3/17/14, "Revenge of the Republican consultants," Politico, Kenneth P. Vogel
"While the animus toward the GOP’s reigning consultants continues to simmer among the tea party ranks, it was much less prominent at this year’s recently concluded CPAC, though Caddell did get some raucous applause when he revisited his 2013 stem-winder.
“I was here last year and caused some problems because I attacked the Republican consultant-lobbyist class as a racketeering operation that had not only blown the election, but had looted the system,” Caddell said, during a panel on electoral trends. “And I don’t want to reprise that other than to say they understand one thing — if they can just hold on, they will get all the money back, and that’s what’s happening. So the people who lost for you before — and are willing to lose as long as they can preserve their situation — are now in charge of your great hopes for 2014.”"...(end p. 2), via Lucianne
=============================
In 2012 Romney and GOP consultants had no intention of beating Obama:
12/22/12, “The story behind Mitt Romney’s loss in the presidential campaign to President Obama,“ Boston Globe, Michael Kranish
“Building on its 2008 field organization, Obama’s campaign had far more people on the ground, for longer periods, and backed by better data. In Florida, for example, the Romney campaign said it had fewer than 200 staff members on the ground, a huge commitment
of its total of 500 nationwide.
But the Obama campaign had 770 staff in Florida
out of 3,000 or so nationwide….
Indeed, in swing state after swing state, the Obama field team was much bigger than the Romney troops.
Obama had 123 offices in Ohio, compared with Romney’s 40.
Obama had 59 offices in Colorado, compared with Romney’s 15,
according to statistics compiled by the Obama campaign.”…
.
================================
12/23/12, "Mitt's Son Says He Never Wanted to be President Anyway," Atlantic Wire, Connor Simpson
"If you thought the tale of how Mitt Romney lost the general election was already told, you would be wrong. Because there is so much left to tell, like how Mitt never wanted to be President anyway.
At least, that's what Tagg Romney says in this new Boston Globe report on what went wrong with Romney's campaign. While the rest of the piece seems to say the problems lay in the Romney campaign's lack of technical advantage, and refusal to introduce the world to Mitt Romney, the human being, this little morsel from the Republican's son points to a larger problem:
“He wanted to be president less than anyone I’ve met in my life. He had no desire to...run,” said Tagg, who worked with his mother, Ann, to persuade his father to seek the presidency. “If he could have found someone else to take his place...he would have been ecstatic to step aside."
So, yeah, that might explain why Mitt lost. Not wanting the job you need to publicly campaign for more than a year to get is step one in the "Not Getting Elected Guide for Dummies" book. Again, the rest of the mammoth piece, which you really should read, paints a larger picture of the struggle between Mitt's inner circle and his campaign advisors over whether they should humanize Mitt, which was ultimately their downfall.
And, also, the Obama campaign had more staff and cooler tech stuff....".
=================================
In 2012 Romney refused to give any of his famous money to his campaign, even chose fundraising over campaigning in the stretch:
9/25/12, “Why doesn’t Mitt Romney contribute to his own campaign?” Reuters, Michael Waldman
"Lately, Mitt Romney has been so consumed with fundraising that his aides have had to defend his absence from the stump....
Romney, for whatever reason, has failed to use his personal wealth to pay his campaign’s bills. His refusal to self-finance is one of the mysteries of this campaign.”…
.
===============================
Comment: The "mystery" is that Romney never wanted to run, fraudulently took money from people, is a con man, and is now into his new career as go-to political good fella of the Imperial Ruling Class to undermine conservatives and the two party system.
===============================
In the 2012 election, “The Republican Party abandoned” the issue of repealing ObamaCare. “A majority of the people wanted to repeal Obamacare, [an issue that] the Republican Party abandoned,” Caddell noted.”:
.
3/14/13, “Caddell Unloads on ‘Racketeering’ GOP Consultants,” Breitbart News, Leahy
.
“The 2010 takeover of Congress by the Republicans, Caddell said, “was not engineered by the Washington Republican establishment. They [the establishment] then took that victory and threw it away"…..
================================
11/28/12, "The Incestuous Bleeding of the Republican Party," Erick Erickson, RedState
"Strip away the candidate and coalition and it is on the fifth floor of 66 Canal Center Plaza where the seeds of Mitt Romney’s ruin and the RNC’s get out the vote (GOTV) effort collapsed — bled to death by charlatan consultants making millions off the party,
its donors,
and the grassroots."...
======================
2/25/12, "66 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 555," NY Times
"In a single office suite in Alexandria, Va., firms hired by “super PACs” share the same space as consultants hired by the Romney campaign. Federal law prohibits super PACs from directly coordinating with candidates, but the groups share many ties and have paid for many similar services."...
=======================
11/29/12, "Who's getting rich off of GOP defeat?" Rosslyn Smith, American Thinker
================================
By 2011 it was clear the Republican Party didn't want to repeal ObamaCare:
11/28/11, “It’s the Obamacare, Stupid,” Jeffrey H. Anderson, Weekly Standard
"The Republicans’ core problem...is that they’ve forgotten to ride the wave that brought them here. Republicans didn’t get elected in 2010 because of voters’ dissatisfaction with the Democrats’ handling of the economy. They got elected because the Democrats openly and arrogantly ignored the voters’ will in passing the monstrosity that is Obamacare.”…
================================
The Radical Left loves Karl Rove because he helps them win:
2/8/13, “Karl Rove’s Courage,” Slate.com, by John Dickerson
“Why it was brave—and smart—for him to challenge the Tea Party.”
=====================
.
No comments:
Post a Comment