Oh here ya go....the chaos and infighting in the Romney campaign staff....get me some popcorn!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 17, 2012 2:40 AM GMT
    Romney’s convention stumbles have provoked weeks of public griping and internal sniping about not only Romney but also his mercurial campaign muse, Stevens. Viewed warily by conservatives, known for his impulsiveness and described by a colleague as a “tortured artist,” Stevens has become the leading staff scapegoat for a campaign that suddenly is behind in a race that had been expected to stay neck and neck through Nov. 6.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81280.html

  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Sep 17, 2012 2:44 AM GMT
    Part of the sinking ship... taking on water in the process no doubt!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 17, 2012 2:46 AM GMT

    “You design a campaign to reinforce the guy that you’ve got,” said a longtime Romney friend. “The campaign has utterly failed to switch from a primary mind-set to a general-election mind-set, and did not come up with a compelling, policy-backed argument for credible change.” (my emphasis)

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 17, 2012 2:50 AM GMT
    "Inside the campaign: How Mitt Romney stumbled " is the title.......

    .........and it is just one of many glimpses of HOW FUCKED-UP TEAM ROMNEY is right now.

    Politico.com's race coverage is excellent......and truly balanced.

    Most liberals see Politico as leaning Right.

    Most cons see it as leaning Left.

    And that's probably the best measure of fair coverage.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 17, 2012 2:58 AM GMT
    I think it's extremely unfair to be pinning blame on Stevens - or the Romney campaign staff - for the fact that Romney has floundered and is trailing.
    As the saying goes - a fish rots from the head.
    The problem is Romney himself.
    He's personally unlikable - and he's flip-flopped from one extreme to the other on every issue.

    The problem isn't one of poor salesmanship.
    The problem is that Romney is a lousy product.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 17, 2012 3:02 AM GMT
    RickRick91 saidThe problem isn't one of poor salesmanship.
    The problem is that Romney is a lousy product.

    +1
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Sep 17, 2012 4:31 AM GMT
    RickRick91 said
    The problem isn't one of poor salesmanship.
    The problem is that Romney is a lousy product.


    This is a similar thought I had recently. A conservative friend of mine is all in for Romney and he made a recent facebook post that ended with, "We need a businessman to run the show."

    I responded with the following: "Really? I thought the businessman was already running the show, considering that he caused the meltdown in Wall Street and got bailed out for it."

    Then I thought some more about the "businessman" in the White House idea and concluded that America never needs a businessman in the White House. America always needs a statesman in the White House.

    The businessman idea is a lousy product.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 17, 2012 4:54 AM GMT
    coolarmydude said
    RickRick91 said
    The problem isn't one of poor salesmanship.
    The problem is that Romney is a lousy product.


    This is a similar thought I had recently. A conservative friend of mine is all in for Romney and he made a recent facebook post that ended with, "We need a businessman to run the show."

    I responded with the following: "Really? I thought the businessman was already running the show, considering that he caused the meltdown in Wall Street and got bailed out for it."

    Then I thought some more about the "businessman" in the White House idea and concluded that America never needs a businessman in the White House. America always needs a statesman in the White House.

    The businessman idea is a lousy product.





    Yup.

    The Repubs sold George W. Bush in 2000 with the same line of bull.
    They said that America needed a businessman in the White House.
    A CEO.

    We've been there and done that.
    What did we get with businessman George W. Bush in the White House?

    9-11
    A trillion dollar war that killed thousands and accomplished nothing
    A housing crisis
    A banking crisis
    The worst recession in 70 years
    Surpluses that turned to deficits
    The doubling of the National Debt

    Now the Repubs want to put another businessman in the White House?
    And have him implement the same failed Bush policies?

    They must really think we're pretty darn stupid.
    They're wrong on all points.



  • thadjock

    Posts: 2183

    Sep 17, 2012 4:49 PM GMT
    i think it's just going to keep getting easier to win against republicans,

    1) they keep narrowing their base by excluding ALL minorities, including the majority of women.

    2) they consistently nominate flawed candidates

    3) they still think money can buy elections

    i just hope it doens't look like too much of a landslide right before the election, D-voters are famous for apathy in nov. if it looks like their candidate's a safe bet. nobody votes with more reliability than bitter old angry white hypocrites
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 17, 2012 6:17 PM GMT
    thadjock saidi think it's just going to keep getting easier to win against republicans,

    1) they keep narrowing their base by excluding ALL minorities, including the majority of women.

    2) they consistently nominate flawed candidates

    3) they still think money can buy elections

    i just hope it doens't look like too much of a landslide right before the election, D-voters are famous for apathy in nov. if it looks like their candidate's a safe bet. nobody votes with more reliability than bitter old angry white hypocrites





    I agree that the Repubs are going to have a tougher time winning elections in the years to come.
    Demographic changes are very much in the Democratic party's favor.

    And if Romney loses as expected - we'll see a civil war break out in the Repub party.
    It won't be pretty.

    http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romney-is-running-as-a-conservative-ideologue/2012/09/17/7a68c7ee-00d7-11e2-bbf0-e33b4ee2f0e8_blog.html
  • thadjock

    Posts: 2183

    Sep 17, 2012 6:36 PM GMT
    hmm....i seem to remember somthing like this happend 4 yrs ago too:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19694078/ns/politics-decision_08/t/mccain-drops-campaign-manager-strategist/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 17, 2012 7:25 PM GMT
    thadjock saidhmm....i seem to remember somthing like this happend 4 yrs ago too:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19694078/ns/politics-decision_08/t/mccain-drops-campaign-manager-strategist/





    Yup.
    It's just happening a bit earlier this time.
    icon_wink.gif
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Sep 18, 2012 3:33 AM GMT
    Well, let's take a look at the big picture of Republican politics.

    In 2008, the GOP nominates a "just-right-of-RINO" candidate, John McCain. As the campaign faced an increasing gap in enthusiasm from the conservative base, he selects pre-TEA Party Queen, Sarah Palin.

    They lose.

    As soon as Obama is elected, the shadow figures of the Republican Party decided to move the party further to the right in order to align the national electorate more to the right. All this time, conservative pundits kept guessing and claiming that the electorate is a "center-right" electorate, but that didn't show in the 2008 election. So how do they intend to move the party to the right? Rush Limbaugh collapses the "Big Tent." The shadow Republicans steal the TEA Party idea from the libertarians and social conservatives follow en masse. Since the social conservatives are not too keen on libertarianism, they focus more on obstructing Democrats, and ultimately a Democratic President. At the same time, Senator John McCain plays the "right of right of right of right" race for re-election --- and wins. With all the rancor and protest....

    they win the 2010 mid-term elections! And it was decisivie.

    Nowadays, TEA Party approval is around 25%. Republican moderates are calling it quits and even Senator Lugar, a senior and consistent conservative, loses the primary! And to top it all off, the Republican electorate nominates a presidential candidate that is further to the left of the previous nominee! This absolutely makes no sense. Apparently out of ideas for the nation, some Republicans at the state and local levels have been tinkering with voter laws in order to intentionally set up the 2012 election to discourage votes for Democratic candidates.

    The new conservatism is about obstruction because it is completely out of ideas. (meanwhile ron paul is attempting to resurrect the BIG TENT).
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Sep 18, 2012 4:32 AM GMT
    RickRick91 saidI think it's extremely unfair to be pinning blame on Stevens - or the Romney campaign staff - for the fact that Romney has floundered and is trailing.
    As the saying goes - a fish rots from the head.
    The problem is Romney himself.
    He's personally unlikable - and he's flip-flopped from one extreme to the other on every issue.

    The problem isn't one of poor salesmanship.
    The problem is that Romney is a lousy product.



    AND, he won't listen to anybody else (his campaign manager and staff).
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Sep 18, 2012 11:21 AM GMT
    Rats off a sinking ship come to mind ?

    rat.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2012 8:46 PM GMT
    jprichva saidThe elephant in the room is, and has always been, that Mitt Romney is just an unlikeable pile of shit. Even the Republicans know this, but they can't talk about it.


    Yeah, but look at the material he has to work with. It is hard to give an acceptable face to the cornerstones of Republican policy: bigotry, ignorance, theocracy and greed .