comMITTed to Romney!

All of a sudden the wire services have real news about Mitt Romney again. It’s starting to remind me of the lead up to the primary season. Not that active yet, but Mitt’s working on it.

~~John Cronin~~

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080807/ap_on_sp_ol/oly_romney_cheek_visa_1

BOSTON - Mitt Romney has asked Chinese officials to restore the visa of Olympic speedskater Joey Cheek so he can attend the Beijing Games.

Cheek’s visa was pulled Wednesday, hours before he was to leave for Beijing.

Cheek, a gold medalist in the 2006 Winter Games, wasn’t going to China to compete, but to support 70 athletes trying to call attention to the genocide in Darfur. The athletes are hoping to convince governments such as China’s to exert pressure on the Sudanese leadership.

Romney, a former Republican presidential contender and 2002 Winter Olympics chief, dictated a letter to his staff Thursday during a layover on his own trip to China.

He’s asking Chinese President Hu Jintou and Premier Wen Jiabao to restore the visa in consideration of his support for Beijing’s Olympics bid and the “numerous courtesies” he says he extended Chinese officials in Salt Lake City

Share on Facebook

Share This

Mitt Romney’s turnaround of the Winter Olympics in 2002 that were held a few months after the 911 attacks is one of his biggest successes in a lifetime of achievement. Mitt’s presence at the Summer Olympics can only remind Americans of his skills at organizing a large group of people in a common endeavor. It will be very interesting to see what effect all this has on the VP selection process.

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.politickerma.com/jeremyjacobs/591/
could-olympics-boost-romney-s-vp-chances

As voters turn their attention away from the presidential race and towards Beijing for this year’s Olympics, former Republican Gov. Mitt Romney could stand to benefit the most from the games politically.

Romney, who was the president and CEO of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah, will be visiting the Olympics this year. He will be leaving on Thursday and, according to his spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom, plans to attend the games only as a spectator.

With vice presidential speculation in full swing, however, any appearances by Romney during the Olympic broadcasts could raise his profile to the Olympics’ wide national audience, said Michael Shea, a Boston Democratic political strategist.

Share on Facebook

Share This

With the 2008 Summer Olympics upcoming in Beijing soon, I figured it would be neat to dig into the archives of the site and show you Gov. Romney’s Opening and Closing Remarks at the 2002 Salt Lake Winter Olympics.

Mitt Romney’s Opening and Closing Remarks At The Salt Lake Winter Olympics in 2002.

Share on Facebook

Share This

I can’t believe I never put these up before, but tonight as I was blogging for another blog and searching for Sarah Hughes’ Gold Medal Performance I found Mitt Romney’s remarks, so I figured better late than never time to get them up here. And without further adieu, here they are.

Salt Lake City 2002 OC - Mitt Romney’s Opening Speech

Salt Lake City 2002 CC - Mitt Romney’s Closing Speech

I so miss following this man…:(

Share on Facebook

Share This

By: Herman Cain
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Sunday, Feb 03, 2008

“The dynamics of political party connections, the political process itself and public perceptions have once again yielded the top two contenders of each major party in the 2008 presidential race. And once again, the public can only hope that the ultimate winner of the White House will be a candidate with the most leadership substance.

“My vote is for Mitt Romney.”

…

“Our success will not be based on pandering to uninformed voters, promising emotional quick fixes over common sense or nitpicking of opponents’ past records. Success will come from focusing on the right problems and solving them. That will mean making tough decisions about some problems that have been with us for decades. It will also mean taking a tough stand on new problems and challenges.

“That’s what leaders do.

“Mitt Romney has done that as a chief executive officer in business, as a governor and as head of the U.S. Olympics. He has done so while balancing political consequences but not compromising fundamental principles of the founding of this country or free-market economics. We have prospered as a nation by strengthening those principles; we will not remain strong if we allow those principles to become diluted with a lack of leadership.”

…

“He has successfully managed a real business with other people’s money and some of his own. He has balanced budgets. He successfully led a turnaround situation with the Olympics. And he has spent more of his career outside government than inside.

“On the other hand, John McCain has spent more of his career inside government than outside, and the reasons not to vote for him as the Republican nominee are very compelling.”

…

“Mitt Romney’s history is more indicative of the substance needed to make major progress on critical issues, and not just to make more politically palatable incremental changes in Washington.” …

View Entire Article

Share on Facebook

Share This

Thank you to reader Sadie for reminding me of this incredible video clip.

Some of you have seen this incredible video clip — we posted it a couple of months ago. I apologize now if you have seen it.

So why am I placing it here again? Because there are many voters in Florida that are holding their noses right now about to vote for John McCain. And we have many new readers coming to this site for the first time, every day now. Most of them have never seen this.

As you watch John McCain’s powerful endorsement of Mitt Romney, listen to his words carefully. How many times does he use words like integrity, honesty, etc. as he describes Mitt Romney?
.
.

.
.
Many of you have heard that Mitt Romney rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics as its number one volunteer. But many don’t have time to read the book on the subject, TURNAROUND. Most have no idea what happened and how extraordinary Mitt Romney’s leadership was for the Olympics as a whole.

Click here for a concise description and links to learn about the details and why his leadership was so critical ——–> WHAT ARE THE TRUE DETAILS BEHIND ROMNEY’S OLYMPIC LEADERSHIP?

~ Vic

Share on Facebook

Share This

Thanks to John Cronin for the current delegate count, which Mitt leads. But let’s also try this with an Olympics theme. USA! USA!

Current medal count on the GOP 2008 Winter Games, in order:

Mitt: 1 gold (WY), 2 silvers (IA, NH)
Huck: 1 gold (IA), 1 bronze (NH)
McCain: 1 gold (NH)

Mitt also leads the popular vote counting only IA and NH (couldn’t find the info for WY, which should add significantly to his lead). While McCain’s win is impressive for his comeback from the dead, he’ll start getting real scrutiny once the charm wears off. I find it hard to anoint him the GOP nominee just yet with just one win under his belt, particularly with the name recognition in NH and having carried it decisively in 2000. I believe his margin of victory tonight was by less than he beat GW back then.

USA! USA!

Lessons Learned?

If I had to cite lessons learned, I’d focus on the last few days in NH where I think Mitt was making a rebound before time ran out. Here is my sense as a true lay observer:

1. The debates helped. Why? Piling on didn’t look good for John, even though he came out the victor tonight. And in the 2d debate the press was uniformly positive, I think because Mitt stayed on his message. People seem to want to connect with him, and he succeeded in that 2d debate.

2. Mitt seemed to “find his voice” (to use his term). Again he started connecting with people. Mitt just seems too good to be true to some. It seems the best way to combat that is to let them get to know you personally; put yourself out there and stir real emotion (remaining presidential, of course).

3. As Mitt stayed on message about change and fixing Washington, people seemed to see someone they could vote for, instead of someone they’re less likely to vote against.

4. The main stream media is mostly just looking for a story. That may not sound like a revelation, but I personally don’t think the press is always biased (okay, Jonathan Martin at the Politico seems to be). The focus just goes to the “story”: Obama’s charisma, John McCain’s resurrection, Hillary’s tears; etc. Mitt needs to find a positive story (perhaps a decisive win in Michigan!) for them to report on. Comebacks seem to attract attention (McCain has had one, Huckabee has had one, Obama has had one, Clinton has had one–now it’s our turn).

Bottom line from the above: I think Mitt’s got a great, positive message he can continue to deliver and I’d encourage him to get out there and deliver it passionately, like we know he can. There’s a reason the National Review chose him: his positions on all the issues, which I know he believes in. And we shouldn’t necessarily look for any breaks from the media, nor take it too personally if they’re negative. It’s kind of like the refs in a sports contest: you can’t complain about them, you just have to play through it and give them something good to talk about.

The Independent Factor

The thought was Independents would pile on for Obama, but perhaps they went to McCain instead, thinking Obama had it in the bag. Here’s a quote from CNN tonight:

exit polls showed 37 percent of those who cast a Republican ballot Tuesday identified themselves as independents, and McCain got the votes of 39 percent of them, compared with 27 percent for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who finished second Tuesday. Romney and McCain were almost even among those who identified themselves as Republicans, with 33 and 34 percent, respectively”

While it’s clear McCain got more of them, I wonder where the rest went (only 66% of Independents voting Republican are accounted for above). In any event one final takeaway from this is not to get too cocky about Obama’s ability to draw Independents, or to even beat Hillary. Some good news in that is that the Democratic race may be as lengthy as the GOP race. Some had said a long fight in the GOP after the Dems had already anointed their candidate would favor the Democrats. Even more good news–Republican turnout was quite high in NH as well, meaning the GOP is paying attention, as we all know they should. And to repeat, with all the record turnout, MITT LEADS THE POPULAR VOTE.

USA! USA!

Share on Facebook

Share This

Taking the Silver in Iowa.

Like Mitt said, it’s not what we’d hoped but it’s still a great finish, and preparation for the ultimate gold. We need to keep things humming along. What can you do? Make sure you make your phone calls for Mitt (if you’re not already a volunteer, contact the campaign to find out how to become one). As I said yesterday, considering where the campaign’s been and where it’s going it’s no time to get concerned about one bump in the road. Here are some facts to keep in perspective:

Wyoming’s caucuses are tomorrow, and both Mitt and McCain have big appearances on the Sunday shows. As “Richard” posted on Politico, Mitt can actually move into first place in the delegate count depending on the showing in Wyoming, and could even retain that lead with as much as a solid 2d place showing in NH.

“Isn’t it interesting people are making fun of Wyoming. That’s like football fans saying they don’t care about field goals. They would just as soon pass them up. Well, Mitt isn’t going to pass anything up. Since not very many people are aware, it takes 1191 Delegates to WIN the republican nomination. So far Huck has 20, Romney 18, McCain and Thompson 3, Paul 2 and Giuliani 1. Wyoming has 14 delegates up for grabs, New Hampshire 14 and Michigan 30. So, because the media looks to promote certain states, it truly is the number of delegates available. By the way, Romney, Thompson and Paul are the only ones that have been to Wyoming so watch them snatch up the delegates….”

I’m not sure these numbers are right but they’re roughly consistent with what I’ve read elsewhere. Mitt being in first place for delegates after NH is more than we could have hoped for a few months ago, and that’s a very achievable goal. We all knew it would be a close race; now we need to pitch in to make it happen! A quick stat: 2 of the 5 brothers were at the Des Moines airport early this morning, and at least one was headed to Wyoming, so Wyoming is clearly going to be feeling the love.

Mitt’s Game of 3D Chess

I happened to find my way into a Q&A Kevin Madden was giving to reporters before Mitt’s appearance at the Sheraton last night. Here are a few shots:

Kevin may have the best tie I’ve seen so far in the campaign, even including Mitt. Try to get a good look.

Kevin told them that Mitt’s playing 3D chess versus his opponents’ checkers, pursuing a multi-front war while his opponents have largely focused on one state. And (using my words) this race is like the Tour de France: winning a particular stage isn’t the important thing, it’s standings at the end. In Lance’s seven tour wins, he won on average fewer than 3 stages per year (20 total stages in 7 wins).

Bring on NH!

McCain is Mitt’s main competition in NH as we all know. Mitt has a new ad, as does McCain. In his, McCain blatantly spins a couple half-quotes from Mitt to make false claims. In one of Mitt’s statements Mitt said foreign policy expertise is easy to find; you can go to the State Department to find someone versed in knowledge, but that expertise (like McCain’s) alone isn’t enough. But the ad twists the statement to say Mitt would rely on the State Department for leadership, which was the exact opposite of what was intended. We need to make sure we call him on this sort of false claim and twisted quotes. So much for John remaining above negative campaiging (as if he’d ever tried).

As a result, now would be a good time to reinforce Mitt’s leadership experience and executive successes (contrasted to McCain’s 20+ years leisurely creating laws after dispatching lackeys to do the research for him). We need to remind people of Mitt’s strengths and that he’s succeeded at nearly everything he’s touched. A few talking points:

1. He had the leadership to turn around the Olympics.

2. He had the leadership to turn around a collection of companies while at Bain, solving problems people before him couldn’t. Sound like a skill we could use in our President today?

3. He had the leadership and determination to keep all the campaign promises he made in Massachusetts, while working with a democratic legislature. By contrast a “maverick” has a hard time getting things done because they don’t tend to play well with others.

4. He had the leadership to organize and motivate volunteers to turn out more voters than expected in Iowa.

5. He showed grace and leadership last night in acknowledging Mike Huckabee’s success, but motivating and convincing the troops we’ll do better in New Hampshire.

6. He has shown the strength of character to think about solutions to problems before he implements them, but then to decisively execute on his plan.

7. He’s the only one that can represent the entire republican party, as the National Review pointed out in their endorsement. In looking at all the candidates, he has the best chance of winning it all, and if you listen carefully he is still the defacto front runner. All guns seem to be pointed at Mitt.

You heard it here first: if we can remind the people of NH what Mitt has accomplished, we will win in NH. People in NH know we need real leadership in Washington. A repackaging of the same old ideas and people just won’t cut it anymore. If there was anything clear in Iowa last night, change and effective leadership are what people are looking for. John McCain is a member of a Congress whose approval rating is abysmal. He has had his chance to be an agent of change as a Washington insider for the last 20+ years. If he hasn’t had shown the leadership yet to solve the problems we have in our society, how will he suddenly start showing leadership now as President? He’s had his chance. We need to tell Washington and Johnny Mac to lead, follow or get out of the way.

Last Thoughts About the Iowa Caucuses

My wife and I drove to a northern suburb of Des Moines last night and attended a caucus of about 130 people. The process, though less complicated than for the dems, was still fascinating. The republican leader (clearly an untrained volunteer from the local community) had an envelope of instructions on how to run the show, and was learning along with everyone else. I felt like I was watching pure democracy, with all its wrinkles. After getting organized, representatives of each campaign were given a chance to speak. When Rudy’s name came up someone shouted “Rudy who?,” generating guffaws. Statements were made on behalf of Huckabee, Fred and Mitt (this last made by yours truly). Votes were cast on yellow ballots made from quartered sheets of 8.5×11″ paper. Ballots were hand-collected and sorted into stacks for each candidate. Votes were then counted and re-counted, then telephoned into GOP headquarters. My wife noted a number of people changing their party affiliations at the door, confirming anecdotally what the national press has observed, that someone out there was driving new voters to turn out, we believe evangelicals.

The Post-Game Party

At the final party Doug Gross, Mitt and Ann re-enthused the crowd.

Here are some pictures:

Now off to bed so I can come back again tomorrow. It’s now after 3 a.m. central time, so I’ve been up about 23 hours straight. Keep it up everybody out there, we all know how much this country needs a man like Mitt Romney (for a reminder see Thomas Alan’s blog on this very site). One last bit of encouragement. Close your eyes and imagine Mitt raising his hand and taking the oath of office in January 2009. Now open those eyes and let’s get it done!

Share on Facebook

Share This

I never properly introduced myself on this site. My name is Rebecca. I am married and have two small children. My current employment is as a wife and mother. I have always liked politics and I have always loved to write. When a friend offered me the chance to blog on this site, it seemed like a good way to get involved without taking too much time from my family.

I first heard the name of Mitt Romney sometime in 2003 or 2004. I was talking with my Dad. The conversation had drifted to abuses of power by government agencies who were not accountable to anyone. He expressed the desire for a strong president that would take power from the bureaucrats and return it to the people, where it belonged. He thought that Governor Romeny could be that man–if only he would run.

Now, I respect my father and I have a high regard for his opinion. That said, he would be the first to tell you that I very seldom rely soley on his advice to make important decisions. I waited to see who was running and then I did a little research. What I found convinced me that Mitt Romney is the best candidate to lead the United States at this time.

In the first place, he is running. Say what you will, it is very difficult–perhaps impossible–to elect a man to office who is not willing to campaign. George Washington is the only man who was ever able to do it.

In the second place, he is running as a Republican and a Conservative. I have no use for the modern Democratic party. I cannot see that they have accomplished anything useful in my lifetime and they are actively advocating the downfall of my country and my species.

Thirdly, Mitt Romney is a good man. There has been a lot of debate over the past couple of decades about the division of public office and private affairs. I do not think there is a division. In a time when we must trust our President with our safety, trust him to make important decisions about life or death, we need someone who is, well, trustworthy. Opponents may like to paint Romney’s squeaky clean personal life as “too perfect” but to me it simply means he has integrity. And I refuse to believe that integrity can go out of fashion.

And then there is Romney’s experience. Romney’s business career consisted of turning around organizations founded on good ideas but with fiscal problems. He was immensley successful at doing this and gained a tremendous amount of trust and respect from his peers. He then used his experience and skills, as well as political saavy and diplomacy, to turn around the 2002 Olympic Games and the budget for the State of Massachusetts. Who better to take the helm of a nation founded on the principle “that all men… are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” but also finds itself in ever increasing financial turmoil?

I was, of course, concerned over the charges of “flip-flopping” on social issues, as well as Romney’s tendency to be rather more liberal on fiscal issues than many true-blue (or should I say true-red?) conservatives would like. As to the former, Romney did switch his position. Once. He has since said he was wrong. His story attests to the fact that Romney is ultimately ruled by his own morality than by any philisophical argument. In response to the latter, I have found that he is overall more conservative than other candidates. I also have great faith in the separation of powers. The President does not have the power to pass laws, Congress must do that. Should the President introduce any bill that is not favored by the people of this nation, it can be efficiently stopped by an appeal to individual legislators from their districts. See the graveyard of amnesty bills killed by grassroots efforts during the current Bush administration.

Romney is also a Mormon. I had no problem with this since I also belong to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Romney does not speak for the LDS Church. Those seeking clarification of Church doctrines should turn to other sources. I recommend www.mormon.org for a comprehensive outline of the tenets of this faith.

I have been in the same room with Governor Romney twice. Both times were at the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library in my home town of College Station, Texas. I never got close enough to shake his hand. Nor did he answer any of my questions. However, there is a feeling of quiet confidence, determination and willingness to work hard that surround this man. His wife was with him on both occassions as were several of his sons. It is impressive to me that his sons take such an active role in his campaign.

Mitt Romney is a man that I feel I can trust. The President of the United States is the leader of his or her party. They are responsible for the security of the nation. It is more important to be able to trust their judgement and morality than to agree with all of their so-called plans or positions. As it happens, in my case, Romney is the candidate whose positions I agree with most often and in whom I have the most confidence. I believe that as you search for information beyond the TV ads and radio spots that you will discover that he is someone to whom you may safely trust the future of our nation.

Share on Facebook

Share This

As we approach the primary voting season, there are more and more new folks finding their way to our humble blog. The information I found on this blog was extremely helpful to me as I assessed the various candidates in search of “the One.” As such, I thought it would be fitting for me to share why I am a staunch supporter of Governor Mitt Romney in his run for the White House.

In a nutshell, Mitt Romney is the only “full-spectrum” Conservative who can rally the support of all three wings of the Reagan coalition, namely, Social, Economic, and Foreign Policy Conservatives.

For a full treatment of Mitt Romney’s positions, I would refer you to his comprehensive policy book “Vision for a Strong America.” Let me summarize here, however, the highlights across the major issues:

• Foreign Policy
o War against Islamic Fascism: We are engaged in a multi-front war which will require using all of our military, economic, and diplomatic might to win; we must defeat the terrorists and those who aid and abet them as well as help the Muslim people enter the 21st century (click here and here)
o Iraq and Afghanistan: The surge is working and we must do what it takes to help Iraq and Afghanistan become stable democratic allies in the war on Islamic Fascism and support our troops (click here and here)
o Iran: Iran must not be allowed to become a nuclear state; diplomacy and economic sanctions are critical, but may not be enough; the military option must remain on the table (click here)
o Military: Need to increase defense spending to a minimum of 4% of GDP to make sure our armed forces have the equipment they need in the field and the support the need back home; the best ally of peace is a strong America (click here and here)

• Economic Policy
o Taxes: We need to keep the Bush tax cuts permanent, eliminate the Death Tax, and cut taxes on capital gains, dividends, and interest to zero for the Middle Class (click here, and here)
o Spending: We need to restrain Federal spending and close the deficit; will veto any budget where non-defense discretionary spending growth exceeds inflation minus 1%; Need to give the President a line-item veto; Strong track record of financial management from Massachusetts where he closed a $3B deficit and turned it into a $1B surplus without raising taxes; carry out a comprehensive review of government spending to increase efficiency and effectiveness (click here and here)
o Entitlements reform: Maintain benefits for current Seniors, but institute fundamental reforms combining slowing the rate of increase for benefits based on income, extending the retirement age, individual retirement accounts, and no tax increases (click here)
o Healthcare: Mitt Romney is the only candidate on either side of the aisle who implemented a universal health care plan; He covered all of the citizens of Massachusetts using market-based insurance without raising taxes; Governor Romney advocates a Federalist state-by-state approach to make health insurance more affordable for everyone (click here)
o Globalization: Continue to trade around the world but make sure we negotiate level playing fields in foreign markets and upgrade American competitiveness through investments in education and innovation (click here and here)

• Culture and Values
o Illegal immigration: Control the border first and turn of the “magnets” that attract illegal immigrants by implementing an employment verification system, no special path for illegal immigrants to become citizens (i.e. no amnesty), no sanctuary cities, increased enforcement by local police agencies (click here, here, and here)
o Traditional marriage: In favor of amending the constitution to keep marriage defined as between a man and a woman; fought the Massachusetts Supreme Court to prevent the state from becoming a destination for same-sex couples looking for marriage licenses (click here and here and here)
o Life: Much has been made of Governor Romney’s switch from being Pro-Abortion to Pro-Life; This is a critical issue for me; I have heard many times why he made this change, and I believe him; I believe that Mitt Romney will fight for the rights of the unborn and be a great leader in supporting Life (click here, here, and here)

The choice of a nominee and President, however, is not strictly a “right-brained” decision based on policy statements and positions. There needs to be something inspirational about a candidate whether it’s the way that they speak to a crowd, interact one on one, or something about their personal story that sets them apart.

Experiencing Mitt through articles and videos really helped seal the deal for me. Below, I have listed some of what I would consider the best of the best articles and videos that helped me come to the decision to support Mitt actively. I’m sure I’m missing some great material, but there is a lot down below. I would encourage you to click through as much of this as you can, and if you have a favorite that wasn’t listed, please leave a link in the comments!

Key videos, speeches, appearances, and articles:
• Articles
o Romney to the Rescue (Newsmax) – Great overview of Mitt Romney
o National Review’s endorsement of Mitt Romney
o The House that Mitt Built (Private Equity International) – Behind the scenes view of how Mitt ran Bain Capital and his leadership style
o The Making of Mitt Romney (Boston Globe) – Reasonably balanced biography of each of the major phases of Mitt’s life starting from his youth through today
o Consultant in Chief (Wall Street Journal) – Interview of Mitt where he talks about how he would fix the Federal Government
o For Romney & Company, Campaign is all Business (NY Times) – How Mitt runs his campaign and what it would mean for his Presidency
o Evangelicals for Mitt statement of support
o Mark DeMoss on why Evangelicals should support Mitt
o Ann Romney Opens Up (People Magazine) – Great interview with Ann; she would be a fantastic First Lady!

• Speeches
o “Faith in America” – Seminal address on the role of religious faith and liberty in our nation
o Address to the Value Voters Summit – Seminal address on culture and value issues
o Iowa Straw Poll victory speech
o Highlights from the Republican debates (click 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th)
o Speech at CPAC 2007 – One of Mitt’s first major addresses to the leading grassroots gathering of Conservatives; one of his best speeches in my opinion
o Presidential Campaign Announcement – Mitt announcing that he’s running and why he’s running

• Campaign videos
o Biographical overview video of Mitt Romney (click part I, II, III, IV, V, VI, and VII)
o “Path to Victory” webcast – Mitt and Meg Whitman (CEO of eBay) discussing the 2007 campaign and discussing the plan for 2008
o Retrospective of Governor Romney’s campaign in 2007
o Online “Ask Mitt Anything” – For those of us who don’t live in an early primary state, Mitt held an online town hall meeting which provides a really good overview of his key positions
o Christmas 2006 – Behind the scenes look at the Romney family and how they made the decision together that Mitt should run for President; cynics have criticized this video as contrived, but I love the fact that he has held his family together while achieving such exceptional success; you can’t fake this stuff

• Media appearances
o Mitt on Jim Cramer of CNBC’s Mad Money – Great interview by Jim Cramer where he calls Mitt the “Best businessman in America”
o Mitt on ABC News talking about Ann – Great interview of Mitt where he discusses what he loves so much about Ann
o Mitt on Meet the Press – Tim Russert throws everything he’s got plus the kitchen sink at Mitt who proceeds to address each point in a clear, classy, and compelling way

• My favorite TV spots
o “Searched” – Compelling true story of how Mitt Romney shut down Bain Capital and moved all the employees to NYC to search for and find the daughter of one of his partners
o “Choice: Judgment” – Striking contrast ad highlighting Mike Huckabee’s 1,033 pardons and clemencies (more than 2x his three predecessors) vs. zero from Mitt Romney
o “Choice: The Record” – Ad contrasting Mitt’s record on illegal immigration vs. Mike Huckabee’s record of supporting tax payer funded scholarships and in-state tuition for illegal immigrants
o “Not Politically Correct” – Mitt’s record supporting life, English immersion education, and traditional marriage
o “Experience Matters” – Ad highlighting the lack of real world, executive experience on the part of Hillary Clinton (and equally applicable to the other Democrats)
o “Ready for Action” – Summary of Governor Romney’s stump speech in 60 seconds; user-generated ad based on a contest that was run back in September
o “Our Home” – Some precious footage of Mitt playing with his children and grandchildren; focuses on the importance of strengthening our families
o “Leadership” and “Energy” – I just love the images of Mitt jogging through the backwoods and the focus on his track record in business; I think he’s the only politician I’ve seen jogging where it looked like he was actually in shape…not just a photo op
o “Ocean” – Ad lamenting the degradation of our culture and Mitt’s thoughts on how he would like to address it; as a parent this one really resonated with me
o “Tested, Proven” – One of his early ads highlighting his track record in Massachusetts
o “I Like Vetoes” – Ad highlights his track record of vetoing excessive spending; no doubt in my mind that he’ll control spending after seeing this ad and other times when he has addressed this topic

Finally, it is one thing to support Mitt with your vote, but I’d like to ask you to consider supporting Mitt in a more active way. Like many of you, I had always followed politics, but never became active in politics (other than voting) until this year in support of Governor Romney.

This year is different. First, this is arguably the most consequential election in over twenty years. The challenges and issues that will be faced by our next President will have far reaching ramifications for our children and grandchildren.

Additionally, we face a set of candidates on the Republican side who represent vastly different positions and perspectives, some of whom threaten to tear asunder the Reagan coalition that has served us so well. Whether it is the socially liberal and sanctuary city defending Rudy Giuliani, the divisive, theocratic, soft on crime and illegal immigration, and fiscally populist Mike Huckabee, or the McCain Feingold, “Gang of 14”, and pro-Amnesty John McCain, there are clear differences in the way that each of these individuals would take the Republican Party.

If you’ve found this persuasive, please do whatever you can to support Mitt Romney’s candidacy. If you’re from Iowa, please caucus for Mitt (get more information here). Winning Iowa is job one between now and January 3.

If you are not from Iowa, please stay informed by checking in here at Elect Romney in 2008 every day. Make a donation to help Mitt win the media air war. Put on a bumper sticker or put up a yard sign (get them here). And most importantly, talk with your friends, family, co-workers, and neighbors about why you’re supporting Mitt Romney! Personal testimonials from trusted individuals are by far the most effective ways to gain more supporters for Mitt!

If you still have questions or remain unconvinced, leave a comment and we’ll do our best to answer your question. Or better yet, if you are also a Mitt supporter, leave a comment telling us why! Thank you for reading!

Share on Facebook

Share This

Many say that we will have a Democrat President in 2009 simply because it is time; that over decades, whenever we have a President of a given party for two terms, the next President is of the other party. The one exception is when America wanted Reagan for a third term and elected GHW Bush. They say that will not happen this time because nobody wants Pres. Bush for a third term. In other words, history will continue the pattern and we will have a Democrat in 2009. I strongly disagree. Why?

What America wants this time in its President is change; big change. The Democrats are proposing change to simply end the war and they want change from anything related to President Bush. Clearly, Americans expect change and they will elect a person who will deliver change; of that, I have no doubt. But who is the best person to set a strategy for change and who is the person to execute against that strategy?

Here I examine the most viable candidates as to their track records as change agents and why they don’t measure up to Governor Romney’s record, talent, skills, and abilities in this regard. The order in which I placed these candidates is the order in which I think they are most likely to effectuate change, whether to the liberal or conservative.

Mitt Romney: If one had to assign a single, generic label to Mitt Romney that would typify his entire career since college, that label would likely be “change agent,” above all others. From his first days at Bain & Company in which he quickly succeeded as a gifted consultant to the days as a principal at Bain Capital, Romney has been directly instrumental in effectuating change in enterprises that were either failing outright or that had lackluster performance for years. Of the many dozens of examples of successful change he led, his taking the helm of the 2002 Winter Olympics and turning it around was nothing short of stunning. It was nearly $400 million in the red when dozens of naysayers told him that taking on that challenge was career-suicide; that the probability of failure was too high. That venture could easily have imploded at any time in his first 12 months as CEO. He not only ended with over a $50 million surplus, but received accolades that it was the most successful Olympics of its kind in history. His election as governor of Massachusetts, his first government service, is amazing as well for the changes he made; from eliminating a huge deficit (ending in a large surplus) to cutting duplicative government departments; all with the most liberal legislature in the country trying to trip him at every turn. The many dozens of ventures Mitt Romney has completely reinvented would literally require hundreds of pages to illustrate. I dare say, no other presidential candidate in our lifetime has had nearly the track record of successful change as Romney; certainly nobody among the current presidential candidates. Additionally, of all the Republican candidates, Romney has made the most sweeping course change proposals from the current administration.

Rudy Giuliani: A distant second choice is Giuliani. He has a record of change in his city, but at what cost? Based on how some Americans perceive the last seven years with Pres. Bush, do we need an autocratic authoritarian as President? Do we really want to entrust the next two to five Supreme Court appointments to a pro-choice candidate who makes us promises of conservative appointments (check his NYC record with judges)? What about his breaking the budget in NYC as spending went through the roof (excluding Sept 11th!)? Do we want to entrust change to a person whose perspective his entire career was that of atypical New York City alone? No, Rudy Giuliani would effectuate change, but unlike Romney, it would not be by disciplined analysis, but by mandate. His mandate, his way. I believe, though Giuliani would govern to the right of Clinton, he would not govern anywhere close to the strong conservative principles so desperately needed now. His experience and his track record as a change agent are mixed at best. He is a distant second choice.

Hillary Clinton: I chose her as third in line, not because of her record for change, but because I think if she were to be President, she would effectuate big change in many sectors across this nation. She has never been a true leader of any entity. Her record is thin as a change agent, but the one thing we have to review is her proposed health plan. Under her husband’s protecting wing, she was permitted to set out a detailed strategy to change the health care system forever. Fortunately, she was stopped by congress from implementing a disastrous strategy. So, I think it is fair to say that the changes she would oversee would include much bigger government spending, higher taxes, a gutting of the military (she hates them), myriad new government programs and entitlements, etc. To compare Clinton’s experience and skill to the talent of Romney as a change agent is like comparing a high school computer nerd to Steven Jobs.

John McCain: He is fourth in my book for no other reason than he is a long-time member of congress who has authored many important bills that have led to change or which proposed major change, including McCain-Feingold and the latest immigration bill. Few senators have the lengthy record of passing new legislation as he. Still, McCain is a senator; a bureaucrat. Though he knows how to work the inside-Washington system to make change the “Senate way,” it is still a legislature. “Change” is not a word that anyone thinks of when considering the work of congress or of any career politician in Washington, D.C. Except as an officer in the Navy, McCain has never led any real change as the executive of any enterprise. If by some miracle McCain were to become President, I believe we would see either no change to the status quo in American government, or change would be nominal.

Barak Obama: As a possible change agent, I place him fifth. The only reason he is fifth (as opposed to eighth) is because he has the most persistent and consistent message of change and he is a viable candidate. But his message of change is only rhetoric. He has virtually no experience at driving change or effectively challenging the status quo. He has no executive experience leading any entity of any kind. But of all the candidates talking of change, he is one of the most viable and it would not take a miracle for him to end up in the Democrat saddle.

John Edwards: He is sixth and ahead of Thompson and Huckabee based solely on his longer years as a senator, his influence in the national debate, and his current rhetoric for change. His candidacy is almost over, but his viability is still greater than that of Thompson and Huckabee. Edwards has no experience as a change agent to speak of and if somehow he were to become President, he would probably try to bring about change, but I believe he would be relatively ineffective at doing so. Edwards has no experience driving change as an executive maybe with the exception of directing his law firm as partner. I think it would be a disaster if Edwards were handed the reins of power as President.

Mike Huckabee: As a governor, he has executive experience and therefore has experience leading change. He is therefore placed as seventh in this line-up ahead of Thompson. Why not place Huckabee ahead of the senators above? Because Huckabee is not as viable. Sure, he is the flavor of the month but he has no depth or staying power. And what about the kinds of changes Huckabee has led as governor? His record is horrible on immigration all the way around. He supports benefits for illegal aliens. Huckabee’s record on keeping taxes unchanged is terrible. Government spending under Huckabee went up 50% and the number of government employees rose 20%. The next President will have to be strong against illegal aliens and tough on cutting taxes. Huckabee simply does not measure up in either of these important areas.

Fred Thompson: He is eighth among eight candidates. Thompson has led no change of any kind at any time in his life. Of the 100 or so bills he authored, it is maybe a handful he led into law. He has one of the most anemic records as a senator in driving any kind of change. It makes one wonder why he is now proposing new policy when he has virtually no experience at effectuating change in government. Thompson has never been a leader of any enterprise and therefore has no real idea how to implement change, let alone plan it. As well, he is almost not a viable candidate any longer. Yesterday on one of the talk shows, Mike Murray summed it up best in describing Thompson when he said, “Fred is like a bear trying to stand up on ice.” Also, on the Mike Wallace show after Thompson was criticized in two Fox clips by commentators, he lashed out in the most defensive replies I have seen of any candidate this whole year; it was as stunning to Mike Wallace as it was to me. Wallace asked Thompson to name any person today who is saying Thompson is running a good campaign and Thompson had no answer to that question.

Mitt Romney has more actual, real life experience in driving meaningful change in large enterprises than all of the candidates above combined.  The other candidates are novices by comparison.

~ Vic

[Because power corrupts] “Society’s demands for moral authority and character increase as the importance of the position increases.”

— John Adams, American Founding Father and second U.S. president (1735-1826)

Please Help Mitt Get His Message Out —-> MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

Share on Facebook

Share This

Hello everyone!

My name is Ron Richey, and I would like to introduce myself as the newest blogger here at ComMITTed to Romney. I’ve had a lifetime interest in politics, but until now, I’ve just been lurking on the sidelines. However, when I received a kind invitation from Ann Marie Curling and Vic Lundquist to become a regular contributor here, I decided to go ahead and try to make a difference.

I am looking forward to the opportunity to promote the candidacy of Governor Mitt Romney–whom I believe to be the most capable individual to offer himself up for public service in a generation. Early on, I recognized him as one who would someday make a run for the presidency. He first caught my attention when he ran against Ted Kennedy for the Senate and then again when he ran the Olympics here in Utah. Governor Romney stands out as someone who displays a rare combination of goodness, competency, and energy.

As a brief introduction, I am a forty-something entrepreneur and businessman living in Mapleton, Utah. My wife and I have five kids ranging from college age down to first grade. In my spare time (like there really is any!) I love to work in my orchard and vegetable garden and stay in touch with current events. But I always find time to jog three times a week because I find that it energizes me like nothing else can (except perhaps politics).

I currently run a startup Internet software company, and as such, I recognize the value of making the economy strong and vibrant for business. Governor Romney’s “innovation and transformation” kickoff speech resonated with me, because I am an electrical engineer by training, and nothing drives me more nuts than seeing things which are not working well. I like to see things get “fixed” and so I am passionate about helping Governor Romney “fix” Washington. I also have an MBA, and so I like to see rigorous analysis of problems and am a fan of GMR’s general approach to problem solving.

I also have an exceptionally strong desire to see a morally-principled leader in the White House. I really resonate with the perspective communicated in messages like GMR’s “Ocean” advertisement where he decries the moral cesspool that our children and grandchildren have to swim in every day. I see pop-culture slouching to its lowest levels ever. I see the growing threat of secular humanism to the cultural and religious norms that have made us the strongest nation on earth for two and a third centuries. Nevertheless, I take comfort in the fact that there is a presidential candidate in Governor Romney who understands what needs to done and has the human capacity to make it happen.

Perhaps most importantly, I see Governor Romney as a leader who has what it takes to guide our country through a very critical time. What we need, what the entire free world desperately needs, is a wise, thoughtful, and competent leader who not only talks the talk of fiscal and social conservatism, but walks the walk. We don’t need a career politician. We don’t need an actor. We don’t need a former first lady. We don’t need America’s mayor. We don’t need a trial lawyer. We don’t need a pop culture icon.

We need the man who has demonstrated, time and time again, competence, leadership, and decisiveness in the face of overwhelming obstacles. We need the man who has cut government waste. We need the man who has been a successful business executive. We need the man who turned around the Olympics. We need the man who has solved thorny problems like health care. We need the man who does not back down to international thugs. We need the man who has been faithful to his wife and family. We need the man who has protected the unborn. We need the man who has fought for traditional families.

We need Governor Mitt Romney.

Share on Facebook

Share This

One of the main leadership attributes of Gov. Romney that led me to support him and ultimately promote him is that he is a master strategist. I know of nobody who has ever challenged that amazing skill. Probably more important is Gov. Romney’s reputation for delivery. It is one thing to set out a plan or to posit a promise. It is completely another thing to deliver against that plan or promise. Gov. Romney has an amazing reputation in his career of executing against his plans. Even when obstacles are thrown at him at every turn, he finds a way to deliver as promised. The book Turnaround provides example after example of huge obstacles, problems, and challenges that Gov. Romney surmounted time and again.

As he continues to succeed against his campaign strategy, we will see greater and even more strident criticism of Gov. Romney by those who oppose him. It is already happening. Ann Marie received some pointed criticism from a couple of online sources today for her blog post below (4 down) about Ruffini. I think those other blog posts were unfounded. Without getting into the details, suffice to say that many Romney critics are missing the point. You can criticize the man for his bio or the issues he puts forward or even the man and his family. Fine, if you don’t like him or what he stands for.

If you really want to know what President Romney will be like as a leader, probably the best example is that of when he led the Olympics rescue. Read “Turnaround” if you want a candid, unvarnished look under the hood at his leadership style. He took on that challenge having absolutely no experience in sports management.

But probably more important is what he plans and promises. GMR is a master strategist whose reputation is one of solid execution against a plan. Basically, whatever GMR plans or promises, he delivers. Without exception that is absolutely true. It was always true in his business world, his church leadership, his leadership of the Olympics rescue, and his leadership as governor. Clearly, his campaign leadership is amazing as well.

So the bigger questions are these: “Do I like what Gov. Romney promises me?” — “Do I like what Gov. Romney tells us his plans are and how he will execute those plans as our President?” If I don’t like what he is saying, GMR is not my candidate. Because his reputation is such that he will deliver what he promises. Sure he will be hampered by idealogue liberals, but he has the reputation of executing to his plans under every imaginable obstacle. Just look at the first year of his taking over the Olympics. There were enormous, unbelievable obstacles coming at Romney just about hourly those first days. Romney could easily have failed in many ways that first year. I honestly believe that most above-average executives would in fact have failed given the same set of circumstances.

Many pundits and other “experts” are completely missing the point about Gov. Romney — I think. They all seem to have answers for him. He should do this or do that with his message. His bio is more impressive than the issues, etc. What it all comes down to is his plans and his promises. There are really only two Republican candidates left effectively (click here to see why I state this —-> Two Man Race). Either you believe what Giuliani is promising and planning or you believe what Gov. Romney is planning and promising. If neither, then this post does not matter to you at all. But the fact is that Gov. Romney has an amazing reputation for delivering exactly what he plans and promises, and usually quite a lot more. By the way and since his “issues” have been mentioned, what other candidate even have detailed plans? Exactly. It is one thing to complain about policy or issues, but to complain about too many? Gov. Romney is by far the most intelligent of all the candidates and it is reflected in part by what he has revealed in plans for this nation.

For those who may not like this or that about Gov. Romney, just ask yourself if what he is planning appeals to you. If it does, then you can bank on seeing it implemented if he is elected President. It is that simple. If you don’t like what he is planning, then vote for the less qualified and less able to execute. No other candidate has the reputation for delivery that would even compare to Gov. Romney. As far as I know, he is the only Republican candidate who has asserted publicly that Hillary Clinton will not be President and that the White House will remain with a Republican. I believe that statement is based on his confidence and abilities to defeat her in a general election. I am frankly tired of so-called pundits and “experts” who say they do not believe what Gov. Romney says. In effect they are telling us they like what he is saying; they just don’t believe he can deliver. Well, they are flat wrong. I choose to side with his reputation on that angle. The cheap shots are getting really old.
Either Romney’s plans for America appeal to you or they do not. If they do not, support and vote for another candidate. However, if his plans for America appeal to you, then stand up and get behind him and help push, because when he is President he will in fact deliver exactly as planned. I for one will never support a candidate whose plans for America include protecting abortion; nor will I ever support a candidate who has a poor record of leadership or execution (all the rest).

~ Vic

Share on Facebook

Share This