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

How would a President Romney be viewed by the Republican base? He‘s not exactly an immigration hawk, and represents the Republican and American establishment like few others. One could call him an archetypical ‚globalist‘, at a time when American and global elites are not exactly popular.

I think Trumps success among the republican base wasn‘t a mere fluke. Here‘s part of a post of mine from another thread:

Trump was a response to the bipartisan political consensus, the main pillars of which were (and still are): immigration is great, America needs to be involved in the middle east and elsewhere, free trade is awesome. This had been the consensus for decades at that point, and anyone who disagreed was a rube.

The thing is, i don‘t think the Republican base was ever really into any of those things. They always wanted to restrict immigration, were never the biggest fans of free trade, and didn‘t really care about the middle east until 9/11. Trump was just the first to say it openly. The Republican leadership had been completely disconnected from their base for a long time, probably since after Reagan. The kind of Neocons that have dominated the party since the end of the cold war have always been progressives hiding behind a veneer of militarism and America-fuck-yeah patriotism, with the exception of some social conservatives like Santorum or Huckabee.

With Romney as president instead of Trump, is this kind of right-wing populism dead? I somehow doubt it. Some believe Trump was just lucky to say the right things at the right time, but i believe Trump‘s 2016 platform would have been successful among the Republican base anytime during the last few decades. There just never was a candidate who truly took these kind of positions. Even people like Gingrich or Santorum always watered down a lot of their positions, especially on immigration. They were always deadly afraid of being called racist, so they made sure to repeat pro-immigration platitudes whenever they could.

The closest was probably Buchanan in 92, but he ran against an incumbent Republican, and most of the base were still too loyal at that point, even if i believe that Buchanan was closer on many issues to the typical Republican voter than Bush (at least for a majority, imo).

Thoughts? How do you think Romney would be perceived by the base?
(I hope this doesn‘t count as ‚current politics‘. But this is something we should consider, imo)
 

Edward IX

Banned
How would a President Romney be viewed by the Republican base? He‘s not exactly an immigration hawk, and represents the Republican and American establishment like few others. One could call him an archetypical ‚globalist‘, at a time when American and global elites are not exactly popular.

I think Trumps success among the republican base wasn‘t a mere fluke. Here‘s part of a post of mine from another thread:



With Romney as president instead of Trump, is this kind of right-wing populism dead? I somehow doubt it. Some believe Trump was just lucky to say the right things at the right time, but i believe Trump‘s 2016 platform would have been successful among the Republican base anytime during the last few decades. There just never was a candidate who truly took these kind of positions. Even people like Gingrich or Santorum always watered down a lot of their positions, especially on immigration. They were always deadly afraid of being called racist, so they made sure to repeat pro-immigration platitudes whenever they could.

The closest was probably Buchanan in 92, but he ran against an incumbent Republican, and most of the base were still too loyal at that point, even if i believe that Buchanan was closer on many issues to the typical Republican voter than Bush (at least for a majority, imo).

Thoughts? How do you think Romney would be perceived by the base?
(I hope this doesn‘t count as ‚current politics‘. But this is something we should consider, imo)
I find a lot of the people who liked Uncle Pat, like the current direction of the current party. I was only 19 but was involved with the Buchanan campaign in '92. I have since grown up and really grew up and changed my views (I am not sure, I ever really understood what he was for. Other than I still dislike NAFTA, and I favour protectionism in trade.)

I think in 2012 Romney was the way the typical Republican viewed the party and themselves. I voted for Obama in '12 because I was very, very angry with the 47% remark, I favour a social safety net and resented it. To be honest, Romney didn't give me a reason or inspire me to a reason to vote for him. Romney came off as the typical "rich guy Republican" who didn't offer much change.
 
imrs.php



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/02/28/how-the-recession-turned-middle-class-jobs-into-low-wage-jobs/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6909e6e67a35

This is the change.

Showing that many of the mid-wage jobs lost were replaced by low-wage jobs.
 
Last edited:
@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 nonnomina 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.

Florida is a state that's redder than the national average and was the closest state Obama won in 2012. Ryan's healthcare reform proposals scared senior citizens and likely didn't help him down there. Given number of Ohioans living in central Florida and how close the 2012 margin was there make me think Portman could deliver Ohio and Florida for Romney. Romney really should have picked Portman in 2012, as at the very least we'd have seen Romney lose 285-253 rather than 332-206.

I wonder if Portman + No 47% comment would have been enough to swing it for Romney.
 
Picking Rob Portman would help Romney win, but him being in the Bush administration as a trade representative hurts. I’m kind of biased because I’m from Cincinnati. Looking back though, Romney had a terrible VP shortlist.
 
Picking Rob Portman would help Romney win, but him being in the Bush administration as a trade representative hurts. I’m kind of biased because I’m from Cincinnati. Looking back though, Romney had a terrible VP shortlist.
I was also going to mention that Portman had only been in the Senate since 2011, but in a different thread, someone referred to it was "icing on the cake"? Three of Romney's final five on his shortlist (Christie, Rubio, and Portman) lacked experience, while Ryan and Pawlenty had or would have a hard time flipping the upper Midwest.

Some other candidates that were eliminated off of Romney's shortlist included, John Cornyn, Bill Frist, Mitch Daniels, Mike Huckabee, and Bob McDonnell (whom was around for the same amount of time as Christie).
 
I was also going to mention that Portman had only been in the Senate since 2011, but in a different thread, someone referred to it was "icing on the cake"? Three of Romney's final five on his shortlist (Christie, Rubio, and Portman) lacked experience, while Ryan and Pawlenty had or would have a hard time flipping the upper Midwest.

Some other candidates that were eliminated off of Romney's shortlist included, John Cornyn, Bill Frist, Mitch Daniels, Mike Huckabee, and Bob McDonnell (whom was around for the same amount of time as Christie).
God, even the eliminated ones aren’t that good. Mitch Daniels could have helped flipped the Midwest, he’s probably the best of those.
 
. . . In regards to the recovery, we would've likely seen a faster one, as regulations get rolled back and overall business optimism rises. . .

Maybe . . .

New Report Examines the Regulatory Tsunami That Wasn't

Center for Effective Government, Sept. 27, 2012

https://www.foreffectivegov.org/node/12222

' . . . There has been an increase in the number of significant rules approved during the first 42 months of the Obama administration relative to a similar period in the first terms of the Clinton and Bush administrations. But this has been largely driven by the fact that the Obama administration was faced with more economically significant rules required by statutory or judicial deadlines . . . '
But driven by new laws. That is, an executive branch doing what it's supposed to.

* And I hope pertaining to banking regulation!
 
Top