Reader comments
'Uneven performance' hurt Mitt, Rove says

102 comments | Read story

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

Anonymous | 12:42 a.m. July 15, 2008

Everyone and their dog knows what hurt Romney. Can you spell

r-e-l-i-g-i-o-n?

rightascension | 12:42 a.m. July 15, 2008

Being called uneven and unprepared by Karl Rove is like being called too old by John McCain.

Uneven performance | 3:24 a.m. July 15, 2008

Dear Karl: Takes one to know one. Or perhaps in your case, "unbalanced" would be a better descriptive word.

Comments continue below

uritaata | 4:18 a.m. July 15, 2008

Mitt appeared as another BUSH II.
This year the winner ran in the center not at the extreme right. Center and non partisan voters rejected more Bush type policies. Far right type policy was not the right agenda to win, on the contrary it was detrimental in open primaries.

KansasGirl | 4:29 a.m. July 15, 2008

I agree with anonymous, religion was the deciding factor. Also, the press demonizing Mormons.

RLP | 5:17 a.m. July 15, 2008

It had more to do with Mike Huckabee than his performance.

Billy Joe Jim Bob | 6:01 a.m. July 15, 2008

"The architect" just doesn't want to admit that his party is still a bastion of bigotry. Mitt's only "uneven performance" was with the Huckabigots on the Evangelical right. Republicans have made their McLame choice, and now they have to live with him.

liberal Larry | 6:13 a.m. July 15, 2008

Romney made a lot of mistakes in his campaign, but the biggest was letting his religion become an issue. If he had run as a moderate, more secular candidate, much like McCain has, he might have been the nominee. He seems to have thought that he could swap his mormonism for evangelism, and that the religious right would buy it. Big mistake, he ended up looking like a panderer to the more normal centrist republicans, and the "born agains" don't accept anyone, but their own. It's too bad, it looks like he has amazing managerial skills, he's just not a good politician.

Cats | 6:17 a.m. July 15, 2008

to righascension: Even Democrats have great respect for Karl Rove although though they hate and fear him. When it comes to political analysis, he knows what he's talking about.

I agree that the "Mormon thing" also hurt Romney. However, he'll be back. He's brilliant and highly qualified. He won't make the same mistakes next time. If McCain loses, he'll be the next in line in 2012.

I'd love to see him as McCain's running mate. GO MITT!

a creepy lot | 6:20 a.m. July 15, 2008

Neoconservatives are creepy people to begin with.
Karl Rove (Like Dick Cheney) is the epitome of that creepiness.
Romney has a liberal side that rubs neocons the wrong way.

KM | 7:09 a.m. July 15, 2008

Its that Mormon thing. The country is fine with almost anything except Mormonism.
Too many biased, ignorant and downright bigoted people.

ex | 7:19 a.m. July 15, 2008

It would be nice to take the religious factor out of politics and have separation of church and state like our american constitution calls for. Dont forget our country was founded to get away from religious persecution of the old world.

Anonymous | 7:23 a.m. July 15, 2008

Gosh, is this guy still around? His significance is greatly diminished and obviously misses the spotlight.

Rove to blame | 7:29 a.m. July 15, 2008

The problem with Romney is that Bush-Rove have made such a muddle of the GOP that it is meaningless.
Karl helped dilute our sovereignty with his amnesty for illegals and Bush spends tax money like a Democrat. Keeping taxes low only runs up the tab.
Don't blame Romney for that.
The GOP has no platform, Karl! YOUR GOP.

Dave | 7:31 a.m. July 15, 2008

People that use the term 'neocon' are creepy.

Ken Baguley | 7:36 a.m. July 15, 2008

You know, we all make mistakes. Mitt made a few, but look at all the mistakes Obama is making, all the baggage he is carrying, his background, his friends, his cohorts...Mistakes? He's a bomb ready to go off. Mitt looks pristine compared to Obama or any other candidate. If he's not taken as V.P. we're in deep yogurt.

To "a creepy lot" | 7:38 a.m. July 15, 2008

I have to ask: why would Romney's "liberal side" be a problem for neocons? There is a strong vein of liberalism that runs through so-called "neo conservatism." You might want to investigate the origins of the term.

charliejdog | 7:44 a.m. July 15, 2008

Anonymous is so right r-e-l-i-g-i-o-n was the reason.

Dave from Carolina | 7:44 a.m. July 15, 2008

The fact that Rove is from Utah is nothing Utah wants to brag about. Rove is a weasel. McCain and his Mommy went out of their way to disparage Mormons as did Huckabee, Romney should run as a Independent next time and stay away from these folks. McCain will never get my vote ,even if Romney is the VP.

ABRanteweia | 7:53 a.m. July 15, 2008

Everyone makes mistakes except JESUS CHRIST. If McCain picks Romney as his VP he will definitely win the general election on November. I'm so thankful to Karl Rove for hurting Mitt Romney as of uneven performance in his campaign. It is a great lesson for Mitt and particularly help learning from his past mistakes.

Note:
Please correct mine if necessary to be amended.

Klissa | 7:56 a.m. July 15, 2008

I would rather have a man of integrety than a political expert. As far as libral or even most mainstream politics - look where that has gotten us now. I never thought I would see the day when honesty, , morality, respect and family values were a detriment. People who complain about religion should look at the faith and forsight of the crafters of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. Our biggest fight has to be won in our own country and liberalism is not the answer. Our educational system is irrational and expensive and failing our children. It is not to late but we need more leaders like Mitt Rominey.

deercrest | 7:58 a.m. July 15, 2008

Rove exposes the presidential election process for the sham it is when he calls out mitt's 'uneven performance'. as in a performer who's been hired to entertain us, but falls short. is that really what we want in a president?

oh and here's some of mitt's comments to the CPAC that rove is SO proud of:

"I'm convinced that unless America changes course, we could become the France of the 21st century"

and talking about mitt dividing the GOP:
"Frankly, in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror."

both John Stewart and I had the same response to that gem. look it up.. it's quite succinct.

I say good riddance to that 'uneven performer'

now if rove would only do the same.

gratedane | 8:09 a.m. July 15, 2008

MITT 2012! As far as creepiness goes, can't do worse than Michael Moore or Dennis Kuchinich.

1776 | 8:14 a.m. July 15, 2008

Karl Rove being a boastful political guru is the main chracter that I don't approve. Be humble and point out the positive suggestions that would grab the attention. Be optimistic!

Romney was new at national-level politics and I am sure that he learned some things including being firm to stand for what he believes in instead of flip-flopping around the issues. Waving hands to him for rescuing the 2002 Winter Olympics from bad publicity to getting rid of greedy people. If you had read his book on it, I like his organizational style that gave this event a big positive turnaround. Other hosts had asked for copies of how to run the olympics.

As the savior of the 2000 Winter Olympics, he could rescue the faltering economy we are facing,just like Bill Clinton's success in pulling America from deep debt.

Ernest T. Bass | 8:30 a.m. July 15, 2008

Romney never did hold firm. To become Gov of MA he had to lean left and become a moderate liberal. In order to gain the presidential nominee he had to lean right and become very conservative.
Most people saw right through that.
Before he dropped out of the race he was talking to Detroit auto makers. He said he would lift any fuel-efficiency requirements on Amercian made cars. That right there tells you how he just adjusted the message to tha audience. Who in their right mind would think lowering fuel efficiency would HELP the auto industry? American car aren't selling and a big reason is that they aren't fuel efficient enough. Lifting that standard would have hastened the downfall of the US auto industry.
The real Mitt may have made a fine president. The Mitt we saw who was trying too hard to fit in to the far right wouldn't have made a good president.
Obama will win and will be great. Now if Obama were to pick Mitt as a running mate, that would be even better.

creepy is as creepy does | 8:54 a.m. July 15, 2008

Sorry gratedane,
the mere THOUGHT of Rove and Cheney's creepy mugs side-by-side is more than enough to give anybody the willies.
And THESE are the Neocon's heroes.
I blindfold my kids eyes whenever these two appear on tv.

classic conservative | 8:53 a.m. July 15, 2008

The real and true reason Mitt Romney lost the nomination was that independents and democrats were allowed to vote in New Hampshire's primary election. This gave McCain the momentum to win the whole thing. Registered republicans overwhelmingly favored Romney in that state. Had only registered republicans voted, he would've won that first all important election. He would've been unstoppable. By the way, we have the neocons to thank for that! They're the ones who're in the heirarchy in the RNC who make the nominating rules.

John | 9:00 a.m. July 15, 2008

to the vast majority of people, the US voters, that follow the mainstream Christian, in the true and accpeted form of the word, religions Mormonism is viewed as a lawless, polygamous, unthinking cult throughout the United States and the rest of the world that has even heard of Mormons .. it's really as simple as that .. they would rather let Jack Kervorkian look after Nana than vote a Mormon into a position of power ..

sunnykc | 9:01 a.m. July 15, 2008

I agree the religion factor did not help. As someone added: there are TOO MANY bigoted, ignorant people out there. There are also a great many who hate anything/anyone that smacks of too much wholesomeness...the "too good to be true" mentality. That said, McCain should pick Romney as his running mate as he'll then be just number two on the ticket plus I think the country has gotten used to the "Mormon thing." Mitt has more smarts and integrity than any politician out there and the voters should focus on that!

Anon | 9:06 a.m. July 15, 2008

Wake up Mormons. The Republican party bounced Mitt due to religion and takes you for granted. The only reason Mormons are largely Republicans is because of the pandering handout and social policies of the Dems.

The Mormon ethos does not really fit well as a Rep or a Dem. The ethos is a blend of individual responsibility coupled with real compassion and constructive community cooperation.

The Mormons should find like-minded groups and start a third party. In 25 years it might be viable. Until then the Mormons will be nothing more that the water carriers for the Reps.

Observer | 9:12 a.m. July 15, 2008

Whether or not anyone likes Karl Rove, he is an absolute political genius. For his family's sake, he has chosen the right time to get out of politics. I think we all really knew that America was not ready for Mitt Romney; but we will definitely need him in four years. I think he will stay in the spotlight and come out swinging with the right message at the right time to win.

Obama Republican | 9:12 a.m. July 15, 2008

The problem Romney has and all National LDS candidates will always have in the republican party is the Radical Christian Right. The Christian Right is no friend to Utah or to LDS as a whole.

We have our place in Politics but we are not welcome at this point on the national platform. I was asked after the Romney campaign was suspended by my Jewish Chiropractor this question. "how do you feel now that you know you are a minority?" He could see so clearly that we are not accepted!

NON-BELIVER | 9:15 a.m. July 15, 2008

YOU CAN CALL ROWE ALL THE NAMES YOU WANT. I DON'T DISAGREE. ROMNEY LOST BECAUSE HE DIDN'T HAVE A CLUE ABOUT WHAT HE STOOD FOR. HE CHANGED HIS MIND SO MANY TIMES THAT EVERYONE WAS CONFUSED. HE WENT THE WAY THE WIND WAS BLOWING. HE DID NOT DESERVE THE NOMINATION. KENNEDY FACED BIGGER ODDS THAN ROMNEY.

Sashay to the right | 9:20 a.m. July 15, 2008

Mitt would have been a lot better off to run as the same person who was elected governor of Massachusetts. Insiders will tell you that is the true Mitt Romney. Instead, he moved significantly to the right, to distinguish himself from those who were then the front-runners: McCain and Giuliani, both of whom are seen as moderates. Mitt's hope to garner the religious right vote was dashed when Huckabee came in with a better conservative pedigree. It's as simple as that. It is typical Mormon persecution complex to suggest it was only religion which did him in. It was a factor, but certainly not the main one. It could have been overcome with a more honest, true-to-his-ideals campaign.

another NN - neocon nasty | 9:28 a.m. July 15, 2008

Karl Rove is a liar and a scoundrel. He is not a patriot but a pure partisan, as his own record proved long before now.

The other night Rove lied about the liberal reaction to the Sept. 11 attacks and again exploited patriotism for narrow partisan advantage in a time of war. He seeks to divert public opinion from the failures of the Bush administration by suppressing dissent, stigmatizing "liberals" and returning to the same old tactics that the Republican far right has used ever since the McCarthy era.

Tuffy Parker | 9:28 a.m. July 15, 2008

I rarely agree with you ETB, but this time you're right on the money. Rommey tried the Bill Clinton model for defining his positions. Obama is trying the same thing which may ultimately cost him an election that is essentially being handed to him.

Clinton was perhaps the the most masterful politician of modern times with his uncanny ability to fool most of the people, most of the time. Romney and Obama simply are not up to that task and will always be better served being themselves.

the high point? | 9:30 a.m. July 15, 2008

I thought this was interesting;

"Rove said he believed Romney's exit from the GOP campaign was a high point for the former Massachusetts governor..."

I agree with the screamer | 9:31 a.m. July 15, 2008

Even though he hurt my ears saying it, he's right. JFK had a harder road overcoming his religion than did Romney. Romney's problem was shape-shifting more than religion.

Wrote the book on nasty | 9:32 a.m. July 15, 2008

Evidently Rove believes that demonizing Democrats and liberals will distract the nation from the Bush administration's failures. That tactic has certainly served him well in the past, when he managed to divert attention from the failure to deal with the terrorist threat before 9/11, the failure to speak honestly about the alleged threat from Iraq and the failure to plan intelligently for the Iraq invasion and its aftermath. We have paid an enormous price for those failures, yet cynical Rove still thinks he can convince us that this is all the fault of "liberals."

Weatherizer | 9:41 a.m. July 15, 2008

Yeah, I'm going to believe anything that comes out of the mouth of a greaseball like Rove.

To ex 7:19 a.m. | 9:49 a.m. July 15, 2008

And you would do well to remember, and don't you forget, that the Constitution calls for freedom of religion, not freedom from religion as the ACLU, et al would have you believe. Karl Rove didn't thrust himself back into the spotlight. The Dems just cannot accept the fact that he has kicked their rears at every turn. The frustrated Dems themselves keep bringing him back into the spotlight in the hope that he will trip up and they can get to President Bush. It just ain't going to happen, but hope springs eternal in the Democrat breast. I am one of those creepy neocons who likes Karl Rove and Dick Cheney and loves Mitt Romney. I asked my dog what hurt Romney most and without hesitation he confirmed what the Architect said, paraphrased: that Romney just wasn't a good enough politician. Romney will be back, politically speaking, a much wiser candidate. Heaven help him! As for Hussein, his flip-flopping toward the center of the political spectrum has not been his finest hour. He has become too slick for his own good. The most recent polls indicate his fragile lead continues to decline. Couldn't happpen to a nicer fellow.

BobW | 9:50 a.m. July 15, 2008

I have continued to think that Mitt should have changed parties and run as a Democrat. It would have been a natural outgrowth of his govenorship in Massachusetts and he could have easily explained his early pro-abortion views, gay marriage openness, etc.

Anyway, Democrats are much more open to newness. Mormonism is certainly on a par with dark skin and being a woman.

He would have had a hard time fund-raising in Utah, however.

Antonio | 9:52 a.m. July 15, 2008

It is so sad that our citizens of the country have actually come to believe the Rove style politics.

That would be smear, lie, debase, anything you would like to do to defeat your opposition.

Mitt might have had a chance if people like Rove were not on his plate.

What ever happened to ideas, education, being able to step accross lines to get the job done?

Am radio and Rove type people have driven a knife into the hearts of the average voting American.

I don't see things getting better. Only worse. The grave has been dug, and we have accepted the worst kind of politics, so I guess we will lie down now.

tx/utah ros | 10:13 a.m. July 15, 2008

For everyone out there that does not like lds
Maybe if you have the money the campaign why do you not run for president. Remember that there are other factors in becoming a president. Money is number one. Then a support campaign and and an education It is not based on being Mormon, Catholic. Jehovah witness or any other relgion. Religion is for everyone that believes in something
Does the constution ever mention a particular reglion no no no And if Mitt Rommney is elected great for america. If Hilary Clinton or anyone else
great for america we will have to learn to live with the facts of politics. Haven't we so far. Lets learn to be tolerate of others love one another and be kind to all.

Phil | 10:14 a.m. July 15, 2008

"Have you read some of the ugly things they say about me?"

Wow! This goes beyond irony. The architect of the Bush/Cheney strategy of divide, then divide some more and polarize. Rove's politics are ugly. We're all paying the price

Just Musing | 10:20 a.m. July 15, 2008

Careful, Bob W, if Democrats become too open-minded, their brains could fall out.

Anonymous | 10:29 a.m. July 15, 2008

I agree with NON-BELIVER above .... Romney "repackaged" himself every day. He's a marketing man, not a a political leader. I also agree with neocon nasty. Rove is a lying sroundrel to the nth degree.

Relocated Southerner | 10:34 a.m. July 15, 2008

Seems being indecisive and wishy-washy hasn't hurt Obama at all, so how could it have hurt Mitt? Oh, maybe that's because the liberal media re indecisive and wishy-washy or will just do anything, say anything to ensure their liberal agenda is met, no matter the cost to the American people!

Speaking about ignorance | 10:59 a.m. July 15, 2008

Many of you have an inflated opinion of others disgust for Mormonism. Just like blacks who think that everyone else is racist, you are too close to the issue to see clearly. Sure there are people that hate Mormons just like there are racist individuals, but to say that people didn't like Romney because he was a Mormon would be like you saying you didn't like Obama because he was black. For whatever reason, Romney didn't connect with enough people like he needed to. They didn't agree with something he said or did. For the vast majority of those who opposed him, religion had very little to do with it. Just like I would never vote for Obama, not because of his color, but because nobody including himself can figure out what he stands for except "change", and frankly I can't spare a dime.

Sagacious Inquisitor | 11:10 a.m. July 15, 2008

To: Wrote the book on nasty.

Surely, ï¿½the failure to deal with the terrorist threat before 9/11ï¿½ as well as ï¿½the failure to speak honestly about the alleged threat from Iraqï¿½ are failures with which Rove had only limited involvement; they both predate the ï¿½changeï¿½ of administration which happened only a scant 9 months before the wrecking explosions in NYC. Those failures happened primarily under the Clinton gang; which should have dealt with them but failed to do so in a timely and responsible fashion. Had that liberal administration properly dealt with these problems, you would surely not now be blaming Rove and his chums for ï¿½the failure to plan intelligently for the Iraq invasion and its aftermathï¿½.

Indeed, weï¿½ve paid an enormous price for all three of those failures. And, the blame for them must be shared jointly between the "liberals" and the ï¿½neoconsï¿½. Neither of them make good leaders in times of challenge and difficulty.

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.