Mitt Romney: In the general election, I’m not going to do all that negative stuff that I haven’t been doing for the last six months.
March 6th, 2012

I’m not quite sure how to interpret this statement from our new insect overlord:

I’m not going to say outrageous things about the president or about my opponents. It gets headlines and a lot of excitement, and it gets you, by the way, a number of days in the polls to get a nice little bump. But I’m going to talk about the real issues Americans face and talk with respect about people who have differing views. I’m not going to attack them personally. I mean, I know that’s fun, but it’s just not productive.

On the one hand, maybe this is a promise that, as I’ve long suspected, Romney won’t be willing to take after President Obama the way he was, say Rick Perry. Or Newt Gingrich. Or Rick Santorum.

But on the other hand, he’s suggesting that his campaign of the last half year never actually happened. Does he really think so little of the intelligence of voters? (Yeah, yeah, I know. If “the voters” were as smart as Mitt Romney, then they’d be worth $250 million, too.)

Then, on the third hand, it’s just politics and politicians–including Mitt Romney and a bunch of guys both better and worse–will say anything. That’s what they do. But on the fourth hand, most good politicians try not to be so obvious about it.

But hey–lots of Smart Analysts keep telling us that Romney is the best chance to win in November.

You know it would be great if someone was keeping a clip file for recriminations on the off-chance that Romney is the nominee and loses the general election. . .

  1. Gabriel March 6, 2012 at 2:47 pm

    There’s not necessarily a contradiction between Romney losing and him having been the best chance. The (untestable) counterfactual will be that Santorum would have lost by another 5 points.

  2. REPLY
  3. Nedward March 6, 2012 at 3:28 pm

    He keeps finding new ways to disappoint. No political instincts. The campaign is run by consultoids, for the benefit of consultoids (he’s a “delegator” in that respect)

  4. REPLY
  5. Fake Herzog March 6, 2012 at 3:40 pm

    Sigh. As someone who just voted for my new insect overlord (and may I remind him I can be very useful when it comes time to round up these characters for the sugar caves), it is obvious to me (because I just had the sensors installed into my brain) that Romney is signaling to independent/middle-class women that he is not like Rushbo and won’t say nasty stuff about Sandra Fluke and/or talk about Obama’s birth certificate.

    I still think he’ll remind those same voters that Obama has been a bad President and his policies are hurting their families. I’m just hoping it will be enough (along with $5/gallon gas, Greek default, and something crazy going on in the Middle-East).

  6. REPLY
  7. Galley Friend J.E. March 6, 2012 at 4:32 pm

    He could promise to close Gitmo.

  8. REPLY
  9. Mike March 6, 2012 at 8:22 pm

    On the fifth hand, Romney won’t say outrageous things about his opponent: He’ll leave that to Restore Our Future and CrossroadsGPS.

    (Otherwise I think FakeHerzog is probably right. Romney won’t bring up Kenyan Anti-Colonialism as an explanation for gas prices; he’ll stick to Steven Chu.)