Mitt Romney’s Favorability Surges as He Strips Obama’s Curtain Away

Five days ago, several polls (including a liberal one) reported that Romney’s favorability rating has surged past Obama’s:

And late Thursday, the Pew Research Center, the poll that has been toughest on Romney’s favorability, released results showing that Romney is ahead of Obama by a point, 50 percent to 49 percent. That is a stunning turnaround from March, when Obama’s favorable rating in Pew was about twice Romney’s, 55 percent to 29 percent.

Pundits from the mainstream media love to point out that rarely if ever does a presidential candidate get elected when their favorability number is below that of their opponent. Until this week, Obama’s rating has been higher than Romney’s all year long. What changed? Mr. Obama poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the media to paint Governor Romney in a negative light most of 2012. Then Americans got to know Mitt Romney, the man, starting with the first debate (see graph above). Both Romney and Obama experienced a dip in their ratings from last week’s intense debate of confrontation. I am guessing we will see a dramatic positive change for Governor Romney after Monday’s debate in which Obama employed sophomoric attacks against a calm, gentleman opponent.

The Washington Times also reported:

“The debates — especially the first one — destroyed the Obama crew’s strategy of disqualification,” said Republican pollster Mike McKenna. “Six months of work and $400 million of ad buys went up in smoke in about 10 days. With less than 340 hours to go, they are having real trouble with their footing.”

The debates’ effect can be seen in the favorability ratings. At the end of September, ahead of the debates, Mr. Romney had a 44.5 percent favorable rating. But by Monday, when he and Mr. Obama faced off for the third and final time, the Republican’s rating had leapt to 50.5 percent.

Tom Jensen, director of Public Policy Polling, a Democratic firm, said Mr. Romney’s favorability surge “really has been remarkable” and explains why Mr. Obama has not been able to put away the race at this point.
[...]
By Tuesday, Mr. Romney’s favorability average at Real Clear Politics had dropped below 50 percent again, though he still leads Mr. Obama when it comes to net favorability — the calculation of favorable rating minus unfavorable rating.

Mr. Obama’s favorability averaged 49.7 percent, or 4.5 points more than his unfavorable rating. Mr. Romney’s favorability was 49.3 percent, or 6.5 points more than his unfavorable rating.
[...]
John Zogby, a pollster for The Washington Times, said Mr. Romney’s favorability surge is a significant development in the race.

“Voters got to see an option. Now that there is an option, Romney is viewed as favorably as Obama as a person,” he said.

[emphasis added]

Could it also be that America is finally seeing Barack Obama, the man, for who he really is? A person that allows his ego and pride to blind him from perceiving reality? Why is it that article after article from the Left and the Right frequently use words now such as arrogant, condescending, petulant, hubris, etc., when referring to Barack Obama? In his weekly WSJ column last week, William McGurn wrote an outstanding article titled, The Wizard of Obama. Excerpts:

Mostly this image was the making of his own immodesty, starting the night he clinched the 2008 Democratic nomination. Mr. Obama might have simply declared victory and congratulated Hillary Clinton on a valiant fight. Instead it became the backdrop for one of his more infamous egoisms. History, he said, would look back at his victory as the moment “the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”

This was no aberration. A man who interviewed for a job on the campaign was told by Mr. Obama: “I think that I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters. I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m gonna think I’m a better political director than my political director.”

Everything about his campaign fed that idea. The Styrofoam Greek columns at the Democratic convention when he was nominated. The faux presidential seal with its own Latin motto. And before the campaign, the two books he authored about—himself.

The press, far from exhibiting any skepticism about this immodesty, bowed before it.
[...]
An editor at Politico (and veteran of the Washington Post) put it this way: “I have witnessed the phenomenon several times. Some reporters need to go through detox, to cure their swooning over Obama’s political skill.”
[...]
In short, Mr. Obama was the man who declared that he would change the thinking of the Muslim world by the mere fact of his election, restore science to its rightful place, and win what he called the “necessary war” in Afghanistan.

And then came this month’s debate in Denver.

That night, the American people watched “the smartest guy in the room” struggle to put together a simple declarative sentence, and then ask the moderator to move onto another topic after Mitt Romney had given a strong statement about jobs and growth and tax revenues.

Some 67 million Americans were watching on TV. What they saw was the scene from the Wizard of Oz, when Dorothy’s dog pulls back the curtain to reveal there is no wizard at all, just a man from the Midwest who pumped himself up into something far beyond his mortal self—and got the whole of Oz to believe it.

[emphasis added]

“The whole of Oz” now sees the little man who once stood tall behind his protective curtain. Or is it the emperor without clothes whose reign draws to a close?

Photo: Saul Loeb / AFP / Getty Images



American Values: “In God We Trust” — “Liberty” — “E Pluribus Unum”

Twitter Follow: @VicLundquist – Dedicated to all members of The United States military and their families

Why Mitt “Wins the War”

PPP did a snap poll immediately after the debate tonight. The respondents scored it a slight lead for Obama at 53% to 42% (yeah, it was another +6% Democratic oversample and PPP is a democratic pollster … but I think that just strengthens my arguments). That 11% edge is smaller than the numbers Obama got in the 2nd debate, and MUCH smaller than the numbers Mitt received after the 1st debate. (FYI … CNN’s snap poll scored tonight’s debate it a bit closer at 48%-40% in favor of Obama).

That’s bad news then, right?!?! … that Romney didn’t “win” the debate? Not at all. Mitt continued to rise in the national and swing-state polls over the last week despite Obama’s “win” in the last debate. The last two days especially, Democrats have been shocked and are panicking that the President didn’t get a bounce in the polls from that.

Here’s the secret though … People’s judging of who “wins” debates is solely based on who is the most aggressive candidate that night. Snap polls showed that Joe Biden “won” the VP debate over Paul Ryan … but Biden turned off MANY voters with his style and condescension. Obama wasn’t as bad as Biden was, but his intimidating stares, his incessant attacks at Romney, and his petty condescension will NOT play well with undecided voters … especially with undecided women.

Don’t believe me? That same PPP poll linked above has the following interesting question and cross-tab.

“Did the debate tonight make you more or less likely to vote for BO/MR, or did it not make a difference?”

Among Independents for Obama: More likely 32%, Less likely 48%, No Difference 20% … for a net of MINUS 16%

Among Independents for Romney: More likely 47%, Less likely 35%, No Difference 18% … for a net of PLUS 12%

That’s a HUGE advantage among Independents for Romney based on TONIGHT’S debate. Yeah, Obama sure “won” tonight, eh? Team Romney is fighting to “Win The War” … and will take some lumps in individual battles to make sure the end goal occurs. He was confident, optimistic, and Presidential. Obama was petty, insulting, and snarky. Quite the contrast!

In the CNN snap poll mentioned above (which was a +4% D sample) asked:

“Who did the debate make you more likely to vote for?”
Romney 26%
Obama 25%

That is THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION IN THE POLL, really the only one that matters, and Mitt came out on top. Another interesting and important question from CNN:

“Who spent more time attacking his opponent?”
Barack Obama 68%
Mitt Romney 21%

Nothing happened tonight to blunt Mitt’s momentum. Obama was swinging for the fences, but failed to connect. Romney easily cleared the credible Commander-In-Chief bar and avoided ANY gaffes. His last few answers and rebuttals were awesome, and his closing statement was EPIC!

We need to work to help make sure it happens, but Mitt’s well on his way to winning this race. Romney has ALL the momentum, and that’s why Obama was attacking desperately. That alone was telling.

UPDATE 12:02 Central … Over at The Ace of Spades there’s an article “Romney Wins the War, Again” that looks like we copied one another. He published it 30 minutes earlier, but I swear I didn’t see it or steal his ideas. Maybe I’m ready to be a big shot blogger if we’re on the same wavelength like that, eh? :)

Romney: More to Gain Than to Lose in Last Debate

Well, the final Presidential debate will be over in less than 24 hours.

I’m sensing a certain level of stress among some Romney supporters in the lead up to this debate. Sure, it’s human nature to feel anxious just before a big event … especially when we are so invested in Mitt’s success. But I’m not nervous one bit, and here’s why ….

Governor (soon to be “President Elect”) Romney has much more to gain than to lose in this debate. It’s Obama that has the tough job tonight. The non-incumbent challenger generally has a low-bar to clear in these debates. They only have to 1) show that they can credibly be Commander-in-Chief and 2) avoid major gaffes. Mitt has shown that he is more than capable of achieving this based on his first two debate showings.

Much of the “who won the debate?” game is about expectations. Obama was widely expected to be a superior debater/communicator, and it was a race-changing event when he lost the first debate so dramatically. This set up debate number two, where Obama had reset his bar down to the floor. As such, many observers felt that he “won” the second debate (by a much narrower margin than the 1st debate, and more on style than on actual issues according to polls). But the President’s “win” was really more of a “most improved” award … we’ve seen no bounce in the polls for him at all.

Conventional wisdom is that Obama is supposed to trounce Governor Romney tonight, since the topic is Foreign Policy. The problem for Obama, is that his supposed foreign policy superiority is already “baked into the cake” of his poll numbers/support. Obama’s problem arises from the fact that his foreign policy successes begin and end with “Bin Laden is dead.” Sure, that’s a HUGE point, but it’s sort of hard to talk about THAT for 90 minutes straight. And no voter is going to change his mind to vote for Obama on this issue. “Hey yeah, Obama got Bin Laden … I had forgotten that. I guess I’ll vote for him now.”

Even those formerly on Obama’s foreign policy team decidedly do NOT see this as a strength for him (be sure to read that scathing rebuke!).

The debate will give Mitt an opportunity to, once again, unexpectedly impress voters on the depth and breadth of his international experience and knowledge. The media have painted him as a lightweight on foreign policy, someone out of his depth. Mitt can and will highlight his substantial foreign exposure through his public, private, and religious experiences.

The wildcard issue for tonight is Banghazi … and not in a good way for Obama.


Despite the President’s higher foreign policy numbers in general, this recent Ohio poll (that was even a +8% Dem sample) showed Mitt UP 49%-47% on the question: “Do you trust Barack Obama or Mitt Romney more on the issue of Libya?” Mitt did miss an opportunity to fully expose Obama on Libya in debate #2. Don’t expect a replay of that tonight …

It is High Time for a Full-Time President

By Doug Stevens

I have finally realized what it is about President Obama that has eaten at me since the debates began. He is a part-time President. For most of his presidency I have felt he enjoyed campaigning more than governing, but recently I have concluded he just doesn’t enjoy governing at all. It seems he prefers activities where he receives adoration and positive feedback rather than doing the hard work of decision making. Now this may sound like a wild claim, so let me make my case.

Photograph: Jonas Karlsson

First, there is increasing proof that he isn’t into the details of foreign policy. The Benghazi terror attack is the first piece of evidence I introduce. I haven’t seen recent reports of his attendance at the Presidential Daily Briefing (PDB), and especially on September 11 or 12, 2012, but I would be willing to posit that he was not in attendance. Marc Thiessen in his September 10, 2012 Washington Post Op-Ed gave the President’s percentage of attendance since the beginning of his term. Last year was 38%. For someone calling the shots on foreign policy, this meeting provides all of the up to date intelligence needed for presidential decision making. Absence would imply others are making those decisions, or that the details needed to govern would not be at hand. For Benghazi to suggest a sacrilegious video was the reason for the terror attack to me seemed so off the wall at the time. We see now it was a practical political reason and deflected a policy explanation, but it had absolutely no evidence of being based on the details of foreign policy. It was a lazy-governing, politically-practical explanation.

My second piece of evidence is President Obama’s preparation schedule for the first debate on October 3. According to a few articles I have read, prior to the debate, he disengaged from the preparation process. See Sara Noble’s article of October 9, 2012. Mastering details is hard work. It would seem like a small extension to the routine of governing to prepare for the details of a crucial debate. Active governing should mean much of the information is already understood. His actions before the first debate suggest detail work is not something he was used to doing. A distance runner can easily run a short distance without training. This and his debate performance is more evidence proving he is not used to or proficient at the hard work of governing.

Photo Credit Unknown

For my third piece of evidence, I cite Obama’s intensive interest in golf. Now, we all need hobbies to provide a balance to hard work. What I don’t understand is as he becomes the most powerful man in the free world he becomes obsessed with being expert in golf. I offer Jody Kantor’s New York Times article of September 2, 2012 that illustrates his obsessive attention to golf. As cited in this article, 104 rounds of golf at an average of 4 hours is a total of 416 hours, or 52 eight-hour work days. I know I couldn’t spend that amount of time golfing in my line of work.

My fourth piece of evidence is the scripted way he seems to present himself. A dedicated leader will set the tone and pace of a team, demand excellence and be constantly seeking input to facilitate a stream of crucial decisions. Isn’t the outcome of effective leading and governing a stream of well-considered decisions? It seems like Obama is the public side of a team, possibly with Valerie Jarrett as the captain. In a September 1, 2012 piece in the New York Times, Jo Becker gives a look at the role Valerie Jarrett plays in the white house. The last three sentences in the article were most telling to me. She often says to the President and he then repeats the mantra, “Homestretch.” It’s like she’s managing his attitude and energy level to get him through the election season. If that is needed, and based on how scripted his actions appear to be, it’s increasingly obvious to me that we are not seeing Barack Obama leading; we are seeing him acting as a governing spokesperson. That approach may work in TV commercials, but not as President of the United States.

My fifth and final piece of evidence echoes the notion put forth by Neera Tanden, a former Obama aide, in an article written by Selwyn Duke; that basically Obama doesn’t like people. If Obama is that narcissistic and doesn’t value other people, how is he going to be motivated to govern people? Why is it that we hear so many Campaigner-in-Chief, Narcissist-in-Chief zingers from humorists; don’t we really want a full time Commander-in-Chief? Can’t we be done with disengagement in the presidential governing process?

So we have a President that is disengaged in the business of governing, and yet expects the nation to ‘rehire’ him for four more years. The past four years we have endured a ‘Perfect Storm’ of disinterest in governing, fiscal irresponsibility and social reengineering. We need to end the storm and send Obama packing. I am even happy to give him a rain slicker, but just go. I say it is time to let him be unemployed, and hire a governing expert, Governor Romney.

Governor Romney has proven that not only is he highly proficient in leading and governing, but he has an above-self passion for the welfare of our country. In every endeavor Governor Romney has accepted, he has been a full-time participant – his business career, the Olympics and Governor of Massachusetts. Not only has he been effective and full-time in effort, but he has been wildly successful.

We can no longer tolerate a part-time POTUS leading our country. By electing Governor Romney, we will also be removing a great burden that is making President Obama stressed and unhappy, governing. It will give him more time to pursue his passions, including golf. Please join me in voting on November 6 and electing a real leader, one that knows how to govern and one who will be a full-time President of the United States!

Benghazi TRUTH: Obama’s Naked Hubris Drives Continuing Cover-up (Powerful Video)


Please help us promote this information far and wide before Monday’s debate. (Thank You!)

Count on it: Before Monday night’s last presidential debate, the Obama administration and/or the State Department will release new information surrounding the attack in Benghazi, Libya in a desperate attempt to alter the truth: That their combined efforts for a month to cover-up the fact they could have prevented the assassination of an American ambassador and three other great Americans. And the fact they all knew on September 11th the attack was a pre-planned, sophisticated, terrorist attack. The desecration of Camp David has only just begun this weekend.

The history we are witnessing right now will go down in American legacy as far more serious than anything related to the Watergate scandals. Nixon’s web of deceit was bad. Obama’s is obscene! The stain he is leaving on the Office of President is deplorable. The intelligence community is only now beginning to expose Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton after they falsely and repeatedly blamed the intelligence community for promoting the “movie-trailer video” narrative.

We at MittRomneyCentral know that most of our viewers prefer brief videos. However, I believe the following video contains crucial information every American should see and understand. For if they were to take it all in, not one American voter would ever vote for Mr. Obama. Not one.

THANK YOU to Bret Baier for this comprehensive investigative reporting! If you wish to only watch the portion of video where the Obama administration’s deceit and cover-up began, see the minute descriptions outlined below the video.


I believe Bret Baier’s powerful investigative reporting is important to view from beginning to end. However, if your time is limited, you may want to start at one of these points below and watch the entire piece later:

  • Beginning to minute 21:55: Actual videos, photographs, interviews, and illustrations of what actually occurred at the consulate September 11th (Warning: some of the footage is graphic)
  • Minute 22:00: The Cover-Up Begins
  • Minute 29:15: October 8th, almost one month after the attack, we see Obama actually reveal his main message and reason for the cover-up. He is desperate to prove that he has vanquished terrorism altogether; that al Qaeda’s threat is waning. In fact, the threat of terrorism is advancing! Mr. Obama’s naked hubris in the face of obvious brazen deceit is nothing short of spectacular!
  • Minute 33:58: The election…The campaigns…Governor Romney calling President Obama out in front of 60+ million Americans in his courageous duty to expose the cover-up!

We must all do out best to expose President Obama’s deceit. Time is so limited now.

For those that are just getting to know Governor Romney or who have not had time to read his books or study his past deeply, you need to understand a very important fact about this man: Mitt Romney knows more about radical Islamic terrorism than any person to ever seek the presidency of the United States. I believe that when he is elected and in office, he will be the most prepared president to face the intense, growing threat of terrorism than any previous person to occupy the Oval Office. Look it up for yourself.

EVIDENCE?

Click here to read more.

President Obama — “HORRIBLE FOR HIM”

We all contemplate Monday night’s debate on foreign policy. In the last three weeks, Barack Obama and Joe Biden blamed the intelligence community for “the movie trailer” narrative for a “spontaneous” attack on the Benghazi consulate. How long did you think it would take the CIA and other intelligence sources to correct the record on such a blatant lie? Did Mr. Obama really think we Americans are all so dumb as to believe such nonsense?

In one word, “yes.”

But why? An absolutely crucial element of Mr. Obama’s campaign theme is that al-Qaeda has been largely decimated and rendered ineffective. Why? Because Barack Obama killed Osama bin Laden. Following the flawed logic, Americans are to conclude the threat of radical Islamic terrorism is no more. We will therefore give all the credit to Mr. Obama by granting him four more years in The White House.

Mr. Obama: We know your game. We have seen this act before. You can go hide out at Camp David this weekend to spin another web of tales for Monday. We will never forget those who have sacrificed their lives for America.

As we all contemplate Monday’s debate and the authority granted each one of us on November 6, 2012, please watch this short video, especially at second 0.35 when Bill Clinton speaks for Mr. Obama. Bill Clinton’s shameless and disgusting revelation perfectly defines this president and his character:


“Horrible for him”? How reprehensible! But it is all the more “in character” after Mr. Obama’s unemotional and insensitive comments regarding the deaths of four great Americans on 9/11/12 as not “optimal.”

Mr. Obama’s “optimal” reality will be stark the evening of November 6th.


American Values: “In God We Trust” — “Liberty” — “E Pluribus Unum”

Twitter Follow: @VicLundquist – Dedicated to all members of The United States military and their families

Obama Just Doesn’t Understand

November’s election will likely come down to how people feel about the candidates…what their gut tells them.

Unfortunately for the president, jobs numbers and anemic economic growth continue to be, as Mitt Romney has put it, a continual “kick in the gut.” Despite finally pulling to even compared to when he came into office at 7.8% unemployment, after taking into account everyone who stopped working due to Obama discouragement, the unemployment rate would now be over 10%. Not acceptable.

In addition, it’s clear Obama just doesn’t get it when it comes to job creation. At Tuesdays’ debate he kept incredulously saying Mitt’s tax plan didn’t work because it contained trillions in cuts (that Mitt says aren’t even accurate), and he doesn’t understand how they’re paid for. Is anyone surprised Obama just doesn’t understand? It’s clear from his record. Why should we be surprised he scratches his head when looking at Mitt’s plan? Mitt knows: cutting taxes will help create jobs. It worked for Reagan. Paul Ryan pointed out it worked for Kennedy. It’ll work for President Romney.

If you think President Obama is a friend to the middle class, and you have a job, congratulations, you’re in better shape than many. But you need to watch this video from back in April to understand just what will happen to you under Obama’s planned tax increases. Not just for the wealthy, but everyone.

President Obama’s response to anemic job growth? Raise taxes. Apply leaches to the patient of the economy. As the growth of the economy has been slower the longer he’s been president, he’s still said he’s taken “step[s] in the right direction.” Tiny steps, getting shorter.

It makes me wonder, after all of President Obama’s attempts to label Mitt Romney as a job outsourcer or out-of-touch rich guy, who is the real friend of the middle class? Even if President Obama is really trying, nothing he’s doing is working. Past reports have said the Obama recovery ranked dead last in modern times, at that time ten out of ten for both jobs and economic growth. I haven’t found an updated report, but I understand growth has slowed, not improved, since. During the period measured, jobs had grown only 4.1% since the recession’s low point. Reagan’s record during the same period was 10.7%. So it’s not like it can’t be done. It’s been done before.

(more…)

Mitt and Women’s Issues: Told in Part By Ann

The latest straw man to be set aflame by Democrats in the presidential election is Mitt Romney’s supposed lack of energy for womens’ issues. If anyone shows a lack of energy, showing up for only one of two debates, and frankly only about half the time generally, it’s President Obama. For Barack Obama to ask women rely on him to defend their interests in this election is laughable. So let’s clear the air right now: Mitt Romney stands strongly for equal pay for equal work and workplace opportunity.

Let’s hear first from the woman who knows him best, Ann Romney:

President Obama’s Grand Accomplishment Not That Impressive

In the debate the president’s great claim to advancing women’s’ issues was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which extends the time women can sue for discrimination well after they’ve left their job. While it has a marginal benefit to those women who find out much later they were discriminated against, it has some unintended side effects, such as increasing risk and insurance costs to businesses since they will be subject to suit, well-founded or frivolous, for a much longer period. It also reduces good businesses’ ability to fight frivolous lawsuits, since the relevant witnesses may also be long gone by the time an aggressive trial attorney decides to file suit. It can also result in punishing shareholders of companies who had nothing to do with past discrimination. It was, prior to the Lilly Ledbetter Act, and will remain, whether Mitt Romney or President Obama is elected, against the law to discriminate in pay and workplace advancement. The law President Obama claims as his grand achievement just made it easier to sue, in some ways benefiting the cause of trial lawyers as much as women. Let’s also note this act was signed by President Obama in 2009 and he’s done nothing else of note in the four years since.

Mitt’s Record vs. Democratic Rhetoric

Meanwhile Mitt Romney has a demonstrable record of fighting for women’s rights. When asked in the second debate about his stance on equal pay for equal work, Mitt pointed out he worked to make sure women were equally represented on his cabinet in Massachusetts. He was ranked number one in terms of having women represented in positions of authority. Still the Democrats seized, not upon the substance of his comment or performance, but on his chosen wording, and are trying their best to manufacture an issue out of it. He said he’d had his staff look for qualified women when the applicants came in predominantly male, and they came back, he said, with “binders full of women” qualified for the job. It’s easy enough to understand Mitt was referring to binders full of qualified women’s names and resumes, but that’s just not good enough for Democrats, who clearly aren’t looking out for women’s rights as much as to promote a stereotype of Mitt Romney unencumbered by facts. Kind of like the undeserved stereotypes women have been fighting for years. So I ask, who here is part of the problem versus part of the solution?

I admit my female radar is sometimes deficient, as my cells carry around just one X chromosome. So I realize there are some women’s issues I will not understand as well. I agreed when Ann Romney said in her convention speech that some things are harder on women in ways men do not understand, in particular Obama’s flailing economy that has disproportionately affected women. But I think that trying to turn Mitt’s words into an issue when his actions speak much, much more loudly, insults everyone’s intelligence, and this insult is aimed principally at women. Again my radar may be deficient, but even mine is on alert when hearing this Dem attack. I use as my backup my wife’s comment to me this morning that she couldn’t even stand to watch the news reports of people trying to attack Mitt in this way. Her radar was going off, but not for the reasons the Democrats thought. It’s because they’re trying to make something out of nothing.

But if you still find me hopelessly handicapped by my maleness, let’s also let Mitt’s former lieutenant governor, Kerry Healey, respond:


(more…)

Michigan, are you listening? Debunking Obama’s Bankruptcy Spin on Auto Bailouts

Obama’s auto bailout ‘success’ is a disaster for taxpayers.

Like a toddler who likes to continually jabber a new phrase, Obama keeps blabbering “Romney said let Detroit go bankrupt! Romney said let Detroit go bankrupt!”

Here’s what our prattling President doesn’t want Americans to know:

Deceitful, smoke-’n-mirrors Obama ADOPTED Mitt Romney’s idea of a managed bankruptcy for American car makers. BUT, Obama’s mishandling of the process has proven very costly.

Romney Press – Oct 16, 2012:

Mitt Romney Will Help Our Auto Industry Become Stronger And More Competitive

As a Michigan native and the son of a car guy, Mitt Romney has always believed that a strong auto industry is an essential component of the nation’s economy. He has a plan that will help the auto industry move forward into a new era of innovation and dominance.

  • Domestic Energy Production That Aids Manufacturing: We are on the cusp of a manufacturing renaissance in the United States, and it will be made possible by an abundant supply of cheap, reliable energy within our borders. Mitt Romney will have a true all-of-the-above strategy that includes coal, natural gas, oil and other resources.

  • Trade That Works For Our Auto Industry: Our workers make the best cars in the world. We must develop markets abroad where our cars can be sold. Mitt Romney will open new markets to American automakers far more aggressively than this President has.
  • Stand Up To China And Level The Playing Field: Mitt Romney will stand up to countries like China that don’t play by the rules. Starting on day one, Mitt Romney will make clear to China that they must respect the intellectual property of American manufacturers and open their markets to American products.
  • Lower Our Corporate Tax Rate To Boost Competitiveness: Mitt Romney will reduce the corporate tax rate, so that our carmakers can compete on a level playing field both at home and around the world, and can afford to invest more in breakthrough products. He will also stop the foolish practice of imposing an extra tax on our automakers when they sell cars overseas so they can reinvest the profits here at home.
  • Get Government Out Of The Car Business: President Obama has told Detroit what kind of cars to build, implemented extraordinarily onerous regulations that will drive up the cost of each car by thousands of dollars, and to this day owns more than one quarter of General Motors. Mitt Romney will get the federal government out of the auto industry and eliminate regulations that distort the market and drive up costs.
  • A Reminder – Mitt Romney supported a managed bankruptcy process for our automakers, which is what President Obama ultimately agreed to support:

    Months After Taking Office, President Obama Finally Arrived At The Conclusion That Managed Bankruptcy Was Preferable To His Initial Strategy. “The Obama’s administration’s leading plan to fix General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC would use bankruptcy filings to purge the ailing companies of their biggest problems, including bondholder debt and retiree health-care costs, according to people familiar with the matter. … President Barack Obama’s task force has told both companies that the administration prefers this route … rather than the prolonged out-of-court process that has thus far frustrated administration officials.” (The Wall Street Journal, 3/30/09)

    The Obama Administration Ultimately Found Bankruptcy To Be The Only Way Forward. “The administration says a ‘surgical’ structured bankruptcy may be the only way forward for GM and Chrysler, and President Obama held out that prospect Monday. ‘I know that when people even hear the word ‘bankruptcy,’ it can be a bit unsettling, so let me explain what I mean,’ he said.” (The Wall Street Journal, 3/30/09)

    What did Governor Romney NOT support? Labor Union handouts, giving American companies to foreign owners, ill-considered dealership closings, and keeping government in the car business:

    President Obama’s Handling Of The Bailout Gave The United Auto Workers Union A Majority Ownership Stake In Chrysler. “The Obama administration’s decision to bail out Chrysler gave the union trust what was initially a majority ownership position of 55 percent of its shares.” (Reuters, 6/3/11)

    The Obama Administration Handed Over Control Of Chrysler To Fiat, An Italian Automaker. “Chrysler LLC, for years America’s third-biggest automaker, survived perhaps the most dire of its periodic near-death experiences in 2008 and 2009, when the federal government forced it into bankruptcy, pumped in $10 billion in taxpayer funds and put it under the control of the Italian automaker Fiat, with the auto workers union as the company’s biggest shareholder.” ((The New York Times, 7/30/12)

    President Obama’s Auto Task Force Pressed GM And Chrysler To “Close Scores Of Dealerships Without Adequately Considering The Jobs That Would Be Lost.” “President Obama’s auto task force pressed General Motors and Chrysler to close scores of dealerships without adequately considering the jobs that would be lost or having a firm idea of the cost savings that would be achieved, an audit of the process has concluded.” The New York Times, 7/18/10)

    The Obama Administration “Contributed To The Accelerated Shuttering Of Thousands Of Small Businesses” And Potentially Added “Tens Of Thousands Of Workers” To The Unemployment Lines. (CNN Money, 7/19/10)

    General Motors Now Wants The Government To Sell Its Stake In The Company, But The Obama Administration Is Resisting. “The Treasury Department is resisting a push by General Motors Co. to sell the government’s entire stake in the auto maker – the latest source of tension between two unlikely partners thrust together at the depths of the financial crisis. U.S. taxpayers kept the nation’s largest auto maker by sales afloat with a $50 billion bailout in 2009 and now own 26.5% of the Detroit company. But GM executives have grown increasingly frustrated with that ownership and the stigma of being known as ‘Government Motors.’” (The Wall Street Journal, 9/17/12)

    Taxpayers Are Taxpayers Are Currently Projected To Lose More Than $25 Billion On The Bailouts Of Auto Industry. (U.S. Treasury Department, 8/12)

    Now, you have the truth.

    Michiganders, help Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan obtain your 16 electoral votes. CAll NOW to get started. Readers, you, too, can help.

    By Lisa Benson



    Follow Jayde Wyatt on Twitter @YayforSummer

    American Exceptionalism — 2012 New Leadership Needed (30-Second Video)

    THANK YOU to Special Operations for America for this powerful message!

    President Mitt Romney will never bow to any other world leader.



    Thank you to Kevin Anderson for bringing this video to MRC.


    American Values: “In God We Trust” — “Liberty” — “E Pluribus Unum”

    Twitter Follow: @VicLundquist – Dedicated to all members of The United States military and their families