Romney Comes Out Swinging At Trump

[Shabibilicious]

Romney attacks Trump, saying he causes dismay around the world

 By David Shepardson,Reuters 5 hours ago 

FILE PHOTO: U.S. Senator-elect Mitt Romney (R-UT) arrives for a Senate Republican Conference meeting to elect leaders for 116th Congress in the U.S. Capitol on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., November 14, 2018. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

By David Shepardson

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Mitt Romney, the former Republican presidential candidate and incoming U.S. senator from Utah, sharply criticized President Donald Trump and suggested the U.S. leader had caused dismay around the world.

In a Washington Post essay published on Tuesday evening, Romney criticized a number of Trump's actions in December.

"The appointment of senior persons of lesser experience, the abandonment of allies who fight beside us, and the president’s thoughtless claim that America has long been a 'sucker' in world affairs all defined his presidency down," he wrote.

He added that "Trump’s words and actions have caused dismay around the world."

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Romney suggested that "on balance, (Trump's) conduct over the past two years ... is evidence that the president has not risen to the mantle of the office."

Romney is staking out an independent position two days before he takes office on Thursday. It is unclear whether Trump will face a serious challenge in 2020 to securing the Republican Party's presidential nomination.

Trump last February endorsed Romney’s run for a Senate seat in Utah.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Romney excoriated Trump as a "fraud" who was “playing the American public for suckers." Trump responded that Romney had “choked like a dog” in his unsuccessful 2012 campaign against Democratic President Barack Obama.

Despite Romney’s prior criticism, after Trump won the presidency in November 2016, he briefly considered tapping Romney as secretary of state.

In his essay on Tuesday, Romney said he "will speak out against significant statements or actions that are divisive, racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, dishonest or destructive to democratic institutions."

Romney has strongly defended press freedom and challenged Trump's repeated attacks on some news outlets as an "enemy of the people."

"The media is essential to our Republic, to our freedom, to the cause of freedom abroad, and to our national security. It is very much our friend," Romney wrote in an essay in November.

(Reporting by David Shepardson; editing by Jonathan Oatis)

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/romney-attacks-trump-saying-causes-dismay-around-world-020658724.html

 

GO RV, then BV

Edited January 2, 2019 by Shabibilicious

[Sage449]

Huh, where were Romney's big boy shorts when he ran? 

[caz1104]

Romney's not even the LEADER of his family....................weak twerp

[Karsten]

I live in Utah and still wonder how the hell he even got on the Ballot other than his Religion....Word is he bought a house here just so he could came he lived here........

 

He will be a Rino and do nothing to better the Country.....He is and always will be a Never Trumper.

 

Karsten

[nstoolman1]

"The media is essential to our Republic, to our freedom, to the cause of freedom abroad, and to our national security. It is very much our friend," Romney wrote in an essay in November.

 

Yes, when it tells us facts and not agenda driven dribble. 

[md11fr8dawg]

What an ABSOLUTE WIMP!! He stands for the Elite Establishment status quo!! He bring NOTHING to the table.

[Muleslayer]

15 hours ago, Shabibilicious said:

Romney attacks Trump

[new york kevin]

Romney, RINO and a Deep Stater. 

[yota691]

 

[Shabibilicious]

8 hours ago, Muleslayer said:

 

Actually it's Reuters, Mule....just have to look a little closer.  

 

GO RV, then BV

[MyLadiesDaddy]

Romney Just maid the biggest Faux Pas in his career. Someone needs to seriously get new advisers. What Romney was

trying to do with this Op-ed piece was set himself up for a run against President Trump in the Primary. Whether or not to 

win is questionable, but history shows that never has a Republican POTUS been challenged in his Primary and won re-election.

But it seems that Romney forgot to discuss this with his niece first. Who is the Head of the RNC.

Now she is going to have to make a decision to change the 

RNC Primary rules or most likely loose her job as head of the RNC. 

I'd be calling up my uncle and giving him a big WHAT FOR. 

 

 

Romney's attack prompts call to protect Trump from 2020 primary challenger

by David M. Drucker

 | January 02, 2019 

 Mitt Romney’s scorching critique of President Trump in a New Year’s Day op-ed has sparked a call from within the Republican National Committee to change party rules to protect Trump from any long-shot primary challenge in 2020.

The RNC committeeman representing the Virgin Islands late Tuesday emailed fellow elected members of the national party urging them to change the rules when they convene in New Mexico for their annual winter meeting later this month.

Republicans are confident that Trump would hold off any primary challenger,

but worry the campaign would derail his re-election.

“Look, the political history is clear. No Republican president opposed for re-nomination has ever won re-election,”

RNC committeeman Jevon O.A. Williams said in a email obtained by the Washington Examiner.

“Unfortunately, loopholes in the rules governing the 2020 re-nomination campaign are enabling these so-called Republicans to flirt with the possibility of contested primaries and caucuses.”

Romney, to be sworn in as Utah’s junior senator on Thursday, was the Republican Party’s 2012 presidential nominee, and is seen as an acute threat to Trump in the wake of his op-ed in the Washington Post. Williams said Romney or someone like him would complicate Trump's 2020 campaign.

“While President Trump would win re-nomination it wouldn’t come quick and it wouldn’t be 

inexpensive. Any contested re-nomination campaign—even a forlorn hope—would only help Democrats,” Williams wrote.

“Accordingly, I am asking for your support to take the unprecedented step of amending the rules to close loopholes in the re-nomination campaign, including Rule 40.”

 

Trump would be the overwhelming favorite in any contested 2020 primary. But Republican National Committee rules make it relatively easy for a well-funded challenger to win enough votes to have his or her vote placed in nomination on the floor of the party’s nominating convention in Charlotte.

Under current rules, a primary challenger can get a vote on the convention floor if he or she wins a plurality of delegates in five states or territories (Washington, D.C. can also be one of the five).

Existing rules technically prohibit any changes to these regulations inside of a presidential cycle, which begins after the midterms.

But as a private organization, the RNC could in fact make any changes it wants at any time.

Williams wants the RNC to change the rules, endorse Trump and declare him the de-facto nominee, heading off any primary challenge. But such a move, while possible, could be complicated and generate criticism that the president is engaging in the sort of establishment election-rigging he decried on the campaign trail in 2016.

Last month, a torrent of criticism followed after the Washington Examiner reported that the South Carolina Republican Party might cancel its 2020 primary for president to preserveTrump’s standing.

But given Romney’s national prominence and lingering concerns about how a primary challenge might affect Trump, RNC leaders might have no choice but to address the issue in some fashion — even if the committee ultimately chooses not to amend the rules.

One interesting dynamic to watch: RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel is Romney’s niece,

although she has never shared her uncle’s hesitation about Trump. One RNC official said McDaniel's relationship to Romney and her position in the RNC will likely force her to make some decision one way or the other.

“I don’t see how RNC chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel can avoid addressing this since the op-ed was written by her uncle and the White House will demand her loyalty if she wants to stay in her position,” a former RNC official said,

on condition of anonymity in order to speak candidly. "It also created an issue where Trump World could take revenge on a number of RNC staff, consultants and vendors with Romney 2012 and 2008 ties.”

McDaniel responded to Romney in a tweet 

Wednesday morning, saying his criticism of the president is "disappointing and unproductive," and "feeds" into what Democrats and some in the media want.

The Trump campaign issued a sharp jab via Brad Parscale, the campaign manager, with Trump offering a relatively mild volley in which he asked Romney to be a team player.

 

“Here we go with Mitt Romney, but so fast! Question will be, is he a Flake? I hope not. Would much prefer that Mitt focus on Border Security and so many other things where he can be helpful. I won big, and he didn’t. He should be happy for all Republicans. Be a TEAM player & WIN!,” Trump tweeted.

 

[bostonangler]

18 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

Romney Just maid the biggest Faux Pas in his career. Someone needs to seriously get new advisers. What Romney was

trying to do with this Op-ed piece was set himself up for a run against President Trump in the Primary. Whether or not to 

win is questionable, but history shows that never has a Republican POTUS been challenged in his Primary and won re-election.

But it seems that Romney forgot to discuss this with his niece first. Who is the Head of the RNC.

Now she is going to have to make a decision to change the 

RNC Primary rules or most likely loose her job as head of the RNC. 

I'd be calling up my uncle and giving him a big WHAT FOR. 

 

 

Romney's attack prompts call to protect Trump from 2020 primary challenger

by David M. Drucker

 | January 02, 2019 

 Mitt Romney’s scorching critique of President Trump in a New Year’s Day op-ed has sparked a call from within the Republican National Committee to change party rules to protect Trump from any long-shot primary challenge in 2020.

The RNC committeeman representing the Virgin Islands late Tuesday emailed fellow elected members of the national party urging them to change the rules when they convene in New Mexico for their annual winter meeting later this month.

Republicans are confident that Trump would hold off any primary challenger,

but worry the campaign would derail his re-election.

“Look, the political history is clear. No Republican president opposed for re-nomination has ever won re-election,”

RNC committeeman Jevon O.A. Williams said in a email obtained by the Washington Examiner.

“Unfortunately, loopholes in the rules governing the 2020 re-nomination campaign are enabling these so-called Republicans to flirt with the possibility of contested primaries and caucuses.”

Romney, to be sworn in as Utah’s junior senator on Thursday, was the Republican Party’s 2012 presidential nominee, and is seen as an acute threat to Trump in the wake of his op-ed in the Washington Post. Williams said Romney or someone like him would complicate Trump's 2020 campaign.

“While President Trump would win re-nomination it wouldn’t come quick and it wouldn’t be 

inexpensive. Any contested re-nomination campaign—even a forlorn hope—would only help Democrats,” Williams wrote.

“Accordingly, I am asking for your support system">support to take the unprecedented step of amending the rules to close loopholes in the re-nomination campaign, including Rule 40.”

 

Trump would be the overwhelming favorite in any contested 2020 primary. But Republican National Committee rules make it relatively easy for a well-funded challenger to win enough votes to have his or her vote placed in nomination on the floor of the party’s nominating convention in Charlotte.

Under current rules, a primary challenger can get a vote on the convention floor if he or she wins a plurality of delegates in five states or territories (Washington, D.C. can also be one of the five).

Existing rules technically prohibit any changes to these regulations inside of a presidential cycle, which begins after the midterms.

But as a private organization, the RNC could in fact make any changes it wants at any time.

Williams wants the RNC to change the rules, endorse Trump and declare him the de-facto nominee, heading off any primary challenge. But such a move, while possible, could be complicated and generate criticism that the president is engaging in the sort of establishment election-rigging he decried on the campaign trail in 2016.

Last month, a torrent of criticism followed after the Washington Examiner reported that the South Carolina Republican Party might cancel its 2020 primary for president to preserveTrump’s standing.

But given Romney’s national prominence and lingering concerns about how a primary challenge might affect Trump, RNC leaders might have no choice but to address the issue in some fashion — even if the committee ultimately chooses not to amend the rules.

One interesting dynamic to watch: RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel is Romney’s niece,

although she has never shared her uncle’s hesitation about Trump. One RNC official said McDaniel's relationship to Romney and her position in the RNC will likely force her to make some decision one way or the other.

“I don’t see how RNC chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel can avoid addressing this since the op-ed was written by her uncle and the White House will demand her loyalty if she wants to stay in her position,” a former RNC official said,

on condition of anonymity in order to speak candidly. "It also created an issue where Trump World could take revenge on a number of RNC staff, consultants and vendors with Romney 2012 and 2008 ties.”

McDaniel responded to Romney in a tweet 

Wednesday morning, saying his criticism of the president is "disappointing and unproductive," and "feeds" into what Democrats and some in the media want.

The Trump campaign issued a sharp jab via Brad Parscale, the campaign manager, with Trump offering a relatively mild volley in which he asked Romney to be a team player.

 

“Here we go with Mitt Romney, but so fast! Question will be, is he a Flake? I hope not. Would much prefer that Mitt focus on Border Security and so many other things where he can be helpful. I won big, and he didn’t. He should be happy for all Republicans. Be a TEAM player & WIN!,” Trump tweeted.

 

 

Changing this rule sounds good if you support the current administration, but what if the president was someone you don't support? Say it was Romney who was president, would you want a rule like this to be in place? To me it sounds like a bad idea to make any candidate "de-facto" Just my humble opinion.

 

And just for the record. I think Romney is a criminal and is certainly no patriot.

 

B/A

Edited January 3, 2019 by bostonangler

[MyLadiesDaddy]

4 hours ago, bostonangler said:

 

Changing this rule sounds good if you support system" rel="">support the current administration, but what if the president was someone you don't support system" rel="">support? Say it was Romney who was president, would you want a rule like this to be in place? To me it sounds like a bad idea to make any candidate "de-facto" Just my humble opinion.

 

And just for the record. I think Romney is a criminal and is certainly no patriot.

 

B/A

Personally it's an irrelevant  issue, the Dems would do the same thing. And if you remember back when Trump announced 

his running for POTUS, SUDDENLY we had 17 Republicans running for office. I've never seen that in all my life and I'm personally 

convinced that was only to stop Trump. As no Republican President that has ever been contested for the nomination has ever 

won that election, I believe that the only reason Romney would do this is to continue to stop Trump. 

Lest we forget the Republicans hate Trump as much as the Democrats. 

[Shabibilicious]

2 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

Lest we forget the Republicans hate Trump as much as the Democrats. 

 

Maybe even more than the Democrats.......for their hands are tied as they can't follow their moral compass and push back at Trump for fear of losing their spot in the swamp.  As always, just my opinion

 

GO RV, then BV

[MyLadiesDaddy]

Just now, Shabibilicious said:

 

Maybe even more than the Democrats.......for their hands are tied as they can't follow their moral compass and push back at Trump for fear of losing their spot in the swamp.  As always, just my opinion

 

GO RV, then BV

That's as true a statement as it is sad. 

[bostonangler]

2 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

Personally it's an irrelevant  issue, the Dems would do the same thing. And if you remember back when Trump announced 

his running for POTUS, SUDDENLY we had 17 Republicans running for office. I've never seen that in all my life and I'm personally 

convinced that was only to stop Trump. As no Republican President that has ever been contested for the nomination has ever 

won that election, I believe that the only reason Romney would do this is to continue to stop Trump. 

Lest we forget the Republicans hate Trump as much as the Democrats. 

 

That kind of confuses me... When the 2016 election cycle began two years before the election, I don't think some of the big names running thought Trump had a chance, so the 17 didn't run to gang up on him. I think the party simply didn't have a leader. As for Romney, he is an opportunist who moves to any state where he can buy an election.. But on a national scale, we've already seen he cannot win, so I think he is irrelevant... It is like Elizabeth Warren, she has no chance and shouldn't waste the money on running... I don't understand how anyone who contributes to campaigns (you know I don't) would give her a dime. They might as well throw their money out a window.

 

B/A

[Shabibilicious]

6 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

That's as true a statement as it is sad. 

 

You are right.....not following one's moral compass is sad.

 

GO RV, then BV

Edited January 3, 2019 by Shabibilicious

[MyLadiesDaddy]

1 minute ago, bostonangler said:

 

That kind of confuses me... When the 2016 election cycle began two years before the election, I don't think some of the big names running thought Trump had a chance, so the 17 didn't run to gang up on him. I think the party simply didn't have a leader. As for Romney, he is an opportunist who moves to any state where he can buy an election.. But on a national scale, we've already seen he cannot win, so I think he is irrelevant... It is like Elizabeth Warren, she has no chance and shouldn't waste the money on running... I don't understand how anyone who contributes to campaigns (you know I don't) would give her a dime. They might as well throw their money out a window.

 

B/A

I understand and I know that it's impolite to even speak of a woman's age, so please forgive me, but you are old enough to know

that we've not seen such a thing in at least 55 yrs. {my age}

I don't think they thought he would win either, but he was NOT one of them and they weren't and aren't willing to take a chance that he 

could. Which is why no one can tell us for certain when the Muller investigation actually started. My speculation it originated soon 

after Trump announced. 

As to why anyone would give money to any campaign, that's just economics with regard to big donors. To cozy up to whomever 

is believed to offer more to their individual commercial enterprises. 

Which is how the swamp was created. 

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

2 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

You are right.....not following one's moral compass is sad.

 

GO RV, then BV

I know that I've always had a moral compass, but I most certainly didn't follow it most of my life. 

Sad but true, thanks be to Jesus Christ for his mercy. 

And I know where you're coming from so I would ask you to consider the story of King Cyrus at the time of 

Daniel the profit. He was hardly a righteous man, Yet the Bible tells us that God raised him up to conquer the known

world and rebuild the Jewish Temple. 

Now I'm not saying that Trump is today's Cyrus, but I certainly pray that he is. Cause it seems to me that the swamp 

is fit to be tied and will declare war against America if something isn't done to wipe it clean. 

[bostonangler]

11 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

As to why anyone would give money to any campaign, that's just economics with regard to big donors.

 

I understand that, but they should know their money is wasted on her... I think there will be candidates who stand a better chance of winning.

 

B/A

[MyLadiesDaddy]

1 minute ago, bostonangler said:

 

I understand that, but they should know their money is wasted on her... I think there will be candidates who stand a better chance of winning.

 

B/A

Agreed! She doesn't stand a snowballs chance in Hades of winning. Still it's way too early and we're most certainly 

gonna see better on the left than that. 

[Karsten]

 

Karsten

[MyLadiesDaddy]

18 minutes ago, Karsten said:

 

Karsten

OMG

MEDIA SMACK-DOWN OF 

THE 

CENTURY

Ten thousand pluses to you Girl

[nstoolman1]

Romney will be another Perot.

Split the votes and a Dem will win. This is what the Never Trumpers want.

They will still be in office and Trump will be out and the status quo will resume. 

The Never Trumpers made sure both the House and Senate never had a true majority to pass anything. Thanks to the RINO's. 

[Muleslayer]

Just like Bernie was for hillarious!