Is this the reason Romney missed out on beng secretar of state?

[Scott Lloyd]

I've had two threads closed on the topic of MItt Romney being considered by the president-elect for the position of secretary of state.

Now that he Romney didn't get the post, I feel it appropriate to start one more thread reflecting on that fact, specifically, this suggestion as to the reason why.

According to this blog post (which I happened onto as a link from Dan Peterson's blog), the reason is that Romney refused to apologize for previous comments about Trump's candidacy.

It's regrettable. I think Romney would have made a good secretary of state. But I admire his adhering to principle.

[Meadowchik]

I would have been surprised if he'd been nominated, even if he did apologize.  Imo Trump just wanted Romney to join the sycophantic parade. I don't blame Romney for trying, though. Anything to mitigate Trump's damage could help.

[Sevenbak]

This little spat between Reid and Romney yesterday is very telling on the process behind Mitt's decision as well.

 

Harry Reid:

"Mitt Romney is somebody I had respect for, I have none anymore.... Either he wasn’t telling the truth, or he’s a person with no character.  After having said that, to go and do homage to this guy he said awful things about, I don’t think that shows much character.”

 

Mitt Romney:

“I was indeed very critical of Mr. Trump during his campaign. But now he has been elected president and accordingly, if I could have helped shape foreign policy to protect the country I love, I would have been more than willing to do so.

As for Mr. Reid, I lost respect for him when he repeatedly lied about my taxes and later admitted to it cheerily. Good riddance, Mr. Reid. The Senate will be better served without you in it.”

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/dec/14/mitt-romney-to-harry-reid-good-riddance/

Edited December 15, 2016 by Sevenbak

[stemelbow]

I don't know, of course, but I'd guess there were plenty of factors that helped Trump decide.  I wouldn't doubt if one reason he decided against Romney was because he didn't feel he had his respect.  The things Romney said about Trump are not little criticisms.  It seemed to me if I were Trump I'd feel like Romney thought I was nothing but a big buffoon judging by his comments earlier this year.  If Romney didn't back down from that I'm not sure how Trump could have offered him the position.  Then again if Trump is nothing but a big buffoon I guess it would be possible he'd offer Romney the spot.  If Romney remained hopeful it was likely because he truly did see Trump as the buffoon having absolutely no respect for him. 

[Alan]

If this is true, Romney should certainly have apologized.

It seems his personal pride has deprived the US of a potentially very good SofS.

[Calm]

If apologizing meant he would have to lied about his opinion of Trump (which given the criticisms he made seems a given), are you suggesting he should have lied, Alan?

[hope_for_things]

Its too late...

[stemelbow]

30 minutes ago, Calm said:

If apologizing meant he would have to lied about his opinion of Trump (which given the criticisms he made seems a given), are you suggesting he should have lied, Alan?

It's likely in this whole affair he lied to someone.  It's also likely Trump did too. 

[Alan]

35 minutes ago, Calm said:

If apologizing meant he would have to lied about his opinion of Trump (which given the criticisms he made seems a given), are you suggesting he should have lied, Alan?

Why would apologizing equal lying?

 

[Calm]

6 minutes ago, Alan said:

Why would apologizing equal lying?

 

If he still felt the same way about Trump...continued to think he was an immoral..., was not sorry in the sense of believing he had done something wrong, etc. and was only apologizing so Trump would put him in as Sec of State, don't you see that sort of apologizing as lying.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/full-transcript-mitt-romneys-remarks-on-donald-trump-and-the-2016-race-220176

 Should he apologize for calling Trump a liar if he still believes the guy is a liar?

Edited December 15, 2016 by Calm

[Calm]

13 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

It's likely in this whole affair he lied to someone. 

 I don't think it is appropriate to call someone a liar based on probabilities instead of actual instances.

[stemelbow]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

 I don't think it is appropriate to call someone a liar based on probabilities instead of actual instances.

I didn't. 

[Sevenbak]

59 minutes ago, Alan said:

If this is true, Romney should certainly have apologized.

It seems his personal pride has deprived the US of a potentially very good SofS.

 I don't think pride had anything to do with it, quite the opposite in fact.

 It would seem that he put his self, his reputation and everything else on the line because he chose principal over party and country over contestant.   What's wrong with standing on principle?

Edited December 15, 2016 by Sevenbak

[Alan]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

If he still felt the same way about Trump...continued to think he was an immoral..., was not sorry in the sense of believing he had done something wrong, etc. and was only apologizing so Trump would put him in as Sec of State, don't you see that sort of apologizing as lying.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/full-transcript-mitt-romneys-remarks-on-donald-trump-and-the-2016-race-220176

 Should he apologize for calling Trump a liar if he still believes the guy is a liar?

Just because you think something about someone, it doesn't mean you have to articulate it.

So he could have apologised for calling Trump a liar, or immoral or a phony, without rescinding what he said and without changing his mind about him. In other words, he could apologise for what he said, not for what he thought.

Obviously, he could only apologise for saying what he said if he was sorry for offending Trump and causing him to be upset.

But I maintain that simply to apologise for saying nasty things would not make him a liar even if he still believed those nasty things.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

I didn't. 

Yes you did. You said it is likely Romney lied to someone. Isn't that tantamount to calling Romney a liar?

[stemelbow]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Yes you did. You said it is likely Romney lied to someone. Isn't that tantamount to calling Romney a liar?

Not in my book.  Everyone has lied, and I don't think I've called someone a liar for a long time.  Seems childish, and almost meaningless. 

As it pertains to this whole affair, I think it likely he lied to someone in some way.  I think it likely enough that it's probably not worth noting, but since Calm brought up the possibility of lying I said as much. 

[Tacenda]

I believe Trump was just trying to play around with Romney and make him feel stupid. I linked an article and a quote that alludes to what I thought at the very beginning. I never believed Trump wanted Mitt, he just wanted revenge. He always does. He is one of the most dishonest playing presidents or soon to be president, I've ever witnessed. He lied when he said he'd put Hillary in jail, he lied about a lot of things during his campaign and laughs about them all now. Sorry to you Trump supporters. I'm trying to support him, but he's not making it easy. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/13/why-the-political-world-needs-more-mitt-romneys/?postshare=5791481690599353&tid=ss_fb&utm_term=.3de715a2d "For many, that picture typified the extent of Romney's humiliation. Trump, grinning, knowing that he had made his biggest critic bow — symbolically — to him. Romney, pained, but sitting there nonetheless, willing to let bygones be bygones in exchange for the possibility of a post in an administration he had once vilified.

For me, that picture said something else. I don't quibble with the interpretation of Trump: I think he was reveling in his unexpected victory and all of the kudos from unlikely sources — including Romney — it won him. And, I agree that Romney looks pained. But I think what that picture tells us is that Romney knew that Trump would turn their dinner into a photo op and was willing to do it anyway because he genuinely believed he might be able to do some good as Trump's top diplomat."

[Jeanne]

3 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I believe Trump was just trying to play around with Romney and make him feel stupid. I linked an article and a quote that alludes to what I thought at the very beginning. I never believed Trump wanted Mitt, he just wanted revenge. He always does. He is one of the most dishonest playing presidents or soon to be president, I've ever witnessed. He lied when he said he'd put Hillary in jail, he lied about a lot of things during his campaign and laughs about them all now. Sorry to you Trump supporters. I'm trying to support him, but he's not making it easy. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/13/why-the-political-world-needs-more-mitt-romneys/?postshare=5791481690599353&tid=ss_fb&utm_term=.3de715a2d "For many, that picture typified the extent of Romney's humiliation. Trump, grinning, knowing that he had made his biggest critic bow — symbolically — to him. Romney, pained, but sitting there nonetheless, willing to let bygones be bygones in exchange for the possibility of a post in an administration he had once vilified.

For me, that picture said something else. I don't quibble with the interpretation of Trump: I think he was reveling in his unexpected victory and all of the kudos from unlikely sources — including Romney — it won him. And, I agree that Romney looks pained. But I think what that picture tells us is that Romney knew that Trump would turn their dinner into a photo op and was willing to do it anyway because he genuinely believed he might be able to do some good as Trump's top diplomat."

I kind of believe this too...it was game..but it doesn't matter to me because both of them to me are two peas in the same pod in many ways!

[stemelbow]

1 minute ago, Jeanne said:

I kind of believe this too...it was game..but it doesn't matter to me because both of them to me are two peas in the same pod in many ways!

White males? 

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

If apologizing meant he would have to lied about his opinion of Trump (which given the criticisms he made seems a given), are you suggesting he should have lied, Alan?

Yes...but..Romney if he felt the way he did..should never have showed up to dinner..pics..interviews..

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

 I don't think it is appropriate to call someone a liar based on probabilities instead of actual instances.

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

I didn't. 

16 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Yes you did. You said it is likely Romney lied to someone. Isn't that tantamount to calling Romney a liar?

 

 

10 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Not in my book.  Everyone has lied, and I don't think I've called someone a liar for a long time.  Seems childish, and almost meaningless. 

As it pertains to this whole affair, I think it likely he lied to someone in some way.  I think it likely enough that it's probably not worth noting, but since Calm brought up the possibility of lying I said as much. 

You contradicted Calm for calling you out on something you did indeed do. And you've just done it again.

Your contradiction is thus false.

This is not a matter of opinion. It is a statement of obvious fact.

 

 

[Jeanne]

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

White males? 

That and some added arrogance.  It would never have worked (IMO)...doesn't mean Romney would be a bad S of S...but I was routing for Rudy or Huntsman. 

[Scott Lloyd]

1 minute ago, Jeanne said:

Yes...but..Romney if he felt the way he did..should never have showed up to dinner..pics..interviews..

Why not?

Quite obviously Romney was seriously considering taking the post and was willing to overlook Trump's past behavior and character flaws for the sake of rendering service to his country. This is commendable, not censurable. It is also apparent that Romney now feels Trump, despite his shortcomings, has the potential to render good service as president of the United States.

If character flaws were enough to disqualify someone for service in that office, Bill Clinton should never have served in the first place and should not have been allowed to continue in service after the Lewinsky scandal.

[Jeanne]

On the news this morning, it was stated that no apology was even asked for.

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

 

You contradicted Calm for calling you out on something you did indeed do. And you've just done it again.

Your contradiction is thus false.

This is not a matter of opinion. It is a statement of obvious fact.

 

 

I disagree.  Saying someone likely lied and calling someone a liar are two different things, particularly when you consider that all people have lied.  If we used the term liar in the way you and Calm seem intent on doing, every single person would be a liar, and there'd be no point to the term at all. 

I'm certainly not completely above name calling, but to force this on me seems silly.  I didn't call him a name.