Radio 4's World This Weekend briefly mentioned this video. Mitt Romney is left looking evasive and perhaps even rude after being asked if he'll arrest a wheelchair-bound man for using 'medical marijuana'. Although the issue may be real it was clearly a set-up. At the end of the interview the man videoing the encounter pursues the wheelchair guy's line of questioning. We can only hope David Cameron is prepared for similar ambushes. We guess someone, somewhere is planning something for Mr Brown. This is the era we now live in.
Class!
Posted by: Aunty Claire Ickle | January 06, 2008 at 14:39
Although the issue may be real it was clearly a set-up.
I don't know how this can be stated with such certainty. The man looked genuine enough to me. Do we know for a fact that he is an actor, or that he doesn't suffer from the condition he talks about?
Just because the man behind the camera persued the question doesn't prove anything. Maybe he was just interested. If I'd been there, I certainly would've been and would probably have tried to get Romney to answer as well.
Mitt Romney is left looking evasive and perhaps even rude
"perhaps even rude"?? He looked extraordinarily rude and insensitive to me. Clearly the thought passing through his head was "I can't answer this man and it's mighty embarrassing, time to move on". If any politician did that to me, it would certainly lose my vote as well as any respect I had for him/her.
We can only hope David Cameron is prepared for similar ambushes.
If Cameron is certain in his policies and prepared to argue his case, he has nothing to fear from any "ambushes".
Posted by: Bruce | January 06, 2008 at 16:01
I may be getting too cynical Bruce but it looked like a set up to me.
Anyhow, I don't think it's enough to have the policy answers in such a situation. It's also important to know how to handle such a situation and for minders to be able to help take down the person's address or something so that the candidate can correspond with the questioner.
Posted by: Editor | January 06, 2008 at 16:20
It's also important to know how to handle such a situation
Well I would say that having a good grasp of policy which you can debate with confidence goes along way towards handling such a situation - but I take your point. From what I've seen, I'd imagine Cameron, like Blair, would be quite good at handling that sort of unexpected event, in terms of interpersonal skills (certainly better than Romney in the clip).
Posted by: Bruce | January 06, 2008 at 16:38
That's just an astoundingly useless way to deal with a question. There's no point in having an opinion if you're reserved about backing it up in public.
I'd also suspect that Cameron would be better with this sort of thing. In fact, if I remember rightly, when he was running for leader the BBC (I think) sent some snivelling little man to follow him around asking him awkward questions; a particular focus was Cameron's view on religion. And I seem to remember he dealt with that extremely well - I would have probably punched the guy.
Posted by: David | January 06, 2008 at 16:51
The right answer was: "I believe in the rule of law. Equality of law for all. If a person breaks the law they should face the consequences."
Posted by: Aunty Claire Ickle | January 06, 2008 at 17:19
If a person breaks the law they should face the consequences
Perfectly reasonable argument. But sometimes the law is an ass.
I believe the point the man was making was, do you agree with this law? Would you change it to take account of cases like mine? We can infer from this clip that Romney's answer to those questions would be "yes" and "no" respectively, but he didn't have the guts to say so.
Posted by: Bruce | January 06, 2008 at 17:23
"The right answer was: "I believe in the rule of law. Equality of law for all. If a person breaks the law they should face the consequences.""
The right answer could also be "The law is wrong and should be changed".
Posted by: David | January 06, 2008 at 17:28
Sorry, I agree that the law should be changed, but Romney will never agree so I tried to spin his stupid position.
Posted by: Aunty Claire Ickle | January 06, 2008 at 17:32
Although the issue may be real it was clearly a set-up.
So?
If this is a sign of 'things to come', then great- I'm all for it. Real answers and reactions to real questions. Or are we against the idea of truth and honesty in politics?
Romney came off as a complete arse and rightly so. He wants it both ways- to exercise his prejudices against others whilst hiding them, as he knows how fatally wounding they will be if voters see them.
Posted by: Machiavelli's Understudy | January 06, 2008 at 20:41
If you look at the profile of the person who posted the video, it looks like they are from a pressure group for the relaxation of marijuana laws and have managed to ask most candidates about it.
Posted by: Deputy Editor | January 06, 2008 at 21:38
Romney is an unprincipled opportunist. It is not surprising that he got caught out.
Posted by: Moral minority | January 07, 2008 at 00:42
The obvious answer was to say "of course I won't arrest you for that, I'm not a policeman".
N.B. I support the legalisation of drugs.
Posted by: dizzy | January 07, 2008 at 04:44
The White House is going to the Democrats since the Republicans are still too ideologically rigid. Iraq will kill their campaigns, one by one. I hope Obama gets it.
Posted by: James maskell | January 07, 2008 at 10:28
I don't see how anyone can have a problem with the use of medical marijuana. Denying someone a substance which helps lessen their suffering is cruel.
Please nobody suggest that I am advocating the use of Heroin for depression, that's just silly.
Canabis however has been proven time and again to have a positive impact on the lives of people suffering from painful and debilitating conditions.
Continuing to deny its positive effects is wrong.
Posted by: Andrew | January 07, 2008 at 19:48