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
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:44 pm
Ernest T. Bass, traffic deaths are 12.3 per capita in the U.S, 9.4 for Canada.
And you can’t say they have better roads than we do, because they don’t.
Nice try on your part (well, not really).
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:44 pm
Ernest….Universal Healthcare costs less…..HAHAHA OMG REALLY!?!?! THIS IS GREAT! hahahaah
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:45 pm
Tiberius…..isnt it amazing?
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:46 pm
Really? Go try to buy a gun or carry a concealed weapon in Canada and see what happens!
huh ? Canadians have guns everywhere.
Anyone can get a gun in Canada.
They do require you go through safety training ( imagine that ) and a few more checks but its not that big a deal.
Canada is full of hunters with tons of guns.
HDB
December 13th, 2011
3:47 pm
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”
Methinks, Teddy Roosevelt was more of a VISIONARY than the cast of characters that are presently on display in the GOP.
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!”
If my tax bill went up 25%…but I…nor my family… would never have to think of BANKRUPTCY because of a debilitating medical condition and/or treatment…….that’s a fair exchange!!! If that would release my employer from having to subsidize my health care…and that extra money comes to me in SALARY/WAGES…..that’s a fair exchange!!!
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:49 pm
Ernest….Universal Healthcare costs less…..HAHAHA OMG REALLY!?!?! THIS IS GREAT! hahahaah
Ummm it is.
Mostly because if more people are in the system you get people before they really get sick and cost allot more.
An ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure.
td
December 13th, 2011
3:49 pm
Anyone but Obama is my choice. I am leaning towards Newt right now but Romney would be 100 times better than the current occupant of the office.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:50 pm
The only reason any country spends less than we do on health care, Ernest T. bass, is due to our litigious society.
Now I’m sure you’ll trot out that same, lame statistic about malpractice fees being only 3% of the problem, but the REAL problem is the cost of defensive medicine being practice to avoid suits in the first place. Doctors themselves estimate they run extra tests to the tune of over 30% of the total cost of health care just to avoid malpractice suits. It is the single biggest expenditure in the extra cost of our healthcare.
Remind me again which party has consistently blocked tort reform, Ernest T. Bass?
Kyle Wingfield
December 13th, 2011
3:51 pm
HDB @ 3:28: Ok, I’ll bite: How would universal health insurance change crime, per capita income, genetics, diet, shopping habits, bad habits, politics or fear of the system?
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:51 pm
Ernest….nope wrong again you are. Look up the pistol and gun laws in Canada.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:52 pm
HDB…..here is an idea. BUY health insurance.
Ernest T. Bass
December 13th, 2011
3:53 pm
Either way its been nice chatting.
I like to see how the dumber half thinks and interact with them every now and then.
Obama in 2012. Then Hillary in 2016 through 2024.
Count on it.
HDB
December 13th, 2011
3:53 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:50 pm
The problem I have with tort reform (as Republicans call it) is that the reform focuses not on the aggrieved party! It takes judgments away from juries and denies proper adjudication!! If a suit is baseless, it’ll be thrown out!!
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
3:54 pm
“HDB…..here is an idea. BUY health insurance.”
UGA 1999, if this was a Facebook page, I’d hit the “like” button.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:55 pm
Ernest……So you believe that by providing insurance to the current 49 Million uninsured that everyones cost would go down. Explain that again! haha.
Ever take an economics class?
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:55 pm
HDB….if a case is baseless it is thrown out!! GREAT!
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:56 pm
Democrats – I dont want to work, I dont want to earn anything. I want everything given to me and I want the evil rich to pay for it. NICE!
HDB
December 13th, 2011
3:57 pm
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:52 pm
1) Isn’t that what the INDIVIDUAL MANDATE proposes???Isn’t that the mandate that REPUBLICANS first was FOR…but when a DEMOCRAT proposes the same, they were AGAINST it???
2) When the per capita income is 32% LESS than the standard, how does someone be able to AFFORD health insurance?? We all know that the preponderance of the population has their health care tied to their EMPLOYMENT!!
YOU KNOW BETTER!!
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
December 13th, 2011
3:57 pm
Relative life expectancies among first world countries have more to do with lardassification than health care.
HDB
December 13th, 2011
4:01 pm
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
3:56 pm
Democrats – I dont want to work, I dont want to earn anything. I want everything given to me and I want the evil rich to pay for it. NICE!
THAT IS SO WRONG!!!
1) I LIKE WORK!! When I ‘m NOT, I’m miserable! It brings a sense of accomplishment in my life!
2) I WANT TO EARN WHAT I DESERVE FOR WHAT I DO!! It determines how I live in the lifestyle I want!
3) The only thing I want given to me is that SAME opportunity as my contemporaries….no more…no less!!
Why am I more prone to vote Democratic?? The GOP persistently IGNORES me as a constituent and promotes policies that are anathematic to my beliefs……it’s that simple!!!
TruthBe
December 13th, 2011
4:02 pm
More Obama stuff.
http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/larry-sinclair-affidavit.pdf
HDB
December 13th, 2011
4:04 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
December 13th, 2011
3:57 pm
You know you’re wrong…….in many first-world nations, a sedentary lifestyle does NOT necessary decrease lifespan…..but I admit….. it doesn’t help!!!
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:04 pm
HDB…..anathmatic fo your beliefs…..Small government, less taxes and self responsibility…..you are against those policies? WOW
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:06 pm
Did you guys see where Obama called Iran and asked for our drone back? Do you think he actually believe Iran would say “sure when would you like to come pick it up”?
TruthBe
December 13th, 2011
4:14 pm
Obama the crack cocaine Homosexual President.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
December 13th, 2011
4:17 pm
If you’re not earning what you “deserve” then isn’t the logical thing to leave and take a job that does pay what you’re worth? Unless someone put a gun to your head, you agreed to work for what you’re being paid.
Democrats fear markets and freedom because they know they can’t cut it.
HDB
December 13th, 2011
4:19 pm
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:04 pm
HDB…..anathmatic fo your beliefs…..Small government, less taxes and self responsibility…..you are against those policies? WOW
THESE are my policies: EFFECTIVE government, sensible taxation, self responsibility, a better safety net, persistent funding for education, universal health care, string defense, elimination of special interests and tax breaks for the wealthy, equal time for the crime………THAT’S me!
When Republicans want to CUT Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education funding under the guise of SMALLER government…and persistent tax breaks for the wealthy, then YES..that IS anathematic to my beliefs!! Charity can NOT handle the myriad of problems confronting the poor; the government HAS to be the source of LAST resort!! When judicial sentencing guidelines target the minority rather than being fair to ALL, then, YES, the policies are anathematic to my beliefs!! When legislation is written targeting a minority like SB 1070 because it’s written by those who have a zenophobic agenda, then YES, the policies are anathematic to my beliefs!! When Republicans IGNORE me as a constituent, refuse to campaign in my community, present their aspects on the issues WITH personal denigration by their prominent media arm and their (for lack of a better word) STOOGES in the neighborhood…….then YES, they are anathematic to my beliefs!!
It’s just that simple with me!!
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:24 pm
HDB……see man that is where we differ. I dont mind certain tax breaks for the wealthy especially when the lower 40% or so pay ZERO in federal income tax. I am more for FAIR taxation.
I am not totally again universal healthcare, that would make it an entitlement and I am not for entitlements at all.
Republicans do not want to cut education, they want to give you options (vouchers). Why are the democrats so against giving someone the option to go to private school if they choose?
What is “your” community?
HDB
December 13th, 2011
4:24 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
December 13th, 2011
4:17 pm
If you can’t find the job you desire in this market because business is HOARDING money rather than expanding so that we ALL can progress…then it’s the CONSERVATIVE thing to STAY PUT!! YOU KNOW BETTER!!
If I’m competing with someone for a job and my qualifications are equal (or in most cases, superior), I don’t worry…….sometimes, the job I want ISN’T the job I’m supposed to have (and I can deal with that!)!!
Republicans fear expanding the markets so that EVERYONE can have their own share of the wealth….not just the wealthy FEW!!
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:25 pm
HDB….”equal time for the crime”…..that really has nothing to do with the federal government. Unless it is a federal law. You should be petitioning that with your local and state judges.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:26 pm
HDB….”HOARDING” hahaha who are you to tell me (a business owner) what I can or cannot do with my earnings?
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:27 pm
HDB…”If I’m competing with someone for a job and my qualifications are equal (or in most cases, superior), I don’t worry…….sometimes, the job I want ISN’T the job I’m supposed to have (and I can deal with that!)!!”
So you are saying we should get rid of Affirmitive Action?
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:28 pm
HDB….”Republicans fear expanding the markets so that EVERYONE can have their own share of the wealth….not just the wealthy FEW!!”
Share of the wealth???? Now you know why we call you Marxists…..Tell me this what would you consider your fair share?
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:30 pm
HDB…..Please define the following word “stealing”.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:32 pm
HDB….Please show me in the constitution where it says the federal governments job is to distribute wealth.
HDB
December 13th, 2011
4:35 pm
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:24 pm
Let’s analyze this point-to-point:
1) I dont mind certain tax breaks for the wealthy especially when the lower 40% or so pay ZERO in federal income tax. I am more for FAIR taxation.
Many of the lower 40% are RETIREES who have paid federal income taxes throughout their working career….and their taxable income is ZERO. That’s because they are on fixed income. They deserve a break. Also included in that zero-fedtax is about 5000 MILLIONAIRES!! They SHOULD be paying taxes!!
2) Republicans do not want to cut education, they want to give you options (vouchers). Why are the democrats so against giving someone the option to go to private school if they choose?
Vouchers are nothing but a diversion of funding from public education to private education.
1) Vouchers will NOT cover the costs of tuition, books, and transportation at ANY private school
2) Private schools CAN NOT educate the masses; they are not designed to do so. They are designed to discriminate (in this case, pick-and-choose, although they DO discriminate in other means!) who they educate. If a strong workforce is desired, BOTH public and private education are needed. Also, I do NOT want the indoctrination that many private schools can do…that should be left up to me as a parent!! That’s MY freedeom being abridged!!
3) I am not totally again universal healthcare, that would make it an entitlement and I am not for entitlements at all.
It’s NOT an entitlement,; it’s fulfilling the social contract of this nation!!
From the CONSTITUTION:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
THAT’S a SOCIAL CONTRACT!!!
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:39 pm
HDB…..you keep using the word “deserves”….what do you feel you deserve?
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:40 pm
If the public government education system is broke, then why not give people OPTIONS!?!?!?!?!?!
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:41 pm
HDB.,,,,,”3) I am not totally again universal healthcare, that would make it an entitlement and I am not for entitlements at all.
It’s NOT an entitlement,; it’s fulfilling the social contract of this nation!!
From the CONSTITUTION:”
GREAT, simply present to me the article in which the constitution says that ever American is entitled to Universal Healthcare. Then you will have no further arguement from me.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:41 pm
HDB….and that CONTRACT says nothing about Healthcare.
HDB
December 13th, 2011
4:45 pm
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:27 pm
So you are saying we should get rid of Affirmitive Action?
NO!! It’s still needed!! I’ve put my resume out for jobs….and when they see who’s BEHIND the resume, they’re SHOCKED!! If Affirmative Action is good enough for the NFL, it’s good for the nation!!
….”equal time for the crime”…..that really has nothing to do with the federal government!
Actually, it does!! What government gave minorities the right to VOTE, be considered as equals in society, worked towards correcting the sentencing guidelines pertaining to drugs?? It was the FEDERAL government! If it were left up to the states, many minority citizens would still be considered as second-tier!!
“Share of the wealth???? Now you know why we call you Marxists”
Give a man a fish, he eats for a day; TEACH a man to fish, he can survuve a lifetime!! Teaching IS SHARING the wealth….and then a man can generate his own! What I consider as fair: what I’ve worked for and earned! Can’t work if there’re no jobs….won’t be jobs unless business expands..and SHARES their profitability by creating jobs…which in the long run will make EVERYONE — including the wealthy RICHER!! THAT’S SHARING the WEALTH!! That’s not Marxist…that’s BIBLICAL!!
Check the preamble of the Constitution and note the verbs: establish, provide, provide,insure, and secure!! Got to pay to play!! In its simplistic form, the Constitution promotes redistribution……
Stealing requires the UNLAWFUL taking of personal property…..and I am not advocating that!!
HDB
December 13th, 2011
4:51 pm
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
4:40 pm
1) Those options won’t work because of the design of the system. Show me how Westminister, Lovett and other privagte schools can educate over 350,000 children simultaneously?? Rather than belittle the system, work towards IMPROVING the system! As a product of public education (on ALL levels), I’m proof that it DOES work!!
What do I deserve? The same as my contemporaries — the RIGHT to the same opportunity as they have!!
“GREAT, simply present to me the article in which the constitution says that ever American is entitled to Universal Healthcare. Then you will have no further arguement from me.”
Read the Preamble:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Domestic tranquility, general welfare, secure the blessings of liberty…….can’t do that if you’re in bad health….or DEAD!!!
HDB
December 13th, 2011
4:51 pm
Back in 1 hr…….
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
4:54 pm
HDB, I wold suggest you look up the word “promote” and stop trying to use it synonymously with the word “provide”. There is no social contract within the Constitution, no matter how much you wish it to be.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
December 13th, 2011
5:26 pm
HDB: Republicans fear expanding the markets so that EVERYONE can have their own share of the wealth
————————-
Yes, everyone knows that Republicans don’t like expanding markets because that would mean they make more profit.
Stop being stupid.
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
5:36 pm
HDB…..every single post you have shared is based on your opinion and not facts.
Also if you want to talk about the bible……Jesus was referring to giving a man a fish (Sharing) by teaching him how to fish you are teaching him a skill so the he can go GET his OWN!
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
December 13th, 2011
5:38 pm
Democrats teach people how to BEG for fish and demand that someone who went and caught some fish hand them over to someone else who did nothing.
Dusty
December 13th, 2011
5:44 pm
Well, I glanced at the afternoon posts. Mr. Bass certainly has me convinced. He should leave immediately for Canada. If I can expedite his departure I will be glad to help.
Of course he won’t leave until President Obama loses the next election. So I hope Bass is getting his bags packed and ready for the great goodbye.
Strangely enough, I have not heard of a large number of Americans fleeing to Canada for the marvelous benefits, the increased taxes and the delightful climate.. And strangely enough, millions of people are trying to get to the USA any way they can.
If you don’t like it here, please go. I have no use for people who do not appreciate this great country of ours.. .
Just think,
He probably won’t thought since he thinks Prez Obama is doing a great job.
Joel Edge
December 14th, 2011
4:22 am
You written an article with thirteen paragraphs highlighting various scenarios and pointing out that we’re not sure what Romney will do or even what he believes. That might be why conservatives don’t trust him, Kyle.
HDB
December 14th, 2011
7:34 am
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate!
December 13th, 2011
4:54 pm
Excuse me…but because YOU don’t see the social contract doesn’t mean it exists! Remember how MLK stated that the Constitution was a contract and the check came back “insufficient funds”?
UGA 1999
December 13th, 2011
5:36 pm
Based on EXPERIENCE….not opinion, therefore they are FACTUAL in my environment!!
Lil’ Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
December 13th, 2011
5:38 pm
Repubiicans teach people how to steal fish from those that didn’t have any in the first place so that they can be enrichened.
There…fixed your statement!!