Romney: ‘Accepting’ the nomination

Romney won with 67% in Connecticut, 63% in Rhode Island, 62% in New York, 58% in Pennsylvania, and 57% in Delaware.

The Boston Globe’s Viser says, “Romney implicitly accepted the Republican presidential nomination” last night. And: “At one point, he paid homage to the campaign slogans of both Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton in their bids to defeat an incumbent president during economic turmoil.”

Advertise | AdChoices

Roll Call also makes that point with this headline: “Mitt Romney Accepts GOP Nomination.”

The Boston Globe’s Johnson: “[W]ith a calmness borne by no longer having to glance back at carping nomination rivals, Romney looked ahead to deliver not so much of a victory speech as his mass introduction to the American audience. Over 15 minutes, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee purposefully hit all the touchstones aimed for in such a pivot.”

AP: “The Republican presidential nomination all but in hand, Mitt Romney is refocusing his efforts on challenging President Barack Obama, raising cash for the battle ahead and reconciling with onetime primary rival Rick Santorum.”

Santorum basically endorsed Romney last night. Asked if Romney’s the “right guy,” Santorum said, “Yeah, absolutely. He's the person that is going to go up against Barack Obama, it's pretty clear, and we need to win this race.” Asked if that was an endorsement, Santorum said: “Well, if that's what you want to call it, you can call it whatever you want. Look, I believe he's going to win the race.”

Explore related topics: decision-2012, romney

Ben-636050

The next president of the United States of America took the podium last night after winning five more primaries. He took the podium with a presidential tone and a presidential command. Mitt Romney has the experience to turn this country around from economic collapse. He doesn’t need to be a comedian. He doesn’t need to be “hip.” That hasn’t gotten this country very far when a desperate nation became enamored with the false promises and hypnotic tone of an inexperienced community organizer who is unscrupulously trying to divide America into class warfare because his record is a failure.

‘It’s still the economy… and we’re not stupid.’

‘Four years ago Barack Obama dazzled us in front of Greek columns with sweeping promises of hope and change,’ he said. ‘But after we came down to earth, after the celebration and parades, what do we have to show for three and a half years of President Obama?

‘Is it easier to make ends meet? Is it easier to sell your home or buy a new one? Have you saved what you needed for retirement? Are you making more in your job? Do you have a better chance to get a better job? Do you pay less at the pump?’

Promising that he knew ‘how to lead us out of this stagnant Obama economy and into a job-creating recovery’, he predicted ‘a campaign of diversions, distractions, and distortions’ over the next six months.

‘That kind of campaign may have worked at another place over in a different time. But not here and not now. It’s still about the economy …and we’re not stupid.’

He added: ‘Americans have always been eternal optimists, but over the last three and a half years, we have seen hopes and dreams diminished by false promises and weak leadership. Everywhere I go, Americans are tired of being tired.’

Truer words have never been spoken.

A BETTER AMERICA BEGAN LAST NIGHT!!!!!!!

ROMNEY 2012

4 votes

#1 - Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:09 AM EDT

honest jo

Romney will make a great President.

he will help to bring integrity an honor back to the office and to this country.

2 votes

#1.1 - Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:56 AM EDT

Wm.-375815

Two points: Many thought W would bring back integrity - not. Two, it's a legitimate explanation when from the first day you are in office, the other party says they will do whatever it takes to make you a one-term president, supports zero, none, nada of any of your proposals, starts raising money and "troops" from Feb. '09 on to stage and disrupt every town hall meeting everywhere across the country. If America is tired, they are tired because the whiny 3 year old has been throwing a tantrum for 3 years. Even the best, most well meaning or parents (voters) give in to the 3 year old, just to stop the noise. We made that mistake in 2000. I hope we don't again. It's so convenient for the GOP to be preaching open revolt for 3 plus years, then to put forth their "adult" to quiet things. Who the hell was causing all the noise and disruption, all the obstruction, the refusal to acknowledge that anything that went bad in the economy was the result of free market unregulated excesses? Who is the party that says we must wait for a better economy before we can raise taxes or implement new technologies to clean our air and water? If we used wars and recessions as excuses not to move forward, Lake Erie would still be on fire.

#1.2 - Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:55 AM EDT

Advertise | AdChoices

Ben-636050

“A BETTER AMERICA BEGAN LAST NIGHT” ROMNEY 2012

NYT Ombudsman’s Startling Admission: ‘Time to Offer an Aggressive Look at the President’s Record’

For those who have long thought the New York Times has been covertly, and even overtly, waxing poetic about President Obama’s record, they just got a startling admission of those sorts from the Times’s public editor — its version of an ombudsman, or paid self-critic. In short: Yes, the Times hasn’t been as critical as it could have been.

“Like a lot of America, it basked a bit in the warm glow of Mr. Obama’s election in 2008,” Arthur Brisbane writes. And that’s after he says “The Times needs to offer an aggressive look at the president’s record, policy promises and campaign operation to answer the question: Who is the real Barack Obama?”

Brisbane then launches into a lengthy explanation. He defends the paper in part, but he also doesn’t shy away from including reader criticism:

According to a study by the media scholars Stephen J. Farnsworth and S. Robert Lichter, The Times’s coverage of the president’s first year in office was significantly more favorable than its first-year coverage of three predecessors who also brought a new party to power in the White House: George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan.

Writing for the periodical Politics & Policy, the authors were so struck by the findings that they wondered, “Did The Times, perhaps in response to the aggressive efforts by Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal to seize market share, decide to tilt more to the left than it had in the past?”

I strongly doubt that. Based on conversations with Times reporters and editors who cover the campaign and Washington, I think they see themselves as aggressive journalists who don’t play favorites. Still, a strong current of skepticism holds that the paper skews left. Unfortunately, this is exacerbated by collateral factors — for example, political views that creep into nonpolitical coverage.

To illustrate, Faye Farrington, a reader from Hollis, N.H., wrote me earlier this year in exasperation over a Sunday magazine article about “Downton Abbey,” the public television series, in which the writer slipped in a veiled complaint about Mitt Romney’s exploitation of the American tax code.

“The constant insertion of liberal politics into even the most politically irrelevant articles has already caused us to cancel our daily subscription,” Ms. Farrington wrote, “leaving only the Sunday delivery as I confess to an addiction to the Sunday crossword.”

The warm afterglow of Mr. Obama’s election, the collateral effects of liberal-minded feature writers — these can be overcome by hard-nosed, unbiased political reporting now. [Emphasis added]

Now is the time to shift to a campaign coverage paradigm that compares promises with execution, sheds light on campaign operations and assesses the president’s promises for a second term.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/nyt-ombudsmans-startling-admission-time-to-offer-an-aggresive-look-at-the-presidents-record/

3 votes

#2 - Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:10 AM EDT

96ws6

Romney accepts the nomination before acquiring the required 1144 delegates. With all the fraud the GOP pulled ot get this far they could have at least waited until the delegate count is reached. Guess they figure the rigging of the election is not worth hiding anymore.