Posted on 11/30/2012 7:44:24 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Obama’s top election strategist tells a Chicago audience he was surprised Mitt Romney’s team did not attack Obama more, stuck so narrowly with their base—and chose Paul Ryan for VP.
President Obama’s top reelection strategist conceded surprise Monday that Republican super PACS didn’t attack Obama far earlier, Mitt Romney didn’t invest much more in ground operations, and that the Republican nominee played narrowly to the party base in picking Rep. Paul Ryan as a running mate.
Offering a lengthy dissection of the campaign, David Axelrod told a Chicago audience that he was “a bit surprised that super PACS, which spent an unbelievable amount of money,” didn’t hit television and radio with anti-Obama ads until May.
“Our air defenses weren’t ready,” he said, alluding to his side’s early lack of resources. “They gave us a pass, for whatever reason.”
At the same time, he was surprised that a plausible, distinctly positive image of Romney as successful businessman was not central to Romney’s media strategy until late fall. In part he ascribed that to Romney’s “Faustian bargain” to get the Republican nomination and tacking far to the right while also unleashing a barrage of mostly negative ads against GOP primary rivals.
The Obama camp assumed that after Romney sewed up the nomination, he would offer that more upbeat aura in his ads. “They never did that,” Axelrod said at the evening gathering at the University of Chicago.
As for Ryan, Axelrod personally figured former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty would be the choice, possibly Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio. His doubts about Ryan were a function of tough-minded views on privatizing Social Security and making significant changes in Medicare.
And as for the Republicans’ field operation, their comparatively small investment played into the Democrats’ hands and was not forecast by Axelrod, either.
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
Always insightful to hear the postmortem in these situations. Even if half of it is skewed, these are he moments where we actually hear more honest analysis than at other times when spin is central to every word uttered. I share some of the same views...why didn’t they run positive Mitt ads all summer...the did that in the primaries a few months before a primary here in Florida, and I think it was prety effective. The ads were good and positive and formed a positive view of Romney well ahead of any competitor doing any ads.
Also, why was the attack on Obama so vanilla...especially from all the super pac that seemed so focused on getting rid of him.
>and chose Paul Ryan for VP.
He chose Ryan so he could drag out the principled voters that stayed home.
That's easy. All his attack got used up earlier against Santorum and Newt, and he didn't have any more attack left for the campaign. Should have left some in reserve, I guess...
Not one word of truth comes from Axelholes mouth.
Romney understands business and the Ryan pick was for a VP who could address one of our biggest problems we have that Ryan knows a lot about. I was very happy with the Ryan choice if we had won...but as a candidate compared to the crap from the other side - he unfortunately appeared weak. It’s all about the “optics” now....not reality.
In retrospect Romney should have been more of a B.S. politician...chosen someone to appear to a voting block, regardless of who was best qualified, and then appointed Ryan to head the reforms we need after the Republicans took over. I don’t know...Rubio might have made a big difference but who knows. Pandering seems to be a vital part of getting elected - regardless of qualifications.
There is nothing ‘principled’ about giving zero four more years.
RE: He chose Ryan so he could drag out the principled voters that stayed home.
So, what to call the millions who STILL stayed home even with Ryan as running mate?
So, what to call the millions who STILL stayed home even with Ryan as running mate?
Axelrod is the only cretin who can out-lie the Kenyan.
So assume the opposite of his tripe and he’s 100% correct.
Zippy wins 4 more years. Ryan was awesome / IS awesome. My bet is just as in 08, that the @#$*(^ Steve Schmidt advised Romney all wrong - just as he did advise McCainiac. They kept the tone to the middle after they screamed “extreme” conservative during the “Let’s trash Newt & the Ricks” adventures during the primaries. And kept raps on Ryan just as they did to Palin. But this time they didn’t trash Ryan like they did Palin. THAT was disgusting as is Schmidt.
As are the results of this election. He managed to blur any line between Obama and Romney by Nov. 5. My 2 cents. Yep, I’m still bitter.
Seems they want to keep the focus on why Romney didn’t win for a reason.
BUMP!!
Sorry, but the last thing I want to hear is the opinion of the brilliant David Assholerod
I’m not sure where I am on the shock/denial/angry line but I’m considering expatriating because I cannot watch this trainwreck any longer.
I think I’d rather be witness to the shenanigans of a third world banana republic on a beach halfway across the globe
than see any more gutshots to our Republic.
BS
GOP Super PACS....Karl Rove strikes again-—right at the heart of those who love this country....the architect is an ass
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.
