for an interview with Margaret Hoover.

Always Right on January 31, 2012 at 9:55 AM

Romney doesn’t have PBHO’s cool-colored-guy-that-white-liberals-can-feel-good-about-voting-for vibe.

Bishop on January 31, 2012 at 9:57 AM

I’d vote for my garbage collector before I’d vote 0bama. (that is if he is an American citizen)
/

OmahaConservative on January 31, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Romney’s business experience is his biggest selling point. His governing experience is the problem.

ElectricPhase on January 31, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Romney will win bigger than Obama won in 2008.
His momentum keeps building and will roll over Obama by November.

ObamatheMessiah on January 31, 2012 at 9:58 AM

In his estimation, neither the GOP nor the Democratic Party have won with a true businessman-as-leader nominee in decades:

Okay, fine, but can we all agree on the fact that having the nation run the Chicago way isn’t working either? We need to make sure that more than just one corrupt city is involved in the next administration.

Happy Nomad on January 31, 2012 at 9:58 AM

I love how so-called conservatives here drool over the fact Romney made money at Bain and use that as evidence Romney isn’t a liberal and would be a good president.

You know who else made lots ‘o money as CEOs?
- George Soros
- Warren Buffett
- Jon Corzine

Using the Mittens logic, all of them would make wonderful presidents as well…cuz they got that executive experience and all.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Whatever a Republican has experience in, it will be made into a liability.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Wow. I guess Romney being a businessman and everyone pouncing on him for it…He really is the outsider among the other two insiders running…Gee wiz Opie…

rich801 on January 31, 2012 at 10:00 AM

I am still unhappy with our choices but I see nothing wrong with having someone in DC that understands business. It’s way past time to see a lot of business people occupy the Beltway instead of career politicians. I am not happy with any of our choices still and will vote ABO.

CoffeeLover on January 31, 2012 at 10:00 AM

A curse? Heck I consider it his greatest strength.

gophergirl on January 31, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Whatever a Republican has experience in, it will be made into a liability.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Yeah pretty much. But in this case the liability is real. Not the “business experience” but being a Wall St CEO who “likes to fire people”.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Obama is a know-nothing Ivy grad and never held a productive job in his life. He’s filled his administration with clones, theorists lacking real world experience. As a result, we are being micro-managed to death by a bunch of academics who fancy themselves elite. If the Republicans can’t or won’t drive this point home, they deserve to lose.

obladioblada on January 31, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Romney’s business experience a curse?

Only if the media deem it a curse.

NotEasilyFooled on January 31, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Exactly, what we need are more people who can talk the talk.

Walking the walk is overrated. Just ask Barack Obama.

NoDonkey on January 31, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Safer bet is to nominate somebody with almost no experience, few friends or acquaintances, and sparse records of having done anything. Sort of a blank slate people can project their own vision upon.

And he has to have a great trouser crease and read the ‘prompter pretty well too.

forest on January 31, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Whatever a Republican has experience in, it will be made into a liability.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Exactly!
It may be time to break the mold if Mitt does get the nomination.
No one so far seems to know what a debit or credit really is…in either party.
Don’t be putting the crown on Mitt either whatever the results today…wait for super Tuesday.

KOOLAID2 on January 31, 2012 at 10:05 AM

It’s also important to note that this poll doesn’t have any information about its sample composition, and given the lengthy history of seriously skewed partisan splits in this series, this may not be the most reliable representation of an actual problem.

Yeah, I just went to several WaPo links associated with this story to try and find the demographics. Normally they do disclose them, but their “documentation” on this one earns them the coveted F- grade.

Considering this “poll” comes from a “newspaper” that endorsed O’bama in 2008 and will happily do the same this fall, consider me skeptical.

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:06 AM

His Wall Street credentials are the liability, if he were the CEO of some manufacturing firm that employs American workers…..oh wait…..

libfreeordie on January 31, 2012 at 10:06 AM

You don’t need to know how to run a business in order to get out of the way of a business running.

RBMN on January 31, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Obama is a know-nothing Ivy grad and never held a productive job in his life. He’s filled his administration with clones, theorists lacking real world experience. As a result, we are being micro-managed to death by a bunch of academics who fancy themselves elite. If the Republicans can’t or won’t drive this point home, they deserve to lose.

obladioblada on January 31, 2012 at 10:03 AM

And now will Mittens’ administration be any difference? Look to his record in MA. Who do you think wrote Romneycare, the CEO of BlueCross? Nope. An MIT professor. Who advised him on tax policy, an accountant from Accenture? Nope. A Harvard faculty member. And so on.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:08 AM

As a Romney supporter for President since 2007, I think the concern about Romney being too much like Hoover is a legitimate concern. Hoover was indeed an activist President before FDR took federal activism to a new level.

I have raised this point in the past that Romney’s skill in solving problems ignores a larger issue about whether the goverment should be involved at all. That is to say, while a businessman must always try to figure out a way to solve a problem, a President must determine first whether the government should even be involved in the solution. Indeed, the best action for a President in many instances may be no action at all. But that will be very tough for a smart, hands-on problem solver like Romney. He will be tempted to solve every issue.

In the end, I want a President who is more like Calvin Coolidge than Herbert Hoover. Yet, while Hoover was too activist for my taster, he was nothing compared to FDR. And Obama makes FDR look like a novice activist. So, I will take anyone over Obama even if he may have a little too much Hoover for my taste.

P.S. Let’s hope that Romney selects a Coolidge clone for his Vice President (someone like Mitch Daniels)…

RedSoxNation on January 31, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Romney’s business background is only a problem for those people who think that the principal purpose of a POTUS is simply to hand out taxpayer-funded goodies.

After Barack Obama was elected there was some event where people were lined up to receive taxpayer money because of their dire economic situations. A woman who was interviewed said she was there for the money. When asked where the money was coming from she said Obama. Then when asked where he was getting it she said she did not know, maybe from his stash.

cicerone on January 31, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Has Mitt ever organized a community? No? Game over.

PBHO 2012

Bishop on January 31, 2012 at 10:10 AM

Obama vs. Romney
Rasmussen Reports 1/28 – 1/30 1500 LV 47 42 Obama +5

And the Axelrod machine isn’t even warmed up yet.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM

A lot of people voted for Ross Perot in 1992, and those voters are still out there looking for a practical person who will approach this bloated federal government with some business sense and not worry so much about the politics of it all. No, they are not a majority, but add them to the base Republican vote and they are.

And Romney certainly has more going for him than just a business record. He hasn’t spoken much of his Olympics experience, his fiscal record as Governor of Massachusetts (inheriting a deficit and balancing the state’s budget) or tied all of his work together as one long successful series of turning around failing enterprises. I think he will do this in the general election and it will be a pretty powerful argument against the failures of Obama, the downgrade of the US, the exploding national debt, and the continuing crisis in unemployment.

He is also a much more plausible “outsider” than either Gingrich or Santorum. When times are bad and the current Administration is failing, voters do tend to favor someone from outside the Beltway.

rockmom on January 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Is Mitt Romney a businessman or a financier?

A better question would be, when was the last time the American people elected an investment banker to the U.S. Presidency?

Doesn’t Mitt Romney also have a law degree from Harvard? Like Obama he could just run as a Harvard educated lawyer. I am sure no one will notice another similarity to Obama/

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Byron’s just gunning for an interview with Margaret Hoover.

I don’t blame him!

Dexter_Alarius on January 31, 2012 at 10:12 AM

His Wall Street credentials are the liability, if he were the CEO of some manufacturing firm that employs American workers…..oh wait…..

libfreeordie on January 31, 2012 at 10:06 AM

What about your Hero O’bama’s “Wall Street credentials”? He still gets more money from them than any Republican. In fact, Dear Leader’s received more cash from Wall Street than any other politician in the past 20 years.

F-

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:12 AM

Has Mitt ever organized a community? No? Game over.

PBHO 2012

Bishop on January 31, 2012 at 10:10 AM

LOL! Thread winner!

JonBGood on January 31, 2012 at 10:13 AM

+100 Cindy

Spot on

cmsinaz on January 31, 2012 at 10:13 AM

His Wall Street credentials are the liability, if he were the CEO of some manufacturing firm that employs American workers…..oh wait…..

libfreeordie on January 31, 2012 at 10:06 AM

He was an integral part of a great restructuring of American business that was both necessary and useful, and he helped launch some of the most popular companies in America which DO emply thousands of people.

rockmom on January 31, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Everything a Republican does is a curse…what’s a real curse is what they don’t do.
Has Mitt ever organized or participated in a conservative movement or event? No
Has Mitt ever passed a bill or tried to limit abortion? No
Has Mitt ever embraced being a conservative or even a Republican when running for an office? No
Has Mitt ever proposed reducing gun laws? No
Has Mitt ever insisted that Gov. takeover of business is wrong? No
It’ not “what they say or do” it’s what they are not willing to do that separates a leader from a wannabe.
And leaders don’t sell their soul for a few votes…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 10:16 AM

His business background is a plus, but already the drumbeat is being raised against the evil businessman.

If you take a look at TV shows such as Law And Order, the villian is almost always a white upper-class business type (or religous nutcase). If you would take the entertainment industries view as a whole, businessmen are more dangerous than terrorists.

The class warfare theme is starting to gain traction and the left and the mainsteam media are wearing their cheerleading uniforms.

Alferd Packer on January 31, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Who do you think wrote Romneycare, the CEO of BlueCross? Nope. An MIT professor.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:08 AM

You’re being intellectually dishonest again, angry. The MIT professor didn’t “write” Romneycare, although he was one of the main architects. The MA House and Senate each wrote their own bills, each of which made substantial changes to Romney’s original bill. Romney then signed the legislation they sent him, and while doing so vetoed 8 sections of it that he didn’t like. All 8 vetoes were overriden by the Democrats.

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:18 AM

UPDATE: At a rally today in a heavily Hispanic neighborhood in Florida Newt proposed making Spanish the official language of his Moon Colony.

How do you say 13,000 in Spanish!?” he asked the crowd.

A voice from the rear of the gathering yelled out: “Bahia de Cochinos!”

profitsbeard on January 31, 2012 at 10:18 AM

He is also a much more plausible “outsider” than either Gingrich or Santorum. When times are bad and the current Administration is failing, voters do tend to favor someone from outside the Beltway.

rockmom on January 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM

After the 2008 financial meltdown, and the passing of TARP, the American people are going to trust an investment banker – wall street insider, and corporate raider?

Obama’s campaign team has a whole theme park of negative ads and allegations lined up for Mitt Romney if he wins the nomination.

Romney’s top campaign donor Goldman Sachs.


Goldman Sachs $367,200

Credit Suisse Group $203,750
Morgan Stanley $199,800
HIG Capital $186,500
Barclays $157,750
Kirkland & Ellis $132,100
Bank of America $126,500
PriceWaterhouseCoopers $118,250
EMC Corp $117,300
JPMorgan Chase & Co $112,250
The Villages $97,500
Vivint Inc $80,750
Marriott International $79,837
Sullivan & Cromwell $79,250
Bain Capital $74,500
UBS AG $73,750
Wells Fargo $61,500
Blackstone Group $59,800
Citigroup Inc $57,050
Bain & Co $52,500

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:19 AM

He is also a much more plausible “outsider” than either Gingrich or Santorum. When times are bad and the current Administration is failing, voters do tend to favor someone from outside the Beltway.

rockmom on January 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM

He balanced a budget by raising “taxes” (fees) 500 times…he supported and defended abortion laws in Mass…it’s easy to “win” when you give in…he has embraced most of Obama’s financial moves…TARP, gov. takeover of business, good grief, he is not the man this time, he needs to separate himself from his liberal past.

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Agree jbg

:)

Excellent bishop

cmsinaz on January 31, 2012 at 10:20 AM

Boy, these Romney vs. Newt threads have become a massive bore. 90% of the articles/threads on HA these days deal with one or the other and everything that can be said about either has been said. Now it is just a endless stream of invective and well worn talking points. Like I said, a major bore. I’m out.

tommyboy on January 31, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Obama vs. Romney

Rasmussen Reports 1/28 – 1/30 1500 LV 47 42 Obama +5

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM

How come you never post this one, angry? Doesn’t fit your Template, right?

O’bama vs. Romney

USA Today/Gallup 1/27 – 1/28 907 RV 48 48 Tie

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:21 AM

cmsinaz on January 31, 2012 at 10:20 AM

Good Morning, Cmsinaz! :-)

JonBGood on January 31, 2012 at 10:21 AM

George W. Bush’s 7 failed businesses wasn’t a curse.

rubberneck on January 31, 2012 at 10:21 AM

I think the concern about Romney being too much like Hoover is a legitimate concern.

Herbert Hoover graduated from Stanford. Mitt Romney attended Stanford for one year (before transferring to Brigham Young).

Emperor Norton on January 31, 2012 at 10:22 AM

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Exactly…10 of his top 10 donors are Wall Street, not Main street…and 18 of his top 20 the same.
This will sink any chance of him being “of the people”…and notice it is not being played out yet?

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 10:22 AM

Among independents, 36 percent view Romney’s work favorably, versus 37 percent who view it unfavorably.

so much for his overwhelming appeal to independents…

mark81150 on January 31, 2012 at 10:23 AM

There is more to being an “outsider” than geography. If the candidates plan to continue on our current path with minor tinkering around the edges, they are an insider.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2012 at 10:23 AM

The class warfare theme is starting to gain traction and the left and the mainsteam media are wearing their cheerleading uniforms.

Alferd Packer on January 31, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Yes, Romney is a made to order 1% punching bag for Obama’s reelection. But in Romney’s defense he is a republican, and it is his turn LOL!

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:23 AM

York is in the tank for Newt, he sniffs his nuts daily.

echosyst on January 31, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Those are almost all people who gave to Obama in 2008. Goldman Sachs employees alone gave Obama nearly a million dollars in 2008. The Wall Street money that went to him dwarfs what Romney is getting so far.

Too bad Obama’s chief Wall Street bundler Corzine is heading for prison.

rockmom on January 31, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Romney. Turn around artist. CEO for hire. When I viewed the negative advertising regarding Romney’s business career, cutting jobs, stream lining the supply chain, making the business run, unfriendly, oh no! to unions, I wondered if we could just hire him for a few years to straighten out the federal government. Sometimes you just have to hire the right kind of employee, to do the work you have.

We are not looking for a messiah. We want to cut government. When Romney says we can’t yet get to a 15% flat tax from HERE, I believe him. Newt cannot get there next year, he is fantasizing again. All things are possible collaborating with Romney, where as with Newt, ultimately everything has to be all about him and his way.

Romney is a business man, and a successful governor. Some time has passed since then, but he restructured MA and drove the liberals here insane. MA survived this recession, because of his reforms. The liberal Gov. of MA, Duval Patrick, is called Do Nothing Duval, for a few reasons. One, he doesn’t know anything, but Two, because Romney sat him down and said not to break it. Patrick rushed headlong in, and reversed some vetos in the budget, and people here did not know where he would get the money, and he has had the easiest governorship in the country…all by resting on Romney’s laurals. Romney kept tight reins, for Do Nothing Duval, the government just grows on its own via our legislature.

Please look into the democrat scandals here, they are the kind of people who hate Romney because he shines light on practices that entrenched people depend on. Romney saved the state of MA from ruin like California. No easy feat, don’t say he can’t govern. He simply says you can’t afford it.

I know you don’t like it, but he said: you can’t afford free universal health care (Euro Style single payer.) He said you can’t put 8% of the population on free Medicaid. (Obama is going to do that in Obama care.)

Nothing can be done until this economy is fixed, and until the federal government is downsized. Please at least consider an MBA. You wouldn’t put someone any less in charge of your own company or your own money.

Fleuries on January 31, 2012 at 10:28 AM

There is more to being an “outsider” than geography. If the candidates plan to continue on our current path with minor tinkering around the edges, they are an insider.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2012 at 10:23 AM

Excellent Point!

JonBGood on January 31, 2012 at 10:30 AM

Exactly…10 of his top 10 donors are Wall Street, not Main street…and 18 of his top 20 the same.
This will sink any chance of him being “of the people”…and notice it is not being played out yet?

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 10:22 AM

The Media is shilling for Romney, I believe because he’s got deep pockets, and that’s what works with the media “$$$” that’s who they’ll back. If anyone points out Mitt’s weaknesses they are accused of attacking him from the left….you know like Mitt did to Teddy Kennedy in Massachusetts when he was running for the Senate.

This masquerade is actually ruining conservative talkers, and pundit’s reputations. The only two conservative talkers, I can count that haven’t jumped the shark Hannity and Limbaugh. The rest of them Beck, Coulter, Ingraham, Drudge, Malkin, Levin, look like huge sell outs.

The Real Romney

Where Romney runs to the left of Ted Kennedy on abortion.

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:31 AM

<stronRomney will lose in 2012 about as badly as Hoover lost in 1932.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 9:55 AM

g>

angryed are you speaking from personal experience? If you do not mind me asking…Who did you vote for in 1932?

Natebo on January 31, 2012 at 10:32 AM

O’bama vs. Romney

USA Today/Gallup 1/27 – 1/28 907 RV 48 48 Tie

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:21 AM

McCain led Obama in the pols for a little while too, this early, nothing is certain.

Ed’s just giving his view as to what many of us are afraid of, being force fed another nonconservative while being talked down to about “electibility”, and having that candidate get flushed anyway.

mark81150 on January 31, 2012 at 10:33 AM

“Business skill and political skill are qualitatively different,” says Steven Hayward, author of the two-volume biography “The Age of Reagan. “They do not transfer well into the other domain.”

Just look how Mitt governed. he may have been a “conservative businessman”, but he governed as a liberal.

What will Michael Douglas and Mitt Romney have in common?
By election day they both will have played Gordon Gekko.

Will Obama make his private-equity experience an issue if Romney wins the nomination? He’ll certainly try, but after all of the scrutiny and fact-checking done on claims in the GOP fight, it might be old news with few new angles by the time it gets to September.

Try? Team Obama is salivating over running against Mitt and his money! Obama can’t run on his own record, but will gladly run against Gordon Gekko’s.
He also won’t mind running against the horndog from Moon Base One, either.

cartooner on January 31, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Yes, Romney is a made to order 1% punching bag for Obama’s reelection. But in Romney’s defense he is a republican, and it is his turn LOL!

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:23 AM

How’d that OWS thing work out for you?

rockmom on January 31, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Those are almost all people who gave to Obama in 2008. Goldman Sachs employees alone gave Obama nearly a million dollars in 2008. The Wall Street money that went to him dwarfs what Romney is getting so far.

Too bad Obama’s chief Wall Street bundler Corzine is heading for prison.

rockmom on January 31, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Romney Courts Wall Street CEO, Young Money Super PAC Forms and More in Capital Eye Opener: Sept. 30

This is an article where Mitt Romney goes out of his way to get a donation from Obama’s BFF and adviser Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan Chase.

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Yes, Romney is a made to order 1% punching bag for Obama’s reelection. But in Romney’s defense he is a republican, and it is his turn LOL!

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:23 AM

How’d that OWS thing work out for you?

rockmom on January 31, 2012 at 10:34 AM

That didn’t take you long to jump to name calling. Nice to see you showing your true colors.

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Meanwhile, we can agree that business success isn’t a be-all, end-all for presidential success, but it won’t be an albatross, either.

I would say that all depends on what happens between now and November — in the economy and in the political sphere. It’s way too early for this kind of prognostication.

hillbillyjim on January 31, 2012 at 10:36 AM

I’ll move to the right of Romney and vote for Obama. I’ll stick with the Tea Party candidates for congress (GOP elites don’t seem to have much control over those choices, e.g. Rubio), but will not support these liberal GOP presidential candidates like McCain and Romney anymore!

Karmi on January 31, 2012 at 10:36 AM

If you’ve been reading much from Byron York lately you know that literally everything is a Romney liability. His wealth, his success, his positions, his win in New Hampshire, the family dog on the roof of the family car, the fact that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west are all indications to Byron York that the Romney candidacy is doomed.

rogaineguy on January 31, 2012 at 10:38 AM

I’ll move to the right of Romney and vote for Obama. I’ll stick with the Tea Party candidates for congress (GOP elites don’t seem to have much control over those choices, e.g. Rubio), but will not support these liberal GOP presidential candidates like McCain and Romney anymore!

Karmi on January 31, 2012 at 10:36 AM

I won’t vote for a progressive no matter what political brand, if Romney’s the nominee I will vote Libertarian unless someone serious runs on the Independent ticket.

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Have a good day cmsinaz! :-)

JonBGood on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Yes, Romney is a made to order 1% punching bag for Obama’s reelection. But in Romney’s defense he is a republican, and it is his turn LOL!

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:23 AM

How’d that OWS thing work out for you?

rockmom on January 31, 2012 at 10:34 AM

You don’t see the inevitability of that campaign trick? Obama absolutely will adopt the 1% vs. 99% argument, Hell he has already, Romneys walking into a flamethrower fight wearing gasoline soaked clothing.

The left can’t fight any other way,..

and Romney is their best possible target for that strawman image.

mark81150 on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Those of us who have worked directly with a so-called “turn-around specialist” know exactly how they operate. They take advantage of people, particularly gullible and desperate independent contractors, and then toss them aside. To be sure, I fully understand the trimming and slimming down of a business’ operation and infrastructure in order to make them viable. BUT, the machinations and outright falsehoods by which these scavengers operate is downright sinful.
I had to laugh as my CEO tried to take advantage of a German sub-contractor who turned the tables on the greedy, lying bästard (my boss) by having his own work patented in his own name. It was a beautiful sight to see. I of course couldn’t say much, but suffice it to say that the “turnaround specialist” had his äss handed to him by regular, but not stupid, small business owner.
It should happen more often.
Mittens is milquetoast. Celebrate all of his alleged business accomplishments all you want, but don’t forget that Mittens sucked in a LOT of the “little people” and then bulldozed them.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 31, 2012 at 10:41 AM

If you’ve been reading much from Byron York lately you know that literally everything is a Romney liability. His wealth, his success, his positions, his win in New Hampshire, the family dog on the roof of the family car, the fact that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west are all indications to Byron York that the Romney candidacy is doomed.

rogaineguy on January 31, 2012 at 10:38 AM

I think his analysis would be wrong. The fix is in, this nomination is Romney’s to lose. York has to write something I suppose that’s what he does for a living. Romney’s out spending Gingrich and he has the media on his side…..well until the General election anyway. It’s Mitt’s turn next, the peasants better just get used to it LOL!

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:41 AM

George W. Bush’s 7 failed businesses wasn’t a curse.

rubberneck on January 31, 2012 at 10:21 AM

“7 failed businesses”, Gracie? A credible cite of them by name would be nice.

He started Arbusto Energy in 1979 and sold it 5 years later while remaining CEO. The new firm was called Spectrum, and was later merged into Harken, which is still in business. After that he was involved with the Texas Rangers. He only owned 2% of the team.

I wouldn’t consider the baseball team “a failed business”, but Arbusto and Spectrum could be considered “failures”, especially if one suffers from BDS. However, 2 failed businesses still leaves your claim 5 failed businesses short.

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Aw, c’mon now. You’re not so evil.

rogaineguy on January 31, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Is that the new narrative now?

To be critical of Romney, is to be in the Occupy crowd?

and last night, the Mittbots were raging about Newt supporters being unhinged and willing to say anything to get their way, regardless of fact….

Then they label us as occupy freaks for pointing out the blatently obvious?

uh huh,….

sigh,.. I used to respect so many posters here, old timers,.. then the primaries come, and people say the most halfwitted things in anger because their guy lost, or didn’t do well..

I can’t wait till the primaries are over..

mark81150 on January 31, 2012 at 10:45 AM

How come you never post this one, angry? Doesn’t fit your Template, right?

O’bama vs. Romney

USA Today/Gallup 1/27 – 1/28 907 RV 48 48 Tie

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Because I have been told umpteen times by so-called conservatives that every poll is biased except Rasmussen. All of a sudden Ras is not trustworthy when you don’t get the right number.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:46 AM

You don’t see the inevitability of that campaign trick? Obama absolutely will adopt the 1% vs. 99% argument, Hell he has already, Romneys walking into a flamethrower fight wearing gasoline soaked clothing.

The left can’t fight any other way,..

and Romney is their best possible target for that strawman image.

mark81150 on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Exactly and instead of shoring up the republican base support, Romney is running to the center in the primary, and he’s not inspiring the conservative base, who he will need in the General. I am an Independent, I am not invested in the republican brand. If he’s counting on Independents to be his base, he doesn’t understand how Independent’s think. Romney needs the conservative republican base. I suspect that in order to pacify conservatives, Romney will pick a strong conservative from a swing state for his Vice President, but it didn’t work for McCain. McCain/Palin wasn’t facing the scorched earth campaign Obama’s campaign team is going to run against the republican nominee.

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:47 AM

You’re being intellectually dishonest again, angry. The MIT professor didn’t “write” Romneycare, although he was one of the main architects. The MA House and Senate each wrote their own bills, each of which made substantial changes to Romney’s original bill. Romney then signed the legislation they sent him, and while doing so vetoed 8 sections of it that he didn’t like. All 8 vetoes were overriden by the Democrats.

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:18 AM

You should change your name to Literal Guy. Fine the MIT prof didn’t write every word of it. But he was the main adviser to Romney on the issue. It wasn’t a private sector adviser, it was a professor. That was the point. Mittens’ advisers were the same people – academics, activists, etc – as Obama’s advisers.
Obama = Romney.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Because I have been told umpteen times by so-called conservatives that every poll is biased except Rasmussen. All of a sudden Ras is not trustworthy when you don’t get the right number.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Sorry, but your response totally ignores the Fact that yesterday you were also posting another poll besides Rasmussen, while ignoring the one poll that didn’t fit your RDS Template.

To wit:

So none of the Mittbots will comment on these Romney/Obama polls, eh?

Rasmussen Reports 1/27 – 1/29 1500 LV 47 41 Obama +6

NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 1/22 – 1/24 RV 49 43 Obama +6

angryed on January 30, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Nice try! Get another shovel.

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Nothing can be done until this economy is fixed, and until the federal government is downsized. Please at least consider an MBA. You wouldn’t put someone any less in charge of your own company or your own money.

Fleuries on January 31, 2012 at 10:28 AM

Just to let you know…the Government is not a “company”…using the same tactics won’t work, that is why Romney has been such a failure at trying to be a politician, he won once, running to the left of Kennedy, and he didn’t go for a second term because of his low popularity.
All others he has lost, despite spending record amount of money…now tell me, if you spend record tens of millions on a series of losing campaigns, where you receive a salary of just thousands, how sound of a business decision is that?

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 10:51 AM

angryed are you speaking from personal experience? If you do not mind me asking…Who did you vote for in 1932?

Natebo on January 31, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Says the guy who can’t block quote.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:18 AM

You should change your name to Literal Guy. Fine the MIT prof didn’t write every word of it. But he was the main adviser to Romney on the issue. It wasn’t a private sector adviser, it was a professor. That was the point. Mittens’ advisers were the same people – academics, activists, etc – as Obama’s advisers.
Obama = Romney.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:50 AM

But you originally claimed that the MIT guy “wrote Romneycare”. That’s hyperbole.

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:53 AM

One problem with clowns like Obama and Pelosi is that they don’t even really understand government.

They are at the 30,000 foot level. They have never once, worked in the trenches.

Therefore, they think the government can perform magic. Because all they know about government, they’ve learned from staffers and from dog and pony shows that in no way reflect reality.

Those of us who have actually worked in the trenches, in the military, know more than an Obama and Pelosi (or a Gingrich for that matter), about how the government actually works.

In McDonald’s, the CEO’s have actually worked managing an actual McDonald’s. We put people into the White House who have probably never set foot in the DMV.

NoDonkey on January 31, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Meanwhile, we can agree that business success isn’t a be-all, end-all for presidential success, but it won’t be an albatross, either.

f

For me it is his only feature but that doesn’t mean the press isn’t going to beat it to death while giving Pres. Goldman Sachs a pass. People are talking like the press is going to handle this equally, accurately and truthfully.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Del (Mr. Literal)

Rasmussen Reports 1/28 – 1/30 1500 LV 47 42 Obama +5
USA Today/Gallup 1/27 – 1/28 907 RV 48 48 Tie
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 1/22 – 1/24 RV 49 43 Obama +6

One of these things is not like the other….figure out which one.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:54 AM

But you originally claimed that the MIT guy “wrote Romneycare”. That’s hyperbole.

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:53 AM

OK Mr. Literal Guy.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Aw, c’mon now. You’re not so evil.

rogaineguy on January 31, 2012 at 10:44 AM

We keep getting told if we knew Mitt, like the people who are around all the time do, we would like him….so why doesn’t Mitt be himself? Regular people (voters) might actually relate to him. Right now he’s like the plastic creation of a marketers idea of what a Presidential candidate should look and sound like Aka a Phony. We are living with a media created candidate today how’s that worked out for everyone?

I am an optimist, a glass half full person. People should start looking at the House and Senate races. If they want Obama blocked, the best way to achieve those results is divided government. Support fiscal conservatives for the U.S. Senate, and House.

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 10:55 AM

ROMNEYCARE

He’s a socialist, thats what I care about.

dogsoldier on January 31, 2012 at 10:55 AM

It is only a curse to the extent that he cannot coherently explain what his companies did and what his role was, and why that is relevent to being POTUS.

Really there are only a couple of questions that Mitt Romney could answer that would give some insight into this, and they are the business oriented ones:
- What was your hardest deal to work on as a non-executive and why?
- What was your hardest deal to work on as an executive and why?
- Are there parallels and similarities between a business charter and the US Constitution, and what are they?
- What powers did you have as an Executive that have no equivalents in the Presidency?
- What powers does the President get that have no equivalents for business sector Executives?

These are key questions to ask any business executive running for not just the POTUS but amended to reflect other elected positions. They revolve around character, understanding of power relationships and then examining how adaptable an individual is to losing some powers and gaining others at the Executive level. It is extremely telling that no one asks these questions and that they are not at the core of the Romney campaign.

If you are going to make business experience central to a campaign, then these are questions that must be asked. That would give insight into how he actually saw his prior Governorship in MA, why he approached it the way he did and then examine the results in light of this information. Similar questions about the hardest decisions as Governor, the similarities and differences between the MA Constitution and the US Constitution, and then the differing roles between Governor and President would also be fascinating… and I would like to hear this sort of thing from ALL candidates, BTW, about their past experiences as they see it and how they then see power outlay of the Constitution and what the differences are between past positions they have been in and the President’s position.

Unfortunately that would require a media… ANY MEDIA… willing to do its job, seek one-on-one conversations with candidates and let them know the type of questions that will be asked so they can be coherent when answering questions. This is not rocket science… it is not brain surgery… and yet we do not know one piece of this from any candidate in the field and haven’t for decades. Harry Truman, as an example, ran a business that went under, didn’t declare bankruptcy and spent YEARS paying everyone back… that shows character and understanding of business more than being successful does and shows how a businessman can deal with hard times, not just good times. He didn’t run on that experience but it sure did make him better prepared to be President when he had to assume office not knowing about the atomic bomb and then having to deal with the USSR at Potsdam after he found out. Failure isn’t a character flaw, nor is success a great sign of moral character, either.

ajacksonian on January 31, 2012 at 10:55 AM

mark81150 on January 31, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Not only is it not new but what qualifies as “critical” has a whole new meaning also.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2012 at 10:56 AM

Romney will lose in 2012 about as badly as Hoover lost in 1932.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 9:55 AM

Maybe, But at least he will be competitive in certain states that McCain and Gingrich were not/will not be

In Nevada he can save us a senate seat
In Florida he can win us a senate seat
In MA he might save the Scott Brown seat

If you think the guy that 65% of america have an unfavorable view is going to win or even make it a tight race you can join the moon colony

OrthodoxJew on January 31, 2012 at 10:57 AM

He can also sing “America the Beautiful” pretty good.

Schadenfreude on January 31, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Lots of Obama voters commenting again, beautiful!

dmann on January 31, 2012 at 10:58 AM

In MA he might save the Scott Brown seat

She, the rich/witch, has it in her pocket.

Brown can forget that one.

Schadenfreude on January 31, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Maybe, But at least he will be competitive in certain states that McCain and Gingrich were not/will not be

In Nevada he can save us a senate seat
In Florida he can win us a senate seat
In MA he might save the Scott Brown seat

If you think the guy that 65% of america have an unfavorable view is going to win or even make it a tight race you can join the moon colony

OrthodoxJew on January 31, 2012 at 10:57 AM

I love the new Mittbot spin. Romney will lose but he won’t lose as badly as Newt. YEAY!!

You have it backwards. A strong conservative would bring out people to save senate seats. A RINO will keep people home.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 11:00 AM

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 10:50 AM

But you originally claimed that the MIT guy “wrote Romneycare”. That’s hyperbole.

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 10:53 AM

PS, as I said in another thread last night, there is nothing wrong w/ criticizing Romney. What I object to is criticizing him, or any other candidate, based on intellectual dishonesty or outright Lies.

That makes his critics just as bad as the Democrats who had BDS and criticized Bush based on intellectual dishonesty or lies.

In other words, if you are going to criticize someone, do it honestly. The best way to do so is with more than one credible source.

And please don’t cherry-pick data to try and make your case, like you did by omitting that Poll I cited earlier.

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 11:00 AM

In MA he might save the Scott Brown seat

She, the rich/witch, has it in her pocket.

Brown can forget that one.

Schadenfreude on January 31, 2012 at 10:58 AM

I think in order to get the Senate back right now, the Republicans need 10 Seats. If they lose Brown they need 11.

George Allen (R) is running in Virginia. It would help Virginia to be able to get their conservative voters out and to the polls. Right now only Romney and Paul are on their primary ballot not exactly inspiring on many levels.

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 11:02 AM

PS, as I said in another thread last night, there is nothing wrong w/ criticizing Romney. What I object to is criticizing him, or any other candidate, based on intellectual dishonesty or outright Lies.
.

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 11:00 AM

Like saying Newt is a communist. Got it.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 11:03 AM

In MA he might save the Scott Brown seat

She, the rich/witch, has it in her pocket.

Brown can forget that one.

Schadenfreude on January 31, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Er, how do you know that? The most recent poll in that race was done nearly 2 months ago.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/senate/ma/massachusetts_senate_brown_vs_warren-2093.html

Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2012 at 11:03 AM

You have it backwards. A strong conservative would bring out people to save senate seats. A RINO will keep people home.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 11:00 AM

The good news we know after 2010 that Obama doesn’t have anything that resembles coat tails :) It would be helpful if the republican nominee had coat tails in November.

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 11:04 AM

So a RINO like Willard will depress the base, lose in a landslide and yet somehow magically help Republican senate seats. Those magic underwear will be on overdrive making it happen.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Many who support Mr. Gingrich will concede he is not their ideal candidate. In fact, it’s telling that Mr. Romney’s GOP rivals are defined as non-Romneys, each standing for something lacking in the front-runner.

Those of us who believed that a primary fight would toughen Mr. Romney up have little to show for it. Far from sharpening his proposals to reach out to a GOP electorate hungry for a candidate with a bold conservative agenda, Mr. Romney has limited his new toughness to increasingly negative attacks on Mr. Gingrich’s character. It’s beginning to make what we all assumed was a weakness look much more like arrogance.

Schadenfreude on January 31, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4