"Nobody liked Romney except voters," writes Stuart Stevens, campaign advisor for Mitt Romney's presidential bid, in an oped today. In reaction to the post-election dumping-on-Romney sweeping through conservative circles, Stevens argues that Romney was better than the party establishment, the party base and the media perceived him to be, and that he and the campaign came darned close to winning, including capturing the majority of the middle class vote.

PostScript, with her unattractive, mole-like claws, dug out the one commenter in 5,000 who agreed with this assessment of the campaign.


Thank you Mr. Stevens. Someone has finally written a positive article about Governor Romney; a very good man! I am sick and tired of the lies and misinformation written about him. President Obama and the Democrats ran an ugly campaign with lies and a media who took their marching orders from the White House, i.e., the Obama campaign. The American people are the losers not to have had the benefit of a Romney presidency!

Indeed, it's difficult to see from Stevens' argument what did go wrong with Romney or the campaign; with such a noble candidate who was so impressive to so many, the results are unexplained. Regardless, the implication is, as Emmylou puts it, that the American people are the losers. We all lost Romney's campaign.

Jonathan Capehart's assessment is that Stevens shows the same faults in his oped that he did during the campaign -- a blindness to just how his candidate was coming across to the average American.

jheath53 agrees with Capehart, that Romney's campaign lost:

Stevens needs to justify the decision to abandon the long held strategy of making the election a referendum on Obama by nominating Paul Ryan as Romney's running mate. By nominating Ryan, the Romney campaign turned away from their initial strategy and turned the election into a choice between Ryan's plan to voucherize Medicare while cutting taxes and Obama's argument for a balanced approach for deficit reduction.

PostScript was curious about Stevens' assertion that Romney won the middle class. So was thomp:

When the majority of people earn 50,000 or less, it's best to fight for them if you want them to vote for you.

Stevens based his assertion on Romney winning in all income brackets except people who make under $50,000 a year. But the median income for households is about $50,000. So, as thomp says, there are as many households in America making less than $50,000 as making more. Essentially, Stevens' middle class consists only of the richer half of the actual literal mathematical middle class. Acting as if half the middle class doesn't exist probably didn't help the campaign much either.

So, what else could explain it?

tncdel wishes Romney had gone full-on after Obama with absolutely everything, even the stuff that's not true:

Romney lost because he was too namby-pamby towards Obama. He should have played hardball with the dog-eatin' Kenyan by, when Obama demanded his tax returns, demanding from Obama a genuine birth certificate while also calling for an independent investigation and DEPORTATION hearing for Obama [since a non-U.S. citizen is NOT entitled to impeachment proceedings].

alacosta1224 ignores Romney's loss by turning Obama's seeming victory into a loss:

Obama's a failure who only won because he succeeded at putting more people into poverty and he added 16 million people on food stamps!

Fact: Obama first President to get Re-elected with less votes, MILLIONS less, than when he took office.

Fact: Obama first person elected President who did not win the Middle Class, and in fact only won the poor, or those who make 50,000 or less!

Congrats Dems! But the country will survive! Rubio 2016!

Jeannine Richardson agrees. Romney won the good voters:

Do you even know what constitutes the middle class? The middle class voted for Romney. Obama got the losers, idlers, naive, union fools and racists. He also got 4 million LESS votes than he did in 2008. The people who voted for Obama don't pay taxes or are union sheeple.

Joseph Elliott says nope, the party should have spoken up more about gay marriage and abortion:

The Republican Party should not pander to women, gays, blacks, Latinos or any class of people, but instead; simply tell the truth. 1,175,000 preventable abortions are performed each year at our expense. This is against Religion and nature.

President Obama and many Senators have endorsed Senator Feinstein's Bill, S.598, to repeal the marriage law which states that marriage is between a man and a woman, this action, if implemented would produce more abnormal families. The Government should protect our rights and especially the rights of children and should remind us of our obligations. Republicans should try harder to convince people that social issues and morality are the most important issues.

Palladia1 says thinking like that is the problem:

The real problem is that the Republicans, instead of trying to grasp what they've done wrong, keep pretending that, actually, they did just fine, but the voters were wrong.

PostScript might just be a cynical Joe cowering in a bunker with horribly misshapen hands, but she thinks it would be a lot easier to change the party's candidate than change the whole electorate. Although if that's the plan, she'd start digging now.