Fehrnstrom vs. Fehrnstrom

If you thought Mitt Romney was an Etch A Sketch, try being his top adviser.

Eric Fehrnstrom is a top adviser to Massachusetts Republicans Mitt Romney and Scott Brown.Mark Makela/ZumaPress.com

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Eric Fehrnstrom is kind of a big deal. As chief strategist for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign, he’s charted a turbulent but unrelenting course to the GOP nomination. As an adviser to Sen. Scott Brown’s reelection campaign, he’s guided the Massachusetts Republican to prominence and given his candidate an even chance of returning to Washington next January.

But there’s a tension underlying Ferhnstrom’s work. The two candidates, despite their moderate brands, differ sharply on some of the biggest issues facing the Republican party in 2012, from Dodd-Frank to gay marriage—and it’s Fehrnstrom’s job to help explain why they’re both right. Such is the life of political consultants, who, at their most successful, are forced to subvert any core beliefs they might hold in the name of some greater good (or, failing that, a fat paycheck). When Fehrnstrom famously used an Etch A Sketch to describe Romney in March, he may as well have been describing himself.

Here’s a quick guide to the Fehrnstrom two-step:

Subject: The Dodd–Frank Wall Street reform law

  • Romney: “I’d like to repeal Dodd Frank, recognizing that some revisions make sense…” According to Romney’s official campaign website: Dodd-Frank represents a “quantum increase in the scale of the regulatory burden on the American economy.”
  • Brown: “I worked very hard to make sure that banks didn’t act like casinos with our money. So the bill that [Elizabeth Warren] was apparently working on, I mean was able to work through as a result of [Warren’s] position, you know, I worked on it, I voted on it, I pushed it through.”

Subject: President Obama’s appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

  • Romney: “President Obama’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is perhaps the most powerful and unaccountable bureaucracy in the history of our nation, headed by a powerful and unaccountable bureaucrat with unprecedented authority over the economy. Instead of working with Congress to fix the flaws in this new bureaucracy, the president is declaring that he ‘refuses to take no for an answer’ and circumventing Congress to appoint a new administrator. This action represents Chicago-style politics at its worst and is precisely what then-Sen. Obama claimed would be ‘the wrong thing to do.’ Sadly, instead of focusing on economic growth, he is once again focusing on creating more regulation, more government, and more Washington gridlock.”
  • Brown: “I believe he is the right person to lead the agency and help protect consumers from fraud and scams…While I would have strongly preferred that it go through the normal confirmation process, unfortunately the system is completely broken. If we’re going to make progress as a nation, both parties in Washington need to work together to end the procedural gridlock and hyper-partisanship.”

Subject: Funding for Title X family planning services

  • Romney: “The test is pretty simple. Is the program so critical, it’s worth borrowing money from China to pay for it? And on that basis, of course you get rid of Obamacare; that’s the easy one. Planned Parenthood, we’re going to get rid of that.
  • Brown: “I support family planning and health services for women. Given our severe budget problems, I don’t believe any area of the budget is completely immune from cuts. However, the proposal to eliminate all funding for family planning goes too far. As we continue with our budget negotiations, I hope we can find a compromise that is reasonable and appropriate.”
  • Fehrnstrom (Bonus): “We’re going to have to make some tough decisions about spending. The test that Mitt Romney will apply is: Is this program so worthwhile and valuable that we’ll borrow money from China to [fund] it?”

Subject: Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

  • Romney: “I believe it should have been kept in place until conflict was over.”
  • Brown: “When a soldier answers the call to serve and risks life or limb, it has never mattered to me whether they are gay or straight, male or female. My only concern has been whether their service and sacrifice is with pride and honor.”

Subject: Gay marriage

  • Romney: “That prospect underscores the vital importance of this election and the movement to preserve our values. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman and, as president, I will protect traditional marriage and appoint judges who interpret the Constitution as it is written and not according to their own politics and prejudices.”
  • Brown: “We’ve moved on. I encourage everyone else to move on.”

Subject: New START treaty

  • Romney: “The president’s New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) could be his worst foreign policy mistake yet. The treaty as submitted to the Senate should not be ratified.”
  • Brown: “I believe it’s something that’s important for our country, and I believe that it’s a good move forward to deal with our national security issues.”

 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate