Posted on 11/08/2012 11:25:45 AM PST by US Navy Vet
Romney Adviser: It Was the Messaging By Robert Costa | November 7, 2012 Boston — A Romney adviser partly blames last night’s defeat on a weak message. “Turnout was the big problem, since we didn’t get all of McCain’s voters to the polls, but we really should have been talking more about Benghazi and Obamacare,” an adviser says, speaking on the condition of anonymity. “Those are major issues and Romney rarely mentioned them in the final days.” The adviser expects Stuart Stevens, Romney’s chief strategist, to bear the brunt of the blame, but not all of it. “There is a Boston clique that will stick together,” the adviser says. “But blaming Stuart and the other newcomers means blaming Romney, so they will be careful. They know Romney always gave Stuart his complete confidence.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nation.foxnews.com ...
Well if you are poo pooing the whole process of analysis after a loss, I’m not sure what to tell you. I bet this guy was on the inside begging Mitt to go with a harder message and was out voted by the others inside. This guy was right, it was the messaging.
Benghazi was money left on the table, as were a lot of other issue,s out of wimpiness and fear.
Romney couldn't talk about Obamacare without having to justify Romneycare, and he weak "MA is one thing, USA is another" doesn't work, because a government mandate is at the heart of each, and that's the fundamental problem.
Fully agree that they (or surrogates, more to the point) should have brutalized Obama with the Benghazi fiasco. At the ver least, we might some justice if it it didn't move the election needle.
Counting down the number of days remaining when we have to hear anything from “Romney advisors”
Just go away
Go
Now
I think it was a tactical decision in the debate. Obama was sure to think that Romney would go there again, armed with more facts, and Obama likely had a well-tested counter prepared.
Outside of the debate, however, is another story. Me, I would have bought ad time both immediately before and immediately after the debate and hammered the point home while people will still formulating their opinions.
They'll be on talk shows for the next four years explaining how it was Sarah Palin's fault.
post of the week
Well said. I liked Romney but he left a lot on the table.
1. Eric Holder’s many disgraces.
2. Losing the middle east to terrorists.
3. Black Panthers (see #1)
4. The billions plowed into donor companies only to have them go backrupt.
5. Keystone
There are probably more but he should have had negative ads running non-stop in the closing weeks. Ohio may have loved the auto bailout but many of the blue collar types don’t like the idea that the Obama justice department let Black Panthers drive white voters from polling places.
Or it was not articulating the economic issue well enough.
Or not hammering the values voter.
Or it was GOTV.
Or it was letting Obama have a free ride this summer (Rove’s main theory).
Or it was riding the clock in the last two debates instead of being more confrontational.
Or it was not allocating more to OH instead of WI and Penn.
Or it was not integrating the Tea Party.
Or it was ignoring the hispanic vote.
Or it was some or all of these.
My point was what ifs after the election are interesting, but it’s not as nearly as certain as we would like. When you win, everything looks good to you; when you lose everything looks bad.
thanks for your reply...
you posted a worn out cliche as some kind of brilliance - but the fact remains, about 2/3 of your list is actually part and parcel of what he is saying.
“Ok you have posted this on about every thread discussing turnout so either prove with sources that the vote totals listed in the article is not true or explain why you keep posting it.”
I am sorry, I haven’t saved the references. Perhaps another Freeper can help me out.
What I have seen - more than once - is a graphic comparing the ‘day after the vote’ totals for McCain and Obama, and the totals maybe a month later, at certification.
Under that is a graphic showing ‘day after the vote’ totals for Romney and Obama, which make it pretty clear than within a month or so we should not see a lower turnout for Romney than we had for McCain.
If I see it again, I’ll post it.
Also, I have posted this information on perhaps three threads; I doubt that is anywhere near “all the turnout threads.” It makes perfect sense if you think about it. The fact is, all the votes are not yet counted. That is easily discerned.
I am trying to stop misinformation from getting out there with us. We make bad decisions if we have bad info. For example if we believe that hundreds of thousands of less votes came in for Romney than McCain, we logically conclude we are losing ground, have to change or give up to be a minority party. But if we realize that Romney actually got the same or more votes than McCain, it would indicate otherwise.
Sounds like the ground-game guys are trying to blame the ones responsible for the air attack.
I expect the messaging guys to whisper about that the GOTV efforts were the problem.
OK here’s a reference (I wasn’t even looking, just surfing)
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/11/07/looking-at-the-national-exit-poll/
John Podhoretz: “As I write, Mitt Romney has 57.4 million votes. John McCain ended up with 59.9 million. It’s a little noticed fact that in two weeks following every presidential election, votes continue to be reported…by the millions. As I recall, Barack Obama got something like four million more votes in the weeks after election day, while John McCain got two or three million. It’s likely that by Thanksgiving, the final vote tally will show Romney very close to or even slightly exceeding McCain’s total.”
Thanks, I will wait to see if these counts change.
Two-thirds is close enough to “everything.”
I’ll take it.
:)
TOLD YOU SO.. Romney was going to take a dive..
I suspect he knew about the massive voter fraud that was going to take place..
He didnt look very upset that he lost... kind of like he knew it all along..
I believe he did.. and was complicit in it...
AND STILL IS.. Bengazi will die a quick death..
And most of AMerica could give a “floater” about it..
What amazes me is the obvious GLEE that Megyn Kelly and Bair showed when Obama WON on FOX...
FOX News is starting to STINK... O’Realy seems to “care less” who won..
Its becoming harder and harder to watch FOX News for me..
Your post looks like a note from a serial killer. Maybe you’re just deranged.
Useless blame game.
Remember when Mitt criticized Obama’s response to Benghazi, the press let him have it, claiming he was just playing politics and that he “jumped the gun”......he put his tail between his legs after that.
Easier than taking responsibility for rooting out voter disenfranchisement of the members of their Republican Party.
Of course Romney’s worth a cool coupla hundred million or so...
but how about all the Republican Party grass roots..who need jobs and their vote.. who humped it...where’d their vote go?
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.