Posted on 11/24/2011 10:05:44 PM PST by rabscuttle385
Southfield, Mich. — As other Republican candidates have stumbled their way toward the presidential primaries, Mitt Romney has put together what would seem to be all the elements of a winning campaign: an effective staff, a robust treasury and smooth, knowledgeable performances both in debates and on the trail.
But for months, the threshold of support for the former Massachusetts governor hasn't inched above a quarter of Republican voters in national polls. For many GOP voters in early primary states, hesitation about Romney comes back to one thing: their perception that he has routinely molded his views to suit the political mood, with ambition his overriding principle.
"He's not a person we could trust to lead our country," said Angela Cesar, a 41-year-old Republican from Ypsilanti, Mich., who said Romney had changed his position on too many issues.
(snip)
"The more I listen to him, the more he just kind of flip-flops and doesn't know where he stands on anything."
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Yeah, just which Mitt Romney are you voting for if you vote for him? He hasn’t shown a lot of signs of converging on one policy, and it’s uncomfortably close to the next election.
Actions speak louder than words.
And so does the Los Angeles Times...Effem both.
Mittens isn’t going anywhere fast. And neither is his twin Gingrich.
Romney is stuck anywhere between 20-26%. But with the complicit leftist media in his corner and so many Republicans stuck in ABBO mode (anyone but barack Obama) one never knows. Scary.
I knew it was just a matter of time before we would agree on something.
NO ROMNEY!
And the LA Times blows. :-P
I think Slick Mitt has a trust deficit with anyone who has discernment capabilities.
And NO GINGRICH!
I don’t trust them.
They’ll use conservatives and then throw them away!
That said, its the first truthful article we’ve seen in the MSM about Slick Willard.
I’m kind of surprised. I thought it would come out AFTER he got the nomination. I expected a hit piece on Romney but not this early in the election cycle.
To be fair, Mitt has made a lot of noises about how Romneycare is distinctly inappropriate at a Federal level, to the point of promising to exempt all 50 states from Obamacare once he became president. Some of Romneycare’s advisors did go on to provide input to Obamacare, but this was without Romney’s own endorsement, AFAIK. If there’s documentation that Romney himself secretly advanced Obamacare planning, that’s a whole different ballgame.
It’s other things than Obamacare that are a more serious issue with Romney. Romney would be a big spending liberal in other Federalized social programs and would be a mush on things like 2nd amendment rights.
I get the impression that Mitt is like the know-it-all kid in class who always had his hand up—a whiny brat that no one liked but had a rich daddy and all the toys everyone wanted.
He wants it too bad—BUT—that being said, he would be 100 times better than the poser we have in the White House Now. I could live with Mittens—I could live with all of the GOP hopefuls when compared to Obama and his crew of Progressives.
I don't think it's a hit piece if it's the truth. Romney has tons of baggage including advocating for amnesty, something he hypocritically condemns Gingrich for.
Perry, Newt and Romney are all non-starters.
Romney on amnesty.
Romney’s liberalism is more objectionable than his embrace of RomneyCare. Its one thing to support a disastrous state experiment. Its another thing to have a consistently liberal record. That’s why people don’t trust him. Slick is the word that comes to mind with Mittens - he’s just unprincipled and his only real concern to get elected.
You've got that right.
He only SAYS he's anti-Abortion. He spent nearly 60 years of his life being unapologetically pro-Abortion and even used the money of Massachusetts tax payers for fund abortions.
He only SAYS he's against a government run socialist healthcare system. RomneyCare is just that.
He only SAYS he supports the 2nd amendment. He signed a gun ban into law.
He's a liberal. Period. I will NEVER vote for him.
Its all in the record.
The two liberals running for the GOP nomination don’t have majority support. People would like someone else to head the party.
Mittens’ real problem is that he lacks the one critical ingredient to be an effective President: core principles.
Without that, he won’t get anything done, even if he was elected.
Incautious strawman arguments like this have a way of collapsing. Romney has shown an appreciation of the difference between federal and state systems vis a vis Obamacare/Romneycare. At the same time, he wouldn't want to see any of Massachusetts' or other states' liberalism get torpedoed, which means he couldn't be counted on to support things like DOMA (or whatever's left of it come November 2012) or anything which elbows into states' abortion policies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjo6GXSqIN8
NO Romney.
NO Amnesty.
NO Way!
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.