Romney moves to the center - NBCNews.com [ournewsa.blogspot.com]
>>> mitt romney 's step back from some core conservative values has been stumping some on the trail because it has worked in his favor. joining me now, msnbc's senior political analyst mark halperin and " usa today " washington bureau chief susan page and columnist for "the washington post " uveen robinson. welcome all. first to mark halperin , the move to the center there's no complaint from conservatives, is it, so eager to defeat president obama they say anything that works is okay with them?
>> well, romney has had as you know a troubled relationship with certain elements of the right, even after he picked paul ryan there was a brief honeymoon period there, people held their tongue for a while but the criticism started again. i think certainly the conventional wisdom amongst the chattering class now the debate performance will quiet critics on the right and get away with saying things moving to the center. the two things, one, it's being overstated how much he's changing positions or even rhetoric from some of the things he's previously said for good or ill but i don't see the cosmic switch to the center as much as others do and the other thing, if he has a bad debate in two weeks i'm not sure the right will be silenced through election day . he has a tentative hold there just as he does on the new romney theme that is helping him right now.
>> on one thing he certainly has changed and that's the 47%, susan page .
>> amazing. maybe this is why president obama didn't raise it at the debate, because they -- i don't know this, possibly he would clearly have some kind of a response. you would give it the greatest possible play by asking about it in the debate and so they avoided doing that. do you think that's true.
>> i really don't. i can't figure it out. i mean what -- i was told they were so concerned that he not appear angry and mean and that he didn't want to be too aggressive, so sort of playing this prevent defense deal, and that they were doing enough damage to mitt romney eugene on 47% in their paid advertisements.
>> however does playing prevent defense work.
>> never.
>> it doesn't ever work. you should play your regular defense and go after the quarterback. and that's what the president didn't do. i think that was a flawed strategy if that was a strategy, which we've also heard. and two, you got to question the preparation. i mean, because just seemed to be moment after moment, where romney left an opening that obama never went for. contradiction, you know, directly contradicting something he said earlier. never went for it.
>> and mark halperin , what congresswoman deget said yesterday when i was interviewing her in colorado, why did he not bring up the women's issues. tell me that.
>> i mean, i think there's a range of things where the president's campaign surrogates and advertising and messaging and sometimes the president himself certainly the vice president have been strong where the president just didn't go there in the debate. i can't explain that except it seems like both david axelrod on the record and based on my conversations and the president's performance, it seemed like he just wanted to take what was presented whatever topic either jim herrer or governor romney brought up that's where the president was going to play defense and push back. he did not try to turn anything. i can't really explain why he didn't but it certainly didn't serve him well. there's a reason they've driven women's issue and the 47% and done it feb tifkly, why he thought the debate wasn't the place to drive those, i do not know.
>> david brooks column in "the new york times" says that on wednesday night romney finally emerged from the fog, broke with the stereotypes of his party and long last began the process of offering a more authentic version of himself. susan?
>> 34 days before the election. talk about waiting until the last minute to do so. you know, one of the things he did, mark made the point that maybe the move to the center wasn't quite as stark as some people are portraying it. wasn't this the tonal change we thought we would see last spring when he clenched --
>> where was the pivot.
>> we kept waiting for which did not come until the first debate and now, of course, time very late, maybe he can build on this momentum. i know that they hope he can.
>> andrea --
>> yes, go ahead, mark.
>> i agree there's tonal shift. i'm saying the issue positions i don't think are changed starkly and keep in mind what did he do yesterday besides rally in virginia? went to a cpac meeting in colorado, got the nra endorsement and interview with sean hannity in fox. if there's a pivot to the center as not unidirectional.
>> also on fox that he said that he was completely wrong about the 47%, so he has taken that opportunity to now not only say it was ineloquent and didn't phrase it right but didn't mean any of it.
>> i have to assume he was prepared to do that at the debate and so i actually kind of --
>> question that was not asked.
>> maybe they wanted to stay away from that and not give him the opportunity before 67 million people to take it back. let him take it back in a smaller audience. i thought -- i actually thought the most important thing for romney was the -- was the humor and the fact that he didn't come across as being mean and --
>> or robotic.
>> or robotic, right. well, now, maybe slightly robotic, but not -- but not the certain anger and edge that he's gotten in --
>> like with the rick perry debates.
>> exactly. other debates. that has helped the obama administration and the obama campaign define him and i think he pushed back against that with the humor.
>> let me look forward and ask you, mark halperin , what do you anticipate coming up now? next week we've got the two vice presidents -- the vice president and his challenger paul ryan there and how about the town hall format for barack obama ? the conventional wisdom has been because everybody has bill clinton in their mind that the democrat, president obama , will do better in the town hall relating and empathizing and showing he connects to people. i'm not so sure about this president.
>> well, i'm not so sure, although both of them will be -- i think the strongest mitt romney has been in my experience as a presidential candidate on the debate the other night was the events he did in both cycles last campaign in 2008 and this one, his so-called ask mitt anything events where he did take questions from people. he showed humor and the kind of fluidness and personality that he showed in the depate ba in those events and people that think this format clearly favors the president i don't think are right.
>> but you know, one advantage that mitt romney won't have, barack obama will not be unprepared for the second debate the way he was for the first one. he's a competitive guy, we know he wants to win this election, he's smart. i have to believe he is going to focus and prepare in a way he did not the first time around.
>> and frankly a low bar for the president next time because he just has to be aggressive, right? that's what he wasn't in this debate. i think he can easily meet or exceed expectations just by, you know, i don't know, five-hour energy or something before he goes out there.
>> thank you very much. it's great to see you, eugene, susan, mark halperin , thank you,
Suggest Romney moves to the center - NBCNews.com Articles Question by It's Your World, Change It: Where/ When Do Republicans Want to Take Our Country "Back" To? Where/ When Do Republicans Want to Take Our Country "Back" To? To the failed policies of George W. Bush? to the failed presidency of his father? to the smoke and mirror days of Reagan? to the incoherent days of Ford? to the law-breaking days of Nixon? To the days of Eisenhower when they didn't have to worry about political correctness? Or maybe back to Hoover when there were Hoover-villes, no Social Security and the elderly died in the streets? Best answer for Where/ When Do Republicans Want to Take Our Country "Back" To?:
Answer by Slightly Dark Francis
The 1950s seems to be the point. McCarthy.
Answer by vote_usa_first
Budget levels should go back to those of around 1990. However, republicans (who are mainly neocons), dont support a smaller budget. They only support small government rhetoric. Both parties are happy where government is right now - more powerful and expensive than ever before. I think 'take the country back' refers to just getting the neocon right to overpower the neocon left in the whitehouse so they can yell "Yayyyyy, my team won!".
Answer by Dave87gn
they want their country back...the one where there's a white guy in the WH Plain and simple racism
Answer by Mike S
Eisenhower sounds good but I think a bit further back somewhere between TR and FDR. Oh...no a rupublican. You have a good day now
Answer by electricpole
How about when it was important to a person to make his own way, and ashamed to accept social "relief" unless he was about to starve. I do like the Ike days, PC is total suppression of Free Speech.
Answer by ieatlunch
They just say because they love the one liners. They really have no idea. Kind of like in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure when the dumb jock was messing up his history speech, but at the end yelled about how the footbal team ruled, and everyone still cheered. Same thing.
Answer by MissKnowitALL
A star for you. Good question.
Answer by katmandu_85219
Fiscal responsibility. To the days of abundant jobs and low taxes. Life from the Reagan yrs through the first of the Bush Jr years. I don't care about the political squabbling, but I want jobs and low taxes. I doubt you were around during the Nixon through Reagan yrs. Things were pretty good under Nixon economy wise, Carter really really sucked though. Reagan got things moving again and things under Bush and Clinton was great, although Clinton's NAFTA caused an unemployment problem in industrial sectors. Bush was good until the recession a few years back. I don't care that Ford was clumsy, NIxon was crooked or any such bull. I care about the economy.
Answer by Nightwind
Ah, but what led you to these stupid and wrong ASSumptions ? During the Bush years we were doing ok economically until the Democrats took over Congress. Reagan got us out of a Depression that Carter started without inflation destroying the country. Nixon was the one that Tried expandin g healthcare like Obama did (except he did it the legal way) Just see the similarities yourself. http://healthcare-economist.com/2009/09/14/obama-v-nixon/ Seems you like to open your mouth wide and whine, but you make too many assumptions based on liberal media. Like your Democrat presidents did any better. Why did FDR stupidly think he could spend us out of the great depression but it lasted for nearly 20 years ? and the stock market didn't recover for nearly 2 decades. Anyone recall the failure of the "New Deal" and "the great society" ? How about that foolish "war on poverty" which has cost us near $ 10 Trillion since inception but haven' t changed any demographics ? If your too simple minded to know what "take back our government" means, perhaps you should stop whining on YA political section. How about Washington representing the people again ? How about politicians not passing legislation they haven't read ? Or against the will of the people ? How about a President that is actually qualified to run something and doesn't rob the Treasury for his own agenda and go on vacations or golf while the nation is in the hurt locker economically. Get a clue dude. Just because you left wingers have no clue about history , it doesn't give you the right to take your ignornace to the internet and talk S**T.
Answer by Facts Enrage Dembots
Not to a person, nor an administration... Back to something much greater... To here... http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html Here... http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html and http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html Without forgetting WHY... http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html Even if it needs explained, from time to time... http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fedpapers.html
Answer by watcher of fools
back to Jefferson,when he was screwing his slave ,Sally and hoping slavery would go on for ever
Answer by Osama Bin laden
Back to the future!
Gaming with the Kwings - Donkey Kong Country Returns part 17This is part 17 of our DKC Returns guide. Stages featured in this Episode, are Clifftop Climb, & Thugly's Highrise! Playlist -www.youtube.com Retro Hitz - itunes.apple.com Add us - www.facebook.com twitter.com www.youtube.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment