Mitt Romney never overcame bailout opposition in Ohio

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • kfbob SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Nov. 13, 2012 9:17 a.m.

    All I know is that the Union got 40% ownership in GM. Last year for the first time I purchased a new car from Toyota Motor Co. I will never buy GM or Chrysler again.

  • PTM ,
    Nov. 12, 2012 6:46 p.m.

    Still Blue after all these years

    There were no private funds available for the bailout, so Romney's scheme wouldn't have worked. Who from the private sector would have financed the bailout? Who did you hear was willing and able to do the financing?

    Second the UAW doesn't own 45% of GM, they own 10.3%. A trust for the UAW owns 41% of Chrysler. The government bailout wasn't illegal, in fact because it was a government bailout it moved through the courts more quickly than a private bailout. Speed was of the essence, where are you getting the bailout was illegal, what is your source? I would also like to know your source regarding the teachers, firefighters and police pension funds. I regret the salaried non-unionized retirees from Delphi didn't fair as well as the unionized workers, but that is the benefit of being part of a union, you aren't treated individually, you have some pushback. I believe Sherrod Brown, Ohio Senator, is trying to get the salaried workers pensions restored.

  • Still Blue after all these years Kaysville, UT
    Nov. 12, 2012 4:20 p.m.

    I'm sorry but PTM is dead, dead wrong. Obama's bankruptcy hurt a lot of people that never should have been hurt including many firemen, policemen and teachers pension funds. They got screwed over in favor of the UAW. Romney's plan would have treated everyone fairly and legally (Obama's was illegal but he forced parties to sign off on it), would have allowed private capital to come in, would have never allowed the UAW to get 45% of GM and would have included government funding if private capital was not available. This would have been the most ideal long term solution. But we now see GM is failing, the vaunted VOLT is a joke and the UAW has the last laugh on America. But this is how its done in Chicago. Cough it up America.

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    Nov. 12, 2012 9:31 a.m.

    Remember, the supposed "fatal headline" was penned not by Romney, but by the New York Times editors. They knew what they were doing.

  • killpack Sandy, UT
    Nov. 12, 2012 6:33 a.m.

    UtahBlueDevil, be insulted all you want. The truth hurts. And, yes, you're mostly correct. The GOP will continue to lose elections for telling people what they don't want to hear. So be it. I know I'm not going to change. And like I care we won't win any more elections? Like Paul Ryan's 'radical' budget was going to do anything? It was bandaid delay. We need real radical budget reforms to save our horribly bloated finances. Those desperately needed reforms just aren't going happen given a mostly welfare dependent electorate. Is that insulting to you? I make no apologies. The truth hurts. Maybe when we turn into Greece people will like me again. I don't really care. I won't be the one who suffers. The ones totally reliant on food stamps will. Sooner or later, those dependent on the government for their livelihoods are going to realize the government is powerless to save them.

  • killpack Sandy, UT
    Nov. 11, 2012 10:25 p.m.


    We don't spend a trillion on welfare? How much do we spend then? Please enlighten us.

  • Moderate Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 11, 2012 9:18 p.m.

    killpack said "We spend one trillion per year on welfare."

    Conservative David Frum went to the Republican convention and asked two questions that the Tea Partiers could not answer correctly.
    1) Have taxes gone up in the last 4 years?
    No. They will go up now, but they have not in the last 4 years.
    2) Do we really spend a trillion dollars a year on welfare?
    No, but it is universally believed by the Tea Party.

    Why can Tea Partiers (and killpack) not answer the questions correctly? Frum says it is because "the Republicans have been fleeced, exploited, and lied to by the conservative entertainment complex." Until conservatives reclaim their message from the noisy entertainment complex, they are doomed to fail.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Nov. 11, 2012 9:09 p.m.

    Coug in China - yeah I caught that when I reread the post. In fact, it will be a while be for we have Chinese built or assembled cars on these shores.... so my bad on that one as well. Good catch.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Nov. 11, 2012 8:23 p.m.

    @killpack - you said;

    "The reason Mitt Romney lost the election is because more people in this country believe in the socialist ideology of bailouts, handouts, welfare, and all those other horrible things that are taking us down the road of a worthless dollar and overwhelming indebtedness than don't. Well, the people have spoken. Let them suffer."

    I will give you this - you are mostly right why Romney lost... but its not because the things you said are true, but that people like you have the above attitudes. The absolute total and complete lack of respect - viewing those who don't agree with you as inferior and socialist.... that is the reason Romney lost. The idea of putting people into power that how their fellow citizens is such low regard is frightening to most Americans. The idea that so many people adhere to political radio and TV shock faux news as though it is real.... that is much more frightening.

    The 47% comment and yours above pretty much explains the election.

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    Nov. 11, 2012 8:22 p.m.

    Meadow Lark Mark: Apparently we're just not as smart as you!

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Nov. 11, 2012 7:30 p.m.

    Romney lost ohio because he wasn't willing to support the automobile industry in this country. He also lost because he couldn't run far enough from Aikin or Mourdoch or Trump. He lost because he was restricted to appealing to grumpy, old white guys. He lost because the country changed and he, and his party, cannot. He lost because the reality the people around him created was false. He lost because he didn't keep religion private. He lost because America matured and his party did not. He lost because people didn't vote for him.

  • rapaz11 Sitka, AK
    Nov. 11, 2012 7:27 p.m.

    It is quite simple. When a politician does something that people like, or something that affects them positively, they are more likely to vote for them rather than vote for someone that just talks and makes promises. Thank goodness people in Ohio do not just blindly vote based on partisan bias, but rather on real issues that affect them.

  • Coug in China China, 00
    Nov. 11, 2012 6:02 p.m.

    @UtahBlueDevil - Sorry to be the one to burst your bubble, but factory workers in China are not unionized. Labor unions will NEVER be allowed under the communist Chinese government. Doing so would lessen the government's centralized contorl of power. As long as the communist party is in policy maker, unions will not exist in China.

  • killpack Sandy, UT
    Nov. 11, 2012 5:39 p.m.

    Wildcat said,

    "For the rest of you, keep on insulting the majority of the nation as takers or socialists, it will assure the GOP of defeats in elections to follow."

    Lol. So you think this election wasn't economically motivated? You really think people voted for the guy with the best personality? You really think Romney lost because he failed to 'sell is image' or 'message' or some other lame excuse like that? Remember James Carville's words of wisdom. This is pure economics. We spend one trillion per year on welfare. The federal government is far and away the single largest employer in the land, and federal government salaries are well above private sector ones. The biggest campaign donors get billions in bailout money when they fail to competently manage their businesses. To me, it is crystal clear why Mitt Romney lost this election. If the GOP keeps losing elections for telling people what they don't want to hear, so be it. Things will continue to get worse. I guess $16 trillion in debt wasn't bad enough. Maybe $20 trillion will wake people up. Either way, I don't really care.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Nov. 11, 2012 5:17 p.m.

    Don't forget his attempts to woo the votes of the trees. Those trees that are the perfect height. Too bad they couldn't get to the polls (dang roots).

  • BYUalum South Jordan, UT
    Nov. 11, 2012 5:15 p.m.

    You can analyze this to death. I think this election was between two ideologies:

    "Free stuff" vs. "Free enterprise" (jobs) pure and simple. The free stuff won. We will be able to tell shortly how that mentality will play out when the jobs start disappearing that pay for the free stuff. I guess they will just have to print more money to pay for the free stuff that people want. Stop kicking Mitt Romney like a can around the block. He is a good man and would have served our country well.

    Some questions that aren't being addressed is how a county in Ohio had 108% of the registered voters vote for BHO. In a county in Florida 140% of the registered voters voted for BHO. Hmmm?! The math doesn't figure.....Conspiracy? Voter fraud?

    God have mercy on us; God bless America!

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 11, 2012 4:59 p.m.

    Romney's company made millions on the auto bailout. Being ever inconsistent, he really loved the bailout.
    He also made millions selling cigarettes in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

  • PTM ,
    Nov. 11, 2012 4:22 p.m.

    With no private capital available at the time, Romney's auto bailout scheme would not work. The Government can take a bankruptcy through the Courts more quickly; in as little as 40 days vs. many months or years for the Romney route. In short the only viable avenue for success was the one taken by Obama, like it or not. The Obama scheme saved millions of jobs. Please give credit where credit where is due, and it is due to President Obama. If your job was on the line, which route would you have preferred, Romney's or Obama's.

  • morpunkt Glendora, CA
    Nov. 11, 2012 4:11 p.m.

    One look no further than the article in the last Newsweek Magazine, from Republican David Stockman, regarding Mitt Romney. It was the most damaging article that could ever be written against a person I voted for, Mitt Romney.

  • ImaUteFan West Jordan, UT
    Nov. 11, 2012 3:59 p.m.

    Ah, the excuses just keep on coming, don't they?

  • liberal larry salt lake City, utah
    Nov. 11, 2012 3:00 p.m.

    All I need to know about Romney's run for president is that he lost Massachusetts, the state that knew him best.

  • Wildcat O-town, UT
    Nov. 11, 2012 2:23 p.m.

    Instead of trying to claim the bailout was his idea and running ads that scared workers enough to the point where the CEOs had to come out and say the ads weren't true, Romney should have admitted it was mistake, and that he would always stand and support workers...but that might upset his donators and base...he never showed the leadership to stand up to anybody.

    When the story came out about the bullying incident when he was 18 about giving a forced haircut (today, he could have been charged with assault), he could have used it as a teachable moment by saying how deeply he regretted it and issuing a statement concerning the dangers of bullying. His approach...I don't remember it.

    He should have released his taxes early showing he probably didn't pay any through loopholes, and stated that it was important for people like himself to pay their fair share.

    For the rest of you, keep on insulting the majority of the nation as takers or socialists, it will assure the GOP of defeats in elections to follow. If you are serious, run a reasonable candidate like Jon Huntsman Jr.

  • Gattaca Pittsburgh, PA
    Nov. 11, 2012 2:15 p.m.

    The criticism over "Let Detroit go bankrupt" article was unfair because the points Romney discussed were pretty much what the Obama administration did.

    Romney's problem was that he was unable to redefine how the Obama camp were portraying him as a ruthless corporate baron. But that is how the game is played I guess, and Obama was much better at it.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Nov. 11, 2012 1:59 p.m.

    This morning I listed to a KSL news report that was making the point that Utah voters "knew" the real Romney like most in the country didn't. And that lack of understanding, they suggested, was the reason for Romney's loss.

    Romney did not lose because of the Auto Bailout issue, nor Bain Capital, Nor because he was a wealthy oligarch. He lost because he did not firmly demonstrate core moral values and the intellectual and moral honesty that any candidate for high office must show. It's political suicide to reverse your prior positions an issues just when it is conveniently necessary to gain political advantage. And, if part of your perceived political advantage is moral superiority, you cannot be found to be lying and misrepresenting your opponent's accomplishments and political views. When Romney's disingenuous tactics were pointed out by the pundits, Romney's campaign simply responded that they were not running a campaign for the "fact checkers".

    Utah may not have seen (or cared about) Mr. Romney's issue pandering and deception, but a majority of the rest of the country did. And that is why he lost.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Nov. 11, 2012 1:42 p.m.

    DN Subscriber - how do you explain this " This would have allowed the makers to reorganize (including renegotiating union contracts) and come out stronger than before. This would have been better, long term, for the workers, but less good for the union bosses.:"

    1) in what way would the "union bosses" benefit more from this... do you think they get a percentage or something?

    2) How would having the pensions funds defunded of people who have worked jobs 30 years or more been a good thing for them?

    The Romney campaign as usual left huge holes in the details, such as how it thought these reorganizations would have been funded, when there was no private equity to fund these deals. The santa you are speaking of is this mythical private money that would have come in. It didn't exist.

    If you prefer to buy cars from "socialist" counties like China, Japan, Korea, and Germany that all have unionize work forces to prove a point... and put Americans out of work.... that if fine. You will be making a point, just not sure what it will be.

    When did Americans helping Americans turn into a bad thing.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    Nov. 11, 2012 1:18 p.m.

    "Low information voters" are hard to persuade, when their small minds are already made up. Throw in misinformation from their union bosses, and the badly biased news media which were clearly in the tank for Obama, this is not surprising.

    Yes, Romney opposed the bailouts. No, he did not want to shut down auto makers. He wanted them to use the readily available legal method prescribed for bankruptcy. This would have allowed the makers to reorganize (including renegotiating union contracts) and come out stronger than before. This would have been better, long term, for the workers, but less good for the union bosses.

    As it was, the "Government Motors" bailout thoroughly cheated many salaried workers out of their pension, and have wasted billions of tax dollars keeping union bosses in charge. And, it has guaranteed that millions of Americans will never again buy a GM or Chrysler product.

    Romney and his policy were right, but a campaign of lies, and the "vote for Santa"mentality won the election. Our national economy and security and our children's future lost.

  • killpack Sandy, UT
    Nov. 11, 2012 12:51 p.m.

    The reason Mitt Romney lost the election is because more people in this country believe in the socialist ideology of bailouts, handouts, welfare, and all those other horrible things that are taking us down the road of a worthless dollar and overwhelming indebtedness than don't. Well, the people have spoken. Let them suffer.

  • PAC Phoenix, AZ
    Nov. 11, 2012 12:30 p.m.

    I guess every man, woman, and child for themself. Well, that is hopeful.