(CNN) – Mitt Romney is remembered as a 'CEO governor' by many of his former colleagues in the Massachusetts State House. CNN National Political Correspondent Jim Acosta reports.
Watch The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer weekdays at 4pm to 6pm ET and Saturdays at 6pm ET. For the latest from The Situation Room click here.
Making a rich by the majority is all that mitten knows.unlike Obama who is a community organizer who knows how to take care of everyone. Mitten trickle down policies, Will only trikle on China and India because they have slaves workers and lower taxes than us.which international company will chose paying American middle class wages over China slave labor when the bottom line is make money for your shareholders. We will see who gets trickled on. Obama needs to modernized our country and put million back to work.
I thought we already went through that with GW Bush.
Wasn't that the big ideas that Bush inspired .
Ouch.Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney !
How many working class Americans can relate with their CEO? That's what I thought. Sorry Willard, you're already going to lose for being a liar, don't make people loathe you for your so-called "governing style" too.
Well, when we need a corporate CEO in the White House, there are plenty around the country that would be way better than Robmey.
Awesome! We haven't had a CEO President since...well...George W. Bush!! That worked out nicely for us, didn't it?
[Mittens left Massachussetts with a 38% approval rating, so I guess his CEO governing style worked out nicely for MA, too.]
There is a great deal of difference between "CEO" leadership and the responsible leadership required to make a good President. The POTUS needs to care about all Americans – not just the corporate leaders who write the campaign checks. The President of the United States is also the Commander-In-Chief, a role the President Obama has performed masterfully. Romney would be a good choice for a few billionaires looking for a vulture capitalist to rape and pillage in the financial world. He would make a perfectly horrible President. Rich, spoiled, preppies don't know how to provide leadership for all of our people.
Let me guess, Romney gets to work and doesn't waste time cozying up, romancing lawmakers and they don't like it?
That isn't governing... governing in the U.S. is about democracy and the people's vote. A CEO answers to no one outside of majority shareholders and a board. I guess you could say million dollar donations to super PACs means the majority with money will have more say about how Romney "governs" that a single share stockholder.
Republicans keep pushing this bizarre and completely unprecedented notion that because Romney was a successful businessman that would mean he would be a successful president. Business and politics are the quintessential apples and oranges – the central purpose of one is to maximize profits while the other is to serve the public good. Never before has anyone campaigned for president on the strength alone of their business experience. And if you look at the historical data, businessmen have always made for poor politicians. The last businessman-president we had was Herbert Hoover – and his style of governing is the last thing we need now.
Romney does have a record of public service. He served one term as governor of MA. Yet he's not running on his record there at all – mostly because it was so awful. After just one term in office, 73% of the people of MA said they would never vote for Romney again. His campaign has already written off his own home state as a loss.
Republicans keep pointing out Romney's business experience while remaining silent on his government experience because frankly that's all Romney has to run on.
As a MA resident, I agree – he governed just like a CEO. NOT what we need in a president.........