Calls for Romney to spell it out
‘Vague plans could cost him votes’
FOR months, Republican Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign has been built on broad themes: cut taxes, repeal and replace Democrat President Barack Obama’s healthcare overhaul, and increase defence spending.
But when it comes to specifics – namely, how to pay for the tax cuts and extra spending, and what exactly a Romney healthcare plan would look like – Romney has been reluctant to give details, essentially gambling that Americans’ frustration with high unemployment and a struggling economy will be enough to propel him to the White House.
Now, with polls showing that Obama has taken a slight lead in the polls after the Republican and Democratic national conventions, increasingly anxious conservatives are calling on Romney to spell out more of his plans – even if it risks alienating some undecided voters.
“Mr Romney’s pre-existing political calculation seems to be that he can win the election without having to explain the economic moment or even his own policies,” said an editorial in the Wall Street Journal, which often is a barometer of the thinking of leading conservatives.
“Such vagueness carries its own political risks,” the editorial read.
It is not the first time that conservatives in his party have raised doubts about Romney’s campaign strategy, but with the November 6 election less than two months away, the calls for the former Massachusetts governor to be bolder and more explicit have become increasingly urgent.
Weekly Standard editor William Kristol said Romney could be on course to lose the election despite factors working in the Republican’s favour, like the nation’s 8.1% unemployment rate.
“When a challenger merely appeals to disappointment with the incumbent and tries to reassure voters he’s not too bad an alternative, that isn’t generally a formula for victory,” Kristol wrote. Romney has long had trouble winning over many of the Republican Party’s most ardent conservatives.
He is distrusted by some conservatives largely because of moderate stances he took as governor of liberal Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007, when he backed a state healthcare overhaul that was a model for Obama’s nationwide plan.