Skip to comments.Romney Chief Strategist Stu Stevens: Media Wasn't In Tank For Obama
Posted on 02/24/2013 2:35:52 PM PST by Sir Napsalot
(9:49 long) Stu Stevens' take on "so-called" media bias and Romney's 2012 campaign.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Democrats, GOPe - Opposite sides of the same coin.
So long as this is the case, true conservatives don't stand a chance.
You simply can’t win when you are this stupid.
enemy agent. No wonder we lost.
Hey, Rove and Armey were just trying to deliver a permanent Republican majority, and their polling told them that majorities of Americans favored stuff like Federal education spending and Medicare Part D.
Simply put, the Republican elite knew that a very large fraction of American voters — probably more than half — want more free stuff. One intractable problem is that when Republicans expand government when they control both the legislative and executive branches, many conservatives and libertarians who pay attention to reality don’t show up on the next election day. The other intractable problem is that anybody who wants free stuff and bothers to vote knows that the Democrats promise more of it.
Hey Romney.....ever want a strategist again, dump this moronic asshole and come talk to me. I did it for a living. I also have an IQ higher than that of tomato (unlike this twerp).
If these guys were running an enemy recognition program, we would have been shooting down our owm planes in WW2 in Leyte Gulf Turkey Shoot. Or perhaps we have met the enemy and it is us, was that what the Stupendous Jackass was trying to say.
Perhaps for our Italian bretherin, his name means stu gots?
As a corollary to your statement, it's what happens when the Northeast Rockefeller Republicans control the process and believe they know what's best for the rest of the country. Throw in crony capitalist consultants like Rove and you have a toxic mix destined to fail.
Actually wasn’t there a Texan prominently in the mix, who sort of crashed and burned?
He could have saved us, honestly.
I’m all for supporting Texans, but he sort of wasn’t as strong as originally anticipated, is all.
So basically it puts so-called “Compassionate Conservatives” and RINOs in the political “No Man’ Land”. Why vote for Free Stuff-Lite when you can vote for the Full Monty?
Are you referring to Bush or Perry...where would Perry have wound up, if Texas was one of the first primaries, instead of being after Romney pretty much had it all sewn up?
Bush had his own bozos, true. But Romney actually lent a couple of his worst handlers to McCain for his run. I don’t recall their names, but they spent all their time undermining Sarah Palin. One of them wrote a book full of lies afterward, bashing her.
Certainly I’m not sticking up for Karl Rove, Bush’s favorite.
Stu apparently has forgotten who was covering the McCain campaign in 2008 for Time Magazine.
I will buy him a clue: it was Jay Carney.
Just think he wasn’t as strong as originally anticipated.
At least last time. Willing to look at him again. Along with several other candidates.
Oh sorry reply 53 was meant for you.
Perry had one bad night, and it sunk him. I like some things about him, some things not so much, but I think there is potential, if he knows how to handle the hostile media in a way that can turn it around in his favor...and I’ve seen that in him before. I don’t think the other candidates had that ability.
IIRC, he had just come off of back surgery and was still on pain killers. Just about the worst bit of bad timing for him.
Some ‘straterigist’ Stu—you didn’t even know your competition was in the tank of the Left Scheme Media. Try reading FR, Breitbart, or listen to Rush, Hannity or Levin for a few pointers. Blinded Idiots (willful or ignorant) ran Romney’s campaign.
I’d be happy to consider Perry again.
Romney, not so much.
Agreed. He also made some bad statements regarding immigration, but I think he could have come around on it. He certainly wasn’t any worse than the other candidates in that area.