Romney 2016?

[ej2mm15]

If mitt runs and loses in 2012, and Obama wins reelection, would Romney run again in 2016?

[California8429]

2012 is a strech from him being Governor, 2016 would be his 3rd time. If he would be crazy to run again. And that would just be another 2 years of life on the campaign trail

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Who's going to even remember Romney in 2016 if he loses in 2012?

Beside, the guy would be already 10 years out of office.

[Donald Trump’s Toupée]

No. He'll be way too old, and seen as irrelevant. His hair will still look goof though.

[Poundingtherock]

HOpefully this question will be moot as he'll be gone in 2012, never to be heard from again except for fundraising purposes.

[tpfkaw]

I've opined elsewhere that if he loses the nomination in 2012, he'll become the 21st century equivalent of Harold Stassen.

[feeblepizza]

The only way Romney runs in 2016 is if he's running for reelection.

Honestly, wormyguy, I don't think Romney would spend his millions of dollars running for President over and over and over and over.

If anyone is the 21st century equivalent of Harold Stassen, it's Ralph Nader.

[tpfkaw]

Mitt Romney would keep running for President even if he spent every penny to his name.  The man has spent his entire life running for President.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

I think people are vastly overestimating Romney. He ran as a bog-standard conservative's wet dream and still lost to Mike Huckabee (who had about 1/16th his campaign funds) and John McCain.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I think people are vastly overestimating Romney. He ran as a bog-standard conservative's wet dream and still lost to Mike Huckabee (who had about 1/16th his campaign funds) and John McCain.

     Pretty much. He polled well in the early states when his only substantial competition was Giuliani in late 2007, but when Huckabee surged & McCain returned to the fore, he always seemed to be one step behind.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I think people are vastly overestimating Romney. He ran as a bog-standard conservative's wet dream and still lost to Mike Huckabee (who had about 1/16th his campaign funds) and John McCain.

Exactly. And Mitt is already, even if he do not know that yet, an yesterday news.

[CatoMinor]

I think it be fun to see him get crushed a 3rd time on the national level if he ran and lost in 2012 and 2016

[Donald Trump’s Toupée]

I think people are vastly overestimating Romney. He ran as a bog-standard conservative's wet dream and still lost to Mike Huckabee (who had about 1/16th his campaign funds) and John McCain.

He didn't really lose to Huckabee, did he? Romney suspended his campaign much earlier, while Huckabee continued to waste time and money chasing a nomination that he was never going to get.

Also, 2008 was the first time people seriously heard of Romney. He now has name recognition, something that people like Chris Christie lack. Romney is the strongest candidate for this reason - and the fact that he has done well with his public image and hasn't been made into a clown by the media compared to the likes of Palin.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

I think people are vastly overestimating Romney. He ran as a bog-standard conservative's wet dream and still lost to Mike Huckabee (who had about 1/16th his campaign funds) and John McCain.

He didn't really lose to Huckabee, did he? Romney suspended his campaign much earlier, while Huckabee continued to waste time and money chasing a nomination that he was never going to get.

Also, 2008 was the first time people seriously heard of Romney. He now has name recognition, something that people like Chris Christie lack. Romney is the strongest candidate for this reason - and the fact that he has done well with his public image and hasn't been made into a clown by the media compared to the likes of Palin.

Romney is too easy to take shots at. RomneyCare is the big one, and there are plenty of little examples of him being a blatant liberal. If any opponent thought that Romney would be the tough opposition, they could hammer away at him easily.

[tmthforu94]

I think people are vastly overestimating Romney. He ran as a bog-standard conservative's wet dream and still lost to Mike Huckabee (who had about 1/16th his campaign funds) and John McCain.

He didn't really lose to Huckabee, did he? Romney suspended his campaign much earlier, while Huckabee continued to waste time and money chasing a nomination that he was never going to get.

Also, 2008 was the first time people seriously heard of Romney. He now has name recognition, something that people like Chris Christie lack. Romney is the strongest candidate for this reason - and the fact that he has done well with his public image and hasn't been made into a clown by the media compared to the likes of Palin.

Exactly, Mitt beat Huckabee. Huckabee got more delegates only because he stayed in longer, but Mitt still lead him in the popular vote, despite dropping out an entire month before him.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

I think people are vastly overestimating Romney. He ran as a bog-standard conservative's wet dream and still lost to Mike Huckabee (who had about 1/16th his campaign funds) and John McCain.

He didn't really lose to Huckabee, did he? Romney suspended his campaign much earlier, while Huckabee continued to waste time and money chasing a nomination that he was never going to get.

Also, 2008 was the first time people seriously heard of Romney. He now has name recognition, something that people like Chris Christie lack. Romney is the strongest candidate for this reason - and the fact that he has done well with his public image and hasn't been made into a clown by the media compared to the likes of Palin.

Exactly, Mitt beat Huckabee. Huckabee got more delegates only because he stayed in longer, but Mitt still lead him in the popular vote, despite dropping out an entire month before him.

What makes you so certain the situation wouldn't have reversed had Romney stayed in the race?

Remember that on January 3, Huck led Romney both in popular vote and in delegates, but that changed later on. Let's assume you're right and that Romney was ahead when he dropped out; why are you so certain that Mitt could not have fell behind once again?

[tmthforu94]

I think people are vastly overestimating Romney. He ran as a bog-standard conservative's wet dream and still lost to Mike Huckabee (who had about 1/16th his campaign funds) and John McCain.

He didn't really lose to Huckabee, did he? Romney suspended his campaign much earlier, while Huckabee continued to waste time and money chasing a nomination that he was never going to get.

Also, 2008 was the first time people seriously heard of Romney. He now has name recognition, something that people like Chris Christie lack. Romney is the strongest candidate for this reason - and the fact that he has done well with his public image and hasn't been made into a clown by the media compared to the likes of Palin.

Exactly, Mitt beat Huckabee. Huckabee got more delegates only because he stayed in longer, but Mitt still lead him in the popular vote, despite dropping out an entire month before him.

What makes you so certain the situation wouldn't have reversed had Romney stayed in the race?

Remember that on January 3, Huck led Romney both in popular vote and in delegates, but that changed later on. Let's assume you're right and that Romney was ahead when he dropped out; why are you so certain that Mitt could not have fell behind once again?

Well, I am 100% sure on popular vote, and personally, I think that's the most important if we're talking about who took 2nd place. More Americans voting for Mitt Romney, so he should technically be in second place.

For delegates, Mitt Romney would have performed very well in both Vermont and Rhode Island, possibly winning at least one of them. He would have also performed decently in Texas and Ohio, picking up a couple delegates in each state. Mitt had a decent lead over Huckabee when he dropped out, and polls at the time did not suggest Huckabee could take Mitt over.

You're January 3rd analysis is just ridiculous, as I could counter that and say Mitt lead Huckabee from right after that till now, technically.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

I think people are vastly overestimating Romney. He ran as a bog-standard conservative's wet dream and still lost to Mike Huckabee (who had about 1/16th his campaign funds) and John McCain.

He didn't really lose to Huckabee, did he? Romney suspended his campaign much earlier, while Huckabee continued to waste time and money chasing a nomination that he was never going to get.

Also, 2008 was the first time people seriously heard of Romney. He now has name recognition, something that people like Chris Christie lack. Romney is the strongest candidate for this reason - and the fact that he has done well with his public image and hasn't been made into a clown by the media compared to the likes of Palin.

Exactly, Mitt beat Huckabee. Huckabee got more delegates only because he stayed in longer, but Mitt still lead him in the popular vote, despite dropping out an entire month before him.

So it was solely John McCain that creamed Mitt Romney?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I think people are vastly overestimating Romney. He ran as a bog-standard conservative's wet dream and still lost to Mike Huckabee (who had about 1/16th his campaign funds) and John McCain.

He didn't really lose to Huckabee, did he? Romney suspended his campaign much earlier, while Huckabee continued to waste time and money chasing a nomination that he was never going to get.

Also, 2008 was the first time people seriously heard of Romney. He now has name recognition, something that people like Chris Christie lack. Romney is the strongest candidate for this reason - and the fact that he has done well with his public image and hasn't been made into a clown by the media compared to the likes of Palin.

Exactly, Mitt beat Huckabee. Huckabee got more delegates only because he stayed in longer, but Mitt still lead him in the popular vote, despite dropping out an entire month before him.

So it was solely John McCain that creamed Mitt Romney?

HOW DARE YOU TO INSULT THE MAGNIFICENT MITT ROMNEY, A MAN WHO IS GREAT (EVENTUALLY, ACHIEVED GREATNESS). NOBODY EVER CREAMED HIM...

(except of Ted Kennedy in 1994 and John McCain and Mike Huckabee in 2008)

[TheGlobalizer]

Mitt isn't going to be on any presidential ticket, ever.

[Lincoln Republican]

If Romney runs and loses in 2012, no, he will not run in 2016.

Greatness has its' limits.

[milhouse24]

After losing in 2012, Mitt will run for RNC chairman, kiss everyone's butt and then will run again in 2016, its that simple.  He's on a mission from God.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

I think people are vastly overestimating Romney. He ran as a bog-standard conservative's wet dream and still lost to Mike Huckabee (who had about 1/16th his campaign funds) and John McCain.

He didn't really lose to Huckabee, did he? Romney suspended his campaign much earlier, while Huckabee continued to waste time and money chasing a nomination that he was never going to get.

Also, 2008 was the first time people seriously heard of Romney. He now has name recognition, something that people like Chris Christie lack. Romney is the strongest candidate for this reason - and the fact that he has done well with his public image and hasn't been made into a clown by the media compared to the likes of Palin.

Exactly, Mitt beat Huckabee. Huckabee got more delegates only because he stayed in longer, but Mitt still lead him in the popular vote, despite dropping out an entire month before him.

So it was solely John McCain that creamed Mitt Romney?

HOW DARE YOU TO INSULT THE MAGNIFICENT MITT ROMNEY, A MAN WHO IS GREAT (EVENTUALLY, ACHIEVED GREATNESS). NOBODY EVER CREAMED HIM...

(except of Ted Kennedy in 1994 and John McCain and Mike Huckabee in 2008)

Careful, he'll cut your throat off

[Roemerista]

He will Run. It is all he knows how to do.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

If Romney runs and loses in 2012, no, he will not run in 2016.

Greatness has its' limits.

Indeed, Mitt Romney achieved an amazing greatness in losing.