Top Romney adviser: Mitt will erase his conservative positions once he’s the nominee

WaPo ^ | 032112 | Greg Sargent

[Fred]

Think Progress flags an amazing exchange on CNN, in which Eric Fehrnstrom, a top adviser to Mitt Romney, seems to confirm that the conservative positions Romney has been forced to take during the primary won’t be a big deal because he can simply erase them once he becomes the GOP nominee:

HOST: Is there a concern that Santorum and Gingrich might force the governor to tack so far to the right it would hurt him with moderate voters in the general election?

FEHRNSTROM: Well, I think you hit a reset button for the fall campaign. Everything changes. It’s almost like an Etch A Sketch. You can kind of shake it up and restart all over again.

There you have it. Dems, predictably, are pouncing on the remark, arguing that it validates their message that Romney has no core and will say or do anything to get elected.

[trappedincanuckistan]

Holy double post Batman!

[Fred]

This is what Romney's etch a sketch will look like after reset

[trappedincanuckistan]

Romney is the Republican/White/Mormon Obama.

[cashless]

I am shocked. Shocked and amazed that Mittsy Wittsy will drop his conservative values after the convention. About the same amount of shock I had when “moderate” candidate Obamalamadingdong started governing as the Marxist that he always was.

[caww]

Please tell me how Romney can be worse than Obama??

We know who and what Obama is about...he makes that clear. Romney is a moving frontman for the organization he calls a church with leadership who he not only is accountable to but will be calling the shots. Which as history has proven will change the game plans according to what they stand to gain by doing so. You will not see them nor know what their next move is til after the fact...and in part is determined to put the USA under International Control as the Gloablist position it.

Romney is no different than Obama....except he will hide behind the mask of what he's really up to ....you cannot fight what you cannot see. Therefore As much distain there is for Obama at least we can load congress and stop him as much as possible.

[upchuck]

Anyone who believes all this so-called conservative pablum Romney has been spouting is seriously sick.

Romey is a moderate/liberal. PERIOD!!! Always has been, always will be. Never forget it. I don’t care what he says now. Hell, he’d say anything to get the nomination.

[StAnDeliver]

"According to Mark Levin (about a week ago), yes, Reagan did this."

Hell, he did it in '76 when he named Pennsylvania Senator & Rockefeller RINO Dick Schweiker as VP candidate, and cost himself the nom.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

[wolfcreek]

[Netizen]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKtNYmsarUE

[Antoninus]

We now know how much it takes to elect a liberal as the standard-bearer for a party with a conservative base. About $80 million. Anyone think Romney's strategy against Obama will be anywhere near as aggressive as his primary strategy?

Unless a large subset of Dems sabotage Obama to get the liberal Republican of their dreams in November, Romney is going to get massacred in the general election. And the GOP-e will be fine with it.

There is no major conservative party left in the USA.

[Netizen]

[Nickname]

Duh.

And if he wins the WH he’ll erase his “moderate” positions and go full-blown progressive on us.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

A very good point to those who lecture on the woes that will beset the nation if we end up with Obama for another 4 years. Those are probably all true prophecies.

However, if our nation is truly at such a critical point; now is not the time to select a candidate that will not be significantly different? The point of the election is to save the country, not simply defeat Obama. I do not need to stress the many attacks on liberty contained in Obama care, nor the dangers of our skyrocketing federal debt. We have also seen the danger of liberal judges on the Supreme Court.

The question that plagues my conscience is this: Is Mitt Romney the man that can change these things and bring back a free prosperous America? Do his action, speaking far louder than campaign words of admitted dubious quality, really justify answering yes? And if you answer no; is the country doomed either way.

I find the answer to be no, as such, I do not know if I can vote for the man and still have a clean enough conscience to be able to look myself in the mirror on Wednesday morning.

Even if he fires his advisor for saying this, that doesn’t make it any less truthful. All indicators point towards Romney abandoning what he has said he will do.

[1010RD]

And why the vetting of Obama is so critical this time around. Romney’s no America hating Marxist.

[NKP_Vet]

You know what is really disgusting is no one wants Romney as the nominee. I mean real republicans out in the heartland of America. People that post on this board see right through this liberal. Lord, his liberal record is an open book. Romney is living proof that money can buy a nomination. He has more money to cut down the opposition. No core values whatsover. Money is the name of the game. Sad, but true. Willard’s money will not help him when the liberals give Chairman Obama a billion of more to cut this RINO to shreds. Like Obama before him, Joe the Bartender is more qualified to be president. Romney is nothing but a rich liberal egomaniac and why he’s still in the republican party is anyone’s guess. He will lose the race to a failed president in a landslide. Here we go again. McCain redux.

[VRW Conspirator]

Is it “agitprop” when Romney's principle media adviser is interviewed live on CNN?

Yes, the source is the WashPo. Not CNN. The advisor wants to pander to the Dems and Dem leaning Independents. WashPo wants to soften the Repub base. Agitprop.

[PieterCasparzen]

Absolutely, Reagan did exactly this......

There is no way to win an election in this country on a divisive, fringe platform, to either side. No way, no how.

Let's go to the video tape. Highlights from Reagan's 1980 debate with Mr. Peanut from October 28 - just before the election - bear out the fact that while he was not as opposed to government regulation as many conservatives are today, he was simply not attempting in any way to campaign on any sort of compromise of his principles.

Here's the roughly 8-minute clip where he actually says HE WANTS TO LEAD A CRUSADE.

Gipper debates Mr. Peanut

Imagine that.

The American people are simply turning their back on God.

That is why spinelessness is becoming commonplace.

Which is why spineless leaders are becoming commonplace.

We are so spineless at this point that we can't find the courage to say that the Biblical moral law is just and good and ought to be followed.

We're a hair's breadth from saying that in the name of "social justice", theft is acceptable if you steal from someone who is richer that you are.

If there is no Biblical basis to law, and morality is "relative", and if the gubmint says it's true, I guess civilization will simply descend into chaos/submission to the politburo.

[Jim Robinson]

FUMR!! GOP primary voters = suckers!!

[Jim Noble]

Duh. Romney hasn’t taken any conservative positions that he will need to erase.