It happens every election. The winner looks like a genius, doing everything right to come out ahead on election day. The loser looks like a doofus, fumbling his way to an electoral loss.
As soon as this election was over, people pointed out how great the Obama campaign was, and it was indeed a very well run campaign. They used targeting, thousands upon thousands of organizers and volunteers, utilized their advertising dollars smartly, and kept to a winning plan, among other major positives for the campaign.
On the other side, reporters, pundits, and average voters talked about how Mitt Romney dropped the ball. There's the 7 things Romney should have done differently, or maybe it's hundreds of things, as victory was surely within his grasp given the polarized electorate.
But they're wrong. Even as bad as he was, Mitt Romney was the best the Republicans had this year. This was their hail mary and the party, not the candidate, dropped the ball.
Let's look at some of the possible ways Romney's campaign could have been different.
Not picking Paul Ryan. Oh sure, all of us on the left were giddy when news came out about Paul Ryan being the VP pick. Now Romney would be tied to Ryan's Draconian budget plan. But let's be real, wasn't he going to be tied to that anyway? Was there any real difference between Romney and Ryan? Who was Romney going to pick that was better that would have passed the Republican smell test? Rob Portman would remind everyone of Bush's failed economics. Rick Perry would have been a joke. Governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia would have made women's issues an even bigger deal. If it were General Petraus, we now know that his personal scandal would likely have come out upon scrutiny. Who could have been better? Santorum? Gingrich? PAWLENTY?! Seriously, as bad as Ryan was, there really wasn't a better choice.
Even Chris Christie would have hurt when the hurricane hit and Romney's VP would be forced to work with Obama.
Distancing himself from the Republican Party. A great idea...in fantasy world. The Republican brand is seen as extremist on social policy, economic policy, and foreign policy. How exactly was Romney going to break away from the party successfully? Even more, if Romney did break away and act more Independent, chastising his party for their extremism, and then he won, he might win the Presidency but lose the Congress as the standard bearer gave people reason to not vote for the rest of the ticket.
Here's the deal, Romney could not distance himself from the Republicans if he had a genie in a lamp. He ran for the Republican nomination for 6 years! There is way too much tying him to the party for him to break away, no matter how much he may have tried.
Appeal to Latino voters. Sure, great idea, but how? In what way was Romney going to be pro-Latino AND win the Republican primary. Do the pundits forget how Romney kept losing in various polls to Perry, Cain, Gingrich and Santorum? Even Bachmann was a threat at one point! If Romney showed the slightest hint of being lenient to immigrants, he would not be the nominee. Period.
Besides that, the Republicans sincerely believed that they would win based on their base turnout, not on persuading more Obama voters. How do they motivate their base by being nicer to Latinos? No, the problem here was not Romney, it was the Republican Party.
Now, beyond Romney, was there actually anybody in a better position to win? No.
Gingrich? HAHAHA! Yes, the failed Speaker of the House who led the Clinton Impeachment while being a hypocrite himself for cheating on his wife...no wives, was going to be the one to reach out away from the Republican extremism. Not a chance.
Santorum? I have Republican friends who seriously think that Santorum was the better choice. Santorum would not only have not won his home state of Pennsylvania, because we don't like him here, but he would have made the swing states of 2012 solid blue and made the red states swing.
Cain? Maybe if he figured out what the policy was in Libya, he could decide on his position on Benghazi.
Perry? Sorry, he's too much of a joke to be added to the list here. Oops.
RON PAUL? Of course he has to be in all caps, but how many people really think he could have won? Oh sure, some anti-war Democrats might vote for him and it would have been a fun debate, but he would have been this year's Goldwater.
Bachmann? If Bachmann had won, not only would Obama have won a huge landslide, Canada and Mexico would have begged to join the union just to add to the electoral vote.
Pawlenty? I'm not sure even Pawlenty would have voted for Pawlenty.
Huntsman? He sounded reasonable, so he never had a chance. But really, he only sounded reasonable. His views on economics and other issues weren't really all that different from the rest of the party, people just never got to hear it.
So Romney was the best they had. This campaign was also the best they could do. With outside groups funding hundreds of millions of dollars, the combined effort not only matched Team Obama, but beat him slightly!
Romney made his gaffes, sure, especially the 47% remark, but his debate performances were pretty good. His speeches were crisp. He connected with many people and brought out big crowds.
Romney did not mess this up for the Republicans. The Republicans messed this up for Romney.
This is not about to change, at least not soon. In 2004, Kerry was looking to win Iowa, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire. Now, a black polarizing Democrat is winning Virginia and Florida and competing in North Carolina and could have been competitive in freakin Arizona. The map has shifted blue and the Republican Party is the one that needs to change, not their 2012 candidate.
Good luck with that.