Romney Can’t Bring Himself To Say That McCain Has Conducted A ‘Dignified And Honest’ Campaign
Romney Can’t Bring Himself To Say That McCain Has Conducted A ‘Dignified And Honest’ Campaign
This morning on NBC’s Today Show, host Meredith Vieira asked McCain campaign surrogate Mitt Romney about a new University of Wisconsin analysis, which found that more of McCain’s ads have been negative than Obama’s in the past week. Romney attempted to defend the McCain campaign. But when Vieira asked him — three times — whether he thought McCain was running a “dignified” campaign, Romney refused to agree:
VIEIRA: So, let me ask you, would you characterize John McCain’s campaign as dignified and honest?
ROMNEY: Well, what I’d characterize the entire campaign as is extraordinarily negative on the part of Barack Obama. [...]
VIEIRA: So you think his campaign was dignified?
ROMNEY: Well, I think it’s going to come down to this, and I think that is, who is going to be able to keep America safe and who is it that’s going to add jobs. [...]
VIEIRA: Governor, not to beat a dead horse here, but once again, do you believe that the campaign was dignified?
ROMNEY: Was it dignified? It was presidential.
Watch it:
Romney has a hard time delivering the McCain campaign talking points. When he recently appeared on CNN, Wolf Blitzer asked him if Sarah Palin was “ready to be President.” Romney hesitated, stuttered, and then eventually answered, “Well, that — that’s something which I — I believe the American people will, uh, assess individually.”
Transcript:
VIEIRA: You know, Matt asked Caroline Kennedy this morning about a University of Wisconsin study, I want to tell you about. It said 63 percent of Obama’s ads were negative. That same study said 79 percent of McCain’s ads were negative. Factcheck.org found that McCain has repeatedly mischaracterized Obama’s tax and health care plans, that he accused Obama of lying about his association with Bill Ayers when there was no evidence of that.
So, let me ask you, would you characterize John McCain’s campaign as dignified and honest?
ROMNEY: Well, what I’d characterize the entire campaign as is extraordinarily negative on the part of Barack Obama. Because with the figures you just gave me, and given the fact that Barack Obama outspent John McCain on the — on the air by some 4-to-1, it means that the amount of negative ads that came from Barack Obama have broken all presidential records.
VIEIRA: But — but this study indicates that there were more negative ads from McCain’s camp than there were from Obama’s.
ROMNEY: I think it’s — as I heard the study, it was a higher percentage, but a higher percentage of a much smaller number is a much smaller number of negative ads. But –
VIEIRA: So you think his campaign was dignified?
ROMNEY: Well, I think it’s going to come down to this, and I think that is, who is going to be able to keep America safe and who is it that’s going to add jobs. And I spent my life in business, as you know — Barack Obama’s plan to raise taxes on small businesses, to charge a fee to health care on small businesses, to insert unions into small businesses, and of course, not to use nuclear, coal, and offshore drilling, that is a job-killing program. There is no question…
VIEIRA: Not — not –
ROMNEY: … it will cost millions of new jobs.
VIEIRA: Governor, not to beat a dead horse here, but once again, do you believe that the campaign was dignified?
ROMNEY: Was it dignified? It was presidential. It’s the way it’s been ever since I’ve been around. Positive and negative in both directions, and I don’t think candidates make a lot of progress by whining about the — the campaign of their opponent. Get out there, tell your message. Our message is pretty simple. Barack Obama’s a charming — a good fella, but he’s not going to create jobs and keep America safe at a very critical time.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
39 Responses to “Romney Can’t Bring Himself To Say That McCain Has Conducted A ‘Dignified And Honest’ Campaign”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
ROMNEY: Was it dignified? It was presidential.
Now that we know what your definition of presidential is, we'll bid you adieu.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:48 amROMNEY: Was it dignified? It was presidential.
- - Not anymore it isn't.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:49 amHe's beening taking notes of how to run a Rove campaign for 2012.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:49 amdefending the indefensible. This from a wingnut who equates campaigning for daddy with military servicel.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:51 amservice, not servicel. sheeesh.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:52 amROMNEY: uh, I won't answer the question, instead I will give talking points.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:52 amI wonder if, in retrospect, McCain is secretly wishing he'd picked Romney instead of Palin.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:56 amIt couldn't have been any worse...
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:01 pmROMNEY: Barack Obama’s a charming — a good fella, but he’s not going to create jobs and keep America safe at a very critical time.
What, you mean like George Bush has done? LOL. That's funny Mitt. Not only has Chimp lost almost a million jobs this year alone, but his invasion of Iraq has created many more terrorist threats were there once were none.
Obama will do both at the same time. And this comment will hant you in 2012.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:02 pmAnother wing nut on the not-so-lonely road to obscurity.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:06 pmAfter eight years of Bush, President now means Partisan Hack.
Yes Mitt, John McCain has been "presidential" in that very sense.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:09 pmI think that whichever candidate wins this election, global poverty needs to be one of the top issues on the agenda that he has. According to The Borgen Project:
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:13 pm$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$540 billion: Annual U.S. Defense Budget.
"I don’t think candidates make a lot of progress by whining about the campaign of their opponent."
Boy, can McCain hum a few bars of that one.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:14 pmComparing your opponent to George Bush is "extraordinarily negative". :)
I wish someone pushed Romney for an example of an extraordinarily negative attack by Obama. Again, I doubt he'd have an answer for that either.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:14 pmIs flip-flopping honest?
Is throwing sh¡t against a wall and hoping it sticks dignified?
¶ AIO
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:15 pmMittuns, will you promise to lend your magic underwear to Sarah Palin in the event McCain's medical issues prohibit him from serving as President?
You see, she has to give back all her clothes, and we sure don't want a President going around all mavericky & stuff not wearing underwear!
Thanks, Mittuns, we knew we could count on you for 'support'.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:15 pmMitt, the dog torturer?
What the fcuk would he know about dignity and honesty?
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:22 pmYou know, if you find you have difficulty saying, "yes, this was a clean, honest campaign run with dignity, and the candidate can be proud of it," something is wrong with the campaign.
Now, visualize somebody like Bill Richardson being asked if he thinks Obama's campaign has been honest and dignified. Is he more likely to say something resembling the hypothetical statement above? Or is he more likely to bob, weave, and answer questions not asked -- as Romney did?
I think Romney's responses say a great deal about what a disaster the McCain campaign has been.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:24 pmTo paraphrase a Texas saying, "He's all hair and no head."
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:25 pmAllow me to educate the mannequin.
Typically, job creation is better under democratic administrations.
Now, slink off to your Macy's window box.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:27 pmROMNEY: Was it dignified? It was presidential. ...
the two should not be exclusive of each other...
never used to be either, till these criminals took over...
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:28 pmIt's called "keeping your options open". He knows he's going to have to run against the RW fundie dahling Palin in 2012, so he can't praise her too much ... but he can't damn her (and McSame) either...
Cheers,
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:28 pmJohn's off to a slow start today...
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:28 pmhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/03/mccains-crowd-disturbingl_n_140412.html
You idiot...
throw them under the bus, so you can beat Palin in 2012 and get the nomination.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:29 pmJohn’s off to a slow start today…
I'd say "stick a fork in him, he's done", but I'm afraid the fork wouldn't penetrate the beef-jerky like hide...
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:31 pmThis tool is awesome: "Your Money" -- McCain vs. Obama.
Fascinating stuff. Compares your taxes, markets, inflation, college, and retirement under each candidate.
Voyant:
http://www.planwithvoyant.com
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:32 pmmarkusmarkus Says:
To paraphrase a Texas saying, “He’s all hair and no head.”
```````````````````````````````````````
I thought the saying was "He's all hair and no hat."?
Anyway, Willard Romney is a f**king mormon...um moron! McCain has been running one of the most negative campaigns in recent history. But as usual the republicans always accuse democrats of what they themselves are more guilty of, knowing that their ignorant supporters will believe them.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:33 pmjimtallby74
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:37 pmDidn't I already ask you nice to stop that?
Mitt Romney refuses to praise John McCain directly, as he still believes he was entitled to be president. And of course, anyone who watched the Republican primaries knows that Romney would have run a campaign against Obama that was at least as ugly, nasty, divisive, and negative as McCain's.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:42 pmIt's like some kind of messed up domino effect going on here. As McCain could neither associate with nor repudiate Bush, now Romney can neither associate with nor repudiate McCain. If he says McCain's great, that'll come back to bite him with the general electorate. If he says McCain's awful, then his own party will devour him. So he hems and haws and can't take a position. This is exactly the situation that brought McCain to the position he's in now. Hopefully it'll be the same situation that'll trap Republicans for some time to come.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:43 pmJoe-the-freaking-Plumber is PRESIDENTIAL???
Oh, spare me. *eyeroll*
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:51 pmWords and phrases I hope I don't hear for a long, long time after tomorrow:
Maverick
Joe the Plumber
Socialist (used incorrectly)
Marxist (also used incorrectly)
Hockey mom
Palling around
Drill, baby, drill
Nuclear (pronounced incorrectly)
There are probably many more...
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:55 pmMutt is too big a coward to lie or tell the truth. Typical Republican.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:55 pm"It was presidential". Huh....Well, I guess if you consider George Bush to be "presidential" than it was "presidential". Sorry Mitt, I don't want a president who lies and does nasty things.
Also, did you get his first answer. It's what all McCain surrogates do when they get a question they don't want to answer. They immediately flip into "Obama did this or that".
What a sad excuse of a party the Republicans have become.
RIP GOP.
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:12 pmBilbo says; RIP GOP.
I can't disagree more strongly.
I say; Let them rot, and burn in hell.
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:41 pmOr Uncle Ho you could pull a McCain and say, "I couldn't agree more, I couldn't disagree more. Oh wait, I could agree to disagree, what the hell was I talking about."
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:44 pmMittens can't lie; he wants to run again himself.
November 3rd, 2008 at 5:24 pmI'd imagine MITT would likely being singing the praises of McCain's wonderful diginity if there were much hope for a McCain win.
I'd be more impressed with Mitt if he mentioned - critically, of course - how deeply the classic racist attack was used, with substitution of other terms for the dreaded enword, as mentioned here:
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:02 pmhttp://tinyurl.com/56rtww
A study from the University of Wisconsin out today says that from Oct. 21-28, 63% of the Obama ads and 79% of the McCain ads were negative.The study says that from Oct. 21-28, $38 million in ads were run and the Obama campaign had nearly triple the spending of the McCain campaign, $21.5 million to $7.5 million.
November 4th, 2008 at 3:09 pmMath Lesson: 79% of $7.5 million is $5.9 million. 63% of $21.5 million is $13.5 million. So, who spent more on negative ads? So, as Romney pointed out, Meredith's question was incorrect. She was wrong, but yet she was snippy to him. While Matt Lauer was very warm and fuzzy with Caroline Kennedy.
Frankly, I have issues with almost all politicians in general acting with dignity. McCain - definitely included. But I also don't feel land dealings with Tony Rezco, or quietly listening to and supporting Rev. Wright for 20 years is dignified. I am also appalled with some of the language in the comments posted here. It would be great if intelligent people could just have an honest, civil discussion. Politicians twist the truth to slant things in their direction, and so do celebrities and news anchors. I vote we toss them all out and just start over!