Posted on 09/05/2013 9:40:20 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
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.”
Admirers point to other examples of Romney’s unrewarded wisdom, as well.
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.”
********************************
I don't know what I'd do if he were to run again. Throwing myself in front of a bus comes to mind.
Demographics are destiny. Romney would have won if the population looked like it did in Reagan’s time. But that’s not today’s reality. And while there may have still barely been enough white people in the United States in 2012 to elect a GOP president, Romney wasn’t an energizing enough candidate to pull off the required perfect storm of suburban and exurban turnout - that needed to happen in the face of a tidal wave of media negative coverage.
Sure he did. Karl Rove loved him. So did Paul Ryan when his turn came.
That makes it plural.
Oh, puh-leeeeeeeeze. Romney agrees in principle with the entire twisted, government-nanny anti-free-market philosophy that is the foundation of Obamacare!!!!
It is just one example of the vast hypocrisy and insidious deceit in this article and in Romney's entire career. He says one thing, and DOES another. Idiots like the author of this article are blind to that truth.
Romney is a vampire -- he needs a stake driven through his political heart, and THE ONLY WAY TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN is to desert the Republican party. I have been registered in the Republican party since 1976, and I faithfully voted for its candidates from 1976 until 2012, when the party had the insane gall to ask me to vote against ALL of my own and America's moral and fiscal interests by "supporting" the placement of government-advancing tyrannical amoral (pro homosexual agenda, pro tax-funded abortion, pro environmental tyranny, pro nationalized health care) Romney in the White House. Voting for Romney would have been every single bit as nuts as voting for Obama. EVERY SINGLE BIT AS NUTS.
The Republican party, however, is completely oblivious to the fact that Romney is the antithesis of EVERYTHING I have been voting Republican for more than 35 years to oppose. As long as guys like Romney are tolerated, let alone promoted in in the Republican party, then the Republican party is the wrong party for me and the wrong party for America.
That is small consolation for losing to Obama because of a poorly run campaign.
Too bad the republicans spent most of the last presidential campaign fighting over Sandra Fluke and free condoms instead of driving home the truth about Obama:
His nonstop lies, wasting $900 billion in stimulus money by handing it over to his pals, bowing to his muslim rulers, stealing the equity from GM dealers and stockholders to give to his union buds, his multiple unconstitutional acts, Obamacare, Obamacare, Obamacare.....
The list is practically endles.
But republicans let democrats dictate the campaign agenda and they treated Obama the criminal with kid gloves.
Absolutely false.
Then you are woefully ignorant of the man Romney. You don't have to be one to worship sodomy, and Romney was a sodomy worshiper. He pledged to sodomize the Boy Scouts years ago. He performed a same-sex "wedding" in Massachusetts after he improperly implemented what the legislature would not. He is all for sodomizing our military, and we would have gotten the same result with Romney as with Obama.
And his pathetic response to a question as to his thoughts on the Chick-fil-A Day demonstration? "That's not part of this campaign."
Sorry, Romney was as leftist as Obama on this issue. He is the Father of Same-sex "Marriage" in this country.
Someone please tell me that this article is a joke. Romney says whatever it is politically expedient for him to say depending on who is audience is. As a result, he’s bound to be accidentally right now and again.
problem was he was a candidate that really did not care about becoming president... he probably would’ve been a very good president...
I rest my case.
A state mandate versus a federal mandate.
Still don't see the difference? One can move out of a state when one disagrees with the state's policies and laws and remain in the USA. What are your options when you don't agree with the federal government's policies and laws?
Not saying I think RomneyCare was a good idea even for my neighbors to the south, but I do think that different states having different policies is a very good thing.
That’s it. It was his blatant dishonesty. He pushed abortion for his entire adult life. Pushed gay rights. Pushed mandated big government healthcare. Pushed liberal judges. Refused to fight for conservatives or conservatism. Then he suddenly claimed he reversed positions on everything, yet he continued flip-flopping on his signature accomplishment. Big Government RomneyCare. He is as dishonest as they come. Will say or do whatever he thinks he has to say or do to get elected. When he stands smiling angelically on a stage bragging about his conservative credentials, he has “LIAR!” written in big bold red letters across his forehead.
He is an insult to conservatism.
Total fraud. Total loser.
By the way,in the debates when asked to list his conservative accomplishments his list had two items. Saved the Olympics, got married and raised a family. Most of what he accomplished as governor was liberal so he drew a blank.
The Republican party, however, is completely oblivious to the fact that Romney is the antithesis of EVERYTHING I have been voting Republican for more than 35 years to oppose.
I just recently dropped my republican voter registration.
Romney’s ex-aides were in the room with 0bama designing 0bamaCare.
Romney COULDN’T attack 0bama’s greatest weakness BECAUSE ROMNEY WAS IT’S INTELLECTUAL FATHER.
Still don’t see the issue?
Conservatives do not push anti-free enterprise, anti-liberty big government mandated programs at any level of government.
Personally, I would HATE seeing the Republican party be responsible for nationalized health care, forced social acceptance of open homosexuality, more and more environmental strangulation of energy and food production (a Republican created the EPA, after all), and public funding of abortion.
If Mitt and Ann were in the WH right now, THAT IS WHAT WOULD BE HAPPENING under the REPUBLICAN banner.
I am glad Romney lost, I thank Almighty God that Romney lost, and the fact that conservative freedom-loving Americans were smart enough and righteous enough to reject the false promise and genuine THREAT, both moral and financial, that Romney represented, is a true sign of hope. We had the MORALITY to reject this amoral person even at the price of having to deal with an equally amoral DEMOCRAT doing the same.
More like worshippers.
Not actually true, so far as I can tell.
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.