2012 Tuesday: One case (sort of) for Mitt Romney
Here is a case for Mitt Romney, albeit one I don’t expect his campaign to make. And make note of this caveat from the beginning: This post is not an endorsement, only food for thought.
We all know by now one of the conservative knocks on Romney: When campaigning for offices in Massachusetts, he often professed squishy-to-outright-liberal positions on such issues as abortion, guns, gay rights, taxes and immigration, only later to adopt far more conservative positions on those same issues once he decided to run for president. Reverse course on one issue — as Ronald Reagan did regarding abortion — and you can claim a genuine change of heart. Do it on a number of issues, and you get labeled an untrustworthy flip-flopper.
We also know by now one of the other other conservative knocks on Romney: While serving as governor and working with a liberal legislature, he actually acted on some of these squishy-to-outright-liberal positions. His health reform is of course the most prominent example. (Spare me the talking point that some conservatives once favored an individual mandate to purchase health insurance; every time Romney describes his reform as something that was “right for Massachusetts” and still popular there, he is acknowledging that, on the whole, it was a liberal reform for a liberal state.)
So, from a purely cynical standpoint: If the argument is that conservatives can’t trust Romney because he once advocated liberal positions, shouldn’t we also consider that he did act on those liberal positions — and might also be likely to act, alongside a conservative Congress, on the conservative positions he now advocates?
In other words, if we assume Romney will say anything to get elected — and then do what he said so that he can be re-elected — why not assume he will act mostly conservatively if elected president?
Again, that’s not a very high-minded way to look at him, which is one reason his campaign probably won’t make such a case.
But every time I hear or see people referring to Romney’s flip-flopping, I can’t help but think that he didn’t flip-flop until after he decided to leave state office and run for national office. He essentially did then, in Massachusetts, what he’d said he would do then and there. So, even if you believe Romney speaks and acts only in his electoral self-interest, should you not also believe he will find it in his electoral self-interest to govern conservatively after campaigning as a conservative?
The closest I’ve seen anyone come to making this argument was National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru in his endorsement of Romney, when he contrasts Romney with Obama rather than with other Republicans:
If Mitt Romney becomes president, he will almost certainly be dealing with John Boehner as speaker of the House and Mitch McConnell as Senate majority leader. While they, too, have their conservative detractors, they are the most conservative congressional leaders Republicans have had in modern times, and they will exert a rightward influence on the Romney administration. If they send him legislation to repeal Obamacare, cut taxes, or reform entitlements, he will sign it where Obama would veto it. If at some other point in his presidency a liberal-run Congress sends him tax increases, he will veto them where Obama would sign. Compared with President Obama, a President Romney would do more to protect the defense budget.
I see three potential objections to the line of thinking I’ve suggested. The first is very weak: Romney is really a liberal at heart and is just saying conservative things now so that he can get into office and govern liberally. I don’t believe that, and I don’t think many other people do, either. For starters, if Romney’s over-arching goal is to pursue liberal policies, why not wait until after Barack Obama leaves office? (If you believe Romney would be more liberal than Obama, I have nothing to say to you.) And if Romney is really a liberal at heart, why wouldn’t he have run as a Democrat from the get-go, given that he was running in Massachusetts of all places?
The second potential objection is less easily dismissed: In the general election Romney would tack toward the center, thinking there is no situation in which Republicans will abandon him and contribute to Obama’s re-election — and that he will then be more beholden to governing squishily than conservatively. I think Romney would be miscalculating if he believes all that, but I guess it’s possible.
The third potential objection may be the toughest to overcome: Should Congress flip back into totally Democratic hands in, say, 2014, then Romney, lacking a true or strong ideological orientation, will perceive that governing liberally is the best way to win re-election. Now, he would certainly have to expect to be primaried in that event, probably successfully, so I’m not sure he would flip even then. But if you go for the pure electoral self-interest theory, this scenario is at least plausible.
Personally, I don’t think any of those three scenarios is more likely than the case I outlined before them. So, I would expect a Romney nominated by the GOP after campaigning as a conservative to govern like a conservative for the most part — which is as much as can be said for either President Bush, and perhaps a future President Gingrich.
That may not be enough to win him the nomination. And, to reiterate, it’s not enough to win an endorsement from me today. But for those who distrust Romney because of the differences between his words now and his words then, I think it’s worth considering the similarities between his words then and his actions then — and what that may foretell about the impact of his words now.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
200 comments Add your comment
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:07 pm
Road…..I am guessing you are not a Road Scholar. Sentences can begin with Why and not be a question. I was making a point that all of you Dems are the same and only spew lies and half truths. I won.
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:09 pm
Then why do SO many from other countries come to America for their health needs? I
They don’t. Thats a myth.
In fact far more Americans leave for healthcare elsewhere.
Ill give you a real world example. Many friends along the USA Canadian border get married not out of love. They do so out of necessity.
Because they know it will give them Canadian citizenship and healthcare and they can be treated.
I have a friend whose wife is Canadian.
He has stated many times and is telling the truth that if he gets really sick it is very assuring knowing he can go to Canada and have his life saved without bankrupting his family.
AGAIN THE WHOLE PEOPLE FROM EVERYWHERE COME TO AMERICA FOR HEALTHCARE IS A MYTH.
IT DOESN’T HAPPEN.
They only exceptions are the super wealthy from other nations who can afford expensive procedures that are done here because of our advanced technology.
HDB
December 13th, 2011
3:09 pm
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:02 pm
Actually, there IS proof that life expectancies are LONGER in nations with universal health care!!
Non-US Average Life Expectancy: 78.4 years
US Average Life Expectancy: 76.7
Granted, there are other factors that are taken in to account….but the evidence is there!!
(I did read all of the article….so I do understand that the author discounts the metrics!!)
http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA547ComparativeHealth.html
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:09 pm
Ernest….hahah….www.realclearpolitics.com ahahahahaha
Jesse Jackson Jr.’s favorite news source….I wonder why….hahahahahaha
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:10 pm
Ernest T. Bass, some day you may wish to undertake a course on statistical analysis regading health care comparison.
Needless to say, the statistics the left keeps citing are an apples to oranges comparison between the U.S. and “the rest of the world” when it comes to life expectancy and health. Ours is a result of a free society, by and large, while theirs is a much more controlled environment.
I’ll take my freedom for a shorter life span any day of the week. However, if you desire a longer life span, Delta is ready when YOU are.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:12 pm
Ernest….prove it. You are so full of crap. How do you believe half of what you are saying. The only part of your post that is somewhat accurate is the fact that prescription drugs in Canada are about 80-90% less expensive in Canda but the healthcare is no where near what our is.
Here is some proof for you…..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:12 pm
People come to America for health care for the better quality.
People who go to other countries from America sacrifice quality for a lower cost.
Both sides do so for valid reasons.
HDB
December 13th, 2011
3:13 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:06 pm
If the evidence is manufactured, it’s the CONSERVATIVES that manufactured it….by SAYING what they SAID!!
Here’s Limbaugh SAYING it!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgKCWt7jrrc
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:14 pm
HDB….then what is your explanation for blacks having a lower LER than whites?
Black male: 69.8 years
White male: 75.7 years
Black female: 76.5 years
White female: 80.8 years
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:15 pm
Again every 1st world country has Universal Health Care except one.
The USA.
Are you saying they are all wrong and we are right ?
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:16 pm
Actually, there IS proof that life expectancies are LONGER in nations with universal health care!!
Republicans never were big on proof and facts.
Remember W. He thought with his gut and was the decider.
Either way they aren’t going to let silly things like facts get in the way of their agenda.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:16 pm
Ernest….Yes….and nearly every America doctor would agree.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:17 pm
Ernest….still waiting for that proof….haha.
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:18 pm
Funniest thing was Rush saying if Universal Health Care passed he was going to Costa Rica for health care.
Costa Rica has Universal Heath Care.
It just shows how painfully uninformed they are on this subject.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:18 pm
The United States ranks 36th out of 194 countries.
HDB
December 13th, 2011
3:20 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:10 pm
“Needless to say, the statistics the left keeps citing are an apples to oranges comparison between the U.S. and “the rest of the world” when it comes to life expectancy and health. Ours is a result of a free society, by and large, while theirs is a much more controlled environment.”
Not really…..universal health care is a part of the social CONTRACT that those nations have written for their government to follow; also note that Theodore Roosevelt AND FDR wanted to expand the US social contract to CREATE a universal health care system…..but the FOR-PROFIT motive countermanded that idea!The US has a more Darwinian environment……IMHO…….
It seems that overseas, the more CONSERVATIVE position is to preserve life as much as possible….from cradle to grave whereas the American conservative position is to protect life BEFORE birth…and screw it afterwards………
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:20 pm
Ernest….Costa Rica is great, been there several times. But it is not just the healthcare that is the draw. They welcome American retirees.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:21 pm
HDB, at some point in your posting lifetime, you’re really going to have to pay attention to what others post. I don’t know if I’ll live long enough to see it, but I hope so.
First, the original issue was why do liberals constantly feel that the GOP hates America simply because they don’t like the current Disaster-in-Chief’s POLICIES?
Look, I know there are people who don’t like him for who he is, but they are far fewer than your views represent. But people don’t like him because he’s been a Socialist-leaning, ineffective, leaderless neophyte adrift in the sea of global economics and foreign policy.
Stop trying to assign anything other than a difference of opinion into something hateful. It is distasteful, dishonest, and adds nothing to a national debate on ISSUES.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:21 pm
BTW guys….who said the Republicans are against universal healthcare?
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:22 pm
Ernest….Yes….and nearly every America doctor would agree.
Not the ones ive talked to.
They all admit our system is broken and needs a major overhaul.
But by all means lets keep spending more and getting terrible results.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:24 pm
“Are you saying they are all wrong and we are right ?”
What part of “I’ll take my freedom over a shorter life span” do you NOT understand, Ernest T. Bass?
Yes, the restrictions on freedom they have to live with in order to achieve that slightly longer life span is wrong, and our model of more freedom than they have is right.
man behind the curtain
December 13th, 2011
3:24 pm
UGA 1999: A small man’s complex with a small, petty mind. Maybe he’ll grow someday.
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:25 pm
FOX News 12/5 – 12/7 911 RV 46 40 Obama +6 vs Gingrich
FOX News 12/5 – 12/7 911 RV 44 42 Obama +2 vs Romney
Obama is winning in both FOX NEWS polls.
If he is winning in a fox news poll then you know it is real bad for the other side.
gobucks
December 13th, 2011
3:25 pm
Ann Coulter suggested the same thing as Kyle in an interview with Hannity. She basically stated that since he was a flip-flopper, Mitt was the preferred leading candidate because the conservatives could mold him. Newt couldn’t be molded because he is too entrenched in his positions which sometimes are and sometimes not conservative. Yes, she stated that she was looking for a piece of clay for president. You however are suggesting something slightly different, that he isn’t clay to be molded by conservatives, but clay to be molded by whatever will get him elected which just happens to be conservative ideals.
Either way, you are getting a piece of clay with really nice hair for president. Good luck with that.
Hillbilly D
December 13th, 2011
3:25 pm
in the last 3 years there have been no Americans taken hostage or killed while over seas,
Scott Adam, Jean Adam, Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd, Joshua Fattal, Bob Levinson, Kevin Lunsmann, Warren Weinstein, Phyllis Mackay, Bob Riggle……….
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:26 pm
Yes, the restrictions on freedom
Please site restrictions on freedom Canadians live under.
HDB
December 13th, 2011
3:28 pm
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:14 pm
Good question…here’s my answer!
1) Crime – Greatest cause of death in black males 18-25 — HOMICIDE
Politics of division – “moochers” rather than “survivors”……
2) Economics – Black per capita income is 68% of white per capita income
3) Genetics – Blacks and Italians are the only people with the sickle cell trait, more suseptible to diseases like diabetes and hypertension
4) Access to Health Care — lack of access due to economic reasons
5) Diet — because of economic disparities, diet based on mainly carbs and fat versus lean meats and vegetables
6) Shopping habits – lack of access to FRESH vegetables and fruits in many black neighborhoods
7) “Bad Habits” – smoking, drinking, pharmaceutical abuse
9) Fear of doctors and the medical system
There’re many reasons…..but if there WERE a universal system in the US….the rates would increase!!
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:30 pm
Ernest T. Bass, they do not live under a Constitution as we do. They have more restrictive traffic laws (and yes, ALL deaths are factored into the equation on statistics used to show longer life span, including accidental death), they do not have our drug and alcohol policies / problems.
All these factor into the freedom equation, and the rest of the world is largely lacking in that side of the house. To live on average another year? Nope, not for me.
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:30 pm
For every Republican who doesn’t want Universal Healthcare I only say this.
Give up your medicare and medicaid as well.
We might as well go all the way huh.
But they don’t want to give that up.
So Government Healthcare is ok for some but not for others….
Right ……
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:32 pm
Ernest T. Bass, they do not live under a Constitution as we do. They have more restrictive traffic laws (and yes, ALL deaths are factored into the equation on statistics used to show longer life span, including accidental death), they do not have our drug and alcohol policies / problems.
Thanks you proved my point.
Basically they don’t have any restrictions on their freedoms any different than we do.
More restrictive traffic laws …. LOL. I almost fell out of my chair.
Thats the best you got. LOL
Hilarious. You cant make this stuff up.
I gotta get a screenshot of this and email it around.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:33 pm
Ernest T. bass, once again, national polls, no matter who runs them, are MEANINGLESS in an election debate.
State-by-state polls are more accurate all the time, but even they can’t tell the whole story until a nominee is chosen by the GOP, as people will still cling to their favorite until all others have been eliminated.
The only people receiving any benefit from these polls are the pollsters who charge for their work.
TruthBe
December 13th, 2011
3:33 pm
Anybody but the Muslim Liberal Communist Liar Obama in 2012. This time we should make the mainstreet media vent Obama and his history. Like for example they speak of Gringrich’s affairs, at least they were with women. Can’t say the same about Obama. When Obama had a homosexual encounter with Larry Sinclair in a limo ride in 2004 Chicago during his Senate Campaign where he back stabed his mentor for her Senate seat. Obama was married to Michelle at the time.Obama and his liberal/communist administration must go. Anybody but Obama in 2012.
HDB
December 13th, 2011
3:33 pm
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:21 pm
“BTW guys….who said the Republicans are against universal healthcare?”
Most of the politicval ones……decrying it as a GOVERNMENT takeover!! Many forget that it was THEODORE ROOSEVELT who championed universal health care in the early-20th Century!!
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:34 pm
FOX News 12/5 – 12/7 911 RV 46 40 Obama +6 vs Gingrich
FOX News 12/5 – 12/7 911 RV 44 42 Obama +2 vs Romney
Obama is winning in both FOX NEWS polls.
Any explanation for that ?
TruthBe
December 13th, 2011
3:35 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4Oo1MGF8c8&feature=endscreen&NR=1
Obama the homosexual.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:35 pm
Ernest T. Bass, I’d give up my Medicare and Medicaid (once I’m old enough for it) if you’ll stop taking the money out of my paycheck to fund it.
And laugh all you will, but you obviously have nothing to counter my argument about freedom, do you?
Rival
December 13th, 2011
3:36 pm
“Spare me the talking point that some conservatives once favored an individual mandate to purchase health insurance…’
That tree is not a tree. It is a corkscrew. Because I just said so.
michele
December 13th, 2011
3:36 pm
Caveat? Kyle, you use that word a lot. I don’t think it means what you think it means.
moron.
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:36 pm
Ernest T. bass, once again, national polls, no matter who runs them, are MEANINGLESS in an election debate.
They are MEANINGLESS when they don’t produce a result you like.
Something tells me if Obama were losing in those polls they would be perfectly legit to you.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:36 pm
HDB, Teddy Roosevelt was a Republican in name only. He certainly was no conservative.
TruthBe
December 13th, 2011
3:37 pm
More Obama stuff if you want it.
http://www.larrysinclair.org/
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:38 pm
And laugh all you will, but you obviously have nothing to counter my argument about freedom, do you?
Yes I do.
Canadians are just as free as we are. Maybe more so.
I challenge you to call a Canadian and ask them if they feel repressed by the Government and do they wish they could get to the USA where they would finally be free.
You wont do it because they would laugh in your face.
Kyle Wingfield
December 13th, 2011
3:39 pm
Tiberius @ 2:50: Yep, and we’re rapidly approaching the point where national polls for the primary are meaningless, too.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:39 pm
I wonder how quickly the fools on the left would still cry out for universal healthcare if their tax bill went up 25%. Oh or do you want the “evil rich” to pay for your healthcare too? MOOCHERS!
Kyle Wingfield
December 13th, 2011
3:40 pm
Road @ 2:50: I don’t get your term limits reference here. And, as per usual, I missed The View today. Sorry.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:41 pm
Ernest…..”Canadians are just as free as we are. Maybe more so”….Really? Go try to buy a gun or carry a concealed weapon in Canada and see what happens!
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:42 pm
Hey Ernest…..go try to get a same day abortion in Canada.
Kyle Wingfield
December 13th, 2011
3:42 pm
Jefferson @ 2:56: The Republicans who supported Bush should have voted for Hillary in the Democratic primary? You’re making even less sense than usual today.
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:43 pm
I wonder how quickly the fools on the left would still cry out for universal healthcare if their tax bill went up 25%
Actually Universal healthcare costs less so I would expect a net gain in in that area.
We spend more but get less results.
Countries with Universal Healthcare spend less and get better results.
This stuff isn’t real complicated.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:43 pm
Ernest….also look at the immigration versus emmigration numbers for Canada and the US.
This is what I mean, if you guys would actually read before you post silly comments you may think twice before hitting the “submit” comment.