Mitt Romney emerges to discuss President Obama, campaign errors, political future (+video)

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • johanngoethe SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    March 7, 2013 6:04 p.m.

    Romney would have made a better president to deal with our current problems. But, alas, he committed significant campaign errors that could not be remedied in time to win. If we had to have a dictator, as the Romans temporarily instituted when Hannibal was at the gates, Romney would be my man, because, I think is is tough and trustworthy.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    March 6, 2013 2:51 p.m.

    Great Obama won. We learn some new vocabulary, and renew some others:

    * fiscal cliff
    * sequester
    * transparent
    * infrastructure
    * debt
    * deficit
    * golf
    * vacation

    Re-electing Obama is the worse mistake in American history.

    When he leaves office in four years, we'll more damage then all wars put together.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    March 6, 2013 9:59 a.m.

    May our Obama voters reap what they sow. We are currently transforming into Cuba.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    March 5, 2013 10:58 p.m.

    To Troy, high deductible health care plans are a direct result of Obama is a ridiculous statment. They have been around as an option forever..years and years. More companies are pushing them now because they cost you more and them less. The very same reason decades ago they dropped define benefit retirment plans and went to defined contribution plans. Now they have dropped all company connections to retirement plans and most large company employees are on their own trying to save for retiremnt. Pay has declined over the last two decades as have all benfit plans. High dedcutible health insurance is just a piece of the squeeze on the middle class and has nothing to do with Obama.

    March 5, 2013 9:37 p.m.

    All these comments only go to prove George Washington was right about the dangers of political parties. Read his farewell address.

    Political parties have nothing whatsoever to do with the Constitution. They are an unfortunate leftover from British political practice. Why did we ever let them surreptitiously sneak into the American System?

  • Harley Rider Small Town, CT
    March 5, 2013 12:00 p.m.

    Everett, 00

    The policy makers are largely The Bilderberg Group and of course a Heavy dose of Israeli influence, the POTUS is just a Lackey. This group totally controls the Senate and the Congress and have for years. Examples - Trade agreements signed - drive thru small town USA and see the result * Immigration - borders opened for many years - no enforcement * Bailouts of Wall Street Bankers - 88% of citizens said no * Obama's Health Care - The People said No * And you do know that the war on Terror is Totally Bogus - It's about passing Harsh Anti Freedom legislation and taking over of Foreign Countrie's Banking Systems & Their Natural Resources. Our Government quit listening to the Citizenry years ago.

    And as far as Electronic Voting - most local elections , issues etc are not of course pre-programmed , but on a National Level it's a different story. Course if one drinks too much Koolaid they will never understand or believe the real behind the scenes manipulations.

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    March 5, 2013 8:50 a.m.


    I should have typed: Neither Romney or Obama had majority support of the people of the nation, the electorate. Paul had insufficient support to win nationally but did have enough to tip the balance for Romney.

    There are, btw, issues that had a general consensus that crossed party lines. A strong position on illegal immigration was one of Romney's most appealing stances; that could have been given more prominence in his campaign. Support of the Social Security system and assurances of honest cola's would have gained him more support with the nation generally than it would have lost him the support of a relatively few groupies.

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    March 5, 2013 8:29 a.m.

    I think that Romney represented a large part of the nation very well: that part that is arrogantly nationalistic who, like Mitt, genuinely feel that the US never needs to apologize to "foreigners" whether friend or foe, and see patriotism not just as love of country but contempt for other nations. Sorry Mitt. He also represented well the attitude that those who don't pay income tax are leeches. Sorry again but, as others have pointed out, the exemptions are supposed to protect working people from penury. These people do pay other taxes btw. Mitt's aggressive foreign policy and hawkishness also represented well many people, although I am not one of them.

    I will add that which I have not seen yet expressed: had Mitt and his party given the Ron Paul supporters anything substantial, had adopted any of their concerns seriously, made any meaningful concessions he might have closed the gap with Obama. Paul support was not enough to win but could very well have tipped the balance.

    Neither Romney nor Paul had majority support in the country; the electorate was partly disenchanted with both candidates. Some kind of alliance was needed for a genuinely popular result.

  • Shazandra Bakersfield, CA
    March 4, 2013 7:10 p.m.

    @Tea Repub-
    That's what I thought, too, re: Mitt's blaming. I read several nat'l articles and smelled sour grapes...

    Then I saw his interview with Chris Wallace. Those omissions in the liberal press didn't use Romney's quotes when Chris asked him if he blamed Chris Christie's fawning over Mr. O at the Sandy conferences. "Ha, No Chris! Nothing anyone else did made me lose. My campaign mistakes were my own fault." That made me respect his honesty and despise our deceitful Liberal Propaganda Machine even more.

    That said, Mitt garnered no respect from ex-Mormon evangelicals on the way he avoided full disclosure of his true religious beliefs. When we got through sending everyone full LDS theology, our local conservatives stopped supporting Romney-Ryan. That wasn't our goal, but it was the consequence of modern Mormon evangelism. When you disown, deny and obfuscate, there is fall-out.

    Just one aspect of voter's reasoning out here in Evie-Land. I still voted for Romney-Ryan; my husband refused to elect a man who could not defend his full religious portfolio. My spouse is the more ethical by far.

  • Shazandra Bakersfield, CA
    March 4, 2013 6:45 p.m.

    Lotsa flip floppers on both sides; lotsa different reasons why people vote as they do.

    I would have voted straight black- had the candidates been Herman Cain and J.Z. Watts.
    I would not have voted female had the candidates been Palin, Pelosi, Waters or Madame Hillary.
    I would have voted for Rand, but not Ron- liked both fiscal plans, could not suffer Ron's stupid Israel positions.
    I would have written-in my husband's name had whiners Santorum, Gingrich or Perry been nominated.
    There is no Democratic female I would have voted for, under any circumstances.

    And I forced myself to vote for Mitt, knowing my Calif vote meant nothing. I knew he was honest, but honestly from another generation that wasn't relating to youth, minorities or my evangelical base.

    Yeah, I agree God spoke to America: This is Consequence Time for bad parenting/politics/ and policy!

  • Clinton Draper, UT
    March 4, 2013 4:47 p.m.

    The fact is that Romney was and is a more honest and capable leader than Obama could ever hope to be. Obama is nothing more than Bush+.

    On a separate note, it absolutely kills me when I see people like Impartial7 calling Romney a flip-flopper and an elitist. Haven't these people paid attention to Obama's flip-flopping, bald-faced lies on the sequester alone? How about Benghazi? As for elitists, it is the Democrat party that is far more interested in taking your money, guns, healthcare options, and other individual rights away than are most Republicans. How much more of an elitist can you possibly be than to think you know what's best for everybody in the country at a personal level?

    Finally, it is interesting to note the absolute greed and juvenile jealousy with which so many people view Romney simply because the guy is successful. To me, that speaks volumes about your own lack of integrity rather than any sort of commentary on his.

  • TeaPublican Houston, TX
    March 4, 2013 4:17 p.m.

    When Mitt Romney emerged from his hole, he didn’t even look for his shadow. Mitt just started blaming everyone else for his losing of the election and his having to hide in a hole since then! That guy Romney never got the support of TeaPublicans. That’s the main reason for his defeat.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    March 4, 2013 3:21 p.m.

    To "George" Romney knew that the press was not for him, he underestimated how much they were and are Obama's propaganda arm. Think of it like a drug cartel. We may know that some are large and quite organized, but quite often are larger and more organized than what we imagine.

    To "Emajor" that is the simple answer. Yes he could have done things better, but when the news outlets constantly paint you as evil it is a hard thing to overcome.

    Name something that he could have done better that ultimately did't depend on the press giving him favorable news stories.

  • UU32 Bountiful, UT
    March 4, 2013 2:35 p.m.

    The "unidentified fan" in the picture is John Miller, one of Romney's finance guys.

  • Happy Liberal Salt Lake City, UT
    March 4, 2013 2:21 p.m.

    Waaah, waaaah, waaaah! Now go away, Ann and Mitt. Please. You lost. Get over it.

  • Itsme2 SLC, UT
    March 4, 2013 2:03 p.m.

    "*You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
    *You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
    *You cannot help little men by tearing down big men.
    *You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
    *You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
    *You cannot establish sound security on borrowed money.
    *You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
    *You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn.
    *You cannot build character and courage by destroying men's initiative and independence.
    *And you cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they can and should do for themselves." -- Rev. William John Henry Boetcker

    Too bad Obama doesn't believe any of this. It kills me too that Romney is not our president.

  • Troy06 OREM, UT
    March 4, 2013 1:47 p.m.

    For all of you Obama lovers let me tell you why I don't like him. I earn less than $60K annually. My wife stays home with our kids. And my insurance now costs me a fortune because of the "affordable healthcare act". High deductible health plans are a direct result of Obama. This means I'm only truly covered by my insurance after I pay the first $3K. The result is we only hit the docs office if we're dying!

    Why did you vote for this plan?

  • George Bronx, NY
    March 4, 2013 1:31 p.m.

    let me ask you if romney was not smart enough to figure out how to not be a victim of the "liberal press" why would we want him for president.

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    March 4, 2013 1:27 p.m.

    "Mitt lost because he underestimated the liberal press"

    That's the only reason? You sure about that? Plenty of post-election analysis articles written on this campaign, you may want to read them and revise that statement.

  • A Guy With A Brain Enid, OK
    March 4, 2013 1:20 p.m.

    Article quote: "Reflecting on the 2012 campaign, Romney said he and his team did not effectively reach minority voters, which he called "a real mistake." He did not apologize for his assertion to donors last fall that Obama had won the election by giving "gifts" to key groups, including African Americans, Latinos and young people."

    Romney calls it as it is. Obama "bought" the elections with promises of more "free stuff" and he had a treasonous mainstream media help him do it.


    America, on November 6th we lost our LAST chance to reverse the economic catastrophe that is waiting for us. An individual can not consistently spend more than they earn and avoid problems. Families can't do it. Businesses can't do it. Cities and counties can't do it, either. Nor can states. But, hey, our federal government can do it, right?

    Get as financially secure as you can, folks, because disaster can't be more than 3-4 years away.....

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    March 4, 2013 12:39 p.m.

    To "Open Minded Mormon" thanks for proving my point.

    What loopholes did Obama want to close?

    Here is one. Romney was going to cut the loopholes in investment income. If you earned less than $200,000/yr you got breaks, more than that you got taxed.

    Apparently you were not listenting.

  • EightOhOne St. George, UT
    March 4, 2013 11:54 a.m.

    Orem, UT

    Here is the difference between Head and Heart. Hearts can lead us in favor of preferences, as personal as those may be. But the GOP has a hard time with the Head. They refuse to look at some data because it doesn't feel right.

    well said. this could also be applied to another local organization

    March 4, 2013 11:45 a.m.

    @Linus -

    I would bet that the Iraq vet who lost both his legs to a roadside mine and now lives off a meager disability payment would disagree that he is "hopelessly lost in his lust for free stuff"....

    The 47% are human beings who need help. Sure there is abuse in our welfare system; but not everyone who needs help is an abuser. Mitt lost in part because he forgot that the 47% are people.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    March 4, 2013 11:38 a.m.

    USS Enterprise, UT
    Mitt lost because he underestimated the liberal press. They find no problems with anything Obama says or does.

    For instanct, Romney was crucified for saying that he wanted to close tax loopholes and reduce rates. Obama campaigned against that.


    What the...?

    What on earth are you talking about?
    Mitt Romeny was asked to name just ONE loophole he close or tax rate he'd reduce,
    He couldn't or He wouldn't.

    He deserved the crucifixion.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    March 4, 2013 11:25 a.m.

    Mitt lost because he underestimated the liberal press. They find no problems with anything Obama says or does.

    For instanct, Romney was crucified for saying that he wanted to close tax loopholes and reduce rates. Obama campaigned against that.

    Now, within the last month Obama has said that congress needs to close tax loopholes.

    Does the press care that Obama has done a 180 on his position?

    Republicans or Libertarians need to realize that they have 1 news outlet that is favorable to them, and there are at least 8 news outlets that will vilify them for anything that they do.

  • Buba Mountain View, CA
    March 4, 2013 11:10 a.m.

    to Rossjc: Mitt lost, not because of the millions of dollars spent on the election from both parties, but because he's an idiot. Who did he think he was or wasn't or was again with such changing ideas, 3-personalities abruptly changing momentarily into whichever one was chosen for him at that moment, etc. Obama is the man. Unfortunately, the GOP is STILL trying to make a mess the things by cutting out the most important programs. What is wrong with the GOP. Racists! That's what they are. Just plain and simple.

  • justice4children Mapleton, UT
    March 4, 2013 10:36 a.m.

    Right On!

    @ NormalGuy

  • justice4children Mapleton, UT
    March 4, 2013 10:19 a.m.

    To: Hutterite..........When and where???

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    March 4, 2013 10:01 a.m.

    Harley Rider
    Small Town, CT
    Mitt Romney was the chosen one - at least up to the end of the first debate where he completely dominated Obama. But The real rulers of Washington, huddled together and made a switch, when Romney wouldn't cave on Obama Care , Immigration , Drone policy , higher surveillance of citizens and confiscation of guns.

    Probably the biggest farce in America is the Electronic computerized voting- All voting is now pre- programmed.


    Blue Ribbon winner for Tin-Foiled Hat award of the month.
    Thanks for the laugh.

  • O'really Idaho Falls, ID
    March 4, 2013 9:46 a.m.

    It's a crying shame that he's not in the White House today. He is the only one of the two that truly had the best interest of the country at heart.

  • Doug10 Roosevelt, UT
    March 4, 2013 9:32 a.m.

    Didn't we have this same scenario 4 years ago when they talked to McCain and he said he would still choose Palin. There is a bullet the country dodged.

    Romney is a nice guy but his policies did not begin to meet the needs of the country. Colin Powell said Romney was using the same group that encouraged George Bush to go to war in Iraq and Romney would have taken the country to war again.

    The ex GOP fed reserve chairman said Romneys policies would incurr more national debt than Mr.Obama so those who voted with their minds rather than along party lines could not justify Mr. Romney in the white house.

    It saddens me to see the GOP trot him out as the voice of the party now. It seems we are still waffling as to what direction to go, who to go with and how to best proceed.

  • JSB Sugar City, ID
    March 4, 2013 8:50 a.m.

    Romney's problem was that he over-estimated the intelligence of the average American voter.

  • FDRfan Sugar City, ID
    March 4, 2013 8:14 a.m.

    Why not knock a few heads that are Republicans? Still shows too much a partisan Republican.

  • Harley Rider Small Town, CT
    March 4, 2013 8:06 a.m.

    Mitt Romney was the chosen one - at least up to the end of the first debate where he completely dominated Obama. But The real rulers of Washington, huddled together and made a switch, when Romney wouldn't cave on Obama Care , Immigration , Drone policy , higher surveillance of citizens and confiscation of guns.

    Probably the biggest farce in America is the Electronic computerized voting- All voting is now pre- programmed. It's been proven that even school kids can easily pre-program election results and you are naive as a lamb if you don't believe this happens. The elitists only want their people in Congress & the Senate . (Thanks to the hanging Chad in Fla) - Just like the totally bogus -Underwear Bomber - We now have the TSA

    A fix - Some things are better done the old fashioned way - Paper Ballots counted by you and me at the end of the day and they Never Leave The ROOM!

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    March 4, 2013 7:53 a.m.

    A couple of small reminders "conservatives"..I use quotes because that's your opinion not mine. The 47% who "want free stuff", are simply people who get up every morning go to work, work as hard if not harder than you conservatives. Come home take care of their families and on April 14th fill out their tax forms and because they have 4 children, a mortgage, and pay tithing to their church, get a refund on their federal taxes that net zeros them out. Keep insulting them as fee loaders and see how that works out for you.

    Thomas Jefferson..if you are providing health care to your employees that meets minimum standards there is no reason you have to change your insurance. So..either your coverage is sub par for 80 people or your employees are very misinformed and about to be massively hodd winked. Health care costs..birth of a baby in mid 70's $ $10,000. Dramatic rise in health care costs due to ACA..pure somke screen.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    March 4, 2013 7:28 a.m.

    He went into shock because he was never aware of reality and that is why he only speaks to Fox news. He is so out of touch he will have a shorter shelf life than Palin (remember her Utah?)

  • xert Santa Monica, CA
    March 4, 2013 7:10 a.m.

    Both Ann and Mitt sounded very bitter and unrealistic about how the election unfolded. It's my hope that they can recover and learn to be of help to their fellow man. Just think what the Romney's could accomplish if they started caring more about giving that accumulating--if the 47% percent started to appear to them more as "those who aren't as fortunate as me" rather than, "those who aren't as good as me."

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    March 4, 2013 5:51 a.m.

    I prefer to think of superstorm Sandy and Chris (not Doug) Christie's response as acts of God designed to nudge America in the right direction on election day. Considering how many "uneducated voters" think Obama has a "Marxist" background, I'd say the man upstairs made the right decision.

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    March 4, 2013 5:20 a.m.

    @GoodGuyGary 7:41 p.m. March 3, 2013

    What a joke if you think you pay more tax than Mitt.


    Most everyone here, if not everyone, pays a higher percentage of their income as tax than Romney does. I know I do.

  • red rocks Saint George, UT
    March 4, 2013 3:20 a.m.

    I love the comment from O-town.

  • red rocks Saint George, UT
    March 4, 2013 3:14 a.m.

    Ernest T is right
    Look at the Solar/so called Green companies that received all of that $$$$$. Oh yeah that was from Obama. I guess that those companies needed all of that money. Well they are truly Green now with all of that tax payer money that they have taken.

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    March 3, 2013 10:31 p.m.

    "...too much experience, too much education, and too much success. Those are not political attributes that are highly sought after to the average American."

    Tell me about it. We could have had John Kerry in 2004 and look what happened. Can you imagine G.W.Bush as Secretary of State? Sounds like a bad comedy...

  • Terry Sandy, UT
    March 3, 2013 10:26 p.m.

    Romney dominated the primaries only after he went on the attack. He had a slight lead after his first dominating debate and then decided to play it safe and appear as the nice guy who would run on his record and vision as opposed to Obama's dishonest mass media character assassinations. This should have been enough with Obama's horrible record with jobs and record deficits, but there are too many uneducated voters who don't spend any time researching the truth & just vote based on the dishonest diatribe they see on TV, so hopefully this is a lesson learned for the Republicans that need to go on the Hard Attack Next Election! Had Romney decided to go on the offensive and bash Obama's true socialist/marxist background and horrible record, he would have easily won. Of course Hurricane Sandy showing Obama as presidential with Doug Christie praising him on national TV also helped push Obama back on top from a slight Romney lead prior to the Hurricane. Because of this, Christie has Zero hope of a future presidential run (as a Republican) in my book!

  • SoUtBoy25 Cedar City, UT
    March 3, 2013 9:18 p.m.

    Let's face it, Mitt was overqualified for President of the United States. He had too much experience, too much education, and too much success. Those are not political attributes that are highly sought after to the average American.

  • George Bronx, NY
    March 3, 2013 7:47 p.m.

    thanks but I am well aware of reality and your comment just reinforces ,u point that people like thomas live on the backs of others, but thanks for the "reality" check.
    Maybe if thomas wants to blame someone for his rise in premiums he should look at the insurance companies posting ever larger profits but then he may have to face the reality he is really no different. I guess thats why it is easier for thomas blame politicians then place the blame where it belongs right?

  • GoodGuyGary Houston, TX
    March 3, 2013 7:41 p.m.

    What a joke if you think you pay more tax than Mitt.

  • Jack Aurora, CO
    March 3, 2013 6:57 p.m.

    Obviously you live in another world than reality. If you think for one second that a business does't pass along its costs you are more than gullible. That's how business works. Costs are recouped by raising the price of goods and services offered. When the price of oil goes up, so does everything processed with,transported by or made with petroleum. When you have to pay more for your raw materials to manufacture goods, those costs are passed along to the consumer. Businesses don't run on good wishes, they must make a profit to survive. To expect a business to absorb increased costs for health care is quite illogical.

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    March 3, 2013 6:18 p.m.

    Funny how so many people from the "party of personal responsibility" are the ones who are whining, casting about for excuses, and calling Obama supporters names on here. What's sadder is that the Romneys themselves seem to be agreeing with you (And anybody who thinks that Mitt Romney's "character assassination" in any way compares to what President Obama has had to endure over the past five years must be determined to remain obtuse.)

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    March 3, 2013 5:50 p.m.

    @farthest thing from the truth

    "...Mitt Romney lost because turned his back on conservatives.

    Mitt Romney pandered to the left,

    Mitt became too agreeable with Obama and failed to differentiate himself, define himself, and fight for the presidency...".

    Romney did not turn his back on cons, they turned their backs to him.

    Romney pandered to the right to become the nominee.

    Romney did not become too agreeable with President Obama. Mitt and those who voted for him have a visceral dislike of people with President Obama's...policies...yeah that's it... his policies.

    Romney differentiated and defined himself perfectly. Everyone who voted against him understood him perfectly.

    Romney fought very hard for the office of POTUS...he simply listened to the wrong people.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    March 3, 2013 5:31 p.m.

    Well one thing that might've been better about Romney as president: He would've received better treatment from the Democrats in Congress than the treatment Republicans have given Obama. Additionally, there would've no hostage-taking over the debt ceiling-- the Republicans would've raised it without blinking.

    Republicans simply reveal themselves to be sore losers.

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    March 3, 2013 4:53 p.m.


    You got it 180 degrees wrong.

    Mitt Romney lost because turned his back on conservatives.

    Mitt Romney pandered to the left,

    Mitt became too agreeable with Obama and failed to differentiate himself, define himself, and fight for the presidency.

    And most importantly because of all that they failed to rouse their base.

    He lost because their base did get out and vote. Obama lost million of votes from the previous election and was ripe to be beaten.

    It is very very difficult to beat an incumbent, and you must define yourself and not let the opposition do it for you.

    Mitt did not do that, and also failed to articulate conservatism,

    but he was never a true conservative, he is liberal republican, and that does not rouse the base.

  • George Bronx, NY
    March 3, 2013 4:27 p.m.

    @normal guy
    The right way? Maximizing profits by throwing hard working people out of work?

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    March 3, 2013 4:24 p.m.

    Private health insurance premiums have been going up and up for DECADES. I suppose it's the Federal government's fault that every pain pill, every procedure, every hospital stay is ridiculously expensive? That's why premiums are high. The cost of health care is astronomical, and this is nothing new. When the Affordable Care Act was being proposed, there was a huge jump in California health insurance premiums that had nothing to do with Obamacare.

    Since the only thing Republicans know how to do about the health care problem in this country is complain about what the Democrats are trying to do about it, how about you come up with a plan for reducing the stratospheric costs of health care and field it to the American people? At least then you will look like you care about this serious issue more than partisan politics.

    "The whole bill was designed to put private insurance out of business "

    The Affordable Care Act requires people to buy coverage from private insurance companies.

  • George Bronx, NY
    March 3, 2013 4:12 p.m.

    @thomas Jefferson
    So rather then pay the actual cost of doing business you are going to pass those cost onto the American tax payers and somehow evrerryone else is a free loader?

  • utah cornhusker NORFOLK, NE
    March 3, 2013 4:04 p.m.

    i voted for mitt and wished he would hsve got it but the Americans wanted obama. I wish things were different.

  • Meadow Lark Mark IDAHO FALLS, ID
    March 3, 2013 3:52 p.m.

    Regardless of the campaign mistakes, Romney would have been a better President. We simply still cannot afford the "Affordable Care Act"

  • Normal Guy Salt Lake City, UT
    March 3, 2013 3:24 p.m.

    I think Mitt would have been an awesome president. The man gets things done. Getting things done the right way isn't always popular though and that hurts in elections.

  • woolybruce Idaho Falls, ID
    March 3, 2013 3:22 p.m.

    Blame Romney, but the real blame goes to the Republican Party. The Republican Party is a minority party that keeps throwing people out of the party, how can that win nationally? Nationally the Republcians are doomed unless they begin to broaden their political coalition. With the attitude of the Tea Party, broadening the coalition just isn't going to happen, more fracturing seems to be the future.

  • Wildcat O-town, UT
    March 3, 2013 3:19 p.m.

    @Thomas Jefferson

    Congress imposed laws on the Postal Service to pre-fund retirement accounts several years out--something no business on the outside has to do. Why did Congress do this? Because the private industry wants to make the Postal Service fail so they can take over the whole mail delivery system. Good to see you have latched on to that talking point as well. By the way, I have had more troubles with UPS than the Postal Service, so even with the imposed laws, I think the Postal Service is doing well.

    @Uncle Rico

    If you can't see the unfairness in giant corporations and aristocrats that have the lawyers, accountants, and means not to not pay taxes while working people like myself are further crunched with cuts to programs they have paid in all their life (social security, medicare, unemployment insurance) while paying a higher tax rate than these institutions and aristocrats, you are beyond education.

    Read in the New Testament about the Savior's views on the rich who have their heart set on riches--I guess He hated "successful" people to.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    March 3, 2013 2:49 p.m.

    I want free government handouts so I'll become a corporation (since they're people too). Repubs are in favor of more handouts than dems, it's just that their handouts are to enormous companies who don't need it.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 3, 2013 2:36 p.m.

    Romney is a good guy, whether you agree with every aspect of his politics or not.

    Bottom line.

    Romney lost because he had to pander to the far right of the party. He said things that he probably did not believe and he took positions that he probably did not support.

    You cant force a candidate to go far right to win the primary and then wonder why the moderates don't fully support them in the general.

    The country is NOT far right. There are reasonable people on both sides of the middle that are needed to win the election.

    If the GOP thinks that Romney lost because he was not conservative enough, they are in for a long losing streak.

    You may not like it, but that's the way it is.

  • Linus Bountiful, UT
    March 3, 2013 1:17 p.m.

    One place where Romney went wrong was his estimate of the percentage of America's voters hopelessly lost to their lust for "stuff." He told a room full of his "friends" that forty-seven percent were addicted to Nanny Government's dole, but he underestimated the number. His statement was very insightful, but America was deeper in the ditch than he thought.

    Need a free cell-phone anyone?

  • wer South Jordan, UT
    March 3, 2013 1:09 p.m.

    For those who have such harsh words for Mitt, I just you would have contacted him during the campaign so you could have straightened him out. He would have done so much better with your vast knowledge and awareness of all the issues.

  • HaDag Orem, UT
    March 3, 2013 1:06 p.m.

    TJ, you are absolutely right. Obama should have never instituted the Postal Service. A failed idea from the beginning. We need to leave business to the true business men. That way everything will be profitable, and all of the products and services will be good. Maybe we just need a few more bankers in this country. They seem to know how to stay out of trouble... (as long as the Federal Government can be fooled into bailing them out).

    For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about: both government and private sectors make good AND bad decisions. I wouldn't want to restrict either group with a blanket statement. The federal highways are examples of success - based on the goal at least (and not the only example). The banking industry, and the various financial bubbles are examples of failure. Hard right or hard left is just being silly.

  • HaDag Orem, UT
    March 3, 2013 1:00 p.m.

    Here is the difference between Head and Heart. Hearts can lead us in favor of preferences, as personal as those may be. But the GOP has a hard time with the Head. They refuse to look at some data because it doesn't feel right. Capitalism can be great. Abortion is wrong. How we are trying to promote or dissuade these kinds actions could be more effective, but we have to be willing to analyze the data. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms for example has been severely limited in even analyzing data on gun violence. Go ahead. Own a gun, but look at the data and be smarter than keeping it loaded where unsupervised kids can find it.

    I like Mitt. I think he could have been a good leader, if left to his own values. He tried to turn himself into a GOP candidate because his heart wanted him as the next President. His head forgot to analyze that he might have left some of his character behind in order to win the nomination. His head definitely forgot to ask if his heart needed to do more analysis of the polls. He truly could not imagine losing.

  • joseywales Park City, UT
    March 3, 2013 1:00 p.m.

    Ironic that the man who openly admitted that he would cut spending to help get us back on track, is the one not in office. But, the man who has continually not done what he has promised to do, is the one in office. Why can't Americans see his deceit? Barry spoke out against Mitt and his policies, yet he is now following them. Sure blame congress if you want, but the point is, Barry isn't near what he said or believes he is. Too bad too, America needs a real leader now, someone who understands money, fiscal responsibility, and how to make tough decisions to make a business (government) profitable. But hey, Community Organizers learned that stuff in college didn't they? Too funny...

    Barry and his ilk remind me of some guys I used to golf with. When they played well, it was because "they" hit the ball great. But when they shanked a ball or missed a putt, it was the "clubs" fault. They would curse, yell, and occasionally break a club over their knee. When libs get it right, it's they who did it, when they can't, it's the "clubs"

  • Uncle Rico Sandy, UT
    March 3, 2013 12:55 p.m.

    @ o-town

    o-town, do yourself a favor and go and review Obama's tactics to swing the boat. While your at it, please educate yourself on taxation of initial earnings, then paying taxes on the yearly dividends. Good grief.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    March 3, 2013 12:27 p.m.

    The president didn't promise to provide anything for free, nor has he done so. He's a lot more intuitive and thoughtful than that.

  • 1aggie SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    March 3, 2013 12:22 p.m.

    So basically he was out of touch with reality right up until the end.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    March 3, 2013 12:15 p.m.

    It amazes me that Mitt, Karl Rove, and all the talking heads at Fox thought he was going to win. It's the same type of "group think" that Bush surrounded himself with when he was in office. That "group think" drove us into a quamire in Iraq that could have easily been avoided with some prudence, hubris and contrary input. Nate Silver had the election nailed down the whole way and any objective pollster saw the same results. For Mitt to be suprised was another example of how out of touch the man is with reality.

  • Rossjc HORN LAKE, MS
    March 3, 2013 11:36 a.m.

    The Free Stuff idea is also very pertinent to why Romney lost. I work in the Health Care field and can tell you from experience that people think Obama has made everything free. Sadly, many of these people dont understand that the money for their free stuff is taken from others that have worked hard for what they've got. One more thing, I am soo sick and tired of our nations people berating and disparaging people that are successful!!!! I'v heard stories of a time in this country when people took pride in the fact that some of the most wealthy and most knowledgable people came from the good old USA but now they look at them as evil money grubbers and not hardworking Americans!

  • Rossjc HORN LAKE, MS
    March 3, 2013 11:36 a.m.

    Obama won the election not on principle, policy, or anything pertinent to the American people. Obama won because he spent millions upon millions of dollars to paint his opponent as a money mongering evil capitalist. Obviously, this strategy worked because there are so many idiots around this country (not to mention the comments above) that believe everything they see on the TV and Internet. We needed Romney bad because of his financial expertise and not necessarily because he was the greatest politician ever ( in fact I would much rather have a non-politician be President than a guy that has done everything in his life to become president).

  • William Gronberg Payson, UT
    March 3, 2013 11:16 a.m.

    The "47 percent" comments by candidate Mr. Romney at Mr. Marc Leder's Florida mansion were an excellent example of “... mistakes in the campaign and flaws in his candidacy.”

  • I Bleed Blue Las Vegas, NV
    March 3, 2013 10:37 a.m.

    Paul Ryan was the big mistake. He should have gone with the thirsty Rubio.

  • Wildcat O-town, UT
    March 3, 2013 10:19 a.m.

    Free Stuff? HA, I pay more taxes than Mitt Romney and GE combined! It is the GOP who wants the free stuff--oil subsidies, tax loopholes, offshore accounts, no taxes for the "job creators" while pilfering social security and medicare from working people, etc. When old Willard Mitt Romney pays a higher percentage than me (he himself is one of the 47% who are takers according to his own words), then we'll stuff, wow, they got you voting against your own interests.

  • Uncle Rico Sandy, UT
    March 3, 2013 9:46 a.m.

    Glad Mitt ran for president. Wish he won, but people want free stuf instead of the opportunity to do great things.I'm not giving the republican party another cent.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    March 3, 2013 9:44 a.m.

    Romney can make all the excuses he wants. Face it, America saw him for the flip-flopping, out of touch, elitist that he is. Ann Romney was not an asset either.