During the recent Republican debates it seems that Republican candidate Mitt Romney has had different opinions on contradicting issues such as Pro-choice and Anti-choice. As a result, many voters have noticed and questioned his views, but more importantly, Democrats have noticed as well. For example, according to the The New York Times article "Democrats Take Aim at Romney in New Ad" (click on Link), Romney makes a complaint against "Obamacare" claiming that it is, "mainly focused on its mandate that individuals buy coverage, not on the exchanges." However, Romney is in no position to put down "Obamacare" when, "He has been on both sides of the individual mandate issue, too."
On the other hand, Andrea Saul, Romney's Spokesperson, says “Instead of focusing on the economy and creating jobs, President Obama and Democrats are focused on tearing down Mitt Romney.”
Well, then what? Is it the Democrats who are at fault for focusing to much on tearing down Romney? Or should Romney be targeted for his contradicting views?
(If the video doesn't work you can see it if you click on the link)
6 comments:
While many of the recent attacks against Romney have come from his fellow Republican candidates, it looks like the Democrats are beginning to solidify their plans to take down Romney by attempting to use his conflicting views against him. As stated in this article (http://www.christianpost.com/news/democrat-ad-highlights-romney-flip-flops-on-abortion-health-care-63168/), while this is certainly not the first time democrats have voiced their opposition to Romney, it is one of the biggest ads they have put out. The article also mentions that Democrats plan to air this ad primarily in key swing-state areas, including Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Columbus, Ohio.
To me, this is definitely one of the most clever and effective ads I have seen, not even just in this 2012 campaign. But I do not think it is trying to achieve anything drastically different than other political ads have tried to do in the past. Video advertisements have become a key campaign strategy, and this ad is just the latest. I am curious to see if the Democrats will target other Republican candidates as well, or if they believe that no other candidate has a chance, and thus is not worth spending money on. It will be interesting to see how Romney and his team act to refute the allegations in this ad, and what they will do in the coming weeks to attack President Obama.
Though this is a great ad, the information presented seems to be spun.
For example, when Romney said "the right next step is to see Roe v. Wade overturned", this quote was chopped from a much longer statement, where Romney was urging for a repeal of Roe v. Wade so the abortion issue and laws could be left to the states to decide, as opposed to the federal government [ x ]. Romney's intended discussion was state v federal government - not pro-choice or pro-life. The topics being argued are completely different, yet this exert from the full statement is obviously quite useful to illustrate Romney as contradictory.
Romney is not completely innocent either. He recently aired an ad in NH that showed President Obama saying "if we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose", trying to portray Obama in a negative light. Sure, these words came out of the president's mouth - but this was actually Obama quoting John McCain.
These kinds of out-of-context quotes are bound to happen during every election. I'm sure that most Americans are too ignorant to actually research the legitimacy of these "statements". Moreover, almost every politician will have some contradicting views sometime in their career. Unless someone is actually consistently contradictory, I wouldn't really hold it against them. After all, circumstances change constantly and along with it, opinions will change as well.
I agree with Michelle. While there may be slivers of truth in the ad, most of the information is likely to be taken out of context. This relates back to Unspun; it is a very visually appealing and dramatic ad that the majority of voters will probably not research the facts. This is definitely a very clever ploy by the Democrats to discredit Mitt Romney.
I also find Andrea Saul's statement ironic. The money spent on Romney's campaign could be better spent elsewhere. Though the campaigning does create jobs, it is only until the elections are over. What will happen to those people then? Go back to unemployment? Instead of spending money on short term goals, Mitt Romney could figure out a way to make more permanent jobs rather than taking people's money and spending it on ephemeral jobs.
While I agree that there is some evidence of "spin" in this add, it is undeniable that Romney is doing some major flip-flopping. To me it seems like he is just trying to appeal to as many voters as possible by saying what he thinks his audience wants to hear. Governor
I also think that this add was made in poor taste. I mean, sure, it was pretty darn entertaining, but it seemed like more of a skit from Saturday Night Live than a professional political message. I understand that mudslinging is a big part of the campaign process, but the same point could have been made without turning it into a sci-fi parody.
The Republican candidates all look like clowns. Looks like Obama is in for another 4 years.
...
RonPaul 2012.
I think that Romney may not necessarily win the republican race, but would be the best choice to beat the democrats and that is why they chose to attack him. As for having differing views, it does show contradiction to his voters and it does make him seem weak, but I think that as long as he gets his "full" statements out where he is open to both sides, etc, not just the little choppy ads that go on tv from the democrats he has a better chance of not seeming like a bumbling fool. I hate to see it when the advertisements take out quotes and chop them up to make someone seem like they were saying something. Like in a recent commercial where a candidate quotes McCain, and the ad spins it to make it seem like it was his quote, his idea, and how bad it was.
Post a Comment