Karl Rove Cannot See the Elephant in the Living Room

Writing in the Wall Street Journal:

Turnout dropped by 7.9 million voters, falling to 123.6 million this year from 131.5 million in 2008. This is the first decline in a presidential election in 16 years. Only 51.3% of the voting-age population went to the polls.

While the Democratic "ground game" was effective, President Barack Obama received 90.1% of his 2008 total while Gov. Mitt Romney received 98.6% of Sen. John McCain's vote.

(Emphasis mine.) Rove then goes on to list tactical reasons for the failure.

  • Republicans must re-examine their 72-hour ground game.
  • Republicans must emulate the Democrats 50-state strategy.
  • Republicans must erase the Democrats' data advantage and add to the voter rolls likely Republican voters.
  • Frame the issues better to resonate with middle-class families. This one is interesting, because Rove identifies it as a strategic concern but then immediately attributes it to a tactical failure:
  • "One reason the GOP didn't do better with its pro-growth agenda was that Mr. Romney's character and record were undermined by early, relentless personal attacks that went largely unanswered."
  • Republicans must do better with Hispanics and millennials.
  • "Republicans need not jettison their principles." Note: This is Karl Rove talking about Republican principles. Presumably that means principles like the Medicare prescription drug benefit (the largest new entitlement program since the 1960's), No Child Left Behind (the federalization of K-12 education), and the Patriot Act (including TSA nude-o-scopes, airport body rub-downs, and a shocking weakening of the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement). Are those Republican principles? Of course not. But the fact that Republicans like Karl Rove think they are sheds light on why we've been losing elections.
  • Republicans must reduce the destructiveness of the primaries.
  • Hold the convention earlier.

What is missing from Rove's list? Hint: The GOP has won only one popular vote since George H.W. Bush rode in on Ronald Reagan's coattails in 1988. What is similar about every candidate since Reagan? What did Bush-41, Bush-43, Dole, McCain, and Romney all have in common? This is indeed an "elephant in the living room" question, because what Rove refuses to see is that the Republican party hasn't run a conservative since 1984. Since then, we have had a never-ending stream of big government, establishment, Rockefeller Republicans--people who think we can out-Democrat the Democrats and in some cases out-bid them for votes. These are people who think government is just fine, that it's only there to help, and that the important thing is not to limit it but to be in control of it.

These are people who say things like "kinder, gentler nation" (ceding an aspect of Democrat bigotry: that Republicans are somehow cruel) and "compassionate conservatism" (Was Ronald Reagan cruel? Did he lack compassion?). These are people whose knee-jerk reaction last week was to argue--once again--for moderation. In fact, you could feel them dying to argue Mitt Romney ran as a conservative. But that argument didn't quite fit. Romney ran as a pro-government intervention corporatist. His passing mention of "government-centered society" on a few occasions did not make him a conservative.

We cannot buy votes. "Kinder, gentler" didn't purchase a thing for George H.W. Bush, for example. Establishment Republicans should be required to put two and two together correctly for a change. We need a conservative candidate who can make the case for limited government and federalism. (Note that "federalize" and "federalism" are two different things.)

Establishment Republicans have had their chance, repeatedly, and they have blown it, repeatedly. Let me suggest a strategy that will sweep away all of Karl Rove's tactical concerns: Our next nominee should be a limited government constitutional conservative, someone who will dust off Reagan's winning playbook and use it to motivate the base while picking up independents and blue-dog Democrats along the way. Just like Ronald Reagan did.

Follow me on Twitter.

Posted by: rdbrewer at 07:00 PM



Comments

1 Sorry, nobody wants this to be true more than me, but I can't buy the argument that goes "When the American people re-elected the most liberal president in history, they did so because the other guy wasn't conservative enough."

The people have spoken, and they want Free Stuff. End of story. We're screwed.

Posted by: Paul at November 15, 2012 07:04 PM (g4Saz)

2 I am a big Reagan guy ( I love my picture of me shaking his hand ) but I am sorry zombie Reagan isn't going to win.

Posted by: Golan Globus at November 15, 2012 07:05 PM (/1U3u)

3 ""Republicans need not jettison their principles." Note: This is Karl
Rove talking about Republican principles. Presumably that means
principles like the Medicare prescription drug benefit (the largest new
entitlement program since the 1960's), No Child Left Behind (the
federalization of K-12 education), and the Patriot Act (including TSA
nude-o-scopes, airport body rub-downs, and a shocking weakening of the
Fourth Amendment warrant requirement). Are those Republican principles?
Of course not. But the fact that Republicans like Karl Rove think
they are sheds light on why we've been losing elections."

do you really think these are the reasons Bush/Republicans in general lost popularity

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 07:06 PM (60GaT)

4 PURGE THE RINO'S.

SCOTT WALKER FOR SPEAKER.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 15, 2012 07:07 PM (XkWWK)

5 Ummm, when did we stop having primaries where the GOP nominee was selected by voters?

Posted by: Andy at November 15, 2012 07:07 PM (OZPoa)

6 What bugs me about Rove is he's a colored jersey guy. He wants the guys wearing our color to win - the presidency, more seats in the House and Senate, statehouses, etc. If that happens, it's all the success Rove needs or wants.

He doesn't care what the guys supposedly on our "team" actually stand for. Snowe? Great! Chafee? Wonderful! Spector? Okay, as long as he's got an R after his name. It's all a big game of numbers to Rove.

It would be nice if the GOP actually stood for something instead of being the "we're the Democrats, just 25 years earlier" party. Heck, we might even start winning some elections if we had an actual GOVERNING PHILOSOPHY and candidates who were actually committed to it.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at November 15, 2012 07:08 PM (QKKT0)

7 Our next candidate will face a new set of challenges in '16, IMO. For one thing, Choom Boy will have gutted the military by then, possibly even lost a regional conflict or two, and will be facing enemies who have had their way with President Moar Flexibility.

I don't think the next Repub choice will have much to say about the economy, though. There won't be one.

All this is based on the not-entirely-certain idea that there will be another presidential election in our lifetimes. Either we'll have a President-For-Life, or riots in the major cities will prevent voting.

No matter how you slice it, the next candidate will be more of a cleaner-of-messes than a statesman.

Posted by: MrScribbler, banned at TepidAir at November 15, 2012 07:08 PM (yKUrR)

8 I dont disagree with your elephantine point, but compared to Obummer even a Rockefeller typeis acceptable and should have won the election. In some circumstances I dont mind moderates as long as they are not the Honorable Loser type moderates.

Posted by: Elize Nayden at November 15, 2012 07:08 PM (DLZfk)

9 I am working on writing an email to someone to hopefully turn into a blog post, but I was having a conversation with a younger guy who works for me who isn't a malicious moon at Lefty but he voted for Obama. He lives in Northern Virginia and doesn't know what sequestration is or what it will mean. He doesn't know much about Benghazi other than the little he has heard on the news.

And in talking to him I had an epiphany about the problem, and I need to get it down somewhere. In the ends the Dems played politics better. Somebody somewhere said something about the Generals vs the Harlem Globetrotters. Kind of. They are playing an entirely different game. And our guys suck at it. I will flesh it out.

Posted by: Golan Globus at November 15, 2012 07:09 PM (/1U3u)

10 The American people continuously vote and poll that they want more spending and less taxes. Well they have gotten it for years and it has led to enormous deficits and an ever increasing welfare state that leads people to give up looking for work.

This problem has been building for decades, it has been there to see and the American people have seen it. Now that the deficit is ballooning out of control, the American people in their infinite wisdom have elected back to office Obama, a Democrat Senate, and a Republican house. Obama and the Democrat Senate are there to keep the gravy train rolling straight into the fucking ground. The Republicans are there to take the blame for anything bad that must and will happen.

The American people are going to have their cake and eat it too.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at November 15, 2012 07:10 PM (++kZl)

11 Sorry, nobody wants this to be true more than me, but I can't buy the
argument that goes "When the American people re-elected the most liberal
president in history, they did so because the other guy wasn't
conservative enough."



Maybe having a candidate who's conservative would get the conservatives to the polls. Romney didn't seem to even pull that off.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at November 15, 2012 07:10 PM (QKKT0)

12 More conservative would not have won. Worst pres ever, worst economy. Shoulda been a cakewalk for Romney/Ryan, which was the best ticket under the circumstances.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:11 PM (zpqa2)

13 Reagan wasn't much more of a fiscal conservative than Bush. Is there any evidence of an electoral appetite for a president that will cut spending, reform entitlements and balance the budget?

Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at November 15, 2012 07:12 PM (+lsX1)

14 More conserv would have lost more squish votes than the conserv votes it would have picked up. 'Too extreme' - run squishes, run!

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:13 PM (zpqa2)

15 10
The American people are going to have their cake and eat it too.


That ain't chocolate cake. Just sayin'.

Posted by: rickl at November 15, 2012 07:13 PM (sdi6R)

16 We don't have to jettison principles to get people on our side.

Get rid of the big govt, big ag, big security state RINOs first.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at November 15, 2012 07:14 PM (fCMdQ)

17 OH. Run a real conservative? Are you sure you want to hill the die on unelectable Palin hill die on relate to demographicss hilll to die on?

And such?
Because unelectable don't you know.

Posted by: Inspector Asshole at November 15, 2012 07:14 PM (IOSGZ)

18 I really think reducing this all to moderates v. conservatives misses the point

a lot of it has to do with image. Romney came off as "conservative" in a bad way to too many people, i.e. he's rich, he doesn't care, he doesn't "connect"

we don't need Palin or Santorum, but they both have something to them that the next nominee needs, populism that doesn't amount to liberal-lite

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 07:15 PM (60GaT)

19 P.S. Socon libertarian hill to diiiiieeee onnnnnnnn.

Posted by: Inspector Asshole at November 15, 2012 07:15 PM (IOSGZ)

20 Oh and Palin won't get out the vote. There's that too.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at November 15, 2012 07:16 PM (fCMdQ)

21 Press and Free Shit Army killed our chances. Tipped. The long knives would have really come out if it were a more conserv ticket, too. Ugly.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:16 PM (zpqa2)

22 Agree with all of it, although I think the issue here wasn't issues - it was the campaign approach.

Mitt was too nice. The GOP in general was too nice. We need to swift boat. Swift boating wins.

He pulls a knife, you pull a gun.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 15, 2012 07:16 PM (uhAkr)

23 "Establishment Republicans have had their chance, repeatedly, and they have blown it, repeatedly. Let me suggest a strategy that will sweep away all of Karl Rove's tactical concerns: Our next nominee should be a limited government constitutional conservative, someone who will dust off Reagan's winning playbook and use it to motivate the base while picking up independents and blue-dog Democrats along the way. Just like Ronald Reagan did."

Thank you!!!

Cons stayed home because the only choice was between two people who have both enacted government controlled health care programs.

The point of the two-party system is to offer options.

Posted by: sdavis at November 15, 2012 07:16 PM (njVMI)

24 Rove has been dead to me since 2010 when he tried to take down the Tea Party....So he can Suck On That !

Posted by: AmericanDawg at November 15, 2012 07:16 PM (XIsD/)

25 I'm strangely bored with the postmortems. We lost a race that shouldn't even have been close and is barely precedented by FDR winning reelection during the Depression.

I'm tired of Republicans destroying themselves to knock the edges off the Democrat's insane policies and make them half-assed work. I'm tired of, in Bob Doles words, of being the tax collectors for the Welfare State.

The Tax Collector is always hated.

LiB.

Le Sigh.

Posted by: toby928© for TB at November 15, 2012 07:16 PM (QupBk)

26
A part of me feels that if RnR had gotten in, our economy is on the brink of such a rotten stretch that they would have been one term and we would be back to dems for God knows how long, what with the media being their propaganda arm and all.
At least this way, as much as the SCOAMTT tries to blame it away, he owns this mess and the mess to come.
I still wish we were not heading into such negative and unstable territory tho.

Posted by: Justamom at November 15, 2012 07:17 PM (Sptt8)

27
Romney outperformed almost every conservative Senate candidate. He even got more votes than Ted Cruz did in Texas. The idea that he lost because he wasn't conservative enough is just nonsense, a dangerous delusion,

Posted by: Jon (not the troll) at November 15, 2012 07:17 PM (E8Ag4)

28 The people have spoken, and they want Free Stuff. End of story.


End of chapter. It looks bad for the good guys, I know.


Here is the upside to Obama winning: Obama won. He broke it; he bought it.

Posted by: fluffy at November 15, 2012 07:18 PM (z9HTb)

29 "Establishment Republicans have had their chance, repeatedly, and they have blown it, repeatedly."

Most recently by re-installing Agent Orange in the Speaker's chair in the aftermath of the election debacle.

Boehner must go.

Posted by: torquewrench at November 15, 2012 07:19 PM (ymG7s)

30 "
I'm strangely bored with the postmortems."

Me too. This is getting tedious.

Burnage and what-not.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:19 PM (zpqa2)

31 All of this is moot unless you have conservatives who are very good candidates - which luckily we should in 2016. But just as there is no "Generic Republican" there is no "Generic Conservative".
Who, exactly, should we have nominated but didn't? Santorum? Newt? an ill-prepred Rick Perry? Herman Cain? Huckabee? (if you even want to call him conservative). I loved Fred T. but he's a "RINO" to many, plus not the hardest working campaigner. Lamar!?Pat Robertson? You could make a case for Phil Gramm, Jack Kempor maybe Forbes. But it's not like we've turned our backs on a lot of great, viable conservative alternatives.
You go to elections with the candidates you've got.

Posted by: buzz at November 15, 2012 07:20 PM (i27M5)

32 FUCKING A. No shit...... We need candidates that have actually come up like the rest of the electorate. Even GWB was a trust fund kid. Reagan can speak to Americans BECAUSE HE IS ONE, a regular Joe that made it.

We need to recognize this. Richie rich cannot sell the message that taxing the rich is bad. For FUCK'S SAKE.

Time to go FULL RETARD!!!!!!!! MARCO RUBIO-TOM COTTON 2016!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is a great blog, glad to have found it. It's helped me get through the fucking disaster of an election. Night retards.

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:21 PM (tVTLU)

33 Marshmallows!

Posted by: BuddyPC at November 15, 2012 07:21 PM (jfUIE)

34 Agree regarding theneed a true small government conservative and why we lose. But I feel it may be too late. Too many cities, states,businesses, and individualswould take enormous hits if spending were cut enough to make to fix things. Nothing short of collapse, similar or worse than the thirties, or outright insurrection, may do it now.

Posted by: Greg at November 15, 2012 07:21 PM (vatr1)

35 He pulls a knife, you pull a gun.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 15, 2012 07:16 PM


I sincerely doubt that getting Romney to tell the ugly truth about Choom Boy would have made any difference.

Free Shit, Race and Fraud. They're what's happening.

I don't overestimate the American public (at least the D voters). Historically, there have been elections around the world where some inherently decent people freely chose the worst possible person to lead them. This has been such an occasion. And, like those instances, all of us will pay dearly for the error.

Posted by: MrScribbler, banned at TepidAir at November 15, 2012 07:22 PM (yKUrR)

36 Mitt Romney's problem wasn't that he was not conservative enough. His problem is he had an R behind his name.

Rove is as responsible for the R party being hated as anybody else on the planet. I think that's the elephant he's not seeing.

Posted by: BurtTC at November 15, 2012 07:23 PM (BeSEI)

37 1. Our election system is broken. Utterly. From open primaries to no voter ID, no sane person can possibly trust it any more. More and more people are seeing that the game is rigged six ways to Sunday.

2. Media delenda est. 'Nuff said.

3. Fuck Karl Rove. Fine, Christine O'Donnell wasn't a great candidate, and perhaps she never stood a chance in deep blue Delaware, but was it really necessary for him to stab her in the back on national TV on the very night of her primary victory?

Posted by: rickl at November 15, 2012 07:23 PM (sdi6R)

38 Please stop thinking it's 1980. That's dangerous for our side.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:23 PM (zpqa2)

39 JDP

"Rich" isn't conservative. Rich is simply "not me."

Why did Herman Cain resonate with so many people, and Romney with almost no one? Because Cain's biography (like him or hate him as a candidate) is one the 'everyman' can identify with.

Just like Reagan's was.

We lost this election because Romney did not connect with our base. Plain and simple. No other way to dice it.

And no, Romney/Ryan wasn't the 'best possible ticket.' Ryan was a sop to conservatives. Yay. Romney spent the whole primary battering the right into submission. You can't tell your base to sod off and not have it bite you. You can't stifle dissent at the convention and power-broker primaries into a virtual gerrymandering of the process to ensure victory without consequence.

The Establishment wanted its candidate so badly they were willing to sacrifice the base to do it. They got what they deserved.

So yes, we should absolutely make sure that our Presidential nominees don't come from the "Establishment" so-called 'wing' of the party any longer.

Oh, and here's one more hint. Being "moderate" didn't stop the Dems and Media from calling Romney 'extreme.' The only answer is to show how THEY are. Fight fire with fire, and stop assuming they can be 'niced' into an issue campaign.

Posted by: Shawn at November 15, 2012 07:23 PM (/lltO)

40 BTW,
the budget under Reagan was balanced, revenues met expenditures.

The problem was the fucking fed rate was jacked at 15%. So debt payments were crippling us. Without that, we would not have had deficits. No one unelected person should be able to double the national debt simply via his policy (i.e., Fed chair)

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:23 PM (tVTLU)

41
tripling the cost of registering your car here in california,they didn't even bother with doubling it first,nope.let it burn

Posted by: kj at November 15, 2012 07:24 PM (AW9md)

42 If only 51.8% of voting-age people showed up to vote, and Barky only managed to pull in 50.1% of that vote, it means that roughly 26% of those eligible to vote are the ones who "made the decision" for 4 more years of this crap sandwich.

What does that translate to in terms of the overall population? What was the final tally of votes per candidate, and what percentage is that of the total population?

'Cuz if it's only 20-25% of the population, no candidate can say that he/she has a "mandate" for anything......

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at November 15, 2012 07:24 PM (XjXIN)

43 "Mitt Romney's problem wasn't that he was not conservative enough. His problem is he had an R behind his name."

This X 1000. Grand OLD Party.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:24 PM (zpqa2)

44
@31.

I want Mike Pence.

Posted by: knob at November 15, 2012 07:24 PM (H1bc7)

45 Perhaps the American electorate will warmly receive a Conservative, even a religious Conservative, but certainly not one who's religion is front-and-center. You're going to have to find one who will say, "my religion says X and I believe X but that's personal, yadda, yadda."

Posted by: SFGoth at November 15, 2012 07:24 PM (dZ756)

46 "36 Mitt Romney's problem wasn't that he was not conservative enough. His problem is he had an R behind his name.

Rove is as responsible for the R party being hated as anybody else on the planet. I think that's the elephant he's not seeing.

Posted by: BurtTC at November 15, 2012 07:23 PM (BeSEI) "

Had he explicitly stood for something, the letter after his name would have mattered less.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:24 PM (hhVWg)

47 How many bajillions did your superpac make for you, rdbrewer4?? Huh???

Posted by: Truman North, last of the famous international playboys at November 15, 2012 07:24 PM (I2LwF)

48 Please, let us have the concern trolls weigh in and tell us about the winning pays of Pussified Conservatism Lite.

Posted by: logprof at November 15, 2012 07:25 PM (jKE+Z)

49 WTF is going on here? I read this post and guess what.... for all the so-called genius analysis going on, WHERE THE FRIG IS MENTION OF SARAH PALIN and the NON-ACTIVATION of the Tea Party that would have happened if she had been brought into the campaign?

All this hand wringing and dissection of the results is ignoring the real elephant in the room which is that Sarah Palin was never welcomed and never really invited to speak at the Convention and was ignored by the Establishment and the campaign. By doing that, they said screw you to all those people that Sarah helped activate for the 2010 elections. You remember those, don't you?

So screw all this analysis... the simple fact is that by ignoring Sarah Palin and the Tea Party, the Republican geniuses and all the so-called genius bloggers I have been reading since the election, like the guy who wrote this article, by not bringing up Sarah Palin they show that they still have their heads up their a^^es. Good luck with that.

Posted by: PhilipJames at November 15, 2012 07:25 PM (hrysW)

50 someone who will dust off Reagan's winning playbook and use it to
motivate the base while picking up independents and blue-dog Democrats
along the way.


And who will hate vaginas, kill poor people and push old ladies off cliffs while giving gifts to their greedy corporate fatcat friends.

The elephant in the room is the media. You'll note that in addition to everything else, they seem to "help" choose our nominee. End.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at November 15, 2012 07:25 PM (6JMZR)

51 So here's the thing. Let's talk about the "fiscal cliff" my guy didn't know what that was and why people were talking about it. I explained how it came about, from the debt ceiling business, how the Congress had agreed to cut spending, and if they didn't, other cuts would happen automatically.

Bottom line is we got snookered. Surprise surprise, Boehner sucks at negotiating, but we got snookered. Because no matter how it breaks, its a win for the Dems. It helps that they have air cover from the media, but they can be on the winning side regardless, and make the Republicans look hapless and uncaring at the same time. The most important poll question in politics is does the candidate care about people like you.

So, lets say we go over the fiscal cliff. Well, look, the Republicans said they wanted these cuts, here they are, and now they are squealing about them. They just want to cut as long as it doesn't hurt their favored rich or whatever. Obama got it - he said in the debate it wasn't him that did the deal, even though it was.

So if the fiscal cliff happens, they get credit for being fiscally prudent. But Republicans don't, because they are already complaining, talking bad about the cliff, it will drive us into recession, etc. If being fiscally prudent is good, why are they trying to avoid it?

And what if the Republicans do steer away from the cliff? How will they do it? Either throw away the deal - which then says the deal was meaningless and was the political posturing that the Dems said it was to begin with. Why go through all that drama if in the end they are going to throw it all away?



Posted by: Golan Globus at November 15, 2012 07:25 PM (/1U3u)

52 I think and continue to think Rick Perry could have won, he announced too soon after his back surgery. He is a small government conservative, and one that Romney feared so much that he had website dedicated to denigrate him. Perry could have won hispanics over because of Texas stance on in state college tuition for illegals. We may not like it but they do.
I am sick of all the attention Iowa and NH get, they virtually pick our nominee for us. There are a few other states but by the time most of us vote, the nominee is virtually certain.
The establishment supports the loser from the last time. McCain was too old in 2008 and Romney was too stiff to connect with the people.
Perry almost always has a smile on his face and has the optimism of Reagan. I sincerely hope that Rubio begin in Iowa this week is his start of running for POTUS in 2016.
I like Rubio but then I hear more things that I'm not so sure about.

Posted by: CarolT at November 15, 2012 07:26 PM (z4WKX)

53 Karl is the elephant in the room.

Posted by: 29Victor at November 15, 2012 07:27 PM (ES9R7)

54 It's not just the candidate. We need a new electorate. We need new voters.

Not the dead kind, nor felons, nor illegal aliens, nor the "early and often" kind. That's what the other party does.

Not the low-information kind, either.

Since it's too late to send them all back to high school to take a civics class - and since the teachers at those high schools are lefty recruiters themselves, so it won't happen there anyway - the question is, how do we create new voters who understand the dangers of big government and the costs of all those freebies? That won't be learned in school. Seems to me that the only place left for that to be learned is the School of Hard Knocks.

Therefore, LET IT BURN.

I'm not persuaded there is a political solution to this. The people in charge don't want honest elections, and won't let America have them. The voting majority will not surrender their Free Stuff. This will not be solved by the electoral process.

Posted by: Keith Arnold at November 15, 2012 07:27 PM (Jdtsu)

55 45

I think Romney of Bain lost the election more than Mitt the Mormon

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 07:28 PM (60GaT)

56 Seriously? Dust off a 1980 play book?

If we fall for this we deserve to lose in 16.

Blue-dog Dems? Where?

Our opponents are fucking commies.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:28 PM (zpqa2)

57 CarolT:

Let's work together for Rubio. What things do you hear?

We need to take back this f'ng GOP. No more establishment retards. Bush barely beat Gore the first time around and I kept saying he was going to smoke Kerry because of 9-11.

And it still came down to fucking Ohio. Whoever is running the pubs has been fucking up something awful for year after year after year.

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:28 PM (tVTLU)

58 Okay someone please explain to me how exactly the Establishment is able to mind control millions and millions of otherwise conservative GOP primary voters into voting for the Establishment's preferred candidate so that he wins the nomination.

And yes you will have to show your work.

Posted by: Mætenloch at November 15, 2012 07:30 PM (pAlYe)

59 We need a likeable, non-threatening conservative that sounds middle of the road and, like Obama, is willing to say anything to get elected. Then, in office, fuck the left/progressives/unions/big government every which way until Friday. With a smile and charm.

Posted by: eureka! LIBer at November 15, 2012 07:31 PM (UL+ny)

60 "A part of me feels that if RnR had gotten in, our economy is on the
brink of such a rotten stretch that they would have been one term"

I share that assessment.

Worse, they would have been blamed for "spoiling" the vigorous Obama economic recovery which is somehow always just around the corner.

It's going to be no fun to endure another four years of stagflation. But it will make clear to at least some swing voters that Obamanomics simply do not work.

Posted by: torquewrench at November 15, 2012 07:31 PM (ymG7s)

61 "We need to take back this f'ng GOP"

The Grand OLD Party brand is dead. It smells. Anything you put into it picks up the smell.

Do. Not. Want.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:31 PM (zpqa2)

62 Maet, they pick who they want and dump a shitload of money into their campaign during the primaries.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 07:31 PM (Iyg03)

63 Posted by: PhilipJames at November 15, 2012 07:25 PM

Actually, it was Teh SARAHCUUUUUUDAAAA!!11!! who sat things out. For whatever reason (probably monetary, for which you can't blame her) she wasn't out there workin' it for the team.

You can use the excuse that the party dumped dung all over her, but the same happened to others in the past and they kept pushing. See: Nixon, Richard.

Palin apparently doesn't want to be president, or even waste much time with politics. Her choice, but she has lost her credibility in that regard, and deservedly so.

Posted by: MrScribbler, banned at TepidAir at November 15, 2012 07:31 PM (yKUrR)

64 This is why social conservatism is actually important and libertarianism is a dead end for the GOP: you can actually bring people to vote against their short-term economic interest if you appeal to their identity and beliefs.

W. was a rich bastard just as Willard was, but he was a culture warrior. He might have beenturned 180° on foreign policy after 9/11 and was a damn squish on the economy, but it was always clear where he stood on social issues and that made him relatable to a lot of people that were not exactly of his class, but of a similar faith.

Playing the god-card was muchmore problematic for Willard due to his mormonism and his history ofmoderation on social issues. His whole political persona was not up to the task of turning this election. Thats why I have some respect left for W: because he was able to turn the 04 election into a referendum on "values" with a so-so economy,the War on Terror and the Iraq war going on. THATS political leadership.

Posted by: Elize Nayden at November 15, 2012 07:31 PM (DLZfk)

65 Rove is not a conservative and since we happily decided to not run a conservative for 28 years there's a good chance the electorate may have moved on.

Thanks GOP keep selling the myth we get a "crazy Reagan conservative" every other cycle.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:31 PM (LRFds)

66 George H.W. Bush: Ronald Reagan's biggest mistake.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 07:32 PM (Iyg03)

67
Romney won the same percentage of white voters that Reagan did. The problem is the non-white vote. Until minorities decide to vote for their own rational economic self interest (instead Obamaphones and tribal identity) the country is screwed.

Posted by: Huusker at November 15, 2012 07:32 PM (Vq7P1)

68 So screw all this analysis... the simple fact is that by ignoring Sarah
Palin and the Tea Party, the Republican geniuses and all the so-called
genius bloggers I have been reading since the election



Are you suggesting that the Tea Party didn't turn out because Sarah Palin was ignored? Not buying it.

Posted by: fluffy at November 15, 2012 07:32 PM (z9HTb)

69 Anyone who thinks another Texas governor would have won the election is seriously drunk.

Posted by: SFGoth at November 15, 2012 07:32 PM (dZ756)

70 You know what the "H.W." in Bush-41's name stands for? Hubris Wanker.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 07:32 PM (Iyg03)

71 It comes down to this: the white working class.

Reagan and Clinton won them on economics, and it produced two blowout victories. In 2004, Bush won them on culture and the GWOT, and it produced a narrow victory.

It would be nice to have more Latino votes, but the hard truth is that even with an utter embrace of full-on amnesty by the GOP, Latinos are still much more likely to vote for Dems.

The white working class (whites making below $50K) is different. What matters here is less that their "white" but more that they are economically vulnerable and want some one who's on their side and presents an empowering solution. Obama, of course, offered neither sympathy or solutions, but effectively poisoned them against Romney via the Bain attacks in OH.

I think Rubio's the most talented communicator the GOP has to offer in 2016, but I worry that he can't reach white working class voters. It's an unresolved question.

Posted by: Robert_Paulson at November 15, 2012 07:32 PM (HU5cF)

72 Another part of the fiscal cliff is the 2% payroll tax cut. Guess what, that goes to middle and lower class - there is a cap on how much payroll tax you pay - I forget what the cap is, $130k or? You pay the same whether you make the 130 or 10M.

Getting 2% of your paycheck back (or not taken out is real money that you can see. It may not be a ton of money, but it is something. This expires at the end of the year. So this tax is going up. It doesn't matter if it was "supposed" to be at that higher level, the fact is that it isn't, and the expiration is a tax increase. So, guess who has to address it? The House. They have to let it happen - and thus "raise taxes" on the lower and middle class. Or they have to extend it. But the payroll tax funds Social Security, and taking essentially 1/6 out of the revenue for it weakens it. (Yes, but it was Obama's idea, so isn't he weakening SS? Shut up.)


So either way this breaks down, the Dems declare a win. And the Republicans look hapleess and like they don't care.



Posted by: Golan Globus at November 15, 2012 07:33 PM (/1U3u)

73 "58 Okay someone please explain to me how exactly the Establishment is able to mind control millions and millions of otherwise conservative GOP primary voters into voting for the Establishment's preferred squish candidate so that he wins the nomination.

And yes you will have to how your work.

Posted by: Mætenloch at November 15, 2012 07:30 PM (pAlYe) "

If the Establishment(s) somehow telegraphs its/their preference(s), a lot of people will go with that. Most people are lemmings.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:33 PM (hhVWg)

74 7 Scribbler,

That set of parameters actually works to our advantage. We can run on what we should have ran on this time UNLOCK THE POWER! Add in the need for a military rebirth and there you have it.

BOOM!

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:33 PM (LRFds)

75 Rove fails to see a lot, oh, such as massive fraud. Rove's not only an idiot but I think he works for the other side.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at November 15, 2012 07:33 PM (KL49F)

76 The culture is such that Reagan would have gotten his ass beat today. We lost the culture.

Unless the R's start handing out taxpayer funded penis enhancement surgery and tattoos to the Honey Boo Boos , Brand Republican is done.

Done.

The American electorate needs to feel the burn.

Let them.

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 07:33 PM (EZl54)

77 62 Maet, they pick who they want and dump a shitload of money into their campaign during the primaries.
Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 07:31 PM (Iyg03)


Yes...but money is not everything. Practically every other candidate had a brief boomlet when they got tons of money pouring in. If they were really the preferred candidate, they would have caught fire.

Posted by: Mætenloch at November 15, 2012 07:34 PM (pAlYe)

78 The elephant in the room is MASSIVE VOTER TABULATION FRAUD.

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at November 15, 2012 07:34 PM (hlUJY)

79 This sounds like a job for... MOAR MODERATES!

Posted by: Tonic Dog at November 15, 2012 07:34 PM (X/+QT)

80 58 Maet,

Open primaries are a part of it.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:34 PM (LRFds)

81 Don't forget, Reagan was also extremely charming.

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at November 15, 2012 07:34 PM (hlUJY)

82 Look no further than California to see how the Rove/Hannity/Krystol et al strategy plays out. The GOP has been moving into squishy territory here for decades, and we've repaid them by ousting every single one to a majority of democrats now.

When faced with Lib and LibLite, folks will go with the caffeinated version every time.

Then, look to California for a preview of what's going to happen to the rest of the nation.

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at November 15, 2012 07:34 PM (Qxdfp)

83 Food Stamp recipients accounted for 75 % of Obama voters.

de Tocqueville nailed it.



Let it burn.

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 07:35 PM (EZl54)

84 Denny's to bill patrons 5% Obamacare surcharge.
Moon Over Mi-Balance Sheet.

Free shit!

http://tinyurl.com/a4gdshl

Posted by: BuddyPC at November 15, 2012 07:35 PM (jfUIE)

85 There are tons of women out there that hate Sarah Palin, but have no answer when I ask why, they just say they "hate her." Sarah could have energized the RNC by speaking at the convention.
I think those women that hate her hate her because she's beautiful. That's it, that is the only reason I can think of.

Posted by: CarolT at November 15, 2012 07:35 PM (z4WKX)

86 Oh, and Let It Burn.

Posted by: BuddyPC at November 15, 2012 07:35 PM (jfUIE)

87 80 58 Maet,
Open primaries are a part of it.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:34 PM (LRFds)


Okay I'll buy that as a factor. But that's not an establishment problem.

Posted by: Mætenloch at November 15, 2012 07:35 PM (pAlYe)

88 Before this election many here said they would vote for a ham sandwich if it ran against TFG, and I believe most of us did in fact vote for the sammich.

Also, many here believed that this last election was our last chance to stop our slide into the abyss.

What's different now?

Nothing. Game over, man.

Posted by: GnuBreed at November 15, 2012 07:36 PM (ccXZP)

89 You can blame Romney’s nomination on the TrueCon Inquisition, Conservatives 4 Palin and the Perpetual Tea Party Rebellion. In their desperate quest for purity, RINO scalps and Not-Romney, these assholes dutifully destroyed the only two viable candidates (Pawlenty, Perry) in the interest of nominating fruitcakes, ignoramuses and spotlight hogs (Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich, Santorum).

Pawlenty and Perry were governors with actual records. In Pawlenty’s case, he had a solid fiscally conservative record that came about after fighting tooth and nail with the Democrat-controlled state legislature. Perry had the best conservative record, the best personal story and presided over the state that produced the most jobs during the recession.

They were both disqualified for petty, stupid reasons…reasons that the TrueCon Committee would later ignore in the cases of Cain (proudly ignorant of policy, said he was pro-abortion and walked it back), Gingrich (had a hard on for global warming at one point, supported the Individual Mandate) and Santorum (big government conservative, loved him some pork).

Palin deserves some blame too for her ‘Will-She/Won’t She’ cockteasery. By baiting her supporters with a potential run (without actually running), C4Palin directed the most vicious campaign of lies and bullshit against the other candidates in order to clear the field for Her Highness. Turns out the two biggest threats to Palin were also the two biggest threats to Romney; Pawlenty and Perry.

That’s how Romney won the nomination; by not doing a damn thing while these clowns all punched themselves out.

Way to go guys. You have no one to blame but yourselves.

Posted by: El Kabong, Honorable Moron from AZ at November 15, 2012 07:36 PM (pzmYs)

90 "67
Romney won the same percentage of white voters that Reagan did. The problem is the non-white vote. Until minorities decide to vote for their own rational economic self interest (instead Obamaphones and tribal identity) the country is screwed.

Posted by: Huusker at November 15, 2012 07:32 PM (Vq7P1) "

Someone is going to have to stand up for Capitalism/the Free Market and explain why it's a good thing.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:36 PM (hhVWg)

91 Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 07:33 PM (EZl54)

Romney won but for massive fraud. We actually haven't "lost the culture" yet.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at November 15, 2012 07:36 PM (KL49F)

92 peace dividend

Posted by: LC LaWedgie at November 15, 2012 07:36 PM (rzTDZ)

93
"The establishment supports the loser from the last time."

And that rule has worked out SO well for us.

How about if we sack proven losers, brutally and quickly, and replace them with people who actually showed in the previous cycle that they know how to win elections?


Posted by: torquewrench at November 15, 2012 07:36 PM (ymG7s)

94 67:
That is a simplistic analysis though. This is about states and the electoral college. Heavy hispanic/minority populations are in states that are locked up anyway.

Does it not disturb anyone here, that we always seem to BARELY WIN, I mean GWB did not get above 300 electoral votes. We barely pulled this bitch out.

The dems are systematically closing the map on us and we are ALLOWING IT TO HAPPEN.

Enough of this shit. We need to take back these states and we need to start now. Rather than just hoping the voters will do the right things in the last two months of a campaign. I mean fuck.

How many relationships are going to be maintained by the GOP in coal country. Jack fucking shit I bet.

It makes one wonder if the GOP has been infiltrated, frankly. HOw the fuck can we not have a reliable GOTV machine up and going in all of these states!!!!

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:36 PM (tVTLU)

95 We tried to take over the GOP. Turd-polishing.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:36 PM (zpqa2)

96 Posted by: El Kabong, Honorable Moron from AZ at November 15, 2012 07:36 PM (pzmYs)

Agree totally.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at November 15, 2012 07:37 PM (KL49F)

97 so much for that theory...

Posted by: MItt Romney - Ham Sandwich at November 15, 2012 07:37 PM (EZl54)

98 Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:33 PM

You may be right, but conditions in 2016 America may well be such that no intelligent person would choose to run for president.

They'd be too busy foraging for food scraps and building a hovel for the family, not to mention looking for ammo with which to defend their ground.

Posted by: MrScribbler, banned at TepidAir at November 15, 2012 07:38 PM (yKUrR)

99 "Someone is going to have to stand up for Capitalism/the Free Market and explain why it's a good thing."

After the burnage, and only after, this will be self-evident. Sorry, but that's where we are now. We may as well hasten the inevitable.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:38 PM (zpqa2)

100 58 -

I've always said the R party votes conservatively, but not necessarily for conservatives.

In other words, we go for safe, known candidates. We don't like sexy.

Posted by: BurtTC at November 15, 2012 07:38 PM (BeSEI)

101 "91 Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 07:33 PM (EZl54)

Romney won but for massive fraud. We actually haven't "lost the culture" yet.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at November 15, 2012 07:36 PM (KL49F) "

If we haven't lost it, it's been "misplaced."

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:38 PM (hhVWg)

102 85 Carol T,

yup that and pure unadulterated harpie rage that she is more accomplished with "less skill"....

my sister in law has defacto quit the party over Palin...

in '08 "Palin is not ready"

in '12 "Ryan is too dangerous"

in '16 I aim to tell her "if Cali is still in America register D"

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:38 PM (LRFds)

103 6 The colored jersey guys are precisely the reason suicidal, corrupt fuckwits like Akin could sit on the science committee and hold bizarre theories about high school level biology.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 07:38 PM (i0vBR)

104 OK Reagan was a conservative, but so was Goldwater who lost massively. Then before that, what GOP conservative has won?

People want teh free shit.

Posted by: Jeanne the Obscure at November 15, 2012 07:39 PM (u/L+R)

105 @91
see @83

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 07:39 PM (EZl54)

106 ....Clinton won them on economics, and it produced two blowout victories.

Clinton blew out victoriously, let alone twice?

Posted by: Ross Perot at November 15, 2012 07:39 PM (jfUIE)

107 I’m sure Palin will start cockteasing a run again in 2015 to shill a new book, so we can have unseen, flapjackmaka and beedubya in the comments and tell us how Marco Rubio ‘is an amnesty shill and talks like a fag.’

Then we’ll end up with Chris Christie as the nominee (after you fuckers destroy any alternatives) and then you’ll blame US for forcing him on you.

Because nothing is ever the fault of the TrueCon Inquisition, is it?

Posted by: El Kabong, Honorable Moron from AZ at November 15, 2012 07:39 PM (pzmYs)

108 101 MUMR,

No just packed up...you given any thought to the 64,000 dollar question?

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:39 PM (LRFds)

109 Now, now, don't you worry your pretty little head. Our RNC Betters know how to win elections. The fact that elections are not won, as such, is irrelevant.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Our only hope. Literally. at November 15, 2012 07:39 PM (Gk3SS)

110 According to Drudge, Wal-Mart's employees are going to have a job action on Black Friday.

Yea, bring it!!!

Unionize those commie-loving-Walton heirs big time. They love commies so much, let them have an empire of commie. Serves them right.

Posted by: Boots at November 15, 2012 07:39 PM (neKzn)

111 Stop talking about fraud. If it's close, they will cheat,

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 07:40 PM (i0vBR)

112 Take off the gloves...now. Get in the libtards faces now...get rid of the "mr nice guy" crap...now! If Rubio is serious about 2016...he needs to pounce on any and everything BoBo does that is unAmerican and props of socialism...which is everything. We must be united around not only our ideals, but the person who is representing our ideals. When a Christie Cheese boi does one of his stunts...bitch slap him/her down...now!! We will never win back this country if we are not willing to fight to get it back....words are cheap and words or weak and we loose. I am tired of loosing. If we say kick their asses....then damn it...let's kick their asses...we have alot of ball growing to do ourselves....just saying.....

Posted by: bayway48 at November 15, 2012 07:40 PM (FzYtL)

113 Robert Paulson:
Great comment. Rubio can do it, he's in the same economic boat. Plus, if Rubio picks Tom Cotton as his running mate, that will be sewn up.
War vet, cattle farmer from rural Arkansas, same place Clinton was from roughly.

That's why I'm pounding the fucking table for these guys.

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:40 PM (tVTLU)

114 "103 6 The colored jersey guys are precisely the reason suicidal, corrupt fuckwits like Akin could sit on the science committee and hold bizarre theories about high school level biology.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 07:38 PM (i0vBR) "

Will this bullshit ever cease?

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:40 PM (hhVWg)

115 Maet, only Romney had the big donor establishment backing. Backers very closely associated with the RNC.

I put up a headline about one of them. From memory, her quote was, "We've already decided Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee." Remember that?

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 07:40 PM (Iyg03)

116 For the 137th time, the votes have not been counted yet.

Romney probably will end up with more votes than John McCain, which would mean that he got pretty much the entire base and the incredibly shrinking number of independents relative to 2008.

TFG managed to make 7 million white voters stay home. That is his legacy.

Posted by: The Q at November 15, 2012 07:41 PM (w4fEE)

117 So it isn't enough to just descrbe the problem, you have to have a solution to the problem. It isn't about the words, not like that Lakoff guy says about framing, it is about the argument itself.

Republicans need to do stuff and not just posture. Put up a vote for a plan that would provide cuts that obviate sequestration, vote for it, and send it to the Senate. And if it doesn't go through, fine. Own up to what happened, say that it was the deal you had to make to get there, and you worked to avoid it, and the Democrats wouldn't play ball. Make the Dems own the defense cuts. But do not whine about them.

Posted by: Golan Globus at November 15, 2012 07:41 PM (/1U3u)

118 110 Boots,

sign any petition they sling....hell march with 'em fuck wal mart up

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:41 PM (LRFds)

119 Perry sorta destroyed himself

i don't think anyone in the field could've outperformed Romney, I thought Pawlenty sounded good but he shot himself in the foot early too

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 07:41 PM (60GaT)

120 "107 I’m sure Palin will start cockteasing a run again in 2015 to shill a new book, so we can have unseen, flapjackmaka and beedubya in the comments and tell us how Marco Rubio ‘is an amnesty shill and talks like a fag.’

Then we’ll end up with Chris Christie as the nominee (after you fuckers destroy any alternatives) and then you’ll blame US for forcing him on you.

Because nothing is ever the fault of the TrueCon Inquisition, is it?

Posted by: El Kabong, Honorable Moron from AZ at November 15, 2012 07:39 PM (pzmYs) "

What?

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:41 PM (hhVWg)

121 I'm so tired of all these analyses of why Romney lost. The simple fact is thatslightly more than 1 out of 2 voters voted for Obama. If there is no repercussion for them for voting that way, they will continue to vote that way.

The ground game is you and me, all of us, pointing out to Obama voters how stupid they are. We need to stop enabling bad behavior. Ridicule low-information voters. Don't support businesses run by liberals.

The GOP can't do it, with the media in teh SCOAMF's back pocket. We need to do it, and we can't wait until election season.

Posted by: Marmo at November 15, 2012 07:42 PM (pcgW1)

122 111 TDP,

Yup...we should have been outside the margin of reasonable fraud folks....come on now they've always cheated 1-3%....

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:42 PM (LRFds)

123 107 Why don't they ever catch on? Every election, it's something.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 07:42 PM (i0vBR)

124

Nice article
What's twitter ?

Posted by: Ringo at November 15, 2012 07:42 PM (O5ard)

125 Guys, Rubio wont run in '16. He cant be on the presidential ticket and run for his Senate seat at the same time. If he loses his political career would be over. He wont run before 2020.

Posted by: Elize Nayden at November 15, 2012 07:42 PM (DLZfk)

126 @99
I have little faith in the education argument.

low info cable watchers don't get TAUGHT that free stuff is good, it just "works that way".

In time, free markets and capitalism won't need to be explained, they will just "work that way"... again.


Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 07:43 PM (EZl54)

127 120 MUMR,

Just nod....

I'm guessing I am supposed to feel some guilt or shame over Palin having any say on the right...

it helps unity to humor folk.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:43 PM (LRFds)

128 "108 101 MUMR,

No just packed up...you given any thought to the 64,000 dollar question?

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:39 PM (LRFds) "

Que sera, sera.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:43 PM (hhVWg)

129 You guys this continue to think this is a tactical or strategical or quality of candidate problem. We could run the dream conservative candidate and we would still lose.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 15, 2012 07:44 PM (GZitp)

130 Watch Reagans time for choosing speech, there is not a single politician today that can write that speach let alone deliver it with the conviction Reagan did.

Posted by: General Woundwort at November 15, 2012 07:44 PM (0fxcV)

131 130 GW,

There's a reason why.....

We need Evan Bayh...

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:45 PM (LRFds)

132 "127 120 MUMR,

Just nod....

I'm guessing I am supposed to feel some guilt or shame over Palin having any say on the right...

it helps unity to humor folk.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:43 PM (LRFds) "

"Squishcons" are rather stuck on stupid.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:45 PM (hhVWg)

133 125 Guys, Rubio wont run in '16. He cant be on the presidential ticket and run for his Senate seat at the same time. If he loses his political career would be over. He wont run before 2020.
----------------------------------------

I thought Joe Lieberman ran for the Senate in 2000 at the same time he was on the ticket with AlGore? Or am I misremembering?


Posted by: Boots at November 15, 2012 07:45 PM (neKzn)

134 125:
WTF are you talking about? He sure as shit can for both at the same time.

Pawlenty looked like too much of a pussy for me. I might've gone for Mitch Daniels.

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:45 PM (tVTLU)

135 "129 You guys this continue to think this is a tactical or strategical or quality of candidate problem. We could run the dream conservative candidate and we would still lose.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 15, 2012 07:44 PM (GZitp) "

Let's test that hypothesis.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:45 PM (hhVWg)

136 Yeah, Rove's ideas might move the needle by a couple of points.
And a couple of points is all we needed in the last one. So, we could try all of that.

But, really, people like free shit. We can argue freedom all we want, and we might even win once in a while under the right conditions, but people love their free shit.

So..Make it Burn, baby...make it burn. Take what you can from Uncle Sugar, and invest what you save in preparedness. They love socialism...let them drown in it.

Until there is nothing left for them to take, these loosers will never learn.

Posted by: MrShad at November 15, 2012 07:45 PM (Xqfwb)

137
OT/ Sorry if this was already posted, but it made me laugh.

Wal-Mart workers plan Black Friday walkout
....The union-backed groups OUR Walmart and Making Change at Wal-Mart, and a watchdog group Corporate Action Network, are calling on the nation's largest employer to end what they call retaliation against employees who speak out for better pay, fair schedules and affordable health care...
http://tinyurl.com/cfg652l

Posted by: spypeach at November 15, 2012 07:46 PM (pwTow)

138 I think he'll get it when the elephant dung reaches nose level.

Rove is in the "drop zone" as it were.

Posted by: AshKente at November 15, 2012 07:46 PM (SP4jC)

139 133 "I thought Joe Lieberman ran for the Senate in 2000 at the same time he was on the ticket with Al Gore? Or am I misremembering?"

The previous poster muddied the waters a bit by saying "presidential ticket," but the main thrust was that Rubio can't run for president AND senator at the same time because he'd be running 2 races at once for 14-18 months.

Like Lieberman in 2000, Rubio would be a perfectly acceptable VP candidate, because he'd be running for Senate for 14 months and only running on the national ticket for 3.

Posted by: The Q at November 15, 2012 07:48 PM (w4fEE)

140 I thought Joe Lieberman ran for the Senate in 2000 at the same time he was on the ticket with AlGore? Or am I misremembering?

Posted by: Boots at November 15, 2012 07:45 PM (neKzn)


That might be true, but running in a very small, very blue state while being veep is something different than running for Senatein the most popular swingstate of the country while probably heading the ticket.

Posted by: Elize Nayden at November 15, 2012 07:48 PM (DLZfk)

141 The elephant is the electorate after decades of pandering by the left.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:48 PM (zpqa2)

142 Reagan was the best. We have been running either trust fund babies or the world's worst candidates since.
GHWB (which really was Reagan's third term)
Dole - do I have to say
GWB
McCain
Romney

So, in 2016, are we going to run some crusty old white fuck that yes was a hero but otherwise can't speak.

Or are we going to run a young hispanic and war hero young white guy who grew up on a cattle farm in a family full of veterans.
FIX THE MESSENGER. Articulate the message.

Get back to Reagan and the rest will follow.

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:48 PM (tVTLU)

143 "136 Yeah, Rove's ideas might move the needle by a couple of points.
And a couple of points is all we needed in the last one. So, we could try all of that.

But, really, people like free shit. We can argue freedom all we want, and we might even win once in a while under the right conditions, but people love their free shit.

So..Make it Burn, baby...make it burn. Take what you can from Uncle Sugar, and invest what you save in preparedness. They love socialism...let them drown in it.

Until there is nothing left for them to take, these loosers will never learn.

Posted by: MrShad at November 15, 2012 07:45 PM (Xqfwb) "

Animals, devoid of any ideas, ideals, or idealism love free shit. People? Not so much. (At least not to the extent they have any of those three things.)

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:48 PM (hhVWg)

144 I think the point is that Romney did not turn out more voters than McCain and Obama's support dropped but did not move to Romney. The lesson is not that people wanted more "free stuff" necessarily it is that they saw no meaningful change of course with Romney or perhaps people are simply despondent and completely tuned out and disgusted.

Posted by: scofflawx at November 15, 2012 07:48 PM (N1Rjx)

145 The true road to victory is paved with ladyparts!

Posted by: Kaylee on Twitter at November 15, 2012 07:48 PM (vbh31)

146 On the brighter side, since the election we haven't heard much from Jack Straw about THE WONDER THAT IS MITT and a big steaming pile of itoldyousos.

Posted by: GnuBreed at November 15, 2012 07:49 PM (ccXZP)

147 The elephant in the room is dedication to purpose. We snarked at Obama for being in Eternal Campaign Mode, but look at what his *actual* campaign did: Nickel and dimed the electorate to death, finding out as much as they could about as many people as they could, and trying to microtarget them. One person at a time. Drops in a bucket, but enough drops and the bucket gets full.

They're playing the long game. Look at their takeover of schools. Being Professor of Literature at the University of Southern North Dakota won't make you rich and famous. But every fall, sure as sunrise, you'll have a classroom of fresh faced, eager 19 year olds, fresh away from Mom and Dad and listening to what you say.

Or these idiot organizations like Code Pink. We point and laugh at these useless cretins and ask, "Why don't these people get jobs?"

Because they have them. Their long game continues, time be damned. Pushing and forwarding their ideology is What. They. Do. That's why the campaign never ends, why the fundraising doesn't stop, and why they run around in goddamn vagina suits. Always preaching, always trying to drown out the opposition. Elections aren't every four years, anymore. They are every day, and the Progs treat them that way. Do that long enough and you win.

Posted by: Secundus at November 15, 2012 07:49 PM (g3jwX)

148 138 AK,

Rove is in fact at Point Break....

looks like Bussey makes sense like Canoe

http://youtu.be/YS_6mR82eQk

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:49 PM (LRFds)

149 Until we know what the margin of fraud was, there is no point to all
this theorizing. It's just making stuff up; talking for the sake of
talking.

Funny how all the pundits were sure of just what was
going on in the weeks and days leading up to the election, then the
election proved them all completely wrong, then the next morning they
were right back there being sure about what's going on -- and it's
totally different than the stuff they knew before. I'm sure they're
right THIS time. Aren't they?

Posted by: pestilential at November 15, 2012 07:49 PM (Pwy5W)

150 Elize:

Please, the money you would bring in by running for Prez. is like icing on the cake. Yes, he can run for both. I think JF Kerry did that as well...

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:49 PM (tVTLU)

151 138:

Great point.

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:50 PM (tVTLU)

152 "145 The true road to victory is paved with ladyparts!

Posted by: Kaylee on Twitter at November 15, 2012 07:48 PM (vbh31) "

That, too.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:50 PM (hhVWg)

153
71 It comes down to this: the white working class.

Reagan and Clinton won them on economics, and it produced two blowout victories.


That Clinton "blowout" on the economy is a myth. Clinton never won 50% of the popular vote.

Posted by: Ed Anger at November 15, 2012 07:50 PM (tOkJB)

154 119 Perry should have blown off the debates. But the loons were gunning for him from the get go. Ron Paul attacked him for supposedly raising taxes. Cain called him a racist. Bachman went full Tardasil. Gingrich surrogates *cough* Redstate *cough* urged him to drop out before SC to keep Romney from becoming the nominee. Then Romney was an awful nominee after every Republican under the sun said he was the worst thing that could happen to conservatism.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 07:50 PM (i0vBR)

155 "When the American people re-elected the most liberal president in
history, they did so because the other guy wasn't conservative enough."

No. That's not the point. The point is that some conservatives have stopped voting for non conservative nominees.

Romney would've probably won if every conservative voter voted for him.

They didn't. There's a reason.

My guess; we'll see Rubio's star ascend in the sky and he'll be the next GOP Messiah. Meh.

Let. It. Burn.

Posted by: AshKente at November 15, 2012 07:50 PM (SP4jC)

156 Elephant in the room? We've got to deal with Candy Crowley again!

Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 15, 2012 07:50 PM (PmlnN)

157 Meeeghan McCain was in Karl Rove's living room?

Posted by: andycanuck at November 15, 2012 07:51 PM (nkiQM)

158 Infighting.... Catch the Fucktardery!!!!!

Posted by: The Mega Independent at November 15, 2012 07:51 PM (6JMZR)

159 LAUP NOR!

Posted by: ConcealedKerry Or SubMitt at November 15, 2012 07:51 PM (THBnv)

160 Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 07:41 PM (60GaT)

The thing is Romney made mistakes along the way, too, but they were always forgiven. Perry's mistakes would've been forgiven likewise had the Palinistas not been on a vendetta to destroy him. As soon as Palin announced she wasn't running in October, Palinstas blamed Perry for it. Then they ran to gaffetastic Cain and amnesty-loving Newt. They simply couldn't forgive Perry for their imaginary scenario.

And it wasn't just Palinistas. Fox News had their own agenda against Perry and they wouldn't let the public forget "oops" because Perry was the biggest threat to their guyRomney. So Fox defended Cain 24/7 knowing he was weak. That paved the way for a victorious Romney. If Perry had had Fox News defending "oops" as much as they defended Cain's adluterous past, Perry could have survived.

In Perry news today, he's the 1st gov to tell the feds to go eff themselves on the exchanges. He's telling them he won't set-up a "state exchange" and is helping to crash Ocare per Michael Cannon at Cato

http://tinyurl.com/acuo9k4

I love Perry more and more.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at November 15, 2012 07:51 PM (KL49F)

161 Hell, I can get you a toe by 3 o'clock this afternoon... with nail polish. These fucking amateurs...

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 07:51 PM (uvNSk)

162 @ 121

Agreed. The only thing that MIGHT wake them up is when they are slapped in the face with their own stupidity. The only way to maintain sanity is to laugh at them.Poke fun at them. Keep upwith the brazillion nicknames for B.O.

Posted by: wth at November 15, 2012 07:52 PM (wAQA5)

163 @147
The elephant in the room is dedication to purpose.



Their trains always run on time.

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 07:52 PM (EZl54)

164 "155 "When the American people re-elected the most liberal president in
history, they did so because the other guy wasn't conservative enough."

No. That's not the point. The point is that some conservatives have stopped voting for non conservative nominees.

Romney would've probably won if every conservative voter voted for him.

They didn't. There's a reason.

My guess; we'll see Rubio's star ascend in the sky and he'll be the next GOP Messiah. Meh.

Let. It. Burn.

Posted by: AshKente at November 15, 2012 07:50 PM (SP4jC) "

If we don't actually argue against Leftist memes, they will triumph.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:52 PM (hhVWg)

165 @159----->Really???????

Posted by: bayway48 at November 15, 2012 07:52 PM (FzYtL)

166 I told that kraut a fucking thousand times that I don't roll on Shabbos!

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 07:52 PM (uvNSk)

167 "Let's test that hypothesis.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:45 PM (hhVWg)"
I got no problem running a hardcore conservative, wish we would, just don't think for a minute they would win. The sooner we realize that the sooner we can quit thinking the this is some kind of political problem instead of a ideological one. We live in a liberal/socialist/statist nation, that's the real elephant in the room conservative pundits won't see.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 15, 2012 07:52 PM (GZitp)

168 156 TQM,

Nah stand on a landmine and take a step back when she tries to bodycheck you for HILLARY!

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:53 PM (LRFds)

169 Shomer fucking shabbos.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 07:53 PM (uvNSk)

170 154

regardless of who was "gunning for him" he didn't really do himself many favors

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 07:53 PM (60GaT)

171 147 Well said. Establishment Republicans ceded the culture wars to the libs long ago, even riding the coattails of Tonaldus Maximus. You have to fight fire with fire.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 07:53 PM (i0vBR)

172 I can tell by the comments on this thread that the next repub. presidential primary season will be just like the last. Too bad we can't agree on a fixed set of principles that will decrease the party infighting enough so that the candidate can focus on winning against dem leftists. We have too many left-leaners on our side.

Posted by: Soona at November 15, 2012 07:53 PM (0Y8Gz)

173 167 lowandslow,

so as I have wondered is there really a nation anymore?

I am not letting them import foreigners to fuck me out of my liberty on my forefather's soil so we have a BIG problem.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:54 PM (LRFds)

174 As much as I like Rick Perry, I have a very hard time that the nation was ready to elect another Governor from Texas.

I mean sweet Jesus, they were still fucking blaming Bush for Zero's economy.

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:54 PM (tVTLU)

175 Donny you're out of your element! Dude, the Chinaman is not the issue here!

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 07:54 PM (uvNSk)

176 Their trains always run on time.
Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 07:52 PM (EZl54)

Yeah, and ours was ORCA.

Posted by: Secundus at November 15, 2012 07:55 PM (g3jwX)

177 OK Reagan was a conservative, but so was Goldwater who lost massively. Then before that, what GOP conservative has won?

Reagan argued that was Coolidge.

Posted by: Meiczyslaw at November 15, 2012 07:55 PM (4+LTj)

178 Golan Globus said "I am a big Reagan guy ( I love my picture of me shaking his hand ) but I am sorry zombie Reagan isn't going to win."




Exactly.

What rdbrewer and many of the conservatives here aren't acknowledging is that 1980's Reagan would have lost in 2012's electorate. It's irreparably changed, it's gone.

Romney was effectually Reagan(star); he ran the same +20% in the non-minority demographics as Reagan did, won the white women/men/married demos. And he won the independent vote by 5% nationally.

The only things that's changed between the same performance which yielded a 1980 landslide and a 2012 ass-kicking is the demographic make-up of this country and the values which draw-out the white vote. Obama just cluster-fucked the white vote in the midwest until it looked like Verdun -- and those who were willing to come out of the foxholes were the evangelicals, were the independents. Our side suffered dramatically less attrition loss than theirs, but it's not enough.

Reagan '80 would have lost last week, I'm sorry to say. We idolize him, it's true though.

Romney won independents in Ohio by 10% -- and we lost. Let that sink in.

We dwell on the minutiae and tactical things, but in terms of the grand strategy the man targeted the independents from day 1 and performed to a level no other Republican candidate could have. It was our only play and it fell short.

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 15, 2012 07:55 PM (jhI6f)

179 Perry 2016 -- Cuz I cain't possibly do as bad in the debates as I did last time

or

Perry 2016 -- It's My Turn

Posted by: GnuBreed at November 15, 2012 07:56 PM (ccXZP)

180 "167 "Let's test that hypothesis.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:45 PM (hhVWg)"
I got no problem running a hardcore conservative, wish we would, just don't think for a minute they would win. The sooner we realize that the sooner we can quit thinking the this is some kind of political problem instead of a ideological one. We live in a liberal/socialist/statist nation, that's the real elephant in the room conservative pundits won't see.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 15, 2012 07:52 PM (GZitp) "

Yes. So we have to fight this ideologically.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:56 PM (hhVWg)

181 To pull in more conservs you would have to sacrifice moderates, esp in the current poisoned media environment, and stupid electorate environment, and ruined GOP brand environment. That a Magic Conservative exists in 2012 is pure fantasy.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:56 PM (zpqa2)

182 @147 Yep, we need to start realizing that. And do the same thing back (even though we, by our natures, hate the eternal political campaign).

Posted by: Tonic Dog at November 15, 2012 07:56 PM (X/+QT)

183 Let's test that hypothesis.
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:45 PM (hhVWg)

Exactly.

That's all we've heard since Poppy Bush. GW won only because a) he only did barely b) gore was a fucking giant puppet.

So just for snickers, let's prove or disprove this constant refrain and actually nominate and run an actual conservative?

I'm in, I just don't know who.

Posted by: AshKente at November 15, 2012 07:56 PM (SP4jC)

184 Please, the money you would bring in by running for Prez. is like icing on the cake. Yes, he can run for both. I think JF Kerry did that as well...

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:49 PM (tVTLU)


I didnt mean to say that he cant do it in a legal sense, but running in Florida is just a much bigger deal and much more consumingthan runningin some small,north-eastern blue stronghold. And the media would go after him for it: "Why do you run for Senate if you're really that optimistic about becoming President?" Andthey would use it against him in Florida as well. And we saw this year thatthis isnot exactly a red state we're talking about. Maybe a Democrat can get away with this stuff, but our guys cant. Believe me.

Posted by: Elize Nayden at November 15, 2012 07:56 PM (DLZfk)

185 @172

"We have too many left-leaners on our side."

Agreed....If you can't take the Heat get out of the Kitchen.

And.....Shit or get off the Pot....etc....etc...etc...FAP<FAPFAPFAP

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 07:56 PM (uvNSk)

186 The Establishment wanted its candidate so badly they were willing to sacrifice the base to do it. They got what they deserved.

Posted by: Shawn at November 15, 2012 07:23 PM (/lltO)

So, do you feel better now? or will you feel better two years from now? Really, what in the hell does this even mean? Who in the hell do you think was "Pure" enough for you?

Posted by: osu at November 15, 2012 07:57 PM (xR46S)

187 Roves Romney scorched any and all Republican oppo in the last week of each primary driving them from the lead to a win or draw for him, when it came time to finish the Lyin kING he whimped out.
HE DID NOT FINISH!
He listened to the be nice to the Lyin kING voices Rove and the like were whispering and let the socialist up and thats a fact Jack!

Posted by: ConcealedKerry Or SubMitt at November 15, 2012 07:57 PM (THBnv)

188 Yes. So we have to fight this ideologically.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:56 PM (hhVWg)

Fight Santa ideologically?
OK, I'll wait.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:58 PM (zpqa2)

189 >>>What rdbrewer and many of the conservatives here aren't acknowledging is
that 1980's Reagan would have lost in 2012's electorate. It's
irreparably changed, it's gone.

Um. I think Reagan would have hammered-down last week.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 07:58 PM (Iyg03)

190 OK Reagan was a conservative, but so was Goldwater who lost massively. Then before that, what GOP conservative has won?People want teh free shit.
Posted by: Jeanne the Obscure at November 15, 2012 07:39 PM (u/L


Hello there.

Posted by: Calvin Coolidge at November 15, 2012 07:59 PM (9YFBQ)

191 Posted by: pestilential at November 15, 2012 07:49 PM (Pwy5W)


Yes, these discussions are all based on the assumption that O won fairly. He didn't. Period. The all-knowing pundits want to change our principles based on fraudulent data. Also, we don't know that Romney got less votes than McCain till all the votes are counted and that takes months. 300,000 votes are outstanding in OH alone.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at November 15, 2012 07:59 PM (KL49F)

192 No, Donny, these men are nihilists, there's nothing to be afraid of.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 07:59 PM (uvNSk)

193 "188 Yes. So we have to fight this ideologically.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:56 PM (hhVWg)

Fight Santa ideologically?
OK, I'll wait.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:58 PM (zpqa2) "

What alternatives are there?

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:59 PM (hhVWg)

194 Give me a liberty conservative who respects the social conservatives and I'm fine. But if anyone thinks we will ever win another election WITH a social conservative, they're nuts. It ain't gonna happen. The country has made their choice about that and the war is lost.

Time to move on.

Posted by: Tommy V at November 15, 2012 07:59 PM (ZYlKz)

195 Elize,

You can easily set that up. Of course you want to go back to the Senate and then you've decided to run for President as well. Let the rest take care of itself.

Uriah Heep,

The flaw in your analysis is that we are losing states like fucking Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and all these other states that Reagan won in landslides.

The racial breakdown of Maine is not that inconsistent as it existed in Reagan's day. So why the fuck are we losing Maine. Wisconsin? Iowa?

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 07:59 PM (tVTLU)

196 Maybe everyone should remember that Clinton won because Poppy lost votes to Perot.

and what did Perot run on?

Posted by: AshKente at November 15, 2012 07:59 PM (SP4jC)

197
OK Reagan was a conservative, but so was Goldwater who lost massively.

I think you have to factor in to that election that LBJ was perceived to be carrying on the legacy of a President slain less than a year earlier.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at November 15, 2012 08:00 PM (8cOY0)

198 Posted by: Soona at November 15, 2012 07:53 PM (0Y8Gz)

There won't be another. And if there is, it won't matter. Fraud will win the day everyday from now on.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at November 15, 2012 08:00 PM (KL49F)

199 >>>What bugs me about Rove is he's a colored jersey guy. He wants the guys
wearing our color to win - the presidency, more seats in the House and
Senate, statehouses, etc. If that happens, it's all the success Rove
needs or wants.

Yeah, I think Rove would be just as happy working for the Democrats. It's the stupid game he loves.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 08:00 PM (Iyg03)

200 Like I said. Reading this thread is discouraging. The dems may be totally fucking wrong on their ideals for this country, but, at least, they're mostly unified.

Posted by: Soona at November 15, 2012 08:00 PM (0Y8Gz)

201 Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 07:54 PM (LRFds)


I understand your point, but I don't think the immigration process is reversible at this point. We have an unknown number of illegals in this country with an entire legal establishment dedicated to ensuring that they get a free ride, anchor babies, health care, and immunity from crimes that you or I would do serious time for.


We can't even suggest that a photo ID is a reasonable thing to present when you show up to vote without incurring the wrath of the media (and far too many people listen to the media).


We are done as a real nation, but we will continue to go through the motions for a while longer!

Posted by: Hrothgar - L.I.B or SMOD for the Children at November 15, 2012 08:01 PM (Cnqmv)

202
Romney. Reagan. Newt. Palin. McCain. Don't matter anymore. This country now has a system in place that will perpetuate the laviathan state. Votes bought with money from the laviathan state to ensure that outcome. Votes bought with bailouts for targeted industries in targeted states and foodstamps and Obama Phones. An election process where the count of the votes doesn't matter, just who counts the votes.

The system is corrupt and will not fulfill its constitutional perogative to safeguard our liberty, but will be used to make us slaves to the elites who covet eternal power over us.

Let it Burn

Posted by: Minuteman at November 15, 2012 08:01 PM (1Rw2p)

203 154 Just setting the record straight.

160 Thank you for that, AG. I forgot how butthurt the Palinistas were. Perry has always fought for conservative values. Then Romney chatted with Clinton recently. Bubba is placating him by blaming his loss on the hurricane. He says Obama wants to reach out to him. No hard feelings. Wanna bet Romney will agree to work with Obama on keeping the parts of Obamacare he likes and providing bipartisan cover for a bill that's about to become more unpopular as it is enacted?

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 08:01 PM (i0vBR)

204 Palin would have won the election for Romney, but she didn't because the Establishment.

Palin would have won the nomination, but she didn't because the Establishment.


Why, it's as if Palin can't even stand up to the Establishment. But she is the one true warrior to slay the Dems because..............

Posted by: Shoot Me at November 15, 2012 08:01 PM (qiXMt)

205 193 MUMR,

another thread someone brought up All in the Family....

MUMR what if one day Archie said, "Edith grab your shit fuck that asshole he can have the house let's go find work in texas??"

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:01 PM (LRFds)

206 And do the same thing back (even though we, by our natures, hate the eternal political campaign).
Posted by: Tonic Dog at November 15, 2012 07:56 PM (X/+QT)

This is the microsecond information age. You can see events on the other side of the planet in real time. Unfortunately, this has also turned politics into a Forever War. It sucks, but there it is. If the GOP doesn't figure that out, they won't be successful.

Posted by: Secundus at November 15, 2012 08:02 PM (g3jwX)

207 Leviathan

Posted by: Minuteman at November 15, 2012 08:02 PM (1Rw2p)

208 @198

How do you know that several of the past elections have been won thru Fraud? On both sides?

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:02 PM (uvNSk)

209 I haven't seen t posted yet, but pardon if I repeat...

UP train strikes parade trailer hauling wounded warriors.

4 dead, 17 injured, many critical.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 08:02 PM (piMMO)

210 "What alternatives are there?"

Only one: LiB/MiB, which will cause the pendulum to swing back.

Sorry, but that's where we are. A magic conservative talking about the Laffer curve is not going to mean shit to this electorate.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 08:02 PM (zpqa2)

211 No, without a hostage, there is no ransom. That's what ransom is. Those are the fucking rules.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:02 PM (uvNSk)

212 Let's talk immigration. Immigration is a good sign - people want to come here. We should encourage it, legally. There are only something like 50k leagal slots to come from Mexico, obviously demand is higher.

Be against illegal immigration, but be for legal immigration. Make it bigger, make it easier. And don't go all we need an amnesty, but recognize that the Dems when the argument when they say, look, we have limited resources, we are going to focus on violent felons, and not that kid who worked through college and is about to graduate, who was brought here by his parents when he was 5. I don't care who you are, if you want to kick that guy out of the country, that sounds heartless Yeah, I said it.

We need to recognize that we need to have an answer for that situation that doesn't make Republicans look hapless and like they don't care. I think Rubio is getting a lot of grief for having a mini-DREAM act, but we need to have an answer. It isn't about getting Latin votes, but about getting the votes of white people who don't want to be heartless.

America is a good country, and it is a big country. We should welcome more immigrants. If you make the legal number 500k instead of 50k, then more people will come legally, and the people who come illegally because theyll never get a chance at the lottery will come legally if the chance is real.

Posted by: Golan Globus at November 15, 2012 08:02 PM (/1U3u)

213 "Fight Santa ideologically?
OK, I'll wait.


Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:58 PM (zpqa2)"

You're going to have to, the return to a more traditional America isn't going to change in one election. We've been on the course of liberalizing America for decades, with the GOP's blessing.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 15, 2012 08:03 PM (GZitp)

214 What alternatives are there?
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 07:59 PM (hhVWg)


-----------------------------------------------


I have some but no one is ready to look at them yet.

Posted by: Soona at November 15, 2012 08:03 PM (0Y8Gz)

215 197 Goldwater was an AZ senator, and Reagan was Governor of CA. 55 EV's far out of the GOP's reach.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 08:03 PM (i0vBR)

216 201 Hrothgar,

That problem has a different set of solutions.

I am not allowed to go "borrow Mexico" with a human wave invasion....

never mind I'll shut up now.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:04 PM (LRFds)

217 Globus,

Exactly. And make the point that makes sense. Does it make sense to have widespread immigration when so many of our own citizens can't find a job....

How are these points not being made???????

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 08:04 PM (tVTLU)

218 178

Excellent analysis.

In fact, if you take 2008 as the outlier, where a helluva lot of people voted for the first and only time in their lives and did so for Obama, here's what happens:

GWB = 62 million, ~40% Latino vote.
Mitt = 59 million ( counting), 27% Latino vote.

Throw in the changing demographics of the country and swap the Asians that went heavily against Romney for the white independents that narrowly favored Kerry in 2004 but went pretty well towards Romney . . .

We did our best. The electorate changed, not us.

Posted by: The Q at November 15, 2012 08:04 PM (w4fEE)

219 "205 193 MUMR,

another thread someone brought up All in the Family....

MUMR what if one day Archie said, "Edith grab your shit fuck that asshole he can have the house let's go find work in texas??"

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:01 PM (LRFds) "

Well, ok, that's an option. And it might very well come to that.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:04 PM (hhVWg)

220 Okay someone please explain to me how exactly the Establishment is able to mind control millions and millions of otherwise conservative GOP primary voters into voting for the Establishment's preferred squish candidate so that he wins the nomination. And yes you will have to how your work. Posted by: Mætenloch at November 15, 2012 07:30 PM (pAlYe)

I began supporting Romney's primary candidacy immediately after Perry's debate implosion. Why? Because compared to Santorum, Gingrich, Huntsman, Cain, et al, Romney was the best qualified, least problematic (for lack of a better word), and most electable of the bunch, and by 'electable' I mean organized, well-funded, and yes, personable. Santorum comes off like an insufferable prig. Gingrich is hopelessly grandiose, with a personal life that can only be called a target-rich environment. Huntsman is indistinguishable from any moderate Democrat I can name, and so on. That said, I had no illusions about Romney from an ideological standpoint, nor was I unaware of his shortcomings. He's an old-school Northeastern RockefellerRepublican. His instincts are cautious and data-driven. He considers himself a gentleman--always a mistake when taking on no-holds-barred ideologues.

Remember the second debate when President Obama lied outright and the debate moderator sprang to Obama's defense? Romney's face showed genuine shock and surprise, and that's when I knew (or was fairly certain) we would lose. A conservativewould know it was a rigged game going in. Romney played by the Rules and, tragically, thought everyone else was playing by the rules, too. He was our leader in this fight and didn't know he was in a fight. That's why he lost. That's why we lost.

Posted by: troyriser at November 15, 2012 08:04 PM (vtiE6)

221 214 Soona,

don't be so sure....


Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:04 PM (LRFds)

222 You can thank Gore'santi-second amendmentthreats for W's win. It cost Manbearpig his home state. Of course W went and spit in gun owner's eye when he said he'd sign a gun ban bill if it made it to his desk.

Posted by: Larsen E. Whipsnade at November 15, 2012 08:04 PM (9YFBQ)

223 @178 What rdbrewer and many of the conservatives here aren't acknowledging is
that 1980's Reagan would have lost in 2012's electorate. It's
irreparably changed, it's gone.


Yes. The American electorate prefers a multi racial dope smoking slacker, who grew up in Hawaii with a silver spoon his mouth. They want a guy who pisses on the one supportive stable factor in his life (grandmother) by taking a public racial cheapshot at her after her death. They want a guy who takes the greatest economy in the world and tanks it over his daddy abandonment issues. They want Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho's retarded little brother.

They want a President that looks like modern fucked up America.

Just like them.


Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 08:04 PM (EZl54)

224 Crash was just outside of Midland, TX

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 08:05 PM (piMMO)

225 So why the fuck are we losing Maine. Wisconsin? Iowa?

It's not race that matters.

Maine has a lot of people on welfare/state assistance. Has since the '70's. This is because of the environment and lack of jobs.

Wisconsin is farm country. See above.

Iowa is just weird. Like maybe a wandering wagon load of Scandi's headed for Minnesota wound up there and it's been blue since clinton (or since Poppy). Plus see above and ETHANOL!!!! Lots a corn grown in IOWAY. Farm subsidies. Government handouts/ crop insurance / welfare for the city folk.

Posted by: AshKente at November 15, 2012 08:05 PM (SP4jC)

226 219 MUMR,

The sooner the better...I am thinking in 5-10 years it'll be gone as an option.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:05 PM (LRFds)

227 218.

I do not agree. Explain Maine. Explain Iowa. Explain Wisconsin.

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 08:05 PM (tVTLU)

228 Leviathan

That's an elephant in mom jeans, right?

Posted by: Kaylee on Twitter at November 15, 2012 08:05 PM (vbh31)

229 191 "300,000 votes are outstanding in OH alone."

They don't start counting those votes, by law, until Saturday, and even if many of them are coming from Cuyahoga, there's still quite a few from the burbs and the sticks as well.

Romney will outperform McCain and come in somewhere between 60 - 61.5 million votes.

Posted by: The Q at November 15, 2012 08:05 PM (w4fEE)

230 Speaking of the Senate races.....obviously there was lots of ticket-splitting in IN and MO, because of the rape bullshit, but why did that happen in "red" states like ND and MT?

I figured that Scott Brown was a goner despite the fact tthat Warren was a hideous candidate, the Dem poured millions into getting the "Kennedy seat" back and they just had to have it.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at November 15, 2012 08:06 PM (yJYwC)

231 "210 "What alternatives are there?"

Only one: LiB/MiB, which will cause the pendulum to swing back.

Sorry, but that's where we are. A magic conservative talking about the Laffer curve is not going to mean shit to this electorate.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 08:02 PM (zpqa2) "

Well, then we're in luck, because Obama will make it burn. (And the House should probably go along with it, just so the Ds/Media can't argue that the only problem was "not enough Socialism." Obama won. Let him own it.)

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:07 PM (hhVWg)

232 194

people reallllllly don't want to believe Romney lost on economics/his image huh. The guy spent the whole campaign talking about jobs, taxes, regulation, etc. etc.

but yeah I'm sure a Gary Johnson type would've just walloped BHO if he was the nominee. gimme a break

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 08:07 PM (60GaT)

233 I was going to wish you good luck in getting people to listen to you, but I can see already from the comments that many still cannot see the truth. I expect they will never be convinced.

Posted by: cranky-d at November 15, 2012 08:07 PM (HDtn6)

234 @215

If California is allowed to collapse economically....it will be rest to it's natural "Red Stated" heritage.

Also, the reason Reagan was so talented at the position was not only the fact that he was a good actor....He was Democrat first, who had insider knowledge of the LEft's Agenda.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:07 PM (uvNSk)

235 Reagan wasn't much more of a fiscal conservative than Bush. Is there any evidence of an electoral appetite for a president that will cut spending, reform entitlements and balance the budget?

Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at November 15, 2012 07:12 PM (+lsX1)

Posted by: Zombie Calvin Coolidge at November 15, 2012 08:07 PM (XvHmy)

236 Reagan wasn't much more of a fiscal conservative than Bush. Is there any evidence of an electoral appetite for a president that will cut spending, reform entitlements and balance the budget?

Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at November 15, 2012 07:12 PM (+lsX1)


Why, hello there...

Posted by: Zombie Calvin Coolidge at November 15, 2012 08:08 PM (XvHmy)

237
We pass amnesty, and we turn Texas into a swing state in a few years.
We don't pass amnesty, and it will likely become a swing state anyway.
One strategy we might give a go is to go after the white vote more.
Huh?
Yup, single white females. There are a vast number of them that vote on one issue, and we all know what that issue is.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at November 15, 2012 08:08 PM (8cOY0)

238 Any Midland folks here?

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 08:08 PM (piMMO)

239 Not this Orca crap again.

Stop with the bullshit excuses already and face the issues dead-on. Hiding behind juvenile games of pointing-the-finger and pass-the-blame will not solve anything for 2014 or 2016.

Fact: We're getting butt-fucked by demographics and the media. Demographics are a a strategic problem which will need a new policy agenda in terms of immigration: some compromise on strong border security and eVerify with a path to citizenship pushed by a cute face like Rubio. The legacy media must die, declare open war on them, find ways to slow their funding and build new tools to go around them. Better map out and understand social networks and information flows and use it to our advantage.

Bullshit Excuse: any sentence that contains 'Orca'. It's nothing but a networked strike-list. A strike-list is a way to know who already voted. Even if Orca failed completely, 100%, it means nothing if your electorate has a higher propensity to vote, has greater intensity and there are more of them. In the worst case of complete failure, it would have taken Boston an extra 30 minutes or an hour to know they won a precinct -- if they had the voters -- big fucking deal.

Orca stories are simple and intellectually easy process stories that hide the underlying problems. Romney should have won, we got bent over by a bunch of assholes from Chicago who can comprehend enough Heinlein to understand that if they hand out enough circuses and oranges to enough minorities, they can organize them and ship them like cattle to the polls while they literally carpet bomb the swing states and turn off anyone who might think of voting that day, but isn't sure.

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 15, 2012 08:08 PM (jhI6f)

240 Nothing is fucked here, Dude. Come on, you're being very un-Dude. They'll call back.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:09 PM (uvNSk)

241 Under Reagan,

Spending and revenue WERE BALANCED.

Except for that out of control clown at the fed reserve. Interest on debt at 15% killed us.

Can you imagine what our deficit would be now if we were paying 15%!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Paul Volcker was the genius who sold the nation's silver at 70 cents per ounce or something absurd like that.

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 08:09 PM (tVTLU)

242 Man I am gonna miss Hostess fruit pies...

that said fuck you IBT BURN.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:09 PM (LRFds)

243 @ 239 -

Thank you.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 08:10 PM (zpqa2)

244 that said fuck you IBT BURN.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:09 PM (LRFds)

What is IBT?

Posted by: osu at November 15, 2012 08:10 PM (xR46S)

245 When was the last time a nominee from MA win? 1960 and his father helped buy it with Daley in Chicago.

Every MA nominee has go on to lose, Dukakis, Kerry and now Romney. There may be more but those are the ones that jump to my mind right now.

Can someone please tell where they heard TFG wrote a concession speech? I know I read it here on my iPhone Monday or Tuesday. Thank you,

Posted by: CarolT at November 15, 2012 08:11 PM (z4WKX)

246 227 Let's see what I can do.

"Explain Maine." New England.

"Explain Iowa." Farm subsidies - Romney threatened to cut that off, one of the most noticeably fiscally conservatives stands he took during the entire campaign.

"Explain Wisconsin." We got our hopes up there because of the recall, but a good 15-20% of Democrats voted for Walker not because they liked him but because they thought the recall effort was wrong. That's how Walker got better numbers in 2012 than in 2010.

Posted by: The Q at November 15, 2012 08:11 PM (w4fEE)

247 You think there is going to be price gouging on ding dongs?

Posted by: Reggie1971 at November 15, 2012 08:11 PM (8cOY0)

248 Prayers in order for all involved.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 08:11 PM (piMMO)

249 244 osu,

International Brotherhood of Teamsters....

I have personal book with the IBT

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:11 PM (LRFds)

250 246 Plus Ryan had never won statewide election there.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 08:12 PM (i0vBR)

251 I'm sure the next GOP Presidential candidate, whether a die hard conservative or a RINO, will give a fine concession speech.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 15, 2012 08:12 PM (GZitp)

252 A conservative circle jerk essentially. Unless their perfect candidate gets led to electoral slaughter, they will just dream on like a college Marxist that says communism never failed...it's not been instituted correctly yet. Bah.

Posted by: Phil at November 15, 2012 08:12 PM (QzdcC)

253 that said fuck you IBT BURN.


*****

It isn't the Teamsters. It's the bakers. Then again, I always welcome a big Up Yours when it comes to the IBT.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 08:12 PM (piMMO)

254 246: Reagan won all of them though, so you've made my point that it's not purely demographics at play here.

239; 243: I disagree. A better ground game in 4 states and we are talking about bringing back the Winston Churchill bust in the WH.

For the last fucking time, GROUND GAME MATTERS!!!!!!!!!

And the pubs keep fucking it up.

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 08:13 PM (tVTLU)

255 The reason the Left is allowed to claim Reagan wasn't a fiscal conservative is because Democrats controlled the House & Senate and wouldn't make a deal on the Tax Cuts unless they were allowed to increase spending.

Of course NASA and the massive Military buildup didn't help, but paid off big time in the end in the Technology Markets and then F'n Slick Willy gets to take credit for it.

This is the reason Democrats are dumb...because they refuse to believe the truth.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:13 PM (uvNSk)

256 "252 A conservative circle jerk essentially. Unless their perfect candidate gets led to electoral slaughter, they will just dream on like a college Marxist that says communism never failed...it's not been instituted correctly yet. Bah.

Posted by: Phil at November 15, 2012 08:12 PM (QzdcC) "

And your solution is?

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:13 PM (hhVWg)

257 Another thing that just screams "Do you know what year this is?" is all the talk of "When was the last time X?" -- THE COUNTRY HAS CHANGED.

States have changed. The electorate has changed.

This talk must make the Progs squee when they see the Grand OLD Party obsessing like this.

MiB

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 08:13 PM (zpqa2)

258 Ah the parade was in Midland...damn...

Hope all the texans are ok.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:13 PM (LRFds)

259 249 244 osu,

International Brotherhood of Teamsters....

I have personal book with the IBT
Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:11 PM (LRFds)

Well, if you gonna say IBT then you have to include SEIU.

Posted by: osu at November 15, 2012 08:14 PM (xR46S)

260
Only 2 things will prevent Hillary from being elected in 2016.
1. She Dies (and she may run from the grave - I wouldnt put it past her).
2. Obama screws things up so bad that dems are voted out en masse (which is very likely to happen).

Posted by: retired military at November 15, 2012 08:14 PM (k2WDr)

261 Pat Fucking Caddell kept telling Romney he was blowing it, but he wouldn't listen. His second rate consultants had this.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 08:14 PM (i0vBR)

262 256 MUMR,

out communist the communists....

works every time...er uh no no it doesn't...

for fuck's sakes the pro pot libtards voted for Przzy Control Freak

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:15 PM (LRFds)

263 Um. I think Reagan would have hammered-down last week.
rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 07:58 PM (Iyg03)

I believe he would've at least told Candy Crowley to shut her pie hole while he was talking. (politely and with humor and she probably would've)

He then would've enumerated the number of times that Choom boy has made the world less safe by his inept foreign visits and actions.

How he helped ignite unrest in the ME IN FAVOR OF THE ISLAMIST'S and that he had no business getting involved with Libya since they were at peace and less trouble to the world than they have ever been.

How he has abandoned and isolated Bibi and put him in a place where unilateral force is his only option if he wants to keep Israel alive.

I could go on and on.

So NO to your statement about how he would've lost also.

As was said. Like so many nonconservative Republicans, they don't seem to understand we're in a war and the Media is one of the fighting forces of the enemy.

Posted by: AshKente at November 15, 2012 08:15 PM (SP4jC)

264 Rove was the first one to attack Perry at FNC when Perry said Texans wouldn't be happy if Bernanke printed more money. Rove described it as bordering on treason, as if Perry would kill Bernanke, he went off the rails right off. We had an email fight, me and Karl.
I used to subscribe to Dick Morris' daily emails, for all the candidates, he was supposedly trying to help every republican candidate, but he never did a video clip on Perry, so FNC employees followed. Was the trash Perry order from Murdoch or Aisles?

Posted by: CarolT at November 15, 2012 08:15 PM (z4WKX)

265 259 osu,

TThe IBT are the ones trying to shake down Hostess...

they were the ones that tried to organize the cargo company I started with.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:15 PM (LRFds)

266 story and photos here

http://tinyurl.com/cs3p5r9

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 08:16 PM (piMMO)

267 Can any of you guys who disagree with me tell me what Medicare Part D and No Child Left Behind bought us?

Because it sure didn't buy us the election in 2008.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 08:16 PM (Iyg03)

268 I had a group of people that I went with to DC on 9/12 for the big Tea Party rally. I'm sure some of you were there. The entire group that I went with broke ranks with the Republicans and voted for Gary Johnson. I tried to talk them out of it, but they were not voting for Romney, no way, no how. I don't get it. They handed it to Obama.

Posted by: Jaimo at November 15, 2012 08:16 PM (ulzt7)

269 that was to the person that rdbrewer was answering with the comment I quoted from rd. Sorry for any confusion caused.

Posted by: AshKente at November 15, 2012 08:16 PM (SP4jC)

270 "262 256 MUMR,

out communist the communists....

works every time...er uh no no it doesn't...

for fuck's sakes the pro pot libtards voted for Przzy Control Freak

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:15 PM (LRFds) "

Romney ran as a Democrat Lite. A lot of people seem to interpret his failure as an excuse to go ... Democrat Lite.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:17 PM (hhVWg)

271 @cranky-d

I watched the first 6 today. Plan to finish tonight. I totally agree with her premise.

The Marxo-Dems may be bad at math but they know how to appeal to the base nature of the masses. They understand the heart problem.

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 08:17 PM (EZl54)

272 Re: Clinton "blowouts" -- my point is just that in the electoral college count, Clinton won 370-plus twice. Obviously, he never claimed a "majority" but, hell, in 1996, Clinton won by 8.5%. That's a pretty healthy margin.

Anyways, yes, the white vote is shrinking as a percentage of the electorate, but I think you could argue that Reagan's 60% share isn't a ceiling. As a whole the white portion of the electorate is aging, and getting more conservative. You can and need to win a larger percentage of white voters -- in the short term -- in order to be competitive. Especially if the Dems now have a magic database that allows them to turnout AA latino neighborhoods to the nth degree.


Posted by: Robert_Paulson at November 15, 2012 08:17 PM (HU5cF)

273 267 rdbrewer,

yup...no trust me i agree...

you cannot sway donk fan...not in enough numbers to justify the economic retardation anyway.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:17 PM (LRFds)

274 @267

Bush doesn't represent what we've wanted all along...So It's a False Choice scenario.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:17 PM (uvNSk)

275 TThe IBT are the ones trying to shake down Hostess...


****

it isn't the teamsters. It's the baker's union: BCTGM

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 08:17 PM (piMMO)

276 "Explain Iowa." Farm subsidies - Romney threatened to cut that off, one
of the most noticeably fiscally conservatives stands he took during the
entire campaign

That is bull! Iowa is no different than anywhere else. Then countyr votes R in huge numbers the cities vote D.
Obama served red meat and free shit to his base and Romney served oatmeal sprinkled with cinnnamon to his.
Obama turned out his base and Romeny never ever attacked the Lyin kING like he did his fellow R's .
Romney never called the Liar an efn liar who couldn't back up his efn lies. Interesting FACT.
In Woodbury county Steve king won his bid against Vilsuck, Romney lost to OBlahBlah! The most conservative member of congress won where Romney lost?
Obama voters to the polls in mass coloring in one circle only cause someone showed the stupids which one OBAMA!

Posted by: ConcealedKerry Or SubMitt at November 15, 2012 08:18 PM (THBnv)

277 267

i don't think they "bought" us anything, but I don't think they have much to do with why we lost

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 08:18 PM (60GaT)

278 "267 Can any of you guys who disagree with me tell me what Medicare Part D and No Child Left Behind bought us?

Because it sure didn't buy us the election in 2008.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 08:16 PM (Iyg03) "

Failure.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:18 PM (hhVWg)

279 276

Great point re King.

Posted by: Prescient11 at November 15, 2012 08:18 PM (tVTLU)

280 rdbrewer said: Um. I think Reagan would have hammered-down last week.

Hey rdbrewer.

Perhaps, but IMHO, we psychologically tend to focus on small fluctuations and lose sight of the macroscopic picture. The election was lost before the last two weeks if you look at the demographics.

Maybe we can make a case that Romney would have pulled out a smaller attrition (or gain) over McCain if it wasn't for the Hurricane and Christie -- fuck him as far as I'm concerned -- which was the single issue identified in the exit-polling strong enough to flip all four states. It cut down Romney's closing argument about working across the aisle and if we assume it was weak propensity voters who stayed in, maybe that's the one issue that could have coupled 4 state flips together.

I just don't know, but that won't stop me from disliking and doing whatever I can in '16 to stop Chris Christie.

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 15, 2012 08:19 PM (jhI6f)

281 270 MUMR,

precisely my read as well...

somhow the answer is always "well we are not donkey enough" Pelosi ain't gephardt the donks are thrilled when we go left they do too////

No we need somebody to look into cameras NOW and say "Hi you may have heard i'm the embodiment of all evil, but I'm also the guy who won't try to control your life down to your toilet paper while keeping businesses from having wiggle room to hire you."

In spanish and english.

Fuck 'em fight in THEIR ground not ours.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (LRFds)

282 "271 @cranky-d

I watched the first 6 today. Plan to finish tonight. I totally agree with her premise.

The Marxo-Dems may be bad at math but they know how to appeal to the base nature of the masses. They understand the heart problem.

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 08:17 PM (EZl54) "

That's all Leftism is. An appeal to the base and stupid nature of the masses.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (hhVWg)

283 Okay. Acronym check. ( did i miss a memo?)

LiB == Let it Burn ?

wtf is

Mib == ?

Posted by: AshKente at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (SP4jC)

284 More whites voted for Romney than voted for Reagan.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (zpqa2)

285 Perry should have blown off the debates. But… Ron Paul attacked him for supposedly raising taxes. Cain called him a racist. Bachman went full Tardasil…

And in every case Perry should have had a conservative response. These same things would have been spun by the media as well, and with less of an opportunity to respond. It was as if he had never had to face serious opposition.

Whoever wants to be the candidate is in 2016, they need to have serious debate prep, from sparring partners who understand that they need to be as loony as the media.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (CeNUw)

286 The R team underestimated the desperation with which black people would seize upon re-electing a symbol (even though that symbol has and will continue to screw the black community royally).

Obamaphone ladies won this. Ohio is not 15% black, but it was for this election. Blacks (mostly black women) turned out above their actual % in the population to re-elect the Obaminator. And white men stayed home in disgust, and here we are. At the margins, marginal people really can make a difference. Go figure.

Posted by: argh at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (cVfzv)

287 I think we should run Bruce Wayne. Or maybe Tony Stark.

Let the Dems run against an imaginary fictional construct that has no relation to reality, for once.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (bxiXv)

288 280 Uriah H,

hey something most of us agree on...fuck Joisey Buddah

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (LRFds)

289 Reagan would have stood shoulder to shoulder with McVain and Grahamnesty and been successfully convicted of "being an elected official while old and white " in the court of CNNMSNBCCBSABC public opinion.


Let it burn.

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (EZl54)

290 MiB Make it burn

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (zpqa2)

291 279
AND SOME Evangelicals who were told not to vote for the Mormon

Posted by: ConcealedKerry Or SubMitt at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (THBnv)

292 252 There would be no Reagan if not for Goldwater, and there would be no Bushes without Reagan. Conservative circle jerks resulted in five Republican wins. While Eisenhower's spawn praised Obama at Mile High Stadium and Nixon tarnished the GOP brand. Betty Ford marched along with Dems and helped make Roe v. Wade stare decisis.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 08:21 PM (i0vBR)

293 MIB = Make It Burn

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:21 PM (uvNSk)

294 287 mero,

If we're gonna go that route let's run Mister Fantastic...I hear he does well with the chick vote.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:21 PM (LRFds)

295
Stop with the recriminations!!! Romney was never my choice, but it really doesn't matter who the nominnee was. Ifhalf the populace cannot discern that just maybe they shouldn't have seconds on the four years of abject shit-flavored failure served up by President Affirmative Action Jug-ears McFuckstick Clusterfuck Commie Muslim Bastard, then all this discussion is academic.

Presnit Asshole ObasketballBrackets was elected by getting the only endorsement that mattered in this election: Honey Boo Boo. That roly-poly inbred retard and her slack jawed meth-house family and everyone else like her can now learn what life in a socialist paradise in a world without a dynamic America is like.

Let it burn.

Posted by: Minuteman at November 15, 2012 08:21 PM (1Rw2p)

296 I saw another story about how Romney lost because he wasn't "specific enough " regarding his economic plans. How much more specific could he have been? And if he started lecturing everyone about section Q, subheading Z, line xvii, would that have earned him one more vote?

I've posted this before, fiscal conservatism is just as hard a sell as social conservatism, just as easily demagogued. The path of least resistance is what it's all about with far too many people.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at November 15, 2012 08:21 PM (yJYwC)

297
That's interesting. Only about 26% of voting age Americans voted for President Disaster.

I feel a little better about my fellow Americans.
_ __ ____ ___ ______ ___ _______ ______ ____ ___ __ __

I predict no deal on the fiscal cliff. I predict they'll find a way to fund needed military operations, and the rest of the "cliff" is a gentle slope compared to what's coming over the next 10 years anyway. And the PTB know that.

Posted by: Meremortal says Starve The Beast, Go Galt at November 15, 2012 08:22 PM (1Y+hH)

298 You "let it burn" types need to consider something: Things will swing back our way. If we roll over, we'll just have a longer road to recovery when it's our turn again.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 08:22 PM (Iyg03)

299 >>>Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:07 PM (uvNSk)<<<<<

I think you're right. Californians have gotten so used to having Prop. 13 in place that they have forgotten what things were like when it wasn't there.

Now that the Dems have their legislative supermajority, and that the voters have endorsed a massive tax hiking scheme via proposition, I predict that by 2016, you're going to see the re-emergence of a powerful anti-tax movement in the state.

Posted by: Robert_Paulson at November 15, 2012 08:23 PM (HU5cF)

300 Eight-year-olds, Dude.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:23 PM (uvNSk)

301 Well, husband just "informed" me he invited three more people to our Thanksgiving dinner.

I'm okay, but jeeeezz, I'm the cook.....

At least none of them are libtards....

Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 08:23 PM (UOM48)

302 Something I read today....

Since 1928, every winning GOP presidential campaign had has a Bush or Nixon on the ticket.


Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 15, 2012 08:23 PM (0kZ2I)

303 Rdbrewer Cannot See The Elephant in the Room

O explodes food stamp rolls. Puts policies in place that ensure no economic growth ensuring no new jobs, 75% of his vote was food stamp recipients (fathom that), giveaways for gheys, sluts, Mexicans, makes up the other 25%. He didn't need the indies. They outnumber us. Food stamp numbers will continue to explode over the next 4 yrs as Job losses continue. New permanent Democratic majority

Posted by: L, just L at November 15, 2012 08:23 PM (0PiQ4)

304 "287 I think we should run Bruce Wayne. Or maybe Tony Stark.

Let the Dems run against an imaginary fictional construct that has no relation to reality, for once.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (bxiXv) "

By the time Democrats/the Media are done demonizing the Republican, that's usually the way it is.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:23 PM (hhVWg)

305 Prescient11- Right now I can't thick of the things I have heard about Rubio that make me doubt his ability. I am in pain from gum surgery yesterday.
I'll think of it later when I'm not trying to think about it. Sorry, Carol

Posted by: CarolT at November 15, 2012 08:24 PM (z4WKX)

306 295 Minuteman,

I'm on board now let's buy some ammo, beans and head for Texas....

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:24 PM (LRFds)

307 Make it burn

ah ha.

Like a Back Burn. Clear out the deadwood and trash brush.

Got to watch the direction of the wind or you eat it.

Posted by: AshKente at November 15, 2012 08:24 PM (SP4jC)

308 292

Nixon may not have been from the conservative wing but he built the post-1964 Republican coalition. credit where credit's due

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 08:24 PM (60GaT)

309
Since Ross Perot ruined it all and gave us Clinton (who won by getting less than 50% of the vote) - our nation has gone down hill.
The Reagan days are over. We now live in a nation so dumbed down, so controlled by leftwing media,I really don't know if a conservative could win.

Posted by: Fresh at November 15, 2012 08:24 PM (O7ksG)

310 They're unified. We're not.

Remember 2008? When PUMAs weren't going to vote for Obama? Then they did?

Or 2012. Obama pissed off AAs with the gay marraige thing and the lousy economy. Voted for him anyway.

Collectivists act collectively.

Posted by: Secundus at November 15, 2012 08:25 PM (g3jwX)

311 We lost because people are stupid. End of discussion.

Posted by: jewells45 at November 15, 2012 08:25 PM (u25eL)

312 I'm about to take one of my husband's Ambiens. At this point, I don't even care if I sleepwalk and stab myself in the chest with a kitchen knife.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 08:25 PM (UOM48)

313 "295
Stop with the recriminations!!! Romney was never my choice, but it really doesn't matter who the nominnee was. Ifhalf the populace cannot discern that just maybe they shouldn't have seconds on the four years of abject shit-flavored failure served up by President Affirmative Action Jug-ears McFuckstick Clusterfuck Commie Muslim Bastard, then all this discussion is academic.

Presnit Asshole ObasketballBrackets was elected by getting the only endorsement that mattered in this election: Honey Boo Boo. That roly-poly inbred retard and her slack jawed meth-house family and everyone else like her can now learn what life in a socialist paradise in a world without a dynamic America is like.

Let it burn.

Posted by: Minuteman at November 15, 2012 08:21 PM (1Rw2p) "

Ok, but sometimes you have to give people something positive to believe in. (Otherwise, what is the point, anyway?)

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:26 PM (hhVWg)

314 67 - that.

Posted by: Fresh at November 15, 2012 08:26 PM (O7ksG)

315 312 jane D'oh,

jane juggle knives sober....

I lost seven fingers that way

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:26 PM (LRFds)

316 I'm about to take one of my husband's Ambiens. At this point, I don't
even care if I sleepwalk and stab myself in the chest with a kitchen
knife.


****

Say a prayer fr the folks in Midland before you do.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 08:26 PM (piMMO)

317 @298

"Things will swing back our way."

Yeah.......That's all great and all but you try untangling a knotted ball of fishing line the size of the Moon and see where that gets ya. Good Luck....I hope you pull it off!

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:26 PM (uvNSk)

318 We need to roll over to hasten the inevitable and avoid getting the blame for the inevitable. Fighting a rigged game against Santa is foolish. Why wait? Force the issue to happen as quickly as possible and be ready to pick up the pieces. Like ripping off a bandaid.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 08:27 PM (zpqa2)

319 313 MUMR,

I told you the answer...make a REAL alternative and then let Ogabe do his worst make them own the cost of lightbulbs, your shower temp all the fucking sierra club bullshit they push....

fuck them win or lose fuck them

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:27 PM (LRFds)

320 When was the last time a nominee from MA win?


Bush 41 was born in Milton, MA

Posted by: fluffy, pedantic dick at November 15, 2012 08:27 PM (z9HTb)

321 "296 I saw another story about how Romney lost because he wasn't "specific enough " regarding his economic plans. How much more specific could he have been? And if he started lecturing everyone about section Q, subheading Z, line xvii, would that have earned him one more vote?

I've posted this before, fiscal conservatism is just as hard a sell as social conservatism, just as easily demagogued. The path of least resistance is what it's all about with far too many people.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at November 15, 2012 08:21 PM (yJYwC) "

If anything, he was too specific. Too much technocracy. Vision. That's what it takes.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:27 PM (hhVWg)

322 Sometimes I think the whole thing has to collapse, the media and the ideology (but I repeat myself) have to be totally and completely discredited, and then we can go back to the constitution and rebuild.

The only problem with that:

1) "Capitalism" will get blamed for the destruction of capitalism. They will figure out a way to claim that it was capitalism that was discredited.

2) By then, the demographics will be so bad that the vast majority of population will be those who were NEVER fans of a free market, and don't even know what individual liberty is. They will never change their minds and embrace it.

In short, I think tyranny may just be the natural course of human history. In a long enough timeline, a group of people will always find their way there.

Posted by: Tommy V at November 15, 2012 08:27 PM (ZYlKz)

323 Dudes, it's not an either or that we lost. We lost because of free shit army AND a piss poor gotv effor AND the fact that Romney was a RINO that made lots of cons stay home AND Sandy AND.....


Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 15, 2012 08:27 PM (0kZ2I)

324 You "let it burn" types need to consider something: Things will swing back our way. If we roll over, we'll just have a longer road to recovery when it's our turn again.
Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 08:22 PM (Iyg03) ____ ____ _____ _____ ____ ____ ____ ____ _____ _ _____ __I disagree. The tipping point leading to eventual fiscal collapse was passed around 2006-7. Things swinging back our way will only delay the bust and the recovery. If things are allowed to proceed slowly into the abyss (Republican plan), we will suffer longer and get the fun of experiencing a complete social as well as financial collapse. LetIt Burn, and make it snappy. There's work to be done, and Republicrats aren't going to do it.

Posted by: Meremortal says Starve The Beast, Go Galt at November 15, 2012 08:28 PM (1Y+hH)

325
"Presnit Asshole ObasketballBrackets was elected by getting the only endorsement that mattered in this election: Honey Boo Boo. That roly-poly inbred retard and her slack jawed meth-house family and everyone else like her can now learn what life in a socialist paradise in a world without a dynamic America is like."

This.

Posted by: Fresh at November 15, 2012 08:28 PM (O7ksG)

326 http://www.spaceviewnetwork.com/info/

DARPA looking for amateur astronomers. They'll be giving some equipment out. Your tax dollars at work.

Posted by: LC LaWedgie at November 15, 2012 08:28 PM (rzTDZ)

327 311
We lost because people are stupid. End of discussion.

Posted by: jewells45 at November 15, 2012 08:25 PM (u25eL



You are so right. I asked my husband tonight, "How do you explain your liberal mother and siblings? And how do you explain their hatred of Israel?"

My husband, as much as I love him, is a coward when it comes to his family. He just gets up and hides in his home office.

I tossed out, as he walked away, "How do you explain your family to our Marine son?"

Nothing.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 08:28 PM (UOM48)

328 MiB= Men in Black. Duh

Posted by: Agent J at November 15, 2012 08:29 PM (w7n/S)

329 Jane, is it that bad? If your having that much trouble sleeping, see a doc.


NDH, I saw the headline. Makes my heart hurt.


Now I need to go take a shower after being in this thread.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at November 15, 2012 08:29 PM (GEICT)

330
18 year olds should not be allowed to vote.

Posted by: Fresh at November 15, 2012 08:29 PM (O7ksG)

331 322 Tommy V,

You are making the argument for definitive measures.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:30 PM (LRFds)

332 L, just L at November 15, 2012 08:23 PM (0PiQ4)

You're assuming the economy won't collapse before then.

It's not a sure thing that won't happen.

US banks and brokerages are leveraged up the wazoo (thousand of percent. yes I said thousand of percent leverage) with EU country sovereign debt.

If the EU crumbles, the US goes with it. Now the G10 will have to step in then to regulate and slow the collapse but there really isn't much they can do unless they completely abrogate all the treaties and laws that govern the financial markets.

And if they do THAT then the system is shown to be a fool's game and it collapses anyway.

Who's going to use any currency (well maybe the renminbi) to make or receive payments? all trade, all sales, all purchases, all borrowing, all lending comes to a halt until it gets sorted out.

That may take days, weeks, months. Nothing moves until it does.
Hope you've got some food and water laid up.

Posted by: AshKente at November 15, 2012 08:30 PM (SP4jC)

333 @295 exactly

I do not blame Romney. Politics is the art of managing people and their expectations.
The sad fact is that the average troll at Ace's represents > 40% of the thought process of the American electorate.
The rest are just helpless, clueless and barely able to tie their shoes.

The only way to manage/pacify teh crazy is EBT cards and the lottery.

It is cyclical . As soothsayer notes, "things change".

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 08:30 PM (EZl54)

334 Now that the Dems have their legislative supermajority, and that the
voters have endorsed a massive tax hiking scheme via proposition, I
predict that by 2016, you're going to see the re-emergence of a powerful
anti-tax movement in the state.

---

I predict they'll leave en masse and come infect red states like mine.

Posted by: Lady in Black at November 15, 2012 08:30 PM (lTVJy)

335 Sounds great, and wish that were it, but it isn't. Look at the senate races. Both conservatives and moderates got slaughtered. Romney outperformed them. From what I can tell, Josh Mandel was a great conservative candidate, and it simply did not matter in Ohio.

Posted by: Dave S. at November 15, 2012 08:30 PM (UvR6d)

336 You didn't think I was rolling out of here naked did ya?

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:30 PM (uvNSk)

337 rdbrewer,

One more thing to note. Romney ran ahead of nearly all the down-ballot Senate races, especially those who are more conservative. Hell, I think he ran ahead of Ted Cruz!?

It's hard to construct an argument that he's not conservative enough, especially when the Sen. candidates who ran relatively better vis-a-vis Romney are those who score more liberal end of spectrum.

This would dovetail with the hypothesis it's a generalized demo problem, not that you're just not drawing out your demo as you contend.

Something to consider.

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 15, 2012 08:30 PM (jhI6f)

338 Posted by: Minuteman at November 15, 2012 08:21 PM (1Rw2p)

I laughed and laughed reading that...but now it's just tears. My country....How I miss it.... I don't even recognize it anymore.

Posted by: kawfytawk at November 15, 2012 08:30 PM (JWLqy)

339 So Hamas is hitting Israel hard because they knowour Israel hater in chief won't do anyting.

Posted by: Fresh at November 15, 2012 08:31 PM (O7ksG)

340 "And in every case Perry should have had a conservative response. These same things would have been spun by the media as well, and with less of an opportunity to respond. It was as if he had never had to face serious opposition."

Perry responded to each and every one of his attackers, but it made little difference when they piled on him as soon as he announced. They were mostly currying favor with Romney. The Palinistas we covered. Let's also recall Huckabee's grudge against Perry for endorsing McCain. Conservatism was not the issue. Being unprepared for a national campaign fresh out of back surgery and mistaking his enemies for opponents did him in.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 08:31 PM (i0vBR)

341 Ahh!

Great post Dave S, and quick off the mark!

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 15, 2012 08:31 PM (jhI6f)

342 327 Jane D'oh,

ma'am not telling you your business....he's stuck.

I am not the norm on blood family I know this.

I walked away for 15 years.

I'll pray for you all.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:31 PM (LRFds)

343 330

18 year olds should not be allowed to vote.




Really? Bring back the damned draft. Unicorn-worshiping wimmins first. Hipsters next.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 08:31 PM (UOM48)

344 TThe IBT are the ones trying to shake down Hostess...

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:15 PM (LRFds)


Actually they *successfully* shook down Hostess, then the bakery people went on strike and (probably) put them out of business.

No more kicking people in the Ho-Hos, you have to kick them in the Little Debbies now.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at November 15, 2012 08:32 PM (bxiXv)

345 >>>We need to roll over to hasten the inevitable and avoid getting the blame for the inevitable.

WE'RE GOING TO BE BLAMED REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 08:32 PM (Iyg03)

346 330

18 year olds should not be allowed to vote.


I'd go for actual taxpayers only allowed to vote

Posted by: kawfytawk at November 15, 2012 08:33 PM (JWLqy)

347 334 Lady in Black,

Then let's think outside of the box....

quick everyone RUN TO CALI as they leave FUCK THEM!

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:33 PM (LRFds)

348 El Kabong, Honorable Moron from AZ - I agree with all that you wrote, but I did not know C for Palin were that vicious.
Pawlenty quit the day after Bachmann one the Iowa Straw poll and Perry announced. He coined the phrase Obamaneycare on one day and didn't have the nerve to use it a few days later at a debate despite the moderator almost coaxing it out of him. I don't remember which debate, there were too many!

Posted by: CarolT at November 15, 2012 08:33 PM (z4WKX)

349 309

Since Ross Perot ruined it all and gave us Clinton (who won by
getting less than 50% of the vote) - our nation has gone down hill.


Posted by: Fresh

Blaming Ross because George Herbert Walker ADA Bush appealed to almost nobody. Great. The only reason anyone talked about deficit reduction after 1992 was because Bush played it up big, used pie charts to explain things in common parlance, and used metaphors people could relate to. Oh wait, that was Perot.

Posted by: SFGoth at November 15, 2012 08:33 PM (dZ756)

350
I'd go for actual taxpayers only allowed to vote

100% agreement.

Posted by: Fresh at November 15, 2012 08:33 PM (O7ksG)

351 So Hamas is hitting Israel hard because they knowour Israel hater in chief won't do anyting.


*****

Canada came out with support for Israel last night and Britain today. I think we issued a statement along the lines of Hamas needing to back off.

It's the "or else" that's missing.

Meanwhile, IDF has assembled troops on the border.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 08:33 PM (piMMO)

352 Fresh said: "18 year olds should not be allowed to vote.

Citizens verse Civilians: Heinlein might have been onto something...

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 15, 2012 08:33 PM (jhI6f)

353 330 18 yo's fight and die for our country. Teachers should not be paid with taxpayer dollars to brainwash them.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 08:34 PM (i0vBR)

354 I'm on board now let's buy some ammo, beans and head for Texas....
Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:24 PM (LRFds)........ I'm making plans, literally. And I don't mean literally in the Joe Biden sense, I mean literally in the literal sense.

Posted by: Minuteman at November 15, 2012 08:34 PM (1Rw2p)

355
I liked Perot, but he gave us Clinton. Sorry. 3rd party bad juju.

Posted by: Fresh at November 15, 2012 08:34 PM (O7ksG)

356 @331 "Tommy V, you are making the argument for definitive measures."

sven10077

Am I? Damn it, I don't know what that means, but I hope it's something really smart.

Posted by: Tommy V at November 15, 2012 08:34 PM (ZYlKz)

357 No more kicking people in the Ho-Hos, you have to kick them in the Little Debbies now.


****

No kicking of Banana Twins allowed!

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 08:35 PM (piMMO)

358 >>>One more thing to note. Romney ran ahead of nearly all the down-ballot Senate races, especially those who are more conservative.

Really? I thought he ran ahead in 4 and down in 10. IIRC.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 08:36 PM (Iyg03)

359 Yeah Jane.. we have them on my husbands side too. I am not even going over for the Thanksgiving.. decided to just have a small gathering here. Just me and my kids and mom. I can't stomach his family right now (not all of them but some). Hubby feels obligated to pay them a visit but I don't think he really wants to.

Posted by: jewells45 at November 15, 2012 08:36 PM (u25eL)

360 WE'RE GOING TO BE BLAMED REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS.
Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 08:32 PM (Iyg03)

Seconded. Everyone look in the mirror-- the person looking back at you is Emanuel Goldstein. Or Emanuelle, if you're an 'Ette.

Posted by: Secundus at November 15, 2012 08:36 PM (g3jwX)

361 @345

"WE'RE GOING TO BE BLAMED REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS."

I don't care if I'm blamed. "Give me Liberty or Give me Death!"

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:36 PM (uvNSk)

362 I plan on voting in 2 yrs, not rolling over. I'm hopeless bc unemployment might be double what it is now and if brought up at the debates, O will yell "Not true! Check the numbers, Candy! Say that louder, Candy! Media will scream Repubs are liars! and the new majority of American voters believe it.

Lying works. Us good people refuse to use such tactics bc we believe in honorable campaigns. Thus we lose.

Posted by: L, just L at November 15, 2012 08:36 PM (0PiQ4)

363 What do you mean brought it bowling, Dude? I didn't rent it shoes. I'm not buying it a fucking beer. He's not taking your fucking turn, Dude.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:37 PM (uvNSk)

364 @345 WE'RE GOING TO BE BLAMED REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS.

Posted by: rdbrewer


I think this is absolutely right. Every time the government comes in screws things up, they point to the screw up and say, "Look what capitalism did!"

They use it to wage more regulatory war, make it even worse, and then say, "It's even worse than we thought! Capitalism as failed us!"

And the cycle continues...

Posted by: Tommy V at November 15, 2012 08:37 PM (ZYlKz)

365 "337 rdbrewer,

One more thing to note. Romney ran ahead of nearly all the down-ballot Senate races, especially those who are more conservative. Hell, I think he ran ahead of Ted Cruz!?

It's hard to construct an argument that he's not conservative enough, especially when the Sen. candidates who ran relatively better vis-a-vis Romney are those who score more liberal end of spectrum.

This would dovetail with the hypothesis it's a generalized demo problem, not that you're just not drawing out your demo as you contend.

Something to consider.

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 15, 2012 08:30 PM (jhI6f) "

If the candidate for the presidency doesn't argue for Conservatism, yeah, Conservatives might not do so well. That's just the way it is.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:37 PM (hhVWg)

366 355

I liked Perot, but he gave us Clinton. Sorry. 3rd party bad juju.
_________

I'm not convinced Perot took more voters from Bush than Clinton. After 3 GOP terms by 1992 people wanted something else with or without Perot there.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 15, 2012 08:38 PM (0kZ2I)

367
We need a better candidate, a better ground game, and aspecial double dose of B-12 or whatever it takes to not only run against the democrats, but against the pro-democrat media complex. (and hollywood and all the other institutionalized lefty Cloward Piven Alinsky commie clap trap)

Posted by: Fresh at November 15, 2012 08:38 PM (O7ksG)

368 There is only one cure for what ails the GOP...


And its name is JEB BUSH!


Posted by: Kasper Hauser at November 15, 2012 08:38 PM (7x9pP)

369 I always loved the Hostess Banana Flips, I haven't even seen one of those in ages, guess I never will again.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 15, 2012 08:39 PM (GZitp)

370 I predict they'll leave en masse and come infect red states like mine.
Posted by: Lady in Black at November 15, 2012 08:30 PM (lTVJy)



F**king Californians and some other undesirables have made CO a blue state. Something unheard of 20 years ago.

Posted by: Ronster at November 15, 2012 08:39 PM (nQMHQ)

371 "If the candidate for the presidency doesn't argue for Conservatism,
yeah, Conservatives might not do so well. That's just the way it is."

wait so Romney runs ahead of more conservative candidates, and at the same time it's his fault they're not doing as well...sure thing

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 08:39 PM (60GaT)

372 The Tea Party - the heroes of the 2010 midterms
The Tea Party - anathema to the Boston Boys in 2012. "Don't worry. We have our Etch A Sketches fired up and ready to go for the general!"

Flip's brain trust couldn't reach the people sitting out the general election because all they could see was another Washington-Wall Street Axis enabler. He didn't earn their interest or their trust. And he didn't even try.

Posted by: mrp at November 15, 2012 08:40 PM (HjPtV)

373 I don't buy into the "Romney was a bad candidate" stuff. Obama is a far worse candidate in so many ways.

This is an institutional problem. It's much bigger than Romney.

Posted by: Tommy V at November 15, 2012 08:40 PM (ZYlKz)

374 jewells45, my husband told me this evening, that I'm "too harsh" on his Obamabot family.

I responded, "So I guess our son in the Marines is 'too harsh' being fed up with your family?"

He stomped out and went into his little Man Cave Office.

Glad our son is getting out. His libtard grandmother, aunts, uncles and cousins never supported him. And his oldest female cousin told him so last Christmas, his first Christmas home in three years, and pre-deployment.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 08:40 PM (UOM48)

375 I always loved the Hostess Banana Flips, I haven't even seen one of those in ages, guess I never will again.


****

Yes. My all-time favorite snack food that hasn't been sold here for what seems like decades now. Yet, a certain moron likes to occasionally post pictures of them in stores in Ohio just to taunt me.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 08:40 PM (piMMO)

376 1) We never get credit for government programs and spending huge wads of money.

2) We always get blamed regardless of what happens.

Therefore: We cannot win by becoming more like the Democrats. Their primitive, reptilian in-group herding instincts--the same ones that cause them to flock to big cities, to need to be around other like-minded people for self-validation--will never be persuaded by us acting like "nice guys." "Nice guy" got Bush 41 nowhere. Why?

Because we're in a different tribe (to them).

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 08:41 PM (Iyg03)

377 354 Minuteman,

Yup. I need a few nights more sleep and to be as calm as i can probably won't be on a while.

The secessionists screwed up and didn't organize we made the tea party instead in part.

They will call us racist while calling us white and saying they are happily importing aliens against our will.

Alec baldwin pissed me off enough I can't think clearly on it but I think I am ready to move on.

The nation is over and I am not letting those bastards steal the whole thing.

I think the red need to keep concentrating and take over the red totally and long march or elect to Constitutional government.

I am pretty sure if we all really love the Bill of Rights we can do either that or have a nice civil war with a bunch of foreign kids indoctrinated to hate us in 10 years.

I am not letting a 18 year old who has never been taught capitalism and the founding tell me what being an American is.

It is not gonna happen I'll tolerate native born fuckhead marxists trying to steal my nation I am not letting shake and bake "americans" with no love of my nation in any way do so.

This is not about race it is about Locke and Marx.

We need to try to win, I do not want to split but if they leave no other alternative and I am having a hard time seeing one what can we do?

They brainwash the kids, they bombard their heads with bullshit on the tube and film, and they cheat their asses off while reporting outright lies as fact and fact as spin.

I don't want to kill anybody I want left alone.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:41 PM (LRFds)

378 Kerry's senate seat is up in 2014, so he last ran for senate on 2008, he was not running for POTUS at the same time.

Posted by: CarolT at November 15, 2012 08:42 PM (z4WKX)

379 So, a Rove-style campaign did not work.

Here is one lesson taken comparing 2008 and 2012: they won't help you predict what will happen in 2016.

Here's another: try a Conservative. You never know, it might work.

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 08:42 PM (sRus3)

380 147

Good analysis. The thing is that for the Left, politics IS their job. They don't believe in the idea of a "citizen-legislator", they believe they are "philosopher-kings". I'm sorry, but a degree in public policy, even if it's from the Kennedy School of Government, doesn't give anyone the divine right to tell me how to live my life. I'll put my IQ scores up against any of the Left's "intellectuals". The difference between me and them isn't IQ, it's that I have no desire to tell anyone how to live their lives and even less of a desire to codify my preference for how you live your life into law.

But, there are a lot of sad sacks out there who will gladly trade their birthright as free people for a mess of pottage, stolen by the person with the degree in public policy from "someone else", and the richer that "someone" is, the better.. Clearly, that was already a problem when the Bible was first written down, so the issue isn't exactly new.

At this point, I'm looking ahead not just to 2014, 2016, but to 2020 and beyond and I just don't see any possible solution except for the one which absolutely CAN'T happen in the short-term, i.e. secession. I think that if the past 30+ years after Carter's defeat have taught me anything, it's that the Left refuses to learn from history and it has the ability to take naive kids and turn them into a voting force which can turn elections.

It's either that or make an all-out play for the white vote by highlighting Obama's racial radicalism. If what I am reading is true, he's on the cusp of implementing "affirmative action on steroids". Why? I thought that "affirmative action" was always designed to be a temporary program, with less and less need for it every year, so why would there be any need to amp it up now? Peeling off 10% of the Dem's share of the white vote would have tipped the election to Romney. Maybe there is a limit to how far the "marginal" white Democrat can be pushed? As many analysts have noted, there isn't enough money floating around in the system to pay off all of the Left's hangers-on and, if I were a betting man, my bet would be that the first people whose checks will stop are white male Democrats. Pull enough of them over to the GOP and it will negate any of the other demographic shifts.

The irony is that those same single white women who helped provide Obama's 2012 margin of victory will, in many cases, get married between now and 2016 and, if they have a kid between now and then, will pull the lever for the GOP candidate in that year. If only there were some way to speed up their political maturity so that they understood this in 2012, but that's an existential process that each individual has to go through for herself.

Posted by: The Grand Inquisitor at November 15, 2012 08:42 PM (P2Ufm)

381 >>>>
Posted by: Lady in Black at November 15, 2012 08:30 PM (lTVJy)<<<

Well, there's that possibility, too.

Posted by: Robert_Paulson at November 15, 2012 08:42 PM (HU5cF)

382 @368

"And its name is JEB BUSH!"

Hell Ya!...Run another Bush. If you gonna go down you might as well take a nice sloppy steamer in your hand and rub in the face of the Mutha Fuckers as they throw you out the door.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:42 PM (uvNSk)

383 We lost Breitbart. He was really hitting his stride when he checked out. His empire lives, but there is a vacuum. He cannot be replaced. We must become a legion of Breitbarts. That is the only way to stop the Democrat controlled Older Media. Until this happens we are all just pissing in the wind. He would want us to pick up where he left off. Expose the corrupt politicians any way possible via blogs, twitter, etc.

Posted by: political correctness czar at November 15, 2012 08:43 PM (Q2Ne0)

384 "371 "If the candidate for the presidency doesn't argue for Conservatism,
yeah, Conservatives might not do so well. That's just the way it is."

wait so Romney runs ahead of more conservative candidates, and at the same time it's his fault they're not doing as well...sure thing

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 08:39 PM (60GaT) "

Yes, because he basically ran a Cult of Personality campaign, and refused to defend Conservative ideology.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:44 PM (hhVWg)

385 rdbrewer said: WE'RE GOING TO BE BLAMED REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS.

Which is a good point considering other things you've discussed and I've mentioned.

I'd contend our main fight needs to be with the legacy media.

Think about this in another way. Reagan, our one superstar, was a fucking actor. He was widely known prepolitics in California and had already built up a rapport with the voter which enabled him to side-step the media filter and have something of a separate communications channel for his time. He could have never built that during a campaign without getting Goldwater-ed.

Same thing happened with Romney. Same thing as you said will happen with the fiscal cliff.

Obama was a small-time Chicago pol who had the media apparatus building him up into something he wasn't and isn't. We don't have that.

The media must die in the long-term and in the short-term candidates must cultivate a relationship with voters from early on. Years ahead. Embed themselves in late night TV, daytime TV, Morning Shows, ESPN, charity events with celebrities, etc

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 15, 2012 08:44 PM (jhI6f)

386 "But, there are a lot of sad sacks out there who will gladly trade their
birthright as free people for a mess of pottage, stolen by the person
with the degree in public policy from "someone else", and the richer
that "someone" is, the better."

We are going to be forced to have health insurance by the federal government under penalty of law. We are not free people, that America is gone.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 15, 2012 08:45 PM (GZitp)

387 "373 I don't buy into the "Romney was a bad candidate" stuff. Obama is a far worse candidate in so many ways.

This is an institutional problem. It's much bigger than Romney.

Posted by: Tommy V at November 15, 2012 08:40 PM (ZYlKz) "

It is an institutional problem. But Romney could have won.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:46 PM (hhVWg)

388 Fuck it, Dude, let's go bowling

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:46 PM (uvNSk)

389 356 Tommy V,

Not smart hard.

I dunno I need sleep.

I keep hearing something from my oath rattling in my brain....

"all enemies foreign and domestic"

I am having a hard time grasping how trying to inflict tyrrany with the help of shake and bake americans doesn't apply?

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:46 PM (LRFds)

390 "374 jewells45, my husband told me this evening, that I'm "too harsh" on his Obamabot family.

I responded, "So I guess our son in the Marines is 'too harsh' being fed up with your family?"

He stomped out and went into his little Man Cave Office.

Glad our son is getting out. His libtard grandmother, aunts, uncles and cousins never supported him. And his oldest female cousin told him so last Christmas, his first Christmas home in three years, and pre-deployment.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 08:40 PM (UOM4 "

Leftists can be so classy.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:46 PM (hhVWg)

391 The libs are like an alcoholic relative who just won't quit. You can talk, argue, reason--nothing works. Until one night he gets behind the wheel, completely blacked out, and wakes up shackled to a hospital bed. Then he calls you and says, "Help me." Then he'll listen. Not before.

Posted by: Secundus at November 15, 2012 08:47 PM (g3jwX)

392 Oh, come on Donny, they were threatening castration! Are we gonna split hairs here? Am I wrong?

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:47 PM (uvNSk)

393 >>>Think about this in another way. Reagan, our one superstar, was a fucking actor.

He was so much more than just an actor. Good grief.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 08:48 PM (Iyg03)

394 @383 We lost Breitbart. He was really hitting his stride when he checked out. His empire lives, but there is a vacuum. He cannot be replaced. We must become a legion of Breitbarts.
_________
Totally agree, and reposting my ridiculously long post from yesterday on this topic:

Pick a target and freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. MSM is too broad. Pick, say, NBC. Ignore all the rest. For now.

For weeks, or months, a coalition of conservative blogs goes all-out fact-checking every damn detail of every story that leads the news on that station or appears on the website. Keep a daily/weekly/monthly count of errata, demanding answers and retractions, and resignations for the worst offenders. Flash-mob their reporters' twitter accounts. Ask when they'll be able to publish an error-free story. Flood their facebook pages. Inundate the comments sections on their online articles. Make them play defense. Make other networks and blogs cover the "War on NBC."

Dig into the hosts/anchors/reporters' personal lives: affairs, misdemeanors, tax returns, guilt-by-association, anything. Dig into the biggest investors, expose conflicts of interest, impropriety, or downright illegality. Follow them around with video cameras, try to get them saying something embarrassing to their employers.

Get dirt on the CEO/President/whatever they have. Unseal court records/divorce records. Maybe talk to his garbageman, or ex-girlfriend, or estranged kids. Find some half-way racist or embarrassing comment he made 20 years ago, and harp on it, harp on it, harp on it. Force him out. Repeat the same cycle with his replacement. Hound the members of the board of directors. Fill their office's voicemails and email addresses with complaints. Subscribe them to mailing lists they didn't want. Make their lives a hassle. Boycott sponsors? Yeah, let's do that too.

Make them a laughingstock. Demoralize them. The other media outlets will know we can do it to them, too. This would necessarily take the focus off other members of the MSM and national politics for a little while, but I think that would be okay. I don't know if it will work or how to start it, but I think it should be tried.
Posted by: Dante at November 14, 2012 09:37 PM (aLg9U)

Posted by: Dante at November 15, 2012 08:48 PM (NWLVJ)

395 reagan won california and new york. he was from california, but every state was in play with reagan. a lot of this was because he was a brilliant communicator with loads of political savvy, had an easy-going temperment, was enormously persuasive, was good looking, was extremely knowledgeable on the big issues of the day having done a LOT of his OWN thinking and writing on the subjects, and i do believe reagan would handily win again because he was simply untouchable, biased media or not. but reagan today could not win california, illinois, or new york, and that is a lot of votes.

Posted by: matt foley at November 15, 2012 08:48 PM (ES9kw)

396 Oh please, dear? For your information, the Supreme Court has roundly rejected prior restraint.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:48 PM (uvNSk)

397 Rove is the reason Republicans don't win Presidential elections. He created this Social Con monster that turns off voters.

Posted by: Mega at November 15, 2012 08:48 PM (KVrHS)

398 Notice how we are trapped in an endless cycle of Democrats and RINOs?

Can't form a third party, too risky.

Can't nominate a Conservative, too risky.

Can't speak up and confront our foes, too risky.

Unless radical change takes place the GOP Machine will crank out weak shit and the Democrat Machine will mow it down.

Forevermore.

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 08:49 PM (sRus3)

399 390 MUMR,

No they aren't classy in anything other than Class war.

Jane I'm sorry to hear it is that bad your hubby feels squeezed.

Loyalty is a wobbly thing.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:49 PM (LRFds)

400 @343

Dear Jane,

I lurk more than I write because I usually write something stupid. Same thing with when I talk. I don't answer my wife sometimes because I will probably break whatever I am trying to fix and I don't want to push her away over my stupid mouth.

On another note, I have been a lurker at Ace's for years and have read and shared with my wife (a recovering California born liberal)about your experiences with your son going into the service and your very funny comments! My son is going to Army basic in January and we are absolutely terrified for his future.
Hope my suthern publik skool illiteracy doesn't make this sound creepy.

Shorter version: I think you are a pretty cool person and a sorta conservative mom role model.

I hope things get better for you very soon and I believe that they will.

T






Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 08:50 PM (EZl54)

401
I love how all the smart people are the ones who both admit we lost the culture war and also claim there's no place left in the GOP for SoCons.

Nothing like giving up without a fight.

Posted by: Ed Anger at November 15, 2012 08:50 PM (tOkJB)

402 Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:48 PM (uvNSk)

Are you drunk?

Posted by: Ronster at November 15, 2012 08:50 PM (nQMHQ)

403 And whadda they got? My dirty undies... The Whites...

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:51 PM (uvNSk)

404 21 Press and Free Shit Army killed our chances.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 07:16 PM (zpqa2)


My take too....how do you beat it?

Posted by: BignJames at November 15, 2012 08:51 PM (j7iSn)

405 @394... Cut. Jib. Newsletter.

Posted by: political correctness czar at November 15, 2012 08:51 PM (Q2Ne0)

406 The "social con monster". Social conservatives, like me.

Posted by: mrp at November 15, 2012 08:51 PM (HjPtV)

407 391 secundus,

I am a child of two alcoholic parents one functional the other while alive not./..

there's truth to what you say but the happiest years of my life in some ways wwere when I was ignoring them and working my ass off.

The problem is the green gaia cult interferes with the economy as a holy sacrament....

I've had enough.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:51 PM (LRFds)

408 Can we nominate Big Bird? That's about how seriously most of the country takes politics.

Posted by: Model-1066 at November 15, 2012 08:51 PM (NoDnj)

409 18 year olds should not be allowed to vote.



Posted by: Fresh at November 15, 2012 08:29 PM (O7ksG)

18 year old military aren't allowed to vote it seems.....

Posted by: Tami at November 15, 2012 08:52 PM (X6akg)

410 and me.

Posted by: toby928© for TB at November 15, 2012 08:52 PM (QupBk)

411 @389 I keep hearing something from my oath rattling in my brain.

"all enemies foreign and domestic"

you remember it right.


Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 08:52 PM (EZl54)

412 My husband is so willing to bend over backwards to not offend his sensitive mother and siblings, he's been willing for 26+ years to allow them to insult me, my late parents, and our son.

I love my husband, but the "holidays" bring out the hate.

I told him tonight, "I hope your late dad and your mom can square things with Jesus after their years of hating Israel and those nasty Jews."

Not a fun evening in our house. And I'm tired of his liberal family and just don't give a shit.

Ugh. I love him, but what a puss with his fucking family. As I said to him, "How the hell did we raise a Marine when you're scared to death of your liberal family????"

He's locked in his home office now. Sigh.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 08:53 PM (UOM48)

413 @402

Ronster,

Obviously your not a Golfer!

Posted by: The Dude at November 15, 2012 08:53 PM (uvNSk)

414 Later, all.

God bless.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 15, 2012 08:53 PM (hhVWg)

415 Well, now that the RINOtards have completely humiliated themselves, it should be easier for Palin to ride in and save the day.

She offered to help several times during the 2012 cycle, but the Rombots told her to go pound sand. On Karl's advice.

This was an "all hands on deck" election. The Democrats figured that out early on. The GOP Establishment never did.

Time for a Stalin Purge, of the Establishment.

Posted by: Adolf Hitler's Last Parody Video at November 15, 2012 08:53 PM (CUoon)

416 Donuts Injected with Liquor to Hit Shelves

Aaaaahhh, the good news I was looking for

Posted by: L, just L at November 15, 2012 08:53 PM (0PiQ4)

417 404 BignJames,

I don't think we can but we need someone to at least try....

ideally the whole party.

Attack the motherfucking media.

Directly don't give the fuckers an inch.

Make them own their bias.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:54 PM (LRFds)

418 "He created this Social Con monster that turns off voters."

lol yeah they were all just cooked up in a lab by Rove

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 08:54 PM (60GaT)

419 @411

Yes Sir....I'm Locked and ready to Rock!

Posted by: The Dude at November 15, 2012 08:54 PM (uvNSk)

420 Ugh. I love him, but what a puss with his fucking family. As I said to him, "How the hell did we raise a Marine when you're scared to death of your liberal family????"

He's locked in his home office now. Sigh.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 08:53 PM (UOM4Sorry Jane, that sucks, but sometimes the truth hurts them themost.

Posted by: spypeach at November 15, 2012 08:55 PM (pwTow)

421 He's locked in his home office now. Sigh.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 08:53 PM (UOM4


Rattle his cage. Kick the door.

Posted by: Ronster at November 15, 2012 08:55 PM (nQMHQ)

422 412 Jane D'oh,

Jane with the business trouble he has to be in a cornered state I am not saying you're wrong just saying circle the wagons the best you can....

Hell maybe you should run Red....

sounds like you need the distance form the "blue helpers"

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:55 PM (LRFds)

423 OK, I'm just spitballing here but if we're worried about fraud how hard would it be to have a film crew at each polling place, volunteer, the entire day? If the film shows 500 people going through the doors and they claim 800 voted on Election Day it's pretty easy to call shenanigans right?

Also, if you're close enough to get faces couldn't facial recognition software at least initially flag possible duplicates for further investigation?

Posted by: Lemmenkainen at November 15, 2012 08:55 PM (K1JW0)

424 Look at our current situation with that camel $ucker over in Iraq. Pacifism is not something to hide behind.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 08:56 PM (uvNSk)

425 Maybe all of the R's down ticket from Romney lost because the Obamaphone phone brigade just voted straight D. Stupid is as stupid does.

Posted by: Jmel at November 15, 2012 08:56 PM (c+D8V)

Posted by: crowsting at November 15, 2012 08:57 PM (yNhZJ)

427 Ronster, Obviously your not a Golfer!
Posted by: The Dude at November 15, 2012 08:53 PM (uvNSk)


Correct. Never chased a little white ball around a park.

Posted by: Ronster at November 15, 2012 08:57 PM (nQMHQ)

428 408 model 1066,

Correct they are told bleive and never ponder that the guy in the nice house up the street can buy them paradise....

that is REALLY what they think.

They watch bullshit like American idol and the Adventures of Boo Hoo the Honeybear or whatever in a 200-1 ratio....

but by god the donks tell 'em to vote.


goddamned simpletons I want a serious nation.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 08:58 PM (LRFds)

429 Posted by: Dante at November 15, 2012 08:48 PM (NWLVJ)

I like the way you think. I didn't even have to read past your fourth sentence. You're bang on, my friend. Let's do it. Course, we'll probably all end up with mystery fatal heart conditions and our coroners will be poisoned, but fuck it.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at November 15, 2012 08:58 PM (6JMZR)

430 OK, I'm just spitballing here but if we're worried about fraud how hard
would it be to have a film crew at each polling place, volunteer, the
entire day? If the film shows 500 people going through the doors and
they claim 800 voted on Election Day it's pretty easy to call
shenanigans right?

Also, if you're close enough to get faces
couldn't facial recognition software at least initially flag possible
duplicates for further investigation?


You hit on something kid.

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 15, 2012 08:58 PM (jhI6f)

431 @ 406 mrp

Your ilk costs us election. Your moral lectures and busy body into people's personal lives is annoying.

Posted by: Mega at November 15, 2012 08:58 PM (KVrHS)

432 Rove is an overrated pig.

Posted by: Travis at November 15, 2012 08:59 PM (ychgM)

433 On the plus side? Murder, death and starvation will be effective allies in modifying people's political views. Should make for good tv too. Let it burn. Yay!

Posted by: Is what JQ Public is thinking.... at November 15, 2012 08:59 PM (Sl7KY)

434 So will a true conservative run next time, or will the the alternatives be people that kneecap Paul Ryan and entitlement reform on Meet the Press, and someone that was a reliable vote for Republicans in their big spending days, again?

Why don't these candidates we need and clamor for after each asskicking run? Accepting all the premises, and saying that's why we lose - if it's a layup then you'd think such a candidate would dip their toes in the water, right?

Maybe we need to look inward? Maybe it's more useful to pressure them to get in right before the primaries, rather than immediately after we get our asses handed to us time after time?

I didn't like Romney much in the primary. I didn't like any of the others either, except for the guy that was incoherent. I liked that guy.

Posted by: Dave S. at November 15, 2012 08:59 PM (UvR6d)

435 Here are two concrete things we can do.

1) Spread propaganda. Print flyers and hand them out and post them everywhere. Create websites and videos. Use your energy and creativity against the enemy. The MFM can stop you from being on the nightly news, but they can't stop you from communicating.

2) Vote with your feet. Make your vote for President count in the EV count. Help choose better Senators and Representative. Send your local tax dollars to governments that are more on your side. Strengthen the resistance to blue migration.

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 08:59 PM (sRus3)

436 @422 "blue helpers"

I have spent my life with them but escaped with my hot female hostage who I have "brainwashed".

Used to spend Thanksgiving listening to Boooooosh! and assorted fruitcake theories. Found out that they all hate to travel.

We moved.

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 09:00 PM (EZl54)

437 Well, I'm giving my husband a bit of a break. We own, together, a small business. We're facing major shit thanks to Obamacare.

I really think my husband is dreading being around his smug liberal siblings (none of whom have ever owned a business).

My husband is a good man, and a civic leader.

I'm calming down....a bit.

Anyhow, grateful for having this place to blow off steam. (Now to go kiss my sweet husband.)

Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 09:00 PM (UOM48)

438 http://tinyurl.com/bmjzgtq

Midland TX Hunt for Heroes article update: 10 in critical condition

Posted by: LC LaWedgie at November 15, 2012 09:01 PM (rzTDZ)

439 Not reading all the above, but from someone who definitely was not a Romney supporter to begin with, I have to say, it isn't Romney nor the message that was the problem. It is the fucking losers who dislike the last 4 years but stayed home that are the issue; they're two steps away from being just another one of the fucking takers. Stop looking for more than that. Hell I hope we can find another candidate next time that is as genuine and understanding of the issues as Romney was. Just look at the difference between that idiot McCain and Romney. Not contest, and yet they sat with their thumbs up their asses.

Posted by: dogfish at November 15, 2012 09:01 PM (N2yhW)

440 412 Jane D'oh

i would say that of the people i know that pay attention to politics, there might be two that are thoughtful and kind liberals. the rest are thoughtful and kind conservatives or loudmouthed, intolerable liberals. some are extended family. it's hard to be polite, not acquiescent but polite, which is usually the defacto conservative setting, with these people so i will probably never return to certain family gatherings and will not tolerate their visits to my home.

Posted by: matt foley at November 15, 2012 09:02 PM (ES9kw)

441 436 T Hunter,

I think we ought to do so as well en masse.

I want a peaceful reset and if need be I hope an amicable split.

We need TOTAL control of academia in our regions.

They are literally erasing our nation.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:02 PM (LRFds)

442 Hectoring Hectarian

just vote Libertarian if you hate "SoCons" that much. you're obsessive.

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 09:04 PM (60GaT)

443 "Your ilk costs us election. Your moral lectures and busy body into people's personal lives is annoying."

I've had four years of moral lectures and busy bodies coming from the White House. All I ask is to be left alone.

Posted by: mrp at November 15, 2012 09:04 PM (HjPtV)

444 @389 I am having a hard time grasping how trying to inflict tyrrany with the help of shake and bake americans doesn't apply?

Posted by: sven10077

I don't mean to say we TRY to inflict tyranny. Just wondering if that's the inevitable path of societies.

Posted by: Tommy V at November 15, 2012 09:04 PM (ZYlKz)

445 439 dogfish,

Yup....

unmotivated voters will hardly be the ones who will be willing to run to the red as things fall....

if you're too lazy to stop Choom you're too lazy to fight out an existence in a harder economic model.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:04 PM (LRFds)

446 I just downloaded the application for food stamps in PA and it allows you to register to vote on the application by checking off a box, This application is also used as the basis for a variety of other benefits like heating fuel assistance Obamaphones in PA. How could ORCA ever compete with a genius GOTV like this?

Posted by: jeannebodine at November 15, 2012 09:04 PM (48+2q)

447 @431

Been to a Baptist or Catholic Church lately? Because I think you would be amazed how some of these Churchs are pushing Marxist Ideology......to people on our team...The SoCons!

Over course, abortion seems to be the mountain that can't be climbed, but some of these people are buying the Marxist Agenda hook-line-sinker, all in the name of being a good christian.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 09:04 PM (uvNSk)

448 Heh. My husband asked, "Can we invite three more people for Thanksgiving?"

Me: "Sure, as long as they understand some people will be drinking alcohol and the atmosphere will be 'festive.'"

Husband: "They're cool with that. They're offering to bring more."

Heh.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 09:05 PM (UOM48)

449 I think most of all we need to make the Roves go away. He IS the elephant in the room, and it's bad advertising for us. The half wit voters...Obama's base...see Rove and the shrieking harpies in their heads start screeching "corporatepharmaceuticalmilitarybigoilindustrial complex..."
We have to be the better choice...and we can't be with people still in the picture that even make us cringe when we see them.

Posted by: Christmasghost at November 15, 2012 09:05 PM (CkK+I)

450 444 Tommy V,

No it is without effort and yes we as a nation are allowing Charles Schumer and friends to try to undo the founding with shake and bake Americans and kids not taught our founding principles at all.

I blame us for allowing his little buddies to wreck this nation.

I am ruminating how hard to go in counterprogramming the BS they all have been forcefed.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:05 PM (LRFds)

451
I am sure everyone has left this thread by now but.......In the spirit of what would Breitbart do? I have an answer. In all of those precincts/cities where there were zero votes for Romney, he would have offered up a $10K reward to xxx number of people who DID vote R. How is it that no one has come forward saying they voted for Romney in Ohio, FL, IL, etc.?
2nd thought -- we need to start a ground game right now that clearly outlines how voting D. plants you firmly back in the white man's plantation. You are nothing but chattel, voting for your supper. And it is 1/TRUE and 2/VIVID.
thoughts?

Posted by: CalyxtheCommoner at November 15, 2012 09:06 PM (rfLqY)

452 @443 four years of moral lectures and busy bodies

Mooch is a SoCon ?

/sarc

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 09:06 PM (EZl54)

453 rdbrewer said: I said: "Think about this in another way. Reagan, our one superstar, was a fucking actor."

He was so much more than just an actor. Good grief.


That wasn't my point.

When you relax, breath and back down from the shrine lets walk through how my comment was about the fact that by the time he ran nationally he was well known and ingrained in the psyche of a plurality of Americans as a Good Guy

Romney, too, was a good guy. A really good fucking guy. But that means nothing when the legacy media controls what's pumped out there about you and they tell you he's a wife killer who's only out for the rich.



My point is that we need to get our young stars out there and build rapport, get in the minds of voters associated with positive things years ahead of the run.


Once again, Heinlein has a quote which I wish Romney could have embodied early:

"The hardest part about gaining any new idea is sweeping out the false idea occupying that niche. As long as that niche is occupied, evidence and proof and logical demonstration get nowhere. But once the niche is emptied of the wrong idea that has been filling it — once you can honestly say, "I don't know", then it becomes possible to get at the truth." -- Robert Heinlein.

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 15, 2012 09:07 PM (jhI6f)

454 It might be that the Democrats have full control and we just don't know it yet. They probably do.

If so, get thee to a red State, and prepare.

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 09:07 PM (sRus3)

455 #59 - we did. Romney was that guy. But the purists didn't figure that out and now we have 4 more years of O

Posted by: NoBama12 at November 15, 2012 09:07 PM (ykY2u)

456 447 WS,

No I would not be shocked at all....

at all....

It is why the last Church I went to was two stations ago.

Southern churches still get it.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:07 PM (LRFds)

457 WE'RE GOING TO BE BLAMED REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS.
Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 08:32 PM (Iyg03)__ ___ ____ ___ ____ ___ ___ ____ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ __ I agree, and so that fact should have no bearing on what we do.

Posted by: Meremortal says Starve The Beast, Go Galt at November 15, 2012 09:07 PM (1Y+hH)

458 How could ORCA ever compete with a genius GOTV like this?

Yup. More sanity. Earlier this year, they also sent voter registration cards to every welfare recipient in MA. Remember? The commies are fighting a battle with us on every single front and we can't even agree on what color f*cking uniforms to wear.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at November 15, 2012 09:08 PM (6JMZR)

459 << This is indeed one of those "elephant in the living room" questions,
because what Rove refuses to see is that the Republican party hasn't run
a conservative since 1984.>>

Dammit, rdbrewer, I don't know who you think you are but the elephant in the living room YOU clearly cannot see is that common sense logic has NO place in today's Republican Party!

Good Day, Sir!

Posted by: Sgt. York at November 15, 2012 09:08 PM (yk8/j)

460 jeannebodine,

I wasn't aware of that. Yikes. Thanks for mentioning it.

Posted by: Uriah Heep at November 15, 2012 09:09 PM (jhI6f)

461 "Your ilk costs us election. Your moral lectures and busy body into people's personal lives is annoying."

Maybe. Maybe annoying. But that's about it, really.

In fact, it isn't even annoying, it's about as much of an imposition as your nagging mother.

It's not the "moral lecturers" who are banning 20oz sodas.

Posted by: AmishDude at November 15, 2012 09:10 PM (xSegX)

462 My husband's libtard siblings and Facebook "friends" are already blaming falling off the fiscal cliff on the Rethuglicans.

It doesn't matter what we do.

Let. It. Burn.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 09:10 PM (UOM48)

463
Haven't read through all the comments, so I may be repeating someone else's observation here.

But - sorry, whatever Rove says and whatever this post says, they both miss the point. An electorate that would re-elect this disastrous, divisive, un-presidential, alien failure of a public figure would be unlikely to respond to a "conservative" candidate. Specifically, if the implication is that Romney could not draw out his needed and natural base due to his lack of conservative cred, then forget it.

Anyone who was even partially aware of and comprehended what the current administration represents, and had any sense - and especially if they are "conservative" - would have indeed crawled over live coals to vote the SCOAMF out. Completely aside from fiscal matters, it is doubtful things have ever been as grave since the Civil War. The lawlessness, a constitution literally on its last legs - hell, even post-constitutional arrangements embodying the essential checks and balances of the system, such as the long-standing arrangement governing recess appointments without Senate approval - just about everything is off the rails.

With a collapsed Fourth Estate and dumbed-down electorate and people with truly alien instincts and tendencies at the pinnacle of power, it is no hyperbole whatsoever to say the US has come to resemble one of the less awful South American authoritarian states, or at least is trending towards a Third World situation.

If "conservative" voters couldn't hold their nose and come out for Romney, it is as though they don't exist, and you can't really base any future political strategy on them.

My contention: they DON'T exist, not in any material numbers anyway. Yes, the implications of that are grave. I do not see any plausible path for a departure from the path of degradation and decline. Institutions don't self-repair, and there really aren't that many Americans in America any more.

Posted by: non-purist at November 15, 2012 09:10 PM (UViC2)

464 <<we did. Romney was that guy.>>

You clearly missed the part where #59 said "conservative". Romney was definitely NOT that guy.

Seriously, fuck off with your "purist" bullshit.

Run a Conservative, or kiss us "purists" goodbye.

Posted by: Sgt. York at November 15, 2012 09:11 PM (yk8/j)

465 Karl Rove and the institutional Republican Party have followed the same policy throughout the 21st Century so far:
1. Disregard the specific interests of the Whites and let their numbers decline;
2. Woo Hispanics and allow or encourage their numbers to increase.

The rational part of this policy is the tacit acknowledgement that the Republican Party cannot survive without an ethnic base. If the party is unwilling to help the Whites survive, a replacement for the Whites must be found, and it's not going to be the Blacks.

The irrational part of this policy is that wooing the Hispanics has never worked, is not working and never will work, because Hispanics are Democrats. They know what they want, and the Democratic Party will supply it while the Republican Part cannot. (Out-bidding the Democrats is hopeless, as they can and will escalate to beat any bribe.) And while the part where Hispanics become Republicans never works, the part where they grow in numbers works very well.

This has created a crisis for the Whites, who remain the irreplaceable base of the Republican Party. They lack political representation, because the Republican Party profits from their votes but does not address harms done to them, such as Affirmative action and displacement-level immigration. And demographically, they are going under.

In three to four more presidential cycles, 12-16 years, the Republican Party must turn things around, or it will be forever irrelevant, in America at large as in California. The political playing field continues to move left by a point or two every election cycle, and it's already far enough left to allow a bad President like Barack Obama to be reelected.

I advocate dropping the Rove policy, which has brought nothing but failure and harm all this century, and turning to help the Whites so that they can help the Republican Party.

The objection to this is, the hour is very late, maybe too late. My first answer to that is, there is no alternative. Asians are just as Democratic as Hispanics; there is no other potential ethnic base to turn to. My second answer is, it's the right thing to do. Condemning Whites in the united States of America to exit history, flooded by replacement-level immigration and dissolved by compulsory integration and assimilation is immoral; with any other ethnic group it would be obvious that forcing them out of existence like this was immoral and opposing that course was the right thing to do. And my third answer is, it might work.

Look how suddenly the anti-White pundits changed from pretending that there was no need to do anything for the Whites because they were in no real danger to saying there is no point in doing anything for the Whites because it's too late. The recommendation is always the same, and that leads me to suspect that they are lying, like climate change fanatics who think the solution is one world state control of everything, whether the problem is global cooling, global warming, or the climate staying much the same.

Explicitly do things that are good for Whites, like opposing affirmative action and mass immigration, ask for support from Whites for representing them, and see how much of that still-large White voting base rallies. It might be enough to save the future.

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 15, 2012 09:12 PM (j7LHF)

466 I think the USA is no longer a single nation, but it just has not accepted that fact yet.



Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 09:12 PM (sRus3)

467 Jane D'oh - the question really though is, do they really believe that, or do they say that because they are scared to look for the truth?

Because the first is potentially an impossible nut to crack, but the later is just essentially the "liberal, pre-robbed".

Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:13 PM (mHU03)

468 <<But - sorry, whatever Rove says and whatever this post says, they both
miss the point. An electorate that would re-elect this disastrous,
divisive, un-presidential, alien failure of a public figure would be
unlikely to respond to a "conservative" candidate.>>

Wrong. Completely and totally wrong. The electorate didn't re-elect Barry, half of its low turnout did. And the reason you INSIST on missing is they went with the devil they knew, while many "purists" sat out the election altogether.

Seriously, your "logic" (actually, complete lack of it) is why we had W, McCain and Romney, and fools like you CONTINUE to insist we run Democrat-lite candidates.

You are what's wrong with the GOP.

Posted by: Sgt. York at November 15, 2012 09:13 PM (yk8/j)

469 463 Non-Purist,

There are enough to fill Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi....minimum.....

I am thinking the blue seceded from us in 2001 without telling us and used the war and their kabuki to distract us...then when they got the ball....

I mean fuck is the office that Bush held and the office that Obama holds remotely the same office with the same sets of rules and oversight by the Legislature and media?

I contend no, and they have made clear O can do almost literally whatever he wants.

No the nation is done.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:14 PM (LRFds)

470 Oh, Blightworker, go back to Stormfront.

We don't care about skin color, we care about culture.

Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:14 PM (mHU03)

471 It's easy to call Bush jr. a big government moderate in hindsight but certainly he didn't run as a moderate. No one thought of Bush as a moderate in 2000. I don't agree that running someone out like Bush ran in 2000 would be a problem. He ran on tax cuts, he embraced social issues pretty well, I think he was a good candidate as a pretty traditinal conservative. McCain, Dole, & Romney are clearly in a different category than the Bushes in my mind.

Posted by: Jay at November 15, 2012 09:14 PM (kIH56)

472 466 Eman,

Yup so prepare.

This secession call was a joke.

I won't join, but the next one if serious and prepared I may and may likely do so.

I am not chasing the socialists into hell in violation of my oath.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:15 PM (LRFds)

473 What do you call a government that can't bear the idea of criticism let alone respond to criticism?

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 09:15 PM (EZl54)

474 We, in Hell, would welcome the disappearance of Democracy in the strict sense of that word; the political arrangement so called. Like all forms of government it often works to our advantage; but on the whole less often thean other forms. And what we must realize is that 'democracy' in the diabolical sense (I'm as good as you, Being LIke Folks, Togetherness) is the finest instrument we could possibly have for extirpating political Democracies from the face of the earth.

For 'democracy' or the 'democratic spirit' (diabolical sense) leads to a nation without great men, a nation mainly of subliterates, morally flaccid from lack of discipline in youth, full of the cocksureness which flattery breeds on ignorance, and soft from lifelong pampering...

C.S. Lewis, "Screwtape Proposes a Toast"

Posted by: Secundus at November 15, 2012 09:15 PM (g3jwX)

475 377 Sven- Heard,Acknowledged, Understood

Posted by: Minuteman at November 15, 2012 09:16 PM (1Rw2p)

476 The GOP political machine is a Hello Kitty tricycle.

The Democrat political machine is an M1A2 tank.

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 09:16 PM (sRus3)

477 York: exactly .. 8 million disliked what he had done enough not to vote for him this time. It's highly unlikely that any of those 8 were the FSA.

Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:16 PM (mHU03)

478 let alone be self critical?

Barry has given his last press conference for a very long time.

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 09:16 PM (EZl54)

479 470 Dante,

Yup...what the hell do the stormfront people think I want to kick out the southern African Americans or give them anything but the innate rights all men are guaranteed by the founding as seen with the amendments?

Freedom ain't a paycheck or a bonus based on skin hue.

Freedom is the right to get the job if you are the best.

No, I want an economy so good and free nobody is too worried about trying to play race games from either direction.

I will never get that under the blue.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:17 PM (LRFds)

480 eman: the GOP brings a spoon to a gunfight.

Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:17 PM (mHU03)

481
Rand Paul 2016
I saw his father's speech last night, and it was FUCKING AWESOME
Of course, I am a small-l libertarian, so I am inclined to agree, but seriously, the Republicans need to run a badass who's not afraid so say shit. I'm sick of these typical blah-blah-blah 'what we need to jumpstart this economy is to not raise taxes on anyone...................blah'. I'm sick of this superficial, boring, oh-I-have-to-qualify-everything-I'm-saying-so-I-don't-offend-any-part-of-the-electorate bullshit. Stop it with the same old - kill me for saying it! - Reagan obsession. And not an obsession with Reagan himself, but this mythical magic-man who comes down from the sky with tax cuts to stimulate the economy. We need a new message - an abstract one, not the same tired talking points, but for someone to go out there any say something new. It can be conservative, but something that we haven't heard yet, or heard in hundreds of years. What about the military-industrial complex is not totally bureacratic and socialist? Why do conservatives defend that bloated mess and then criticize the federal government? I was in the military, and my fellow sailors were all brave and great at what they do, but while I was in there was a whole lot of post-office type shit going on, too. Political correctness training, paperwork, red tape. Seriously, Greg Gutfeld should run for President in 2016. I am dead serious. I'm sick of these boring suits. Fuck it.

Posted by: Jheri Carl at November 15, 2012 09:17 PM (//cIL)

482 The reappearance of Jan Levinson is the only thing that could have saved this episode of The Office. Damn I miss her.

Posted by: logprof at November 15, 2012 09:17 PM (jKE+Z)

483 "The hardest part about gaining any new idea is
sweeping out the false idea occupying that niche. As long as that niche
is occupied, evidence and proof and logical demonstration get nowhere.
But once the niche is emptied of the wrong idea that has been filling it
— once you can honestly say, "I don't know", then it becomes possible
to get at the truth." -- Robert Heinlein.
Posted by: Uriah Heep


Good quote.

One axe that Romney came close to picking up but didn't was the phrase,"We can do better."

There seemed to be much hay to be made out of Obama's sloppy replies of "Doing Just Fine" in regards to the economy and America's status in the world's eyes.

I have to wonder if Romney went a little hotter and harder with the idea that Obama is just managing our decline. American's don't mind being told that we can do better if you phrase in like a pep talk and it's certainly true.

This election was a referendum on Obama and his lack of management. I have to wonder if Romney would have done better by calling him out with something like "American's don't settle for second best and this President is asking us to settle for last."

Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 15, 2012 09:18 PM (4h0z0)

484 <<Romney, too, was a good guy. A really good fucking guy.>>

Based on what? His constant change of positions? His inability to corner Barry on Ben Ghazi?

Romney was Obamalite. I held my nose and voted for him only after Ben Ghazi happened. As has been established, many millions more chose not to vote.

At what point is your "we need to run a RINO to win" fantasy going to butt heads with the realities of W, McCain and Romney?

Posted by: Sgt. York at November 15, 2012 09:18 PM (yk8/j)

485 Here's a post for ace.

Top Ten Things I Love About the GOP

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 09:18 PM (sRus3)

486 The GOP brought a Bible to a Swingers Party

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 09:19 PM (uvNSk)

487 466 I think the USA is no longer a single nation, but it just has not accepted that fact yet.

This.

One effect of the Democrat voter fraud is that now various factions in the Republican party are pointing fingers of blame at each other.

That's a feature, not a bug, to the Commies.

Posted by: rickl at November 15, 2012 09:19 PM (sdi6R)

488 Good gravy, Bud Selig looked three sheets to the wind today.

Posted by: logprof at November 15, 2012 09:20 PM (jKE+Z)

489 The GOP brings FireCrackers to a War!

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 09:20 PM (uvNSk)

490 473 T Hunter,

The United States of Obama... hattip to Spike lee...



I am gonna go get my daily aerobic exercise by screaming for fifteen minutes.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:20 PM (LRFds)

491 Anyone who thinks someone MORE conservative than Romney or Bush can win an election just by the mere fact they are truly conservative is a fucking idiot.

Let's nominate Vic next time.. I'm sure he's gonna garner like 75% of the vote because he's such a true conservative.

RD Brewer.. you're looney.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 15, 2012 09:21 PM (UTq/I)

492 437 Well, I'm giving my husband a bit of a break. We own, together, a small business. We're facing major shit thanks to Obamacare.

I really think my husband is dreading being around his smug liberal siblings (none of whom have ever owned a business).

My husband is a good man, and a civic leader.

I'm calming down....a bit.

Anyhow, grateful for having this place to blow off steam. (Now to go kiss my sweet husband.)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at November 15, 2012 09:00 PM (UOM4


Your husband's smuglings (smug lib siblings) will eventually be my slaves. No, wait...they will eventually see the light of reason and everyone will live happily ever after. Yeah that's the ticket. I'm drunk and in not a good mood. Perfect frame of mind for the coming apocalypse.

Posted by: Model-1066 at November 15, 2012 09:21 PM (NoDnj)

493 487 Ricki,

Yup....

if you are in a purple state and fall prey to this suck ass economy if able go to red if need be. Blue run red....

concentrate and by Jesus we need to have babies.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:21 PM (LRFds)

494 Since 1928, every winning GOP presidential campaign had has a Bush or Nixon on the ticket.

Humm... yeah you are right.

Jeb Bush for 2016! /sarc

Posted by: Huusker at November 15, 2012 09:22 PM (Vq7P1)

495 470 Oh, Blightworker, go back to Stormfront.

We don't care about skin color, we care about culture.
-
Disparate impact means you are legally obliged to care about skin color. Getting rid of that doctrine would be a huge "gift" to Whites.

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 15, 2012 09:22 PM (j7LHF)

496 York:

I think the perception that he was an Obama-lite probably hurt him a lot. I have talked to some (3-4ish) conservative people that are very aware of Obama's failures, but not highly political, and they all expressed opinions of that nature. I didn't ask if they actually voted for Romney.

Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:22 PM (mHU03)

497 394 - Dante- I wonder if O'Keefe and his Project Veritas could coordinate this as a focused effort, expanding the pool but zeroing in on the selected target? It would be like the energy dircted from a laser rather than from a spotlight. The damage it does is thorough and effective.

Posted by: Minuteman at November 15, 2012 09:23 PM (1Rw2p)

498 492 Model 1066,

The more proper way to look at it if I remember my stupor is this...

The Blue will sit around in their govt allocated share of the cookie jar's spoils raging that they are our slaves while we happily do what tasks we can for those around us to earn our part of our future......

That is why they hate us and it is why we cannot win....

they will never stop hating that in our "selfishness" as they cast it we are in fact surrendering our goods and or services to the whole to be judged on our worthiness.....

I want to be free.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:24 PM (LRFds)

499
@394 ---- THAT is what I am talking about. If we truly want our country back, we have to be willing to wage an all out guerrilla war on the media. They are in large part responsible for the current regime. They enabled them at every turn. If we want to sit around like the Roves of this world, finding a billion reasons that are NOT the reason for our losses, fine. I don't want to play the blame game. I want to exact pain on the house that media built. We need to 'go rogue' or shut up and sit down. So do we keep up with the 'LIB' strategy or do we put our lives, our hearts, our sacred honor' on the line? I want to steal back our country, not wallow in defeat and despair.

Posted by: CalyxtheCommoner at November 15, 2012 09:24 PM (rfLqY)

500 I hate to admit it, but Hannity has had a great show tonight on the topic of Benghazi.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 09:24 PM (piMMO)

501 Posted by: ConcealedKerry Or SubMitt at November 15, 2012 08:20 PM (THBnv)

Yeah, right. We had Billy freakin' Graham endorsing Mitt and taking out full-page ads in newspapers for him. Most pastors who have some sway (i.e. tv programs, newsletters, mega-churches) said over and over that we cannot let O have a 2nd term. I'm one of those Christians who believes Mormonism has a false Christ, yet I supported Romney and so did all my Christian friends.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at November 15, 2012 09:24 PM (KL49F)

502 "Top Ten Things I Love About the GOP"

Propping up an anachronism, "grand"!

Posted by: derit at November 15, 2012 09:24 PM (I88Jc)

503 oh and 1066 in acting that way they are in fact psychologically our slaves whether we make gain or not....hell Bush was wrong it is not the Mulsims who hate our freedom it is the goddamned weak American.

I am gonna go stare at the wall a second.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:25 PM (LRFds)

504 495:
Disparate impact is a shit-tastic liberal legal philosophy that should be flushed down the toilet less you catch another disease.

Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:26 PM (mHU03)

505 Paul,
1
"Sorry, nobody wants this to be true more than me, but I can't buy the
argument that goes "When the American people re-elected the most liberal
president in history, they did so because the other guy wasn't
conservative enough."


But that is exactly what happened. Republicans sat home on their fat-asses because Romney wasn't "Conservative Enough".

By doing so, they re-elected the JEF and , like the Jews of old, sold themselves into slavery.
They wanted everything to be free, except themselves...

They got it.
So it goes...




Posted by: ChrisP at November 15, 2012 09:26 PM (G+4K3)

506 W was most definitely not seen as a "RINO" by, erm, the conservative base who voted for him

if there's any takeaway from that it'd be to not nominate Richie McRichster next time (yes I know, Bush had a privileged background, but he had the "common touch" or WTFever)

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 09:26 PM (60GaT)

507 501 Aslan's girl,

Every socon I know but one voted Mitt he voted gary Johnson and downticket GOP b/c of the noise around "remove loopholes" he owns too many houses.

One FiCon I know of 3 I'd call that sat out.

Nah we need to stow the firing squad for a bit and find out who turned out.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:27 PM (LRFds)

508 481 Remember that billionaire who said he'd donate heavily to any candidate who endorsed gay marriage regardless their party affiliation? I wonder if Rand Psul's taking him up on his offer? His loony old man took checks from white supremacists.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 09:27 PM (i0vBR)

509 More Lee Atwater

Less Karl Rove

Posted by: kbdabear at November 15, 2012 09:28 PM (wwsoB)

510 I think we should run a very Conservative candidate the next time out. He will lose big but at least he could use the campaign to educate the people a bit. Reagan himself would get clobbered in this day and age.

The culture has been lost. Hard work and self-reliance are abstract concepts. People think money is created by government and can be just handed out. Capitalism has been blamed for all of our woes and most people believe it. We're screwed.

A strong defense is seen as creating a war machine to invade countries for no good reason. Traditional values? Don't make me laugh. People haven't cared about that since the 50's.

The next opportunity Conservatives will have is when the fiscal collapse comes. MAYBE people will wake up, maybe not.

Posted by: Ken Royall at November 15, 2012 09:28 PM (x0g8a)

511 More Barry Goldwater, less Karl Rove

Posted by: Thunderb at November 15, 2012 09:28 PM (Dnbau)

512
I have yet to witness any of these So-Con "moral lectures and busy bodies"?
Unless you mean Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Transexuals groups who lobby Congress for special rights, monies, protections, medical care, etc.
Or maybe the Federal Government lecturesin millions of taxpayer $ for PDAs lecturing our kidson how they can't say "gay" or offend a 10 yr old boy who is allowed to wear a dress to school.....or the Federal Government telling K-12 schools they must allow lectures from homosexuals on how they are just normal and natural. And don't forget the "Coming Out" Day of celebration in our HS now!
Or leftwing Hollywood lecturing our kids on how healthy and natural it is to be a lesbian and homosexual....on TV all day and night.
And let us not forget the Federal Government lecturing us and our Churcheson paying for contraception, abortion, and sex changes.
Maybe if the commie left would SHUT UP about their sex-life they would not invite pushback. What a novel idea!



Posted by: Pam at November 15, 2012 09:29 PM (cgrL5)

513 More Andrew Breitbart, less Bill Krystal.

Posted by: Truck Monkey at November 15, 2012 09:29 PM (jucos)

514 "Yup...what the hell do the stormfront people think I
want to kick out the southern African Americans or give them anything
but the innate rights all men are guaranteed by the founding as seen
with the amendments?

Freedom ain't a paycheck or a bonus based on skin hue.

Freedom is the right to get the job if you are the best.

No, I want an economy so good and free nobody is too worried about trying to play race games from either direction.

I will never get that under the blue.


Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:17 PM (LRFds)"The Left will scream until they are blue in the face that your "freedom" is nothing but a "dog whistle" for racists.Nor will they ever face the implication of that statement, i.e. that minorities are incapable of freedom. Or, if you point that out, they will say that minorities find their "freedom" in "collectivism".It is literally like they will call "white" "black" with sincerity and a straight face and they've brainwashed minorities to believe that "freedom" is code for "white people running roughshod over us".They may call their ideology "progressive" but anyone with knowledge of the history ideas will see it for the pre-Enlightenment tribalism that it is.

Posted by: The Grand Inquisitor at November 15, 2012 09:29 PM (P2Ufm)

515 Also, remember to get your last twinkies.

Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:29 PM (mHU03)

516 they will never stop hating that in our "selfishness" as they cast it we are in fact surrendering our goods and or services to the whole to be judged on our worthiness.....

I want to be free.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:24 PM (LRFds)


Well said. In short, living takes courage. Being pandered to and taken care of is for wimps and mommas boys.

Posted by: Model-1066 at November 15, 2012 09:30 PM (NoDnj)

517

Everyone go read Reagan's first inaugural address:
http://tinyurl.com/tx0s

You will see how off the rails Republicans have gone. The only people who talk like Reagan now are people outside the (R) party. So sick of these pansy ass bastards in politics.

Posted by: Texas Ranger at November 15, 2012 09:30 PM (IvvrO)

518 Ebola dropped 10% compared to 2008 and we still lost him.

That takes skill.

Ninja skill.

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 09:30 PM (sRus3)

519 Anyone who thinks someone MORE conservative than
Romney or Bush can win an election just by the mere fact they are truly
conservative is a fucking idiot.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry


Bush was not a fiscal conservative. Period. No point in even trying to argue that one.

Romney's record as Gov. was mixed; focused on balancing a budget but he also increased the size of the state government. We were hoping that he had a different mode when it came to governing the Federal government. There was nothing solid to base that upon but it was all we had.

Chances are he would have pulled the rookie mistake of charging into the budget deficit mess and get lost in the details, after which Boehner and Co would have made another bad deal which only delayed the problems.

But we'll never know.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 15, 2012 09:30 PM (4h0z0)

520 More Bull Halsey, less Wesley Clark

Posted by: Truck Monkey at November 15, 2012 09:31 PM (jucos)

521 Grand Inquisitor: of course they will, and I will scream that their "equality" is nothing but a "dog whistle" for racists.

Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:31 PM (mHU03)

522 "Also, remember to get your last twinkies."

Tallahassee's gonna be pissed to find nothing but Drake's and Little Debbie's!

Posted by: derit at November 15, 2012 09:31 PM (I88Jc)

523 Anybody ever slice up a Twinkie and put it in a food dehydrator? Bet that's some good candy.

Posted by: Model-1066 at November 15, 2012 09:32 PM (NoDnj)

524 Posted by: weft cut-loop
........
Ok.. so tell me.. who would have won???

Got a name?

I'm willing to listen.. who would have won?

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 15, 2012 09:32 PM (UTq/I)

525 Also, remember to get your last twinkies.
Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:29 PM (mHU03)

I hope Hostess makes all their recipes and processes public knowledge.

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 09:32 PM (sRus3)

526 Never going to win until you take the gloves off...

Force concentration is the practice of concentrating a military
force, so as to bring to bear such overwhelming force against a portion
of an enemy force that the disparity between the two forces alone acts
as a force multiplier, in favor of the concentrated forces.

This is an asymmetrical task that the democrats have applied on Republicans and are killing us...

We need to start on a segment of the Democrat partyand apply force concentration until we win...

My suggestion is to start with the Unions...They have become the get out the vote/money laundering operation for the Democrat Party...

Vote with your Dollars everyday...

Stop buying union products...Start with UAW...Plenty of new cars built in Right to work Law states...Toyota and Nissan are built in Mississippi and Alabama...

John Deere is UAW..... Buy MTD products...

Ace mentioned NBC...Not one click or product...

Don't call it boycott...Just vote with your money...

I haven't gone to a movie in 5yrs....I just won't support Hollywood since they have gone High Octane Liberal

If we don't work together we will accomplish nothing...It will be over...


Posted by: Chicken ala King at November 15, 2012 09:32 PM (VvvBE)

527 @506

"W was most definitely not seen as a "RINO" by, erm, the conservative base who voted for him"

Yes...mainly true...he made some mistakes...but most of the failure Bush was blamed for was actually born out of the Left..especially the economic problems, and people just can't seem to understand it all. Probably because they are Retarded!

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 09:32 PM (uvNSk)

528 The vaunted blue dogs all retired 20 years ago. All that's left now are the commies.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy at November 15, 2012 09:33 PM (GHI/D)

529 514 The Grand Inquisitor,

Yup and the media fix is in so hard and so deep, and the moonbats are trying to shovel in outsiders so fast that I am afraid I cannot possibly win the argument that I KNOW I would win in schools given equal time.

I did volunteer work for Junior Achievement in the inner cities in Springfield Ohio in the late 80s early 90s.

Those kids were thrilled to learn economic principles because they had NOT BEEN TAUGHT HOW SHIT WORKS AT ALL.

We are letting motherfuckers like blightworker turn out a goddamned slave cargo cult.

I hate fuckers like you Blightworker.

I hate you because fuckers like you try to make poor white trash your fucking slaves too.

I hate you so much I will peacefully cede my home state to you, but buddy I wouldn't follow me where I stop walking I am not moving after I settle again.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:33 PM (LRFds)

530 Stand up and proudly declare what you believe. Don't give in to people who will NEVER like you as you will only lose me..... and you NEED me. It is not that fucking hard to understand. We, as conservatives, will NEVER win the freebee war. Never. So why try and 'out democrat' the democrats?

Posted by: Truck Monkey at November 15, 2012 09:34 PM (jucos)

531 More John Bolton less Colin Powell

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 09:34 PM (uvNSk)

532 lecturing our kidson how they can't say "gay"

I always liked this one. "Gay" is itself an appropriated word.

Posted by: AmishDude at November 15, 2012 09:34 PM (xSegX)

533 Whether we like it or not we are now the Resistance.

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 09:34 PM (sRus3)

534
If you really want to help or "save"the Republican Party, there is an easy way, and it's free. It will do more than a million comments in the blogosphere which no one will remember tomorrow.


Register as an independent.

Posted by: Meremortal says Starve The Beast, Go Galt at November 15, 2012 09:34 PM (1Y+hH)

535 "Bush was not a fiscal conservative. Period. No point in even trying to argue that one."

but people keep referencing Medicare Part D and NCLB like that's the reason Republicans lost favor since 2006, and that's not really the case

Posted by: JDP at November 15, 2012 09:35 PM (60GaT)

536 ala King:

that is a valid tactic, but remember how the Chic fil A hit fell over backwards on the liberals.

Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:35 PM (mHU03)

537 Something that bothers me is that if GHWB hadn't been so arrogant--if he had gone with the playbook that made him president--he wouldn't have throttled limited government conservatism in the crib like he did.

In a way, we owe all our failures since then to that asshole.

Because he. knew. better. He knew better than Reagan. He was so arrogant, he felt he could dispense with what got him elected.

Sure the Bushes have a nice temperament. They're statesmen, in fact. The most arrogant statesmen ever.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 09:35 PM (Iyg03)

538 I hope Hostess makes all their recipes and processes public knowledge.

The branding and IP will have a buyer. The facilities...maybe not. The Brand and IP are worth more than the facilities anyway.

Posted by: @PurpAv at November 15, 2012 09:35 PM (GHI/D)

539 Also, remember to get your last twinkies.


****

They announce the final outcome tommorow morning. If they cave, it will set an awful, terrible precedent, although I can understand them wanting desperately to save as many of the 18k jobs as possible as well as the brand itself.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 09:35 PM (piMMO)

540 I haven't gone to a movie in 5yrs....I just won't
support Hollywood since they have gone High Octane Liberal


Posted by: Chicken ala King
.........
Hoo boy.. and look what you accomplished! Oh wait.. you accomplished nothing besides miss a bunch of movies.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 15, 2012 09:35 PM (UTq/I)

541 520 More Bull Halsey, less Wesley Clark
Posted by: Truck Monkey at November 15, 2012 09:31 PM (jucos)


More Humongous less Tinkerbell.

Posted by: Model-1066 at November 15, 2012 09:36 PM (NoDnj)

542 May God strike me dead, I just read something Luap Nor said and agreed wholeheartedly (regarding secession and nullification).

Hold me . . .

Posted by: Peaches at November 15, 2012 09:36 PM (kpCLl)

543 Ok.. so tell me.. who would have won???Got a name?I'm willing to listen.. who would have won?Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry


The better candidate, whoever that was, didn't stand up. I'm not saying Romney wasn't our best shot in the choices offered. He was.

But likewise, there is no point in denying that A ) he lost and B ) he never made the choice stark enough.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 15, 2012 09:37 PM (4h0z0)

544 More Mad Max less Reindeer Games

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 09:37 PM (uvNSk)

545 quiet.economic.secession.



Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at November 15, 2012 09:37 PM (EZl54)

546 "521
Grand Inquisitor: of course they will, and I will scream that their "equality" is nothing but a "dog whistle" for racists.


Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:31 PM (mHU03)"And, while you would be correct, they will then say that their "racism" is "justified" by "400 years of slavery" or that only whites can be racist because they have "power" and "white privilege".
In which case you are back to defending any policy that doesn't divert resources from whites to blacks, i.e. that you are against minorities because you won't take from whites to give to them.And, regardless of the illogic of that position, millions of people will nod their heads and vote accordingly. These people are as impervious to logic as zombies or rabid animals.

Posted by: The Grand Inquisitor at November 15, 2012 09:38 PM (P2Ufm)

547 Oh wait.. you accomplished nothing besides miss a bunch of movies.

Yea, I keep forgetting that going out to a movie has always been free.

Posted by: @PurpAv at November 15, 2012 09:38 PM (GHI/D)

548 'sup freaks, 'rons, 'ettes-
Tommorow is my 3 wk. anniv. @ AoSHQ, and I 'gottatell you, it (the blog, and real life) wasa lot more fun "way back then". I have been funkified since the election, and still feel slightly dazed and confused. I was sure the JEF SCoaMF would be packed off to HI, and the speaking tour.
-
I'm not so much mad at him. I always knew what he was/is. I am butt-hurt that the majority of my countrymen choose the "Free Shit Army" over Freedom and Liberty.
-
I'm not ready to completely acquiesce, but I fear there is no "come back". I lean toward L.I.B., but I have teenage boys that I have to consider. It wasn't supposed to be this way, and I'm having a rough time figuring out the path forward. But entering into the holiday season there is still much to be thankful for. True friends, family, God, and the horde. I lift my Valu-Rite to you compatriots. You are the fort!

Posted by: Just Another Moron (Formerly New and Semi-New) at November 15, 2012 09:38 PM (mkb9H)

549 Hoo boy.. and look what you accomplished! Oh wait.. you accomplished nothing besides miss a bunch of movies.


****

There's nothing wrong in standing on principle.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 09:38 PM (piMMO)

550 466 I think the USA is no longer a single nation, but it just has not accepted that fact yet.
-
The Democrats, with regrettable Republican support, have been importing a new nation since 1965. This is fatal for the old nation, since mass immigration is not slowing down. And by "fatal" I mean genocidal, because it's clearly foreseeable that as a result of this mix of policies, White people will cease to exist, in whole or in (large) part. This would be obviously immoral if we were talking about the Japanese or the Taiwanese or any other non-White nation.

It is a hard and unpleasant thing to have to face this and take action to create some sort of tolerance and sustainable co-existence when the default position of politicians like Bill Clinton has become, sure White America will cease to exist, and that's a good thing!

But the hour is very late. If the Republican Party fumbles and fudges and stays the course for just a few more electoral cycles, very bad consequences will follow, and it will be too late for regrets about how this could have been avoided by simple and legitimate democratic means early in the 21st Century.

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 15, 2012 09:38 PM (SWuYh)

551 Ground game, Sandy, the Latino vote, Tampons, ORCA ....

The Terrible "Ifs" Accumulate ...

Posted by: Winston Churchill at November 15, 2012 09:40 PM (wwsoB)

552 I'm sorry guys but judging by most of the comments YOU are missing the Elephant too 7.9 million people didn't show up to vote cause they've already come to the conclusion that the countries done. The election of O'bama was the point of no return they have dropped out civil society, the are farming their gardens and hunting heir meat and short of invasion they won't be back, my wife's there already and I'm thinking of going. She's been making her own Christmas present for a couple of years now. This doesn't mean I hate you or disagree with you but to quote Prof. Reynolds "Something that can't go on forever won't". And right now I think one of those things is our country. I can't cry anymore I've been out of tears for a while now, I am sorry.

Posted by: Catseye at November 15, 2012 09:40 PM (c7wu3)

553 The branding and IP will have a buyer. The facilities...maybe not. The Brand and IP are worth more than the facilities anyway.Posted by: @PurpAv

What he said.

I hope the founders retained a stake in the brands. They could be worth billions.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 15, 2012 09:40 PM (4h0z0)

554 NDH:
The Teamsters were asking the other union to cave. That seems highly serious to me.

Posted by: dantealiegri at November 15, 2012 09:41 PM (mHU03)

555 "Yea, I keep forgetting that going out to a movie has always been free."

Near a state college campus? They usually have movie nights. Get back some of your wasted tax dollars.

Posted by: derit at November 15, 2012 09:41 PM (I88Jc)

556 Posted by: Just Another Moron (Formerly New and Semi-New) at November 15, 2012 09:38 PM (mkb9H)

Sweetie, why not just pick a nic and stick with it? As you may have noticed, we're kind of a cranky bunch these days. I suggest Poindexter. Nobody has it yet and it's got a certain je ne sais quoi to it.

Posted by: Peaches at November 15, 2012 09:41 PM (kpCLl)

557 @536 dantealiegri

That is exactly what we need...
Chik fil a was organized by the good guy Repubs....

Successful force concentration by Conservatives...

Remember the Gay protest was going to be a "kiss in" or something like that...The Gay population is only like 1-2% of total population...Which is miniscule anyway...

So it was turned around because we had an overwhelming force to rebut...


Posted by: Chicken ala King at November 15, 2012 09:41 PM (VvvBE)

558 544 More Mad Max less Reindeer Games
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 09:37 PM (uvNSk)


We're on the same page!

Posted by: Model-1066 at November 15, 2012 09:42 PM (NoDnj)

559 Whoa! This swift boat guy on Hannity. I first looked at the screen while Hannity was talking and I thought "what the fuck happened to Dick Morris?"

Posted by: Jheri Carl at November 15, 2012 09:42 PM (//cIL)

560 Whether we like it or not we are now the Resistance.

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 09:34 PM (sRus3)___ ___ ____ _____ ____ ___ ___ True in many ways.We are living inan allegorical sci-fi horror movie.

Posted by: Meremortal says Starve The Beast, Go Galt at November 15, 2012 09:42 PM (1Y+hH)

561 7.9 million people didn't show up to vote cause
they've already come to the conclusion that the countries done.
Posted by: Catsey


Show us your evidence.

I am genuinely curious, not just snark.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 15, 2012 09:42 PM (4h0z0)

562 "I'm kinder, gentler, more arrogant." --GHWB

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 09:42 PM (Iyg03)

563 542 Peaches,

he's a deeply flawed guy but they are literally trying to destroy us in ways we never allowed ourselves to target them and I do not want to target them.

They can either let me go if it comes to that or face my fury which will start off peaceful and political and escalate to match their evil strike for strike.

I am done going left at all.

YOU MOVE barry or show me paradise but I will not cede my beliefs in freedom.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:43 PM (LRFds)

564 You are making this more complicated than it is. Why did Reagan REALLY win? Because he was a real good talker that was comfortable in front of the cameras. Why did Clinton win? Because he was another really good talker that was comfortable in front of the cameras. The media will cover for someone like Obama, who is a really good talker only if there is a teleprompter nearby. And Perot had those great charts for the low information voter and snappy lines like "that great sucking sound of jobs headed to Mexico". I like Romney and respect him. But he is not slick enough for today's campaigns. Somewhere out there is a conservative candidate that is a real good talker and can say "there you go again" when the opposition tries to slip one by. That's the person we need to run. In fact, we need to be grooming our own slick, witty candidates. Remember William Buckley Jr.? Even people that didn't care for conservatives liked him. It's part of whatever charm Newt has, but he doesn't have enough of it. And yeah, it's a lot easier to make the case for a Republican if they have had to struggle a bit in their life. That's part of what Palin brought to the table. We need communicators badly.

Posted by: notsothoreau at November 15, 2012 09:43 PM (5HBd1)

565 More Unabomer Manifesto, less Brooks Brothers catalog.

Posted by: Jheri Carl at November 15, 2012 09:43 PM (//cIL)

566 "I'm more compassionate... and bursting at the seams with hubris." --GWB

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 09:43 PM (Iyg03)

567 But likewise, there is no point in denying that A )
he lost and B ) he never made the choice stark enough.


Posted by: weft cut-loop
...........
Yes, there is plenty denying that.

He made the choice quite stark. The electorate simply wasn't buying it.

I would argue that Republicans need to take more of a populist stance. Romney should have hit Obama on not prosecuting Wall St execs.

Jindal is right.. we look like the party that is defending big money.. the very people/industries fucking over the little guy - i.e US!

We need to push conservatism as a populist view.. we need to re-make the GOP as the party that looks out for middle American workers.. so far, all we seem to do is look like the party defending the rich.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 15, 2012 09:43 PM (UTq/I)

568
Don't forget GW ran as a "Compassionate Conservative" who wanted to reform ($$) education and Prescription Drugs for seniors.....so many of us were quite concerned about him.<BR>
And then Gore tried to steal the election.<BR>
GW's Administration was in place 3 mos late, and much was left to be done still when 9/11 occurred....8 months in, approx.<BR>
Because of all that, and his dignityin Office, Conservatives still hold a special place in their hearts for him.

Posted by: Pam at November 15, 2012 09:44 PM (cgrL5)

569 Yeah, sven, it still did nothing for my internal compass to be reading that and think, well, sure. Because I know Paultards and they really skeeve me out. Bad.

Posted by: Peaches at November 15, 2012 09:44 PM (kpCLl)

570 I hope Hostess makes all their recipes and processes public knowledge.

The branding and IP will have a buyer. The facilities...maybe not. The Brand and IP are worth more than the facilities anyway.
Posted by: @PurpAv at November 15, 2012 09:35 PM (GHI/D)

Don't sell it. Give it away to the public.

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 09:44 PM (sRus3)

571 494Since 1928, every winning GOP presidential campaign had has a Bush or Nixon on the ticket.

Humm... yeah you are right.

Jeb Bush for 2016! /sarc
Posted by: Huusker at November 15, 2012 09:22 PM (Vq7P1) Could we get Tricia to run?

Posted by: Reggie1971 at November 15, 2012 09:44 PM (8cOY0)

572 More Kate Upton, less Rosie O'Donnell

Posted by: mrp at November 15, 2012 09:45 PM (HjPtV)

573 R + IP

Let the Mother Fucker Burn!

Posted by: jeremiah God Damn Barack Obama the Mother Fucking SCoaMF wright at November 15, 2012 09:46 PM (ovpNn)

574 It drives me nuts when the right seems to concede that liberal policies somehow benefit the poor instead of locking them into a life of poverty. nuts!

I give them some slack because it is literally impossible to advance a conservative message with the media in the left's corner. there is no way they are going to give it any airtime at all. We simply have to find a way to get around it.

I think we need to do some conservative community organizing. Going out into communities -- poor and minority communities -- and connecting the dots between conservative principles and the specific lives of the people we are talking to. Connecting the dots is not pandering.

Posted by: elizabethe at November 15, 2012 09:46 PM (ou/rY)

575 I hope Hostess makes all their recipes and processes public knowledge.


They are not stupid enough to just put their intellectual property on the street. I wonder if sno-balls will still be available. This is not the world I grew up expecting!!

Posted by: Peaches at November 15, 2012 09:46 PM (kpCLl)

576 That's all well and good as far as it goes, but WHO chose the GOP nominee?

Sure, the establishment and the money men quickly lined up behind Romney, but ultimately, it was GOP primary voters who chose him.

It may be a small matter, but yet again I think getting rid of open primaries would be a good thing, chasing out the milquetoast moderates (and mischief makers). Though, I'll note, others have suggested this would have the opposite effects, chasing off hardcore conservatives and libertarians who don't particularly care to register as Republicans.

Posted by: Martin at November 15, 2012 09:46 PM (MSrqi)

577 >>>Because of all that, and his dignityin Office, Conservatives still hold a special place in their hearts for him.

Dignity? Dignified hubris.

And, no, he was not a conservative. He was fairly close to Obama in fact in his reckless growing of government.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 09:46 PM (Iyg03)

578
Dang, why after all these years, I can't get my paragraphs right?
I just got a new comp, anyone have advice for me?
Thanks!

Posted by: Pam at November 15, 2012 09:46 PM (cgrL5)

579
You mentioned the last time the GOP got a majority was George HW Bush. Also, we haven't received majorities with our later candidates because they were not true conservatives. Well, George HW Bush wasn't a true conservative either.

Posted by: Mark at November 15, 2012 09:47 PM (rvbao)

580 @540 Hoo boy.. and look what you accomplished! Oh wait.. you accomplished nothing besides miss a bunch of movies.

******

I didn't miss anything nim rod...I don't live for the next greatest movie...

I don't run to Hollywood to give them my earned money...

Comes out on Netflix or free on cable usually within a year...


Posted by: Chicken ala King at November 15, 2012 09:47 PM (VvvBE)

581 546 The Grand Inquisitor,

Then the best answer is to split the nation and show them we are the better and more just system.

Fuck the double bind and the nation has been dead since 2001 or 1968 hell one could make the argument without WW2 it may have died in the late 30s early 40s.

I am done allowing fucking Ivy league asshammers to collect trillions of bucks and still fuck up America.

Enough.

Go as Galt as you can prepare as best as you can Let it Burn if you stumble vote with your feet if able.

Concentrate the red and take care of brother and sister red first period.

Fuck the Blue go red.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:47 PM (LRFds)

582 Posted by: Catseye at November 15, 2012 09:40 PM (c7wu3)


I know what you mean: the sick feeling that anything and anyone productive and honest is just setting themselves up to be bled out by an ever increasing number of worthless parasites.

Posted by: Model-1066 at November 15, 2012 09:48 PM (NoDnj)

583 Sorry to be all crankypantsificated.

Posted by: Peaches at November 15, 2012 09:48 PM (kpCLl)

584 I see only one thing missing on that list! Karl Rove and the rest of the damn Country Club RINOs!

Posted by: Old Dog at November 15, 2012 09:49 PM (tQYJH)

585 JC!

Hannity is playing that audio of Kerry testifying and the rage has welled up in me to the point that I want to throw something through the t.v.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at November 15, 2012 09:49 PM (piMMO)

586 Pam, the site formatting has sucked since a troll took it down, oh....almost a year ago.



To get paragraphs, hit return at least 3 times.

Posted by: Tami at November 15, 2012 09:50 PM (X6akg)

587 Utter nonsense. You're trying to tell me that Karl Rove thinks the only way we can win is to buy votes ?

Say whatever you want about Bush and his "compassionate conservatism", but Karl Rove turned out the GOP base to an extraordinary extent over red meat conservative issues in 2004. That is HARDLY the record of someone peddling the "we have to out-democrat the Democrats" strategy.

Posted by: deadrody at November 15, 2012 09:50 PM (DkAJe)

588 I didn't miss anything nim rod...I don't live for the next greatest movie...

I don't run to Hollywood to give them my earned money...

Comes out on Netflix or free on cable usually within a year...


Posted by: Chicken ala King at November 15, 2012 09:47 PM (VvvBE)


How does an industry that makes such crappy products stay in business? I think the last movie I saw in a theater was "Steel Magnolias".

Posted by: BignJames at November 15, 2012 09:51 PM (j7iSn)

589 Dang, I thought, okay, only 2 beers in the house, that's a good thing. Fuck, I'll be right back.

Posted by: Peaches at November 15, 2012 09:51 PM (kpCLl)

590 552 This doesn't mean I hate you or disagree with you but to quote Prof. Reynolds "Something that can't go on forever won't". And right now I think one of those things is our country. I can't cry anymore I've been out of tears for a while now, I am sorry.
-
Act with hope even if you can't feel hope. And let your feelings be bold too, if you can.

My argument is: where is the reward for crumbling and accepting the future that people like Bill Clinton and Tim Wise are saying is inevitable? Who pays us, when and where, in what coin, for living without hope like they want us to, till we die?

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 15, 2012 09:51 PM (SWuYh)

591 "Sorry to be all crankypantsificated."

Imagine Tom Brady throwing a pass so hard into the numbers that it knocks the receiver right out of his pants.

Posted by: derit at November 15, 2012 09:51 PM (I88Jc)

592 I would like to add that I have (in my short time here) definately developed some faves. There are leaders among this tribe. I see reasoned, considered, comments (you know who you are). And I love the Conservative ladies. From the kitteh gurlz, the matronly/motherly, and the stompy-booted. I love this blog. And I love all of you patriots.
-
Keep the faith. Justice will, eventually, prevail. Ours is the only "winning" philosophy, if we stay true...

Posted by: Just Another Moron (Formerly New and Semi-New) at November 15, 2012 09:51 PM (mkb9H)

593 Imagine Tom Brady throwing a pass so hard into the numbers that it knocks the receiver right out of his pants.

Posted by: derit at November 15, 2012 09:51 PM (I88Jc)

Heh. Gronk!!!!

Posted by: Peaches at November 15, 2012 09:52 PM (kpCLl)

594 So, since John Kerry will probably be nominated for SecDef, does that mean that Jane Fonda was not interested?

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 09:52 PM (MmH0Z)

595 >>>Utter nonsense. You're trying to tell me that Karl Rove thinks the only way we can win is to buy votes ?

What, you mean like Medicare Part D? Sure.

>>>but Karl Rove turned out the GOP base to an extraordinary extent over red meat conservative issues in 2004

9-11. Iraq. Incumbency.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 09:52 PM (Iyg03)

596 More Red Dawn less Mooseport

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 09:52 PM (uvNSk)

597 A lot of these establishment types like Rove who sold the Party on Romney, simply refuse to acknowledge that he was a flawed candidate. (More precisely, they refuse to acknowledge that they made a mistake.)

2010 was driven chiefly by opposition to Obamacare, so, of course in 2012, the GOP nominates perhaps the one Republican who cannot make a credible case against it because he authored Romneycare.

Party of Stupid(TM) indeed.

Posted by: Martin at November 15, 2012 09:53 PM (MSrqi)

598 He made the choice quite stark. The electorate simply wasn't buying it.Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry

No, he did not. He refused to set up the distinction and go after Obama for lying about his actions and philosophy.

Romney crafted a nice and genteel proposition when what was needed was a locker-room, unconfortable, gamefaced, miffed coaching.

I
would argue that Republicans need to take more of a populist stance.
Romney should have hit Obama on not prosecuting Wall St execs.


The Romney nom did make that tac a bit difficult, but I still think he could have tried a version of that before the convention he should have introduced himself to the public outside of the MSM's frame. He could have described his work at Bain as just a biz-doctor or something. Restructuring isn't the same as the stereotypical Wall Street gameshow. A little, but not a a lot room in which to try to be more populist.

Jindal
is right.. we look like the party that is defending big money.. the
very people/industries fucking over the little guy - i.e US!


Everyone's right after the whistle blows.

We
need to push conservatism as a populist view.. we need to re-make the
GOP as the party that looks out for middle American workers.. so far,
all we seem to do is look like the party defending the rich.


Can't disagree with that. It wouldn't take a lot of populism either to start the seed of doubt with this administration. They are incompetent, credentialed assholes who love the money. Opportunities abound.



Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 15, 2012 09:53 PM (4h0z0)

599 Fitting quote from the Simpsons;

"I just swept the circle of death!"

Posted by: Model-1066 at November 15, 2012 09:54 PM (NoDnj)

600
You know how conservatives can win? Not by pandering to certain groups like everyone is saying, or running a 'true conservative' like everyone else is saying. No, let the economy drop off the fiscal cliff. Let us turn into Greece, and then when the dust settles, someone can dust off the original copy of the Constitution and start fresh.

Posted by: Jheri Carl at November 15, 2012 09:54 PM (//cIL)

601 Your husband's smuglings (smug lib siblings) will eventually be my slaves.

Into the smokehouse with the rest of them.

Posted by: toby928© for TB at November 15, 2012 09:55 PM (QupBk)

602 @600

Here.Here

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 09:55 PM (uvNSk)

603 I still can't accept that conservatives sat home because Romney wasn't "Conservative Enough", and, in effect, voted for 4 more years of the JEF! It just blows my mind.
What have they done?
I find myself waffling between anger and depression.

WTF, O?
So it goes...

Posted by: ChrisP at November 15, 2012 09:55 PM (G+4K3)

604
I submit that you are discussing the rearrangement of thefamous chairs on the Titanic. The idea that electing Republicans will save or even help is not supported by recent history. Reagan's era happened in a different time and country. We are going to have a fiscal collapse or a slow Japan style lost 2 decades or so. Bernanke is walking that tightrope (slow Japan style)right now and has been for some time. Either way, we are going to lose about half our wealth. That's the math, and no candidate or party can change it.

Also, avery high percentage of today's electorate is untouchable by any campaign, candidate, ads or strategy. You mustfight over a small percentage who don't pay any attention to politics, let alone geopolitics. That's where rdbrewer is right. You want to win the presidency, get a star with some savvy.

Posted by: Meremortal says Starve The Beast, Go Galt at November 15, 2012 09:56 PM (1Y+hH)

605 The elephant in the room?

Since the 60s at least, The RINO side of the Repub ledger has let the Dems steer the course of the country by being Dem lite. All the big gubmint and none of the leftist social values. Repubs grew to like being the back benchers and under dogs...permanent minority status... Repubs thought offering things like the Dems was all they needed to do.But itn turns out, a lot of Dems crave Identity. Identity politics is the thing that crushed the Right all along the way. Cause we are Individualists, not identity seekers, and no one seems to see that...at all.

So,When a towering figure uses power and rightist identity it works. Problem is in other countries that combination led to fascism. As Reagan proved, identifying with your leader is the key; and we suck at it. Reagan did it by himself, and had to have two runs at Preezy to get it done. But it can be done...

Giving free shiite is a bunch of the problem, but a certain percentage of those takers might be pryable from the ranks of the Left, and elections can be won. Better, more controlled electronic voting, tabulated in America would help. Criminal prosecution for extra national donations would help. Having a ground game that was as thorough and well guided as the Dem's GOTV effort would be good.

Ultimately, all this is a band-aid:

1/A; either the debt is paid with inflationary dollars, staunching the problem and letting the cycle start over again, or

2/B; the thing collapses and the whole cycle begins anew. But with case 2, or B, the person holding our leash might just speak Russian or Chinese...or worse yet, Arabic...

So, being Christian by nature, I go with Let It Burn...the sooner the better.

Getting it to fix at 20T or 25T to repay...Let It Burn...Let the Left hold it and fix it as far they will...if they even would...Let.It.Burn...

Posted by: sandman is now 9.5 at November 15, 2012 09:56 PM (zxaA2)

606 #464 - there were 2 people in the race of which Romney was by far the more conservative - saying he wasn't conservative enough compared to someone not even in the race (ore even alive) is useless
#519 - Romney repeatedly said he would repeal Obamacare. Unless one thought he was lying this meant a 75% or more chance Obamacare would be gone. Instead the people who sat home reeelcted the guy with 0% chance of repealing Obamacaer

Posted by: NoBama12 at November 15, 2012 09:57 PM (ykY2u)

607 @ 600 Shorter: LiB

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at November 15, 2012 09:57 PM (MmH0Z)

608 @603

No...No

#1.) Fraud
#2.) Paul Bots stayed home
#3.) Population does know the facts because of Media manipulation
#4.) People attempting to usher in economic pain now, instead of after Obama Administration leaves.

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 09:58 PM (uvNSk)

609 I opposed Mitt in the primaries, but promised I would support and vote for the nominee.

I kept my vow.

Now: a new one.

Never again.

Posted by: eman at November 15, 2012 09:58 PM (sRus3)

610 Oops "doesn't"

Posted by: Walter Sobchak at November 15, 2012 09:59 PM (uvNSk)

611
Thx Tami...guess I have been mad enough to post long rants in the past year, lol.


Ok, hope this works.


Posted by: Pam at November 15, 2012 09:59 PM (cgrL5)

612 Take off the gloves...now. Get in the libtards faces now...get rid of the "mr nice guy" crap...now! If Rubio is serious about 2016...he needs to pounce on any and everything BoBo does that is unAmerican and props of socialism...which is everything. We must be united around not only our ideals, but the person who is representing our ideals. When a Christie Cheese boi does one of his stunts...bitch slap him/her down...now!! We will never win back this country if we are not willing to fight to get it back....words are cheap and words or weak and we loose. I am tired of loosing. If we say kick their asses....then damn it...let's kick their asses...we have alot of ball growing to do ourselves....just saying.....
Posted by: bayway48 at November 15, 2012 07:40 PM (FzYtL)


This.

Posted by: Snotnosed Nuclear Sonic Punk at November 15, 2012 09:59 PM (Y+woW)

613 Near a state college campus? They usually have movie nights.

The problem is there's very little being produced even worth bothering to go out to see, even for free. The last thing I saw in a theater was "300", and I bought the DVD as well.

Walmart has these 50-packs of old movies for $10. Most of them are quite bad, but the handful of good ones make the things a much better value proposition than a movie theater. Even the bad one function as sleep aids at night.

Posted by: @PurpAv at November 15, 2012 09:59 PM (GHI/D)

614 Deadrody, wasn't there a same sex marriage initiative on the ballot in 2004 in a couple of swing states that helped get out the base for the election? Might be a good time to do the same in 2014

Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 15, 2012 09:59 PM (VrVBw)

615

Sorry, what did you say? We were distracted putting another coat of paint on our "Another Bush/Chris Christie 2016" signs.

Posted by: The Republican Establishment

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at November 15, 2012 09:59 PM (kdS6q)

616
I know if I comment now, there will be a new post within 5 minutes........4........3......2....
How does running athlete Paula Broadwell have the torpedoes, in that pic with Petraeus ?

Runners lose those. Must be store bought.

Posted by: seamrog at November 15, 2012 10:01 PM (Qh1Od)

617 LOS ANGELES, November 15, 2012 President Valerie Jarrett sent out her spokesperson Barack Obama to take questions from the media.

It was Mr. Obama's first real press conference in eight months. As with previous press conferences, questions requiring a "yes" or "no" answer would be given lengthy explanations to reduce the number of questions asked. Whether the topic was Benghazi or the looming fiscal cliff, President Jarrett instructed Mr. Obama to answer all questions with "invest in education" or "green energy."


Read more: Mr. Obama's latest temper tantrum: America held hostage by democracy | Washington Times Communities
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter

http://tinyurl.com/chr5a5y

heh

Posted by: BignJames at November 15, 2012 10:01 PM (j7iSn)

618 "600
You know how conservatives can win? Not by pandering to certain groups like everyone is saying, or running a 'true conservative' like everyone else is saying. No, let the economy drop off the fiscal cliff. Let us turn into Greece, and then when the dust settles, someone can dust off the original copy of the Constitution and start fresh.
"

Or they'll kill a bunch of people and establish a dictatorship.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 15, 2012 10:01 PM (uhAkr)

619 Martin,

"A lot of these establishment types like Rove who sold the Party on
Romney, simply refuse to acknowledge that he was a flawed candidate.
(More precisely, they refuse to acknowledge that they made a mistake.)



2010 was driven chiefly by opposition to Obamacare, so, of course in
2012, the GOP nominates perhaps the one Republican who cannot make a
credible case against it because he authored Romneycare.



Party of Stupid(TM) indeed."

"Romney-care" was in one state. Mass legislature and Gov agreed it was ok for Mass. He did NOT advocate it for the US.

If more "Purists" like you, got off the couch and voted for 'Anybody But Obama', the JEF would be gone.

Posted by: ChrisP at November 15, 2012 10:01 PM (G+4K3)

620 Take off the gloves...now. Get in the libtards faces now...get rid of
the "mr nice guy" crap...now! If Rubio is serious about 2016...he needs
to pounce on any and everything BoBo does that is unAmerican and props
of socialism...which is everything. We must be united around not only
our ideals, but the person who is representing our ideals. When a
Christie Cheese boi does one of his stunts...bitch slap him/her
down...now!! We will never win back this country if we are not willing
to fight to get it back....words are cheap and words or weak and we
loose. I am tired of loosing. If we say kick their asses....then damn
it...let's kick their asses...we have alot of ball growing to do
ourselves....just saying.....


Posted by: bayway48 at November 15, 2012 07:40 PM (FzYtL)

Oh my. I don't know...that sounds extreme

Posted by: Julia at November 15, 2012 10:02 PM (MmH0Z)

621 No, let the economy drop off the fiscal cliff. Let
us turn into Greece, and then when the dust settles, someone can dust
off the original copy of the Constitution and start fresh. Posted by: Jheri Carl


I've become fond of #LIB but we have to face up to the problem that there is not a single bit of truth in that the country would inexorably become staunchly conservative after a decline.

There is not a single reason why the public wouldn't be equally inclined to join a full-blown, genocidal Marxist program.

These ideas, while somewhat cathartic, they aren't necessarily true.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 15, 2012 10:02 PM (4h0z0)

622 "The problem is there's very little being produced even worth bothering to go out to see, even for free."

The next six installments of "The Hobbit"

That new James Bond flick, "Octopussy"

Stars Wars reboots

Posted by: derit at November 15, 2012 10:04 PM (I88Jc)

623 "574
It drives me nuts when the right seems to concede that liberal policies
somehow benefit the poor instead of locking them into a life of poverty.
nuts!



I give them some slack because it is literally impossible to advance
a conservative message with the media in the left's corner. there is no
way they are going to give it any airtime at all. We simply have to
find a way to get around it.



I think we need to do some conservative community organizing. Going
out into communities -- poor and minority communities -- and connecting
the dots between conservative principles and the specific lives of the
people we are talking to. Connecting the dots is not pandering.

Posted by: elizabethe at November 15, 2012 09:46 PM (ou/rY)"

I was thinking this week that part of the GOP's problem is that they, on some level, even if not enough, remain the party of "negative rights" as enshrined in the Constitution, while the Dems are all-in on "positive rights". I concluded that part of the reason "negative rights" don't have as much attraction is that they imply the the "positive" parts of life, especially work, are your own responsibility. One of the reasons the media plays the "The Republicans don't give enough details about their plans" is because the "details" of many Republican plans are meant to be filled in by individual citizens pursuing their own rational self-interest. How is Romney supposed to detail out how every person will react to "cutting regulations", for example? Or how they might use a tax cut to save enough to start a side business?

I also think that you need a better future time-orientation to appreciate negative rights, because you need to understand that "positive rights" just divert resources into government-approved schemes and preclude those resources being used in activities which aren't pre-approved by the government. Every dollar that's redistributed from the private economy into Obamacare is obviously a dollar than can't fund a future innovation, for example.

Posted by: The Grand Inquisitor at November 15, 2012 10:04 PM (P2Ufm)

624 I want a thorough investigation of those absent GOP voters. Exactly WHY didn't they vote. I don't care if it takes 6 months to a year to interview them individually. I want the truth.

Until we know why, we cannot decide what to do.

Was it fear of losing EBT and unemployment? Anti-Mormonism? Too liberal? Too conservative? Not (choose one, Palin, Perry, Cain, Paul)? Lazy? Liked abortion? What???

Until we know, all of this speculation is based on assumptions, not facts.

Posted by: Miss Marple at November 15, 2012 10:04 PM (GoIUi)

625 618 Bevel,

How insane is it that I have arrived at the conclusion the only way to stop that may be to leave?

Make no mistake if not a dictatorship the left want a totalitarian oligarchy using illegal immigration to nullify my vote.

How the fuck did I wind up here?

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 10:04 PM (LRFds)

626 How does an industry that makes such crappy products stay in business?

Foreign markets mostly. Even the really bad stuff out of Hollywood plays well overseas...because their native movie industries are amateurish by comparison to our sucky stuff.

There's been quite a few movies recently that were losers in the domestic market, but were winners when foreign markets weighed in.

Posted by: @PurpAv at November 15, 2012 10:05 PM (GHI/D)

627 "Concentrate the red and take care of brother and sister red first period.

Fuck the Blue go red."

I know Texas is a popular state for the Red, but a state that a lot of people never think about is Kentucky. Especially Northern Kentucky.

- Solid RED (Rand Paul)
- no extra gun laws
- concealed carry are readily available (My 83 YO mother has one)
- one of the lowest costs of living in the country

Summers can really suck though.

Thought I would throw that out there.

Posted by: sdavis at November 15, 2012 10:05 PM (njVMI)

628 ONT is up. (new Thread)

Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 15, 2012 10:07 PM (4h0z0)

629 125 Guys, Rubio wont run in '16. He cant be on the presidential ticket
and run for his Senate seat at the same time. If he loses his political
career would be over. He wont run before 2020.

----------------------------------------
Rubio could run for Bill Nelson's Senate seat just two years later.

Or he could possibly run for Governor of Florida in 2018, because a Dem may very well be elected governor in two years, since Florida's Republican governor has low approval ratings right now.

Posted by: edj at November 15, 2012 10:07 PM (+QKfp)

630 627 Sdavis,

Maybe but it is too close to home.

I almost wish I had taken the Ft Knox assignment.

I quit Ohio last week, my heart couldn't take being so close when I finally no longer chase my soldier wife.

I think I will be in AK, ND, MT, ID, TX, or LA.....probably LA I know good people in a good parish that live humbly but prepared and will face tomorrow with strong loving hearts.

Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 10:08 PM (LRFds)

631 Explicitly do things that are good for Whites, like opposing affirmative action and mass immigration, ask for support from Whites for representing them, and see how much of that still-large White voting base rallies. It might be enough to save the future.
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 15, 2012 09:12 PM (j7LHF)

Jesus Christ. What is this, an exegesis of the '14 words'? Take it on over to Stormfront or American Renaissance. Reading it here sickens me.

The GOP has traditionally been bound together by its ideals--limited government, individual self-determination, fidelity to founding principles. The path you advocate leads nowhere but down into the darkness of the fringe. Further, the reason why skin color and ethnicity play such a large role in American politics is because dividing us into groups and setting those groups at each others' throats is how demagogues rule, not how free men govern.

Posted by: troyriser at November 15, 2012 10:08 PM (ptcFO)

632 What about, GOP, the Party of the Cleansing Fire? Of course, we'd have to shitcan about 90 percent of our elected officials. Which would be fine.

Posted by: Peaches at November 15, 2012 10:08 PM (kpCLl)

633 Sven-
I see your posts and almosts always agree with your articulation. You are one of the leaders. Galt, or run for office? I am not ready to completely capitulate. IronGramps, et aldeserve more. We (as a group) have to educate and elucidate the idealofindividual supremacy. Self evidency, and whatnot. Capitalism is the most logical of the models. Keep the faith bro'.

Posted by: Just Another Moron (Formerly New and Semi-New) at November 15, 2012 10:09 PM (mkb9H)

634 "Romney-care" was in one state. Mass legislature and Gov agreed it was ok for Mass. He did NOT advocate it for the US.

If more "Purists" like you, got off the couch and voted for 'Anybody But Obama', the JEF would be gone.
Posted by: ChrisP at November 15, 2012


I'm hardly a "purist". I called Ron Paul an asshole for not endorsing Romney then bemoaning the results of the election. I did vote for Romney, but I'm not going to pretend he was the perfect candidate who would have won if not for a handful of tactical decisions.

Complaining about people staying at home accomplishes nothing. You have to do something to get them to vote.

Posted by: Martin at November 15, 2012 10:09 PM (MSrqi)

635 "581
546 The Grand Inquisitor,

Then the best answer is to split the nation and show them we are the better and more just system.


Posted by: sven10077 at November 15, 2012 09:47 PM (LRFds)"

I've been saying this since 2004, after seeing the libs' reaction to Bush's win, which struck me as completely psychotic.On some level, a nation exists to make its citizens happy or, at least derives its legitimacy from not directly causing its citizens to be unhappy. Today's US makes at least half of its population deeply unhappy, depending on the results of elections. Seems to me that's a recipe for instability. There's plenty of land on this continent for two countries.

Posted by: The Grand Inquisitor at November 15, 2012 10:10 PM (P2Ufm)

636 630 probably LA I know good people in a good parish that live humbly but prepared and will face tomorrow with strong loving hearts.

Ahhh... Cajuns. Well, at least I know you aren't afraid of shitty, muggy summers

Posted by: sdavis at November 15, 2012 10:10 PM (njVMI)

637 As you can see his many failures have not costsRove many adherents on this site. They want more loser to prop up until they get knocked over on election day. So more 'Hot Air' hero blue tinted rinos for the GOP ! More "sanity". More fail.

Posted by: Cackfinger at November 15, 2012 10:10 PM (CCHli)

638 Romney's line was that Obama was a nice guy but in over his head on the economy, and that the issues were 1. the economy, 2. the economy and 3. the economy.

That didn't stir up enough support, and it wasn't true anyway. The demographics are even more important than the economy.

People aren't in a state of being ready or near-ready to accept a collective death purely because of the economy. It's not that America is losing some money, or even a lot of money.

It's that the country is going away. More precisely, what made America America, its population and the distinctive values of that population, is going away.

That is what has to be addressed by anyone who wants to restore genuine hope.

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 15, 2012 10:11 PM (SWuYh)

639
I have never been a fan of the public turning on Big Gov.


Instead, the worse the econ gets, the more they will turn to gov for help, and for employment. We lose more of the public to gov everyday that we "let it burn".


Our only hope is that since we are such a young country, and our history is one of being founded on liberty, that those instinctive memories may still save us.

The question is; do we have enough REAL Americans left remind us?


This is why we cannot wait for ballot box regress....what every we decide to do it had better be fast and furious.

Posted by: Pam at November 15, 2012 10:12 PM (cgrL5)

640 p, since Florida's Republican governor has low approval ratings right now

The systematic demonization of Scott by Democrats and the media is something any would be Republican candidate should study.

As a practical matter, out in the street, he's been no better or worse than any governor FL has had in the past 30 years, but perception has gone against him hard.

Posted by: @PurpAv at November 15, 2012 10:13 PM (GHI/D)

641 I meant to mention this earlier, but got distracted elsewhere.

All of the analysis, strategizing, and blaming is pointless if we don't recognize the real elephant in the room, which is that democracy is not a stable form of government.

We must return to a system in which voting is an earned privilege, not a right. Only makers, not takers, should ever be able to vote. Period.

The universal franchise will inevitably doom us. There is no way around it. It doesn't work, it can't work, it will never work.

Until we address that, all of this discussion is so much arm-waving.

Posted by: rickl at November 15, 2012 10:15 PM (sdi6R)

642 All: I'm on my shitty iPhone what has busted glass because Comcast sucks ass and my cable is down. Hard to scroll through and absorb the wisdom of the moron horde on the tiny screen so bear with me. Or not. Do I get a bag of ewok shavings for effort?

Posted by: Model-1066 at November 15, 2012 10:16 PM (guWsH)

643
Posted by: weft cut-loop at November 15, 2012 10:02 PM (4h0z0)
--- ---- ----- ----- ---



With respect, you are laboring under the misconception that Republicans can somehow avoid a massive financial contraction (depression)and years of hardship.



They can not. There is no policy including austerity, that will avoid what is coming. All preparations and other strategies should start with that premise, in my opinion. Thanks for reading.

Posted by: Meremortal says Starve The Beast, Go Galt at November 15, 2012 10:16 PM (1Y+hH)

644 @564

this pretty much goes hand in hand with my theory that the better looking candidate wins the election in the modern era, and it's not much more complicated than that. perceived coolness ie. clinton's sax playing also comes into play.

johnson>goldwater (with the help of the kennedy sympathy)
nixon>johnson
carter>ford (with the help of the nixon scandal)
reagan>carter
reagan>mondale
bush>dukakis
clinton>bush (kinda close here, but women loved clinton and
clinton>dole
bush>gore
bush>kerry
obama>mccain
obama>romney (age mostly)

i am adjusting this hypothesis to replace it with my free shit theory going forward.

Posted by: matt foley at November 15, 2012 10:17 PM (ES9kw)

645
" You have to do something to get themto vote."

Therefore my fellow Americans, I nominate Eric Holder and Hillary Clinton to fill the two vacancies on the Supreme Court, John Kerry to be Secretary of Defense, and am announcing the only way we can save the country, the nationalization of all IRA's and 401k plans. Also, as gun violence is overwhelming us, I am hereby banning the private purchase of firearms. God Bless America.

Posted by: Barry Obama at November 15, 2012 10:18 PM (VrVBw)

646 Romney was plenty conservative. The baseless GOP base wasn't rational enough to support him. It was more important for them to be right than to remove Hussein.

Posted by: Terry Gain at November 15, 2012 10:24 PM (Xri0e)

647 While Romney got about 600,000 fewer votes than McCain, Obama lost nearly 7 million votes over his 2008 total. Obama turned off a lot of voters, but Romney couldn't sell them on him.

That suggests that Obama was successful in a message of, "It really doesn't make much difference, so you might as well vote for the devil you know."

Romney failed to draw sharp-enough contrasts, especially on the wildly unpopular Obamacare, which drove the 2010 elections. (In this respect, the author of Romneycare may have been the worst possible standard bearer for the GOP.)

Here's a thought, why don't we try nominating an actual small government conservative? What are we afraid of? That he may lose by a larger margin so we can't say, "Well, it least it was close"?

Posted by: Martin at November 15, 2012 10:25 PM (MSrqi)

648 yeah if we ran a real conservative, all those millions of mythical conservatives wouldve voted

Posted by: Avi at November 15, 2012 10:32 PM (40anC)

649 631 Jesus Christ. What is this, an exegesis of the '14 words'? Take it on over to Stormfront or American Renaissance. Reading it here sickens me.
-
I've said before: come back Pat Buchanan, much is forgiven. He turned out to be right on useless war, on demographics and on the culture.

The only major thing I think he's wrong on is that he's started to counsel resignation, and I think the right thing to do is to hope, and counsel hope, and act accordingly, however foolish or "sickening" some people may find that.

631 The GOP has traditionally been bound together by its ideals--limited government, individual self-determination, fidelity to founding principles.
-
Have you noticed that the Democratic Party has imported a new nation that thinks the opposite? "For the Race, everything, outside the Race, nothing!" A new population creates a new situation.

Have you noticed that being color-blind is now a. illegal under disparate impact, and b. collectively suicidal?

631 The path you advocate leads nowhere but down into the darkness of the fringe.
-
Have you notice that race-based politics is not the fringe but the spine of the Democratic Party, the law of the land, and in the Constitution by virtue of Carolene Products Footnote Four if nothing else?

631 Further, the reason why skin color and ethnicity play such a large role in American politics is because dividing us into groups and setting those groups at each others' throats is how demagogues rule, not how free men govern.
-
Emphasis on how demagogues rule, as in Barack Obama, right now.

What you are pretending is radical and strange is mainstream political practice, only the mainstream political practice is constant anti-White racial politics.

I think that anti-White racial politics ought to be opposed. You should too.

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 15, 2012 10:32 PM (SWuYh)

650 The "rule" of "it's his turn/he's next in line" isn't actually a thing. It can certainly look that way, but what actually happens is that the guy who came in second last time comes in with a pre-existing base of support. And he's generally been networking in the four years since, to build on that.

If "it's his turn now" were an actual rule, the establishment wouldn't have gotten behind Poppy Bush in 1980 (it was Reagan's "turn"), and they would've supported Romney right off the bat this year rather than try to cajole Christie into running first.

Which brings me to my other point. The establishment does, to some extent, pick our candidate. What happens is, these power-brokers meet up in smoke-filled rooms with fancy cigars and snifters of brandy, and they decide between themselves on a candidate they can all unite behind.

Meanwhile, the grassroots typically split between several candidates; as these
candidates drop out, some of their supporters go to the establishment
pick, while others continue to split between other non-establishment
candidates.

Think of the backroom wheeling and dealing as a pre-primary (premary?). These guys don't have more influence between them than all the grassroots types, but their united front is really hard to overcome unless we unite in a similar manner behind one candidate.

This happened in 1980. The grassroots united behind Reagan pretty quickly (building on his strong 1976 primary showing), and the establishment's pick, Bush, fell behind. The establishment, not wanting to be left out, cut a deal with Reagan; he agreed to take Bush on as his running mate for the sake of party unity, and the establishment grudgingly gave Reagan their blessing.

In 2000, the establishment got behind John McCain early on, but then he self-destructed, so they had no choice but to ditch him in favor of GWB, who was at least moderate enough for them to settle and had enough grassroots support to clinch the nomination outright with the establishment jumping on board.

In 2008, they again got behind McCain right off the bat, and he won because there wasn't anyone really exciting in the hunt that year. The grassroots sort of coalesced around Mitt Romney later on, but McCain already had a solid lead in the delegate count and colluded with Mike Huckabee to keep Romney from making a comeback.

In 2012, the establishment united behind Chris Christie, who wasn't even running. When they couldn't cajole him into throwing his huge hat in the ring, they settled for Romney. When Rick Perry jumped in, the grassroots quickly united behind him, making him the immediate front-runner. But then he self-destructed much like McCain had in 2000.

The GOP establishment is strong in its unity, but can be overcome by a determined and similarly unified grassroots effort. I'm not sure if there's anyone out there who could unite the grassroots in that way, but 2016 is a long way off.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 15, 2012 10:37 PM (RLZvP)

651 <<Anyone who thinks someone MORE conservative than Romney or Bush can win
an election just by the mere fact they are truly conservative is a
fucking idiot.>>

On what record of victories is this idiot line of thinking based?

Posted by: Sgt. York at November 15, 2012 10:40 PM (yk8/j)

652 Peaches- Yes, we do have to rid the GOP of 90% of them. We keep Jim DeMint, Rand Paul, Rubio, Ryan, and others.

McCain should retire, Christie has always been a RINO, he may be good for NJ but not for the GOP. I live in MA, and was not happy with many of Brown's votes, but he is better than Warren will be. Brown's biggest mistake in his reelection campaign, to me, was to call in the RINOs to campaign with him. I include McCain as RINO, he's conservative when it suits him.
Think about McCain//Fiengold and we know he's not a conservative.
Scott was trying too hard to be a liberal republican, here, we have many conservatives that were incenses with his vote for Dodd/Frank and others.
Scott should have run as a MA conservative, we had a moon bat opposing him and moonbats win here.
Purge the GOP and start anew. Boehner should not be speaker, he thinks he's won but he's lost more than he expected! I haze been in a mood since last week's election and it shows no sign of going away!

Posted by: CarolT at November 15, 2012 10:42 PM (z4WKX)

653 <<W was most definitely not seen as a "RINO" by, erm, the conservative base who voted for him>>

You must have been a child at the time, or did you miss the fact he lost the popular vote the first time?

Did you miss the wars over No Child and Medicare Part D?

Seriously, your revisionist views is nowhere near reality.

Posted by: Sgt. York at November 15, 2012 10:43 PM (yk8/j)

654 <<Also, remember to get your last twinkies.>>

Yup, that ship's goin' down hard.

Posted by: Sgt. York at November 15, 2012 10:43 PM (yk8/j)

655 The grassroots most certainly did not unite behind Perry. Huckabee and Palin supporters went between Bachman and Cain, who went aggressively after him along with Ron Paul and Rick Santorum. The latter even argued against his own 2006 immigration bill he was so desperate to bloody Perry up for Romney. Cain and Santorum endorsed Romney in 2008. Perry's ratings started slipping long before, "Oops."

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 10:47 PM (i0vBR)

656 I didn't hear this from any indy/moderate voters last week: "Hmm. But that George Bush did give me Medicare Part D. I think I'll vote Republican this time."

Did you guys hear someone say that?

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 10:49 PM (Iyg03)

657 "...I've said before: come back Pat Buchanan, much is forgiven. He turned out to be right on useless war, on demographics and on the culture..."

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 15, 2012 10:32 PM (SWuYh)

Patrick 'Hitler was a great man' Buchanan isn't right about anything. Liberal talking head programs trot him out as the token 'conservative' because he meshes nicely with their idea of a bigoted, boorish conservative. Whatever the hell else Buchanan might be, he isn't a conservative.

Posted by: troyriser at November 15, 2012 10:50 PM (ptcFO)

658 651

Poppy Bush lost for breaking his tax pledge. W ran as a conservative. Reagan built his coalition campaigning for Goldwater. His conservative 1976 speech launched his 1980 candidacy. Who are these fucking moderate winners?

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 15, 2012 10:55 PM (i0vBR)

659 All of the analysis, strategizing, and blaming is pointless if we don't recognize the real elephant in the room, which is that democracy is not a stable form of government.
===

Damn good thing that we don't have a Democracy then, eh?

Posted by: sdavis at November 15, 2012 10:56 PM (njVMI)

660 The United State is not a democracy we a republic, if we can keep it to quote Benjamin Franklin.

Posted by: CarolT at November 15, 2012 11:01 PM (z4WKX)

661 >>>W ran as a conservative.

No, he ran as a social conservative. Not the same thing. Socons aren't necessarily conservative at all.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 15, 2012 11:02 PM (Iyg03)

662 #655: Perry self-destructed with "You have no heart." Before he said that, he was the front-runner due to very strong grassroots support.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 15, 2012 11:03 PM (RLZvP)

663 Trouble is, it takes a Ronald Reagan to win as a straight up conservative. When you tell the takers to get off their asses and take responsibility for their own lives, you have to do it with style and smiles. Otherwise, you just come off as a mean old man. Where has our Ronald Reagan been? Clinton could connect. Obama has great rhetorical skill. Bush didn't, but look who he had to run against? Kerry and Gore. Pffft. No matter what else, the candidate has to be a great personality. We need a Christie personality, with better conservative credentials.

Posted by: Cornfed at November 15, 2012 11:06 PM (CyqAO)

664 Yep, it's time for Huckabee.

Posted by: Hussein in the Membrane at November 15, 2012 11:16 PM (EX+sq)

665 Here's another point made in National Review Online today by Michael Walsh, which I think is related to yours:

"The last two Democratic presidents have both been kids from nowhere, not
poor ... but driven to make something of themselves
in the world. ... Some Republican presidents used to come from the same Jacksonian,
bootstraps class ... but
since Reagan the party has nominated a succession of blue bloods and
millionaires... Three of the four of them lost presidential
elections and promptly returned to their former lives; in effect, they
had no skin in the game.

"In 2016, maybe a couple of guys with lean and hungry looks, who
understand that a national election means a national campaign of
principled ideas, and not just winning a few precincts in the Buckeye
State, might be just the ticket."http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/333446

Posted by: Erich Schwarz at November 15, 2012 11:18 PM (fu1qz)

666 Ugh, that came out somewhat badly formatted ... oh well!

Posted by: Erich Schwarz at November 15, 2012 11:19 PM (fu1qz)

667 What do you guys think of Allen West in '16? I'd be pretty excited.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 15, 2012 11:19 PM (RLZvP)

668 657 Whatever the hell else Buchanan might be, he isn't a conservative.
-
He tried to conserve America. I think that's conservative.

What do you think of Karl Rove's policy to go along with importing a new Hispanic nation, by means of replacement-level immigration both legal and illegal (but blessed by amnesty), on the assumption that it is or will become Republican? Do you think that is conservative?

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 15, 2012 11:28 PM (SWuYh)

669 Posted by: The Lightworker at November 15, 2012 11:28 PM (SWuYh)

Saying Hitler was a great man is not something an American conservative would say or think or act upon by writing a fucking book about it. Buchanan is a cartoon.

And Karl Rove? His idea that Hispanic immigrants are somehow going to suddenly adopt conservative ideas of individual freedom and limited government is an example of magical thinking, especially since Spanish-speaking media is slanted left to far-left. Another thing, too: divvying people up into ethnic voting blocs is a tried and true Democratic Party tactic. Race pandering is their game and Republicans are not good at it, mainly because the founding principles of the GOP are implicitly predicated upon color-blind merit. They seek to divide while we strive to unite. That's one of the big differences between us and them.

So no, Rove is not a conservative. Insofar as I know, he has never pretended to be.

Posted by: troyriser at November 15, 2012 11:42 PM (ptcFO)

670 Every single nominee was elected by the Republican voters in the primaries. If you want more conservative nominees, you must do one or more of the following:

1. Attract more conservative voters
2. Recruit better conservative candidates (Santorum, Gingrich, really?)
3. Sell the rest of the party's electorate on the conservative candidates

Whine all you wish like some crazed fringe nutter about the "Establishment forcing X down our throats," but "they" have done NO SUCH THING. Our primary process is the most democratic in the world - even more democratic than the Democratic Party because the GOP reserves far fewer "Super Delegate" seats for party bosses and activists, elected officials, and special interest groups.

Every candidate starts out even. The problem is that since Reagan (and for the most part before him) the so-called "conservative" candidates have SUCKED ASS.

If your complaint is instead who gets support from big donors, tough. It's their money, who the hell do you think you are to tell them who to donate to? But Romney in particular built his own donor base until he had the nomination wrapped up, he wasn't a consensus pick of our big money men like, say, Dubya in 1999/2000. Neither did the others you mention, Bush the Elder, Dole, and McCain, attract the unanimity of the money men early UNTIL they had effectively wrapped up the nomination.

So, don't go blaming the Party because "conservative" candidates like Pat Buchanan, Phil Crane, Pete DuPont, Paul Laxalt, David Duke, Steve Forbes, Alan Keyes, Phil Gramm, Bob Dornan, Gary Bauer, Bob Smith, John Kasich, Herman Cain, Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Sam Brownback, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Michelle Bachmann, and Thad McCotter just had no broad appeal in their own party.

Posted by: Adjoran at November 15, 2012 11:45 PM (ZHQvg)

671 Rick Perry in 2016, with Rubio or Jindal as VP. Rick Perry came from very humble beginnings, it's too bad that FNC has Rove and will probably keep him because there is a long standing feud between the Bushes and the Perry's. Of course Rove will take Bush side, they all endorsed K B Hutchinson for Governor in 2010 against Perry, Perry won.
I wish I could move to TX!
Good night all.

Where is Steevey? I will say this for him.
Barack Obama is a SCOAMF!

Posted by: CarolT at November 15, 2012 11:46 PM (z4WKX)

672 @ 1 - 668

Wow. I've tried reading mosts of the posts in this thread and have come to conclusion that 'The Elephant in the Room cannot herd all these cats'.

I've read strong and valid arguments going in all directions.

I think the most common theme is that this, today's Republican Party is a loser.

Hundreds of reasons and excuses have been offered. I won't even begin to attempt to parse them.

So, I think we should consider starting a third party that's not Democrat and not Republican.

I don't know what to call it. I don't know what it's platform should be exactly - other than Liberty and Freedom.

I reckon we could call it the "Unherdable Party" - UP.

Instead of a jackass or elephant, our mascot could be a hot air balloon, or a rocket, maybe an eagle.

My mind is boggled at all the arguing going on here about why we lost. So let's join the UP and then argue about how we won.

Posted by: currently at November 15, 2012 11:56 PM (flA6l)

673 Karl Rove: "Republicans must do better with Hispanics and millennials."

The Republican Party must do better with Whites, immediately and in the long run, and the long run requires planning for Whites to have a future. Which should be fine, because a great way to get people to vote for you is to do stuff for them, and if it's useful political stuff it should lead to improved demographic prospects.

Doing better with Hispanics has been the agenda for many years. It doesn't work, so it can't be a top priority.

Increasing the White vote for the Republican Party is more practical in terms of numbers and for the long term in terms of a sustainable coalition. Where the two priorities conflict, boosting the White vote is more important.

I do not think that heavily unionized Northern Whites are going to vote in mighty numbers for the pure flame of conservative principles. I think they will vote for the said they see as acting in their interests. I think a "gift" or "gifts" of some kind will be needed. Goodies are needed.

The ability to compete for jobs one is qualified for without being hobbled by affirmative action, set-asides, quotas and disparate impact suits would be a valuable goodie. The suppression of competition from cheap illegal labor would be another goodie.

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 15, 2012 11:57 PM (SWuYh)

674 It's certainly possible for Perry to make a comeback in '16. McCain made a comeback in '08 after self-destructing in '00, after all.

I think it's less likely for Perry, as he pissed off a lot of the same strongly principled people he'll be counting on later, while McCain pissed off the same people but had his support base elsewhere.

Still, Perry is an appealing possibility for '16.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 16, 2012 12:02 AM (RLZvP)

675 672: Wow. I've tried reading mosts of the posts in this thread and have come to conclusion that 'The Elephant in the Room cannot herd all these cats'.
-
Ace is making a valid point. It's just not the only point that needs to be made.

The Republican Party is in more trouble than it would be if only a more conservative Presidential candidate was needed.

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 16, 2012 12:04 AM (SWuYh)

676
"Are those Republican principles? Of course not. But the fact that Republicans like Karl Rove think they are sheds light on why we've been losing elections."
This. But I would disagree they aren't GOP principles, and this is what has finally occurred to me. What are the supposed GOP principles? Abe Lincoln shat on the Constitution. He went far beyond naked scanners. Since then it's pretty much been maintaining the status quo and learning how to abuse our newfound federal powers.
Republicans almostunanimously supported the Patriot Act, along with the bailouts and all these other non-Conservative laws you speak of. The problem is that GOP ISN'T CONSERVATIVE. It never has been. Conservative in the traditional sense of being strict small government, individual liberty Constitutionalists.

Posted by: Andrew at November 16, 2012 12:05 AM (neFIy)

677 Also, the problem with dusting off Regan's playbook is if you really want to get down to it he wasn't a strict Constitutionalist either. Were we in a declared state of war with the USSR? Yet all that money was spent. Reagan himself stated the greatest failing of his administration was that he didn't balance the budget and effectively didn't stick to his own values.

Posted by: Andrew at November 16, 2012 12:08 AM (neFIy)

678 "TILL NOW I ALWAYS GOT BY ON MY OWN!" I tried to put you some truth. you don't want to here it. You are now and forever on your own! Goodbye!

Posted by: Catseye at November 16, 2012 12:16 AM (c7wu3)

679 I think a more conservative candidate than Romney would've won. His weakness on election day was 32% Republican turnout.

Part of this can be blamed on the catastrophic failure of ORCA; if it had worked as advertised, Romney would've won, if for no other reason, then because more Republicans would've been badgered into getting out to vote.

But it shouldn't have come down to that, with Obama losing so many votes from his '08 total. If we'd had a candidate who appealed more to conservatives, more of those Republicans who didn't vote would've been broken-glass voters like so many of us here were.

The problem is, too many rank-and-file grassroots types feel disenfranchised by the GOP now. The party refuses to deliver candidates who these people feel are really looking out for them, rather than just pandering a little and counting on anti-Democrat votes.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 16, 2012 12:17 AM (RLZvP)

680 Look at the Florida redistricting for evidence of the GOP establishment not wanting grassroots types rocking the boat. They put Allen West in a more liberal district, and put a sitting TEA Party congresswoman in position to have to fight a primary battle against a sitting establishment congressman.

These districts were clearly redrawn with the specific purpose of getting rid of TEA Party incumbents.

With Orangina Boehner easily winning nomination to be Speaker again, I'm not sure whether it'd be better to try to clean up the GOP or start a new party at this point.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 16, 2012 12:39 AM (RLZvP)

681 Amen and Preach. It. Brother!.

I seem to recall conservatives and Tea Party types like me saying over and over (and over) that we needed a candidate who actually believed in limited government and didn't have a history of using the Constitution as toilet paper. All we heard back from the establishment was "ignore Romneycare and all the other stuff that makes Romney look like a democrat" and "he's moderate and electable".

Obviously Romney was a squish too far for many people and, as it turns out, he was not very electable because of that.

Posted by: Amy at November 16, 2012 12:42 AM (NpRlM)

682 Sorry, but that's horse shit that we don't win because they aren't "real" conservatives. And the most liberal Republicans, Nixon and Bush Sr, won landslides.

As far as Romney vs McCain vs Dubya, I'd say they were all pretty close on the ideological scale, almost of it was simply timing.

I don't believe for a minute GOP voters sat out because they felt Romney was insufficiently conservative. And if they did, we need a new coalition of ADULTS in our movement.

We would have lost an epic landslide if we had nominated someone like Santorum or Newt, instead we lost by a couple points. Had a few small things broken our way (no Sandy, no Akin) I think Romney would have won.

When it coms to real life anecdotes, the people I know that are abandoning the GOP is almost exclusively over social/religious issues. I've yet to hear someone say they sat out the election because the GOp candidate didn't make abortion a bigger issue.

Posted by: Jeepers at November 16, 2012 12:52 AM (XDRsa)

683 Like I said, 32% Republican voter turnout. 32%. If we'd gotten even 40% instead, all those predictions of a Romney landslide would've come true.

Did 68% of Republicans sit at home because Romney was just right?

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 16, 2012 01:05 AM (RLZvP)

684 "When it coms to real life anecdotes, the people I know that are abandoning the GOP is almost exclusively over social/religious issues. I've yet to hear someone say they sat out the election because the GOp candidate didn't make abortion a bigger issue."

Agree.I know some Democrats who cling to their party only because the GOP's religious whacko's like Akin scare.

The problem is you cannot blame the so-cons for wanting to impose their morality: that's what politcis is about.

But if they could come around to believing that the best strategy for the culture and their religion and its views would be one where it would not be imposed, because they fear that if they lose the political argument, the imposition will be the other way around: the left imposing against religion, then they could become more libertarian.

Let me use an example. Gay marriage.

The left wants the state to legitimize and allow gay marriage by law.

The so-cons want the state to delegitimize and not allow gay marriage by law.

However, the so-cons are rightly worried about if they lose, will the state in legitimizing gay marriage come right into their churches and demand forced acceptance of gay marriage by private groups, i.e. your church must offer gay marriage or face the sanction of the state.

A solution to this is to not demand the state not allow gay marriage, but to instead have the state recede from the marriage issue entirely. This means so cons would have to give up the state ever working on their behalf to enforce their views on others, but in return they get a defense of their church.

They can continue with any private, cultural works against gay marriage, but cede the political weapon of using the state to achieve their goal in that regard.

IMHO, this is the bargain that has to be made. And they will make it once they see the left come into their churches. But we are not there quite yet.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 16, 2012 01:14 AM (NfAQ+)

685 The Tea Party isn't going anywhere. If we allow Obama to raise taxes, good and hard, and add in some of our own that will hurt libs, then suddenly the Tea Party will become extremely popular and demands for smaller government will occur.

It may take more than a few elections though - see California. You need to give the statists time to prove their "high taxes lead to strong economy" theory and have it fail. It will not be fun.

Posted by: Sexypig at November 16, 2012 01:18 AM (NfAQ+)

686 I think if we'd nominated Gingrich or Santorum, we'd have gotten higher Republican turnout at the cost of some independent votes. But at what proportions? That's the $64,000 question.

How many of those independents would've voted for Obama instead, and how many would've just stayed home?

And then there's the question of how many Democrats would've turned out.

Personally, I think the higher Republican turnout would've been enough to make the difference.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 16, 2012 01:18 AM (RLZvP)

687 58 Maet,

The establishment republicans in VA made sure primary voters here only had a choice of Romney or Ron Paul. They changed the rules about how many signatures had to be turned in before the the signature threshold had been deemed to have been met ( Republican party of Virginia decided in November of 2011 to increase the threshold for automatic certification from 10K to 15K... the signatures were due in December, 2011), to get candidates on the ballot without, ya know, telling the candidates in a timely fashion (except, I am assuming, Romney). They then decided that you had to have Since Ron Paul is ummm an acquired taste, Romney won handily (I voted for Paul in protest). Write in candidates are not allowed on primary ballots in Virginia.

The Virginia GOP also tried to have signing a loyalty oath (that you would vote for the GOP candidate in the general election) as a condition of being able to vote in the primaries at all. They only backed off because they came up with the loyalty oath within 60 days of the primary and state law does not allow rule changes that close to an election.

Posted by: Amy at November 16, 2012 01:30 AM (NpRlM)

688 The fact is, Obama made a clean sweep of the swing states. I really don't think a more conservative Republican candidate would've done worse than that. The only way that'd be possible would be if he lost some red states, too.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 16, 2012 01:31 AM (RLZvP)

689 Are you really arguing that a more conservative Republican would've lost Indiana and Idaho?

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 16, 2012 01:37 AM (RLZvP)

690 Or Oklahoma and Texas?

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 16, 2012 01:39 AM (RLZvP)

691 Or Georgia and Arizona?

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 16, 2012 01:43 AM (RLZvP)

692 Keep in mind, too, that Romney lost every swing state while winning the independent vote.

Where could he have gotten more votes and possibly won? From Republicans. Did I mention that 32% of Republicans went out to vote? 50% Republican turnout would've made up for a whole lot of independent votes lost for our candidate being too conservative for them.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler (@ProthonotaryW) at November 16, 2012 02:03 AM (RLZvP)

693 RDBrewer: exactly right.

Posted by: K~Bob at November 16, 2012 02:41 AM (LG46h)

694 I'm just going to comment that nobody is reading the comments unless they're in a dispute with someone that rebutted them.

You bastards can just yap and yap.

I say shut the fuck up and come up with a plan.

What a bunch of whiny ass bastards.

This thread is hopeless.

Posted by: currently at November 16, 2012 03:20 AM (flA6l)

695 Those independents were mostly Republicans who quit the party in disgust but realized Romney was the lesser of two evils. A more conservative candidate or just plain better retail politician would not have phased them. It would have instead motivated a large portion of the base who saw no difference between Romney and Obama. Remember: Romney paved the way for gay marriage, cap and trade, Obamacare, and he was no friend of gun owners. His refusal to take on any issues made many downscale whites wonder why he was even running and suspect it was just a vanity project. For that they would be called racists and face harassment? Because that was the reality of the past four years. It has been a nonstop negative vicious dirty campaign that disgusted many.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 16, 2012 03:43 AM (i0vBR)

696 "The so-cons want the state to delegitimize and not allow gay marriage by law."

The so-cons want they state to preserve traditional marriage. They are not worried about gay "rights" but rather recognize the benefit the traditional family is to society. While Democrats recognize it as a threat to their constituency of perverts, welfare queens and minorities. Single white women help pad their numbers until more minorities can replace married working whites.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 16, 2012 03:48 AM (i0vBR)

697 "And Karl Rove? His idea that Hispanic immigrants are somehow going to suddenly adopt conservative ideas of individual freedom and limited government is an example of magical thinking."

Hispanics went for Bush by 41% in 2004 on the issue of national security. Juan McAmnesty lost 10 pts off that turnout and Romney's self-deportation tanked Hispanic support even more. Here's an idea. Don't offend them and instead sell the benefits of conservatism. Talk about education and job opportunities. Work on streamlining the federal government including the immigration system so that it works for those who adhere to the letter of the law. Those are the ones who legitimately vote and even volunteer and donate.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 16, 2012 03:59 AM (i0vBR)

698 The Democrats have only won the popular vote twice since Carter was president. Clinton never cracked 50% in either of his elections.

Posted by: Joel Leggett at November 16, 2012 05:05 AM (ChqG2)

699 People also need to STOP thinking there was insufficient turnout. There are millions of votes not yet counted. In CA alone Romney is likely to pick up nearly 1 million votes when all is said and done.

Guess where that puts him ? Ahead of John McCain in 2008. So if more people voted for Romney than Obama, who supposedly stayed home ?

Nobody, that's who. Myth.

Posted by: deadrody at November 16, 2012 05:43 AM (DkAJe)

700 SoCons had two lots of 4 years to come up with a suitable candidate in 2008 and 2012.

They did not do this

Instead they prefer to bitch and moan and then stay home, letting the Far Left take over. All because Romney had magic underpants and passed a healthcare reform. They'd abandon Jesus for his ties to Samaritans and tax collectors.

The same will happen in 2016 because these idiots are all about the short term and don't realise sometimes you have to compromise while still sticking to the long term goal.

That's what the Democrats do.

Posted by: FiCons at November 16, 2012 06:11 AM (v4f8Q)

701 Re: 694, I presented a plan.

To win the White vote by a bigger margin is do-able, though the challenge is then to change the policies that are driving Whites down as a share of the population. So go after that White vote, by addressing issues like mass immigration, affirmative action, quotas, set-asides, disparate impact and so on. Make it so that if you're White you'd be stupid not to vote Republican even if you are in a union and you like your union, because only the Republican Party addresses Whites as a community like any other community that's accepted as legitimate and entitled to its share of the spoils, such as the Black community. Accept that ethnic politics is now the main game, and play to win within democratic norms.

I get called nasty names for saying that, but my plan, which is not original with me, is logical.

Alternative plans, which ignore the effectiveness of Democratic vote factories, the strength and persistence of the Democratic anti-White coalition, and the reality that already-existing laws (governing legal mass immigration among other things) give the Democratic coalition victory by default, do not add up.

The Republican Party, as it is presently constituted, is becoming outmatched due to policy-driven demographic changes. Unless it changes it will become helpless.

After you decide your plan you can talk about leadership. An attractive speaker who is unwilling to pursue the one plan that offers long term hope is irrelevant.

Posted by: The Lightworker at November 16, 2012 06:14 AM (fT6Tl)

702 Repeal No Child Left Behind. Push to eliminate educational bureaucrats instead of scapegoating teachers.
Get the feds the hell out of public education.
The GOP was on the right track when they started out simply offering charter schools as an alternative to public schools. Then, they had to go FULL ON, big government,test everything that moves, stupid.
Axe NCLB, and I'll vote Republican again. I couldn't stomach voting for the guy who created ObamaCare and endorsed NCLB as a "good law."

Posted by: stickety at November 16, 2012 06:19 AM (+Vm+w)

703 "At one point in the commander’s tent, many of the eastern generals, etc.
were telling Grant, “Bobby Lee, Bobby Lee, he’ll do this, that, and the
other.” Finally Grant had heard enough and told them, “I’m tired of
hearing about Bobby Lee. You’d think he was going to do a double
somersault and land in our rear. Quit thinking about what he’s going to
do to you and think about what YOU’RE GOING TO DO TO HIM. Bring some
guns up here.”

-----

This election, and 2008, were lost when the Republicans let the media intimidate them from taking huge swaths of Obama off the table for discussion, Rev. Wright being but one of several examples. Neither McCain nor Romney recognized that when you're competing with Chicago Alinsky thugs, Marquis of Queensbury rules will only leave you doing post-defeat introspection and the thugs doing inaugural planning. As a result, we lost the country.

Posted by: McGuire at November 16, 2012 07:50 AM (u3N3z)

704 Say what one will about GHWB and Lee Atwater, they did not let themselves be bullied into silence by media shrieking racism on what was a very legitimate issue of Dukakis' record -- his decision to give violent criminals furloughs.

An issue that was never put squarely in front of the American people are the hundreds of affirmative actions programs, set asides and outright quotas mandated in Obamacare. Imagine what all those white union guys in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania might have thought about THAT.

Unilateral disarmament is a certain reciple for losing anything.

Posted by: Atwater's ghost at November 16, 2012 07:58 AM (u3N3z)

705 I know the discussion is long over, but damn u nailed it rdbrewer. I cant stand hearing any more bullshit about how conservatives need to roll over on all their principles cause thats why Romney lost. Romney was chosen by the establishment from day one and only a fool would deny it. The people dont get excited about mushy, big government, pro-UN, interventionalist, mild-mannered, moderates pretending to be conservatives. They get effin excited about conservative constitutionalists who r pissed off at the establishment and what America has become, damnit! Keep forcing through the connected guy "who's earned his turn" w the RNC bigwhigs, n ull keep getting abysmal turnout.

Posted by: Infidelswine at November 16, 2012 08:15 AM (4U7Da)

706 Ron Paul

Posted by: Gerry at November 16, 2012 08:44 AM (+t7PE)

707 I am a bit confused how Romney tried to "out-Democrat the Democrats".

It seems to me one of big reasons he lost is because Obama fed the moochers. Then gave them a reason to vote.

Romney articulated some core conservative principles as a centerpiece of his platform; less government, fiscal responsibility, personal responsibility, capitalism, etc. and got trounced. He was certainly more "conservative" than McCain. How did that work out?

Republicans? Well it sure seems a lot of them sat home.

The elephant in the room is that many Republican voters, the ones that don't show up regularly to actually vote, are lazy, apathetic and unmotivated. Some are also childish, single issue voters that won't show up unless a candidate promises to wash their car and buy them a steak- metaphorically speaking of course.

Look at the number of registered voters and turnout. This election continues the trend of less people showing up on Election Day.

Romney lost by about 400,000 votes. That's 3.5 Michigan home games.

It's not wholly just about conservatism. It's about articulation and consistency. I am not certain what the electoral answer is. But I know the aforementioned is the problem.

Posted by: marcus at November 16, 2012 09:06 AM (CNEa6)

708 >>>The Democrats have only won the popular vote twice since Carter was
president. Clinton never cracked 50% in either of his elections.

They won the popular vote four times: '92, 96, '08, and '12.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 16, 2012 09:55 AM (Iyg03)

709 Whoops. Five times. 2000 also.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 16, 2012 09:56 AM (Iyg03)

710 >>>I am a bit confused how Romney tried to "out-Democrat the Democrats".

The quote was that the establishment conservatives have done that.

--out Democrat the Democrats: No Child Left Behind
--out-bit the Democrats for votes: Medicare Part D

But fine, Romney? Remember those pictures I used to put up of him wearing a corn hat? Remember why I did that? Ethanol.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 16, 2012 10:00 AM (Iyg03)

711 "including TSA nude-o-scopes"

Wrong. Those are all Obama. IIRC, they were introduced after his Administration chose to do it. You have any different information?

Posted by: Greg Q at November 16, 2012 01:00 PM (4Pleu)

712 The TSA was created under Bush. Bush signed off on the Patriot act.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 16, 2012 01:17 PM (Iyg03)

713 The entire TSA is an abomination to privacy, liberty, and the Constitution. Our weak-minded politicians and their Patriot Act-loving sheep fear muslim butthurt more than they fear the loss of freedom to a communist government. We cant name our enemy or profile them, but we can shred the Constitution n sexually humiliate toldlers, elderly, handicapped and everyone in between in the name of "fairness." Sure barry has trumped him by a thousand, but GW did make mistakes that need to b corrected. If that cant b admitted by mainstream repubs in hindsight, then they will certainly lose more n more constitutionalists and will not gain of those unaffiliated and jaded w partisanship.

Posted by: Infidelswine at November 16, 2012 01:35 PM (4U7Da)

714 There are more Red States than Blue States. Every single Red State needs to have 2 Republican Senators - period - end of discussion. Democratic Senators from Red States are absolutely unacceptable; they always vote with the donkeys. We need to concentrate on this.

Since nobody is going to actually do anything about getting rid of Red State democratic senators - I say let it all burn to the ground.

Posted by: An Observation at November 16, 2012 01:57 PM (ylhEn)

715 Step 1:
stop letting states who vote Dem kick off the GOP primary.

Step 2:
stop agreeing to let liberal media "moderate" debates including GOP primary debates.

Step 3:
review step 1 & 2, laugh and let it burn.

Posted by: In the bunker at November 16, 2012 04:02 PM (R7H3g)

716 This a great site and I don't discover it until after the election (although I knew it existed somehow). But I'm glad to see mostly a crowd who understand this was less about Romney but more about other things. On other conservative sites you see idiotic opinions thrown up like this posts author.

I am sick and tired of hearing this we need a more conservative guy argument. You mean Goldwater? He got rounded. Reagan? He initially was a Democrat, was a union member and after lowering taxes increased them several times. And then he gave amnesty to illegals. Anyway this notion of some uber conservative will save the day is pathetic.

What is even more pathetic are the apparently many "conservatives" who didn't come out to vote. Shame.

Posted by: Rock at November 16, 2012 09:08 PM (nPei1)

717 Goldwater also got hammered by JFK remorse. Goldwater was vindicated in 1984 when Reagan was reelected. IIRC, Goldwater and William F. Buckley celebrated together that night... and did a TV appearance. I think I saw that.

I can't control whether you're going to be able to look directly at the facts, Rock. All I can do is present them to you.

Rock argument: "Well, Reagan started out as a Democrat." So, Rock. Really? Do you feel like you've refuted something there?

Taxes went from a top marginal rate of around 70% under Carter to a little over 28% with Reagan. We had the boom. The fact the taxes might have moved a little during that time does not make Reagan some kind of moderate, dummy.

>>>What is even more pathetic are the apparently many "conservatives" who didn't come out to vote.

Yeah, as I was saying, running a real constitutional conservative will bring out the base.

Posted by: rdbrewer at November 16, 2012 10:00 PM (Iyg03)

718 Best "To Do list" Item above is Must have Red State Senators. If we have more Red States and more Governors, it is a major failing to allow Blue Senators get past our filter in Red States. Strategically, this is the "real" meaning of the phrase doubling down.

Doubling down nowadays seems to mean a candidate that receives blowback on a meme, but digs in unexpectedly when it seems he should soften his position. Doubling down in Blackjack actually means when a dealers up card reveals the dealer has a disadvantageous hand and your cards are a good deal and highly likely to win, you take this updated intel on your increased advantage and you are given the opportunity to place a second bet on the table to win bigger. In other words, you are "hitting your opponent when he is down".

This is the idea on Senators. We are searching for places to dig out of holes based on concern troll advice from the left wing media like "Why not go after black voters? They voted 100% against you in some precincts". Many Republicans are chasing that rabbit in to the weeds. I'm not saying we give up on that, but prioritize here, please. Let's "Double Down". Let's focus on situations where the Dems have a bad hand and we have a good hand and pile more resources on that good bet.

Senator Cornyn who led the Senate Election effort should bear some of the responsibility for 2012, but putting Ted Cruz and Portman on the commitee is a good start.

Posted by: TJ King at November 17, 2012 06:06 PM (bTARb)

719 I don't usually comment I read the blog daily. But today I feel I actually have something to add. The next Republican candidates or ticket needs to not be Mr Highroad Dole, McCain and to a lesser extent Romney all took the highroad. Don't respond to the press make them respond to you. They aren't going to play nice with you so don't play nice with them. Be prepared you will be attacked on abortion, immigration, and being rich and/or friendly with big oil, Pharma, or whatever the current boogieman is. understand that the press will define your views for you. Don't let them. Explain how freedom works and how fairness means equal opportunity not equal outcomes. Maybe even go a step further and show how equal outcomes are not fair. explain how things that sound good like affirmative action are actually racist and unfair. And lastly play the lefts games with them in 2008 the lefty lineup was Hillary, the first WOMAN president Richardson the first HISPANIC president and Obama the first Black president. No matter who you voted for it was going to be historic. yes three highly unqualified candidates but three HISTORIC unqualified candidates. So we need to pull a West, Rubio ticket historic and qualified play their game. Ok enough ranting got to get back to the Bruins game

Posted by: Theworminator at November 17, 2012 06:12 PM (nbSck)






Processing 0.09, elapsed 0.1066 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0231 seconds, 728 records returned.
Page size 431 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat