Mitt ran a clean campaign based on reality and capitalism and the American
people voted instead for smoke and mirrors and socialism.
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.
God protected the USA against Romney.
So Romney is a truthful, god fearing person? He does care about everybody? He
doesn't cater to audiences? Hmmm ...
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.
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.
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.
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
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!!!
Amen, Amen, Amen!
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."
Good luck, America. You picked a poor excuse for a president over an honorable
very capable person. What were you thinking?
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.
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.
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.
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.
People can say whatever they like in hindsight. The bottom line -- the better
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
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
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.
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.
We were offered something better and we chose not to take it. Just like in the
scriptures, we will live with the consequences
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.
FT,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.
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.
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.
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.
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
It is the shame of the Republicans that they lost the election so definitively,
yet have not learned a single thing for all that.Pathetic.
This country is not wise, or thrifty minded enough to elect an honorable
president.Is deceit the only way to a political office?
Yes us Democrats feel exactly the same way, Mitt was the best and the brightest,
PLEASE RUN HIM AGAIN.
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
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.
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
@LDS LiberalYou 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.
Kalindra,George Washington never wanted to be President of the United
States, and he did better than all right. Not a good argument.Buba,
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.
worfMcallen, TXLDS 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 vote....as 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.
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
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.
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.
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
anyway....how'd that work out in the last election?
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
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.
LDS Liberal holds Obama on a pedestal.
@Happy Valley HereticHahaa 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.
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.
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...
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.
Says the "Conservative Cryer" also known as the National Review.4
more years of crying by Mountainman about freebies that were never promised.KourgerThe 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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@LDS LiberalWhich 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 president4. 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:
BYUalum,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.
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.
The question will always reamain...Which Mitt Romney are we talking