Former presidential candidate Mitt Romney joined the fray today and made an impassioned speech against Donald Trump.  Is Romney the last hope to speak to sane Republicans?

I think most people respect Mitt Romney, even if they don’t agree with his policies.  Romney spoke directly and firmly.

Trump’s response was to suggest that when Romney ran,  he was all but down on his knees.  Given the double entendre of that statement, Trump should be ashamed of himself.  That remark was the crowning blow in the land of low-class.

Will Republicans listen to Romney?  My guess is his speech will do no good.  Those who agree with him already wouldn’t consider voting for Trump.  The Trump-followers wouldn’t have voted for Romney in the first place.  The angry, the lewd, the bullies, are all right where they want to be and proud of it.

26 thoughts on “Mitt Romney joins the fray

  1. Wolve

    Out of the ashes of the 2012 disaster rises the icon of Republican self-defeat, telling one and all how to win. Ironic to the max.

    1. You see a loser. I see a person who lost an election. He was working against the first black president who was an incumbent. I would also look at how the party failed him.

      I also don’t think Romney was telling Trump how to win. I think he was saying why he shouldn’t be in the race in the first place.

      I have respect for Romney. He is presidential.

  2. Wolve

    With the “angry” I will agree. The “lewd” and the “bullies”? No,no,no,no. You are applying your “angry” ad hominems to the wrong side. Try the side where the leading candidate is under criminal investigation by the FBI;a Dem Congresswoman from Hawaii has talked about the negative aftermath of her endorsement of Bernie over Hillary; and an “old peep” campaigns with a stained purple dress hanging over his head. Adjust your target, gunner!

    1. Solve, you and I apparently have a totally different definition of what constitutes lewd as well as what constitutes bullying.

      Let’s start with lewd. Did you not think the Trump remark about Mitt on his knees was lewd? I sure did.

      Did you not see the bullies in the audience, shoving the woman around? Have you not seen other footage with people being pushed to the ground.

      Those are my definition of bullies.

      Did someone do something to Tulsi Gabbard? She broke rank. Sometimes there is payback, like not getting the committee you want or not being on the Christmas card list.

      What ARE you talking about? What does she have to do with purple dresses?

  3. Wolve

    And I see the second debate in 2012 — with the disaster of Benghazi front and center on the table. Obama had blown the first debate by acting like it was an imposition to prepare for it or even be there. The second was where Romney could have made a lot of hay. But, for some reason which may never be known, he sat there like the proverbial bump on a log. He not only got taken by Obama but he was even shafted by “moderator” Candy Crowley — with virtually no counter punching. My personal thought at that time was: “Oh, no!” Nah, not presidential. Weak in the clutch, I say. He showed that during most of the campaign. Loser.

    No, he wasn’t talking to Trump. He was telling the Establishment Repubs how to beat Trump. That’s where the “ironic” comes in.

  4. Wolve

    Tulsi Gabbard. So, the policy on the Dem side is to punish someone in Congress for making up their own mind about party candidates? Nice advert for the Land of the Free. I have often thought lately that’s it’s getting mighty hard to tell the difference between the Democrats and the Establishment Republicans. Same can of worms. It’s called “bullying.” Gabbard gets it. Cruz got it from the Senate Republican leadership. You excuse that kind of political bullying?

    Oh, stop being coy, blogmistress. You know full well over whom the purple dress hangs forever — sort of like an albatross.

    1. On this issue, I don’t see much difference between democrats and republicans. Hmmmm…how about Torquiest pledges? Tell me again why Boehner is out…

      Applying pressure is not necessarily bullying.

      Clearing pushing people out is bullying, especially when you aren’t security.

    2. I thought it was blue….that seriously has nothing to do with Hilary. In fact, I would say that if she had her druthers, she would probably do almost anything in her power to have not had that happen.

      I actually don’t know what you are trying to say other than you refuse to have anything bad said about chump…errr Trump.

      What do you think a “whip” is for? They aren’t called that for nothing. Political bullying? You know the score when you go in.

  5. Wolve

    Did I think that Trump’s comment about Romney getting down on his knees and begging for an endorsement was “lewd”? Well, no. I thought he meant that Mitt could have gotten down on his knees and begged for an endorsement. You know, begging on one’s knees — sort of like praying? English language terminology of long standing.

    But I am admittedly one of Censored’s “old peeps.” I don’t care to let my mind wander into the contemporary strangling of our moral culture by the constant use of sexual innuendos. Like that silly Rubio bit about Trump’s “small hands.” Now, that was indeed lewd. No thank you.

  6. Well, Trump just told the audience how endowed he was…yes, that kind of endowment. I rest my case.

    Wolve, to everyone I know, the knee remark was lewd. At best it was a double entendre. At worst….well…he wasn’t wearing a blue dress…to use your reference.

  7. @Wolve

    Hmmm…I didnt see your small hand comment. Rubio’s original comment came about because someone had told him Trump was very sensitive about his small hands. Trump set him straight. Everything is just fine.

    TMI. Do I really need to know that about any of the candidates?

  8. Kelly_3406

    The Romney speech will almost certainly backfire. He lacks the moral authority and clout to persuade Trump supporters. Plus, the speech was incredibly condescending to those who have already voted for Trump. It was if he was saying that they are not smart enough to know who they are voting for and something has to be done overturn their franchise. This overt disrespect from the GOP establishment is what has allowed Trump to win over disaffected voters.

    Having said that, I do not think that Romney’s purpose was to persuade anyone. Didn’t it seem like a glaring omission that he did not endorse anyone? Instead, he could be angling to be the delegates’ choice at a brokered convention. Trump’s lead is not really that large and if the delegates continue to be divided among three candidate, then no one may have a majority. If Romney encourages a split among delegates, then he could position himself to be the “white knight” that rides in to “save” the party at a brokered convention. So this could be the opening round of Mitt’s attempt to steal the nomination from the candidates currently in the race.

    1. You could be on to something. I can’t imagine why else he would have done that.

      I disagree that he lacks the moral authority. I am not sure what you mean. However, I do agree that he lacks the clout. I am not sure anyone has the clout. This situation absolutely seems like a runaway train headed for God-knows-where.

      I didn’t disagree with Romney’s assessment. I have seen the people at the conventions in video. I have not been impressed. Obviously the standards are not high. Perhaps that is what Romney was speaking of.

  9. blue

    Its a good discussion when you can agree with everyone on both sides.

    Bottom line, however, is that Romney just produced the best ad for Hillory – or Sanders – imaginable. And for that he has betrayed himself, and his party. And, yes, I do beleive that he is angling to be the designated savior at the convention, which makes him all the more corrupt. He did not act in the interest of Country but for himself, and for that he has lost any honor he might have had.

    1. At some point Republicans have to ask themselves how much honor they can have with the kind of raucous behavior being demonstrated.

      Perhaps he is acting in self interest. But–bear in mind that he could have run a year ago. It isn’t like he couldn’t have jumped into the fray if he really wanted to. In many respects, he might be acting out of regard for his party.

      I have a difficult time having that much loyalty to either party or any party for that matter. Would you sell your soul for the sake of the party? Oh hell no I wouldn’t. I dropped off being Republican in the 80’s when the religious nuts tried to take over. Then I dropped out of being in the Democratic party when party loyalty became an issue over what I thought to be right (locally).

      Loyalty to ideology just isn’t within my being.

      I don’t think Romney is corrupt. I know that there has been on on-going push to get him on board. I don’t care for his make-over but that is policy, not the person. I can like people I can’t vote for.

    2. Blue said

      Its a good discussion when you can agree with everyone on both sides.

      I agree and I wish Congress could get to the point of finding some common ground, rather than shutting own every idea the minute it is presented.

  10. blue

    I was a Romney supporter – for a number of reasons, but last night just before the debate I recieved an e-mail asking for money for Rubio. Not all that surprising until I read the fine print; it was sent by the Romney for President Committee.

    1. Would that be the old Romney for President or the New Romney for President Committee? That is certainly a telling piece of email. Thanks for the info.

  11. Steve Thomas

    blue :
    I was a Romney supporter – for a number of reasons, but last night just before the debate I recieved an e-mail asking for money for Rubio. Not all that surprising until I read the fine print; it was sent by the Romney for President Committee.

    I doubt this will change Trump’s upward trajectory at all. In fact, I think it only solidifies Trumps brand as the “anti-establishment candidate”, a mantle successfully swiped from Cruz. All Romney accomplished was to put a finer point on that which the electorate already knows.

    1. I doubt if it will change anything either. I agree.

  12. Pat.Herve

    It was the message that Romney – and the Establishment are sending – they are not saying vote of this guy who will be the best candidate. They are saying that ‘we need to stop Trump’. They want chaos at the convention. They are pushing anyone but Trump – any other year, they would be getting behind the front runner in order to have a strong candidate.

    They are attacking Trump for taking advantage of free trade with Mexico – a Republican agreement.
    They are attacking Trump for taking advantage of foreign workers – a legal program Cruz and Rubio are trying to enlarge.
    Romney is saying that Trump has a hidden bomb in his taxes – is this the same Romney that complained when Reid said similar things?
    Rubio complains about personal attacks, yet talks incessantly about the size of Trumps hands and spray tans (I think he uses the same one as Boehner).
    The Republican Party wants oaths to support the nominee – yet prominent Republicans are openly saying they will not support Trump – what kind of principles is that?

    Wake up Republican Party – get out of the echo chamber and LISTEN to the electorate.

    1. The GOP needs to look at a little history….the 1968 Democratic convention. How did that all work out for the Democrats????? I didn’t understand it then. Not sure I do now. Essentially, in the end, the establishment ignored the will of the people. They lost to Dick Nixon.

  13. Kelly_3406

    Pat +1

    Your points are exactly what I meant by moral authority. Romney has criticized Trump for not being a supporter of Republican principles, but he famously became “conservative” after supporting abortion and pushing through Romneycare as governor in Massachussetts. He lacks the “moral authority” to call out another candidate for inconsistency.

    Romney appears to be uniting the GOP in a way that he never intended. There seems to be strong majority coming out strongly against a brokered convention.

  14. Kelly_3406

    It seems very significant that Trump changed his position to support foreign workers with skills in science, technology, engineering or math (STEM) who are in the US legally. He seems to be preparing quietly (for him) to develop reasonable policy positions.

    1. I don’t see foreigner workers and having anything to do with what Trump said about immigration.

      I don’t mind bringing in specialty workers–dancers, cooks, circus artists, etc. BUT–companies bring in foreign workers and pay them much less than they do American workers. Meanwhile, Americans can’t find jobs. It happens all the time and it is simply dead wrong.

      Meanwhile. Republicans howl and block comprehensive immigration reform. They play on the fears of the lower and middle classes about “illegals’ and then big business brings in hundreds of highly skilled works for pennies on the dollar to squeeze out highly skilled Americans.

      Follow the money. It’s all done perfectly legally. Who bears the brunt? The poor chap who enters illegally just to keep body and soul together.

  15. blue

    I am hearing agreement here. Yes, illegal immigration has driven down wages, increased our social welfare costs and has increased our crime rate. Unemployment is demeaning and illegal immigration is compounding that social and economic ill. Legal immigration is also out of control and needs to be revised and controlled to ensure that we are not displacing our own skilled workers too.

Comments are closed.