Could Romney have stayed more to the center? - GoFuckYourself.com

slapass · 11-07-2012, 05:09 AM

Romney is not super hardcore on the right. I wonder why he did not show that and try for a middle run? After WWII most presidential elections were won by the candidate painting his opponent and too far right or left and that he was in the center. I know Reagan changed all of that but Romney really was more in the center and just came off as untrustworthy by driving so far to the right. Obama left a lot of room in the center.

/armchair quarterbacking

devilspost · 11-07-2012, 06:50 AM

Mitt was unlikable zero charisma bad candidate. He tried left right and middle he just didn't have any it factor at all. That goes for republican politicians in general.

arock10 · 11-07-2012, 07:01 AM

He would've lost in the primaries being to moderate

Paul Markham · 11-07-2012, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arock10

He would've lost in the primaries being to moderate

Middle America wants a bible thumping right winger who will burn liberals. The rest of America, know better.

HelmutKohl · 11-07-2012, 09:37 AM

bronco67 · 11-07-2012, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by devilspost

Mitt was unlikable zero charisma bad candidate. He tried left right and middle he just didn't have any it factor at all. That goes for republican politicians in general.

haha yeah. Who said he didn't try the middle? He also tried up, down and sideways. He tried anything he thought people would get suckered into.

Wizzo · 11-07-2012, 09:49 AM

I agree, I think Romney is more moderate then what he projected but here's the problem with partied system. He had to go way to the right to get the support and funding of the GOP base, then once nominated any move towards the center is seen as flip-flopping and portrayed as a negative, so damned if you do, damned if you don't.

spazlabz · 11-07-2012, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Middle America wants a bible thumping right winger who will burn liberals. The rest of America, know better.

that is absolutely untrue. Middle America has what can be called conservative values but in the post you are replying to arock was specifically speaking about the primaries. Republican primaries in many areas have been taken over by self described 'Tea Party' activist. As such any republican running has to kiss their asses or they don't get delegates from that district. So what we see is candidates moving to the 'extreme right' in most of their primaries and then having to skip, jump and slide to the middle gradually to have a prayer in the general election. That is why the new Mitt came out in the debates, being an 'extremely conservative' candidate wont fly to the majority of Americans so he moved to the center... about as gracefully as a bull in a china shop.

The biggest problem I had with Mitt was that he was... really he was a truly moderate guy...not as bipartisan as he wanted the country to think he was but he certainly was not a tea party freak. He was so desperate to get the job he sold out any core beliefs he may have had at one time. I mean there is flexible and then there are noodles and Mitt Romney. Had he shown his convictions, stood firm on his values and truly expressed them he would have lost the primaries but if he could have done it immediately after the primaries then he might have won the general election.

primaries are the problem in this case and how could that be fixed? Open primaries that's how

epitome · 11-07-2012, 10:07 AM

Mitt was whatever people wanted him to be. That is a bad sign. You want someone with convictions like dare I say it... Bush (whose convictions went against the super majority but were still convictions nonetheless). Obama is another one that said what he wanted to accomplish and has done or is working on most.

MattPornerBros · 11-07-2012, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arock10

He would've lost in the primaries being to moderate

This

In hindsight he may have won since most others sunk themselves but I still believe he would have lost. The Tea party was a disaster to the Republicans and all candidates vied for their support to win the nomination, but that meant being very right.

LAJ · 11-07-2012, 01:11 PM

Mitt was a moderate a few times, so I guess the short answer is "Yes."

2MuchMark · 11-07-2012, 01:19 PM

I tend to think now that Romney has just been nothing more than an employee of the GOP and Karl Rove. He will say anything he is told to say and has no personal position on anything. In a year or 2, the 'publicans will hire someone new and try all over again.

Paul Markham · 11-07-2012, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spazlabz

that is absolutely untrue. Middle America has what can be called conservative values but in the post you are replying to arock was specifically speaking about the primaries. Republican primaries in many areas have been taken over by self described 'Tea Party' activist. As such any republican running has to kiss their asses or they don't get delegates from that district. So what we see is candidates moving to the 'extreme right' in most of their primaries and then having to skip, jump and slide to the middle gradually to have a prayer in the general election. That is why the new Mitt came out in the debates, being an 'extremely conservative' candidate wont fly to the majority of Americans so he moved to the center... about as gracefully as a bull in a china shop.

The biggest problem I had with Mitt was that he was... really he was a truly moderate guy...not as bipartisan as he wanted the country to think he was but he certainly was not a tea party freak. He was so desperate to get the job he sold out any core beliefs he may have had at one time. I mean there is flexible and then there are noodles and Mitt Romney. Had he shown his convictions, stood firm on his values and truly expressed them he would have lost the primaries but if he could have done it immediately after the primaries then he might have won the general election.

primaries are the problem in this case and how could that be fixed? Open primaries that's how

My apologies. I was under the impression that real people voted in the Primaries. Not just Tea Party members.

I can only judge on the news I see here. He comes across as a kid born into wealth, rode the money to adult hood, took over a company and went on to buy companies, strip them, lay people off and someone who couldn't carry the State he was Governor of. Still reading this shows he knows that raising taxes is one of the ways to repay debts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Ro...003.E2.80.9307

11-07-2012, 05:09 AM	#1
slapass Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Earth Posts: 14,622	Could Romney have stayed more to the center? Romney is not super hardcore on the right. I wonder why he did not show that and try for a middle run? After WWII most presidential elections were won by the candidate painting his opponent and too far right or left and that he was in the center. I know Reagan changed all of that but Romney really was more in the center and just came off as untrustworthy by driving so far to the right. Obama left a lot of room in the center. /armchair quarterbacking

11-07-2012, 06:50 AM	#2
devilspost Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Tampa yomebe -at- hotmail Posts: 3,980	Mitt was unlikable zero charisma bad candidate. He tried left right and middle he just didn't have any it factor at all. That goes for republican politicians in general. __________________ Brothels and Escorts Worldwide.

11-07-2012, 07:01 AM	#3
arock10 Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 6,218	He would've lost in the primaries being to moderate __________________ Sup

11-07-2012, 09:49 AM	#7
Wizzo 2011 GFY Hall of Fame! Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Back in Texas! Posts: 15,224	I agree, I think Romney is more moderate then what he projected but here's the problem with partied system. He had to go way to the right to get the support and funding of the GOP base, then once nominated any move towards the center is seen as flip-flopping and portrayed as a negative, so damned if you do, damned if you don't. __________________ Looking for Opportunity!

11-07-2012, 01:11 PM	#11
LAJ Gingerific Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Austin Posts: 5,567	Mitt was a moderate a few times, so I guess the short answer is "Yes." __________________ YNOT.com - The original industry resource email jay at ynot dot com or skype LAJConsulting

11-07-2012, 09:37 AM	#5
HelmutKohl Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 378

11-07-2012, 10:07 AM	#9
epitome So Fucking Lame Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: St. Petersburg, FL Posts: 12,156	Mitt was whatever people wanted him to be. That is a bad sign. You want someone with convictions like dare I say it... Bush (whose convictions went against the super majority but were still convictions nonetheless). Obama is another one that said what he wanted to accomplish and has done or is working on most.

11-07-2012, 01:19 PM	#12
2MuchMark Videochat Solutions Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 49,288	I tend to think now that Romney has just been nothing more than an employee of the GOP and Karl Rove. He will say anything he is told to say and has no personal position on anything. In a year or 2, the 'publicans will hire someone new and try all over again. __________________ Custom Coding \| Videochat Solutions \| Age Verification \| IT Help & Support www.2Much.net