The Fall of Romney, Inc.
by Patrick Ruffini :: February 8th, 2008 12:13 amIn fairness to Team Romney, they did more right than not. They rose from single digits in the national polls to receiving 32% of the primary votes cast to date. They became the conservative establishment’s choice. They leveraged mechanical and resource superiority into solid leads in Iowa and New Hampshire, giving Rudy Giuliani pause about competing in the early states and chasing John McCain from Iowa. They leveraged their candidate’s mastery of pat, 60-second answers into dominance (and rising poll numbers) out of the first debates. They met their goal of winning Ames, and got a bump. They met their goal of 30,000 votes in the Iowa Caucus.
Nearly all of the benchmarks set by Romney, Inc. were met — and often with flying colors. They checked every box they needed to become the nominee. Practically everything the Romney campaign could keep under control, they did. But for a few thousand votes in New Hampshire, the conversation today would be dramatically different.
Unfortunately for Mitt Romney, goals and benchmarks are not the same as real-world outcomes. John McCain missed nearly all of his campaign’s benchmarks and yet will become the nominee.
The X-factor in translating a campaign’s technical mastery into victory is the candidate himself. And here, there was something missing.
I am attending CPAC this week. This is the same CPAC Mitt Romney put a huge effort into last year, paying some 200 students to come vote for him and likely providing his margin of victory over Rudy Giuliani (I know! Rudy once finished second at CPAC. Wild…). His speech last year was packed with every conservative insider’s code word imaginable. McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy — you name it.
Conservatives at CPAC care mostly about one thing: getting the policy right. Saying the right words is of paramount importance. And what you say today is more important than what you said yesterday (provided you didn’t make a sport of poking conservatives in the eye). And so while we all got a chuckle out of “Flip Romney,” CPAC rewards the candidate whose words (today at least) most closely match the clearly defined worldview of its audience. Much the same is true of the predominantly economic and national security conservatives in the blogosphere and on talk radio.
What Romney didn’t account for is that it would take more than being a CPAC, or Agenda Conservative to win the nomination. Country Music Conservatives — and frankly, most voters outside the Beltway swamp — don’t listen to your words; they listen to your tone of voice as you’re delivering those words. Do you get angry when you should? What’s your sense of humor like? For social conservatives, are you grounded in faith? And ultimately, are you the real deal?
This has nothing to do with being right on issues. It has everything to do with being authentic.
Any voter in the Agenda Conservative orbit got the Romney message: we need to stop McCain and Huck is a tax hiker, so vote Romney. This message actually affected a fairly large segment of the primary electorate: about 30%. As the kind of people who go to CPAC and think issues matter, bloggers like us are squarely in this orbit. Everyday, what we write has the opportunity to directly impact about 30% of the party — and more than that when we have other things in common with social conservatives or moderate hawks.
Romney’s capturing of this constituency is seen in the election returns. He was essentially the candidate of white collar salesmen driving around in the suburbs listening to talk radio. He got 46% in Oakland County, Michigan, 38% in Cobb County, Georgia, and 42% in Duval County (Jacksonville), Florida. Those were virtually his lone standout performances — and they came from the world most bloggers and radio hosts inhabit. Even those of us who are social conservatives rarely live in the rural South. And because of this cocooning, the conservative elite failed to understand how those voters could possibly have more in common with a Baptist minister with a Massachusetts millionaire. We can debate the LDS effect all we want, but even without it, Romney already had two strikes against him: that he was from the land of Kennedy and Kerry and acted like it, and that he was too white collar for a party that most of the bluebloods have left.
The idea that talk radio could paper over this basic demographic divide is almost comical. The leader/follower model of conservative support (get Rush, the talkers, the CPAC people, all the groups on your side, and in so doing win the hearts and minds of a decisive majority of conservatives) has been proven starkly and decisively wrong.
Despite these challenges, it was still a close call. As I said: a few thousand votes the other way in New Hampshire… But still: the ease with which John McCain won states like South Carolina and Florida has taken us all aback. It all boils down to Agenda Conservatives being nowhere near a majority of the party. Yes, John McCain was a weak frontrunner, but Mitt Romney was a weak challenger, and enough conservatives chose character and authenticity over issues to make the difference.
Let’s face it: in this primary, blogs and talk radio were an echo chamber. What was happening in the electorate (identity-minded Christian voters choosing Huck; loosely affiliated conservatives choosing McCain) was unthinkable to Agenda Conservatives. At a minimum, this challenges us to think differently about the movement, to junk the leader/follower model for a networked model that elevates real grassroots outside the Beltway over “grasstops” and to find new ways of bringing low-information conservative voters into the fold.
Tagged: cpac 
mitt romney strategy
Comments (15) 
Trackbacks (5) 
del.icio.us 
digg it 
subscribe
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
As usual, I have to disagree. Conservatives lost because they weren’t united. It has always been their advantage over the party moderates ever since 1964. Romney may be a bit plastic, but compared to Richard Nixon he’s a downright goofball.
But the other problem is that Romney basically ran a “stay the course” campaign. You can’t be another George Bush when George Bush is wildly unpopular. The irony, perhaps tragedy is a better word, is that John McCain beat Mitt Romney by capturing the Republican anti-war vote. McCain played on Bush’s unpopularity and completely out-foxed Romney. People who were angry with Bush voted for McCain as did people who opposed the war. “Only one man opposed our flawed strategy in Iraq,” one of McCain’s ads proclaimed, “and that man is John McCain.”
The ad is deceptive in the extreme and gives the impression to the casual listener that McCain opposed the war which certainly NEVER was his position. But Romney never called him on it. He was too afraid of appearing too “soft” on the terrorism issue. The result is that he let McCain have it both ways.
Instead of scoffing at Ron Paul’s opposition to the war, Romney would have been far better to have tried to help validate the Ron Paul candidacy so that anti-war voters would have come to regard Paul as a viable anti-war alternative, and not have fallen for the phony McCain appeal.
Hahahaha this is really funny. Because at CPAC, after Romney announced that he was out, the little interns handed their display table over to RON PAUL supporters!
And they are signing up on our forums in droves.
So don’t be sure that Romney people would ever vote for a scumbag like McCain!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I was saying when you said McCain pulled his online advertising…. McCain is the Republican pick. This was a REPUBLICAN primary.
Hello Big Tent Party.
Don’t worry. You guys will crush us liberals with your massive haul from “F7″. You’ll have about $9.83 a day to spend between now and election day!
Will Rob may be right in that conservatives weren’t united, I’d say Patrick is more the mark in saying “It all boils down to Agenda Conservatives being nowhere near a majority of the party.”
This is, ironically, a sign of Republican success. It used to be that, in the South, if you were white, you were a Democrat. Period. Now that’s greatly changed over to Republicans.
While many are relatively conservative as compared to the rest of the country they’re not as passionate on the key issues. Lower taxes? Sure, but it ins’t absolute. Pro-life? Sorta, kinda. I guess. Strong defense? Of course, but Iraq seems like a mess…should we have done in in the first place? And yeah, after years of polar ice caps melting and other strange things, concern about global warming may be in the back of their mind. And when it comes time to vote, they aren’t going to be necessarily attracted to down line line hard right agenda stuff. They’re now the new Mainstream Republican.
McCain is well known, a hero, and conservaive enough.
Mitt is a guy that seemingly changed his mind on a bunch of stuff. And he’s from Mass.
Huck may be fine, perhaps a bit to liberal on social issues related to the poor.
And they still didn’t end up hearing that much about that guy from Law & Order.
Ron Paul is…strange.
Mitt was wooden, seemingly got nasty, so they went elsewhere.
Interesting piece….It’s good to see the Republican party exposed for the dysfunctional collection of disparate factions it actually is and has been for 20+ years…What Republicans have thrived on in the past is a top-down cult of personality and falling behind the candidate who can paper over the differences either through personality (Reagan) or oil money (Bush)…Not much different than Democrats, of course, but your has spent side spent years making money off tarring Democrats as the only divided party when your paper was the same thing, if not worse. And, now in 2008, with your President and party in shambles, it is laid bare for the world to see.
By the way, Trevino, what’s your share of the $8.52?
Well, more alive than the “Rightroots” at least.
John McCain had last rites from the experts inside the Beltway many times….so ponder that dear Mr. Willis
If in watching the various republican candidates, Mitt Romney didn’t stand out, than I am in a lost party. His speaking skills, his appearance on camera, his knowledge and command of the issues outweighed all other candidates.
The speech he gave at CPAC Thursday is the best speech I’ve heard since Reagan. I hope Mitt will position himself as the conservative candidate for the future!
I am a liberal. Please don’t shoot me, I come in peace.
My parents are Republicans from Florida. My mother, an unabashed Fox News watcher, originally liked Romney, but then switched over to Huckabee. She said about Romney, “He smiles when he’s angry. I find it very off-putting.”
My father went for McCain. He said he didn’t trust Romney because he “lied to those poor auto workers in MIchigan”.
“This has nothing to do with being right on issues. It has everything to do with being authentic.”
You are spot on.
One word: Mormon.
The media refuses to discuss or even mention this. Its too shameful to even think about. The idea that in the 21st century someone would be denied votes because of what faith they were raised in is disgusting, but this is the sad truth. I know many evangelicals whose church claims that Mormonism is evil because of their baptism of the dead. Ignoring the differences between the southern evangelicals and the midwest mormons is like saying the Shiites and the Sunnis are the same sects in Islam.
I knew a long time ago Mitt didnt have a chance at winning the nomination, and in fact, will NEVER win the nod because of his faith. You have to win the south and a mormon will never win the south.
I find it foolish he decided to rebrand himself as a hardcore conservative, when he would have been better off joining the democratic party, and rebranding himself a moderate liberal. The dems dont count on the evangelicals and he would have been viewed as an authentic politician because he ran on very liberal values against Ted Kennedy. Also, the Dems care less about religion than the Reps.
I think Mitt Romney didnt appear authentic partly because he never wanted to discuss his faith, and the media was too afraid to be branded bigoted.
Beyond this, if you didnt know, Mitt Romney owns Clear Channel which is a big conservative media conglomerate. In other words, Rush, Ann, Laura Ingrahm, and a lot of other conservative radio hosts were kissing his butt in order to get a nice raise. Mitt Romney was spending money like a drunken sailor, so whos to disagree that major butt kissing would result in promotions and financial wage increases?
It seems to me the McCain smear from the right is just an attempt from the pundits to put themselves ahead of party loyalty.
Dear Heather, Heather’s parents, et al, what does “authentic” really mean? I find this an interesting word tossed about when describing what Romney isn’t. For those who have been in his presence, for those who know him, heck, for those who even watched closely, he is not only “authentic,” he is genuine, sincere, and a really decent guy. Just because someone manages to keep himself from overt displays of anger and hurling four-letter words when confronted by stupidity, arrogance, and ignorance doesn’t mean he is insincere. In fact, it is a mark of self-control and self-mastery. These are traits we want in a president.
Spot on? Hardly.
“Didn’t appear authentic because he didn’t want to discuss his faith”?? For crying out loud, this is a election for political office, not a bible-bash or seminar in comparative religions. Romney gave the religion question everything it deserved, and more. He gave a speech on the subject that in 40 years will be quoted in history textbooks. The media wanted the food-fight and tried to encourage it. Huckabee was obliging as well. It just ran out of steam when most sensible American’s saw it for it was.
I should think that all these experts and party pros should have learned a lesson a long time ago, but apparently it’s time to repeat it. That lesson is NEVER, NEVER run attack ads in a multi-candidate field. The best you can hope for is that you will tar your opponent successfully and both he and you will lose to the third party who didn’t suffer from the attack ads or didn’t respond in kind. If you attack everyone in the field, you will soon find yourself being attacked by all of them, and chances are they’re combined wealth is greater than yours. Attack ads are best used against an opponent who is better known than you are and way ahead.
[…] “What Romney didn’t account for is that it would take more than being a CPAC, or Agenda Conservative to win the nomination. Country Music Conservatives — and frankly, most voters outside the Beltway swamp — don’t listen to your words; they listen to your tone of voice as you’re delivering those words. Do you get angry when you should? What’s your sense of humor like? For social conservatives, are you grounded in faith? And ultimately, are you the real deal? This has nothing to do with being right on issues. It has everything to do with being authentic.” Share and enjoy, gentlemen: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. […]
[…] February 8, 2008 in 2008, GOP, analysis, argument, campaign management, conservatism, election 2008, mitt romney, romney, the dark soul of Mitt Romney, triumph of unreasonTags: end of the line, epitaphs, patrick ruffini, patrickruffini.com, post-mortems “In fairness to Team Romney, they did more right than not,” writes Patrick Ruffini in a patrickruffini.com blog burst titled The Fall of Romney, Inc. They rose from single digits in the national polls to receiving 32% of the primary votes cast to date. They became the conservative establishment’s choice. […]
[…] February 8, 2008 in 2008, GOP, analysis, argument, campaign management, conservatism, election 2008, mitt romney, romney, the dark soul of Mitt Romney, triumph of unreasonTags: end of the line, epitaphs, patrick ruffini, patrickruffini.com, post-mortems “In fairness to Team Romney, they did more right than not,” writes Patrick Ruffini in a patrickruffini.com blog burst titled The Fall of Romney, Inc. They rose from single digits in the national polls to receiving 32% of the primary votes cast to date. They became the conservative establishment’s choice. […]
[…] The Fall of Romney, Inc. […]
[…] The Fall of Romney, Inc. - Patrick Ruffini In fairness to Team Romney, they did more right than not. They rose from single digits in the national polls to receiving 32% of the primary votes cast to date. (tags: romney 2008) […]