Republican Mitt Romney will not run for president in '16

[Lite Beer]

Republican Mitt Romney will not run for president in '16

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican Mitt Romney, after a three-week flirtation with another run for president, said definitively on Friday that he will not seek the White House in 2016.

Romney's decision could be a boost for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who were competing for the support of the Republican Party's establishment-minded voters and donors. Romney's exit comes after several of his former major donors and a veteran staffer defected to support Bush, the brother and son of former presidents.

"After putting considerable thought into making another run for president, I've decided it is best to give other leaders in the party the opportunity to become our next nominee," Romney told supporters on a conference call.

Several key former Romney donors told The Associated Press this week that in Bush they see someone who can successfully serve as president, as they believe Romney could. But they also think Bush has the personality and senior staff needed to win the White House, something the former Massachusetts governor could not bring together in his two previous presidential campaigns.

Romney, who is 67, had jumped back into the presidential discussion on Jan. 10, when he surprised a small group of former donors at a meeting in New York by telling them he was eyeing a third run for the White House.

It was a monumental change for Romney, who since losing the 2012 election to President Barack Obama had repeatedly told all who asked that his career in politics was over and that he would not again run for president.

In the days since that meeting in New York, which caught several in attendance off-guard, Romney made calls to former fundraisers, staff and supporters, and gave three public speeches in which he outlined his potential vision for another campaign.

Aides gathered in Boston last week offered Romney a blunt assessment of his chances, suggesting there was a path to victory, while highlighting signs of eroding support in early-voting states such as New Hampshire.

The exit of Romney from the wide open Republican race most immediately benefits the other favorites of the party's establishment wing, including Bush, Christie, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker.

The more conservative side of the field is largely unchanged, with a group of candidates that will likely include Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, who is popular with libertarians, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a champion of the anti-tax tea party movement, and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who has support among evangelical Christians.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the presumptive frontrunner.

Romney was to have dinner Friday night with Christie, who was among his staunchest backers during the 2012 race, according to someone familiar with what was described as a long-planned meeting.

Romney's aides had acknowledged a third campaign would have been more difficult than his second, but insisted he would have had the necessary financial support, noting his supporters raised more than $1 billion during the 2012 election.

If he would've run, Romney would have been attempting something not achieved in American politics since the 1968 election of Richard Nixon: a presidential nominee who lost a general election and then came back to win. Nixon, who lost to John F. Kennedy in 1960, also remains the last nominee to lose as a major party's standard-bearer and then win nomination again. Such a feat had been common before the modern voter-driven nominating system of primaries and caucuses came into being.

Romney's decision against running clearly pained him, and he took no questions from supporters on Friday's call.

In his call with supporters, Romney appeared to take a swipe at Bush, saying it was time for fresh leadership within the Republican party.

"I believe that one of our next generation of Republican leaders, one who may not be as well-known as I am today, one who has not yet taken their message across the country, one who is just getting started, may well emerge as being better able to defeat the Democrat nominee," Romney said. "In fact, I expect and hope that to be the case."

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-01-31

[Jay Sata]

He never had a chance so a wise decision.

What worries me is who will be pulling the strings if Bush ever became President.

[Ulysses G.]

I am a Romney fan and it was a tragedy that he was not elected in 2012, but I think that he made the right decision and I am glad that he decided not to run. The democrats had already slimed him so badly with lies and distortions in the last election, that no matter what a good, competent leader he is, I don't think that he could have won.

[ccarbaugh]

Romney, Bush, Clinton, Christie, .... is this the best a nation of 320 million can do? All are controlled-puppet wannabes!

[brewsterbudgen]

Romney, Bush, Clinton, Christie, .... is this the best a nation of 320 million can do? All are controlled-puppet wannabes!

There's always Ted Cruz and Elizabeth Warren!

[bendejo]

Looks like the money men told him to take a hike. I was looking forward to the new Mitt.

Miss him already.

[Suradit69]

He never had a chance so a wise decision.

What worries me is who will be pulling the strings if Bush ever became President.

"He never had a chance so a wise decision."

I wouldn't careless bandy about words like "wise" when discussing Mitt. The fact that he was seriously considering a third run despite his past performance and the current staffer defections suggests he had a tenuous grasp on reality.

"What worries me is who will be pulling the strings if Bush ever became President."

Will be interesting to see who he chooses (or who he is forced to choose) as a running mate. He will need to make a gesture to placate his own party's extremists, but most of those choices will probably end up being divisive in the general election. Sarah Palin turned McCain's campaign into even more of a circus than it might otherwise have been, but she at least did distract attention from his obvious slide into senility. In a competition for subpar intelligence between the two, Sarah made McCain seem like a genius ... aside from his poor choice of running mates.

If Sheldon Adelson is a heavy contributor to the campaign, he may try to get Bibi Netanyahu, the Republican senator from Israel, on the ticket.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Suradit69

[Dannyboy666]

I am a Romney fan and it was a tragedy that he was not elected in 2012, but I think that he made the right decision and I am glad that he decided not to run. The democrats had already slimed him so badly with lies and distortions in the last election, that no matter what a good, competent leader he is, I don't think that he could have won.

Competent, Surely you Jest... 5555555

[inbangkok]

I am a Romney fan and it was a tragedy that he was not elected in 2012, but I think that he made the right decision and I am glad that he decided not to run. The democrats had already slimed him so badly with lies and distortions in the last election, that no matter what a good, competent leader he is, I don't think that he could have won.

Yeah, it was the Democrats fault. Get real.....Romney Slimed himself. Plain and simple. I am not going to even waste my time listing the hundreds of examples. However, it is worth noting that Newt Gingrich, his fellow Republican, is truly the one who helped hammer the final nails into the guys coffin with his documentary about Bain Capital.

[Ulysses G.]

Would that be Newt Gingrich, who was trying to get the nomination himself?

No. It wasn't just the democrats. They were aided and abetted by their two-faced cronies in the mainstream media.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[JingerBen]

I am a Romney fan and it was a tragedy that he was not elected in 2012, but I think that he made the right decision and I am glad that he decided not to run. The democrats had already slimed him so badly with lies and distortions in the last election, that no matter what a good, competent leader he is, I don't think that he could have won.

Romney didn't win because he was slimed with lies and distortions?

That's ridiculous! He didn't win becaues he's a serial loser.

[Jay Sata]

Romney has a record as an asset stripper who made many people lose their jobs.

As I have said before he is also a draft dodger.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Jay Sata

[ironhorse10]

Why can't the American people forget either of the Demo's and Rep's and try something that might actually be good for the country? Havn't we had enough of the Bushs and Clintons? How about the Tea Party ? Ryan Paul-Ted Cruz, both would be better the Hillary, or Bush. Ofcourse, both of those idoits ( Clinton and Bush) are connected with the Builderburg Group, so it will be business as usual. For those of you that don't know about the Builderberg Group, or Agenda 21,or the End Game. Look them up.

[umbanda]

Sure...nobody will beat another Bush for the US Presidency...unfortunately.

[umbanda]

Romney, Bush, Clinton, Christie, .... is this the best a nation of 320 million can do? All are controlled-puppet wannabes!

There's always Ted Cruz and Elizabeth Warren!

The same was said about Obama in 2007....

The Us Presidency campaigns are like an AD about losing weight...BEFORE and AFTER...

Edited January 31, 2015 by umbanda

[Smurkster]

If Sheldon Adelson is a heavy contributor to the campaign, he may try to get Bibi Netanyahu, the Republican senator from Israel, on the ticket.

​which would only go to prove just exactly how dangerously close the US relationship with Israel is...

[NeverSure]

Why can't the American people forget either of the Demo's and Rep's and try something that might actually be good for the country? Havn't we had enough of the Bushs and Clintons? How about the Tea Party ? Ryan Paul-Ted Cruz, both would be better the Hillary, or Bush. Ofcourse, both of those idoits ( Clinton and Bush) are connected with the Builderburg Group, so it will be business as usual. For those of you that don't know about the Builderberg Group, or Agenda 21,or the End Game. Look them up.

Kind of hard to look up the Bilderberg group with the wrong spelling. And you know so much about it?

[Jay Sata]

I notice that Romney slighted Bush when he said he hoped for some new faces in the choice of nominee.

[Traveler19491]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

I am a Romney fan and it was a tragedy that he was not elected in 2012, but I think that he made the right decision and I am glad that he decided not to run. The democrats had already slimed him so badly with lies and distortions in the last election, that no matter what a good, competent leader he is, I don't think that he could have won.

I can agree with you on some points, Ulysses. He's "good" at business, but only in that he knows how to buy businesses at depressed prices, strip them of their marketable assets, get rid or workers, and then pillage the remaining workers of their compensation and benefits, leverage the company to the hilt, and then sell it for more than it's worth. But he apparently did an OK job of running Massachusetts, and designed Obamacare for the Democrats. But unfortunately for him, he showed his true colors with that "47%" comment. That "slime" came from his own lips, and was the single biggest cause of his loss, by his own admission (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/03/04/why-mitt-romneys-47-percent-comment-was-so-bad/). He seems to feel that I'm a leech because I'm sucking at the government tit for my Social Security, something I paid into my entire working life, as does every American worker, and due to that being my only income I do not have to pay taxes. Romney sides with Republicans who want to rid America of those "socialist" scourges called Social Security and Medicare. Sorry, not, in my opinion, a competent leader.

[NeverSure]

I too hope for some new faces in the campaign. Get tired of same ole insiders.

[inbangkok]

Would that be Newt Gingrich, who was trying to get the nomination himself?

No. It wasn't just the democrats. They were aided and abetted by their two-faced cronies in the mainstream media.

Yeah, "that" Newt Gingrich. As well as Santorum who said he would be the absolute worst possible candidate that Republicans could nominate. And like I said, get real.......like the Republican party doesn't have there own 24 hour news station full of cronies? I just love how people continue to perpetuate this lie of the "all controlling liberal media" Seriously laughable. You seem to have very little interest in looking at things objectively.

Bottom line is that no one really likes Romney. I rarely hear anyone say anything good about the guy. He is an obscenely arrogant oligarch whose vision was to run the country as such. He crafted this narrative himself with his own comments and his own words.....nothing to do with the media or anyone else.

[Ulysses G.]

Bottom line is that no one really likes Romney. I rarely hear anyone say anything good about the guy.

And you look at things "objectively"? What a joke. The latest poll had Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney dead even. Somebody must like him.

What is amazing to ne is the people who still have not woken up to how badly they were hoodwinked by the mainstream press in the last presidential election.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[rickirs]

There is a potential major factor facing any Republican presidential candidate in 2016 - the performance of the Republican-controlled Congress.

If the Republicans waste their majority with nonsensible and controversal (aka unconstitutional) legislation to feed the ultraconservative radical Republican agenda rather than meeting the needs of the American people, it will be difficult for a Republican presidential candidate to place failure on the Democrats. It will be, "Elect me and get more of the same." With President Obama's approval rating over 50% compared to Congress at 15%, a Republican candidate would have to disassociate himself from his own party. Good luck with that strategy.

For the American electorate, it would be easier to vote Democrat. Any Democratic candidate who presents a moderate mainstream agenda will win the POTUS election.

[Traveler19491]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Bottom line is that no one really likes Romney. I rarely hear anyone say anything good about the guy.

And you look at things "objectively"? What a joke. The latest poll had Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney dead even. Somebody must like him. alt=rolleyes.gif>

The problem with polls is that they don't necessarily assess the "likeability" of a candidate. Romney's high ratings are more about his perceived ability to defeat Hillary, not that they liked him. Of course the same can be said about Democrats and Hillary. If you stop and think about it, I've never really heard many people say many "good" things about either of them...only whether or not they can win. Face it, American politics is no longer about who is the most competent, or who has American's best interests at heart. The elections have descended to being nothing more than a Friday night high school football game, replete with cheer leaders, and fans on either side hurling insults at the other. The winning team gets bragging rights, and the quarterback is the new "big man on campus", but what does the school (America) benefit? Not much. It has been decades since politicians honestly engaged in performing the job that the signers of the Constitution envisioned for them. It's all about power and wealth, NOT about caring for the country. This is true of Democrats and Republicans alike.

[rickirs]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Bottom line is that no one really likes Romney. I rarely hear anyone say anything good about the guy.

And you look at things "objectively"? What a joke. The latest poll had Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney dead even. Somebody must like him. alt=rolleyes.gif>

That's from a FOX News poll - so you're right, somebody does like Romney.

Edited January 31, 2015 by rickirs

[inbangkok]

Bottom line is that no one really likes Romney. I rarely hear anyone say anything good about the guy.

And you look at things "objectively"? What a joke. The latest poll had Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney dead even. Somebody must like him.

What is amazing to be is the people who still do not realize how badly they were hoodwinked by the mainstream press in the last presidential election.

Ugh....you clearly don't understand politics. Just because someone votes for an individual, or ranks them umber one in a poll does not mean they are liked. It simply means they are liked better than the others. Quite often "the least worst option". You think a lot of people actually "liked" Obama the second time around. Oh please. They simply liked him better than Romney.

I don't pay attention to the "mainstream press", so no worries. It is quite clear that you are the one being hookwinked...........

I have read many of your postings here in the news section and you are without a doubt an unflinching ideologue. That being said, you should really think twice before telling others that they are the ones being "hoodwinked" or not being "objective".

Edited January 31, 2015 by inbangkok

[Ulysses G.]

The problem with polls is that they don't necessarily assess the "likeability" of a candidate. Romney's high ratings are more about his perceived ability to defeat Hillary, not that they liked him. Of course the same can be said about Democrats and Hillary.

Exactly what I was thinking as I was reading your response. I have never found Hillary particularly likable - even when I voted for her husband. From what I have seen, she is not a good speaker and does not have a lot of charisma either.

[Ulysses G.]

Bottom line is that no one really likes Romney. I rarely hear anyone say anything good about the guy.

And you look at things "objectively"? What a joke. The latest poll had Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney dead even. Somebody must like him.

What is amazing to be is the people who still do not realize how badly they were hoodwinked by the mainstream press in the last presidential election.

Ugh....you clearly don't understand politics. Just because someone votes for an individual, or ranks them umber one in a poll does not mean they are liked.

Huh? You are the one that just claimed that no one likes Romney and that was why he was not elected. Make up your mind. I seem to know a lot more about politics than you anyway.

[inbangkok]

Bottom line is that no one really likes Romney. I rarely hear anyone say anything good about the guy.

And you look at things "objectively"? What a joke. The latest poll had Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney dead even. Somebody must like him.

What is amazing to be is the people who still do not realize how badly they were hoodwinked by the mainstream press in the last presidential election.

Ugh....you clearly don't understand politics. Just because someone votes for an individual, or ranks them umber one in a poll does not mean they are liked.

Huh? You are the one that just claimed that no one likes Romney and that was why he was not elected. Make up your mind. I seem to know a lot more about politics than you anyway.

No idea what you are talking about anymore. I stand by my assertion that the vast majority of people have very negative things to say about Romney....especially Republicans......as well as true conservatives. And I have no idea what the confusion here is. Many, many people who voted for Romney despised him. They simply despised Obama more. Are you following me yet?

You can think what you want about my knowledge of politics.........does not phase me one bit.

[Ulysses G.]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Bottom line is that no one really likes Romney. I rarely hear anyone say anything good about the guy.

And you look at things "objectively"? What a joke. The latest poll had Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney dead even. Somebody must like him. alt=rolleyes.gif>

That's from a FOX News poll - so you're right, somebody does like Romney.

Think again. Fox News does not conduct its own polls and the respondents are chosen at random. They are not Fox News viewers. They are as accurate and reputable as any other major poll.

The Fox News Poll is directed by Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research ®. The poll is conducted via telephone among a nationally representative sample of approximately 900 registered voters. Of the completed interviews, roughly 650 are conducted with respondents on landlines and 250 with respondents on cell phones.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/07/fox-news-poll-methodology-statement/