« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Mitt Romney gets a not-so-warm welcome at the Daytona 500

It’s a sure sign of spring: the Sprint Cup NASCAR season starts today with the Daytona 500 (provided it stops raining…). And the two top contenders for the GOP Presidential nomination are there – Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum are pressing the flesh at the track. At first glance it would seem like a pretty odd place for two Northeastern big government conservatives to hang out. Daytona is the Super Bowl for good ol’ boys (although with a pre-race show from Lenny Kravitz, the “good ol’ boy” label is a bit less appropriate) Romney and Santorum hardly fit into that category. With a crowd of 100K+ at the track and a huge television audience, it’s a pretty good place for a politician to hang out.

With the Michigan primary coming up next week, an event that highlights high-performance American cars seems like a natural for these guys. Until recently, NASCAR has been all-American, but in recent years, Toyota has made a good showing – at least seven of the qualifying drivers will be in Toyota Camrys (or at least they have a vague resemblance to a Camry). But despite the fact that Romney’s home state is Michigan, he’s not a real popular guy with the folks up there, and especially not with the UAW.

Today at Daytona the UAW plans to protest against Mitt with a plane-towed banner that reads “”Mitt Romney: Let Detroit Go Bankrupt”" This stems from Romney’s 2008 NYT op-ed that was titled, not coincidentally, “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt“. That piece wasn’t particularly anti-UAW, but it did zero in rather pointedly on some union sacred cows:

First, their huge disadvantage in costs relative to foreign brands must be eliminated. That means new labor agreements to align pay and benefits to match those of workers at competitors like BMW, Honda, Nissan and Toyota. Furthermore, retiree benefits must be reduced so that the total burden per auto for domestic makers is not higher than that of foreign producers.

That extra burden is estimated to be more than $2,000 per car. Think what that means: Ford, for example, needs to cut $2,000 worth of features and quality out of its Taurus to compete with Toyota’s Avalon. Of course the Avalon feels like a better product — it has $2,000 more put into it. Considering this disadvantage, Detroit has done a remarkable job of designing and engineering its cars. But if this cost penalty persists, any bailout will only delay the inevitable.

Second, management as is must go. New faces should be recruited from unrelated industries — from companies widely respected for excellence in marketing, innovation, creativity and labor relations.

The new management must work with labor leaders to see that the enmity between labor and management comes to an end. This division is a holdover from the early years of the last century, when unions brought workers job security and better wages and benefits. But as Walter Reuther, the former head of the United Automobile Workers, said to my father, “Getting more and more pay for less and less work is a dead-end street.”

You don’t have to look far for industries with unions that went down that road. Companies in the 21st century cannot perpetuate the destructive labor relations of the 20th. This will mean a new direction for the U.A.W., profit sharing or stock grants to all employees and a change in Big Three management culture.

As of late last week, Rasmussen showed Romney back in the lead in Michigan, following a rather mediocre debate performance by Santorum.  Santorum has been considered to be somewhat friendly to organized labor and has a history of pro-labor votes on items such as minimum wage, salaries, Right to Work, and steel tariffs. So it’s not surprising that the UAW is interested in seeing Rick over Mitt.

The op-ed in question was actually a pretty strong piece by Romney. His position on the auto manufacturing industry was spot on. And you have to like the fact that he really got under the skin of the UAW on this.

Nonetheless, it caught me off guard when I saw/heard that these guys were at the 500 – an event that has been a lot more popular with a pretty different demographic than these two would normally appeal to. But it appears that the appeal of NASCAR has changed – no country music this year.  It’s a younger and less traditional crowd.

Maybe there’s hope for Mitt yet.

COMMENTS

  • Professor de la Paz

    And I’m surprised that Rick hasn’t done much to distance himself from his pro-labor past except bloviate on how he felt it was against his duty as a Pennsylvania Senator to support right to work when his state didn’t. Maybe, just maybe the reason he lost in 2006 was because “Sometimes you have to take one for the team” just isn’t a very good excuse when the future of the country is at stake. Just sayin’.

  • renl57

    …is trying to contrast his “integrity” and “principle” against the flip-flops of Mitt Romney.

    You can’t be both a principled conservative and a guy who votes liberal just “to take one for the team”.

    On more than one occasion, principled Republican conservatives–rather than “taking one for the team”–were even willing to defy President Bush, the standard-bearer of their party. Bush’s immigration reform and TARP come to mind.

  • Scope

    somewhat that he is sponsoring one of the cars driven by an underdog.

  • retrocon87

    I am certainly not crazy about Romney, but I agree with everything he wrote in that article… and as far as “he has no spine and just says anything he needs to say to get elected,” writing that article and standing by it now in Michigan takes guts.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    wreck out of this Gatorade Duel before the November 500…

    but very few Republicans voted against their President on NCLB and Medicare Part D…and none that did ran for President.

  • jon11

    Mitt isn’t very charismatic. Ill be the first to admit it. He doesn’t do a great job connecting with a lot of voters.

    but i really do believe that most of his flaws are more superficial than substantive, which is the opposite of what we see in Obama…a guy who is all style and no substance.

    Romney, objectively speaking, is one of the most qualifed, maybe the most qualified men to seek the presidency in my lifetime.

    He ran a state, built a fortune and created thousands of middle class jobs in the process, turned around the saltlake games.

    What had Obama done when he was elected?

    again, objectively speaking, next to nothing.

    And what the last debate in paticular showed me is Romney just flat out works harder than the other candidates. Santorum, who i admittedly don’t like much, clearly didn’t prepare for that debate. He wasn’t even ready for some of the stuff everyone knew was coming.

    mitt is always prepared. he always does his homework. He got the best organization and the best team around him, but he doesn’t let that stop him from personally out hussling the competition…from doing the little things…like getting on the ballots :)

    he’s an extremely competent man and he’s the best hope we’ve got of beating obama in the fall.

  • clintonformccain

    was just completed and a new marketing strategy unveiled. It specifically highlights the effort to target a more diverse fan base (especially Hispanic fans) and make races easier to attend for single-parent families.

  • Bill S

    I support the SMOD in 2012. The 3.1 GOP candidates that are left just suck…and that includes Romney. But that op-ed was good.

  • acat

    The trouble is, that’s not saying much … because Obama is such a terrible president….

    Romney’s record looks good, as long as one doesn’t peel back the surface… but once ya get a look inside, there’s a choice – close it back up and hope nobody else notices (which is my plan if he wins the nomination) or expose him as the faux-conservative faux-centrist and try to get a better (actual conservative) candidate on the ballot.

    Mew

    p.s. hat tip to sweasel for the art

  • kowalski

    They should drive the banner around between two Chevy Volts that go about 20 miles before they poop out.

  • westcoastpatriette

    to get a little worried about you. I mean, I know this primary season has been stressful, but still….

  • kowalski

    They can then give the cars to charity, write off $40 grand x 2 on their taxes and give the cars to the poor, who will have even worse mobility problems with them than without them.

  • westcoastpatriette

    perfect pic

  • lineholder

    I don’t like the man that much, but he does have his moments.

    I just wish I could have more confidence that it was sincere rather than some sort of political ploy on his part. Unfortunately, I don’t. I just think it’s so much a part of the man’s character to go with what is politically expedient for himself that I question this a lot where Romney is concerned.

  • kowalski

    Come to think of it, if the Obama administration had really wanted to help people with “Cash for Clunkers” what it should have done is offer a big tax write off to people who donated old but functional cars and trucks to charities that need them, instead of pumping up the automakers for new cars.

    If anything we had a surfeit of old but serviceable used cars in the market at the time, and people who had them should have been able to donate them for Kelley Blue Book value writeoffs on their taxes while giving a bonafide charity a serviceable vehicle.

  • kowalski

    Number one it would have helped people who had good cars donate them to a good cause, and secondly, once those old cars were off their hands, those people would have wanted to buy a new car from the automakers themselves.

  • gs425

    “big government” and “conservative” do not go together. Ever.

  • Bill S

    … to this

    And this.

  • Bill S

    The problem is that those moments don’t come often and they don’t come consistently. Shoot, even RuPaul has his moments…about once every couple of years.

  • tngal

    And considering that’s what a Nascar fan wants to see, well they might be happy with the Volts out there, kowalski. If they wanted to watch a car poop out they should just watch Jeff G.

    (Sorry, but the little e fan in me just had to nudge #24)

  • acat

    she’s got her own site, http://www.sweasel.com – usually Safe For Work but NOT politically correct – and, every now and then – when the mood hits her – she’ll do something brilliantly political like this.

    Mew

  • dsimk

    To say the candidates that are left just suck is unfortunate and dismisses a more substantive look at policies. I know policies are outlined in different posts. But I’ve seen so many comments from Red State readers here like people calling Romney, “Rmoney” because he’s all about money. Hmm, seems like a left-wing progressive criticism of a man who’s been successful in launching businesses legally.

    I’ve seen conservatives post on other topics and commentators the same thing.

    I think Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich all have merit for their positions. But listening to Romney’s most recent speeches and hearing him in the debate, I think he’d do well as president.

    I feel the Red State readership has gone too far in looking at the emotions of the current race–like Eric Erickson giving a whole post criticizing Romney for saying “severe conservative.”

    Conservatives have made great strides in recent years and stand a chance to continue gaining ground at all levels of government and society. But I think our culture of posture based on rhetoric can damage to undo us.

    I remember listening to a CNN report where the guest “expert” did a whole segment based clearly on Romney’s posturing and rhetoric based on only a few words. He had nothing of substance to say. So is this what the debate has come down to–the rhetoric of the left versus the rhetoric of the right without being able to articulate the deeper issues?

  • dajeeps

    to a fault. In some ways, he’s like what some have accused Newt of being because he has so many big ideas – unreliable. Everything about Romney, including his past is a big question mark because principle doesn’t matter as much to him as winning and staying on top. It’s a required quality for a very successful business man, but what happens if the situation we expect never materializes. What happens if he gets a D congress, would he just cave on everything, or worse, participate in everything they want to be on top? I don’t think there’s any question he did that in MA.

  • westcoastpatriette

    Can you?

  • kowalski

    Let’s just say the dollars spent/miles traveled/hearts wrenched ratios don’t add up for the Volt in a way that makes anyone think more highly of electric vehicles.

    They’re the new, more expensive Chevy Nova, which in Spanish means: “It Doesn’t Go.”.

  • texastory63

    Even after the Bushwacking he rec’d at the debate I would still vote for him over Romney, Gingrich or Paul. As I understand it, Romney supported No child left behind and the medicare expansion. Both were bad laws what do we do with them going forward.

  • pff23ro

    The fact of the matter is that for many of our polls on our side, they are not grounded in conservative principles.

    Say what you will about Obama (or insert anybody’s name with a D in front of their names), there is no question where he comes from ideologically. When you have 2 decades of so called conservative politicians advance liberal if not outright marxist principles, it is to be expected that we have these lousy candidates. (FYI: yes marxist is lower-case, because this man is responsible for the death of millions, and doesn’t deserve to be labeled a human being, as capital letters would imply).

    In this election, we obviously have the B squad suited up. Our only solution in this situation is this: any candidate that we choose on our side, must be held accountable for any of their actions/votes. Based on how they have voted, or the policies they have put forward, there is no question that they will stray to the left. We must hold them to our principles, lobby them loudly, and be prepared to fight and lose for principles.

  • redmymind

    This is the exact idiotic, pathetic, sheepish sentiment that got us Dole and McCain. I guess these spineless zombies never learn. Z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z . . .

  • vangoghssister

    nt

  • Adjoran

    with Frist and McConnell and Lott, have voted for all these spending plans, have stayed in the DC area after getting beat for reelection, and worked as a $1 million+ per year lobbyist lawyer, yet proclaim himself a “Reagan conservative” or “Washington outsider” or “reformer,” isn’t it?

    Newt was an incompetent Speaker who was a thorn to conservatives – until we threw him out. He now wants to take credit for the things which were accomplished in spite of his leadership, not because of it.

  • Adjoran

    The others lack any significant management experience. The US federal government is the largest enterprise in the world with an annual budget larger than the entire economies of every other nation in the world except China and Japan.

    One does not start at the top in most fields, but legislators love to pretend they could be President as much as assembly line workers believe they could be the CEO. There’s a reason we elect Governors and Generals frequently, and legislators rarely: the former have jobs which give them some relevant experience; the latter do not.

    Consider the results of electing legislators in the last century: Harding, Kennedy, and Obama. I rest my case.

  • trickamsterdam

    Consider electing Governors in the last century: Carter, FDR, Bush43

    Your case rests alright. In peace. Or pieces. (btw, Obama was this century, but I get your point)

    PS – I’ve tried to respond to Romney propaganda here and elsewhere (which is all this post I’m commenting on was) even when it completely bores me (as this post by Adjoran would bore virtually anyone) and to donate to people who can try to stop this guy, so no one will be able to say in mid-November, that I didn’t do everything try to avert this train-wreck that’s coming other than actually vote for this dog-torturing pathological liar.

  • trickamsterdam

    Which is what happens when you try to be cute instead of direct. Replace him w/ W. Wilson, and forget the snark.

  • acat

    as a manager is spotty at best…

    Do me a favor – convince all the morons in Iowa who voted for Cain, Gingrich, Bachmann, and especially Santorum, and smack them upside the head with a clue-by-four.

    Mew

  • sowa1

    a President that has run a State, saved the O;ympics etc. Knows how to create jobs. We also need to take the Senate. House has done a fine job. It’s the Senate Dems that will now vote on anything. You can take this as an endorsement for Romney.

  • sowa1

    When I hear people say that they don’t like the Republican Candidate and would vote for Obama again, it makes me sick. Obama has broker laws, spent over 5 Trillion dollars in the few years he has been in office. His Obamacare has so many taxes and regulations in it (we haven’t heard them all yet),it will destroy Healthcare for all of us. There is a reason Senators do not make good presidents. Just look at what we now have.

  • dimbulbz

    If you can only direct the vitriol at the people who are destroying our nation, that will be good. These men are not the devil and its really disheartening to see such rage – are you sure you know what you are talking about? Wether you are for Romney, Santorum, Newt or Paul. Be glad we really dont have a McCain in the race. Say good things, but stop the extremist rhetoric – save it for after the primary. Lets get smart.

  • Pingback: Carina Allmond