Didn't Romney embarrass himself enough in 2012? Well Hillary will trounce
Let's see -- not trounced in 2012, appears correct in light of foreign
policy gaffes during and since his defeat, Affordable Healthcare Act
repercussions have been significant, post-election popularity has remained
steady or gained (especially in people realizing he really is a good person; it
wasn't spin), people feel he can be trusted, we're due for party to
change at the top... If he has good ideas for current foreign affairs issues
and a plan to clean-up the Obamacare mess... yeah, he could give Hilary a good
run.Basically, nothing has tarnished him since. And yes, there are
good number people who voted for Obama in 2012 that have second guessed
themselves.He should avoid the circus of last time and not burn
himself up in the GOP Primary... let a primary be about who besides him should
run, squabbling amongst themselves... if he declares, he would already be the
As a lifelong member of the GOP who voted for Obama because my Party didny offer
anyone worth voting for the past two Presidential elections, If I had to choose
from among Jeb Bush, Bobby Jindal, Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, or
Mitt Romney, I would choose Romney.But what is this nonsense about
Mitt being "right about Russia"? Mitt never warned that Ukraine would be
embroiled in a civil war. Mitt didn't predict anything. All he said was
that Russia and Putin are our "geopolitical foe".
I personally think that Romney would have made a fantastic President. We are in
a world of hurt when it comes to the economy. Who better than Mitt to fix
it?Who could create jobs better?Mitt's experience with the
Olympics allowed him to rub shoulders with world leaders.He lived in
Europe for two years and learned to speak French.He has conducted business
around the world.He is smart enough to hire talent when he is not an
expert on something.That said; there is one sad fact, that as a
member of the LDS church bothers me. Over 20% of the population would never
vote for a Mormon. That would probably doom and attempt to run again.Mitt, love ya, but please don't run.
Romney didn't say Russia was our foe, he said they were our #1 geopolitical
threat. Has that not been shown to be true?Obama successfully mocked
Romney in the debate to the disadvantage of the USA. In real life, Putin has
successfully mocked Obama and NATO countries, repeatedly, to the disadvantage of
Ukraine. Have you read the news breaking on Forbes tonight about the
Crimean election sham? After the "election" scheduled in eastern Ukraine
on 5/11 to annex eastern Ukraine, where will Putin hold the next
"election"? Latvia? And after that?The problem isn't
just that Ukraine is embroiled in civil war that Romney didn't specifically
predict, the problem is Putin's imperial dream - our #1 geopolitical threat
just as Romney stated. Ukraine is a subset of that threat.Putin is
taking advantage of our president and his meaningless red lines and lines drawn
in the sand while the country keeps its head in the sand.
About as far fetched as his chance of winning in 2012
Not going to happen. The country should have elected him when we had the
chance. Last week we find out we had 0.1% economic growth. This country got it
soooo wrong with Obama.
Romney is too good for the political mess America has found herself in because
of he incompetency of Obama. Presently, America is on a slow but sure decline
and Hillary is perfect for finishing the job Obama started. Now, China is
becoming not only the number one economy but an emerging world superpower.
History will repeat itself as Hillary is set to repeat Obama's socialist
incompetent and corrupt legacy. Sadly it's the Americans who will make sure
that America's fate is sealed by making the same mistake of electing
someone who is weak, incompetent and does not fully believe and invest in the
Reasons why a third Romney run makes sense:Third time is the charm!
Ask Nixon...Republicans have no visible front runner. For those of
you who have forgotten the popular vote, the final popular vote totals were
65,899,660 for Obama-Biden (51.1%) and 60,932,152 (47.2%) for Romney-Ryan.
Romney was only 5 million votes shy of winning the popular vote and with the
state of things since the election Romney could overcome that margin better than
any other candidate.Romney has been right about foreign policy, the
economy, the Affordable Care Act and most other issues that he ran on.Romney has the national organizational structure that any other candidate
would have to build from the ground up, personal money/money backers, national
name recognition far and above any other potential Republican candidate. Another bloody RNC Primary would probably doom anyone else except
perhaps Jeb Bush.The nation has any Bush vs any Clinton fatigue.Mitt would be great at articulating mistakes in the last campaign and
how to lead and correct them in a new election.All of the Mormon
issues have been brought to light and more than enough reasonable people
don't have a problem with it.
"I personally think that Romney would have made a fantastic
President"I would agree with that with a caveat.If
Romney would be Romney, with all his business experience, I can agree.If
Romney would look at (insert issue here) and make decisions on where the data
took him, like all good businessmen would, he would do well.Unfortunately, he had to pander to the right wing and say things that he did
not believe, take positions that he was not comfortable with and become a person
he was not.He morphed into what someone else wanted him to be. That
makes him a sellout.No thanks.
Romney lost because 2 million fewer Republicans voted in 2012 than in 2008.
There are still plenty of Mormon-hating Conservatives out there and Romney
himself did not make the strongest case for why we should vote for him, other
than he was not Obama. If I thought he could tell his story better about exactly
what he would do (beyond "grow jobs"), how he would reform government,
reduce its size while increasing its efficiency (we are rated 65th in the world
by the Economist magazine in terms of government spending efficiency), then I
would think another run would be worthwhile. But in my view, he ran both
campaigns pretty much the same way. Just let it go people. That ship
That the Republicans would even consider running a two-time loser only shows how
desperate and out of touch they are, and how empty their viable candidate bucket
really is.That said, I think Romney is too smart to fall for it.
But who knows? Politics is very addicting.
"Romney didn't say Russia was our foe, he said they were our #1
geopolitical threat. Has that not been shown to be true?"No, he
did not say that. He said Russia was "a geopolitical foe" - one of
several geopolitical foes (echoing Bush's "Axis of Evil"
statements).Romney made no unusual or uniquely prescient
predictions, so he couldn't have "gotten it right" on Russia. And
Russia is not our "#1 threat"! Not by a long shot!Our return
to the Presidency will not happen with such thin reasoning and bogus claims. The
Republican Party - MY Republican Party - will only succeed by solid principles
of liberty and equality as we did from Freemont and Lincoln, to Reagan and Bush
Sr. Half truths and speculative innuendo will only continue to marginalized us.
The nation made a terrible mistake in 2012, but it's a mistake we're
all going to have to live with. Mitt would have made a great
president, but he's not running again.
OH PLEASE! Please nominate Romney again that would make Hillary's landslide
victory that much bigger!
It is being reported that Romney Care in Mass is being dismantled and
participants moved to ACA. Maybe he was smart mot taking ownership during the
I hope a third Romney run is impossible. Bad as Obama is, and I never wanted
him as President -- I wrote in Huntsman, who would have been a great president
-- Romney would have been infinitely worse. We dodged a huge disaster when
Romney was sent packing. Hopefully he will stay gone.
Are Republicans so bound to the past that they can't let it go? Time to
In our party Chris Christie has been shown to be on the take in his home state,
were he to venture onto the federal stage he would be eviscerated...as he should
be. Paul Rand has gone so far to the right he no longer is seen as a centrist
or a has a fiscal plan that is plausible.If Mitt could be trusted he
would have been a great man for the white house but he told so many whoppers
during his run he became unelectable.The parties are rehashing the
Bushes and Clintons and Mitts. That way they can keep the electorate in the
dark, keep the middle class in limbo and with power and money can elect the
person who will run Washington and ignore the country.Both parties
have front runners just neither party has a winner.
To quote a Disney song that's been pounded into our ears recently, let it
go, DN. Mitt Romney is never going to be president.
Romney had Obama on the ropes after the first debate and somehow let his
handlers tell him to take his foot off the gas. What image do we have of Mitt in
those last two debates? Smiling as Obama personally thrashed him on TV. Mitt had his chance. He sold out to the far right too often instead of
being a fiscal conservative who let everyone else battle over social issues
(issues that don't get solved by politics). I would never vote
for him again and I had reservations about whether he was authentic or electable
during the last election. One of the things analysts said killed Romney was
evangelicals simply did not turn out to vote. By not voting, they chose Obama
over Mormon Romney.If Jon Hunstman made a run again, I would support
him. He is a fiscal conservative who isn't afraid to stand up against the
liberal spenders but also took a stand against the extreme right of his own
party. What this country needs is a strong dose of independent and
a lot less Democrat and Republican. Huntsman is that guy.
From the article: University of New Hampshire political science professor Dante
Scala said: "Typically, activists up here are looking to the next thing,
what's the new thing in American politics. They're also looking for a
winner in 2016," Scala said. "And Mitt does not fit either of those
categories." They are looking for a new thing, a winner, and Mitt does
not fit those categories.I think with the photo-ops and just happening
lately to be there at the right time to comment that Mitt would love to be
begged to come in and be the Republicans savior. I think it's a great idea.
I agree with ElmoBaggins.Let him run again.Let him lose again.Works for me.
I'm not expecting anything really of this... But why not? Trying to
support righteous people in office is an unending burden, but having someone as
clear-cut and obviously suited as Br. Romney to back makes it fun.
If Mitt Romney would turn on his party and serve the people instead of his
instincts? He would say corporate bribery is against our laws and must be
ended.Mitt Romney would be our next president. If he could only make
himself do what is right. That would be in direct opposition to Satan/instinct
programs power over status quo operations. He would definitely need God to help
him to open his mouth. All things are possible with God.
Sadly, American has shown that there are still far too many uninformed,
low-information voters who are not yet ready to get off of that
what's-in-it-for-me bandwagon. After the last presidential
election, I watched as a TV crew went out on the street to talk to the first
dozen Obama supporters they could find at random. Only 2 even knew who the vice
president was and besides mentioning getting Bin Laden (which Obama had very
little to do with), none of them could name anything constructive Obama had
accomplished during his first term. They were basically excited about having
Obama as president, but with no good reasons why. It was truly sad and
pitiful.Even with the disaster that Obamacare is proving to be and
the obviously botched foreign policy moves Obama has made, liberals are still
willing to continue going down with the ship rather than admit they were wrong
about Obama and/or that a change of direction would've been so much better
(and still is).Everyone except politically blind dyed-in-the-wool
liberal Obama supporters now know what huge mistakes the last two election
Mitt Romney is completely tone deaf when it comes to talking about working
people. There is no groundswell of people regretting voting for Obama over Mitt
Romney. I don't understand the people who seem to view him as some kind of
@dmcvey:That's the problem. People don't understand.People have voted in corrupt leaders who placed us into a seventeen
trillion dollar debt, and don't understand how it happened.Half
our people are on their knees for assistance, and don't understand why.Despite a huge amount of funding, our citizens are under educated. Many
don't understand that either.Pathetic!
Mittens, another Bush, or Chris Christie? If I were a republican & had these
3 choices; I'd vote Libertarian.
per dmcvey moments agoMitt knows as much about working people as GHW
Bush knew about barcode scanners in grocery stores.
@ Brio, you say "American has shown that there are still far too many
uninformed, low-information voters." That's exactly my point!
That's exactly what the Republicans are relying on. Without them, they are
done and over.@Wally West, vote Democratic.
to EsquireDemocrat/Republican. Its like Coke/Pepsi, Burger
King/McDonalds, Nissan/Renault, yada yada yada.
Man!, oh, man!, oh, man!I'd fight for Mitt Romney again in a
heartbeat! I posted 5,000+ pro-Romney commments on one popular website alone in
2008 and 2012. Over a period of 5+ yrs of reading about Romney I discovered no
less than 28 (yes, 28) separate qualifications Romney had to be President,
and.....NOT ONE came from a Deseret News-researched story. Not. One.The 'mainstream' media crucified Mitt Romney.Who
cares?The mainstream media is waaaaaay liberally-biased and is
America's number ONE enemy. That's right: number one.Any
wise person knows if today's mainstream media says something is bad,
it's good. If they say it's good, it's bad.Romney
@ Itsjstmeagain - Merritt Island, Fl "It is being reported that Romney Care
in Mass is being dismantled and participants moved to ACA. Maybe he was smart
mot taking ownership during the campaign."If you'll do some
research, Romney actually wanted a much more streamlined, simpler, and cheaper,
form of insurance in Massachussetts. It was the Democrat-controlled state
legislature which added on so many bells and whistles which made MA's state
health care burdensome and expensive.So blame them, not Romney.Your move....
Romney might have been a good President, but he was an incompetent candidate,
both in his public statements (being unable to remember from one day to the next
what his position was on any given issue and thinking that reporters should not
notice or comment upon his inconsistencies) and in his choice of campaign
advisors (who assured him that he was winning right up until the polls closed
and their employment was ended).
Huntsman was the more electable candidate in 2012 and would be again in 2016.
Although I voted for Romney in the November 2012 elections, I favored Ron Paul.
Ron Paul is more committed to Constitutional freedom and the preservation of the
Bill of Rights than Romney is. If Romney runs against Rand Paul in
the 2016 GOP primaries, I will support Rand Paul. However, if Romney wins the
GOP nomination, I will vote for him.
I think perhaps those demanding Romney to run again need to believe him when he
said he would not. What is there about "no" that you do not understand?