Ryan,
That is some pretty tortured spin, my friend.
It looks pretty clear he was asked explicitly whether he supported those ballot issues in particular. And it is clear from his statement that he was avoiding publicly supporting the specific ballot issues. The only out he possibly has is that he was ignorant of the content of the particular ballot issues and how they to the efforts he expressed general support for. And indeed, he does say "I am not terribly familiar with the two ballot initiatives." However, he was at a phone bank specifically tasked with ginning support for the ballot issues. He really was not briefed on what they were doing? Come on. And, as you note, he expressed support for "My friends in Ohio [who] are fighting to defend crucial reforms ..." on his Facebook back in June. That is not exculpatory but shows he knew exactly what was going on and what the issues were.
It is pretty obvious that Mitt knew exactly what he was doing. He wanted support from the phone bank workers and the Ohio Republican voters, so he went there to cheer them on. But he also knew that the ballot issues are polling badly and did not want to be tied too directly to supporting them, potentially harming his chances with independent voters. Hence, not advertising the visit to reporters and demuring when asked if he supported the specific ballot initiatives.
The charge against Romney isn't that he is doesn't agree with the ballot issues. The charge is that his support is conditional on whether it makes him look good or not. The charge is that he can't be counted on to go to the mat on issues that are important. He's perfectly willing to reap the rewards as long as there's no political risk to him.
Romney has to be dragged to the right. That is just going to be a fact of life for conservatives if he gets the nomination and the office. That will be our "regular programming" as long as he is our front man. We'll get lip service, but who knows what he'll spend his political capital on.
--dmac
No comments:
Post a Comment