Mitt Romney portrayed as flip flopper in new DNC ads (video)

Mitt Romney is the target of a new Democratic National Party ad airing in six swing states. The ad portrays Mitt Romney taking different positions on immigration, abortion, health care, and other issues.

  • close
    Video grab of a new Democratic National Party ad criticizing GOP candidate Mitt Romney.
    View Caption
  • About video ads
    View Caption

The Democratic National Committee is up with the web advertisement (see video below) – in addition to a shorter 30-second bit in Virginia, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pittsburgh and Wisconsin – highlighting what they see as Mitt Romney’s changes of heart on a variety of issues (from abortion to the President’s stimulus plan to recent ballot measures in Ohio) all interspersed with TV pundits and late-night talk show hosts taking aim at the GOP frontrunner.

While Newt Gingrich has garnered headlines - and is in the lead for the GOP nomination, according to some polls – the DNC still sees Romney as the Republican to beat. 

Of course, political history is a contested place. Just a few days ago, MItt Romney’s campaign launched an ad targeting Obama for, among other things, saying “If we keep talking about the economy, we’re going to lose.”

Unfortunately for the Romney campaign, Politifact rated that piece of the commercial thus: "Pants on Fire."

That’s because Obama was explicitly quoting then-opponent John McCain in his statement. Politifact writes:

"We certainly think it’s fair for Romney to attack Obama for his response to the economy. And the Romney camp can argue that Obama’s situation in 2011 is ironic considering the comments he made in 2008. But those points could have been made without distorting Obama’s words, which have been taken out of context in a ridiculously misleading way."

If you see any “pants on fire” moments in this latest DNC ad, let Decoder know and we’ll note it in a subsequent post.

Go beyond:

Like your politics unscrambled? Check out

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.