November 19, 2012
— Gabriel Malor Happy Monday.
It's important that we learn some lessons from this election, but it's more important that we don't learn the wrong lessons.
I am quoted in this LA Times op-ed, that proposes Sarah Palin as a "GOP cure." The post that's being quoted (without being linked; bad form, LA Times) is at the NYDN and that post was an extension of this one here at the HQ.
The column and both posts are worth a read or a re-read, if I do say so myself. All three are trying to get at why we lost so as to make reasonable predictions about how we can win next time. But the LA Times column proceeds from a false idea, one that I've seen repeated elsewhere on conservative sites, including our own.
One problem that we should shoot down immediately is claim by the LA Times writer that the GOP is in need of a cure. That's just not the case. We lost by between 300,000 to 400,000 votes in swing states. That's an amazingly close election. It does not represent a repudiation of Republican ideas at all. We lost an election, not an argument.
Another problem that we should be shooting down is the claim that Romney failed to turn out the GOP vote. It's a complete myth; turnout does not explain our loss and anyone trying to tell you that it did is simply trying to sell you something. Usually, they're trying to sell you on the idea that Romney wasn't conservative enough, which conveniently dovetails with their own political preferences. (But, note well, they'd have said Romney wasn't conservative enough even if he won.)
To answer the turnout question, let's look at the numbers. In 2008, 131.3 million people voted. Obama got 69.5 million votes; McCain got 59.9. In 2012, 123.2 million people voted, but the difference was almost entirely on the Democratic side of the ledger. This year, Obama got 6 million fewer votes than in 2008. Romney only lagged McCain by 0.274 million votes.
And how did Romney do if we just look at the swing states? Actually, in swing states Romney exceeded McCain by 256 thousand votes. He also outperformed Bush in 2004 in the 2012 swing states.
So the idea that there was some untapped pool of voters just itching to go GOP, if only we'd run a different candidate just isn't supported by the evidence. The failure here wasn't a failure of ideology, but one of strategy. Romney (and me, and virtually every conservative strategist and commentator) thought the election was about the economy. And for Republicans it was. But for swing voters, it was about whether they were comfortable siding with Republicans. Obama contested that with vapid, frivolous japes about binders, Big Bird, and blame Bush.
There is another lesson lurking here, but it's one that many folks don't want to hear. We did not lose this election because Obama promised voters handouts. Maybe that's how Obama thought to buy core Democratic turnout, but he still massively underperformed his numbers from 2008. And it's certainly not how he got the swing voters; they recognized a pander. Instead, he got the swing voters by making Romney the icky candidate. The same thing could have been done to any candidate we ran because it wasn't about Romney's politics, it was about a caricature of Republicans that we have repeatedly failed to rebut.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
02:56 AM
| Comments (605)
Post contains 576 words, total size 4 kb.
http://is.gd/HJgmN9
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 02:56 AM (YdQQY)
http://is.gd/0dVi8T
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 02:57 AM (YdQQY)
http://is.gd/IuqVjh
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 02:57 AM (YdQQY)
Against the Law
At 32, Dev is "mostly retired" from Raines Investigations, but he's back in the field after Lark Delaney seeks his help to find the baby her sister gave up for adoption. Dev uncovers a shady adoption ring, and, as the danger increases, he can't ignore his growing attraction to Lark.
And thatÂ’s it for today. Not much out there.
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 02:58 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 03:00 AM (XkWWK)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 03:01 AM (XkWWK)
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 03:01 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 03:04 AM (XkWWK)
Posted by: Icedog at November 19, 2012 03:04 AM (9ScGj)
Posted by: Daybrother at November 19, 2012 03:05 AM (+paCV)
And yet Obama made an even less impressive case.
There are several independent events that can be blamed for Romney's loss.
1. Sub-standard GOTV effort (sorry Gabe, your arguments make no sense)
2. Sandy's small positive effect for Obama
3. Romney's failure to carry the momentum of the first debate into the second and last debates (more a function of structure than performance. Fuck you RNC)
4......
Fix any one of these and Romney would have won.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 19, 2012 03:06 AM (GsoHv)
Gosh, it's almost like you didn't even bother to read my post. But I'm sure that couldn't be the case. You wouldn't embarrass yourself by asking me once again to tell you to read the above post, and the two posts I linked, would you? Really?
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at November 19, 2012 03:08 AM (6jFGb)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 03:08 AM (XkWWK)
This is par for the course.
Just wait until Obama fixes the Iran nuclear problem.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 19, 2012 03:08 AM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Dave walk at November 19, 2012 03:08 AM (jV0wG)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 03:09 AM (XkWWK)
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at November 19, 2012 03:09 AM (6jFGb)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 19, 2012 03:09 AM (azHfB)
Posted by: Icedog at November 19, 2012 03:09 AM (9ScGj)
Posted by: Schrödinger's cat [/i] at November 19, 2012 03:11 AM (feFL6)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 19, 2012 03:11 AM (azHfB)
Posted by: clemenza at November 19, 2012 03:12 AM (afx6B)
Which pool of voters do think that came from?
Posted by: typo dynamofo at November 19, 2012 03:12 AM (+VMZ0)
Obama got 6 million fewer votes. We don't care about that, except to ask "where did they go?"
In a country that increases in population every day, over 7 million people fewer voted than 4 years ago. I think it is reasonable to assume Romney got SOME of the 6 million votes Obama did not get, and no doubt Obama got MORE of the newer voters joining to rolls.
Some people who voted for Obama in 2008 switched to Romney this time. Which means..... more than a small number of people who voted for McCain DID NOT VOTE FOR ROMNEY!
Logic, it's what's for dinner.
Posted by: BurtTC at November 19, 2012 03:12 AM (BeSEI)
SCOAMF-D is not allowed to be attacked hard because 'racist" "bush" "historic."
Fuck the media.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 03:13 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Marion Barry at November 19, 2012 03:14 AM (feFL6)
Posted by: Icedog at November 19, 2012 03:15 AM (9ScGj)
Posted by: Schrödinger's cat [/i] at November 19, 2012 03:15 AM (feFL6)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 03:16 AM (XkWWK)
It's best for everyone concerned if I am not reminded at 715 in the morning that Fairy Johnson and Libertarian Cult decided Mitt was just the same as choom and threw their vote away.
I am so sorely tempted to keep telling my Congressional delegation "give Ogabe everything he wants but the Bill of Rights."
I'll test your hypothesis Luap Nor Kult.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 03:16 AM (LRFds)
The same thing could have been done to any candidate we ran because it wasn't about Romney's politics, it was about a caricature of Republicans that we have repeatedly failed to rebut.
IMHO because we don’t have a candidate with the stones to look a Democrat in the face and call them out as a fucking liar – in those words. Until we get in the gutter with these scum and rip their balls off, we’ll never win.
Thanks for your thoughts, though, Gabe. When my headÂ’s a little clearer, IÂ’ll give them a look. And thanks for the news roundup, Vic.
In any event – got a little more loaded than usual yesterday to forget my writer’s block, and I’m still pretty hungover. Work’s going to be a pain today, so the story about Thomas Ince will have to wait. Instead, here’s a story about the Production Code:
In the 1940 movie They Knew What They Wanted (which was the basis for the Frank Loesser musical The Most Happy Fellow), Charles Laughton played the part of Tony, and Italian winemaker who marries a mail-order bride, discovers she is cheating on him, but in the end forgives her. Well, this went against the Production Code, which specified that sin must be punished. So Laughton, director Garson Kanin and a few others went to see Joseph Breen, head of the Code.
Kanin argued that there was no point in even making the film unless there was fogiveness at the end, but Breen remained adamant. “No punishment, no movie.” After about half-an-hour of this go-around, Laughton spoke for the first time. “Do I understand, Mr. Breen, that the Production Code does not recognize the New Testament?” Breen, a good Catholic, stared at Laughton in astonishment. “Christ forgave the adulteress, didn’t he, Mr. Breen?” the actor finished.
Breen was silent for a minute or two. Then, quietly, he ushered them all out of his office with the words, “You may have a point there, Mr. Laughton.”
The forgiveness scene stayed.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at November 19, 2012 03:17 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: RondinellaMamma at November 19, 2012 03:17 AM (53riN)
and how many Libertarians just sat out rather than voting for the major candidate nearer their beliefs?
You want to talk about Purity Police Libertarian is the ultimate purity pony.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 03:18 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: jj at November 19, 2012 03:18 AM (gWO5X)
It's called energizing the base.
You can say this until you're blue in the face, but there is no evidence that base voters sat out. This is just wishful thinking, divorced from reality. It does not offer a solution to the election.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at November 19, 2012 03:19 AM (6jFGb)
Yup it is why I do so wish we engaged in Operation Pipewrench or Project Wideawake.
They threw shit on Mitt about time travel and cancer eyes for God's sake.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 03:19 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 03:19 AM (XkWWK)
Yes. However it is possible that Romney's ideology was responsible for his loss, or responsible for making it so close.....
Actually, my real point is that the Republican party is still behaving like the patricians of the 1950s. The Democrats are behaving like the Bolsheviks in 1915.
We need to fine-tune the process of GOTV and sharpen the edge of our responses to Democrat attacks....but mostly we need to go on the offensive and show America what limited government and unlimited opportunity will do for everyone. And if that means tailoring the message in a hundred different ways to a hundred different voting blocs? So be it.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 19, 2012 03:21 AM (GsoHv)
Posted by: soothie at November 19, 2012 03:22 AM (VgTUv)
I'm not sure that Loneghan could have beaten Corzine, but I voted for him in the primary.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 19, 2012 03:22 AM (GsoHv)
Says what they needed
was maybe 10k lines of code, not 250k. And that they should have outsourced the whole snafu to India. Not sure if he's snarking there. He does that. Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at November 19, 2012 07:11 AM (feFL6)
When you know what you are doing and aren't being paid by the line, usually less code is more effective.
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 03:23 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: typo dynamofo at November 19, 2012 03:23 AM (+VMZ0)
Posted by: Thunderb at November 19, 2012 03:23 AM (Dnbau)
Gabe I am having trouble finding our Menshevik wing to the Bolshevik wing of the Democrats....
where they hiding?
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 03:25 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Icedog at November 19, 2012 03:26 AM (9ScGj)
Posted by: clemenza at November 19, 2012 03:26 AM (afx6B)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 03:26 AM (XkWWK)
We lost all three of those and damn near lost NC which used to be a guaranteed red State.
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 03:29 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 03:30 AM (XkWWK)
Posted by: Golan Globus at November 19, 2012 03:31 AM (/1U3u)
Posted by: soothie at November 19, 2012 03:32 AM (XPxw+)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 03:33 AM (XkWWK)
I am also convinced that not responding to the attacks and being oh so presidential in the last two debates didn't help (although having to debate both Obama AND Crowley didn't help the cause either).
And I must admit even I, as a right wing Constitutionalist, got a little tired of seeing one of the 0.01% running as our standard bearer.
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 03:35 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Schrödinger's cat [/i] at November 19, 2012 03:35 AM (feFL6)
There's just so much you need to do to counter raw power that no amount of finesse matters until you can check that power.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 03:36 AM (moRRg)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 19, 2012 03:36 AM (JDIKC)
Posted by: soothie at November 19, 2012 03:37 AM (0yntW)
Posted by: Golan Globus at November 19, 2012 03:37 AM (/1U3u)
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 03:37 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at November 19, 2012 03:38 AM (X3lox)
Posted by: soothie at November 19, 2012 03:38 AM (qwfV8)
And what is that caricature? That Republicans are horrible meanieheads who want to take away your stuff. Or, in other words, where's my free shit. That's what binders, Big Bird, tampons, Julia and all that other crap boils down to in the end. Republicans want to walk into your house, go tsk tsk tsk and take away all this stuff that you like.
Here's the thing though, how do you fight that caricature? By pointing out that no, Republicans don't want to do that, we just think we shouldn't have to pay for your stuff and that you are entirely capable of paying for it yourself. As someone noted recently, EAT YOUR PEAS isn't nearly as appealing as dude, hey, we think it's just totally awesome that you and your ladyparts should make the Catholics pay for The Pill and your abortion.
That idiotic binder thing, which I still do not comprehend btw, was actually an attempt by Romney to rebut the caricature that Republicans hate women. That Romney slightly amusingly misspoke while pointing out that he actively sought out women to fill posts is apparently bigger news than that the Democrats think that women are too fragile to handle criticism. He did precisely what you want him to do and was pilloried for it.
How, precisely, are Republicans supposed to push back at the various caricatures when the push back itself is seen as supporting that view?
Posted by: alexthechick at November 19, 2012 03:38 AM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: Thunderb at November 19, 2012 03:39 AM (Dnbau)
-- If they can't win the primary, they can't win the general.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 03:39 AM (moRRg)
There's just so much you need to do to counter raw power that no amount of finesse matters until you can check that power.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 07:36 AM (moRRg)
FIFY
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 03:40 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Icedog at November 19, 2012 03:40 AM (9ScGj)
The Dems will not have Obama next time. They will fish around and look for another Magic Negro but it will be to no avail.
But we still need to at least change the voting order of the Primaries. It is insane that we allow guaranteed blue States to determine our candidate.
It is also insane that we allow FL to move their primary every time with little punishment.
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 03:41 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Thunderb at November 19, 2012 07:39 AM (Dnbau)
Spoken like a true NATO ally!
How dare those joooos defend themselves!
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 03:42 AM (Cnqmv)
Sshhh! Gabe typed something up and they printed it in a newspaper. That means it must be true, and any appeal to logic otherwise is not to be tolerated.
Posted by: BurtTC at November 19, 2012 03:42 AM (BeSEI)
Posted by: pep at November 19, 2012 03:42 AM (YXmuI)
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 03:42 AM (moRRg)
Posted by: Chief Assclown John Roberts at November 19, 2012 03:43 AM (pkkxZ)
Posted by: SurferDoc at November 19, 2012 03:43 AM (6H6FZ)
Posted by: and irresolute at November 19, 2012 03:43 AM (DBH1h)
Posted by: Thunderb at November 19, 2012 03:44 AM (Dnbau)
Posted by: Department of Weasel Whacking at November 19, 2012 03:44 AM (CWlPF)
Posted by: unclear on the concept at November 19, 2012 03:44 AM (jZZFi)
Posted by: Chief Assclown John Roberts at November 19, 2012 03:44 AM (pkkxZ)
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 03:44 AM (YdQQY)
Elections are about the lowest-common denominator, it seems.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 03:45 AM (moRRg)
Posted by: toby928© for TB at November 19, 2012 03:45 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: soothie at November 19, 2012 03:45 AM (XPxw+)
Posted by: Icedog at November 19, 2012 03:46 AM (9ScGj)
"...it wasn't about Romney's politics, it was about a caricature of Republicans that we have repeatedly failed to rebut."
Isn't that what the LA Times article was all about? Romney had a hard time connecting with working people and the author suggested someone who does connect.
Posted by: jwest at November 19, 2012 03:47 AM (ZDsRL)
Posted by: SurferDoc at November 19, 2012 03:49 AM (6H6FZ)
Posted by: Thunderb at November 19, 2012 03:49 AM (Dnbau)
Malor's mind is made up. Don't confuse him with facts. Or logic.
As usual, we will be good little losers, blaming an awful candidate -- which Romney was not -- for the blindness of our Republican Elites, who may well have had the election stolen right from under their noses by a well-orchestrated Democrat effort.
Choom Boy's troops counted the votes. Yes, he got fewer votes than last time (and I suspect that was legit) but Romney, a better choice than McCain, also got fewer votes in strategic areas. Those, IMO, were "disappeared" votes.
But of course the Elites must not mention any hint that the Traitor-in-Chief's posse, under his personal direction, did something illegal. Oh hell no. Just because someone talks about "bringing a gun to a knife fight" doesn't mean we should actually believe him. Just because there were visible and documented signs of illegal behavior on display doesn't mean the Democrats actually committed major crimes.
We're too nice to suspect them. So we attack the dwindling number of our own who suspect that the most criminal presidency in history are guilty of some very illegal activity, that they, in approved third-world style, stole the election.
The only way this can be put to rest is by investigating thoroughly. If it is proven that President Historic First©'s regime is blameless, I would be more than happy to shut up about it, and let Malor stick to his "oooh, we lost because of strategy!!11!!" argument.
Until then, I believe Free Shit and Fraud won it for Osama Obama. Until we combat that, we are, and will remain, losers.
Posted by: MrScribbler, banned at TepidAir at November 19, 2012 03:49 AM (yKUrR)
Posted by: BignJames at November 19, 2012 03:49 AM (j7iSn)
Posted by: unclear on the concept at November 19, 2012 03:51 AM (jZZFi)
Posted by: Icedog at November 19, 2012 03:52 AM (9ScGj)
I still think this loss is being "over-thought". (is that a word?)
As it currently stands, more voters in this country want to be patted on the head and given things than do the hard work necessary to earn the money to buy those things.
Posted by: jj at November 19, 2012 03:52 AM (gWO5X)
Posted by: Andy at November 19, 2012 03:52 AM (OZPoa)
Posted by: SurferDoc at November 19, 2012 07:49 AM (6H6FZ)
I figured he would have problems in the South. Instead it was VA and OH that cost him. Remember all the Romneyybots saying during the primaries he would deliver some blue States.
Not only did he not deliver any blue States but he coughed up purple States as well. Would we have done better with Rick Perry? Unknown, but it could not have been any worse.
We allowed the MFM to pick our candidate again by staging phony debates that asked stupid questions.
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 03:52 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: toby928© for TB at November 19, 2012 03:53 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: SurferDoc at November 19, 2012 03:53 AM (6H6FZ)
Every poll showed it would be a close, turn-out election. Everyone expected a high turnout election, which would have favored Romney since he was winning independents.
That did not happen.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 03:54 AM (moRRg)
Posted by: Thunderb at November 19, 2012 03:55 AM (Dnbau)
Posted by: Truman North, last of the famous international playboys at November 19, 2012 03:55 AM (q6NYV)
Problem is, there is a power vacuum in that area, and the Ottoman's aren't the only ones competing for dominance. I can't wait for the Russians to get involved. That's when the real fun starts.
Posted by: BurtTC at November 19, 2012 03:55 AM (BeSEI)
Posted by: and irresolute at November 19, 2012 03:55 AM (DBH1h)
Nothing like a little condescension to start off your Monday morning.
Oh, and EoJ?
64 ::::28 Sheesh, what a grouch.
Good grief.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at November 19, 2012 07:11 AM (6jFGb):::::
Both sides need to tone down the angry rhetoric.
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 19, 2012 07:36 AM (JDIKC)
Shut the fuck up.
Toned down enough?
Posted by: Reality at November 19, 2012 03:56 AM (da5Wo)
Posted by: Golan Globus at November 19, 2012 03:56 AM (/1U3u)
Posted by: Chief Assclown John Roberts at November 19, 2012 03:57 AM (pkkxZ)
-- And quickly lose them what little PR wins they are able to salvage. Believe it or not, indiscriminately burning down civilian neighborhoods is actually frowned upon by most people. Israel is handling this as well as they can.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 03:57 AM (moRRg)
And how did Romney do if we just look at the swing states? Actually, in swing states Romney exceeded McCain by 256 thousand votes. He also outperformed Bush in 2004 in the 2012 swing states.
Unskewed_Elections_Results.com
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at November 19, 2012 03:57 AM (kdS6q)
Posted by: SurferDoc at November 19, 2012 03:58 AM (6H6FZ)
Hmmmm, you mean like those who predicted a Romney landslide? Like you?
Posted by: pep at November 19, 2012 03:58 AM (YXmuI)
Posted by: Reality at November 19, 2012 04:00 AM (da5Wo)
Posted by: Chief Assclown John Roberts at November 19, 2012 04:00 AM (pkkxZ)
the war on women is set to continue in the upcoming Jan '13 General Assembly too.
Posted by: kelley in virginia at November 19, 2012 04:01 AM (HNwOT)
Posted by: Icedog at November 19, 2012 04:01 AM (9ScGj)
Concerning Romney's vote total, where is the reporting on this?
I would love to see a focus group video or read some articles interviewing people who voted for McCain but didn't vote for Romney.
We need to find out what the fuck they were thinking.
Posted by: jwest at November 19, 2012 04:02 AM (ZDsRL)
Posted by: pep at November 19, 2012 07:58 AM (YXmuI)
I have freely admitted that like a lot of people, I predicted a wave election and a 47 State win. It should have been a landslide and all the factors pointed toward that...except the polls.
Turns out the polls were right.
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 04:02 AM (YdQQY)
Gabe,
That's a good summary of many of the relavant facts, but...
How do you explain that the voters were D+6 this time? Didn't the registered Republicans outnumber the registered Democrats? Since Obama got fewer votes, that means that about 6% of the voters who were supposed to be Republicans are mysteriously missing. How did Obama get D+6, with significantly fewer votes?
There are other suspicious things. First and foremost, is the Senate races. Weren't about five of them toss-ups, with a less-than-even chance at others? We lost ALL BUT ONE. The odds of tossing 0 or 1 tails when you toss a coin 5 times is 6/32.
And just look at the Allen West election. You win some, you lose some, but that whole situation STINKS to high heaven.
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 04:03 AM (Mxt9o)
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at November 19, 2012 04:03 AM (xJPAY)
That said, Romney had a well funded organization set up to roll a pretty pathetic litter of Republican also-rans in the primaries. Face it, everybody looked so fucking bad, especially that retard Rick Perry, that I cast a vote for Noot in the primary even while thinking "I can't believe I'm doing this".
That being said, it still should've been a fucking landslide for Romney. The JEF is such a hapless dumbfuck that if anybody is literate enough to write history in the future they will look back on this as the Age of Stoopid.
Posted by: Captain Hate (more dagny and less curious) at November 19, 2012 04:03 AM (dblOZ)
or the polls were the excuse that they relied on to let them nuke and magic up votes in the borderline red-purple states.
At any rate it is over.
So is the US if a guy can run up more debt in 4 years to no gain than ww2 and no one gives a shit he is a retard, but we the people are shit.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 04:04 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at November 19, 2012 04:04 AM (xU0B8)
Womyn won the war, I am done fighting it'll cost us another 6 trillion in debt.
You win ladies I will not try to take your tampons or force you to have babies no more forever.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 04:05 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 04:05 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 04:05 AM (XkWWK)
Posted by: Golan Globus at November 19, 2012 04:06 AM (/1U3u)
Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 07:52 AM (YdQQY)
Perry would have been crucified. He was incapable of debating for 45 minutes. What makes you think he would have held on to NC?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 19, 2012 04:06 AM (GsoHv)
Proportionality. It should have no place in war.
Posted by: Reality at November 19, 2012 04:06 AM (da5Wo)
I'm tired of all the navel-gazing that everyone keeps doing over the election, but I'm also angry that everyone in the GOP is now selling Romney out. They're circling the firing squad instead of the wagons.
We lost by approximately 400,000 votes in the swing states. Yes it's a loss, but an awful lot of people agreed with us. This knee-jerk reaction of Jindal, Cruz, Gingrich (Food Stamp President, anyone?), and others to trash Romney only makes the independents that voted for him wonder if they were wrong. We can't win hearts and minds by saying "everything that guy just said is bullshit" immediately after the election.
Posted by: Lurker who's always late to the thread at November 19, 2012 04:07 AM (tl7W6)
If not stolen outright there was unarguable massive fraud in PA and OH at a minimum.
End of story and I am sick and tired of our just whistling past the graveyard over it.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 04:07 AM (LRFds)
--> Rapey McRaperson cost us the Senate by sacrificing an easy win along with the follow up Foot in Mouth candidate. That's simple, easy and not conspiracy based at all. Run stupid candidates, get stupid results. I didn't follow those Senate races closely enough to know if they were stupid before or after their rape comments. Running George Allen in Virginia was just kind of stupid; we do all remember that probably around 30-40% of people will instinctively vote against him because he was labeled a racist, fairly or not, right?
"How do you explain that the voters were D+6 this time?"
--> Obama's strategy was to make the election a disgusting, horrendous thing and depress overall turn out while using micro-targetting to frighten his base into voting despite the fact it was an ugly thing no one wanted to look at. No one, as far as I know, predicted a lower voter turnout this year. Obama played to our baser natures and convinced enough people "Politics is disgusting," and got them to tune out.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 04:07 AM (moRRg)
Turns out the polls were right.
I applaud you for that. Really. So please tone down the Romneybot stuff. It isn't helpful. He was a good man, a good candidate, and I don't doubt that he did far better than any of the others would have done.
I confess that I still don't understand the election, but in the absence of a better explanation, I remain a "tribalism and looting" guy, and I'm deeply worried about the country my kids will inherit.
Posted by: pep at November 19, 2012 04:07 AM (YXmuI)
Knock off the bullshit, figure out how you fucked up and do better. Nothing else works.
Posted by: SurferDoc at November 19, 2012 04:07 AM (6H6FZ)
Think about how the ground was prepared and how Obama won the election:
1) An uncritical and unskeptical Media. There has been plenty of analysis of ACA (Obamacare), but precious little skeptical analysis that is widely published in the mainstream media. There are still millions of people (and some of them actually voted) who really do not have clue as to what is going to happen. The Media is against us (no news to anyone who is a reader on this blog), and that counts for a lot of votes. It is possible that there are people that voted for Obama or did not vote that would turn out if they actually had an inkling of the true nature of things. This is a huge mountain to climb.
2) NARWAL: Obama and his operatives in the Democrat Party hacked and stole an immense amount of personal information from Facebook and other data bases to help craft a system of addressing people personally on targeted issues by e-mail. So if we consider data theft and general criminality to be ideal electoral strategies, go for it.
3) The Auto industry "baiilout" , which was nothing of the sort. The cramdown on the Senior Bond holders and handing part of the net worth of GM to the UAW, and then handing Chrysler to FIAT. That there is a game changer AGAINST Obama if the Media would tell anything close to the truth about it. Chrysler employees are in fact going to get screwed as FIAT takes a lot of production capacity and moves it off shore to , get this, make money.
4) Stealing the vote: Post election, it is appearing that some precincts went for Obama in, let us say, unusual statistical ways. This alone may not have won the election, but it was insurance against it being too close, as was Florida in 2000. This is in the Democrat playbook for all future elections. I don't know how they did it, but they sure broke the law. Proving it is another matter. I'm waiting (in vain) for the Republican state government in Ohio to investigate electoral irregularities in Cuyahoga County. They are probably going to do nothing based on trying to keep their jobs for the 2014 election. Obamaphones!
5) Lastly and probably most important: Strategically, we are in a difficult position that is getting worse, with respect to the immigration invasion from Mexico and points south. California will never go Republican again in my lifetime. New Mexico and Nevada are probably lost too. Colorado is probably tipping. Arizona may be next. What if Texas tips Democrat? Then we will never ever win another national election. Florida may be going too, and apparently so is Virginia. We are in a corner on demographics aided by the tide of immigration. The stupid solution is to open the doors wider and lose faster, but smarter people than me are on it. I hear that Top Men in the Republican Party are working on it.
Top. Men.
So yes, let us continue the circular firing squad, in search of that Perfect Conservative Candidate that is out there somewhere and hiding. Romney wasn't ideal, but he was electable. He made mistakes, but he was up against lies, treachery and felonies. And so will the next candidate for President.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch is really Eddie Willers at November 19, 2012 04:08 AM (Md8Uo)
Posted by: Opus An Arcus at November 19, 2012 04:08 AM (wa911)
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at November 19, 2012 04:08 AM (X3lox)
Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at November 19, 2012 04:08 AM (xU0B8)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 04:08 AM (XkWWK)
"108 The biggest myth of why we lost the election is, we did not lose the election. It was stolen. Period."
Truman! I suspect the same, but don't feel I really have proof. It "feels like" a socialist coup. What's the latest on the case for "It was stolen."?
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 04:08 AM (Mxt9o)
Posted by: MrScribbler, banned at TepidAir at November 19, 2012 07:49 AM (yKUrR)
Heaven forbid we actually pursue the voter fraud aspect of this. That said, I have come to believe that the level of cheating was probably not to blame for the loss, because if they could cheat so efficiently as to have it wrapped up on election day before all the polls had closed, they either won legitimately, or they already have an awesome functional cheating mechanism in place and we are doomed forever.
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 04:09 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at November 19, 2012 04:09 AM (Ho2rs)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 19, 2012 04:09 AM (JDIKC)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 19, 2012 04:10 AM (8y9MW)
It's the normal thing to do we are truly morphing into the mirror image of the mules.
Obama is a new thing b/c in the past he would have been thrown under the bus for costing them the House but Clinton set the precedent that they do not eject on first fuck up.
Mitt ran a decent enough race the roca debacle notwithstanding,.
The 6 trillion dollar scoamf won b/c America quit being America.
Let me get this straight Ogabe got elected as "Bush spent er uh too much money bad wars Bush" and governs like a freer spending Bush with even more imperial aftertaste...
and the GOP is the problem?
Fuck 'em at this point any help or move to the left to grab votes may still be in the service of the destruction of freedom and separation of powers.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 04:10 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Icedog at November 19, 2012 04:11 AM (9ScGj)
Posted by: BumperStickerist at November 19, 2012 04:11 AM (RuUvx)
Posted by: uterus cannon at November 19, 2012 04:12 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at November 19, 2012 04:12 AM (X3lox)
Posted by: pep at November 19, 2012 08:07 AM (YXmuI)
-----
I do not believe that there will be a country to inherit
Posted by: Velvet Ambition at November 19, 2012 04:12 AM (R8hU8)
-- What matters more: Winning or being decent? For some people, winning is more important. Fighting hard? I'm fine with. Playing dirty to win is of no interest to me.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 04:12 AM (moRRg)
144 134 Proportionality. It should have no place in war.
Posted by: Reality at November 19, 2012 08:06 AM (da5Wo)
Yup. You win by exponentially.
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 08:08 AM (XkWWK)
In law school I wrote a paper comparing the RoE in a specific UN mission with Use of Force guidelines by US police officers. I have several family and friends that are cops, so I interviewed them. One of my close friends from hs is a cop and when I asked about deadly force, the first words out of his mouth were "If someone tries to kill me, I kill them first."
Sounds like a good plan to me.
Posted by: Reality at November 19, 2012 04:12 AM (da5Wo)
I only read the post and none of the comments, but....
Using 2008 as a defining datum is a falliay. Every election has its own character because the electorate has a different character every election. Yes, substantially the same from cycle to cycle but 2008, people voted for different reasons then they did in 2010 and 2012.
Lesson: Educate the misinformed/uniformed. Monumental, but achievable, task given the state of our education system and media.
Posted by: antibreitbart (sort of) at November 19, 2012 04:14 AM (UhXzR)
Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at November 19, 2012 04:14 AM (xU0B8)
Yeah under a normal president that would be true.
This is Chicago Jesus.
Mostly she peruses the ONT and did while in the dirt as well. She likes observing the differing dynamics between the main threads and the ONT.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 04:15 AM (LRFds)
"106 Disappearing hundreds of thousands of votes is a pretty tall order; and if they were going to cheat, why not cheat at the House level too? There is voter fraud going on, but for it to be on that large of a scale requires us to believe teh entire government is compromised, which is... unlikely. ..."
The Presidential election was decided in a relatively small number of mid-sized states - on the state level. The Senate was also in a discrete number of states, and it doesn't take much to swing a close race.
There are 438 House races, all over the place. Plus, BTW, they're pretty obviously some pretty bad cheating ging on in Allen West's House district, which also happens to be within a key Presidential state - FL.
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 04:15 AM (Mxt9o)
As Foxworthy once said, "If you mix stagnant pond water with raw sewage you're not getting Evian."
Posted by: Reality at November 19, 2012 04:16 AM (da5Wo)
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at November 19, 2012 04:17 AM (X3lox)
Democrats voted for Obama knowing that the House would remain Republican. There can be no argument about that.
Posted by: BumperSticker
Then how come the Republicans lost 8 House seats, last I saw. Voters wanted to make it interesting?
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at November 19, 2012 04:17 AM (kdS6q)
Posted by: uterus cannon at November 19, 2012 08:12 AM (3ZtZW)
I've been stating for years that the decentralized nature of the moooooslims makes it impossible to have a much needed reformation whereby they could kick all the dumbfucks out and have a religion that actually did some good rather than a nutjob enhancing cult.
Posted by: Captain Hate (more dagny and less curious) at November 19, 2012 04:18 AM (dblOZ)
Posted by: AuthorLMendez, Go Bucs! Go Heat! at November 19, 2012 04:18 AM (yAor6)
1) Creator of Obamacare was our standard bearer.
2) Northeastern liberal as our standard bearer.
3) Began every attack with "We agree that the President inherited a tough situation." thus making everything else you say pointless.
4) Agreeing to have Liberal moderators moderate all of the debates.
5) Taking debates 2 and 3 off. I turned the 3rd debate off as Romney began conceding point after point to Obama, I was sickened.
6) Allowing the sub-retard Biden bully and wipe the floor with our supposed brainiac was also quite disheartening.
7) Substittuing and actual GOTV with a virtual GOTV was the nail in the coffin.
There are other reasons but these are the ones that jump out.
Maybe in 2016 we run an actual conservative who stands for something and has no fear of mixing it up with his opponent and the media?
Just a thought.
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 19, 2012 04:18 AM (RrD4h)
Now that there's some good political analysis. We need to change our messaging to get the Meggie Mac vote. That's all it takes, conservatives.
Just be less "icky", problem solved.
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 04:19 AM (BoE3Z)
-- Get one who can win the primary in 2016, and we will. The problem is that none of them seem able to win the primary.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 04:20 AM (moRRg)
more than a small number of people who voted for McCain DID NOT VOTE FOR ROMNEY!
Five million McCain voters died. The GOP needs to attract new voters (ie young people) or find a way to keep old people alive longer.
Posted by: kevinw at November 19, 2012 04:22 AM (ncq1x)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at November 19, 2012 04:22 AM (Ho2rs)
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 08:20 AM (moRRg)
It's because those "type" of people are too "icky", don't you know.
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 04:22 AM (BoE3Z)
-
Trust me, you're going to lose some arguments.
Posted by: Chief Justice John Roberts at November 19, 2012 04:22 AM (yJ+RL)
Posted by: William Teach at November 19, 2012 04:23 AM (vRNdo)
Bullshit, the GOP primaries are rigged to give us the results the establishment want.
Front load the primaries in the actual Red "conservative states" instead of the blue and purpleish states and you will have a conservative candidate.
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 19, 2012 04:23 AM (RrD4h)
Posted by: Captain Hate (more dagny and less curious) at November 19, 2012 04:24 AM (dblOZ)
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 19, 2012 08:18 AM (RrD4h)
yeah dude it was so Romney's fault all the way we lost. Destroying O in the debate? doesn't matter. Having better crowds? doesn't matter. Doing better then McCain? doesn't matter. The 1st Republican Prez Candidate to win in 20+ years to gain traction w/ Independents and Suburban voters? doesn't matter. If you think we lost just because of who our nominee is, then you live in a simple world.
Posted by: AuthorLMendez, Go Bucs! Go Heat! at November 19, 2012 04:24 AM (yAor6)
179 I have to wonder, if Sarah Palin is the answer, where the heck was she during this past election cycle?
Posted by: William Teach at November 19, 2012 08:23 AM (vRNdo)
The consensus (whatever that's worth) seems to be that the Romney camp quietly told her to sit down and stfu. Or something to that effect.
Posted by: Reality at November 19, 2012 04:24 AM (da5Wo)
Posted by: Icedog at November 19, 2012 04:24 AM (9ScGj)
*ding* *ding* *ding* we got a winnah!
Posted by: AuthorLMendez, Go Bucs! Go Heat! at November 19, 2012 04:24 AM (yAor6)
Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at November 19, 2012 04:24 AM (xU0B8)
Posted by: Opus An Arcus at November 19, 2012 04:25 AM (wa911)
Based on our loss, whatever the reason (and I'm drifting to the "minority party" side of that debate, myself) we have three possible options here.
1- Surrender. I lump everyone from the "Let it Burn" and "It was the Far Right's, fault!" crowds here. Anyone who either just wants to sit back and let it happen, or compromise our positions falls in this group.
2- Retreat. This group includes those who are making active plans to bug out in the near future, as well as those advocating the "Run (to) Red" strategy. One might be said to be a tactical retreat (survival first), and the other a strategic retreat (let's shore up our lines), but they're both advocating retreat to some degree.
3- Attack. This (far smaller) group says we should fight the Democrats on everything, and expose everything they do. This group says we should attempt to avoid the fiscal cliff, but be willing to go over it. This is the group that says we need to start using Democrats' tactics (Alinsky, et. al) against the Democrats.
I'm not sure which is best, honestly. There's a strong pull to "Let it Burn." There's a great satisfaction in being able to say "I told you so." I simply don't think we have the resources to go on the attack. I think attacking when we have a chance is something we need to do, but I don't think we can adopt a purely offensive strategy at this point. Retreat, like "Let it Burn" has a certain pull to it, but I worry about it's practicality. Retreating to the family farm and going off the grid is very much like "let it burn," in many ways. Having a mass Conservative Migration to already conservative areas is a good strategic move, but I'm not sure we have the time necessary to make it work.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 19, 2012 04:25 AM (8y9MW)
-- Or that they implode. This time around Perry forgot the things he wanted to cut; Bachmann never gained traction; Cain got derailed by a potential sex scandal (though he flared out before that went anywhere), etc., etc. As much as I disliked Huckabee, he at least didn't fall apart in 2008. If social conservatives want to run a social conservative, you need to get someone like Huckabee who can actually handle the rigors of running for office, and someone who isn't already damaged goods (like Cain, Perry, Palin, etc.) I like different pieces from most of the people who ran in the primary, but one thing Romney's loss shows us is that you need to actually have an A-game to play with the big leagues.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 04:25 AM (moRRg)
Apparently my sock from last week stuck. My bad.
Reality = BCochran1981
Heh. I kinda like that.
Posted by: BCochran1981 at November 19, 2012 04:26 AM (da5Wo)
oops, fixed
Posted by: AuthorLMendez, Go Bucs! Go Heat! at November 19, 2012 04:26 AM (yAor6)
Posted by: SurferDoc at November 19, 2012 04:27 AM (6H6FZ)
Put me firmly the fuck in #3 category.
Posted by: BCochran1981 at November 19, 2012 04:27 AM (da5Wo)
The "icky" guy who was going to take away their Free Shit and make them get jobs. Which is somehow different than promising them Free Shit, I suppose, but Free Shit still figures prominently.
Posted by: HeatherRadish™, Crankypants Extraordinaire at November 19, 2012 04:27 AM (hO8IJ)
Posted by: AuthorLMendez, Go Bucs! Go Heat! at November 19, 2012 04:29 AM (yAor6)
Posted by: Opus An Arcus at November 19, 2012 04:29 AM (wa911)
Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at November 19, 2012 04:29 AM (xU0B8)
If you cannot learn from this election because you would rather have the same old True Conservatives (TM) argument you always have, we are probably doomed to repeat the same errors again.
Exactly. No non-conservative has lost a presidential election before. In the last 20 years. Except Bush 41, Dole, McCain, and Romney. And no non-consetvative Senate candidates lost. Except Lingle (HI), Thompson (WI), Brown (MA), McMahon (CT), and Berg (ND). And no conservative candidiates won their Senaate races, except all (Flake AZ, Cruz TX, Fischer NE) but one (Murdoch IN), who was completlely undermined by sore-loser RINO Lugar and the RNC.
This thread is of the RINOs, by the RINOs, and for the RINOs.
Posted by: EV at November 19, 2012 04:29 AM (cqZXM)
Posted by: Truman North, last of the famous international playboys at November 19, 2012 04:30 AM (I2LwF)
Perry didn't do well because the GOP had something like 1000 debates.
And everyone was trying to donkey punch everyone.
Though many didn't like him Herman Cain had a concise message that was beggining to resonate until he was ordered to be destroyed by who I don't know, but a lot of our candidates were destroyed beyond all repair this last go by the sheer number of debates.
It was stupid and needless.
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 19, 2012 04:30 AM (RrD4h)
Posted by: Jean at November 19, 2012 04:30 AM (4jJCE)
Posted by: Schrödinger's cat [/i] at November 19, 2012 04:30 AM (feFL6)
Posted by: ziggyelman at November 19, 2012 04:31 AM (AsMdZ)
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 04:31 AM (moRRg)
Based on our loss, whatever the reason (and I'm drifting to the "minority party" side of that debate, myself) we have three possible options here.
1- Surrender. I lump everyone from the "Let it Burn" and "It was the Far Right's, fault!" crowds here. Anyone who either just wants to sit back and let it happen, or compromise our positions falls in this group.
2- Retreat. This group includes those who are making active plans to bug out in the near future, as well as those advocating the "Run (to) Red" strategy. One might be said to be a tactical retreat (survival first), and the other a strategic retreat (let's shore up our lines), but they're both advocating retreat to some degree.
I've got a foot in both these camps, Allen. Let it burn, and try not to get too scorched. Also, back out and wait for the inevitable breakdown. # 3 - well get back to me when we have a credible standard-bearer. Right now we are a rabble, so pulling back is necessary.
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 04:32 AM (BoE3Z)
'137 ...
"How do you explain that the voters were D+6 this time?"
--> Obama's strategy was to make the election a disgusting, horrendous thing and depress overall turn out while using micro-targetting to frighten his base into voting despite the fact it was an ugly thing no one wanted to look at. No one, as far as I know, predicted a lower voter turnout this year. Obama played to our baser natures and convinced enough people "Politics is disgusting," and got them to tune out.'
This seems possible. What it points to is "negative advertising works."
But, really. People spoke of "holding their noses" to vote for McCain. Romney had a better performance, and a real track record on the important issue of the day, while Obama had broken almost every promise he had run on (except ObamaCare) and had an abysmal record on the economy and unemployment this time. It makes sense that Obama got fewer votes (and if it were not for the MSM propaganda machine, and bigotry from minorities, he wouldn't have stood a chance), but it doesn't make sense that Romney didn't get more votes.
The voters showed their vengance against ObamaCare in 2010, where were they this time?
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 04:32 AM (Mxt9o)
The questions is.. could Romney have won by doing something differently? I think perhaps he might have been too nice. He could have hit back harder. Obama's camp just made him look to unacceptable.. and that's why you saw the bounce after the first debate... some folks saw Romney wasn't the ogre/idiot Obama had made him out to be. It just wasn't enough.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 19, 2012 04:32 AM (UTq/I)
Posted by: uterus cannon at November 19, 2012 04:33 AM (3ZtZW)
Cain destroyed himself by fucking someone other than his wife.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 19, 2012 04:34 AM (GsoHv)
Posted by: uterus cannon at November 19, 2012 04:34 AM (3ZtZW)
The one I think is most likely? People just didn't turn out because the election depressed them and they tuned out.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 04:34 AM (moRRg)
Posted by: Icedog at November 19, 2012 04:34 AM (9ScGj)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at November 19, 2012 08:22 AM (Ho2rs)
Early voting is the biggest load of shit that has ever come down the fucking pike. That began when Slick was in office, no? Speaking of Clenis, I want every fucking one of you stupid jizzmops who claimed he was *really* on our side to own up to just how incredibly well that brilliant bit of dumbfuckery worked out. Trusting Slick leads to people experiencing what Juanita Broaddrick went through.
Anyway, good luck on getting rid of early voting because the donks will fight that tooth and nail. It's a good way of congregating people who will vote a certain way, loading them on buses on a weekend and delivering them to the booth.
Posted by: Captain Hate (more dagny and less curious) at November 19, 2012 04:34 AM (dblOZ)
Well, we couldn't make an issue of Obamacare with Romney as our nominee, could we? I mean, he invented the thing in MA.
Posted by: GMan at November 19, 2012 04:34 AM (sxq57)
150. I get that we have to look at the election critically to determine what went wrong so that we can fix it, and I agree with Gabe that most of the reasons why Mitt lost were strategic. It's now baked in the cake that Republicans are evil white guys who hate clean air and minorities. Look at the way they're portrayed in movies and on TV. When was the last time that a conservative character was shown in a positive light? Alex P. Keaton in the '80s? All the more reason that we should have fought the stupidity of binders, birth control, tampons, and Big Bird instead of laughing at it.
My point is that the many in the GOP are reacting badly to the loss by trashing Romney unfairly, and it's not helping. Jindal and others ran to the first open mic to criticize a guy that they campaigned for, which makes Independents think "huh, maybe they're right". Mitt made mistakes, but there's no need for everyone to bash him.
Posted by: Lurker who's always late to the thread at November 19, 2012 04:35 AM (tl7W6)
Posted by: Emile Antoon Khadaji at November 19, 2012 04:36 AM (KvKOu)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 19, 2012 08:34 AM (GsoHv)
You have a problem with that? But...you post dirty pictures.....
Posted by: BCochran1981 at November 19, 2012 04:36 AM (da5Wo)
you mistake lumping voters together as one group. voters are individuals. many low info voters skipped on voting in 2010 (and will again in 2014) when their messiah isn't on the ticket. some true believer types in the Republican party came out in 2010 but took their ball and went home when they didn't like how this election played out. you just have to look at the comments on here and other blogs where a small minority said they weren't voting. that small minority adds up to real numbers and in a close election it matters
Posted by: AuthorLMendez, Go Bucs! Go Heat! at November 19, 2012 04:36 AM (yAor6)
Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at November 19, 2012 04:36 AM (xU0B8)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 07:19 AM (XkWWK)
Sorry for the late answer, J.J. - had a meeting to go to. Just a nut.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at November 19, 2012 04:36 AM (zF6Iw)
-- Not many. If that had happened, Romney would not have won independents so heavily (and Romney's deference should have had no impact on Republican turn out. If it -did- hurt on Republican turn out, then we have a different problem.) If anything, since Romney won independents in many areas, his strategy there, at least, worked.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 04:37 AM (moRRg)
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 04:37 AM (BoE3Z)
Amen, "John Boehner did not singlehandedly give us everything we wanted."
Uh yeah we barely live in a republic anymore kids.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 04:38 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Truman North, last of the famous international playboys at November 19, 2012 04:39 AM (I2LwF)
G-ddamnit Gabriel...
We DID lose the election because of handouts. That is the F--king lesson of the election no matter how much we wish it were otherwise. This is not to dismiss the power of Obama's unchecked slander machine or his multi-billion dollar PR operation known as the Media. Obama won Ohio because of an auto-bailout. Florida was close because of the hispanic vote that depends on all kinds of social services, and seniors who depend on Medicare, etc.
70 million people are on medicaid. 50 million on foodstamps. This was an election decided by a few hundred thousand votes in a few swing states. Tens of millions of people in this country are flat-out BOUGHT OFF and you think it isn't the handouts?
Posted by: Sam In VA at November 19, 2012 04:39 AM (rFiOs)
Posted by: Opus An Arcus at November 19, 2012 04:39 AM (wa911)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 19, 2012 04:41 AM (g2ldK)
Posted by: BCochran1981 at November 19, 2012 08:36 AM (da5Wo)
And leer at hot chicks (and, sometimes, not-so-hot chicks) and gaze approvingly at all beautiful women on TV and in movies.....
But I don't fuck other women.
I don't have contempt for Cain because the media tore him up; I have contempt for Cain because he violated his marriage vows. If he wanted to bang other women he should have gotten a divorce.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 19, 2012 04:41 AM (GsoHv)
DING DING DING...WINNER!
Posted by: Paladin at November 19, 2012 04:42 AM (bxc5w)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 19, 2012 08:41 AM (g2ldK)
Nope....he was a Perry guy, as was ace, after Pawlenty flamed out. DrewM was a Newt guy.
Posted by: Tami at November 19, 2012 04:42 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Sam In VA at November 19, 2012 08:39 AM (rFiOs)
Tens of millions of Americans have a price. This is 19th century machine politics, writ large. Hard to beat. When the gravy train dries up, only then will these bought-off residents be forced into another direction/
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 04:42 AM (BoE3Z)
Could it be we lost because people WANT to be lied to?
Also, all those votes from illegal aliens and dead people didn't hurt.
Posted by: katya the designated driver at November 19, 2012 04:43 AM (DoZD+)
But I don't fuck other women.
I don't have contempt for Cain because the media tore him up; I have contempt for Cain because he violated his marriage vows. If he wanted to bang other women he should have gotten a divorce.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 19, 2012 08:41 AM (GsoHv)
Exactly. Doesn't the Outwardly Lewd Morons Who Still Respect Their Vows club need a newsletter?
Posted by: BCochran1981 at November 19, 2012 04:43 AM (da5Wo)
207 I wish Romney would have hit back harder, but anytime that he laid a glove on Obama on issues like removing the work requirement from welfare or Benghazi, the MSM would clutch their pearls and scream "RACIST!", "OPPORTUNIST!", "GAAAAFES!" That doesn't mean that you have to stop punching though.
Posted by: Lurker who's always late to the thread at November 19, 2012 04:44 AM (tl7W6)
primaries and the who that state voted for in the general
1) Iowa - Obama
2) New Hampshire - Obama
3) South Carolina - Romney
4) Florida - Obama
5) Nevada - Obama
6) Colorado - Obama
7) Minesotta - Obama
9) Maine - Obama
10) Arizona - Romney
11) Michigan - Obama
12) Wyoming - Romney
13) Washington - Obama
These are the states that are "choosing" our GOP candidates and giving the "preferred candidate" of our party momentum.
Does anyone else see a problem with this picture?
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 19, 2012 04:44 AM (RrD4h)
Posted by: RWC at November 19, 2012 04:45 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 19, 2012 08:44 AM (RrD4h)
considering we need some of those states to win 270 I don't
Posted by: AuthorLMendez, Go Bucs! Go Heat! at November 19, 2012 04:46 AM (yAor6)
Posted by: Underdown at November 19, 2012 04:47 AM (8KGvR)
"Republicans have to make strategy part of the primary process as well as ideology. GOP candidates seeking Federal office need to have these questions put to them and provide solid answers:
1. What is your message and how will you get it out past a hostile media? "
A good idea. I would add just a couple of things.
(1) Expand the questions to include other "trap" questions conservatives or Republicans are apt to be asked.
(2) Change "Federal" to "Federal or State".
(3) 2. How will you answer when a liberal journalist tries to trap you with the abortion-rape "or the repeal Roe v. Wade and take away women's reproductive rights" question?
(4) Put it on one sheet of paper that all candidates are required to read twice daily.
Posted by: RM at November 19, 2012 04:47 AM (TRsME)
The red eye radio guys summed it up the best: The biggest mistake the Romney campaign made was assuming the American electorate was smart.
This country doesn't deserve good leadership (those of us who voted the right way excepted). Six million voters hated preazy but couldn't be bothered to show up to vote against him? That's not Romney-hate, that's laziness and moral vacuity.
A decadent society gets the government it deserves.
Posted by: kallisto at November 19, 2012 04:48 AM (jm/9g)
Posted by: Schrödinger's cat [/i] at November 19, 2012 04:48 AM (feFL6)
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 04:48 AM (moRRg)
Posted by: BCochran1981 at November 19, 2012 08:43 AM (da5Wo)
Here's the first issue:
http://tinyurl.com/cnq2k3n
NSFW
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 19, 2012 04:48 AM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Ed Anger at November 19, 2012 04:49 AM (tOkJB)
-- They worked, so, clearly they didn't. Just because we thought "Romney killed my wife with cancer" was a stupid ad doesn't mean it didn't work. These ads are measured by effectiveness not cleverness.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 04:49 AM (moRRg)
Posted by: Golan Globus at November 19, 2012 04:50 AM (/1U3u)
Posted by: Ed Anger at November 19, 2012 08:49 AM (tOkJB)
I honestly don't know who this guy is - what is his sin?
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 04:50 AM (BoE3Z)
http://tinyurl.com/cnq2k3n
NSFW
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 19, 2012 08:48 AM (GsoHv)
I just momentarily passed out. Lot of blood left the upper extremities in a hurry. And good grief, I had no idea Decker showed her tits that much. This requires some research. When I'm not at work.
Posted by: BCochran1981 at November 19, 2012 04:51 AM (da5Wo)
Very simply, Democrats got more voters to turn out than we did. By definition math wins an election.
If you look at registered voters for the GOP (and one might even include Independents) there are a significant number of people who simply did not vote.
How one who is actually registered doesn't vote in a historic election such as the last one is beyond me. Why register?
I don't however believe is has anything to do with Romney's "Conservatism".
Nor do I believe this whole if we just run Rubio, Hispanics will put us over the top bullshit.
People showed up for free shit. They showed up to steal from productive people and businesses. Shit we can't afford and people we can't keep taxing at confiscatory rates if we ever want the economy to come back.
You need to kill that beast by holding firm on spending and taxes. You need to cut those subsidies and handouts as your number one priority. Otherwise the beast lives and Rubio will be Disaster Part II.
Democrats know it. Look how hard they are pushing and drawing lines in the sand on handouts they promised. They know if they don't deliver- people won't believe them.
Posted by: marcus at November 19, 2012 04:51 AM (GGCsk)
Put a TRUE CONSERVATIVE up for election, he/she will win.
It's called energizing the base.
The peoblem is that everybody has a different definition of what a "true conservative" is. Ron Paul, anyone?
Posted by: katya the designated driver at November 19, 2012 04:51 AM (DoZD+)
Posted by: Golan Globus at November 19, 2012 04:51 AM (/1U3u)
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 08:50 AM (BoE3Z)"
Tom Cotton is the newly elected AR representative and I'd hope a future leader in the party
Posted by: AuthorLMendez, Go Bucs! Go Heat! at November 19, 2012 04:51 AM (yAor6)
Posted by: MoKim at November 19, 2012 04:54 AM (kprEX)
Posted by: Adam drinking at the beach at November 19, 2012 04:54 AM (+oPN1)
They know if they don't deliver- people won't believe them.
But they will. Because the libs will simply blame the Republicans and people will believe it. Because they are lazy and willfully stupid. I rub shoulders with Obama people every day and most of them are like this. They don't think about/care about where the money comes from and they will never blame Obama and his people for what is going wrong.
Posted by: katya the designated driver at November 19, 2012 04:55 AM (DoZD+)
Mostly fraud. The free shit promises aren't worth a lot when you consider within 2 weeks of being sworn in he raised sales/excise taxes on the poor more than enough to compensate for whatever extra he promised to give away.
Romney maybe could have pointed out how Obama raised regressive taxes significantly the moment he took office. I don't think that was ever mentioned.
Posted by: @PurpAv at November 19, 2012 04:55 AM (jSbEA)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at November 19, 2012 04:57 AM (fCMdQ)
Whoa there fella, we're not defending a PhD dissertation here.
Posted by: Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock at November 19, 2012 04:57 AM (YXmuI)
Does anyone else see a problem with this picture?
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 19, 2012 08:44 AM (RrD4h)
Iowa needs to be told to go to the back of the fucking line and to wipe their fat asses with their state constitution that says otherwise. If I hear that asshole F Chuck in 3 years yammering about how those hayseed simpletons need to be "wooed", bad things will happen.
Posted by: Captain Hate (more dagny and less curious) at November 19, 2012 04:58 AM (dblOZ)
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 08:12 AM (moRRg)
Pop back in four years and tell us how that worked out for you, Sparky.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at November 19, 2012 04:59 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: Ammo Dump at November 19, 2012 04:59 AM (YYyqq)
Posted by: @PurpAv at November 19, 2012 08:55 AM (jSbEA)
He could have, but it would have been water off a duck's back. The demographic that gets him over the top would not understand the "regressive taxes" concept. They understand "free shit" really well - Obama phone/Obama stash, that sort of thing. Tax talk is for makers.
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 04:59 AM (BoE3Z)
Exactly!!! The MSM is dying slowly...but that doesn't help us now or the near future. and zero will bail the NYT and others out he won't let his buddies die...
Posted by: ziggyelman at November 19, 2012 05:00 AM (AsMdZ)
Regardless of positions on issues, free shit giveaways or anything else, elections are won by:
1) The better looking candidate
2) The younger/cooler candidate
That's just the way it is.
Posted by: jwest at November 19, 2012 05:01 AM (ZDsRL)
I too am irritated by the plethora. But I'm seeing a plethologist.
Perhaps he will use a plethoscope, and prescribe a plethectomy.
Posted by: comatus at November 19, 2012 05:01 AM (qaVK+)
All you guys who are saying "Romney wasn't critical enough of Obama" maybe should think that through a little more.
The way I remember it, Romney was getting reamed over in the MFM for gaffes that weren't even gaffes.
It was practically impossible to criticize Obama. The media had buried practically every issue. Benghazi was a complete screw-up, showing complete, scary-level incompetence, so they BURIED IT.
Hell, how come it never came up that Obama is a socialist - even NOW? The f-ing guy gets on his little "you didn't build that" rant - which was a de facto socialist manifesto, and the media told everybody he was "taken out of context". Even the Right-leaning media left him alone, saying he "mispoke". How the hell do you "misspeak" for FOUR PARAGRAPHS!?!
If you called Obama on half the crap he's pulled, it just comes off as a conspiracy theory, because of the treasonous malpractice by the MFM.
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 05:01 AM (Mxt9o)
Posted by: dogfish at November 19, 2012 05:03 AM (N2yhW)
245
That's something I was curious about too. Why in hell do Iowa & New Hampshire ALWAYS go first. Shouldn't there be some sort of rotation to be fair. Who decides that?
Posted by: Reggie1971 at November 19, 2012 05:03 AM (8cOY0)
You want to win a national election?
(1) Neutralize the MFM.
(2) Stop letting them steal elections. Voter ID is a good start, but if they're manipulating the voting machines, or otherwise magically "lose" votes, that ain't gonna help.
You do those things, and STILL keep losing, then go ahead and talk about changing course.
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 05:05 AM (Mxt9o)
If you called Obama on half the crap he's pulled, it just comes off as a conspiracy theory, because of the treasonous malpractice by the MFM.
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 09:01 AM (Mxt9o)
That got the attention of the right people despite the efforts of the MFM. The problem is that there are more people that are content to be takers from the system than there are people willing to start businesses.
Posted by: Captain Hate (more dagny and less curious) at November 19, 2012 05:05 AM (dblOZ)
Posted by: Baldy at November 19, 2012 05:05 AM (opS9C)
Posted by: Model-1066 at November 19, 2012 05:05 AM (778Fr)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at November 19, 2012 05:06 AM (Ho2rs)
There's no evidence some didn't either. Just like there's no evidence the Ds didn't hack the counts a little in the machine. There's a gold plated I do what I want fuck-ton of evidence they pulled regular D machine fraud. 500+ votes 100% SCOAMF precincts is blatant fraud. You couldn't get 500+ guys to take a free BJ, someone would balk.
Posted by: DaveA at November 19, 2012 05:07 AM (MOWP1)
The MSM is dying slowly
I wish that were true but I'm not sure I believe it. You thing George Soros is going to let his greatest propoganda machines go under?
Posted by: katya the designated driver at November 19, 2012 05:08 AM (DoZD+)
There is also a fairly new commenter who keeps plugging for Tom Cotton, even though he is newly elected.
The guy isn't a total spammer, but he needs to stop shouting about the miracles of Cotton.
Posted by: fluffy at November 19, 2012 05:08 AM (z9HTb)
We lost to this?
Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 19, 2012 05:09 AM (1Jaio)
2) W - Barely beat Kerry
3) McCain- Loss
4) Romney-Loss
Solution?
Eliminate the SoCons - Embrace the Gay Mafia- the leftover cucumbers from homo safe sex class will make a lovely salad - illegal Immigrants? - NO HYOOMAN IS ILL EAGLE - Hey maybe we could set up a foreign voter import business. By 2016 we could import half of Peru - NATURAL REPUBLICANS?? huh? amirite?
Moose Limb Tearorrists? They will loveloveloveUS when we abandon Israel.
FORE WARD!!
YAY MOAR LEFTER !!!!!!!!!!
l.i.b.
Posted by: T. Hunter - let it burn at November 19, 2012 05:10 AM (EZl54)
Posted by: DaveA at November 19, 2012 09:07 AM (MOWP1)
Exactly; in every precinct there has to be at least a few cranks who hate their fucking neighbors and would do anything to just counter what they do.
Posted by: Captain Hate (more dagny and less curious) at November 19, 2012 05:10 AM (dblOZ)
We will save them.
Posted by: MacArthur Foundation at November 19, 2012 05:10 AM (z9HTb)
Posted by: fluffy at November 19, 2012 09:08 AM (z9HTb)
We're soon going to demand equal time.
Posted by: The Miracles of Polyester at November 19, 2012 05:11 AM (9F2c1)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 19, 2012 05:11 AM (5PkZK)
Posted by: katya the designated driver at November 19, 2012 09:08 AM (DoZD+)
That commie POS has got to be closing in on 90. He's got to be almost feeling the fires of hell
Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 19, 2012 05:11 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: Y-not on the phone at November 19, 2012 05:12 AM (5H6zj)
On this "icky" thing...
John F-ing Kerry was an unappealing Rich With Dude (TM). How was that treasonous bastard not "icky" while Romney supposedly was? Romney was the unheard-of politician who actually turned out to be more of a great guy, the more you heard about him. They had to druge up being mean to some kid 50 years ago, for cryin' out loud!
In a way, I guess I'm agreeing with Gabe. Because the "icky" factor is decided by the MFM - THAT'S the biggest hurdle we've had.
It seems like in a time like this where the big three networks are on the wane that this should be possible.
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 05:13 AM (Mxt9o)
Posted by: John P. Squibob at November 19, 2012 05:13 AM (kqqGm)
Posted by: The Miracles of Polyester at November 19, 2012 09:11 AM (9F2c1)
Polly Esther for Congress!!!11!!1!
Posted by: Tom Cotton at November 19, 2012 05:14 AM (z9HTb)
Is it still assassination if the First Lady offs the Prez for cattin' around?
Posted by: Dastardly Dan at November 19, 2012 05:14 AM (rvLeh)
Biggest single mistake Romney made was picking another white guy to run with him against the Historic First Black President. Even McCain understood that he needed to counter with some Historic pick of his own. If he was going to run with an all white male ticket he should at least have picked someone who could help him win a swing state, like Portman or McDonnell.
Posted by: Jon (not the troll) at November 19, 2012 05:14 AM (E8Ag4)
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at November 19, 2012 09:05 AM (OWjjx)
Yes. And I'm one of them.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at November 19, 2012 05:14 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: Model-1066 at November 19, 2012 05:16 AM (778Fr)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, with gasoline and matches, looking innocent at November 19, 2012 05:16 AM (GBXon)
Posted by: Blacksheep at November 19, 2012 05:17 AM (bS6uW)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, with gasoline and matches, looking innocent at November 19, 2012 05:17 AM (GBXon)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 19, 2012 05:17 AM (BushJ)
Tom Cotton will stop us from F#@king that chicken!
Posted by: DJ Mallamutt, Meme Mixer at November 19, 2012 09:12 AM (OWjjx)
Cut. Jib. Newsletter.
Posted by: The Chicken at November 19, 2012 05:17 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: Jean at November 19, 2012 05:19 AM (tWctt)
Posted by: Blacksheep at November 19, 2012 05:20 AM (bS6uW)
Posted by: Jean at November 19, 2012 05:20 AM (tWctt)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at November 19, 2012 05:20 AM (fCMdQ)
It seems like in a time like this where the big three networks are on the wane that this should be possible.
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 09:13 AM (Mxt9o)
The Big 3 are declining in viewership - but - there is PBS, CNN,MSNBC, Yahoo News, KOS, Huffington Post, and so on. Their outlets are strong, and well-funded. And the entertainment industry. Which is all Left, all the time. That leavening is poisonous and subtle.
The pain that's coming "might" be the best teacher for Lefties. We need to protect ourselves from it as much as possible.
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 05:21 AM (BoE3Z)
Posted by: Museisluse at November 19, 2012 05:21 AM (SsWgR)
He hated America. Also, he got his money in an Acceptable Way and not by working in business for it.
Posted by: HeatherRadish™, Crankypants Extraordinaire at November 19, 2012 05:22 AM (hO8IJ)
Because some nice Boyscout called you up for their public service project on their way to Eagle Scout. Or because you were at the DMV to get your license renewed, and the person asked.
We make it ridiculously easy to register to vote. That's one of the reasons the fraudsters' cries of "Voter ID is too hard to get" doesn't sway me. Besides the fact they're lying, there's the fact I want it to be harder to vote. I only want people who really care about the election voting.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 19, 2012 05:22 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Blacksheep at November 19, 2012 05:23 AM (bS6uW)
Posted by: Boll Weevil PAC at November 19, 2012 05:24 AM (9F2c1)
Posted by: Model-1066 at November 19, 2012 05:24 AM (778Fr)
Posted by: Blacksheep at November 19, 2012 05:25 AM (bS6uW)
Posted by: fluffy at November 19, 2012 05:26 AM (z9HTb)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 19, 2012 05:27 AM (8y9MW)
-
Start pushing to repeal the Hollywood tax cuts, seriously.
For decades, liberals have been playing the long game, building strategic advantages that inexorably increase, especially:
1. Mass immigration / population replacement, producing a more leftist electorate.
2. Breaking down the family. If only intact families voted, conservatives would win.
3. Building a mass media machine starting with Hollywood that poisons the culture.
Things aren't going to get better without some kind of conservative attack. They're going to get worse and worse and worse.
The occasional election of a Republican who does nothing to roll back the main strategic advantages of liberalism will not change this.
The immigration floodgates (legal and illegal with amnesty) have to be closed. There has to be a serious effort to make family values real. (Yay Rick Santorum - he could not have won, but if at least if he had won he would have addressed a real issue.) And the hard work of breaking down the media machine must start.
Right now, Glen Reynolds is the most useful man alive, even though he isn't a conservative, because he is smart, and he's focusing not just on hammering the credibility of "democratic operatives with bylines" but on the hard-to-defend advantages and finances of Hollywood, which pours into the culture the harmful memes that the news media later exploit.
Given that there is no political leader now, this is the only kind of attack that can be made, and there must be an attack, so this is it. If nothing else, just talk about it.
Repeal the Hollywood tax cuts.
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 19, 2012 05:28 AM (yJ+RL)
You cannot convince me that Romney lost a legitimate election.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at November 19, 2012 05:28 AM (AD7g/)
Posted by: Toure at November 19, 2012 05:30 AM (+oPN1)
"199 ... I only have about 50 links worth of anecdotal evidence of every possible variety, and about five links on directions on how to steal votes electronically.
I don't know how much evidence people need to believe this. Andy thinks we're tin foil ninnies for even entertaining the idea."
I also have math. How do you get D+8 in one election, lose 6 million votes, and still end up with D+6?
Truman - is there a web site with that stuff? I guess "anecdotal evidence" doesn't sound very compelling, but it seems like people should be looking at whether votes could have been stolen electronically. On the ORCA thing, it makes me wonder if the system was attacked, when I hear that suddenly tons of people can't sign on, even after resetting passwords. Admittedly, it was stupid to abandon the old system, leaving no backup in case the new one failed.
For all we know, a simple cyber attack undermined the GOTV, and made the difference. Shame on them, but shame on the Romney guys for not being ready for that, and putting all their eggs in one basket.
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 05:30 AM (Mxt9o)
Ther's another lesson lurking here? Yeah. You could say that...
Yeah, you gotta work on mechanics and messaging. Yeah, you gotta deal with incmpetence in your campaign staffs. Yeah, you gotta crack down on vote fraud and everything else. Needs to be done.
Yeah, there is a 'but', here, of course.
What happened to Reagan's message? Belief in the American dream? Belief that all Americans can achieve that dream? Belief that American is still a place of opportunity...for every American citizen. Then, he communicated that dream, that possiblity, that potential, to American citizens. He didn't viciously attack Americans or America. He didn't viciously attack others within his own party. Conservatives and Republicns these days do just the opposite. Everything he did right, you do wrong, not only as a party, but as individuals and groups, as blogs and campaigns.
But what did Reagan know, eh? It's not like he ever won a presidential election by a landslide ...or won a second one quite handily, or nuthin'. What a fool he was, eh? What did he know.
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at November 19, 2012 05:31 AM (WwR1j)
Posted by: ahem at November 19, 2012 05:32 AM (FbJlB)
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at November 19, 2012 09:28 AM (AD7g/)
With tens of millions of voters who have a franchise, but no skin in the game except for Free Shit, the legitimate part is maybe moot.
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 05:32 AM (BoE3Z)
That sure is a recurring opinion here, isn't it? That Reagan was a fool. I can't go three comments without seeing that.
You irretrievably-dense straw-man fabricator.
Posted by: Waterhouse at November 19, 2012 05:33 AM (2R1uR)
Beyond that, we only maybe fight back during elections, while the MFM, Democrats and education system are fighting 24/7.
Posted by: Mark at November 19, 2012 05:33 AM (RDl1z)
Posted by: Hard Right at November 19, 2012 05:33 AM (uhftQ)
"239 ... "Mr. President, congratulations on your win. I've never seen you lose."
That is what we're dealing with."
Keep in mind that, as one pundit pointed out at the time, it's not a big deal if you have ONE suck-up; it's that nobody else in the room glared at her for her journalistic malpractice. It was a love-fest.
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 05:34 AM (Mxt9o)
Your second point was addressed by the 45 goals to a Communist takeover, read into Congressional record in 1963:
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. 41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.Posted by: kallisto at November 19, 2012 05:35 AM (jm/9g)
Posted by: kawfytawk at November 19, 2012 05:35 AM (JWLqy)
-
In 1980, whites were 88 percent of the electorate. In 2012, they were 72 percent of the electorate. Not only that, but the non-white electorate is far more Democratic than it was in 1980.
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 19, 2012 05:36 AM (yJ+RL)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 19, 2012 05:36 AM (QXlbZ)
Posted by: Golan Globus at November 19, 2012 05:37 AM (/1U3u)
"Israel has every right to expect that it does not have missiles fired into its territory," Obama said at the start of a three-nation tour in Asia.
"If that can be accomplished without a ramping up of military activity in Gaza, that's preferable," he said. "It's not just preferable for the people of Gaza. It's also preferable for Israelis, because if Israeli troops are in Gaza, they're much more at risk of incurring fatalities or being wounded."
We lost to this? Thanks to all of the uneducated nitwits who voted for this uneducated commie nitwit
Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 19, 2012 05:37 AM (1Jaio)
All ya have to do is figure out how to win the dumbass vote when the other side controls the news, the intertainment industry, most of the bureaucracy at all levels of governmenrt, and has a majority among the rich, and the rent seeking big corps. And near as I can tell they own most all the judges, lawyers, NGOs and now even the Supremes.
Should be easy.
Posted by: Invictus at November 19, 2012 05:38 AM (OQpzc)
that essentially choose the GOP candidate or give him momentum
.
1) Iowa - D, D, D, D, R, D, D
2) New Hampshire - R, D, D, R, D, D, D
3) South Carolina - R, R, R, R, R, R, R
4) Florida - R, R, D, R, R, R, D, D
5) Nevada - R, D, D, R, R, D, D
6) Colorado - R, R, D R,R, R, D, D
7) Minesotta - D, D, D, D, D, D, D
9) Maine - R, R, D, D, D, D, D, D
10) Arizona - R, R, D, D, R, R, R, R
11) Michigan - R, R, D, D, D, D, D
12) Wyoming - R, R, R, R, R, R, R
13) Washington - R, D, D, D, D, D, D
If you think this system will produce anything except a
milk toast moderate to liberal candidate I got some swamp land to sell you.
Posted by: General Woundwort at November 19, 2012 05:38 AM (RrD4h)
Posted by: JustLikeDavidHasselhoff at November 19, 2012 05:38 AM (QyMDY)
Posted by: kawfytawk at November 19, 2012 09:35 AM (JWLqy)
Ya know, if we had one honest politician, he'd just tell the truth. "You cannot have this level of a welfare state without everyone's taxes going to European levels. Stop charging this shit on your children's credit you spoiled rottten fools."
He'd be destroyed, but at least it would be the truth.
Posted by: Invictus at November 19, 2012 05:41 AM (OQpzc)
Posted by: Golan Globus at November 19, 2012 05:42 AM (/1U3u)
1. Whiteboards
2. ???
3. Victory!!!
Posted by: kbdabear at November 19, 2012 05:43 AM (wwsoB)
Your second point was addressed by the 45 goals to a Communist takeover, read into Congressional record in 1963:
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
-
Judging by results, cultural Marxists are succeeding where crude Marxists failed, and they are proving right about the strategic value of their goal.
It's easy to dismiss social conservative concerns as embarrassing, just sex or irrelevant - but when you look at how married people vote compared with how singles vote, the reality of the situation ought to be obvious. If social conservatives lose, or are put in the back of the bus and told to shut up while their concerns are disregarded, then in the long run conservatism loses.
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 19, 2012 05:46 AM (yJ+RL)
But if all those are reasons why we didn't lose, then....how DID we lose?
And has anyone compared the turnout in the Sandy-struck North East, vs the turnout in 2008. I'm curious how much of Obama's 10 million is attributed to the storm.
Posted by: bigpale at November 19, 2012 05:46 AM (6TaTb)
Posted by: Jean at November 19, 2012 05:47 AM (tWctt)
Ok, read Gabes post and article. Sound to me like we need to appeal to feelings because facts dont matter to these people. Yes, the stupid vote. such is life.
I know someone who is actually smart and reasonable. However, he first said, before the debates that Romney wasnt really different then Obama. During the debates he concluded Paul Ryan was a religious extremist, liked Biden's growing the economy from the middle out comment, believe the R&R plan did not add up and thought O's bayonet snark was the AWESOME! and sided with Obama about the military budget is what the military wanted. When i pointed out O lied his response was, well they all lie, how do you know Romney didnt?
So smart in general, not so smart on politics. blah. He doesnt want big govt but thinks religious institutions shouldnt deny birth control?? enviroment must be protected and cant seem to understand the need for checks and balances on that to avoid shutting down the economy. Makes my head hurt.
I was expecting some snark from co-workers how voted for Obama but not a word. I wonder if deep down people are relazing it was a mistake.
Posted by: Mark at November 19, 2012 05:47 AM (RDl1z)
Posted by: Schrödinger's cat [/i] at November 19, 2012 05:48 AM (feFL6)
Gingrich was some Sandinista lover, and Wurnstrom, running the Brokaw feed our after our, then we had a Senate candidate, who was like a caricature of W, the Party kept Rivera, and exiled West to St. Lucie Cty, and then you have the 'subtle' undertow of the Zimmerman witchhunt,
Posted by: archie goodwin at November 19, 2012 05:48 AM (ctjsq)
Posted by: El Kabong, RINOINO at November 19, 2012 05:48 AM (pzmYs)
Even though exit polls show a 53 to 39 percent of voters thought that Romney would better handle the economy, 81 percent felt that "Obama cares about people like me"
Obama cares means that Obama is going to give me free shit, not Obama is going to tuck me in at night
And if like Meggie McCans you feel that socons are the reason we're losing, are there enough of the young hip set who support gay marriage just itching to vote GOP to make up for the loss of those voters ?
Posted by: kbdabear at November 19, 2012 05:49 AM (wwsoB)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at November 19, 2012 05:49 AM (GE1+K)
Posted by: Golan Globus at November 19, 2012 05:50 AM (/1U3u)
Posted by: kawfytawk at November 19, 2012 05:51 AM (JWLqy)
The democrat party controls; 90% of home mortgages, student loans, auto industry, unions, media and now healthcare. Energy is next, they are putting the squeeze on now.
Nevertheless, I look forward to serving our democrat masters. Sieg Heil!
Posted by: den1313 at November 19, 2012 05:51 AM (yMk61)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 05:52 AM (vCK/R)
Posted by: Closing Time at November 19, 2012 05:52 AM (1crPI)
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 19, 2012 09:46 AM (yJ+RL)
___
Here's item 15:
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.Items 17 through 22:
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks. 18. Gain control of all student newspapers. 19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack. 20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions. 21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures. 22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."
It's nothing short of miraculous that fifty years after this plan was articulated (and most goals in place), Republicans still control the house, 60 per cent of state governments, and narrowly lost a presidential election.
Posted by: kallisto at November 19, 2012 05:53 AM (jm/9g)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 05:53 AM (vCK/R)
It's easy to dismiss social conservative concerns as embarrassing, just sex or irrelevant - but when you look at how married people vote compared with how singles vote, the reality of the situation ought to be obvious. If social conservatives lose, or are put in the back of the bus and told to shut up while their concerns are disregarded, then in the long run conservatism loses.
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 19, 2012 09:46 AM (yJ+RL)
Yes, they have been successful. Using the useful idiots along the way. And they are relentless in their pursuit of destroying the country and its institutions
Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 19, 2012 05:54 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: disappointed at November 19, 2012 05:54 AM (vYB+W)
Posted by: Avi at November 19, 2012 05:55 AM (40anC)
Posted by: Leigh at November 19, 2012 05:55 AM (pWkNv)
It's nothing short of miraculous that fifty years after this plan was articulated (and most goals in place), Republicans still control the house, 60 per cent of state governments, and narrowly lost a presidential election.
Posted by: kallisto at November 19, 2012 09:53 AM (jm/9g)
Chicago is a shining example of shit on displaying pretending to be art work
Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 19, 2012 05:55 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 05:55 AM (vCK/R)
2016 - It's the stupid, stupid.
Posted by: RioBravo at November 19, 2012 05:56 AM (eEfYn)
"It wasn't turnout! It was FRAUD!"
I don't know about that. After checking my own township and precinct, I found out that voter turnout was up over 2008, that Mitt and our ultra conservative congressman won by good margins and that somehow, Debbie Fucking Stabenow won for Senate.
How that cow could get a majority of the votes in our conservative district is beyond comprehension. However, the elections here are run by republicans, I know most of the poll workers and I'm convinced it was legit.
I still can't believe it.
Posted by: jwest at November 19, 2012 05:56 AM (ZDsRL)
Choked on a danish so I left off that bit which was the crux of the biscuit...
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 09:53 AM (vCK/R)
We can't compromise our way out of this mess. Just becoming Democrats, in order to appeal to Democrats, won't work. They already have a party - who the hell needs us? The damage mentioned is already done. It has to burn, there's no alternative.
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 05:57 AM (BoE3Z)
-
It should be a serious conservative aim to support home-schoolers. If Joe and Jane America don't want Joe Jr. to be indoctrinated in cultural Marxism and mugged at school, "conservative" politicians that aren't serious about helping them are useless.
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 19, 2012 05:57 AM (yJ+RL)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 05:58 AM (vCK/R)
Posted by: eman at November 19, 2012 05:58 AM (AynOt)
Side note. Somebody noticed that Megyn Kelly seemed positively giddy during the election coverage.
Did they also notie that she came on to O'Reilly's show, and said - with a straight face - that if you have 19,000 votes in certain election districts in the Philadelphia area with ZERO for Romney that it's NOT evidence of fraud? Geez - there's really 19,000 people in this world who are UNANIMOUS on ANYTHING Megyn? Seriously? Not even ONE person who made a mistake, or who just wanted to be a wise-guy? It was ridiculous.
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 05:58 AM (Mxt9o)
Posted by: rockmom at November 19, 2012 05:59 AM (qe2/V)
Posted by: laughing at neck braces at November 19, 2012 06:01 AM (nVqtU)
Posted by: Winston Churchill at November 19, 2012 06:01 AM (wwsoB)
'373"It wasn't turnout! It was FRAUD!"
I don't know about that. After checking my own township and precinct, I found out that voter turnout was up over 2008, that Mitt and our ultra conservative congressman won by good margins and that somehow, Debbie Fucking Stabenow won for Senate. ...'
So - voter turnout was up for your district, but you don't think it's suspicious that it wasn't up nationally?
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 06:02 AM (Mxt9o)
Posted by: rockmom at November 19, 2012 06:02 AM (qe2/V)
Posted by: Thunderb at November 19, 2012 06:02 AM (Dnbau)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 19, 2012 06:02 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Gerry at November 19, 2012 06:04 AM (lNrX+)
+1000
We lost an election, not an argument. ?????
Losing while winning = GOP
And it's certainly not how he got the swing voters; they recognized a pander. Instead, he got the swing voters by making Romney the icky candidate.
yeah cuz Luntz's dunces would never allow themselves to be pandered to. /sarc
Romney was "icky" because he nominally represented principle and it was an easy out for the dunces to go " oh but he flipped on abortion so - HYPOCRITE! GIMME CHEEZ!". Not because of Obama's way brilliant strategy.
Obama represents the decline of American culture: Honey Boo boo and porn flakes . The gamer slacker - gimmedats eat it up - no moral questions need be addresses with Ozombie
The truth is Romney pridefully believed that presenting a mostly consistent moral candidate to an immoral electorate was enough. It wasn't enough because of the degradation of the culture and the fact that the electorate doesn't want to face any moral questions.
Like Ogambe and Benghazi.
You got a lower number of voters, but he still pulled it off. What was the difference? The disappearance of the moral compass and evaporation of shame.
The electorate is the story here.
Yeah. I know. Damn SoCons.
Posted by: T. Hunter - let it burn at November 19, 2012 06:05 AM (EZl54)
Posted by: rockmom at November 19, 2012 06:05 AM (qe2/V)
I agree that this election was won by making the Republican unacceptable and turnout. We all commented that Obama was only interested in going to fund-raisers actually his whole 4 years. Now we know that basically the Obama campaign knew they could overcome the destruction of their politices with money. That's scary but if you listen to what we are debating it is all the issues that 100's of millions of dollars told us were important. Gay marriage, Abortion, illegal immigration. I would add that Obama spent the last 4 years building his turnout machine in swing states. He still got millions of less votes.
Basically this election was bought. Obama had enough money to make it about big bird and binders, fake war on women. The lesson mentioned above is we shouldn't take the massive PR campiagn by a cult leader who had more money as proof that we don't know what is best for the country.
2016 the cult leader goes away. 2010 taught us that Obama is actually a detriment in purple off-year elections like 2014. Everyone hang in there and don't throw away your beliefs. We might be surprised how quick they come back in fashion unless anyone thinks Obamanomics or Obamacare is suddenly going to wok.
Posted by: Conan at November 19, 2012 06:06 AM (26yg9)
"...it was about a caricature of Republicans that we have repeatedly failed to rebut.
Considering the FiCons and the SoCons seem to enjoy making caricatures out of one another, I don't think we're going to rebut that anytime soon.
Bottom line is, months of negative attack ads from Obama (with an utterly complicit media) with NO, NADA, ZIP, ZILCH return in kind from Romney is what killed him. Sure you can lump in shitty ground game, voter fraud, and turnout into the mix, but it comes down do controlling the flow of information.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at November 19, 2012 06:06 AM (uD2fR)
Posted by: rockmom at November 19, 2012 09:59 AM (qe2/V)
__
so we just have to wait for such time as the Sex in the City electorate aborts itself out of existence and/or is rendered sterile by the various and sundry STDs that mutate and transform to untreatability.
Come to think of it, that cohort are not generally the breeders. The social cons are.
Posted by: kallisto at November 19, 2012 06:06 AM (jm/9g)
Posted by: arcangel at November 19, 2012 06:06 AM (/NCJW)
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 06:07 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Thunderb at November 19, 2012 06:07 AM (Dnbau)
I know Gabe doesn't want to hear this but the Republicans DID lose because Obama promised to be Santa Claus. The longer people like Gabe live in denial the greater chance we will expedite our way to a full blown socialist society.
Maybe that's what Gabe and people like him want. They want to be liked so they don't want to express the truth. They only want to whisper it behind closed doors.
Posted by: polynikes at November 19, 2012 06:07 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: blindside at November 19, 2012 06:08 AM (x7g7t)
Short form:
You have to grow old, but if you vote for Obama, you don't have to grow up!
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 06:10 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna let it burn really.really bummed at November 19, 2012 06:12 AM (9+ccr)
Laughing neck braces: we have to get into the culture, without that its over.
culture people, culture.
You aren't going to grab the culture by the head and twist it your way. If we could why did we not do it before?
I think to say every election is going to be about the culture like this one was is a big mistake. Obama is a unique candidate that won't come again. It was cool to vote for Obama (culture) Is it cool to vote for Hilliary? We'll see but I sure am not certain they can run the same campiagn they did for Obama on any issues they want especially after 8 years of Obama. I would say that in 2004 we won on national security and no 9/11's by 2008 that issues was worn out and people wanted something more. I could easily see people tiring of Obama in 4 years and a guy like Rubio would be a welcome a face as Obama was in 2008.
Posted by: Conan at November 19, 2012 06:13 AM (26yg9)
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 19, 2012 06:13 AM (8ohP1)
Posted by: toby928© brings the cheer at November 19, 2012 06:13 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: eman at November 19, 2012 06:13 AM (AynOt)
Posted by: blindside at November 19, 2012 06:13 AM (x7g7t)
"So - voter turnout was up for your district, but you don't think it's suspicious that it wasn't up nationally?"
Posted by: Optimizer at November 19, 2012 10:02 AM (Mxt9o)
If there was massive fraud, Obama would have received at least as many votes as he did in 2008. No one would have batted an eye.
Posted by: jwest at November 19, 2012 06:13 AM (ZDsRL)
Posted by: kallisto at November 19, 2012 10:06 AM (jm/9g)
They are the 800 pound gorilla. In terms of voting. Talk all you want of veering Leftward to pull in the hipster, Latino, Gay, black, you name it, voter. If you alienate the Social Conservatives, you will lose all elections, up and down the line, even city councils. Piss them off at your peril.
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 06:14 AM (BoE3Z)
Posted by: blindside at November 19, 2012 06:14 AM (x7g7t)
Not as if there is only one reason, but if I had to pick the top one, it is the media. Billions and billions of dollars of free advertising for democrats, not just during the election, but the whole 4 years, everyday.
Take one media outlet - abc, espn, disney channel. I have young kids, they like cartoons, what of it, didn't we all, except that they are bombarded with leftist propaganda not only then but during the breaks freaking Moochelle shows up in every one of them. We all know of espn on their knees for O, can't even watch a game without these bastards propaganda. Of course the news at abc, local and national goes without saying.
Fighting that is very tough business, and it is not a matter of me turning off the tv, its that the electorate is being bombarded with it, and we have to change it in a couple of months of campaigning.
(fyi - we change the channel if Odictator comes on and the kids know why)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 19, 2012 06:15 AM (3BbLJ)
Instead, he got the swing voters by making Romney the icky candidate. The same thing could have been done to any candidate we ran because it wasn't about Romney's politics, it was about a caricature of Republicans that we have repeatedly failed to rebut.
---------------
And how exactly do you think he made Romney into the "icky candidate?" Yep, by saying Romney wouldn't be giving you free stuff the way Obama would.
This country couldn't even bring itself to elect a moderate, let alone a real dyed-in-the-wool conservative, so in that sense I agree with Gabe that a more conservative candidate probably wouldn't have won either. But to suggest that we just barely lost seems to be fanciful. Given Obama's record, to the extent that he has one, this shouldn't have even been close, and yet here's a guy trying to say "gee, we almost got it this time!"
Sorry, this election just proved that a great big bloc of this country is addicted to free stuff and are immune to any arguments as to why we can't keep giving that stuff away...even milquetoasty arguments such as those proposed by Romney. That's the big problem, and that's the issue where there is no good conservative pop-culture-friendly message to combat it. We're in the political wilderness until the entire financial system crashes ala Greece.
Posted by: JohnTant at November 19, 2012 06:15 AM (eytER)
Posted by: Thunderb at November 19, 2012 06:16 AM (Dnbau)
Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at November 19, 2012 06:16 AM (LBSbz)
Posted by: arcangel at November 19, 2012 06:17 AM (/NCJW)
The only way children learn the lesson of tough love when one parent is giving them whatever they want is feeling the consequences of that type of parenting. Unfortunately the consequences takes time as the one parent has no problem going into debt to continue giving the spoiled kid whatever he wants.
Divorce is the only solution.
Posted by: polynikes at November 19, 2012 06:17 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Golan Globus at November 19, 2012 06:17 AM (/1U3u)
I fully expect the homosexual propagandists, pro-abortion and amnesty crowd to thrive in the ash heap of the GOP with their new RATA party - Reaching Across The Aisle.
Let them try to kick Lucy's football for a few decades.
Meghan McCain/Gabe 2016 !!
LIB
Posted by: T. Hunter - let it burn at November 19, 2012 06:17 AM (EZl54)
Something has definitely changed in the electorate when the conventional wisdom about "No incumbent with ___ has ever won re-election" is so far out the window it ain't comin' back.
It used to be about The Economy Stupid. It's not anymore.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at November 19, 2012 06:17 AM (uD2fR)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 19, 2012 06:17 AM (3BbLJ)
I'm not really sure about the exact cause of our defeat. It seems to be a combination of a lot of things: messaging, a dumbed-down electorate, MFM malfeasance, voter fraud. It's a long list. Attributing it to just one thing doesn't seem to answer the question of why it happened.
IMHO, conservatism needs to become "cool." Exactly how we do that is a mystery. There is a clear need to counter current societal images of conservatives as anachronistic and clinging to "the old," at least to me. Maybe we'll become the counter-culture soon. Then we can take advantage of the indoctrinated and their ignorance by presenting the timeless truths as something new and radical, with freedom and self-determination being the new Hip.
That's pretty much what modern radical leftism did with the outmoded, old theories of Marx. That shit's been around for over a century, but it was packaged as "new" and sold by the media to the young skulls full of mush. Maybe some of the rich guys and gals on our side can form some sort of organization to purchase the traditional Leftard MFM outlets (they're hemorraging money and will be for sale soon, hello Newsweak) and start to gently do to them what they did to us.
Howzabout a Conservative Long March of our own? After It All Burns, of course.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at November 19, 2012 06:17 AM (lOmbq)
Bush got 62 Million votes, Romney was just a wall street type with limited empathy.
Better candidate wins it.
Posted by: Miikeb at November 19, 2012 06:19 AM (q25mW)
Posted by: Cackfinger at November 19, 2012 06:19 AM (CCHli)
They only had so many places where they control the system. Take a look at the county map of election results.
http://tinyurl.com/cd72mka
Posted by: Buzzsaw at November 19, 2012 06:19 AM (tf9Ne)
Posted by: kawfytawk at November 19, 2012 06:19 AM (JWLqy)
Hollywood. Pretty tough to run against that. Evidently "cool "is more important than solutions....
I the cool guy wears thin when the results are bad. We won't see the public appetite for more liberal nonsense I think even as soon as 2014. The fact is I would add if we have lost the country then it is lost. Let's not spend time caving to Dmeocrats and speeding it up. Stick to our ideas. I would hope everybody here has them because they believe they will work.
Posted by: Conan at November 19, 2012 06:20 AM (26yg9)
Posted by: The Most Interesting Man in the World at November 19, 2012 06:20 AM (GQ72I)
Posted by: Tesh at November 19, 2012 06:20 AM (cnjni)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at November 19, 2012 10:17 AM (lOmbq)
That's what is going to happen, whether anyone wants to go for a walk, or not. And the current borders won't apply, after all is said, and done. Put another way, the divorce papers have been filed.
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 06:20 AM (BoE3Z)
Posted by: Thunderb at November 19, 2012 06:21 AM (Dnbau)
Posted by: eman at November 19, 2012 06:21 AM (AynOt)
Posted by: Palerider at November 19, 2012 06:21 AM (5CusZ)
In regard to claims of fraud and the contradictory fact that Obama also received less votes than 2008, I refer to the old saying:
When you and another person are being chased by a bear, you don't have to be able to run faster than the bear, only faster than that person.
Posted by: polynikes at November 19, 2012 06:22 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at November 19, 2012 10:17 AM (uD2fR)
Now it's about having just enough of an economy so that the Free Shit doesn't stop flowing!
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 06:23 AM (Cnqmv)
-- Romney, the man who saved drowning people with his kids, suspended his business to find a missing girl, and sat with a dying kid to help him settle his affairs lacked empathy?
See, the problem is that people didn't bother to learn about Romney, not that he was a caricature.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 06:24 AM (moRRg)
Reasonable analysis so far.
But how was Romney made into the icky candidate?
In part because of poor Presidential candidate selection by the GOP, and in part because of horrible messaging by the socon wing. To wit: class, and contraception.
Some swing voters have a big case of class envy. Some swing voters have bad impressions of high finance driven downsizing and outsourcing, often because they have experienced the consequences directly.
Romney was a uniquely bad candidate in this regard. You can argue that these voters are wrong and irrational to hold these attitudes. But they do hold them. And they vote accordingly. Running a guy who says things like "some of my best friends own NASCAR teams" is not a way to win them over. Running a guy who says that he likes being able to fire people is not a surefire route to popularity with an electorate smarting from mass firings. The Democrats _hammered_ these themes with upper Midwest white voters.
Other swing voters, of both sexes, really do believe and fear that the GOP is a thinly veiled theocratic party which will attempt to make abortion and even contraception unavailable. Again you may argue that these views are wrong and irrational. But they are real views held by real voters who have to be won over.
Instead, we had the spectacle of one social conservative GOP Presidential primary contender prominently talking about how the bully pulpit of the White House needed to be used to speak against the evil of contraception. Then later we had completely insane gaffes coming from GOP Senate candidates, also from the socon wing, about rape and abortion. And the rest of the party and the Presidential ticket did not move decisively to distance themselves from these sorts of statements.
This was not a Presidential candidate selection error as in the previous case cited. This was the socons totally failing to realize that their rhetoric has, does, and will kindle those fears among certain swing voters about an anti-abortion, anti-contraception party coming to power. And it was the non-socons in the GOP failing to realize that they were going to be tarred with the same brush. Again, the Democrats seized on this and hammered it viciously with young female swing voters who say it's a big issue to them.
And in the end it was enough hammering to add up to a victory for them.
Posted by: torquewrench at November 19, 2012 06:24 AM (ymG7s)
Posted by: Thunderb at November 19, 2012 10:16 AM (Dnbau)
__
They're just a piece of the preazy electorate pie. They would have to have huge families - I'm talkin' old school Irish Catholic numbers - to make up for the Sex in the City crowd depopulating itself and the shrinking numbers of AAs, who disproportionately avail themselves of abortion. Who knows, maybe the brown people cohort will start to take a liking to abortion as much as AAs do now.
Posted by: kallisto at November 19, 2012 06:24 AM (jm/9g)
Posted by: The Most Interesting Man in the World at November 19, 2012 06:25 AM (GQ72I)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 06:25 AM (vCK/R)
Palerider
Yeah watch it burn is probably more accurate...but makes you feel even more helpless...
feeling helpless sucks -
let it burn = no more using the garden hoses on the inferno
psychological cushion maybe
Posted by: T. Hunter - let it burn at November 19, 2012 06:26 AM (EZl54)
Posted by: helen thomas at November 19, 2012 06:27 AM (uFY4s)
Posted by: Queen Michelle at November 19, 2012 06:27 AM (ypzqs)
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 10:24 AM (moRRg)
__
Yes, I became convinced of this when I discovered that a friend of mine who is a small business owner and a finance major - voted for obama because Romney was the out of touch rich guy. He claimed he didn't have enough time to do research on the candidates due to work and family responsibilities.
Laziness. Wanting to be kewl. Stupidity. Relying on MFM soundbites for news. Tragic.
Posted by: kallisto at November 19, 2012 06:27 AM (jm/9g)
Posted by: Miikeb at November 19, 2012 10:19 AM (q25mW)
About as insightful and accurate as Steve Martin's How To Become A Millionare.
Posted by: polynikes at November 19, 2012 06:27 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: laughing at neck braces at November 19, 2012 06:28 AM (nVqtU)
You. In the barrel.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 19, 2012 06:29 AM (8y9MW)
If you anaylze this thing closely enough, you'll see we really won.
And soon, we'll all be offered big ticket jobs polling for the GOP!
arrivaderci, Mom's basement!
Posted by: guy falle at November 19, 2012 06:29 AM (lB/5N)
Laziness. Wanting to be kewl. Stupidity. Relying on MFM soundbites for news. Tragic.
Posted by: kallisto at November 19, 2012 10:27 AM (jm/9g)
I don't get this. Even if he did zero research, didn't his life as a small business owner these last 4 years tell him anything? !
Posted by: Tami at November 19, 2012 06:30 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Cackfinger at November 19, 2012 06:30 AM (CCHli)
Posted by: torquewrench at November 19, 2012 10:24 AM (ymG7s)
Your inaccuracies and misquotes about Romney are just as bad as the left so maybe you have a point.
Posted by: polynikes at November 19, 2012 06:30 AM (m2CN7)
I was talking to one of my employees a couple of nights ago. About 21, currently going to college, family immigrated from India when he was 8, reasonably intelligent. All his Indian friends, relatives, and non-Indian friends and relatives all vote Democrat and identify as Liberal. So I asked him "Why"?
Then the fun began.
Turns out it's just decades of cultural and academic programming - Democrats are for the common man, Republicans are evil and for the rich guys and corporations. These are all assumptions made and acepted by and large among liberals with no intellectual inquiry at all. Immigrants (both legal and illegal) tend this way because things are usually better off here than there, and the culture and academia bombard them first with leftist tripe.
Since business was slow, I got about two hours to just simply go Socratic on him. It's always fun to actually see the look on their faces when reality dawns on them.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at November 19, 2012 06:30 AM (uD2fR)
Posted by: notsothoreau at November 19, 2012 06:31 AM (uPhCY)
I can hardly wait for the second term vacation itinerary (to include a cast of thousands of retainers also traveling at our expense)
At least after 2016 there will be more well qualified ex-USAF airline pilots that got thousands of hours flying the Obamas hither and yon!
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 06:31 AM (Cnqmv)
I hope people do come to at least one conclusion, that Odictator and his cronies have figured out the way around the separation of powers. As long as a lap-licking media nevers says anything they can do whatever they want.
No budgets, no problem, just keep spending. Court holds you in contempt, ignore it. Sell arms to drug warlords and get caught, I saw nothing. Use the TSA as the modern SS to violate people, I hear nothing. Dictate new rules by ignoring Congress, well, just had to be done. And on and on.
They are serious about transforming this country into a socialist heaven.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 19, 2012 06:32 AM (3BbLJ)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Coming not nearly soon enough. at November 19, 2012 06:32 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Tami at November 19, 2012 10:30 AM (X6akg)
__
I think it was more like he was propagandized by his wife. But still, he could have just said he voted for preazy but really pushed the button for Romney.
He did have a really bad accident that resulted in head trauma, maybe that's the explanation.
Posted by: kallisto at November 19, 2012 06:33 AM (jm/9g)
Posted by: eman at November 19, 2012 06:34 AM (AynOt)
If we honestly believe that we have an image problem with people viewing Republicans as evil vampires, then we need to directly combat that instead of running another ad with a concerned sounding narrator and scare chords over Democrats' faces.
Posted by: Matt S. at November 19, 2012 06:34 AM (moRRg)
http://is.gd/bIX09M
Posted by: Gerry at November 19, 2012 06:35 AM (lNrX+)
Other than, maybe, just maybe, figure out what we did wrong and what we could do better? That's the whole point of the exercise.
Posted by: torquewrench at November 19, 2012 06:35 AM (ymG7s)
"Who will you guys turn blog tricks for next?"
It's hard to say. If we go with someone capable of bringing in millions of single women, working class people and others, we risk alienating Peggy Noonan, David Frum and Ace.
There are no easy answers.
Posted by: jwest at November 19, 2012 06:35 AM (ZDsRL)
Posted by: laughing at neck braces at November 19, 2012 06:36 AM (nVqtU)
Okay, I think I've decided.
I propose a strategic retreat of the Red Migration variety. Conservatives in irredeemably Blue States move to Pink / Purple states. Turn them Red/Pink. In addition, focus on local and State races. Get on local and state school boards.
Someone mentioned on Friday or Saturday, I think, the idea that currently unemployed (but degreed) Morons should go get their alternative teaching certificates (where possible) and become teachers, even administrators.
Take it back the way they took it from us.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 19, 2012 06:37 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: torquewrench at November 19, 2012 10:24 AM (ymG7s)
In addition to #449, you might have a point if it was indies and swing voters that decided this.
It was not.
Time for you to get back to the drawing board. The SoCons didn't cost the Presidency. As much as Gabe may want to say it in this post, it's still bullshit.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at November 19, 2012 06:38 AM (uD2fR)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at November 19, 2012 10:17 AM (uD2fR)
It's not about the economy when the economy is in the shitter and there is a Democrat prezzy. Then it's about every unimportant thing like Big Bird and binder
Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 19, 2012 06:38 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: Cackfinger at November 19, 2012 06:38 AM (CCHli)
Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna let it burn really.really bummed at November 19, 2012 06:38 AM (9+ccr)
Not to worry--reading this thread will cheer you up immensely!
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 06:40 AM (Cnqmv)
Agree. Although, must say, many of us thought it'd be a run away for the R's.
I can speak to the experience in Colorado, though.
We really thought they'd win because there was very little support expressed locally, especially compared to 2008, where people literally painted their faces blue and red--with that stupid Hope "O" on it. This go-round, hardly any enthusiasm. We thought Colorado was a wrap up for Romney.
Then, there was pot on the ballot.
And, not only did we lose the presidency, but now freaking pot is LEGAL.
So, I'm sorry Mr. Malor, but I think you're dead wrong about Romney's loss not being about hand outs. In CO, they handed out pot, and all the pot-heads came and voted for it. And, while they were there, they voted for BHO, too. Sneaky Dems...
Posted by: WittyMermaid at November 19, 2012 06:40 AM (X/CmF)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 19, 2012 06:40 AM (BushJ)
They are serious about transforming this country into a socialist heaven.
That they are. They will do anything in any way to advance their agenda.
The worst part is that they worked to defeat the American Society that reached its peak in the years after WWII. Once the Greatest Generation died out, they were free to install Leftardismness as the New Cool, playing on youthful rebellion as the Coming Thing.
We couldn't be defeated militarily, although that was tried. We were defeated culturally. It's no coincidence that Soviet Russia spent vast sums of money and manpower studying human response and how to manipulate it. They used the results of their research on their own people with great success and turned their efforts toward us. They even told us what they were going to do to us, then they went ahead and did it.
And we let them.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at November 19, 2012 06:41 AM (lOmbq)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at November 19, 2012 06:43 AM (V3kRK)
Yes, but it was Sen "Tailgunner Joe" McCarthy that was an insane fear-mongering pathetic excuse of a Senator for trying to expose mythical Communists in the federal government!
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 06:44 AM (Cnqmv)
One of the other reasons we lost: Just watch spineless GOP in the coming "negotiations" on the fiscal cliff. They will sell out their constituency once again.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 19, 2012 06:45 AM (3BbLJ)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at November 19, 2012 10:43 AM (V3kRK)
I love heartwarming stories like this!
Posted by: Tami at November 19, 2012 06:45 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Tami at November 19, 2012 10:44 AM (X6akg)
What more could you ask for? Content, proactive analyses of the political scene, DOOMS Day scenarios, etc...
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 19, 2012 06:46 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: elizabethe at November 19, 2012 06:47 AM (ou/rY)
Posted by: laughing at neck braces at November 19, 2012 06:47 AM (nVqtU)
Some of us aren't so drug-addled and easily manipulated.
Posted by: what at November 19, 2012 06:47 AM (TJRHp)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 19, 2012 10:45 AM (3BbLJ)
Betrayal, it's what we do best!
Posted by: Karl Rover at November 19, 2012 06:47 AM (Cnqmv)
Our daughter is a nursing student (a.k.a. "surrounded by many naive/idiotic young girls"). And, truly, that Dem threat of "they will take away your 'right' to abortion" was real, at least in CO. Our daughter's friends were all about that... They can't find Israel on a map, nevermind having even HEARD of Benghazi. But, by gosh, don't mess with their right to kill their babies in the womb.
Ere go, while that abortion message didn't resonate with us intelligent folk, it resonates big with the idiocy/uninformed establishment. Hence, here is (at least) part of the lesson to be learned: Stupid/uninformed people DO LISTEN to stupid lying ads. And, there are A LOT of stupid/uninformed people, even though we wish there weren't.
Posted by: WittyMermaid at November 19, 2012 06:47 AM (X/CmF)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 19, 2012 06:48 AM (BushJ)
Posted by: elizabethe at November 19, 2012 06:48 AM (ou/rY)
The reason we lost the election is because no one listened to me.
I offered a plan specifically designed to – as I said at the time – “gain us 300,000-400,000 votes in swing states.”
I forget what it was, and I donÂ’t have a link. But, man, if we had only done what I retroactively say we should have done, weÂ’d have won.
Posted by: CJ at November 19, 2012 06:48 AM (9KqcB)
How the fuck do you do it? Do you bribe Ace? Pixy? Fuckin A
Nice Bourboncast, BTW
Posted by: fluffy at November 19, 2012 06:48 AM (z9HTb)
Yeah, right. The key words there are "We lost".
As for Mitt's "argument", was that the pre-Etch A Sketch Argument or the post-Etch A Sketch argument?
Podhoretz makes, I think, a much better case for Mitt's political catastrophe in his 11/15 New York Post column.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/cfbueut
Posted by: mrp at November 19, 2012 06:49 AM (HjPtV)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, with gasoline and matches, looking innocent at November 19, 2012 06:50 AM (GBXon)
You should have dropped to the floor on all fours and let her use you as a stepstool to get what SHE wanted. Have you learned nothing from watching the RINO ruling class at work?
Posted by: Karl Rover at November 19, 2012 06:51 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at November 19, 2012 10:43 AM (V3kRK)
I would have loved to have seen the look on its face
Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 19, 2012 06:53 AM (1Jaio)
Yes, but it was Sen "Tailgunner Joe" McCarthy that was an insane fear-mongering pathetic excuse of a Senator for trying to expose mythical Communists in the federal government!
You, sir or madam, as the case may be, have Broken the Code. That is exactly how it is done. By assuming an air of superiority (usually a false one), a "dominant" personality exerts an influence. This is what makes the concept of "kewl" so powerful to the weak-willed with huge egos, the natural outcome of a feminized, Mr. Rogers society.
There's a lot of psychology at work in this tactic. Spread the message through the useful idiots in the media 24/7, and you end up with the re-election of a radical Marxist who fails at everything he does.
But, you voted for him, so you're just as Kewl as you can be. Take that to the Unemployment Office.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at November 19, 2012 06:53 AM (lOmbq)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 19, 2012 06:55 AM (BushJ)
Posted by: Rob McNeece at November 19, 2012 06:55 AM (hNXHo)
Posted by: dixiegal at November 19, 2012 06:56 AM (ye++F)
And people need to quit bitching about media bias. Life isn't fair. If you're sitting at the table staring at a chessboard yet refusing to learn the game because you'd rather play checkers... you're going to lose. Republicans need to learn how to control their message in a hostile media environment, because that's reality and it isn't going to change.
Posted by: not the mama at November 19, 2012 06:57 AM (kzCIn)
So it just gravitates to you? You have mentioned 'an extra ration of brown liquor' in the past. Where do I sign up?
Posted by: fluffy at November 19, 2012 06:58 AM (z9HTb)
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at November 19, 2012 06:59 AM (X3lox)
Posted by: Rob McNeece at November 19, 2012 06:59 AM (hNXHo)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at November 19, 2012 10:53 AM (lOmbq)
I don't know how you rate success, it seems to me that Obamao has done more to ensure that radical Marxism is a mainstay of these formerly United States than any other individual could have possibly done in only four years and now he has an unconstrained second term to finish the job.
We on the other hand are left with the likes of Karl Rove to plan our ascension into the seat of power (once we accept Jeb Bush as saviour of right-thinking conservative thought)!
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 19, 2012 06:59 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: elizabethe at November 19, 2012 07:00 AM (ou/rY)
I told her she could get it her damned self and walked away.
This! Why not treat the Idiots as The Enemy? It's just returning their opinion of us back on them.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at November 19, 2012 07:00 AM (lOmbq)
As far as I can tell, we can't even take the position that we don't give a shit about how you handle your sex life, you can have an abortion every month if you want, but just DON'T expect ME to pay for it, without incurring the wrath of the FSA.
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 19, 2012 07:03 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: MythicMeganBanger at November 19, 2012 07:03 AM (uEm7J)
Posted by: soothie at November 19, 2012 07:03 AM (vczth)
Posted by: bill glass at November 19, 2012 07:04 AM (Q1BxK)
Posted by: Zsasz at November 19, 2012 07:05 AM (RDP+N)
And it's this unconscious thing that we need to fight against and I think that that's why changing "messaging" is important.
Here's a little comeback: "Sweetie, what if your mother believed in abortion and had done away with you? Where would you be now?"
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at November 19, 2012 07:06 AM (lOmbq)
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:06 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: soothie at November 19, 2012 07:06 AM (UJMZs)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Coming not nearly soon enough. at November 19, 2012 07:06 AM (VtjlW)
Problem is that the cheating allegation is anecdotal and "we" show no inclination or ability to pursue this to obtain facts and criminal convictions.
In this case, the plural of anecdote is not data.
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 19, 2012 07:07 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Zsasz at November 19, 2012 07:07 AM (RDP+N)
So many here talk about winning elections by assimilating with the Left.
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 07:08 AM (BoE3Z)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Coming not nearly soon enough. at November 19, 2012 11:06 AM (VtjlW)
Pics or it didn't happen!
Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD (for the Children) at November 19, 2012 07:08 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 19, 2012 07:08 AM (vCK/R)
because "patriot eleventy she's our countrywoman eleventy"....
Someone needs to sell me on the whole "we're gonna wishcast America back so you're a loser who hates the nation" thing because from where I sit you're asking me to powerdive into a lavapit with ObamaFO lady and help her chuck the US Constitution.
Fuck her and Obama prefereably with Bill Maher's crank.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:08 AM (LRFds)
To a certain extent, this is impossible, because the fundamentals of conservatism (personal responsibility, hard work, duty to family, nation, deity, etc) aren't exactly a free ride on the Tilt-o-whirl. It's more like a commitment to endurance running and weightlifting. Hard, often thankless effort in pursuit of delayed gratification.
Conservatism is fundamentally the idea that you are not a special little snowflake with a unique insight into the world.
Obama didn't just win because he promise free shit, he won by making people feel like they were part of the elite. He won by creating the illusion that they were somehow so much smarter and better than generations past, and that the consequences of behavior wouldn't fall on them.
Posted by: Alex at November 19, 2012 07:09 AM (3x3F6)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at November 19, 2012 07:09 AM (Ho2rs)
Posted by: Sophistahick at November 19, 2012 07:09 AM (UhXzR)
Basically (though- go read it) it boils down to this: local and state elections, conservative teachers, conservative entertainment, and (I hadn't thought of this until just now) having local GOP and Tea Party groups be less insular.
I'm not sure about y'all, but I've never seen the local GOP or Tea Party do simple things like sponsor a float in the 4th of July parade, or help sponsor a 5K, or toy drive.
Imagine if your GOP/Tea Party group became known as a routine sponsor of a Thanksgiving food drive and a Christmas toy drive? "They don't care" just goes right out the door.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 19, 2012 07:09 AM (8y9MW)
Damn straight hang where you are as long as you can but husband your resources and if you stumble Run Red.
Fuck the blue.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:09 AM (LRFds)
If you compare Walker and Jindal on one side with Romney on the other, you will struggle to point out a single
conservative policy that Romney implemented during his term as governor
(think Obamacare, Gay marriage, increasing ‘fees’ ……)? On the other hand
Jindal (no tax increase so far, education reform, ethics reform,
budget cuts, net positive job creation for Louisiana compared to -4 mil
jobs for America,.....)and Walker (Fought unions to reduce costs and was successful, reformed gun laws,.......) are conservatives that has fought for the cause
Only difference here is that they are from the middle class and do not like to bash middle class Americans. There are lot of republicans, who due to the policies of this president (job killing to be specific) have had to take some sort of government assistance. To ridicule them for what they are doing (and they are already ashamed) is bluntly speaking, cruel. 38% of the 47% voted Romney in case you want the numbers. Republicans instead of bashing them as the 47% must state how the free market policies are going to pull them out of their situation. As Jindal said America is an aspirational nation and republican party is an aspirational party.
As for what Martinez said, what she said is entirely different from what Jindal and Walker said. What she wants is for elected officials to look like their community. Which means pure racism. On the other hand Jindal stated clearly that we ought to be color blind and not pander to races.
In conclusion let every poster remember the words of a great man and understand what Jindal and Walker are saying and what Romney is not"
"Whatever else history may say about me when IÂ’m gone, I hope it will record that I appealed to your best hopes, not your worst fears; to your confidence rather than your doubts."
Posted by: CoolAir at November 19, 2012 07:10 AM (TxyUc)
Yeah?
Like Joseph Stalin and USA on our lend/lease in the case of Ivan "gift" supplies?
I doubt it would work you ever hear of Churches?
They do that shit all the time and still get demonized.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:11 AM (LRFds)
Podhoretz makes, I think, a much better case for Mitt's political catastrophe in his 11/15 New York Post column.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/cfbueut
Posted by: mrp at November 19, 2012 10:49 AM (HjPtV)
I looked at your article. I couldn't disagree more. Romney lost because of Cheating, and Media bias.
Posted by: DiogenesLamp at November 19, 2012 07:12 AM (R9579)
Goggle Free Republic The List Obama Voter Fraud.
The election was stolen and will continue to be stolen every year until Republicans stand up. Will they do that? No. That would mean their invites to the cool kids parties would go away.
So be prepared for all future Presidents to be Communists dressed up as Democrats.
Until they stop the elections of course.
Posted by: shibumi at November 19, 2012 07:12 AM (z63Tr)
Yeah I must have missed where Romney said "eat the poor and the middle class", and frankly if you're relying on aid guess what?
You're not middle class anymore.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:13 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Baldy at November 19, 2012 07:14 AM (opS9C)
Posted by: kawfytawk at November 19, 2012 07:14 AM (JWLqy)
Sure they get demonized (by the media). Few actually buy into that, though. The Catholic Church had (maybe still has) an image problem because of the pedophile priest scandal (yes, I know- small percentage, etc., etc.- I'm talking image problem, not facts). I can't think of anyone, though, who thinks that Churches, in general, "don't care," or are even "bad."
And I'm not even sure what "Like Joseph Stalin and USA on our lend/lease in the case of Ivan "gift" supplies?" means...
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at November 19, 2012 07:14 AM (8y9MW)
Obama didn't just win because he promise free shit, he won by making people feel like they were part of the elite. He won by creating the illusion that they were somehow so much smarter and better than generations past, and that the consequences of behavior wouldn't fall on them.
Posted by: Alex at November 19, 2012 11:09 AM (3x3F6)
Obama won by Controlling the Airwaves and Cheating. That, and the fact that the public has grown increasingly stupid over the years.
Posted by: DiogenesLamp at November 19, 2012 07:14 AM (R9579)
You're not middle class anymore.
actually that's not really true anymore, people get unemployment benefits for 99+ weeks, and mortgage help, that enable them to continue a middle class existence, even if it is lower-middle-class
Posted by: chemjeff at November 19, 2012 07:14 AM (d/5qf)
Part of why I support Run Red, we can either grab the red and keep it thus or let the goddamned blue enslave the countryside in the blue slowly but ever so surely.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:14 AM (LRFds)
Yup I've donated my last done I could have bought acreage with my donations.
No unity no piggy bank.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:15 AM (LRFds)
Oh trust me I know just like the fucking retarded limits on foodstamps I technically qualify for and would never touch.
You still are not middle class by your hand.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:16 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at November 19, 2012 07:17 AM (+inic)
Only difference here is that they are from the middle class and do
not like to bash middle class Americans. Posted by: CoolAir at November 19, 2012 11:10 AM (TxyUc)
I'm a huge Jindal fanboy, but he is not from the Middle Class. He is the product of high skilled immigrant parents.
Posted by: Nate at November 19, 2012 07:17 AM (i3OIF)
Posted by: CoolAir at November 19, 2012 11:10 AM (TxyUc)
Another fucker who misrepresents and in the same breath contradicts themselves. First I'm not going to rehash the Republican primary and correct your misrepresentations of Romney but I will point out that what Jindal proposes as his strategy is exactly what you accuse Romney of doing while governor of MA.
Ninja please.
Posted by: polynikes at November 19, 2012 07:18 AM (m2CN7)
The election was stolen and will continue to be stolen every year until Republicans stand up. Will they do that? No. That would mean their invites to the cool kids parties would go away.
So be prepared for all future Presidents to be Communists dressed up as Democrats.
Until they stop the elections of course.
Posted by: shibumi at November 19, 2012 11:12 AM (z63Tr)
You should see my latest thread on Free Republic. The notion that Obama would steal the election is one of the main points in my argument. It was why I was arguing from the beginning for at least one State to create a State Law requiring an original birth certificate as proof of eligibility.
All those people who said we need to "Win at the ballot box" simply didn't consider the possibility that their idea wouldn't work because Obama owns the Media, and he cheats.
Posted by: DiogenesLamp at November 19, 2012 07:18 AM (R9579)
Posted by: not the mama at November 19, 2012 10:57 AM
I don't know if you can control the message when the media is lined up against you.
Think of it this way. You are the new girl at school. All the other girls hate you. How do convince them that you're the best thing since white sliced bread if they have it out for you? How do you convince them you're not going to take their boyfriends away? How do you convince them to not tell lies about you on Facebook?
Stories like this do not usually end well for the girl who is hated.
Posted by: shibumi at November 19, 2012 07:19 AM (z63Tr)
The 47% voted for Obama and handouts. End of story.
Posted by: GMan at November 19, 2012 07:19 AM (sxq57)
yeah that's a lot like "up from dire Poverty Barack Obama"....
Mitt is not better off than Pierre Heinz from Masshole land....
didn't help.
There seems to be a working class hero notion that if we can just find a Milton Friedman fan from Calcutta who happened to be born in America ala bruce lee "winning!"
Um "no"
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:19 AM (LRFds)
A few small things broke against us, but it shouldn't have even been close. We absolutely could have squeaked out a narrow win with the present coalition, but do really want every election to come down to voter contact software on the day of the election? I'd rather put together a 55% majority coalition than have it be determined by the weather that day.
Palin is everything that's wrong with the the current conservative coalition, she's basically the personification of the Culture War with boobs, which is why she was so polarizing. Had Palin run we would have lost independent voters by 20 points, and there's not a Republican I know that honestly thought the woman was ready to be President on Day 1 (especially since she quit in the middle of her first term as Governor).
We need a new conservative coalition that's either agnostic or at the very least "centrist" when it comes to social/moral issues. And Republicans that want to run on issues like birth control (Santorum) or rape babies (Akin, Mourdock) need to be run out on a rail.
Posted by: McAdams at November 19, 2012 07:20 AM (7MC2X)
* Important to keep in mind that there will not be another Obama again. There will never be another "first" president of color whose only task is to energize minorities, women and the media.
Yes, there will be more minority presidential candidates, but I don't think they will have the same GOTV juice as the articulate half-white Messiah. I could be wrong, but I think he was the Dems' Reagan. And they'll be yammering about the Next Obama for as long as we've been waiting for the Next Reagan.
Posted by: CJ at November 19, 2012 07:20 AM (9KqcB)
There I was in the kitchen, hopping up and down to get them, all the being watched by the Good Ex BF and another good guy friend (who is 6'5"). They watched this for a bit and then my friend turns to the Good Ex BF and says "It's so cute she thinks that will help."
There may possibly have been some sponges thrown at them at that point, it's kind of hazy.
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Coming not nearly soon enough. at November 19, 2012 11:06 AM (VtjlW)
Of course, when you consider the boobs + hopping-up-and-down equation, getting help really wasn't gonna happen.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at November 19, 2012 07:21 AM (TIIx5)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at November 19, 2012 07:21 AM (V3kRK)
Romney didn't explain how his policies were going to lift people from poverty to middle class. He didn't appeal to their aspirations. And on top of that in private meetings he was ridiculing the 47 percent with out realizing that 3 years of unemployment can make a 47 percenter out of a traditional republican middle class guy.
Posted by: CoolAir at November 19, 2012 07:21 AM (TxyUc)
No Palin is hated because Bill Clinton crossover GOP women who are breaking for Obama are egotistical bitches.
"What does she have that I don't have?"
Well the willingness to go in and get bloodied, a brain, a reforrmer's zeal, an ass not measured in ax handles....
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:22 AM (LRFds)
Art is a reflection of man not vica versa.
Ahem. Communist Goals, as read into the Congressional Record, 1963
16. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.
17. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at November 19, 2012 07:22 AM (lOmbq)
What she wants is for elected officials to
look like their community.
___
Wait - Susanna Martinez said this? She's light haired and fairly light skinned, she doesn't exactly have the Latin Spitfire appearance.
Posted by: kallisto at November 19, 2012 07:23 AM (jm/9g)
Posted by: McAdams at November 19, 2012 11:20 AM (7MC2X)
You will never win an election with such a coalition. Like it or not, the SoCons make up such a large part of the party that it is impossible to win anything without them. Beyond that, a nation that does not adhere to their ideas will quickly become ungovernable, and shortly thereafter collapse. (Or turn to a dictator.)
Yes, Akin and Mourdock were brain dead stupid for even talking to the media (or anyone else) regarding this issue. They may very well have cost the election. (among other things.)
Posted by: DiogenesLamp at November 19, 2012 07:25 AM (R9579)
Posted by: bill glass at November 19, 2012 07:25 AM (Q1BxK)
Um "no"
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 11:19 AM (LRFds)
You sell him too short.
He "should" be upheld as a model for ideal immigration in this country.
It is just that he is not going to be our answer just because he is
"working class".
Posted by: Nate at November 19, 2012 07:26 AM (i3OIF)
Or.
A real conservative (non-Dem-lite) who could actually go against Obama where he was weakest. We couldn't do that at all with Romney.
Both of those reasons make me think Rick Perry would have fared better than Romney. He was a nice, personally appealing, warm guy would attack, say, O-care and big-government-ism directly.
Where Gabe runs into trouble is using John McCain as a benchmark. The fact that Romney beat McCain by a fraction of a point isn't saying much. But using that as a stepping off point to argue the GOP turnout was therefore fine is a bridge too far.
On other other hand, I do think Obama kept from losing even more voters by offering handouts and keeping a lot of his base from staying home.
Where Gabe and I agree is personal appeal. We have to have a candidate who educate voters about the bennies of limited government while not turning them off by appearing aloof, uncaring, and "from a different class."
Like Reagan.
Posted by: rdbrewer at November 19, 2012 07:26 AM (Iyg03)
Um yes he did, and your buying into the 47% meme when it was WILDLY out of context whiole Choom king gets gapped every fucking deference on well EVERYTHING....
a lot of why I will not give another dime next cycle and possibly ever.
Purity Con class warrior can party on someone else's dime.
http://youtu.be/HkbmzwfkazY
People know I generally detest Beck as an emo Drama queen....he got it I cried in rage at the fucking lie and willful misrepresentation of what Romney was saying.
Romney was saying that the 47% are trapped and priosoners essentially of Helicopter Ben who is engaged in wild structural devastation of the monetary system in this nation.
We have the most retarded economic policy I can imagine venture socialism writ large...the wins are the bankers and investors and the losses are ours inclusive.
I want this whole rotten Potemkin Village edifice of a fucking economy to implode so we can get real growth and real fucking wealth again.
Let it burn.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:26 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: chemjeff at November 19, 2012 11:24 AM (d/5qf)
Didn't want one in the first place.
Posted by: DiogenesLamp at November 19, 2012 07:27 AM (R9579)
Oh fuck you. Akin and Mourdock did not "run on" the issue of "rape babies".
In Akin's case, he answered a reporter's question stupidly. The media and DNC of course blew it up into "rape babies". Yes Akin is stupid but it wasn't exactly like rape babies was a central theme of his campaign.
Posted by: chemjeff at November 19, 2012 07:27 AM (d/5qf)
Posted by: elizabethe at November 19, 2012 07:27 AM (ou/rY)
Posted by: polynikes at November 19, 2012 11:25 AM (m2CN7)
Romney and Kerry are the two who come to mind.
Posted by: chemjeff at November 19, 2012 07:28 AM (d/5qf)
NO MORE CANDIDATES FROM FUCKING MASSACHUSETTS
LOL. I'm OK with that.
And... although I supported Romney was worried that he would not repeal Obamacare completely.
So, when do the Death Panels kick in? Going to be quite the surprise for the elderly and boomers who need complex and expensive treatments.
Wonder how long before AARP says it's patriotic to be denied treatment?
Posted by: shibumi at November 19, 2012 07:28 AM (z63Tr)
People are totally turned off by politics. They can't stand hearing all the bullshit. I'm at the point that I want everyone hooked up to a lie detector machine before they speak publically.
Posted by: KC at November 19, 2012 07:28 AM (i7KmQ)
No I don't sell him short and yes i donated and volunteered for him while in la la land b/c he is an ideal immigrant.
Bobby Jindal is why I laugh my ass off at "you haterz da immigrants nazi sven" from Killgore trout and friends.
That said the way people are trying to use Jindal pisses me off if I want to play class warfare games I can go to the party playing that and winning on it.
I begrudge no man their wealth or poverty fairly won I just can't stand the able bodied who grift.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 19, 2012 07:28 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Rob McNeece at November 19, 2012 07:29 AM (hNXHo)
You mean all one of them?
Posted by: polynikes at November 19, 2012 11:25 AM (m2CN7)
I take his meaning to be NorthEastern-Country-Club-Rockefeller Republicans in General. George H.W. Bush (From Connecticut) was a perfect example of what we don't want. He screwed up Reagan's Legacy and stuck our movement with the blame.
Posted by: DiogenesLamp at November 19, 2012 07:29 AM (R9579)
Posted by: chemjeff at November 19, 2012 11:28 AM (d/5qf)
I don't count Dems. I wouldn't vote for one if it came from Texas.
Posted by: polynikes at November 19, 2012 07:30 AM (m2CN7)
Obama won by Controlling the Airwaves and Cheating. That, and the fact that the public has grown increasingly stupid over the years.
Posted by: DiogenesLamp at November 19, 2012 11:14 AM (R9579)
Cheating may or may not have been enough to slide Obama a few tenths of a percent. It's ... like fretting about your blood pressure on the way to the electric chair. The core and fundamental problem is the electorate overwhelmingly doesn't see through him.
Controlling the airwaves is another issue, but one that can be mitigated with the right message and messenger. It can't be fully dealt with until the dinosaur media plods a little closer to extinction, and the newer media outlets achieve more parity, but those days are coming.
The real battleground lies within the moral force and cultural confidence of the parties themselves. The Democrats have it. The GOP doesn't. Until that is fixed, worrying about the peripherals is a distraction.
Posted by: Artemus Khan, Supervillain Billionaire Layabout at November 19, 2012 07:30 AM (k1vsl)
Romney didn't explain how his policies were going to lift people from poverty to middle class.
Am I the only one who thinks itÂ’s odd that despite spending billions (trillions?) of dollars, the War on Poverty has not changed the poverty rate at all, and the GOP has not made an issue of the failure of this Basic Democrat Belief?
We still use vague rhetoric. As if we donÂ’t have a half-century of evidence. Fascinating.
Posted by: CJ at November 19, 2012 07:30 AM (9KqcB)
And then do what the Left does, pound the hell out of the message. Rinse, repeat.
Toss out the Roves and Frums and Noonans and the other professional hand wringers with yesterday's bath water and conduct an all out offensive against the commies with a big fucking strobe light.
Leave the playing nice to the Bushies, and the other elitist hoy polloy.
They get us bupkiss.
Posted by: ontherocks at November 19, 2012 07:32 AM (aZ6ew)
Posted by: bill glass at November 19, 2012 07:33 AM (Q1BxK)
Posted by: Sophistahick at November 19, 2012 07:34 AM (UhXzR)
Posted by: Soona at November 19, 2012 07:34 AM (pXw68)
Posted by: Artemus Kahn at November 19, 2012 11:30 AM (k1vsl)
A "Messiah" who gets everything perfect, is not much of a plan, not that it matters now. I think it's too late to avoid a serious readjustment of our population by natural forces. I would advise everyone to take the necessary steps to mitigate being caught up in it.
Posted by: DiogenesLamp at November 19, 2012 07:35 AM (R9579)
We still use vague rhetoric. As if we donÂ’t have a half-century of evidence. Fascinating.
Posted by: CJ at November 19, 2012 11:30 AM (9KqcB)
The "War on Poverty" is nothing but a vote farming system devised by Lyndon Baines Johnson, and which has so far worked just as he predicted. It was a direct response to the 24th amendment. Anyone pointing out what a failure it is would be immediately labeled by all the media as a Racists who hates the poor.
Good luck with that.
Posted by: DiogenesLamp at November 19, 2012 07:38 AM (R9579)
They get us bupkiss.
Posted by: ontherocks at November 19, 2012 11:32 AM (aZ6ew)
Being Leftie-Lite is a chumps game. Look where it got us, in the long run,plus it makes you a whore.
Posted by: tubal at November 19, 2012 07:38 AM (BoE3Z)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at November 19, 2012 07:39 AM (V3kRK)
As long as there are customers for it, it will continue.
I'm not disagreeing with you. I see a lot of, well, shit (for lack of a better term) being presented before the American public as being "edgy" or something like that, which goes back to that "cool because it's rebellious" thingy.
I don't know anyone who has a reproduction of "Piss Christ" on their wall.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at November 19, 2012 07:40 AM (lOmbq)
In Akin's case, he answered a reporter's question stupidly. The media and DNC of course blew it up into "rape babies". Yes Akin is stupid but it wasn't exactly like rape babies was a central theme of his campaign.
Posted by: chemjeff
I think it's obvious I was being facetious, but Akin very much ran mainly on the issue of abortion, that was his calling card issue his entire career. SoCons that are obsessed with this issue (despite having about as much influence over it as the weather) can't help themselves and will always get into trouble. If you hold that position, eventually you're going to have to explain it, and they always fuck it up because it's a fucked up view. Akin's comments caught fire not because he didn't understand female fertility issues.
The GOP can't tolerate members that espouse that view, it cost us the Senate and I would argue the White House. It played in perfectly with the War on Women theme that gave us the biggest gender gap in several generations. We've lost countless Senate seats over it (remember Ken Buck) and it's a view that's downright repugnant to about 90% of Americans and it won't even play any longer in the Bible belt.
Posted by: McAdams at November 19, 2012 07:40 AM (7MC2X)
Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at November 19, 2012 07:41 AM (qwK3S)
Posted by: Sophistahick at November 19, 2012 07:42 AM (UhXzR)
Posted by: DriveBy at November 19, 2012 07:42 AM (C9Vc8)
The only thing missing from Gabe's post is "we're smart enough, we're good enough, and doggone it, people like us."
Plus, LA Times, bitchez!!
OK, uncle already. I need a gallon of coffee and a day on the river. And that's what I'm gonna get....
Posted by: Meremortal at November 19, 2012 07:45 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: Soona at November 19, 2012 07:50 AM (pXw68)
Posted by: Baldy at November 19, 2012 07:54 AM (opS9C)
Posted by: CoolAir at November 19, 2012 11:21 AM (TxyUc)
And if you're a "traditional republican middle class guy," you should also know Romney wasn't fucking talking about you! He was talking about Peggy Joseph and the Obamaphone Lady.
Get a cluebat and go fuck yourself with it.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at November 19, 2012 07:55 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: SFGoth at November 19, 2012 07:58 AM (dZ756)
Posted by: McAdams at November 19, 2012 11:40 AM (7MC2X)
yes yes I know, we stupid socons should sit down and shut up and let our RINO betters tell us what is the correct position to hold (which, coincidentally, just happens to be what the Democrats believe)
look, if you want to sell out to the Democrats on teh social issues, then the only way Republicans can then distinguish themselves from Democrats is on fiscal issues, and on that score, Republicans lose because Democrats will always promise more free shit and EAT YOUR PEAS isn't a winning message.
so we have to stand for something principled, and yes, standing for protecting unborn life is the correct thing to do.
I don't care how much you detest and loathe us ignorant redneck hillbilly socon pro-lifers but you need us way more than we need you. we are the ones who turn out the vote on election day. it was the supposedly "fiscal conservative social liberal" idjits who voted for Obama and Johnson instead.
Posted by: chemjeff at November 19, 2012 07:58 AM (d/5qf)
Posted by: Jimmy Doolittle at November 19, 2012 07:59 AM (C3KwS)
And Dukakis.
Akin was Huck's guy. Palin endorsed and campaigned for Sarah Steelman.
As for Sarah Palin's appeal among "independents", a Marist poll released 9/21/11 had this to say:
Among independent voters, 47% tout Palin while 43% are behind Obama. In August, 48% backed the president while 42% were for Palin. Palin has gained some support within her Republican base 81% now say they are for Palin compared with 60% last month. 87% of voters who support the Tea Party rally behind Palin compared with 70% last month.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3ql56s2
Posted by: mrp at November 19, 2012 08:02 AM (HjPtV)
Posted by: chemjeff
Finally, someone gets it.
Posted by: McAdams at November 19, 2012 08:05 AM (7MC2X)
Horsecrap, he did exactly that. The people he did it too last time in 2008 are already getting the free shit, this time is was to get a whole new bunch of them to get in line for the handouts.
Posted by: Unclefacts, now with even more summoning power. at November 19, 2012 08:05 AM (6IReR)
Posted by: SFGoth at November 19, 2012 08:14 AM (dZ756)
They believe what they want to believe, in spite of any amount of evidence, facts, or reason.
Their machine runs on bullshit, so crank up our own bullshit machines and stand back!
And kill the mass media while you're at it.
Posted by: Harry Bergeron at November 19, 2012 08:27 AM (tjWis)
Posted by: Schwalbe: The Me-262© at November 19, 2012 08:28 AM (UU0OF)
@ 584 - "it cost us the Senate and I would argue the White House."
You could argue that.
You'd be an idiot to do so, but you could argue that.
Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at November 19, 2012 08:34 AM (+inic)
Dump the bastards in shark-filled waters.
Posted by: Benelli at November 19, 2012 09:01 AM (2q6rx)
Posted by: McAdams at November 19, 2012 09:13 AM (7MC2X)
Posted by: Rich at November 19, 2012 09:16 AM (arczc)
Posted by: Rich at November 19, 2012 09:18 AM (arczc)
Posted by: Rich at November 19, 2012 09:19 AM (arczc)
Posted by: Rich at November 19, 2012 09:23 AM (arczc)
Posted by: Rob McNeece at November 19, 2012 09:34 AM (hNXHo)
"the GOP is in need of a cure. That's just not the case."
Newsflash, Urkel is the worst Prezzy in US history. 50-odd percent of voters thought the depression was Booosh's fault.
Romany had a 12 point swing over McLame among Indies and lost a total of 1 million in overall support.
Down Low lost 7 million votes and Romany picked up 4 million among the swingers, presumably. QED, he lost 5M among Republican voters and conservative Indies.
Winning.
Next time don't call us, we'll call you, buh bye.
Posted by: gary gulrud at November 19, 2012 10:16 AM (uv0Aw)
Posted by: perturbed at November 19, 2012 10:20 AM (u6Ueb)
Posted by: Cackfinger at November 19, 2012 12:01 PM (CCHli)
But 'failing to rebut' is what Republicans <i>do</i>! Would you have them betray their essential nature? John Boehner <i>is</i>
"Mr. Republican."
Posted by: PersonFromPorlock at November 19, 2012 02:11 PM (2VCZA)
Posted by: kzinrett at November 20, 2012 07:13 AM (QU5IA)
Posted by: Independent at November 23, 2012 07:51 PM (8RdUG)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3244 seconds, 733 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2012 02:56 AM (YdQQY)