The overarching theme of the wrath of Republican and Governor Romney donors is that they are upset by the loss. Governor Romney himself had to personally explain to his most generous and loyal donors why they didn't win.
Karl Rove continues to pontificate about how and why the Romney team lost to the Incumbent.
Donors from all over are upset because they feel like they were misled to believe that Romney was the clear winner.
At what point does your donation become something more than a donation? When does it become an investment?
I could easily say that if I donated money and my candidate lost that I would be upset that my money didn't result in a win. But that would be disingenuous because this is politics not business. Politics always has winners and losers no matter how much you want someone to win. In fact, the incumbent Senator from Missouri was on track to lose, yet people still donated to her campaign with the understanding that she could lose.
I don't think I've ever seen this kind of backlash around an election loss. These campaign contributors, especially to the Republican efforts, are supposed to be smart business men and women. They probably wouldn't do this in their actual businesses, why would they do this with politics?
Another argument, these same contributors and business people hold themselves in high regard as being savvy business people that know that a person like Romney, having a similar skill set as them, could turn this economy around. After the donor debacle I personally doubt that assertion more than ever.
Don't get me wrong, investing in anything and taking a loss would be disheartening to anyone especially me! But politics has two choices winners and losers, there is no hedging of bets, there is no gray area, there is no breaking even. You know when you donate to the cause that the money given is gone, at least that is how it is supposed to work.
So I ask the question again, why are they so upset? Did they expect a return on their investment? Hypothetically if Romney was elected instead of President Obama, how would these donors recoup their investment? Special favors, reduced tax rates, favorable tax code? I can only speculate since he didn't win.
Another factor at play is the ability for any one person to give unlimited amounts to what is known as Super PACs or Political Action Committees. This is one of the first times I've seen this level of fallout and I'm curious if there is a correlation to the huge sums given to PACs.
Just some thoughts and trying to put things in perspective.