[Southack]

Politics doesn't work that way. You're spouting idealisms. But "explaining" your past won't win elections.

You couldn't convince 20 random people in a supermarket that Nixon had no motive to bug the Watergate hotel.

Likewise, you won't be able to get past the news media's blasting of Romney for his SLC Olympic bribery scandal. A campaign manager would have to spend the entire campaign on the defensive, "explaining" why Romney was the good guy...and fewer than 15% would pay enough attention to even understand...with fewer still being swayed by your pleas and "explanations."

[Young Scholar]

He won the governorship of Massachusetts largely on the strength of his SLC Olympic record. It might not have the same impact several six years later, but it would be impossible for his opponent, the media, or anyone else to turn such a strong positive around into a negative.

What do you have against Romney?