A whole new Romney for 2012 presidential run

[BayGBM]

A whole new Romney for 2012 presidential run
The early Republican favorite is wearing Gap skinny jeans and going tieless on network TV. But despite his makeover, he still has a hard time connecting with voters.
By Paul West, Los Angeles Times

Defying his reputation as a 1950s square, the new, more casual Mitt Romney is popping up around the country as he readies a second run for president. He's going tieless on network TV, strolling NASCAR pits in Daytona and sporting skinny Gap jeans bought for him by his wife.

His latest campaign book, just out in paperback, opens with a regular-guy scene: wealthy Mitt in a Wal-Mart checkout line, buying gifts for his grandsons and comparing the surroundings to Target, another discount store he says he's familiar with.

The image tweaks are part of a broader makeover as Romney prepares to run from what should be an enviable spot: He's the early Republican favorite — though far from an inevitable nominee.

The former Massachusetts governor will start out with valuable presidential campaign experience from his 2008 try, and a deeper financial network than his Republican rivals. The national economic debate plays to his background as an investment executive and "gives him a big advantage," said Carl Forti, a former top advisor.

Yet for every edge, there are drawbacks. Taken together, they make Romney an unusually weak front-runner.

One of his biggest problems is "a suspicion that he is not as authentic as voters would like and he doesn't connect as well with voters as they would like," said Whit Ayres, a Republican pollster not aligned with any candidate. "Politicians who are viewed as authentic have a much easier time connecting with the voters they are wooing. People like Ronald Reagan and [New Jersey Gov.] Chris Christie seem to have no trouble connecting, in part because they seem so comfortable in their skin."

The problem has been fed by the fact that, in each of his runs for public office, Romney has remade himself. Last time out, he shed his moderate social views on abortion and gay rights, then struggled to convince primary voters of his conservative bona fides. A perception grew that the handsome candidate, with his almost-too-perfect hair and teeth and seemingly scripted answers to every question, would say anything to get elected.

Meantime, religious conservatives, uneasy with his devout Mormon beliefs, failed to warm to his candidacy — and that remains a problem, particularly in Southern primaries.

In 2008, he had "no overarching theme to answer the question, 'Why should I vote for Mitt Romney?'" said an advisor, requesting anonymity to discuss his candidate's prospects candidly. Romney's campaign book, "No Apology: Believe in America," attempts to frame an answer around a theme of national greatness.

If 2012 were a typical nomination campaign, Romney's status as the establishment favorite would play to his advantage in the nomination contest. But today's GOP is consumed by anti-establishment fervor. Energy in the Republican primaries is likely to be pulsing from fired-up "tea party" backers, and Romney will face fierce competition for their support from more-conservative rivals.

His most serious new challenge involves an issue that wasn't a major factor last time: "Romneycare," the Massachusetts healthcare plan he signed into law in 2006. It features a provision just like the one that has conservatives outraged over President Obama's plan — a government mandate that requires virtually everyone to purchase medical insurance or pay a penalty.

"I still think he has to explain the Massachusetts healthcare law in terms that will satisfy the conservative base in the party, and I think that's a tall order," said former Rep. Vin Weber, policy chairman of Romney's 2008 campaign, who is supporting fellow Minnesotan Tim Pawlenty this time.

Romney defends his Massachusetts creation by arguing that applying a mandate nationwide, as Congress has done, violates states' rights guaranteed under the 10th Amendment of the Constitution.

But few outside the Romney camp think a legalistic explanation will satisfy conservatives fed up with what they see as excessive government power.

In his most high-profile appearance so far this year, at a conservative convention in Washington, Romney never mentioned his healthcare plan. His remarks, bashing Obama, were in line with a cautious strategy designed to minimize unforced errors.

A formal candidacy announcement from Romney would be a technicality; for months, he has been quietly lining up support from insiders and big fundraisers, while successfully limiting media exposure. His visits to key primary states often take place in private and without advance notice. He declined an interview for this article through his press secretary, Eric Fehrnstrom, who said Romney wasn't scheduling newspaper or magazine interviews at this time.

Tonight, Romney will raise his profile with his first public appearance since last fall in New Hampshire, the first primary state.

His moves so far have been aimed at correcting a flaw from 2008: peaking before it mattered. In both Iowa and New Hampshire, he built — and lost — early leads. "The one thing I learned from the last campaign I ran is that we got in too early," he told Hugh Hewitt, among the conservative radio hosts he has cultivated.

A stealth campaign has worked to his advantage up to now, helping him dodge the intense scrutiny that is a front-runner's curse. When he told CNN's Piers Morgan, at the height of the pro-democracy uprising in Cairo, that he would "avoid the term dictator" in describing Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Romney received none of the attention Vice President Joe Biden got five days earlier for the same eyebrow-raising remark.

Romney, who turns 64 this month, has streamlined his campaign organization, by reducing the number of voices in the inner circle and shifting his longtime aide and 2008 campaign manager, Beth Myers, out of an operational role. He isn't planning to spend his personal fortune the same way he did last time, when he seeded his candidacy with more than $42 million of his own money. But with a net worth of at least $190 million, he can always dip into his own pocket.

As for doubts about authenticity, Romney is counting on the electorate being less concerned with past inconsistencies than in picking a candidate who can turn the economy around. Brushing aside a question from CNN's Morgan about his tendency to flip-flop, Romney said, "People in America want to know who can get 15 million people back to work."

[240 is Back]

LOL @ Romney going after NASCAR voters.

They see him as another John Kerry.  He was anti-gun, pro abortion (his family even donated money to planned parenthood!!!), and wrote romneycare.  And he defended romneycare this week repeatedly.

he should just kick back and let the GOP winner choose him as Veep.  He just doesn't seem authentic.  You listen to a huck talk, or a barbour talk, or bachmann or christie - they sounds authentic and real.  People like Palin and Romney and Rudy - they were libs when convenient and they're tea party when convenient.

[Soul Crusher]

Embarrassing.  He should just be himself. 

[240 is Back]

Embarrassing.  He should just be himself. 

I dunno.......  you probably wouldn't like the TRUE mitt.  He's a lifetime liberal, in case you didn't know... He switched to "I'm a down south righteous tea party conservative (like palin) once that got popular.  He's not, as you know...


Romney was all about raising taxes and adding fees to everything as Gov. - including tons of new payroll taxes. 

He wanted the state to manage damn near every aspect of peoples' life - healthcare included. 

Quote: "my answer is yes. It's liberal in the sense that we're getting our citizens health insurance"

He also ordered town clerks to allow same sex marriage. 

[BayGBM]

LOL @ Romney going after NASCAR voters.

They see him as another John Kerry.  He was anti-gun, pro abortion (his family even donated money to planned parenthood!!!), and wrote romneycare.  And he defended romneycare this week repeatedly.

he should just kick back and let the GOP winner choose him as Veep.  He just doesn't seem authentic.  You listen to a huck talk, or a barbour talk, or bachmann or christie - they sounds authentic and real.  People like Palin and Romney and Rudy - they were libs when convenient and they're tea party when convenient.

x2 

[Purge_WTF]

  I'd never vote for a Mormon president.

[Dos Equis]

  I'd never vote for a Mormon president.

Why not?

[240 is Back]

 I'd never vote for a Mormon president.

i dont give a crap about religion.

I am a little concerned about a guy who changes positions so radically based upon what's popular at the time.  At least bachmann - who was considered a far-right loon 5 years ago - has always been consistent in her conservative values, and she is believable on it today.

On the other hand... Palin was talking about how she's okay with capping emissions, letting illegals stay if they sign a paper, TARP is so important to pass, etc - in the last 2 years.  She'll change positions on anything to be popular - and as president, she'll do it too (just as obama has).

I'd rather have someone I disagree with (but I know where he/she stands on the issue) than someone who tells me what I want to hear, who has a history of changing positions.

[Soul Crusher]

Yet you support obama.  Go figure.

[Purge_WTF]

Why not?

  A man whose life is dictated by a "faith" whose values and principles are so far out of whack running the free world makes me a tad uneasy.

[240 is Back]

Yet you support obama.  Go figure.

if romney's the nominee, I will get buck naked and take a picture with romney stickers all over me.  and i'll vote for him too.

Like I said (a million times) - i will vote for any repub candidate that isn't Palin.  It's that simple.  I don't think romney is the most consistent repub - I'd much rather a Christie or bachmann get it over a flipflopping Trump/ Palin/ Romney/ etc.

It's just which GOP candidate it better - and attacking Romney isn't an endorsement of Obama.  I can tell you that strawberry ice cream sucks, but coffee ice cream is awesome.  This isn't an endorsement of broccoli

[240 is Back]

  A man whose life is dictated by a "faith" whose values and principles are so far out of whack running the free world makes me a tad uneasy.

aren't all religions a little funny like that?  I mean, a book written by men about what is way above the comprehension of a man?

And romney's family $ being donated to Planned Parenthood tells me he's not the most religious dude anyway - but ya gotta hold the bible and go to church if you want the job of POTUS.  Too many people vote with their bibles.

[BayGBM]

To Quiet Critics, Romney Puts 2012 Focus on Jobs
By JEFF ZELENY

BARTLETT, N.H. — As Mitt Romney travels the country lining up contributors and influential Republicans for a second presidential bid, he is presenting himself as a ready-to-lead executive, gambling that a fluency in economic matters distinguishes him from other candidates and can help overcome concerns about authenticity that dogged his first race.

Mr. Romney makes the case, in private meetings with business owners and in appearances like a dinner speech here Saturday, that the halting economic recovery — even after solid job growth in February, the unemployment rate remains at 8.9 percent — provides a compelling rationale that he is the strongest candidate to create jobs and take on President Obama.

“I like President Obama,” Mr. Romney said, “but he doesn’t have a clue how jobs are created.”

The message is well suited to Mr. Romney’s background as a successful executive and former governor, as well as the man who rescued the 2002 Winter Games from financial trouble. But it may also be his best opportunity to try to steer around criticism over the health care plan he created in Massachusetts, which to many Republicans looks distressingly similar to the federal law signed last year by Mr. Obama.

And it offers him a chance to sidestep the concerns of social conservatives, some of whom question his commitment to their causes and are uncomfortable with his Mormon faith.

As he moves closer to formally opening his campaign, Mr. Romney has taken a far different approach than he did the last time. To avoid the risk of overexposure and early scrutiny, he is operating in a cautious, low-key fashion, building allies among Republicans by doling out money to candidates from his political action committee and testing themes on donors and other supporters with limited news coverage.

Mr. Romney is trying to present a more relaxed image to combat impressions that he is unapproachable and stiff. He has not been seen in a necktie for months — not in television appearances, meetings with donors or political dinners, including the one Saturday evening, where he was one of the few men wearing an open-collared shirt.

He turned up in the pit area of the Daytona 500 last month, mingling with race car drivers while wearing a Bass Pro Shops shirt. And last week, Mr. Romney, who put his wealth four years ago around $200 million, walked into Tommy’s Barber Shop in an Atlanta strip mall for a haircut. (Aides sent out a picture of him in the barber’s chair via Twitter.)

In the early maneuvering for the 2012 race, Mr. Romney has aimed his fire at Mr. Obama rather than any of his prospective Republican rivals, attacking the president as a weak leader who pursued a European-style big-government agenda for his first two years in office instead of focusing on jobs.

“The president points out that he inherited an economic crisis,” Mr. Romney told about 300 people at the Attitash Grand Summit Hotel. “He did, and he promptly made it worse.”

“The consequence is soaring numbers of Americans enduring unemployment, foreclosures and bankruptcies,” he continued. “This is the Obama Misery Index, and we’re not going to let the American people be fooled.”

So far Mr. Romney has offered few specific details beyond general Republican philosophies, saying only that the country needs “to believe in free enterprise, capitalism, limited government, federalism.” He delivered his speech with the aid of a Tele-prompter and laughed as he recalled the “humbling experience” of his last campaign. “I made more than my share of gaffes here,” he said.

He selected this town nestled in the White Mountains about 125 miles north of Manchester to offer one of the first extensive previews of his campaign themes. He shook hands with nearly everyone at the Carroll County Republican dinner in his first public visit to the state that holds the opening primary of the 2012 nominating season, a contest critical to his success.

“I spent my career in the private sector,” Mr. Romney said. “I know how jobs are created and how jobs are lost.”

In his 2008 race, Mr. Romney shed moderate stances on abortion and gay rights to align with a conservative electorate, prompting questions about whether his positions were driven by politics or conviction. This time, a concentration on jobs and the economy signals a return to themes he struck during his successful bid for governor in 2002. Yet his record as governor also provides one of his biggest obstacles.

More even than his faith and his social-conservative credentials, questions about the health insurance plan he signed into law in Massachusetts have left him open to criticism from his party.

The White House has joined in, showering unhelpful praise on the plan, which, like the federal law, includes a mandate for residents to carry insurance.

Mr. Romney defended the program again on Saturday night, saying that it was “unique to Massachusetts” and should not be imposed on other states. But his criticism of the national law — “I would repeal Obamacare, if I were ever in a position to do so,” he declared — has been overshadowed by his Republican rivals’ trying to conflate the two.

He devoted only a few moments of his speech to health care and tried to lighten the mood, saying: “You may have noticed that the president and his people spend more time talking about me and Massachusetts health care than ‘Entertainment Tonight’ spends talking about Charlie Sheen.”

Several Republican strategists who worked on Mr. Romney’s first presidential campaign said they had urged him to try to get ahead of the controversy a year ago during the national health care debate. But they said their suggestions had been overruled.

“He made a huge mistake not litigating his health care record when Obamacare was on the table,” said Alex Castellanos, a Republican strategist who advised the early stages of Mr. Romney’s last race. “He should have been the leading opponent and said, ‘I can tell you better than anyone, don’t do this.’ But now he’s chosen to litigate this during a campaign, which is the worst time to do it.”

The health care law, particularly the individual mandate, has been a catalyst for the anti-Obama energy of Tea Party supporters. But Mr. Romney and his advisers argue that voters will be more concerned with the economy and job creation.

Doug Gross, a prominent Iowa Republican and state chairman of Mr. Romney’s last campaign, said Mr. Romney had a chance to create new appeal if he could present himself as genuine and not as someone chasing voters far to the right.

“He was a relatively moderate governor of a Northeastern state, and he tried to come to Iowa to be a social conservative and it didn’t work,” Mr. Gross said. “If he can’t be perceived as a true fiscal conservative and a limited government guy — the burden of proof is against him. He’s got to overcome the burden.”

Mr. Gross and more than a dozen other former supporters who are not aligned with other candidates said they worried whether Mr. Romney could withstand scrutiny without being tempted to reinvent himself again. But they urged him to campaign in Iowa, even with its heavy social conservative presence, because economic concerns topped nearly everyone’s priority list.

Four years ago, Mr. Romney focused considerable attention on the Iowa caucuses, which open the nominating contest, only to finish well behind former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, who spent a fraction of the money Mr. Romney did but surged with the support of evangelical voters and social conservatives. Mr. Romney has yet to settle on a strategy this year, but aides said it would include all states.

As he mingled with Republicans here, Mr. Romney offered no hints about when he intended to formally open his candidacy. Delaying an announcement, his aides believe, postpones a bull’s eye that accompanies being perceived as a front-runner. Yet he has a fully formed campaign apparatus and national fund-raising network ready to fire up whenever he gives the signal.

[Dos Equis]

  A man whose life is dictated by a "faith" whose values and principles are so far out of whack running the free world makes me a tad uneasy.

That's pretty much every president and presidential candidate we've ever had.  Remember this from the 2008 campaign?  

September 27, 2007, 8:57 AM
The Democrats Quote Scripture
By JEFF ZELENY

HANOVER, N.H. – In the final moments of the Democratic presidential debate here last night, after nearly two hours of wading through their differences on Iraq, health care, tax policy and a variety of other weighty matters, the candidates were asked a crisp question: What is your favorite Bible verse?

Senator Barack Obama: “The Sermon on the Mount, because it expresses a basic principle that I think we’ve lost over the last six years.”

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton: “The Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I think that’s a good rule for politics, too.”

Mike Gravel: “The most important thing in life is love. That’s what empowers courage and courage implements the rest of our virtues.”

Representative Dennis Kucinich: “Prayer from St. Francis, which says, ‘Lord make me an instrument of your peace.’ ”

John Edwards: “What you do unto the least of those, you do unto me.”

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson: “The Sermon on the Mount, because I believe it’s an issue of social justice, equality, brotherly issues reflecting a nation that is deeply torn and needs to heal and come together.”

Senator Christopher J. Dodd: “The Good Samaritan would be a worthwhile sort of description of who we all ought to be in life.”

Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr.: “Christ’s warning of the Pharisees. There are many Pharisees, and it’s part of what has bankrupted some people’s view about religion. And I worry about the Pharisees.”

In the so-called Lightning Round of the debate, there was little time to elaborate. And none of the candidates cited a specific chapter or verse.

The answers from Mr. Obama and Mr. Richardson, for example, come from the Gospel of Matthew. The reply from Mr. Edwards also comes from Matthew, Chapter 25.

A quick check of an on-line Bible passage search found that several of the answers cannot be found in the Bible at all. (The Prayer from St. Francis, invoked by Mr. Kucinich, actually first became known in the early 20th century and gained popularity during World War II.)

Mrs. Clinton referred to her favorite verse as the Golden Rule, which is not listed as such in the Bible. However, Luke 6:31 offers the precise message to which she was referring: “Do to others as you would have them do to you.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/the-democrats-quote-scripture/

[Dos Equis]

Romney Slams President Obama's Health Care Law
Published March 05, 2011
Associated Press

BARTLETT, N.H. -- Call it an attempt to address an obvious political vulnerability.

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney on Saturday derided President Barack Obama's health care law -- modeled in some ways after one the ex-governor signed in Massachusetts -- as a misguided and egregious effort to seize more power for Washington.

"Obamacare is bad law, bad policy, and it is bad for America's families," Romney declared. "And that's the reason why President Obama will be a one-term president." He vowed to repeal it if he were ever in a position to do so, and drew hearty cheers from his Republican Party audience.

Then, raising the Massachusetts law, Romney argued that the solution for the unique problems of one state isn't the right prescription for the nation as a whole, and he acknowledged: "Our experiment wasn't perfect -- some things worked, some didn't, and some things I'd change."

"One thing I would never do is to usurp the constitutional power of states with a one-size-fits-all federal takeover," Romney said, again earning applause. "The federal government isn't the answer for running health care any more than it's the answer for running Amtrak or the post office."

With that, he used his first appearance before New Hampshire Republicans since the midterm elections to start addressing head-on the issue that's certain to be a hurdle in his all-but-certain presidential campaign.

Romney's states-rights pitch is one that GOP primary voters are likely to hear over the next year as he tries to persuade them to overlook his flaws because he alone is the strongest Republican to challenge Obama on the country's top issue -- the economy.

The failed candidate of 2008 is expected to formally announce a second candidacy later this spring. Campaign signs posted along the road leading to the hotel where he was speaking may have gotten a bit ahead of him. They said "Mitt Romney for President" and suggested that the theme would be "True Strength for America's Future."

Romney and his aides insisted they were old signs.

Among Romney's biggest challenges: explaining to GOP primary voters why he signed a law that became the foundation for Obama's national overhaul. Passed by Congress last year, Obama's health care law has enraged conservatives who view it as a costly government expansion and intrusion into their lives because it mandates insurance for most Americans.

Romney all but ignored the topic in his last major public appearance last month at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington.

But, since then, the similarities with Romney's 2006 law in Massachusetts have increasingly been dogging him. The state's universal coverage law has a more sweeping mandate for people to get insurance than exists in Obama's law -- and penalizes the uninsured more severely.

Obama praised the efforts in Massachusetts during a meeting with governors at the White House, saying: "I agree with Mitt Romney, who recently said he's proud of what he accomplished on health care by giving states the power to determine their own health care solutions. He's right."

Also, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, an Obama friend, said Romney deserves a lot of credit on health care. "One of the best things he did was to be the co-author of our health care reform, which has been a model for national health care reform," he said.

The praise from Democrats provides fodder for Romney's Republican primary opponents; some are already heaping on the criticism.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee says in his new book: "If our goal in health care reform is better care at lower cost, then we should take a lesson from RomneyCare, which shows that socialized medicine does not work." It was a play on the word that conservative critics use to describe the national law: Obamacare.

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, who is likely to run for president against Romney, took a shot at Romney when he testified before a House committee reviewing Obama's health care overhaul. He lumped Romney in with a late liberal icon and an Obama friend in saying: "Senator (Edward M.) Kennedy and Governor Romney and then Governor Patrick, if that's what Massachusetts wants, we're happy for them. We don't want that. That's not good for us."

A GOP rising star, House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., also weighed in, saying of Romney's law: "It's not that dissimilar to Obamacare. And you probably know I'm not a big fan of Obamacare."
All that was the backdrop as Romney took the stage at the Carroll County Lincoln Day Dinner at the Attitash Grand Summit Hotel in northern New Hampshire.

First, he poked fun at the criticism that seems to be coming from all sides, saying "you may have noticed that the president and his people spend more time talking about me and Massachusetts health care than Entertainment Tonight spends talking about Charlie Sheen."

Then he turned serious and provided an explanation, emphasizing states' rights to a crowd from the "Live Free Or Die" state.
His coming candidacy may hinge on whether they buy it.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/05/romney-slams-president-obamas-health-care-law/?test=latestnews

[BayGBM]

Republicans looking for the anti-Romney
There's a big opportunity in the 2012 presidential race for anyone with conservative credentials who isn't Mitt Romney.
by Doyle McManus

President Obama launched a vicious, underhanded attack on one of the leading contenders for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination last month: He praised former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for launching a state-administered healthcare plan.

"I agree with Mitt Romney, who recently said he's proud of what he accomplished on healthcare in Massachusetts," Obama told the nation's governors.

Romney supporters winced, but his potential rivals for the Republican nomination were delighted. They've already taken to calling the Massachusetts healthcare plan "Romneycare," to remind conservative voters how much it resembles the "Obamacare" law they loathe.

Like the "tea party," the Obama White House, it appears, is hoping for a Republican candidate more conservative than Romney.

On paper, Romney should be the front-runner for next year's GOP nomination: He has experience, name recognition, broad popularity and plenty of money. But Republican strategists warn that because of "Romneycare" and other early flings with moderation, Romney lacks one important factor: fervent support from the strongly conservative voters who dominate the primary electorate in most states.

"I don't see any way he can become the nominee," said Eddie Mahe Jr., a former deputy chairman of the Republican National Committee.

And that's why so many Republican politicians — 17, at last count — are testing the waters for potential presidential campaigns: There's a big opportunity for anyone with conservative credentials who isn't named Romney.

The country's in a conservative mood. Republicans just won a landslide victory in last year's congressional elections. The unemployment rate is likely to remain stubbornly high all 20 months until the presidential election. Defeating an incumbent president is never easy, but this ought to be one of the best chances in a generation. If only conservatives can settle on a champion, that is.

Some potential champions appear unlikely to run. GOP strategists say there's no sign that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, a potential front-runner, is preparing a campaign. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a favorite of fiscal conservatives for his enthusiastic budget cutting, has emphatically ruled out a run.

Others are waffling. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is widely popular, but he talks fervently, and convincingly, about how much he enjoys not being a candidate. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich announced last week that he was "seriously exploring" a candidacy, but all he displayed, aside from a new website, was continued uncertainty. And Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, who won attention for a tough speech on fiscal responsibility last month, took a step back from candidacy last week, saying his home state's budget crisis might get in the way of saving the rest of the nation.

That process of elimination has led Republican strategists to begin focusing on two politicians who, though unknown to most Americans, at least appear serious about pursuing the nomination: Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour and former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty.

Both are orthodox conservatives who, unlike Romney, never passed a healthcare law, supported a federal bank bailout or governed where same-sex marriage was legal. Barbour, a former lobbyist and chairman of the RNC, is a prodigious fundraiser, a useful skill for any national candidate. Pawlenty, who calls himself a blue-collar "Sam's Club" Republican, has built a solid following among conservatives in Iowa, where next year's first caucuses will be held in February.

One danger for the party, though, is that the nominating process could erase one of the lessons of last year's victory: that Republicans can win among independent voters when they focus on fiscal concerns and downplay social issues such as abortion and gay marriage.

When Daniels recently called for a "truce" on social issues to focus on deficit reduction, he was roundly condemned by social conservatives. Meanwhile, Huckabee, a former Baptist minister, has kept cultural issues prominent in his speeches; last week he said (wrongly) that Obama had grown up in Kenya, and he condemned actress Natalie Portman for "boasting" about her unwed pregnancy. And Gingrich's core message is heavy with warnings about Muslim inroads into American life, including the suggestion, unsupported by much evidence, that U.S. courts might begin to administer Islamic law.

The structure of the election could also push candidates to the right. Iowa, where the first caucus vote is held, has historically been hospitable to cultural conservatives; Huckabee won there in 2008. And the debates leading up to that contest are starting early, with the first one May 2 at the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley.

It's too early to predict which of the potential candidates will prove the strongest alternative to Romney. But the fragmented field suggests two possible scenarios. One is that a multitude of feuding conservatives divide the GOP base into many pieces, allowing Romney to muscle his way through the crowded field.

But it'smore likely, Mahe suggests, that a candidate such as Pawlenty, Barbour or Daniels finds the sweet spot in the race: one step to the right of Romney but one step to the left of everyone else.

"If you have 12 lookalikes, the one who's the most moderate may end up a winner," he said.

"I do not think it's going to be easy to defeat Obama," he warned. "Defeating an incumbent is tough. He has a dedicated, committed base that seems to be holding. The American people don't seem to dislike him as a human being.

"It can be done," he said. "It depends on who we nominate."

On the other hand, with an overcrowded Republican field, a polarizing GOP primary battle, a White House that's heading back toward the center — and, perhaps, a slowly improving economy — it could be a good year for Obama after all.

[BayGBM]

See Mitt Romney flip-flop
His convenient and implausibly explained reversals on issues say all we need to know about his character. He will do or say anything to become president.
By Michael Kinsley

We're all for transparency these days, and if anything is transparently clear about American politics, it is that Mitt Romney will do or say anything to become president. The best guess is that at heart he is an old-fashioned moderate, business-oriented Republican (just about the last one standing). But there's no knowing for sure. He may have no sincere beliefs at all.

There was a piece about Romney on the front page of the New York Times on Sunday, and what amazes me is the deadpan frankness with which the article exposed him as a phony, and then went on to discuss what Romney might do to solve this problem.

He was criticized last time for being a stiff, so this time he is not wearing a tie. Ever. Even on occasions when every other male is wearing one. Problem solved, as Romney sees it.

"To Quiet Critics," says the Times headline, "Romney Puts '12 Focus on Jobs." In other words, change the subject! "I like President Obama," Romney told the Times patronizingly, "but he doesn't have a clue how jobs are created." Did Romney have a clue in '08 but lost it? Because the last time he ran, Romney played down his experience as a businessman and played up his recently acquired views as a social conservative, because that was what every commentator and consultant was telling him he had to do back then.

One little difficulty with Romney's new emphasis on his expertise — and Obama's lack thereof — about job creation is that Romney doesn't actually say what he would do differently to create more jobs. He just repeats that "I spent my career in the private sector. I know how jobs are created." The nearest he comes to getting specific is to say that in the business world, "the three rules of every successful turnaround" are "focus, focus, focus." This is Peter Pan advice, about as useful as repeating "I do believe in fairies."

To be sure, Obama's economic leadership is not beyond criticism. Many people think his stimulus and various bailouts were too costly (though both policies were initiated under his Republican predecessor, George W. Bush). Some think his financial regulations are too complex. Almost everyone thinks he should have been more aggressive in tackling the deficit, though somewhat fewer have offered specific alternatives.

Anyway, none of this has anything to do with job creation in the short run (which is the run Romney is running). A smaller stimulus or more aggressive deficit reduction would have reduced jobs in the short run.

The Times says that Romney's convenient flip-flops in 2008 on abortion and gay rights "prompted questions about whether his positions were driven by politics or conviction."

In fact, to any reasonable person, Romney's reversals on such questions didn't raise questions about his sincerity as much as answer them. It wouldn't be unreasonable for someone who really admired Romney's record as a businessman, or who really couldn't stand Obama, to overlook Romney's current right-wing stands on abortion and gay rights. But his sudden, convenient and implausibly explained reversals on these issues say something about his character that you can't flip away quite so easily.

But healthcare is the killer. The center of the Obama healthcare reform, and the part that has most excited the ire of conservatives, is the individual mandate — the requirement that everyone purchase health insurance somewhere, somehow. Romney now says, like all leading Republicans, that given the chance, "I would repeal Obamacare." Yet Romney advocated, signed and (for a while) bragged about a similar requirement in the Massachusetts reform passed while he was governor.

The similarity is no coincidence. Private sector healthcare can't work without some sort of mandate that healthy people as well as sick ones carry insurance. As a smart businessman, not just some dumb politician, Romney surely grasps this point. Nevertheless, he says that the situation requiring an individual mandate was "unique to Massachusetts" rather than — more accurately — a universal requirement imposed by mathematics.

To me, these issues and the way Romney has handled them are characterological, unchangeable at this point, and stamp him as ethically unqualified to be entrusted with the presidency. To his former advisors quoted in the Times, they are merely strategic challenges to be overcome. Alex Castellanos says Romney should have gotten healthcare "litigated" and over with long before the 2012 campaign started. Doug Gross, a "prominent Iowa Republican," suggests that Romney has to "present himself as genuine and not as someone chasing voters far to the right." (That is, he can chase them, as long as he doesn't present himself as the kind of guy who chases them.) "More than a dozen" previous Romney supporters worried whether he "could withstand scrutiny without being tempted to reinvent himself again."

Pshaw. Maybe he can, through extreme self-discipline, refrain from flip-flopping this time. But that would only be if he calculated that the cost of the flip-flop exceeded the cost of an unpopular position. (He is, as he keeps reminding us, a businessman.)

Romney and I attended the same private high school in Bloomfield Hills, Mich., although he was several years ahead. I remember only one encounter. For some reason, we shared a packed car to a gubernatorial debate during his father's reelection campaign for governor. The younger Romney was arguing vigorously the whole way that people were talking more about why the Michigan economy was good than why the Michigan economy was bad, and that this proved that Romney senior's tenure as governor had been a success.

In a speech over the weekend, as reported in the Times, Romney said that "the president and his people spend more time talking about me and Massachusetts healthcare than 'Entertainment Tonight' spends talking about Charlie Sheen." After half a century, his presentation is a tiny bit funnier, but the point is just as lame.

[240 is Back]

"The Times says that Romney's convenient flip-flops in 2008 on abortion and gay rights "prompted questions about whether his positions were driven by politics or conviction."


Voters are smart. 

[Soul Crusher]

Yet when obama flip flops 24 7 you have no problem w it.  Got it.

[loco]

Why not?

He believes in magical underwear.   

[BayGBM]

For Romney, a different campaign but old obstacles
Dan Balz, Washington Post Staff Writer
 
Mitt Romney wasn't in Iowa on Monday, which tells you much about his second campaign for the presidency. It will not be a rerun of the first.

The former Massachusetts governor skipped the first mini-forum of the 2012 Republican nomination battle. As several of his likely rivals shared the stage at a church in Des Moines, appealing to Christian conservatives, Romney chose to make his splash on the front page of the Boston Herald with a guest column ripping President Obama on the economy, just as the president was arriving for a visit.

Four years ago, Romney was in a great hurry to prove his bona fides as a candidate against better-known Republicans such as John McCain and Rudy Giuliani. This time he has been content to wait and to focus on the president rather than fellow Republicans. His strategy has helped dictate the pace of the slow-starting campaign, which he hopes will be to his advantage. The change reflects Romney's status in the top tier of the Republican field as well as lessons learned from his flawed campaign of 2008.

At every turn four years ago, Romney wanted to be first and earliest. He was overeager. He tried to match McCain organizationally, starting in 2006. He made a fundraising splash in January 2007 as a way to signal that he could go the distance financially, even if he was in single digits in the polls.

He launched television commercials earlier than any of his rivals, and moved the polls in his direction. He won the Iowa straw poll in August 2007 after a heavy investment of time in energy. He never quite recovered from that victory.

His Iowa commitment, from which he could not extract himself, turned out to be a miscalculation of sizable and costly proportions. To his dismay, he eventually found himself in a nasty one-on-one battle against a rising Mike Huckabee.

The former Arkansas governor's support among social and religious conservatives, who were dominant in Iowa, proved too much for Romney's otherwise well-organized campaign to overcome. On the night of the caucuses, a victorious Huckabee handed Romney off to McCain for the next battle in New Hampshire. "Now it's your turn to kick his butt," Huckabee told McCain, according to advisers to both.

Romney's time and money spent in Iowa proved costly in New Hampshire. Had he defeated McCain there, the Arizona senator probably would have been forced to end his campaign. By losing the two early states, Romney essentially doomed his own chances. All the evidence suggests he will not make that mistake this time around.

Romney's Iowa commitment in 2012 is still a work in progress. His attention to New Hampshire is there for all to see. It was there Saturday that he delivered one of his few public speeches of the year. He hasn't been in Iowa since fall.

Romney knows he must win New Hampshire if he hopes to become the nominee, and he will sacrifice Iowa, if necessary, to ensure that he does. An Iowa mini-forum with Christian conservatives held before anyone has declared a candidacy doesn't fit among his priorities at this stage of the campaign.

He wants to demonstrate to his party's activists that he has the knowledge and experience to take on an incumbent president on both economic and foreign policy. And in so doing, he hopes to show Republicans that he would be their strongest candidate in a general election.

Romney still faces two problems left over from his last campaign. The first is health care. Can he ever persuade Republican primary and caucus voters that what he did in Massachusetts was truly different from what Obama did nationally?

Romney used his speech in New Hampshire to try to explain those differences: that Massachusetts was a state-specific solution and not, as he put it, a one-size-fits-all approach for the nation. But he will have more to explain, particularly the individual mandate that both the Massachusetts law and Obama's plan include.

It's possible that the Massachusetts health-care plan will be to Romney what Hillary Clinton's vote for the resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to go to war in Iraq was to her candidacy four years ago: a seminal action that permanently alienates a part of the party's base.

As with Clinton four years ago, it is long past time for Romney to apologize for what he did in Massachusetts or say it was a big mistake that he now regrets. He can only explain why he did what he did and, as Clinton did in ratcheting up her opposition to Bush's policies, become one of the loudest advocates for repeal of Obama's health-care law.

His other big challenge will be establishing his authenticity. If early soundings are any indication, he carries baggage from his first campaign on this question. Many Republicans think he fits the profile of a nominee who could help put the U.S. economy on better footing. But he hasn't fully earned their trust.

So although Romney may follow a different strategy this time, the obstacles in his path will be familiar.

[Hugo Chavez]

  I'd never vote for a Mormon president.

I'll second that and fuck BB, you don't have to answer to him.  Why should you have to explain why you don't want some wacked cult follower leading America...  No way to a mormon in the White House.  Fuck that.

[LurkerNoMore]

Why not?

Would you vote for an atheist?

[Soul Crusher]

Would you vote for an atheist?

Who cares what he believes?  WTF is the big deal with someone being mormon?

so long as he leaves me the hell alone, he could believe in the tooth fairy for all I care.   

[LurkerNoMore]

Who cares what he believes?  WTF is the big deal with someone being mormon?

so long as he leaves me the hell alone, he could believe in the tooth fairy for all I care.   

I never said there was anything wrong with being a Mormon.  Or in your case a moron.  Which is why I asked BB this and not you.  Because I was expecting a more intelligent answer from his perspective if confronted with that scenario in regards to his faith.