Mitt Romney’s VP Flip-Flop

2012 GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney at a campaign stop on Aug. 17, 2011.<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mittromney/6069980831/in/photostream">Mitt Romney</a>/Flickr

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


If you say that Mitt Romney flip-flops on the issues, you might as well be saying that Lindsay Lohan is sometimes fitted with an ankle monitor. It’s such an obvious, well-worn, widely noted fact at this point that it’s almost pointless to keep bringing it up.

The 2012 Republican presidential candidate has notoriously gone back and forth on gay rights, immigration issues, abortion rights, and even conservative Reagan-love. More recently, Romney couldn’t figure out whether or not he had said that Barack Obama made the Great Recession worse and “made it last longer.” (For the record, he did say all that.)

Now the former governor of Massachusetts can add this flop to the extensive and eclectic list:

During an August 25 campaign stop in Exeter, New Hampshire, candidate Romney said this, according to Holly Shulman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party: “You know, I think it’s kind of presumptuous for someone running for president to already, you know, have in mind who would be their vice president.”

Now here’s what the former Massachusetts governor announced at a fundraiser at the Virginia Beach home of Republican state senator Jeff McWaters on July 25, according to the right-wing website Bearing Drift:

Romney said that [Virginia Governor Bob] McDonnell has been an “incredible governor” and will be on “any candidate’s short-list” for Vice President…[H]e reiterated that the short list is “McDonnell, Governor Christie of New Jersey and Marco Rubio of Florida.”

I can already hear the conservative defense of Romney’s latest change of heart: “Stop nitpicking at everything Mitt Romney says or does, especially something so insignificant like thinking about VP picks! What about Obama’s flip-flops on the debt ceiling or closing Gitmo or Mubarak, and so on?”

Granted, no political party has a monopoly on their candidates conveniently changing their minds, and some of those criticisms of the president are indeed worth examining. But Mitt Romney can’t even decide whether he should decide to decide on his preliminary VP picks. Surely those on the Obama-loathing right, who can’t seem to get enough of calling the president indecisive, can see the irony in the fact that one of their 2012 frontrunners pulls this stuff so casually and so often, right? Right?

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