Posted on 12/28/2014 2:43:47 PM PST by ObamahatesPACoal
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus reportedly told a donor that he blamed 2012 presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s campaign for the candidate’s poor showing at the polls.
The New York Times reports that a donor met Priebus during an RNC fundraiser in New York and told the chairman that the GOP’s intense primary season didn’t give Romney the time to pivot back toward the center after primaries, where he needed to appeal to the party’s more conservative base.
But Priebus reportedly said that the problems ran deeper than the structure of the primaries, noting Romney’s widely reported comment that “47 percent” of Americans are dependent on government. He added that reports of Romney’s extreme wealth, specifically the fact that his California mansion had a car elevator, didn’t help either.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Horse hockey, he wasn’t supported by the base because he’s a liberal. Too bad these GOPe ers don’t get that. Pivot to the center my a$$.
Romney was seen as a typical country club Republican.
He was the weakest candidate the GOP could have nominated to run against Obama.
Mittens was everything the party establishment wanted in a presidential candidate - safe, uncontroversial and the kind of guy who could appeal to the middle.
He still got stomped. And now they want to nominate Jeb who embodies those same qualities.
None of those things are reasons Romney lost. He lost because some conservatives stayed home, and blacks racially block voted. Had nothing to do with his wealth. I follow politics closely and never even noticed the elevator story.
“didn’t give Romney the time to pivot back toward the center after primaries”
The primary’s lies were too fresh in memory for a limited, modified hang-out.
Romney GO AWAY.
You had your chance. Do something else.
You can be a very good representative for America. Just not our president.
For real.
Lame excuses.
Here’s why Romney didn’t win....he wasn’t a Conservative and ignored Conservative voters.
Romney’s problems began and ended with guys like Reince Priebus and Mitt Romney.
That’s a HS of an excuse if I ever heard one.
Romney decided early on the election would not be about ideology but about competence.
Another Massachusetts guy named Michael Dukakis ran on the same theme in 1988.
He lost.
The fact that he's an extreme liberal didn't help his cause either.
If Romney wants to run again, I propose he run on a platform of returning American industry.
Do it Romney. Be for American manufacturing.
Bring home all of the manufacturing, which has gone to China. Be bold, and stand up strong for us.
Otherwise, get lost.
Your choice.
You are absolutely right.
And I am no Romney fan, but he was right that 47% of the voters would not vote for him because they are on the dole.
What he did not realize is that a substantial percentage of the conservatives would not either, for entirely different reasons.
Nor will they this time.
Run Romney or Bush and we will have that nutcase Warren for our next president.
Precisely why Red Hampshire democrats crossed over in the open Republican primary to give Romney the momentum he needed to win the nomination. They knew Obama would beat him like a drum.
You get the government you vote for.
His pointless public opposition to the Detroit bailout sank him with Midwestern union voters. And that’s all she wrote. Bush understood the electoral vote calculations, which is why he went with the bailout. Heck, Reagan imposed restrictions on Japanese auto imports (”voluntary” export restraints, from the Japanese standpoint) because of the Midwestern union vote. Then there were the steel and Harley Davidson tariffs (imposed to help Harley Davidson stay afloat). The problem with Romney is that he’s a political hobbyist who’s never taken the time to understand politics. He figures that what works in business - top-down impositions - also works in democratic politics. He’s wrong.
The GOPe will do the same in 2016 and reap their "reward".
The problem with that theory that you run conservative in the primaries and move to the center in the general is that it only serves to prove that your candidate is a liar. Which way he is lying only time will reveal.
I don’t vote for known liars.
there were several weaker candidates thet sgould never stood on the stage Rick santorum and Michelle Bachman to name two
Both ran largely on vanity
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.