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 ...
WTF are you referring to?
I have been reading your comments in the last few days, your're good.
I try to be. I do my best to follow the tenets of Christianity, obey the law, respect those who earn it and be charitable to those deserving.
Substantive debate means you are elucidating your own thoughts on issues. Attacking others is not substantive.
In my opinion FWIW, both Rand & Marco are not known as flame throwers. Both have good command of the issues. I have listened to Rubio’s long speeches in the US senate. He is the most eloquent republican in a long time. Paul has more common sense and a rock solid spine than most.
Let us hope there will be no circular firing squad in 2016 primaries. Otherwise say hello to president Hillary.
Do me a favor and preach your holier than thou routine to someone else.
By all means, run Jesus as your candidate. Find your man with zero imperfections, but who also has the ego-centric narcissistic tendencies to make him want to run a 3-year campaign to get elected. Make sure he will never, ever fight back against the slimebag accusations from the other side because he is so perfect that he could never descend to that level. And if he did, that would exclude him from candidacy in your eyes, the eyes that are not supposed to judge, lest they be judged themselves. And when you finally get your man, or woman, perched precariously on that razor’s edge of perfection, watch as he is destroyed, allowing a true demon to become elected in his stead. What then? Do you rejoice because slightly soiled perfection (that only you have the eyes to detect) got in the way and the US swirls down a toilet bowl to hell? Congratulations, you got your wish. Be proud.
Hear hear!
Neither Rubio or Paul have impressed me at all lately.
“He is the most eloquent republican in a long time.”
So? He wants amnesty. That ends any consideration of or for him. Unless you SUPPORT amnesty.
Been ‘fun’ folks but I cannot deal with another thread full of conservatives demanding moderation. the facts are there for anyone wishing to honestly consider them sans excusemaking.
I’m done.
Are you giving up? I'm not. This war between liberal and conservative isn't going to be won in one major battle. We conservatives have been losing ground incrementally for decades and that ground is going to have to be regained incrementally. We had made some gains in gun rights recently, so now the libs are attacking the 2nd Amendment with a vengeance again. Why don't conservatives choose and relentlessly attack one or two liberal sacred cows? Make them feel the pain.
Wow, you're even better at concern trolling than I thought.
Nice touch.
What's your problem? If you have proof of your accusations, post them, otherwise stuff a sock in it, ankle biter.
Would you care to name 2 possible contenders for 2016 who have impressed you?
As a legal immigrant myself, I am as far away from amnesty as one can get. However just being against it has not solved the illegal problem, has it? The stark naked reality on ground is that Barack Hussein Obama has been re-elected to the highest office in the land. The US senate is firmly in democrat hands.
It won’t matter what Rubio thinks on amnesty. Obama will take care of the issue before 2016, so that Hillary won’t have to make excuses. Obama has the most power right now. Just the stark naked reality on the ground.
I can say one thing without hesitation...What Obama will do about amnesty is 100 times worse than anything Rubio has in mind.
That is correct. So we need candidates for 2016 who won’t make politically destructive statements in front of anyone except perhaps their spouse.
There should be some kind of *charm school* for candidates to help them respond appropriately to various questions. I think the Democrats must have some kind of central planning for their candidates. You will notice that they always repeat the same talking points from Obama down to every politician. I also believe that Obama probably got acting lessons.
Libs always circle the wagons around their own no matter how criminal, vulgar or obscene the actions of a democrat.
Democrats only run candidates who agree with the democrat party.
Republicans ran an anti-republican, and anti-Reagan, and anti-conservative, he was naturally uneasy and awkward and incoherent, a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual agenda radical, cannot effectively give the talking points of the opposite of his agenda.
But I sincerely do not think we (as a nation) would have moved farther Left with Romney replacing Obama. And electing Romney surely would not have turned me more Left any more than it would have you. The nation as a whole would have moved Right, imperceptible as that would have appeared to a great many people.
I just want to stop the all-or-nothing approach and work in small, simple steps. It makes it easier for everyone to "get on the bandwagon", and is not losing ground, it's moving forward, hopefully in a way that the libs have difficulty fighting/resisting.
Your man Romney was an effort to end the republican party and turn it into the democrat party.
Romney was to end social conservatism and opposition to Romney/Obama care and the homosexual agenda and end republican opposition to abortion, etc.
The republican party has already possibly suffered a death blow from Romney, under him as president, it would have emerged as a branch of the democrat party.
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.