On November 19, 2011, CNN released news that New Hampshire Senator Kelly Ayotte will endorse Mitt Romney in the upcoming race for the White House. "Mitt Romney has proven not only through his prior experience as a successful businessman and governor, but also through his solid campaign and excellent debate performances, that he is that candidate" said Senator Ayotte. Ayotte is a very popular fist term Senator and her support were definitely help Romney in his endeavors.
Her remarks perhaps raise certain questions. First, she regards his debate skills as grounds to endorse him. If this were 60 years ago, if she were not at the debates, what could she endorse him for? Granted he has handled his debates well, it worries me that a candidate is being endorsed on the grounds that he can debate well. Such activity only confirms the idea that candidates are being elected more on their personal attributes rather than their political ideologies. I would have liked to see Romney receive endorsement on behalf of his position on immigration or taxes rather than how he handles himself on a televised debate. She goes on to say "He will remain vigilant in the fight against al Qaeda and Islamist terrorists, and his national security decisions will be based on advice from our military commanders – not political polls," she said. "With a rising China and persistent nuclear threats from rogue nations, we need Governor Romney's strong, steady leadership to vigorously protect American interests." Perhaps by this statement she assumes that our country's military decisions have been based more on political poles than on the leadership of the service's commanders? If that was the case, wouldn't we have been out of Iraq a long time ago? Regardless, I am okay with politicians endorsing candidates, I just wish it could be for better reasons.