Is Romney the Republican John Kerry?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The guy people aren't really thrilled with but nominate anyway because he'll snatch up all the early states?

I'm thinking so.

[Mr. Morden]

Massachusetts in late 2007 / early 2008:

World Series champion
Super Bowl champion?
GOP presidential nomination?

[RRB]

I'm telling you guys.....It's going to be Huckabee

[MODU]

I'm telling you guys.....It's going to be Huckabee

I like Huckabee, and am glad that he's finally considered by some a top-tiered candidate.  Can he continue with his momentum to get to the top?  I don't know, but it is fun to watch someone topple the "anointed ones."

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I'm telling you guys.....It's going to be Huckabee

If it's not Romney - it WILL be Huckabee.

[© tweed]

Romney = Kerry isn't a very good parallel.

[Inmate Trump]

I don't understand why the Republicans are warming up so nicely with this guy....I can see Huckabee, Giuliani, McCain...they all make sense.  But Romney?  I don't get it.

Yes, he's their John Kerry in that he's boring, a fake, and completely unelectable when it comes to the general election.  He may get the nomination, but he WILL lose election.  The only people who will vote for him are hardcore Republicans who'll vote for any candidate so long as they claim to be Republican.  All the other "less-than-hardcore" Republicans, and ALL independents will vote for the Democrat.

Mitt Romney is a good candidate for the Republicans, if they want to toss away whatever credibility they haven't yet lost and lose the White House for the next 8 years.  With the other choices, they might have a chance, plus they'll know they aren't giving away their vote to a lying used carsalesman who says absolutely anything to get a bounce in the polls.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Kerry is a decisive straight-shooter compared to this Massachusetts flip flopper.

[Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred]

Unfortuntalely for Democrats, if the best they can muster up is a bunch of pathetic one-term senators and a shrill, opportunistic hag like Hillary with so many skeletons in her closet that the sound of their clattering bones will drown out anything she has to say in the general election, I would say that Mitt Romney has a VERY excellent shot at becoming the next President of the United States.

Like someone on here once said, those who underestimate Romney do so at their own peril. And like I said before, you cannot analyze a particular candidate's weaknesses in a vacuum.

Oh, and PS: Mitt Romney is a former governor with exectutive experience.  John Kerry was a legistlator.   Why are Democrats too stupid to learn that governors, and not senators, make far more formidable candidates?   You will continue to lose elections, time and time again, if you overlook this simple fact.

[Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred]

Mitt Romney is nothing like John Kerry.  John Kerry is a mediocre legislating wall-flower.  Mitt Romney is a distinguished and accomplished businessman, manager, and executive.  The mere fact that Massachusetts elected them is their only similarity.  The reason Romney is winning in the early states is not just a coincidence, it's because the more people hear about him, the more they like him and his common sense, as well as his complicated and experience-driven, views.  His experience, conviction, and commanding Presidential presence demand attention and respect.  Well deserved respect at that.  He has made real achievements and understands the issues this country is facing and their possible solutions better than any other candidate.  He is not fake, he does not change to fit the tide, he is a principled, consistent leader.  That's exactly what we need right now and Mitt Romney is the only candidate that can provide that.

I agreed with you up until that amazingly ridiculous assertion that Flip Romney "does not change to fit the tide".     You have got to be joking, right? 

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Oh, and PS: Mitt Romney is a former governor with exectutive experience.  John Kerry was a legistlator.   Why are Democrats too stupid to learn that governors, and not senators, make far more formidable candidates?   You will continue to lose elections, time and time again, if you overlook this simple fact.

Oh sure. The GOP could nominate Bob Taft and he'd no doubt defeat any senator.

The fact there are disadvantages to being a senator doesn't mean governor has any magical advantages, especially one with a very mediocre and easily attackable record as Romney. And the disadvantages of being a senator are much weaker with one-term ones as opposed to Kerry. And certainly weaker than being a Mormon. Romney is not going to be the next President, the only "major" candidate I'd say that with more certainty is Thompson.

[opebo]

...a shrill, opportunistic hag like Hillary...

Of course, racist (I refer to your screen name 'Tonto'), no woman could reach the position of candidate for the nomination of the Democratic Party without being considered 'shrill' or a 'hag' by misogynists such as you. 

[Lincoln Republican]

The answer to this obviously loaded and biased question posed by Romneyphobe and anti-Mormon fanatic BRTD is an emphatic, categorical, unambiguous, definitive, resounding, unmistakable no.

Grow up, drop your bigotry, and cease your childish, uninformed, and churlish attacks on Romney's faith.  Romney is running for President as a qualified, accomplished, and highly skilled political leader, not as a Mormon.

No, Mitt Romney is not the Republican John Kerry.   

Romney is more intelligent than Kerry.
Romney has a much more impressive record of accomplishment than Kerry.
Romney is by far a more effective communicator, speaker, and political performer than Kerry.
Romney is infinitely more photogenic than Kerry.
Romney is more capable than Kerry.
Romney is clearly and definitely Presidential timber, a status Kerry could never hope to achieve.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Oh sure. The GOP could nominate Bob Taft and he'd no doubt defeat any senator.

The fact there are disadvantages to being a senator doesn't mean governor has any magical advantages, especially one with a very mediocre and easily attackable record as Romney. And the disadvantages of being a senator are much weaker with one-term ones as opposed to Kerry. And certainly weaker than being a Mormon. Romney is not going to be the next President, the only "major" candidate I'd say that with more certainty is Thompson.

Why are you so obsessed with singular extreme cases as proof that something is wrong?  I could just as easily say the GOP could nominate Larry Craig and he'd no doubt defeat any Governor.  Grow up and debate with logic and facts, instead of using the argument tactics of a three-year-old.  Your partisan and biased view of Romney's record as Governor does not mean that it is mediocre.  Contrary to fact (used very loosely) in BRTD world, Romney was highly praised for his accomplishments and made a clear difference in the way Massachusetts ran.  Also contrary to your hopes and dreams, Romney is a much more formidable candidate than John Kerry could ever hope to be.  John Kerry lost in a year that should have been a Democratic cake-walk to the White House while Romney has turned himself from a one-term Governor with a "very mediocre and easily attackable record" to a top candidate for President.  Wow, what a spin!  If he can do that, how could he possibly be considered a weak candidate?

The point is, Americans do not vote for someone just because they have been a Governor. It's just the type of people the jobs that it and the Senate attract and the voting records Senators compile that mean Governors tend to be good candidates. This does not mean that as that troll above claims, a Governor will ALWAYS beat a Senator.

As for Romney's record, go take a look at his approvals in Massachusetts right before he left office, and his status as a candidate, go look at his current standing in the GE polls.

[Gustaf]

Romney isn't very similar to Kerry in other respects though. He isn't electable for instance, which is what people thought Kerry was.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

The answer to this obviously loaded and biased question posed by Romneyphobe and anti-Mormon fanatic BRTD is an emphatic, categorical, unambiguous, definitive, resounding, unmistakable no.

Grow up, drop your bigotry, and cease your childish, uninformed, and churlish attacks on Romney's faith.  Romney is running for President as a qualified, accomplished, and highly skilled political leader, not as a Mormon.

No, Mitt Romney is not the Republican John Kerry.   

Romney is more intelligent than Kerry.
Romney has a much more impressive record of accomplishment than Kerry.
Romney is by far a more effective communicator, speaker, and political performer than Kerry.
Romney is infinitely more photogenic than Kerry.
Romney is more capable than Kerry.
Romney is clearly and definitely Presidential timber, a status Kerry could never hope to achieve.

I believe you have Romney and Kerry's names swapped.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The point is, Americans do not vote for someone just because they have been a Governor. It's just the type of people the jobs that it and the Senate attract and the voting records Senators compile that mean Governors tend to be good candidates. This does not mean that as that troll above claims, a Governor will ALWAYS beat a Senator.

As for Romney's record, go take a look at his approvals in Massachusetts right before he left office, and his status as a candidate, go look at his current standing in the GE polls.

No one said the only qualification to being elected President over a Senator was having a record as Governor.  It was simply stated that history has dictated that nine times out of ten, a Governor will beat a Senator in the race for President.  It's sad that this even has to be explained, because I know you know this, you're just too childish to form an actual debate and feel the need to resort to these ridiculous "oh yeah, what if" extreme contrary cases.  Thank you, we are all aware that it is not a 100% fact that any Governor will beat any Senator in a Presidential race no matter what the circumstances.  But it is highly likely that in ordinary circumstances, a Governor is more likely to win the race than a Senator.

And yes, I know Governors usually win. However I explained there are various reasons for this that do not apply to Romney. And I never was claiming that you believe that any Governor would beat any Senator 100% of the time, just that that troll above basically is. And check out his latest post for more trollish nonsense if you think what I'm saying is stupid.

[Gustaf]

Romney is more like a Republican Howard Dean than John Kerry if you ask me. But he is a bit of an odd fellow as a presidential candidate which makes hím hard to predict. The Democratic equivalent would be a failed one-term Governor of Utah with low national support, high support in the early states, who used to be really conservative but now profiles as the liberal candidate even though the hard-core liberals have reason to hate him and who gets thrashed in the national polls by all Republicans. I don't think such a candidate has ever existed. George McGovern maybe?

[Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred]

Romney isn't very similar to Kerry in other respects though. He isn't electable for instance, which is what people thought Kerry was.

You want a good definition of the word "crazy"?

Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result each time.

[Conan]

Mitt Romney is nothing like John Kerry.  John Kerry is a mediocre legislating wall-flower.  Mitt Romney is a distinguished and accomplished businessman, manager, and executive.  The mere fact that Massachusetts elected them is their only similarity.  The reason Romney is winning in the early states is not just a coincidence, it's because the more people hear about him, the more they like him and his common sense, as well as his complicated and experience-driven, views.  His experience, conviction, and commanding Presidential presence demand attention and respect.  Well deserved respect at that.  He has made real achievements and understands the issues this country is facing and their possible solutions better than any other candidate.  He is not fake, he does not change to fit the tide, he is a principled, consistent leader.  That's exactly what we need right now and Mitt Romney is the only candidate that can provide that.

I'm sure his experience as a war hero didn't show any managerial or distinguishing traits.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Can the Romney defenders explain why he's getting killed in the polls now and doing significantly worse than the other GOP candidates (showing that this isn't just something happening to the Republicans at large.)

[Nym90]

Well, in terms of the race for the nomination, possibly.

He'll lose the general by a lot more than Kerry did, though.

[Jaggerjack]

The answer to this obviously loaded and biased question posed by Romneyphobe and anti-Mormon fanatic BRTD is an emphatic, categorical, unambiguous, definitive, resounding, unmistakable no.

Grow up, drop your bigotry, and cease your childish, uninformed, and churlish attacks on Romney's faith.  Romney is running for President as a qualified, accomplished, and highly skilled political leader, not as a Mormon.

No, Mitt Romney is not the Republican John Kerry.   

Romney is more intelligent than Kerry.
Romney has a much more impressive record of accomplishment than Kerry.
Romney is by far a more effective communicator, speaker, and political performer than Kerry.
Romney is infinitely more photogenic than Kerry.
Romney is more capable than Kerry.
Romney is clearly and definitely Presidential timber, a status Kerry could never hope to achieve.

What the f**king EVER! I'm not interested in reading about you and your fantasies with Romney.

[Lincoln Republican]

Then you have one simple solution, Fabian, don't read my posts, which are not fantasies, rather, as in this case, intelligent statements of fact.

[Jaggerjack]

Then you have one simple solution, Fabian, don't read my posts, which are not fantasies, rather, as in this case, intelligent statements of fact.

Your facts are bullsh**t to the rest of us, man.