No, the Romney film would not have made a particle of difference in the election
I keep reading about how wonderful the Netflix documentary “Mitt” is, what a nice guy it shows Romney to be, and how if only the film had been released before the 2012 election it would have made a difference.
Well, however fine a film it is, and however nice a guy it reveals Romney to be, I have to say that “they” (the media, the pundits, the left, the liberals) would have destroyed it before the election. They don’t need to do so anymore, and therefore they can afford to be magnanimous. They can even let little bleats of wistful praise escape: gee whiz, we didn’t know what a nice guy he was!
Of course they (the MSM, for example) did. They tried to make sure we didn’t know. And the Republican Convention had plenty of information available, too. But not many people watched it, and the networks didn’t even cover the parts about Romney’s bio and good deeds. That was no accident at all.
I’m not sure whether I’ll watch the Netflix film, because I’m not really a glutton for punishment.
Whoever is the Republican nominee in 2016, get ready for the full-court-press-press. Anyone who thought that what happened to George W. Bush or Sarah Palin had something to do with some special characteristics of stupidity, accent, word choice, does not understand politics and the press today, nor do they understand the opposition in general.
The opposition (and that most definitely includes the propaganda wing, the MSM) will find whatever vulnerability exists, and if it doesn’t exist they will make it up. They will do the opposite for their candidates, the Democratic candidates. People may say they don’t trust the MSM or don’t listen to them. But most do, and even if they think they don’t the message still seeps in.
It’s as though the Republican (and/or conservative) candidate starts a footrace carrying a 100-pound sack. What’s inside the sack may differ for one candidate versus another. But everybody on that team has got to carry the sack all the way to the finish line, and then for the rest of his/her life, and that person had better be very very strong.
People may say they don’t trust the MSM or don’t listen to them. But most do, and even if they think they don’t the message still seeps in.
They failed Propaganda 101 or never took it, so they don’t know.
They think their 30 friends around them saying the same thing means it is true, when in fact those 30 people were programmed to say and think as they do.
The sources in the MSm are double protected and duplicated, in order to launder information and clean it of the origins. As with laundered money, it goes through a process that makes it seem credible and legitimate.
If ever there was a candidate with genuine intentions to reach real solutions, a pragmatic candidate with strong conservative convictions at his core, it was Romney. Our nation lost its chance to “compromise” when he was defeated. I will not forgot the slander of dingy Harry Reid as he used to protection of the Senate floor to accuse Romney of tax fraud.
Stuart Schneiderman had a pretty hard hitting article on Romney pointing out Romney had no problem being an effective warrior against fellow Republicans but lost that warrior spirit once he was in the campaign against Obama.
http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/2014/01/milquetoast-mitt-romney.html
and that person had better be very very strong
Which was one of the problems with Romney, he wasn’t. Not sure who would have been better — Rick Perry would have been my pick — but Romney just folded as I expected. We needed a Sheridan but got McClellan.
Every national Republican campaign needs a media reaction team to immediately get on top of and refute the propaganda of the MSM. Andrew Breitbart (RIP) knew how to do this. There are others out there who can do it. It helps if the reaction team uses humor and easily grasped analogies to show how outrageous the progressive attacks, spin, and lies are. Mark Steyn does this pretty well. Tim Allen, the conservative comedian, does it well. Surely there are others.
Romney’s failure was twofold. He didn’t place enough emphasis on defending himself from being characterized as an out of touch one percenter. His campaign did not understand the importance of social media and the get out the vote ground game. They believed, as did I, that because of the crappy economy people would be eager to vote against Obama. Because Romney was obviously better on the economy. It didn’t materialize and Obama’s team did get out the vote in impressive fashion. (Even resurrecting some dead people and getting them to the polls.)
Based on observation and experience, I now apply a simple rule to anything said or “reported” by the MSM.
I automatically assume that it is a flat out lie or is, at best, a shaded, partial, and/or a deliberately deceptive “truth,” is somehow slanted, twisted, or manipulated, or is an attempt at misdirection.
The opposition (and that most definitely includes the propaganda wing, the MSM) will find whatever vulnerability exists, and if it doesn’t exist they will make it up.
Then maybe we have to find a candidate who is untouchable or impervious to their efforts simply because of who or what she/he is. Like Susana Martinez. A woman and Hispanic. Just how would the Dems and MSM be able to vilify her without pushing the wrong buttons among those two groups of voters?
After Kerry lost to Bush I remember one of the network anchors wondering how that could have happened since their coverage, by his estimate, gave him 15 points.
I don’t think we’ll ever get a better PERSON for the job than Mitt Romney. He was the complete package: experienced, talented and principled. But the MSM was more interested in stories about his dog riding on the roof of his car.
Off topic but related, sadly. Gateway Pundit ran a clip from our local station regarding the impact of Obamacare on the staff of a small auto body shop in a struggling rust belt community. It’s an excellent report, both heart wrenching and anxiety-inducing (because many of us will be feeling the same pain in the not-too-distant future):
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/01/thanks-obama-pa-employees-discover-massive-cost-increase-with-new-obamacare-plans-video/
The origin point of winning the election is the movement, not the candidate.
“We needed a Sheridan but got McClellan.”
Incorrect. Romney needed a US Army of a movement to counter the proper Marxist-method activist popular movement that carried Obama and did the heavy-lifting for the Dems, and instead, Romney got some stumbling backwoods militia of a movement.
Everything GOPers keep lamenting that Romney wasn’t this or that and need to find a GOP candidate who’ll do this or that – No. Those are all functions of a proper Marxist-method activist popular movement, not some messianic candidate who’ll do all the heavy-lifting of things that aren’t his to lift.
The Dems have the necessary movement to carry their candidates and do the work. The GOP doesn’t. One needs to be created for the GOP. Creating one is not up to any GOP candidate or party officials. That function belongs to the rank and file, the people on the ground, led by expert, dynamic Marxist-method activists.
Stop asking for candidates to do things that aren’t theirs to do. That’s a cop-out and passing the buck. Those things are for the people to do with a movement.
Eric, “Stop asking for candidates to do things that aren’t theirs to do. That’s a cop-out and passing the buck. Those things are for the people to do with a movement.”
I agree, but you also need a candidate that people will enthusiastically support with their money, time, and energy.
Mitt had the same problem his dad had. Both had no real idea why they wanted to be President except it was a step up. They were too quick to reach a deal (not a bad business strategy but fatal for a political leader) and not confident in their own political philosophy. Combine this with Mitt’s patrician manners and the deal was done.
Each could have done well as the Chief Executive but not as the leader of the nation (or the free world). The feelings of self-doubt mitt had in the Debates seem much more than pre-speech jitters. His lack of confidence is a sign that he did not feel he needed to save the nation. Lincoln always showed that he knew how to convey this
You’re setting an awfully high standard, DirtyJobsGuy. Maybe Mitt wasn’t the real thing, but he’d have been a whole lot better than the languidly arrogant community organizer who came to office less qualified and less prepared than any president in our history.
DirtyJobsGuy:
Au contraire. Romney the younger (I know less about the elder) had an excellent idea of why he wanted to be president: it was to help the country economically, to be the turn-around guy for the country, as it were. He thought Obama was destructive for the country, particularly economically but also in foreign policy. I am always puzzled by why people sing this “Romney had no real idea why he wanted to be president except it was a step up” song. It makes no sense to me and does not conform to the reality I witnessed and heard.
Now, you may not like him. You may not agree that he was enough of a fighter, or critical enough of Obama, or clear enough in his principles, or any of a hundred or more other things. But the man knew exactly why he wanted to be president, and it wasn’t that it was a step up, or that his ego needed stroking.
Eric said…“The origin point of winning the election is the movement, not the candidate.”
I really think you are underestimating the importance of the presidential candidate in getting out the vote in our system. Eisenhower and Reagan, for example, were the biggest Republican presidential vote-getters of all time, I believe. I submit that was primarily because of their personal appeal to a wide swath of the public, not their political ideas.
Romney needed a US Army
One of the most striking things about Romney’s campaign was how he avoided the Tea Party or any other grass roots organizations. He needed an army, but stuck with a small group of insiders. Decent guy, but no political skills, I don’t think he had any feel for what was going on in the country. He would have been an excellent choice for a cabinet position, but as the presidential candidate he didn’t have the political skills needed to build the coalition that American politics requires for success.
Mitt Romney’s skill-set was exactly what this country needed at just the right time.
Unfortunately, we took the road more traveled by….
If you look back at Obama’s campaigns for the state legislature, the US Senate and the presidency, you will find David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett. Their campaigns of personal destruction worked and worked well. The Republicans had/have no answer to the constant vicious lies. Whether it was disgusting Harry Reid and his accusations of tax fraud or Stephanie Cutter and her “hard working guy” whose wife was killed by Romney, unless the Republicans react/act in kind, they lose.
A great local politician I know lost a big budget battle because someon stood up at a meeting and told a bald faced lie. No one answered it. The politician said that would never happen again and he would let no lie stand. And it worked.
Just keep in mind “the campaign of personal destruction”
Well, yes,they are carrying a hundred pound sack of reeking damp manure. It’s called “The Republican Party.”
It is worth repeating; Romney, and every Republican candidate for President, has an uphill battle. Not just in going against his opponent; but also going against the MSM.
CV has it right: “He was the complete package: experienced, talented and principled. But the MSM was more interested in stories about his dog riding on the roof of his car.”
The MSM knows that it doesn’t have to convince everyone of us with their lies; they just have to convince enough to tip the votes to the Democrats. Just a couple of lies to throw doubt into some low-info voters is enough to throw the whole election.
Neo, I can’t remember if it was you or one of the wonderful commenters on your blog – but, it is true; this nation can survive 8 years of Obama; but we cannot survive with a voting public that voted for Obama twice.
vanderleun: that’s funny; now more than ever. that amnesty thing is going to work out real well for them. (and all of us living here in North Mexico).
Neo: agree, but there was something extra special about The Precious. The media went above and beyond the call of duty for Him.
The Bolshies have been on a war footing since 1905. It’s time we took them seriously enough to do the same — way past time.
Churchill said something about needing a war horse to ride in a cavalry charge, but in politics often finding he had to choose the best hack that was left in the stable and just make do.
Sounds like real life to me.
One of the most striking things about Romney’s campaign was how he avoided the Tea Party or any other grass roots organizations.
Eric’s too busy dumping on the Tea Party to recognize his own personal flaws.
As such, he won’t get an army nor will any army be given to him, thus people like Romney won’t get one either. At least, not from that direction.
The media is not in the process of throwing the election but merely making enough excuses that voter fraud seems natural and normal.
The media was always like this, even back during the Civil War when the Leftist alliance did not exist as they do now. Their ability to produce propaganda was limited, since there were still political things people wanted. All the propaganda against Reagan didn’t prevent some SOuthern Democrats from abandoning ship.
The media provides enough support that the 10-20 million fake votes are seen as legitimate and as people who voted with the public common sense, projected unto the people by the Main Sewer Media.
Like most things with the LA, their operations look like they are solo operations but have extremely wide support and effects.
A woman and Hispanic. Just how would the Dems and MSM be able to vilify her without pushing the wrong buttons among those two groups of voters?
Remember that black guy nominated for Supreme Justice?
Wasn’t he an uncle tom and a race traitor?
The Left have their ways, have no doubt about that.
As for being a woman, refer to Sarah Palin’s campaign.
Romney is the No. 1 candidate?
http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/mitt-romney-is-the-2016-republican-front-runner-20140130
The power of a documentary film!
Could this be one of the greatest come-back stories of all time?
On the other hand, who knows if there will be an America in 2016. The Feds, with their quantitative easing and printing money, kept the snowball rolling down the hill.
Soon. Very soon.
kept the snowball rolling down the hill.
There’s another snowball rolling around here.
It makes no sense to me and does not conform to the reality I witnessed and heard.
It’s just a form of projection, Neo.
They are projecting Obama’s sins upon some scapegoat or hate totem pole.
It’s SOP for the Left.
}}} Whoever is the Republican nominee in 2016
In the end, the governor of Wisconsin is my bet. I hope he stays “out of the running” for as long as possible, just to keep him from getting exhausted by the Palinectomy that will result in him being seriously considered.