Looks like it will be an interesting watch what are the thoughts of you all?
The film maker had 6yrs of access to Mitt and his family and political team.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLHxbemvpxY

Will watch just to see Mitt cry. lol Mitt.

It's interesting how the terms "loser" and "laughing stock" show up in family discussions about losing the election. Mitt Romney is a big winner by the traditional Americans values, being as rich and powerful as he is, so why would these terms even be in any discussion about him, let alone an internal discussion?

I think this speaks to an underlying psychological problem in America. I think the winner take all attitude where you either win it all or you're ****, is shown here as penetrating into the stratosphere of of american society. Not even a man who has made millions, been governor of a state, has a loving family and pays a miniscule tax rate can escape feeling like a loser. The american character has turned into something very toxic.

I think this is a reach. The same phenomenon certainly exists outside of the US.

NPR had a really solid story about George Romney's role in creating public housing, which he had to skillfully hide behind Nixons back. Worth listening if you can find it. Seems like the apple fell far from the tree iyam.

He is a loser for many reasons unrelated to losing nearly every election he has entered. He is almost certainly a criminal given the election displayed how inadequate he is at anything managerial that doesnt related to fiddling the books, exploiting loopholes smarter people told him about and hiding money offshore. He is the walking embodiment of it being who you know not what you know that equals success.

Oh, and while we are there, equating wealth with success or value is pathetic.

I saw Mitt recently and know people in his circles. He was clearly disappointed by the election, but 100% sure he doesnt feel like a loser and is going to be just fine.

I dont like a number of his viewpoints, particularly on social issues, but lol at thinking he's probably a criminal or not a competent manager.

Just to be clear, when equating wealth with success or value I am citing the standard american paradigm, not my own personal beliefs.

You seem to be calling Mitt a loser based on a popular but less dominant paradigm in which quality of work is valued but still within a system where achievement is valued. What would you say to the thought that although Mitt might not be as talented as his father, he still made the most out of what he was given (even if that meant in large part just listening to advisers) and therefore you can't call him a loser since he did his best? Calling someone a loser who did their best and maximized their (perhaps lesser) talents sounds like the result of a toxic ideology.

I think it exists but to a much lesser extent in most "advanced" countries. Admittedly my opinion is based mostly on my own personal experience and observations. There is no study I can cite to back me up. That this loser/winner polarized dynamic permeates american society is so obvious it requires no backing up. How much it permeates other societies is less clear. In my view this explains to some extent other american phenomena such as ubiquitous rude behavior, constant personal conflicts over trivial matters, school/other mass shootings, and the gradual valuing of sociopathic/psychopathic traits (we see this is movies/entertainment and in organized social structures that increasingly reward sociopaths)- you don't see these things in other places like you see them in america.

A french/german/scandinavian equivalent of Mitt Romney in terms of traditional measures of success is not putting his thumb and finger in the shape of an L on their forehead.

Romney understands how the stock market and tax code works better than 99% of the people. He just exploits the weakness in those that do not. When Romney says corporations are people there is a lot of truth to that statement. Corporations don't pay taxes people do and the government allows you to deduct mortgage and debt interest. Using a vehicle like private equity he can basically own the debt and stock at the same time such that all the cash of the company leaves as debt or capital gains. He can use other peoples money (bank debt) to obtain undervalued companies for next to nothing. Using other methods he can put money offshore or juice IRAs.

Romney lost his home State Massachusetts 60.7 to 37.5. I don't think I ever seen someone lose their home state that bad (they usually win even if the election is lost).

Yeah normal people do not make serious runs at becoming POTUS. At a minimum you have to be an egomaniac, and most people who were a major party nominee are the sort of people who NEVER successfully slake their thirst for achievement.

Romney isn't anything remotely resembling normal for the discussion of 'traditional american values'. He's borderline mentally ill and so was every president since Gerald Ford imo... And before him it was every president since Hoover (who marks the last president of the old style before campaigning was such a nightmare).