Powered by Max Banner Ads
The Mayan apocalypse within our political culture continues unabated as this meteor hurtles towards our collective sensibilities, stunning us with its awesome terribleness. From the Boston Globe, here’s Tagg Romney depicting his father, who laid waste to Gingrich and Santorum in the primaries with overwhelming political expenditures and ran a particularly vicious campaign against Obama in the general election, telling us how little he had really aspired to the office:
“He wanted to be president less than anyone I’ve met in my life. He had no desire to . . . run,” said Tagg, who worked with his mother, Ann, to persuade his father to seek the presidency. “If he could have found someone else to take his place . . . he would have been ecstatic to step aside. He is a very private person who loves his family deeply and wants to be with them, but he has deep faith in God and he loves his country, but he doesn’t love the attention.”
He wanted to be President “less than anyone” Tagg ever met? What sort of mind even produces a sentence like that? HE RAN FOR PRESIDENT TWICE! If he had just wanted a Mormon to win to fulfill prophecy, Jon Huntsman was right there. And Tagg is describing Mitt as a humble “please let someone else have this honor” type? REALLY?
Meanwhile, the article informs us that the Romney campaign literally had a worse idea of field organizing than the average losing campaign in Orange County:
Rich Beeson, the Romney political director who coauthored the now-discredited Ohio memo, said that only after the election did he realize what Obama was doing with so much manpower on the ground. Obama had more than 3,000 paid workers nationwide, compared with 500 for Romney, and hundreds of thousands of volunteers.
“Now I know what they were doing with all the staffs and offices,” Beeson said. “They were literally creating a one-to-one contact with voters,” something that Romney did not have the staff to match.
They were trying to create a one-to-one contact with voters through their field campaign? What the — whoever thought of using paid staff and volunteers for such a thing? Why, IT’S UNHEARD OF!
And Romney did not have to staff to match Obama? Well, I guess that’s a problem when all you have to assemble a staff is A LOT MORE MONEY THAN YOUR OPPONENT!
It’s a six-page article, kind offered by the Globe for free (for now) … let me see if there’s anything else on the first page of interest to me. What’s this?
One of the gravest errors, many say, was the Romney team’s failure, until too late in the campaign, to sell voters on the candidate’s personal qualities and leadership gifts. The effect was to open the way for Obama to define Romney through an early blitz of negative advertising. Election Day polls showed that the vast majority of voters concluded that Romney did not really care about average people.
Romney was all about talking about his personal qualities (“I know howta! I know howta!“) and leadership gifts (“I builta! I builta!“) from the start of the campaign! He tried hard to define himself — and it didn’t work because his self-description was myopic and pie-eyed. Few believed him. Instead, indeed, “the vast majority of voters concluded that Romney did not really care about average people.” And do you know why? Because they had working sensory organs and at least semi-functioning brains, that’s why! Because he didn’t care about the 47% and about the vast majority of the 99%.
That was it for me: I stopped at the bottom of page 1. If anyone here wants to read pages 2-6, you can fill us in on the rest. I’m just glad that the year is over and that we, for the most part, won’t have to think of Mitt Romney again except as a line or two in the history books.
As for lessons, I’ll leave the final word (maybe for the year, maybe for the b’ak’tun) to a commenter using the name of “dporpentine” who had this reaction to the first paragraph quoted above from the story:
“If we learned nothing else from this election, we learned that Tagg Romney is a horrible person.”
Rarely have we more desperately needed a year to end than we do this one.