Moshe, I'm betting that's NOT one of Ann's show horses, is it!
The $44 mil refers to the personal money he spent on his 2008 bid. Here's an article which ran in New Republic on Nov 8th which certainly fits in with what Tagg said:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/109940/should-romney-have-opened-his-wallet#
The third explanation is more speculative, but, I would maintain, not unplausible. It is that Romney simply decided that this campaign was not worth the investment. Yes, he dearly wants to be president--to the extent that his campaign had a larger purpose, it was that, well, he really wanted to be president. But he is also a notorious penny pincher*, one who refuses to pay workmen for home improvements and goes to tremendous lengths to reduce the amount of money he owes the U.S. Treasury. Sinking $42 million into a losing effort last time surely burned him, and perhaps he simply decided that win or lose, he wasn’t going to take the hit this time. After all, he made a similar decision with his tax returns: as much as it may have hurt his election prospects to refuse to release more than two years of tax returns, thereby allowing the Democrats to make all manner of insinuations, he apparently decided that running for president was not reason enough to allow the exposure. So now he returns to private life with a paltry one-for-four batting average in running for office, but with his secrets, and his fortune, still intact.
So while Mitt "wanted" it, he apparently really didn't "want it" enough to go all-in (which is what he told his campaign workers he was doing, stopping at nothing and giving his bid his 110% (which doesn't include using his own $$$, like he did in 2008) I mean, this guy was paid $5k to get the Romney campaign logo on his face, but then flip-flopped after saying it and decided to get it removed. Par for the course?).
Tagg should stop talking, as it's one of those situations where he's not doing his dad favors, whatever he says (the donors must not enjoy having salt rubbed in their wounds). However, it's perfectly in keeping with the family history: like father, like son, like grandfather.
