In response to:

Twisting the Internal Polling Knife

southern tom Wrote: Nov 12, 2012 10:31 PM
...DID Romney's campaign really misjudge, or was the election stolen?? There's a lot of circumstantial evidence pointing towards the latter.
denir Wrote: Nov 12, 2012 10:32 PM
"A moderate would've gained Independents, a female would've gained females and people who wanted to make history.

A person of color would've had people of color sit it out instead of getting up for Obama, or even crossing over.

We needed a VP with natl-sec-exp or at least exec-exp.

Ryan had none; only a negative extreme-Cons throw granny off the cliff, scare women stigma.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

The GOP's own stupidity led to 4 more years of OWEBUMMER."

In hindsight of Nov-6-2012, Yes !

But the Pres-cand has to pick someone that he wants, the VP doesn't run or win the race,

it's up to Romney to win but he was so mediocre,

He didn't really want to win or doesn't have what it takes to win in Natl-Politics !

M-R = decent-great-Pres !

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...