The
Washington Post demonstrates, in less than a sentence,
the hilarity at the core of Mitt Romney's plan for 2016:
If he runs again in 2016, Romney is determined to re-brand himself as authentic, warts and all ...
Authentic is something you are supposed to
be, not something you are supposed to brand or rebrand yourself as. Of course public figures are always branded in some way and no politician can afford raw authenticity. But by the time you're trying to rebrand yourself as authentic, the authenticity battle has been lost.
What would the new, authentic, warty Mitt look like?
Now, Romney speaks openly about his service as a lay pastor in the Mormon church; recites Scripture to audiences; muses about salvation and the prophet; urges students to marry young and “have a quiver full of kids”; and even cracks jokes about Joseph Smith’s polygamy.
From telling college students to
borrow $20,000 from their parents to start a business in 2012 to telling them to marry young and get to breeding in 2016. Okay, then. But that seems to be the plan in a nutshell: No more will the campaign be about businessman Mitt, it'll be about Mormon patriarch Mitt.
I have questions. It's a different look, but is it really a better one from a vote-getting perspective? If Romney is downplaying the super-wealthy businessman image that went over so poorly with voters, what exactly is he claiming as his major qualification for office? Does his team think that losing in 2012 showed so clearly that he was qualified that they can just go with cuddly Mormon grandpa and no one will ask what unique competencies or policy positions he brings to the table?
I am looking forward to watching Mitt Romney try to project authenticity, though.