Quantcast

Comments about ‘Mitt Romney insider details what went wrong during 2012 presidential campaign’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Aug. 10 2013 3:15 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
IDSpud
Eagle, ID

@moniker. "Declare war on women" is certainly a very loaded statement to throw around as a blanket response to what are very complex socio-economic challenges we face as a nation. It is also ironic that the very ones (liberals) who use it as an attack slogan against conservative principles favor policies (or at least lack the back bone to change bad policy) that truly hurt women and families. And why is no one at least a bit suspicious by a voting district that is 100% for a particular candidate? What on earth is wrong with having voters in some way demonstrate that they are citizens and legally able to vote? Whatever disenfranchisement there may be is not a Republican only problem. There's plenty that needs fixing in this country, and no one party is solely to blame. Sadly, the polarization keeping us from getting back on track is only getting worse.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

What went wrong? Nothing.

Grammy3
SOUTH JORDAN, UT

You would have made a wonderful President for this great Country of ours. Makes me sick to think of those who stood in your way and never supported you. Like Palin, Santorum, Paul, ect. if they had gone out there and hit the streets and all of those places to make sure that you won this country would be in such a better place right now.

mattrick78
Cedar City, UT

Obama may not be a great president, but I doubt that Romney would have done any better seeing how he ran his campaign. Romney ran a terrible campaign and a lot of his missteps were due to his gaffe-prone rhetoric from his comments over the London Olympics to the infamous 47% speech. He made John Kerry look tame as he flip flopped over issues from Obamacare to the Dream Act.

operaman86
Midvale, UT

I agree with you Hey Baby. The problem is the way that that each state parses its electoral votes. NO state should have the "winner take all" format. It totally disenfranchises huge groups of voters in states. It basically treats certain voting districts like second-class citizens. Take California for instance. They have 55 electoral votes because they have 53 congressmen (and women) in the House of Representatives that are elected by congressional district and 2 senators in the Senate that are elected by state-wide vote. Not every congressman (and woman) from California is a democrat. Which means that certain congressional districts vote Republican. Now, if the people in those districts are smart enough to individually elect their own leaders without the overwhelming collective controlling them, why shouldn't they be able to do the same thing with the electoral vote that only exists because of their congressional district? The candidate that gets the most votes in a state overall should only receive TWO electoral votes, representing the two Senators from that state that elected by state-wide vote. The rest of the electoral votes should be cast by which candidate gets the most votes in each congressional district.

New to Utah
PAYSON, UT

Zwick covered some of the bases in the 2012 election. Romneys campaign did an excellent job in fundraising. The primaries were a big expense and distraction and played a role in the perception that he was listening to his more conservative base. Having actually seen the Democrat party in action,their action plan is the end justifies the means. By this logic anything is appropriate to destroy ones opponent, honesty,facts,are not barriers. This was played out by the bartender liberal who illegally and secrety recored the 47% tape. This was shown in the mean spirited and dishonest ads blanketing key swing states. It now appears that liberals likely at the direction of Obama's chief counsel used the IRS and possibly the FEC to target conservative groups to prevent them from helping Romney win in states like Ohio,Florida,Virginia and others.The media revealed itself as being totally partisan, ignoring anything that painted Obama is a negative light, like Benghazi and Fast and Furious. Obama's campaign successfully suppressed Romney's vote and succeeded in getting the Black vote out in record numbers.We have to learn from this election and understand the tactics.

kosimov
Riverdale, UT

If anyone here has any doubt about what Obama is doing to America, and why, they ought to find a documentary called "Agenda", and watch it. Obama is really not in charge of the things which are most dangerous to America. I wouldn't want to step into the trap of debating who SHOULD have won the election, because that has always been a mistake; I recall my grandparents telling me many times not to get involved debating politics because it is an impossible game to win. In fact, to quote a "computer" from an old movie: 'the only way to win is not to play'.

Regardless of what we all think about Romney, Obama, the election, etc., we ought to be able to agree on one thing: America is in deep trouble. We are in danger of losing our American culture, that is, the things which have made America great over the years. If that happens, it won't matter who is president. We should unite and solve our problems together, not keep fighting over why one person or another is more popular. How many of us believe we are on the right track now?

embarrassed Utahn!
Salt Lake City, UT

It must be really difficult for people with the self-righteousness gene. They are so sure they were right and never learned to be gracious in defeat. Enjoy the 2016 election folks, I know I will.

Plus, President Obama IS doing a great job and WILL be remembered as one of our greatest President ever.

photografr7
Inwood, NY

What went wrong was that Romney was not qualified to be President, but his advisers couldn't tell him that without risking their jobs.

Eddie
Syracuse, UT

Katowice,
I see you are typical far left by not even addressing the more than 100% comment and tried To redirect to social security. The facts of the matter is that under this Pres we have more than doubled the national debt, more than doubled the number of people on food stamps and SS is given to those who have not EARNED it. I hope you enjoy your hard earned money going to those who are here illegally. If you think that SS is going to only those who worked for it, you are one of the many who are blinded by Barry.

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

"the impact of Romney’s... failure to win over voters Zwick said were more interested in what government could offer them."

It's that simplistic "makers vs. takers" view of America, right there, that alienated so many voters.

It's wrong, dumb, and highly offensive. That conservatives still cling to this mean-spirited fantasy and have such contempt for people who disagree with them is the main reason the Republican Party is not going win the White House in 2014, and must rely on voter suppression and gerrymandering to retain relevance in congress.

Look for 2014 to be a Democratic election year, and 2016 to be an even bigger disaster for the GOP.

Joshua Steimle
Draper, UT

I didn't vote for Romney because the more I learned about him, the more he sounded like Obama. Both want to use the power of government to force the rest of us to do what they feel is right. I'm looking for a President who will work to give me my freedom and let me be responsible for what I do with it. Sadly neither party has nominated anyone like that since...well, maybe since Calvin Coolidge.

Nighshade
Acton, MA

Natural politicians win and Mitt isn't a natural. Obama is, G. Bush II was, Clinton was, Reagan was, Kennedy was, etc. Politics has to be as comfortable as your own skin to win that office. You have to be born for it. Mitt was too uncomfortable, too stiff--as was Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Hillary Clinton and Kerry. Good people all--and would probably have been good presidents--but they couldn't win a national campaign. You have to be relaxed, natural, warm and connect with people from the stage to win the Big One and very few people can do that. Mitt probably would have been ok as prez but he couldn't defeat a talented politician like Obama. Obama overcame race, lack of prior experience, a strange name and much more to defeat all the primary candidates including Hillary/Bill and then the GOP candidates backed by huge amounts of power and money. He was a phenomenal campaigner, maybe the best in history. No one has been able to match him (not even Bill Clinton!) Say what you want about Obama's governance but he had the ability to get elected. Mitt, you were out of your league.

TimBehrend
Auckland NZ, 00

It's frightening to hear Zwick reduce politics to a personality match-off between celebrities. There is as much substance in presidential races as in Bravo's Real Housewives franchise, all slickness, pose, and the intellectual equivalent of repugnant cosmetic surgery. Such is the temper of our times.

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

Ok BYU alum here's why Romney lost and Repubs will continue to lose. Most of America knows that the "free cell phones" is a thirty year old communication program that started with free "calls", and has nothing to do with Obama. Most of America knows illegals don't receive Social Security, food stamps, or welfare. Most of America knows that unemployment is temporary and can't be relied on for more than a very short period. Most of Americans know that a disgraceful number of "working" Americans still don't earn enough to buy shelter, clothes, and food for a family of four so therefore they need help with food to feed their children. Food Stamps primarily feed "working" families. I could go on but you sum it up the best yourself. "Have we become so slothful that we look to government to take care of us? Calling the working poor (who are the vast receivers of government benefits) slothful is not just inaccurate but an insult and a disgrace.

UtahBlueDevil
Durham, NC

"“There’s always going to be some percentage — I’m not going to say how many, I’m not going to give a number — but there’s some percentage who want to know what’s in it for me,” Zwick said."

Here is the problem with this...... it is applies to everyone. Be it entitlements, or taxes, or some policy..... everyone votes their own personal agenda. To claim otherwise would be..... well... silly.

It was obvious that Mitt was running against his own record as a moderate, and avoided issues of faith. It is too bad on both accounts. He became hard to vote for by independents because it was very obvious he was not running at Mitt Romney, the moderate Mormon candidate... but some effigy of what his handlers thought would get him votes.

He should have run as Mitt... and the outcome could have been very different.

Fred44
Salt Lake City, Utah

Republicans will never win another Presidential election until they provide the American people a reason to vote for them. Demonizing people may make Rush, Shaun, and Glenn a lot of money, and appeal to the far right, but most Americans find it disttasteful. The 47% comment was an elitist comment that most Americans believe was sincerely how Mr. Romney feels. The Republicans if they ever hope to win again must embrace economic policies that create GOOD jobs for middle class Americans which will require a little lower profit margin for the wealthy. Reagonomics and the idea of trickle down has not worked for anyone but those at the top. It is insulting to say that 47% of Americans want a handout. Yes there are those that do, but that number is much smaller, and some of them vote republican. Look and see how many students at BYU receive some type of government handout (financial aid you don't pay back would be a government handout) Pretty sure most BYU students vote republican.

JBQ
Saint Louis, MO

The media danced all over Romney. Nevertheless, you have to look at the reality of the situation. I voted for both J Mac and Willard and would do so again. However, Mark Shields of the PBS News Hour pretty well labeled what happened. It was a matter of "perception". It was seen through the media that Mr. Romney was aloof and isolated and did not have "empathy" for those less fortunate. There were some three million less voters for Romney than McCain to reinforce that belief.

bullet56
Olympia, WA

What went wrong in the 2012 election had little to do with the candidate Romney, and more to do with the GOP. The GOP still does not get it. A party of mostly older white men, with antiquated values, a timid vision of the future, and a paranoid attitude towards the "rest of the nation". The GOP does not look like America and drags it's feet on issues that are destine to become part of the American fabric. Just look at immigration reform now, health care, and other issues. Unfortunately, it has become the party of obstruction, not innovation.

Linguist
Silver Spring, MD

A couple of thoughts from me, a Democrat and supporter of President Obama:

I am sure Gov. Romney is a decent man. So is President Obama. I think one of the biggest reasons that President Obama won was because for four years, the American Right tried to demonize him and turn him into something that no one in his right mind could possibly believe he was (e.g., someone who hated this country, who seeks to destroy it, a "socialist", a liar, an idiot, a criminal, a Muslim, a Kenyan, and so on). Repeating those charges angered many people who still see him as a smart, decent and patriotic American.

Along comes Gov. Romney and, instead of presenting a consistent record as the moderate governor of a northeastern state, he ran as far right as possible ("severely conservative") and many said, "How on earth can he be both?").

Yes, the President's campaign was brilliant. And yes, Governor Romney's was not. But the fundamental problem for the Governor was that President Obama is a pretty decent President, and a sinking economy stopped sinking and began slowly rising about a year after his policies began to kick in.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments