Posted on 03/03/2013 10:10:39 AM PST by lowbridge
Mitt Romney says it "kills" him that he's not president. But he doesn't blame Superstorm Sandy, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie or anything else on his loss to President Barack Obama--except his campaign's failure to connect with minority voters.
“I lost my election because of my campaign," Romney said on "Fox News Sunday" in his first television interview since his November defeat, "not because of what anyone else did."
The former Massachusetts governor refused place blame on Christie, who some Republicans say elevated Obama in his embrace of the president in the wake of the storm.
Romney said his inability to win over black and Hispanic voters--and the damage done by those disastrous "47 percent" comments--ultimately derailed his White House bid.
Ann Romney, though, pointed the finger at the fourth estate. “It was not just the campaign’s fault," Ann Romney said. "I believe it was the media's fault as well, in that he was not being given a fair shake--that people weren’t allowed to really see him for who he was. ... I’m happy to blame the media.”
She added: “I totally believe at this moment, if Mitt were there in the office, that we would not be facing sequestration right now."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I believe Mitt Romney would be a very good President. Not my first choice on the issues, but I sure wish he was there.
We HAVE to vote for Bob Dole, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Jeb Christe because if we don’t, there will be worse!! HILLARY WILL WIN!!!
Gee. If I didn’t know better I’d swear that the GOP was fielding increasingly liberal candidates while screaming how if we stray from the plantation, the sky would always fall.
Nah...never happen.
The modern conservative as portrayed by Princess Leah:
“Help us RINO, you’re our only hope!”
Oh good grief whine whine whine “nobody likes me every one hates me I think I’ll eat some worms”.
You lost because you are liberal
Question to all; If a true right wing, Christian conservative can’t win a primary election or party nomination, how could he/she win a general election?
The unpopular but correct answer is that if they can’t, and we ‘have’ to elect a liberal claiming to be a conservative just to mark one in the win category, then the country you and I grew up in is over. The liberals demonstratively won.
There is no way around that.
So the question is then which of a person’s morals/principles is for sale to get that oh so important WINO (win in name only)? We will have determined what that person is. We just need to negotiate the price.
Because if you give up your principles to win, you haven’t ‘won’ a damn thing even if your candidate gets elected.
The reelection of Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, Durbin, Reid, Boxer is proof enough.
What perfect conservative can you name that would meet your uncompromising criteria? Based on current demographics, why do you believe that person could win a primary let alone general election?
Romney sure sucked as a governor and he was booted with a 34% approval rating with no chance of reelection, so I don’t know why you think that he would have been a good president.
I’m perfectly willing to accept anyone that lines up 80% with core conservative principles. What is so uncompromising about that?
Please tell me as I really do not get why we HAVE to accept abortion, gay everything and gun control. Tell me why I have to turn my morality legally over to a group of politicians who demand I accept dead babies and BDSM as a basis of government.
What the ‘moderates’ demand is uncompromising, not me. What I want is sane.
Name some potentials and explain how he/she can win a primary, let alone a general election as things stand today.
Romney didn’t lose because he wasn’t “pure” enough (whatever the hell that means). He lost because he is a loser who ran a horrible campaign.
It was all perfectly predictable.
Start with Palin and oh...I dunno...maybe have the right stop pretending to be MSNBC and attacking her. Because lets face it. The vast majority of the base is about lockstep with her positions. And every PDSer out there just rehashes the lib line.
Then there are state pols that have actual conservative records...
But none of it matters since she had a TV show so that DQs her. And ANY tea party candidate will get the Palin treatment from their ‘supporters’. Their ‘supporters’ proved that this cycle and don’t say they didn’t. Not when they WILLINGLY sided with the RINOs/Left in torpedoing Akin over a dumb assed comment. His history of conservative voting went out the toilet.
He said one stupid thing and he was turned on. Romney had one stupid lifetime and his severe conservative support squad attacked their own. Orwell was right about Doublethink and holding two diametrically positions and agreeing with both.
So it’s a total waste of time to front anyone as long as the movement is made up of freaking morons who cut their own and their candidates’ throats at every opportunity. And then complain about the blood on the walls. Get rid of the idiots and we’ll talk more about doing something. Until then, no one is going to offer themselves up as a sacrificial lamb. And for damn good and PROVEN reasons.
Romney’s 47% statement was secretly taped while he was at a fund raiser. Today’s candidates have to be always on guard in any public place. Remember the *macaca* comment.
The problem is that the majority of voters are morons that want abortion, gay marriage, handouts and entitlements. How does a true conservative have a snowballs chance in hell of winning an election with the majority of voters being avowed leftist twits?
The same for me, Norm. That's what I'm talking about. We can't change everything in the blink of an eye, on day one of a conservative Presidency. We don't like Zero using EO's to get what the Dems want.
As to abortion, homos and gun control, we have to work on eliminating government funding for Planned Parenthood (which is just a government-funded abortion clinic), shore up DOMA, and (like I posted in a gun control thread elsewhere) make our own proposals to actually releax the gun laws. Fight fire with fire. Every time the libs propose another gun law, propose a law eliminating some gun law. Even if it only gums up the works for the lib proposal, it'll show them that we mean business.
We are going to have to accept, for the time being, abortion, etc. and work the salami approach - slice-by-slice - until we whittle it down to practically nothing. Think of smoking. Instead of making laws eliminating it, we've made the cost fairly prohibitive and we've educated people, using peer pressure, to not do it. It's a free country, smoking is still legal, so people can do it in the privacy of their own home (like I do with my pipe).
One step at a time, man. Just don't give up, and stop trying the all-or-nothing approach. It's definitely not working.
Nice job as a concern troll. You're better then most. Your big government thinking doesn't really fit with the goals of FR. Nice try though.
I have been reading your comments in the last few days, your're good.
Like I said. If we can’t win based on conservatism/our ideals, the ideals of the founders, then we already lost the country. We lost it because when abortion/gay etc is what the people want, it’s over. Franklin foresaw this when he made his statement about people voting themselves largess.
It’s that simple. When America ‘wants’ those things by default, and we can’t win based on what made America ‘America’ to begin with. That’s it. Over. Because people gave up on those ideals, abandoned principle and embraced liberalism. Nothing there for us to ‘win’ anymore. Maybe someday when the lib hangover sets in.
No one wants to face it, but it’s the truth. We can’t ‘will’ it to be something else anymore than the story about the 6yo boy that says he’s a girl. Likewise. we can call it America, but it ain’t. We can say conservatism lives, but until people start voting it, it’s dormant at best.
I wish it was not the case. But I do not see any other answer that fits the facts.
The entire history of United States is a 2 party system. May be there was one exception long time ago.
To win at national level requires a ton of money, humongous party infrastructure for GOTV and registration and volunteers. I see nothing in any 3rd party which is even close to attaining that status. So I will stick to the 2 party system and try to work from inside the party instead of wasting my precious resources on a losing proposition and a pipe dream. I did not get this far in life by chasing rainbows.
It’s not working as it’s not been tried to begin with.
It is a simple logic problem. Can you go right by moving left? No. But we collectively are not even holding the line. Every move takes us leftward. And Mitt was a leap left. Even if you voted for him, I don’t know how that can be denied.
The GOP saw the sheer number of people willing to compromise and so they went left. Bhoner’s BS since the election proved that.
I know we can’t get it all at once. But if we do not stand ground, we lose ground, not gain any.
Oh Irony, where is thy sting...
You are chasing one now. You ain’t changing squat and you know it.
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.