Sources in Romney Camp Blame Adviser for Mediocre Campaign

[trailmonkee]

Source: new york times

According to a report by Politico, Mitt Romney isn't the only person responsible for his campaign's recent stumbling. In off the record interviews, members of the Romney camp paint a picture of a campaign that's surprisingly disorganized for an organization run by a former Bain man, and at the center is Stuart Stevens, who's been serving as Romney's chief strategist, ad maker, and speechwriter. Sources say that while Hurricane Isaac didn't help, Stevens deserves much of the blame for the Republicans' lackluster convention. In addition to deciding Clint Eastwood's remarks didn't need to be vetted by the campaign, Stevens scrapped two completed versions of Romney's acceptance speech in the week before he was set to take the stage, forcing Stevens and Romney to cobble together the final version with little time to rehearse.

We only get a tiny glimpse at original speech, which was penned by veteran Republican speechwriter Peter Wehner. It included the line, “The incumbent president is trying to lower the expectations of our nation to the sorry level of his own achievement. He only wins if you settle.” Eight days before the convention, Stevens decided to start over and asked the speechwriters who were finishing up Paul Ryan's remarks to write an entirely new draft. Stevens was also unsatisfied with their work, and he and Romney wrote a new speech themselves. In those frantic final days a reference to Afghanistan that appeared in earlier drafts was dropped, along with plans to stream Romney's remarks before an American Legion convention in Indiana to the RNC in Tampa.

It's telling that sources in the Romney camp are frustrated enough with recent events on the campaign trail to vent to Politico about Stevens, who's described as an impulsive “tortured artist" type who's unpopular with conservatives. Yet, a Romney official says that despite the grumbling, it's unlikely that Stevens will be booted from the campaign:

“Mitt is a sticker — he stays with you. He had a reputation at Bain for sticking with people. They made a bad investment, he hung with them. … None of this is going to be fixed. This is the organization, and this is who Mitt is betting on to win. There aren’t going to be further changes.”

Read more: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/09/romney-camp-blames-adviser-for-mediocre-campaign.html?mid=google

[Ilsa]

1. So, he doesn't really like to fire people.

If he wins, he'll keep whatever incompetent hangers-on that managed to survive campaigning with him. That will not be good for our country.

[dballance]

21. Unless you are gay /eom

[aquart]

2. He doubles down on his mistakes instead of learning from them.

Oy.

[caveat_imperator]

29. Which is one of the top reasons why he should never be president.

[bluestateguy]

3. Pretty unpatriotic to go against the president when we have troops in the field

Despicable.

[Tarheel_Dem]

4. "There aren’t going to be further changes." I love your stick-to-it-iveness, Mitt.

[BlueStreak]

8. It is way too late to fix basic problems

The long knives are coming out early. Usually this doesn't start showing up until the last could of weeks before Election Day, and then explodes after the election.

Romney abandoned the economy as a central issue in mid-July. I guess his polls showed him it wasn't working as an issue. But the reason it wasn't working was because Romney was spending so much time being evasive, flip-flopping and just plain lying.

News flash, if you do that every day of the campaign, NO issue will work for you. Changing issues at this late stage is foolish, and shows the hubris and arrogance that has dominated this campaign. They simply cannot accept the point that Americans have given Romney a hearing and they have rejected HIM. They didn't reject Romney because he was talking about the economy. They rejected him because this is not the quality of person we want performing the most important job in the world.

[Tarheel_Dem]

13. I haven't been convinced yet that the PTB even care about the WH this election cycle.

I think they are far more concerned about Congress, and want to make an earnest push for the WH in 2016. They can't do that if Rmoney wins. I could be wrong, but no campaign can this bad, except on purpose. Lucky for us, I think he's being sabotaged.

[jmowreader]

26. If they were concerned about Congress they wouldn't have picked Romney

Romney will probably have negative coattails--not only will he lose, but he'll take a LOT of people down with him.

[BlueStreak]

44. They don't control everything. Romney was the best of the bunch

as far as the PTB are concerned. The rest were just plain crazy. They could have lived with a Romney Presidency, but Obama does just about as well for them. They would rather have a Christie, Jebbie, or Mitch Daniels, but those guys calculated this wasn't the year to run.

Not to get ahead of ourselves, but looking toward 2016 there really is no heir apparent to Obama. Biden and Hillary are probably too old. I don't think America will go back to their generation. I can't recall a time when there weren't at least some likely successors waiting in the wings. There is time for a successor to emerge, but in this era of unlimited money, you really have to get started earlier than in the past.

[Cha]

19. Well said, BlueStreak. And, since Romney doesn't want

to cough up his Tax Returns..he's showing he doesn't want the job.

[leftynyc]

34. It would look worse to change

Then that becomes the story, the disarray and backbiting. It's a gamble but I'm sure Romney is thinking "now I have someone to blame".

[Skittles]

5. the guy's task is to breathe life into an empty suit

that ain't easly

[Frank Cannon]

6. Nice try, Mitt, but we know from your own behavior...

that you're a petulant control freak who can't accept any criticism or questioning whatsoever without behaving like a spoiled five-year-old.

Own it, buddy. Your campaign sucks because you suck.

[hrmjustin]

7. My God! The campaign is not even over yet, and they are turning on each other.

It is still a close race. Why are these people acting like it is over already.

[NYC Liberal]

9. Can't wait for the tell-alls.

Although they probably won't be as good (or funny) as the ones about Palin after 2008.

[sofa king]

27. Don't I remember this from 2008?

Somewhere around September or October I remember the pre-post-mortems starting to be filed by the wonks, while insiders all tried to finger each other for picking Sarah Palin.

Here's an example that DUers chortled over for a few days back then, on September 23, 2008:

http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-plank/mccain-stumbles

There was a change in which candidate Virginia voters thought was “more honest and trustworthy” --from 44 to 38 percent McCain in the poll released Sept. 7 to 43 to 41 percent Obama in the poll released Sept. 21. That could be a result of another McCain strategy backfiring: the rash of ridiculous negative ads, highlighted by the ads claiming that Obama had defamed Palin by taking his statement about “lipstick on a pig” entirely out of context and the ad claiming that he was a supporter of sex education for kindergartners.

As the campaign proceeds, it is hard to see how McCain can undo these two mistakes. He can’t get rid of Palin. And his campaign staff, drawn from the same people who defamed him in the 2000 South Carolina primary, will be tempted to run even more scurrilous ads in order to slow Obama’s momentum.

But that time the Republicans at least had a convention bounce. Romney couldn't even muster that.

[AZ Progressive]

10. This "bickering" in his campaign staff is a testament to how much of an empty suit Romney is n/t

[EarlG]

11. Lol, so soon?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021319912

[nolabear]

12. I predict a firing and a come-to-Jesus plea.

Blame him, dump him, convince everyone you'll never, ever be bad again.

We'll see.

[SoapBox]

14. Shoot First...Aim Later!

[madokie]

31. Best line out of this campaign yet

[Solly Mack]

15. lolol. Show's over.

[sameday]

16. The Blame Goes To All Of Them

If Romney was really smart he would have never selected Paul Ryan to be his running mate. Ryan's Medicare debate killed the ticket.

[TomCADem]

17. No One Made Romney Dismiss Troops as Not Important...

...When he was asked why mention of the troops was omitted from the speech. The bottom line is that they are looking for someone to take the fall for Romney's own values and positions.

[Cha]

18. And, while they were "cobbling" that speech

together..they forgot to Thank The Troops. Now why was that?

[6000eliot]

20. The only reason to hire the inferiors is that you then have someone to blame.

[Mojorabbit]

23. Exactly. Where does the buck stop? At someone else other than Romney it seems. nt

[DallasNE]

22. So What Would Happen In A Romney Administration

If they faced a situation more serious than running a convention -- such as running a nation -- and it wasn't a little rainstorm but a global flare-up between nuclear nations and you don't get to write 3 different scripts while you figure things out. You know, the 3AM phone call thing. When things broke out in Egypt and Libya recently it took Romney 3 days to condemn the YouTube trailer that is widely regarded as the triggering event, apparently because everybody was so intent on blaming Obama. Kind of like the gross gaffe of not mentioning Afghanistan or the sacrifice the troops are making there. That is pathetic and it is not Commander In Chief territory.

[King_Klonopin]

24. This is how the collapse starts (e.g. "It's Goering's fault.")

[Iliyah]

25. well if that was the beginning of his first speech

that one have sucked as well. Mittens campaign sucked before he haphazardly got the nomination, it was the corporate media keeping it close, and still is trying to keep it close. For one thing Mittens doesn't tell much truths and his VP pick seems to be worst. America doesn't know what to believe when Mitt speaks, well I don't and he has that evil smirk.

[DonCoquixote]

28. Yes, this is fun BUT

Let's go ahead and say that the entire Mitt Romney campaign was purposefully built to be an incredible FIASCO!!

OK, I mean,let's let the imagination roll. Put on the tinfoil hats! For the sake of argument, let us say

THE ENTIRE PLAN WAS TO WASTE A BILLION DOLLARS ON A COMPLETELY WORTHLESS CAMPAIGN! THE INCOMPOTENCE IS A MASTER PLAN!

OK, so what was the point of that?

Simple, because all that would take away attention from the fact that this election can be STOLEN.

Also, what would be the biggest show of 1% power, than to show that they could put in a man no one wanted, it is the ultimate statement of rule by money!

[DallasNE]

30. It's Not The Advisor

It's the candidate and moments like this. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021326694

[tclambert]

32. They have begun openly criticizing the quality of Romney's campaigning. That's great news.

They're starting to play the blame game for their election failure already. It creates a positive feedback loop with voters, too, who ask themselves, "How can we trust him to run the country if he can't run a campaign properly?" That leads to worse polling results, which leads to more criticism of his campaigning ability, which leads to more voter distrust.

In other words, the wheels are coming off, Willard!

[Ian62]

35. Yep

Then as you say the cycle goes round again and escalates.

I am expecting some GOP candidates for Senate and House (national and state) to start distancing themselves from Romney to try and protect their own campaigns in the last month.

Which will open up a whole new can of worms for Romney.
If Romney does not have the support of his own party's candidates, why should you show any faith in him by voting for him?

So far it is only a few GOP talking heads and some campaign leaks that are complaining.
GOP candidates doing the same will be a whole different story.

[Ian62]

33. GOP are just trying to find excuses

Romney is such a terrible candidate with such an appalling track record and loads of dirt, he was always going to lose heavily.

Obama has only used less than 10% (of what I know about) that he can use against Romney so far.
Loads more will come out over the coming weeks.
(I.E. aired to the general public. Most of it is already on the net through alternative news sources like Mother Jones.)

Romney has only got vague and empty rhetoric, lies and distortions.
Nothing of substance.
Romney has said nothing of substance for the last 8 months at least.
He can't state I created x thousand jobs at Bain, because he simply didn't - the fact checkers would crucify him.
(Remember Clinton's stats? Romney can do nothing like that.)

The same goes for his appalling record as Ma Governor. He hasn't even bothered trying with that one.
Obama should make more of destroying Romney over his Ma record on what are normally Republican type values, strengths or issues.
Negative job creation, raising fees by $780m p.a., hurting small businesses, cost of doing business etc.)

Very little dirt has been "publicly" aired about Romney so far.
Obama can pick & choose the best bits.

I am sure Obama is already planning what surprise "news" he will air about Romney in the last 1 or 2 weeks.

I am also sure Obama has got a team wading through all Romney's nefarious and sometimes criminal business associates over the last 25 years. More news is expected on this.

Then of course there are the debates where Romney will get crucified.

It is termed Cognitive Dissonance.
Romney's campaign staffers do not want to accept how truly terrible a candidate he is.

[oldsarge54]

36. Less than two months to the election

And the post election blame game has already started. In an earlier post I made a prediction concerning the future of the Republican party. Why do I feel I might be right?

[mojo2012]

37. Too much dirt

Romney won't fire any of his staff especially those he knew from Bain. They have too much dirt on him for Romney to afford to let them go

[Ian62]

38. There is certainly a lot of truth in that

Obama is busy digging for more dirt

[tanyev]

39. Because they will never admit that Mitt is a mediocre candidate.

[bklyncowgirl]

40. So Romney's the great CEO, the guy who likes to fire people, the organizational genius.

“Mitt is a sticker — he stays with you. He had a reputation at Bain for sticking with people. They made a bad investment, he hung with them. … None of this is going to be fixed. This is the organization, and this is who Mitt is betting on to win. There aren’t going to be further changes.”

I have a feeling that if Romney had been running a real company that actually made things or sold things instead of a vulture capitalist firm, he'd be in the poor house by now despite his daddy's millions in seed money.

[bemildred]

41. Oh good, a scapegoat has been selected. nt

[Javaman]

42. Is that "sticking with people" or

"sticking to the people"?

lol

[Overseas]

43. Did that guy advise Mitt to keep hiding his tax returns?

[DallasNE]

46. Or To Be Giddy

And smirk when learning that Americans were killed in Libya? The campaign can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. The problem is a highly flawed candidate. One that cannot connect on any level, much like Richard Nixon.

[snooper2]

45. You see this pick?

LOL

[progressivebydesign]

47. Such BS. A campaign that size isn't run by one person. Yes, someone is in charge...

..but they can't blame all of it on one guy. Unless Stevens is dressed up as Ann and sitting next to Romney feeding him lines, Romney sucks mightily on his own accord. And the other disasters are not the work of one person.

In the end, promoting Romney as a candidate, is like the ad firm hired to promote a new glow in the dark cereal that's coated with lead paint. You can only do so much when the product itself is putrid.

[Arugula Latte]

48. "Mediocre" -- that's pretty generous.

How about "going-down-in-flames" campaign?

[catbyte]

49. Remember: Fish rot from the head down. The FAIL begins & ends with Romney

[ThoughtCriminal]

50. Romney: "No! You blithering imbeciles!"

I SAID I wanted a Medicare campaign, NOT Mediocre.

[sinkingfeeling]

51. I think, after last night, they should be blaming Mittwitt for a failed campaign.