In a previous post, I wrote about a very revealing video of Mitt Romney. This video was filmed without Romney’s knowledge during an off-the-air conversation. In it, Romney talks sincerely and frankly in a way which we do not normally see him.
Here’s the video:
The first half of the video has the combative radio host asking Romney a series of tough questions. The second half has Romney speaking off-the-air, mostly about his church. My previous post talks a lot about this.
Aside from the religious discussion, there is another particular and very revealing thing that Romney says. It’s at the point 17:04 of the video. Here’s the transcript:
Jan Mickelson: …I take this stuff really seriously.
Mitt Romney: Oh I don’t though. For me it, this is all frivolous. *laughter* Oh come on, come on, I’m running for president…
This is a very interesting thing that Romney says, and it’s especially interesting given the way he laughs when he says it and his body language.
What Romney’s implying is that all “this stuff” – all the campaigning, all the television and radio interviews – is “frivolous.” It’s just a bunch of stupid stuff that he has to do in order to become president. It doesn’t really matter.
Now, Mitt Romney has a very big image problem. His critics accuse him of being willing to say and do whatever it takes to become president. Democrats say that Romney will flip-flop on any issue as long as it benefits him. This problem has deeply hurt Romney; it is a big reason why he lost the 2008 Republican primaries and why he’s taking so long to shake off the opposition right now.
There are a number of reasons why Romney has this problem. But one of the big reasons, and one of the most subtle of them, is illustrated in the quote above. That is, Romney’s attitude towards campaigning is a big reason why people don’t think he’s sincere. To Romney, campaigning is just a bunch of bullshit that he has to endure in order to win election. When you get down to it, that’s what means when he says “this is all frivolous.”
And it’s not the first time Romney has said this. Remember when Romney was accused of hiring undocumented immigrants? Here’s what he said in defense of himself:
So we went to the company and we said, look, you can’t have any illegals working on our property. I’m running for office, for Pete’s sake, I can’t have illegals. It turns out that once question, they hired someone who had falsified their documents, had documents, and therefore we fired them.
Of course, this is a terrible attitude to have. Voters are not stupid. They can tell things like that very quickly. People are very good at intuiting what a person feels. If a candidate thinks that campaigning is dumb, they notice. Romney has that attitude. Unsurprisingly, he’s now developed a reputation of being insincere and a flip-flopper.



10 Comments

Romney lives by the motto: “Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not.” (Flanders and Swann, 1956)
Q: What’s Behind Romney’s Sincerity Problem? A: Sincerity!
Maybe there’s nothing behind it at all. Just a vapid, self-aggrandizing vulture capitalist in an otherwise empty suit.
In fact, Barack Obama has an even worse problem in this regard than Romney does but the muddle-headed liberal, progressive and left intellectuals refuse to hold Obama accountable.
I never met Mitt Romney but he seems to be a “chip off the old block.”
I knew George Romney very well and I found his ability to “flip-flop” on issues to be one of his major attributes because it didn’t take much push from civil rights, environmental and labor groups to make him do the right thing quite often.
I though “flip-flopping” was John Kerry’s strongest point for the very same reason.
When ever I support a politician from the Democrats (I have never voted Republican in my life and probably never will unless Lincoln rises from underneath the heavy granite tomb holding him down), the only thing I look for is a candidate who might be likely to bend towards justice if pushed hard enough.
Obama is one worthless, creepy bastard who is never going to bend towards justice— the harder people push him the heavier will be the blows from the police billy clubs.
Romney is a Wall Street vulture capitalist; Obama represents the Wall Street venture capitalists.
I am sick and tired of the muddle-headed leftists who attack Romney and leave Obama alone under the guise Obama is a “lesser evil” when in fact Romney is more likely to be the one who can be forced to bend towards justice— if he is “the chip off the old block” I suspect he is: because of his flip-flops.
In the meantime I’m not going to worry too much about whether or not Romney or Obama gets elected because the fact is there is no difference between a “vulture capitalist” and a “venture capitalist.”
Romney’s “insincerity problem” is the least of this country’s problems when compared to what Obama has done to this country that is why I am looking at voting for Jill Stein or Rocky Anderson for president (probably Rocky Anderson).
http://www.jillstein.org/
http://www.voterocky.org/
I couldn’t agree more, Alan.
Obama reneged on every progressive campaign promises he made. How’s that for sincerity?
It may sound snarky, but I’d be ready to give Romney a chance to renege on his conservative ones. Except for the fact that I refuse to support either wing of the Uniparty.
It’s third party all the way down the line for me.
Third party all the way down the line for me, too. If all these people who talked about holding Obama’s feet to the fire actually did something the “change” Obama led people to “hope” for would have been well underway by now— they are as big of phonies as Obama.
OKAY, Alternate ID and Alan Maki, you are both absolutely right about Obama. He reneged on all his campaign promises, positions, and in some cases has even worked hard to do the opposite of what he promised.
Only difference – I intend to give Romney that chance. I believe Obama is no LOTE and may possibly even be the worser of two evils. At least if Romney gets in, we will see some semblance of two parties again (although the Democrats will continue to play the “they forced me to vote the Republican position” as they did during Bush II and Obama).
I respect your choice, ocoastperson.
When it comes to Dem vs. Repub, I actually believe that Romney is the LOTE. Obama has brought the country right-ward at a faster pace than any previous administration. I think Romney will drift leftward if elected while Obama will continue his right-ward march unimpeded by the Dems.
It’s just that, for myself, I cannot, in good conscience support either wing of the Uniparty.
:)
A-yep.