Romney stayed longer at Bain

**Colin P. Varga** · 07-12-2012, 07:59 AM

Government documents indicate Mitt Romney continued at Bain after date when he says he left - The Boston Globe

Romney has said he left Bain in 1999 to lead the winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, ending his role in the company. But public Securities and Exchange Commission documents filed later by Bain Capital state he remained the firm’s “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president.”

**Zep** · 07-13-2012, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by sput nick

Dems hate people who make money.

This is about as silly as when the left claims that republicans by and large hate poor people. I hope you realize that you sound exactly like the lefties who say that, just reversed.

**seand** · 07-13-2012, 03:10 PM

This issue is sort of silly.
#1 - the Obama campaign just picked that one company because they were particularly good for purposes of demonstrating Bain bought companies in trouble, put them out of business and sold off their assetts. Thats what they did, when Romney was in control, after he left and when he was or was not in control (depending on who you believe) and working on the Salt Lake City Olympics. That particular company is just particularly "photo-op worthy". Nothing about how they handled that company was in anyway inconsistent with how Bain operated in dozen of other instances when Romney was at the helm. Hedge funds don't specialize in growing businesses for decades. They get in and out quick. They look for companies where a drastic reoarganization or a slice and dice of the assetts will turn them a profit. Its not a model of "building a business" that applies particularly well to running a country.

#2 Romney's name was on the SEC paperwork. Even if he had nothing to do with day-to-day operations at Bain that still sort of indicates a cavalier attitude towards SEC filings that doesn't sound particularly good to voters wary or the recent excesses in the derivative market

I can't understand why Romney seems to be intentionally drawing more attention to this.

**Naveen** · 07-13-2012, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by seand

I can't understand why Romney seems to be intentionally drawing more attention to this.

Because he's a terrible candidate. Just awful.

The GOP is counting on big money and voter suppression to beat Obama. They're just hoping Romney doesn't much things up so much that even those things don't give them enough of an advantage.

**Zep** · 07-13-2012, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by Naveen

Because he's a terrible candidate. Just awful.

This is demonstrably false. I believe the latest polls have them tied, don't they?\

Edit: 46% Each

**Naveen** · 07-13-2012, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by Zep

This is demonstrably false. I believe the latest polls have them tied, don't they?\

Edit: 46% Each

Oh yes, you're right. Romney's a great candidate. LOL.

**Zep** · 07-13-2012, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by Naveen

Oh yes, you're right. Romney's a great candidate. LOL.

If you're the GOP and your goal is to win, or at least to stand a fair chance at defeating an incumbent and the polls are currently showing you tied, then....yes? I think that's obvious isn't it?

Unless when you said "terrible candidate" you just meant "I don't like him and his doo-doo policies" then sure, whatever.

**It'sJessMe** · 07-13-2012, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Zep

This is demonstrably false. I believe the latest polls have them tied, don't they?\

Edit: 46% Each

Sure...but presidents aren't elected by popular national vote. If you look at it by electoral college or state by state, President Obama is up.

After all...the McCain campaign had full access to Romeny's tax filings when they vetted him for VP and (perhaps partially because of what was in them) chose to go with....Sarah Palin.

**Zep** · 07-13-2012, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Naveen

The GOP is counting on big money and voter suppression to beat Obama. They're just hoping Romney doesn't much things up so much that even those things don't give them enough of an advantage.

I should have probably paid more attention to this portion of your post. My hunch as to what you meant by terrible candidate seems spot-on.

**Zep** · 07-13-2012, 04:49 PM

Originally Posted by It'sJessMe

Sure...but presidents aren't elected by popular national vote. If you look at it by electoral college or state by state, President Obama is up.

This is a fair point!

Originally Posted by It'sJessMe

After all...the McCain campaign had full access to Romeny's tax filings when they vetted him for VP and (perhaps partially because of what was in them) chose to go with....Sarah Palin.

Well, let's be fair here, that was possibly the worst VP pick in, i don't know...ever? I don't know that much about historical VP choices. It's gotta be up there though.

Either way, point taken.

**Naveen** · 07-13-2012, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by Zep

I should have probably paid more attention to this portion of your post. My hunch as to what you meant by terrible candidate seems spot-on.

Romney seems phony. He seems out-of-touch. He can't seem to come up with a straight answer for anything, and even that convoluted answer he'll later contradict. The more he speaks, the deeper a hole he digs for himself on just about anything. No one is going to vote for Romney because they like him. That's why he's such a bad candidate.

But people do vote on partisan and ideological grounds, and that is the reason for most of Romney's support. (The money is the third leg of that stool.)

But as stated above, national polls mean squat. It's the state numbers that are important, and this is where the voter id laws come into play. Even though Romney is down in all of the major swing states, the GOP is counting on those laws to keep Democrats from voting and put Romney over the top.

**darthsinatra** · 07-13-2012, 05:01 PM

I think the issue today is not so much Bain's business practices while Romney ran it, but WHEN Romney ran it AND his eligibility to run for and become governor of Massachusetts. If he broke SEC rules about that he is going to be investigated and his eligibility for candidacy for POTUS could be called into question. Remains to be seen how far the Obama camp might take this. Check it out:

"“Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature, was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC [Securities and Exchange Commission], which is a felony, or he is misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people to avoid responsibility for some of the consequences of his investments,” said Stephanie Cutter, President Obama's deputy campaign manager, on Thursday in a conference call with reporters."" Did Mitt Romney run Bain after 1999? Will voters care if he did? (+video) - CSMonitor.com

However, none of this is likely to happen or to weigh very heavily in voters' minds.

**annie** · 07-13-2012, 07:38 PM

Lemon. Wet. Good.

**five apples** · 07-13-2012, 07:49 PM

With this economy, he should be killing Obama, so yes he is a terrible candidate. Pretty much every standing government in the Democratic world has gone down on election day by wide margins, so that this is close is quite simply shocking. This reminds me of Kerry in reverse.

In fairness I don't know if it is his personality or the simple fact that despite what some might say on this board, his proposed economic solutions seem foolish to many while we sit here and watch what is going on in Greece. His tax plan, which really benefits himself (and I am not saying that is why he is for it), isn't going to play well, and the dude is a Mormon, a religion many put on par with Scientology. Also, the country has drifted left on the whole bs "family values" crap, which doesn't help him either (I will mention he has been really smart to avoid that debate, so he deserves kudos there). So how much is it him? And how much is it what he stands for. I can't tell.

**raider.adam** · 07-13-2012, 10:44 PM

Originally Posted by Naveen

Because he's a terrible candidate. Just awful.

The reality is neither are good candidates, but of course elections are not absolute references, but relative.

The GOP is counting on big money and voter suppression to beat Obama. They're just hoping Romney doesn't much things up so much that even those things don't give them enough of an advantage.

I don't think they are counting on big money because Obama is raising big money too. What they are counting on is a continuing lackluster economy and public distaste of health care reform.

Look on the bright side. Social issues aren't driving the election.

Originally Posted by It'sJessMe

Sure...but presidents aren't elected by popular national vote. If you look at it by electoral college or state by state, President Obama is up.

After all...the McCain campaign had full access to Romeny's tax filings when they vetted him for VP and (perhaps partially because of what was in them) chose to go with....Sarah Palin.

You're making the assumption that is why he didn't choose Romney, which of course you don't know.

**Colin P. Varga** · 07-14-2012, 08:33 AM

Originally Posted by raider.adam

...

Look on the bright side. Social issues aren't driving the election...

Definitely. The economy is going to be be big issue, then the healthcare reform (ACA), then social issues. But Mitt might have a problem with the economy as an election issue if it seems like he had during his time at Bain Capital been acting like some of the financial institutions that contributed to the economic mess we have now. That is fast and loose with the truth, regulations, and in general fair play.

On social issues former Gov. Mitt has a huge advantage over Pres. Obama inasmuch as he as all the bases covered on social issues.

**NickTheCage** · 07-14-2012, 09:15 AM

Obama: Romney should answer Bain questions - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com

Is it a crime?

**seand** · 07-14-2012, 09:43 AM

Submitting false reports to the SEC is a felony, yes. Though rarely enforced as if it was one, to be fair.

**Zep** · 07-16-2012, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by NickTheCage

Obama: Romney should answer Bain questions - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com

Is it a crime?

I think if anything it would be a civil matter moreso than a criminal one. That of course would be dependent on investors claiming damages as a result of the instances where they were mislead.

**seand** · 07-16-2012, 09:34 AM

I've been thinking about this and the sort ludicrousness of clinging to "I'm not responsible for things Bain did when I was only a figurehead, even I listed myself on legal papers as CEO, President and Sole Share Holder".

Whats he going to do if he becomes President? Say "I'm not responsible for that missle strike on Iran, I was only a figurehead. I was judging a pie eating contest at a county fair Iowa. It was General Such-and-such who hit the red button."

If your name is listed as the person in charge, the buck stops with you. Otherwise you are a lousy executive and by definition a poor choice for a job where the title is "Commander in Chief".