Mitt lost like a Mormon

[_cwald]

This was a great OP. Thanks.

[_beastie]

I have seen similarities between the Romney campaign and Mormonism throughout the entire election cycle.

I do want to offer one more observation: I truly believe that Mitt had a "testimony" he was going to win. I think this explains his willingness to ignore the polls and, in particular, explains the fact that he hadn't prepared a concession speech. The bad polls could be seen simply as a trial of faith - God was testing him. And the refusal to write a concession speech could be seen as an act of faith as well. Nothing wavering, and all that. I also think that is part of the reason he was so shocked by his collosal loss.

[_3sheets2thewind]

I think Obamas win is due to people will stick with what they think they know rather than accept something they have reasons to worry about.

All in all, DCP is correct conservatism as he knows it is very unlikely to win the Presidency.

It is very pathetic that mccain got more votes than Romney, Good gosh, Sarah palin and mccain get more votes.......hard to believe, and I voted for Obama in 08, Romney in 12.

[_quaker]

http://www.pewforum.org/Politics-and-El ... lysis.aspx

From a perspective outside the US this election was plastered over the airwaves/newspapers/social networks more than any in the past. The driving power for the attention was the apparent tightness of the race. To manufacture the level of attention that was created you need something appealing, like the idea of great competition - whether it truly exists or not.

I can see the incentive for networks, talking heads, analysts, forecasters, consultants, party volunteers and everyone to contribute to the creation of the circus. In the end the money spent by all the political campaigns across the country on every US citizen that voted was over 50$. That is the price somebody pays to go watch a decent show. When the audience is that invested, you must give them a show.

The way I see the similarities between the Romney campaign and the LDS church is the over reliance on management to produce results and the restraining of real leadership. Romney relied heavily on consultant studies to dictate every position he should state in public. The result was a flip-flopping and plastic character, a true sycophant, that was perceived as manufactured. And that is what it was. The LDS church follows along the same route as it attempts to define image and maintain pleasing statistics. I believe that in both cases all would be benefited by becoming less reliant on a managed approach to everything by allowing more leadership to prevail. Obviously there is a hesitance and fear to let this happen because the results are less predictable.


And now a bit of a sidetrack:

In the end it was tough for Romney. He had to cater to the far right to become the Republican nominee. He had to satisfy the people who would select him over Santorum. From the time of his nomination to the time of the presidential election it was impossible to cleanse himself of the extreme image he had to adopt to get nominated. He had to flip flop which caused further negative reinforcement. At that point I would have liked to see him gamble that no matter what he could have got the far right's vote because of their Obama hatred. Then he could have felt unbeholden to the nuts, cleared the air that the nomination campaign was pretty much a show, and then spoken with candour the remainder of the campaign. It would have gained my independant favour (but would the far right nuts be offended enough to not vote Obama or Romney?).

[_Spanner]

Very nice, thought provoking OP.

When he was stalling on conceding, I thought he was giving God time to work his miracle.

[_Bond James Bond]

Is it possible Romney's base (primarily older white people) is shrinking? Might account for losing 1 million+ votes.

[_DarkHelmet]

I think Obamas win is due to people will stick with what they think they know rather than accept something they have reasons to worry about.

All in all, DCP is correct conservatism as he knows it is very unlikely to win the Presidency.

It is very pathetic that mccain got more votes than Romney, Good gosh, Sarah palin and mccain get more votes.......hard to believe, and I voted for Obama in 08, Romney in 12.

I also voted Obama in 08 and Romney in 12. It is really sad that Romney pulled fewer votes than McCain/Palin. Could the demographics have changed that much in 4 years, or did McCain voters stay home? I was also surprised to see that the blue Obama states are struggling more during the recession than the red states. Why would they vote to continue 4 more years of this? Are they putting all the blame on Bush for their misery? And why would the red states, who are doing better, vote for change? Another strange exit poll showed that most voters said the economy was the #1 issue, and most voters said they trusted Romney more than Obama on economic issues, yet Obama still won. This election was weird.

[_Bond James Bond]

Sticking with the Mormon theme though Romney ran a very clunky and inefficient "top down" campaign. He threw a lot of money (directly and through SuperPAC surrogates) and got little return. Crossroads GPS ran almost 400$ million in ads and didn't win in a single race that I can find. Romney didn't have the ground game but was reliant on hefty TV buys. I know Obama had a lot of TV buys as well but he had an efficient ground game that targeted getting out erratic and unlikely voters rather than just trying to convince likely voters.

The Romney campaign preached from the podium while the Obama campaign was down in the congregation whispering in people's ears and shaking hands and making personal contacts. The limitations of money were exposed at least this time because while money does buy ads it doesn't knock on doors. Obama had a base of more than four million donors many of whom also canvassed and phone banked and data mined and generally found every vote they could and made it a point to get them to the polls.

The thing the Republicans better be fearful of is if Democrats will turn towards making states like Texas and Georgia swing states (with their changing demographics those states could be swing states within 10-20 years) by creating a similar ground game to what has been created in Ohio.

[_son of Ishmael]

I don't think that being a Mormon is what cost Mitt the election. Having said that, if he was an Episcopalian, it would have been a lot closer.

[_Chap]

Is it possible Romney's base (primarily older white people) is shrinking? ...

What else did you expect it to do? Cultures change as people die off and different people occupy the social space. America today is not America fifty years ago; change is quickening, and twenty years will see the same amount of change as the preceding half a century.

Sorry old, white, male rather religious people. You've had your turn imagining that the world was made for you. Now it will be someone else's turn for a while.