In response to:

GOP Solution: Stick to Values, Pick Better Candidates

Lisa179 Wrote: Nov 10, 2012 8:35 AM
Sounds good in theory but tell me Mark, which of the other candidates could have done better? Newt with more baggage than United Airlines? Santorum who would have been painted as a Todd Akin/Richard Mourdock mentor? Herman Cain with his bimbo eruptions? Michele Bachmann who was deemed near psychotic, extremist and hysterical? How about Rick Perry who couldn't speak as well as President Bush. We had the best candidate of the group. What we failed to do was to speak the language of females (both male and female females) Romney was all about fixing things and facts and figures as was Ryan. People vote on their emotions unfortunately not their brains. Further not only did we fight the MSM but also a natural disaster. Obama wins.
LAPhil Wrote: Nov 10, 2012 10:59 AM
Good post, Lisa. I agree with all of your assessments of the Republican alternatives to Romney with the possible exception of Michele Bachmann, whom I think was attacked unfairly. The problem was they all had big fan bases who were too blind to see their candidates' flaws and that they were all probably unelectable because of them. So Romney became the default candidate in a way, but I think he could have been a great President if more people had swallowed their pride and gotten behind him in the general election.
RedRum Wrote: Nov 10, 2012 10:20 AM
Romney was by far the best of a comparatively weak GOP field in 2012. Still, Romney ran an overly cautious campaign that lacked specifics and clarity regarding his agenda. The speech Romney made at the RNC was the least memorable, pointless and ineffective acceptance speech by a nominee (of either party) that I can remember. Romney didn't go after Obama with any sense of urgency or intensity (that third debate performance was puzzling). You cannot defeat an arrogant, mean-spirited, self-entitled celebrity President (who has the most evil, hard-hitting campaign imaginable doing whatever is necessary to win) by always being nice, taking the high road and not capitalizing on the many opportunities present. Romney was not up to that.
ksatifka Wrote: Nov 10, 2012 10:15 AM
Romney was indeed the best of the weak group. I notice you did not mention Ron Paul, who was the only peace candidate. Paul's major problem was his age.
Jim134 Wrote: Nov 10, 2012 10:11 AM
This guy sounds like a true Democratic media opperative. It does not matter who is the Republican pick, the mainstream media will demonize the choice for whatever reason.

The candidate that is picked just needs to get down in the sewer with Obama and much around. We should have gotten hold of Obama's college transcripts or just make up a story like Rather did.

The object of war is to win. If you lose you don't get to write the history.

These are days of hindsight and second-guessing for Republicans, which is human nature after a trauma like this election loss.

There are million “why” theories out there, from the Hurricane Sandy effect to pernicious media bias. Wringing our hands over those factors gets us nowhere.

We can’t stop hurricanes, and media bias is always there. Reagan and Bush 43 won twice against waves of poisonous bias, so that is not an insurmountable obstacle.

What Republicans need is a slate of candidates that can energize the base while expanding the appeal of a conservative message.


Related Tags: Mitt Romney