Posted on 01/18/2014 4:27:38 PM PST by gusopol3
A new documentary about Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney premiered Friday night at the Sundance Film Festival in Utah. The film, "Mitt," is an extraordinarily intimate look at the former Massachusetts governor as he ran for president twice, in 2008 and 2012. Director Greg Whiteley had impressed Romney with his 2005 documentary "New York Doll," which brilliantly chronicled a broken-down rock musician's conversion to Mormonism, and for the new film, Romney gave Whiteley unprecedented freedom to record behind-the-scenes moments as the candidate and his family endured the trials of two presidential campaigns.....
the old lack of confidence came out again as Romney suggested he never felt comfortable in the race. He passed on something someone at headquarters had told him: "In some ways, we kind of had to steal the Republican nomination. Our party is southern, evangelical and populist. And you're northern, and you're Mormon, and you're rich. And these do not match well with our party."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
In a way, he was. When considering his primary opponents, the bar was set low. Romney’s competition in the primaries was strictly second tier, the GOP’s bench warmers. Gignrich was carrying a closet of skeletons on his back. A man led around by the ear by his wife is not good presidential material. Santorum would have scared the s*** out of the general electorate. Bachmann was incoherent. Perry was also, but he had an excuse. Heman Cain was a joke. Huntsman was running in the wrong party. Midgets all, excepting Perry sans back surgery.
Here is the truth as I see it. mitt was always going to lose... his son even said that his father NEVER wanted to win. After the first debate... the real power brokers that control men like mitt, sent out their command... back off... you must lose... and he collapsed and became john mccain.
What’s the difference being different if the difference is the same?
I’ll vote for a republican if the republican deserves my vote. The party has lost its base. Why is that my fault?
He should have stayed doing that. But no. As a true believer in the power of the State to “do good”, and as a “do gooder” at heart he dumped the free market and devoted his life to wrecking ours.
Gignrich was carrying a closet of skeletons on his back
We all have more than one weakness. But I think the one I indicated is what cost him the nomination. Newt’s failure to respond with humor and sarcasm to the Rommney camp’s use of the baseless legal persecution led by Bonner and the Deocrats when Newt was speaker, I think led to Rommney’s nomination. That and too many conservatives in the field.
I guess that in your view there are no absolutes. That is a TYPICAL liberal point of view.
For me there ARE absolutes...and if one can't believe that then one is NOT a Christian. You can't have it both ways or decide WHICH of the ten commandments you will follow on any given day.
I live in San Francisco. See below.
ALL DEMOCRATS:
District 1 Eric Mar--Chinese
District 2 Mark Farrell--WHITE guy who represents District 2, which includes the Presidio, Marina, Cow Hollow, Pacific Heights, Presidio Heights, Anza Vista, Laurel Heights, Jordan Park, the Lake Street corridor, Sea Cliff and parts of Russian Hill.
THOSE districts HAPPEN to be where 99% of all the monied people live...the 'nobs'--which is why Nob Hill is called that.
District 3 David Chiu--Chinese and President of the board
District 4 Katy Tang--Chinese
District 5 London Breed--African American
District 6 Jane Kim--Chinese
District 7 Norman Yee--Chinese
District 8 Scott Wiener--homosexual and hot shot in the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) group
District 9 David Campos--Latino
District 10 Malia Cohen--African-American
District 11 John Avalos--Latino
The ONLY ones who have a WHIFF of conservatism are the Chinese stuporvisors and they HAVE to be fiscally conservative or they won't get the Chinese vote.
The city does it by districts so that minorities will ALWAYS be elected. It USED to be a city-wide, open election and we had FAR more conservative board members...and NO minorities.
Any questions?
Thanks.
THANKS.
and they are all democrats.... in California as in many other states primaries are by PARTY... which wild liberals were in the GOP primaries???
Moreover SF did NOT vote for Romney
:) Rita
I have posted that many times here myself.
Every one was a loser, damaged goods, in one way another.
Why do you think only second tier Republicans dared to challenge the EXTREMELY FLAWED and predictable LOOSER Romney?
They probably got offers they couldn’t refuse
“Hello?”
“No I don’t want to run, ask someone else”
“Because you are looking for a designated loser, and it ain’t going to be me”
:o) cloud mountain....always foggy here.
I am sure there is more than one reason.
The truth is that it was not going to be as easy as some claimed to take out an incumbent POTUS Obama, after all whoever tried would be beat up in a primary where Obama would not. And Obama had the power to give out freebees in election year to get Dem base voters to vote.
I know Rush convinced his listeners that it would be easy for any of them to take out Obama in 2012.
He started that theme in late 2010 and kept it up till Romney lost, after telling his listeners that Romney would win in a landslide.
No, only a pussy like Romney could have lost to Obama. He was the perfect candidate to lose.
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.