2012 Election | Gay Marriage | Mitt Romney | News

'Des Moines Register' Thinks They Know The Real Mitt Romney

For the first time since backing Richard Nixon in 1972, the Des Moines Register today backed a Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, because they think Romney's business background will help stabilize the economy.

Though the editors say President Obama made the right move with the stimulus package, they think only Mitt Romney can renew consumer confidence, which they claim will result in more industrial investment. The paper also believes Mitt Romney can overcome the obstructionism that hampered President Obama. But the Republican can only do so if he abandons the right wing agenda that helped him win the primary:

Romney should not squander an opportunity to build consensus in Washington by wasting time on issues that animate many in his party. We cannot rewind the clock on progress for minorities, women, gays and lesbians. We must make it easier for immigrants to come here to live and work legally and stop making criminals of those who are living here lawfully, paying taxes and raising families. The federal government must continue to insist on clean air and water and encourage clean and renewable energy.

The paper, which endorsed Romney during the primary, acknowledges that Romney shifted to center after winning that race, but thinks the man we see now is the "real" Romney, meaning he's more moderate than he let the right believe. His campaign's recent announcement that they still support a Federal Marriage Amendment says otherwise.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Of all the tropes, this one is the most annoying. Because he ran one institution that has one set of goals (profit), he can therefore run another one that has different goals (the security and well-being of its citizenry)?

    Businessmen are not saints, and governments are not businesses.

    Posted by: Mikemike | Oct 28, 2012 3:21:16 PM

  2. They endorsed Nixon as well.

    What possibly could go wrong?

    Posted by: AllBeefPatty | Oct 28, 2012 3:26:44 PM

  3. oh fer gawd's sake. It doesn't matter one bit whether Mitt is conservative or moderate. It's the makeup of the congress that will send Mitt the far-right legislation. The republican controlled house isn't going to become moderate just because Mitt "might" be moderate. And, Mitt sure as hell wouldn't veto anything they send to him.

    They claim Mitt was moderate as the Gov of Mass. But, that was only because he was forced to be. The legislature there was 87% democrats. And, Mitt vetoed a record number of bills they sent to him. They turned around and overrode a record number of his vetos. That's how he got a moderate record in Mass. By veto and override. If the people of Mass were so impressed with his governing qualities, why is he being trounced in Mass by Obama? Do you suppose that maybe the people of Mass know he isn't the moderate he claims to be?

    Posted by: Tim NC | Oct 28, 2012 3:27:13 PM

  4. "We cannot rewind the clock on progress for minorities, women, gays and lesbians."

    LULZ. Not sure if this is shear arrogance or false optimism. Look at the recent survey on race relationships and attitudes in the US...doesn't look like the clock is advancing, that's for sure. If there's any lesson from modern history, it's that "progress" is rewound all the time.

    Anyhow, "last Republican since Nixon" speaks volumes, look at how that turned out! And Nixon would be so liberal compared to today's Republicans he'd be kicked out of the party.

    Posted by: EchtKultig | Oct 28, 2012 3:27:51 PM

  5. Well said, MikeMike and just because someone at the DesMoines Register has an editorial column doesn't mean he/she can think. The logic behind this editorial seems to be -- Mitt said dumb stuff but he didn't mean it and we trust him because he told us too -- and you should too. Balderdash! Voting for Willard is buying a pig-in-a-poke.

    Posted by: Alex Parrish | Oct 28, 2012 3:28:18 PM

  6. ...and that wold be a pig WITHOUT lipstick!

    Posted by: Alex Parrish | Oct 28, 2012 3:29:33 PM

  7. God help us all if Romney wins

    Posted by: Mickey | Oct 28, 2012 3:31:15 PM

  8. Mittens doesn't know anything whatsoever about running a business. He only knows about buying companies

    Posted by: Steve | Oct 28, 2012 3:33:29 PM

  9. How astonishing it is to think of Nixon as a Moderate/relatively Liberal Republican! I'd be happier if we had a few genuine moderate and Conservatives Rethugs around, like Eisenhower and Goldwater. The Tea Piss soaked pretenders to conservatism ought to go to the chopping block sooner than later. Lets see some GENUINE Class Warfare for a change. the offending eyes or arseholes should be plucked out.

    Posted by: gregory brown | Oct 28, 2012 3:35:57 PM

  10. The DMRegister does reflect Iowa thesedays, which is not as nutty as fundie Kansas and Missouri, but close, an the huge elderly population and little growth population elsewhere is pushing the paper to write this. Frankly, I think once people reach retirement age they should not be allowed to vote. They simply have too much say on a future (the next 20-30 years) that they likely won;t be around in.

    Posted by: jesse | Oct 28, 2012 3:39:06 PM

  11. That recommendation seems to be based on wishful thinking. What a laugh. I guess someone was under pressure to write something, anything to fill a page of that rag.

    If Romney gets in there might be a whole lot of crying in the red states as their federal subsidies are eliminated and their state taxes go up.

    And for women voters they may find out in two years that the state has a higher priority in deciding what goes on in their wombs than they do.

    Yep, wishful thinking could end up with a whole of crying going on.

    Posted by: be careful what you wish for | Oct 28, 2012 4:09:07 PM

  12. LOL..there is no "real" Mitt Romney. He's going to say and do exactly what he thinks it will take to get him elected. And if he is running this country, he will do exactly as he is told to do, either by the Mormon elites or the Republican hierarchy.

    And running a government is nothing like running a business - it is often quite counter-intuitive. Remember, the last few times we've elected a "businessman", we've ended up in a depression (or near depression).

    Posted by: Talisman | Oct 28, 2012 4:10:18 PM

  13. The Des Moines Register saying Romney can overcome bipartisanship is like saying if we surrender to Al Quaida, we can have peace. The Republicans held this economy hostage and cheered for American failure. You want proof, look at the record number of filibusters. You want proof, go back to 2009 and watch how they cheered and gloated when the United States lost the 2016 Olympic bid. The only time they love this country is when their obscenely wealthy rich boys are running it. The Des Moines Register editorial board is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

    Posted by: Mike | Oct 28, 2012 4:32:46 PM

  14. From what I read, the top four newspapers across Iowa today all endorsed Romney.

    Posted by: MarkUs | Oct 28, 2012 4:33:12 PM

  15. @Talisman
    I read a great analogy earlier: Romney doesn't have a position. He has a waveform encompassing all possible positions until someone with a specific goal makes an observation and collapses the waveform into a state that exactly matches what he wants to hear.

    Posted by: Steve | Oct 28, 2012 4:38:09 PM

  16. I guess his record 800+ vetoes in Mass and the equally astounding 750+ overrides wasn't enough to prove them his inability to work across party lines? This bit of nonsense is the most irritating in an election cycle of irritating nonsense. The idea that Romney is some kind of bridge builder because he managed to create healthcare in Mass.....with a 78% democratic legislature. Wow, what a trick Mitt. Maybe you can convince baseball stadiums to sell beer and peanuts as well.

    Mitt's inability to build bridges, his hardcore conservative stances on almost every social issue and his stripping of the poor to give to the rich is why he ran out of office with a 35% approval rating and dared not run again. No here he is selling the same snake oil and people just suck it up.

    Posted by: Michaelandfred | Oct 28, 2012 4:59:28 PM

  17. LOL... that gave me a chuckle. We endorse the Republican candidate but hope that he'll behave like a Democrat in office... what country have they been living in?

    Posted by: marshallt | Oct 28, 2012 5:14:41 PM

  18. We all know that the repugs are champing at the bit to gut environmental regulations, among other things. Sometimes (like most of the time) I feel that America is doomed to go down the same wrong path time after time, without ever learning anything. We are well on the way to third world status- if not aleady there.

    Posted by: Byron St. James | Oct 28, 2012 5:26:50 PM

  19. They must have consulted a Magic 8-Ball if they think they know the "real" Mitt Romney, because he hasn't released more than 2 years of income taxes, his tax and budget plans are a mystery, and he won't discuss his religious beliefs. So what did could they have based the endorsement on, his shoe size?

    Posted by: Caliban | Oct 28, 2012 5:34:13 PM

  20. Who reads newspaper editorials anymore?

    Posted by: jason | Oct 28, 2012 5:47:03 PM

  21. So desperate. Looking for anything in Mitt Romney that they can stomach so they won't be forced to vote for someone who has actually brought America forward...albeit slowly. There was a study done that asked: can CEOs be good leaders. The answer was 'no' because they act like dictators, leading by fiat, and are unable to work well with others--very undemocratic. The Des Moines register should look at Romney in toto -- his bullying of innocents, his part in the destruction of the economy through Bain Capital, his putting of church before his country, and his shadowy financial dealings and taxes. Even his big prize on his resume, the Olympics, were not what he says they were: a large part if not the majority, were government handouts--not private sector (he lies about that, too). This will be another Nixon administration if he becomes President. Can we actually handle another disgraced and impeached administration; 'cause that's what'll happen.

    Posted by: woodroad34d | Oct 28, 2012 6:06:16 PM

  22. Consumer confidence is higher than it has been in a years and for the first time we see people are starting to feel positive about the track we're headed on as a country economically. So the "only Mitt Romney can restore consumer confidence" is false. The rest of the piece isn't worth commenting on. Romney supporters have nothing to back themselves on outside of "he's not Obama".

    Posted by: Francis | Oct 28, 2012 6:06:48 PM

  23. Yes, yes, elect Romney to carry out Obama's agenda even though Romney has campaigned against that agenda. Makes prefect sense, Des Moines Register editors.

    On assumes the editorial board are ardent supporters of drug legalization...

    Posted by: BobN | Oct 28, 2012 6:10:03 PM

  24. Just out of curiosity, can Romney legitimately claim to have run a company that actually created jobs. By create jobs, I don't mean merely hiring people - if you hire 20 people by using business practices that cause other businesses to have to lay 40 people off, you haven't created any jobs at all - you've eliminated jobs. Does Romney think he can move Chinese jobs to the U.S.? About the only way to do that is to reduce what Americans get paid (including benefits), and which isn't what the voters have in mind when they want less unemployment.

    Now, if you develop a new technology (e.g., you invented the transistor), you can claim to have done something that created jobs, but Romney hasn't invented a damn thing.

    People should start calling Romney on that. I think he's just trying smoke and mirrors, with the emphasis on smoke.

    Posted by: Bill | Oct 28, 2012 6:25:14 PM

  25. Obviously they would rather having a lying hypocrite who will say absolutely anything to get elected rather than a black president. To say but they endorsed Obama the first time around ignores the train wreck which was/is Sarah Palin. Build consensus, they mean surrender to the right wing idiots. Not go backwards in civil rights? Didn't they read the pledge that Romney signed about marriage equality? Either he is completely against gay rights or he is a huge liar. Both are just about as bad. Bottom line to say that you are voting for someone because you don't think they will fulfil their campaign pledges is just about the most idiotic thing I have ever heard. How stupid are these people? And if they are willing to throw a minority under the bus for an illusionary economic plan which is basically tax cuts for the rich that says loads about their values.

    Posted by: MikeH | Oct 28, 2012 6:41:07 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «New MN Marriage Amendment Poll Reiterates Tight Race« «