Stupid Romney lack of an idea of the day

One of the more interesting things (to me, at least) about Romney’s campaign for President is his unwillingness to take a position on any number of middling-level issues of the day.

Today’s selection goes beyond middling-level. Try Afghanistan. Apparently he has no policy on Afghanistan.

This despite the fact that we’ve been there nearly 11 years. And despite the fact that Romney’s been running for President since about 2006, and has had plenty of time to pull a position together, and modify it as circumstances changed.

Really, someone like this should have been laughed out of the primaries. But the state of the GOP being what it is, he was the least ridiculous joke in the field.

Romney’s strategy is to have as little policy as possible, and hope that he’ll get elected for no other reason than that he isn’t Obama and he’s a Republican.

The only thing Romney knows for certain is that he REALLY wants to be President.

Oh come on! You know that isn’t true. He also knows he loves money.

Yeah, but that was his position last week.

Frankly, I’m not sure how anyone can actually have a policy on Afghanistan. Our policy appears to be muddle through as situations arise and make the effort to steadily progress to getting the hell out of there. As good as any.

You’re already doing better than Mitt. Consider a campaign manager!

Yes, but even on this he’s flipflopped on this just like everything else since he ran as a moderate for governor of Massachusetts.

Then, he wanted to be governor. Now, he wants to be president. Where is the consistency? Make up your mind, Mittens!

Maybe that’s what it’s all about - he’s realized he can’t be called on flipflopping if he doesn’t take a position in the first place!

Look, when his party wants him to have a position, the extreme elements will be certain to tell him what that position is.

As I said in another thread, his positions are devolving.

Mitt’s position on every issue is the opposite of President Obama’s, per directives of the Conservative base.

Hell, I could add “And I couldn’t do any worse” to almost any political post I would consider running for … I was joking around with some people about running for First Selectman for my town on that platform :dubious::rolleyes:

Because Obama killed bin Laden, we can figure at least part of Romney’s position is that bin Laden should still be alive.

Governor Romney’s position is that we need to train Afghan forces to the point where they can protect the sovereignty of Afghanistan, and not withdraw until they can do that. His plan is to conduct a full interagency assessment of our military and assistance presence in Afghanistan to determine the level required to secure our gains and complete that training, with a withdrawal point based on the assessment by the commanders on the ground of where we are on those goals.

So his plan is continue what Obama’s been doing the past three years, then?

No. The President’s " Strategic Partnership Agreement" between the United States and Afghanistan specifies 2014 as the end of our engagement there.

Governor Romney’s position is that announcing a definite end date, as that does, was unwise.

I’m frankly a little surprised that this information was so difficult for all of you to find. Does anyone need any help tracking down informational resources?

I see. So his assertion is that the current Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces is in a poorer position to choose “a withdrawal point based on the assessment by the commanders on the ground of where we are on those goals.” than someone with no official position or information who has spent the past N months devoting all of his time to running in a primary?

That’s not a position – that’s being contrarian for the sake of a sound bite.

Personally I think the “We’ll get to it when we get to it” approach to Afghanistan is a great idea.