Romney keeps missing the message
A candidate with even half the usual complement of political antennae would have seen this as a game-changing opportunity to win with conservatives. It was Mr. Romney’s moment to turn his occasional defense of Bain Capital into a broad rallying cry for capitalism. Florida posed the perfect backdrop to elevate his causes of free-market housing and energy. It was a chance to unveil a simpler and bolder economic reform plan.
Instead, Mr. Romney is plodding on. As in Iowa, as in New Hampshire, as in South Carolina, he’s still criticizing Mr. Gingrich. He’s still running on his biography. (Did you know he rescued the Olympics?) He’s still sending the media press releases announcing the latest Miami Dade politician to pronounce him most electable against Barack Obama.
Which gets to the other story of this week: the president’s State of the Mitt Address. Mr. Gingrich might have some Republicans spooked, but Democrats are still hoping for the Massachusetts governor. They, too, have noticed that Mr. Romney is ducking the class-warfare debate, and that not even the Gingrich threat has moved him to engage. They take that as an invitation to make it the central theme of the Obama re-elect. The president’s Tuesday speech was a direct assault on Mr. Romney’s wealth and tax breaks for “the rich.”
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 Next »
Yawn. Obama falls back to his default position of class warrior. Americans still see a SCOAMF and 11% real unemployment.
rockmom on January 27, 2012 at 11:25 AM
^ ^ ^ THIS. ^ ^ ^
Kent18 on January 27, 2012 at 11:26 AM
Mittbot can’t engage on conservative values because he has no conservative values himself and seems loathe to even experiment with them. He’s trying to coast to victory without having to make any conservative commitments so he can try and out-liberal Prince Zero in the general election.
A man who is not familiar with and has no conservative convictions of his own cannot rightly relate to, identify with, or even convincingly espouse the philosophy and virtues of conservative policy. Did you expect anything different from Milquetoast Mitt the Rombot?
(PS: I guess that new OS installed at the RNC tweaked Mitt’s processor and was able to bring him back to life. It’s a shame.)
Speakeasy on January 27, 2012 at 11:27 AM
Yep, he blew his opportunity to put this away a couple weeks ago. If he was a true believer in economic freedom he would have done a much better job of selling it.
forest on January 27, 2012 at 11:28 AM
Gee, I can’t imagine why.
Romney Evolves On Blind Trusts: How he learned to stop worrying and love that age-old ruse.
Mitt Romney’s Struggle With Truth Continues
Flora Duh on January 27, 2012 at 11:29 AM
My lib friends had a field day on FB with the Romney shoe shine picture (which turned out to be Romney getting searched by the TSA). Nonetheless, it painted a perfect picture of what the Dem machine will use against Romney. He’s the perfect villain for Obama. Rich white guy who loves to fire people. Obama couldn’t have dreamed of a better opponent.
The fact the RNC can’t see the super sized bullseye on Romney’s back is incredible.
angryed on January 27, 2012 at 11:30 AM
It’s surprising that none of the candidates have bothered to bring up Fast and Furious in the debates. It’s a 2-for-1 special, they get to hit Obama and the media for dodging it with ridiculous, non-issue questions. It’s a standing ovation waiting to happen yet nobody seems to want it.
Go RBNY on January 27, 2012 at 11:31 AM
I guess that explains this:
New DNC Ad: Mitt vs. The Truth
Flora Duh on January 27, 2012 at 11:33 AM
Romneycare had better hope his message, whatever that is, is sounding real sweet to Dems and Dem leaning indies, because he’s turning off conservatives in droves and he’s going to have to make their votes up somewhere. He has no shot at getting our 5 votes. He’s got to pick up more than 1 Dem voter for every Con he has lost.
And then there are the unfortunates down ballot of Mutt…
james23 on January 27, 2012 at 11:33 AM
I was thinking the same thing. The answer to any corruption related question to the candidate is Fast & Furious and/or Solyndra.
But I think even among Republicans, there is not a lot of knowledge about these two issues and most people – sadly – would have no clue what they’re talking about.
angryed on January 27, 2012 at 11:34 AM
I agree, and kept tweeting the candidates and Wolf Blitzer to approach it.
Flora Duh on January 27, 2012 at 11:34 AM
Romney = every Obama straw man, come to life
The GOP establishment and the rubes in the GOP electorate falling for the “electable” meme are giving Obama an early Christmas present. The Dems couldn’t hope for a better opponent for Obama.
Mitt is toast in the general election, but the base will get the blame, just as we did when McCain lost.
DRayRaven on January 27, 2012 at 11:34 AM
What is this author talking about? Mitt gave a very passionate defense of capitalism in the second SC debate, and he got absolutely CRUSHED in the primary.
haner on January 27, 2012 at 11:35 AM
Romney cannot defend the free market. Period. He is either incompetent or he doesn’t believe in it (other than as a tool to make himself rich, a la Buffett and Soros).
besser tot als rot on January 27, 2012 at 11:36 AM
Don’t worry, Kim – the “message” will be “delivered” to him on November 7th … and I will be here laugh my ass off and rub it in!
HondaV65 on January 27, 2012 at 11:36 AM
Romney isn’t trying to send a message. That’s the point of Romney. He’s running as a better “fixer,” that’s all.
de rigueur on January 27, 2012 at 11:36 AM
It’s a bit late to be saying this now since Romney is again without opposition.
I think F&F will not be mentioned during the campaign, and I would be unsurprised if it is quietly dropped by the Republicans the same way the NBP investigation was.
Doomberg on January 27, 2012 at 11:37 AM
Link please.
besser tot als rot on January 27, 2012 at 11:37 AM
If the economy is still in the tank or tanks further, Romney will win. If it improves, Obama will win. That has always been the equation of this election.
Rational Thought on January 27, 2012 at 11:37 AM
You must have new version of Webster’s where passionate means grudging.
angryed on January 27, 2012 at 11:37 AM
None of the candidates really believe in fiscal conservatism, so none have ardently advocated for it consistently.
(And for the Ron Paul supporters who will argue that he does, that’s great, but it only works if you can get Congress to go along with you, and he’s not influential.)
beatcanvas on January 27, 2012 at 11:37 AM
If Romney can’t defend the free market to Republican primary voters (i.e., people already inclined to agree with him), he is toast in the general.
besser tot als rot on January 27, 2012 at 11:38 AM
Link? LOL. That would mean showing facts and things that actually happened.
angryed on January 27, 2012 at 11:39 AM
This is typical of RNC thinking. Run against a Democrat by showing you can be a better Democrat instead of showing you can be a good Republican.
So we get Obama vs. Better Obama.
angryed on January 27, 2012 at 11:41 AM
On last night’s thread, Romney supporters insisted that the potential votes of conservatives, come November, were (simultaneously; somehow) both “absolutely necessary to defeat Obama” AND “irrelevant.”
The exact same game plan for wooing conservative voters, in other words, as that so spectacularly (and successfully) employed by John “Fight With Me” McCain, just four short years ago.
Kinda takes your breath away, don’t it…?
Kent18 on January 27, 2012 at 11:41 AM
Best left for the general when they can hit the One for these issues?
rich801 on January 27, 2012 at 11:42 AM
I don’t know what the original poster meant by a speech to defend capitalism given by Romney – so a link on that would be nice.
But the second part of his statement … that mitt got “crushed” in South Carolina is true.
HondaV65 on January 27, 2012 at 11:42 AM
Remember, they think Obama and Obama’s policies are popular. That has always been their core theme of this campaign – “we need someone to run either to Obama’s left or as a competent version of Obama.”
Doomberg on January 27, 2012 at 11:43 AM
I thought Palin was the plan for wooing conservative voters. How did that work out?
Exactly.
Go RBNY on January 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM
The Mittbots don’t care about winning in November. They care about winning the primary. If they win November, it’s a cherry on top. But the real battle is in the primary to crush the tea party and any other peasant revolt against the elite.
That’s why Romney doesn’t care what damage he does to himself or Gingrich in the general with the slimy attacks.
angryed on January 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM
Yeah well, I have a bit of a different “game plan” for them this time. They give us RomneyCare – and I vote for Obama.
Why not? I’m an independent – I’m certainly no pu$$y-assed establishement Republican.
And – if I’ve got a choice between two men – both with a Socialist Health Care system named after them – I’ll take the one with the health care plan that hasn’t FAILED yet …
And … THAT’S OBAMA.
Oh no – I’m not gonna sit home and sulk. I’ll pull that lever for Obama big as sh** – as a message to the Establishment that they don’t own my vote.
HondaV65 on January 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM
Axelrod created the Occupy movement and the Buffett rule, in order to beat Romney.
Rmoney has not offered any counter for this.
Doom, I predict.
faraway on January 27, 2012 at 11:46 AM
Overall, a sound analysis.
Shorter version: What does Romney think is worth getting angry about?
Christien on January 27, 2012 at 11:46 AM
They’ve been playing this game for months. Which is one of the reasons that, put a gun to my head, I’d probably vote for Obama over Romney. As it is, I won’t vote for either statist in the general. And Republicans won’t get any of my money on the off chance that it could end up being used to support Romney. They can pray that I show up to vote down ticket in my swing district.
besser tot als rot on January 27, 2012 at 11:46 AM
Yep
Southernblogger on January 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM
You thought Palin was the plan? Where did you get that idea? Or – are you, like RomneyCare – just pulling that little factoid out of a very dark place of your anterior anatomy?
HondaV65 on January 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM
The fact that you (or, possibly — who knows? — the McCain campaign itself) might genuinely believe that a VP pick would be all it took to credibly sell a lifelong middle-left squish as a plausible presidential candidate to knowledgeable conservative voters is as damning as it is deplorable.
Kent18 on January 27, 2012 at 11:48 AM
Worked out like this: McCain only lost by 7 instead of 12. Look at the polls before he picked Palin vs a week after. Had McCain actually attempted a campaign he might have won.
GWU/Battleground 9/7 – 9/11 1000 LV 3.1 44 48 McCain +4
Associated Press/GfK 9/5 – 9/10 812 LV – 44 48 McCain +4
FOX News 9/8 – 9/9 900 RV 3.0 42 45 McCain +3
Gallup Tracking 9/7 – 9/9 2714 RV 2.0 43 48 McCain +5
Gallup Tracking 8/30 – 9/1 2772 RV 2.0 50 42 Obama +8
Rasmussen Tracking 8/30 – 9/1 3000 LV 2.0 51 45 Obama +6
USAT/Gallup Tracking* 8/30 – 8/31 1835 LV 3.0 50 43 Obama +7
CNN 8/29 – 8/31 927 RV 3.0 49 48 Obama +1
Hotline/FD 8/29 – 8/31 805 RV 3.5 48 39 Obama +9
CBS News 8/29 – 8/31 781 RV 4.0 48 40 Obama +8
angryed on January 27, 2012 at 11:49 AM
Yep. And we all know who won the Coke vs. New Coke taste test…or, in this case, Joke vs. New Joke.
Christien on January 27, 2012 at 11:49 AM
It worked out well. It pushed McCain into the lead. Then the economy melted down and McCain’s tone deaf response was that the fundamentals were sound. BOOM! Game over. Can’t imagine Romney being tone deaf this time …
besser tot als rot on January 27, 2012 at 11:51 AM
Well, Palin was the only reason I voted for McCain in that election.
It won’t happen again. Mittens could pick her and I’ll still vote for Obama.
We have to BREAK the cycle here where the establishment takes conservative voters for granted. If they hand us another squish (RomneyCare) … vote Obama.
HondaV65 on January 27, 2012 at 11:52 AM
Rule of thumb in Hollywood for box office is that the sequel does about half the business of the original. If that holds true for the conservative voters in elections…
de rigueur on January 27, 2012 at 11:52 AM
The concern with Gingrich is more the amount of baggage, not so much that he doesn’t understand that he’s going to be attacked about it during any general election campaign. The problem that keeps cropping up with Romney is he seems to be totally clueless at times that he is going to be attacked over things like his tax returns, and then takes 2-3 days to pretend he’s not being attacked in any meaningful way and therefore doesn’t have to respond.
Liberals griped back in 2004 that John Kerry didn’t respond fast enough to the Swiftboat vets’ allegations that Kerry was falsifying his Vietnam War record, and that’s why he lost the moderates in the election. Leaving aside the merits of Kerry’s situation versus Romney’s as far as the accuracy of the charges, you can’t just sit back, especially with the majority of the big media outlets pitted against you, and assume that just because you don’t think the allegation is a big deal means that the swing voters out there in the swing states are going to feel the same way if you don’t bother to answer the charges right away.
Even with most of the media on his side, Kerry couldn’t keep the Swiftboat charges from getting out into the public thanks to the new media. A Romney who wins the nomination would have six-plus months of having to battle those same media outlets trying to make minefields out of molehills by turning him into the world’s most corrupt capitalist. If his team can’t react faster and figure out what’s coming better than they have so far, he’s going to be a train wreck even worse than Dole or McCain.
jon1979 on January 27, 2012 at 11:52 AM
I won’t vote for Romney, either…but I sure as hell won’t pull a lever for Obama. There will be a palatable third party alternative, if not from the Libertarians, then the Constition Party. Someone…anyone but Obama or Romney.
DRayRaven on January 27, 2012 at 11:52 AM
Vote for yourself, before you vote for Obama.
Christien on January 27, 2012 at 11:53 AM
Kim, the WSJ and Romney all supported the corporatist Wall Street bailout but while the WSJ probably had in mind that Romney would be a champion of corporate governance and Keynesian economics, by now Romney has poll tested and focus grouped it and realizes how impossible it would be electorally. Even good old fashioned capitalism is under threat, trying to defend corporatism is electoral suicide.
And unfortunately one of the worst assaults on good capitalism has been by corporatist themselves, the bad false-capitalists.
FloatingRock on January 27, 2012 at 11:54 AM
Apt analogy. Although I wonder if the contents of the bottle have changed at all. Maybe just the labeling: “New Improved! Now with Added Business Experience!”
de rigueur on January 27, 2012 at 11:57 AM
Oh this is just utter bullsh!t and you know it.
Romney gave a very good defense of capitalism in the 2nd SC debate, go youtube it yourself, you’re a big boy. But it was all drowned out in the stupid Newt-King open marriage showdown.
haner on January 27, 2012 at 11:58 AM
Corporatists are wolves in sheep skins hiding amidst capitalists.
Capitalists should repudiate and distance themselves from corporatists at every opportunity before they destroy real capitalism, but unfortunately the corporatists are prominent in business media.
FloatingRock on January 27, 2012 at 11:58 AM
Oh, absolutely. But that’s the sole RNC-crafted and -approved strategy for national elections, since 2004: find out who your opponent is… run as far to their political left as you conceivably can, without actually singing CCCP factory working songs in front of reporters between campaign stops… and just assume that conservatives will come belly-crawling to you, come November, because HEY LOOK! PUPPIES — !!!
Not so much a “brain trust,” in this particular instance, as it is a brain fart.
Kent18 on January 27, 2012 at 11:59 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »