U.S. & World

Explaining Mitt Romney's loss: Messaging or messenger?


Return To Article
  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    March 9, 2013 7:18 p.m.

    Haha, cool cat, not at all. Perhaps you need to learn what stereotyping means. Clearly I don't know the exact reason he was there, he did say he was there to make a change, but I never besmirched his character, except in the area he offered up: accusing others of being lazy and shiftless, when they too could have just as easily been there for the reason of replacing a lost card, etc.

    No stereotyping at all. Really, you do need to learn what sterotyping is. Saying that people waiting in line at a social security office are looking for government handouts and do not believe in honest work, or self reliance, is, among many other things, sterotyping.

    Pointing out the inanity of criticizing others while waiting in the same line is just astute observation.

  • Cool Cat Cosmo Payson, UT
    March 8, 2013 9:37 p.m.

    @ Mark

    ...Perhaps he lost his card and was looking to get a new one...? Or maybe he was there to ask about a new social security card for his newlywed wife? Those are certainly possibilities.

    However, he also made the assumption that most everyone else was there for a handout, so I guess you BOTH are guilty of stereotyping people. Congratulations.

  • Bored to the point of THIS! Ogden, UT
    March 8, 2013 11:59 a.m.

    Mitt Romney ran for President?

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    March 8, 2013 9:11 a.m.

    So, New to Utah, you fit right in. Your post on the 5th at 8:30 hit just about every single right wing talk radio bumper sticker talking point out there. Strong work. You fit right in.

    Then you posted this, "Government handouts seem more acceptable than honest work,self reliance. I had to make a change at Social Security in Provo and there was hardly standing room available."

    You had to make a change to your social security? So I can assume you are on social security? And you are right there with everyone else in the offices with standing room only? And yet all of THEM are the lazy ones taking government handouts, and YOU are the only one that is self reliant and a hard worker? Really? Too funny.

  • New to Utah PAYSON, UT
    March 7, 2013 10:07 a.m.

    It is troubling that so many people in Utah have accepted the Obama playbook of dependency.Government handouts seem more acceptable than honest work,self reliance. I had to make a change at Social Security in Provo and there was hardly standing room available. My thought our country will be bankrupt just as Obama finishes his second term.

  • mcclark Salt Lake City, UT
    March 6, 2013 3:33 p.m.

    I knew Obama was going to win a least a week before the election, the polls said so. So hearing Romney say he thought he was going to win until the Florida and Ohio returns came in is kind of disturbing. He is that out of touch with reality?

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    March 6, 2013 2:50 p.m.

    Enterprise, UT
    It's hard to beat free...everyone wants something for nothing and the Dems will never be beat as long as they hand out entitlements for votes.


    Why is this a Democrats issue? I didn't see Romney wanting to take a machete to government entitlements.

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    March 6, 2013 2:47 p.m.

    Romney lost because of his gaffe-prone rhetoric and because he had enough "flip flips" to give John Kerry a bad case of ideological vertigo.

    The GOP needs to embrace diversity and come up with better candidates.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    March 6, 2013 10:09 a.m.

    Mitt Romney didn't lose! We did.

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    March 6, 2013 6:33 a.m.

    If you think the Tea Party was moderate back in the day, then you must have been living solely in a conservative strongholds. Most analysts I've heard on this matter say BOTH parties have been trending towards their extremes in recent years. Hence our gridlock.

    Your wistful nostalgia of America from 80 years ago is selective. There is a lot that has been improved.

  • frugalfly PULLMAN, WA
    March 5, 2013 10:17 p.m.

    Romney lost, period. Barrak Hussein Obama won, period. What we learned in the last election is that the general direction of the country over the past 80 years has drifted to "liberalism" and "progressivism". We now are a people who have culturally evolved into a culture of less religiosity, more government involvement/intervention, less oriented to family, more perverse, less self sufficient, more self gratifying, and more reliant upon debt. The evidence of this is that the so called "Tea Party" is considered "Radical". I just laugh. I am no tea party member but the statutes which it holds and puts forth are considered radical by our current culture. The Tea Party would be considered center earlier in my lifetime and now it is considered the "radical right". I am just amazed. We aren't the same country...

  • New to Utah PAYSON, UT
    March 5, 2013 8:30 p.m.

    I have participated in campaigns in liberal states and honestly Obama is a great campaigner. He is a horrific president and has not lead as president. David Axelrod and team Obama had to destroy Romney and suppress the vote to win. They used principles from rules of radicals and class warfare, race, gender, age to coble together a win. It was a dirty, slimy and yet carefully crafted campaign. Romney was too nice a person and had to much love for our country to really get into the mud slinging. Ultimately the news media, liberal establishment in academia,Hollywood and the organizational ability of the unions was just too much.The message was good but was drowned out by Obama's divide and conquer effort.Obama should accept that he is the leader and quit campaigning and show some leadership.

  • NeilT Clearfield, UT
    March 5, 2013 6:46 p.m.

    Many of the comments are excellent and reflect my feelings as well. I voted for Romney as a vote against Obama. I was profoundly dissapointed in his campaign. Romney never articulated where he would cut spending and insists on increasing defense spending. As if the pentagon is some sort of sacred cow and is exempt from being accountable for being wasteful. I am tired of Republicans crticizing those who don't pay federal tazes. Could it the way the tax laws are written. It's not if people are somehow finding ways to deliberately avoid taxes. Isn't taking advantage of all legitimate deductions what the wealthy do. Romney supporters need to take the time read the comments on here. Romney's loss had nothing to do with voter fraud and Obama promising free stuff and more to do with the message.

  • Res Novae Ashburn, VA
    March 5, 2013 5:35 p.m.

    "I knew Mitt was in trouble when I (a middle-aged, white, politically moderate, LDS, male) had trouble connecting with him on just a human level."

    Perfectly put, those are my demographics as well. I watched Romney for years hoping he would get a shot. But when the opportunity came it was at the price of running to far to the right for my taste. I was disappointed because I couldn't see anything authentic in his campaigning. I became convinced that he wasn't being true to himself and that he was saying what he thought others wanted to hear. And then the 47% comments came out and he lost me. I have been one of the 47%. I know what it is like to struggle. Romney never has, and if he was willing to write off millions of Americans who struggle to make basic ends meet, then I couldn't vote for him.

    Where did the Romney who ran for governor of Massachusetts go? I'd have voted for him in a heartbeat.

    Where did the Romney who ran for Massachussetts governor go? I'd have voted for that Romney oj a heartb

  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    March 5, 2013 4:09 p.m.

    @troubs, may we assume that you gave back all your free stuff.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    March 5, 2013 3:21 p.m.

    Messaging or Messenger?

    The messenger
    Someone who was born into affluence, attended elite private schools, made money by taking over companies, laying off union workers and leveraging companies with debt while skimming off the profits is going to have a hard time with voters suffering from an economic crisis. To top it off, he hid most of his tax returns and the 2 he released revealed an extremely low tax rate as a result of special loopholes. His continual shifting of positions and stances as candidate and governor caused mistrust and confusion. Free healthcare--isn't that what he implemented as Gov. Of MA?

    The message
    Nobody can win a general election by castigating 47% of Americans (2/3 of whom work), women, and minorities. Republicans remain unaware welfare was reformed in the 90's. A majority of Americans don't believe in "trickle-down" economics or that the wealthy are paying too much income tax. Most Americans are aware that growing inequality is a threat to the U.S. economy--and see the great economic gains by only those in the top1%. Most American women believe they can and should be in charge of their own medical issues.

  • troubs Enterprise, UT
    March 5, 2013 1:48 p.m.

    It's hard to beat free...everyone wants something for nothing and the Dems will never be beat as long as they hand out entitlements for votes. Its going to get worst before it gets better.

  • Brown Honeyvale, CA
    March 5, 2013 11:38 a.m.

    @John Wilson What you said is so true! I am amazed at the people on this post who don't put forth the effort to watch the entire interview but just believe what the author of this article wrote. Shame on you all! Romney was right on with the 47% comment, he is a business man whose ability to accurately assess a situation is sorely needed in our government. Everyone talks about disliking politicians and needing statesman and yet they only want to hear the warm fuzzy "I will make everyone happy" comments. A politician actually gives an accurate assessment of a problem and he is demonized for being uncaring and out of touch, oh, and having too much money. Have any of you ever lived in the slum areas of the US? I have, and I understand what the Govt dole is doing to the 47%. Have compassion, but change the system so the 47% has the motivation to increase their income through education, not by having another baby!

    @Oatmeal "Politically Moderate" is the politically correct way to identify oneself these days…get a backbone and stand for something.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    March 5, 2013 11:16 a.m.

    I had a song that I liked a lot. every place I went that song was played over and over again until I couldn't listen to it ever again. I loved banana milk shakes till I had one to many of them and I could not drink one without getting sick. Romney is in that category of stuff I can't stand any more. because I heard to much of all the time.

  • Brown Honeyvale, CA
    March 5, 2013 11:00 a.m.

    Let me tell you what the Govt dole is…I see it every morning. Parents dropping their kids off at 7:00 to get free breakfast, after which they get free tutoring, then free schooling (none of these parents pay property taxes), then more free lunch, free dental care, free after school tutoring and then they pick them up at 4:30 when the school closes. Yes, I have compassion for these children and their parents but I am tired of the 47% in my elementary school that is bringing down the level of teaching--I asked one teacher why she wasn't requiring the memorization of the world countries and their capitals for my second child as she did for my first. Her response: "because half the class won't get any help from home to memorize it" This goes right back to the lack of personal responsibility--let someone else do it/pay for it. Oh, did I mention I see many of these parents pull up in their new SUV's and talking on their iPhones? They take it because they can. Needing to take Govt dole used to be an embarassment, now it is a supplemental income.

  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    March 5, 2013 10:43 a.m.

    @kberry, are you painting a self portrait .

  • Something to think about Ogden, UT
    March 5, 2013 10:14 a.m.

    re: wrz

    I'm a school teacher. I'm part of the 47%. Police, Firemen, Etc.. We're all "sucking up to welfare?"

    I don't think so!

    I'd even bet you have a job that in some way benefits from government funding. Go back to school!

  • rgkmzk Orem, UT
    March 5, 2013 10:02 a.m.

    Romney was beholden to the Koch brothers and large donations from people who dictated his campaign. Romney's campaign was so far removed from understanding the actual voters because of these donations that came with restrictions. Americans don't want freebees, but many of us have worked hard and are still working hard, but because of lack of breaks or luck or whatever we don't have, we have not achieved the success of even providing for our families. If Romney had put in more effort to show us how we could achieve our needs with his policy, he would be president today. He dwelt too much on government deficit spending and not enough on how his ideas would promote the American dream. Obama showed us a way to get what we need better than Romney did. The negativity in his campaign was disastrous to him.

  • John Wilson Idaho Falls, 00
    March 5, 2013 10:01 a.m.

    I am an independent who voted for Obama in 2008. and voted against him in 2012 by voting for Romney. I never cared for Romeny, so it was truly a vote against Obama. I was curious, so I watched the entire interview. I was impressed with Romney's answers. He took full personal responsibility for the loss. He didn't make excuses. He was clear, charming, engaging, and articulate. In sum, he was what you would hope for from somone who lost the election. I have read several articles about the interview, including this one. I don't believe the writers even watched more than sound bites. I don't think they watched the entire interview. Romney lost, and was gracious in talking about it. The country needs to get over him. He is no longer a political player. He knows that and freely admitted it. Give the guy a break. He lost, and is being classy about it.

  • kberry Tooele, UT
    March 5, 2013 9:37 a.m.

    While the messenger and the message are never "perfect" the majority of the problem is with the voters. More voters are ill-informed, ill-educated, and immoral. The bottom line is we need to take more personal responsibility to take care of ourselves and to help our fellow men. Taxes are not charity!

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    March 5, 2013 9:29 a.m.

    President Obama's campaign had been planning on Mitt Romney getting the Republican nomination for months prior to the convention. They had the strategy down pat on how to erode any gains the Governor had made in the almost 2 dozen debates on national television. They knew that Mitt Romney would be an open target for their type of Chicagoship type of operations. His father had been a candidate and made some errors that were capitalized by the adversaries, even within the Republican party and especially the press of the 1960s. The Press did the same this time with the 47 percent remark that an insider made capital on with that recording surfacing at the appropriate time. Since the Tea-Party was new to the national Presidential election campaign and convention process, that probably didn't help for unifying a party that has some growing pains. The President knew how to capitalize on the entitled people to get their votes with threats of having those entitlements cut by the Republicans. Those entitlements won't go away as they are entrenched into the livelihood of constituents/providers for 70 years and more. These are not short term entitlements that Congress thought would go away.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    March 5, 2013 9:12 a.m.

    Does it really matter?

  • sergio Phoenix, AZ
    March 5, 2013 9:07 a.m.

    I guess one could say that the prove is in the pudding. Mr. Obama got elected president and things are getting better. Mr. Romney is sulking about his hurt feelings and doing nothing to make things better. Mr. Obama just seems like the better all around man.

  • wilson-kelly Vale, OR
    March 5, 2013 8:37 a.m.

    Let the blame game begin!
    That simple little gentleman wager of $10,000 did it for me! Definitely don't run in that world, and that is betting, imo.
    It is absolutely amazing, or maybe not, that a question of "Why didn't you vote for Mitt?" is never asked by the GOP.
    I will get the stupid surveys asking if I believe we should support more government spending or some other redundant question.
    I watched the GOP in action... again. They turned a blind eye toward the slighting of Ron Paul. Okay, but now you want to get serious when your man gets whacked?
    What was the difference between BO and MItt on pre-emptive war... none.
    What was the difference between BO and MItt on the Federal Reserve and the monetary issues.... none
    What was the difference between BO and Mitt on health care, about the same.
    So we will be introduced now to another Bush Presidency by the GOP in '16 with Jeb Bush, (he can win!).
    Hope this works out well.
    Maybe next time the GOP will start asking real questions, but I am not holding my breath.

  • Oatmeal Woods Cross, UT
    March 5, 2013 8:34 a.m.

    I think it was the messenger. I knew Mitt was in trouble when I (a middle-aged, white, politically moderate, LDS, male) had trouble connecting with him on just a human level.

  • FDRfan Sugar City, ID
    March 5, 2013 8:12 a.m.

    How could you ignore a third, and the most important option - MESSAGE?

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    March 5, 2013 8:03 a.m.

    Whatever the Republicans do, keep Newt Gingrich and Karl Rove away. They should be as welcome in Republican circles as Reid and Pelosi.

  • Mike in Sandy Sandy, UT
    March 5, 2013 7:32 a.m.

    Absolutely--- the messenger.

    Mitt came across as brash, and really had zero connection to the everyday voter.

    PLUS...caught on video in the first debate with President Obama, he was seen cheating...smuggling in notes that are specifically not allowed.

    The nation didn't trust him.

  • Springvillepoet Springville, UT
    March 5, 2013 7:02 a.m.

    The simple facts of election history shows us that no president in the 20th Century, other than FDR, could really be called anything but a moderate within his chosen party. And truthfully, FDR was only farther left because the times dictated what he referred to as "bold experimentation" in order to try and alleviate the economic disaster of The Great Depression.

    Even President Obama is a centrist. The political spectrum demands it, because no president can get elected without a majority of support of those in the center. 10% of the population (both left and right combined) are in the extreme wings of the political spectrum, but about 80% of Americans are in the middle 10% of the political spectrum, with only a few differences in opinion/belief separating them. Without that base, no president gets elected.

    Romney messed around with the group which actually defines an inability to present a unified message in American politics---The Tea Party. Coming back to the center was what he needed to do, but in doing so, he lost the only gain he made with his swing to the right---that Tea Party.

  • DanO Mission Viejo, CA
    March 4, 2013 11:09 p.m.

    Mitt and Ann still don't understand why he lost. That's reason enough to be glad they aren't in the White House. As for Republicans and "job creators", they don't understand who the job creators actually are. It's not the business owner, it's the consumer. Demand creates jobs. It's basic economics.

  • JimInSLC Salt Lake City, UT
    March 4, 2013 10:59 p.m.

    Mitt impressed me as a person that could easily have become a war monger if given the position of President and Commander in Chief.

    In the third debate w/ Obama on foreign relations, Romney was almost one hundred percent in agreement with Obama's policy. Romney pledged to put even more money into military spending.

    I voted for Obama his first term because he promised to end the wars. He got elected and escalated the wars. I did not vote for him again, he had proven himself not to be a man of his word.

    Both Obama and Romney are controlled by corporate interests that are profiting from war. The US has become the terrorist of the world. Iraq was for oil, Afghanistan is for real estate for a pipeline. The next war will be to try to save our collapsing currency. I count it a blessing to live in america, and have served in the military, but our current government policies make me sick. It is we the people responsible for putting them in office. We have the best government that corporate money can buy; The best government for corporations that is.

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    March 4, 2013 10:15 p.m.

    "The comment was accurate. He didn't say they were lazy. He said they were on government dole. And they are/were"

    Lots to deal with here. The comment was only accurate in that he had the correct percentage of people who were paying no federal income taxes. That's where accuracy ends. They still pay FICA payroll taxes, which are substantial. And the 47% did not vote exclusively for Obama as Romney stated, a very sizable proportion vote Republican. Really, this was debunked quickly after Romney said it, so why do you still believe it months later? Now about the government dole comment. If qualifying for a lower tax rate is "being on the dole", then everyone is. If you get tax breaks for your kids, you are on the dole. If you deduct your mortgage interest you are on the dole. If you are contributing to an IRA and taking the deduction, you are on the dole. Romney pays a lower percent tax rate on his capital gains. Well, he's on the dole.

    "Many of the 47% are sucking up unemployment benefits.."

    Many? How many? Care to give a percentage?

  • wrz Pheonix, AZ
    March 4, 2013 9:32 p.m.

    "The 47% comment was the clincher for me."

    The comment was accurate. He didn't say they were lazy. He said they were on government dole. And they are/were.

    "Anyone who honestly and truly believes that half of the nation are lazy freeloader does not deserve to be in the white house."

    Many of the 47% are sucking up unemployment benefits and are not seeking employment until the benefits are about to run out. That's freeloading. In any event, Romney made a mistake by dissing these folks. If you want to win an election you must not be found dissing anyone... in public or elsewhere.

    "Many of us are undoubtedly curious how the Romney family can ever put this behind them if the DN continues to publish endless stories about why Mitt lost."

    How can you say that...? This is the first story since the election.

    "Perhaps Mitt and Ann could avoid those interviews if no one was interested any longer?"

    You seem interested since you apparently read the article and took the time to comment.

  • Emajor_ Ogden, UT
    March 4, 2013 9:28 p.m.

    "We would be solving some of the economic mess we have now if he were president!"

    There's some wild unfounded speculation. All through the campaign season, people were badly overstating the role the President has in directing the economy of this country. The economic collapse wasn't caused by a President, and it isn't going to be solved by one. One case in point: during the campaign, Romney promised X-millions of new jobs over 4 years if he won. But economists were predicting that many jobs regardless of who occupied the White House.

    "Mitt's executive experience was turning around businesses and making them profitable. He could have done the same for our country"

    Ronald Reagan's Budget Director, David Stockman, strongly disagrees with that one. He argued in a very lengthy analysis that Romney was a financial speculator, not a job creator or true businessman who actually creates and markets a product. And as such, his corporate experience would be of little benefit in shaping national economic policy. Because it will never be tested, it is easy to keep believing Romney would have saved the economy. But you're probably wrong.

  • O'really Idaho Falls, ID
    March 4, 2013 9:21 p.m.

    There was nothing wrong with Mitt Romney, nor his message. If the opposing side would have listened and considered the strength of his ideas, things would have turned out differently. But unfortunately, MSM,lefties, Hollywood and the Obama-phoners drowned out and distorted his message to the point that it was unrecognizable. Such a shame! We could be on the road to recovery if just a fraction more of the country had listened and used their brains.

  • Emajor_ Ogden, UT
    March 4, 2013 9:18 p.m.

    I had almost forgotten about what a cast of characters the GOP primary field was. Bachmann, Cain, Santorum, Gingrich, Perry. You couldn't make this stuff up if you tried.

    Romney was the best of a truly uncompetitive lot. Rather than running as the thoughtful moderate Republican he seemed to be as governor, he proceeded to flip-flop across the general election, changing his position, offering vague & meaningless platitudes instead of specifics, throwing bones to Tea Party voters while insulting 47% of the nation by lying to rich constituents at a $50K a plate fundraiser. Romney was a chameleon who rarely showed his true colors, and when he did (like the 47% comment), they weren't colors many people liked. Then there were the strategic and logistic flaws in his campaign.

    Message or messenger? Both.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    March 4, 2013 8:58 p.m.

    Look at the field of GOP candidates who ran. I still shake my head in amazement.

    That Romney was considered the best the GOP could muster in 2012, even with high unemployment and a struggling economy, speaks volumes about how weak the GOP bench has become.

  • BYUalum South Jordan, UT
    March 4, 2013 8:33 p.m.

    Mitt Romney is a good man and would have made a great President. We would be solving some of the economic mess we have now if he were president! All the freebies BHO handed out won him the election. Plus, some people were able to vote numerous times, i.e. Florida and Iowa. Voter fraud played a huge part. Mitt's executive experience was turning around businesses and making them profitable. He could have done the same for our country. No wonder he is frustrated. BHO continues to spend huge amounts of money touring around in campaign mode instead of staying home and showing leadership! He blames, blames, blames when he should take responsibility and begin to unite this country.

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    March 4, 2013 7:58 p.m.

    It was definitely the message.

    Liberal republicanism does not sell.

    It just compromises and stands for nothing.

    It lets the opposition define them.

    It does not rouse the base.

  • Uncle Rico Sandy, UT
    March 4, 2013 7:10 p.m.

    @ Shaun

    The problem with the Republican Party is they treat you like your worthless unless your a job creator. Not every one wants to be a business owner but they want to go to work earn a wage their family can live on.

    No Shaun, but this is undoubtedly the message you took out of the Republican Party. I would guess that you are not a job-creator or business owner. Having said that, if the Republican Party thought everyone else was "worthless", than there wouldn't be a purpose for job creators would there?

  • Aggielove Cache county, USA
    March 4, 2013 7:03 p.m.

    Ballot cheating

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    March 4, 2013 6:38 p.m.

    The GOP had organizational and message problems across the board. Although I was never predisposed to support them, among the more galling things were putting out the false (but easily rebutted) statements about outsourcing Ohio auto jobs to China and "legitimate" rape. The blatant attempts to suppress minority voting by cutting election hours and inhibiting early registration in several states also was offputting.

    As to Gov. Romney himself, his pandering to the Tea Party wing was a dealbreaker. The man had solid centrist credentials with a state run health care plan that was the model for Obamacare, support for climate change initiatives, and tolerance for LGBT rights. He unnecessarily distanced himself from those stands to win the nomination against a weak field of ultra-rightwingers already prone to self-destruction. His shift to the right was transparent to anyone. You could tell that he was uncomfortable saying some of the things he had to say to win delegates. It revealed him to be a man without principle or conviction, willing to say anything to get elected. In the end, ironically, it boiled down to his character. He might have won as a center-right candidate, but threw it away.

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    March 4, 2013 6:40 p.m.

    Richard Nixon's formula for winning the White House was to "run to the right" to get the Republican Nomination, then "run to the middle" to win the General Election. But what happens when "running to the right" takes you so far to the fringes of the political landscape that a journey back to the center cannot be accommodated? Isn't that what happened here? The more the Radical Right monopolizes the Republican Party, the more they are going to put it out of business. Ronald Regan could not win the nomination of today's GOP.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    March 4, 2013 6:39 p.m.

    The problem with the Republican Party is they treat you like your worthless unless your a job creator. Not every one wants to be a business owner but they want to go to work earn a wage their family can live on.

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    March 4, 2013 5:53 p.m.

    @andyjaggy 5:07 p.m. March 4, 2013

    Exactly right. This was a case of a lousy message promoted by a lousy messenger. Contrary to what Mitt wants to whine, his message was fully and accurately understood by the voters (and found to be wanting). And, especially when Mitt was himself, he showed how unqualiied he was to be president for anyone but the extremly privileged, and what an unappealing candidate and person he really was and is. The majority of the voters had the discretion to see through him and his message, and rejected him. Much as I don't like Obama, and didn't vote for him, Romney (by his own words and actions) showed that he would have been infinitely worse. The country dodged a huge disaster when Romney was defeated.

  • ThornBirds St.George, Utah
    March 4, 2013 5:50 p.m.

    Many of us are undoubtedly curious how the Romney family can ever put this behind them if the DN continues to publish endless stories about why Mitt lost.
    Perhaps Mitt and Ann could avoid those interviews if no one was interested any longer?
    Really, after all, does all this conversation change their lot in life?

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    March 4, 2013 5:49 p.m.

    The nation is moving on. Romney, however, was tied to the republican party, and it is firmly and stodgily tied to all the baggage and anger that is the tea party. We're movin' on.

  • andyjaggy American Fork, UT
    March 4, 2013 5:07 p.m.

    A little bit of both I believe. I wanted to vote Republican this election, but at the end I just couldn't do it. The 47% comment was the clincher for me. Anyone who honestly and truly believes that half of the nation are lazy freeloader does not deserve to be in the white house.

    The 47% were those not paying federal income tax, they still paid plenty of other taxes. It also included seniors and military personnel. It also included a whole lot of Utahns who get lots of tax breaks because of the child tax credit and our large families. Yet somehow everyone in Utah thought that it was only referring to everyone else.