I see that CNN is trying to claim it was a success as well:
"A powerful speech from Ann Romney," said CNN's Wolf Blitzer, chief anchor of the network's coverage of the convention.
"CNN chief political analyst David Gergen said, "Ann Romney added to the vote that Mitt Romney is already likely to get. That was very, very important. Ann Romney's speech has a chance to be remembered for a long time."
"CNN chief political correspondent Candy Crowley, anchor of "State of the Union," agreed, saying, "I think Ann Romney gave a speech people will remember."
"The line of the night of course was Juan Williams who not only called her a corporate wife who doesn't really get the challenges of Every Woman but he did it on Fox News right in front of Brit Hume."
However, I think that Sally Kohn knocked it out of the part:
"I thought Ann's speech was beautifully written, but her delivery was as hollow as her message.She basically asked voters to trust her that Mitt's a good guy, since he won't produce his tax returns and keeps flip flopping on every issue imaginable. And she asked women to trust that Mitt and the GOP care about them, since their policies and statements show anything but."
I think that the main thing to remember is that this speech was supposed to make people like Mitt better. I don't know that she did that.
The whole premise of Ann Romney being this great asset for her husband is the idea that the Lacanian psychoanalyst Zizek talks about:
'Woman is the symptom of man.'
For a primer on Zizek-Lacan http://www.lacan.com/zizwoman.htm
The basic point is that if you want to see what lurks in the heart of a man, don't talk to him, talk to the woman in his life. She'll give you the truth of him more than he would himself.
Republicans are hoping that we fall in love with Ann Romney and conclude that if she loves Mitt there must be something there even if we have a hard time seeing it.
Yet, when you listen to Ann Romney what is it that we learn that we didn't know about Mitt? Her attempt at proving that they struggle was not convincing. About the only thing that does anything but belie her claim that her and Mitt are not a "story book marriage" but real people, is her miscarriage and her multiple sclerosis.
As to the miscarriage it's very sad. I myself growing up was very disappointed after my mother miscarried-it was her second. Still there is my brother and me. Ann may have lost a child but she does have 5 others.
Of course, it's still tragic but it's not as if she was unable to give birth or something. It shows that even when she has a disappointment she always ends up on her feet.
While the multiple sclerosis is a great trial for her and Mitt,, she unlike most Americans has the advantage of first rate health care. Her husband has promised to take away health care for 32 million Americans his first day in office.
Does she care about this? Then she claimed that Mitt took a big risk when he joined Bain, but actually he took no risk
So I do see the truth of Mitt in her-basically he doesn't get it. He never has gotten it and neither will he ever.
At the same time, whatever you thought of the speech, I think that watching Mitt as she told the world the things he for some reason can't tell us himself, it made him look inadequate. I also thought that Chris Christy made him look weak as he suffers from the comparsion with Christy, Ralph Cramden Circa 2012 and Romney's Lord Faunterloy look.
He just looked passive, like he needs his mommy to tell us why we should vote for him.