Romney

Mitt Romney is tan, rested, and ready to lose again, so let’s do this thing

Mitt Romney in the hills by DonkeyHotey via Flickr

Mitt Romney in the hills by DonkeyHotey via Flickr

Looks like that bogus Quinnipiac poll may be forcing Romney to come out into the spotlight…

The Raw Story

In a move that can be seen as either desperation or ‘we’re all gonna die anyway, so what the hell?’ conservatives are casting their eyes westward to a man — a stoic man, an honest and true man of values, standing knee deep  in the Pacific Ocean watching the sun go down on America — as their savior in 2016.

That man is a man called Mitt. Family man, businessman, gentle and attentive lover, and owner of both a car elevator and a losing career in elections.

Surveying the 2016 GOP field and falling into a pit of existential dread and despair where there is no light, no hope, no exit, nothing but a  bleak meaningless abyss of wretchedness and desolation, Republicans see hope in the sparkle of Mitt Romney’s eyes and the Earth-mother joy in life his wife Ann brings to the party.

So the ‘Why not Mitt?’ crowd is going to throw some shit against the wall and see what sticks. After all, that is what fan-mag Politico does.

In an article subheaded, “I’m absolutely serious,” a former George W Bush White House person you have never heard of states his case.

Pointing to a recent poll stating 45 percent [or 3 percent less than voted for him in 2012] of voters polled said the United States would be better off today with Romney as president, Emil Henry says that Mitt Romney was very well received indeed at a rave he threw for a bunch of his pals in Utah:

That was also the question on not just the minds but the lips of many at a recent private gathering in Utah known as the E2 Summit, Romney’s now-annual retreat for high-profile politicians, policymakers, innovators, entrepreneurs, business leaders, top bundlers and, of course, a core group of long-time Romney loyalists.

Cancel the convention location search, nobody has to go to Cleveland, we have a winner!

Noting that the GOP field is “fractured” and filled with loons, untested loons, corrupt loons, and loser loons, Henry suggests that Romney is better than nothing and, besides, Morning  Caffeinated Anger Dad Joe Scarborough — who may or may not have had a hand in a rage-filled  explosion of lust and betrayal resulting  in a staffer’s death – says Romney is ‘da bomb,’ which is a phrase popular with middle-aged white men who consider themselves ‘hip to the kids lingo, yo.’

MSNBC host Joe Scarborough, who opened the conference in Utah, said it best: There is no Republican who can “fill the stage” better than Mitt Romney.

Again: YOU DON’T HAVE TO GO TO CLEVELAND IN THE SUMMER, REPUBLICANS. DO YOU WANT THIS GIFT-WRAPPED?

Lastly Henry notes that all the other Presidential failures (George McGovern, Michael Dukakis, Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry and John McCain) were “career politicians.”

Where Romney stands out versus every failed nominee of the last half century is that he, a lifelong businessman with just one successful four-year stint as governor of Massachusetts, is not a career politician.

This is true. Romney ran against Ted Kennedy for a Senate seat and lost in 1994. He then licked his wounds, saved the Olympics,  and came back and was elected governor of Massachusetts  in 2002.  Then he ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, only to lose to shouty Palin-annointer John McCain.  And most recently he ran against Barack Obama in 2012  and lost again giving him a career record of 1-3.

So while it is true that he is not a “career politician,” that might have something to do with the fact that people who vote cooperated and kept him that way by giving him a helping hand.

With one finger extended.

So, yeah, he’s your guy. His record speaks for itself and he’s totally due so you guys should do this thing.

After the last two elections, we expect nothing less.

Chris Christie Is Quickly Becoming The New Mitt Romney

National Memo

Republicans spent most of 2011 pretending that Mitt Romney wouldn’t be their nominee for president. And when the 2012 primaries began, they did everything they could to damage their nominee before he could get to the general election.

The race for the 2016 GOP nomination is starting to hint at a remarkably similar shape.

Governor Chris Christie (R-NJ), fresh off his landslide re-election, is leading the pack of contenders to represent the Republican Party in the next presidential election. With 24 percent of the vote, he’s ahead of Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) at 13 percent, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) at 11 percent and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) with 10 percent in a new CNN poll. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) round out the frontrunners.

Like Romney and unlike his competitors, Christie has never been “a Tea Party favorite.” And with a little less than half of Republican primary voters not identifying with that movement, the governor is fighting for one half of the base as his several opponents wrestle for the other.

Like Romney and unlike his competitors, Christie has never been “a Tea Party favorite.” And with a little less than half of Republican primary voters not identifying with that movement, the governor is fighting for one half of the base as his several opponents wrestle for the other.

The Tea Party’s big mistake was not uniting behind any one candidate after Rick Perry’s debate performances disqualified him. Instead, they fled from Not-Romney to Not-Romney, disparaging their eventual nominee’s key legislative accomplishment and business record as one candidate after another failed to dethrone him.

With so many heroes of the Tea Party movement in the running, it appears that history could be on repeat. The New Republic‘s Nate Cohn suggests that Governor Scott Walker (R-WI) could be the candidate to unite the party — even if he isn’t even cracking the top six in the CNN poll. Much of Walker’s appeal will depend on how badly the GOP wants a Non-Christie.

The current governor of New Jersey has some decided advantages over the former governor of Massachusetts, even if their first terms were both marked by marginal economic gains.

First of all, Christie was re-elected in a blue state — a feat that Romney didn’t even attempt to complete, after winning election with less than 50 percent of the vote.

The Garden State’s governor is a natural, possibly even a Clinton-esque, campaigner who knows when to triangulate against both sides of the aisle. He — like George W. Bush before him — feels confident in running against an unpopular Congress, even if his party controls the bottom house. And he has never been pro-abortion rights, though his dabbling in gun control may put a similar crack in his conservative credibility.

Christie wasn’t the godfather of Obamacare — but he did split the health reform baby by accepting Medicaid expansion while refusing to build a health care exchange for his state.

As the governor’s frontrunner stance firms, the attacks on him will grow more severe. Already he’s facing questions about his lobbying activities, which include slight connections to Bernie Madoff, and conservatives are blasting him for “bizarre behavior,” such as possibly not supporting the opponent of Governor Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) even as Christie serves as the chairman of the Republican Governors Association.

Republicans only united around Mitt Romney after they failed to destroy him. The question now is whether they’ll make the same mistake twice.  And if Christie succeeds in uniting the party, then the question becomes if he’ll continue to follow Romney’s flip-flopping path of not revealing what he actually feels about immigration reform until he loses the presidency.

7 telling passages from Double Down

News coverage of a new political tell-all book has been non-stop for the last 72 hours.  

Most of us have heard about the book by Game Changer authors Mark Halperin and John Heilemann called Double Down which has tongues wagging and keyboards tapping all over the Beltway.  

The book details the 2012 election season and according to early reports, it’s bound to be as much of a success as Game Changer

The Week

Don’t wait until November 15 to read all 473 pages of Double Down, the 2012 installment of Mark Halperin and John Heilemann’s campaign biography. Copies of the book are popping up in bookstores, and there’s been lot of TV coverage of the behind-the-scenes relationship between the Clintons and the Obamas. (Not really news, but plenty of color: they’re not each other’s best friends, but they’ve grown on each other.) Here are 8 other points of color, each of which illustrates a deeper political dynamic.

1. Far from being annoyed with Vice President Joe Biden, Obama developed a deep affection for him, prizing his intelligence, his loyalty and his truth-telling. When Biden returned to the White House after visiting his son Beau, who had been hospitalized for a neurological condition, Obama “came sprinting down the hall to the White House.” Biden would not tolerate any digs at Obama in his presence. He “uppraided” then Rep. Anthony Weiner for making such a comment, and did something similar with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. At a lunch in 2011, Obama told Biden: “You know, I’m surprised. We became friends!” Biden’s reply: “You’re fucking surprised?”

2. The Obama White House was floored at the way Jon Huntsman Jr., then the ambassador to China, openly flirted with running for President. Chief of staff Richard Daley told him point blank: “This is a pretty shitty way to treat someone who gave you the opportunity of a lifetime. When he did decide to make a go of it, Huntsman was a surprisingly passive candidate, and, shocking his aides, said he would refuse to accept his father’s money to make it to the nomination.

3. Mitt Romney’s favorite substitute for the F-bomb: “blooming.” As in, “that blooming idiot.” And, where others would say “shit,” Romney would say “grunt.” He did not seem to mind when others cussed in his presence, especially Chris Christie, who had become a pretty regular confidante. When Newt Gingrich was on the ascendance, it was Christie who urged Romney to “kick the shit out of him.

4. Behind the scenes, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels watched the unfolding disaster of the Romney campaign, tried to get Jeb Bush and Paul Ryan to run for President at the last minute.

5. Romney’s vice presidential vetting team initially considered New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte, Gov. Chris Christie, Gov. Tom Pawlenty, Sen. Rob Portman, VA Gov Bob McDonald, IN Gov. Mitch Daniels, Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. John Cornyn. The final short list: Ryan, Christie, Pawlenty and Rubio. Ryan overcame his early hesitation that Romney was not a movement conservative and his wife’s fear about the arduous of the campaign. Ryan was particularly wary of top Romney aide Stuart Stevens, whom he saw as “indifferent” to the conservative moment.

6. The biggest worry for Romney’s veep vetters about Christie was not his health: it was about various financial dealings involving his family and friends. A 2010 DOJ investigation into Christie’s spending habits as a US Attorney. His time as a lobbyist for the securities industry. His brother’s dealings with the SEC, and more. Christie had contempt for Romney’s operation, which returned the feelings: Christie was a very hard surrogate to manage, insisting on very expensive charters and emoluments. Romney’s team did not think Christie’s operation was sufficiently cooperative with their vetting requests. Romney picked Ryan ten days before the choice was announced. “The Garden State governor’s record was littered with potential landmine.”

7. After the first presidential debate, President Obama confessed that “he was struggling.”

“You keep telling me I can’t spend too much time defending my record, and that I should talk about my plans, he said. But my plans aren’t anything like the plans I ran on in 2008. I had a universal health care plan then. Now I’ve got.. what? A manufacturing plan? What am I gonna do on education? And what am I gonna do on energy? There’s not much there. .. I can’t tell you that. Okay, I woke up today. I knew I needed to do better, and I’ll do better. I am wired in a different way than this event requires.”

Obama paused.

“I just don’t know if I can do this.”

 

Mitt Romney on his 47 percent comment: ‘Actually, I didn’t say that’

Poor Mittens, still in denial…

Daily Kos

So I saw this tweet from David Corn…

…and I thought to myself, “No way! Not even Mitt Romney could say something that dumb.” But David Corn is the guy who broke the whole 47 percent thing in the first place, so I clicked.And sure enough:

[Washington Post Reporter Dan] Balz tried to point this out: “But when you said there are 47 percent who won’t take personal responsibility—.” Romney interrupted: “Actually, I didn’t say that… That’s how it began to be perceived, and so I had to ultimately respond to the perception, because perception is reality.”

Gee, Mitt, where could that perception possibly have come from? Perhaps the simple fact that it’s exactly what you said?

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what… These are people who pay no income tax. [...] My job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.

It’d be one thing if Mitt Romney apologized for his comments—or if he defended them. But pretending that he never even said them in the first place? That’s like saying that not only does he believe 47 percent of Americans are lazy freeloaders who refuse to take personal responsibility for themselves, they—along with the rest of Americans—are stupid idiots who would trust Romney’s revisionism over their lying eyes. Well, in this case eyes and ears.

In 2012 Election, African American Voters Surpassed White Turnout For The First Time Ever

Post image for They Tried, But They Could Not Stop Us. We Went To Court. We Stood In Line. We Voted! And We Won!

They tried to take our voice from us, but we would not let them. We stood in line. We endured their slings and arrows. We braved their threats and insults. And then, we voted…

This is great news.  In 2012 we stood our ground and defied the many attempts at voter suppression.  “We stood in line”…

Think Progress

Though Republican election officials in battleground states sought to dampen voter turn out of traditionally Democratic voters through by instituting identification requirements and limiting early voting hours, a new analysis of census data by the Associated Press shows that African-Americans “voted at a higher rate than other minority groups in 2012 and by most measures surpassed the white turnout for the first time.”

The analysis finds that had “people voted last November at the same rates they did in 2004, when black turnout was below its current historic levels, Republican Mitt Romney would have won narrowly”:

The 2012 data suggest Romney was a particularly weak GOP candidate, unable to motivate white voters let alone attract significant black or Latino support. Obama’s personal appeal and the slowly improving economy helped overcome doubts and spur record levels of minority voters in a way that may not be easily replicated for Democrats soon.

Romney would have erased Obama’s nearly 5 million-vote victory margin and narrowly won the popular vote if voters had turned out as they did in 2004,according to Frey’s analysis. Then, white turnout was slightly higher and black voting lower.

More significantly, the battleground states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida and Colorado would have tipped in favor of Romney, handing him the presidency if the outcome of other states remained the same.

African Americans outperformed their voter share, representing 13 percent of total votes cast in 2012 while making up 12 percent of the population — despite facing great obstacles to exercising the franchise.

A poll conducted by Hart Research poll immediately after the election reported that 22 percent of African-Americans waited 30 minutes or more to vote, compared to just 9 percent of white voters. A more thorough analysis from Massachusetts Institute of Technology confirmed that black and hispanic voters waited nearly twice as long to vote as whites. In Florida, home to the longest lines, at least 201,000 people may have been deterred from voting by the long waits.

Black youth was also far more likely to be asked to show ID, a study by professors at the University of Chicago and Washington University in St. Louis found, and many did not even try to vote because they lacked the required identification.

“The 2008 election was the first year when the minority vote was important to electing a U.S. president. By 2024, their vote will be essential to victory,” William H. Frey, a demographer who analyzed the 2012 elections for the AP, said. “Democrats will be looking at a landslide going into 2028 if the new Hispanic voters continue to favor Democrats.”

Mystery man behind ’47 percent’ video revealed

prouty

Scott Prouty

Get ready for the far-right’s all out assault on Scott Prouty…

The Raw Story

The curtain has been lifted.

The man who secretly filmed then-presidential candidate Mitt Romney telling a private audience that “47 percent” of voters would vote for President Obama “no matter what,” outed himself Wednesday night during an hour-long segment on “The Ed Show.”

Scott Prouty, a bartender who was working Romney’s private meeting with major contributors at a Boca Raton, Fla. fundraiser, told Ed Schultz, “I was behind this whole thing.”

”I didn’t go there with a grudge against Romney,” said Prouty. “… I really had no idea he would say what he said.”

The “47 percent” remark is considered — even by Romney himself — to have been a major blow to the campaign. Prouty said he remained anonymous in the aftermath of the comment  because he didn’t want to distract from the video itself.

“I wanted Mitt Romney’s words, and Mitt Romney’s words only” to be the news story, said Prouty.

According to the Washington Post, Prouty said he expects “to be torn apart by the right-wing media,” now that he’s come forward.

Watch a segment of the interview below:

 

Mitt Romney’s first post-election interview: 5 takeaways

The Week

Romney started his return to the public spotlight on Fox News Sunday

On Sunday, Fox News aired the first interview with Mitt Romney since the former Massachusetts governor lost the 2012 presidential race. Fox New Sundayhost Chris Wallace flew out to California to interviewRomney and his wife, Ann, and they dissected what went wrong for the Romney campaign, what the Romneys plan to do now, and what ails the GOP, President Obama, and America, among other topics. (Watch the Mitt Romney solo interview below.) Here, five key takeaways from Romney’s first big post-election interview:

1. He and Ann thought he was going to win until the very end (think: Ohio)
Both Romneys believed they were moving to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. right up until the returns started coming in, they tell Wallace. “I think Mitt intellectually was thinking it was possible we couldn’t” win, Ann says. “He knew how close it was, but my heart and whole soul was, we’re going to win, I was there.” Mitt agrees that “we were convinced that we’d win,” even though the polls were close. “We knew the energy and passion was with our voters, and my heart said we were going to win.” The first hint that his internal polls were wrong was when Florida exit polls started coming in showing a very close race — “we thought we’d win solidly in Florida,” Romney says — and from there it was “a slow recognition” that he’d lost. “Ultimately, when the Ohio numbers began coming in and they were disappointing,” he began to give up hope.

2. The Romneys blame his loss on his campaign, plus ObamaCare
Mitt Romney mostly blames his own campaign for his loss, singling out his poor showing among blacks, Latinos, and other minorities. The campaign wasn’t “effective at taking my message primarily to minority voters,” he says, and “the ObamaCare attractiveness and feature was something we underestimated… particularly among lower incomes.” ObamaCare? “ObamaCare was very attractive, particularly to those without health insurance,” Romney says. “And they came out in large numbers to vote.”

At the same time, Romney acknowledges that his infamous “47 percent” remark “hurt and did real damage to my campaign,” even though suggesting that almost half the people in the country are moochers is “not what I meant.” Reinforcing a common criticism — or excuse, from supporters — that he’s a “famously unprincipled political weather-vane,” says Daniel Larison atThe American Conservative, Romney added: “What I said is not what I believe.”

Ann Romney, for her part, contributed this little “sound bite that’s sure to get all kinds of rotation over several news cycles this week,” says Eric Wemple at The Washington Post: “I’m happy to blame the media.” She says that the campaign didn’t let people “really get to know Mitt for who he was,” but “it was not just the campaign’s fault. I believe it was the media’s fault as well” for not giving him “a fair shake.” There’s “a mound of contradiction” in that critique, since the campaign tightly controlled media access to Mitt Romney, says Wemple. Blaming both the campaign and the media “at the same time is a touch precious.”

One thing Romney explicitly did not blame: New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R). “I’m not going to worry about how Chris was doing what he thought was best for the people of his state,” he says. “I lost my election because of my campaign, not because of what anyone else did.”

3. Mitt Romney thinks he would be doing a better job as president
Romney doesn’t have many nice things to say about the man who beat him. The president, mostly, is letting a “critical moment, this golden moment just slip away” to fix America’s long-term fiscal problems.

It kills me not to be there, not to be in the White House doing what needs to be done. The president is the leader of the nation. The president brings people together, does the deals, does the trades, knocks the heads together. The president leads. And — and I don’t see that kind of — of leadership happening right now. [Fox News]

Instead, Obama is “out campaigning to the American people, doing rallies around the country, flying around the country and berating Republicans and blaming and pointing,” which only makes GOP lawmakers “retrench and then put up a wall and to fight back.” Maybe Romney is right that he “would have been better at working out a deal, says Ann Althouse at her blog, “but Obama, being better at campaigning, won the election, and if what he is doing now is more campaigning… well, that’s the downside of democracy, isn’t it? We judge the campaigns. We don’t know what expertise they’d bring to negotiating and reconciling differences.”

Continue here…

 

Ann Romney has not gotten over losing the election

Some people have dubbed Ann Romney The Queen of Mean…just saying…

The Week

Fox News has bagged the first interview with the Romneys since President Obama’s convincing victory in November, and the conservative-leaning network has offered a sneak preview to whet the appetite of political junkies and Romney fans. In an interview with PoliticoFox News Sundayhost Chris Wallace says Mitt has taken his defeat in stride, but his wife Ann “feels the pain and the what-ifs and the hurt more than he does.” Wallace adds, “There’s a lot of emotion that comes through in the interview, and she’s more open about it — the ‘what might have been.'”

Mitt, on the other hand, reportedly went into the election knowing he’d face liberal bias in the media, but “you don’t expect anything different and that’s part of what you wage in a campaign,” says Wallace. Romney also reportedly believes he could handle “the mess in Washington” a “lot better” than the White House’s current occupant.

The full interview will air this weekend on Fox News Sunday.

Watch the clip…

 

Man Behind “47 Percent” Video Opens His Own Research Firm

BuzzFeed

Jimmy Carter’s grandson turns his big scoop into a career. He’s already taken down another Republican with a hidden-camera video.

The freelance researcher who became a minor campaign celebrity after unearthing the now-infamous video of Mitt Romney railing against 47 percent of Americans at a private fundraiser has used his political fame to start his own opposition research firm.

When the researcher, James Carter IV, first saw the secretly recorded footage of Romney in August, he immediately identified it as a bombshell, and sent it to David Corn, a Mother Jones reporter with whom he had worked in the past. When the magazine published the scoop — headline: SECRET VIDEO: Romney Tells Millionaire Donors What He REALLY Thinks of Obama Voters” — Corn received a solo byline, with Carter getting a modest mention at the foot of the post: “Research assistance: James Carter.”

Corn would later turn what his magazine called “the scoop of the decade” into a HarperCollins e-book, which he titled, 47 Percent: Uncovering the Romney Video That Rocked the 2012 Election. Carter is thanked in the acknowledgements for “his diligent pursuit of the source for the Romney fundraising video and for introducing the two of us,” writes Corn. “It was a consequential hook-up.”

It was, in fact, Carter who found the video, researched Romney fundraisers, identified the likely location and date of the one featured in the video, and convinced the source of the footage through a series of Twitter direct messages to hand it over to Corn.

“[Corn] got a lot of the credit for it, and that’s fine — that’s the way it had always worked,” Carter told BuzzFeed, adding, “I was perfectly fine with it. I’m the research guy, and he was the reporter and publicist.”

Continue reading…

3 reasons President Obama’s lunch with Mitt Romney is a good idea

Formal rivals Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are meeting for lunch: Might they chow down on these cookies depicting their faces?

Closing words from President Obama’s Victory Speech, November 7, 2012:

I believe we can seize this future together because we are not as divided as our politics suggests. We’re not as cynical as the pundits believe. We are greater than the sum of our individual ambitions, and we remain more than a collection of red states and blue states. We are and forever will be the United States of America.

The Week

The former campaign-trail rivals are meeting in the White House’s private dining room. And, arguably, it’s a win-win situation for them — and America

Mitt Romney will join President Obama for a private lunch on Thursday, White House press secretary Jay Carney announced Wednesday. While Obama aides didn’t release any details on the luncheon’s agenda, the president offered some hints in the first news conference he gave after defeating Romney and winning re-election three weeks ago. At the time, Obama suggested that he would welcome Romney’s input on how to address some of the nation’s most pressing problems: “There are certain aspects of Gov. Romney’s record and his ideas that I think could be very helpful….” Many in Washington have dismissed the upcoming lunch as a feel-good PR move, but others say the event can benefit both politicians, and even the nation. Here, three reasons this bipartisan lunch is a good idea:

1. Romney could help ease Washington gridlock
It’s easy to make jokes about what’s likely to be an awkward meal, says Michael Tomasky at The Daily Beast, but this lunch “could conceivably be a good thing.” Despite his loss, Romney remains “one of the country’s best-known Republicans,” and has “more juice with the broader public than Mitch McConnell or John Boehner.” The former Massachusetts governor and two-time failed presidential candidate no longer has to play to the conservative base, so he can “play a moderating role” in the GOP, if he chooses. He could start by making nice with Obama and “telling Republicans, hey, gang, let’s drop the unceasing obstinacy.” Whether they’ll listen is another matter.

2. Obama can show he really wants to work with Republicans
“It behooves Obama to be gracious” after his big election win, says Peter Grier at The Christian Science Monitor. “With large margins of Americans telling pollsters they want Democrats and Republicans to work together, the lunch offer is a big flashing light of a signal that Obama intends to do just that.” Or at least look like he’s doing so. This is a golden opportunity for Obama to “set a tone of civil discourse” that could help him face the daunting challenges ahead, starting with negotiations on a deficit-reduction deal needed to avoid the “fiscal cliff” of painful tax hikes and spending cuts scheduled for Jan. 1. Romney can do the same thing for Republicans by publicly setting aside partisanship — polishing up their brand, and his own (especially after his remark that Obama beat him by buying votes with “gifts”).

3. This helps Romney stay relevant
Romney might be leery — Richard Nixon was hesitant to accept an invitation from John F. Kennedy after losing the 1960 election to his Democratic rival, says Tom McCarthy at Britain’sGuardian. Former president Herbert Hoover contacted Nixon at the request of Joseph Kennedy, the president’s father. According to Nancy Gibbs and Michael Duffy, authors of The Presidents Club: Inside the World’s Most Exclusive Fraternity, Nixon resisted taking part in what he dismissed as “a cheap publicity stunt,” but Hoover reminded him that Kennedy, who had just been elected president, wasn’t the one who needed help drumming up publicity. “This is a generous gesture on his part,” Hoover reportedly told Nixon, “and you ought to meet it.” The same holds true for Romney. Who knows, says David A. Graham at The Atlantic, Romney might even come out of this with a job. Obama “could make a bipartisan gesture by appointing Romney to be commerce secretary, treasury secretary, or the first to fill a ‘business secretary’ [slot] that Obama offhandedly suggested late in the campaign.”