RSS Feed MenuClick here for all of David Frum’s blogposts on Mitt Romney’s “No Apology”.
I see from the Twitter traffic that these Romney readings are being picked up by people who dislike the former governor, from the right and from the left. Just to clarify: The middle chapters of No Apology are some of the most impressive ever to appear in a campaign book. Listen to this, from the chapter on education:
Following my election as governor of Massachusetts, and knowing that I now shared responsibility for the education of hundreds of thousands of young people, I studied the education literature to gain perspective. What I found was a virtual quicksand of differing opinion in which it would be easy to sink, but what was missing was an examination of data. Instead, most writers sought to convince readers by appealing to their inherent prejudices and by recounting anecdotes that supported their particular policy preferences. … Anecdotes are illustrative, but data is compelling – particularly if it is comprehensive and presented by an unbiased source. (201)
Isn’t that just how a president should think?
James Cody // Mar 12, 2010 at 2:55 pm
Isn’t that exactly how Barack Obama governs, such as in developing his Afghanistan policy during the second half of last year, on which you repeatedly bashed him for allegedly (and I would argue falsely) being slow, too deliberate, and backing out on his campaign promises?
tvchurch // Mar 12, 2010 at 3:23 pm
David,
You may recall that Romney gave a talk at AEI in 2006 about Massachusetts’ education policy (http://www.aei.org/event/1282). He actually used scatter plots and data. His analysis won me over. I trust him on secondary education policy.
-Tom
ltoro1 // Mar 12, 2010 at 8:37 pm
Cody, the issue I had was that Obama took well into the second half of the year to analyze the data and make his decision. Well after he seemed to spend a great deal of time on cap and trade and health care reform. I understand Obama really wanted to focus on cap and health care reform, but Afghanistan should have been a higher priority.
Independent // Mar 12, 2010 at 9:59 pm
DavidF offers: “Just to clarify: The middle chapters of No Apology are some of the most impressive ever to appear in a campaign book.”
After multiple segments slamming Mitt with everything from comparing him to Obama to the nonsense about Mitt not knowing the genesis of economists’ “Dutch disease” phrase, you now say the middle chapters are some of the most impressive ever to appear in a campaign book… that begins with the letter N… by an author with a last name that begins with R… first published on a Tuesday… using a special font?
Wow, that’s some terrific praise there, speech boi.
Or are you just covering your bets in case the Hero of 2012 decides he needs a speech writer from the moderate RINO wing of the GOP?
sinz54 // Mar 13, 2010 at 10:58 am
James Cody: Isn’t that exactly how Barack Obama governs, such as in developing his Afghanistan policy during the second half of last year
As with Obama, that’s Romney’s advantage as a candidate–and his possible disadvantage as President.
Unlike Sarah Palin or McCain, Romney could debate Obama in brain-to-brain combat and win.
They do indeed have similar personalities, Romney and Obama, and Jimmy Carter too:
They’ve got brains;
No passion;
And no guts.
The problem with that, is that a disembodied brain cannot connect on a visceral level with the vast majority of the American people. Carter could never get the American people behind him. And now Obama is having that same problem.
Bill Clinton may not be quite as smart as Obama.
But he could connect with the American people.
Real leaders have to. They can’t just come up with brilliant technocratic solutions. They have to get the American people to back those solutions.
In college, Obama didn’t have that problem.
As a CEO, Romney didn’t have that problem.
Because as a CEO, his employees worked for him and had to carry out his directives.
But if he becomes president, he’ll be working for us.
We don’t have to obey him. He has to convince us.
Independent // Mar 13, 2010 at 12:02 pm
Sinz54 heads off the cliff with: “They do indeed have similar personalities, Romney and Obama, and Jimmy Carter too: They’ve got brains; No passion; And no guts.”
Umm, Romney and Carter and Obama? To run for a Party’s top nomination, to endure countless moments of second-guessing idiots who can’t comprehend your policy and spin it to their own wickedly warped perspective, to battle through the swampy slog we call the MSM campaign press, to listen to others purposedly and deceptively mislead others about what you said 5 minutes ago… and get back up the next morning and do it again –that, Sinz54, takes guts. That takes passion and drive.
To portray Carter’s or Obama’s fault as somehow being that they couldn’t connect with people and that did them in is to miss the role of policy and advocacy in the Presidency. The problem isn’t that they can’t sell –it’s that no one is buying what they’re selling.
To miss something that fundamental causes me to wonder what planet you’re orbiting.
No passion? No guts? In a presidential candidate or in a president? Give it a rest. Like Obama’s message and Carter’s message, no one should be buying what you’re selling, pal.