Political Animal
Blog
Last fall, Mitt Romney spoke to a gathering of capital financiers in Los Angeles, and predicted the 2012 campaign would be about “values,” not the economy.
Apparently, he’s since changed his mind.
Republican Mitt Romney will formally launch his second campaign for the White House on Thursday with an operation leaner and wiser than it was four years ago and a message singularly focused on what he sees as President Obama’s greatest area of vulnerability: jobs and the economy.
Romney and his advisers are working backward from November 2012. They believe that the economy will decide the outcome of the election and that the president has yet to convince voters that his economic policies have worked. […]
“This election is going to be a referendum on President Obama and his handling of the economy,” said campaign spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom. “He didn’t cause the economic recession, but his policies have prolonged it and deepened it in some respects. We wondered what it would be like to elect a president who has no experience. Now we know.”
At a certain level, the larger point here makes sense. The economy will almost be the driving factor in the 2012 race, so Romney’s focus away from “values” is sensible. If President Obama is perceived as having turned the economy around, he’s going to win. If he’s perceived as having come up short, he’s vulnerable.
There are, however, quite a few problems with the particulars of Romney’s message. The idea, for example, that Obama policies have “prolonged and worsened” the Republican economic crisis is demonstrably ridiculous.
But I’m especially fascinated by the Romney camp’s “no experience” line. This was popular in 2008 as a line of attack, but it didn’t go far. I’m a little surprised Romney and his team are still going with it.
Indeed, has Romney thought this one through? Barack Obama served eight years in state government, four years in the U.S. Senate, and by Election Day 2012, will have also served four years as the president of the United States in a time of multiple domestic and foreign crises. Mitt Romney served one term as governor, saw his approval ratings tank, and ran away rather than seek re-election.
Does Eric Fehrnstrom really want to talk about electing someone with “no experience”?
Complicating matters, during Romney’s only service in public office, his state’s record on job creation was “one of the worst in the country.” Adding insult to injury, “By the end of his four years in office, Massachusetts had squeezed out a net gain in payroll jobs of just 1 percent, compared with job growth of 5.3 percent for the nation as a whole.”
How bad is Romney’s record? During his tenure, Massachusetts ranked 47th out of 50 states in jobs growth.
But wait, Romney’s defenders say. Sure, his only experience in public office was a bust, but let’s not forget he was also in the private sector, running Bain Capital. Except, that’s not much of a defense given the frequency with which Bain slashed American jobs.
Maybe Romney should go back to the “values” attack, after all?
Facebook
Twitter
j on May 29, 2011 10:52 AM:
I just loved the democratic ad about Romney trashing the auto bailout.
c u n d gulag on May 29, 2011 10:57 AM:
Poor, poor Mittens.
If being wrong was a plus, he and 'Bloody' Bill Kristol could RULE THE WORLD!!!
Bwa-ha-ha!!!
Uhm, Mitt, never mind your experience with (not) creating jobs, tell us again how you (didn't) create a health care system in your state.
What, Mittnes?
CAPTHCA - hoist by your own canard...
I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!
kevo on May 29, 2011 11:12 AM:
Mitt is projecting an image of our President that, because of his "boyish" presence, holds no experience - just a generic attack against President Obama's "otherness."
As for Romney, I do agree he has experience by what I've witnessed. Mitt has tremendous experience with rhetorical calisthenics, private fundraising, and running as fast as he can away from his previous governmental proposals, policies and accomplishments (almost like an Olympic sprinter training to break a world record!).
Run, Mitt, Run has a whole new set of connotations for me these days! -Kevo
Bernie on May 29, 2011 11:14 AM:
Steve, you're absolutely right.
Unfortunately, everything you said is utterly irrelevant in today's media environment.
Words have come unmoored from their meanings, from the actions they're meant to represent, and from any referent in time or space.
Look at Palin: a quitter, a grifter, under a cloud of ethics investigations, someone who's never accomplished anything of note in public service; yet she's the darling of millions of ignorant worshipful teabaggers.
In such debased, decadent times as ours, traditional concepts such as "experience," "success" and "accomplishment" have no meaning. Narratives are fashioned out of whole cloth, then discarded as quickly as they appear.
Trying to hold Republicans, those avatars of relativism and nihilism, to traditional concepts of accountability is like trapping water in a sieve....
Gummo on May 29, 2011 11:16 AM:
Okay, that last comment was mine.
Where the commenting system got the name "Bernie" or why it appeared over my comment, I have no idea.....
Rip on May 29, 2011 11:19 AM:
Yes, but Mittens has business experience, which in the Republican mindset is more valuable than government experience, because working for the people isn't a "real" job.
after all this is the party that thinks government should be run like a business, one that makes a profit off it's services I suppose, and has a 535 member Board of Directors of which roughly half want to fire the CEO at any given time.
berttheclock on May 29, 2011 11:25 AM:
Perhaps, "Bernie" still "lives" as in "Weekend at Bernies".
This "We need a business man" argument has mixed reviews. Harding was a self made newspaper owner. Truman was a haberdasher. Minus and plus.
Reminds me of the time the City of Portland wanted to buy our local electrical company, PGE. Letters to the editor from PGE employees poured in telling one and all the horrors of government run utilities. Having lived under such in LA and Seattle, I was very much bemused, in that both entities were cheaper than PGE and run very well by their respective city employees. Unfortunately, Portland did not buy out PGE and they are still the highest utility in the PNW. Yes, and, they are still owned and operated by ENRON and our Public Utilities Commission in Salem is "owned and operated" by them, as well Whatever ENRON wants, ENRON gets.
Kathryn on May 29, 2011 11:29 AM:
I don't believe thinking through strategy for his campaign is a strong suit for Mittens (thanks for whoever came up with that, makes me giggle). If Pres. Obama is for it, he'll write on oped opposing, down with puppies, motherhood, apple pie, whatever. Mitt the inauthentic!
zandru on May 29, 2011 11:32 AM:
Gummo, you're probably right, but not in a helpful way.
Look at it this way: Mr. Benen has laid out a sequence of undisputed facts, for which supporting documentation, and probably audio and video, can be found. These can be used by Democratic challengers, Democrats in general, liberals, progressives, groups supporting liberals or progressives, or heck, by Republican challengers. (This last will ensure that the facts hit the media...)
You yourself can cite these facts at the proverbial water cooler (more likely Starbux), post them on your "Face Book," tweet them to your followers, email them to all your tea-bagging relatives, and in other words "catapult the propaganda."
Or you can, quite realistically, sit back in impotent disgruntlement that today's so-called "journalists" aren't doing it for you.
Mr. Benen is giving us ammunition. ...well, enough of that bad metaphor.
Jerry Elsea on May 29, 2011 11:33 AM:
The "no experience" line is especially weak in view of Obama's efforts as community organizer in 1980s Chicago. The goal was neighborhood empowerment -- breaking down the debilitating isolation between households and individuals and stressing everyone's connectedness. Such work involves blending nonprofits and businesses, volunteers and professionals in serving the common good. With empowerment comes the determination to vote, and that apparently is what prompted Sarah Palin and Rudy Giuliani to scorn community organizing in their speeches at the 2008 Republican National Convention. Stir up the have-nots too much and you imperil politicians eager to keep them marginalized.
Long on experience in state and federal government, Obama should make more of his earlier work in community organizing.
berttheclock on May 29, 2011 11:45 AM:
Juxtapose President Obama's experience with that of US Rep Joe Walsh, who has heavily criticized the President. Walsh's background out of college was teaching youth in the Chicago area in the "Jobs for Youth" program, teaching at Hebrew Theological Institute or College, then, working in fund raising for right wing organizations. He is listed as being a fund raiser and a venture capitalist. Yes, great experience, indeed, for leadership.
pluege on May 29, 2011 11:46 AM:
fools always fight the last war. I would expect the romney crew to be among the leaders in top fools of 2012.
Gummo on May 29, 2011 11:57 AM:
zandru, I wasn't clear: I was referring to our useless media and how they treat facts, history and reality in general.
But you're right, all this is useful information for going AROUND the media and trying to keep each other informed.
But I am more pessimistic about you when it comes to reaching anyone who disagrees with you -- these days both sides really do have their own facts, or what they call facts; we really do live in different realities....
gandalf on May 29, 2011 12:06 PM:
Gummo both sides do not have their own facts. Facts are what they are.
JS on May 29, 2011 12:38 PM:
Yeah, just take Mittens' experience argument and run it on a loop with his statement that he would have killed the auto industry...
And put an ad in heavy rotation in MI, OH, PA, IN and WI. Good luck playing on McCain's electoral tightrope to victory.
PonB on May 29, 2011 1:17 PM:
"You list all the qualities that you despise
And then you realize...
That you're describing yourself."
- Marillion, The Rakes Progress
zandru on May 29, 2011 2:25 PM:
Thanks, Gummo: I do agree with your depiction of the current media.
However, we really can't afford to be pessimistic, or any other funk-inducing condition that prevents fighting back. The worse things become, the more it becomes clear that there is no bottom. It can and will keep getting worse, unless enough people do something to stop it.
Fortunately, it appears that in spite of the pathetic excuse we have for journalism, people ARE starting to notice. Look at the way people across the country have been applauding the Wisconsin union workers. How thousands have been showing up at Republican town hall meetings to vent their rage.
We are reaching a point where folks are willing to listen to facts other than the ones Fox News and its echo chamber mainstream media keep pushing; facts that are in line with things they are currently experiencing in real life.
Let's go for broke for the 2012 election! Talk up the reality-based community; work to get better Democratic candidates running, displacing blue dogs as necessary.
And in 2014, repeat. Because it's not so much a campaign as a way of life: democracy.
toowearyforoutrage on May 29, 2011 7:05 PM:
A president who'd had executive experience before becoming president could have killed Osama bin Laden in just 18 months where Obama with his paltry legislative background hasn't been able to so much as FIND him in 7+ years.
Put a Republican Governor in charge if you want results people.
anandine on May 30, 2011 8:48 AM:
There is a sense in which Obama worsened the depression: He failed to provide enough stimulus to bring us out of it faster.
yellowdog on May 30, 2011 7:33 PM:
Romney has been a presidential contender for years now. Other than being perfect for an Aqua Velva ad, I don't see what he has to offer. He exists only because of his name recognition: George Romney was a decent chap and a not-bad governor of Michigan and a pillar of the liberal/Rockefeller wing of the GOP. But haven't we learned that an unearned name--the legacy admission to US politics--has a downside? Have we not had enough of callow sons of accomplished fathers, at once running on the father's connections and good name, yet resenting Papa's inescapable shadow? Children, spouses, and siblings of politicians who have been elected to office themselves have a mixed record (where do you put the Kennedys?), but there are some in the bunch who clearly -had- to have family help to get where they got. They may be admirable in many ways, but there is usually a big deficit of some sort clouding their candidacy. They lack some of the personal appeal, life experience, or leadership skill otherwise necessary to build a political identity on their own. Think of Robert Taft, Al Gore, Adlai Stevenson, the Bushes. The problem: Having a family member serve in office adds nothing to my own qualifications. My family name only adds to my name recognition and identity among the set of voters I need to woo. It says what other candidates cannot, "I am not some total stranger." If Gary Johnson came from the Reagan family, he would not have to spend so much time introducing himself to folks in Manchester and Des Moines. If Mitt Romney came from a family named Jones or Johnson, he would be where Gov. Johnson is in the polls now (barely registering), depending on his record and personality and tactical campaign skill to win attention and money. Ask a few hypothetical questions: Could Mitt Romney win a race on his record and personality alone? Could Romney run a Johnson-like race and succeed? (or like 'nobody' Jimmy Carter in 1976) Can Mitt Romney succeed in an enterprise in which his father's name does not count heavily in his favor? Can Mitt Romney succeed someplace they have never heard of George Romney? Someone closer to Massachusetts politics will have to verify this, but my memory is that voters in Mitt's one race there were reassured by Mitt's being the son of a liberal Republican, just as the party at large now is disturbed by it.