My power to see the future could have stopped Russia’s invasion

Oct 2010
Romney: Has power to "see the future"

Former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney on Sunday suggested that he had a power to “see the future,” and could have stopped Russia from invading Crimea if he had been elected in 2012. “The president’s naïveté with regards to Russia, and his faulty judgement about Russia’s intentions and objectives has led to a number of foreign policy challenges that we face,” Romney opined to CBS host Bob Schieffer on Sunday’s edition of Face the Nation. “And unfortunately not having anticipated Russia’s intentions, the president wasn’t able to shape the kinds of events that may have been able to prevent the kinds of circumstances that you’re seeing in the Ukraine, as well as the things that you’re seeing in Syria.”

“I think effective leaders typically are able to see the future to a certain degree, and are able to take actions to shape it in some way,” he added. “And that’s, of course, what this president has failed to do. And as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton as well."

What that vision might have looked like, his preventing Russia from taking over Crimea, we, as mere mortals, can only speculate. I would only remind readers that he envisioned an election night victory as well. And we all know how that turned out.
This gave me quite a chuckle. Wasn't sure if it should go here or in the humor section. :f_laugh:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Mar 2014
Central US
Of course, the lefties have to LIE about what Romney actually said, to MAKE UP SOME COMPLETE NONSENSE to ridicule.

ROMNEY NEVER SAID what the LYINGASS OP TITLE CLAIMS he did; however, he DID correctly cite RUSSIA as a Geo-political RIVAL of the United States, likely to behavre agressively if not regularly challenged/confronted, which the current Idiot in Chief, President Mommy Pants, soundly ridiculed, when Romney made that astute observation.

So, based on what was ACTUALLY SAID ,as opposed to the Left Madeup Bullshit than Romney NEVER SAID, and what has ACTUALLY HAPPENED, it's quite clear that ROMNEY WAS CORRECT,and President Mommy Pants, was WRONG, per usual.

Try to get your minds around it. :smiley_big_grin:
May 2012
By the wall
Your obviously missing his point.

As President he would have surrounded himself with people that were probably experienced in foreign affairs and his National Security Council would have consisted of experts rather than friends as Obama has done.

Basically Obama has surrounded himself with people who's main goal is to protect the presidency, not the nation. Their sole purpose is to offer advice that keeps Obama out of trouble politically. Look at who is military advisors are and you will see this.

What Obama does that is different from other presidents is he does not take advice from say experts on Russia in regards to this issue. What happens is that every morning during his foreign policy briefing he is giving the recent news that has happened within the last 24 hours and suggested responses and actions to take in regards to it. These suggestions are formed from a group of about 300 people who's sole job it is to protect the president in the responses he gives and the actions he takes.

He does not sit down with foreign policy experts and discuss his options, he simply takes his cue from the top suggestions given to him by a panel he has probably never met.

This is why Romney would not have been able to see the future, but more than likely would have been advised about what Russia was up to before it happened. Obama's team is purely reactionary. 100% reactionary.

Its how they control the propaganda. Not by deciding first but by letting situations develop then counter-attacking in the way that best suits the president.
Mar 2010
Why do people listen to presidential losers like Romney, McCain, Santorum, Gullianii etc.?

Isn't that like asking a washed out Who's got Talent contestant to be on panel to judge the finalists?
Last edited:


Former Staff
Feb 2007
Captain Hindsight, to the rescue! That is what this whole thing boils down to - with regard to his comments.
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Dec 2010
Well golly, Miss Cleo, if you can see the future then why didn't you see how badly you'd get your ass kicked in 2012?
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people


Former Staff
Aug 2012
I honestly believe that there was only ONE thing that could have kept this from happening:

The Ukraine keeps it's corrupt, Moscow-puppet leaders...accepting Moscow's bail out as well.

Now, they find themselves without Black Sea Ports, a dwindling country, and deep in debt, while their European and American friends do what we do: Talk, wring hands and make profound statements.......

(Although, it does appear that the West, instead of Moscow, will be the one's funding the Ukraine's bailout, now.....)


Former Staff
Dec 2013
Isaac Chotiner, senior editor at the New Republic agrees with Romney.

The liberal magazine The New Republic admitted that Mitt Romney was right about Russia after the Vladimir Putin-led nation invaded the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea late last week.

“Russia…is, without question, our number one geopolitical foe. They fight every cause for the world’s worst actors…But when these—these terrible actors pursue their course in the world and we go to the United Nations looking for ways to stop them, when—when Assad, for instance, is murdering his own people, we go—we go to the United Nations, and who is it that always stands up for the world’s worst actors? It is always Russia, typically with China alongside,” Romney said in a 2012 interview during his presidential campaign with Wolf Blitzer.

“This all seems…exactly right,” Isaac Chotiner admitted Monday for The New Republic.."

Since the interview, Syria’s Bashar Assad used chemical weapons against his own people and China has come out “in agreement” with Russia’s invasion of Crimea.

Mitt Romney and Russia, Putin, and Ukraine | New Republic