Budding Political Operatives Take Note: You Need Money For A Campaign (duh), But Don't Let A Wealth Of Resources Define Your Candidate
Redstate's Erik Erickson has written a post on why he's not so fond of Mitt Romney and the Romney campaign.
The graphs that budding campaign operatives should pay close attention to:
Or, to put it in a way that Vermonters will understand:
My other deep concern about Mitt Romney is not about him, but about his campaign. His campaign has largely operated on the idea that through their money they could wage war against anyone in the primary and anyone in the general election. That hasn't worked out so well for him. The arrogance of fortune in that campaign gave way to a sense of invulnerability. That sense led to the achilles heel of the campaign -- they could buy up all the air time, but they could not sell their candidate to the voters. He has a hard time connecting with the average person. I have no doubt that Mike Huckabee's line about people wanting to vote for the person they work with, not the person who laid them off, was directed at Mitt Romney, Huckabee's denials notwithstanding.
This fortress of wealth has made the Romney campaign one of the most predictable campaigns of all time. Every move seems choreographed through abundant polling and implemented with abundant cash. That captures the overwhelming point here. All of Mitt's money and all of Mitt's men have not yet been able to connect him to the voters at large, but they've spent a hell of a lot of money trying (I suspect they'll succeed in Michigan).