General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy didn't the Republicans vet Romney more thoroughly?
They had the chance during their debates and nominating process but they simply refused to go there. They knew there were questions about his taxes and his business practices. But they refused to address the problems head on and Romney walked away with the nomination. Now they are stuck with a big question mark.
They have a nominee who prefers to put his money in Switzerland, the Caymans, and Jamaica, rather than America. He is an expert at manipulating the tax code, perhaps even bordering on tax evasion? He is totally out of touch with average Americans and has shown himself void of any tact or diplomacy in foreign policy.
Nobody knows how much wealth he has, but Harry Reid has stated that it is much more than the estimated $250 million dollars. He is more secretive than Richard Nixon. He embarrasses Thurston Howell with his flaunting of his wealth. The saddest part of the entire process is that so many people actually support this guy. If there were no political Parties, he would not get 5% of the support of the people.
randome
(34,845 posts)I keep asking the question of who is in running the GOP and no one can answer.
It sure as hell isn't Karl Rove.
No one is driving the clown car. That's why this is the perfect opportunity to set the GOP back even further this election.
1-Old-Man
(2,667 posts)There are competing interests in the Republican Party just as there are in the Democratic Party, no one 'vets' the candidate. It is the Primary voters who make the choice and because the Primary elections are strung out over a period of months you really don't see voters in one state making their choices based on the same information as voters from other states. That and mis-reporting of Primary Election results on the Republican side likely skewed the results of the later elections.
tridim
(45,358 posts)The proof? History.
And also most republicans are already so corrupt that none of them would pass a typical vetting.
sofa king
(10,857 posts)Same thing. We have a criminal born into a crime family working for a criminal party, and to the criminal party's surprise, the criminal the were forced to pick is a criminal and--Surprise!--being untrustworthy.
Now I'm seeing Republicans tossing up the "my cat's breath smells like cat food" complaint. Well, what did you expect from the people who stole two elections and killed half a million innocent people? Do they think the guy who wins that nomination is gonna give everyone a free sundae? No, he's going to steal the ice cream from your refrigerator. That's what they do.
Romney the criminal wasn't pleased about losing the last nomination process to McCain. So he did what all good criminals do: he gamed the system so that nobody could steal what was rightfully his to steal. It apparently never occurred to him that his personal conduct might be called into question at a later stage of the process, so he didn't bother to address that.
And why should he, when he can simply muddy the waters by lying about it?
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Romney is a placeholder, easily thrown to the wolves, because they didn't see any real chance of beating Obama in 2012.
Sid
randome
(34,845 posts)You mean they 'planned' from the outset to lose the election? If 'they' had any plans, they would have run someone credible during the Primary.
There is no 'they' there.
rfranklin
(13,200 posts)They know where there money comes from and they did not want to open up that can of worms. You can see how President Obama has had "businessmen" turn on him because he has dared to mouth the most mild of criticisms about the one percent.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)they confused him with Cory Booker.
uponit7771
(90,271 posts)...and be ran over like Kerry did
Vogon_Glory
(9,105 posts)I think that the simple answer is that vice presidential nominees get vetted, presidential candidates don't. They don't because they don't have to. If you want to become your party's presidential nominee, you get the necessary number of signatures, fill out the paperwork (And keep it up to date), set up a campaign organization, start spending money and hustling voters and away you go.
R-money didn't get vetted because he didn't have to, not in the way that guys like Robert Dole or George HW Bush had to be (And Dan Quayle. And Sarah Palin. ). Mitt-sie looks likely to get nominated because he seems to be the least-lousy candidate Republican primary voters decided to vote for.
Hopefully the Republicans will do the country a favor and nominate Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry, or Rick Santorum the next time around.
Freddie
(9,247 posts)That says it all!
Besides, he's been running for President for at least 6 years now, you'd think his past would be quite well known by now. Oops.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,166 posts)Just look at the field they offered in the primaries - by comparison, Rmoney was a shining star.
Vogon_Glory
(9,105 posts)But if Divine Providence is kind to the USA, should R-money's presidential campaign goes down a black hole, hopefully one of those lesser stars will attract enough Republican primary votes to be their presidential candidate in 2016.
I'm hoping for Rick Perry, Michelle Bachmann, or Rick Santorum against the Hill or Elizabeth Warren.
TheKentuckian
(25,003 posts)For real, the anti-Willard forces just couldn't come together on a candidate or he'd have been bounced way back.
They are also a bit of a mess talent-wise. They don't have much better than Weird Willard, Rubio (has a melanin problem), Christy who is a newbie and has control problems, Paul Ryan with the reality problem, and a few boring and unpopular fundy governors that are most viable due to lack of exposure.
DBoon
(22,315 posts)From their perspective,there is nothing wrong with him - wealthy, entitled, self-centered prick. Just like one of them - so no problem.
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)rock
(13,218 posts)It was first base in a baseball game. No, I don't mean it was playing first base, I mean it WAS first base.
auburngrad82
(5,029 posts)malaise
(268,316 posts)but that's not going to happen
uponit7771
(90,271 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)And they didn't really expect to have to play defense much. When you own the MSM, it's easy to get complacent.
WI_DEM
(33,497 posts)mick063
(2,424 posts)Remember the GOP debates? Remember that train wreck?
After each poll leader self destructed, Mitt was the sole survivor. The entire field was vetted and the GOP cream rose to the top. In other words, he was the only "electable" survivor. Mitt was the best they had to offer.
We are not seeing the vetting of a presidential candidate. We are seeing the vetting of an entire political party. When they can get past being stupid, they will put up a formidable foe. As it is, Mitt's money backers are the only advantage for the GOP. They fail in every other category.
still_one
(92,017 posts)to independents, but his elitist and selfish views is what the republican party today is, so though he is not as rabid as the others he still expresses wing nut opinions
yardwork
(61,495 posts)You might as well have posted "Why didn't Wall Street vet their business practices more thoroughly?" After all, the economy of the world depends on these men - they are all men, almost all of whom are white - following their own rules. But they didn't. They lied and cheated on a scale that is unimaginable to the average person.
Same with the corporations. They've sold themselves to China, they've laid off millions and moved the manufacturing overseas to countries where they are allowed to employ what is essentially, if not actually, slave labor, and nobody says boo. Where is the government? Oh yeah, that would be "protectionism." That would interfere with "the free market." Can't have that - that might be "socialist."
Romney's candidacy is just the next logical step.