Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Mitts gonna Mitt
Mitt Romney started the year off with a Washington Post hit piece on the president, with this headline:
Mitt Romney: The president shapes the public character of the nation. Trump’s character falls short.
Even Trump-haters are noticing how this isn’t going the way he hoped:
Yet, completely predictable.
This is the standard that has been set by many on the left/media (furthered by a small set of grifters/unhinged cultists pretending to be on the right): conservatives must abandon all positions and principles for their criticism of Trump to count. https://t.co/RiMhrn53QD
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) January 2, 2019
Romney’s op-ed earned praise from Morning Joe and Jeff Flake, and a tiny sliver of the tiny sliver that is NeverTrump.
It also earned the wrath, mockery and scorn of most of the left and right.
I know on a voting level what matters most is R or D.
But on a public discussion level, losing Orrin Hatch’s seat to Mitt hurts more than losing Flake’s seat to Sinema.
We trusted Romney with the 2012 nomination; admittedly because there were no good candidates. We voted for him in the general and Romney failed to win the election, and stuck us with four more lousy years of President Obama.
Romney should spend more time working humbly to reverse the damage he’s done, and less time grandstanding against the man who succeeded where he failed.
Published in Politics
He can try, but he’d have Candy Crowley hung around his neck for the entire 2020 primary season (a very big weight to bear). That would be highly problematic in a direct challenge to Trump, less so if Trump’s problems grow to the point he simply doesn’t run for re-election in ’20, though he’d still face the wrath of the hard-core Trump supporters.
You think he is dangerously clueless and I think he is brilliant. Did you read the link I posted in #45? Obviously not or you wouldn’t think he is clueless.
Thou shalt not speak ill of thy fellow Republican.
Well, I have to say, other than your comment about Romney not losing “primarily because of a lack of support among conservatives” I’m on the exact same page as you.
By 2020, nobody is going to remember or care about Candy Crowley. It’ll be downed out by might bigger things.
Also, if Trump doesn’t run in 2020, then it’s a whole different problem.
Short of a major medical issue or a prosecutorial agreement, I can’t envision Trump not running.
And if he wouldn’t stand up to Candy Crowley when needed, when and to whom will he stand up. Isn’t that a ‘character trait’?
That was all 60 years ago, in the past. I don’t dwell on it, just an example that men and woman of any religion can be just as crappy as any other religion. The fact that they are bigwigs in a church does not give them special powers.
I think that train left the station back in 2015 when Trump took a swipe at McCain for being a prisoner of war
Did you read the link I posted at #45? Probably not or you would not think Trump is clueless.
He took a swipe at McCain for being a piece of garbage. The prisoner of war part was a vehicle not a reason.
It’s not Candy Crowley per se, it’s the meme that Trump fought back when the media went hard against the GOP presidential nominee in 2016, while Romney caved to Crowley when she used inaccurate information against him to help Obama at the 2012 debate. If Mitt wants to run in 2020 — even it Trump’s not seeking re-election — that’s the 800-pound gorilla he’ll have to overcome; that when push comes to shove during the 2020 general election, he’ll do the same thing he did on stage eight years earlier, in allowing the media to walk over him.
And what’s your proposal to make that possible?
The first two steps are for the government to stop regulating the parties.
First, states should stop legislating and convening party primary elections. A political party is a private institution, and should determine and execute the conditions of its internal affairs on its own dime and without outside interference. Getting the government out of the primary business would allow parties to set parameters, such as the date of the primary and who gets to vote, in a manner that better suits their own interests.
Second, there should be no limit on the amount of money citizens can donate to parties. Restricting money to parties (and candidates) while allowing unlimited donations to 501c(3) and similar organizations also drains the parties of power and shifts many of their functions to these outside groups (h/t Jonah Goldberg for introducing me to this point).
He’s the only person capable. I mean, a recent election rout, a president that can’t break 40%, and a stock market coming down to Earth. The days of sucking up to Trump have got to be over. Somebody better be thinking about alternatives or its malpractice. Great news that Mitt is on it. Others will follow now.
Clearly this is Romney’s sole objective with this self-serving op-ed, strategically placed in the mouthpiece of the Left in the nation’s capital on the first day of the new year. And be assured that he is reaching out to democrats here. He’s beating Johnny “my dad was a postman” Kasich to the mushy middle. This time he’s really going to make his dem-lite policies appeal to the nation!
This is all about Mitt and nothing about the GOP. Do you really believe that the Washington Post has the GOP’s best interests at heart? Do you really believe that they would reserve this prime real estate and timing of op-ed placement for this perspective if it truly was going to “save the GOP from itself?”
If this was about Mitt saving the Party, why didn’t he use a GOP platform rather than the Compost?
Clicking through Kay’s link I found this story about Romney’s niece, Ronna McDaniel, who is chair of the RNC. I don’t actually pay attention to swamp creatures like an RNC chair, but there is food for thought in the article.
What counts as a “GOP platform”? I mean other than amgreatness.com and Zero Hedge.
I would think that the vaunted National Review would do, don’t you?
Avoiding the point as well? With a sly little dig on conservative platforms. Not as well played as you think.
Mitt, like JPod, Bill Kristol, and McCain, is the son of a greater man. This appears to cause a narcissistic seeking of cheap grace.
He would not go after Obama and the left, even though they tell big lies with malevolent intent and no excuse. He does not want to pay the price.
Instead, he goes after Trump for what are at most small lies, more often mistakes, often truths, and usually excusable because Trump is having to extemporaneously fight a battle alone while being backstabbed by the likes of Romney.
Consider Romney’s attempt at a point:
Is that claim true or false? It’s clearly true. But it does not make Romney feel good.
To Romney, I say: “You are why Trump!”
“America is strongest when our arms are linked with other nations. We want a unified and strong Europe, not a disintegrating union. “
“Several former Soviet satellite states are rethinking their commitment to democracy.”
“The alternative to U.S. world leadership offered by China and Russia is autocratic, corrupt and brutal.”
I didn’t miss your point. I understood it.
You buy into that false notion that the Washington Post is just a Democratic propaganda mouthpiece, not a newspaper.
I didn’t avoid your point. You’re just wrong. The Washington Post is the leading newspaper in the nation’s capital. That’s why he published it there.
Thanks for the explanation. Unfortunately, even the Queen isn’t much of a Queen any more, as the most casual acquaintance with the state of her country would make clear.
Still, in spite of the fact that the US President “serves as both the head of the Executive branch of government and as the head of state, all wrapped into one” (the most unambiguous and un-confusing way of putting it that I can think of), the fact remains that neither I, nor many people, look to the occupant of the White House for moral guidance and direction. Just as most Brits no longer expect upstanding moral rectitude from members of the Royal Family, nor model themselves upon it. Those days are long over. And not because of anything Donald Trump has done or not done, I assure you.
That tweet from Mollie is quite funny. She is a gem.
Mitt Romney is like the brick-and-mortar specialty retailer that refuses to adjust to the world of online shopping, stubbornly sticking to a business model from a previous century and then complaining as their customer base dwindles to nothing.
The old model for electoral politics in the United States is dead. Romney is the guy pining for the olden days and complaining about the kids and their newfangled ideas! Romney got elected to the Senate in the only place in the United States where he could. But he had to be as much of a carpet-bagger as Senator Hillary Clinton From New York.
Yeah. I mean, if there’s anyone who is equipped to judge another man’s Vietnam War service, it’s Donald Trump. After all, he had his own personal Vietnam.
Mollie is brilliant and once again I mourn her absence from Ricochet.
In the Washington Examiner’s “What Does it Mean to be a Conservative Today?” I think she nails it.
While others are content to tut-tut, Romney-like, about lack of decorum and crap like that, Mollie gets to the heart of the matter:
He was judging things like McCain’s backstabbing of the base and throwing the election to Obama. He has proven decently equipped to do so.