Althouse: "It appears Mitt Romney's campaign prepared a transition site in the event that he won."

November 8, 2012

"It appears Mitt Romney's campaign prepared a transition site in the event that he won."

Screen shots... of what might have been.

AND: Romney "was shellshocked."

48 comments:

edutcher said...: Supposedly they can't find 9 million white people who might have voted for him - that's why all the rhapsodizing about the minority vote.

Add those white guys to Romney's total and I wonder if Rove, Morris, and Barone would have been right.

Wonder what happened to those white guys.

And their votes.; 11/8/12, 8:32 PM
Sydney said...: They stayed home.; 11/8/12, 8:36 PM
jr565 said...: Libertarians. People like Bender?; 11/8/12, 8:36 PM
jr565 said...: Third party? People like Alex?; 11/8/12, 8:37 PM
Andy said...: Romney "was shellshocked."

"Mitt Romney's internal campaign polling showed President Obama leading Ohio by five points on Sunday, the final day the campaign polled the state, two GOP sources told CNN."

So Romney is an idiot if his loss was a shock to him.

Can someone explain to the Republican Party how useful it is to have even a mild grasp on reality?; 11/8/12, 8:37 PM
coketown said...: Nobody was excited about Romney. As evidenced by the low turnout. Romney didn't even match McCain numbers. The Fresh Scoop of the last two weeks of the campaign was that people were starting--finally!--to look enthusiastic. But they weren't. I almost didn't vote. I was indifferent. It's ominous indeed when rising enthusiasm makes the news.

Any Republican candidate will draw votes and support from the base. Any candidate is a hook. We wanted bait--something to lure us to the hook. Something special that no other candidate has. Then he can expect exceptional support.

It's like that old saying: A rooster will visit with every hen in the flock, but the hen with the largest comb gets the biggest dose of sperm. Romney's comb was minuscule.; 11/8/12, 8:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Ugh. I should not have clicked on CBS News's site. What little I could tolerate of the comments made my soul bleed.

I've tried ignoring the hatred, projection, and depersonalization. I've tried taking the high road, being bigger than they are, rising above it all, yada yada yada.

I've been trying to do it since 1964, when John Chancellor called Goldwater kids like me called Hitler Youth. I just can't do it any more.

And I'm seriously beginning to believe this election was stolen from Romney.; 11/8/12, 8:42 PM
edutcher said...: I quite agree.

You may want to read this.

Go to the first comment page, 5th comment.; 11/8/12, 8:46 PM
Michael K said...: I was also shocked but I hate to imagine what it was like for all those people who stood for hours for those rallies.

The Obama pros turned out their most devoted followers. Regular folks lost out.

I wonder what their excuse will be when it all caves in. "Romney couldn't have done any better," I suppose.

hatboy still having trouble with reality, I see.; 11/8/12, 8:46 PM
Mike said...: I don't know... I guess I was sort of shell-shocked too. I merely watched some Obama + Romney rallies on CSPAN the difference in enthusiasm was huge. It _looked_ like Obama's campaign had no energy, despite the polls giving the edge to Obama.

A lot of people are today saying Romney was an idiot for believing he would win. I disagree. He did an unusually great job of turning out lots of middle-of-the-road voters who lean Republican but don't always vote that way. Apparently along the way a large chunk of social conservatives stayed away, bucking the conventional wisdom of virtually the entire political and pundit classes.

This is a big bummer to those of us not focused on the social conservative agenda. And, much to my own dismay, I think Mike Huckabee was right in this regard (can't believe I'd ever write that).

The one very big event that the 2008 campaign had and the 2012 campaign did not is the Saddleback forum with Rick Warren. I think that was actually hugely important to McCain's campaign. And it was an opportunity that Romney did not get, and didn't replace.; 11/8/12, 8:47 PM
Bob Boyd said...: @ Coketown

So you're saying Romney felt gyped out of his rightful dose of electoral sperm, but Obama teared up like a sentimental old laying hen when it turned out he had the most impressive comb in the coop?; 11/8/12, 8:48 PM
Andy said...: hatboy still having trouble with reality, I see.

What part of reality do you think I'm having trouble with?

The part where I said Romney would be a terrible candidate and would lose to Obama?; 11/8/12, 8:52 PM
Anonymous said...: edutcher at 8:46 pm: Yup.

And I have never seen a scene like the one at my polling place of 30+ years out here in the wilds of Central California: huge stacks of blue provisional ballots on the tables, huge crowds of people that even in my ethnically and economically diverse neighborhood, even in 2008 when 0bama was elected the first time (fair and square), I never saw before.; 11/8/12, 8:59 PM
sane_voter said...: I am stunned by the lack of turnout on the R side. With so many fewer votes for Obama vs 2008, it seems Romney should have won. There is plenty for Poli Sci folks to chew on for the next year.; 11/8/12, 8:59 PM
bagoh20 said...: 4 years ago L. A. was blanketed with Obama signs and stickers, but this time they were almost non-existent. Even out here in lefty land Romney signage was much more common than Obama. Obama got about what you would expect of a failed yet popular incumbent, but even that seemed higher than the enthusiasm I was seeing would indicate. The enthusiasm on the right seemed much stronger for Romney, yet for some reason they just didn't come out to vote. I suppose the enthusiasm could have mostly just been those who did vote being more open about it than usual, and making it look more broad than it was. It was a surprising dynamic. The story really is why didn't the 3 million missing Republicans vote, and the same with what should have been his other strong demographics. I got no answer for that. He only needed the McCain vote, and it sure looked like he was doing much better than that.; 11/8/12, 9:00 PM
Titus said...: not enough old white men.

not enough needy's.

2016 even less needy's.; 11/8/12, 9:04 PM
Lydia said...: Thinkk maybe not inviting Sarah to the convention had something to do with the low turnout?; 11/8/12, 9:05 PM
Peter Hoh said...: If Romney was actually shellshocked and if he really didn't have a concession speech prepared, then I have to say that I am really impressed with his concession speech.

Maybe he should have gotten rid of his advisors and just been himself all along.; 11/8/12, 9:05 PM
edutcher said...: leslyn said...

And I'm seriously beginning to believe this election was stolen from Romney.

And how would that be? By the Romneygate burglars?

More like the Chicago crowd, the ACORN crowd.

Y'know, Barry's homies.

The usual suspects.

Demos can't win without cheating. You guys think it's cool.

Wonder in what shredder those votes ended up?; 11/8/12, 9:06 PM
Lydia said...: Make that "think."; 11/8/12, 9:07 PM
Mike said...: I think the missing ingredient was that Romney didn't make a case to voters concerned with social issues -- this includes those with conservative AND liberal social views. Romney thought that by not emphasizing the culture war he would not be judged by it. Instead he inherited perceptions about other Republicans' positions.

Why not make the case to reduce the government's involvement in social policy? Give the culture war back to civil society. The government should stay out of it as much as possible. It is a principled stand that many evangelical Christians would embrace. And it is an approach acceptable to a good number of people with a revulsion to the culture war. Even social progressives could understand it.

Romney lost the votes of many of my own friends because they assumed he would jump into the culture war at the federal level. They trusted him more on the #1 issue (the economy) but thought he was somehow one with Akin. It didn't matter that he wouldn't associate himself with Akin. He needed to promote his disinterest in the culture war and put it into a policy that a majority of Americans could endorse.; 11/8/12, 9:08 PM
Titus said...: Signs in Wisconsin were Romney.

Ryan won over 29% in 2010 . 2012 by 13% in his district. Disgusting.

Wisconsin sucks, not voting for their own congressman.

Meady, who votes for fag haters must be deva.

You still have Ron Johnson, he really hates fags though.

tits.; 11/8/12, 9:20 PM
Michael K said...: "You might take a look at the pictures of "regular folks" at the Obama campaign in Chicago, and then compare that with the Lear-and-Gulfstream crowd in Boston. You might get an inkling why Romney lost while believing the hype."

The folks I saw at Obama rallies were the same folks who voted 99.5% for him while turning out 130% of registered voters in those precincts. Those were the ones that booted out GOP poll watchers.

I said I admired the ability of the Obama campaign to turn out their devoted followers. I wonder how many Obama followers know what the national debt is.; 11/8/12, 9:24 PM
pm317 said...: If Romney was actually shellshocked and if he really didn't have a concession speech prepared, then I have to say that I am really impressed with his concession speech.

The other guy would have stuttered through the wrong speech on TOTUS without noticing it. But he got elected.; 11/8/12, 9:27 PM
Michael K said...: "It is a principled stand that many evangelical Christians would embrace. "

I disagree. The future of the Republican Party is with the libertarian wing or it will never get beyond 35%. The social "conservatives' have gotten spoiled by having all the attention on their single issue politics.

It is time for them to join the people who want the country to survive as we know it. I'm sympathetic on cultural issues like home schooling but abortion, while distasteful morally, will not be ended in my lifetime. It is a matter for individual conscience.; 11/8/12, 9:29 PM
Oso Negro said...: http://www.punditpress.com/2012/11/fraud-in-pa-obama-got-over-99-of-vote.html; 11/8/12, 9:30 PM
Paul said...: And we hear in Philadelphia polling places were GOP observers were kicked out voted for Obama in the 99 percentile. Yea like Castro gets votes in Cuba.

We wonder how much funny stuff went on with those 'electronic' voting machines and no ID needed.; 11/8/12, 9:31 PM
wyo sis said...: If Andy has half as much disdain and disgust for Romney as I have for Obama his comments make perfect sense.
It's a lot more fun to be Andy right now than it is to be me. Maybe another time we can turn that around. Fair is fair.; 11/8/12, 9:32 PM
chickelit said...: Helen said...
Thinkk maybe not inviting Sarah to the convention had something to do with the low turnout?

I was a big Palin supporter but I can't believe people would be that spiteful. You could have phrased it better by pointing out that McCain got more votes than Romney because of Sarah Palin.

I agree that Romney was shortsighted to have ignored Palin's people at the Convention. I'll bet he thought he made amends by naming Ryan. But also I tend to think Romney neglected Palin on advice from the Bush League, personified by Karl Rove. That was battlespace preparation which lost his war.

If Cedarford shows up to dismiss this theory, I'll know I'm on to something.; 11/8/12, 9:33 PM
chickelit said...: wyo sis said...
It's a lot more fun to be Andy right now than it is to be me.

Andy is buttsore even when he wins.; 11/8/12, 9:34 PM
wyo sis said...: "We wonder how much funny stuff went on with those 'electronic' voting machines and no ID needed."

And yet the only one I've seen video of shows votes magically changing to Romney. I wonder why the media would do that? Unexpectedly.; 11/8/12, 9:40 PM
garage mahal said...: You mean all the smart people were predicting my loss? They were actually betting money on it?

And NOW you tell me!?; 11/8/12, 9:40 PM
David said...: The Republicans were motivated. But the Democrats were organized.; 11/8/12, 9:41 PM
Mike said...: Michael K -- I think that was what I was saying, and we agree, no?; 11/8/12, 9:48 PM
edutcher said...: Paul said...

And we hear in Philadelphia polling places were GOP observers were kicked out voted for Obama in the 99 percentile. Yea like Castro gets votes in Cuba.

Actually 99+.

Sounds like Saddam Hussein.

Why do I suddenly feel this thing is going to come out, after all?; 11/8/12, 9:50 PM
Lydia said...: chickelit said:

I was a big Palin supporter but I can't believe people would be that spiteful.

I wasn’t a Palin supporter, but I do think that if she was the main reason some people voted for McCain in 2008, then not even mentioning her at the Republican convention must have stung like hell and possibly made them just angry enough to stay home on Tuesday.; 11/8/12, 10:02 PM
Erik said...: I swear on the Holy Bible that I will swim through a river of piss-colored broken glass to vote for Romney. What? The election's over? Damn.; 11/8/12, 10:12 PM
Wince said...: Have you noticed it's been non-stop Romney in the media since election night.

Where's Obama and his second term agenda?; 11/8/12, 10:43 PM
Peter Hoh said...: Larison on the voters who stayed home:

What this “real party” talk obscures is the degree to which the GOP fails to serve the interests of many of its constituents and its most likely supporters while masking this failure with a generic appeals to “values” or American exceptionalism. Those appeals don’t really promise Republican voters much of anything specific or concrete, and so the GOP conveniently never has to deliver. If many white working- and middle-class voters stayed away from the polls this year, I suspect it is at least partly because many of them recognized that the GOP, especially one led by someone like Romney, had nothing to offer them.; 11/8/12, 11:10 PM
jimspice said...: You conservatives have learned absolutely NOTHING from this loss, and I applaud that. Please keep on keeping on and the good guys will continue to widen those margins.; 11/8/12, 11:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Edutcher--you are a complete moron. There's simply no other word to describe you.

Were you surprised? Surprised that the polls conducted leading up to Tuesday's vote were accurate?

This wasn't a surprising election. Nate Silver was spot on, and did a pretty great job breaking everything down.

Romney lost because he couldn't take a stance on any issue. Every position he had taken in his past, he changed.

The Economist didn't endorse Romney because they weren't sure which one we'd get--would it be '94 Senate Candidate Romney, who leaned to the left? 2003 Governor Romney, who was a center-left man? Or, 2008/12 Romney, a vast conservative?

I'm glad you've learned nothing.; 11/8/12, 11:19 PM
chickelit said...: Bill asserts: The Economist didn't endorse Romney because they weren't sure which one we'd get--would it be '94 Senate Candidate Romney, who leaned to the left? 2003 Governor Romney, who was a center-left man? Or, 2008/12 Romney, a vast conservative?

Oh bullshit Bill. I've been an avid reader/subscriber of The Economist since 1990--not for a lifetime--but long enough. The Economist profoundly changed when John Micklethwait took over as editor. The Economist these days puts a premium on gay marriage, global warming, carbon trading, gun control and other classically British positions when it comes to America and Lexington.

They still do very well covering the rest of the world but they are as clueless as Sullivan when it comes to America.; 11/9/12, 12:01 AM
shiloh said...: My post from another site:

“10 million fewer total votes. Interesting.”

Totals in thousands:

RI ~ 2008 = 475 / 2012 = 426 minus 49k

PA ~ 2008 = 6,071 / 2012 = 5,596 minus 475k

OH ~ 2008 = 5,773 / 2012 = 5,379 minus 394k

NC ~ 2008 = 4,354 / 2012 = 4,499 plus 145k (Willard won NC plus 97k)

NY ~ 2008 = 7,721 / 2012 = 6,185 minus 1,536k

NJ ~ 2008 = 3,910 / 2012 = 3,379 minus 531k

MA ~ 2008 = 3,102 / 2012 = 3,128 plus 26k (hmm, Elizabeth Warren effect?)

MD ~ 2008 = 2,661 / 2012 = 2,476 minus 185k

ME ~ 2008 = 744 / 2012 = 711 minus 33k

FL ~ 2008 = 8,453 / 2012 = 8,358 minus 95k

DE ~ 2008 = 413 / 2012 = 414 plus 1k

CT ~ 2008 = 1,627 / 2012 = 1,546 minus 81k

Total for above states = minus 3,207,000

As mentioned above, Hurricane Sandy effect and Republican voter disenfranchisement/suppression in OH/FL etc.

NY and NJ were definitely affected by Sandy and that's over (2) million votes.

And as always Althouse cons ~ feel free to stop whining at any time ... or not!; 11/9/12, 1:14 AM
Tregonsee said...: During the last weeks of the campaign, there was much talk about the huge crows that Romney was drawing, and how he had hit his stride. It reminded me of the last days of another presidential candidate. Walter Mondale in 1984.; 11/9/12, 6:23 AM
machine said...: "Aides taking cabs home late that night got rude awakenings when they found the credit cards linked to the campaign no longer worked."

trickle down fails again...; 11/9/12, 8:21 AM
Peter Hoh said...: Romney's high-tech approach to GOTV failed: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/11/romneys-get-out-vote-plan-was-complete-disaster/58860/; 11/9/12, 8:59 AM
Conserve Liberty said...: Romney lost the votes of many of my own friends because they assumed he would jump into the culture war at the federal level. They trusted him more on the #1 issue (the economy) but thought he was somehow one with Akin. It didn't matter that he wouldn't associate himself with Akin. He needed to promote his disinterest in the culture war and put it into a policy that a majority of Americans could endorse.

Despite many years of rational explanation by me, my wife, my son and her father that NO ONE will EVER be able to successfuly alter the abortion or contraception position of this country, my daughter-in-law voted for Obama "just in case Romney has some trick up his sleeve." She's also an NEA member and her mother is genetically encoded a Democrat. Usualy she is a rational actor, but my bet is a lot of that happened.

Romney's high-tech approach to GOTV failed: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/11/romneys-get-out-vote-plan-was-complete-disaster/58860/

For a candidate who proclaiomed as his central strength that he knows how to fix things THIS is an indictment.

The only real charge one can make against a guy as much a gentleman as a Romney is that he was just too nice and trusting to actually win. He trusted his Mormon Brethren and they let him down.

Through a long history of youth-leadership volunteer work I am very familiar with the LDS approach and values. They are genuinely nice, caring, charitable people - but innocent, and they have a blind spot regarding accepting non-Mormons as the same, and accepting non-Mormons as possibly more skillful in areas where they lack skill or experience.

FWIW - I didn't receive a single GOTV call from the Missouri Republicans this year. NOT ONE. Every other time I've had to tell them everyone in my house is completely solid and dependable and to spend their time calling other people.

This year, for the first time ever, I couldn't keep the Democrats off my phone.

There's your 2.5 million votes.; 11/9/12, 9:52 AM
Unknown said...: Quite interesting and different post.. Keep posting..Stay blessed!!00M-657, 000-318, 000-283, We are proud to say that we have the relevant exam material which we acquire after thorough analysis of most recent exams.; 3/28/13, 7:46 PM