Will Mitt Romney's aversion to the auto bailout hurt him in Michigan? (+video)
Mitt Romney’s defense of his stance on the auto bailout is difficult to parse. Romney was against the bailout before he was for it, except not the bailout that happened, or something like that.
Republican presidential candidate former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney speaks at a campaign rally in Mesa, Ariz., Monday.
Gerald Herbert/AP
Will Mitt Romney’s past opposition to the auto bailouts mean trouble for him in the upcoming Michigan primary? You’d think that would be the case. Michigan’s economy is pretty much all autos, all the time. Even the Republican car executives who live in gilded Grosse Pointe and Bloomfield Hills know that their jobs might have been nothing but tailpipe exhaust if Washington hadn’t used taxpayer cash to help GM and Chrysler.
Skip to next paragraphRecent posts
-
05.17.12
Mitt Romney repudiates idea of using Jeremiah Wright against Obama -
05.14.12
With graduation speeches, Obama, Romney target 'must win' audiences -
05.09.12
Rick Santorum tells Jay Leno why Romney endorsement was 'buried' (+video) -
05.08.12
A possible blessing for Dick Lugar in fight to retain US Senate seat -
05.03.12
On National Day of Prayer, plenty of politics
Plus, Mr. Romney’s obviously still sensitive on the subject. He’s got an opinion piece in Tuesday’s edition of the Detroit News arguing the merits of his position. In it, he says it’s “indisputably good news” that GM and Chrysler are still in business. He points out that he grew up in Michigan drinking Vernor’s ginger ale and going to Tigers games. His dad George was head of American Motors. (His campaign released a new ad emphasizing his roots in Michigan - see below)
(Have you ever had Vernor’s? It’s the Ndamukong Suh of soda pop. Take a sip and you’ll think they made a mistake at the factory and you’re drinking undiluted ginger ale syrup base.)
Then Romney goes on to say that the managed bankruptcy that the Obama administration arranged for the Tottering Two is just what he would have done, except he would have done it differently. The unions got too sweet a deal, and the person the administration chose to run the bailouts, Steven Rattner, was “ethically challenged.”
“This was crony capitalism on a grand scale. The president tells us that without his intervention things in Detroit would be worse. I believe that without his intervention things there would be better,” wrote Romney.
Well, we’ll say this: Romney’s argument is difficult to parse. He was against the bailout before he was for it, except not the bailout that happened, or something like that. At time of writing, the commenters on the Detroit News website weren’t buying it – they were 90 percent highly negative of Romney’s piece.










These comments are not screened before publication. Constructive debate about the above story is welcome, but personal attacks are not. Please do not post comments that are commercial in nature or that violate any copyright[s]. Comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence will be removed. If you find a comment offensive, you may flag it.