Am I the only one who thinks Romney will stage a comeback in 2016?

[Consciously Unconscious]

It seems as if most of the people saying yes were answering the question "Am I the only one. . .?"

[morgieb]

Yeah, he ain't running. He had his chance, and I can't see him wanting to go down that path again.

[eric82oslo]

47% of the populace will strongly disagree with you. But seriously, that guy has shot himself in the foot - and even in the heart - so many times already that I think a comeback close in time would be next to impossible. He actually claimed that people who thought giving education to illegal immigrants were horrible people. That doesn't make him a heartless person only in Rick Perry's view, but also in mine, and I'm sure in millions of others' minds.

[PJ]

Of course it doesn't have to be in 2016, it could also be in 2020. Nixon came back 8 years after, after all, and even in the most socialist of Democrats must concede that Romney is a better man then Nixon.

socialist =/= democrats

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

Of course it doesn't have to be in 2016, it could also be in 2020. Nixon came back 8 years after, after all, and even in the most socialist of Democrats must concede that Romney is a better man then Nixon.

socialist =/= democrats

They might not call themselves socialists, but the majority of Democrats favor Fabian socialism- normaly referred to as "social democracy", the gradual transition from a capitalist economy to a government run economy. They might not use that terminology, but it is at the heart of everything they promote.

47% of the populace will strongly disagree with you. But seriously, that guy has shot himself in the foot - and even in the heart - so many times already that I think a comeback close in time would be next to impossible. He actually claimed that people who thought giving education to illegal immigrants were horrible people. That doesn't make him a heartless person only in Rick Perry's view, but also in mine, and I'm sure in millions of others' minds.

Well that might come across as cold hearted, but the fact is that providing public services to illegal immigrants is essentially subsidizing their trespassing on American soil, and in any case they don't pay the taxes that fund public services such as schools so  they're not really entitled to them.

He's done. He's had his chances. He has far too much baggage. Comparing him to Nixon is horrible because Nixon didn't lose/screw up as badly as he did, and Nixon was far younger.

He'll only be 68 in 2016, younger then John McCain who was 71 in 2008. Plus he looks younger then he actually is, which counts for a lot in today's shallow world.

And how is Romney's defeat a bigger fumble then Nixon's in 1960?

I don't get why any Republican would want him to. You really want to give another chance to the guy who is on video bashing half the country?

I don't see what the problem is. Firstly Romney wasn't bashing them, he was explaining their consistent support for the Democrats- and if anything he was a defending the poor and leftists by asserting they were motivated by self-interest, contra those with more rightwing views who accuse them of being motivated by socialist ideals and jealousy.

Secondly those folks will never vote for a Republican, Romney or not, so what is lost from nominating him again?

Plus, if he was to run again - what exactly would he be running as? Failed presidential candidate who served one term as governor at least ten years ago?

He'd be running on the same qualifications he did in 2012. +
-a man who's warnings of what Obama's reelection would mean have been vindicated
-a man tempered and given new perspective by his defeat and time out of the limelight
-a man who's background as fixer(both of corporations and the Salt Lake Olympics) is even more relevant in 2016 then it was in 2012.

[Mordecai]

They might not call themselves socialists, but the majority of Democrats favor Fabian socialism- normaly referred to as "social democracy", the gradual transition from a capitalist economy to a government run economy. They might not use that terminology, but it is at the heart of everything they promote.

Not for about thirty years they haven't. Ever since the 1980s they've been moving right towards neoliberalism and have used cultural liberalism to distinguish themselves from Republicans.

Well that might come across as cold hearted, but the fact is that providing public services to illegal immigrants is essentially subsidizing their trespassing on American soil, and in any case they don't pay the taxes that fund public services such as schools so  they're not really entitled to them.

He should have taken a leaf out of Reagan's book on amnesty and called for a national DREAM Act.

He'll only be 68 in 2016, younger then John McCain who was 71 in 2008. Plus he looks younger then he actually is, which counts for a lot in today's shallow world.

That's one of the biggest problems with the GOP right now, they can't stop nominating candidates who should be thinking of retiring from politics instead of running for President. It worked with Reagan because he had personality, he was likeable and he had the skills from his acting career (it was a shallow world back then too). Heck, Romney even pales in comparison to McCain, who at at least had a compelling life story and a persona. A "Comeback Kid" narrative won't work with a guy who's nearly 70 and hasn't held office in nearly ten years.

I don't see what the problem is. Firstly Romney wasn't bashing them, he was explaining their consistent support for the Democrats- and if anything he was a defending the poor and leftists by asserting they were motivated by self-interest, contra those with more rightwing views who accuse them of being motivated by socialist ideals and jealousy.

He blatantly said that he wasn't going to bother trying to understand them or let them try to understand him. Instead he's going to appeal to about only 5% of people. Which, to a lot of people, meant that he didn't care about their problems and obliterated the chance of getting their vote.

Secondly those folks will never vote for a Republican, Romney or not, so what is lost from nominating him again?

The little, dwindling dignity that the Republican Party has left.

He'd be running on the same qualifications he did in 2012. +
-a man who's warnings of what Obama's reelection would mean have been vindicated
-a man tempered and given new perspective by his defeat and time out of the limelight
-a man who's background as fixer(both of corporations and the Salt Lake Olympics) is even more relevant in 2016 then it was in 2012.

Except that he'd have exactly the same problems as he did in 2012 with the added disadvantage of having lost to Obama and his opponents having a stockpile of ammo to use against him. He'd be booed out of the primaries.

[Lincoln Republican]

No, he will not mount a comeback.

Yes, you are the only one who thinks he will.

[Mister Mets]

I don't think he will, but it seems likelier now than it did last year. Three things have changed.

- He's kept a fairly high media profile. The netflix documentary and the Melissa Harris Perry gaffe about his adopted grandson have kept his name in the news in a good way.

- Policy outcomes have been in his favor. He could run a "Don't you wish you voted for me in 2012?" campaign. The economy's not the best, and there's the Obamacare roll-out.

- A top establishment Republican had a really bad week. Christie's chances of running have decreased so there's an opening in the slot Romney took in '12.

[IceSpear]

I don't get why any Republican would want him to. You really want to give another chance to the guy who is on video bashing half the country?

I don't see what the problem is. Firstly Romney wasn't bashing them, he was explaining their consistent support for the Democrats- and if anything he was a defending the poor and leftists by asserting they were motivated by self-interest, contra those with more rightwing views who accuse them of being motivated by socialist ideals and jealousy.

Secondly those folks will never vote for a Republican, Romney or not, so what is lost from nominating him again?

Well first of all, Romney's comments didn't really make sense anyway. He seemed to be conflating two ideas: the amount of people who will vote Democratic no matter what, and the 47% of people who pay no INCOME tax, as if these were the same exact groups. Obviously, this is not the case. Obama had plenty of rich supporters (Hollywood, latte liberals) and Romney had plenty of poor supporters (Appalachian whites).

Secondly, I don't see how anyone could read this and not see it as insulting:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And lastly, if you're so right wing you broke the political compass, shouldn't you hate Romney anyway? Most of the far right hated him all throughout the primary and only held their nose to vote for him because of how much they disliked Obama.

[Mister Mets]

Hot Air has a piece on it.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/01/17/gop-establishment-panics-over-christies-troubles-i-think-we-need-mitt-back/

It's based on a comment in a buzzfeed piece.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/chris-christies-crisis-plunges-republican-party-deeper-into

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Peeperkorn]

Romney is a better man then Nixon.

Quakers > Mormen, so no.

Also, Dick was a selfmade man of humble origins while Mittens was like an evil and dumber Richie Rich since he was born.

These Romney-love completely baffles me. Is it some kind of strange paraphilia?

[ag]

I think the GOP    want someone more moderate on immigration.

Hispanics don't care about immigration,

Keep dreaming.

[badgate]

I think the GOP    want someone more moderate on immigration.

Hispanics don't care about immigration,

Excerpt from Rep. Joaquin Castro's recent Texas Monthly piece 'Mr. Castro Goes to Washington'

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Full Story: http://www.texasmonthly.com/story/behind-the-scenes-of-joaquin-castros-first-year-in-congress

[Skill and Chance]

It would be highly unlikely, but I'm not going to say impossible.  One can envision a scenario where things get bad enough for the GOP that he is the only credible game in town, like William J. Bryan was for the early 20th century Dems.

That having been said, Romney would be far better positioned for the future if 2012 had been closer.  The Nixon 1960 comparison would be a lot more compelling if it had all come down to 1000 votes in Colorado in a recount with Romney carrying the national PV.

[Peeperkorn]

Hispanic agenda is to reach the 70% of "American" population and then put the wasps in reserves with McDonald's and protestant churches for tourism.

[Minnesota Mike]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/18/mitt-romney-president_n_4624365.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

[Mordecai]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/18/mitt-romney-president_n_4624365.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

Which means that he doesn't think he has a chance. Which is probably better for everyone.

[seanNJ9]

Think about it. Obama has been an even great disaster thus far then he was in his first term. And Obamacare has been a resolute disaster, making it far less effective a weapon to use against Romney- he can at least assert "at least I didn't screw it up when I implemented it in Massachusetts.

Moreover, he's taken a more laidback and reflective lifestyle since his defeat(remember that story about him buying sh**t at some store?), so that if he comes back in it'll be with a less elitist public image and with his prior detachment(which I will admit he did suffer from) tempered.

what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[crash1984]

I think Romney is done. For what it is worth he never really had much competition in the 2012 primaries. The big names all realized Obama would likely win again and as a result most of the other candidates were running simply for other political gains. About the only candidate who was not looking for political gains other than Romney was Rick Perry but he was just not ready.

2016 the primaries are going to be less people who are looking to make political gains and more people who are looking to become president. Even if Romney had not ran in 2012 I still doubt he would make it far in 2016. You are going to have people like Christie (the scandals will be blown over within a few months), Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, and Rick Perry all fighting for the Republican nomination.

[New_Conservative]

I think Mitt would make a great President, but I hope for his sake, that he will no longer run for President.

[You kip if you want to...]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/18/mitt-romney-president_n_4624365.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK

[eric82oslo]

There's a new documentary out these days called "Mitt" which is right now premiering at the Sundance Film Festival. It is following Mitt during both of his presidential campaigns. A reporter at the Washington Examiner has watched the film and he is reporting back to his readers.

This is the summarizing last part of the story: "A candidate who did not believe he could beat the president in debate, who always felt second-best to his father, who believed the country was moving away from him, and who didn't even feel at home in his own party. The Romney campaign faced many uphill battles in the 2012 campaign. "Mitt" shows us that some of the most intense were in the candidate's mind."

Read the entire illuminating, surprising and highly interesting story here: http://washingtonexaminer.com/in-new-film-a-dramatic-look-at-mitt-romneys-loss-of-confidence/article/2542430

The first thing that enters your mind while reading the story is not that Mitt will probably make a heroic comeback in 2016.

[Mister Mets]

His name was included in a Purple Strategies poll of potential New Hampshire primary voters.

http://www.purplestrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/Jan2014NHPoll_Final.pdf

He got 25 percent, compared to Rand Paul's 18 percent and Chris Christie's 17 percent.

I don't think he'll run, but there may be a non-trivial chance of it happening.

[Mr. Morden]

He's already given an Elizabeth Warren-esque denial of interest:

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2014/01/mitt_romney_christie_obama_201.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

If Mitt is being seriously entertained by GOP voters... then Jebus... just gift the Dems the White House.