On one hand, Romney is one of the worst candidates you'll ever see, from a purely political perspective. He's simply not a very "natural" politician.
On the other hand, he's one of the most capable men ever to run for the White House in this nation's history. Anyone who has dealt with CEOs in industry will understand how people like this operate. One of their most important attributes is one that serves them very poorly in a popularity contest, and that is their ability to be completely detached and devoid of all personal connection when dealing with a situation that requires strong leadership.
This is why I pay no attention to campaign speeches, campaign ads, etc. This is all just "noise" in the background of a very important election. If you want to get a sense of where things really stand, just sit down and watch the entire length of last week's debate -- with the sound off. Those two people didn't even belong in the same zip code, let alone on a stage in a presidential debate.
Astute point and I agree with you on that. Too many Americans see the election of a president as a popularity contest and as a result, we usually end up with a back-slapping, snake-oil salesman who has a way with the ladies (Bill Clinton personifies that stereotype). Yet as an actual leader and an executive, these are often the worst people for the job.
It is rare to see charisma and competency in the same package. Ronald Reagan is the only president I know that was not only a master politician but also had the executive ability to inspire people and actually get substantive things done, even when the opposing party controlled power in Congress during his whole two terms.
I would say Mitt Romney has it even over Reagan with respect to executive ability, surrounding oneself with the right people and getting things done. If we get Romney into office, with a Republican controlled Congress, I think all of us here are going to be very surprised. Pleasantly surprised.
“On the other hand, he’s one of the most capable men ever to run for the White House in this nation’s history. Anyone who has dealt with CEOs in industry will understand how people like this operate. One of their most important attributes is one that serves them very poorly in a popularity contest, and that is their ability to be completely detached and devoid of all personal connection when dealing with a situation that requires strong leadership.
This is why I pay no attention to campaign speeches, campaign ads, etc. This is all just “noise” in the background of a very important election. If you want to get a sense of where things really stand, just sit down and watch the entire length of last week’s debate — with the sound off. Those two people didn’t even belong in the same zip code, let alone on a stage in a presidential debate.”
This is all fantasy! Romney ran as the CEO Governor in Mass. too, and that got them RomneyCare, 700 million in new taxes and fees, and third from the bottom in business growth. Any honest look at his record reveals a shifty operator who says whatever he wants and governs as a leftist, and you want us to believe in this fantasy of CEO-competence when he has never once ever displayed any of it? Nuts!
I agree, good post.