Romney in 2016?

"My time has come and gone."

UPDATE: I wrote this post based on the squib at Talking Points Memo (where the link goes), but now I've watched the Romney interview (on "Fox News Sunday"), and I need to say that Romney clearly leaves the door open to a 2016 run. Chris Wallace tries to close the door by inviting him to make a "Shermanesque" statement, that is, to say that he would not run if nominated and would not serve if elected. I need to get the exact response from the transcript, but he absolutely does not accept the invitation.

ADDED: Wikipedia has an entry for "Shermanesque statement."

UPDATE: Now, I've got the transcript. So let's take a close look:

WALLACE: Governor, let me -- let me look to the future because voters seem willing to give you another chance. There was a "USA Today" poll just a couple weeks ago of Iowa voters in which you swamped the field there. You had 35 percent. Huckabee was second with 9 percent, and the rest of the field trailed after that. And recently, you gave an interview, and when asked about running again, you gave a whole lot of reasons why not, but then you also said circumstances can change. Question, what does that mean?

ROMNEY: Well, you know, I spoken on this topic so many times. I don't really have anything new to add, Chris. I'm not running. I'm not planning on running.

The double "I'm" = present tense. He's not now running or planning on running. Next:

I'm going to be supporting our nominee...

No exclusion of the possibility that he himself could be that nominee.

.... hopefully, a strong individual that's able to take our message to the American people and get this country back on track for the people who need help and there are a lot of people who do.

And he's been using the entire interview to present himself as exactly that "strong individual." Wallace knows he needs to pin this down:

WALLACE: But are you making a Shermanesque comment -- commitment, absolutely will not run; if nominated, will not serve? Or are there circumstances under which you would consider running again?

ROMNEY: Chris, I'm not going to add to the story. I've got nothing new for you. 

Paraphrase: Chris, you've seen through my rhetoric, and I'm not doing the Sherman statement or revealing that I would step up if drafted.

I've spoken at this time and time again.

Spoken at this is a strange locution, suggesting uneasiness, but I've gone back to the recording and think he may have said "spoken of this." He gets laugh-y and blabby at this point, though, so I'm feeling the guile.

I'm not running. I'm not planning on running. I'm going to be helping the person who takes the banner for us.

The triple "I'm." Present tense again. The "person who takes the banner" could be him.

WALLACE: Let me ask you about this a different way. In your heart, do you still think that you would make the best president of all the people out there?

ROMNEY: Look, there's no question in my mind that I think I'd have been a better president than President Obama has been. No question in my mind about that. And there are other good people who I'm sure will be able to lead the country in the future. I wish it were me.

He wants it.  "I wish it were me" implies but it's not, and yet he doesn't say that. He does proceed with:

Let me tell you, it was a great experience running for president. I loved that. But my time has come. I had -- come and gone. I had that opportunity. I ran, I didn't win. And now, it's time for someone else to pick up the baton.

It's time for someone else... but what if no one else materializes? What if the baton just lays there, unpicked up? Is he willing to pick it up? He says "time" twice, speaking in the present tense, but that leaves it open that some time from now, if no one else comes forward, he will be there, ready to serve. He would love it!

Wallace takes another approach:

WALLACE: You mentioned Hillary Clinton. Do you think you'd make a better president than Hillary Clinton?

ROMNEY: No question about that in my mind. The American people may disagree with me. But, look, you've got to get this economy going. 

At this point, I think I said out loud: He is running. He's making a pitch for why he's better than the presumptive candidate of the other party. And he's raring to go:

You have to have people who understand what it takes to create jobs and to help people come out of poverty, to help the middle class to have a better and prosperous future. You've got to have that understanding. You've also got to have people who've actually run something. The government of the United States is the largest enterprise in the world. You watched a president who just doesn't understand how to make an administration work, how to interact with Congress, how to get things done. You have to have those things. I don't think Hillary Clinton has that experience. And I look for instance at her record as secretary of state, look, her record is Barack Obama's record in foreign policy. And it's a disaster. The president went to Egypt and said we're going to have this new wonderful relationship with the Muslim world, and now, the Middle East is burning. The president won't even call the invasion by Russia into Ukraine an invasion. Look, if you can't -- if you can't speak decisively, you can't be decisive. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are two peas in the same pod. And the American people have tasted that and have said, look, that's not a good taste. It's not right for the American people.

It's as if he had his campaign speech written. Two peas in a pod, and not the kind of peas you like, either. This are the kind of peas that the American people have tasted that and have said, look, that's not a good taste. Give peas a chance. We gave peas a chance. And they were bad peas.