It seems that all I hear about is how Romney is the clear winner after every debate, and Tuesday's G.O.P. Republican debate at Dartmouth was no different. Again, Romney was touted as presidential, cool, calm, collected (article here and here). That sounds suspiciously familiar, like a certain successful campaign ran in 2008. In fact, I hear very little about anything else Romney stands for and even less about his past positions (also very familiar) in the traditional media. You would think that after all the problems surrounding RomneyCare there would be some question as to how Romney would really govern. There is recent news that Romney's team who worked on RomneyCare helped Obama's team, and Obama himself, with ObamaCare (MSNBC.com). Yet, the only thing we hear about is how Romney looks so solid up there (again, so familiar). But what is Romney's real fix for America's problems? He criticizes Perry for calling Social Security what it really is, a Ponzi scheme (HuffingtonPost.com), but offers no solutions of his own for fixing the failing system. In fact, what are his solutions to anything?
In all honesty, I have heard very little specifics from the candidates. I know Bachmann wants to undo all of Obama's policies, but that is pretty general. I know Huntsman has an economic plan, but again, it's not exactly front page news. And of course all of the candidates want to cut taxes and government spending. Does this sound any different from Romney? What plans does he have that eclipse the other candidates' ideas? And if he presents no contrast, how is he always the clear winner? Because he acts the best?
The real difference is the liberal media and the establishment Republicans, both of which want him as the candidate. The Republican Establishment thinks he is the only one who can win, and the liberals know they can beat him. Romney's popularity in the northeast should tell us all we need to know. He is one of the worst candidates the Republicans could put forward.
No comments:
Post a Comment