We’re not talking about Romney, who personally ran a good campaign.
It was all those campaign funkiest and consultants who did the details, which are the ones Caddell is talking about.
Think of that buffoon Eric Fehrnstrom who after Romney took strong stands on amnesty and other issues in the primaries came out and said “we’ll change our message like an Etch a sketch”
That lost millions of those white Reagan democrats and others who could no longer trust Romney.
I’ve got to disagree. Romney ran a lousy campaign.
He backed away from anything on Libya, on the budget, and on unemployment (except his “12 million jobs” line.)
He refused to take up social conservative issues, but the damning thing about it was that his silence was AFTER he sided with gay couples, gay adoption, gay boy scouts, and a gay military.
His only words on abortion were words to clarify that he didn’t really mean “health of the mother” when he said “health of the mother” when talking about EXCEPTIONS to abortion. IOW, he did not make a case for the sacredness of life, he spoke instead about the necessity of abortion in many cases, as he saw it. He was not a “LIFE” crusader; he was an exception crusader.
How easy is it to say, as Reagan was wont to do, “if we’re arguing if it’s life or not, then let’s err on the side of life.”
So, he had folks sit on the sidelines and he lost.
The only way one can say Romney ran a “good” campaign is if they believe Romney intended to lose.