Posted on 07/05/2012 8:07:24 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
WOLFEBORO, N.H. — Mitt Romney is planning to fortify his communications and messaging team by adding seasoned operatives, advisers close to the campaign said Thursday, after withering criticism from prominent conservative voices that his insular team has fumbled recent opportunities.
Romney’s advisers insisted that he would keep his inner circle intact amid growing concerns about the Republican presidential candidate and his campaign. The tempest began with a weekend tweet from media tycoon Rupert Murdoch and burst Thursday onto the pages of his newspaper the Wall Street Journal, as its conservative editorial board opined that Romney’s advisers were “slowly squandering an historic opportunity” to beat President Obama.
[....]
There are no plans, however, to alter Romney’s core team of advisers, most of whom have worked for the former Massachusetts governor for years, and campaign officials said it was highly unlikely that Romney would demote or fire any of his senior staffers.
“I don’t sense any panic. I don’t sense that any heads are going to roll,” said Tom Rath, a longtime senior adviser to Romney. “The idea that this guy at this point having gone through what he’s gone through is going to somehow scramble the eggs on the team — they don’t know Mitt Romney.”
“The idea that somebody other than Beth Myers, Eric Fehrnstrom, Matt Rhoades, Stuart Stevens and Peter Flaherty are going to call the shots, it’s just plain wrong,” Rath said, ticking through Romney’s closest advisers, including Rhoades, the campaign manager, and Stevens, the chief strategist.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
So, why doesn’t this guy have any Republicans in his inner circle?
I think the Romney’s team needs a total makeover starting at the very top.
That’s right, start with a new Presidential candidate.
This is what happens when you have taken all sides on all issues during your political career.
It also doesn’t help that Romney doesn’t have a conservative bone in his body.
If mittens doesn’t wake up - and I doubt very much that he will - he loses, big, in November.
Romney stands by appointment to Brookline Housing Authority
November 22, 2006 09:52 PM Email| Comments (0)| Text size – +
By Frank Phillips, Globe Staff
Even as the move drew sharp criticism, Governor Mitt Romney on Wednesday stood by his appointment of his spokesman, Eric Fehrnstrom, to the Brookline Housing Authority.
Romney also said that the pension gains that will result for Fehrnstrom are of no concern to him.
“I don’t disqualify someone because appointing them would mean they would get pension benefits,” Romney said. “I think it would be any inappropriate way to make any appointment.”
The Boston Globe reported Wednesday that Romney had appointed Fehrnstrom to a five-year term as the governor’s designee on the authority.
The position is part-time, but the appointment will allow Fehrnstrom, who is to leave his spokesman’s job on Jan. 4, to extend his years in government and obtain the 10 years of service necessary to qualify for a state pension.
The Fehrnstrom appointment set off a stir in the political world. Romney has touted himself as a reformer, and has launched attacks on Beacon Hill perks and extravagant pension benefits.
The head of the state pension system, Michael Travaglini, denounced the move. Former Governor Michael S. Dukakis, a lifelong Brookline resident, questioned Fehrnstrom’s qualifications for the post.
It may be time to accept the not so conservative Romney as the only alternative to the radical socialist from Chicago. Romney seems to be doing just fine against an incumbent who has built in voting blocks solidly in his pocket (96% blacks, 47 million on food stamps, 48% who pay zero income tax etc.)
We all were hoping the republican voters would vote for Cain, Newt or Rick. But they all lost or withdrew. Nothing we can do at this point to resurrect them in 2012. It is done, finito!
In the 15 states CNN calls its battleground states — Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin — Romney leads Obama, 51 percent to 43 percent. Notably, though, the CNN/ORC International group includes three states thought to be comfortably in the Romney column this cycle: Arizona, Indiana, and Missouri.
It’s difficult to overestimate Barack Obama’s ability to shoot himself in the foot.
Many of the “non Federal tax payers” still have a reason to care, if they use their noodles.
” - - - they don’t know Mitt Romney.”
A perfect summary of “The Romney Problem.” No fire in the belly.
All the voters know is that Romney will lose to Obama by 10 % in November, because Romney is within the margin of error to lose to Obama now.
HEY! Romney spokesman, we are going to DUMP Romney by an ABSTAIN first Ballot in Tampa, because we want to beat Incumbent Obama in a landslide.
BTW, Romney would make a great UN Ambassador.
Darned if you do, darned if you don’t. Was he lousy at this new post?
That’s a lousy analysis. Historically, an incumbent who hopes to prevail needs to be way ahead of his challenger this time of year. Historically, undecideds break heavily towards the challenger. Obama has much to worry about from even Mitt.
(1) I presume you are speaking of the federal income tax ~ it was supposed to only apply to the top 1% or 2%.
(2) It's clear that with the federal income tax hitting 53% of wage earners, it is out of control and that it failed in its purpose AND SHOULD BE ABOLISHED.
(3) Ronaldus Magnus made magnificent strides towards eliminating the federal income tax on the working poor.
(4) There are other taxes that are pass throughs from companies ~ since, in reality, only their customers really pay taxes.
(5) Individuals are taxed on their entire income, not their profit. Financiers and business are taxed only on their profits.
(6) You want tax equity, tax individuals on their profit also.
(7) FOOD STAMPS are chump change in the world of federal spending. Your banker gets more federal money to play with than anybody on food stamps!
(8) With 96% of blacks in Obama's pocket, he's slipping badly. LBJ Had 97%. BTW, another candidate like Romney is the guy who lost the black vote ~ and he was also against allowing Social and Fiscal Conservatives to get involved in Presidential politics.
(9) A correct Republican position should be to ELIMINATE the federal personal income tax; sale or monetization of federal lands, mineral reserves and other assets, including the Continental shelf; payment of the national debt (down to monetary needs); and a whole host of social conservative issues ~ eliminate abortion, remove federal court jurisdiction from family law, etc. We must support full funding for national defense even if that includes requiring tribute from client states.
NOTE: I was just going over the bona fides of Romney's inner circle ~ they all seem to be from that tight little isolated chunk of New England called (quite erroneously) "The HUB". They know nothing of America.
Besides removing himself from this campaign, Romney has to make sure those people are convinced they should work someplace besides Republican campaigns. We don't need their kind!
http://www.creators.com/opinion/mark-shields/tolerant-americans-2012-12-01-14.html
Mitt Romney, about whom there are precious few endearing anecdotes, locked up Rath’s heart in the summer of 2010 shortly after it was reported that Rath, with a blood-alcohol level of 0.11 percent, had been arrested for driving under the influence. Rath called Romney and offered to minimize embarrassment to the candidate by resigning from the campaign. Romney rejected the offer: “No, you and I are joined at the hip.” Then Romney, the former Mormon bishop, quipped to Rath, a Catholic, “You know, Tom, if you belonged to my church, you wouldn’t have had this problem.”
So the Sunday school teacher has a glass in front of her. She tells the class that it is straight bourbon. She drops an earthworm into the glass. It falls to the bottom, wriggles a little bit and then is still.
She says to the class of high schoolers, “So what does this teach you about alcohol?”
And Johnny, in the back, raises his hand and says, “If you drink enough alcohol you won’t get worms.”
” - - - That’s a lousy analysis.”
Maybe, but ya gotta admit, Mitt is an even more lousy candidate.
We won't know until the election if we are even going to get these guys up near 35 or 40 million votes each.
Until the pollsters get a grasp of how many are just not motivated to care anymore figuring out who is 'winning' is out of the question.
Both parties need better candidates!
I appreciate your detailed analysis. My point however had nothing to with whether taxes are justified. My point is Obama is creating a BIGGER DEPENDENT CLASS who will increasingly veer towards their benefactor.
That is the biggest flaw in a democracy. When people discover they can vote themselves bigger and bigger benefits by electing their benefactors, seeds of destruction of the democracy are sown.
It is a good sign that in spite of the ever growing dependent class, republicans can still win sometimes. There is still some hope left for America. But the trend is inescapably dark and gloomy.
Is this a serious piece or is this a typical Washington Post hit piece designed to set conservatives against rinos in the Republican Party?
Is the debate over whether Romney is actually winning the campaign or whether Romney is a Rino as opposed to a conservative?
Is the debate about trying to control a campaign or controlling a candidate by staffing his inner circle?
Does Murdoch's brilliant career in publishing qualify him to critique the tactics of a presidential campaign?
Does Jack Walsh's brilliant career at GE qualify him to critique the tactics of a presidential campaign?
Are these men criticizing tactics or are they questioning conservative bona fides, or have their comments been taken out of context and blown out of proportion?
Is Romney in fact in trouble in this campaign? Is he not well ahead in the swing states that matter? Are not the polls that show him in trouble all left-wing polls based on voters rather than likely voters? Is not the poll that really counts, Rasmussen, favorable to Romney?
Is Romney goofing off by the sea while he loses the Midwest or is he actually accomplishing a ton of work that must be done like picking a vice presidential running mate, raising money, prepping for the debates, planning the campaign?
What are we talking about?
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.