Romney Needs to Fight
In Talking to the Unconverted, James of England notes that he has spent much of the last few days "stunned by the terrible political news"--polls have shown a rebound in support for Obama--then asks for "criticisms...[and] improvements" in the arguments James himself advances on behalf of Romney. My view? That if he lives to 100 Romney will never find a more ardent or articulate supporter than James. What needs criticism and improvement is the Romney campaign itself.
In a word, Romney needs to show some fight.
Since, as James notes, Romney is running on his credentials as a businessman, perhaps the Romney campaign would listen to two business figures who have proven even more successful than has Mitt himself: Rupert Murdoch, who, starting with part ownership of a regional newspaper in Australia, built the News Corporation, one of the biggest media companies in the world, and Jack Welch, who transformed GE.
"Met Romney last week," Rupert Murdoch recently tweeted. "Tough O [Obama] Chicago pros will be hard to beat unless he drops old friends from team and hires some real pros. Doubtful."
"Hope Mitt Romney is listening to Murdoch advice on campaign staff," Jack Welch then tweeted. "[N]o room for amateurs."
Tweets don't amount to campaign memos, obviously, but taking these in context--Rupert Murdoch has tweeted about the Romney campaign several times now--these represent, I think, a frustration with Romney's reluctance to go on the attack, to fight.
Just consider what happened over the last several days.
When the Supreme Court handed down its decision, Republicans in Washington immediately said, in effect, "Okay, if the Court calls ObamaCare a tax, we'll make the most of it, attacking the program as just that, a vast tax on the middle class." But Romney himself flubbed the opportunity, insisting that ObamaCare represents not a tax but a penalty.
Let's grant that Romney was correct on the merits. Just as the Romney campaign insisted, the Scalia dissent was correct as a matter of constitutional law while the Robert's majority opinion was wrong, very wrong.
But Romney is running for president, not for a seat on the Court. Attacking Chief Justice John Roberts is beside the point--heck, Mitt can leave that job to Richard Epstein and John Yoo. Romney should instantly have grasped the opportunity to use the Supreme Court decision in attacking president. It took the Romney campaign a good 48 hours to recognize its mistaken, announcing that Mitt would join his fellow Republicans in attacking ObamaCare as a tax after all.
To quote Jack Welch once again: "No room for amateurs."
- Comment (42)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
May '12
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
Peter Robinson:
When the Supreme Court handed down its decision, Republicans …said, in effect, "…if the Court calls ObamaCare a tax, we'll make the most of it, attacking the program as …a vast tax on the middle class." …Romney … flubbed the opportunity, insisting that ObamaCare represents not a tax but a penalty.
Actually, conservatives said it was preposterous and absurd for Roberts to call this a tax, that his decision was a tortured, muddled travesty, and that he betrayed the conservative movement. Only after rending their garments thusly did they, out of the other side of their mouth, start saying Obama had passed the largest tax increase in history.
I'm sorry it doesn't take a genius, businessman or otherwise, to realize those two notions, that Obamacare can't coherently be called a tax and that Obamacare is the biggest tax increase in history, aren't reconcilable positions to be spouting simultaneously. The only political hay to be made from the decision is the one Fehrnstrom rightly highlighted, that Obama is a duplicitous opportunist who claimed the penalty wasn't a tax while trying to sell the bill, but claimed it was a tax to the courts.
Edited on July 5, 2012 at 9:12pmMay '12
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
As for taking the political advice of Murdoch and Welch, I'm sorry but as you yourself have pointed out repeatedly, Peter, being a great businessman doesn't mean you understand politics or how to win in that arena.
As I said before, it's the first week of July. People need to take a deep breath. Obama had one good week, let's not start panicking. Good grief.
Edited on July 5, 2012 at 8:58pmJun '11
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
It's so ironic: the Obama campaign relentlessly portrays Romney as a heartless, ruthless corporatist, and Romney's response is to act like fighting a tough campaign is somehow undignified and disrespectful.
It's time for Mitt to retrieve his inner junk yard dog from the roof of his car and put it in the driver's seat.
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
Instead of going on vacation over the 4th of July, Romney should have attended a celebration of our independence, and he should have read out the Declaration of Independence. On the 5th of July, he should then have given a speech suggesting that what is at stake in this election is not just managerial competence. What is at stake is whether we will have a government that honors our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
He may be recovering from surgery, but Paul Rahe is worth an entire campaign staff.
May '12
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
Let me make one more point. Does anyone really think that Americans are less upset at the idea that the government wants to penalize them for their healthcare decisions than they would be over the idea that they're being taxed for their healthcare decisions? This is all silly semantics that aren't worth getting tied in knots over. People hated Obamacare for it's choice-reducing, care-diminishing, cost-skyrocketing awfulness before the decision. They still do. It's not as if making a semantic distinction is going to harm Romney's ability to attack Obama on healthcare. There is plenty of material there to work with. This whole episode is just being blown beyond all proportion.
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
You may make any point you like, of course, Cylon, but you're missing the point entirely: Romney spent 48 hours attacking the Supreme Court when he should have been attacking Barack Obama.
Watching good pitches whistle past is no way to win.
Jun '12
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
Hear hear. You cannot win the game if all you play is defense. McCain '08 should make that abundantly clear.
Apr '11
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
I don't know why we think a speech from Romney will help. He isn't the most riveting speaker in the world. Listen I would love it if Romney would go out there and give me a "Time for choosing speech", but he isn't Ronald Reagan. I don't think Romney is a home run hitting batter. He can get on base and run, but he just isn't going to hit it out of the park. This may be less exciting for us here in the bleachers watching the game unfold, but tough!
Also, are we forgetting it is July 5th, I'm still full of BBQ and so is everyone else. No one would be watching this speech but us. As far as I know everyone on this, site with a few intransigent exceptions, is going to vote Mitt. He doesn't need to impress us. The people he needs to impress are all not really paying attention.
In September I will begin to worry if Mitt is not calling Obama a dirty egg sucking liar for his duplicitous health care law. Right now I'm going to have more ribs.
Mar '11
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
Politicians, like most humans, are always a mixed bag of traits. Romney is not an angry man. His obvious serenity has done much to reassure fence-sitting voters that a change in leadership is not a frightening prospect.
But many voters, particularly the Republican base, are spitting mad. Romney has to find a way to get angry on behalf of the people harmed by Obama’s past and future policies. Lives are being diminished by economically benighted strategies and, in the not-too-distant future, perhaps shortened by the massive fraud that is Obamacare. As David Mamet wrote inThe Untouchables, “They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's the Chicago way! And that's how you get Capone. Now do you want to do that? Are you ready to do that?”
When one side fights the Chicago way and the other plays by Marquis of Queensbury rules, it’s not a fair contest. Gentleman Mitt Romney is unlikely to be President Mitt Romney.
Edited on July 5, 2012 at 9:44pmMay '12
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
Peter Robinson
Romney spent 48 hours attacking the Supreme Court when he should have been attacking Barack Obama.
Watching good pitches whistle past is no way to win.
That's a bogus characterization of Fehrnstrom's remarks which makes me question whether you've even watched the exchange you're criticizing the Romney campaign for. When Todd was pressing Fehrnstrom on whether the mandate was a tax or a penalty, Fehrnstrom was doing everything he could to downplay the distinction between tax and penalty and instead turn the question into an attack on Obams for arguing both sides of that question in a duplicitous way. He at least deserves credit for pointing out the two-faced approach of Obama and attacking him for it. Instead, no one even seems aware that he said that. I expect the liberal media to ignore that very good attack against Obama. It's disappointing to see people on the right disregard it or, even worse, be clueless of it.
Apr '11
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
How frickin' hard is this?
"I disagree with The Court's ruling, but we have to accept it as law. If Obama wants the benefits of his law being considered constitutional he has to accept it as a tax."
How come every intelligent conservative can easily express this, except our @#%$! standard barer? I'm so fed up with the same old nonsense over and over again.
May '10
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
I Agree things need to pick up. I agree that it may be a stretch that the Fehrstrom/Saul flub may have been a way to bait Obama into digging a slightly deeper not-a-tax hole, but I think the lack of intensity is actually a lull in intensity and intentional, keyed both to seeing how the Obamacare thing gels a bit--what is Obama going to do?--and a lull as the VP choice is finalized.By the way, why isn't Gov. Kascich in the VP stakes?
May '12
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
I am not worried ... yet.
We're getting a heat wave here, and between that and EOM bills I am distracted and not paying full attention.
Am I alone in this? I don't think so.
Romney won't win the Obama-heads. And the people he can win over may recognize the virtue of someone who doesn't blow the wad the way Obama has been doing.
Mind you, Romney cannot stay so placid for much longer. He needs to bare some teeth ... but waiting till after people have picked that last bit of barbeque from between those last two molars may not prove to be such a terrible decision.
Jan '11
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
During the primaries, the rest of the Republican field argued that Mitt was the worst possible guy to attack Obama on healthcare. He had too much baggage of his own.
Sure, Romney can attack on the economy, on business, on unemployment ... but it seems that the Romney camp is afraid to go after Obama on healthcare.
But ...
Message to Romney: Obama has the worst record on nearly every presidential qualification ... but do you see Obama reticent about attacking? If Obama isn't going to be modest (or truthful, or within the bounds of sanity) when he makes campaign promises, responding with gee-whizzes isn't going to win.
May '12
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
Peter Robinson
In Talking to the Unconverted, James of England notes that he has spent much of the last few days "stunned by the terrible political news"--polls have shown a rebound in support for Obama--then asks for "criticisms...[and] improvements" in the arguments James himself advances on behalf of Romney. My view? That if he lives to 100 Romney will never find a more ardent or articulate supporter than James.
No doubt. James makes the best arguments I have heard to be an enthusiastic Romney supporter. I am an enthusiastic Romeny voter, but to date he has not given me a reason to get off the couch and into the game on his behalf besides not being Obama.
I think Gov. Romney could show a greater sense of urgency and hire James of England immediately. If Gov. Romney or his staff appeared to be half as enthusiastic as James of England then Gov. Romney would be clearly in the lead.
One thing to be very excited about - Romney raised $100M in June. People are putting their money where their vote is going and everywhere except Washington DC $100M is still real money.
Aug '11
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
It would be rude at this juncture to say "We told you so," . . . but guess what I'm thinking.
Edited on July 6, 2012 at 5:27amOct '10
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
No country for nice men.
Perhaps Romney and his handlers will awaken to the fact that they do not face opponents (or competitors, as they had in business), but rather sworn enemies whose goal is to silence them, destroy them with personal attacks (just wait for the Mormon card to be played starting in mid-September), and intimidate them into preemptively surrendering their most effective arguments against the regime lest they be accused of being “divisive”.
Where is Romney's daily statement on Fast and Furious? All he needs to do is re-tweet @DarrellIssa. Where is Romney announcing the national debt every day, with the delta from yesterday, and the cost to each citizen? Where is Romney denouncing the surveillance of farmers, ranchers, and feedlots in the productive heartland by unmanned aerial vehicles? Where is Romney inveighing against Roberts for his cowardice and betrayal of individual liberty and federalism?
Crickets.
The U.S. needs change. I wish you had Hope.
May '12
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
My biggest worry is that he selects as his running mate someone too like him.
He is simply not an attack dog. There's fight in the dog we call Romney, and I wouldn't want to get between him and a bowl of dog chow, but he is simply not inclined to attack.
Romney's VP needs to be someone who is an attack dog, just not foaming at the mouth the way Joe Biden is.
Maybe that'll turn the tide for him.
May '10
Re: Romney Needs to Fight
By the way, the other issue that makes intensity complaints uncalled for at this juncture is how media has changed. Post-television media (including talk radio) have made the period it takes to sway the undecided more of a shorter, more compressed; it's also made it harder to maintain intensity because...things will get VERY intense. Wait another 2.0 weeks before getting worried. My target date for the VP announcement is two weeks from now. It's somewhat hard to go full-intensity until the team is in place.
And again, why not Gov. Kasich?
Edited on July 5, 2012 at 10:30pm