Why is Romney allowing the President to define him.

USFREEDOM911 said:
All Romney has to do is rerun Obama's campaign promises, from 2008, just prior to making a comment about them.

The "Hope and Change" one alone shoiuld be funnier then all get out.
Click to expand...

two things got in the way of hope and change

a depression/recession and the gop
 
Don Quixote said:
two things got in the way of hope and change

a depression/recession and the gop
Click to expand...

How do progressives say this with a straight face, knowing full well that Obama, and the demo's dominated all facets of our government, short of the SCOTUS for the first two years of Obama's Presidency?
 
Yurt said:
interesting...so now negative campaigning...which obama has railed against...is "defining your opponent".....

you're hilarious jarod...
Click to expand...

Two different things, and what the President is doing currently is both negative campaigning and an attempt to define his opponent.

Its the timing that makes this particular negative campaigning an attempt at defining Mitt. You see, according to polls people had not yet made up there minds about Mitt. If the President can rush in now and implant an idea, using negative campaign ads, he might be able to sway how these people see Mitt. First impressions generall greatly affect later opinions.

I belive it was a huge mistake for Mitt to not respond and to allow himself to be defined in this way. Maybe I am wrong and Mitt has a plan and this is part of it, but it seems to me that plan may have backfired in many of the swing states, people seem to be forming a negative opinion of Mitt.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
Romney can't spend any of the money he raised for the general election until after the party convention in August. Right now he is limited to money raised for the primary election. That's probably why he isn't doing much. The PACs and Super PACs and political charities are doing the ads for Romney at this point.
Click to expand...

IF this is true, you may have answered my question, but why is the President alowed to spend money?
 
Darla said:
Also keep in mind - the McCain campaign from what i have read actually did see all of Romney's tax returns, the ones he won't release now.

And they went with Sarah Palin.

Think about it.

I think the right instinctively knows there's a mountain of shit there, and if they see the light of day they will render Romney unelectable. That's why they are so shrill about the topic.
Click to expand...

Its very funny that the same people who demanded the Presidents certified long form birth certificate and now want all of his grades from College dont care to see the last five years of Mitts tax returns.
 
Jarod said:
Two different things, and what the President is doing currently is both negative campaigning and an attempt to define his opponent.

Its the timing that makes this particular negative campaigning an attempt at defining Mitt. You see, according to polls people had not yet made up there minds about Mitt. If the President can rush in now and implant an idea, using negative campaign ads, he might be able to sway how these people see Mitt. First impressions generall greatly affect later opinions.

I belive it was a huge mistake for Mitt to not respond and to allow himself to be defined in this way. Maybe I am wrong and Mitt has a plan and this is part of it, but it seems to me that plan may have backfired in many of the swing states, people seem to be forming a negative opinion of Mitt.
Click to expand...
I finally heard a little push back on Obama today, the "can't tax job creators" usual.. he's got a golden opportunity, with Obama defining "rich" as $250k.
It's really not rich in some states -well off - but not "rich"
He still will not define himself, maybe because he doesn't want to open up his past?

I dunno, but this is not the way to campaign to rewmove a sitting POTUS, one has to discredit the POTUS, but also show an alternative vision.
I see none of the later.
 
Damocles said:
It depends on which way they are being defined, whether it is effective, and if it can be used later against those doing the defining...

At this point the current RCP averages (after ACA ruling) are rolling in the Romney direction (still show Obama ahead in the average but Romney is closing the gap and showing as the winner on more polls than he did just after the ACA ruling).

If they "define" him and yet the momentum continues to remain in his favor once the "correction" comes it will have a still larger effect. Also, with regard to the "vulture capitalism" if they let them to go all in on that one it will be fun to watch as they draw out first Obama's record (giving money to Swiss Companies, failing Solar companies, etc.) on his "crony capitalism" with the Stimulus as well as driving the point that his National Co-Chair made his money by doing exactly what Romney did. By holding for the right timing they can have better effect.

Basically, by waiting to see how the "defining" affects the campaign first they can better create a more effective answer to it in the future.
Click to expand...

This is another good possability, I belive something like this is what the Mitt Campaign is thinking, but it looks to me very risky and likely to backfire.
 
Damocles said:
It depends on which way they are being defined, whether it is effective, and if it can be used later against those doing the defining...

At this point the current RCP averages (after ACA ruling) are rolling in the Romney direction (still show Obama ahead in the average but Romney is closing the gap and showing as the winner on more polls than he did just after the ACA ruling).

If they "define" him and yet the momentum continues to remain in his favor once the "correction" comes it will have a still larger effect. Also, with regard to the "vulture capitalism" if they let them to go all in on that one it will be fun to watch as they draw out first Obama's record (giving money to Swiss Companies, failing Solar companies, etc.) on his "crony capitalism" with the Stimulus as well as driving the point that his National Co-Chair made his money by doing exactly what Romney did. By holding for the right timing they can have better effect.

Basically, by waiting to see how the "defining" affects the campaign first they can better create a more effective answer to it in the future.
Click to expand...
Good post. but it's risking what JAROD said, being defined early.
We're talking about the independent vote though, and they are notoriously fickle, constantly shifting, so maybe that's what Romney is looking for.
( the base is already locking in on both sides)

But he is risking being defined as "rich/out of touch", and that could stick without a response like "swiftboating" did to Kerry when he ignored it.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
All Romney has to do is rerun Obama's campaign promises, from 2008, just prior to making a comment about them.

The "Hope and Change" one alone shoiuld be funnier then all get out.
Click to expand...

The time for that is last week and this week, before the Olympics. After the Olympics Mitt will have a second oppertunity, but you never get a second chance at a first impression.
 
annata said:
Good post. but it's risking what JAROD said, being defined early.
We're talking about the independent vote though, and they are notoriously fickle, constantly shifting, so maybe that's what Romney is looking for.
( the base is already locking in on both sides)

But he is risking being defined as "rich/out of touch", and that could stick without a response like "swiftboating" did to Kerry when he ignored it.
Click to expand...

Maybe I am wrong, but it looks to me like this is exactly correct, Mitt seems to be making the Kerry Swiftboard mistake.
 
Jarod said:
Its very funny that the same people who demanded the Presidents certified long form birth certificate and now want all of his grades from College dont care to see the last five years of Mitts tax returns.
Click to expand...

That could just as easily work in the inverse as well no?
 
j-mac said:
Bijou, Think Progress? Really? Shouldn't we know the context of what, and who he was addressing there? That is a really disingenuous clip...
Click to expand...

it was at the NAACP convention.....certainly bad news....the GOP was counting on 85% of the votes of NAACP members......now that may not happen.....
 
j-mac said:
Bijou, Think Progress? Really? Shouldn't we know the context of what, and who he was addressing there? That is a really disingenuous clip...
Click to expand...

No it isn't disingenuous. He was addressing an NAACP crowd.

And you are as entitled to despise ThinkProgress as I am entitled to revile Breitbart, but unless you refute the content, it's nothing but your opinion and has no bearing on the credibility of the piece.
 
Bijou said:
No it isn't disingenuous. He was addressing an NAACP crowd.

And you are as entitled to despise ThinkProgress as I am entitled to revile Breitbart, but unless you refute the content, it's nothing but your opinion and has no bearing on the credibility of the piece.
Click to expand...

There wasn't enough of it there in that clip to make any determination on anything other than the NAACP is in favor of Obamacare...Wow, now there is a revelation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top