Getty Images
For those of us who've marveled for months at Mitt Romney's reluctance to take firm positions on major issues, it's heartening to see so many others start to notice the same problem.
Politico reported this week, "Vague, general or downright evasive policy prescriptions on some of the most important issues facing the country are becoming the rule for Romney." MSNBC's own Joe Scarborough told viewers this week the Romney campaign's "goal is to not let people know what he believes on one issue after another." Chris Cillizza noted yesterday that Romney "continues to decline to outline specific policies or take firm positions," adding, "How sustainable is this?"
Today, the Boston Globe's Scot Lehigh highlighted the same problem.
When Mitt Romney ran for governor in 2002, he campaigned like the management consultant he had once been, digging deep into issues and proposing thoughtful plans based on his analysis of the facts. It was a winning performance.
A decade later, however, it's as if an anti-matter Mitt is running for president. This Romney takes regular refuge in vague answers and foggy formulations. And not just on caught-by-surprise matters such as President Obama's new policy not to deport certain young illegal immigrants.
Rather, the vagueness extends to the heart of the Republican candidate's core proposals.
There's a running list of issues Romney is afraid to take a firm position on, and it keeps getting longer.
The next question, of course, is why Romney does this.
The candidate has already admitted that if he talks in detail about what he'd do if elected, voters might not like it, so he prefers to keep the specifics under wraps. The GOP nominee, in other words, is taking the coward's way out.
But Jonathan Bernstein goes a step further, citing Romney's "fear of conservatives" and similarities to Bush as driving factors.
[W]hile most voters may think of Bush as a typical conservative Republican, many Tea Partiers and other conservative activists see Bush as one step (if that) removed from the dreaded RINO label. And so for Romney, who still must worry about keeping activists happy, there's no way to square the circle. If Bush was dangerously moderate, then deviating even a bit to the center would put Romney in dangerous territory for activists. But of course a move to the right to separate himself from Bush, and Romney would be courting a reputation for extremism that could be trouble for him with swing voters.
Whatever the motivation, the larger truth is that there's an element of fear that permeates Romney's entire campaign -- he's afraid take firm position on issues; he's afraid to offend conservatives; he's afraid to pushback against extremist rhetoric; he's afraid of the religious right; he's afraid of Rush Limbaugh; he's afraid to release his tax returns; he's afraid to disclose his bundlers; and in general, he's afraid to lead.
Postscript: I'd be remiss if I neglected to mention Romney's ironic campaign rhetoric: "Unlike President Obama, you don't have to wait until after the election to find out what I believe in -- or what my plans are." The exact opposite is true.
Leave a Comment:
Of course, the Republican base by and large eats this crap up. They like to believe that "you" (whoever "you" are because "you" are not one of "them" certainly) are not worthy of knowing things about Romney like what his positions are. To a Republican, a thing that pisses off a liberal or the media (one and the same, don't cha know), is by default A Thing Worth Doing, so good for Romney for not letting his campaign be pigeonholed by the enemy.
On the flip side, it also allows Republicans to live under the delusion that What they Don't Know Won't Hurt Them, as Romney's policies would by and large hurt anyone not already wealthy. But he's not Obama and that's good enough for them.
Say Slappy why haven't they given you a spot on one of those TEEVEE talk shows . You seem to have broken the code . You nailed it in two paragraphs.
Unfortunately your insight is reality based therefore would have no place in TEEVEE land .
We;re trying to generate a horse race here for Pete's sake
He truly is the "hollow man." Mitt Romney is merely repeating the long line of lies and exaggerations that have become the trademark of the Republican Party and the conservative agenda. There is no accountability from the GOP for the very real consequences of their own actions on the fiscal health of our country. Romney is gutless and refuses to take a stand against his own party for reckless policies that have driven up our debt and weakened America. Romney is another worthless conservative partisan who will change nothing from the unsustainable status quo. http://www.sunstateactivist.org
That he does not reveal his policy idea makes it seem that he either: has none and is waiting for commands from someone else, or that he is a coward and knows what he has will anger people. His staff seems unable to convince him that they know what they're doing if the second option is true.
Or, he will consult with the public/Congress before doing anything drastic. It doesn't matter though, anybody but Obama will do fine.
Anybody but Obama will do just fine.
Wow. Disgusting.
Yes, anybody but the man who fixed the grand crime perpetrated upon the US by a feckless GOP despite the resistance of those who thrive on the suffering of the middle class. Anyone but someone who acts in the interest of America rather than kowtowing to moneyed interests both here and abroad. Anyone but someone with stances, beliefs, and ideas that he acts from. No, what we need is an empty head and a signing hand... if you hate America, that is.
Yes slappy I agree,Romney say's a little bit about everything but not much about anything.
cut him some slack. after all, he's dealing with the present day republican party. or, to put it another way--how would you approach hannibal lector?
Like all bullies, Romney is basically a coward. If the Obama campaign has the sense to keep pointing out his inability to take a position, and then starts coupling that with pointing out his lies and putting up the facts, perhaps it will get through that what we have is a candidate willing to say or do anything to be President, making him the most dangerous candidate (for both his opponents and supporters) to ever run for the office. This is what makes him so much like a certain failed paper-hanger who ran in an obscure election 79 years ago in an otherwise-unmentionable central European country.
Maybe his views are "evolving"?
What views?
Maybe robme is a "sniveling coward?"
You have to have consistent views before they can evolve.
Yea, the republicans have a real winner with this one, 'The Gutless Wander.' Good luck, with that one...
It could be that he has taken note of Obama's success in the last campaign; a campaign marked by vast generalities and one word slogans like "Hope". He should know, however, that Barack Obama wasn't hiding his agenda. Obama had no idea what he was going to do as President or how he was going to do it. He still doesn't. We are witnessing, and living with, the results right now.
No, the President outlined his agenda rather clearly. What he didn't do was tell us all that he would over compromise to appease the other side. And what they didn't do was tell him that they were going to reject every compromise he gave them, even if it was their own. THAT is what got us into the quandary we are in now. We are living with the result of them believing that compromise is wrong.
The president isn't congress and they have just as much power, if not more in how the country is run. They always have. Not making this congress accountable for how they have stalled the recovery just to make a president look bad is astounding.
@Bob Spratt - that's a post worthy of Mitt the Mendacious - a completely alternate reality spoken as though it's the God's honest truth. For those who still have ties to this universe, check out this Washington Post piece with 2008-candidate Barack Obama giving very specific answers on the issues:
Barack Obama on the Issues:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/issues/candidates/barack-obama/
Bob, you seem to be lost. The fox news site is that way >>>>>>>>
Not only is Bob lost. He's wrong. But I repeat myself. Nobody knew the extent of the damage Republicans had done at the time Obama was running for President. That wasn't known until May 2011. There was nothing wrong with a message of "hope" when the entire world was crumbling all around. Obama was handed a shhitpile by the Republicans to fix. Then they plotted out how to obstruct and stand in the way in every way they could to solutions to their mess.
Hope was never a slogan. Hope is something people try to have when they are doing everything they are supposed to be doing , in the hopes that others will do the same. Hope is being patient and waiting for the rest of the human race to catch up with them .Hope is understanding what is needed in order to have World Peace and hoping others will also see. I hope you can understand that.
Not Willard Romney; Coward R-money.
This vague secretive campaign worked in 2010 for the Tea Party for the most part. For the Romney campaign it is about the money not the substance.
Mr Romney doesn't have to say anything about anything. Voter suppression and Citizens United will take care of the "election" for him.
Only if we let them get away with it.
Maybe it's past time we liberals woke up and realized that being civil does not work anymore. Sure-VOTE, but start screaming back. Flood the internet with truth, flood your local and federal reps with phone calls and email.
Silence may be golden but it is fools gold compared to the arrogance on the right.
Here's what's irking me.
Romney has taken positions. Lots of them. Very firm, quite specific positions on almost every issue of importance. Happened just a few months ago, during those things the MSM has already consigned to its self-induced amnesia called "primaries." And, in every case, the positions he took were extreme, hard-right positions. He did that because his party had become a radicalized extremist movement that no longer recognizes the right of anyone but them to rule, regardless of electoral outcomes and he lacks the moral authority, innate courage, or personal charisma necessary to lead them out of the fever swamp.
In Rationalworld, when someone says "I hate, hate, hate green eggs and ham" on Monday and then, on Friday, obdurately, conspicuously refuses to tell you whether they have a position on the desirability of green eggs and ham, sensible people assume you must still hate them and just won't say so because you don't want to offend green egg and ham lovers.
In MSM Beltway Asshatland, however, no position a Republican took more than a week ago exists. Poof. Gone. So if he won't say whether he likes green eggs and ham, they'll base their judgment on his "tone," which, apparently, means the tone of voice he uses when he spends seven minutes obdurately refusing to take a position.
So what you're saying is that the famous "Etch-A-Sketch" comment wasn't a plan, it was a prediction based on observing the media?
So sorry to inconvenience Mr. Romney, Steve, but he is running for president so he should expect to answer many questions, sometimes more than once. Very annoying, I know, but there it is.
Plus, you can't just default back to the last position he took because, given his history, that position has probably changed.
Romney is hoping that he can skate through the election without saying what he wants to do. And despite the grumbling within and out of the Republican party, he will not say anything of substance to avoid losing votes. But this will fail as a strategy when he is forced to debate Obama. If he spews talking points he will lose the undecided and independent voters. His failure to make decisive statements will also cost him votes within his own party due to apathy and disappointment. If he is forced to disclose his plans in detail, he will lose votes. Romney is betting on regular Republicans, the voters who hate Obama to show up to the polls and the undecided voters to vote for a "change" because of the economy.
The say nothing strategy will work until he gets the nomination. After that he will rely on ambiguous policy statements and an overwhelming amount of negative ads to carry him through the election. Scott Walker won because of the enormous amount of ads he was able to run. However, the Dems can tie Romney to the Ryan budget because Romney has endorsed it. That budget should be the main campaign point for the Dems because of the number of people that would be affected by that budget proposal. Every Dem in the country should be whipping their opponents with Ryan's budget and make it toxic, like Obamacare, even if Republicans win. That budget should be the main message of the Dem party. You don't need to make complex or nuanced arguments about the Ryan budget.
I've been thinking a lot about the Wisconsin recall election lately and although I think the overwhelming financial support Walker got helped, I don't think it was everything. The election was essentially a "do-over" of the previous general election for governor. In the original, the voters chose Walker and in the recall did also by a similar margin. Tom Barrett has his own baggage and there may even have been some voters who didn't like the concept of the recall, since it nullifies an election that was apparently clean. Elections are won by small margins these days and although I'm personally against the monied interests taking over our democracy (like the Koch Bros), other voters obviously see things differently.
As for the Ryan budget, the Rmoney campaign may not be able to run away from it, since they are seriously considering putting Ryan on the ticket as VP. That alone Will put the Ryan Budget front and center.
I doubt Romney will put Ryan on the ticket because he would be a millstone with various groups of voters. The AARP has already put out ads about SS and Medicare. Putting Ryan on the ticket would bring out ads from a lot of groups and the Republicans would be on the defensive. Romney is going to run away from the Ryan budget along with the rest of the Republicans and that is why the Dems need to make it the main issue of the campaign. That budget is a blueprint for how Republicans want to govern and there are more than enough blocks of voters who will be hurt by that budget.
Throughout much of the GOP Pres. Primary, the unknown Republican was the leading contender, and Romney seems intent on keeping it that way. It seems clear at this point he's just a Norquist and Chamber of Commerce and Wall Street mannequin.
"The next question, of course, is why Romney does this."
He does this because he can, because that corporate owned librul media has been giving him a pass on not answering anything! Unlike then Presidential hopeful Sen. Obama, who was forced to answer all questions with specifics - even down to answering for Rev. Wright! That the lame-stream media is finally starting to wake up and speak to this issue says WE should have asked these question months ago!
This is easy. All this shows is that Republicans KNOW their policies have been failures. But they've got a problem: their propaganda machine has embedded really, really buggy software in their Useful Idiots. So they can't change what they're saying or the cat is out of the bag about their 30+ years failed ideas that caused the mess the world is in.
So they keep on lying. If they don't, they'll be extincted. That goes to the failure of their agenda. That goes to their integrity and character. And why the media and Democrats keep allowing it is way beyond me.
Good pointing, Dis. Maybe the Republicans know their policies are a success for their coterie constituency and failure for others is not their concern. Dems allow because they cower to successful bullying ever since Reagan's popularity made the Dems of that day fearful. Since then, more dems have voted republican on legislation than vice-versa, making Reps the most effective minority (they more freely filibuster than any party before) to a feckless, leaderless majority Dems. The media is stuck on their own cycle of common news never really demanding answers from guests before on to the next agenda item to get to the commercial that pays everybody. To me, their context is politics, not substance.
Romney is determined to be anything and everything to everybody. He has a different position depending who he is speaking to. Of course, when confronted with his contradictory statements and asked what is his real position he has to refuse to answer. They are ALL his positions, he has a special one for any group anywhere.
He's evasive about everything, I wish the guy would "nuts up" and just say what he wants (not Grover) to do.
His only decision everyday must be who he needs to pander to.
In the meantime, please Mr Benen, find out what's on Romney's lapel pin.
Some say it's a gold "Republican" elephant.
I say it's in violation of the United States Flag Code (and probably made in China)
Can you confirm?
I know some say it is a GOP elephant, but I say it looks more like an Etch-A-Sketch. Don't cha think? Yeah, that's what it looks like from here.
He's vague because it's not his Presidency. He's just the figurehead. Koch Bros, Norquist, & Rove will tell him what to say and do once he is anointed Stupid Leader of the Free World. Basically, Mitt represents what happens when an empty suit is put forth as a being of substance. Perhaps he should run as Mitt Romney Bain - then he'd be a person too
MittPuppet doesn't state his positions as it has not yet been decided which hand will be up his you-know-what making his lips move.
Romney CAN be suspected of hiding his true agenda; and why not? Since his only expertise is in looting businesses, we can suspect he has his eye on the US Treasury (as Ken Lay did). Since he is a Bishop of the Mormon Church, we can suspect that he has his eye to fulfilling its prophecy by becoming its 'white knight' (the one who as president would inaugurate mass conversions). Since he has surrounded himself with neo-cons and Bushies, we can suspect that he will venture into newer and ever more costly wars...
Mum's the word.
Romney is afraid to say anything. He needs to move away from the absurd far-right positions on women's reproductive rights and immigration reform. But he's afraid of upsetting the base. The man is in a pickle and he really doesn't know how to deal with it. From where I'm standing, his predicament is fun to watch.
Mitt is vague about specifics on virtually every issue because there are no specifics. He'll continually flip-flop on his policy positions because he is a habitual panderer desperately seeking validation from the voters. He makes crap up because he cannot be bothered with doing his homework so that his comments are drawn from verifiable facts and reflect reality.
I would suggest that Romney lacks the courage of his convictions, but Mitt doesn't appear to have any convictions.
Most folks would regard these traits as weaknesses, but Mitt probably regards them as character attributes. Bottom line, if he believes that it will help him to get elected, it's all good.
The article missed another possibility for why Romney avoids taking stands on the issues. Remember that he spent all his time sucking the life blood out of different companies? Living in that bubble doesn't lend itself to understanding issues not directly related to extracting money. What it does suggest, however, is that he knows just enough about other issues to realize that he is essentially clueless and is likely to say something incredibly stupid if he says anything at all definite about them. Therefore he answers everything with broad generalities that mean nothing.