Romney appeals for working-class votes in Ohio

Comments (51)
ConradU812 wrote:

The left doesn’t hate Romney, they just fear him. He’s a strong, dominant leader and something this country’s been missing for a few years now. It’s time to get our dignity back, America.

Feb 28, 2012 9:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
alsanali wrote:

@ConradU812, trust me, the left is not afraid of Romney. We’d just love to see Santorum win the ticket so Jon Stewart has plenty of great material for the next nine months.

Feb 28, 2012 10:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
actnow wrote:

Mitt Romney can win the middle of America….Santorum can not. Americans will support a moderate conservative over a far left incumbent. We have over $70 trillion in unfunded federal liabilities. There is simply no way to protect tax payers, defense, Social Security and Medicare if we don’t get real about the run away spending of our government. It’s time for change we can believe in…and it’s not Obama any more.

Feb 28, 2012 10:45pm EST  --  Report as abuse
NilsPils wrote:

Mitt is the most genuine, no-nonsense, practical and well spoken candidate to take on the Obama machine and pull us out of this financial quagmire. If he governs with the same level of integrity he lives his personal life, we’ll all be better off. GO MITT!

Feb 28, 2012 11:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
limapie wrote:

Obviously, you’ve never worked for a company that Romney had his chops sunk into before he sold it to foreigners.

I’m not voting for Romney. I’m not voting for Obama either.

I’ll write in a candidate.

The Republican party is just hard up for a nominee that can afford
their own campaign.

Feb 29, 2012 12:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
matthewslyman wrote:

53% of Democrats supported Santorum, in contrast with 38% of the sum-total of voters in this primary. When Santorum, of all the candidates, is probably furthest from the politics that these Democrats espouse. Did anyone ask these voters what motivated them to vote for Santorum? Could it be the very act of sabotage Santorum encouraged; motivated by an actual belief that Romney is the only remaining electable Republican?

Feb 29, 2012 1:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
GMavros wrote:

It is amazing how many ignorant voters are out there, and here, from both parties. It is precisely ‘running our country like a Corporation’ that has brought us to the brink of a total economic collapse.
Are you all deaf and blind to the REAL world vents, which has been nothing more than a saga of corporate & financial corruption of astronomical proportions ?

Running a country is an entirely different game than running a corporation, a corrupt corporation at that.

Putting Romney in charge would be like putting the wolf to guard the sheep.

He is the perfect successor to G. Bush Jr., although a bit less stupid, he is capable of unlimited catastrophic blunders.
Just look at his past and present record, and that of his associates.

With a Romney in charge our living standard and our democracy will be reduced to that of China’s in no time.(Wages in particular).

This is the inevitable course of corporate control, intentional or not.

I will again write in Albert Einstein at the ballots.

Feb 29, 2012 3:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
GMavros wrote:

GMavros wrote:
[corrections to previous post]

It is amazing how many ignorant voters are out there, and here, from both parties. It is precisely ‘running our country like a Corporation’ that has brought us to the brink of a total economic collapse.
Are you all deaf and blind to the REAL world [events], which have been nothing [less] than a saga of corporate & financial corruption of astronomical proportions ?

Running a country is an entirely different ball game than running a corporation, a corrupt corporation at that.

Putting Romney in charge would be like putting the wolf to guard the sheep.

He is the perfect successor to G. Bush Jr., although a bit less stupid, he is capable of unlimited catastrophic blunders.
Just look at his past and present record, and that of his associates.

With a Romney in charge our living standard and our democracy will be reduced to that of China’s in no time.(Wages in particular).

This is the inevitable course of corporate control, intentional or not.

I will again write in Albert Einstein at the ballots.

Feb 29, 2012 3:42am EST  --  Report as abuse
Missourimule wrote:

In your dreams, Reuters. I was for Cain, first, then Newt, and now, Santorum . . . but we’re not going to lose track of the goal. There’s too much at stake here for us to stay home and pout, because “our” candidate didn’t win the nomination. Barack Obama is turning this country into something neither the founders, nor most of us envision, and he must not be allowed another term.

Feb 29, 2012 5:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
acin2012 wrote:

So when is Gingrich and all the others going to drop out? What fight? It seems pretty clear to me Romney is the front runner. The others need to drop out, rally behind Romney and unite the party before it’s too late and we all lose interest. This is what you get for starting the “defeat Obama in 2012″ campaign back in 2008!!! Americans are sick and tired of it all. Seriously!

Feb 29, 2012 6:00am EST  --  Report as abuse
GMavros wrote:

….WE ARE ALL THROWING UP ALREADY….

Feb 29, 2012 6:12am EST  --  Report as abuse
flashtime wrote:

the Americans like third world folks, ultimately would be influenced by candidates rhetoric; and unfortunately in case of Obama we should say they would be tricked and enchanted by his BS that always remind me of the “Animal farm” paragraphs. yes, Mitt makes gaffes, but in my view it’s because of his integrity. big liars and outspoken bluffers are pretty good at speech. for those people who understand a bit of corporate financial matters, it’s obvious that Mitt not going to cheat people financially, but there is the possibility of this for priest Santorum or inattentive old Paul.

Feb 29, 2012 7:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
drxym wrote:

It’s kind of sad to see people seeing Romney as the favoured candidate not on the basis of any attributes he possesses but because he is the least worst of those running. This is an awful field of runners.

Mitt Romney is super rich and screwed over countless people to get there. Rick Santorum is an unhinged religious nut. Newt Gingrich is a hypocrite and ethically challenged. Ron Paul is some borderline racist flake parroting the same mantra regardless of reality or economic conditions for the last 30 years.

It’s a terrible choice.

Feb 29, 2012 8:14am EST  --  Report as abuse
DetroitNative wrote:

Romney and Santorum are perfect pawns for the bankers and fed. The only candidate the powers behind the curtain truly fear is Ron Paul.

Feb 29, 2012 8:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
fritzk wrote:

it was easier for the gop to be beligerent obstructionists.
now that Any of them is forced to declare what they are For it comes down to; unbridled greed, religious fundamentalism, a return to the 1800′s, or unbridled hypocracy and hubrus.
Combine that with the empty platitudes and promise from BO and it is easy to see that Everyone, the goosesteppers on the right AND the treehuggers on the left, needs to pull back the curtain on this ridiculous charade.
you are the 99%.
no one has your interests at heart.
wake up.
get up.
stand up.
speak up.

Feb 29, 2012 9:11am EST  --  Report as abuse
libertyville wrote:

The Republican campaign is energizing the base as it finetunes and strengthens the eventual winner. It beats listening daily to that grade B stand-up comedian in the White House.

Feb 29, 2012 9:18am EST  --  Report as abuse
jmmx wrote:

This is hardly a Big Win for Romney. He just barely pulled his home state, and the convention votes will be apportioned. It is pressing things to call it a win at all – I would call it a a “squeak by.”

Feb 29, 2012 9:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
thinkman2 wrote:

Gee! Did Obama start those wars, pass all those laws and pay trillions to defense contractors all by himself? What went on during the 8 years before him and the time since we elected a Republican House?

Feb 29, 2012 9:28am EST  --  Report as abuse
matthewslyman wrote:

@DetroitNative: It’s not just the “powers behind the curtain” that fear what a President Ron Paul would mean for America. For example, because almost immediately after Ron Paul implements his plan to abolish the “Federal Reserve” and restore the gold standard, American hegemony of global trade will be a thing of the past… I don’t think Ron Paul fully understands the implications of all of his policies, even though he’s had a long time to think and refine his ideas. I do think Ron Paul is a good man though!

Feb 29, 2012 9:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
powerwhip wrote:

Obama’s a lock for another term. Focus on taking back the house and retaining the majority in the senate. VOTE EVERY REPUBLICAN OUT OF EVERY OFFICE EVERY CHANCE YOU GET. VOTE!

Feb 29, 2012 9:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
YUPtrev wrote:

People who write off Ron Paul because he is “extreme” or has “crazy” views towards the Fed, or any other “necessary” gov entity need to realize that there are checks and balances in our government to keep all power from any one branch. So, if we have a “crazy” conservative notion that we must return to the gold standard, this will not happen over night… It will be worked on over time and a phase in process would blossom. What you should be scared of is someone elected president who has no real conviction on where the government should go. Nothing substantial will get done.
So whether it be Mitt, Rick or Obama, expect no real changes, just more of the same.

Feb 29, 2012 10:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
RailBended wrote:

Democratic campaign policy.. Let the Republicans take the spotlight and polarize their voters and make the rest of the country sick to their stomachs of hearing about it at every turn.

Come election day, the republican candidate can only expect half of his party to fully support him, and the democratic candidate can expect his entire party to support him. The fluff in the voting population is the disillusioned republicans who wanted “the other guy”..

So.. roughly 50% for Obama, 25% for “Mick Santomney”, and 25% who will split between the previous two and 3rd party..

How are the Republicans going to win again?

Feb 29, 2012 10:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
Joeford wrote:

How can a person vote for Romney with his constantly changing direction depending on what the polls tell him. Take a look at the following clips of what he said then and now youtu.be/a9IJUkYUbvI
youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3DHqzoxuEHc

How can you take this man seriously. We need to shake up these established far right and far left parties. Vote Ron Paul to shake this place up.

Feb 29, 2012 11:18am EST  --  Report as abuse
MhD wrote:

I’m an Obama supporter. Not to say that I don’t agree with some of the comments regarding State’s rights and too much government. It’s true that the Federal Government has lost touch with core competencies fueled by pork and ‘re-eletion’ politics.

What I don’t understand is how the GOP was unable to put words into action. Here they have Ron Paul ready to go and they can’t seem to get it together. Well, I guess that’s good news for Obama supporters because he’s the only guy who will give Obama a run for his money.

In the end, talk is cheap. So go ahead put a multimillionaire forward. Another corporate guy with political lineage who made his money as a ruthless private equitarian (i.e., leverage for debt what someone else built, take huge dividends regardless of performance and leave the tax payers to pick up the mess for those that simply don’t pan out). At least this time it’s a guy who actually had some success in the private sector.

Feb 29, 2012 11:24am EST  --  Report as abuse
neilc23 wrote:

An Associated Press poll differed significantly from the conclusions reached in this article. The AP polled just over 1,600 voters and reported that 40% of the voters were Democrats.

If so, it would imply that much of Santorum’s vote count was cast by Democrats in an attempt to serve up the weakest Republican to run against Obama.

Feb 29, 2012 11:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
Tmrw2044 wrote:

@powerwhip…totally with you! As an independent the GOP candidates as a bunch are quite amusing, but no substance. Think Ron Paul probably has “some” of the most prudent ideas, but overall he lacks what the majority will vote for. And if some of the foolish post here believe, the middle of the electorate are of the same mindset as either Romney or Santorum, you’re in for a rude awakening next November.

Feb 29, 2012 11:38am EST  --  Report as abuse
neilc23 wrote:

If all the Democrats voted for Santorum, the returns would have been:

46.5% Romney
33.0% Santorum
13.1% Paul
7.5% Gingrich

While there is no way of estimating how many Democrats voted for Santorum, it is a reasonable conclusion that most of them did since 1) Santorum’s Robo-Calls were directed at union voters, and 2) Romney has been critical of unions.

Regarding unions, the UAW Internet site proudly proclaims that Michigan workers who are laid off can still receive annualized salaries of $57,800 plus health care benefits for up to 48 months.

Feb 29, 2012 11:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

Dangit, I wanted to see Santorium win in MI. Not because I agree with him or think he is even close to presidential material, but because he is the exact opposite. I wanted to see more of the Obama being a ‘snob’ for wanting everyone to have the opportunity to go to college, as stupidity makes me laugh, and it gives more material to perhaps the funniest show on TV, ‘The Daily Show’. But all is not lost, Santorium still got enough votes to make sure he will be noisy the next few months.

Also, I find it a sad commentary on the current state of mind of the GOP voters that more then 5%, much less 30-40%, would even CONSIDER voting for Santorium. For one example, Santorium would love to make America a Theocracy, yet at the same time he spews so much hate for other Theocracies, just because they are a different religion then his. We need to have LESS religion in our modern society, not more. That being said, I do believe people should be allowed to practice WHATEVER religion they want freely, but when you are a member of a greater society you CAN NOT try and impose your religious beliefs on others.

Feb 29, 2012 12:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
steeleng wrote:

One of my BIG concerns about Romney is:

He’s the guy, who lost to the guy, who lost to Obama.

Feb 29, 2012 12:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
leftright wrote:

Can anyone explain exactly what there is about Romney that they don’t want in their next President? Consider what the President should be doing while in office. 1) Negotiating with other countries, 2) negotiating with industries, 3) negotiating with unions, 4) negotiating with congress, 5) understanding his advisors, 6) listening to the American people. He should be acting as sort of an agent of ours, making the best deals that he can for us, his employers. Who would you rather have doing that for you, Romney or Santorum? It’s an easy choice for me. But if you are more concerned about whether he would be a friendly next door neighbor, or what church he goes to, or what he thinks about abortion or gay marriage, then pick someone else. But really, the president has little to do with those issues. How about choosing someone that may solve a few of our problems, instead of another guy you would like to have a beer with.

Feb 29, 2012 1:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sivmevan wrote:

So the circus is on the road again. What a waste of time and money to eventually choose a President among candidates who are hardly different from one another, and who will make little difference to the way that the US is run or its attitude to the rest of the world!

Feb 29, 2012 1:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ColleenHarper wrote:

actnow said: “Americans will support a moderate conservative over a far left incumbent.”

Sorry to invade on your little myth, but from the fascist far right-wing, all independents in the middle look like the far left. The moderate middle might go for Romney, but I’m comfortable they will never go for Santorum.

Obama is no socialist, no matter how often the right wing media claim that he is. He’s too darn moderate for me, and I LIKE my socialized medicine I get from the Veterans Admin.

Colleen Harper, disabled Vet.

Feb 29, 2012 1:18pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dingodoggie wrote:

@Ocala123456789 – yeah, God will pick the best guy, sure. The others are possessed by the Devil, of course.

To help Him there, I would suggest the tried practice of the Middle Ages, just tie the hands and legs of the candidates and throw them in a lake. Whichever candidate floats to the surface again, is supported by the Devil and must be burned. The one staying under water longest, or dropping to the bottom, is the good guy, and should be elected for President.

Would save lots of money, actually. And at least Santorum will like the idea.

Feb 29, 2012 1:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
NilsPils wrote:

@steeling “One of my BIG concerns about Romney is: He’s the guy, who lost to the guy, who lost to Obama.”

Reagan was the guy who lost to the guy who lost to Jimmy Carter.

Feb 29, 2012 1:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
spall78 wrote:

Romney talks like cameras aren’t rolling.

2012 Cross party voting is disgusting, dirty politics!
2007 Cross party voting is fun and effective!

Put together a bunch of 30 second commercials that hold up two of his opposing statements side by side and you’re done. No need to get nasty or distort anything; he’s done all the work for the opposition already.

Feb 29, 2012 2:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
mjp1958 wrote:

Why oh why can’t Republicans get excited about a multi-millionaire candidate who made his money tearing apart American companies, belongs to a cult, dyes his hair, pays 13 percent tax, and has a state healthcare program named after himself. Surprise, surprise!

Feb 29, 2012 2:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gregbrew56 wrote:

“Romney makes pitch to ‘American worker’”

As if he can relate to a 40-hour work week.

Has Romney ever worked at a job that actually produced anything besides money?

Feb 29, 2012 3:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ksteadford wrote:

For the American worker? Yes like he was 4 years ago when he wrote an article saying we should let Detroit go broke.

Feb 29, 2012 4:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Speaker2 wrote:

Its a sad state for the Republican party when the current crop of presidential hopefuls make Richard Nixion and Barry Goldwater look like moderates.

Feb 29, 2012 4:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JLWR wrote:

Workers are NOT going to support a predator tax-doger like Romney. Talk about out of touch – he is out of touch with reality entirely not just out of touch with the middle class. Go retire Romney in one of your 5 houses and get the heck out of politics, pleeze!

Feb 29, 2012 4:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse

What a load of crap from this crap merchant.

Feb 29, 2012 4:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
the_Gaul wrote:

Romney knows as much about the “American worker” as you know about my family. Sure; you can make generalizations. You’ll even be right 5% of the time. But the United States cannot hope to advance its economy and philosophy with a 95% error rate. Romney can afford to be wrong. You cannot.

Feb 29, 2012 4:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Adam_S wrote:

LOL, Romney appealing to the American worker is like Marie Antoinette appealing to the cake eaters. Good grief. Romney will swing some independents, but will alienate the base. Santorum will swing the base, but alienate independents. Neither has what it takes. Deal with it.

Feb 29, 2012 5:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Romney makes pitch:

“Vote for me…. and I’ll say whatever you stupid hillbillies want to hear.”

For example: “I understand that hunting is a sport that many people enjoy including even myself on occasion. NASCAR! Gitter Dunn!”

Oh GOP. You guys are getting awesome.

Feb 29, 2012 5:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
KyuuAL wrote:

To America workers: This scumbag had made a career out of buying companies and dismantling them. That includes firing workers and taking pension funds.

Feb 29, 2012 5:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
NewsDebbie wrote:

What a crock of BS.

Feb 29, 2012 5:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
oneofthecrowd wrote:

Great job Mitt, get on that ballot!

Feb 29, 2012 8:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
SanPa wrote:

“The reason I won yesterday in Michigan and Arizona is because I’m talking about the issue people care most about and I understand that issue,” Mitt Romney.

I guess that character assassination must the issue care about, and Mitt understands.

Feb 29, 2012 8:56pm EST  --  Report as abuse
lolcoolj wrote:

Romney is such a corporate whore that when the press shows pics of him at some plant or manufacturing facility pandering to people who’s jobs he will outsource to china, he’s wearing $500 jeans. Does anyone else notice this? Everything that is wrong with this country is related to corporate control over the last 50 years. It doesn’t really matter what ANY of these muppets say. Want to know who they work for? Look at the donor list. That’s it. Obama and Romney have a LOT in common when you follow the money. Obama’s cabinet looks like a federal reserve dinner guest list. DOES ANYONE REMEMBER EISENHOWER’S FAREWELL ADDRESS??? WAKE UP!

Mar 01, 2012 1:50am EST  --  Report as abuse
KyuuAL wrote:

Want my vote Romney? Press for a 35% Capital Gains tax

Mar 01, 2012 3:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
YUPtrev wrote:

I bet you wouldn’t be arguing for a 35% capital gains tax if you did your research and made sound investments… Why should I have to pay for being a responsible investor? As iff the corporate taxes aren’t enough, the government wants a portion of OUR earnings too!

Mar 01, 2012 11:43am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.