Was Mitt Romney Right About Everything? From Russia to Detroit, his fans say they’ve been vindicated

Ten months after Mitt Romney shuffled off the national stage in defeat — consigned, many predicted, to a fate of instant irrelevance and permanent obscurity — Republicans are suddenly celebrating the presidential also-ran as a political prophet.

From his widely mocked warnings about a hostile Russia to his adamant opposition to the increasingly unpopular implementation of Obamacare, the ex-candidate’s canon of campaign rhetoric now offers cause for vindication — and remorse — to Romney’s friends, supporters, and former advisers.

“I think about the campaign every single day, and what a shame it is who we have in the White House,” said Spencer Zwick, who worked as Romney’s finance director and is a close friend to his family. “I look at things happening and I say, you know what? Mitt was actually right when he talked about Russia, and he was actually right when he talked about how hard it was going to be to implement Obamacare, and he was actually right when he talked about the economy. I think there are a lot of everyday Americans who are now feeling the effects of what [Romney] said was going to happen, unfortunately.”

Of course, there is a long tradition in American politics of dwelling on counterfactuals and and re-litigating past campaigns after your candidate loses. Democrats have argued through the years that America would have avoided two costly Middle East wars, solved climate change, and steered clear of the housing crisis if only the Supreme Court hadn’t robbed Al Gore of his rightful victory in 2000. But a series of White House controversies and international crises this year — including a Syrian civil war that is threatening to pull the American military into the mix — has caused Romney’s fans to erupt into a chorus of told-you-so’s at record pace.

In the most actively cited example of the Republican nominee’s foresight, Romneyites point to the candidate’s hardline rhetoric last year against Russian President Vladimir Putin and his administration. During the campaign, Romney frequently criticized Obama for foolishly attempting to make common cause with the Kremlin, and repeatedly referred to Russia as “our number one geopolitical foe.”

Many observers found this fixation strange, and Democrats tried to turn it into a punchline. A New York Times editorial in March of last year said Romney’s assertions regarding Russia represented either “a shocking lack of knowledge about international affairs or just craven politics.” And in an October debate, Obama sarcastically mocked his opponent’s Russia rhetoric. “The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War’s been over for 20 years,” the president quipped at the time.

That line still chafes Robert O’Brien, a Los Angeles lawyer and friend of Romney’s who served as a foreign policy adviser.

“Everyone thought, Oh my goodness that is so clever and Mitt’s caught in the Cold War and doesn’t know what he’s talking about,” O’Brien said. “Well guess what. With all of these foreign policy initiatives — Syria, Iran, [Edward] Snowden — who’s out there causing problems for America? It’s Putin and the Russians.”

Indeed, earlier this summer, Moscow defiantly refused to extradite National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden to the United States, prompting Obama to cancel a meeting he had scheduled with Putin during the Group of 20 summit. Russia has blocked United Nations action against Syria. And on Wednesday, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told lawmakers that Russia was one of the countries supplying Syria with chemical weapons.

To Romney’s fans, these episodes illustrate just how unfairly their candidate was punished during the election for speaking truths the rest of the country would eventually come around to.

“The governor tried to enunciate how to deal with these very hard, tough issues, and we were met with slogans,” O’Brian lamented. “And now the real world is exposing the slogans as being totally trite.”

During a foreign policy debate in October, the candidate briefly expressed concern over Islamic extremists taking control of northern Mali — an obscure reference that was mocked on Twitter at the time, including by liberal comedian Bill Maher. Three months later, France sent troops into the country at the behest of the Malian president, bringing the conflict to front pages around the world.

On the domestic front, Obamacare — which Romney spent more time railing against on the stump than perhaps any other progressive policy — is less popular than ever, while the federal government struggles to get the massive, complicated law implemented. (One poll in July found for the first time that a plurality of Americans now support the law’s repeal.)

And while the unemployment rate has, in the first year of Obama’s second term, gradually fallen to post-crisis lows, the still-ailing U.S. economy, which served as the centerpiece for Romney’s unsuccessful case against Obama’s reelection, was given a potent symbol earlier this summer when Detroit became the largest American city ever to declare bankruptcy.

The Motor City became a symbolic battleground during the election, with Romney proudly touting his father’s ties to the auto industry, and the Obama campaign relentlessly attacking the Republican for a Times op-ed he had written years earlier headlined “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.”

“The president took the title of that op-ed, which of course was written by editors of the New York Times, and used it to say Gov. Romney was being insensitive about his own home city,” complained former campaign spokesman Ryan Williams. Romney’s article argued that beleaguered automakers should consider going through a managed bankruptcy instead of taking a bailout but, Williams said, “the president’s campaign intentionally tried to blur the lines. It worked. And several months later, the city is going bankrupt because of liberal democratic officeholders.”

Referring to the bankruptcy, Putin’s posturing, and the Mali conflict, Williams added, “Obviously, it would have been nice if any of these incidents would have occurred during the campaign to vindicate Romney. You would never want to see the bankruptcy of a major U.S. city, or the president embarrass himself on the world stage like he has, but Gov. Romney did discuss these potential outcomes.”

Romneyites are processing these feelings of vindication in different ways. The campaign’s chief strategist, Stuart Stevens, said he has been disappointed to see their central message — that Obama would be unable to restore America’s strength — turned out to be so accurate: “If there is a part of the world in which America is stronger, it’s hard to find. What’s the president doing? Attacking a talk radio host. He has criticized Rush Limbaugh with more conviction than the leaders of Iran… We can only hope it improves. ”

And Jennifer Rubin, the conservative Washington Post blogger who became Romney’s most outspoken advocate in the press, accused members of the news media of failing to take the Republican’s arguments seriously, while allowing the incumbent skate through the race untouched.

“As for the media, they are the least self-reflective people I know,” Rubin said. “The left-leaning media has carried the president’s water faithfully, eschewing the least bit of critical analysis. Now they don’t like the result?”

For Zwick, perhaps the closest thing to a true Romney loyalist on the campaign last year, the belief that his candidate turned out to be right offers little comfort. “It’s frustrating because there’s no way to correct it,” Zwick said. “We don’t do what they do in the U.K. and lead the opposition party when you lose. When you lose there is no way to sort of be vindicated. There’s no way to say, ‘OK, well, I didn’t win the presidency but I’m going to continue to fight.’ There’s no fighting. There’s no platform to do that. Fifty million Americans voted for the guy and yet it’s all for nothing.”

“I wish he’d run again,” Zwick added. “He’s not going to. But if he did, I’d be right there.”

Look guy, I explained how it is.

All your pontificating doesn’t change the fact that Romney survived the REPUBLICAN PRIMARIES and was the only choice we had left at that point. What you or I did at that time was washed away when our Candidates of choice didn’t make the big time.

I’m not sure why you seem to have a personal vendetta against me because I told you how it was and is, but enough already.

Romney lost and we are left with the Obama Regime. Get over it. You are acting like I chose Romney over the other Republicans during the Primaries, it didn’t happen.

BTW - The guy who runs this Site Voted for Romney as well in the General Election, as hesitantly as others here did, try breaking his balls for a while pal.

You and I are officially over.

Romney lost because he did not run against Obama. Calling him a good guy is not running against him. And yes, I know that he knows how to run, he did a job on conservatives every single chance he got. He doesn’t run against liberals. So Obama got a pass. He was required to run against Obama. He had to give people a reason to vote for him by contrasting himself with Obama. Either he could not make the contrast because he is too much like Obama or he would not make the contrast because he liked Obama too much. In any event, he never pressed his case.

The next problem with your blustery thesis is that I’m not a guy, your Bud or a pal. Third, the problem you continue to refuse to address is the fact the the liberals are attempting to manipulating conservatives in the republican party the way democrats manipulate their low info voters. A liberal is a liberal whether they have a (d) or an (r) next to their names. Conservatives do not support communists, liberals, socialists, marxists, or their ideas, period. A good GOPe-trained, low-info republican will support marxism, communism, socialism and liberalism if they are corralled into doing so.

You get your “balls broken” (figuratively) because you don’t see that the GOPe has manipulated you into voting the way you did and you are blindly defending your choice of voting for a socialist by trying to deflect your guilt on to those who could not of good conscience and principle allow themselves to be manipulated. I’ll put it in the vernacular you will better understand. You are trying to “break the balls” of people who refuse to vote for socialists, liberals, communists and marxists with (r) next to their names. That is why I responded to your original post. I responded to others as well.

So don’t consider yourself special. You’re not special with me, confused but not special. I don’t have any vendetta against you. You are just one of the sleeping, uninformed blind who needs a wake up call. Until conservatives wake up those who have been duped into thinking there are two workable political parties, there will be no improvement in this country.

Who Jim Robinson or anyone else on this site voted for is not my concern. But anyone who tries to make a case for that POS, gay agenda loving, baby killing, lying, socialist Romney will always have a problem with me. At least Jim Robinson seems to understand that there are people of conscience, principles and conviction who will never vote for socialists like Romney, even if they have an (r) next to their name. You don’t seem to understand that at all.

And the next time you decide to invoke Mr. Robinson’s name as cover for your ridiculous rants, you should ping him.

Romney is from a long line of liberals. His father was a Saul Alinsky lover. He regularly lies. I’ve known that about him as long as I’ve known anything about him. I remember his father. So when he said he would secure the border and reverse Obamacare, I knew he was lying.

Mr. Etch-a-Sketch would not do any conservative sounding thing he promised. I live in Florida. I have Marco Rubio as a senator. He betrayed every conservative when he promised no amnesty while running for office.

Just imagine what it would have been like to have a presidential candidate who promised to behave conservatively but once elected, had a sudden and complete change of heart. That would have been Romney. As bad as TEA Party people in Florida felt after Rubio stabbed them in the back, that would just be a fraction of the feeling of betrayal conservatives would have felt if Romney had actually tried to win and succeeded.

You are absolute correct that the RINOs, GOPe and members of the RNC are our opposition. It is a disgrace that they hate us so much. They should just go join the democrats.

My mistake, I forgot to Ping him. I beg forgiveness.

I was too busy trying to scrape something off my shoe.

Again, why do you insist on lecturing me about Romney? I really don’t care.

Do you think you are telling me something new? I have no idea why you just keep going on and on with this. You’re becoming a Stalker. Like I said, go break someone else’s balls.

In case you missed it, Obama is King. Quit living in the past. It’s over and we lost. Get a life my FRiend. I have no interest in being part of your “if only Romney wasn’t the Republican Nominee” fantasy.

Did you read any of my responses to you? I supported Newt, as I think you said you did in the Primaries. Unlike you, I Voted for the only opponent to Obama in the General. Have you lost your mind accusing me of pushing Romney?

You are letting your fantasy turn you into a Stalker. We are done in case you haven’t figured it out yet. I don’t need to be harassed by you because you refuse to face reality. DO NOT POST TO ME AGAIN, the party is over.

Not very honest are you. Your entire original rant was on why conservatives should have given up on their principles and supported Romney because the GOP said so. And I posted concerning your comments that you believe adhering to conservative principles gave us Obama instead of it being the responsibility of the liberal republicans who refused to run against him.

You avoid addressing the GOPe manipulation question. Why do you have so much trouble addressing this fact — that you are being manipulated by the GOPe just as the democrats manipulate blacks and other low info voters? You would much rather hold conservatives responsible for adhering to their principles than to hold the GOPe and liberals responsible for their acts. Why is it so much more important for you to blame conservatives than understand that there was never any GOPe plan for a “republican” to win? Are the GOPe friends of yours?

Here are some other questions you will probably never answer honestly:

Are you a republican, or a conservative?
Do you put service to your GOPe overlords over conservative principles?
Do you begrudge conservatives the right to stand for their principles?
Are you willing to sell out conservative principles for liberal candidates because some party republicans arrange it?
Do you believe we should place party over principles?
Should conservatives feel responsible for a non competing candidate who refused to confront liberals and make a case for himself losing an election?

Now addressing your smoke screen:

LOL! Someone responds to your multiple posts to them on one thread and you imagine they are your stalker? WOW! You have a pretty high opinion of yourself and your beliefs. I suggest that you get used to people who have opinions different from you responding to you. And if you can’t take it, ignore them. Stand by your own advice to yourself and be as you said ‘officially over’ don’t lie about it and keep on posting to them as you did to me.

I don’t expect you to answer any of my questions because the answers are self evident. Your screen name belies your political beliefs. You are the republican first. I am a conservative. You keep worrying about support for “the republicans.” I’ll keep working for conservative principles.

You are a liar and a misdirector. My US Marine, drill sergeant dad would have called you an agitator. You think you are a magician and no one sees you refusing to address the real questions. Cry all you want that conservatives should blame themselves for the non candidate. Keep whining about people who talk about a former candidate on a thread about that former candidate. Keep refusing to address why republican party loyalty is more important to you than conservative principles. Then blame all your faulty reasoning problems on someone stalking you.

Your paranoia is not very becoming. If you don’t want a response, don’t post to people.

I appreciate the time you spent kicking the dead horse.

You're right, I'm not very honest, you got me, I'm an Obama loving Libtard who has infiltrated the bowels of Free Republic in order for you to wear out your keyboard.

My “original rant” was simply pointing out that we ended up with Romney as the Republican Nominee, whether we liked it or not, making him the only alternative to Pharaoh Obama.

That is why I followed the “Levin Doctrine” in the General Election. Everything leading up to that point was mute the moment Romney clinched the Republican Party Nomination.

It's not Rocket Surgery you know, but it might be Brain Science.

Now, stop bothering me. Your conclusions about what you think I believe are pure fantasy. Go see a Psychiatrist so you can work through it, really.

"I appreciate the time you spent kicking the dead horse."

You may be slow to understand what's happening around you, but I wouldn't exactly refer to you as a dead horse.

Conservatives are usually not as sheep-like as you. But then a republican such as you wouldn't know anything about that. The GOPe decides to run Obama (r), you'll be right there voting for him in the general election.

Either start thinking for yourself and stand for conservative principles or keep being a blind follower and vote for the liberals just as you're commanded by your GOPe rulers. Unlike them, I'm not here to control your vote.

Do you know the difference between your mixed metaphors, "Rocket Surgery" and "Brain Science?" Finally, if you don't want an answer from me, don't bother to post to me.

Goodness, another ankle biter chimes in.

I guess that means Jim Robinson and Mark Levin were big Romney supporters too. I’m sure you can do a search so you can find Jim’s thoughts on the subject after we got stuck with Romney as the Republican Nominee.

I was a Newt supporter before he dropped out of the Race, not that it makes any difference in today’s world.

I will admit to being Anti Obama because that is the only reason I Voted in the General Election for his Opponent.

You didn’t do the same so I guess we can follow your logic and assume you were an Obama supporter. /s

No need to respond. Facts is Facts, pure and simple.

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.