Posted on 02/14/2008 9:12:59 AM PST by JRochelle
Snip Let us not forget that Romney snapped his fingers before the election and decided to become a conservative by switching his positions on a litany of key issues, even though his past record was moderate. There were endless gaffes throughout the campaign in which he reinforced the well-earned perception that he would say anything to get elected--from describing himself as a lifelong hunter even though he had hunted only twice, for saying he watched his father march with MLK, for claiming an endorsement of the NRA he never received, etc.
He also failed to emotionally connect with voters. I would go to Romney speeches all year, and talk to audience members after who would tell me they agreed with what he said, but he was "too slick" and "too packaged." It never ceased to amaze me how emotionally tone deaf he was as a candidate, most notable was when he said his sons were serving their country by working to get him elected. I went to a townhall meeting just days before the New Hampshire primary in which a woman said her 26-year old cousin had been paralyzed in a rugby accident, and she asked Romney for his position on stem cell research. Romney responded, "Great, thank you for the question" and he went on with a textbook answer about pluripotent cells without offering any sympathy. Romney's checklist conservatism appealed to desperate conservatives on a cerebral level, but he never reached people emotionally as Huckabee and McCain did. If you want to know why McCain beat Romney, look no further than the final debate between them at the Reagan Library. When they were asked why Reagan would endorse them, Romney recited a laundry list of issues on which Reagan would have agreed with him, while McCain
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Copyright New York Times Company Apr 11, 2003
(Boston Globe)
WASHINGTON - Governor Mitt Romney refused yesterday to endorse tax cuts at the heart of President Bush’s economic program, but he told members of the state’s congressional delegation during a private meeting he also would not oppose the cuts because he has to maintain “a solid relationship” with the White House.
Meeting with the all-Democratic group of House and Senate members for the first time in Washington, D.C., the Republican governor found himself challenged as the group talked about the state’s $3 billion budget gap for its coming fiscal year, as well as the Bush administration’s recent decision not to include Massachusetts in a $100 million round of federal antiterrorism funding.
Representative Barney Frank of Newton asked the governor whether he had spoken against the $726 billion worth of tax cuts the president is currently pushing at the federal level. Coming on top of $1.6 trillion worth of tax cuts in 2001, Democrats argue that the next round will expand the budget deficit, drain the US Treasury of money for social programs, and prevent the federal government from assisting states facing revenue losses caused by the downturn in the economy.
Romney said he had not publicly opposed the cuts, according to one observer at the meeting, prompting Frank to ask, “Will you?” Romney replied that he probably would not. The answer triggered laughter in what both sides described as an otherwise bipartisan session.
“I was very pleased,” Frank said afterward. “Here you have a freshman governor refusing to endorse a tax cut presented by a Republican president at the height of his wartime popularity.”
According to the observer, who spoke on condition of anonymity, Romney told the delegation that he “won’t be a cheerleader” for proposals he doesn’t agree with, “but I have to keep a solid relationship with the White House.”
How else do you explain the, what was it, 30-40% of people polled who said they could never vote for a Mormon for president?
That question had nothing to do with Romney or his politics at all. It was a straight-forward question and a pretty clear result.
Mitt's religion clearly sunk him. With that "never vote for a Mormon" contingent eliminated, he would have been able to get the nomination, I believe.
But Resty!
It appears that YOUR post at #167 has been REMOVED!!
Just WHAT did you say NOW?
Interesting; but not logical.
All I can say to that is, I told you so. It appears that we were right all along. Wasn’t it you that proclaimed loudly and often that there was only a small, fringe group that opposed Mormonism and it wouldn’t make any difference at all in the election?
Looking for a link to your posts.......
"Governor Mitt Romney refused yesterday to endorse tax cuts at the heart of President Bush’s economic program, but he told members of the state’s congressional delegation during a private meeting he also would not oppose the cuts because he has to maintain “a solid relationship” with the White House."
There is zero evidence that he opposed them.
When yer nose to nose....
...when yer toes to toes....
Okay, so that's his change in position. 14 years ago he thought it would be a good idea to allow gays to serve openly, and now he supports the current "don't ask, don't tell" policy. I don't consider that a major change.
This wasn't about the election; it was about the primaries.
The percentage of strong anti-Mormon fervor is higher among Republicans, and I believe it sunk him.
I think he could have overcome it at the national level.
Hope you enjoy President Obama.
1 Kings 19:9-10
9. There he went into a cave and spent the night. And the word of the LORD came to him: "What are you doing here, Elijah?"
10. He replied, "I have been very zealous for the LORD God Almighty. The Israelites have rejected your covenant, broken down your altars, and put your prophets to death with the sword. I am the only one left, and now they are trying to kill me too."
I understand taxes.
Too bad you let your Mormon bias stop you from supporting a true conservative. Tancredo, Hunter, Thompson....there were plenty, if Romney hadn’t flip-flopped and bought himself a place in the top three.
Romney is the one who powered himself into a posistion to disrupt the electoral process with money. The problem was, nobody bought it (but him).
If Obama is elected, it is no more my fault than yours.
My question is:
How can a person, born into a multi-generational Mormon family, raised in the LDS church, gone to an LDS school, taught in their churches, been on missionary duty, held high positions within the Organization, just HOW would a person like that EVER had a 'position' that was pre-abortion to BEGIN with???
ONE???
Read the rest of it. Arguing over a failed and irrelevant candidate is getting us nowhere. You see only what you want to see and I see things that concerned me enough to make me see them through an opposing set of glasses. He has no relevance now or in the future, so I’ll concede this as an uneccessary exercise.
A bigoted statement about Mormonism is ANYTHING that is not according to what we want folks to find out about our Beloved Organization®.
--MormonDude(We do have the answers. When would be a good time for a couple of our fine, young Missionaries stop by your home to talk to you?)
“by switching his positions on a litany of key issues, even though his past record was moderate.”
The author repeats the line “litany of key issues” but doesn’t list them. Why? That’s because there is only one issue he switched on (abortion) and that was in the middle of his term as Governor.
The Don Kroah show on WAVA had a guest warning people to not vote for Romney because he’s Mormon, and I personally know Christians who said they wouldn’t vote for him because of that issue alone.
The bottom line is the author of this article is a bit disingenuous.
No problem.
Mitt will have a Damacus road experience where he 'sees the Light'.
A 'come to Jesus' moment where he recognizes he's been following the wrong path.
THEN all the Baptist and Catholics and maybe even Presbyterians will embrace him and propel him into the POTUS in 2012; all past error then forgiven.
"Waaaahhh! I'm telling! I'm telling!!!!"
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.