Mitt Romney for President, MyManMitt.com
About Us
Contact Us
Donate to Mitt Romney Campaign

Mitt Romney on the Issues
Videos Mitt Romney
Help Mitt Romney




Monday, July 30, 2007
posted by Kyle Hampton | 1:07 PM | permalink
Here's what Romney said about Iraq back in June at the CNN debate. Most of the question is the ever-present handwringing about "if you knew then, what you know now...". However, during his answer Romney says that, looking forward, the right thing to do is to stabilize Iraq.


Then comes today's op-ed in the NY Times from former critics of the handling of the war saying that the troop surge is working and that Iraq is stabilizing. Score one for Romney.

Labels:

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Romney and the surge
  • DiggRomney and the surge
  • Fark:Romney and the surge
  • Furl:Romney and the surge
  • Ma.gnolia:Romney and the surge
  • Netscape:Romney and the surge
  • NewsVine:Romney and the surge
  • Reddit:Romney and the surge
  • Slashdot:Romney and the surge
  • StumbleUpon:Romney and the surge
  • TailRank:Romney and the surge
  • Technorati:Romney and the surge
  • YahooMyWeb:Romney and the surge

Technorati Tags: |
 
11 Comments:


i think it's important to point out here that romney didnt even have a position on the surge in all of 2006. "I'm not going to weigh in, I'm a governor" i believe were his words.



To The Dud,
How many Governors did weigh in on the surge in the Summer of 2006?
Why would they?

By Anonymous GeorgiaMom, at July 31, 2007 at 10:45 AM  


what governors?

Governors that were planning on running for Commander In Chief just *days* later.

Perhaps even governors who were NOT planning on running. Say, Tom Ridge for example.



Dude,
And just "days" later, when he had officially started his exploritory commitee, he immediately started endorsing the troop surge. There are many things that Governors decide are not prudent to comment on, as they concern national interests, not states What exactly is your point?



"Days later"?

Was that before or after he declared himself a lifelong hunter?

My point: Romney has a terrible time going on record.



Dude-

I can appreciate your need to find someone to criticize considering McCain's already-imploded campaign. However, your disconnected, incoherent arguments are unpersuasive.


Paraphrasing:
You: Mitt did "A".
Response: "A" is reasonable.
You: Deflection. Mitt did "B".


Do you not see how silly your approach is? Once your initial argument is discredited you act as though you didn't notice and you skip to something entirely unrelated. Tell McCain hi for me by the way. I'm sure he'll have time to see you personally considering how few followers are still hanging around. :)



ok, slick-willy i'll try again.

People don't trust Romny to handle Iraq. Less than half of REPIBLICANS do. He goes around the country saying he's not going to weigh in one day, then he supports the troops the next, then he's flexible a few months after that. Is that a formula to garner trust? Maybe in the Romney camp, but nowhere else.

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=28252

+8% more Republicans trust Thompson
+18% more Republicans trust McCain
+26+ more Republicans trust Giuliani

McCain and Giuliani have a net gain of more than 20% of independants. Why don't independants trust Romney? How can he possibly hope to win when 1) his own party doesn't trust him, and 2) swing voters don't trust him.

Explain that. You can't. Nor do i expect you to even try.

Nice of you to throw out the red herring on McCain when you accuse me of the same. But I'll respond to that one. Unlike what you did to me:

McCain's campaign hasn't imploded. The latest poll out (NBC/WSJ) has McCain in a statistical tie with Thompson for second. Romney (again) can barely break single digits. He's had that problem for quite some time now right?

Lets find out how legit people feel Romney is after he's forced to double funding of the campaign to a whopping 20 million this next quarter.

One last question, where is Romney on embryonic stem cell research?
In 2005 he was in favor of the US House bill which federally funded embryo's. But in the MSNBC debate he said he would NOT fund them. Then the Palm Beach Post says this:
On embryonic stem cell research, Romney said the place where he draws a bright line and says no is when there is an embryo created solely for the purpose of research and destruction.

3 positions on stem cells, all of which are after his so-called pro-life conversion. ouch.



one more thing.

Don't revel in your delusion of a McCain implosion. All the polls show that McCain's supporters' second choice is Giuliani and then Thompson. About 1 in 8 McCain voters seem to be willing to vote for Mitt as a second choice. A strong McCain HELPS Romney.

Just let that sink in....



Dud, Why are you here? Nobody thinks you have a reasonable or valid point.
In fact, you come across as something entirely different.
You will lure none of us away from Mitt, you will make no friends and you will gain no admirers.

By Anonymous GeorgiaMom, at August 2, 2007 at 7:17 AM  


Dude-

My comments about McCain were no red herring. The point of your posts (Romney's position on Iraq)had already been defeated. I was merely pointing out your poor argumentation. My comments about McCain were for kicks. Plus, they were true.
(1) He has no $ and he will gain less in the future since most analysts think a McCain nomination is impossible now.
(2) The polls you mention are almost irrelevant. Literally half of America doesn't even know who Mitt Romney is yet. They will before the primaries begin though--thus, national polls at this point have little importance. McCain's numbers are not due to real support--name recognition is king in the summer & of little value in January where national polls are concerned. McCain has imploded. Analysts know it. Informed bloggers know it. McCain will wake up soon.
(3) In Iowa, NH, Nevada, Michigan (where people know who Mitt is) he polls very well. In IA & NH, he's gone from a distant 3rd to a strong 1st position.
(4) Hardcore McCain supporters hate Mitt because he is the enemy--the guy who owned McCain at his own strategy, sucking up the O2 from Iowa & NH & the $ from everywhere else. These people (very few indeed) will never vote for Mitt out of resentment. Other McCain supporters go for him because they know his name best & liked him in 2000. These uninformed types naturally will then choose other names they know (Rudy, Fred) as their 2nd preference. Again, they don't know Mitt yet.
(5) The flip-flop tag is oh so old. Yes, Mitt flipped on abortion & has been very direct about it. Otherwise he has not.
Stem Cell: Was told the embryonic stem cell research would involve using frozen, about to be thrown away, embryos & he thought it was good to use them. They then wanted to create new embryos in a lab to test on. He said no. He's had one position only--embryonic stem cell research is ok in and of itself, but creating embryos to that end is not.
Gays: For rights, against re-defining marriage.
Guns: For 2nd Amendment, against weapons that outmatch police (assault rifles, automatics)
Twist it as you like, rational people see through your weak argumentation.
(6) Mitt's approach is usually data driven. He supports the surge because it looks like a good strategy, but his future commitment is smartly based on the data they bring back in September & December. This is an intelligent approach. If Bush had done the same we may have done the surge 3 years ago instead of hanging w/the bad strategy we've had. McCain's "last man standing" approach is naive and unreasonable.
(7) All people change their mind. Rudy's current positions compared to his actions as mayor are amazing. Astronomical changes compared to Mitt. McCain has changed his mind less, but he's FLAT OUT WRONG: immigration, campaign finance, gang of 14, etc.



Okay, thedude...

You say, "All the polls show that McCain's supporters' second choice is Giuliani and then Thompson."...

Well, first of all, just how many polls are there that poll what peoples second choice AFTER McCain is? You say "ALL" of them say a certain thing, but I can't imagine there being too many asking that question... in fact, I've never seen ONE.

Obviously, your other poll references are referring to the national polls where, true, Romney is technically in 4th place... or 3rd if you consider one of the options isn't even running.

Of course pragmatically, no one has come close to considering that Mitt Romney is out of the race or that he is even in the second tier even based on his "barely double digit" score in the polls. Why? Trajectory, my friend, trajectory.

Rudy is in first place. Rudy also started the race as a celebrity who's grin the entire world recognized. The fact that he is leading at the start shouldn't surprise people. What should surprise people is that Republicans consider him a viable candidate even though compared to any of the Democratic front runners, he has a poor showing, and that he couldn't even concieve of beating a hated outsider like Hillary for his home state's Senate seat.

John McCain came from a similar position. While I wouldn't call him a celebrity, it is clear that he has been a popular choice for republicans for a long time. Not popular enough in the past to get too far, but certainly well known. So to start near the top of the heap for him should also come as no surprise.

Freddy, once again, is enjoying the recognition his celebrity status brings him. As Bob Novak said, most Thompson supporters believe that he is qualified for a presidential bid based on his fine work as DA of New York. In other words, he is not known for what he's done, like Rudy, he is known because he's been on TV. So, again, his quick rise to consideration by republican voters should come as no surprise.

But what does come as a surprise to many with an eye on this campaign is Romneys meteoric rise to the top tier of republican candidates. Romney effectively came from zero to being a major contender. That is a higher percentage gain by far than any other candidate. That is what is impressive. What is also impressive is that anyone who spends any time with Mitt is no longer suprised at his success.

A year ago, if you would have asked your friends who Mitt Romney was, I would assume that very few if any would have been able to give you an answer. I know that was true in my case.

A year ago if you were to ask who Fred Thompson was, again, no one would know UNTIL you said, "You know, the Law and Order guy"... then recognition would come.

A year ago if asked about McCain, virtually anyone connected to politics would have been able to tell you almost everything relevant about him.

And with Rudy Guiliani, you could have asked folks in Mongolia who he was, and they could have told you.

So here we are a year later, and the fact that Romney is a clear contender for the republican nomination and one of the very few that anyone believes could beat the democrats this time around (including many that aren't his supporters) is an amazing thing.

That is what polls are really saying, thedude.

And when you say, "ALL THE POLLS"... you obviously missed the polls in the first few primary states who all have Romney as the clear leader... so who cares who is behind McCain?

It's obvious that most of the Republican Party and the country nationally is still polling based on name recognition alone.

But the folks that are going to be voting first, and who pay attention soonest have realized that Romney is the best man for the job.

By Anonymous GeneraLee, at August 2, 2007 at 1:56 PM  



Sign up for MyManMitt
Enter your email address:

RSS Feed MyManMitt.com
Mitt Romney Facebook MyManMitt
Mitt Romney YouTube






Copyright 2007 MyManMitt.com