This is the other conference underway in Las Vegas.  Holding 30 governorships gives them the confidence that the republican party should double down on the old time values and message, rather than change to win.  Reinforced by local Nevada pollster Glen Bolger, on hand to prove that the reason for Mr. Romney's loss was because the president strung together a coalition of nuts and bolts, not that 3,000,000 fewer republicans turned out for Mr. Romney than turned out for Sen. McCain in 2008. 

Their takeaway:  It wasn't the values or the candidate.  What a relief.

Your headline seems correct.

In response to Firewind's comment:

Gotta a link?  I found O'Reilly and Coulter saying that, but not governors, who said:

LAS VEGAS — Top Republicans meeting for the first time since Election Day say the party lost its bid to unseat President Barack Obama because nominee Mitt Romney did not respond to criticism strongly enough or outline a specific agenda with a broad appeal.

In conversations at the Republican Governors Association confab in Las Vegas, a half dozen party leaders predicted the GOP will lose again if it keeps running the same playbook based on platitudes in place of detailed policies. Instead, they asserted, the party needs to learn the lessons from its loss, respect voters' savvy and put forward an agenda that appeals beyond the while, male voters who are its base.

Yeah, I thought Jindal was pushing towards going away from that meme which is really more parroting of Romney's campaign and the conservative media echo chamber.  I'd be surprised if the RGA comes out with anything like that as its message.  Well, not really surprised, like "OMG I CANT BELEIVE THEY SAID THAT", but more like "wtf these guys are doubling down on the same nonsense that didn't work and Jindal obviously isn't wielding any real influence over the RGA."

"...a half dozen party leaders predicted the GOP will lose again if it keeps running the same playbook based on platitudes in place of detailed policies. "

That sounds about right.

Like him or not, Romney did not make the case clear enough for why he would be the better choice.  All along, I felt the impetus was on the challenger to make his argument and convince people to either change their minds or participate.  He didn't do it, and the incumbent won.

Cue the sour grapes...

Now, he wants to blame his loss on imaginary "gifts" from Obama to the people Romney himself totally ignored and wrote off (47%) from the beginning...?  What a d**k.  Before yesterday, I felt sorry for Mitt.  Now, I just pity the loser.

 

This post has been removed.

Not finding a link up yet.  Had a hard enough time searching "republican pollster Bulger" after hearing him quoted in the report.

If it's a given that it couldn't have been the values or the candidate, it's got to be all the other stuff, and who better to help us out with that than the pollsters?

In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

Agreed.  Although you wouldn't know it by the 'arguments', accusations and outlandish predictions - as well as current excuses and backtracking - on the other side.

Dick Morris - the world's worst political visionary - just came out and said that his silly "landslide" claim was expressly for the purpose of reassuring the foxnews/romney crowd's prejudices that they would prevail over the kenyan anti-colonialist.

Thankfully, some in the RGA have some more thoughtful responses.  Here's hoping that the rest of the party listens - for all of our sakes.

 

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

...As Mr. Hannity was rather screwing him to the wall for leading Murdoch&Ailes on. 

Notice his mouth thing everytime he tells a whopper?  Like Ms. Coulter, keep throwing their whoppers and them against the wall to see if something sticks.

But they'll keep him around in case Secretary Clinton runs.

Its good we have moved away from the National Republican Governors Association to talking heads.

Touche

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

Come on, you really didn't feel sorry for Mitt, and by the way he is a stupid d**k.

In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

Yes, I really did.  Because I'm a genuinely caring guy, and I hate to see someone selling his soul so unwillingly and shamelessly.  And yes, he is a d**k.  But sometimes d**ks need love, too, don't you think?

As long as he doesn't take the lonely highway to Bittersville - like McCain did - I'll continue to wish the best for R-Money and his clown troupe....

 

In response to DamainAllen's comment:

I can't beleive he said it either, despite it being true.

 

In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

Look, Mitts right, just like he was right on Obnama's foreign policy.  I'm sick of people getting squeamish when the truth makes the a bit uncomfortable.

That being said, Mitt was a lousy candidate who would have been a great president.

Obama is a great candidate who is turning out to be a lousy president.

I guess we can't have it all.

 

The new logo for the GOP .