Saturday, December 17, 2011

Des Moines Register Endorses Romney

Register for Romney: Tonight, the Des Moines Register editorial board endorsed Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination for president. The Register's endorsements over the past decade haven't brought Iowa success to the candidates, but they do give the news cycles fodder for comments on the value of the endorsements.

The Hotline's Reid Wilson looked at recent endorsements:
@HotlineReid Register's endorsement track record: Clinton and McCain '08, Edwards '04, Bradley and Bush '00.

Only Bush won out of that list. As Nick Ryan, former aide to Iowa Republican Congressman Jim Nussle and current advisor to Rick Santorum's presidential campaign, points out, the Register has now endorsed Republicans in back-to-back cycles who have failed to campaign in the state nearly as much as the rest of the field, first McCain and now Romney.

Back to the endorsement...Romney's people trumpet the endorsement tonight. I received several emails about the endorsement from the Romney campaign. Although, the emails do leave out parts of the Register's editorial, the parts that address concerns of Romney's flip-flops and nuances on issues over the years.

Here's the Romney emailed version of the editorial :

Sobriety, wisdom and judgment.

Those are qualities Mitt Romney said he looks for in a leader. Those are qualities Romney himself has demonstrated in his career in business, public service and government. Those qualities help the former Massachusetts governor stand out as the most qualified Republican candidate competing in the Iowa caucuses.

Sobriety: While other candidates have pandered to extremes with attacks on the courts and sermons on Christian values, Romney has pointedly refrained from reckless rhetoric and moralizing. He may be accused of being too cautious, but choosing words carefully is a skill essential for anyone who could be sitting in the White House and reacting to world events.

Wisdom: Romney obviously is very smart. He graduated as valedictorian at Brigham Young University and finished in the top 5 percent in his MBA class at Harvard, where he also earned a law degree. Romney also exhibits the wisdom of a man who listened and learned from his father and his mother, from his church and from his own trials and errors in life. He does not lack self confidence, but he is not afraid to admit when he has been wrong.

Judgment: Romney disagrees with Democrats on most issues, but he offers smart and well-reasoned alternatives rather than simply proposing to swing a wrecking ball in Washington. He is a serious student of public policy who examines the data before making a decision. His detailed policy paper on the economy contains 87 pages of carefully crafted positions on taxes, energy, trade and regulatory policy, complete with 127 footnotes.

Rebuilding the economy is the nation’s top priority, and Romney makes the best case among the Republicans that he could do that.

He stands out in the current field of Republican candidates. He has solid credentials in a career that includes running and starting successful businesses, turning around the 2002 Winter Olympics and working with both political parties as Massachusetts governor to pass important initiatives. He stands out especially among candidates now in the top tier: Newt Gingrich is an undisciplined partisan who would alienate, not unite, if he reverts to mean-spirited attacks on display as House speaker.

This ability to see the merits of tough issues from something other than a knee-jerk, ideological perspective suggests that Mitt Romney would be willing to bridge the political divide in Washington. Americans are desperate for the Republicans and Democrats to work together. His record of ignoring partisan labels to pass important legislation when he was governor of Massachusetts suggests he is capable to making that happen.

The actual Register endorsement also includes this:

Romney is accused of being a “flip-flopper.” He has evolved from one-time independent to moderate Republican in liberal Massachusetts to proud conservative today. He does not deny changing his position on some issues, but he will say he has made mistakes and has learned from them. Though Romney has tended to adapt some positions to different times and places, he is hardly unique. It should be possible for a politician to say, “I was wrong, and I have changed my mind.”

But more subtle distinctions apply to Romney on some major issues where he has been accused of flipping or flopping. He helped create health-care reform in Massachusetts that is strikingly similar to the much-derided “Obamacare,” for example. Yet Romney argues reasonably, though not entirely persuasively, that while all states should be free to experiment with their own reforms, it is wrong for the federal government to force a one-size-fits-all plan on the entire nation.

Romney’s tendency to carefully pick his way through the political minefields is illustrated by his carefully nuanced position on abortion over the years. He was quoted in 1994 as defending a woman’s right to choose abortion. When he ran for governor in 2002, Romney said he was personally pro-life but vowed he would not restrict or promote access to abortion. Yet he vetoed legislation legalizing the so-called morning-after pill because he saw it as easing access to abortion.

Voters will have to decide for themselves whether such subtly nuanced statements express Romney’s true beliefs or if he’s trying to have it both ways. Romney at least appreciates both sides of hard questions. “Many women considering abortions face terrible pressures, hurts, and fears; we should come to their aid with all the resourcefulness and empathy we can offer,” he wrote in a Boston Globe essay in 2005. “At the same time, the starting point should be the innocence and vulnerability of the child waiting to be born.”
With about 2 weeks left, we'll see if this endorsement helps or hurts Romney's chances to win the state's caucuses.

1 comment:

Swing State Voter said...

What is even sadder about how often the Register gets it wrong is that you have wrong data in there as well. You are giving them credit for endorsing Bush in 2000. They backed John McCain that year.
(going on the word on Wiki that is)