Dan Balz's Take
Change as Romney's Tune
Mitt Romney has gingerly picked up the challenge that was laid down to all the Republican presidential candidates recently by Newt Gingrich. In a weekend speech in Michigan, Romney sounded a message of change, telling Republicans they must clean up their own house before they can expect to win back public confidence.
Gingrich believes Republicans will lose the White House next year unless the party's presidential nominee makes a clean break with President Bush and the state of affairs in Washington. Romney's speech -- buttressed by modest newspaper and television advertising -- marked the first attempt to rally support by suggesting just that.
But the new speech raised at least as many questions as it answered, not least of which is whether it delivers on the Romney promise of real change.
Romney's appraisal of his party was hardly a slashing critique of the president himself. When he mentioned Bush specifically, it was to praise him for keeping the country safe and restoring dignity to the Oval Office. But threaded throughout was a critical assessment of what has happened in Washington during Bush's nearly seven year in office.
Romney offered a familiar, if incomplete, litany of Bush's mistakes. They include the administration's woeful response to Hurricane Katrina, the failure by the president to use the veto to check rising federal spending, even the government's failure to prevent the subprime lending crisis. He also scored Washington Republicans for their ethical lapses -- a criticism of the party's congressional wing.
"At this critical time in our nation's history, Washington is failing us," he said. "I think we'd have to admit that the blame doesn't all belong to the Democrats. We Republicans have to put our own house in order."
Romney's takeaway line, which he has used in newspaper and television ads since, is that "change must begin with us." It is based on the campaign's assessment that Republican voters in particular believe the party has lost its way under Bush.
"This message speaks to an understanding among Republican activists that we have to refocus our efforts as a party on our core policy principles and start acting like Republicans again if we're going to win in 2008," Kevin Madden, the campaign spokesman, explained in an e-mail.
He said Republican activists are "frustrated with the way Washington has been conducting business on the core issues of spending, border security and ethical standards."
One unaffiliated GOP strategist said he was impressed with what Romney had to say over the weekend. "Romney is doing the best job developing a message for the GOP to move beyond the Bush era," he wrote in a message. "No other GOP campaign has this strategy as an integral part of their quest for the nomination."
Other Republican strategists were far less complimentary, saying they found the message either confusing or contradictory. One wrote in an e-mail, "Truthfully, it's hard to assess whether this will be an effective message or not because I just really don't get it. I'm not sure what they mean by that phrase and how the campaign might demonstrate it or make it real to people."
Another strategist was even more critical, saying it could become fodder for one of Romney's rivals for a devastating ad turning the change message on its head by reminding voters of Romney's various flip flops on issues. "All his flip flops into one giant change ad," this strategist said.
Romney has adapted his change message to win over Republican voters. Whether he can broaden it for a general election audience -- which would be his goal if he were to win the nomination -- is more problematic.
Like many politicians, he decries the partisanship in Washington. He calls for a return to civility in the political discourse and says he's ready to work with "good Democrats" to change the capitol. "The political atmosphere in Washington has become so toxic, we are in danger of weakening ourselves from within," he said in Michigan. "America needs unifying leadership."
What is his solution? Apparently through brinksmanship and confrontation with those "good Democrats" over spending. "If I am elected President," he said, "I will cap non-military discretionary spending at inflation less one percent. If I get appropriations above that amount, I will veto them. And I like vetoes. I've vetoed hundreds of items already. Let's put some fresh ink in the Presidential veto pen!"
Notably absent from his speech was any mention of the central challenge before the country and the biggest issue of Bush's presidency. Scour Romney's prepared text and you cannot find the word "Iraq" anywhere in it.
He focused on the threat of Islamic jihadism, but offered neither a critique of the administration's management of the war nor any blueprint for the future of Iraq. His silence on that issue -- and his ringing call for victory over Islamic terrorism -- implies a stay the course strategy for Iraq.
Why did he ignore the war? "Iraq is the central front in the war against terrorism and radical Jihad," Madden explained. "Governor Romney purposely talks about the global conflict we're facing as a way to underscore that the threats we face from terrorists are not just limited to Iraq and Afghanistan."
Romney's speech offered an affirmation of the party's conservative values. In that sense, he is no different than the other leading candidates in trying to appeal to the party's base. The language and sound bites in the speech boldly aim to make Romney distinctive within a jumbled GOP field. The specifics make him still one of the pack.
--Dan Balz
Posted at 2:10 PM ET on Sep 25, 2007
| Category:
Dan Balz's Take
Share This: 
Technorati
| Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Labor Endorsement 'Dogfight' Continues |
Next: Giuliani Stuck
on Sept. 11
Get This Widget >>
Posted by: piper190 | September 27, 2007 12:52 PM
ALEX3-Here is a free clue-just for YOU!
We have 160,000 Troops in Iraq-A Country of 40,000,000
Here in the US, a Country of 300,000,000, Mexico and Central America have 10,000,000 INVASORIOS! Now, add in the 30,000,000 Legal Foriegn Residents!
NOW, consider Presidente Cabrone's-Oops, Calderon's Comment-"Mexico has no Borders-where Mexicans are is Mexico"!
Sorry, but THIS Country has a MUCH Bigger issue than having our troops in a Foreign Country(Of which everyone LOVES to overlook:Germany, Phillipines, Japan, S. Korea(Still, Techically a Cease-Fire!)and others!). Or, is the Issue, that we are actually NEEDED in Iraq?
Posted by: rat-the | September 26, 2007 5:31 PM
More great news regarding Mitt Romney:
"But anyone listening to WBUR, Boston''s National Public Radio station, yesterday would have been hard pressed to miss news that new data out of the U.S. Department of Education showed Massachusetts kids scored higher than any other state on three out of four National Assessment of Educational Progress exams, and tied for first on number four. The state also won top honors the last time the test was administered, in 2005, when Romney was in office."
Mitt was the first elected American leader to bring HEALTH INSURANCE to all the citizens of Massachusetts "without" raising taxes.
Govenor Romney''s hard work on "education" issues also put his state at the top of all other fifty states.
Proven results in Health Insurance for ALL and Education results that puts his state ahead of all others in achievements.
Does this record and these facts help folks decide who''s the very best candidate from either party?
It''s all about "performance" which is why I''m voting for Mitt Romney in 2008.
Posted by: bridgeway | September 26, 2007 1:13 PM
What a phoney!
Posted by: busladies | September 26, 2007 10:05 AM
Mitt is the most viable moderate conservative in the Presidential race and the best qualified to bring new leadership with his vision for America''s future.
Gov. Romney has an impressive resume to showcase. When elected governor in 2002 he assumed a monstrous 3 billion dollar deficit and put the state of Massachusetts back in the black without raising taxes. In 2006 Mitt signed into law a bill that provided HEALTH INSURANCE to all the citizens of Massachusetts without raising taxes......wow!
His success in public office mirrors his record in the private sector at Bain Capitol where he reorganized and made household names of companies such as Domino''s Pizza and Staples.
He also bailed out the U.S. Olympics in Salt Lake City in 2002, and turned a profit there for 100 million dollars. I have nicknamed Mitt, "the Rominator", for obvious reasons.
Romney has also taken a tough stance on terrorism. Mitt wants to expedite the turn over of security in Iraq and in a June interview with the Associated Press Mitt indicated that he was against permanent US bases in Iraq.
Mitt''s the only top tier presidential candidate who strongly opposed the flawed Senate immigration bill( aka "No alien left behind") architected by Senators McCain and Kennedy.
Posted by: bridgeway | September 26, 2007 9:43 AM
The 2008 Election WILL BE the most important election in the History of our Country. And if the Dems win it will be the sharpest left turn we have ever taken in the History of the country. Cuban President Fidel Castro has spoke in favor of a Clinton/Obama ticket. That should be proof enough.
Posted by: lancerlabar | September 26, 2007 12:19 AM
Alex3,
If you think that Iraq is the most important issue facing America today, you are missing the bigger picture. Hillary will drag our country down a road to Socialism, unfortunately many Americans don't seem to care. If Romney or Thompson don't get the nomination I think I will vote for CDAVIDJ's pet goldfish.
Posted by: lancerlabar | September 26, 2007 12:14 AM
I'd like to offer my conclusion that Romney's agenda involves getting the rest of us to accept traditional family values, like impregnating your brother's 14 year old daughter in the name of Joseph Smith and his golden tablets.
Is that ok?
Posted by: lichtme | September 25, 2007 10:58 PM
I think Dan is absolutely right to point out the absence of the mention of "IRAQ" in Romney's speech. The most important issue facing Americans today and he doesn't mention it?
Tells you a lot where the GOP is today.
Hopefully he comes out against the war in some form or fashion later. Won't vote for him still, but the more the merrier I say.
Posted by: Alex3 | September 25, 2007 7:38 PM
Balz only brushes on the intellectual undercurrents that Romney must tread. That is, how to redefine the GOP, without alienating the patchwork constituencies that build the party's majority. The GOP has maneuvered itself into a situation where change=suicide but no change=certain death. In fact what Romney is actually attempting is not change, but the sheer survival of the GOP. I believe the GOP will fragment so severely in their convention, that internal discussion within the party will no longer be possible. The GOP may well fragment into a Libertarian Party and a Christian-Evangelical Party. This would actually be better than the situation today, because the two could align themselves, or not, as desired on various issues.
Posted by: AgentG | September 25, 2007 7:37 PM
So Romney thinks Bush has 'restored dignity to the Oval Office'? Does that mean that it is more dignified to lie us into war and hire incompetent cronies than it is to have an affair? Hmm, I'll have to think about that one.
Posted by: jlk1 | September 25, 2007 7:12 PM
The Democratic candidates (Note the proper use of the adjective, Mr. President) may have baggage, warts, skeletons, etc., but the Republicans cannot seem to field one sincere or genuine candidate (hence rat-the's Frankenstein monster).
I don't much like Hillary or the Clinton brand of politics, but I would vote for my pet goldfish before I would vote for a complete amoeba like Mitt.
Posted by: cdavidj | September 25, 2007 6:30 PM
GLOBALINKUSA and NINNAFAYE-This last comment(S) can be directed at you, as well as the Republican leadership!
The whole "Concept" of Debates, Primaries, and even Lame Chimp-like Ducklings, can be OBLITERATED by the UNPRECEDENTED dream of this little RAT!
See, the varied Backgrounds of the Republican Contenders "Compliment" each other! Why have Syrup debate the Pancake?
Why have Honey Debate the Biscuit?
Why make them have to make anyone chose which they like more?
EVERYONE loves a Buffet!
Imagine No Primaries needed! Sure winners already in place-AND the beneficial impact of a certain RepubliCAN win on the Congressional races! All because of something RADICAL and un-heard of before RATs invaded!-Co-operation! Supportive actions! TEAM WORK!
Ohhhhhh, you dirty RAT!
Elections OVER!
Let's Party!
But, would Dr. Rudy McRomsonedo please prescribe the Cataonic Chimp a CLUE! First!
Posted by: rat-the | September 25, 2007 6:08 PM
Bush may have restored dignity back to the whitehouse but destroyed the dignity of US worldwide. Bozo Bush Whitehouse scandls may not involve sex... but involves everything else that, in the long term, is a lot more harmful to US & the world.
As we know now...We are all better off with an effective & caring president with a sex scadal then an empty head bafoon who is incapable of truly caring for anyone & even worse....of vision or governing. World can't wait for Jan 09 ... but sadly it will have to.
Alas.... instead of making history W will be in the dustbin of human history. What a waste of 8 yrs.
BC
Posted by: globallinkusa | September 25, 2007 5:54 PM
"Someone like her who talks so eagerly about gaining and wielding power really, really, REALLY makes me nervous."
Have you slept through the last six years? For that matter, have you heard of some guys named Rove and DeLay? Has there ever been a more transparent power grab in the history of the universe?
Lucky for the rest of us that "the permanent majority" has already screwed the pooch.
Posted by: cdavidj | September 25, 2007 5:49 PM
LOL!!!! NINNAFAYE!!!
Take it from this Penche Gringo, it's spelled Cajones!
Got MINE!
Now, in answer to your comment-I despise GROUPS!
I DESPISE "RACIST" Groups the WORST!
Sure, I'll want MY Reps. talking with La Raza and the NAACP! RIGHT AFTER THEY TALK TO THE KKK!
LOL-JOKING!
Americans, PRIZE our INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS!
There should never ever be "Group" Rights!
IMO-All Americans are BLUE! Same Color!
Now, as for all you "Dark" Blue People!
JOKING! JOKING!!!!
Posted by: rat-the | September 25, 2007 5:37 PM
hey rat-the, why are your saviors afraid to debate each other in a forum sponsored by black and latino citizens? when they win the election as you are so sure they will, will they govern the brown and black electorates, or just let them fend for themselves. why are the repugs so perverted and spaghetti spined? develope some kahones repugs or prepare for a good thumping in 08.
Posted by: ninnafaye | September 25, 2007 5:00 PM
Change might be nice if it were coming from someone who didn't try his hardest to stock his cabinet full of leftovers from the current administration. Cofer Black? That's a real force for change.
I can't wait 'til I get my hands on Washington and make it even worse than before!
If Romney can't get anything done with the MA legislature, what makes him think he'll get anything done with Congress?
Please look past the game show host charm and see this guy for what he really is: an ego run amok.
Posted by: peryteran2 | September 25, 2007 4:58 PM
After a succession of sex perversion and money scandals, a 14 year old kid could have told you that Romney. But, as luck will have it, you idiots will NEVER LEARN.
Posted by: analyst72 | September 25, 2007 4:23 PM
Gimme a Flip! Gimme a Flop!
What'ya got? Flip-Flop!
Posted by: sequoiaqueneaux | September 25, 2007 4:17 PM
Dan Balz writes
"Romney's appraisal of his party was hardly a slashing critique of the president himself. When he mentioned Bush specifically, it was to praise him for keeping the country safe and restoring dignity to the Oval Office."
And thus the hurdle faced by the Republican candidates. How do you both pander to the base in order to win the nomination, while distancing yourself from the Bush administration in order to appeal to the majority of Americans that think the country is headed in the wrong direction? Kudos to Mr Romney for making the attempt. I don't see how it can work. I happen to agree with former Speaker Gingrich, but I don't think there's anyone running for the GOP nomination capable of pulling off the plan that the Newt outlines.
With any luck, the Dems will succeed in nominating someone who can bring a fresh perspective to the Presidency.
Posted by: bsimon | September 25, 2007 4:04 PM
If Obama doesn't make it, I could see myself supporting Romney before I would support Wonder Woman a.k.a. Hillary Rodham Clinton. She was on full display last weekend, talking like she was already president. Someone like her who talks so eagerly about gaining and wielding power really, really, REALLY makes me nervous.
Posted by: ripvanwinkleincollege | September 25, 2007 4:00 PM
Dyinglikeflies-Allow ME to retort!
What Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson would be, if they are the agreed upon Statesmen of Team "Dr.Rudy McRomsonedo", are the figureheads Giuliani(Legal), McCain(Military), Dr. No(AKA-Paul)(Medical-and just plain ol' good common sense), and Tancredo(Immigration and Labor Law advocate) in the CABINET-Able to persue their respective strengths, WOULD HELP GUIDE!
See, I do not another self appointed Know it not as President! Carter was the Previous winner of "Worst ever", until Bushie came along and tried being the Know it Not!
The Presidency of Reagon's was strong, because that slightly senile great Statesman could listen to GOOD Advice-exept the damned amnesty! LEARN from MISTAKES PLEASE!
I want a President who REPRESENTS ME, and America-NOT HIMSELF!
The issues you blast Mitt for flipping on, he does not decide anyway! Lurch's Voting for THE IRAQ OFFENSIVE, then NOT SUPPORTING IT, is a Flip I cannot ABIDE!
Besides-Does ANYONE want MORE LIBERAL JUDGES APPOINTED BY CONGRESSIONAL LAWYERS TO UNDERMINE THE LEGITIMATE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS?
Please, RepubliCANs, do WHATEVER IT TAKES TO WIN! TEAM UP!
Posted by: rat-the | September 25, 2007 3:51 PM
What is Romney's stand on his Church using Bishopric referrals and past practices at BYU using electroshock therapy to "cure" gays? Why won't he or his Church address this even if to say they thought it was the right thing to do at the time?
Posted by: coloradodog | September 25, 2007 3:37 PM
When Romney says Republicans must "change", we know he means it- he has changed his own positions so many times, and been so many different things to so many people, that he has become the Rich Little of this election. Or perhaps he is Sybil. If only one of his multiple personalities was that of an honest politician, then we could at least hope he would be the right person one seventh of the time.
Posted by: dyinglikeflies | September 25, 2007 3:36 PM
Hpoefully, my choice as the lead Statesman, of what I now jokingly refer to as "My Creation"-just in time for Halloween, and to become the Dim's worst nightmare therefor, will see this Post.
FACT Mitt-Elections in the US have had Abysimal Turnouts over the last few elections. We just are not impressed enough to justify the risk of being pulled into Jury-Duty by registering! We prefer to Vote by "Residence"
The latest bombardments of our Representatives over Bush's IDIOTIC Amnesty package, demostrates that we are actually alive! We will support REAL Changes-You Officials just NEVER try any!
What does the-RAT mean by REAL Changes?
Regulated, not un"Controlled" Substances!-Let Americans manufacture, distribute and LEGALLY Posses "TAXED" Substances!
EXPANDED and available to all who need it MILITARY HOSPITALS!-Keep the damned Insurance Companies OUT, and let Treatments be done by people learning while Earning on people grateful just to be getting treated!-Take the Burden OFF the private Hospitals! et V.A.Hospitals out into RURAL Locals where so many of the service personel come from!
FLAT TAX!-Greatest Idea since Sliced Bread!
ENFORCE OUR FEDERAL LAWS ON SOMETHING OTHER THAN JUST DRUGS!-I.E.-Illegals and Employers not properly reporting Employees and providing proper beni's like Worker's comp!-See Hospitals! D'oh!
Get HR 1940-Birthright Citizenship Act-Off of Ninn's desk and into REALITY-Make it Retro-active back say 10 Years-BB(Before Bush!)
These are what we WANT! You might just be surprised what stopping support of al-Maliki's Shia Theocracy, and getting a Secular Non-Sectarian Government in Iraq might do as well!-Not more of the Idiocy of pulling troops and creating the World's biggest mess imaginable!-we need to fix the problem, the problem began in Sadr City-Remember?
Finally, Do the RAT thing! Make my Dream for a Republi-CAN win come true! You guys will never, Never, NEVER!!! Get past Bush's tarnished reputation alone! Team Up!
My "Creation"-
DOCTOR RUDY McROMSONEDO!
Fear Dr. Rudy McRomsonedo Dims!
BwaaHaaHaaahaaaa!
Mitt-Check out my Comments site for more of the "Good Stuff"!
Your Welcome!
Posted by: rat-the | September 25, 2007 3:25 PM
"telling Republicans they must clean up their own house before they can expect to win back public confidence."
Okay. How about y'all take a couple years off to work this out? We'll be here...
Posted by: mobedda | September 25, 2007 3:11 PM
Well, at least Romney has the brains to recognize that any candidate who goes into the election as Bush, Part II is doomed from the get go. However, he still has to play to the same conservative base and that base has a value system that has pretty much been rejected by the vast majority of the country and the overwhelming majority of the rest of the world. So the change he is talking about needs to be awfully extreme. Probably too extreme to get him nominated.
Posted by: mountaintb | September 25, 2007 3:07 PM
Balz, you are bizzare.
You become awfully critical and negative because Romney doesn't answer all your questions at once?
Does every speech have to address every issue every time?
Come on, either be real or reveal who you are supporting.
Posted by: jprice1 | September 25, 2007 2:55 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
"But anyone listening to WBUR, Boston''s National Public Radio station, yesterday would have been hard pressed to miss news that new data out of the U.S. Department of Education showed Massachusetts kids scored higher than any other state on three out of four National Assessment of Educational Progress exams, and tied for first on number four."
I hate to break it to you, but for most of the last 200 years Massachusetts has been the most liberal and best-educated state in the nation. This has little if anything to do with Governor Romney. Maybe those crazy crazy blue staters are on to something.
Here's a radical thought: tax people a sustainable amount, invest the money in education, live and let live, and your state will prosper.
Or you could go the other route: establish creationist museums, keep tax rates too low so "the beast is starved" while raking in federal moneys supplied from the more prosperous blue states, keep the gays away, refuse to fund educational or health initiatives, etc.
--------------------------
But I digress from the political issue, as this is about Romney. How is Mr. Romney going to appeal to Republicans who HATE Massachusetts even though it the best educated and among the most prosperous states in the nation? He's running like a racehorse away from his health insurance plan which is the kind of pragmatic success that appeals to those outside the dead-end 29%.
Republicans are going to vote for a Mormon from Taxachusetts?