If you were waiting for Mitt Romney to slip up and tell the truth, tonight was your night.
During a 60 Minutes interview which aired on Sunday, September 23rd, Romney was asked about the poor image of himself and his campaign portrayed by the infamous the “47% are victims” remark. It was then that Romney admitted to his incompetence:
Scott Pelley: As you know, a lot of people were concerned about the video of the fundraiser in which you talked about the 47 percent of the American people who don’t pay taxes. Peggy Noonan, a very well-known conservative columnist, said that it was an example of this campaign being incompetent. And I wonder if any of that criticism gets through to you and whether you’re concerned about it at all, whether–
Mitt Romney: That’s not…that’s not the campaign. That was me, right? I– that’s not a campaign.
Right, Mitt, that was YOU being incompetent, not your campaign.
Later, Romney was asked to describe which essential qualities an excellent leader should possess. Romney described someone very unlike himself; instead, he described someone who’d remind some people of President Obama. Here’s the transcript from CBS’s website:
Pelley: What are the essential qualities of a leader?
Romney: Well, a leader has to have the capacity to build trust in the people he or she works with. People have to look at that person and say, “I may disagree with them. But I know where they stand. And I can trust them.” A leader has the capacity of vision, the ability to see where things are headed before people in general see those things.
When comparing Obama and Romney, there’s no question which one voters see as more trustworthy and consistent. Romney has flip-flopped on every issue from healthcare to gay marriage, so we don’t know where he stands. Romney’s also talked behind the backs of Americans, saying he’s “not concerned with the very poor” and “it’s not his job to worry about those people” – the 47% of Americans that don’t “take responsibility for their own lives.”
Also in the 60 Minutes interview, Mitt conceded that Obama’s four years of experience managing the U.S. economy makes the Democratic incumbent better suited for the job, continuing the remarks above with:
Romney: That [leader's] vision is typically a product [...] not just of their skill and brilliance, but even more their experience, their life experience. And so if you’re looking for a leader to guide an economy, you hope that you have someone who didn’t just study it in school, but someone who’s actually lived in the economy.
The only economy Romney has experience with is the State of Massachusetts – meanwhile, Obama has been managing a modest yet persistent recovery in jobs and industry on a national level. The important point is that running the economy of a small Northeastern state like Romney did doesn’t really compare to the work of steering a national economy out of the depths of a major economic depression. If you’re looking for the candidate with more tested experience, and more history with running the U.S. economy, the obvious choice is Obama.
What’s more, Romney didn’t deliver any better job recovery results in Massachusetts than Obama did nationally. The Boston Globe reported earlier this month:
In many ways, Romney inherited a state economy in 2003 similar to the one President Barack Obama found entering the White House in 2009: one marked by a deep recession, huge job losses, and a widening budget deficit. And, like Obama, Romney struggled mightily, delivering at best a modest recovery dictated less by his political leadership than by sprawling global forces beyond his control. At the end of his term, Romney could claim a small net job gain and a lower unemployment rate, but the pace of job growth lagged the nation badly and only a huge outflow of Massachusetts workers to faster-growing states kept the unemployment rate from climbing higher. It is not quite the image of a turnaround painted by Romney’s presidential campaign.
Here’s the video: