Skip to comments.Is Romney bullet proof? (Vanity)
Posted on 09/19/2012 9:13:02 AM PDT by ReaganÜberAlles
It is beginning to occur to me, that at some point, it seems that no matter what the Dems throw at Romney it does not sink him. He bounces back. Rasmussen has him up and new polls shows him pulling away in NC and taking the lead in NH.
Could the narrative soon become that because of the dismal economy and seething dissatisfaction with the direction of the country that Romney has "rope a doped" Obama and nothing he throws at him will knock him out?
Well part of it is, pretty much everybody has decided whom to vote fir already I think. Plus, his supposed gaffes are what we all think anyway.
I’m thinking it has more to do with the alternative than Romney himself........
Your title asks if Romney (a presidential candidate with secret service protection) is bullet proof? You ain’t too bright, are ya?
Where did you see the NH number?! That would be huge!
obama cannot win without NH! (in my opinion...)
It’s not sinking him because the country is evenly divided. There is no way 50% of the country is going to vote for obama no matter what sleazy tricks the media employs.
Yeah, should have put that part in quotes but stick it where the sun don’t shine anyway Browneye
Never mind...it’s Rasmussen and he shows Romney up three (!) in New Hampshire!
With what’s been thrown at him so far, I think it’s more a case of the democrats shooting blanks than it is of Romney being bulletproof.
No, there just might be a slim majority thatagrees with him. But America is on a steady slope to socialism and it can’t be stopped. The rate of change of the slope can be altered but the direction is fixed. Hopefully Romney can slow it down.
Top story ‘Breaking News’
No, I think it’s more of a case of Obama’s idiocy canceling out MSM spin of Romney.
As I said in another thread, it’s Obama vs. a pile of poo. If it were really Obama vs. Romney, Romney would be way up, IMO.
Start the narrative and I'll support it. Whatever it takes to get the communist out of office.
Obama’s attacks are getting less purchase because, with Obama’s economy in the toilet, Obama realized long ago that his ONLY chance was to trash his opponent.
Long ago. So long ago that he’s been running mostly-negative ads for a lot LONGER than in a typical campaign. As a result, people are starting to be less influenced by the negativity.
Obama can still win, of course. It sickens me that this is even close — and part of the reason why is that we nominated the individual mandate’s baby daddy.
“Teflon” might be a better description than bullet proof.
I think Romney is surviving more than the MSM expects because they don’t realize that: 1) Their audience is much smaller than it used to be and has alternative input. 2) Except for the cocooned liberals, everyone knows the MSM is in the tank. Not to mention they’ve become more and more shrill, exposing their bias all the greater. 3) Events, dear boy, events. You can fudge unemployment stats, you can ignore gas prices, and all the rest, but the people *living* out there in the real world know what they’re experiencing. The weather man can tell you it’s 95 degrees, but if you spend any time outside, you know it’s 45. Are you going to believe and vote based on what they tell you, or on your own lying eyes?
Let’s not count our chickens before they’re hatched. Let’s get him elected first, and then we can test your theory. I don’t think Romney will have the charisma that Reagan had, but hopefully he will be business-like and competent on the economy and foreign policy.
Yes. Romney is no Reagan, but he’s a success story who I honestly believe will roll back spending, maybe not because of burning ideological disagreement with things like Planned Parenthood and the GSA, but because he knows we can’t afford it. Nobody could be worse on foreign policy than Obama, who is actively aiding our enemies.
More like slime proof.
Agree most people have decided BUT I think either candidate can lose some support to a scandal, and I think a lot of people are waiting to abandon Obama if Romney does well in the debates.
Some of the recent polls show an increase in approval for Obama on the economy, but I frankly think that is largely just Dems coming home to support him on everything, not a real shift.
The reason is clear. The country is too polarized for things like this to matter. There aren’t enough voters in the middle to tip things (though Romney wins those by a comfortable margin). Even if Romney murdered someone, I’d still crawl through lava to vote for him. It’s the same for some on the other side with Obama. You either love Obama and free birth control, and you want to see him be president again, or you hate him with a passion.
This election will all come down to turnout, and seeing as we have the most hated Dem president among conservatives in the history of the nation, we have a big advantage there.
Bambi ain't particularly popular, even here.
We've made a record number of calls; walk to every single called person and do a lit drop; and have identified every switch voter from 2008 and every indie and every Republican. The county chairman, who has done informal indie polling since May is so optimistic I don't dare state his prediction.
I’ve said this from the beginning.. there is NOTHING Obama and his minions can throw at Romney and change the fact Obama is going to lose, because OTHER THAN THE KOOL AID DRINKERS NO ONE IS LISTENING TO OBAMA! THe electorate by and large WROTE HIM OFF LONG AGO!
This election is nothing more than bread and circuses, the press is doing to bend over backwards to try to save Obama, its not going to work.
The press is inventing controversy, and its blatant, even democratic voters can see the game going on, Obama is done. Its not going to be close people.. Obama has ZERO chance of holding any state he won by less than 55% of the vote in 08, period. He won’t get over 42-43$% of the popular vote on election day and very possibly could get under 40%
Hope you right, HJ.
Its also important to note that Michigan has been trending rightward for a while now. Kerry’s 04 win here wasn’t huge and 08 was a special case. 2010 was a massacre of the democrats and this year it looks like they’re mostly just trying to hold seats they have without really challenging for new pickups.
We are working for the Romney campaign in Michigan, it is a toss up here, the first time since 1984 that the dems might lose a presidential election in MI.
That being said, it's not really us working for Mitt, it's the genuine (and very defensible) fear of Bambi's administration for another four years.
I expect if we drag him over the finish line we will have to work very hard to drag him further to commons sense conservative principles, or at least towards them.
However, I am heartened by his tendency to be far more "conservative" during this campaign than he seemed to be, and more courageous in his statements, esp. about the ME.
I fear our RINO squish gubner will stall good conservative ideas from being implemented here.
my 18 yo has been interning with Romney HQ in Northern VA since the summer and his operation here is also very impressive. AND, he wasn’t even in the state for primaries, since no one but ronpaul was on the ballot here.
If that turns out true, I'm not going to be upset. If he does well, I can eat crow and say so.
Right now I just want to get rid of the Marxist stain in the white hut.
Rick Santorum has been making some campaign stops with Pete Hoekstra. He also has some good endorsements from Herman Cain and I believe Michele Bachmann.
After watching the ‘secret video’, I’m more hopeful. He gets it, I think.
The thing I love about that video is that the campaign has resigned itself to something very sensible - you haven’t got much to offer people getting things for free who lack the desire to provide for themselves.
I’m not sure he meant to do the next bit, but he also implied that either you are that kind of person, one of the 47%, or you are not, and if you’re not, you probably ought to be voting for Romney.
He almost said, “Look, if you believe that your working neighbors owe you a living, and that you shouldn’t have to do anything to earn it, vote for Obama, because that’s what he stands for. If you’re the kind of person that believes you should have the opportunity to earn your own living, and not be a burden to your neighbors, then vote for me, because that’s the difference between me and Obama.”
Of course it can be stopped. We can make the USA a massive energy exporter for the next century and not import a ml of foreign energy and we’d be on the right side of things in 10 years.
Even my kids are starting to get a sense of what Obamism is about at the cafeteria line. You’ve got entire schools boycotting the sh*tty, calorie-capped lunches that fat-assed first lady imposed by fiat on the scruel children.
I think a big part of it is just that Obama and his lapdog media have a huge credibility gap. Only the 20-30% of the country that are hardcore socialists actually pretend to believe what they say anymore, and I have a feeling even they know what is going on, even if they won’t admit it.
Mitt was right again about the dangerously large number of people in this country who sponge off government and have no financial stake in the country. They just saw Rahmbo cave in the the teachers union and government unions narrowly defeated in their attempt to take over Wisconsin.
I hope the MSM keep harping on these non-"gaffes."
It is too much to hope for ... but Romney should employ Gingrich as his debate coach...
i’d relax at this point...people DON’T want to vote for obama but has Romney done enough to get the undecideds to vote for him???
btw- must add lets wait till the end of the week until we decide if the latest criminal media attack on Romney has had any effect on the “polls”...
That's how I see it too.
I have a brother who has been a staunch Clinton and Obama-loving liberal for years. Our political rift was so bad all we did was argue when we got together. I haven't seen my brother in three years, and before that another three. Estranged I believe is the word.
I received an e-mail from him this morning and he's done with not only Obama, but liberalism itself. It's a long story and I won't bore anyone with it here, but his catharsis apparently happened over time and he just realized that the embrace of "rugged individualism" can have tremendous personal benefits. Will he vote for Romney? I can't say for sure, but he's done with the Democratic Party.
(oops - I went a little longer below than I planned - but I’ve watched Mitt since the Teddy election - as a voter, I know him well)
I see a few things going on, and one of them is perhaps the most encouraging.
1. When it comes to the economy, (and now foreign policy), it’s not that Mitt himself is bullet proof. It’s that the facts are bullet proof. The economy is terrible and can’t be spun or lied about. The attempted lies about what happened specifically in Libya and in general in the ME, this situation is also bullet proof, because ... reality is bulletproof. America is full of ignorance, for sure, but even ignorance can for only so long deny that a blue sky is ... blue.
2. The attacks on Romney simply don’t rise to the level of a stain on a blue dress. I think all the charges against Romney have in many ways stuck, but they are either minor charges (Olympics), or cliche/caricature charges (Fires and kills people / Hates 47% of the country) - so reduced to minor charges, The third type of charge - the primary charge of the 47% tapes, falls under the actual definition of the word ‘gaffe’ - an unscripted statement of the truth. In this third case, Romney angers the Dem base who never would have voted for him (the are reacting like holy water was tossed upon them,) solidifies the conservative base (how many people here did I read all of a sudden saying ‘WOW - maybe I will vote for this guy - still don’t like him much, hate his abortion stance, but at least he’s basically conservative.’ Finally - there is the element of those who actually are responsible people, who for whatever reason are on the dole - and it’s probably temporary ... but maybe they’ve started to enjoy the safety net. They are ashamed, rightfully, and will fix their thinking now that it has been laid plain before them - vote for Romney out of a re-establishing of their own pride - Obama having tried to addict them the heroin.
3. The third is the most important though: MITT ACTUALLY HAS IMPECCABLE CHARACTER (of course no human is perfect.) The reason you can’t stick a scandal on him is that there are none. The reason you can’t say ‘he hates America’ is because he doesn’t really understand how to hate or despise or resent. He actually loves the country, and would love nothing more than to see it flourishing again - to see the moochers have pride again. Sometimes this works against him - he appears like a naive idiot teenager out of a 50’s TV show sometimes (OK almost all the time.) But though business and politics have made him not-so-naive, nor have they jaded him, and nor has it wiped that silly 50’s look (I mean - he still says ‘why, i think’ ... (nobody says ‘why’ starting a sentence)) ... might as well say ‘why, golly-gee-wiz’.
But, America picks up on this. They may not love him the way one adores a charismatic figure, but they don’t mistrust him (the left doesn’t mistrust him - they hate him, they trust he’ll do what he says).
This type of thing - same as the Reagan election - a little different from WBush - who’s character was good but not especially deep -> popularity based on character rather than charisma simply takes long to grow. It’s a deeper, less emotional popularity - but far more powerful.
So yeah - I agree with you - nothing meaningful is sticking, but it’s different from Clinton. Clinton could sexually harass a 12 year old in front of 100 women and they’d still want to kiss him. But in Clinton’s case - things SHOULD stick to him, but they don’t, because he hypnotizes them with charm (never understood this - women of FR - can you explain???.)
Very different for why things don’t stick to Romney.
In Romney’s case, things don’t stick to him either because the ‘things’ are blatant cliches or lies or caricatures ... or they don’t stick because people get that he’s a good, decent man, and so he gets the benefit of the doubt where the gaps in information lay. Therefore, America gets that the 47% comment was
1. not elegant, but also not in a setting demanding elegance, and not about hatred/division
2. was about political calculation but in a practical sense - not calculation to deceive - but calculation to succeed. Planning, rather than manipulation. (No one can claim he was being manipulative.)
For America to read between the lines and judge it ‘practical’ and not ‘cynically calculating’ is what I mean by #3 above. His good character and his track record - not of perfection - but of being a decent man - fill in all the blanks where American’s are left to themselves to interpret ‘what was actually in the man’s heart and mind.’
I followed Mitt for a long time in Massachusetts, since his first run against Teddy - 16 years ago? At heart - he’s a conservative, not ideologically, but because conservativism is the only possible outcome of ‘good-character + correct-assumptions + rational-logical-thinking + wisdom-and-experience.’ Thus he is conservative by default, axiomatically, not by his own choosing.
Had he not flip flopped, he would have gotten no where in this state (Mass) and hence no where any where. Some purists can argue, fine, then he never should have run in Massachusetts if he had to compromise his beliefs. I disagree. I think spiritually they don’t come with a hell of a lot more integrity, and wisdom dictates that you do the most good possible without setting back the good. You take what you can get, and fight the other stuff tomorrow.
What’s encouraging to me is that I think many in the country are beginning to realize this. Character and the deeper nature of men (especially if it’s quietly good) takes a long time reveal itself as others, and it must be tested over and over again (so, thank you, Obama campaign, and thanks for the FR’s who’ve been lambasting him) He is way far from perfect - this is a fallen world - but compared to what both the right and left have to offer, he’s as good a man as Reagan, what he does with that is still to be seen. If the turf of the day were right, he’s be fighting against the Fed (anyone schooled in business knows why the Fed is suicide) ... and he’s be fighting against abortion. Legislation is not a way to permanently change defective views. When the defective views are near enough corrected ... then the last step is legislation.
On the level of ‘just a voter’ (I’m just a dopey guy who cares about politics) ... I’ve lived in Mass for 30 years, am one of the only 4 conservatives :-), but as ‘just a voter’ and not an insider in any way - I can tell you that Mitt is about as good and wise a man as conservatives are going to get for a long long time. He’s the perfect mentor for guys like Ryan and the rest of the often younger group. They’ll be the fire and the charisma, he’ll be the manager.
HIs policy will never get distracted by scandal. (I love Newt too, but he would not have been effective). He will put in place policy that is possible at the time he puts it in place (Sorry Ron - you’re a great voice, I hope you’l be chief of staff, and frankly you’re right on almost everything - but you would not in fact change the country at all, and in fact you might drive it left unintentionally).
As for abortion - that work needs be done on the hearts and minds level before the legislative level. Younger guys like Ryan, and women, will connect better with the generation that’s forming it’s ideas on things like this - their charisma will naturally draw in the younger generation. Mitt knows that as a leader of a country, if he uses his leadership in the presidency to calmly remind the next generation that life is life, and that the left has reduced life to a secular sack of mechanized biochemical chaos, that’s the fastest most realistic route to ending the slaughter. Legislation, though, is a generation away. Screaming about it is not better policy then pragmatically ending it as soon as possible.
Summary: You can’t really catch Mitt doing anything wrong. Why? Because he’s a total 50’s geek with the odd twist that he’s been schooled in the the brutal business/financial world - so he’s wise, practical, pragmatic - his strength comes from his character, but his pragmatism (often hated here) comes from his broad knowledge of how the world actually works here on a fallen Earth.
Teflon Don... Romney.....
Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
This is good news.
Can you elaborate by state area?...Northeast, Central, Southwest? or Cuyahoga, Summit, Medina, Stark vs. Franklin vs. Hamilton counties?
The fun thing is, he said something very like that in response to some heckler a few months ago. It was along the line of, "If you like free stuff, then vote for Mr. Obama, because that's what he's all about."
Dayton, 45 min north of Cincy and central.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.