Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Mitt Romney goes mum on Mourdock mess (updated)
Mitt Romney goes mum on Mourdock mess
By Greg Sargent
Mitt Romney is under increasing pressure today to further distance himself from Richard Mourdock after the Indiana GOP Senate candidate’s remarks about rape and God created a national firestorm. Yet according to various reports, the Romney camp has gone silent on the matter, and there are no public indications that this is going to change.
Democrats have succeeded into turning Mourdock’s comments into a second day national media story. This morning, Obama subtly tied Romney to Mourdock, saying: “As we saw again this week, I don’t think any politician in Washington, most of whom are male, should be making health care decisions for women.” Reporters hit Romney with another round of questions about Mourdock today, but according to CNN, Romney refused to answer them. As Jed Lewison puts it, Romney has “entered a virtual cocoon of silence.”
Meanwhile, even Republican Jon Huntsman (admittedly a Romney rival) implicitly criticized Romney’s handling of the mess, claiming: “I would have simply said, `I’m withdrawing my support.’”
Why the Romney reticence? What’s the downside for Romney in cutting Mourdock loose, particularly given how intense the battle for the female vote has become?
- more -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/mitt-romney-goes-mum-on-mourdock-mess/2012/10/25/5f8e3e4e-1ec4-11e2-9cd5-b55c38388962_blog.html
By Greg Sargent
Mitt Romney is under increasing pressure today to further distance himself from Richard Mourdock after the Indiana GOP Senate candidate’s remarks about rape and God created a national firestorm. Yet according to various reports, the Romney camp has gone silent on the matter, and there are no public indications that this is going to change.
Democrats have succeeded into turning Mourdock’s comments into a second day national media story. This morning, Obama subtly tied Romney to Mourdock, saying: “As we saw again this week, I don’t think any politician in Washington, most of whom are male, should be making health care decisions for women.” Reporters hit Romney with another round of questions about Mourdock today, but according to CNN, Romney refused to answer them. As Jed Lewison puts it, Romney has “entered a virtual cocoon of silence.”
Meanwhile, even Republican Jon Huntsman (admittedly a Romney rival) implicitly criticized Romney’s handling of the mess, claiming: “I would have simply said, `I’m withdrawing my support.’”
Why the Romney reticence? What’s the downside for Romney in cutting Mourdock loose, particularly given how intense the battle for the female vote has become?
- more -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/mitt-romney-goes-mum-on-mourdock-mess/2012/10/25/5f8e3e4e-1ec4-11e2-9cd5-b55c38388962_blog.html
Updated to add:
13 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
