Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

10 Reasons Why Obama Won And Romney Lost -- A Two Part Series (Part Two)
ConservativeHQ.com ^ | 11/20/12 | Richard Viguerie

Posted on 11/24/2012 6:37:37 PM PST by T-Bird45

In many aspects of the 2012 presidential campaign, Mitt Romney and the establishment Republicans who were running his campaign just plain got outgunned and outsmarted.

Yet, in the aftermath of Romney’s defeat, he said he lost because he couldn’t overcome the effect of Obama’s “gifts” to key demographics: student loan modifications for young voters and amnesty for young and predominantly Hispanic illegal aliens.

We think Romney missed the mark with that analysis because conservative ideas have successfully countered the Democrats’ attempts to bribe voters in the past. To avoid the kind of defeat Republicans suffered in 2012, conservatives must learn from the successes of the Obama campaign.

Let’s start that learning process by examining five of the top reasons Obama won.

Obama won because he defined Romney, destroyed his image, nationalized the election and drew a stark contrast with him. It is the law of the political jungle – define or be defined. Obama defined Romney in negative terms, but Romney never defined Obama or himself.

What’s more, the one candidate who took our advice and said over and over that the election was about two world views was Barack Obama. Obama framed his world view as one where only the power of government could create “fairness” in a world that otherwise would be unfair through the machinations of big business and other forces hostile to average citizens – even social issues, such as same-sex marriage, were cast as issues of “fairness.”

Obama then worked relentlessly to put Romney in the context of this argument for fairness. The Bain Capital attacks orchestrated by the unions and Democrat Super PACs all hammered home the point that Mitt Romney was not just unfair to working people, but heartless. The fictional, but unfair “war on women.” The unfairness of people not having health care. The unfairness of the tax rates paid by the “wealthy” – the contrast was clear. Obama stood for fairness, Romney stood for all of those forces in society that make life hard for the little guy.

The obvious lesson here is define or be defined – but there’s a deeper lesson for Republicans here as well. Republicans will never win if they accept or fail to rebut the idea that it is government’s job to impose “fairness” on society. If the Republican candidate for President won’t make a passionate argument for freedom, liberty and opportunity, and oppose the whole notion that it is government’s job to impose “fairness” on society, he’s bound to lose.

Obama won because he focused like a laser on the states he needed to win to block Romney’s path to 270 electoral votes. By rights, Obama should have lost the states of Virginia, Florida, Ohio and Wisconsin, all of which had Republican Governors and Republican legislatures going into the election – but he won them all. Some were closer than others, but Obama won credible victories in each state by putting in place strong voter ID and get-out-the-vote programs over the course of his first term, and working each state relentlessly.

Romney never seemed to commit himself to a similarly well-focused plan. The futile last minute spending in Pennsylvania by pro-Romney PACs, and visits from both Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan to a state where he had no ground game, had alienated the Tea Partiers who elected a Governor and new Republican members of Congress in 2010, and that he ultimately lost by some six points, is but one illustrative example.

The lesson here is one Republicans should have learned a long time ago: to win the Presidency, they have to be a national party and build world class political organizations all across the country. They will not win if all they do is come around every four years and run millions of dollars worth of TV in a relatively few “swing states.”

Just as the Democrats and unions do in their urban and coastal strongholds, Republicans need to build, and maintain between elections, world class political organizations in center-right states, particularly in Florida, Virginia, Ohio, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Michigan, Colorado and the rest of the Great Plains and Trans-Mountain West.

Obama won because he ran as himself. Despite Republican carping about how “phony” Obama is, he actually ran for President as himself. He campaigned on hitting the “wealthy” for more taxes, on implementing Obamacare and for advancing the radical secular liberal agenda on almost every issue, and, despite the overwhelming evidence that it is a complete failure, he defended his economic record.

Obama didn’t turn himself into a pretzel trying to mollify conservative independents or soft Republicans the way Romney tried to appeal to center-left voters who were not natural allies of his candidacy. Obama ran as an authentic liberal, and came away with more credibility, more likability and more votes than did the inauthentic Mitt Romney.

The lesson here is, again, one that establishment Republicans should have learned a long time ago: campaigning as a conservative in the primaries and then “shaking the Etch-A-Sketch” or “pivoting toward the center” -- which is what most Americans outside the Beltway call lying -- is a recipe for defeat.

Obama won because he understood this was a base election and he solidified, energized and turned out his leftwing base. For the better part of two years commentators were predicting 2012 would be a “base election.” Obama energized his leftwing base by throwing down the gauntlet to Romney and the Republicans on the entire range of values issues.

Same-sex marriage, government-paid abortion on demand at any point in a pregnancy, repealing the Defense of Marriage Act, continuing the war on religious freedom and the Catholic Church over Obamacare’s contraception and abortion mandates... Obama and his allies never backed down and made this radical secular liberal agenda a centerpiece of the campaign.

In response to Obama’s challenge on the social issues, Romney went AWOL and failed to even respond, let alone campaign on the conservative agenda and the social issues – even those the polls showed to cut substantially in his favor, such as the right-to-life and reining-in the size and scope of government.

Indeed, instead of solidifying his base, Romney and his establishment Republican allies did everything they could to distance themselves from the small government constitutional conservatives of the Tea Party and from social conservatives.

The lesson here is that without fully engaging all four legs of the 2010 wave election coalition – national defense conservatives, economic conservatives, social conservatives and the small government constitutional conservatives of the Tea Party -- Republicans will have a difficult time defeating a Democratic coalition of ethnic voters, big labor, young singles, traditional progressives and radical secular liberals.

Obama won because his team understood and effectively used the new and alternative media to get-out-the-vote and dominate communications with voters who only get their information through online media. No campaign is perfect, and no doubt someone will identify a laundry list of things Obama’s online team could have done better. But to win, you don’t have to be perfect, you only have to be better than the other guy -- and Obama’s online effort was light years ahead of Romney’s.

The Obama Team understood that among adults younger than age 30, according to a Pew study, as many saw news on a social networking site (33%) as saw any television news (34%), and just 13% read a newspaper in print or digital form.

In contrast, Romney and the Republicans were stuck in a 20th century air war campaign strategy that relied on TV and denigrated digital communications. Obama spent at least $52 million just for online ads during his 2012 campaign, compared to the $26 million spent by Governor Romney's campaign – and that does not include their social media, email and other online and digital platforms.

Obama’s online effort was a key piece of his landslide in the young voter demographic, and thus his victory. Digital and social media were also key to Obama's get-out-the-vote effort, which used social media and a weird, but effective form of online peer pressure to squeeze every last vote out for the President.

Technology is neutral and the digital world thrives on freedom. Ron Paul and the Tea Party have built huge networks and online communities of conservative voters. The Romney campaign and the establishment GOP forfeited access to those networks by alienating those voters and distancing themselves from Ron Paul and the Tea Party.

The communications lesson here is simple: Republicans need to get in the 21st century.

What’s more, the larger lesson is equally simple: the small government constitutional conservatives of the Tea Party Movement, economic conservatives and libertarians, social conservatives and national defense conservatives must redouble their efforts to reassemble the 2010 coalition and take over the GOP.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012electionanalysis; cinofailure; election2012; richardviguerie
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-114 next last
I read and commented on Part One but didn't find Part Two posted in a search. Hope I didn't miss it somehow...

For those who missed Part One, see the first comment for the direct link.

1 posted on 11/24/2012 6:37:44 PM PST by T-Bird45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

Direct link to Part One on FR:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2961750/posts


2 posted on 11/24/2012 6:38:36 PM PST by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45; Jim Robinson; Mr. Silverback; TheOldLady; KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle; LibLieSlayer; ...

Pinging the some from the original ping list on the Part One article.


3 posted on 11/24/2012 6:45:40 PM PST by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

“What’s more, the larger lesson is equally simple: the small government constitutional conservatives of the Tea Party Movement, economic conservatives and libertarians, social conservatives and national defense conservatives must redouble their efforts to reassemble the 2010 coalition and take over the GOP”

Bingo!!!!!


4 posted on 11/24/2012 6:49:58 PM PST by freeangel ( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

Excellent article. How I pray someone at the RNC is listening and actually working tonight. I wake up everyday and hope New offices r opening up across battleground states right now...that volunteers r being put on the payroll....those with passion. I am hoping they r given the lastest technology....etc....


5 posted on 11/24/2012 6:51:13 PM PST by yellowdoghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

Obama won because people like these gifts (?) :

FREE ABORTIONS
1 in 5 residents of US are now on FREE Medicaid=60 Million!
FREE Food stamps approaching almost 50 Million with 450,000 added in July+August
FREE Rent subsidy
FREE Heat subsidy
FREE Obamacare
FREE Obama phones
FREE Contraceptives
FREE Mammograms
FREE Pre-natal care & delivery
FREE Transportation to medical facility
FREE Translators for non-English speaking
FREE Lawyers for the indigent
FREE Pell Grants
FREE Daycare


6 posted on 11/24/2012 6:51:56 PM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed when people figure out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; NFHale; Impy; ...
RE :”Obama won because he defined Romney, destroyed his image, nationalized the election and drew a stark contrast with him. It is the law of the political jungle – define or be defined. Obama defined Romney in negative terms, but Romney never defined Obama or himself.
What’s more, the one candidate who took our advice and said over and over that the election was about two world views was Barack Obama. Obama framed his world view as one where only the power of government could create “fairness” in a world that otherwise would be unfair through the machinations of big business and other forces hostile to average citizens – even social issues, such as same-sex marriage, were cast as issues of “fairness.
Obama then worked relentlessly to put Romney in the context of this argument for fairness. The Bain Capital attacks orchestrated by the unions and Democrat Super PACs all hammered home the point that Mitt Romney was not just unfair to working people, but heartless. The fictional, but unfair “war on women.” The unfairness of people not having health care. The unfairness of the tax rates paid by the “wealthy” – the contrast was clear. Obama stood for fairness, Romney stood for all of those forces in society that make life hard for the little guy.
The obvious lesson here is define or be defined – but there’s a deeper lesson for Republicans here as well. Republicans will never win if they accept or fail to rebut the idea that it is government’s job to impose “fairness” on society. If the Republican candidate for President won’t make a passionate argument for freedom, liberty and opportunity, and oppose the whole notion that it is government’s job to impose “fairness” on society, he’s bound to lose.
Obama won because he focused like a laser on the states he needed to win to block Romney’s path to 270 electoral votes. By rights, Obama should have lost the states of Virginia, Florida, Ohio and Wisconsin, all of which had Republican Governors and Republican legislatures going into the election – but he won them all. Some were closer than others, but Obama won credible victories in each state by putting in place strong voter ID and get-out-the-vote programs over the course of his first term, and working each state relentlessly.
Romney never seemed to commit himself to a similarly well-focused plan. The futile last minute spending in Pennsylvania by pro-Romney PACs, and visits from both Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan to a state where he had no ground game, had alienated the Tea Partiers who elected a Governor and new Republican members of Congress in 2010, and that he ultimately lost by some six points, is but one illustrative example.
The lesson here is one Republicans should have learned a long time ago: to win the Presidency, they have to be a national party and build world class political organizations all across the country. They will not win if all they do is come around every four years and run millions of dollars worth of TV in a relatively few “swing states.”

Pretty good analysis :
Romney ran on nothing, as an empty suit who would have the election handed to him without a fight.
By the time he ran those ads (spending millions) in those swing states the voters had already decided. His campaign was inept. His donors wasted (some big $$$) money on him.

7 posted on 11/24/2012 6:56:07 PM PST by sickoflibs (How long before cry-Bohner caves to O again? They took the House for what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

Richard Viguerie has the luxury of spouting off after the fact and outside of the arena.

Perhaps Richard Viguerie should run and show us how it is done.

Romney was the guy in the arena.
He wore the sweat and blood and spent himself in a worthy cause in difficult circumstances.


8 posted on 11/24/2012 6:57:24 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
In contrast, Romney and the Republicans were stuck in a 20th century air war campaign strategy that relied on TV

Obama bombed the crap out of Romney in Ohio with the 47% comment.
It was 24/7 TV

Romney was right.
Rush was right.
It's hard to beat Santa Claus

9 posted on 11/24/2012 7:02:49 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

Add to your list,

FREE cash.

That’s right. Under the Family Independence (FI) program the takers are given cash. Well, not real cash but a charged debit card. Same thing.


10 posted on 11/24/2012 7:11:14 PM PST by upchuck (America's at an awkward stage. Too late to work within the system, too early to shoot the bastards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
"We think Romney missed the mark with that analysis because conservative ideas have successfully countered the Democrats’ attempts to bribe voters in the past.

Who the hell is "We" Kimosabi?(you don't have your own opinion?)

The fact is Obama won on entitlements. Unfunded entitlements.

Romney tried to paint the picture that conservatism will work and that fiscal responsibility is paramount.

The parasites rejected it.

11 posted on 11/24/2012 7:18:26 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mylife

A good article. If you think it was because of 24-7 tv you are missing the point. Obama won because he and the organization were better. Tv ads only get you so far. Neighborhood leaders everywhere knocking on doors, social media, targeting new voters. Obama defined Romney and then worked his base hard. I mean look at the demographics that voted. That is why we lost. Running a 70’s campaign in 2012.


12 posted on 11/24/2012 7:22:01 PM PST by chopperjc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
Willard M. Romney appears to be the return of Tom Dewey only a lightweight Dewey, who after all was the Republican governor of New York. But Dewey's 1948 campaign resembles the Romney 2012 campaign in some key ways. The candidates both seemed to believe they were entitled to a win. Dewey would not bother to lower himself to the level of ‘that vulgar little man, Harry Truman’ to duke it out with the hyper partisan Missourian. Dewey after all was above all that, he was much to important and dignified to have to stoop to common political invective. As a result Harry Truman defined the race between the people's champion speaking in the voice of the common man against a snobbish, pompous , stuffed shirt who was comfortable with other wealthy upper class predators. Now this was Tom Dewey the man who was the Manhattan DA, Mister gangbuster himself. But that Tom Dewey never showed up. Instead there was wire service picture after wire service picture of a polished and spruce Dewey uttering a lot of sonorous banalities and looking more and more like the porcelain groom that used too be placed atop wedding cakes. Secondly both campaigns tried as hard as possible not to be ‘controversial and confrontational’. In Dewey's case the usual wizards of smart from the GOP National Committee were more concerned with someone saying something that might anger Senator Taft or his coterie and illuminate the papered over chasm between the Taftites and the Easter Establishment represented by Dewey. Consequently every time any GOP figure really started to fix the Democrats as big spending New Dealers whose programs were inherently destructive of the constitutional basis of the nation they were immediately hushed by being told ‘controversy will disrupt party harmony’.
As a result the relentless Truman attack campaign went largely unanswered as the GOP assured itself that Americans would identify with their calm and dignified articulation of bromides and cliches.

Both Dewey and Romney appear to have been genuinely surprised that vulgar strident appeals to blatant self interest defeated their calm, dignified, self important articulation of pretty much nothing.

13 posted on 11/24/2012 7:25:05 PM PST by robowombat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
I think this guy is full of crap. The communications lesson here is simple: Republicans need to get in the 21st century.

we invented modern comms.

14 posted on 11/24/2012 7:25:07 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chopperjc

See my number 13. Running a flat lifeless 1948 campaign would seem to me to be the case.


15 posted on 11/24/2012 7:26:32 PM PST by robowombat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
Obama ran as an authentic liberal, and came away with more credibility, more likability and more votes than did the inauthentic Mitt Romney.

He says "inauthentic" I say "phoney".

Potato/potahto.

16 posted on 11/24/2012 7:27:18 PM PST by Graybeard58 (What G.O.P.e. candidate is in store for us in 2016?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mylife

yep...obama stole it fair and square...


17 posted on 11/24/2012 7:27:18 PM PST by CaptainKip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: chopperjc

Those Obama phones did their job, didn’t they?

All this welfare stuff was around before 2008, but the Baraqqi Regime expanded it faster than Mike Moore’s waistline.


18 posted on 11/24/2012 7:27:38 PM PST by nascarnation (Baraq's economic policy: trickle up poverty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: freeangel

The summary, concluding sentence you quoted is certainly on point but it needs application in both the micro and macro sense. The sentence takes the macro view; the failures recounted by Viguerie were also micro in nature, specifically the candidate did not measure up on any of those groups’ checklists. As noted in the article, there was much pretzel-twisting and finding of nuance.

Ignoring the obvious blemishes on any candidate while holding your nose over voting for or advocating for the lesser of two evils is just not a winning proposition. Hypocrisy is an ill-fitting suit.


19 posted on 11/24/2012 7:27:48 PM PST by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

Obama phones? I do not understand. The point of the article, and a good one I think, it had nothing to do with the giving.


20 posted on 11/24/2012 7:31:18 PM PST by chopperjc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: chopperjc

So it’s about the method over substance?

Or are we to believe that Romney is a rich asshole that has no clue?

That was the Obama campaign in a nutshell, while he sat around eating Waygu beef and driving Reg’lar Americans over the fiscal cliff.
Obama is such a BS artist it is amazing.


21 posted on 11/24/2012 7:32:21 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: robowombat

Could not agree with you more.


22 posted on 11/24/2012 7:33:54 PM PST by chopperjc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

“Hypocrisy is an ill-fitting suit.”

If that weren’t such an elegant thought, I might have been rather miffed at your comment. But that IS an elegant thought and well put.


23 posted on 11/24/2012 7:34:26 PM PST by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
Romney lost for one reason and one reason only. He is not a Conservative.

Envision the United States of America as a apple. Now picture a worm having gotten inside the apple. Now picture that apple being eaten from the inside. Eventually you won't be able to polish the apple enough to make it look good. It will wither and blow away.
The US has allowed the worm of moral decadence and perversion to creep in. For decades now that decadence, like the worm, has been eating away at our nation. There is no way to compromise with the decadence just as you cannot compromise with the worm in the apple. So long as the worm is alive the apple has no chance of surviving. So long as our nation continues to accept perverts and their perversions and allows them to eat away at the principles and building blocks that have made out nation the greatest nation in modern history this nation is doomed. Trying to polish the surface with a mitt romney or mccain or whatever other name is associated with "moderates/compromisers" will only delay the inevitable. Soon the freeloading worms in this country won't have anything else of yours to consume. That's when they will consume you.

Spineless cowardliness is killing us. No one in the RNC wants to fight to have obama brought up on charges of treason. No one in the RNC wants to vet him. Talking about his lack of personal history is a taboo. You cannot mention the fact that he has produced no valid form of ID. Not a birth certificate, legitimate social security number, college transcripts, etc. NOT ONE Republican will point out the FACT that obama cannot serve as president if for no other reason than the FACT that his father was NOT a US citizen (at least the man he claims is his father). No... It's easier to say that such matters are trivial. To hell with the FACT that our founding fathers had good reasons for insisting that our presidents be the "Natural born children" of two "American" parents.
We all know the list of crimes obama is guilty of and we all know the citizens do not care. Newt was a voice crying in the wilderness and Americans would not hear. We got mitt. A man that did not have the spine to call obama out on these crimes. He was afraid he would be???? What? What does obama have on him? Is he a co-conspirator with obama and the muslim brotherhood? Is mitt a co-conspirator with obama and the rest of the globalists to destroy the economies of the world in order to secure themselves cushy offices in the New World Government? If not why did he allow obama to win without a fight?
Just a few random but valid questions. Questions most are either afraid to ask or too arrogant and dimwitted to ponder themselves. Undoubtedly many of you have even more questions.

All of this is as it is for one reason and one reason only. The hearts of my fellow Americans are sick. Too many of you will not stand for what is right because you too are sick, diseased, mentally deranged deviants that are so afraid of being uncovered and exposed by the judgements of others that you will excuse the debased behaviors of those who are supposed to be the best among us. If obama is the best among us we're screwed.

God has turned moderates and liberals over to strong delusion. America is not repenting for her sick, corrupt heart and as such is no longer viable.

24 posted on 11/24/2012 7:34:33 PM PST by Whats-wrong-with-the-truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

I think guys like Vigueray sat it out.


25 posted on 11/24/2012 7:34:40 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

Romney should had never been the candidate. He never fully connected since he is a moderate republican aka democrat. The people who began the Anybody but Obama agenda caused this to happen. He did not fool or energize the rock solid conservatives and independents for different reasons. He is not all that good of a person in my book for deliberately trying to destroy all of his opponents while not going after the real problem, Obama and the Marxist agenda. Those crying over Romney, may get their wish, he may run again. The media has plenty of time to do a love fest, bring him back and there you go.


26 posted on 11/24/2012 7:36:38 PM PST by Christie at the beach (I like Newt. .Our nation's foundation is under attack.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

I told everyone that despite who our nominee was that it would come to the senate.


27 posted on 11/24/2012 7:36:54 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

Romney was between a rock and a hard place on the social issues. He already had a (well deserved) flip flopper reputation. He didn’t have any credibility on social issues, so he tried to run exclusively on fiscal ones. Had he suddenly come out as stridently conservative on the social issues, gay marriage, abortion, etc., we conservatives would have known he was lying. Not only that, but it would have driven away the fiscally conservative social liberals. On top of all of that, Romney wasn’t even all that credible on fiscal issues. He came across as a rich elitist.


28 posted on 11/24/2012 7:37:12 PM PST by CitizenUSA (Why celebrate evil? Evil is easy. Good is the goal worth striving for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mylife

Look I agree with you on the Obama side, and politics has always been method over substance. To think Romney gave any substance would also be naive. Mr I will tell you plans after election. Yeah that will work.

The article may not be what we want to hear but flat out the Dems did it better and beat us.

Now what do we do? Time to go to work and modernize our efforts.


29 posted on 11/24/2012 7:42:42 PM PST by chopperjc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

And fraud, wherever it could be perpetrated...


30 posted on 11/24/2012 7:43:02 PM PST by Quickgun (I came here screaming and covered in someone else's blood. I can go out that way if I have to)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots

I just ran a search engine on that phrase to see if I lifted it from something I read without realizing it. It came up negative so I guess I’ll have to protect that saying. Thanks for the compliment — hope your Thanksgiving holiday time has been a blessing to you and yours.


31 posted on 11/24/2012 7:46:45 PM PST by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: chopperjc

I think Vigueray is an insider ahole that is sniping at other insiders.

I never cared for the mans divisiveness in the party.


32 posted on 11/24/2012 7:47:41 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: mylife

Get over Romney, he was a disaster, and was never a conservative, or even a moderate republican, he has always been out for himself, and he despised the Reagan wing of the GOP.

Romney’s massive failure gets analyzed and looked at, not hidden so that you can run another such loser.


33 posted on 11/24/2012 7:49:01 PM PST by ansel12 (The only Senate seat GOP pick up was the Palin endorsed Deb Fischer’s successful run in Nebraska)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Whats-wrong-with-the-truth
God has turned moderates and liberals over to strong delusion. America is not repenting for her sick, corrupt heart and as such is no longer viable.

I have no idea what the Almighty is up to but some of your more mundane comments preceding this rhetorical flight is indicative of what could have been done by a candidate who didn't think the campaign was a procession to a coronation ball. Besides being relentlessly on the attack, which even the commie media would have picked up as they do like nice sharp conflicts to get the drones to tune in rather than watching Vanna White. Now while WMR couldn't get up and blast away at the Mahdi's birth certificate or BHO’s truly problematic nature (No President ever has as strange a history as this man and if you dig a bit he makes Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton look like normality itself compared to the Mahdi's strangeness) a good well financed shadow campaign could have been organized by some superpacs to blanket the nation with BHO’s very strange biography including strong hints at his sexual strangeness, the nature of the mentoring Uncle Frank gave him, the peculiarly foul nature of the crew of thugs, near communists and perverts from the Windy City that have made BHO’s career. His admitted drug use and some innuendos that it was by no means in the past. (A police officer acquaintance said to me that BHO looked like a host of hidden white collar addicts he had dealt with. He couldn't be the only one to note BHO’s shakiness indicated the man still has a monkey on his back.) This sort of two track campaign would have worked well and needed to be flexible to use opportunities that destiny placed in the Republicans hands such as Fast and furious and then right on the eve of the election the Benghazi fumble which if exploited long and loud and in detail by both the formal campaign and the ghost campaign would have sunk Obama for good

34 posted on 11/24/2012 7:51:48 PM PST by robowombat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

I’m over Romney.
When will y’all focus on Obama?


35 posted on 11/24/2012 7:52:15 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: mylife

Romney is and was a looser. Your wore these threads out before the election, now it might be prudent to fold that tent and take it home.

Not one SoCon on this forum believed Romney was a winner. I wish he had been who he said he was but I guess people did not buy the new better version of the reformed socialist that he was in Massachusetts.


36 posted on 11/24/2012 7:53:38 PM PST by itsahoot (Any enemy, that is allowed to have a King's X line, is undefeatable. (USS Taluga AO-62))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

“Just as the Democrats and unions do in their urban and coastal strongholds, Republicans need to build, and maintain between elections, world class political organizations in center-right states, particularly in Florida, Virginia, Ohio, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Michigan, Colorado”

One problem, Mr. Vigurie — of the states mentioned above, only North Carolina can still be called “center-right”.

The others have become “purple” or are out-and-out left-leaning. Haven’t you learned anything from the last two elections?

“Obama didn’t turn himself into a pretzel trying to mollify conservative independents or soft Republicans the way Romney tried to appeal to center-left voters who were not natural allies of his candidacy.”

So how will it make sense if in the future Republican candidates twist themselves and their message into pretzels to appeal to Hispanic voters who are not and will never be natural allies to conservatism?

“In response to Obama’s challenge on the social issues, Romney went AWOL and failed to even respond, let alone campaign on the conservative agenda and the social issues – even those the polls showed to cut substantially in his favor, such as the right-to-life and reining-in the size and scope of government.”

Hmmm.. these social issues certainly did not cut in the favor of conservatives when it came to “the ladyparts voters”, young and single women who voted for Obama to the tune of 68%? How much more can conservatives do to refute their arguments and agenda, that hasn’t already been said or done?


37 posted on 11/24/2012 8:01:15 PM PST by Road Glide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Christie at the beach

ABO was the hue and cry from every contender including my beloved Palin. I said at the time this was a mistake, and would likely let Romney slip in.

We had more than a few ABO supportes here in freezer land as well.

Everyone was shouting it is all about the economy stupid, I kept saying it is not about the economy. Guess who was right?


38 posted on 11/24/2012 8:04:01 PM PST by itsahoot (Any enemy, that is allowed to have a King's X line, is undefeatable. (USS Taluga AO-62))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

Stop being disingenuous.
Romney was never my pick.
I did however point out that it was critical to win the Senate after (BEFORE) Romney won the primary.

Where are we now?
What did Vigeruray do to turn the tide?


39 posted on 11/24/2012 8:05:08 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot
Romney is and was a looser.

One rich, family oriented, church going loser.

40 posted on 11/24/2012 8:12:14 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: mylife

Put in mind too, that the Democrats had their pro-Obama propaganda campaign running nonstop from Obama becoming a frontrunner, and Romney was stuck in a long quagmire to get the nomination, with his losing opponents refusing to concede. Unless you can simply acknowledge the genuine magnitude and timescale, or even the probability that in so many situations it’s simply lose-lose, you’re not going anywhere.


41 posted on 11/24/2012 8:12:34 PM PST by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Whats-wrong-with-the-truth

I guess Mia Love and Allen West aren’t conservatives either.

I firmly believe that there are a large number of “conservatives”, many posting here on FR, who relish the thought of being losers. That way, they can simply blame the other voters who dared to cast a vote for the candidate they simply called not conservative enough. It keeps blogs rolling, website traffic up and it prevents them from taking responsibility for much of anything. During the primaries, each candidate was called not quite conservative enough for the purists to support.

Meanwhile, the left is totally organized. Our side? Busy with the circular firing squad.


42 posted on 11/24/2012 8:12:40 PM PST by swpa_mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mylife

Romney wasn’t “in the arena”, he was looking to be president for self aggrandizement, to this day no one can come up with what he believed in, or any particular reason for his obsession to be president.

I have a good idea from looking so closely at his life, and it is not pretty, nor flattering to him.


43 posted on 11/24/2012 8:14:49 PM PST by ansel12 (The only Senate seat GOP pick up was the Palin endorsed Deb Fischer’s successful run in Nebraska)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
Evangelicals turned out in record numbers for Romney. He got more evangelical votes than Bush or McCain.

_____________________________________________________________

Poll: Evangelical Vote at Record High in Election

Wednesday, 07 Nov 2012 05:28 PM

Evangelical voters reached a record high in Tuesday’s election, with 78 percent of white evangelicals supporting Republican Mitt Romney, a national survey has found.

The survey of 800 voters commissioned by the Faith and Freedom Coalition found that a record 27 percent of those who voted in the presidential election were evangelicals.

Romney’s 78 percent showing among white evangelicals was 10 points higher than Arizona Sen. John McCain’s in 2008.

“Evangelicals turned out in record numbers and voted as heavily for Mitt Romney yesterday as they did for George W. Bush in 2004,” said Ralph Reed, chairman of TK-based Faith and Freedom Coalition. “That is an astonishing outcome that few would have predicted even a few months ago.

http://www.newsmax.com/US/romney-evangelical-vote-obama/2012/11/07/id/463268

44 posted on 11/24/2012 8:15:20 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

Ten reasons??? Sheeeeyit. There’s about a thousand youtube videos of Obama voters exposing just how stupid they are. And that’s just from Obamaphone! lady, Nanzi Pelosi and Joe Biden.


45 posted on 11/24/2012 8:21:18 PM PST by Texas Eagle (1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: swpa_mom

Romney was a whack case, a radical liberal, whose only legacy in politics will be gay marriage and Obamacare, Romney rejected the GOP pro-life platform and called for homosexualizing the Boy Scouts and the military, and returned to his pro-abortion “health of the mother” after he won the nomination.

The man is a whack case that literally believes that he is becoming God, and teaches that others can become Gods also, and rule over their own planets, he is a draft evading pathological liar that claims to have marched with MLK and other bizarre lies.

A lot of credibility was lost supporting a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, cult leading Mormon Bishop from Massachusetts, who believes that he is in the process of becoming a God, who actually campaigned claiming that Reagan was “adamantly pro-choice”, and who recently rejected the party platform on abortion, and on homosexual Scout leaders, and homosexualizing the military, and created romneycare.

It is still mind boggling how such a bizarre creature became the Republican Presidential candidate.

This is one for the history books.

I hope he and his didn’t break the party for ever.


46 posted on 11/24/2012 8:22:30 PM PST by ansel12 (The only Senate seat GOP pick up was the Palin endorsed Deb Fischer’s successful run in Nebraska)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot
Not one SoCon on this forum believed Romney was a winner. I wish he had been who he said he was but I guess people did not buy the new better version of the reformed socialist that he was in Massachusetts.

How does that square with his record support from evangelicals?

47 posted on 11/24/2012 8:22:40 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

I could NOT disagree more with the dummy who wrote this article...his research is shoddy, his approach is as LAZY as Romney, his logic is exactly why the Republicans have lost...he doesnt know what the word ‘accountability” means

Lets look at the FACTS:

The liberal Media, as the citations below demonstrate, universally JUMPED to the conclusion that Obama lost the first debate with Romney...

I am and WAS very suspicious when hard nosed ferocious US left wing main stream media make a sudden turn against their beliefs...

And of course the conservative Media celebrated....

If this dummy paid attention to my beloved FREEP, he would have seen this develop

I have studied Obama for many years, and believe he is an impressive actor...

To see him look down to the floor on camera during the first debate, to see him ignore the face of Romney, to
see him fail to powerfully challenge his opponent, is NOT the conduct that he is capable of, or has exhibited over a long time...he was ACTING and like Mohammed ALI he “rope-a doped” Romney

In world war two, Obama’s hero Stalin withdrew across Russia and lured the Germans into a enveloping trap...from which they couldn’t escape...

In sports the score after the 1st period doesn’t really matter if it can be used to discover an opponent’s “game plan” that can be terminally exploited in later periods

Obama KNEW that employment could be substantial in the November 2 NFP release (he planted 100% a year before)and
surveys showed that the U S Economy is and was the number one voter issue in this election

Romney, the SWEET DUMMY, explained his political and economic plan in the first debate...and delivered Obama the facts he needed for the next two debates and facts that Obama’s campaign needed to counter the large “RAT ROVE” Media AD campaign...

Parenthetically in the NFL, they stopped using CHALKBOARDS 25 years ago, but Rove didnt graduate to anything more modern...he was a fool when he advised Bumbrain Bush the Minor, and he was a BIGGER FOOL in the role he played in the last election...

Rove is playing under the “Old Rules” while Obama had high intellect associates who marshalled the BEST Hollywood STORYTELLERS and IMAGEMAKERS along with the power of TOP Silicon FACTFINDERS...

In WAR and Chess, those who possess the best information WIN

This years political loss can be found in the legacy of Bumbrain BUSH and laws he passed such as the Patriot Act which allow LIBERALS TODAY to treat americans more like the enemy than those who wish to teach us a capitalist lesson...

and ROVE was right there at the center of the stage...he sickens me

Romney lost because of the legacy he inherited, and because quite frankly he only worked 6 days a week...while his opponent’s team worked 7 days

if you tried to reach Romney’s campaign on any sunday, no one answered the phone...week after week after week...not even phone mail was turned on...

Romney, nor any of his sons, ever risked their lives in the u s military, and he lacked both the instincts for hard work and/or exceptional personnel selections in his campaign...he may have been successful at Bain or Caving into MASS liberals, but he didnt have God’s blessing or he would have won

Nice losers all of them...but losers...

America is being punished for condoning immoral, evil and outrageous conduct, just as Rome was punished for similar actions...no matter what liberals believe they cant stop the clock from ticking...how many people survive beyond 100 ? not enough to remember all the mistakes we should have learned from...obama has no institutional memory and his arrogance of history will lead us nowhere


http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/10/live-blogging-the-first-presidential-debate-2012.html

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/04/carville-mitt-romney-came-with-a-chainsaw/

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/10/obamas-cutter-takes-swipe-at-lehrer-137444.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/03/chris_matthews_freaks_out_at_obama_after_debate_romney_was_winning.html

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/incumbent-debate-curse-barack-obama-falls-to-mitt-romney-20121003

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/romney-obama-debate-could-be-pivot-point-in-campaign/2012/10/03/74fad02c-0d98-11e2-bd1a-b868e65d57eb_print.html


48 posted on 11/24/2012 8:23:29 PM PST by Understand the stimulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mylife

Do you honestly think those factors alone mean anything?

We could try inviting the illegal immigrant vote?
Dems already beat everyone else to that one, and because of their being the first they also monopolize them as an audience.

Try appealing to the NAACP?

A laugh, and a guaranteed failure.

Social Issues?

Again, the problem the GOP has with social issues is failing to show that their stances are more than a reaction to the Democrats’ stances. Abortion is a losing cause more than anything due to the fact that the right gets more and more on the extreme end, where legal action hasn’t progressed. How is one supposed to believe that abortion will end anytime soon? How could it be done? Again, the failure exists here where the candidates fail to really define.

As far as religion goes, it’s a lose-lose situation. The left can make up any crazy story about any candidate’s religion.

As far as family-oriented, that’s also lose-lose as well.

Rich? Well, here’s the thing, it doesn’t matter if the candidate is multimillions of dollars or only hundreds of thousands, he would still get classified as an evil rich white man.

People need to understand the main point that the left doesn’t have core principles: they make up standards with a chalkboard as to what makes “evil”.


49 posted on 11/24/2012 8:24:31 PM PST by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

The “whack’s” base was larger than Big Ears’ base, but he did not pump his base as well. There was no clamor at the end about Mitt being a “whack” at all. Mitt did err by not pressing his attacks harder. That enthuses the base better than a “prevent defense” does.


50 posted on 11/24/2012 8:25:07 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (How long before all this "fairness" kills everybody, even the poor it was supposed to help???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-114 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson