Democrats Uniting Behind Romney — Please Comment

The Gipper with Tip

During the 1980 presidential campaign, Ronald Reagan attracted a large number of Democrats that eventually voted for him. They became known as the “Reagan Democrats.” There is no simple description for a Reagan Democrat. However, it is generally accepted that Reagan’s message of a strong national defense, combined with a very positive vision for America, were key to his success. I remember those days well.

President Carter was mired in the Iranian hostage crisis — Having studied this event, I am convinced he was doing everything he could to free the hostages, but his demeanor and outlook reflected the weight of the world — he seemed serious, even downtrodden all the time. The oil crisis forced us all to wait in hour-long gas lines — interest rates were at historic highs.

Ronald Reagan’s message was uplifting and forward looking. He articulated a strong vision for all Americans. Today’s pre-election season reminds me of that time — every day. Our ship of state is in a debt crisis in which the captain is without a compass, sextant, or a clue as to how best to navigate. Unemployed people have given up looking for a job and resigned themselves to the pittance of the handout. Unlike Carter who had some prior executive experience, Mr. Obama not only lacks the prior experience, he is devoid of leadership skills. Worse, he is incompetent which is why he seems so desperate right now. The insecurity is easily perceived in his countenance.

A person in a leadership position that is the product of the Peter Principle stops attempting to be proactive in strategy and tactical execution; they become reactive in every decision. Mr. Obama is in complete reactive decision-making mode now. Contrast Mr. Obama’s overall message/vision with that of Governor Romney’s. Mr. Obama is downtrodden as was Carter in April, 32 years ago.

Friday I was driving around LAX to meet my wife after a trip and was listening to satellite radio (TV: FOX News) to hear Governor Romney’s speech at the NRA annual convention. Though I could not see him as he spoke, his message and delivery were reminiscent of those 1980 Reagan days. Without being dramatic, I was stunned by how it struck me viscerally. Few leaders will ever match the charisma and wit of the great communicator — but what do you expect? — Governor Romney did not have decades of training as an actor! And yet, that positive message and vision broke through in that speech.


In the last 60 days, I have had several discussions with three Democrats regarding their political leanings in November. One of these told me he is 98% certain he will vote for Governor Romney. The other two told me they have not made up their minds but they really like Romney. Both said they would certainly consider voting for Governor Romney if the nation stays on its current economic trajectory. All three told me they are very disappointed with Mr. Obama’s job performance. (One or more of them may eventually write a guest post for MRC.)

We need to hear from you. If you are a registered Democrat and you are seriously considering a vote for Governor Romney in November, please leave a comment on this post and be frank with us. We’re looking for candor. Why are you considering Governor Romney over Mr. Obama?

If you are a Democrat and have already decided to support Governor Romney and vote for him in November, what caused you to decide not to vote for President Obama this time around? Please take a moment and leave a comment on this post.

We are very interested to hear from any American that is a Democrat and considering Romney.

NOTE: This website is a grassroots site — we have no affiliation whatsoever with the official campaign of Governor Mitt Romney.

The Heritage Foundation supports Mitt Romney on the new START Treaty

In an op-ed yesterday, The Heritage Foundation backed Mitt Romney in his position against the new START Treaty. The Heritage Foundation points out,

Romney rightly observes that the treaty “deserves a careful, deliberative look by the men and women America has just elected.” If the Administration and Senate leadership push for a vote on New START during the lame duck session, the Senate would not have time to adequately evaluate it.

Romney had pointed out also that among other things, The treaty put limitations on our missile defense and the Heritage Foundation agrees.

Limits on U.S. missile defense options in the treaty are both specific and substantive. Most significant is the fact that the Preamble of the treaty establishes a link between strategic offensive and defensive arms. Also, Paragraph 3 of Article V prohibits conversion of offensive strategic missile launchers to launchers of defensive interceptors and vice versa. These conversions have been done in the past and might be required as an option for the President in case of a future crisis.

In addition, The verification provisions of the new treaty is less stringent than the original treaty and that the Russians have cheated on every arms control agreement the United States has ever signed with them.

In conclusion, The article states that the treaty is biased in favor of Russia.

With limitations on U.S. ballistic missile defense options, limitations on U.S. conventional global strike capability, and exclusion of tactical nuclear weapons in the treaty, there is no leverage left to achieve elimination of Russia’s tactical nuclear weapons. Russia will surely not willingly give up its unilateral advantage in exchange for getting to a “nuclear zero” fantasy when others (e.g., China, North Korea, and Iran) are sure not to follow.

The full article can be read HERE.

Video of Romney’s “Conversation” at the Foreign Policy Initiative Luncheon

Found this at Free and Strong America PAC blog:

The video is uncut and is the entire “conversation”, nearly an hour long. I’ll come back to it sometime while I’m not at work. :)

Be sure to read Jennifer Rubin’s recap of the event (click here). Her intro:

Former governor and presidential candidate Mitt Romney was the lunch speaker at the Foreign Policy Initiative conference. In a conversational interview with FPI board member Dan Senor, he appeared more relaxed and fluent than he had on the campaign trail. Without a fixed script (or any notes), he was able to demonstrate some impressive grasp of details while setting forth his big-picture critique of the Obama foreign policy. He gave credit to the president for his willingness to stick to a winning strategy in Iraq and for not “yanking all the troops out,” as he had promised during the campaign. But that is where his praise ended.

Romney speaks at the Foreign Policy Initiative Luncheon 9/21/09

Romney Burnishes His Defense Credentials

Mitt Romney had a big weekend, a lengthy weekend at that. Between Thursday and today he has done no less than five fundraisers, one of which was for his PAC, gave two high profile speeches, had three media appearances, and did at least one interview. He was even spotted by an excited Twitterer running laps around the Reflecting Pond Sunday morning. Besides the jogging, Romney’s spent much of his time this weekend discussing National Defense, and due diligence requires this to be topic be covered.

My first impression when hearing Romney speech to the Values Voter Summit is that he spent more time than usual discussing foreign matters. It was indeed more Defcon than Socon. Not surprising because he is apparently not allowed to talk about such issues or forever be labeled a panderer. After taking a glance at it his speech again I’m seeing that he spent nearly half of his speech addressing foreign policy in one way or another, though his more meaty remarks were reserved for his speech to the Foriegn Policy Initiative Luncheon. His speech, or “conversation” at the FPI differed also in that he used no teleprompter or notes.

Jennifer Rubin of Commentary Magazine gives a thorough review of the Romney’s appearance at FPI. She notes:

[Romney] appeared more relaxed and fluent than he had on the campaign trail. Without a fixed script (or any notes), he was able to demonstrate some impressive grasp of details while setting forth his big-picture critique of the Obama foreign policy. He gave credit to the president for his willingness to stick to a winning strategy in Iraq and for not “yanking all the troops out,” as he had promised during the campaign. But that is where his praise ended.

It was in many ways a surprising outing for Romney, demonstrating more depth and verve than many in the room could recall from the campaign. Whether that message resonates outside the room, with the larger conservative community and with elected leaders, remains to be seen. But certainly we will hear more from him in the future.

Rubin echoes what others have also said recently. Basically, that they hadn’t heard or seen this side Romney before. He is, and has been, underestimated on his “grasp of details” concerning national defense. Unlike the like social (abortion, same-sex marriage, stem-cell research) and economic issues that were on front and center during his tenure as Massachusetts Governor, there was only one instance that gave us a peek into what a President Romney might be like when faced with foreign issues: Romney Denounces Khatami’s Visit to Harvard, Declines to provide escort, or offer state support for trip.

At FPI, Romney also rapped President Obama on being soft about defending American values around the world, his misguided decisions on Honduras, Iran, Europe, and Israel, his efforts to win the global popularity contest, and his indecisive actions on Afghanistan. Not to be left out is praise that Romney gave President Obama on continuing with a winning strategy in Iraq, notably in contrast to his campaign promises to “yank all the troops out”.

If Romney is the work-a-holic that I know him to be, you can bet that he is furiously studying up on foreign policy with advisers and by reading anything and everything on the subject. With McCain and Giuliani out of the pool of potential 2012 candidate there is huge opening for someone to pick up the Defcon Mantra and shore up that leg of the 3-legged stool, and Mitt has his eye on it.

Case in point, the title of his book to be published in March: No Apology: The Case for American Greatness. An obvious dig at Obama and his habitual apologizing for us terrible Americans while abroad. You can bet there will be much in the book in regards to foreign policy. And a book is the perfect way to let the public at large get some insight into what he knows and understands on the subject. Heads will start turning.
Cross-posted at