Why Romney’s Explanation for Losing is Laughable

First Read: “When you think about it, Romney’s explanation for Obama’s victory is laughable — the president won because he successfully delivered to his voters. Isn’t that what politicians and presidents are supposed to do? In addition, Romney’s ‘gifts’ rationale doesn’t explain why he lost Iowa, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin, states with older and whiter populations. What’s particularly striking here: Jindal’s criticism. He was the first Republican to step up here, and it’s an easy brave moment if you’re an aspiring 2016er. A softball to hit out of the park. Romney, sounding more bitter than big in those comments, is giving plenty of aspiring Republican leaders to now use this moment to distinguish themselves from Romney. Watch for a bunch of folks on the GOP side to pile on actually.”

Rick Klein: “If Mitt Romney really believes he lost the election because President Obama gave key voting blocs ‘gifts’ — or, if he doesn’t believe it but continues to tell people that he does — he’s doing no favors to the Republican Party, his own role in it, and the healing of divisions after the election.”