Romney Was a Loser – Can We Please Let Him Stay Lost?
Bill Quick

In new film, a dramatic look at Mitt Romney’s loss of confidence |

Such a clear-cut triumph would seem a huge confidence-builder, but afterward, Romney seemed mostly concerned that Obama would come back and beat him badly the next time. “Sitting presidents have a very hard time in these debates,” Romney told the family.

“They feel like, who is this whippersnapper coming up here who knows nothing? And so they don’t prepare, and they just think they can waltz through it. Then they get crushed in the first debate, and then they come back.”

“He’ll be better next time,” Ann said, as always trying to build her husband’s confidence. “But you can be better next time, too.” Romney wasn’t buying it. Instead, he went into an extended monologue on how his father, former Michigan Gov. George Romney, was a better man than he will ever be.

As he spoke, Romney held the notes he had made during the debate (candidates are not allowed to bring any notes with them to the stage, but are allowed to make them during the debate). Romney pointed out that in every debate he began by writing “Dad” at the top of the paper.

Great.  Romney not only was the one candidate who could not get in Obama’s face about Obamacare, but he had no confidence in his ability to even win a debate with the guy about anything.

In other words, he had “Grade A Prime Loser” tattooed on his DNA.  But he was the Gentry GOP pick.  We should always let them pick our candidates for us.  Because they always pick winners.

Although I’d be hard-pressed to figure out how our post-2012 governance would have differed under Romney versus what we did end up with.

I mean, do you honestly think that Romneycare – whoops, I mean Obamacare – would have been repealed by now?  Or that the Senate would not have passed scamnest for illegals, and the House wouldn’t desperately be trying to figure out how to do likewise?  Or that the NSA wouldn’t still be scooping up every conceivable bit of data about every American it can get its hands on?

Bill Quick

About Bill Quick

I am a small-l libertarian. My primary concern is to increase individual liberty as much as possible in the face of statist efforts to restrict it from both the right and the left. If I had to sum up my beliefs as concisely as possible, I would say, "Stay out of my wallet and my bedroom," "your liberty stops at my nose," and "don't tread on me." I will believe that things are taking a turn for the better in America when married gays are able to, and do, maintain large arsenals of automatic weapons, and tax collectors are, and do, not.


Romney Was a Loser – Can We Please Let Him Stay Lost? — 3 Comments

  1. It strikes me that this case is another indictment of gentry-based politics. If I understand this incident, it’s solid evidence that Mitt was never, ever suited to take on high office. He is/was just a reasonably competent business man, probably helped along by his father’s notoriety.

    If you are intimidated by a lightweight such as Obama, you don’t need to be president. Yet Mitt got to a point where a few minor changes might have won the election for him.

    Same for G.W. Bush. He only became president because he came from a political family. He had no philosophy, and no particularly strong decision making skills. He also lacked critical communications ability. If he hadn’t been born into a political family, he would have selling insurance somewhere.

    Gentry politics elevates people who are not remotely competent or qualified, and gives them a pretty good chance to achieve office based on name recognition plus insider manipulation by consultants and media.

    I’ve been at the point for at least twenty years that if I see someone in politics whose father was also there, I automatically assume they are likely to be a puffed up fraud. The first example I saw that made me take that default assumption was Nashville Congressman Bob Clement, whose dad Frank Clement was governor. I’ve heard Bob C. on the local news, and he’s an incoherent dunce. Only the combination of a well-known family plus a district that hasn’t elected a Republican since 1875 could elevate such a moron to Congress. He wasn’t qualified by cognitive ability to do anything more complex than stock shelves.

  2. I’ve been at the point for at least twenty years that if I see someone in politics whose father was also there, I automatically assume they are likely to be a puffed up fraud.

    It’s a solid rule of thumb, but it wouldn’t have saved us from Obama.

    • Would not have saved us from Clinton either. In his case, it was the used car salesman demeanor that tipped me off. For Obama, it was his Chauncey Gardiner effect – gullible people saw whatever they wanted to see.

      So, yeah, there are a lot of markers. Given that 95% of our politicians are grifters, frauds, fools, narcissists, jerks, or some combination thereof, it’s probably easier to spot the honorable ones. The best marker there these days is that they are viciously attacked by members of their own party.