Posted on 02/01/2012 8:08:54 AM PST by bigbob
Coming off a decisive loss to Newt Gingrich in South Carolina, Mitt Romney needed to do three things to win the Florida primary: 1) attack Gingrich with a level of ferocity not yet seen in the already-contentious Republican presidential campaign; 2) raise the level of his performance in debate; and 3) improve his on-the-stump message to give voters more substance and fewer platitudes.
For his part, Gingrich had two must-dos: 1) deal with Romney's attacks in a calmer, more seasoned way than Gingrich handled the last Romney barrage, during the campaign in Iowa; and 2) keep up the solid message he rode to victory in South Carolina.
Over the past week in Florida, Romney did nearly everything right; his ads hit hard and his debate performance was dominating, even if he improved only marginally on the stump. And Gingrich did nearly everything wrong. The result was a decisive 14-point victory for Romney, who now has two primary victories to Gingrich's one.
(Excerpt) Read more at campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com ...
I think his summary gets it right: At some point, Team Gingrich believes, voters will grow sick of the negativity and say to Romney, "Enough -- what about you?"
The experiences in SC and FL should show Newt what works, and what doesn't. Now we wait to see if he can return to the "big ideas" and bold conservative approach that have salvaged his candidacy twice before.
Let’s not discount the fact that the FL GOP, especially in the coastal counties, is disproportionately older, and Romney won these big. Why? Because, deep down in their little heart of hearts, these older voters want a guy who’s going to keep ObamaCare pretty much as it is, since they get the goodies bundled up in it.
LLS
I agree, LLS.
Newt is showing he has little self control, he allows himself to get sucker punched time and again... then responds in kind. he wasn’t able to rise above it, and he felt compelled to attack Romney’s money, very unrepublican...
Romney’s attack ad approach goes all the way back to Nauvoo, IL. You don’t like how someone’s criticizing you? Don’t answer their charges; use any means to destroy them instead.
Many of the older FL GOP are retirees transplanted from the northeast. They are very familiar with Romney politically. They like his style.
people always say they hate negative ads and they always work
I agree with what you say, and here is another truth: In the pros, ORGANIZATIONS win, not players. Romney has the organization. You can’t really pinpoint when he started the 2012 campaign because he never really stopped the 2008 campaign. He’s been quietly going around the country for the past four years sewing up various local and state GOP organizations. Sure, there are Republicans out there who are supporting Newt, but Romney grasped the levers of the machinery.
That’s why a year ago I posted here that he would win the nomination. It is not what I want. I’ve already declared that I will not vote for him because when I go meet my maker, I want to be able to say: “I never voted for a socialist.”
But facts are facts.
I disagree. Seniors were strongly against Obamacare, and know Obamacare cut the hell out of Medicare. Seniors must have fully believed Romney was every bit as willing to reverse Obamacare as the others.
Saw a stat on here last evening that said Willard ran 13,000 ads (most, if not all attack ads) vs. Newt’s 200 ads. Hard to fight against a 65 to 1 radio of ad bombardment.
One word on why Newt lost.....Debate. that is it period. No ifs ands or buts. Newt only won SC because of his debate performance and he lost FL because of his debate performance. There is nothing more or less to this. I mean it makes for good stories that everyone can slice and dice this win for Romney but it comes down to the debates and that is it. Everyone says money and commercials but that is not what lost it for Newt. That look of confusion and shock when Romney gave it back to Newt about his Franny-Freddie stock is the lone reason Newt lost. It is horrible and Newt was stuck and didn’t know what to do. His whining probably didn’t help either. One minute the debate was too quite and the next it was too loud. People don’t like complainers. He needs to stop that immediately.
Unfortunately that seems to be the case. I think part of the reason is that such a large fraction of the population is simply disconnected from political reality, and are susceptible to believing whatever mush gets poured into their brains via the media. A candidate like Newt does well with those who understand the issues and are engaged, but I’m afraid ‘we’ are the minority.
Observations about Seniors may or may not be correct, I don’t know, but regardless of age, a lot of people simply aren’t paying attention, and that’s both scary and sad.
You’re right.
The GOP in WA state isn’t conservative either. Heck, the T-Party in WA state isn’t conservative. The whole party seems to be made up of people with no real core values other than what benefits them.
Right now, in WA State, the GOP establishment is backing Romney big time. They have been backing him for the past two years, even invited him to speak at our state convention the year before last. It was a disaster and still they supported him.
The worst part about this article is the line about Romney’s debate performance being dominating. LOL! He was channeling Gore with his dour looks at the other candidates. Santorum clearly won that debate, not Romney.
Newt is suffering from a typical problem exemplified by the way fouls get called in sports. The original and inciting file is seldom called. But the reaction to the original file almost always gets the whistle.
Romney can pretend innocence as much as he likes by faux-lamenting as he did in the Bloody Thursday debate, “Wouldn’t it be nice if people wouldn’t make attacks that have to be answered in the debates? (paraphrase).
But the reality is, Mitt started it. Newt desperately needs to learn not to react. Until the general, the press will be more than happy to blow the whistle on him and ignore Romney’s fouls. Of course that will change drastically with Mitt’s acceptance speech. At that point his own earth will be scorched—and by pros who will make him look like the amateur that he is.
“Right now, in WA State, the GOP establishment is backing Romney big time. They have been backing him for the past two years, even invited him to speak at our state convention the year before last. It was a disaster and still they supported him.”
That’s exactly my point. Romney was doing all these things with the state GOP’s, and he brought sacks of cash to shower on the locals when he was there. They were all purchased by his “organization,” and became a part thereof. Nobody cares what he said, nobody remembers it. But they remember the money.
Newt didn’t do that; he’d just show up on Fox or Hannity from time to time.
Money talks...
I wish Gingrich would stick to that approach. When it comes to actual accomplishments that promote the conservative agenda, Romney has very little to show.
Well dps.inspect, are you saying that Newt doesn’t have a right to get pissed when someone is outright LYING about you? Wouldn’t you want to hit back? And he wasn’t attacking Mitt’s money, he was attacking the PERSPECTIVE that Mitt has because of his silver-spoon-money upbringing and lifestyle.
However, at this point, I would agree that he needs to just take a small swat at the blood-sucking mosquito then get back to attacking Obama and putting forth a solid message. He doesn’t need to pick back up the sword.
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.