Mitt Romney

The 2012 Republican Presidential Candidates: A Group Embarrassing To American Politics, Except For Three!

Ronald 4 Comments

The Republican Presidential race for 2012, now effectively over, was a terrible embarrassment to American politics and history, with only three candidates fitting the image of being serious, mainstream candidates.

Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul were all, at best, “cartoon” characters, not coming up to the standards expected by most sane, rational Americans for the office of President of the United States.

However, three candidates did fit the standard of what one would expect of a major party nominee for President.

With all their shortcomings, former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, and Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts all fit into the arena as legitimate candidates.

And there is a possibility that Romney might select Pawlenty for Vice President, making for a very sane, responsible ticket, which could, in theory, give Barack Obama a “run for his money” in the Presidential race.

But the whole craziness of the Republican Presidential battle helped to marginalize Romney, and destroyed the candidacies of Pawlenty and Huntsman.

2012 will not be remembered as one of the great years of exceptional candidates offered by a major political party for the Presidency of the United States!

Joe Biden The “Attack Dog”: “Osama Bin Laden Is Dead, and General Motors Is Alive!”

Ronald 3 Comments

Vice President Joe Biden is clearly a very effective “attack dog” for Barack Obama!

Yesterday, Biden went after Mitt Romney, the presumptive GOP Presidential nominee, pointing out that he wants to take us back to the Bush era of foreign policy and economic policy.

His most effective lines were that due to Barack Obama, Osama Bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive, and that had Mitt Romney been in the White House, the opposite result would have been likely!

Wow, that has to really hurt, and it shows how Joe Biden is one of the very best Vice Presidents we have seen in pure rhetoric and defense of the President they serve, and is exactly the right man to have a heartbeat away from the Presidency. It also shows his level of mental and physical strength, and why he should not be dismissed as the potential successor to Barack Obama in 2016!

And Biden reminds us that it is time to celebrate what are certainly two of the greatest accomplishments of Barack Obama as we come to the one year anniversary of the demise of Bin Laden, the terrorist’s death, and the great success of the auto industry.

And, although Biden did not mention another great accomplishment of the Prresident, Rush Limbaugh indirectly reminded us of it, when he referred derisively to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as “just a Secretary”, the biggest bull line of late from the overweight airbag, when everyone knows that Hillary has been an exceptional asset for the country as our chief foreign policy figure, a record which puts her in the line of possible successors to Barack Obama, as much as Joe Biden!

Mitt Romney And American Society: In The 1950s! Mitt Romney And Foreign Policy: In The 1980s!

Ronald Leave a comment

Now that Mitt Romney has the GOP Presidential nomination, we are realizing that he is back in the 1950s, as far as American society is concerned, and back in the 1980s, as far as American foreign policy is concerned!

One might wonder, what does the author mean?

Well, socially, Romney’s family is a 1950s family: a dutiful wife who has never worked for pay, only as a mother and housewife; having a large family of five children; the five sons being well behaved and never getting into trouble; no question of unhappiness or conflict or divorce; very religious; and living a comfortable, suburban life! This is the image of the 1950s, when women knew their “place”; when children did not use illegal drugs or get drunk or even smoke if they came from a “good” family; and minorities were seen, but not heard, and there was very little direct contact with them.

Well, foreign policy wise, Romney is in the 1980s, with the image of the Cold War under Ronald Reagan; with the Russians called the Soviet Union, and seen as an “evil empire”; with the Soviets controlling Eastern Europe, including the nation of Czechoslovakia, and Eastern Europe enslaved by the Russian armies.

Top aides to Romney have used the term “Soviet Union” recently, as has Romney, forgetting that the Soviet Union disappeared in 1991, and while Russia is certainly a nation to watch and keep track of their activities, they are certainly nothing like the old “Soviet Union”, do not control Eastern Europe, and do not even control all of the separate provinces that are now independent nations.

Also, the references to “Czechoslovakia” are truly laughable by Romney aides on foreign policy, as that nation broke up peacefully 19 years ago, in 1993, into the Czech Republic and Slovakia. This is the same mistake made by Senator John McCain, the 2008 Republican Presidential nominee!

One would think that a candidate for President, and his top advisers, would know the true story about Czechoslovakia!

One would also think that a candidate for President would realize we are not in the 1950s regarding the family, the role of women, and the reality of minority groups in America!

So one has to say, is this what the nation wants in 2013 and beyond: a candidate socially in the 1950s, and foreign policy wise in the 1980s Cold War mentality? One would hope the answer is NO!

Oh No! Speculation About 2016 Democratic Presidential Nomination Already? And Involving New York?

Ronald 2 Comments

It is hard to believe, but Politico has published an article speculating about two possible candidates for the Democratic nomination for President in 2016 almost seven months before we settle who will sit in the Oval Office on January 20, 2013!

And get this: the two political figures mentioned are both New Yorkers, a state thought by many to have no role in the future of Presidential races, but anyone thinking that would be wrong!

The two are Secretary of State and former Senator Hillary Clinton, wife of the 42nd President, Bill Clinton, and Governor Andrew Cuomo, son of former Governor Mario Cuomo, himself the subject of much speculation for President in the 1990s, but never running.

Speculation is rampant, although Hillary denies it, that she might be tapped for Vice President in place of Joe Biden, or that she will just retire for two years, write a book, relax, and then come back and run for President, but with Andrew Cuomo not allowing that to stand in the way of his own ambitions.

And then, outside of the Politico article, there is speculation that Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York will also wish to move ahead and seek the Presidency in 2016!

Imagine New York being a center of Presidential speculation, and we don’t even know if the President in office will be leaving in 2017 (Barack Obama), or be finishing his first term in office (Mitt Romney)!

The Clashing Value Systems Of Mitt Romney And Barack Obama

Ronald 1 Comment

Last night, after proclaiming victory in five Middle Atlantic and New England state primaries, Mitt Romney declared that a person’s success in the business world, as he has had, should be respected, but also applauded as something to admire and praise.

This is Mitt Romney’s whole life, the acquisition of wealth for its own sake, no matter how it is gained, and it has shaped Romney’s value system of what is important in one’s life, economic success. And he wants us to tell him how impressed we are with his gaining of wealth!

Barack Obama, on the other hand, did not know what wealth was until he made money from books he wrote, an intellectual challenge not connected with the business world. He was a community organizer in Chicago, helping poor people in unpleasant urban environments to cope with a difficult world, and used his intellectual nature to be an adjunct professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago. Along the way, he and his wife Michele borrowed money on student loans to make it through college and law school, and held comparatively low paying jobs where he was helping others, and educating others. And then he ran for public office with a commitment to the advancement of others.

One has devoted his life to profits and being admired and applauded for materialism, which he loves to brag about, while the other devoted his life to service to others, concern about others, struggling to pay off student loans, and wishing to make a difference to the masses of people who are not born to wealth, or become wealthy.

These different value systems and mind sets are the crux of the election that is coming up in November!

What kind of President do we want? A President interested in his own constant acquisition of wealth and constant glorification of his accomplishments and success? Or a President who wishes to leave a legacy of making life better for those less fortunate, those who are the backbone of what America is all about, the every day citizen who just wants to have a better life and a sense of security for his children and for his or her old age?

This is a battle for the soul of America in 2012, a crucial turning point in American history!

The Urgency Of Mitt Romney To Be Transparent About His Life

Ronald Leave a comment

When a person decides to run for President, he opens himself up to the American people, and we have a right to know as much as we can about his background , his history, his beliefs, and his agenda.

Of course, no one is tied down to what he says his agenda is, as circumstances and events will shape a lot of what occurs during his administration, if he is elected President.

But being honest, frank, transparent, is always the better way, as we value someone who comes across as not secretive, not deceptive, not manipulative.

Sadly, Mitt Romney, the presumptive GOP nominee for President, particularly after victories in New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, now needs to prove that he is not secretive, deceptive and manipulative, the impressions he has left in the battle for the nomination over the past year.

Therefore, if he wants us to take him seriously, and decide if he deserves to be President, he must come forward with information in precise terms about the following:

Romney needs to tell us about his Mormon faith, how he views it, what he thinks of its shortcomings and the criticisms made of it, as many wonder about a religion often considered a cult. We have a right to know how much his faith will govern his decision making and his world view.

Romney needs to reveal his investments, if any, based on reports, that he has in the Cayman Islands, the Bahamas, Monaco, or Swiss banks, and why he chose to invest there, rather than in US banking institutions.

Romney needs to explain his family history, and the truth about his father, instead of claiming how poor his dad, George Romney, was, and how Mitt pulled himself up all on his own without any help from family, a story that is seen as a myth. He needs to stop denying his heritage and his wealth and advantages inherited from being the son of the chairman of American Motors and the Governor of Michigan in the 1960s.

Romney also needs to tell us what his agenda is on foreign policy, how he plans to relate to the outside world. And he needs to tell us what kind of Supreme Court appointments he would wish to make, and how he sees the law and the Constitution, in specific details. And he needs to stop evasion as a tactic, as he will be confronted with it during the campaign by media investigation, and certainly by President Obama in the three televised debates. We have a right to know if he wished to govern as a moderate or a conservative.

Since he insisted that Obama should be forthcoming on his plans after the election, he must be willing to do the same, and be totally transparent in all regards, something he has not done so far.

If he is not transparent, then he will lose the election. If he is transparent, and we find the information unacceptable, then he will lose. But better to lose on transparency than the lack of it. To have an image of being honest, frank, and transparent, is always preferred, and a good character lesson for the nation at large!

“Cool” Vs. “Stiff” Presidential Candidates: The Vote Goes To The “Cool’ Candidate Eighty Percent Of Presidential Elections Since 1932!

Ronald 1 Comment

One aspect of the battle for the Presidency over time, particularly in the age of modern media and national campaigning, is the personality of the candidates, and whether a person running for the Presidency is “cool” or “stiff” with people.

When one investigates this from the time of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932 onward, in most cases, but not all, the “cool” , more personable, candidate wins.

This happened with FDR against Herbert Hoover in 1932, against Alf Landon in 1936, against Wendell Willkie in 1940, and against Thomas E. Dewey in 1944.

It also occurred with Harry Truman against Dewey in 1948; Dwight D. Eisenhower against Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and 1956, and John F. Kennedy against Richard Nixon in 1960.

1964 was a rare year, where Barry Goldwater seemed more personable by far than Lyndon B . Johnson, but the Johnson campaign successfully depicted Goldwater as dangerous and extremist.

In 1968, Hubert Humphrey was certainly more gregarious and warm than Richard Nixon or George Wallace, but still lost, due to the Democratic split over the VIetnam War; and in 1972, George McGovern came across as more trustworthy and personable than Richard Nixon, but was depicted as extremist and radical in a way similar to Goldwater eight years earlier.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter, a new face on the scene, came across as more personable than Gerald Ford, who seemed stiff and uncomfortable to many.

By 1980, Ronald Reagan easily came across to Americans in a more charming manner than Jimmy Carter, and Walter Mondale never could overcome the Reagan mystique in 1984.

In 1988, neither George H. W. Bush nor Michael Dukakis came across as personable, the only time in modern history that such a situation existed.

In 1992 and 1996, Bill Clinton easily came across much better in personality than Bush or Bob Dole.

George W. Bush definitely had the edge in his personality in 2000 and 2004 against Al Gore and John Kerry.

And Barack Obama had a clear advantage over John McCain in 2008, and certainly has that edge as well against Mitt Romney in 2012.

In conclusion, only Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon were the less personable candidate when they ran in 1964, 1968, and 1972, and only in 1988 could it be said there was no difference between George H. W. Bush and Michael Dukakis in the level of their “coolness”.

The conclusion is that the more personable or “cool” candidate has a clear edge in the modern era in being elected to the Presidency!

Lack Of Republican Diversity In Presidential Tickets: Nixon, Dole, And Bush Dominant Since 1952

Ronald Leave a comment

With the discussion of Jeb Bush as a possible Vice Presidential running mate for Mitt Romney, it reminds us of the oddity that three names have dominated Presidential tickets in the Republican Party for the past sixty years, since 1952.

Richard Nixon was on the ballot five times–Vice President in 1952 and 1956, and President in 1960, 1968, and 1972.

Bob Dole was on the ticket twice–Vice President in 1976 and President in 1996.

A Bush was on the ballot six times–George H. W. Bush for Vice President in 1980 and 1984, and for President in 1988 and 1992. His son, George W. Bush, was the Presidential candidate in 2000 and 2004.

So only twice were none of these three names on the ballot–1964 when Barry Goldwater and William E. Miller ran, and 2008, when John McCain and Sarah Palin ran.

2012 Presidential Election: Possibly Another Bush, And Even A Clinton?

Ronald 3 Comments

Speculation is rampant that former Florida Governor Jeb Bush might indeed agree to run for Vice President with Mitt Romney.

After denying it for so long, Jeb now has left the door open, but makes clear he would rather not be on the ticket.

It is interesting how Florida Senator Marco Rubio promotes Jeb, and Jeb keeps on promoting Rubio for Vice President.

Would Jeb Bush help Romney in the Fall campaign? Both yes and no!

Obviously, Jeb is very intelligent, a good speaker, and a mainline conservative, who is not reckless, and does not make loony statements about issues. He is married to an Hispanic (Mexican) woman, is seen by many as a successful Governor of Florida, and in theory, could help to deliver that state to Romney in the fall. He is seen as a potential candidate for President in 2016, and even being on a losing ticket, he probably would gain stature for such a race by coming to the aid of Romney and the party now.

On the other hand, the question is whether there is a desire for a third Bush on a national ticket, particularly with the controversies over his brother, George W. Bush, and his eight years in office. There is believed to be an exhaustion with things Bush at this point of time. And imagine the idea of having a Bush on the national ticket every election since 1980 except 1996 and 2008, six of the last eight Presidential elections! Those who dislike the Bushes, particularly, George W. Bush, might not be willing to vote for Mitt Romney with Jeb Bush on the ticket.

And then, there are still the rumors flying that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton might agree to run for Vice President, in place of Joe Biden, in order to add strength to Barack Obama’s campaign. She laughs it off, and says it will not happen, but if Obama were to ask her, could she really say no?

So imagine an election with a Bush AND a Clinton on the national tickets, which would mark one or both names on the national scene every election since 1980, except 2008, and only not in 2008 because Hillary Clinton lost the nomination to Barack Obama.

There could very well be exhaustion and disgust at the thought of what might be seen as two “royal” dynasties in America, the Bushes and the Clintons!

Jon Huntsman Compares Republican Party To Communist China

Ronald 3 Comments

Jon Huntsman, former Utah Governor and Ambassador to China, in a speech in New York City last evening, compared the Republican Party of today to the government of Communist China, in that in both cases, dissent is cracked down upon.

Huntsman said the extreme right wing, controlled by the Tea Party and religious conservatives, has made it impossible for even Ronald Reagan to be nominated and elected in today’s political climate.

Doubting that he could be elected Utah Governor now, Huntsman deplored the challenge against traditional conservatives, including Utah Senator Orrin Hatch, who has been forced into a primary by right wing elements, and Indiana Senator Richard Lugar, who faces a similar challenge next month.

Huntsman said that the Republican Party today has little in common with the party of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan, but has hopes that Mitt Romney can move the party back toward the center.

In that, Huntsman is overly optimistic, as Romney sadly has catered to the right wing on the road to be the GOP nominee for President, but in the process, has not won their hearts!