I actually could not disagree with this more. His entire article makes a lot of sense up until his final point...that Obama won because he is so popular and win elections. He has a very good political machine, much as many presidents do, and their strategy worked successfully. He won because they came up with the right strategy executed it against another team that picked the wrong strategy. They only can execute their strategy with a compliant media. Our side has to beat two opponents.
Obama worked to get his approval from 45 to 50 percent between August and October. Our side did not even try to define him in the campaign and assumed that people’s overall dissatisfaction meant they could simply be convinced to go with the other guy if he looked like a palatable alternative. Probably every person on this board with something in the pit of their stomach during the convention as the strategy was becoming clear...Obama’s a nice guy, but his policies failed’. I deferred and didn’t complain, but it didn’t feel like a winer.
It does seem that Romney and the convention conservative wisdom is to accept that making your attacks on the person will turn voters off, especially women. Why then was Obama so successful in attacking Romney and making him into a wife killer? The GOP refused to attack the media’s popular president, and by acknowledging the media myth that everyone loves Obama/democrats and we have to separate the man and myth from deeds is indeed a recipe for failure.