WI: Mitt Romney runs better campaign and wins in '12, faces same problems as Obama from 2013 to '17

How does a Pres. Romney handle:

the continued slow economic recovery,

ISIS gaining a stronghold in parts of both Iraq and Syria,

the Syrian civil war,

the ebola outbreak in 2014 with of course the possibility of being worse,

unaccompanied minors traveling to U.S. from Central America,

and other issues?
 
Last edited:
With the big and obvious exception of Obamacare, many of the biggest challenges faced by the Obama administration occurred during the second term.
 
I read from an analyst that if Romney won in 2012, he probably wouldn't have won the popular vote. If that is the case, he would have this issue offset his very presidency from the beginning. Romney would have lowered taxes as Trump has, so that might affect the economic recovery. The Democrats probably win big in 2014, due to a stiff response from Romney to issues, such as a failed attempt to repeal AHCA. Romney would not receive the approval rating boost Obama received between 2015-16, because it would be his first term, in contrast to Obama finishing a second term. Romney probably doesn't get primary challenged, because he's a Republican the party can unite behind regardless if he moves to the center or not. The Democratic primaries include Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Brian Schweitzer, and maybe a leftist other than Bernie Sanders.
 
The Syrian civil war, emergence of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria boosts rival Jabhat al-Nusra

Washington Post, Oct. 28, 2013.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...16179a2c2c7_story.html?utm_term=.6ca1bd2bae60

.

.

' . . . Until recently, Jabhat al-Nusra was known as the most radical wing of the opposition seeking to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. It was the first to assert responsibility for car bombings against government targets and was quickly designated a terrorist group by the United States.

'But the newcomer ISIS, with its high proportion of foreign fighters, has eclipsed Jabhat al-Nusra as it enforces bans on smoking, forces women to wear the veil, carries out public executions and clashes with other rebel groups to expand in opposition-held areas. . . '

.

.

.
So, ISIS makes previous extremist Jabhat al-Nusra look good in comparison. Plus, ISIS has foreign fighters which makes it look imposed-upon.

But, a difficult menu of choices for any president. Or . . . are there creative methods of thinking outside the box? But then, even with his business background, Mitt seems a pretty conventional guy.
 
Romney wouldn't do much to repeal the Affordable Care Act. When asked about what his complaints were, he said he didn't like how it reduced medicare spending. If anything we'll get bipartisan policy wonkery and reform.

He'd be tougher on Russia during the Ukrainian Crisis and probably would bomb Assad. For all we know there won't be an ISIS if Romney topples Assad early before Assad can release the jihadists from Syrian jails.

The immigration crisis at the border probably will be handled similarly. Despite the perception to the contrary, Obama was pretty tough on the border. Romney probably is a bit tougher on immigration internally (ICE going after people and whatnot) but I can't see much more.

Romney can't win with Paul Ryan as his running mate. Paul Ryan scared too many moderates and old people. Romney-Portman probably gives Romney Florida and Ohio, and Portman probably has some appeal in western Pennsylvania. Flip those three states and you've got President Romney.


Romney likely pushes on TPP the same way Obama did. Given Portman's experience as US Trade Representative, I could see the Romney administration being very into negotiating trade deals.

I can't see there being much of a difference on Ebola.


I think there'd be some sort of Iran agreement still. The Iranians put a moderate in charge and were reaching out - a lot of the opposition was just partisanship I think.

With no 2016 prospects, Christie might avoid bridgegate. He wanted a landslide reelection to set him up for 2016 and that's what led to his staff pulling what they did.

2014's Senate races will favor the Democrats. They went in with 53 seats (plus two caucusing independents) and lost a bunch of close races. Alaska, Colorado, North Carolina, Arkansas, and Louisiana probably stay blue. Iowa is a toss-up, as is Montana. Democrats can pick up Mississippi if Chris McDaniel beats Thad Cochran in the primary. Georgia was somewhat competitive that year and the Democratic candidate was the daughter of the much beloved Sam Nunn. South Dakota's Senate race should be interesting too.
 
I can't see there being much of a difference on Ebola.
I can remember a conservative neighbor talking to me with energy and animation about how dangerous Ebola is. He even placed his arm next to me, and said if either one of us had Ebola, something as simple as a sweaty arm . . . I think it's more commonly spread by medical procedures. And/or the victim bleeds from every orifice, and then, when the family respectfully wash and prepare the body for burial, yes, the disease can spread, that's what I'm read. And initially, an unlucky victim can get it from bats. All the same, this conservative seemed to play to type by believing that other people don't "get" it and fully understand how dangerous a place the world is.

Largely, it was bad luck that Ebola hit the headlines in Oct. 2014 and hurt whoever was in the presidency.
 
Last edited:
An individual conservative neighbor is not a basis for understanding how a Romney administration would operate.

The health advisers and civil service staff that stay in place regardless of administration would still be there and give similar advice to Romney. It's not like everybody in the CDC would be removed should Obama lose.
 
I read from an analyst that if Romney won in 2012, he probably wouldn't have won the popular vote.
Eh, that's hard to believe, the electoral college favored Obama in 2012. For instance, a 2.5 swing nationally would result in Romney beating Obama 49.7% to 48.6%, but losing 266 to 272 thanks to how Obama's vote was concentrated.
 
No matter how bad his Presidency goes, it would be a godsend in retrospect. We wouldn't have the guy we have now had he won in 2012.

In order to get him in the first place, a lot of things have to go differently. He can't make that wage gaffe at the private dinner. Obama has to continue to do miserably in the second debate. I'd argue that he'd need to go with a different VP pick, maybe Rubio although I'm not sure.

I'd also agree in the fact that we might get sterner responses toward the Ukrainian crisis and Syria, for better or for worse. But nothing that would drastically alter our world I don't think. Probably some large airstrikes that are actually designed to make a difference. He'd probably start some trade scuffs with China as well.
 
In order to get him in the first place, a lot of things have to go differently. He can't make that wage gaffe at the private dinner. Obama has to continue to do miserably in the second debate. I'd argue that he'd need to go with a different VP pick, maybe Rubio although I'm not sure.

Rubio would be a solid choice. I always find it weird that Romney went with a standard, rich white guy from the Midwest as his running mate. Bobby Jindal, Susana Martinez or Brian Sandoval also could've helped pick up some votes from unusual sources.
 

Edward IX

Banned
@Jackson Lennock do you not think that Christie ends up in the administration as the Attorney General? Not in any way to kick this to current status, but I am fairly shocked he did not end up as Attorney General in the Trump administration (or at least Ambassador to Ireland).

Or is what the Romney campaign learned about Christie while they vetted him for VP enough to keep him out of the Government?

I will say this, I think Chris Christie could have ended up the Republican nominee in '12 had he got in. Could he have beaten Obama? I don't think so, but that would have been a interesting election.
 
Romney's staff was iffy about Christie. Christie banned Romney from fundraising in NJ without his approval at one point.

Romney also cared a lot about fitness and promptness (both of which Christie lacked).

But then there's this.

The vetters were stunned by the garish controversies lurking in the shadows of his record. There was a 2010 Department of Justice inspector general’s investigation of Christie’s spending patterns in his job prior to the governorship, which criticized him for being “the U.S. attorney who most often exceeded the government [travel expense] rate without adequate justification” and for offering “insufficient, inaccurate, or no justification” for stays at swank hotels like the Four Seasons. There was the fact that Christie worked as a lobbyist on behalf of the Securities Industry Association at a time when Bernie Madoff was a senior SIA official—and sought an exemption from New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud Act. There was Christie’s decision to steer hefty government contracts to donors and political allies like former Attorney General John Ashcroft, which sparked a congressional hearing. There was a defamation lawsuit brought against Christie arising out of his successful 1994 run to oust an incumbent in a local Garden State race. Then there was Todd Christie, the Governor’s brother, who in 2008 agreed to a settlement of civil charges by the Securities and Exchange Commission in which he acknowledged making “hundreds of trades in which customers had been systematically overcharged.” (Todd also oversaw a family foundation whose activities and purpose raised eyebrows among the vetters.) And all that was on top of a litany of glaring matters that sparked concern on Myers’ team: Christie’s other lobbying clients, his investments overseas, the YouTube clips that helped make him a star but might call into doubt his presidential temperament, and the status of his health.




I think through sheer force of personality Christie could beat Obama in 2012 - especially if he has a running mate who could deliver a state. Christie-Portman could probably swing Pennsylvania I think (Christie helping with the Philly suburbs and Portman helping in the west). Depending on how much Christie campaigns, I could see him taking New Jersey and New Hampshire (New Jersey especially depending on the NJGOP machine).
 
An individual conservative neighbor . . .
I agree it’s just one person. But sometimes it is interesting seeing a written theory play out in real life.

With Ebola in Oct. 2014, you might remember if you called up to get a doctor’s appointment for pretty much anything, the automated phone system asked (1) if you had a fever, and (2) if you had recently travelled to Liberia, Guinea, or other countries in west Africa.

I think Ebola was one factor hurting the Democrats in the 2014 midterms.
 
As a fiscal conservative who can't stand Trump, I've reflected on this a lot. Looking back, Romney got a bit of a bad rap. I agree with most of the stuff above in regards to foreign policy. In regards to the recovery, we would've likely seen a faster one, as regulations get rolled back and overall business optimism rises. That's pretty similar to what we have seen under Trump in the past year and a half.
 
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/mid-term_elections.php

In 2010, the Dems lost 63 seats in the House, and 6 in the Senate. This House loss was greater than the Dems had lost in 1994 during Clinton’s first midterm.

In 2014, the Dems lost 13 seats in the House, and 9 in the Senate. This Senate loss was about the same as for both Clinton in ‘94 and Reagan in ‘86.

———————

* If there had been a Republican president in 2014, no, I don’t think it’s necessarily going to be symmetrical because Republicans have a higher voting turnout in midterm elections.

** I don’t think the Dems had that much of a high-water mark following the 2008 elections, but this is a good point to look at.
 

Edward IX

Banned
@Jackson Lennock thanks for that run down. It confirmed what I have heard. Again I think you hit on something that I think most people agree on: Portman was the VP candidate in '12. He most likely flips Ohio. If he and Christie flip PA (and I think Christie flips NH, I don't know if NJ was possible, I sort of doubt it.) Then you are looking at a very narrow EC win for either party and a lower Popular Vote win for Obama. It comes down to FLORIDA, FLORIDA, FLORIDA.

I think had Christie gotten in about the time of his speech at the Reagan Library (remember, the "your Country needs you, Governor!" Remark made by the older woman?) For the life of me, I don't know why he didn't get in.

I have to admit when I watched his second inauguration, I was 100% sure that I was watching the 2016 nominee. Without "Bridgegate" if he was nominated that he could have been nominated and would have won.

In 2012 I did not vote for Romney, even though I tend to vote Republican because his 47% comment angered me so much. IMO I still think he was just a horrible candidate. I still don't believe that he could have won. He was such a unchrismatic person to a man who had charisma in spades. I don't know a scenario, with in reason that Romney wins.
 
Last edited:
Top