Skip to main content

View Diary: Mitt Romney: A man without principle, a campaign without purpose (227 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I agree (15+ / 0-)

    Although the RNC convention will probably look like a cross between a remake of Wall Street and a Klan rally.

    Republicans are very good at "against."  But that's their good side:  far better than when they focus on "for."

    When Free Speech is outlawed, only outlaws will have Free Speech.

    by Dallasdoc on Sun Jan 15, 2012 at 07:50:04 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  the only thing they're 'for' is suffering (5+ / 0-)

      Everyone who has the unmitigated gall not to be rich white men must pay dearly for their arrogance!

      /snark

      Do you know why they call it the American Dream? Because it only happens when you're asleep.

      by Visceral on Sun Jan 15, 2012 at 08:15:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Agree, Dallasdoc. (11+ / 0-)

      As Lawrence said, the anti-Obama thing may have worked in the mid terms, stoked heavily by the pinnacle of a dreary economy, but presidential elections are not won by what you're against, they're won by what you're for.  In all the elections I've lived through, I can't think of one exception to this.  

      In addition to all of Mitt's other problems, from Bain to Seamus the dog, many don't seem to have noticed yet that he doesn't seem to have an agenda beyond Obama hating. Really, he just talks in big bubbles of rhetorical bullshit that don't say or promise anything. Only when he gets to the Obama bashing does he show any sign of clarity or life.

      In Mitt's world there is no Morning in America, no shining city on a hill.  In Mitt's world so far, there's only his wooden reciting of stanzas from America the Beautiful---which make one so itchy uncomfortable one longs for the days of Roseanne's version of the Star Spangled Banner.  

      •  Yeah, what the hell's that all about? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        StellaRay, Dallasdoc
        In Mitt's world so far, there's only his wooden reciting of stanzas from America the Beautiful---which make one so itchy uncomfortable one longs for the days of Roseanne's version of the Star Spangled Banner.  

        What a vapid, pandering, empty suit this tool is.  

        Imagine the faux outrage coming from the usual suspects were Obama to call press conferences [plural], and solemnly recite lines from the Pledge of Allegiance  -  as opposed to actually discussing an issue or offering something of substance.

        Romney campaigns like he's courting the votes of children.  [What does it say about your political party when your every position is dumbed down to appeal to the absolutely stupidest members of your own likely voters?  And is it isn't even necessary.  The GOP has a lock of the Tea Party morans.  They aren't going anywhere because they've been voting Republican all along.  The media acts as if the Tea Partiers were some new phenomenon.  But these hillibillies have always been, fringe perhaps, but make no mistake, they were and always have been conservative Republicans.  The term "Tea Party" was just a new name for an old, tired, tried-and-failed playbook.  The only thing new about it was their level of anger over losing the election in 2008.  To a black guy.  Named Hussein Obama.  From Kenya.  Who's a Marxist.  Who pals around with terrorists.  And who wants to destroy everything they hold dear.  And who kills kittens for giggles.  And...]  

        Criticism of Romney's corporate raiding is due to "envy" and is an attack on capitalism itself.  AND..... and...... did you know this country was founded upon a belief in God?  Or some such nonsense.  The man actually said that in defense of Bain.

        "Fucking Jews."  -  Richard Nixon to Billy Graham.

        "Fucking Jews."  -  Billy Graham back to Richard Nixon.

      •  elections are not won by what you are against? (0+ / 0-)

        I'd like to move to whatever country you live in!

        Day after day on hateradio and C-SPAN I hear callers say that even though they agree with Democrats on a lot of issues they "have to" vote Republicon because they are opposed to abortion, or gay rights/marriage equality, or gun control, or socialism, or Muslims, or a black man being president (although they usually phrase that last one very delicately).

        We can't even get those people to THINK about what they are FOR.  They swim in a sea of messaging about fear of the negative.  As a result, that demographic is more highly motivated by what they are against than what they are for, otherwise Ds would win every election.

        "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
        Must see video: When Mitt Romney Came to Town

        by TrueBlueMajority on Mon Jan 16, 2012 at 10:48:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  There's a distinction (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TrueBlueMajority

          to be made between the voters and the candidate.  Voters often vote against something, but presidential candidates must stand FOR something to win.  Regan and both Bushes ran on SOMETHING above and beyond Democratic hate.  Regan most famously with his "Morning in America" and "shining city on the hill."  GWB with his compassionate conservatism.  

          IMO, presidential candidates must channel a vision of something better.  McCain lost for a lot of reasons, but one of them was that he was not able to channel a vision of something better.  Unlike Obama, he ran a negative, attack oriented campaign, meaning that was his most memorable message/voice.  Not true of Obama.

          And now we see the GOP doing the same thing all over again.  Because of the economy, it's going to be a tough, hard fought campaign.  But my bet is that if Mitt does not create a positive message that resonates with far more people than his base---and I don't think he's capable of that---he will lose.

          •  Hey TrueBlue, (0+ / 0-)

            I really appreciate our conversation here.  I've read so many of your comments, and nodded my head to most of them.

            You brought up really good points that made me think and define my POV.  I hope we will continue to enjoy each other's POV, but most of all, share what I KNOW we share.  The utter and complete need to come together when it's important.

            Good luck to both of us, darlin', in the election of our lifetime.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site