Romney still doesn't get it, hopefully the Republicans don't either

[El Minion]

Corporations are people too, unfortunately not enough of them voted for you Romney.:welcome: I didn't know that minorities make up the majority in OH, FL, VA, CO and the rest of the swing states.:Whaaaa!: Keep blaming the black man for keeping you down Romney ROFL!

Romney reflects on his loss in call with campaign donors (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-romney-election-campaign-donors-20121114,0,5622330.story)

By Maeve Reston

November 14, 2012, 1:37 p.m.

Mitt Romney told his top donors Wednesday that his loss to President Obama was a disappointing result that neither he nor his top aides had expected, but said he believed his team ran a “superb” campaign with “no drama,” and attributed his rival’s victory to “the gifts” the administration had given to blacks, Hispanics and young voters during Obama’s first term.

Obama, Romney argued, had been “very generous” to blacks, Hispanics and young voters. He cited as motivating factors to young voters the administration’s plan for partial forgiveness of college loan interest and the extension of health coverage for students on their parents’ insurance plans well into their 20s. Free contraception coverage under Obama’s healthcare plan, he added, gave an extra incentive to college-age women to back the president.

Romney argued that Obama’s healthcare plan’s promise of coverage “in perpetuity” was “highly motivational” to those voters making $25,000 to $35,000 who might not have been covered, as well as to African American and Hispanic voters. Pivoting to immigration, Romney said the Obama campaign’s efforts to paint him as “anti-immigrant” had been effective and that the administration’s promise to offer what he called “amnesty” to the children of illegal immigrants had helped turn out Hispanic voters in record numbers.

“The president’s campaign,” he said, “focused on giving targeted groups a big gift — so he made a big effort on small things. Those small things, by the way, add up to trillions of dollars.”

The Wednesday donor call was organized by Romney’s finance team and included a final rundown of fundraising efforts as well as an analysis by Romney pollster Neil Newhouse, who has been criticized by some Republicans for misleading the candidate about his chances.

“I am very sorry that we didn’t win,” Romney told the donors. “I know that you expected to win. We expected to win…. It was very close, but close doesn’t count in this business.”

Romney reflected on the trajectory that led to last week’s loss, acknowledging that he’d “gotten beat up pretty bad” by Obama and his allies after the primaries, but noting his rebound after the first fall debate.

The 2012 Republican nominee avoided any recriminations about his team or a second-guessing of their efforts, calling the organization “a very solid team that got along” – an attribute he said he hoped would be reflected in the 2012 campaign books that are being written.

Romney added that there was “no drama in the campaign — not that everybody was perfect; everybody has flat sides, but we learned how to accommodate each other’s strengths and weaknesses, to build on the strengths.”

“The organization did not get in the way,” he said.

In words of thanks for his donors, Romney said he never expected the campaign to raise more than $500 million. The Romney team ultimately raised more than $900 million, according to finance chairman Spencer Zwick, who reviewed some of the final tallies during the call.

Romney said he and his team were discussing how to keep the campaign’s donor group connected — perhaps with annual meetings or a monthly newsletter — “so we can stay informed and have influence on the direction of the party, and perhaps the selection of a future nominee.”

“Which, by the way,” the former candidate added with a chuckle, “will not be me.”

The former Massachusetts governor said he was trying to turn his thoughts to his plans going forward.

“But frankly we’re still so troubled by the past, it’s hard to put together our plans for the future,” he said.

[Rohirrim]

So, I guess he wasn't bull****ting about the 47% thing, eh?

BTW, Mitt. It wasn't "close."

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

He needs to justify spending their money and losing as badly as he did. And rich people don't want to feel out of touch.

[BroncoInferno]

Asian-Americans are more likely to be business owners, better educated, and more likely to be married than their white counterparts. Clearly not a demographic looking for hand-outs. So, if all Obama voters just want free stuff, why did the Asian-American vote go to Obama 3 to 1? Why the Jewish vote 2 to 1? I hope this is the excuse the GOP continues to foist (Obama voters are free-loaders), because they will be political irrelevant for the foreseeable future.

[Rohirrim]

Mitt offered plenty of "gifts" as well, like no capital gains or estate tax, reduced corporate taxes, and reduced regulations. Unfortunately for him, there just weren't as many voters who could benefit from his "gifts." Ha!

Once again, the Right stumbles over the arithmetic.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Asian-Americans are more likely to be business owners, better educated, and more likely to be married than their white counterparts. Clearly not a demographic looking for hand-outs. So, if all Obama voters just want free stuff, why did the Asian-American vote go to Obama 3 to 1? Why the Jewish vote 2 to 1? I hope this is the excuse the GOP continues to foist (Obama voters are free-loaders), because they will be political irrelevant for the foreseeable future.

Good question.

Nothing but crickets by way of response from the right.

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/73892_439590329433385_1034901038_n.jpg

[Requiem]

I've seen a younger generation of Republicans (those who I know that serve as state legislators or are making their rounds on Capitol Hill, etc.) that are more willing to provide change and make some concessions on social issues -- but that isn't going to happen for a while on their front. The Republican Party has got to understand that the demographic change in America is going to have a huge impact on electoral dynamics moving forward. They are on the "losing" side on almost every social issue of substance moving forward and will continue to be. Long-time breakthroughs in various states on specific issues have happened the past several elections cycles.

America is a relatively young nation and extremely diverse. Much to the chagrin of many on the right-side of the political spectrum, that diversity is only going to amplify moving forward. The only hope for the Republicans, and it is pretty much a guarantee -- is that Rubio is a part of their ticket in some capacity come 2016. He will help in a lot of areas and provides a boost in the electoral college and quite possibly (by association) the Hispanic Diaspora voting bloc.

As for Mitt's comments, it is not surprising. The guy has tried to buy his way to the White House twice and failed miserably. He is an empty suit and quite honestly, a man without conviction or character. I'm sure he will find solace wiping his ass with Ben Franklin's the rest of his life while he continues to circumvent laws and participate in blatant tax evasion till the end of his days.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Mitt offered plenty of "gifts" as well, like no capital gains or estate tax, reduced corporate taxes, and reduced regulations. Unfortunately for him, there just weren't as many voters who could benefit from his "gifts." Ha!

Once again, the Right stumbles over the arithmetic.

Yep.

Those are the kinds of "handouts" GOP voters don't mind.

They don't mind the government picking their pockets - as long as the money goes to Halliburton or Exxon and not to underprivileged kids.

[Pony Boy]

Nothing like a good old Liberal Circle Jerk .......where's Spider did you guys forget to call him?

31765

[Kid A]

What a terrible candidate. As mentioned in the Jindal thread, aspiring 2016 GOP candidates realize you can't win a national election when you openly display utter contempt for half the country, attributing their every motivation to selfishness.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/11/mitt-romney-still-hates-47-percent-of-america.html

I think the latest Romney donor remarks ought to put to rest the debate about his sincerity. When the 47 percent remarks emerged, I argued that it was the real Romney speaking. Some moderate Republicans suggested he was merely pandering to people whose donations he badly needed. I never thought this made much sense — surely Romney had ways of relating to wealthy Republicans without launching an extended analysis he didn't believe — but the latest version of essentially the same riff ought to put that debate to rest. He's never running again. He doesn't need these people. The real Romney is indeed a sneering plutocrat.

[Rohirrim]

What a terrible candidate. As mentioned in the Jindal thread, aspiring 2016 GOP candidates realize you can't win a national election when you openly display utter contempt for half the country, attributing their every motivation to selfishness.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/11/mitt-romney-still-hates-47-percent-of-america.html

Bingo! Just like I always said. Nothing but a huckster.

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Nothing like a good old Liberal Circle Jerk .......where's Spider did you guys forget to call him?

31765

You're such a failure. Thanks for the laugh.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You're such a failure. Thanks for the laugh.

You have to wonder if the news of Romney's defeat has reached his home planet yet.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Nothing like a good old Liberal Circle Jerk

A.k.a., "how the election results look to a right-wing extremist crack smoker."

[Bacchus]

Asian-Americans are more likely to be business owners, better educated, and more likely to be married than their white counterparts. Clearly not a demographic looking for hand-outs. So, if all Obama voters just want free stuff, why did the Asian-American vote go to Obama 3 to 1? Why the Jewish vote 2 to 1? I hope this is the excuse the GOP continues to foist (Obama voters are free-loaders), because they will be political irrelevant for the foreseeable future.

Lots of Hispanics are small business owners as well, with landscaping and construction and yet the Republican part just keeps grouping all meteorites into one pile. The needy want gifts pile. As long as they keep thinking this way the Dems will be able to take this country back. Voter suppression will only take you so far.

[Requiem]

Lots of Hispanics are small business owners as well, with landscaping and construction and yet the Republican part just keeps grouping all meteorites into one pile. The needy want gifts pile. As long as they keep thinking this way the Dems will be able to take this country back. Voter suppression will only take you so far.

The only reason the Democrats didn't win the House is because the Republicans did a hell of a job gerrymandering their districts. It happens.

[Pony Boy]

You're such a failure. Thanks for the laugh.

Old "Denver Moose Poop" retrurns to the WRP, tell me did you ever find a job or are you still on the unemployment tit?

[Kid A]

Ezra Klein nails it, as per usual:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/11/15/from-the-47-to-gifts-mitt-romneys-ugly-vision-of-politics/

During the campaign, Mitt Romney repeatedly promised seniors that he’d restore President Obama’s $716 billion in Medicare cuts. He promised them that, unlike Obama, he wouldn’t permit a single change to Medicare or Social Security for 10 years. He promised them, in other words, political immunity. While the rest of the country was trying to pay down the deficit and prioritize spending, they’d be safe.

He also promised the rich that they’d see a lower overall tax rate, and while he did say he would try to pay for some of those tax cuts by closing loopholes and deductions, he also said he expected faster growth would pay for those cuts — which means he really was promising tax cuts to the rich at a time when he said deficit reduction should be a top priority. Oh, and let’s not forget his oft-stated intention to roll back the Dodd-Frank financial reforms and replace them with…something.

Keep all that in mind when you hear Romney blaming his loss on “the gifts” that Obama reportedly handed out to “the African-American community, the Hispanic community and young people.” Romney was free with the gifts, too, and his promises to seniors and to the rich carried a far higher price tag than any policies Obama promised minorities or the young.

That’s Romney’s political cosmology: The Democrats bribe the moochers with health care and green cards. The Republicans try to free the makers through tax cuts and deregulation. Politics isn’t a conflict between two reasonable perspectives on how to best encourage growth and high-living standards. It’s a kind of reverse-Marxist clash between those who produce and those who take, and the easiest way to tell one from the other is to see who they vote for.

When Romney thinks he’s behind closed doors and he’s just telling other people like him how politics really works, the picture he paints is so ugly as to be bordering on dystopic. It’s not just about class, but about worth, and legitimacy. His voters are worth something to the economy — they’re producers — and they respond to legitimate appeals about how to best manage the country. The Democrats’ voters are drags on the economy — moochers — and they respond to crass pay-offs.

[Spider]

Nothing like a good old Liberal Circle Jerk .......where's Spider did you guys forget to call him?

31765

I am still in shock over you getting so excited over my honk if your horny sticker ...20 minutes and high speed chase will shake any hetrosexual male up ...

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Old "Denver Moose Poop" retrurns to the WRP, tell me did you ever find a job or are you still on the unemployment tit?

HURR DUH HURRR DURRR NURRRRRRR.

Found a job. But then, you already knew that. I found the job about two and a half years ago, and told you that then. Senility setting in, dummy?

Of course, then that job ended, as jobs in the Oil and Gas industry do, and I started my own business. I BUILT THAT and whatnot.

In other news, you're still really, really stupid.

[Pony Boy]

HURR DUH HURRR DURRR NURRRRRRR.

Found a job. But then, you already knew that. I found the job about two and a half years ago, and told you that then. Senility setting in, dummy?

Of course, then that job ended, as jobs in the Oil and Gas industry do, and I started my own business. I BUILT THAT and whatnot.

In other news, you're still really, really stupid.

Ha.... If you've got a business — you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/C-ZO7XOpwa8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Ha.... If you've got a business — you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/C-ZO7XOpwa8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

And if you've got a brain, you should have gotten a discount. You don't think. Fox News makes your brain move.

[Fedaykin]

Ha.... If you've got a business — you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/C-ZO7XOpwa8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Still clinging to dishonest crap like the above? You know full well (it's been explained a dozen times on this board at least) that Obama is talking about infrastructure in that speech.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Ha.... If you've got a business — you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.


You know that big ass whooping Romney just received in the electoral college?

Morons like you built that. :welcome:

[Pony Boy]

You know that big ass whooping Romney just received in the electoral college?

Morons like you built that. :welcome:

Sorry, I didn't mean to leave you out......... I realize you only speak in cartoons ......... :welcome:

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Sorry, I didn't mean to leave you out......... I realize you only speak in cartoons ......... :welcome:

Your candidate's campaign was one big cartoon.

http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj148/2chico_bucket/soreLoser-pnged.png

[Odysseus]

Mitt was a terrible candidate. He was and now is GLOBALLY disdained. He offered nothing, represented nothing, and the people I know of who voted for him were doing it for selfish reasons. They want to overseas contracting to continue at a high level.

Obama's 2nd debate where he failed to even practice was the President's inability to restrain contempt for the man. The problem that Mitt has to face is, election aside, Obama's estimate of him was correct. That has to be hard to take personally.

[Odysseus]

Pony,

Obama was talking about a sense of community...you know...like other people in the world besides yourself?

The shirt you are wearing? Did you make that? This Internet that you are enjoying. How exactly are you providing yourself the bandwidth? If you are singular in the world why exactly do you post here? Is it to entertain?

I do not claim the Democrats to have a good sense of business. In fact, I think they are awful...but the Republicans are so spun up on sex and religion that they very seldom talk about business outside of giving more to corporations and tax breaks for people who make considerably more than you.

[GreasyQtip]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A71TI3zCMAAd9S4.jpg

Hahahahaha, I can't believe it, just when everyone expects them to get it and rethink the Republican idea.... THIS

[houghtam]

Ah, Bill...

[Fedaykin]

Ah, Bill...

Not irony. It's hypocrisy...

[That One Guy]

I'm not reading the thread (circle jerk as was mentioned early on) and won't be back, probably, to read any responses but I think it's pretty telling how the title of the thread is written. The "my team is winning" logic is so important that rather than have a reasonable opposition party so there's always a check, the OP would rather Rs keep providing no alternative so the Ds can keep winning.

Wouldn't a reasonable opposition party be better than no choice whatsoever?

[Requiem]

Yeah, you read it.

[Rohirrim]

I'm not reading the thread (circle jerk as was mentioned early on) and won't be back, probably, to read any responses but I think it's pretty telling how the title of the thread is written. The "my team is winning" logic is so important that rather than have a reasonable opposition party so there's always a check, the OP would rather Rs keep providing no alternative so the Ds can keep winning.

Wouldn't a reasonable opposition party be better than no choice whatsoever?

Sure. Let us know when you come up with one.

[Cito Pelon]

I'm not reading the thread (circle jerk as was mentioned early on) and won't be back, probably, to read any responses but I think it's pretty telling how the title of the thread is written. The "my team is winning" logic is so important that rather than have a reasonable opposition party so there's always a check, the OP would rather Rs keep providing no alternative so the Ds can keep winning.

Wouldn't a reasonable opposition party be better than no choice whatsoever?

Sure, a "reasonable" opposition party is fine with me.

[Fedaykin]

I'm not reading the thread (circle jerk as was mentioned early on) and won't be back, probably, to read any responses but I think it's pretty telling how the title of the thread is written. The "my team is winning" logic is so important that rather than have a reasonable opposition party so there's always a check, the OP would rather Rs keep providing no alternative so the Ds can keep winning.

Wouldn't a reasonable opposition party be better than no choice whatsoever?

We absolutely need a reasonable opposition party. However, the Rs are simply not that right now:

Exhibit A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover_Norquist#Taxpayer_Protection_Pledge

[Rohirrim]

Yeah. I would prefer an opposition party that at least agrees with the basic tenets of our form of government.