Mitt Romney as the new ‘face of conservatism’

February 12, 2008

While in Massachusetts, Mitt Romney insisted that he did not want to return to Reagan-era policies, and when confronted on his party affiliation, he frequently reminded voters that he was an independent in the 1980s.

But as a presidential candidate, Reagan became the focal point of Romney’s stump speech, as he positioned himself as the heir to the former president’s legacy. Now, with an eye towards the future, Romney has decided his presidential ambitions should be built around following Reagan’s example after his unsuccessful 1976 campaign. (via TP)

Some 50 stalwarts of the political right privately met with Mitt Romney minutes after he dropped out of the Republican nominating race to discuss the former Massachusetts governor becoming the face of conservatism, as Ronald Reagan became en route to his 1980 election win.

Participants said the group was not organizing against the presidential bid of Sen. John McCain, the party’s presumptive nominee, but only seeking to revive core values such as lower taxes, limited government and free speech.

“The purpose of the meeting was for him to announce his willingness to fight shoulder to shoulder with true conservatives from here on out,” said political strategist Paul Erickson, who worked for Mr. Romney’s campaign. “He did just that.”

Apparently, quite a motley crew was on hand for the meeting. The ACU’s David Keene, disgraced activist Ralph Reed, Bay Buchanan, James Bopp, and Laura Ingraham, among others, were there to solidify the relationship.

“If someone had suggested a year ago and a half ago that we would be welcoming Mitt Romney as a potential leader of the conservative movement, no one would have believed it,” Keene said to open the meeting. “But over the last year and a half, he has convinced us he is one of us and walks with us.”

Forget a year and a half ago; I still can’t believe it now.

Jay Sekulow, a Romney volunteer and chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, told attendees that Mr. Romney is the “turnaround specialist” the conservative movement needs.

“The movement needs someone of Ronald Reagan’s stature and Romney could fill that role,” Mr. Sekulow told The Washington Times yesterday.

Only 51, Romney clearly believes his political career has a bright future, but has to decide which persona he’ll wear now. Can-do technocrat? Too dull. Moderate who can win in blue states? Not in today’s GOP. Right-wing loon? Bingo.

As far as Romney is concerned, if he had successfully wrapped up the far-right early on last year, he probably could have had enough support to beat back John McCain. So, he’s laying the groundwork to do just that for 2012 — and the far-right, looking for someone to pay attention to them, is apparently on board with the plan.

It’s the exact same strategy Reagan embraced after ’76, when he became a national right-wing leader before heading into the 1980 primaries.

But let’s just pause for a moment to consider who, exactly, the far-right movement is rallying behind.

Romney has changed positions on immigration, abortion, Iraq withdrawal, his opinions on President Bush, greenhouse gas emissions, and even the Spanish language.

He’s the new “face of conservatism”? They must be desperate.

Not as desperate as he is, apparently. What’s more, largely the same things got written about Reagan back in ’76/77 … I even recall (dimly) the phrase Mr Plastic being used.

  • “quite a motley crew was on hand for the meeting.” Ha. Good one.

    But the new face of Conservatism is……………The Huckster!

    RUN HUCK RUN

  • On Willard “Mitt” Romney

    Jay Leno: “A you know, Mitt Romney’s campaign is dead. Although I understand why those officials just told President Bush he went to ‘live on a farm.'”

  • The Republicans have a rather interesting way of reviving and idolizing their biggest embarrassments: Nixon, Ollie North, G. Gordon Liddy, and yes, even Reagan. Romney is the mannequin who will wear any ideology.

  • If he’s such a turnaround expert, maybe Mitt will sell off the RNC assests and lay off the deadwood, which would be most of them.

    I’m thinking a massive load of wingnut email addresses would go for a lot of money, since they will buy anything.

  • Romney buy failed company, restructure them and return it to profitable, so that company can hire more people and create more jobs. He provided thousands of jobs like Sports Authority, Staples, etc. What would senators do with failed company or government? Keep everyone on the job without pay? Since the failed company would have no money to pay, there is no choice but layoff people so that they can return to profit and hire again, even I got layoff before. That’s how market economics works. Do not belittle business leaders as McCain and Huckabeast did, they provide 80% economic for this country.
    Please work on changing the winner take all rule in GOP NJ, NY, CT election
    to make all the vote counted proportionally.
    How could Rudy manipulate our state election rule to benefit himself,
    and then benefit McCain after Rudy dropped out of the race.

    JR Dieckmann
    Any and all conservative candidates were driven out of the race before the vast majority of Republicans even had a chance to vote for them.

    To prevent this from happening again, all primaries, or at least the vast majority of them must be held on the same day, as the candidates campaign to the nation instead of individual states. This would prevent back room deals played by McCain and Huckabee in WV. No more open primaries. Only Registered Republicans should have a say in who is selected to represent their party. Primary voters should be pre-registered before a given deadline, not simply sign up on election day.

    You just don’t let the stockholders of Ford vote for the CEO of General Motors, or the stockholder of Sylvania vote for the CEO of G.E. This current policy is simply ludicrous, and now we see the results.

  • I understand that, when push comes to shove, a lot of Republicans who are huffing and puffing now will pull the lever for John McCain. But still, as Kevin Drum said, the fact that the front runner, McCain, is being beaten or almost beaten by someone, Huckabee, who is supposed to be an afterthought at this point can’t bode well for his election prospects. The news that they are already trying to find someone else for 2012 doesn’t sound like a vote of confidence, either. Hell, if Obama or Clinton can reverse the margins in Ohio, New Mexico, and Iowa, which shouldn’t be hard with increased Democratic turnout and depressed Republican turnout, this thing is ours.

  • On NPR’s Wait, Wait Don’t Tell Me this last week, the ‘prediction’ question at the end of the show was this:

    What will Mitt Romney do now that he’s no longer running for president?

    One of the answers? What? I never ran for President!

  • There is nothing wrong to change message or mind. Do you know any candidate or any people who never change mind?
    We need a leader to listen to American people, not a stubborn dictator who does not care what American think.
    Romney’s vision of using economic strength to combat terrorists, to change the heart and mind of the Muslim world so they will reject violence and embrace peace and prosperity. You can not conquer the world with more and more troops and violence. If we do not have solid economic to backup, you would have no means to fight. Romney’s Apollo plan for energy independence are also set him above all other candidates.

  • Another biased article on Romney, even after the fact!

    Mitt has not flipped on nearly as many issues as you have been led to believe.

    Irag Withdrawl – everyone and their dog knows this claim is baseless. Romney stated that we needed to have Goals, Milestones and Timetables in Irag and that we should not set a date certain for withdrawl. Romney’s approach is called “management.” So the guy wants to lay down the steps necessary for victory, rather than just expect victory to be the outcome of whatever strategy is in place, and we hit him hard for that (we must be stupid America)?

    Immigration – this claim is based on Romney calling McCains plan “reasonable back in 2006. However, the version of legislation in 2006 did not include amnesty, this was added later. It is like calling a 20 year old woman beautiful, and then calling that woman ugly 50 years later – the bill didn’t age well! The fact is of all the GOP candidates, Romney had a proven record on immigration. He authorized his state troopers to enforce the immigration laws. What have Giulianni, McCain, or Huck done?

    Abortion – I’ll give you this one, but he had a good reason for doing so.

  • My Question: Is McCain Eligible to the office of President?
    Why the question? Well he was born in Panama.. Therefore under the constitution he does not qualify to the office of The President.

    Article II Section I of the US Constitution reads:

    “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

    The Key word is “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN”.

    He is a Citizen of the United States because both parents are but because he was Not born in a USA Territory then accordingly to the Constitution he is not eligible to the office of President.

    Panama in 1936 (The year he was born) was LEASED and the USA holds no Territory OWNERSHIP.

    The founding fathers during the process of writing the Constitution were engaged in a debate as to what kind of Americans should be eligible to the office of President and Vice-President.

    In 1790 an Act of Congress was passed where it said “”the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens”.

    But The Act of 1790 was superseded by the Naturalization Act of 1795 therefore the Act of 1790 it is not valid.

    So, to be a “natural born citizen,” a person must be born in the United States; otherwise, they are citizens by law and are naturalized.
    As of Today no court or Congress has yet address again address the key words
    “Natural born Citizen”

    So do you see the embarrassment that is coming to the Republican party if McCain becomes the party nominee?

    Respectfully yours,

    Roger

  • Linda –

    Did Romney off-shore his Internet trolls? Or has our public school system just failed you miserably? Or – maybe you’re one of the next generation AI spambot trolls I’ve been hearing so much about!

    Your sentences are lacking in some essential elements – adjectives come to mind, as well as determiners. Also, you might want to try using prepositions in the correct spots. Not to be a grammar fascist, but your content is nearly unreadable and your style makes you sound like an utter loon.

    As to your overall point – the country is not a corporation, and trying to treat it like one is a course for failure. Corporations live and die by the market – nations allow the market to exist and protect it from itself. What makes for a successful corporate raider may not make for a good president. Romney’s credentials as a successful CEO suggested good organizations skills which might translate into a solid leader, but he gave no indication that he was “leader” material – he seemed to have no vision of his own as to what the country should be like. Instead, he tried to weave a vision for the country based on what he though Republican voters wanted to hear. Even if it meant back-peddling on positions he’s claimed to have held for decades. That’s not leadership material – that’s follower material. I have no doubt that he’s a decent corporate raider, but I would have severe concerns with him attempting to lead a country.

  • Roger –

    That’s just plain dumb. Section 1401 of the US code includes in its defininition of persons who “shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth” the following: “a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;” McCain’s parents fit that definition, as far as I can tell, so he is a citizen from birth.

    Also, let’s be blunt. The idea that a person could be born to parents who are citizens, who happent to be serving overseas at a naval base on behalf of our national defense, and that would disqualify him as being a “natural born citizen” is so stupid, so utterly un-patriotic, so transparently bogus that it is only on the Internet where such a stupid idea could not only come to fruition, but also flourish.

  • Well, it’s those shoulders you could land a 747 on…and lest not forget how orgasmically fantastic he smells. How could he not be the new RR?

    And NonyNony, no kidding! Reading Linda’s posts were painful in both understanding and concept. Mitt is hardly ALL THAT. Doubling Gitmo? War forever? Please. Spare me the rhetoric. Go to RedState or some other right wing blog to espouse his greatness. It’s falling on deaf ears here.

  • So Romney practices the political leadership style of “find where the people are heading, and run to the front of the crowd.”
    But the crowd he’s run to the front of is a diverse mob. The common elements of this mob is hatred: hatred of Democrats, hatred of immigrants (only brown-skinned ones), hatred of almost all government (except for lip service to the military), hatred of being in a community of people unlike themselves.
    But the real fellow leaders of this mob are the “Club for Greed” business people & wealthy Republican families.

    I am sad to call this mob my fellow Americans, because they represent most of the worst of us. Hatred & greed, rule by force, propaganda, and relgious authoritarianism are the lifeblood of this movement.

    Can Romney eventually cobble together the Bush coalition? I hope not.

  • Participants said the group was not organizing against the presidential bid of Sen. John McCain, the party’s presumptive nominee, but only seeking to revive core values such as lower taxes, limited government and free speech.

    What core values did Reagan embrace?

    Lower taxes? Reagan raised taxes.

    Limited government? Reagan increased both the size and budget of the federal government.

    Free speech? This is a core value?

    Yes, conservative voices are just being suppressed everywhere.

    Except on the radio, television, newspapers, and Internet.

    What this group calls “free speech” can be translated into meaning “dominating the conversation”.

  • “The ACU’s David Keene, disgraced activist Ralph Reed, Bay Buchanan, James Bopp, and Laura Ingraham, among others, were there to solidify the relationship.”

    Jeebus, what an audience. I’ll bet the kool-aid flowed like wine with that crowd. Now if only they could do something about Mitt’s pesky Mormonism. And if only Tagg and his brothers are willing to forego their inheritance (“… but Dad!”)

    Face of conservatism, shoulders of the Republican Party … hair of the GOP may be the better fit.

  • How dan anyone be surprised that this is happening? It was so frickin’ obvious when he made his statement – you could see it coming from ten miles away on the other side of the mountain!

    1. Mitt drops out and says he’s doing so as a “loyal Republican.” Scores points for “party loyalty above all.”

    2. McCain takes on Huckabee as VP and they both go down in flames in November. Mit’s competition is gone.

    3. Mitt reads his lines well (like Ronnie did) at conservative conferences for the next four years as leader of the (dis)loyal opposition.

    4. Voila! Mitt is front-runner in 2012.

    Anybody who couldn’t see this the instant it happened needs a brain transplant.

  • Romney Trolls on Board. Got to love the Romney Trolls.

    But hey Trolls, didn’t MITTens win the recent poll asking people to name the candidate you most wanted to see Beat Up?

    Man MITTens is a real piece of work. I miss mocking him. I really do.

  • I realize that others may not feel the same way, but I liked Romney. I liked his policies and his positions. Yes, I realize what changes he has actually changed, and feel that there are far fewer of them than some would have us believe, and I think they are rational and reasonable changes. Personally, I hope that he does run again in 2012. I think he would be a great president. From what I’ve seen he has a great family and a great set of personal values. That is not everything, but it is critical to me.

  • Romney is an extraordinary candidate who is EXACTLY what we need, both as a party and as a country. (The Party does need a shakeup, and Romney is our turnaround man.)

    Had Romney won either Iowa or New Hampshire, he would be in McCain’s position right now, and I anticipate he will win one or the other in 2012. (McCain won’t be there to get in the way in NH. He’ll be too old.)

    Having met Romney and observed him for over five years, I can commit already that ConservativeRepublicans.com will be 100% behind him in 2012, and hopefully the position or two that some call new will have aged a bit.

    Romney’s character is attacked by the Left BECAUSE it is his strength, not because it is his weakness. It is an advantage he has over every Democrat and many if not most Republicans. Look at his relationship to his wife and kids for proof. They voted as a family to support Mitt in his run for President, before he ever did a thing. They love him. They all have successful marriages. No pro-abortionists here! No moderates. No liberals. Just five sons with one wife each and lots of grandkids who love and admire both him and Ann and are willing to drive and fly all over the country to spread the word and build support.

    All this effort for a man who some would consider a workaholic if he didn’t have things in such good order at home.

    Then you throw in his record as Governor, which is surprisingly consistent and conservative, given some of the falsehoods swirling in the blogosphere. He had to take some moderate/compromise policy positions to get elected in Massachusetts, but that does not make him a moderate any more than McCain taking a few conservative compromise positions this election makes him a conservative. (McCain says he will give a voice to Conservatives, but he sure hasn’t promised to be their voice!)

    Jesus said, “By their fruits ye shall know them.” Look at Romney’s record, both at home and in office, and you will find him to be the picture of industry, harmony, and results.

  • Romney is too good of a person that a common American cannot identified with. What have we become America? I hope we did not become a corrupt and immoral community who cannot tell what is right and wrong.

    • Comments are closed.