Posted on 07/23/2008 5:33:00 PM PDT by JRochelle
You've probably heard the story about the tycoon who wanted to bring out a new kind of dog food.
He spent lavishly. He hired the best marketing person, the top PR firm, the best ad agency, the No. 1 packaging expert, the most powerful distributor -- but the sales were flat after six months.
He summoned his consultants to a meeting and asked why the food wasn't selling. "The dogs won't eat it," was the answer that came back.
And so it is with Mitt Romney. Despite outspending his rivals by huge margins throughout the primaries, the dogs won't eat it. He lost Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida and California. The only primaries he won were in Michigan, where Dad was governor; LDS states; and a few states on Super Tuesday in which his California-obsessed rivals couldn't spare the cash to advertise. Only John Connolly in 1968 had a worse cash-to-delegates ratio.
And John McCain rightly did not like Romney's tactics during the primaries. Using his gigantic money advantage to dominate television, he seized early leads in virtually all of the primary states, only to lose them later on. And, when they started slipping away, he resorted to unfair, distorted, scorched-earth negative ads, betting that his opponents couldn't afford to spend enough for the truth to catch up to his charges.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
There, fixed it for you. Have a great day.
Your ignorance about politics is breathtaking. To blame Romney for the decline of the Rep party in Massachusetts is nonsense. I guess Romney has also caused the decline in RI. The demographics of this country are changing significantly. The non-Hispanic white male is the principal power base of the Rep party. That percentage of the population is declining and its impact will be felt more and more in the future. Today, half of the children in the US under 5 are minorities. Immigration, our main source of population growth brings in 1.2 million legal immigrants and another 500,000 to 1 million illegals. 87% of all incoming immigrants are classified by the USG as minorities entitled to use such programs as affirmative action and minority set asides for business. We may have very well seen the high point of the Rep party during the period in 1995-2006. Demography is destiny.
And yet he promised he would. Now either you'll concede he's a liar and had no intention of doing anything other than getting himself elected Governor, or you'll concede he is grossly incompetent. Either way, he's unfit for office.
Yeah Romney is sort of like Churchill's description of democracy, i.e., "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." Romney is the most qualified and capable candidate of either party who ran for President in 2008. I would much rather have him as President than any of the others by a country mile.
What a shame the unwashed mobs were allowed to voice their opinion about the uncrowned king of America...Beastly inconvenience, that “one man, one vote” thingy is... Romney didnt get a mandate from the voting public during the primaries...
John McCain became the presumptive nominee of the party with just 31% of the vote and he was the only top tier candidate of either party that didn’t garner at least 50% of the vote in his/her home state. Winner-take-all and open primaries permitted McCain to game the system producing a nominee who doesn’t enjoy the support of most of his party.
I have no problem with one man, one vote, just who is casting that vote and how it was counted. Open primaries permit non-Reps to have a say as to who will be the party's standard bearer. If they are independents and Dems, they have a much difference perspective and commitment to the Rep party and its values. I would rather Reps select who will be their standard bearer. Why allow outsiders to help make that choice?
I am also against winner take all primaries, which don't reflect the real breakdown of the party for the candidates. McCain squeaked by in SC and FL, narrowly beating Huckaby and Romney respectively. The fact is that McCain, the party's self-described maverick, is the GOP standard bearer and he obtained that lofty stautus with less than one-third of the vote. Is that fair? McCain gamed the system. We need to change the rules so it doesn't happen again.
What makes you think he will in November, when all of the Democrats and all of the Republicans get to vote in an “open and winner take all” general election ?????????
LOL. That's why the call it the GENERAL ELECTION. The primaries are used to get the party's nominee, not the general party's nominee.
Not based on the results, ie. the American public. Per the article above,
McCain squeaked by in SC and FL, narrowly beating Huckaby and Romney respectively.
McCain gamed the system.
____________________________________
But McCain did beat Huckabee and Romnee.....
Romnee tried to “game” the system by buying the nomination...
A limit on spending would make that fair...
It is precisely Romney FAULT (ever is he the victim, right?)
First, Mitt Romney did not campaign for Patrick's GOP contender.
Instead, he was out of the Commonwealth for himself (as always).
In fact, Romney's ONLY kind word for Ms. Healy (who ran against Patrick)
was the day before and AFTER she lost. Proving who Myth REALLY is, does it not?
Second, both Boston newspapers put the blame on the Mythster.
“The Massachusetts Republican Party died last Tuesday.
The cause of death: failed leadership.
The party is survived by a few leftover legislators
and a handful of county officials and grassroots activists
who have been ignored for years.
Services will be public and a mass exodus of taxpayers will follow.
In lieu of flowers, send messages to New Hampshire Republican voters
warning them about a certain presidential candidate named Romney.”
- Boston Herald, 11/12/2006
"In 2006, while Romney was chairman of the National Republican
Governors Association - a group dedicated to electing more
Republican governors - his own hand-picked Republican successor
as governor lost badly to the Democrat, despite the fact that Republicans
have held the governorship in Massachusetts since 1990. Romney largely
ignored the Massachusetts elections and spent most of the time
during the campaign out of state building his presidential campaign.
He came back and publicly campaigned for the Republican candidate
the day before the general election!
“Locally, this is a rebuke to Mitt Romney and checking out within six months
after being elected and having accomplished almost nothing,”
[Jim] Rappaport [former chairman of the state Republican Party]."
- Boston Globe, 11/8/2006
Romney wiped out the Massachusetts GOP.
This is a warning to those who support RINOs, everywhere.
Let us let Mitt Romney destroy the GOP, just like he did in Massachusetts. [/s]
BTW, I'm a rabid pro-life voter and Romeny's seeming conversion on the issue of abortion and ESC exploitation tipped me. Sadly, I have since concluded that he made a mouthed conversion, not a real one. His acts after making his supposed conversion tell a different fundamental perspective. BUT, if you asked me which candidate would be more likely to actually support true conservative policies, I'd have to tip my hat to Romney ... he at least appears to give a crap what the conservative base believes. I'm only getting hints of that from McCain, with the change on drilling and closing the border as the start of a sane immigration policy.
I’ll bet you are a complete dolt.
I don’t rail against the gang of 14. John Thune did not destroy Bolten’s career.
DUH.
You couldn’t be more wrong.
Thankfully I think McCain will not pick him.
Good news on post #28.
“Mitt tanks the ticket,” says a McCain insider. “We lose fiscal conservatives. We lose social conservatives. We lose Catholics. We lose evangelicals. All the groups were spending time and money on bringing into the camp would be lost. He just doesn’t help us enough to do something like this, as much as Mitt might think we should. He doesn’t even win us Massachusetts.”
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=13563
Ping to read later
You sir, do not know women very well. Women are not like men in the area of looks. Sure its nice if a guy is handsome but that is the least of things that are important. Why do you think ugly guys get good looking women? Odds are they are able to take care of the woman!
As a female I will say Mitt is handsome. But his looks don’t matter when he opens his mouth.
His smarmy attitude, his constant half smile when he talks is not something that is attractive. He comes off as a wimp. He always has the same expression. And that makes his good looks worthless. He comes off as a condesending jerk. Why do you think he lost to the ugly guy?
And I haven’t even started on his lying and how that is so not attractive.
LOL!
Romney won lots of straw polls and online polls.
LOTS AND LOTS!
But in the end, they don’t count!
“Sadly, I have since concluded that he made a mouthed conversion, not a real one.”
I don’t know the timing of Romney’s ‘evolution’ on that issue, but I think it’s safe to say that if he’d run for governor of Mass. on a strict national Republican party platform he’d never have won an election in that state. The same if Clinton and Gore had reflected the national Dems’. issues when running for statewide office in Arkansas and Tennessee. Politician’s make such changes. We’ve had former Klansmen supported the rights of black Americans in Congress and on the Supreme Court.
Dems. accept these changes more readily than Republicans or conservatives. Conservatives want to see that lifetime consistency on their most important issues. I think we just have to make a determination of what they believe now and how they would govern if elected. I was sort of equally for Romney and Thompson during the primaries, and would have been happy with either, but Thompson faded so quickly.
I’m sort of amazed at how Romney was able to become so friendly with McCain after the way McCain just plain lied about Romney’s position on Iraq timetables before the Florida primary. I couldn’t dismiss that sort of thing so soon, but most politicians can.
Well you will be mighty disappointed.
Romney will never be elected President.
Done. Welcome aboard.
Morris is clueless.
From day one this election has been about vote splitting.
The conservative base needed to be split to have a Soros style RINO win.
Thompson was a splitter in the end (unfortunatly)
Huckabee’s insane remaining in the race was JUST to split votes from Romney.
Kook Paul was just a media figment to split votes early on and deny any youth vote to republicans.
Of course the Huckster fanatics here can see the strategic elements of adult campaigns. (de-nial is not just a river in egypt)
Romney may or may not be a mistake. McCain is a definit mistake and this is what we were given by the GOP overlords. It is just a question whether mccain is going to pick a “man” or a wuss to be VP.
A weak presidential candidate does not look strong with a wimp for a vp. (ie you don’t look less fat by standing next to fatter people)
Romney) lost Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida and California.
FYI: Romney lost Iowa 34% [McCain] to 25%; NH 38% to 32%; SC-- 33% [McCain] 31% [Huckabee], and Romney [15%]; FL 36% [McCain] to 31% for Romney and CA 42% to 35%. These are hardly resounding victories for McCain.
I followed the McCain campaign for four days each in SC and FL driving almost 2000 miles. If Huckabee had not been in the race in SC, Romney would have won over McCain. And it was the Hispanic vote in FL that put McCain over the top. Open primaries and winner take all rules helped McCain game the system.
FYI: I do find it ironic that McCain is complaining about all the press coverage the Obama campaign is receiving. In the primaries, it was McCain who was receiving the lion's share of the press coverage. I attended many McCain campaign events and the press coverage dwarfed what Romney received. It was amazing to see all the satellite trucks in Fl covering McCain and then go to a Romney event and see just a few news media. There is no doubt that McCain was the MSM's candidate in the primaries.
And I am shocked that MCCain would even give Romeny the time of day when Romney runs to the press and says it is because of CFR that a Utah based company was making push polling calls.
Oddly several Romney campaign workers were among those polled. ANd they were told to go tell the media their story. Another oddity, they forgot to mention that they worked for Romney!
But it was McCain’s fault!
The European media is INSANE for Obama. They see him as an out of the closet socialist that will have the USA conform to EU socialist ideals.
McCain is off their media radar. As far as the EU media socialists are concerned, the election is over.
Don’t forget the EU is a ripe area for voter fraud. There are many ex-pats there that will be voting for president absentee. (met one in europe on a recent trip. She made californians look right of center)
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.