Skip to comments.Romney lost by playing defense, Santorum says
Posted on 11/09/2012 3:51:17 PM PST by Arthurio
(CNN) - Former GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum offered no insight into his own political future in a Friday CNN interview, but did offer his thoughts as to why the Republican nominee lost to President Barack Obama on Tuesday.
"What Mitt Romney, in my opinion, didn't do was go out and vigorously defend the beliefs that he said he espoused and didn't go on the offense," Santorum said in an interview to air Friday on CNN's "Piers Morgan Tonight." "And when you're playing defense, which is what I believe the campaign was doing and Republicans were doing generally throughout the course of this campaign you're not going to win.
"He didn't make it about those two fundamentally different visions for America," he said of Obama's re-election campaign, "and I don't think we did a very good job either as Republicans pointing out those fundamental differences and what type of freedom we're talking about."
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
Rick is an idiot - he couldn’t beat Romney and if he wanted to proved his worth he could of campaigned for him.
Sitting back now and criticizing just makes him look like any other politician without a real job instead of a leader.
The GOP got beat not just Romney. They had a better idea on how to market their candidate. If you give stuff away to people then entice / encourage them to vote, these people will do exactly what they are told - sheeple.
Gingrich ripped Romney apart during the primary, while Obama played golf.
Pat Caudell(sp) really gave it to Mark the fill-in guy for Hannity today.It was really interesting stuff as well.
He pointed out how Romneylet the rats have bain and so many other hits that we never had a chance.the 47% etc.
Than there was the fat basturd from NJ Colin powell and he said we should have been in PA with big ads months ago.
He said our guys— mainly Rove and the other campaign managers were so inept mitt never had a chance. Poor messassging we never had a theme, it was a huge clusterf...
He made a lot of solid points.
We will start winnng when both the DBM and the demonrats are afraid of us not until.
Thats another thing pat caudell mentioned we should have been really tough on Benghazi. Instead Mitt did not even mention it.
you have a good point.Its tough to counter all the lies of the demonrats, run a good campaing trying to get your message out. It a lot tougher when you have to fight a bised media as well.
Problem is they don’t fear us at all.
We have to make them fear us.
We could attack what they need; advertising monney.
We could start with their news operations.
Say nbc nightly news,just target eveyone of their sponsors and at least make it cost them double to run bad news depts.
I think it could work.
that might get their attention hard to tell.
I'm talking about the general. Santorum would have been completely laughed out of town and would have gotten far less of the women's vote (particularly in swing states) than Romney.
To the comment: “Mitt did a great job in the debates. He ran hard.
He even got JimRob’s support and that was just about impossible.”
I didn’t much follow Romney’s politics before this election as some of the rest of you who seem very angry that he was elected. But I backed him after he was our candidate. I was impressed with his debates as well. How many of us could have kept the presidential cool that he did when the rules were broken by Candy Crawley (sorry, don’t know her last name). I thought he out performed Obama all three times (in spite of having liberal moderators each time.)
I am convinced that Obama won through lying and deceiving the American people, along with voter fraud, and cover ups and the media.
Why does the media support him anyway??? What advantage is there to them if he is in power? I don’t understand it.
The day after the election a hispanic at my work asked me if I had watched the election coverage. (He is a new employee and didn’t know he was talking to a conservative.) So since he asked, we discussed it and I let him know of the loss he and his family and children would inherit due to Obama being re-elected. I let him know it would surely cause businesses to move out of our state and explained why. He looked somber. I filled him in on Benghazi. He never heard about Benghazi. He seemed sad finding out this “new information”. We talked about how many just want freebies and that could be why they elected Obama (but obviously he is not asking for freebies since he is a working man.) But I asked him how his children would be able to get a job when they graduate if more and more businesses move out of state. He said he didn’t know. There is just one tiny example of the fact that Obama has won due to deceit and cover ups. Many people just don’t know who this man is and the horrible job he has done so far as president, because it is not reported.
Anyway, I wish everyone would stop blaming Romney for this loss.
How does one win against deception, cheating, lying, intimidation, cover ups, 8 years of media bashing the republican party and president (who did a much better job than Obama.)
If I had a choice I would elect the most conservative person running. But Romney was the better of the two and probably would have gotten our American economy back in shape.
I didn’t know much of Paul Ryan before this election but I also liked his conservative values that he portrayed.
PS...I meant “elected” as the Republican candidate.
Oh, hush up, Rick. This isn’t productive. If you have something useful to do with yourself and your contacts (including me), then get on with doing it.
Was it getting stuff, was it playing defense, was it the media?
As I’ve reflected on this over the past 2 days, my sense is that the agenda, the discussion, the very knowledge that people possess was the issue.
That makes the media weigh in more heavily than anything else in terms of obama’s victory.
On the one hand, a large segment of them have been lulled into a permanent stupor, getting their news from the likes of letterman, snl, the view, and even sitcoms. On the other hand, there are folks who listen to news, but the majority of news outlets are so one-sidedly liberal that they simply don’t hear the message being proposed by the other guy. There is a blackout of opposition information.
It was THAT blackout that made Romney’s decision to play defense such a crucial mistake. After being introduced to the people, not as a demon but as a businessman by his first debate, he should have continued to use the debates and his access to coverage to talk about the information the people weren’t getting. He didn’t. He chose to say repeatedly “I can create jobs.”
The bottom line for the future of the Republican Party is not really demographics. Their future lies in gaining more media access that is free and unhindered. Accomplishing that is possible by total capitulation of conservative principles and becoming liberal lite to the democrats liberal heavy. They might then get a hearing, and that’s being bandied about by such as Brit Hume, Bill Crystal, etc.
If that is unacceptable, then Republicans must find just as effective, far-reaching, fast, and entertaining news sources as enjoyed by the Democratic Party. One idea is to take over one of the major networks. Fox + ABC, for example, would considerably level the playing field.
My sense, though, is that such a takeover will not be allowed by those who trade in power and change.
That leaves a period of crisis that will change the fundamental way people think as a possible route for changing the nation. A depression, a lost war, a plague...who knows. But a day of fiscal reckoning is approaching. There is a day when spending more than one’s income + one’s borrowing will come to an abrupt end.
The nation then could try war to take what it wants from other nations, but economic weakness leads to military weakness, so the longer the fiscal insanity continues, the weaker our military will become.
Financial collapse is now an imaginable future.
The advantage is the adoption of policies they believe in. The media is full of leftists and, I'm sure, even a healthy sprinkling of marxists (NYT would be one example of such an enclave).
They really believe they are morally superior in believing in free sex, socialism, anti-christian philosophies, etc. Therefore, they are eager to join in the effort to promote these things.
Anyway, I wish everyone would stop blaming Romney for this loss.
Agreed. But this will go on for awhile. IMO Romney is to be respected even more for engaging in a process where your own people stab you in the back again and again if you fail in the thankless job of running for office but obviously vast numbers here who will not agree with me on that.
Have a good weekend, FRiend.
The Massachusetts Hillary, backed by the global financial phony paper makers, lost, and with it the attempt at government installed financial fascism.
Even the youth vote smelled this one out.
I have said many times, the democrat platform has been unchanged since the 1930's and it was unchanged this year: "Vote for us and we will take money from other people and give it to you." As simple as it has always been.
There are way too many “this is why / what happened” theories out there, with each one certain they’re right.
Romney couldn't credibly defend beliefs that he didn't really hold. He was betrayed by his own track record, of all things. LOL.
I believe Santorum lost in 2006, not 2008. I thought he came into the Senate in the “Class of 1994” with Newt Gingrich’s House Republicans.
Couldn’t agree more. He is simply spouting this to fulfill his ego and stem himself up for Iowa in 2016. I am sure, if we nominated Santorum, he would have had a Todd Akin moment.
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.