Joe Scarborough has an opinion piece up at Politico (ultra-leftist "Journolist" site which will happily print something from a Republican attacking another Republican-especially the nominee) "The Problem With Mitt."
The gist of the article, after Scarborough engages in self-congratulatory passages crediting himself with the abilities of a seer who predicted this sort of outcome in 2003, is that Romney is, well here is Scarborough's description of the will o the wisp that Mitt apparently is;
Scarborough gets right into it in this opening paragraph
To be fair to Romney, Scarborough posits that perhaps he is the victim of bad advice from his campaign team but then discards that idea by excoriating Romney for not tackling the big issues-defense/big government/national debt/medicare.
Scarborough advises that Mitt would have a chance, and would gain credibility if, instead of a sound bite campaign he got stuck into the big issues from a conservative standpoint.
I see the core of the argument, and the signal for the path ahead in 2016 if Romney loses,is expressed in this paragraph.
"If we want to win the battle of ideas in the long term, we should be willing to face the fact that Mitt Romney is likely to lose — and should, given that he’s neither a true conservative nor a courageous moderate. He’s just an ambitious man. Nothing wrong with that, except when you want to be president. Great leaders combine ambition and ideas and conviction.