In response to:

"There's a Sense That We Let Mitt Romney Down"

Ralph56 Wrote: Nov 11, 2012 10:42 AM
Sorry Stan Romney should have treated Obama like he treated Newt. His advisers thought they were in a boxing match, when in fact they were in a street fight. Obama's negative ads about Romney early on worked. Dems want to win more than Repubs do and are willing to do what it takes to do so, regardless of how tasteless it seems at the time. Also, Romney's record in a blue state scared a large number of conservatives into staying home, because they saw the country going down hill, but at a slower pace. Also, there were those who could not bring themselves to vote for a Mormon. Sad yes, but they couldn't separate religious beliefs from principles. ff,
Lustre Wrote: Nov 11, 2012 11:01 AM
What? Get a grip. Romney intellectually brutatlized and exposed Obama for his incompetence in the debates, and with his ads.
Lustre Wrote: Nov 11, 2012 11:07 AM
Putting two white men on the ticket up against a person of color (Obama) gave reason for people of color to go vote for Obama. Having a person of color as VP was the solution to that. Ryan was a bad choice in that regard.
Putting a female on the ticket as VP would have gained female votes, which we needed, as well as votes from people who would like to be part of "making history"; having the first female VP ever voted in. Ryan was a bad choice in that regard.
Putting a moderate on the ticket as VP would have gained Independents, which we needed. Ryan was a bad choice in that regard.
That said, I have nothing against Ryan, but having him on the ticket instead of a moderate female of color was a big mistake.
glad2bme Wrote: Nov 11, 2012 12:39 PM
If you haven't noticed throughout history there has always been two white men on both parties to vote for. Just because Obama was a candidate and now President for two terms does not change that all. You have to understand that there will probably never be another individual like Obama. Who do you think put up the money for Obama to win both terms...White Money...(I am a minority who voted Republican). Blacks (we) always vote Democrat, it was a dual Bonus that the candidate for two terms was black and he had all minorities back him. The problem is no one saw it coming that he would get high $$$ to back him and he would get a high turnout of the minority vote. Now, that whites who voted for him feel like the minority.
jayzee Wrote: Nov 11, 2012 1:20 PM
Sorry. But becoming more like your opponent and his balkanization of America is not a winning issue with me. We've played the "two-fer" game for so long (black female/racial preferences/affirmative action) that minorities actually believe that they are "making" it based upon their intelligence and superior qualifications. That's what we have in the White House, again.
Lustre Wrote: Nov 11, 2012 3:35 PM
glad2, wake up. Demographics are changing as I type. Turnout with people of color has always been low until Obama. The Dems were wise to put Obama up, while we were stupid not to have a moderate female of color on the ticket with Romney.
We had the complete opposite and lost even though the economy under Obama sucks.
Independents, women, and people of color preferred another 4 of Obama.

Mitt Romney's top campaign aides conducted a conference call with conservative journalists this afternoon, during which they assessed the damage from Tuesday's electoral loss.  The participants included campaign manager Matt Rhoades, political director Rich Beeson, polling director Neil Newhouse and digital director Zac Moffatt.  A few notes from the call:

Matt Rhoades, on the overall race: "No campaign is perfect, and we certainly made our share of mistakes." On Paul Ryan: "He has come away from this race with a very bright future before him."

Rich Beeson, on the campaign's strategy: "We won independents and held the base....

Thursday, May 23 | 04:36 PM ET
Thursday, May 23 | 04:36 PM ET
Thursday, May 23 | 04:36 PM ET
Thursday, May 23 | 04:36 PM ET