When Mitt “Repeal” Romney Embraced Teddy Kennedy

Yesterday, in a post about President Obama’s offshore oil drilling plan, I noted that the “candidate of change” had once talked out of both sides of his mouth on offshore exploration. He condemned John McCain for wanting to expand offshore oil drilling one day, and then said another day that he was open to expanding it. So it goes.

But despite his occasional message duplicity, Obama has largely succeeded in avoiding the impression that he will change positions just to pander for votes. This is a political talent Obama has that Mitt Romney has historically lacked. In recent months, Romney has made great strides in actually presenting himself more like he is, saying recently at a book event that he should have stuck to his “power alley” in 2008, that is his expertise in business and economics, and not spent so much time trying desperately to remake himself into a social conservative hero. “I think that one of the things that’s very important in running a campaign is to make sure that you’re known for the things that really motivate you,” he said. (Can’t say I didn’t tell you so, Governor.)

And yet, Romney seems unable to avoid his penchant for wild swings in his public presentation. Exhibit A is the over-the-top statement that Romney put out after Health Care Reform passed, which is remarkable for both its vitriol and lawyerly delicacy. (You have to read it a couple times before you realize that most of the venom is not directed at the policy but the process.) Gail Collins takes a borderline gratuitous (really, more about the dog?) shot this morning at Romney along these lines, since it was Romney after all who got a similar health care reform set up in Massachusetts. There are some differences between the Romney plan and the Obama plan–one is state, one is federal, one 70 pages long, one takes longer to read, as Romney’s website points out. But overall, it is hard to argue that they are entirely different animals, as Kate points out below. Both are based on the freedom-killing principle of an individual mandate.

Reading Collins’ piece, I was suddenly taken back, as if in a dream, to a more wondrous time, for me at least, during the 2008 Iowa Straw Poll at Ames. Back then, Romney was on a different tack, arguing that his past embrace of Ted Kennedy’s health care vision for Massachusetts was something of a badge of honor. This really happened. I have video, though I must apologize for the shaky camera work and poor audio quality.

One of the most interesting questions of the coming Republican primary season is which Mitt Romney will show up. Will it be the Romney he is, a geeky wonk, who knows business, overflows with competence and is driven by an eager call to service? Or will it be the micro-marketed Romney, who thinks he can become in the moment whatever his spreadsheets tell him to become? I have my opinion about which one could create a real threat for President Obama in 2012. But I am not sure Romney has made up his mind.

Related Topics: 2012, mitt romney, Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • bobell

    “the freedom-killing principle of an individual mandate”?

    You report, we decide?

  • charlieromeobravo

    I love watching Romney get wacked over the head with his own words. He’s such a political mannequin it makes me giggle.

  • http://www.ghostnote.com Cookie Puss

    Who let the dogs out?

  • http://twitter.com/michaelscherer Michael Scherer

    A little bit of sarcasm. Figured you all could take it.

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    The DC Media Reaction: Off-the-top-of-the-head, armchair-psychoanalysis-based speculation about winners and losers, with zero reporting about alternatives, policy impact, or costs and benefits.

  • sacredh

    One of the most interesting questions of the coming Republican primary season is which Mitt Romney will show up. Will it be the Romney he is, a geeky wonk, who knows business, overflows with competence and is driven by an eager call to service? Or will it be the micro-marketed Romney, who thinks he can become in the moment whatever his spreadsheets tell him to become? I have my opinion about which one could create a real threat for President Obama in 2012. But I am not sure Romney has made up his mind.

    Romney channeling Sybil is worth at least 2 “1000 Words”.

  • grape_crush

    Will it be the Romney he is…Or will it be the Romney who thinks he can become in the moment whatever his spreadsheets tell him to become?

    There’s no dichotomy, Michael; it’s all the same Mitt.

    What’s more interesting to me is the permanent campaign he seems to be running. Not too many people have the resources to start a presidential campaign 3-4 years before the elections.

  • Ivy_B

    You really think the dog isn’t going to come up?

    And, Mr. Real made a lot of money by cutting jobs at those companies he took over. I always thought that could really be exploited if he became the nominee.

  • square1

    Obama has largely succeeded in avoiding the impression that he will change positions just to pander for votes. This is a political talent Obama has that Mitt Romney has historically lacked.

    There are three explanations for this. First, there is something called the “enthymematic process.” The way it works is that a speaker makes a statement or statements that imply additional information and the listener fills in the blanks. For example: “People prefer tall politicians. Obama should do well.” The unstated information that completes the syllogism is that “Obama is tall”

    The trick in politics is that, depending on the context, different people fill in the blanks differently. Because politicians know this, they deliberately make statements that leave blanks where a diverse audience has differing views and let each person fill in the blanks as they see fit. (Lay people know this as being vague.)

    Obama is a master of the enthymematic process. He can speak to a large group (or the entire country) and say “Washington is broken. We need to fix the way Washington works.” Or “I want to bring change to Washington.” And the listeners will assume that Obama agrees with them on what is “broken” and what the “change” should be. Thus, Obama has avoided too many flip-flops simply by not pinning himself down.

    The second reason that Obama can get away with this is that the base of the Democratic Party did not severely punish him when he took a position that they did not agree with. Many Democrats just assumed that Obama was pandering to an insular Beltway media and his corporate donors, but once elected he would become more liberal.

    Where Romney has to get down in the weeds of wingnutville to convince grassroots Republicans that he is on their side, Obama never had to pander to the (vastly smaller) irrational ideologues in his party.

    Third, Democrats’ views don’t shift every five minutes. Obama can reasonably predict what Democrats’ views will be in 2, 4, or 6 years. Republicans? Who knows. Two years ago. they wanted to maintain an employer-provided HCR model. In the past year that became a “socialist take-over of health care.” During the next two years, they will probably (rhetorically) come out in favor of single-payer as more fair than the current system with an individual mandate. Are you going to blame Mitt Romney for swinging wildly to keep up with the rest of his party?

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    Right now there is, very obviously, 13% of Americans known as the tea party who are on the war path to take over the government, beat down liberals and eat our children for breakfast.
    .
    Another 27% consider themselves conservative.
    .
    To win the nomination, he has to be ready to hate liberals.
    .
    Then, in the general election, he will have to be Mr. Moderate to get the 27% of the tea party two thirds of the 35% who call themselves “moderate” to win.
    .
    Unfortunately for him, he is too transparent, negotiated too much with Democrats for the tea party and not going to win evangelicals as a Mormon.
    .
    He’ll never get the Republican nomination.
    .
    He’s well on his way to becoming a non-story.

  • bobell

    Just checked my calendar. Sorry for taking you seriously on this of all days.

  • Ivy_B

    Interesting analysis.

  • http://theblindspotsofgod.wordpress.com lawyermommy

    I watched Obama speaking about his new position on off shore drilling BUT the most exciting take was Hannity’s view of the entire matter. It was utter drivel and a weak but amusing effort to discredit something that was a Republican selling point during the elections. “Drill baby Drill”??? Sound familiar??

    Anyway, that was an aside.

    Romney was a viable candidate in the Republican primaries but they chose a mavericky man instead and we know how that worked out.

    I do not which Romney can launch an effective fight for the Presidency against Obama but I do not know if he will be nominated.

    In the light of the current Republican move to the far right fanatical witch hunting tack which sometimes borders on maniac delusion (Obama is the anti-Christ)–I do not think Romney will win the nomination in the primaries.

    Of course, this is politics and things can change. However, if he does not join the Republican sheep, following the talking points of Fox news and uphold the feigned hysteria and unbridled opposition of everything Obama, he will not win his party’s nomination.

    I strongly urge him to look for something Republican- like these days to throw out there– to give him some credibility with his tea partiers and lunatic party mates.

    I would have suggested that he state that Obama is an alien, but somehow, I think that belief has already taken root among the Republican party leadership and their BASE base who think it is a good basis for their continued message of hate and anti-progress partisan actions.

    I can only suggest that he think of something novel. Maybe state that Obama is not really a Lawyer because in law school he sat close to the window during class!!!!! Laugh if you will :) but this sort of idiotic proposition is at par with claims that Obama is Hitler-like!
    Hitler a racist, antisemitic lunatic who believed in the purity of the white race is NOW Obama’s role model???? Atrocious and idiotic concept.

    Romney, in this climate has to come out raw, partially insane and opposed to any and everything rational for him to be considered in any Republican Presidential primary unless of course things change.

    I want to end this comment using a Micheal Steele like quote. “Foshizzle lets have beef with the cat”.< my attempt at Streele like ebonics.

    The current Republican politics is a MESS. A bunch of old men from the old guard inciting the poorest and most easily controlled in their party. It will cost them the center. Fanaticism and hate in politics very quickly loses its taste with right thinking folk.

    LM
    http://theblindspotsofgod.wordpress.com/2010/03/26/technology-savvy-nigerian-criminals-are-the-greatest-threat-to-national-security/

  • apr2563

    Read NRO and you can trace the Republican Presidential chaos. Particularly monitor their editor Katherine Jean Lopez.
    //
    During the last election they loved Thompson, when he failed it seemed to follow thusly: Rudy>Huckabee>Mittens>McCain reluctantly until Sarah shined a light on them. There was a wishful hope man and dog sex expert Santorum might run. A hope especially wished for by the ever virginal Katherine Jean.
    //
    This year it has been Jindal>Pawlenty>Gingrich>Mittens>and now Thune or Daniels. Even on NRO, although though they loves their Sarah, they have not wholeheartedly hoped for her candicacy.
    As each candidate is exposed as bufoons, they move on to the next.

  • Ivy_B

    apr, check the Morning Reads – they haven’t really given up on good old man on dog.

  • square1

    I agree that Romney will never win the GOP nomination. He should quit now and save his money.
    .
    Romney should have defended the Mass. health care system. People would have respected him for — for once — taking a principled stand. He then should have broken with the GOP (“my party left me…yadda, yadda, yadda”) and run as an independent in 2012.
    .
    He should have tried to siphon off Wall Street Dems, older (racist) Dems who still don’t like Obama, and Republicans who think the GOP has lost it with the Palin-Beck teabaggery.
    .
    Obama needs a hardcore wingnut like Palin to run against in order to scare the (currently disenchanted) Democratic base to come out and vote. Romney won’t scare as many Democrats. Some of whom might prefer to have Romney in the WH than Obama since Obama blocks a more liberal Democrat from rising through the party.
    .
    An independent Romney campaign could have split the GOP vote and siphoned off enough Dems to win. Sadly for Romney, he blew it when he threw his lot in with the teabaggers, thus preserving his reputation as a flip-flopping panderer.

  • stuartzechman

    This is excellent commentary, sqr1.
    .
    Thanks so much.

  • apr2563

    Oh, that will make the ever virginal Katherine Jean so happy. She will probably make a visit to Lourdes to pray that Santorum, the weak of mind, is given strength to take on the homosexuals and become a viable candidate to protect her from all the perverts that exist outside of the Catholic church.

  • gpanfile

    This seems Fox-worthy to me: “the freedom-killing principle of an individual mandate.” So the individual mandates to, let’s say, pay income taxes, contribute to Social Security and Unemployment, and to purchase auto insurance… are those freedom-killers too? Or are they simply pragmatic approaches to the inarguable fact that if you let people NOT participate in such systems, at some point for humanitarian reasons others will have to pick up the slack in emergency rooms etc.?

  • maverick2k9

    “I noted that the “candidate of change” had once talked out of both sides of his mouth on offshore exploration. He condemned John McCain for wanting to expand offshore oil drilling one day, and then said another day that he was open to expanding it. ”
    .
    Sigh.. I think I need to paraphrase Obama’s comments and remind MS that “We’re not campaigning anymore. The election’s over.”
    .
    MS, Your hero McCain has lost the election fair and square. Just face the reality that he is never ever going to be President.
    .
    So stop this biased whining and start reporting for once. How about reporting on McCain’s 360 turn on a number of policy issues? – Climate change, TARP bank bailout, Don’t ask Dont tell. There are so many examples out there.
    .

  • FlownOver

    The only thing you can count on is that it will be the Romney dictated by that day’s polls. There’s never been such an obvious unprincipled sellout seriously considered for major office.

  • http://literatistuff.wordpress.com literatistuff

    Mr. Scherer. How about cutting a good guy some slack. Isn’t he an American? Didn’t he marry and stay married. Didn’t he raise smart kids that went to Harvard who were also Americans. And didn’t he run a successful business which employed many many people.

    There is a broad and vibrant America which is alive today and Mitt Romney (former governor of a United State) is a member of that capitalistic America.

    There are really only two parties. . . I know I would like to have a solid man like Romney and not a scuz ball like John Edwards lead my country.

  • firebatfox

    Square1 is correct – Romney will not get the GOP nomination. It’s cute, though, the way the liberal bloggers at Swampland see him as the leading Republican candidate for 2012. I guess, worried as they must be about Obama’s standing in the polls (and ObamaCare’s standing in the polls), they’re wishin’ and hopin’ that Romney will be the GOP nominee, so as to give their party a shield against the healthcare issue. And of course that’s funny, because I thought the whole point was that once the bill was passed and we found out what’s in it, once our shy, retiring, President gave a speech or two to the country about the law to clear up all the misinformation about it, voters would crawl over broken glass to cast ballots against any conservative who dares whisper the word “repeal.”

blog comments powered by Disqus