Election losers still win big

Election losers still win big

Dec. 3, 2012

Katy Grimes: The chief strategist for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign has finally spoken out about what happened. And as expected, he’s playing down the significance of the loss.

In a Washington Post op ed, Romney’s Chief Strategist Stuart Stevens, said that President Barack Obama was “a charismatic African American president with a billion dollars, no primary and media that often felt morally conflicted about being critical.”

Calling the media “morally conflicted about being critical” of Obama is like saying that serial killer Ted Bundy was morally conflicted about the women he stalked and murdered. It didn’t stop him from killing – the results are still the same.

Cliff Kincaid, a journalist and media critic, recently took apart Stevens’ Washington Post op ed.

“If this is all Stuart Stevens takes away from the campaign coverage, he is woefully ill-informed about the nature of media bias,” Kincaid said. “While it is certainly true that reporters didn’t want to criticize the first black President, Stevens’ comment doesn’t explain the intensity of the media attacks on Romney and the media cover-ups on Obama’s behalf.”

Kincaid points out that Stevens was one of the advisers who told Romney that he should avoid criticizing the press.

While Stevens was the top strategist, there were others in the campaign equally responsible. Lobbyist and former top Republican official Ed Gillespie, publicly justified Romney’s silence on the gross liberal media bias when he said that the campaign had a “no whining rule” about media coverage.

Kincaid pointed out that even Democratic strategists had called on the Romney campaign to call out the many incidences of media bias and cover ups.

There’s a significant difference between whining during a competition, and calling out the cheaters. But this is the mainstream media in America today.

The Republican strategists are as responsible for the loss, because someone high up in the party decided what could and could not be discussed.

Self-censoring is as dangerous as being censored.

When will Republicans recognize that Democrats do not self-censor? They only seek to censor Republicans… and Ron Paul. So why do Republicans help them?

Senior strategists had also advised Republicans to avoid calling Obama a Marxist or socialist. The thinking was that undecided voters would be offended and vote for Obama anyway.

“Yes, the Republican Party has problems,” Stevens said, “but as we go forward, let’s remember that any party that captures the majority of the middle class must be doing something right.”

Most of the strategists are beltway insiders, and they get paid huge amounts of money even when they lose. Until this practice ends, nothing will change.

As wealthy commodities trader Randolph Duke explained to Eddie Murphy’s character in Trading Places, “The good part is that no matter whether our clients make money or lose money, Duke & Duke get the commissions.”


Write a comment
  1. Charles Nichols
    Charles Nichols 2 December, 2012, 15:09

    If the current percentages hold, Romney will have received a smaller percentage of the vote for President than did Herbert Hoover.

    Romney joins a long list of losing RINOs. Time to stop listening to the pundits and start nominating conservatives.

    Reply this comment
  2. Left of Rio Linda
    Left of Rio Linda 2 December, 2012, 17:00

    Because the Republican party has become a party of “PC” candy asses.

    Reply this comment
  3. Paul
    Paul 2 December, 2012, 21:14

    I believe Obama felt confident going into the election he would easily win but became doubtful after the first debate. He obviously won by a large margin but for all the wrong reason. America is in trouble and sadly, this administration is clueless in how to build the economy, jobs etc…. Expect more hard times folks. We are all in the shitter now.

    Reply this comment
  4. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 2 December, 2012, 23:16

    Comes and goes in cycles….. I remember when Dems could not win the presidency if their life depended on t, from Nixon to Bush 1 only Jimmy Carter got in a short 4 years, a 24 year run of Repugs with only Carter for 4 years in between…then came Clinton, then Bush, now Obama, and in 2016 who knows, but one thing is for sure, it will be cyclical.

    Reply this comment
  5. Hondo
    Hondo 3 December, 2012, 19:22

    95% of all of Obama’s adds were negative. He had no record to run on. His only chance was to trash Romney. That would only work if Romney was a wimp and refused to defend him self and to treat Obama with kid gloves.
    The race for the president is more like a hockey game and you better be ready to catch some elbows and through a few yourselves. Romney came with his badminton team and got bitch slapped all over the country. Obamacare was never talked about. It has the biggest tax increase on the middle class in Amerika’s history and Romney never talked about it.
    I almost believe Romney was paid to throw the election. There is no possible way to run a worse campaign than he did.
    Like I said. The reason Obama ran 95% of his adds negative is because he did a bad job and he knew it. He was easily beatable. If you didn’t mind playing hockey.

    Reply this comment
  6. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 3 December, 2012, 23:54

    95% of all of Obama’s adds were negative. He had no record to run on. His only chance was to trash Romney

    Hondo- Mike Dukakis was destroying GWB in 1987, had a 17 point lead, and then Bush ran the Willie Horton ads…. Dukakis did NLOT respond (huge mistake-which Clinton did NOT make) and the rest is history. After that negative ads were the norm, and always will be, for both parties.

    Reply this comment
  7. SactoSilly
    SactoSilly 5 December, 2012, 00:19

    This is a great piece. Love the “Trading Places” references at the end. And, if this is why Team Romney really thinks they lost, we were in more trouble than I thought!

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

Brown calls market 'dangerous'

APRIL 20, 2010 By CALWATCHDOG STAFF Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown, in response to a question from a TV reporter

Failed rich candidates should be taxed 100%

John Seiler: We have a lot or super-rich candidates and office-holders now: Schwarzenegger, Whitman, Poizner, Fiorina, that wrestling lady in

How many Californians will leave?

Dec. 4, 2012 By John Seiler The big question before us in 2013: How many Californians will skedaddle out of