Mitt makes a good case for self-reformation here.Republican Mitt Romney on Saturday bluntly challenged his party to "put our own house in order" as the GOP presidential candidates courted activists in Michigan, now an important player in the nomination march.
In an indictment of Republicans, he bemoaned excessive spending, insecure borders and ethical lapses. "When Republicans act like Democrats, America loses," he said. "We've got to start acting like Republicans, not earmarking Republicans, not big government Republicans, but like Reagan Republicans and Teddy Roosevelt Republicans."
Mitt's right. This party has got to do better. Having a Rudy or Fred isn't the answer, however. Rudy's more Democrat than Republican. Fred is a Republican, but would do an awful job. His campaign and understanding of the issues is a disorganized mess.
6 comments:
Mitt totally bombed in Michigan like his whole campaign...going down the tubes...Just Google
"Romney Falls Flat -- Bombs, Even" and you will see the tons of articles. McCain wiped the floor with Romney and didn't pay for one straw poll vote.
I already read the article you referenced. It is one point of view. Many other stories I read were positive about Mitt's performance in Michigan.
As always, people interpret things the way the want and/or are conditioned.
Romney will methodically make progress. Fred will methodically, consistently lose support.
If McCain is your man, I don't know why you'd have much hope. He got the feel-sorry-for-bump after the last debate. His policies are still all wrong.
Mitt Romney "bombed" in Michigan because he gave the group of Republicans there a very tough talk.
It wasn't a fun speech. It was a serious speech -- about the Republican party and what we need to do to get back on track.
Read the speech first, Anonymous.
Fred Thompson bombed because he was just plain boring, according to the reports -- and those reports were from people who were really excited about FDT and looking forward to hearing from him.
His whole campaign going down the tubes? You meant McCain, right?
I love how the bankrupt losers in every facet of society claim some sort of higher nobility and "blue-collar" identity to justify the fact that they have no fiscal solvency. As if being bad with money were a virtue.
Romney has paid a lot of money to make up some of the name-recognition gap that the rest of the panel of front-runners enjoy due to either infamous politics or media exploitation. To call Romney's publicity machine unethical after comparing it to the free "superman image" publicity that Rudy, Fred, and John have all enjoyed in one way or another shows both ignorance and bias.
No other candidate is working harder than Mitt Romney to get votes. He is spending a lot, but he is also running the miles. He is shaking the hands, meeting the people and covering the issues.
There are basically three types of people that blame other peoples money as the root of the worlds problems; the lazy, the ignorant, and John Edwards. Which one are you?
Comical attack. Romney bombed, but pulled down 39% of the vote.
Also, you're wrong about McCain. His campaign financed the food, lodging and buses of his college student voters (most of his votes).
However, even if you were right about "buying votes." This is an old and stale argument. The winner always spends the most money. They have the most money because a) they have the greatest support (in terms of campaign contributions) and b) they were the most successful in life monetarily. These two points are certainly true of Romney.
Look for Romney to easily win Michigan after sweeping Iowa and New Hampshire.
Post a Comment