Source: www.dailykos.com - Saturday, January 31, 2015
From Pew Research David Karol : We cannot know all the factors that went into Romney’s decision, and maybe we never will. Politics, as Bismarck said, is not an exact science, and neither is political science. But as far as it goes, the abortive Romney 2016 bid is consistent with a view of campaigns in which party elites play an important role. Romney had the poll numbers. He has the money. What he didn’t have was a warm welcome from party elites. Romney by now has a lot of experience in presidential campaigns. It seems he drew conclusions from the signals he got. Campaign analysts should, too. To be clear: I don't know what @MittRomney will say this morning, but every talk I've had w/ Mitt World leads me to believe he will run — @MarkHalperin Jonathan Bernstein doesn't have to scramble. Himself writing in 2014: A Catch to Philip Klein for demolishing the case for Mitt Romney, 2016. Yeah, it’s a thing, or at least some people are trying to make it one. It’s possible that, one of these Novembers, a presidential loser will win the nomination again, as Richard Nixon did in 1968. Before that, Tom Dewey got a chance to lose a second time in 1948, and Adlai Stevenson in 1956. Hubert Humphrey came very close to winning in 1972. I’d say that Al Gore would have been a very viable candidate in 2004 or 2008, and that John Kerry could have had an excellent chance in 2008. So it could happen. But Romney? See also Jan 2015 ( Do Republicans Real
from Top News on RSS Feeds http://ift.tt/1AaHyck
From Pew Research David Karol : We cannot know all the factors that went into Romney’s decision, and maybe we never will. Politics, as Bismarck said, is not an exact science, and neither is political science. But as far as it goes, the abortive Romney 2016 bid is consistent with a view of campaigns in which party elites play an important role. Romney had the poll numbers. He has the money. What he didn’t have was a warm welcome from party elites. Romney by now has a lot of experience in presidential campaigns. It seems he drew conclusions from the signals he got. Campaign analysts should, too. To be clear: I don't know what @MittRomney will say this morning, but every talk I've had w/ Mitt World leads me to believe he will run — @MarkHalperin Jonathan Bernstein doesn't have to scramble. Himself writing in 2014: A Catch to Philip Klein for demolishing the case for Mitt Romney, 2016. Yeah, it’s a thing, or at least some people are trying to make it one. It’s possible that, one of these Novembers, a presidential loser will win the nomination again, as Richard Nixon did in 1968. Before that, Tom Dewey got a chance to lose a second time in 1948, and Adlai Stevenson in 1956. Hubert Humphrey came very close to winning in 1972. I’d say that Al Gore would have been a very viable candidate in 2004 or 2008, and that John Kerry could have had an excellent chance in 2008. So it could happen. But Romney? See also Jan 2015 ( Do Republicans Realfrom Top News on RSS Feeds http://ift.tt/1AaHyck
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire