I liked Mitt Romney. He has experience running large organizations and he’s not afraid to make tough decisions. Both parties have an establishment candidate and an outsider. The Dems establishment candidate is Hillary. They have no clear outsider. The GOP has some potential outsiders (Cruz, Rand, amongst others) but, with Christie and Jeb Bush polling so low, Romney is the next logical Establishment choice. Not everything is a huge conspiracy!!! If one of the outsiders beats Mitt in the Primaries, then so be it. But, to go into any election without an establishment candidate is absolutely foolish.
They got insiders and outsiders, but the big question is, do they have a Conservative? I MIGHT be convinced to vote for Cruz, MAYBE, but in all honesty, I don't see anyone who is really up to the task ahead of us.
Yeah, according to him. Name one large organization? When he "took over" the Salt Lake City Olympics all he did was massivley apply for every federal program he could think of.
The guy that ran the 1984 LA Olympics actually made money using free market principles.
I'm also interested in a list of those "tough decisions". In 2012 his economic "plan" had 59 points. That's not making tough decisions. It was all muddled consulting speak.
Uh oh. You're not one of those RINO bast'ds, are ya?
Why are you shilling for Mitt? Tough decisions? Like changing his core convictions on issues that suits his particular audience, that suits his ambition to be elected? Please!!!
I told people here in 2012 that while Mitt might be a nice guy, he was the wrong guy to run against Obama because you needed a clear, concise, energizing person that would go for the jugular against Obama or get beat and I got berated here on FR for saying I saw Obama winning because of Mitt
This leads me to believe that Romney wasn't strong enough to stand up to his backers and consultants, and not willing to broaden his reach to help Republicans take back the Senate.
-PJ