In response to:

Twisting the Internal Polling Knife

NullifyNow Wrote: Nov 12, 2012 11:26 PM
That is, their participation in the genocide of white America.
denir Wrote: Nov 12, 2012 11:39 PM
I supported Romney because he could've won, "but only if he really wanted to !"

He had so much in his profile that moderates, even Dems would go for,

But he was a very-mediocre-uninspiring campaigner !

Since M-R didn't win, in hindsight Ron Paul could've won because he would've been able to co-opt alot of Obama's issues.

R-P was against the M-E-wars, WDC-Wall-St-Collusion-Corruption, for Auditing-the-FED, bringing-back-Glass-Steagall, all-from-way-back !

Lol, even OWS-types would've ditched the Obamination, campaigned for R-P, with that kind of anti-WDC-Wall-St-Collusion-Corruption, Audit-the-FED, political-platform !

He's pro-Life, but wouldn't have been defined as such though, women would've flocked to him because he's a womens Dr !

In light of the revelation that Mitt Romney was "shell-shocked" by his loss last week, I've been pretty tough on the job performance of his campaign's internal pollsters, who clearly missed the mark -- resulting in costly tactical decisions down the stretch:
 

These analyses [of the "expand the map" strategy] make sense, but only within the context of the campaign truly believing that they were safe in other crucial must-have states -- a cataclysmically wrong assumption. When I stopped by Romney headquarters in Boston back in September, Newhouse said his team was anticipating a...