Columnist: Post-election criticisms have turned Mitt Romney into something he's not

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Jan. 7, 2013 4:10 p.m.

    Mitt ran a clean campaign based on reality and capitalism and the American people voted instead for smoke and mirrors and socialism.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Jan. 7, 2013 12:20 p.m.

    Which Romney?

  • 56chevy dana point , CA
    Jan. 5, 2013 7:53 p.m.

    We have all been outsmarted by the 40 year plan devised by Ted Kennedy and the liberals since his time. The movement to allow the illegal vote and to make it easier for those minorities to vote has succeeded. The minority vote now falls to the white vote. It ail never change until the republicans lower the bar and that will make us just like the dens. I wished I could be optimistic, but "the dye is cast." i can't stand being a republican any longer because I no longer know who we are. Lastly, Ronald Reagan could not have won this last election.

  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    Jan. 5, 2013 6:34 p.m.

    God protected the USA against Romney.

  • LValfre CHICAGO, IL
    Jan. 5, 2013 4:54 p.m.

    So Romney is a truthful, god fearing person? He does care about everybody? He doesn't cater to audiences? Hmmm ...

  • milner Centerfield Sanpete, UT
    Jan. 5, 2013 3:14 p.m.

    Who cares!

  • Jary Phoenix, AZ
    Jan. 5, 2013 3:04 p.m.

    Thank you Jay! I have been in a post election funk because of the loss, but also because of the hyper-critical commentary, especially from the so called "right." Mitt ran a hard campaign, exposing he and his family to public scrutiny that most could not endure, where he had to battle the left and right at the same time. Many of those he fairly beat in the primaries never truly came to support him as he did McCain in 2008 and now Newt has the temerity to say that Rick Perry, whose debate skills were exposed in the primary, would have been a better candidate. Bobby Jindal's whinning doesn't help either. Mitt's post election comments, as painful as they might be for many to hear, were right on. The modern Democrat Party is an amalgamation of bought and paid for special interests. Period!!! It's time to cowboy up and win! I thank Mitt and Ann for giving it their best.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 5, 2013 2:28 p.m.

    I am confident that Mr Romney is a good person and a good family man.

    I am also confident that he could make a good leader.

    Unfortunately, todays GOP doesn't want a leader. They don't want someone with business smarts.
    They want someone who will do what they want. They want someone who will sign the legislation that they want signed rather than to study the situation and go where "the data takes you"

    Yes, I believe that Mitt could have been a good president if his hands were not completely tied by the right wing of the GOP.

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    Jan. 5, 2013 1:24 p.m.

    I don't think we missed out on nearly as much as you think we did by not giving Romney the presidency. I could never tell where he stood on an issue. He was disingenuous during his campaign. His prescribed policies were thin; promising 12 million jobs in four years even though economists predicted the economy would generate that many regardless of who was president. A budget reform plan that was so optimistic, analysts didn't see any way the math could work without raising taxes on the middle class.

    His 47% comment was a self aggrandizing set of mistruths that was the nail in the coffin for me. It was the first time I believed we were seeing the real Romney, and he was lying about half the country in front of folks paying $50,000 a plate to see him do it. His peers.

    Even Reagan's budget director, David Stockman, found little merit in Romney's business practices and didn't think his experience as a financial speculator had any relevance to running the country.

    So no, we didn't miss out on much.

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    Jan. 5, 2013 1:18 p.m.

    The conservative sour grapes continue. This really cracks me up, because up until this election, conservatives were the most nationalistic flag-waving group you could find. No criticism of this great land or its people could be tolerated. "If you don't like it, then leave" "no apologies for greatness", "Obama's apology tour", etc. Now, holy cow! Somehow America changed overnight into a dependent mass of unmotivated and gullible citizens who cannot make their way in the world without federal help.

    The country didn't change, no more than it did when I sat dumbfounded that G.W.Bush won a second term. You just aren't handling a single election result well.

    This is what happens when you have to twist reality to explain disappointing results. You folks are going to have a long, long four years. I suggest meditation before your anger burns you out entirely.

  • Moracle Blackshear, GA
    Jan. 5, 2013 1:00 p.m.

    We will all know how much better a Romney administration would have been, if we lose our right to own firearms (causing a rise in crime); see our dollar become worthless and our economy collapse; see food and gas become so expensive we can't afford to buy either; and hear our government say they will take care of us if we let them place a tracking chip under our skin and turn ownership of all we have over to them....Ouch!!!

  • Mrs TAP Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 5, 2013 12:10 p.m.

    Amen, Amen, Amen!

  • xert Santa Monica, CA
    Jan. 5, 2013 11:25 a.m.

    National news sources began reporting yesterday, that Mr. Romney lost the election by receiving only (wait for it)--47 percent of the popular vote. The deliciousness of that particular slice of mint cream irony is such that it may stay on my palate for months. Karma say boo yah. Mitt! Boo yah being street lingo for "pack the dog on the roof and leave town please."

  • leonard Oakley, ID
    Jan. 5, 2013 11:21 a.m.

    Good luck, America. You picked a poor excuse for a president over an honorable very capable person. What were you thinking?

  • Joan Watson TWIN FALLS, ID
    Jan. 5, 2013 11:11 a.m.

    it's all a game - a BIG GAME. There are some, but not many in the U.S. government who are ethical, honest, intelligent, moral, free from self agrandizement, power lust. Demos/repubs reps and senators, behind the scene secret power players. and the media. The list goes on. As for media games, the so call 'Mother Mary' is not a person rather a left wing magazine. To my knowledge their reporter who recorded and edited Mitt's speach has not been identified. Consider the game to sling mud, distort, deceive, defame - ala Harry Reid's style, but not his alone. In my opinion the US shot itself in the foot by not nominating Mitt the first time for the Presidency - and has now shot itself in the head by rejecting him as president.

  • Joan Watson TWIN FALLS, ID
    Jan. 5, 2013 11:00 a.m.

    it is all a game - a BIG Game. There are some, but not many in the US government who are ethical, honest, intelligent, free from self agandizmentand power lust. All inclusive are our dems/repubs reps/senators, behind the scenes secret power players, and the media. - the list goes on. As for media games, the so called 'Mother Mary' who recorded and edited Mitts speach, is not a person, but a left wing Mmgazine. Their reporter has not, to my knowledge, been identified. Considerthe game to sling mud, destort, deceive, and defame - ala Harry Reid style, but not his alone. In my opinon the US shot itself in the foot the first time he lost the nomination and has now shot itself in the head by rejecting him as president.

  • A1994 Centerville, UT
    Jan. 5, 2013 11:00 a.m.

    The whole feeling of the Obama administration is of a suffocating government presence. For you who supported Obama, are you really pleased with the warrantless wire tapping that the Democrat-controlled Senate just passed? At some point you are going to to have to come to the realization that Obama has taken what Bush did and expanded it exponentially. He's a hypocrite of the worst kind. Fiscally, he has doubled down on deficits. He called Bush unpatriotic for adding $4 trillion to the debt in 8 years, but then added $6 trillion in only 4 years. How can you ignore these glaring contradictions?

    As far as the GOP backbiters ripping Romney, they are slimy political urchins who will do and say ANYTHING to get elected. Romney was right. Obama offered more stuff for less work.

    Jan. 5, 2013 9:36 a.m.

    I agree wholeheartedly with "Aunt Lucy" (3:52 p.m.). I haved lived overseas extensively and what I saw in France is where we are now headed--socialism and the lack of personal incentive it engenders. So sad. Our country lacks self-discipline it appears to turn this around. So very, very sad.

  • BoringGuy Holladay, UT
    Jan. 5, 2013 9:31 a.m.

    People can say whatever they like in hindsight. The bottom line -- the better man won.

  • morganh Orem, Utah
    Jan. 5, 2013 9:30 a.m.

    Charles Krauthammer said it best when he said, " the media will do everything possible to drag Barack Obama over the finish line." They had help from Obama's attack dogs ie. Stephanie Cutter who lied when she said she never met Joe Soptic who claimed his wife died of cancer because of Bain Capital. They have a disdain for Romney because if Obama their "anointed son" was defeated by someone who can show fiscal restraint and also have a running mate who can do the same it would be the end of their progressive ideologies. The result is a progressive socialist whose desire is to full the dream of his Socialist father for America that he could not full fill in his native Kenya.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 5, 2013 9:24 a.m.

    Worf and Mountainman.... just stop.

    No one is holding Obama on a pedestal. Comments like those are just attempts to justify your hatred.

    It was interesting to see an interview with Romney's eldest son a couple of weeks ago - someone who you would think actually knows the man pretty well. He commented he didn't think his dad really ever totally had his heart in running. He said Mitt is a private family man, didn't like the lime light, and preferred to work less in the publics eye... in fact he said he was surprised his dad ran because it was not his fathers style.

    Perhaps it was unfinished family business that drove him to run. Perhaps the leap in exposure from state to national politics he didn't expect. Palin could have warned him about that. WHo knows.

    I thick we could all see from time to time the lack of energy in Mitt. The campaign also took twist I am sure he didn't feel comfortable with. Mitt is a good man, I am glad he didn't win, it brings out the ugly side in people, as witnessed here often.

  • Meadow Lark Mark IDAHO FALLS, ID
    Jan. 5, 2013 9:10 a.m.

    Romney would have been better than Obama. What is truly sad is that we have a majority of people in our country who desire to have free hand outs. Hence we want to have those in office those who will keep the entitlements going. I think it is so sad that perhaps most in our country don't value the principle of work. So many want something given to them for nothing. Look at gambling throughout our country. Too many of us want something for nothing. Until our core values change back to honoring work, honesty, kindness, and other virtues we may be in for a rocky road.

  • woolybruce Idaho Falls, ID
    Jan. 5, 2013 9:00 a.m.

    The problem with Mitt Romney wasn't Mitt Romney it is the Republican Party that is still breaking apart. Make up of Moderate, wait they are kicking moderates out, leaving libertarians and southern Christian Extremists, and even with that they can keep the coalition together of the two factions.

    Just this last week, more civil war in the Republican Party. If this keeps going, the Democrats will sweep back into power in the House.

    So Mitt's biggest problem was he had to put a voice to the conservatives to keep them in the coalition only to loose the independents and moderates. When he put a voice as a Moderate, the radical conservatives bolted. Obviously he looked like a chameleon, because that is what exactly what the Republican Party demands, a literal bundle of contradiction.

    By the way Obama is not the re-carnation of Mao.

  • Cats Somewhere in Time, UT
    Jan. 5, 2013 8:51 a.m.

    We were offered something better and we chose not to take it. Just like in the scriptures, we will live with the consequences

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Jan. 5, 2013 8:50 a.m.

    Thanks DN, this was hilarious to read. Who knew the DN readers were prophets, mind readers, statistical geniuses, etc. Fact is none of it matters Mitt lost (decisively), as did the Repbulican party. Now I just have to figure out if I'm waiting for God to bring his/her wrath down on us or if I'm waiting for Obama to announce that he has finally destroyed everything American (whatever that is). Oh well we'll just have to see..cheers.

  • Badger55 Nibley, Ut
    Jan. 5, 2013 7:56 a.m.

    Romney's approval in MA was above 60% until his stance on abortion came out after the SCOTUS ruling. it had nothing to do with his governing abilities. It was above 50% for 3.5 out of the 4 years he was a governor. Which is much better than Obama's overall rating. His rating only dropped below 50% after he announced he was running for POTUS. Guess the people were just upset he was not staying.
    -Took MA from 50th in job creation to 28th when he left office.
    -Eliminated a $2 billion MA deficit and created a surplus with a $2 billion rainy day fund
    -Managed a scandal ridden, financial disaster 2002 olympics to be one of the few Olympics to actually turn a profit
    -Donated more of his time(28 total years, including 2002 Olympics and MA Governorship) and money(nearly 30% in 2011) to charity than probably any other politician.
    Romney is a better leader. Hands down.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Jan. 5, 2013 7:34 a.m.

    Nordlinger can play the role of Romney apologist all he wants, but much of the criticism is accurate. Romney offered nothing but vague platitudes. He provided no plan or vision. I have no idea what he stood for except that he was not Obama and it was Mitt's turn to lead. That's not good enough. And his own post-election comments reiterated his 47 percent remarks. And here we are over two months later, and there is no sign whatsoever that Romney has any intention to be a leader in influencing public policy. To my dying day, I'll believe it was always about Mitt and not the country.

  • Albert Maslar CPA (Retired) Absecon, NJ
    Jan. 5, 2013 7:08 a.m.

    Selecting Romney was as wrong as the faux debates to select the nominee. The debates guaranteed that Obama would use them to shred whoever would be the eventual GOP nominee. There must be a better way to beat the likes of Obama.

  • Rynn Las Vegas, NV
    Jan. 5, 2013 6:45 a.m.

    Aunt Lucy, I agree. I know someone that has been unemployed for about 4 years because his parents have enabled him to the point that it's crippled him. He doesn't even know how to take care of himself anymore because he doesn't have to. They provide all financial necessities (and some perks too). They've created a monster in which they will probably be supporting him for the rest of their lives because he just doesn't have the motivation to do it on his own.

    The same with government. There is helping and there is enabling.

  • ldrake50 WVC, UT
    Jan. 5, 2013 1:39 a.m.

    Unfortunately, America got what they deserved. I firmly believe votes were "bought" with promises of continued entitlements and empty promises. Already Obama has shown no intentions of bipartisanship. We did this to ourselves for not seeing the absolute goodness in Mitt Romney; he was the man we needed for the job that needed to be done. I place a lot of blame on the press ... their job was to tear Mitt down as far as they could. Thirteen isn't a very lucky number. Hold on to your socks, we are going to go for a very unpleasant ride.

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    Jan. 5, 2013 12:14 a.m.

    It is the shame of the Republicans that they lost the election so definitively, yet have not learned a single thing for all that.


  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 4, 2013 11:58 p.m.

    This country is not wise, or thrifty minded enough to elect an honorable president.

    Is deceit the only way to a political office?

  • barndog48 AMERICAN FORK, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 11:50 p.m.

    Yes us Democrats feel exactly the same way, Mitt was the best and the brightest, PLEASE RUN HIM AGAIN.

    Jan. 4, 2013 11:17 p.m.

    He was right, 47% would not vote for him, because it would affect their entitlements.

    How can so many in the media twist things around and make inaccurate comments. Politico's statement is pure propaganda. Self deportation laws have proved to be very effective, Arizona and Alabama proved it. They did articles on both, and know the truth.

    I don't think the best man won. When the President sends his vice president to talk to the other side, because he has burned his bridges, we are in trouble. I'm happy the voters kept the house in the hands of the Republicans to counter Obama.

    The media and the Republican party never really gave him support.

  • LDSareChristians Anchorage, AK
    Jan. 4, 2013 10:01 p.m.

    bslack posted:
    During this critical time, why would President Obama authorize or lift the freeze on Salaries for those in the Federal Government.

    Answer: He bought votes, this is the pay off.

    Mitt's plan was to reduce the budget of each department by 1% each year he was in office. Certainly didn't buy him any votes.

    The bottom line is greed. Democratic/Liberal greed.

  • coleman51 Orem, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 9:28 p.m.

    In the article it states that the country was not good enough for a President like Mitt Romney. Romney would have been a great President but instead the American people picked the most corrupt President in American history. Well did Mosiah say in the Book of Mormon "And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you great destruction even as he has hitherto visited the land." We have reached that point in our history.

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 9:04 p.m.

    @LDS Liberal

    You just keep living in your liberal fantasy land.

    Half the country voted for Romney, and the vast majority of electable positions in the country were won by republicans. Losing a few seats in federal congress does not mean that much.

    If you willing to vote for a quitter and RINO like Hunstman then you are not good barometer of this country.

    The country is NOT 60 percent left of center, it is quite well established this country is right of center. This election proved is the historical fact it is very difficult to beat an incumbent.

    Especially when you do not offer a real alternative. Romeny was closer to being a democrat lite than anything.

    Romney did not lose because of turning right,

    Romney lost by turning left, and failing to distinguish himself from Obama, he became agreeable with Obama, refused to attack Obama and his horrible policies. He did not truly fight for the office and he alienated his base causing them to stay home. Romney just did not motivate his base with Obama losing 11 million votes he could have won if had energized his base, but turned left and soft and liberal.

  • BYUalum South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 8:16 p.m.

    George Washington never wanted to be President of the United States, and he did better than all right. Not a good argument.

    Romney as a self-made man had a business and political resume` that was far and above anything OBH has done. Obama still doesn't know how to lead. He does know how to threaten, however. Ask anyone in the military or a Senior Citizen. What we have is a slick talker, MSM behind him, welfare and food stamp "folks" with their hands outstretched to all his continued rallies, and a man who, when he doesn't get his own way, uses Presidental privilege to go around the law. He's done that over 900 times his first term.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 6:58 p.m.

    Mcallen, TX
    LDS Liberal holds Obama on a pedestal.
    5:14 p.m. Jan. 4, 2013


    You know,
    You really crack me up worf -- and really don't know me at all.

    To start with, I'm a former Republican, but left the party 25 years ago after Reagan as the party shifted further and further away from me to the uber far-right we see it today.
    I didn't leave the party, the party left me.

    Today, I'm considered left-of-Center.
    Along with 60% of the U.S. population.

    2. Had Mitt Romney stayed true to himself and his Father and Mother - a fiscally conservative - socially liberal, NorthEastern Rockfeller Republican -- he would have had my well as that 60% in the middle.

    As stated -- The GOP vetting process just to get the nomination and on the ticket by the uber-far-right-wing-extremeists (Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin...) left EVERYBODY with a sour bad taste in their mouths.

    3. I never have voted for Obama. In fact, I voted for a Republican in this last election. I wrote in who I though the best man for the job really was -- Jon Huntsman Jr.

  • Shazandra Bakersfield, CA
    Jan. 4, 2013 6:15 p.m.

    It is what it is, right? Lessons learned? Me thinks not. Smart men ran on the Repub. ticket, but obviously not smart enough pull off the switch. Nor did the GOP know how to relate to the demographics they needed. Romney is a compassionate, generous man; he chose not to present that side to the public. He lost the entitlement crowd.

    He chose to accentuate his business acumen ad nauseum. He lost any OWS, bleeding-heart libs, and leftists he might have garnered.

    He is supportive of all ethnicities, but didn't relate well to those segments personally. He lost the Latino, Black and Cuban bloc. He basically ignored his own polygamous relatives in Mexico, for fear that too many ties would remind constituents of the weird factor in his geneology...? His religion answers were obfuscation and made the resultant researchers angry afterwards.

    Own your family, your religion and your heritage 100%. It can never hurt. In the end, a truly compassionate servant lost the opportunity to lead this selfish, lost, navel-gazing generation to a better future.

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    Jan. 4, 2013 6:04 p.m.

    Re Kouger:

    I feel sorry for you that you think the proper measurement of "charity" and the defining characteristic of being "charitable" is the amount of money one donates. Donating money to a charity is perhaps the least charitable thing one can do; it's not a bad thing, but is the bare minimum one can do. I guess I missed the part where you followed both these people around for the duration of their adult lives and made a determination that one was more charitable than the other.

    If the open season on Mr. Romney is over...when is it the proper time to call off the absurd disputes of the President's birth, beliefs (religious, economic, political, etc.), and character? Sounds an awful lot like "do as I say, not as I do" rhetoric from the columnist.

  • Shazandra Bakersfield, CA
    Jan. 4, 2013 5:52 p.m.

    You nailed it Kouger! Well said. Facts is facts.

    I voted for every candidate but Mitt in the primaries, but they all fell off the rails one by one. I believe that God puts in who He wants in governments, just as the Bible reiterates in both Testaments. I pulled the final lever for Mitt and said a prayer. So I am confident that we need 4 more years of spanking for the Entitlement Generation to get what they deserve: Huge tax bills for their ostrich necks.

    I believe Romney/Ryan would have been great for America. But as an ex-Mormon, I also know where Mr. R obfuscated on the religion questions. Full disclosure may have helped his numbers in the evangelical camp, cuz there's a ton of us 'formers' there. No need for a lashing from current LDS: you won't answer those questions either, and the DN won't even let them be asked here.

    So live with the lack of evangelical support that could have only helped the Republicans at the very least.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 5:38 p.m.

    Yes Obama ran for the presidency out of revenge on America too funny . Paranoia is no way to win elections. But you conservatives keep on trying it'd that work out in the last election?

  • kishkumen American Fork, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 5:35 p.m.

    Post-election criticism? Ummmm, the Prime Minister of the UK, numerous Republican governors and legislators, most news outlets (except The Deseret News and Fox news) have all criticized this guy since he started his presidential run in 2007 for NUMEROUS character flaws. The comments after the election are just a continuation.

  • Buba Mountain View, CA
    Jan. 4, 2013 5:28 p.m.

    America did not miss out on a great president, a great man, a great family man, and a great leader...Obama. For those of you think that we missed out on Mitt Romney - fine. But which one did we miss out on? What he forgot what he was that day? He lost by 47%. Does that ring a video bell? It sure turned out to be a voting wake up bell. I do not know where the GOP is headed or if they even have a head to think with. The Tea Party sure screws things up. These people are not even human. And guess what? In the very near future, there will be a majority of Spanish speaking wonderful people to finally take back what they once owned - the USA. African Americans will grow as fast and then guess what? Whites will be in the minority. So GOPs, you better wake up and smell the future.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 4, 2013 5:14 p.m.

    LDS Liberal holds Obama on a pedestal.

  • Kouger Lehi, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 4:58 p.m.

    @Happy Valley Heretic

    Hahaa right ... the best man who has become the WORST president! Pathetic, to say the least. By the way, it's better that the country be run as a business than a pantry. Again the one motivation Obama has being president is REVENGE on everything American.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    Jan. 4, 2013 4:44 p.m.

    Considering that Romney never really wanted to be President anyway, I would say he and the country are both lucky he lost.

    Oh - and the biggest problem with the "attacks" by conservatives against Romney after he lost the election, is the fact that they waited until after the election to call him out on what he was saying. What he said was wrong - it was wrong when he was running, and it was wrong after he lost. You cannot govern a nation of individuals whom you despise. I guess we should at least give him kudos for being willing to admit how he really feels about people.

  • Beowulf Portland, OR
    Jan. 4, 2013 4:31 p.m.

    Here, here Mr. Nordlinger!

    Yet I, as an LDS who wholeheartedly backed Romney, heaved a sigh of relief when he lost, because I was afraid of what might happen to LDS members in semi-nasty countries such as Russia, where pro-government thugs were gearing up to attack LDS meetinghouses as bases of US agents provacateurs in disguise.

    Maybe in another generation or so...

  • no fit in SG St.George, Utah
    Jan. 4, 2013 4:22 p.m.

    Don't know about everyone else, but throughout the rest of my life whenever I hear the number 47.........
    It shall bring a big grin upon my face.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 4:20 p.m.

    Says the "Conservative Cryer" also known as the National Review.
    4 more years of crying by Mountainman about freebies that were never promised.

    The best man won the office...well, I'd say: Ooooh bummer for those who believe our country should be run like a business, yeah for those who believe in America!

    Jan. 4, 2013 4:16 p.m.

    The most telling comment in the article was: "people don't always buy what you're selling, and they always get what they deserve." That's true in any democracy. The majority always gets what they deserve, because it was their choice.

  • bslack Draper, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 4:12 p.m.

    FT you are exagerating the truth. Govenor Romney chose not to run for Govenor a 2nd term in 2006, because he was preparing to make his first run at the Presidency. If anything, the people of Massachuetts were concerned because of the amount of time spent preparing for his run to be President as well as the elected leader of the Republican Govenors Association. Govenor Romney did some good things for Massachuetts such has the first Health Care Plan as well as reduced the State's deficit by a large amount. I feel Govenor Romney would have been a good President because he is more centrist and a much better leader in bringing the two sides together to fix problems instead of trying to cram a one-sided solution down our throats.

    Once again we see Congress, the Senate, and President Obama not working together and not a leader in the bunch to create a plan that is best for the Country. During this critical time, why would President Obama authorize or lift the freeze on Salaries for those in the Federal Government. The whole bunch is a joke.

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    Jan. 4, 2013 4:07 p.m.

    Most of the conservatives who supported Romney during the General Election fought tooth and nail to keep him from getting the nomination. He was not their first choice or even their tenth choice. That meant the Romney had to placate them to get the nomination and said a lot of things that came back to haunt him. These same conservatives honestly believe that if Romney had not moved to the center during the General Election he would have won. That wasn't the problem. The extreme positions he took during the primaries was the problem. The idea that Rick Perry or Newt Gingrich would have won is of course laughable. Its not just the criticism of Romney that should stop, but the general pandering to the extremes of the Party that must come to an end.

  • aunt lucy Looneyville, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 3:52 p.m.

    I understand what Mitt is saying and I think he's spot on. When a government goes too far with safety nets to help the needy it turns charity into an act of demeaning and enabling. Confidence and ambition are lost and the recepitent of the "hand out" now feels helpless and dependent on the service. They blame everyone but themself for their state. The very governement that is claiming to help them is keeping them a slave to poverty and dependency. In that sitaution it is no surprise that individuals will vote to keep more programs and government hand outs coming. They have no hope or confidence in their abilities to provide. Consequently Mitt stood no chance to win the election and by allowing Barack 4 more years, we will only move more closely to socialism when the government will take care of all us. This is what I hear him saying and I couln't agree more with him.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Jan. 4, 2013 3:38 p.m.

    America has changed. We don't elect good leaders anymore, we elect freebie providers! Now we get to see how our current president will pay for all the entitlements he has provided and promised.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    Jan. 4, 2013 3:13 p.m.

    So Gingrich now says that either he or Rick Perry would have made a better candidate than Mitt. That's good for a laugh. I didn't vote for Romney and I criticized him a lot but I think he was the best of the lot in the GOP field of contenders.

    Mitt's defeat underscores what's wrong with the GOP. To get the nomination, he had to sell himself to the right wing as something he was not. He wasn't credible but that was his only hope. He pulled it off with the help of his uninspiring opponents. Then after getting the GOP nod, he had to sell himself all over again, this time to the middle as a moderate. He hesitated too long but came closer than I thought he ever could to pulling that off too.

    Nice try, Mitt, but there are only so many rabbits you can pull out of a hat.

  • Reader Sandy, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 2:22 p.m.

    I think Mitt Romney is a capable, compassionate man who does understand the average American. I believe he has the leadership skills to lead this country. II also believe the Republican party has gone so far right that they for the most part only represent a very limited part of America. I believe Mitt Romney said and did things that were not truly who he was just to please the far right and the Tea Party so he could even have a chance to win the nomination. I think his defeat belongs solely to the Republican Party and the Tea Party. Until those groups get their act together and exhibit a liitle more compassion and understanding that the population of America is not "white bread", no Republican nominee will be electable.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 2:01 p.m.

    It would have been interesting to see what a Mitt Romney presidency would have done for the country. But he was a terrible Govenor, leaving after only one term in office and a 35% approval rating. Residents of Massachuetts were running him out of the state with pitch forks and burning torches. Both he and the GOP ran a terrible campain, isolating all the minorities and women. If the Romney campaign was any reflection of how he would have governed we would be a lot worse off than what we currently are suffering through.

  • Sparky908 Yakima, WA
    Jan. 4, 2013 1:52 p.m.

    Yes I agree, our greed as a nation and our desire as a party (GOP) to be the ultimate conservative, ended up costing us the "game". I also agree that we didn't do ourselves any favors by beating up our team and then showing the other team our play book. Guys like Gingrich, Perry and Sandtorum have no one to blame but ourselves. If we would have handled ourselves in a more dignified and gentlemanly manner, Obama would have had to stand on just his record.

    Mr Romney is a class act, most qualified and has the work experience. However, because of the parties lack of decorum, we have the "captain of the titanic" on the job. As a coach once told me, "if you want to be a winner, play as a winner". Hopefully the GOP will figure out how to do that.

  • Kouger Lehi, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 1:50 p.m.

    @LDS Liberal

    Which Mitt Romney?

    1. The Mitt Romney who graduated with two degrees - with honors - from Harvard hence the Mitt Romney who is SMARTER than the current President (what's his name again?)
    2. The Mitt Romney who was a noted CEO - hence way more more qualified in business and executive matters than the current president
    3. The Mitt Romney who was a successful businessman - hence far more successful than most including the current president
    4. The Mitt Romney who was a GOVERNOR of a liberal state - hence more QUALIFIED and experienced in executive and political matters than the current president.
    5. The Mitt Romney who was President/CEO of a successful Winter Olympics - a position and accomplishment that the current president would NEVER achieve or be qualified for.
    5. The Mitt Romney who was/is more charitable than most including the current president AND vice president - individually and ... COMBINED!!

    ... and so on and so forth.

    Those are hard solid facts about Mitt Romney; they are not abstracts, opinions or speculations which people like you have used to distort your views about a great and qualified man in Mitt Romney....well, I'd say: Ooooh bummer!

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    Jan. 4, 2013 1:15 p.m.


    You very well may be correct, but we missed out on him not because of anything the democrats or the President did, we missed out on him because of what his own party did to him and tried to make him do. To win the republican primary, you have to turn hard to the right, and then the things you say on the way to winning the primary, will cost you in the general election.

    I think the real Mitt Romney was probably a lot more centrist than the Mitt Romney that the we saw and heard. Unfortunately we will never know because we still don't know who the real Mitt Romney is.

  • BYUalum South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 12:55 p.m.

    America missed out on a great president, a great man, a great family man, and a great leader...Mitt Romney. What a missed opportunity for our country! I hope we survive with the given administration and their seize for power and control.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 4, 2013 12:45 p.m.

    The question will always reamain...

    Which Mitt Romney are we talking aobut?