Should Mitt Revisit the ABC's of an MBA?
Tonight's Republican presidential debate at Dartmouth College doesn't lack for intrigue.
After two underwhelming debate performances, does Texas Gov. Rick Perry right the ship?
The past couple of weeks have been Herman Cain’s moment in the sun. Is he a passing fad, or in it for the long haul as a serious contender?
As for myself, I'm watching Mitt Romney.
Why? For the same words the Romans used to describe the Mediterranean: mare nostrum.
Hanover, N.H., is the equivalent of Romney's backyard -- the former Massachusetts governor owning a summer home on a different mare, Lake Winnipesaukee). Moreover, the subject matter – economics – plays to Romney’s c.v. as a statesman and investor (Bain Capital/Harvard Biz School).
Bottom line: if there’s a moment for Romney to start separating himself from the pack, this might be it.
Here are two sets of numbers to ponder, pre-debate:
1) A Quinnipiac survey, released last week, showing that Romney’s edge over President Obama on the economy has grown from 4 to 10 points over the past month (49%-39%). Perry leads Obama by only 3 points (45%-42%). That jibes with a Washington Post-Bloomberg poll (same folks hosting the debate, btw), showing that a slim plurality of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents trust Romney the most on the economy.
2) The divide within the Republican field. That same WaPo-Bloomberg poll gives Romney 24%, Cain 16% and Perry 15%, with the rest of the wannabes mired in single digits. And so it’s been since this race began. It’s two camps of decideds: a solid group of Romneyites, maxing out between 25%-30%, and the other three-fourths seemingly with one trait in common: they don’t like Mitt.
A school of thought holds that, for now, it’s best for Romney to channel his inner Alfred E. Neuman and take a “what, me worry?” approach to the primaries. He has organization and money; in theory, if he plays mistake-free ball, then enough undecideds should start to break his way. And forget whatever plurality he stitches together -- 30%-35%-40%. A win’s a win.
Just ask John McCain, the last GOP nominee.
The flip side to that argument: backing into the nomination might doom Romney in a general election as candidates who can’t stoke their party’s base (like McCain) tend to fare poorly when it comes to drawing independents.
So rather than play it safe and stay above the fray as the amiable Fred Rogers of the Republican field, perhaps it’s time for Romney, the one-time venture capitalist and investment banker, to channel a different “Mister Rogers” on the Dartmouth stage.
And that would be T.J. Rodgers, Dartmouth Class of 1970.
Rodgers is the founder and CEO of Cypress Semiconductor and an early equity investor in SunPower. He’s a blunt-speaking libertarian and a champion of laissez-faire capitalism.
Adjectives to describe Silicon Valley’s Mister Rodgers’ style and approach: “wry, “in your face”, “unabashed free-market capitalist.”
As you’ll read here, he’s not averse to walking into a room of green investors and start lecturing away on the dangers of government subsidies and overreacting to global warming.
Rodgers -- seen here in an “Uncommon Knowledge” interview with Peter Robinson (whom I believe is vaguely connected with Dartmouth . . . ) offers audiences the following guidelines:
1) Don’t rely (for long) on government funding or subsidies.
2) "Run like hell" when you hear the terms "green jobs, green economy, double bottom line or carbon tax."
3) Believe in the free market and freedom of the individual.
4) Believe in the 1st, 4th and 10th Amendments.
In other words: Rodgers is bullish on capitalism; he’s bearish on government meddling. And that sounds like the right balance for Romney to strike tonight: defend the free market, defy Occupy Wall Street, clarify what government should and shouldn’t be doing in the midst of a prolonged recession.
And, in doing so, perhaps point out the failed handwork of one Timothy Geithner, Dartmouth Class of 1983.
This would require a tweaking on Romney’s part.
Rather than presenting himself as an updated product (as it’s his fourth campaign, this would be Political Version 4.0), the candidate should return to the business side/investing side of his past. He should start thinking of himself as a start-up – and start talking to GOP voters as he would angel investors.
For Romney, that would mean returning to the basics of why he’s in the race, his belief in whatever mission he believes he represents, and an unwavering confidence in the country’s future. Like a venture capitalist: think ambitiously, speak optimistically, close the deal.
Does Romney have this in him? We don't know. And that doubt is one of the reasons why he's mired at 25%.
But if he can pull it off, maybe he gets something more valuable than a statr-up's round of financing -- and that's advancing beyond the first round of voting, to the general election.
Ok, Romney-bashers, have at!!
- Comment (8)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments :
May '10
Re: Should Mitt Revisit the ABC's of an MBA?
Any blip of momentum Perry might have had after supposed revelations of Romneycare Advisors with Obama was pretty much blown to bits by the Christie announcement.
I want them to go hard against Romney. He needs the practice for the general election.
May '10
Re: Should Mitt Revisit the ABC's of an MBA?
Did TJ Rodgers try to block SunPower's begging for that DoE loan guarantee last week?
Mar '11
Re: Should Mitt Revisit the ABC's of an MBA?
Mr Cain is a closer approximation to Mr Rogers (T.J) than is Mr Romney.
I can't see Mr Romney's support growing significantly - it is remarkably constant. He can hope for Peter's scenario of a split conservative vote, that's about it.
The main thing to watch for after tonight is whether Mr Cain takes more of the conservative vote from Mr Perry and Mrs Bachmann, in which case he may move into the overall lead.
If not, it is looking like he might be open for the VP slot, which wouldn't be too bad, either.
Afterthought: The Obama and Christie endorsements may finish off Mr Romney.
Edited on Oct 11, 2011 at 11:34amOct '10
Re: Should Mitt Revisit the ABC's of an MBA?
If Romney's stance on China trade is anything to go by, he seems to have forgotten most of the economics he was taught.* And his bowing the knee to Big IP seems explicable only by donor or, if one is to be charitable, consultant capture.
BTW, when is that Mike Murphy inside-baseball podcast coming?
(* Yes, I am going to keep harping on about this.)
Sep '10
Re: Should Mitt Revisit the ABC's of an MBA?
Can someone synopsize this post for me? All I got was "Romney hdfskas d ,xcuisagfdamcb zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz" And there were two ordered lists, I remember that.
Dec '10
Re: Should Mitt Revisit the ABC's of an MBA?
After reading yesterday about Romney asking voters to vote for either him or Herman Cain, I'm beginning to actively dislike Romney. Herman Cain should be insulted by the condescension and should tell him to jump off a cliff if offered the VP slot.
Romney is obviously cynically working for the divided vote between Cain/Perry. I've begun to hope Perry crashes and burns tonight and has to drop out of the race, leaving his voters to Cain.
Anyone know if a money-bomb is planned for Cain? Waiting by the phone with my checkbook in hand...
Apr '11
Re: Should Mitt Revisit the ABC's of an MBA?
genferei: If Romney's stance on China trade is anything to go by, he seems to have forgotten most of the economics he was taught.* And his bowing the knee to Big IP seems explicable only by donor or, if one is to be charitable, consultant capture.
BTW, when is that Mike Murphy inside-baseball podcast coming?
(* Yes, I am going to keep harping on about this.) · Oct 11 at 11:31am
Do you believe that "Big IP" is different from America's manufacturing, entertainment and hi-tech companies? If you don't believe it is different, why do you believe that viewing them as important can only be explained through bad faith? If you do believe that they are different, could you expand upon that?
May '10
Re: Should Mitt Revisit the ABC's of an MBA?
James is right- "Big IP", outside of the patent management shops (which are not that large, relatively speaking- Ronald Katz is not massive) is actually America's manufacturing and entertainment industries. IBM and Hollywood, with a healthy dose of pharma and communications/software (a lot of business method claims) tossed in.