.

Moderate Mitt or Right-Winger Romney?

Presidential candidate Mitt Romney now hopes undecided voters view him as more moderate, but columnist Heather Borden Herve says don’t believe everything you think you see.

 

The weekend after the first presidential debate, my husband and I couldn’t stop replaying and critiquing what had happened in that first meeting of the candidates. Sobered by President Barack Obama’s disappointing performance, we were clear on at least one thing—the race is far from over.   

But we couldn’t help but notice something else. Throughout the Republican primary season, we’d watched as Gov, Mitt Romney persistently veered hard to the politically extreme right, choosing to ignore undecided independent voters and more moderate voices in his own party. 

It seemed strange coming from a politician who used to be pro-choice, who used to be pro-marriage equality, who used to be a forward thinker on healthcare. But if that’s what it took to win the nomination of his increasingly fractured Republican Party, then that’s what candidate Romney would do.

So perhaps it shouldn’t have surprised anyone that, during his first debate against the President, 'Romney the Moderate' was back, swooping in to confuse us all. His admittedly strong performance aggressively challenging Obama won him the debate on style points alone, and it almost helped deflect attention from the position changes he was suddenly spouting. But could viewers tell the difference between ‘Mitt the Moderate’ and ‘Romney the Right-winger’?

Tactically, by flashing signs of the fiscally-conservative, socially-moderate GOP’er he once was, Romney was sending a message to those independent, undecided voters that could have been pretty much in the bag for the Republican nominee earlier on. Watching the debate, many of them likely sat up and listened a lot harder, thinking, “Could he still be ‘our’ guy too?”

In the days after that first debate, it became clearer that Romney had started erasing any memory of his preceding campaign stumbles, and he made strong headway in correcting the course of downward trending polls. He was helped along by debate answers that might not have been so factually truthful but sure sounded good to moderate Republicans hoping to hear a less extreme viewpoint. Fact-checking proved that Romney played loose with some of his statements; to be fair, the bi-partisan FactCheck.org found fault with both presidential candidates on things they asserted.

But the Romney we saw at the debate and since then is much different than the Romney we’d seen before. On questions about tax cuts we heard him say pre-debate that he’ll cut taxes across the board—including for the top one percent—but on debate night itself he said he’ll let top wage earners pay their fair share. He’s criticized the President’s healthcare plan, yet touted his own, almost identical one from his years as Governor of Massachusetts.

Romney made other statements that were designed to appeal to more moderate voters, but were not as truthful as the candidate would have you believe. He asserted his supposed support of those with pre-existing medical conditions—in truth, not as many people in that category would be able to keep their health coverage under a Romney plan as he’d like voters to believe. Similarly he said he’d make sure grants for education would be protected, and education would be a high-focus priority in a Romney administration—this, from the guy who’d previously said he’d eliminate the Department of Education. He even agreed that business needed government regulation!

Since then, Romney has similarly shown two sides on the issue of women’s healthcare and reproductive rights. One minute he asserted his perhaps less heavy-handed approach to choice:  “There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda.” Doublespeak and obfuscation? Shortly thereafter his campaign backtracked and reaffirmed Romney’s strong opposition to safe and legal abortion, except in rare exceptions for rape, incest and when the mother’s life is in danger. Even his vice-presidential running mate, Paul Ryan—with his own, more extreme views on abortion—in his own debate appearance, reminded those of us who are pro-choice of Romney’s true intent to overturn Roe v. Wade.

But Romney is hoping the undecided voters are hooked, or at least have considered taking the bait. Might he really be the guy who can reach across the aisle to work with members of the opposing party? Could he be a President who rebuilds the economy and improves healthcare (even for women!) all the while strengthening our underperforming educational system?

I wouldn’t bet on it, and I’m hoping the President gets a little more fire in his belly to show the electorate—especially the undecided voters—that Romney is really a candidate who says only what he thinks they want to hear, and who won’t be able to keep the promises he makes to both sides of his own party.

Without knowing if it will be ‘Mitt the Moderate’ or ‘Romney the Right-winger’ on any given day of the remaining three weeks of the campaign, let’s hope everyone pays attention to which Mitt Romney they hear, knowing full well that we don’t really know which Mitt Romney we’d get should he win.

Paul Improta October 17, 2012 at 05:54 PM
The country is "center-right" Romney is right in the middle where the country is. The problem here is that the writer is so far left that middle seems extreme right - it's a matter of one's perspective.
Jimmy Pursey October 17, 2012 at 08:11 PM
The country is not as gullible as ol' Paulie Boy is. The majority of Americans are right in the middle, and unhappy with the dead two party template. The fact that scares the pleated pants off people like Paul..is that this is the last election cycle that could conceivably be won solely by appealing to white male voters. Romney's defeat will signal the death knell for an era. The Republican Party will need a complete makeover if it is to survive another election cycle.
sebastian dangerfield October 18, 2012 at 07:41 PM
yes jimmy . Makes sense. You'd have to go alllllllll the way back to the 2010 mid term elections to find the last time the Repubicans won. Jimmy any time you want to actually make an intelligent comment---sans, references to white/black, what religion someone is, etc ---please do. You live in a world segregated by political demographics as thought we all dont add up to one country. You might want to tone down watching msnbc or nbcnews.
Jimmy Pursey October 18, 2012 at 08:01 PM
I thought I told you earlier that you weren't smart enough to speak with me? And then you told me you "hate cops", and insulted my dead parents.
sebastian dangerfield October 18, 2012 at 08:28 PM
Jimmy? Wait is calling your stupid father stupid an insult? Or is calling me stupid an insult? Im betting that you actually think there is a difference. But the truth of the matter, you are wrong. Wrong in the sense, Im smart and you and your dad are morons. Now I hope you dont think that this is off limits. That would make you wrong in many of your posts. And Jimmy appears not capable of understanding he is wrong. hahaha (own you again you)
sebastian dangerfield October 18, 2012 at 08:31 PM
Jimmy tells me something...and then says "i thought i told you?" It was like 30 minutes ago. You forgot? Or you dont know what you said? Is that the reason you have a question mark? (own you again- but this is kid stuff. How about you get your boss involved. --He will be smarter than you, and this stuff is too easy. I want to spar with someone capable.)

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »