Whatever you think of Karl Rove, he is a brilliant campaign strategist. They
don't call him "The Architect" for nothing.
I think Romney lost because he was totally out of touch with the average
ROVE HAS BEEN DISCREDITED AND IS GRASPING AT STRAWS.Those errors were NOT
why he lost.First of all, convincing the public that Bain was good was
probably impossible, and dwelling on that would have hurt Romney more.Second, the main problem WAS that folks understood Romney. Even without the
47% remark, he and Ann (especially Ann) came across as autocratic and snobby.
Being polite and generous when working for your church does not guarantee being
able to understand all Americans and showing that you do.In addition,
Romney got a big boost in the first debate, against a tired President, when he
came out swinging with a bunch of newly manufactured positions, but Obama later
successfully showed that Romney LOOKED as if he would say anything to get
elected.Romney got hammered because people decided not to trust him --
It is interesting to note that Rove's American Crossroads failed to get
the vast majority of its candidates elected despite collecting hundreds of
millions of dollars to do the job, yet Rove criticizes the Romney team. This is
definitely an example of the pot calling the kettle black and Rove deflecting
from his own problems. Also, don't forget that Rove was adamant on Fox
News that Ohio was going to be taken Romney and had a meltdown when Fox called
the state for Obama. Rove is undoubtedly a smart man, but his glory days are
apparently over and he has shown the capacity to make serious errors and made
critical tactical errors of letting emotions get in the way of facts.
Perhaps people voted against Obama more than for Romney.Perhaps we
have an ignorant electorate who are feed baloney by both sides and buy their
favorite brand.We get what we elect, either through knowledge or
ignorance. Experience is a brutal teacher but fools will have no other.
The reason Romney lost was because he didn't offer people free stuff....he
Obama won in 2008 because he promised many things that the people wanted changed
in government, Closing Gitmo, ending the wars, transparency of govt., etc...
If Romney had kept the focus on the things that Obama promised and failed to
deliver, and promised to succeed in doing those things, maybe he would have had
a better chance.The problem for me with Romney (in addition to
Bain), and this was most clear in the 3rd debate, the policy that Romney would
adopt was too much like Obama's foreign policy. Obama has turned out to be
a war monger and the impression I got of Romney was that he would be too. I
could not vote for either.
You just gotta wonder if they will ever get over it.
#1 reason Romney lost : Rove was calling the shots.
Romney did not lose. Oboma won by getting more voters out.Obama and
his band of strategists and operatives and organizers, and their legions of
allies in the media convinced enough voters that Obama would give them free
stuff, and got them to show up at the polls. (Some multiple times!)One might argue that most of Obama's voters were what have become known
as "low information voters" but their votes count just as much as
someone who actually understands the candidates and issues, and the consequences
of bad choices.Romney's support was lukewarm, other than those
who realized that another Obama term would be (and is turning out to be) an
unmitigated disaster for our country. Republicans will continue to
lose if they run "Democrat lite" candidates, and "moderates."
Real conservatives have shown they can win, and that is where the future of the
Republican party must turn, otherwise it will continue its spiral into
irrelevance.However, the irresistible lure of "free stuff"
for the low information voters saturated by a well organized campaign team may
prove insurmountable. Thus our great nation will finally collapse,
destroyed from within.
It's like time is standing still.The same angry, "Obama ruined
everything" comments.....Month, after month, after....Over, and
over, and over, and......
The bottom line is that the Amercan voters made the right choice. Some people
will always lack patriotism to support America and the people's president.
Romney lost because he lost the urban areas. The chief reason he lost the urban
areas is that he did not offer expanded governmental services to people who want
more and more from the government. It's also hard to win when your
opponent is successful at getting 100% of the vote in certain districts,
particularly when more people vote than are even registered. In Ohio the
Democrats got more Somalis to vote than have gained citizenship.
Consider the old line landed aristocracy of Great Britain. In time the British
came to regard such as parasites, obtaining a return just by virtue of
ownership. To some degree this is how Romney is viewed. Most of us understand
earning a return from hard sweat, even when salaries are large. Consider that
Obama was an attorney (a real job), Reagan was for most of his career an actor
(a real job), Jimmy Carter was and is a peanut farmer (a real job). But what is
Romney? He makes money simply by virtue of his owning and shielding capital.
For Romney to get his message across he would have had to explain a completely
different way of life than the one we understand. He couldn't and he lost
because of it. I think Romney is probably a "nice guy." But he is an
economic beast I can't trust. Apparently a lot of other people felt the
As much as I like to give Romney and Romney supporters a hard time,I
respect Romney for making the "architect" Karl Rove look like a complete
fool election night.
Carl Rove has only won 20% of the campaigns he has managed.People listen
to him, why?
Is Rove out of touch? I have never heard of anyone else say they didn't
vote for Romney because of the reasons he listed.
Rove had absolutely nothing to do with Romney's campaign. Romney's loss says more about us than it does about him. It is a
significant statement about how much we have degenerated as a country. When we
re-elect someone who is a complete failure as a leader and as a president and
clearly has no respect from other world leaders, it shows that we are on the
road to self-destruction.
Rove has no idea. There is just one of two reasons why Romney
lost:#1. Too many who would have voted for him over Obama could not
be bothered with actually showing up to vote.(know a ton of these people)#2. "choose you by the voice of this people...that ye may be judged
according to the laws which have been given you by our fathers, which are
correct...Now it is not common that the voice of the people desires anything
contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the
people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall you observe and
make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people. And if
the time comes that the voice of the people chooses iniquity, then is the time
that the judgments of God will come upon you, then is the time he will visit you
with great destruction...."I hope it is only lazy people in #1,
and not #2.
DN Subscriber 2:I am doing graduate work in Engineering and
Economics from a top-3 university. I stay very plugged in to current events by
reading the Economist, Politico, the New York Times, and the DNews, and
listening to the BBC and NPR regularly. I am hardly a low-information voter. I
voted for Obama, because he convinced me that he would most closely follow my
ideals of good governance.I would say there are also plenty of
low-information voters whose pastors told them, "Vote for Romney because
Obama will destroy America!" Whether you agree that statement is true or
not, you can't say there aren't uninformed people on both sides. And
you can't say that Romney wasn't also promising to give anything away
(tax breaks, anyone?).
I thought Romney governed in Massachusetts well. He seemed to know who he was
and where he was headed. But, the Romney I saw during the campaign was not that
man. Campaigner Romney seemed to be a chameleon who said whatever the crowd in
front of him at the time wanted to hear. He changed position on so many of his
policies that I no longer understood exactly what he stood for. I could not
vote for him when I felt I had no idea how he would govern as president.
DN #2 first point is correct. But another way to look at it is Romney did not
get the anti-Mormons out. Obama got less voters out this time than last so we
can't say Obama ran a good campaign (of course he did because he won) at
least not compared to his last. Analyze the numbers. Evangelicals and their ilk
stayed home. Could not vote for a Mormon and they did not vote for Obama (but
they did). They and others got what they deserved. An America in decline. The
worse is yet to come. Republicans and Conservatives are being destroyed in front
of our eyes as I write this.
JUSTMYTOUGHTS Romney offered lots of people stuff--venture capitalist, angry
anti immigration foes and the angry anti abortion crowd were going to have
Christmas in november. The problem for you and Romney is there are more people
like me than qngry folks like you. And now we are going to overturn Amendment 3.
Fasten your seatbelt. Your gonna have a bumpy ride.
Is one of the two things that Romney trusted Rove and his polling numbers?
At least the article got it right, even if the headline didn't: these were
tactical failures, not "fails." Basic grammar.
Karl Rove is another crowing rooster trying to take credit for the rising sun.
He did not win the election for George Bush and was just a media creation. But
kowtowing to Norquest hurt Mitt Romney more than anything else. Go ahead
Republicans with your "lower the tax rates for the wealthy" and you hurt
America as much as the Democrats. We need to do away with the Party system and
let individuals with the best ideas be elected. Too many Americans can see
through this puppet scenario.
It was Mr. Romney who gave the reason rather than Karl Rover. He said that it
was the gifts that Mr. Obama passed out that made the difference. This
president has never been a leader, shows by his disdain of the people that he
doesn't care and has no respect for or received from world leaders. Now he
is going to "show us" by using his powers via the EPA that he can punish
us even more with his war on the environment - something that is political
science rather than physical. This country will continue to suffer until we get
smart enough to elect someone who promotes programs that make us responsible
citizens rather than takers only. The next 3 years are going to be tough...
Another of Mr. Romney's tactical errors was running in the 1st place.
I think the reason Romney lost was because he never related to the poor and
middle class in this country. And we know that group is becoming larger and
larger. I think the reason Romney lost was because he never related to
minorities, any of them. Not women, not senior citizens, not Hispanics, not
Blacks. I think Rove is looking at this exactly like Romney was, from the
extremely wealthy viewpoint. I am not a Democrat, nor a Republican. I have
voted for both in my lifetime. But I have never voted for someone who I did not
think their main concern was what's best for the American people.
Unfortunately, with very very rare exceptions, wealthy is not the best for the
So I walked outside yesterday and it was 95 degrees. You know why? Because it is
the end of June. In five years the Deseret News will be complaining
that the only reason Santorum lost the presidency is because he wasn't
enough like Romney.
@mcclark: I think Romney lost because the average citizen is totally out of
touch with reality and engages in political activity with a team-sport
mentality. The facts are that Obama has continued and expanded upon nearly
everything that people hated so much about Bush, yet those who spent 8 years
mocking and deriding Bush voted for Obama . . . twice.@Bob K: From
a factual standpoint, Romney did exceptionally well in all three debates. What
Obama stepped-up on in the last two debates was the 8th grade put-downs and bald
faced lies (e.g. Benghazi and the Rose Garden speech). Of course, that's
what most voters connect with rather than facts...
Perhaps Romney lost the election because people actually did see what he really
was. Someone who is a very nice guy but who would say whatever it took to sway
his audiences. The Pinocchio board went ballistic whenever Romney made a
speech.He was head and shoulders above Pres Obama when it comes to
business experience and he he has shown he can run companies. Some he kept
alive and some he did not based upon what their economical expectancies were.
However when he got the chance to stand in front of audiences and say what he
thought people wanted to hear he would come up with lines about how his wife
drove Cadillacs, and this as the country was coming out of a huge economic
downturn.Continually he showed how out of touch he was with the
common American. Collin Powell expressed concern that Romney would have the
country at war and Alan Greenspan a GOP fed reserve chairman said Romneys
economic plan would create more debt than Pres Obama's plan. Those two men
saying that should turn most voters away.However Romneys own
inability to communicate caused his downfall on election day.
Does it really matter? This whole thing is biblical. Read the bible folks.
I loved Romney's attacks on Obama.Obama is clearly a lying
Chicago politician with no real experience and he is wrecking America by
allowing the enormous debt to continue to grow. We are all toast and at this
point there is not a lot we can do about it.But, Romney would have
been better off ignoring Obama altogether. Everyone knew he wasn't the
right guy and couldn't get the job done, but by attacking the obvious only
made Romney look like a silly politician.If he would have just
started laying out a logical plan with real details and said, "This is the
plan. It will work. Please steal my ideas Obama. I care about America, and if
we are going to save it the sooner this plan is started the better"Then he would have won.
Romney lost because he was not the best candidate.'Nuff
said.Move on.Get over it.
Cats said: Whatever you think of Karl Rove, he is a brilliant campaign
strategist. They don't call him "The Architect" for nothing.Actually Bush called him "Turd Blossom" a more accurate
nickname.Enough with the "free stuff" baloney, I don't
know a single person who voted for Obama, that thought they were getting
"free stuff." I only hear about it from right wing posters, whom I can
only assume, are angry at not getting their imaginary gift bag. Where are the
angry low information masses that didn't get their "free stuff,"
why aren't they posting about being lied to? They don't exist, because
Nobody thought they were getting free stuff.
Coming from a man who predicted Romney would win all the way into election
night. All Rove is doing is defending himself, and taking the heat off with his
When I read the comments here I shake my head. It is as though these folks
actually believed what they read in the media. Our nation is made up of low
information voters - as Rush Limbaugh puts it. Logic suggests Romney lost
because there are too many people supping at the public trough and he would have
cut that back. Romney would have shifted focus from welfare to creating a more
robust economy. Someone said the best welfare program is a job, something the
Democrats have so far failed to create in any meaningful numbers. But with
millions welded to the government, no one espousing serious changes can be
elected. As an aside to my fellow commenters, never believe the media. Their job
is not to inform but rather to collect readers and viewers and thus
Sometimes I think that DN should have just pretended that Romney won last
November so they could spend the next eight years running stories about his
triumphant "presidency." Nearly eight months later and they'll
still look for any excuse to run a story about him...
I voted against Romney, not for Obama. He was a complete disappointment as a
candidate. I was going to vote for him at first, but he slowly lost any
confidence I had in him, the 47% comment was the final straw for me. Anyone who
believes that half the population of this country are free loaders just waiting
for their next government check doesn't deserve to be in the white house.
Please oh please I hope the Republican party can come up with a
candidate I can actually vote for in 2016. Chris Cristie, are you reading this?
Most likely he will get run out by all the extreme wackos before he even gets a
Mark Shields of The PBS NewsHour team of Shields and Brooks gave the one reason
for Romney's defeat. He said that it was a matter of the perception of
"lack of empathy". Karl Rove has lost his credibility and is linked with
a failing perception of the Republican Party. Either the party redefines itself
and moves to the left or right or the Whigs will have a parallel history as the
Republicans continue to fade from view. The target for the Democrats is to have
"one party rule" with enough give and take built into the model to make
the country grow. My nephew just received a political science degree from the
University of Missouri. That is the philosophy that they are being taught. It is
"socialism with a human face". There is no room for capitalism. As a
Catholic Navy vet who thinks highly of the writings of Malachi Martin, a Jesuit
advisor to Vatican II, you can pretty well say that the Catholic Church believes
the same. Capitalism is a failed model and conservatives should realize this and
work toward the forming of a "Third Rail" in the center of the track.
I think he lost because he was out of touch with the common person! Hard for him
to relate because he has been rich all of his life, so he has had everything he
has wanted without really having to work for it!
I hope Rove isn't suggesting Romney LOST the election when we all know
Obama STOLE the election by out thinking, out hustling and out working
Romney's campaign. Generally speaking the person who runs the
most organized, focused, strategic campaign wins. In this case, and for many
more reasons than the two Rove points out, that person was Obama.The
funny thing was, Obama's campaign team was so skilled and artful in how
they executed their strategy that Romney never saw it coming and believed up
until 8:00 PM on election night he would win.Too bad. In this
election anyway, he wasn't the better man.
Mitt lost because Obama cheated.
The only "gift" that I've been offered by Obama is to receive real
Medicare health coverage in return for paying 50 years worth of Medicare taxes.
The nerve of people like me.
Romney lost because the majority of voters are low-information voters.
Obama's lies have become more widespread and the American people are just
soaking it up. We have seen Obama use this to his advantage in the debates; he
would tell a blatant lie, knowing that it will most likely be proven wrong the
next day, but that doesn't matter because all people will hear is the lie.
They don't end up hearing the correction. All they remember is what Obama
said originally.This is helped by the media which favors Obama 100%.
I believe there was a study that showed that in the last few weeks leading up to
the election, 0% of the liberal media posted anything negative about Obama (I
guess he really is the Savior, then?). Objective reporting in the liberal news
media is long gone. Objectivity is apparently undesirable anyway.Romney lost not because he was not the right choice; he lost because enough
people didn't bother to find out who the best choice was and just soaked up
whatever the media said without ever questioning it.
JLFuller said: "When I read the comments here I shake my head. It is as
though these folks actually believed what they read in the media. Our nation is
made up of low information voters - as Rush Limbaugh puts it. "When I read the comments like yours I shake my head. It is as though you
actually believe what they say on the radio. Our nation is infected by low
information listeners of rush limbaugh, sean and glen, I used to listen to rush
in the 90's because my father told me how great he was. After a couple
years of listening to clever editing, half truths and a lot of speculation based
on opinion rather than actual facts, I couldn't listen to all the angry old
dittoheads anymore. I grew up and started getting news from several sources and
then seeing where they meet, the truth is near there.Romney lost
because the he represents the 1% who have been fleecing this nation for the past
30 years while the trickle down tax theory destroyed the middle class.
Romney lost because he was wrong on every major issue. He was wrong on the
economy. His economic plan would have destroyed our economy--more tax cuts for
rich people, no investment, no employment plan, just more income inequality. He
lost because he stood for lunatic notions like 'self-deportation.' He
lost because he didn't have a clue on foreign policy. I'm not a big
Obama fan, but this was the easiest vote I've ever cast. I voted for a guy
who at least understands the issues, and has some sense of economics.
Romney lost because the Democrats cheated. There was election fraud like never
before. Had it not been for this, Mitt likely would be the president right now.
Sad for America that the principles of honesty and integrity have disappeared
from the societal and political stage.
Man, these old conservative excuse mantras are becoming awfully stale.
Rove is right that you can't pin an election loss on any single thing. In
Romney's case I think it was the combination of a lot of little things.* Some have correctly mentioned that the Obama get-out-the-vote efforts.
This was especially important in places like Ohio. Many voters who
couldn't name the Vice President were nonetheless carted into the polls to
vote for someone who had provided them with an ObamaPhone or the like. The
failure of the Romney Teams get-out-the-vote software was a minor drag in this
effort for Romney.* The Romney Team, like MANY conservative pundits
(Dick Morris, anyone), were relying on flawed polling data. Remember Romney
thought, by the latest numbers, that he would win Florida, etc. Morris and
others kept trying to adjust the polling upward in favor of Romney by claiming
that turnout would be different than the polls suggested. They didn't see
that they actually were slightly down in areas they thought they were up in.continued...
* The undercurrent of anti-Mormon sentiment among some conservatives. Although
MANY, such as the Rev. Jeffress sought actively to keep Romney from the
nomination with religious references, he at least publicly expressed support in
the general election. However, it is hard to believe that with such a strong
avoidance by some toward a Mormon candidacy -- so strong they had to convene
meetings to decide whom to support as each of the other non-Romneys left the
race, finally even settling on Santorum who was their last pick otherwise --
that all such voters went into the booth for Romney.* The damaging
effects of conservative talk-show commentators such as Rush Limbaugh, Laura
Ingraham, and others to dampen enthusiasm toward Romney. Rush tries to deny his
roll in Romney's loss, but prior to Romney becoming the nominee Rush spent
a great deal of time telling his listeners how Romney was the "establishment
candidate" (not true), how Romney was a "dry-ball moderate", etc.
These characterizations conveyed an unfair bias against Romney beyond a simple
One of the most damaging attacks by conservative pundits against Romney was in
the illogical hype over ObamaCare compared to "RomneyCare". Rush spent
much airtime trying to tell us how "Romney Advisers" had been
instrumental in crafting and pushing through the hated ObamaCare, detailing how
these "Romney Advisers" had met with the White House, etc. However,
while the Obama Administration had met with some who had been involved with the
Massachusetts' health care law, these individuals (Jon Kingsdale, John
McDonough, and Jon Gruber) were not "Romney Advisers". They were simply
individuals outside the Romney team who had worked on health care issues in the
past and were involved in the Massachusetts process. Some in particular were
staunch Democrats. Gruber, in particular, had appeared several times on MSNBC
as a commentator against Romney. Limbaugh was flat wrong to label Gruber a
Romney adviser who promoted and helped fashion ObamaCare. Laura Ingraham fell
into the same false rhetoric about Romney's ties to ObamaCare, apparently
forgetting that she (along with Santorum) had given full-throated support to
Romney in 2008 -- a period also after the signing of the Massachusetts health
Captain Green wrote:"Romney lost because the Democrats
cheated."Sour grapes do not become reasonable people.Try to keep it intelligent and classy... if you are capable of it.
@andyjaggy: You're not offering an accurate account of what Romney said.
What he said was that 47% of voters were going to vote for Obama no matter what.
He also said 47% of the population doesn't pay federal income taxes, so
his message on lowering taxes wasn't going to connect with them.
Therefore, he said his job was to convince the small percentage of independent
voters. All three of those statements are demonstrably true. In fact,
according to IRS tax data, the percentage of people who don't pay any
federal income taxes is more like 50%, so if anything Romney understated the
reality of the situation.Romney also commented on the problem of
entitlement programs. It is intellectually dishonest to pretend that there
isn't a large segment of society who believe they are entitled to
healthcare, food, and housing, especially since that is the platform Democrats
have run on for years. Could Romney have been more politically correct? Maybe.
However, I personally enjoyed his frankness. I voted for him because he was
honest and in all ways the better candidate.
I think Obama won this election, because the American People do not know a good
guy when they see one. One That loves his Country, Is honest, Is a Christian in
a Christian nation. but voted for one, possibly when they were not even american
citizens, and those who do not love this country and didn't want what was
best for the entire country to have a good leader. Demorcrats and Republicans
are merely parties, so that the choice can be down to two, Come on America,
read the news, wake up, and it won't hurt to learn how to pray before you
vote in any more elections,
I think he lost because he failed to address anyone who was not already a
supporter. He wrote off anyone who is on any kind of government assistance as a
waste of his time, instead of telling them what a stronger America could mean to
them. He should have appealed to their better natures and talked to them about
how his plans could give them opportunities to be self sufficient because in
fact not everyone who is getting help - really wants to be in that situation.
Some of them do want to rise above that. Instead of including them in the
conversation, he alienated them. When you realize that about half of the voters
are receiving assistance, you are stupid to not realize that you need to win
over at least some of them.
It is pretty simple, really.There are an estimated 201.5 million
U.S. citizens age 18 or over who were eligible to vote in this last election.Of these, about 55 million were registered Republicans.About
72 million were registered Democrats.About 42 million were
registered as Independents or some other minor party.Obama's
strategy was straightforward: get those 72 million "out to vote", then
try to sway some of those 42 million Independents by: 1) showing
that on the issues where Romney is moderate (Healthcare reform), Romney is no
different than Obama; 2) showing that on the issues where Romney
is "conservative", Romney is too extreme (ala the Tea Party);and 3) showing that Romney is all over the map, with no
coherent central ideological paradigm (a "flip-flopper") who cannot be
trusted even if he does take a (temporary) stand on any given issue. This is
also related to Romney being "out of touch".And it
worked!At least in part because Romney played into this strategy
perfectly. And maybe that is because Romney IS actually all those things he was
made out to be.In other words, Obama's campaign showed us the
Romney could have won--but as hard as he worked, he still gave a lot of people
(including me) the idea that he didn't really have his whole soul into
winning. Rove couldn't have fixed that, no matter how many commercials.To win a presidential election these days, you have to want it as badly
as the Democrats want it--and Romney didn't. To him, it wasn't a blood
sport or Game 7 like it is for Democrats; that's how they justify the vote
fraud, the lies about opponents, and the other chicanery they always pull.To Romney, it seemed more of a casual golf or tennis match. You
lose--meh...maybe you'll win next time. The exercise is the important
thing. And this applies to all the other RINO's as well--squishy moderates
don't win not only because they're moderate, but because it's not
a super-serious thing to any of them. Maybe it's their vast wealth.What we conservatives need in every election is not only a good person,
but someone who will treat it as a Game 7 and campaign like a Democrat --but
without the illegal part.
"The other key moment and issue Rove said hurt the Romney campaign was
failing to show who the former Massachusetts governor is as a person."No, we clearly saw which type of person Romney was. He felt he was
entitled to the presidency ("it's our turn"). He was an
out-of-touch millionaire who felt the rest of Americans were bottom feeders
beneath his notice. He was calculating, untruthful and showed his contempt for
the Constitution of the United States by signing pledges to adhere to right wing
dogmas and disenfranchise American citizens he didn't approve of. That's why he lost. Oh, and because he was "Mitt" Romney
(a mitt is a glove).
Again, Romney was in part a victim of bad polling data that portrayed him as
doing better than actual. That plays into the strategy one takes."The Scientist" thinks the Obama campaign showed us the "REAL"
Romney. This is obviously incorrect, as for example the Joe Soptic ad that
claimed Romney had some responsibility for Soptic's wife's death and
DIDN'T CARE ABOUT IT. This was and is an obvious falsehood.Also, the 47% comment was misunderstood because it was taken out of context.
Remember he was simply answering a question to a potential donor about his
appeal to voters. He answered that there were some to whom he would not likely
appeal. Romney did jumble and lump together different constituencies in a way
that was not precisely correct, but he was not writing an editorial for the
NYTimes. The potential donors understood his strategy even though he
didn't clear up the difference between the 47% not paying taxes and the
smaller percentage who were government-dependent, etc. He was not saying he
didn't care about any of those voters as citizens -- another aspect of the
comment portrayed falsely. He was referring to his own voting appeal.
The 2 reasons Romney lost?:1. Flip. and 2. Flop.Sad, me [and the other vast majority 90% of the middle, centered,
independent moderates] could have voted for the Blue Dog, NorthEastern
Rockefeller Republican, Big Tent Reagan "Governor" Romney.You know -- the;Romneycare, Gay marriage, pro-choice, Restricted assault weapon -- Romney.Not that 2 bit fake puppet the
Tea Party nominated.
Why are we still talking about this, but have ignored Benghazi? Get off of it
Mr. Rove and move on.
Karl Roves points are accurate. Failure to fight back effectively to the lies
and distortions of a $500 million Obama's swing state strategy hurt. It
suppressed the vote. It is interesting how liberals to this day consider W an
illegitimate president but no one is considering that Obama's IRS targeting
of conservatives which may have affected the election is not illegitimate.The
other point is failure of the news media to honestly report on the election. It
should have actually covered the Benghazi coverup and hit the inconsistencies.
The other point is Romney campaign should have done more to positively portray
Romney as a caring,compassionate leader. The media was so completely in the tank
for Obama that the fourth estate really sealed the election for Obama. Jonathan
Alter the liberal newsweek editor has a book out called I think "The Center
Held" chronicling why Obama won and Romney lost. Brent Bozell a conservative
has a book called "Collusion" basically how the mainstream media covered
for Obama and was the deciding factor in the election. I plan to read both
I was disappointed in Romney's campaign, still voted for him. Can someone
please cite a specific example of where Obama promised free stuff. It is time
to for the Republicans to change course. A change in party leadership would be
a great start. The other day the ACA was the topic of discussion at work.
Despite the overall disdain for the ACA everyone person present cited examples
of the ACA they supported and agreed with. Republicans don't understand
that concept. Healthcare and immigration reform are important issues to voters.
I believe they main reason Romney lost was he insulted so many voter blocks.
Romney lost because there was nothing that he didn't change his position
on. In addition he failed to explain the reasons for these changes, but
insisted that he was the most consistent man on earth. This, along with his
lack of vision as to where he wanted to take the country, made him seem
Rove is out of touch. He blew this cycle big time.Romney lost because:He is just too rich for the taste of the overwhelming majority of
Americans.His 47% comment echoed what many thought from the get go. It
was proof positive that Mitt just didn't get the lives of many people. His
tax returns were additional proof. If he wanted to be president, he should have
planned on releasing them - or stayed out of the race. If he wanted to be
president he should have kept his investments here in this country - at least in
the last four years. Having a blind trust that has no political vision was just
dumb. He wanted to have his cake and eat it, too. It made him look like he had
so much money he didn't need to keep track of it.In the primaries, he
veered too far to the right(?) on immigration to have ever won the general
election. Rove and many others warned of this problem four year ago. Mitt
wanted the nomination so bad he said things that made it worthless.Every
other mistake his team made pales by comparison to his own errors.
Romney lost because the radical right were vehemately opposed to supporting a
Mormon. Plain and simple. There are statistics on this that I heard quoted on
Rush Limbaugh show a while back although I can't recall the specifics. The
Radical right just didn't get out and vote. If they had, he would have
Romney lost so that the average American citizen would get this disgusting
government we now have. In this country we get the government we deserve!
Romney lost because he was caught in LIES and he was totally OUT OF TOUCH with
the average voter...Romney had few, if any, people on the ground... he
lots of signs and advertising but not workers.
Mitt Romney had a great plan to increase jobs,energy independence and help
people start businesses by getting government out of the way. He lost because
the left including universities,labor unions, large non profits and the
mainsteam news media had at least triple the money and influences. It is
interesting to read the posts from the liberal states of Washingto,Oregon and
California. Politics in those states are a blood sport. I have lived there and I
know it. The powerful labor unions, universities and so called charitable trusts
spew non stop liberal dogma. The Democrat party believes totally in the end
justifies the means and Republicans are homophobic, racists and hate schools and
children. It is pretty tough to win even if you get the most votes because the
judges are all liberals and will keep counting until the D is the victor.Ask
Dino Rossi in his first contest with Christine Gregoire how elections are
decided or see how Meg Whitman was destroyed by being for Prop8.Money matters
and liberals have by far the most. Mitt Romney was a compassionate decent man
whom the left vilified.
Romney lost because he didn't promise lots of free stuff to people and
didn't lie enough about how great the next four years were going to be.Debt has grown, gas prices up, health care premiums up, umemployment
unchanged, unabated inflation to come....Hope and Change!!!
It's really quite simple why Romney lost. We still remembered George W
Bush. A much as Rove tried to hide him, let people forget, we remembered the
disaster of war and debt that was his presidency. I don't want to see
another Republican in the White House for a good long time. Preferably not
until the 30 year old "starve the beast" idea has faded into history,
and we get some Republicans that aren't committed to sabotaging the
Carl Rove is totally wrong. Romney lost because:He didn't get
the Hispanic vote. He should never have mentioned '47 percent' and
'let them deport themselves'... Someone will always have a camera on
it. Obama got the Hispanic vote because he was perceived as an immigrant
himself... from Kenya. Immigrants, legal and otherwise, favor other
immigrants.He didn't handle the tax return issue very well.
Harry Reid kept spouting that Romney didn't pay any income taxes and since
the tax returns were not released the voters assumed the worst. Romney should
have grilled Harry about how he knew about Romney's returns. As we now
know, folks at the IRS very likely leaked the info on the say-so of either Obama
himself or some of his hired czars.Romney didn't handle the
Bain Capital issue well. He should have emphasized the companies that he saved
from bankruptcy and the resultant jobs that were saved. The US is
full of low information voters as dumb as a bag of hammers. A candidate must
appeal to them since their vote counts as much as the informed voter. And so it
@milhouse:"And you can't say that Romney wasn't also
promising to give anything away (tax breaks, anyone?)."Tax
breaks?? Low information voters (and unfortunately there are millions out
there) are generally non tax payers. In fact, they usually can qualify for the
EIC (Earned Income Credit), which is a 'refund' of taxes never
paid.@UTAH Bill:"Campaigner Romney seemed to be a
chameleon who said whatever the crowd in front of him at the time wanted to
hear. He changed position on so many of his policies that I no longer
understood exactly what he stood for. I could not vote for him when I felt I had
no idea how he would govern as president."You want a chameleon?
How about Obama... Gitmo closure; troops out of the mid east conflicts; Gay
marriage; abortion; and several others. If you voted for the true chameleon you
made a mistake.If Romney made a mistake it was not promising massive
handouts to low information voters. Instead, he wanted to cut the size of
government, stop the massive outflow of goverment largesse, and get the lazy and
indolent American back to work.