No. And obsessing about him is kind of....
With all of the promises made by Mr. Obama starting with jobs, jobs, jobs that
are unfulfilled, the wisdom of Mitt Romney is stunning. In a contest between an
experienced executive/administrator with knowledge of industrial policy and a
community organizer with a left wing agenda (And reads from the teleprompter
very well.), the country chose the wrong one.
Still talking about Romney???If the GOP hopes to win in 2016 they
really need to start looking forward and not backward.Or are the
candidates so terrible for 2016 that they must obsess over the past? Is that the
Romney has never been relevant. I don't see that changing now.
" the wisdom of Mitt Romney is stunning"Mitt Romney recently
came out in support of raising the min wage. That is something that the majority
of repubs are against. Is mitt Romney still wise and the repubs wrong? Or are
the repubs wise and mitt Romney not?
No and his movie proved it. I watched it hoping to find that he was just
misunderstood but he really is out of touch. This country can't
take any more "creative destruction" thank you.
I'm in favor of Mitt Romney to run against the Clintons in the next
presidential election. As an ordinary American working class liberal I
see the difference between Republicans and Democrats as the competition between
business and people. I think Mitt Romney is a perfect representative of the
business orientated people of America. And while the difference between a
Republican businessman and a Democrat businessman is only slight. the Clintons
seemed to give more thought to people.
Romney is potentially relevant for 2016.And it is because the GOP
field is again very weak.What a conundrum for the GOP. Regardless
of who the GOP runs, a big chunk of the party is not going to be happy.If Romney were an independent, and unencumbered by the winds of the GOP base,
heck, I may even vote for him.But, Romney would not be Romney. He
would morph to be whatever he thought would get him elected.He would
pander to the right wing base and in doing so, become unappealing to the
moderate and independent voters.
To an educated, responsible, and self thinking person, he is relevant.To liberal followers. No!
Joe Blow,I would rather take Romney's morphing and pandering
than Obama's lies.
Let's see: he got completely drubbed in the Electoral College, even though
he received all of the "anyone but that Black foreigner" vote.He, his family, and staff were so convinced he would win that they were
actually surprised and had no preparation for a concession speech.Maybe he is relevant to mormons and republicans, but America said no to him in
a loud voice.
@worf..You described what moderates and liberals think..... but what do
conservatives think of him....?
@worf 10:21 p.m. May 22, 2014To an educated, responsible, and self
thinking person, he is relevant.To liberal followers. No!-------------------------I am well-educated (B.A., J.D.),
responsible and selv-thinking person. I am a true conservative (in this day and
age, that makes me a mainstream, moderate Repulican). For those reasons, I find
Romney to be absolutely irrelevant.Thanks for the laugh. You should
know, though, that your comment is totally incorrect.
Interesting title to this article. I have trouble recalling when Mitt Romney was
If you want a job and an actual paycheck, Mitt Romney is very relevant! If you
want food stamps and welfare entitlements, not so much! If you want
accountability and transparency from your government, Mitt Romney is very
relevant. If you are willing to accept and embrace stonewalling, lies, broken
promises and cover-ups of one scandal after another, not so much!
Only in the pages of the Dnews, only in Utah.
He's not relevant if he doesn't join the conversation!Unless he gets out there and at least engages some people in debate.... his
ideas ARE irrelevant... because nobody knows what he is saying, or thinks about
any ideas he may have.He doesn't have to run for President to
be relevant. But he does have to get his ideas out there... some way...But I don't blame him one bit for stepping back. I have grand
kids now too... and would not get engaged in a bitter and divisive and knock
down drag out job like being President of the United States.The
"Attack him from every angle... every day" tactics didn't start
with Obama. It happened to Bush too... and it has happened to almost every
President we have had.Not a job I would want...
Maybe he can be relevant by helping the republicans realize that America wants a
President that is a moderate. Maybe he can help republicans understand that
wages matter not just for CEO's but for those on the lowest end of the pay
scale (minimum wage).
4601 - So at this point six years of experience as the actual President of the
United States still means nothing to you? And if you think about it, a
community organizer is a lot closer to the Office of the President than a
corporate raider er I mean investment consultant. One makes a whole lot more
money than the other and gets a better tax rate, but one listens to and cares
about the needs of the people, not just the bank accounts of a privileged
few.And by the way, every April and October I listen to great wisdom
from men and women gathered in a great hall in a western city, who read their
comments from the teleprompter. I think the fact that they do it is evidence
that it is not a sinister practice and that moral teachings can be expounded,
even "from the teleprompter."
It's hard to believe that some Ron Paul people still think they're
"Tea Party" people. Barack Obama, the Democrats, and the US Socialists
(Occupy Wall Streeters) funded and manipulated a lot of Ron Paul sheep into the
"NO 1144" voter-suppression campaign, disrupting Republican primaries,
and favoring Democrat agendas like recognizing homosexual relationships as
marriages, legalizing marijuana, and advocating abolishing free trade and
ditching Israel.Meanwhile, Mitt Romney supported the real Tea Party.
During the Republican convention, Republicans implemented nearly all of the Tea
Party's platform proposals into the official Republican platform. Fiscal
responsibility, lowering taxes, streamlining the tax system, auditing the Fed,
returning more power to the states, and dumping ObamaCare for legislative reform
and free-market principles were all on Mitt Romney's presidential
platform.Some "Romney didn't help" quotes in this
article are reminiscent of the post-2012 bitterness from Dems, Ron Paul sheep,
and false tea partiers. Even already favored candidates, having an additional
vote of confidence from a stellar reputable conservative voice like Mitt Romney
can solidify those votes, and help voters recognize that their candidate
supports the same morally and fiscally conservative values as Mitt.
Please, give it a rest. You might as well talk about Goldwater.
I supposed it all depends upon WHICH Mitt Romney we are talking about.Flip-and-Flop...
Q: “Is Mitt Romney more relevant than ever?”A: No“An endorsement from someone like Mitt Romney matters only in the sense
that it means a pretty sizeable check will be headed that candidate’s
way”But feel free to keep dreaming…Q: Who
are the republicans putting up to run in 2016?A: Not Mitt RomneyBut feel free to keep dreaming…
No, he was more relevant in 2012. Also, anyone saying he was never relevant is
just as incorrect as the headline.
To one, he will always be the best choice for president of the United States of
America as he is head and shoulders above the now president - and all future
I sometimes wonder if there is intelligent life on the political left. No, just
kidding, I know there is. But it's unfortunate and disappointing that the
face of liberalism and the Democratic Party here on the DN comment boards hardly
ever rises above trolling and demonization. And, curiously, it's even worse
in the Trib. Maybe they're all heeding Cass Sunstein's call to engage
in cognitive dissonance in order to disrupt "the enemy". But I
don't expect those tactic wins many converts.