While Mitt Romney’s rivals criticize his tenure at Bain Capital, the two founders of Bain’s most notable successes, Sports Authority and Staples, say his experience best equips him to serve as the nation’s next president.
Jack Smith, founder of Sports Authority, calls the attacks “a terrible slap against a brilliant guy’s record.” Bain was one of the original investors in the sporting-goods store, and Romney served as a director on the company’s board. Smith says he would consult Romney on “anything and everything.” “He provided guidance and direction,” he adds.
“I heard [Newt] Gingrich talking about how they eliminated jobs and the money they grabbed, that’s baloney,” Smith insists.
Tom Stemberg, founder of Staples, agrees, calling Romney “the single best corporate director I’ve ever worked with.” Asked about Rick Santorum’s contention that Romney’s experience as a CEO isn’t the best preparation for the presidency — because a president can’t boss Congress around — Stemberg retorts, “That’s an absurd analogy.” As a member of the board of directors, Stemberg notes, “You can’t boss anyone around. You’re only a shareholder. You’ve got one vote.”
Rather, Romney’s corporate experience taught him how to function as an executive and as a legislator, Stemberg argues, because he had to convince seven or eight people to go along with him. Yes, successful businesses such as Sporting Authority and Staples would have existed without Romney, but “they are way better enterprises today than they would have been” if Romney hadn’t been involved.
Smith, meanwhile, says Romney’s still got that entrepreneurial talent. “If he started a business today, he would make it successful.” And if he became president of the United States, Smith contends, he could fix the country’s business.
Maybe if Romney becomes President he could sell California to the Chinese - a move that I've been in favor of for some time now. I hate to lose Pebble Beach to the ChiComs but all in all I think there is a great deal to be made. Say 15 Trillion?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWe might as well sell it for something before Mexico just takes it for free.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI live in California. By the time Jerry Brown gets done with it, you'd be lucky to get bus fare for the whole thing. Oh, wait, I mean bullet-train fare.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'd say it's his experience as Mass gov that has me questioning why I would ever vote for him.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt's that very experience which tempers my enthusiasm for President Obama.
Having read about his fiscal policy in MA, I wouldn't be devastated by a Romney presidency.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI can't wait for Romney to, figuratively, fire Obama. Like Mitt says, he likes to fire people who don't provide the service they promised to deliver. Newt and Rick are all a-twitter because Mitt "fired" people. That's exactly what we need in Washington DC. There are a bunch of people who need to be fired.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm a small business owner and firing someone or laying them off is one of the worst responsibilities I have. But sometimes it must be done, like it or not.
I visit a lot of blogs. Too often, way too often, I read conservatives bash each other and forget, totally forget, that any GOP candidate is a huge upgrade on the disaster that is Obama.
I think Mitt can win. I doubt the other GOP guys can. But have no doubt, I will vote for anyone over Obama.
Mitt is the man ready to rumble with The One's BILLION $ war chest. We need that if we are to win.
And I'll remind all my conservative friends that Reagan was not Reagan until after he left office. Romney will, IMO, be as conservative as Reagan when historians write their analysis years from now.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCan somebody explain what Mitt Romney actually did? Like, what his job was? I've yet to hear him explain in it a way that doesn't sound like meaningless buzzwords and corporate-speak. And if he wants to stop the Gingrich/Obama narrative (i.e. that the main thing he did in his job was lay people off) from taking hold, he'd better start being a little clearer. Repeating the phrase "the private sector" ad infinitum is not enough.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSomeone should remind Grindgrinch that the Occupy Wall Street crowd rarely votes in Republican primaries. Cordially, Bill
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJim Cramer likes Mitt Romney
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOh... so ex-CEO's are saying Romney alright? Well, that clears up everything. I guess, we needn't have any concerns about our Republican Party being associated with Romney's Wall Street financial backers if a couple of ex-CEO's say there's nothing to worry about.
So let's here it, all you Romney fans. How do you like it when people start dragging Mitt's baggage out for inspection?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"So let's here [sic] it, all you Romney fans."
Not a fan of Romney, but surely a fan of capitalism.
What exactly are you worried about? Wall Street? That's where the capital sometimes comes from. No capital, no business. No Wall Street, no pensions, no life insurance policies, no IRA's.
Perhaps it's the unavoidable rotten apples in Wall Street (Dodd Frank notwithstanding). We agree, but taken as a whole, be thankful it's there. Unless you prefer London, or Hong Kong, or Kuwait, or Singapore, or the Mob.
Or is it "CEO's" you're worried about. What do you know about CEO's? These two guys worked with Romney, and they probably didn't spend a lot of time talking about what to do if a state decided to ban contraceptives. Instead, they likely spent 24/7 building a couple of successful businesses. Is your problem that they got rich? Why is that a problem?
The captcha was "narrow-minded."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFirst off, I'm strictly a free market guy, and haven't any problems with capitalism. But I am very concerned with the influence of the supposedly too-big-to-fail financial institutions upon our govnermental policies. Wall Street is too much in bed with Big Government.
Secondly, let's not be confusing Wall Street with where the capital comes from. For instance, tax dolllars don't come from Washington, they come from the taxpayers. In the same sense, capital doesn't come from Wall Street, it comes from the savings of many of our nation's citizens. And many of these people were given short shrift by the actions of the Obama Administration, which has been greatly backed by many a Wall Street finanicer.
Finally, we're talking about perceptions here, and what the Republican Party should and shouldn't be identifying itself with in picking a nominee. That's why many of us are about Romney.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExactly. It's high time we pinned the Wall Street and Big Biz Lobbyists in Bed with Big Government thing on the Obama administration. And separate the good parts of capitalism from that (think lemonade stands, mom & pop stores, Steve Jobs, the stocks in John Q. Public's 401k...). It should be pretty easy to come up with some good sound-bite explanations. I hope to heaven someone is hard at work on that right now!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm a Romney guy and I have no problem bringing his baggage out for inspection. It continues to be my view that Romney's baggage is less than anyone else's. Including Obama's. I could be wrong but I'm comfortable with that judgment. It is also my view that Republicans who make anti-business arguments for political advantage are more guilty of pandering than anything that Romney has ever, ever been accused of doing.
Hope that answers your question.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI find this Gingrich and Santorum line of attack to be embarrassing. I think this line of attack, for a republican, is as bad as the right wing social engineering comment. Now our side is attacking CEOs? Bury the country now if this line of attack succeeds. We are done if being extremely successful disqualifies someone the president. I'm embarrassed I ever supported Gingrich.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNow, now... Let's keep our emotions in check. We're just going through the understandably aggravating, but necessary process of vetting our Republican candidates. The Romney folks had no problem when it was done with Perry, Gingrich, and Cain.
As Republicans, it's important to give due diligence to considering whether our party wants to identify itself with the kind of Wall Street connections that Romney seems to personify.
After all, it's only the same thing the Democrats would attack Romney for.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell, when you have Republicans and Democrats agreeing that a good line of attack against any given candidate is that he was very successful, created tens of thousands of jobs through wise investing, is a disqualifying attribute, then yeah I'm pretty pessimistic about the future of America. We are totally screwed if that's the idiotic mentality that our presidential candidates are going to have. It's totally idiotic.
And read my past comments. I've been about as anti-Romney as they come. His ONE good quality is that he was a VERY successful business man who knows how to run a business. You will also see that in the past I've been pro Perry, pro Gingrich, and Romney has seen little love from me. At this point though, he's the only one I see that can beat Obama.
Also, Gingrich destroyed himself. He did and said the things that he was attacked for. Perry destroyed himself. He really did suck during those debates. Santorum is quite possibly the weakest candidate of them all and the Democrats would slaughter him. At this point, I'm just facing reality. Romney is tough to be excited about, but if it's him vs. Obama, then yeah I can get excited about cow manure vs. Obama. I just want to be sure we win. If Perry could have gotten his foot out of his mouth for 2 seconds, he would have been the ideal candidate. He has a tremendous record to point to, but he sounds like a bumbling fool, and in a general election, that matters.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTo preempt the Santorum fans. Santorum is unelectable because he always sounds like he talking down to everyone. He has a very unlikable personality. My wife, who is about as close to Santorum on social issues as can be, can't stand the guy. She thinks he's a chauvinist, and that's not a word she throws around...ever. He would have a huge woman problem if he were the nominee.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOh, well, if your wife doesn't like Santorum, then that wraps it up for him.
Somehow I have my suspicions, though. You say no one could be closer to Santorum's positions than your wife, but she has such disdain for him that she apparently couldn't vote for the guy. Hmm. How could one jettison their most closely held social positions because of a personal dislike for a candidate?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse