Skip to content

Mitt Romney claims a brokered convention would be a gift to Barack Obama

March 12, 2012

  Earlier today Mitt Romney voiced his displeasure at the prospect of a brokered convention.

Look, if we go all the way to the convention we would be – we would [be] signaling our doom in terms of replacing President Obama,” Romney said on Fox News.

“You’re going to see me getting the delegates I need to become the nominee and we sure as heck are not going to go to a convention. All the way to the end of August to select a nominee, and have campaigns working during the convention?” Romney said. “Why, can you imagine anything that would be a bigger gift to Barack Obama than us not having a nominee until the end of August? That’s just not going to happen

  Let me answer your question Mitt: Yes, I can imagine a bigger gift to Barack Obama than a brokered convention. The Republicans could nominate a big government, liberal ex-governor of Massachusetts who raised millions of dollars in fees (taxes?) on Massachusetts residents (especially gun owners,) supported healthcare mandates, bailouts, and cap and trade policies before he was against them. That would be one hell of a gift to Barack Obama because it would effectively neutralize several of the biggest issues in the general election and would give Barack Obama an opponent who simply isn’t all that different from the failed president, thusly handing a victory to Barack Obama.

  Mitt Romney is opposed to a brokered convention for one reason, and one reason only; it would mean that he failed to seal the deal, it would mean that he failed to win over conservatives because they can see right through his well crafted disguise and understand that he is not the man he claims to be. Mitt Romney feels as if he is entitled to the nomination and he is aghast at the prospect that he could possibly lose what he feels is rightfully his. I would argue that a brokered convention would provide the Republicans with the only chance–albeit a slight one at that–at offering the people a candidate who can beat Barack Obama because I feel Mitt Romney might be the least likely candidate in the field with a chance of defeating Barack Obama. I scoff at the notion being forced upon the American people by the establishment and the media that Mitt Romney is the most electable candidate.

  What Mitt Romney is basically telling voters is this: stop screwing around with the nomination process, give in and accept that he is the nominee, and stop voting for other candidates because it is useless. I find his assertion that he is the Republican anointed one to be just a little bit offensive–and quite Obama-like–and the voters will decide who should be the nominee. We certainly do not need an arrogant, self-centered politician telling us who we should vote for. We already have one of those in the White House and it hasn’t worked out too well, has it?

  Mitt Romney is not making the case that voters should consider him for president based on his political beliefs because he has none, he will do and say whatever he feels it will take for him to win the nomination, so instead he is trying to intimidate voters into supporting him by playing the “Obama card” because it is all he has left at this point. Mitt Romney is using the politics of fear to scare voters into voting for him, and if the Republicans do end up nominating him they will be thrust into years of irrelevancy.

17 Comments leave one →
  1. LD Jackson permalink
    March 12, 2012 10:02 pm

    With all due respect to Mr Romney,that is about as arrogant as anything I have heard Obama say.


    • March 12, 2012 10:07 pm

      He really does rub me the worng way, and the more this is dragged out the more he annoys me.


  2. Phillip Cleary permalink
    March 12, 2012 10:56 pm

    I feel that Romney is the preferred candidate. The Democrats preferred candidate. The media has been shooting down all the conservatives but has largely left Romney alone. The reasons are as you stated he is Obama lite.


    • March 13, 2012 6:12 am

      Exactly Phillip, the media will leave Romney alone until he is the nominee and then they will unload on him. THis is what happened with McCain and you would think that we would have learned this time around not to fall for the “most electable” scam.


  3. March 12, 2012 11:06 pm

    It doesn’t matter, the math is on Romney’s side the way it was when Obama put Hillary away.

    The rest is all media hype.


    • March 13, 2012 6:14 am

      It looks like that is the case Harrison, it will take a complete collapse for Romney to lose at this point.


  4. March 12, 2012 11:58 pm

    I’m not defending Romney-I don’t have that kind of skill, but on the other hand, the more time Republicans spend battling eachother, the less time they’ll have to battle Obama. Whoever the nominee is, they need to get to work. All of them should have been tearing into Obama from the start. So far, all we’ve gotten is rah rah rhetoric.
    Whoever the candidate, we could have Marco Rubio at vice, John Bolton secretary of state, Tom Tancredo Homeland Security, Paul Ryan budget director, Dr. Paul reinventing the FDA-the list goes on. Obama could be packing his bags in a matter of weeks. Maybe its just me being naive. It seems so simple.


    • March 13, 2012 6:16 am

      And Romney is the man who should take much of the blame for the negative tone of this election. He is the one who went negative when he felt threatened in Iowa and now the candidates have spent so much time trashing each other that I don’t think any of them are electable.


  5. bunkerville permalink
    March 13, 2012 9:37 am

    We are in the ultimate catch 22, otherwise known as damned if you do, and damned if you don’t. These three need figure it out among themselves, do what Obama did with Hillary and end this so we have a chance in hell. Once again, why do we have our Convention in late August? Especially after we decided to divy up the delegates and not winner take all in most the state races? They had to know it would be settled late in the year.Just wondering.


    • March 13, 2012 8:16 pm

      I like the proportional awarding of delegates, but it does seem short sighted on the part of the RNC because they should have know it would drag this process out. The RNC thought we would just fall in line and vote for Romney and that hasn’t happened yet; they deserve this for taking the voters for granted.


  6. March 13, 2012 1:26 pm

    Don’t be so sure that Romney is the sure-fire candidate. It looks as though he won’t get the required delegates to win outright. If he doesn’t get that, then it goes straight to a brokered convention. What happens then? Ron Paul sneaks in under the radar and gets the nomination. Very quietly, while the media has been ignoring this, Paul has been gaining a huge majority of the delegates in caucus states (actual votes are just straw polls and are meaningless, the real prize is delegates who are awarded afterward by volunteers). Also, Paul has committed people who have signed up to be delegates in primary states. Though they are bound to delegates in the first round of voting, they can vote for whomever they want after that. If a brokered convention happens, Ron Paul wins. He has the best organization; the media has just been too biased to notice.


  7. March 13, 2012 7:39 pm

    Perhaps his primary campaign slogan should be “resistance is futile?”



  1. GOP Nomination Race Hits Alabama and Mississippi

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: