Only one I can see is that he can afford to buy the job of being President.
2007-09-21 03:41:44 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
GOOD HAIR
2007-09-21 03:45:37 · answer #1 · answered by ash 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
When the 2002 Winter Olympics, held in Salt Lake City, were embroiled in bribery scandals, a change in leadership was made midstream, with Mitt Romney taking the reins and hitting the ground running. Prior senior management positions in business (now you know where his wealth comes from) prepared him for the rigors of quickly getting the Olympics back on its feet. Suddenly there was accountability and transparency, and the Olympics were not only salvaged from complete disarray and dishonor, but they were a remarkable success. He didn't get to be governor of Massachusetts by accident. You don't reach the top of the mountain by falling there. Many voters in that state recognized his talent for turning a disaster into a triumph. New Hampshire, one of the early primary polling states, had a chance to get a good look at Romney in the neighboring state of Massachusetts, and I think it's significant that Romney has consistently led the other Republicans in New Hampshire's polls. I think the position that wins me over the most to favoring Romney is that he recognizes that the problems inside the Beltway of Washington DC are not going to be fixed by presidential candidates who are Washington insiders. The insiders only continue to be part of the problem. Insiders benefit from the status quo, because as long as things stay the same, they get to stay on the inside. Insiders won't shake things up, for the current system is the one that's been devised to support them. As a person who cleaned up the Olympics and as one who has elected executive branch experience, you aren't going to find many Washington outsiders who demonstrate that level of experience that Romney does who also possess an ability and a will to root out the corruption rampant in our nation's capital.
2007-09-21 09:55:54 · answer #2 · answered by williamsonworks 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Executive experience implementing change in the bluest of blue states with a recalcitrant and unresponsive legislature - all pro bono.
Large scale management experience. Deep investment finance experience.
And we haven't had a president with great hair since Ronald Reagan.
2007-09-21 03:48:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
he has the same qualifications Bill Clinton had, when he ran for president,.....Mitt, the same as Bill, both were governors of states located in the United States Of America,.....which is also like the current president, we have,.....you see more presidents come from Governorships, then from the House or Senate,.....maybe Hillary is not a shoe-in,.....or is that pronounced, Hsu-in?,.....
2007-09-21 03:54:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
He is over 35 years of age, born in the US and has lived in the US for more than 14 consecutive years. That is all that is required. By the way, all the others running have met the same requirements.
2007-09-21 03:46:58 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
whilst the 2002 wintry climate Olympics, held in Salt Lake city, have been embroiled in bribery scandals, a difference in administration replaced into as quickly as made midstream, with Mitt Romney taking the reins and hitting the backside walking. previous senior management positions in industry (now you comprehend wherein his wealth comes from) waiting him for the pains of immediately getting the Olympics back on its feet. without warning there replaced into as quickly as duty and transparency, and the Olympics weren't simplest salvaged from finished disarray and dishonor, in spite of the undeniable fact that they have been a fairly good good fortune. He did not get to be governor of Massachusetts by twist of destiny. you do not be triumphant interior the optimal of the mountain through falling there. many electorate in that state pointed out his skills for turning a disaster good right into a triumph. New Hampshire, between the needed early maximum needed polling states, had a risk to get a properly look at Romney interior the neighboring state of Massachusetts, and that i assume it fairly is super that Romney has generally led the different Republicans in New Hampshire's polls. i assume the function that wins me over in all probability the main to favoring Romney is that he recognizes that the problems interior the Beltway of Washington DC are not going to be consistent through presidential applicants who're Washington insiders. The insiders simplest hold to be component of the undertaking. Insiders earnings from the popularity quo, via fact the as long as concerns shop the equivalent, they get to adhere on the interior. Insiders would desire to not shake concerns up, for the present technique is the only this is been devised to help them. As a guy or woman who wiped freshen up the Olympics and as guy or woman who has elected government branch enjoy, you do not look going to locate many Washington outsiders who prepare that degree of enjoy that Romney does who additionally very own an ability and a will to root out the corruption rampant in our united states of america's capital.
2016-10-19 07:32:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Let's see, he was a governor, and a fairly successful one. He has successfully built and run several businesses and charitable organizations. He is more qualified than the current president already.
2007-09-21 03:49:23 · answer #7 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
He's an American, over the age of 35. Check the constitution, it has something to say about it.
2007-09-21 03:50:03 · answer #8 · answered by samans442 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He has ran a state, unlike your democratic front runners.
2007-09-21 03:56:41 · answer #9 · answered by vinsa1981 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He's a white male
2007-09-21 03:47:45 · answer #10 · answered by nick k 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
None whatsoever
2007-09-21 03:45:47 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋