Cuccinelli advisor blames Bobby Jindal, RGA for defeat: ‘They just blew it’

The Daily Caller ^ | 8:08 AM 11/06/2013 | Matt K. Lewis

[riverdawg]

“The Party boys were quite busy changing the rules to ensure the tea party never see the light of day in the Republican party.”

I thought it was the Virginia GOP-e that wanted to continue with the primary nominating process (in place before 2012) and the Tea Party wanted the change to a convention process. Are you saying it was the opposite?

[riverdawg]

“I love it when people babble on with talking points they've picked up somewhere that have no connection with reality”

My “talking points” came from discussions with friends and family in Virginia who badly wanted Cuccinelli to win, and voted for him, but were astonished to witness the ineptness of his campaign, especially with regard to “social” issues that are certain to repel many moderate and independent men and women.

[lentulusgracchus]

Are Cuccinelli's advisors burning his political bridges and making fresh enemies by blasting away at Republicans whose help he might need for a comeback?

How would you tell the difference, practically? With friends like them and "help" like that .....

[lentulusgracchus]

The answer has to be in his appeal (or lack thereof)

OR LACK OF ADS and ad money!! (Helloooo, RNC!!)

[Jane Long]

Which Republican Governor's stumped for Cuccinelli? I know one who did not...Krispy. He was asked and refused. I didn't hear of my Gov Perry stepping up to help, but I may have missed something.

I wondered where BOTH RNC and RGA were during the campaign.

[Political Junkie Too]

From what I can tell from this article, the supposed "advisor for Ken Cuccinelli" remains unnamed throughout this article. It's simply a device to allow other innuendo to be reported under the imprimatur of authoritative fact.

This is a Leftist psyops hit piece.

-PJ

[Charles H. (The_r0nin)]

If Cuccinelli was the Tea party favorite, and the Tea Party is the “base” of the Virginia GOP, then how can you blame his defeat on low base turnout?

Because at the beginning, using consultants recommended by the national GOP, Cuccinelli moderated his "tone", criticized the shutdown and Ted Cruz, and was passive in the face of attacks. It's only after he jettisoned the advice of the consultants and went on the offensive that he went from double-digits down to competitive. If he hadn't listened to the moderates in the first place (and had a little USEFUL help from the GOP), he would have won...

[Charles H. (The_r0nin)]

My “talking points” came from discussions with friends and family in Virginia who badly wanted Cuccinelli to win, and voted for him, but were astonished to witness the ineptness of his campaign, especially with regard to “social” issues that are certain to repel many moderate and independent men and women.

And that "inept" campaign was run by national GOP-e consultants, in the hopes of attracting moderates. How did that work out? The fact is that Cuccinelli won independents (a point I made that you conveniently ignored) by a ton and still lost... becausse his based got demoralized. He was always a fighter as AG, but the GOP consultants turned him into wimp. And uninformed conservatives went to the Dem plant Sarvis. His change back into a fighter happened too late to save him. I watched it happen first hand, not third hand through your friends...

[riverdawg]

If the base won't come out to defeat an odious creep like McAuliffe, then it got what it deserved.

[riverdawg]

Cuccinelli lost the female vote by 9 percentage points. And he got just 37% of the vote among women aged 30-45, a 19-point decline from what McConnell received in 2009. You can't attribute that to the libertarian, or a demoralized base.