Rubio Taking a Wait-and-See Attitude on Karl Rove's Conservative Victory Project

Eh, you know what I think. I've said it enough. Sure, I want the heat and fire of the Tea Party, but I'd also like that tempered by some cold numbers-based decisionmaking.

I don't trust The Establishment to actually do anything, but I'm losing confidence in the Tea Party's ability to distinguish Protest Candidates from Candidates who Can Actually be Put Into Position to Make Change.

I think the dynamic -- and the pushback from either side -- is necessary. I don't want to see either side "win" in this.

I don't think you should be looking to "win" interparty disputes fully. If you completely win, you've won the right to have the losing party abandon you.

Anyway, Rubio doesn't say all that, but he's keeping an open mind.

Oh: Chris Matthews, who can hear a dog whistle beyond the capability of dogs' hearing abilities, called Rubio primitive.

And did you hear? Rubio drinks water. Holy mackerel, there's your headline.

Posted by: Ace at 03:47 PM



Comments

1 Rove(spit)

Posted by: Dept. Of Accuracy Dept. at February 13, 2013 03:48 PM (+I8Mq)

2 Speaking of someone trying to stay relevant........

Posted by: Sarah Palin at February 13, 2013 03:48 PM (xmcEQ)

3 Karl Rove is a sideshow. And one I might add that the dems are glad to sit back and watch. Let's move on

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 13, 2013 03:48 PM (jE38p)

4 I have an open mind too.

Posted by: Joe Biden at February 13, 2013 03:49 PM (8ZskC)

5 Jumbo Shrimp. Military Intelligence. Conservative Victory... SIGH!

Posted by: dfbaskwill at February 13, 2013 03:49 PM (71LDo)

6 So, the garbage was extra-sticky and slightly sweet today?

Posted by: Truman North at February 13, 2013 03:49 PM (I2LwF)

7 Lets remember what Karl Rove's main stratagem is:

The evangelicals and professional, working middle class have no choice but to vote for republicans. So lets run republicans that are, doctrinally, just to the left of center.

It's possible that he could achieve a republican majority. But that republican majority will function like democrats. That's the result of Karl Rove politics.

Posted by: Truman North at February 13, 2013 03:51 PM (I2LwF)

8 Abandon? They are the abused wives that won't go away. We desperately NEED to drive these big spending liberals from the party in order to bring the hard core fiscal conservatives back home.

Posted by: SpongeBob Saget at February 13, 2013 03:51 PM (epxV4)

9 The story of America in a Baroke Owebama nation.......

http://scoamf.us/6K

Chickenfoot

Posted by: © Sponge at February 13, 2013 03:51 PM (xmcEQ)

10 Let's elect more fierce leaders like Mitch (Wooden Chin) McConnell.Fucking tool.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at February 13, 2013 03:51 PM (wbmaj)

11 *looks around*



No coed tits?



Fuck it. Going back to the other thread.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at February 13, 2013 03:52 PM (da5Wo)

12 If you consider George W Bush a conservative , then Karl Rove is the man for you.

Posted by: Truman North at February 13, 2013 03:52 PM (I2LwF)

13 Karl--Yes, let's drive out the big spending liberals and replace them with big speding Republicans-like George Fucking Bush.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at February 13, 2013 03:52 PM (wbmaj)

14 I've stopped paying attention to what Rove has to say. Rove claimed he was heavily involved with the Reagan campaign in TX in 1980. Michael Reagan says he's full of shit.

Posted by: John P. Squibob at February 13, 2013 03:53 PM (kqqGm)

15 #11 Save the Coed Tits

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at February 13, 2013 03:53 PM (wbmaj)

16 This is interesting though. If you want to win elections, Karl Rove is your man. If you want to save the country, Forget him.

Posted by: Truman North at February 13, 2013 03:53 PM (I2LwF)

17 Any " Protest Candidate" whose election would result in the removal an establishment politician - the go along-to-get-along types who have gotten us into the mess we are in today - is BY DEFINITION a "Candidates who Can Actually be Put Into Position to Make Change."

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Posted by: ThomasD at February 13, 2013 03:54 PM (sPW8y)

18 Eh. At this point, all they're struggling over is who gets to steer the Titanic those last fifteen feet before it plunges down into the icy death grip of the Atlantic.

Posted by: Tired Wench at February 13, 2013 03:54 PM (HGPVQ)

19 I've stopped paying attention to what Rove has to
say. Rove claimed he was heavily involved with the Reagan campaign in TX
in 1980. Michael Reagan says he's full of shit.


Posted by: John P. Squibob at February 13, 2013 03:53 PM (kqqGm)


Someone involved with politics lies out his ass? SAY IT ISN'T SO!!!!!

Posted by: © Sponge at February 13, 2013 03:54 PM (xmcEQ)

20 Fuck Rove. He's not my countryman, because he puts his personal swish & power above the clarity of the Constitution and the good of the country.

Rove, like every other motherfucking leftist, can go directly to hell.

Posted by: Inspector Asshole at February 13, 2013 03:54 PM (UzocF)

21 So, which stalwart establishment republican who WON AN ELECTION (which is over so very fucking important) has done a single fucking thing that has helped people who work for a fucking living?

Posted by: bobloblaw at February 13, 2013 03:54 PM (syvXH)

22 nuance

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at February 13, 2013 03:54 PM (EZl54)

23 I agree with not wanting to win so completely that we alienate half the party but, really, isn't the party divided already?

What we forget is to focus on those things about which we tend to agree: cutting the deficit, reforming entitlements, the 2nd amendment...

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 13, 2013 03:54 PM (TK19Y)

24 >>>ny " Protest Candidate" whose election would result in the removal an establishment politician - the go along-to-get-along types who have gotten us into the mess we are in today - is BY DEFINITION a "Candidates who Can Actually be Put Into Position to Make Change."

yes we're purging ourselves to fitness, rather like an anorexic

Posted by: ace at February 13, 2013 03:55 PM (LCRYB)

25 OT: Pope to canonize Gabby Giffords before he steps down. Choirs singing.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at February 13, 2013 03:55 PM (wbmaj)

26 Does the Tea Party actually field candidates and hand select them? Did the Akins and Angles losers just decide to run on their own, and the Tea Party hastily get behind them bc they said the right things and sounded good at first?

Posted by: L, elle at February 13, 2013 03:56 PM (0PiQ4)

27 Ahem, I'm reposting my hot young blonde post below. Such an awesome picture and a lift for guys getting older.

Anyway, who the fuck says that Rove is such a genius. He had GWB campaigning in fucking CA instead of focusing on real battlegrounds and almost lost the fucking election. His addition to the equation was microtargeting. And that's pretty much it.

If GOP was smart, they would be moving much more to shoring up everyone to get them on the same page, reaching out (as they have been) to latinos, and go hard after the libertarian vote/small government/individual freedom. That's where 5-6% of an easy to get vote is.


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

Ace, I am a firm believer in the nation of islam rule. Divide your age by half, add 3 or 4 years, and that is who you can bang. I don't think this guy qualifies, but who knows. And who in the fuck in TN elected this idiot.

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 03:56 PM (tVTLU)

28 I'll repeat my position on this, I have no problem with Rove's group trying to get its candidates elected. I also have no problem with the Tea Party trying to get its candidates elected.


Tell you what, I hereby offer my services as a media trainer to the candidate for both sides. I am reasonably confident that once a candidate passes the final examination given by Miss Alex's School Of Manners, Charm And Shutting My Fucking Pie Hole And Not Saying Massively Stupid Shit Outside My Own Head, that candidate will be well suited to represent the GOP.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy at February 13, 2013 03:56 PM (VtjlW)

29 Honestly, right or left, who gives a flying fuck WHAT Chris Matthews says? Seriously......

Posted by: © Sponge at February 13, 2013 03:57 PM (xmcEQ)

30 It's not water, ace, it's hydroxyl acid.

Did you know that hydroxyl acid has a higher pH than any other known acid?

Do you know it's used in fracking?

It's a greenhouse gas.

It's found in almost all industrial waste.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 13, 2013 03:57 PM (T0NGe)

31 At one point I had envisioned the two parts of the GOP -- the establishment and the Tea Party -- finding common ground and working together somehow. I guess that was utopian. It's more important to control the party than defeat the DemonRats, apparently.

Posted by: joncelli at February 13, 2013 03:57 PM (RD7QR)

32 O'Donell's suicide run sure did move the Republicans to the right. Yep, that sure did happen. The non-Establishments are perfect in every way.

Posted by: Shoot Me at February 13, 2013 03:58 PM (qiXMt)

33
Four dead Americans in Libya? Ehhh, who cares. You see Rubio take a sip of water in the middle of that rebuttal...what a fuckin clown

Posted by: King Shortputts Media Betters at February 13, 2013 03:58 PM (F6KtL)

34 If Rove really wanted to make a difference, he'd start a candidate boot camp.

Regardless of ideology, the candidates learn how to sell their ideas and present them in the right way.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 13, 2013 03:58 PM (T0NGe)

35
Crap I wish I could get elected to congress, I'd love to have first hand knowledge of that pit of corruption. Funny thing is I could never get elected, because I haven't lived a perfect life and I am not a democrat.

But going to the floor and calling pelosi an unmitigated bitch would be worth the slap on the wrist. And another reason why I couldn't get elected.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 13, 2013 03:59 PM (p/cQy)

36 Lets remember why we're having this fight. The Republican Party is a club. The reason for the club's existence is to win elections and keep those seats. The Republican Party does not exist to benefit America or Americans. It does not exist to lower taxes. It does not exist to protect the constitution. It exists to win elections.

In this sense, Rove is perfect. He doesn't care whether you're a goddamned commie. He prefers it, actually. And because our system provides a big advantage to incumbent politicians, he prefers to work for them.

So the perfect candidate for rove is a liberal incumbent republican.

That makes Rove the most money. Which is what you would expect Rove to want-- to make the most money. And there's no shame in that.


Rubio's failure to reject Rove's group speaks either to Rubio's inner lefty coming out, or his insecurity in holding on to that office of his. Either way, it says more about Rubio than it does about Rove.

Posted by: Truman North at February 13, 2013 03:59 PM (I2LwF)

37 We desperately NEED to drive these big spending liberals from the party
in order to bring the hard core fiscal conservatives back home.


So, there were enough hard core fiscal conservatives who stayed home for the last two presidential elections, that had they voted, we would have been spared Obama? Really? Did they stay home this time because the damage O was doing just wasn't worth showing up to stop? You dream, general. Whether you like it or not, we need the mushy middle.

But since this is the roughly millionth time we've had this argument, I don't suppose there's any reason for me to continue to make the point.

Posted by: pep at February 13, 2013 03:59 PM (YXmuI)

38 All I care about in the short term is the GOP making a concerted effort to win the Senate. I don't think that means a one-size-fits-all approach.

Now in Utah, we SHOULD HAVE dumped Hatch. The challenger was perfectly good and there was ZERO risk of losing that seat to a Democrat. So I was pissed when many (iirc, most) of the punditry and leadership types backed Hatch... particularly given the laughable reasoning that he would be the senior member of Finance (when we won the Senate... how'd that work out?!).

But in other states we may have to put up with a Scott Brown type just to get the numbers to get the majority. I'd certainly rather that than not running anyone.


I still have not seen an analysis of the last election that addresses if the individual states' GOP orgs were in place but not used properly by Romney or if they were in as much disarray as Team Romney was.

Politics are local. The solution that is right for Utah or Texas is not the one that is right in Massachusetts or Maine.

Posted by: Y-not at February 13, 2013 03:59 PM (5H6zj)

39 O'Donell's suicide run sure did move the Republicans to the right. Yep, that sure did happen. The non-Establishments are perfect in every way.

How well did that Moderate Mitt guy work out for you?

Posted by: Grey Fox at February 13, 2013 03:59 PM (U3ERv)

40

El Moderada! Yi! Yi! Yi!

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 13, 2013 03:59 PM (kdS6q)

41 Dunno, we tried the east coast 'moderate' R plan how many times? What was the results? Even when we 'win' we join hands with the Ds and in a 'bi-partisan' fashion do exactly what the Progs want, if perhaps a little slower.

Goldwater - Conservative. Lost but generally credited with setting up Reagan's win.

Nixon - RINO. 'Won' but gave us the EPA, etc.

Ford. - RINO loser.

Reagan. Nuf said. But all he managed to do was slow the rate of growth of big govt.

Bush I - We read his lying lips and didn't want another round.

Dole. RINO loser.

Bush II - Sorta conservative, except when he wasn't. Sold as a 'compasionate con' though.

McCain - RINO Loser

Romney - RINO Loser.

Same pattern goes downticket. 'Winning' with a RINO is often almost as bad as losing with a conservative. Except the conservatives have a better win/loss record. Sooner or later we need to look at the numbers and reality, it is telling us something.

Posted by: John Morris at February 13, 2013 04:00 PM (sCRhB)

42 Unemployment over 8 %...? Ehhh, racism, yeah racism. But Rubio sweating and drinking water during a speech. We'll ride this horse to death.

Posted by: King Shortputts Media Betters at February 13, 2013 04:00 PM (F6KtL)

43 I'd be all for a "vetting" of candidates. I mean what the fuck is with the rape shit.

Demorats are not that smart. It should be easy to defeat them in every way. But these fucking candidates are not educated in how to do so, nor to articulate positions to fit the soundbyte media who are all out to destroy our candidates.

WE MUST ADAPT AND TAKE THE FIGHT TO THE FIELD ON WHICH WE FIND OURSELVES.

Perhaps a boot camp, where candidates can be vetted and educated and shown some fucking media savvy as to mistakes made in the past by well intentioned individuals. With conservatives and "establishment" types overseeing it. No coercion, but attendance is mandatory if you want monetary support....

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 04:01 PM (tVTLU)

44 Rubio is going to go down in political history for his uncanny impersonation of Al Franken impersonating Lyndon LaRouche.

I'm entirely serious.

Back in the late '80s, LaRouche was running for President, and Franken did a skit on SNL in which he played LaRouche delivering a longwinded policy address that became steadily more unhinged as it went on.

I loathe Franken, but it has to be admitted that he precisely nailed certain LaRouche mannerisms, such as reaching for a glass of water off camera, and drinking it, and putting it back, while not deviating his monomaniacal stare into the lens by even one millimeter.

What does Rubio do in his big SOTU rebuttal last night? The same strange gig of staring steadily at the camera while reaching for water, as though afraid to avert his gaze. He looked incredibly weird. As incredibly weird as Al Franken doing an impression of Lyndon LaRouche, which was itself incredibly weird. Incredibly weird squared.

When will the GOP get some media coaches and some skilled handlers to ensure that these kinds of amateurish failures stop happening? A little bit of professional polish in the presentation goes a long way.

Posted by: torquewrench at February 13, 2013 04:01 PM (gqT4g)

45 Obama's SOTU clearly wasn't very good if all that anyone can seem to talk about is how some dude took a drink of water afterward.

Posted by: gm at February 13, 2013 04:01 PM (/kBoL)

46 Obamacare causing premiums to sky rocket? A non-story. But you know what's a story....that Rubio guy taking a sip of bottled water. What a fool.

Posted by: King Shortputts Media Betters at February 13, 2013 04:01 PM (F6KtL)

47 Ace, I don't disagree with your general point. I think this battle is good and I welcome it. I think it will make the base get better at picking candidates, but it is good that the base doesn't just settle for candidates either.

That being said, you stated "but I'm losing confidence in the Tea Party's ability to distinguish Protest Candidates from Candidates who Can Actually be Put Into Position to Make Change," what examplesexist that give you less confidence in the tea party's ability? There are many from 2010, but that was two elections ago, and basically the tea party's first go at it. What examples exist from 2012? I don't think it fair to say the the tea party overreached on Mourdock. At the time, he looked like a good choice.

I'm just curious. There may be many that I'm not thinking of.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:02 PM (gmeXX)

48 And did you hear? Rubio drinks water. Holy mackerel, there's your headline.









Squid fuck in water. No thank you.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at February 13, 2013 04:02 PM (TIIx5)

49 Drone strikes killing American citizens? He's the Commander-in-Chief. You see that Rubio clown take a sip of water....wow, and he thinks he can be President

Posted by: King Shortputts Media Betters at February 13, 2013 04:02 PM (F6KtL)

50 John Morris,

I could not agree fucking more. For national elections, it's as much about the CANDIDATE as the message. Reagan was middle class, humble beginnings to stardom.

No more richie rich fucking RINOs. FUCKING PERIOD. And no old men codgers.

Amen.

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 04:02 PM (tVTLU)

51 It's possible that he could achieve a republican majority. But that republican majority will function like democrats.

Todays House Republicans.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 13, 2013 04:03 PM (p/cQy)

52 Sure, I want the heat and fire of the Tea Party, but I'd also like that tempered by some cold numbers-based decisionmaking.

Are you suggesting that is what Rove has been providing? It has not been working out so well.

Posted by: alex at February 13, 2013 04:03 PM (4YlNx)

53 Rubio's failure to reject Rove's group speaks either to Rubio's inner lefty coming out, or his insecurity in holding on to that office of his. Either way, it says more about Rubio than it does about Rove.

....

There are those who speak of Rubio delivering Florida in 2016 but, frankly, he acts a little like a man who isn't secure in holding his own.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 13, 2013 04:03 PM (TK19Y)

54 yes we're purging ourselves to fitness, rather like an anorexic

Straw man, ace. What's the point of being healthy when healthy means "we'll screw you slightly less than Democrats on most days, and only slightly more on others"?

Kill it. A smart guy on the Internet said we have 8-16 years of wandering in the wilderness anyway. Let's make sure the RINOs are extinct on the other side.

Posted by: Truman North at February 13, 2013 04:03 PM (I2LwF)

55 I don't trust The Establishment to actually do anything, but I'm losing confidence in the Tea Party's ability to distinguish Protest Candidates from Candidates who Can Actually be Put Into Position to Make Change.

---

I trust The Establishment to completely fuck things up.

The Tea Party has probably gotten as many things right as things they've screwed up, which puts them ahead of the curve compared to the RNC, RNSC, et all.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at February 13, 2013 04:04 PM (e0xKF)

56
I'd prefer the Tea Party to be a negative incentive, rather than the source for picking candidates.

In other words, if you are running and the Tea Party doesn't like you, I'd like you to be sweating bullets, and to be thinking of ways to win their favor.

So yeah, I don't mind a few idiots having been Tea Partied, only to have some doofus who doesn't really have a chance to win being nominated. In the long run it's better, even if we lose some. It's where we are now, I think.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 13, 2013 04:04 PM (TOk1P)

57 It's a greenhouse gas.


It's found in almost all industrial waste.


It supports the growth of dangerous micro-organisms.

Posted by: Radish at February 13, 2013 04:04 PM (/kI1Q)

58 And off we go! Down the same old road. I'm wondering if this tired old 70's Ford LTD can make it. Hate to give it up. It's taken us down this road so many times before.

Posted by: Soona at February 13, 2013 04:04 PM (tmdxK)

59 I wonder if O'Bumbles could pass one of his own Universal Background Checks?

Posted by: dfbaskwill at February 13, 2013 04:05 PM (71LDo)

60 :::yes we're purging ourselves to fitness, rather like an anorexic/::

You have to empty the stomach to find out what's in it.

Posted by: Karen Carpenter at February 13, 2013 04:05 PM (Oz633)

61 &&&

bite me

&&&

Thanks to Alex for this wonderfulchrome extension.

Posted by: HoboJerky, profit of DOOM! at February 13, 2013 04:05 PM (1sQYD)

62 Yes it is superficial, but optics are so important with respect to politics, and Rubio failed at that last night. His optics rendered the content of his speech immaterial. Frankly, I'm not sure why he agreed to do the rebuttal. It is such a difficult thing to do because the setting sucks. It has high risks for very little reward. Ultimately, I don't think it will hurt him too much, but it certainly didn't help him.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:05 PM (gmeXX)

63 Jose Antonio Vargas, an illegal immigrant and former reporter, scolded a congressional panel on Wednesday, saying that he should not be called illegal, and saying it is an insult to his family who brought him here.
“When you inaccurately call me illegal, you not only dehumanize me, you’re offending them,” he said. “No human being is illegal.”

'No human being is illegal"--No? Maybe not, but they do illegal things, so go fuck yourself and stop trying to change English just to suite your political purposes asshole.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 13, 2013 04:06 PM (jE38p)

64 Heh, just heard Czaben's take on Dorner. It was good.

Posted by: logprof at February 13, 2013 04:06 PM (4pNjZ)

65 agree with Ace basically

obviously Rove can be criticized for not really having a "core" on certain things (which as a political strategist, isn't necessarily surprising,) but this fact doesn't delegitimize his criticism, which is pretty much on-point when you have select Senate candidates fragging themselves over two cycles.

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 04:07 PM (60GaT)

66 45 Obama's SOTU clearly wasn't very good if all that anyone can seem to talk about is how some dude took a drink of water afterward.

"The Most Gifted Rhetorician in American History" has yet to deliver a memorable SOTU. Compare and contrast with Bush 43, who gave several.

Posted by: 80sBaby at February 13, 2013 04:07 PM (YjDyJ)

67 “When you inaccurately call me illegal, you not only dehumanize me, you’re offending them,” he said. “No human being is illegal.”

---

No matter how you slice it, you're a goddamn criminal.

That sound better to you, asshole?

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at February 13, 2013 04:07 PM (e0xKF)

68
If you find actual conservatives on the ballot, you should vote for them, otherwise they are all really in the big govt party.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 13, 2013 04:07 PM (p/cQy)

69 “No human being is illegal.”

How about "lifelong criminal", fuckhead? How's that grab you?

Posted by: Waterhouse at February 13, 2013 04:08 PM (mO9O5)

70 Thanks to Alex for this wonderfulchrome extension.
Posted by: HoboJerky, profit of DOOM! at February 13, 2013 04:05 PM (1sQYD)

Glad you like it! I look forward to adding more features, and maybe even one day helping HeatherRadish realize her Moron Dream.

But, until then: &!

Posted by: alex at February 13, 2013 04:08 PM (4YlNx)

71 "No more richie rich fucking RINOs. FUCKING PERIOD."

Here in Commiefornia, in the 2010 election cycle, we had multiple wipeouts with wealthy former chief executives running on the GOP ticket: Fiorina and Whitman.

The local Democrats played the class warfare card about "heartless CEOs" and, hey presto, whaddaya know, that card still works like a charm with average-Joe low information voters. Fiorina and Whitman were destroyed at the polls.

Did the national GOP pay attention to this? No, and they went ahead and nominated a guy who shared the same fatal vulnerability, and then were surprised when the national Democrats pulled out the same card and played it again successfully.

Not only doubling down on failure. Tripling and quadrupling down on failure.

Posted by: torquewrench at February 13, 2013 04:08 PM (gqT4g)

72 The noted Race Detective Charles Icarus Johnson is also strangely silent on Tingles calling Rubio "primitive."



Posted by: BlueStateRebel at February 13, 2013 04:09 PM (7ObY1)

73 No matter how you slice it, you're a goddamn criminal.

That sound better to you, asshole?

....

'Criminal Immigrant' it is then

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 13, 2013 04:09 PM (TK19Y)

74 so, it's like that, then?

Keep calm
and
ampersand on.....

Posted by: © Sponge at February 13, 2013 04:09 PM (xmcEQ)

75 OT: Pope to canonize Gabby Giffords before he steps down. Choirs singing.


You have got to be kidding.

Posted by: Infidel at February 13, 2013 04:09 PM (O/fK8)

76 @37 pep

I thought that Obama got reelected because the conservatives and Socons stayed home.

Now you are saying that there weren't enough of them that stayed home to cause an issue.


so which is it?


Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at February 13, 2013 04:10 PM (EZl54)

77 71

ok but that's a sorta apolitical issue

i.e., Republican rich person status has an impact but isn't related to how RINO or non-RINO they are.

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 04:10 PM (60GaT)

78 OT, but not really.../

As it stands, my order of voting preference for nominee for prez...

Carson
Walker
Martinez
Rubio
Nikki Haley
R. Paul
Jeb Bush
Christie

Posted by: Serious Cat at February 13, 2013 04:11 PM (UypUQ)

79 I'm getting an exorbitant lag time loading due to some site called damnlol.com here.

Anyone else getting that?

Posted by: © Sponge at February 13, 2013 04:11 PM (xmcEQ)

80 75 OT: Pope to canonize Gabby Giffords before he steps down. Choirs singing.


>>You have got to be kidding.


Yes.

She's not dead, for one thing.

Posted by: Y-not at February 13, 2013 04:12 PM (5H6zj)

81 Speaking of RINOs, this is who the MA GOP establishment is touting for Kerry's Senate seat:

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/us_politics/2013/02/former_seal_joins_race_for_senate

I appreciate his service to country, but the dude's a Democrat.

Posted by: logprof at February 13, 2013 04:12 PM (4pNjZ)

82 @philipaklein RT @bdomenech: RT @WAOW: MADISON, Wis. (AP) -- Republican Gov. Walker rejects voluntary Medicaid expansion for Wisconsin under federal law.

Posted by: 80sBaby at February 13, 2013 04:12 PM (YjDyJ)

83 gee. Thats kind of racist of Mr. Mathews

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 04:12 PM (Dnbau)

84 Karl Rove's an intelligent man. As an intelligent man, he knew the circumstances of Akin's primary nomination in Missouri, where McCaskill's people used an old Chicago trick by encouraging Democratic crossover voting in the primaries to get Akin, far and away the weakest candidate in the field, nominated, thus increasing her chances of reelection. The Tea Party was not to blame.

Rove also knew that now former Senator Dick Lugar--my Senator--had become a Democrat in all but name. One look at his voting record and committee and confirmation hearing remarks would make Lugar's conversion clear to anyone. Whenever Democrats talked about Republicans they could work with, Lugar was invariably the Republican mentioned. Yes, Mourdock was inexperienced at national-level politics. Yes, Mourdock is completely devoid of anythng remotely resembling charisma, but he is a genuine Republican conservative. Besides, Dick Lugar hasn't lived in Indiana for over 20 years. The people of Indiana deserve a Senator who is at least a resident of our state. Whoever he was representing in the Senate, it wasn't us. Let Virginia have him.

My point? Rove is acting in bad faith. He's more or less identified the Tea Party as the party responsible for the GOP's fortunes, which also allows him to conveniently pass the blame from the Country Club Republican Establishment to those he considers hicks comprising the conservative base.

Rove views us as a greater threat than the socialist weasels now occupying the White House. He's a divisive, malicious bastard whose greasy, porcine mughas become the face of the Republican Party. Given Rove's animosity to the base, there will be no coming together under one big happy tent while he holds a leadership position, de facto or otherwise, in the GOP.

Posted by: troyriser at February 13, 2013 04:12 PM (vtiE6)

85 Serious Cat - that is much better than the list we had last go round.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:12 PM (gmeXX)

86 No one likes the name Tea Party? Then call it the Freedom Party. There. Fixed.

Posted by: Soona at February 13, 2013 04:12 PM (tmdxK)

87 And anyway, why rag on the Tea Party for a spotty record of picking candidates? At least they are trying, don't see anyone else doing that much. Just continuing to run the same damned losing gameplan over and over is insanity.

Reality check: WE ARE LOSING. WE ARE LOSING BIGTIME. WE HAVE BEEN LOSING FOR A CENTURY. Our best shot, the Sainted Reagan, only slowed the growth curve for the all powerful fedgov. While he did end the Soviets he did exactly zero to curb the larger menace within. If now isn't the time to call some risky plays then when exactly is? When the storm troopers are banging on our doors in a not so far away night?

We need to try things. Some won't work. We can learn to not do those again. But with luck some will work and we can do more of those things. But again, what exactly is the other option?

Yes, up on the east coast we probably need to be willing to support people like Scott Brown and Chris Christie. But there is zero reason to settle for RINOs in actual red states.

Posted by: John Morris at February 13, 2013 04:13 PM (sCRhB)

88 Did everyone take the day off over at the "Conversation"?

Posted by: jwest at February 13, 2013 04:14 PM (ZDsRL)

89 Walker is slowly moving up my list of candidates for 2016. I don't think Rubio is the lock he probably thinks he is.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:14 PM (gmeXX)

90 is he primative because he is from a recently immigrated family

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 04:14 PM (Dnbau)

91 ...McCaskill's people used an old Chicago trick by encouraging Democratic crossover voting in the primaries....
-----
It really pisses me off that there's been no effort I can see of the Party fixing our friggin' primaries. They need to close them. AND they need to consolidate them so that NH and IA don't have such a ridiculously huge impact on things.

And NO MORE DEBATES RUN BY THE ENEMY.

Posted by: Y-not at February 13, 2013 04:14 PM (5H6zj)

92 is he primative because he is hispanic?

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 04:14 PM (Dnbau)

93 She's not dead, for one thing.

Yea, should have figured that out. It just seems nothing would suprise me anymore.

Posted by: Infidel at February 13, 2013 04:15 PM (O/fK8)

94 is he primative because he is swarthy?

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 04:15 PM (Dnbau)

95 What the RINOs don't know: They can never bow low enough to appease the left.

What the left doesn't know: They can never bow low enough to appease Islam.

Posted by: WalrusRex at February 13, 2013 04:15 PM (Hx5uv)

96 So its more "fun time at the circular gun range" or co-ed tits... let me think which one of these is better.

Posted by: Jollyroger at February 13, 2013 04:15 PM (t06LC)

97 OT: Pope to canonize Gabby Giffords before he steps down. Choirs singing.
Seriuosly? Not to be insensitive and I mean God bless her, but getting shot now get's you canonized? Whatever. There's many reasons I left the Catholic church. Hopefully the new Pontiff can right their ship.

Posted by: Minnfidel at February 13, 2013 04:15 PM (uVah9)

98 is he primative because he looks short?

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 04:15 PM (Dnbau)

99 I'm getting an exorbitant lag time loading due to some site called damnlol.com here.Anyone else getting that?
Posted by: © Sponge at February 13, 2013 04:11 PM (xmcEQ)


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


LOL!

Posted by: damnlol.com at February 13, 2013 04:15 PM (tmdxK)

100 Y-Not, all good points. And I'd say different debate formats.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:16 PM (gmeXX)

101 Primitive and dreamy.

Posted by: Barney Frank at February 13, 2013 04:16 PM (Hx5uv)

102
"I'm losing confidence in the Tea Party's ability to distinguish Protest Candidates from Candidates who Can Actually be Put Into Position to Make Change."

Stop it, ace. You never had confidence about the above, and you are simply reinforcing what you have thought for quite some time.

I'm not saying this to defend those few candidates that you just can't move past, just notingwhat I observe.

And now I'm ready tomove on towardmaking a difference, rather than beating each other up overa difference.

Regards
MM

Posted by: Meremortal at February 13, 2013 04:16 PM (jTKU5)

103 84

Romney's loss is on him, but when you have certain Senate candidates essentially self-destructing, regardless of any other merits, why the hell wouldn't someone take notice?

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 04:16 PM (60GaT)

104 73 No matter how you slice it, you're a goddamn criminal.

That sound better to you, asshole?

....

'Criminal Immigrant' it is then
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 13, 2013 04:09 PM (TK19Y)



I've been using the contraction "crimmigrant" for years.

Posted by: Truman North at February 13, 2013 04:16 PM (I2LwF)

105 Yes, up on the east coast we probably need to be willing to support people like Scott Brown and Chris Christie. But there is zero reason to settle for RINOs in actual red states.

---

This to a degree.

My stance is that NE RINOs can get some support, but NOT the kind of overwhelming financial support given to former Sen. Linc Chafee when he was openly flipping the bird to the party.

That guy was such a crapweasel that he claims he'd have caucused with the Dems if he'd actually gotten re-elected that year.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at February 13, 2013 04:16 PM (e0xKF)

106 Have to be dead to be cannonized.

Posted by: Infidel at February 13, 2013 04:16 PM (O/fK8)

107 Primitive = snowbillie, only from FL where there ain't no snow.

Posted by: @PurpAv at February 13, 2013 04:16 PM (BH8oG)

108 92 is he primative because he is hispanic?

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 04:14 PM (Dnbau)

--Well, the Miami Sound Machine had a hit album called Primitive Love.

Posted by: logprof at February 13, 2013 04:16 PM (4pNjZ)

109 Mr. Matthews needs to explain what he means by "primative"..sounds like a code word to me

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 04:16 PM (Dnbau)

110 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a malignant traitor.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 13, 2013 04:16 PM (8y9MW)

111 i mean too much of this is tribal "establishment vs. conservative" point-scoring when all it is is "don't nominate suicidal candidates"

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 04:17 PM (60GaT)

112
"I think the concern that people have is that somehow people in Washington in the Beltway are going to decide that someone can’t get elected. That’s the argument they used against me and I don’t believe that’s Karl Rove’s intention... "




Actually Marco, that's exactly his intention. He SAID that's his intention.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 13, 2013 04:17 PM (kdS6q)

113 what does Mr Matthews have against hispanic men?

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 04:17 PM (Dnbau)

114 Chris Matthews saying "primitive" is his siren song for "crush my shart blossom, big daddy!"

Posted by: Fritz at February 13, 2013 04:17 PM (UzPAd)

115 MSNBC's Matthews calls Latino US Senator "primitive"???????????


Please please please do a post about this or an article. Seriously. Don't you see every narrative and hilarity in just the headline that can be sent around!!!!

I mean the piece writes itself. "MSNBC's Chris Matthews is well-known for racial dogwhistles. This term means that certain words are actually code words for racial statements. He has gone so far as to assert that the word "Chicago" code be one of these so-called offensive "code words."

But what does it mean when Matthews refers to Marco Rubio as a "primitive." Mr. Rubio is a Hispanic American whose parents were immigrants to this country. Is it fair for Matthews to lambast the word "Chicago" as a code word, and yet denigrate a prominent Latino as a primitive.

Chris Matthews of MSNBC has some explaining to do, as according to his standards, this is blatant racism on his parts. Or perhaps his "standards" only apply to those criticalhis tingle-hero, President Obama.Matthews should be careful of his dog-whistle labels, or otherwise legitimate criticisms(mentioning cities, for example) could be misrepresented as racist. ForMatthews to denigrate minorities as primitives isthe ultimate case of the pot calling the kettle black.
Oh wait, was that racist? I guess I will have to wait for double-standard, dog-whistle tingle Matthews toletus all know, after he is done calling minority US Senators "primitive."

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 04:18 PM (tVTLU)

116 this fact doesn't delegitimize his criticism, which is pretty much on-point when you have select Senate candidates fragging themselves over two cycles.

This ignores that multiple establishment candidates lost Senate races by similar margins during this time period.

The solution isn't with the leadership that gave us electoral defeat in 2006, 2008, and in the case of Romney, 2012.

The TEA party is young and has flaws. However Rubio, Cruz, and Rand are all examples of senators that would have been shut out by the establishment. Hell, even Scott Brown won through huge TEA party goodwill and lost without it (although he was doomed anyway).

The TEA party will put forth bad candidates on occasion. But then, so does the GOP and so do the Dems.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at February 13, 2013 04:18 PM (kdfQ/)

117 I mean, just because he is not a tall blond Irish drunk like Mr Matthews.. primative?

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 04:18 PM (Dnbau)

118 1. Elect "electable" R's who function as D's.


2. ????


3. Conservative win!

Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 13, 2013 04:18 PM (DvVVN)

119 “When you inaccurately call me illegal, you not only dehumanize me,
you’re offending them,” he said. “No human being is illegal.”


Illegal and alien is the language used in current US law.

Posted by: @PurpAv at February 13, 2013 04:19 PM (BH8oG)

120 Gabby's Husband: Here's one -- nine pence.
St. Gabby: I'm not dead!
Papal Rep: What?
Gabby's Husband : Nothing -- here's your nine pence.
St. Gabby: I'm not dead!
Papal Rep: Here -- he says he's not dead!
Gabby's Husband: Yes, he is.
St. Gabby: I'm not!
Papal Rep: He isn't.
Gabby's Husband: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
St. Gabby: I'm getting better!
Gabby's Husband: No, you're not -- you'll be stone dead in a moment.
Papal Rep: Oh, I can't take him like that -- it's against regulations.
St. Gabby: I don't want to go in the cart!
Gabby's Husband: Oh, don't be such a baby.
Papal Rep: I can't take him...
St. Gabby: I feel fine!
Gabby's Husband: Oh, do us a favor...
Papal Rep: I can't.
Gabby's Husband: Well, can you hang around a couple of minutes? He won't
be long.
Papal Rep: Naaah, I got to go on to Robinson's -- they've lost nine
today.
Gabby's Husband: Well, when is your next round?
Papal Rep: Thursday.
St. Gabby: I think I'll go for a walk.
Gabby's Husband: You're not fooling anyone y'know. Look, isn't there
something you can do?
St. Gabby: I feel happy... I feel happy.
[whop]
Gabby's Husband: Ah, thanks very much.
Papal Rep: Not at all. See you on Thursday.

Posted by: Bring Out Your Dead! at February 13, 2013 04:19 PM (TOk1P)

121 "Rubio Drinks".
There, that's what a good editor is for.

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at February 13, 2013 04:19 PM (Qxdfp)

122 Speaking of NE RINOs, Susan Collins has said she won't support Hagel. So that's something, anyway.

Posted by: Y-not at February 13, 2013 04:19 PM (5H6zj)

123 And anyway, why rag on the Tea Party for a spotty record of picking candidates? At least they are trying, don't see anyone else doing that much. Just continuing to run the same damned losing gameplan over and over is insanity.


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


What some people fail to realize is that we've had some successes with the Tea Party. Which, considering the DC leviathon, isn't a bad record.

Posted by: Soona at February 13, 2013 04:20 PM (tmdxK)

124 I vote for AtC... anyone that wears stompy boots to kick the shit out of a liar is a winner in my book!

I prostrate myself before you, Oh Mistress of the Stomp!!!

Posted by: Mjölnir the Banhammer for the Gates of Hell at February 13, 2013 04:20 PM (Jls4P)

125 I'm with ace. I want a party somewhere between the Die Rinos Vic Party and the FrumBrook Party.

Also, in the catergory of not ever being pleased, conservatives on this sitecalling for a fiscal conservative should love Christie but he apparently lost them because of other issues. I'm glad they have seen the light but the point is, everybody is going to disappoint you at some time.

Posted by: polynikes at February 13, 2013 04:20 PM (m2CN7)

126 If through the MSM's blatant and silly overreaching of "Water-gate", we can change even one liberal's mind, we should.

Posted by: Mirror Universe Obama at February 13, 2013 04:20 PM (8wqqE)

127 I just want to know the examples from 2012 where the tea party was more interested in protest candidates than winning. Seems like we are still talking about 2010 which was the tea party's first election.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:20 PM (gmeXX)

128 Protest Candidates from Candidates who Can Actually be Put Into Position to Make Change.

Like Akin and Mourdock? Waaaaaait a minute!

The problem isn't that the tea party "Can't distinguish" it's that there is rather a dearth of available options. It Has Been Decided that the Establishment oiks won't do anything (and they won't), and a good definition of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result." So the Tea Party is trying something different.

And, in places, its working. In others, it's not. It is in the interest both of the Republican Good Ole Boys' club and the Liberals to paint everyone in the Tea Parties (and especially anyone seeking to become a citizen-legislator) with the broad brush of some of the more spectacular explosions- including Akin and Mourdock- neither of whom were "Tea Party" candidates.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 13, 2013 04:20 PM (8y9MW)

129 is he primative because he is hispanic?

He's primative because he has an ACU rating higher than 0.

Posted by: Radish at February 13, 2013 04:20 PM (/kI1Q)

130 The MA GOP can go eat a bag of dicks. Whether its Winslow or Gomez, they are going to suck all the money out of the state that should be going to winning off-year state house and senate seats. Those fucking morons.

And still no word on the third republican senate candidate anywhere in the press, which makes me happy. He has t announced yet, but he's going to have the backing of he liberty people.

Posted by: Truman North at February 13, 2013 04:20 PM (I2LwF)

131 If Karl Rove had had his way Senator Charlie Crist would have given the Republican rebuttal to the president. So yeah lets listen to that genius.

Posted by: Dr Spank at February 13, 2013 04:20 PM (4cRnj)

132 OT - Soopermexican has video of the shootout yesterday

Posted by: RWC at February 13, 2013 04:21 PM (fWAjv)

133 Test 0 o

Why does pixy turn all my zeroes into ohs?

Posted by: Radish at February 13, 2013 04:21 PM (/kI1Q)

134 Ace: "If you completely win, you've won the right to have the losing party abandon you."

Well, as a racist, baby-killing Tea Party advocate, I've seen how this particular street runs. Turns out it's one way. I'm supposed to sit down, shut up, and sacrifice my principles... for the pragmatism. I've paid my dues to that fallacy long enough. For decades as it turns out. I'm not the one who did the abandoning while we, as the Right of Center, kept moving the Overton Window left. I went along. Again for decades as it turns out. But when a Tea Party "freak" (by whatever metric gets bandied about, honestly or dishonestly by The Powers That Be) wins, that candidate is immediately scorned to oblivion and used as the representative sample to demonize everyone who doesn't cow to the very Powers That Be that exist to destroy any challenge.

Nope. Not playing anymore. When winning is still losing, I'm out. I used not to be. I am now. Out. Pragmatism and "moderation" is the New Capitulation. Screw that. We've all seen exactly where that gets us. It gets us SCoaMF and wannabe-SCoaMFs. It's time for the pragmatists to sit down and shut up for a while and follow different leaders. My ideology has been sabotaged enough.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 13, 2013 04:21 PM (eHIJJ)

135
"Karl Rove was one of my earliest supporters even when I was thirty points down in the polls he wrote me a check, he told people he was supporting me, he helped me in my race and I was thirty or forty points down. That’s important for fairness to say that. Ultimately, when I was the nominee American Crossroads came in to Florida and spent a lot of money on my candidacy and we’re grateful for that."




Open the door for your -- ah! -- Mystery Date....

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 13, 2013 04:21 PM (kdS6q)

136 Also, in the catergory of not ever being pleased,
conservatives on this sitecalling for a fiscal conservative should love
Christie but he apparently lost them because of other issues. I'm glad
they have seen the light but the point is, everybody is going to
disappoint you at some time.

Posted by: polynikes at February 13, 2013 04:20 PM (m2CN7)

The fat bastard was attacking republicans for not giving him pork.

Posted by: Barack Obama at February 13, 2013 04:21 PM (AWmfW)

137 Gabby's Husband: Here's one -- nine pence.
St. Gabby: I'm not dead!
Papal Rep: What?
Gabby's Husband : Nothing -- here's your nine pence.
St. Gabby: I'm not dead!
Papal Rep: Here -- she says she's not dead!
Gabby's Husband: Yes, she is.
St. Gabby: I'm not!
Papal Rep: She isn't.
Gabby's Husband: Well, she will be soon, she's very ill.
St. Gabby: I'm getting better!
Gabby's Husband: No, you're not -- you'll be stone dead in a moment.
Papal Rep: Oh, I can't take her like that -- it's against regulations.
St. Gabby: I don't want to go in the cart!
Gabby's Husband: Oh, don't be such a baby.
Papal Rep: I can't take her...
St. Gabby: I feel fine!
Gabby's Husband: Oh, do us a favor...
Papal Rep: I can't.
Gabby's Husband: Well, can you hang around a couple of minutes? She won't
be long.
Papal Rep: Naaah, I got to go on to Robinson's -- they've lost nine
today.
Gabby's Husband: Well, when is your next round?
Papal Rep: Thursday.
St. Gabby: I think I'll go for a walk.
Gabby's Husband: You're not fooling anyone y'know. Look, isn't there
something you can do?
St. Gabby: I feel happy... I feel happy.
[whop]
Gabby's Husband: Ah, thanks very much.
Papal Rep: Not at all. See you on Thursday.

Posted by: Gender Is Important at February 13, 2013 04:21 PM (TOk1P)

138 Torquewrench, Absolutely!!!
John Morris: You are wrong about Reagan. Revenues and expenditures were balanced under Reagan. Aside from one glaring issue.

The debt service interest payments were out of fucking control thanks to Paul Volcker. Imagine what the deficit would look like right now with 13% Fed rates.

Even under Clinton's 8 years, which most of the time had balanced budgets if not surpluses, THE DEBT STILL WENT UP BY OVER A TRILLION. It is because interest on the debt is the killer. And it will kill us all.

Can we back away from ZIRP? I have no idea.

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 04:22 PM (tVTLU)

139 I don't know where this Giffords canonization rumor got started, but it is ludicrous.

Posted by: Y-not at February 13, 2013 04:23 PM (5H6zj)

140 Akin wasn't tea party, and Mourdock was a good candidate who didn't help himself, but nor did it help that Luger and his supporters decided not to support him. Dewhurst supported Cruz. It is possible to support your party after you lose.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:23 PM (gmeXX)

141 The Tea Party is absolutely to blame for the trouncing that the Republican Party took in 2006. Wait. What?

Posted by: Karl Rove needs anti-histamine at February 13, 2013 04:23 PM (nZvGM)

142 Rove needs to join forces with Meggers McCain to form a support group - "Desperately Seeking Attention".

Call me!

Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars at February 13, 2013 04:23 PM (Jcd0S)

143 "The solution isn't with the leadership that gave us electoral defeat in 2006, 2008, and in the case of Romney, 2012."



It's just fucking comical these days that the proven losing strategies from losing strategists is something we're supposed to back, because...well...we'll win the next one by golly!


Just keep doing the same old shit guys, and expect a different result. The Dems can swing further and further left with no electoral penalty, and we have to swing left too??


If that's what's necessary, count me out.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 13, 2013 04:24 PM (DvVVN)

144 Why does pixy turn all my zeroes into ohs?
Posted by: Radish at February 13, 2013 04:21 PM (/kI1Q)

Rationing.

Posted by: RWC at February 13, 2013 04:24 PM (fWAjv)

145 116 i don't disagree.

i dunno how much of recent losses (Tea Party or establishment) is ideology, how much is optics/gullibility about red-state Democrats' centrism, it's difficult to say without projecting your own personal biases onto it.

however i do think someone like Akin feeds into a certain opposing narrative used against the GOP that other losing candidates didn't, even though the impact on votes is the same.


Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 04:24 PM (60GaT)

146 Truman North: "This is interesting though. If you want to win elections, Karl Rove is your man. If you want to save the country, Forget him."

Bingo. Except for the Rove actually winning elections thing. Turns out his record is rather dubious overall.

And Rove, you need to meet Satan's Barbed C*ck.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 13, 2013 04:24 PM (eHIJJ)

147 I refuse to believe that needing water during a speech can lead to someone suddenly being unworthy for political office, but the MSM is doing their best to make it so. Van Jones certainly has Rubio in his crosshairs now. Too bad they did not put as much ink and screen time investigating Benghazi as they have a bottle of water; utter fail. Probably not saying anything that other, cleverer morons have not already said today, but I needed to vent.

Posted by: LizLem at February 13, 2013 04:24 PM (8wqqE)

148 I think we should focus on abortion and gay marriage to help win elections.

Because the Republican platform on those issues is so popular.

Posted by: Eaton Cox at February 13, 2013 04:24 PM (q177U)

149 could not disagree more. Look at the caliber of the tea party senators compared to anyone else in congress of either party. if those are the protest candidates then yeah sign me up. it's the tea party/common sense vs. the washington establishment. I couldn't care less what Carl Rove or the other Republican bluebloods have to say about it.

Posted by: exceller at February 13, 2013 04:24 PM (ROGMG)

150
I'll argue that the 'heat and fire of the Tea Party' is not only the right prescription for the nearly-dead GOP, it's the only prescription.

The challenge facing the GOP has nothing to do with wonky policy; it's solely about selling a brand to an electorate with an extraordinarily short attention span.

Posted by: soothsayer at February 13, 2013 04:25 PM (CXoSL)

151 lets try this exercise.... what ifsomeone on Fox called the President "primative", can you imagine the howling, the screams of "racism!!"?

Primative?

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 04:25 PM (Dnbau)

152 If it were up to Karl Rove, Marco Rubio wouldn't even be a senator right now.

Posted by: buzzion at February 13, 2013 04:25 PM (GULKT)

153 There's a generational auctorial tic writers especially around our age very often display where what the writer will do to look like he's Serious People is he'll feign perplexity at a simple- and dualistic-seeming judgment and pretend to have deferred really deciding anything about it because Things Can't Be That Simple, Can They? and he makes it like what you're doing as you read along, over whatever temporal or textual length he's doing this thing over, is you're watching him in the process of becoming Solomon and so then at the end when he very judiciously reaches the judiciously deferred time when finally he'll allow himself finally and judiciously to choose the side he was always on already, suckers and people who are also inclined to pretend they're not like they really are will go man, that guy's thinkin'--like I do.

...

I'm just noting this.

Posted by: oblig. feigns anthropology at February 13, 2013 04:25 PM (cePv8)

154 I think Van Jones is "primative"

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 04:26 PM (Dnbau)

155
BTW - The CBN interview rhis all jumps off from: http://tinyurl.com/bjcm5ou


Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 13, 2013 04:26 PM (kdS6q)

156
Posted by: Eaton Cox at February 13, 2013 04:24 PM (q177U)

Liar.

Posted by: Meremortal at February 13, 2013 04:28 PM (jTKU5)

157 Demorats are not that smart. It should be easy to defeat them in every way. Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 04:01 PM (tVTLU)

Patently not true. It's this sort of underestimation that gets us kicked in the balls then repeatedly suckerpunched in political arenas. They are smart, and they know how to play politics. We need to be smart and play politics better.

Posted by: Heralder at February 13, 2013 04:28 PM (+xmn4)

158 Karl Rove should retire. HIS presidential candidates always lose. Why, in the name of all that's holy and unholy, should we be listening to this douche.

Posted by: Soona at February 13, 2013 04:28 PM (tmdxK)

159 Again, I don't disagree with Ace's primary point, which I interpret to be that this tension is probably good for the party. But Ace seems to be leaning away from the Tea Party. I go the other way. I'm much more impressed with the Tea Party's victories lately than the establishments. So rather than the Tea Party being the brake, I'd rather the establishment be the brake. Maybe that is what Ace is saying. I guess I'm just not as down on them (whoever they are) as much as Ace. I think this has a lot to do with living in Texas and being a Ted Cruz supporter from the get-go, when few gave him a chance.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:28 PM (gmeXX)

160 If it were up to Karl Rove, Marco Rubio wouldn't even be a senator right now.
Posted by: buzzion at February 13, 2013 04:25 PM (GULKT)

So what was posted at Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 13, 2013 04:21 PM (kdS6q) help reconsider what you just posted.?

Posted by: polynikes at February 13, 2013 04:28 PM (m2CN7)

161
This ignores that multiple establishment candidates lost Senate races by similar margins during this time period
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at February 13, 2013 04:18 PM (kdfQ/)
But rarely in states that the GOP had been expected to win easily.

Posted by: Jon (not the troll) at February 13, 2013 04:28 PM (2g9rv)

162 I'm with soothsayer on this.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:29 PM (gmeXX)

163 including Akin and Mourdock- neither of whom were "Tea Party" candidates.

Mourdock was a less-spending alternative to Obama's Favorite Republican Senator, who had been elected and re-elected to a statewide office.

None of the people who can't stop cursing "tea party" for putting him on Indiana's ballot said shit about him during the primaries.

Posted by: Radish at February 13, 2013 04:29 PM (/kI1Q)

164 I'm putting my marker down now, by the way: Rand Paul wins the 2016 MA Republican presidential primary.

Posted by: Truman North at February 13, 2013 04:29 PM (I2LwF)

165 It's this sort of underestimation that gets us kicked in the balls then
repeatedly suckerpunched in political arenas. They are smart, and they
know how to play politics. We need to be smart and play politics better.


This.

Even if they're not "smart" they are certainly canny (and those aren't always the same thing). Underestimate them to your own (and, unfortunately, mine too) peril.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 13, 2013 04:29 PM (8y9MW)

166 Heralder and AllenG:

I would just read the rest of my post. An educated person could simply destroy each and every argument of the left on gun control.

The people behind the scenes are smart for the demorats, but your average MSM lickspittle follower is not. See Soledad O'Brien; Piers Morgan, Wolf Blitzer, etc.

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 04:31 PM (tVTLU)

167 I think this has a lot to do with living in Texas and being a Ted Cruz supporter from the get-go, when few gave him a chance.
Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:28 PM (gmeXX)

I'm neither a tea party advocate or dissenter but I would say the first person to really notice Ted Cruz on a national level and give him a chance for big things was Jay Nordlinger from National Review. He is not a tea partier.

Posted by: polynikes at February 13, 2013 04:32 PM (m2CN7)

168 Mourdock was a less-spending alternative to Obama's Favorite Republican
Senator, who had been elected and re-elected to a statewide office.


I'll admit all I know about Mourdock I learned on Ace o' Spades. So I might have missed something. But my point was the one you made- Mourdock was a "career politician" who had held state-wide elective office. Had that seat been open (instead of him winning a primary against the incumbent), it's likely that Rove's new group would support him vociferously.

Sometimes you just can't predict a dick-stepping moment.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 13, 2013 04:32 PM (8y9MW)

169 JDP @ 145 wrote: "however i do think someone like Akin feeds into a certain opposing
narrative used against the GOP that other losing candidates didn't, even
though the impact on votes is the same."

So? The Party Media already had their War on Women storyline written, they were only looking for the stock footage to flesh it out. If the only way we win is if NOBODY NOWHERE on our team EVER says anything epic stupid during an election cycle... well we can all just get our 'sporting goods' out now and suck the business end because we are boned.

We SAY we want citizen legislators instead of polished poll tested, focus group sound bite spoon fed politicians. Then we scream and shout "Fie!" when some unpolished citizen aspires to the legislature. Pick. Normal people, who sometimes turn out to be less than perfect... hell sometimes less than bright or even sane; or you can have career politicians. But we know how that ends.

Posted by: John Morris at February 13, 2013 04:32 PM (sCRhB)

170 it'd also help if select conservative groups stopped using RINO not just for actual RINOs, but conservatives with tactical disagreements

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 04:32 PM (60GaT)

171 If Karl Rove were really serious about Republicans winning and retaining seats shouldn't he have a word to the sitting members about doing the right thing by their voters instead of antagonizing them. It's the behavior of the sitting members that is fuelling the Tea Party.

Posted by: Decaf at February 13, 2013 04:33 PM (NmvvV)

172 An educated person could simply destroy each and every argument of the left on gun control.


Sure they could. Even barely literate Morons like us can. And if the majority of the population operated on logic and reason, we'd win every election. They don't, so we don't.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at February 13, 2013 04:33 PM (8y9MW)

173 Patently not true. It's this sort of underestimation
that gets us kicked in the balls then repeatedly suckerpunched in
political arenas. They are smart, and they know how to play politics. We
need to be smart and play politics better.

Posted by: Heralder at February 13, 2013 04:28 PM (+xmn4)

They're not that smart , they win on being completely immoral. Anything goes, anything. Just take the case of Zimmerman.

Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 13, 2013 04:33 PM (AWmfW)

174 Sometimes you just can't predict a dick-stepping moment.

---

It isn't always what you do but how it's covered.

Who the fuck had ever heard the term "macaca" before the WaPo decided to do a full-court press to kill Sen. George Allen's career?

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at February 13, 2013 04:34 PM (e0xKF)

175 I would just read the rest of my post. An educated person could simply destroy each and every argument of the left on gun control.
----

Prescient, I agree, but I think we make a mistake trying to win on logic. We should simply stick with they are coming to take away your guns. Nothing else. That's how you get the masses to vote. They don't care about logic. The people who claim they do, the educated, the hipsters, the college kids are simply lying. Nohting willl get them to change their minds about guns. The GOP should simply say, we will not let those liberals take away your guns. Nothing fancy.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:34 PM (gmeXX)

176 Re Rubio's sip of water.

You would think he did this.

http://bit.ly/WJBl29

The press needs an intervention.

Posted by: sTevo at February 13, 2013 04:35 PM (NrSrt)

177 SH:

Yes, the tea party is an excellent phenomenon. But there is something happening underneath the surface. From the reddit founder's suicide, to now the atlantic writing about "unlocking phones" and the drone strikes.

There is an undercurrent brewing on both the liberals and the tea party that we are sick of having our rights trampled by our government overlords. We are sick of being felons for owning guns or smoking weed or assisting in the free flow of information. we are sick of getting our crotches felt up or our electronic devices seized near border crossings.

THIS IS THE RON PAUL PHENOMENON. THIS IS THE MOVEMENT THAT IS GROWING. THIS IS WHAT WE MUST!!!! TAP IN TO.

If we do this, we will win. And win in large fashion.

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 04:35 PM (tVTLU)

178 FYNQ

Repubs feel the need to answer every liberal trick question even if they don't know what they are talking about.

The mindset with Dems is not to answer questions with "how do I tell the truth?" but rather "BS BS what would my attorney tell me to say BS BS ?"

or FYNQ




Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at February 13, 2013 04:35 PM (EZl54)

179 169

"The Party Media already had their War on Women storyline written, they were only looking for the stock footage to flesh it out"

and not having whatshisname could've deprived them of some of that stock footage

sorry i just don't share this fatalistic view, and don't see the point of talking about anything if your position is that the media brainwashes everyone and there's nothing to counter it.

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 04:36 PM (60GaT)

180 But rarely in states that the GOP had been expected to win easily.

If Romney had not been our nominee in 2012, the dominant meme today would be that he would have won.

The GOP establishment candidates lost their primaries despite in general massively outspending their opponents. They were not good candidates.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at February 13, 2013 04:36 PM (LnQr8)

181 Polynikes - I agree with you completely. Those against the Tea Party bring up O'Donnell and those who support it use Cruz. Both are kind of unfair IMO. O'Donell was an exceptionally weak candidate in all respects, but Cruz was an exceptional candidate in all respects. Plus the states couldn't be any different. Anyway, I'd simply learn lessons from both their candidacies and move on.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:36 PM (gmeXX)

182 The challenge facing the GOP has nothing to do with wonky policy; it's solely about selling a brand to an electorate with an extraordinarily short attention span.

Sooth, it's the opposite, Republicans are in trouble because conservatives have long memories.

Posted by: Decaf at February 13, 2013 04:37 PM (NmvvV)

183 177

if this happens i'm joining the crotchety young fogie party as i am strongly anti-choom

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 04:37 PM (60GaT)

184 Somtimes I enjoy these discussions and sometimes I don't. Most of the time we have no idea what the electoral atmosphere is going to be even a year down the road.

Which reminds me. Shouldn't we be putting our focus on 2014 instead of trying to divine future candidates for 2016? I know where the dems focus is now.

Posted by: Soona at February 13, 2013 04:37 PM (tmdxK)

185
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at February 13, 2013 04:33 PM (AWmfW)

You can be smart and wrong or smart and progressive (but I repeat myself). It's really not giving them too much credit, as fun as it is to just universally malign our political enemies, it doesn't help us win.

And yes, as Allen said, even if it's not smarts it's canny politics. They appeal to emotion when they know emotion will win while we're busy boring people with bar graphs. The bar graphs are important, but not if no one is listening in the first place.

Posted by: Heralder at February 13, 2013 04:37 PM (+xmn4)

186 SH:

I agree. But underneath the theme one needs to be able to back it up with absolute facts and argument.

That's what we need. Themes to hammer home again and again. And then the ability to back up the fucking argument. Usually we can do the latter, somewhat, but the former we are not very good at.

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 04:38 PM (tVTLU)

187 The ARCHITECT!! backed Oompa-Loompa over Rubio and Sphincter over Toomey

Both switched to the Dem party after being primaried

Way to pick 'em Karl. Go fuck yourself

Posted by: kbdabear at February 13, 2013 04:38 PM (mCvL4)

188 THIS IS THE RON PAUL PHENOMENON. THIS IS THE MOVEMENT THAT IS GROWING. THIS IS WHAT WE MUST!!!! TAP IN TO. If we do this, we will win. And win in large fashion.
Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 04:35 PM (tVTLU)

I don't think pissing on the graves of dead heroes is going to bring in the votes. Fuck Ron Paul.

Posted by: troyriser at February 13, 2013 04:38 PM (vtiE6)

189 @177 Prescient - I don't disagree with any of that. Call it a libertarian push, or what. Its why I like Rand Paul - at least so far. You are right, there is something there, and we should tap into it somehow.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:39 PM (gmeXX)

190 And did you hear? Rubio drinks water. Holy mackerel, there's your headline.







4 Americans killed in Benghazi wasn't a story but the MFM will run with this for weeks

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 13, 2013 04:40 PM (1Jaio)

191 THIS IS THE RON PAUL PHENOMENON. THIS IS THE MOVEMENT THAT IS GROWING. THIS IS WHAT WE MUST!!!! TAP IN TO. If we do this, we will win. And win in large fashion.
Posted by: Prescient11
***

You've been smoking sea slug penis.

Posted by: Sea Slug at February 13, 2013 04:40 PM (uhftQ)

192 190 And did you hear? Rubio drinks water. Holy mackerel, there's your headline.

---

He didn't spit it into the air, making a fine mist, did he?

Next thing you know, he'll start carrying a sledgehammer and porking the boss's daughter too!

Posted by: Hunter Hearst Helmsley at February 13, 2013 04:42 PM (e0xKF)

193 I agree. But underneath the theme one needs to be able to back it up with absolute facts and argument.

----

I don't know about that. I think we should simply argue with emotion. Facts ultimately don't matter to voters. Emotion is how you get people to vote.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:42 PM (gmeXX)

194 ....sh and prescient are paulians...what a surprise

Posted by: phoenixgirl at February 13, 2013 04:43 PM (GVxQo)

195 Let's give Dick Lugar some more time. after all he's only 81 and its early in his 6th or 7 th term.he's still chalk full of new ideas to make government smaller. If Karl Rove says to support Dick, that's good enough for me.

Posted by: exceller at February 13, 2013 04:43 PM (ROGMG)

196 Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:36 PM (gmeXX)

The difference between me and a lot of posters here is that once McDonnell(or any tea partyperson)was our candidate or once McCain was our candidate, the mission was set and from then on itwas full 100% propagandizing , over the top support. Unfortunately the vote depression rhetoric continued on our side which surely also went beyond just our intertubes.Same thing happened with Romney.

Posted by: polynikes at February 13, 2013 04:43 PM (m2CN7)

197 THIS IS THE RON PAUL PHENOMENON. THIS IS THE MOVEMENT THAT IS GROWING


WASF

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at February 13, 2013 04:44 PM (EZl54)

198 but Cruz was an exceptional candidate in all respects.

So why did the establishmentpush someone else instead of him?In my estimation Rove and his coterie are no better at picking winner thananyone else.

Posted by: Decaf at February 13, 2013 04:44 PM (NmvvV)

199 phoenixgirl -- don't insult me by calling me a Paulian. I have never supported the guy.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:44 PM (gmeXX)

200 if this happens i'm joining the crotchety young fogie party as i am strongly anti-choom
Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 04:37 PM (60GaT)


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


I am too. The choomers for legalization are just another future useless group that'll be eventually begging for government cheese.

Posted by: Soona at February 13, 2013 04:45 PM (tmdxK)

201 JDP @ 179 said, "sorry i just don't share this fatalistic view"

Reality. Our enemy isn't Obama. Our enemy isn't the senile botoxed fool Pelosi. They wouldn't last five minutes without the Party's media machinery. We try new tactics until we find some that are effective against that opponent. Newt knows this and can fight them but his methods require very rare skills to employ. We need to find more universal ways to attack them. They are dying; but not nearly fast enough to save us unless we can start seeing them as THE enemy and bend our every effort to the problem of finding some attacks that can work against them to hasten their demise.

Either that or give up and suck the barrel. And that ain't my style.

Posted by: John Morris at February 13, 2013 04:45 PM (sCRhB)

202 So why did the establishmentpush someone else instead of him?In my estimation Rove and his coterie are no better at picking winner thananyone else.

----

That's it. By not supporting Cruz, the establishment continues this us v. them mentality. If the establishment had supported them, I think they would better be able to claim that they know what they are doing.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:45 PM (gmeXX)

203 but Cruz was an exceptional candidate in all respects. So why did the establishmentpush someone else instead of him?In my estimation Rove and his coterie are no better at picking winner thananyone else.
Posted by: Decaf at February 13, 2013 04:44 PM (NmvvV)

Again with the establishment schtick. Rick Perry supported Cruz's opponent so is Rick Perry the establishment now?

Posted by: polynikes at February 13, 2013 04:47 PM (m2CN7)

204 "I agree with you completely. Those against the Tea Party
bring up O'Donnell and those who support it use Cruz. Both are kind of
unfair IMO. O'Donell was an exceptionally weak candidate..."


Why can't the Tea Party and its supporters own up to that? Instead we get "Oh, but her suicide run helped out in the long term." No it didn't. We're back to whining about RINOs and Teh Establishment.

O'Donell was a failure. So is the Tea Party so far. I don't see the Tea Party being our savior if it's going to whine about how nice a guy it is. Whining about an invisible enemy like Teh Establishment doesn't strike me as the behavior of a winner.

Posted by: Shoot Me at February 13, 2013 04:48 PM (qiXMt)

205 Polynikes - No I don't think Perry is, but obviously the establishment is a loose term, just as the tea party is a loose term.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:49 PM (gmeXX)

206 Shouldn't we be putting our focus on 2014 instead of trying to divine future candidates for 2016?

Yes, yes, yes. We've done enough autopsying of the last election, let's bury the dead and get on with it. Without a win in 2014 there won't be a 2016. Obama will run a scorched earth operation that there will be nothing left of the Republican party or even conservatives to matter in 2016.

Posted by: Decaf at February 13, 2013 04:49 PM (NmvvV)

207 We likely wouldn't have Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, or Ted Cruz in the Senate if we'd had listened to our betters.

Maybe if the "establishment conservatives" Rove is leading could, oh, I dunno, perhaps explain their love of Charlie "I'm Orange" Crist in 2010 maybe I'd give them some credence...

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie ® at February 13, 2013 04:49 PM (1hM1d)

208 Primitive?

One word you would associate with that is--fear.

The Democrat's bread and butter is demographics and the resentment card.

The Democrats have the black vote nailed down--and some viable black candidates.

Now-when it comes to the latino vote and latino candidates it gets a little less secure.

Dems have Salazar--who is kind of out to pasture, some mayor in LA and--Eva Longoria.

I'm pretty sure they hope Eva Longoria doesn't get any ideas....

So the word 'primitive" is really a projection of what Rubio makes Matthews feel--

fear.

(kind of the antithesis of a tingle.)

Posted by: Biden at February 13, 2013 04:50 PM (r2PLg)

209 oops--not Biden.

Posted by: tasker at February 13, 2013 04:51 PM (r2PLg)

210 polynikes @ 203 said, "Rick Perry supported Cruz's opponent so is Rick Perry the establishment now"

No, Perry gets a pass. A Governor is kinda required to support his Lt. Gov. Politics has rules and traditions ya know. Conservatives of all people should respect that.

Posted by: John Morris at February 13, 2013 04:51 PM (sCRhB)

211 SH: "Emotion is how you get people to vote."

A lot of truth in that statement. As sophisticated as this country has become via technological advances, I'm convinced it's much more stupid than it has ever been. Logic and tangible knowledge (which is different than modern credentialism) has deteriorated as evidenced by, for example, student performance thorough time, the introduction of Ebonics, and SOTU speeches. We are dumbing our country down to the point of dysfunction. When logic and facts are inadequate to persuade, you have to try something else since actual education takes years and years of development. We are a developing Idiocracy. Consequently, we need different tactics

We have an acute problem. Our immediate political response does indeed need to be an appeal to emotionalism and how people "feel" as opposed to "think". Sure, we can introduce logic and facts into the argument, but it cannot be the sine qua non.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 13, 2013 04:51 PM (eHIJJ)

212 Again with the establishment schtick. Rick Perry supported Cruz's opponent so is Rick Perry the establishment now?

Yes. How much more establishment can you get than a long term governor?

Posted by: Decaf at February 13, 2013 04:52 PM (NmvvV)

213 Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie ® at February 13, 2013 04:49 PM (1hM1d)

again, does Rubio's own words mean nothing?

Karl Rove was one of my earliest supporters even when I was thirty points down in the polls he wrote me a check, he told people he was supporting me, he helped me in my race and I was thirty or forty points down. That’s important for fairness to say that. Ultimately, when I was the nominee American Crossroads came in to Florida and spent a lot of money on my candidacy and we’re grateful for that."

Posted by: polynikes at February 13, 2013 04:52 PM (m2CN7)

214 Why can't the Tea Party and its supporters own up to that? Instead we get "Oh, but her suicide run helped out in the long term." No it didn't. We're back to whining about RINOs and Teh Establishment. O'Donell was a failure. So is the Tea Party so far. I don't see the Tea Party being our savior if it's going to whine about how nice a guy it is. Whining about an invisible enemy like Teh Establishment doesn't strike me as the behavior of a winner.

----

I think you undercut your argument in your two paragraphs. Let me flip it on you. Why can't you admit that the tea party fueled the success of 2010? Both the Tea Party and the Establishment have successes and failures. And both are very loose terms as to who belongs to what group, but I think we generally understand it. I hope both can learn and understand that some candidates are better than others and some states are easier to back more conservative candidates. In essence, for lack of a better rule, the Buckley Rule.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:52 PM (gmeXX)

215 Whining about an invisible enemy like Teh Establishment doesn't strike me as the behavior of a winner.

exactly!

Posted by: John McCain at February 13, 2013 04:52 PM (EZl54)

216 Whining about an invisible enemy like Teh Establishment doesn't strike me as the behavior of a winner.

no doubt!

Posted by: John Boehner at February 13, 2013 04:53 PM (EZl54)

217 Posted by: Decaf at February 13, 2013 04:52 PM (NmvvV)

So the establishment is any Republicanwho opposes who you want as a candidate. Got it.

Posted by: polynikes at February 13, 2013 04:53 PM (m2CN7)

218 Whining about an invisible enemy like Teh Establishment doesn't strike me as the behavior of a winner.

perfectly stated!

Posted by: The Maine Twins at February 13, 2013 04:54 PM (EZl54)

219 I think we should simply argue with emotion. Facts ultimately don't matter to voters. Emotion is how you get people to vote.

It's worked for Democrats in the last three elections. How long does it take us to twig to it? Enough with the Sheldon Cooper approach.

Posted by: Decaf at February 13, 2013 04:54 PM (NmvvV)

220 Primitive --that really is a telling word choice.

Posted by: tasker at February 13, 2013 04:55 PM (r2PLg)

221 201

Newt's good at attacking the premise of a question. his response in one of the debates regarding drone strikes on American citizens who've joined al Qaeda, for instance, was very good. other candidates should take note to challenge certain assumptions as opposed to arguing within them and tacitly conceding the point.

the "how dare you" bombast he occasionally did against legit questions, though, not a really good strategy.

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 04:55 PM (60GaT)

222 Decaf, I agree we should be putting our focus on 2014. I would do that by keeping gun control in the news for the next 18 months.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 04:55 PM (gmeXX)

223 Boehner, whatever you think of him, =/= Maine sisters

this is a very wide net of RINOism

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 04:56 PM (60GaT)

224 Primitive --that really is a telling word choice.
Posted by: tasker at February 13, 2013 04:55 PM (r2PLg)

The comments on this issue made methink of the scene in Animal House.

Posted by: polynikes at February 13, 2013 04:56 PM (m2CN7)

225 Whining about an invisible enemy like Teh Establishment doesn't strike me as the behavior of a winner.

C'mon! I'm groovy with those Tea Party whippersnappers !

Posted by: Mitch McConnell at February 13, 2013 04:56 PM (EZl54)

226 Karl Rove was one of my earliest supporters even when I was thirty points down in the polls he wrote me a check, he told people he was supporting me,

Who did Rove tell that he supported Rubio if nobody knew about it? I don't remember his mentioning it during any of his appearances on Fox.

Posted by: Decaf at February 13, 2013 04:58 PM (NmvvV)

227 Rubio drinks water?

Clearly it isn't distilled or rainwater, since it clearly corrupted his purity of essence of his bodily fluids during his rebuttal yesterday...

Posted by: Brigadier General Jack D. Ripper at February 13, 2013 04:58 PM (XvHmy)

228 Shoot me @ 204 said, "Oh, but her suicide run helped out in the long term." No it didn't.

I'd say it did. In the end we weren't likely to seat ANY Republican in that state. Reality check time. But rejecting the party approved RINO sent a shock wave across the political landscape that told every incumbent Republican everywhere that that the natives were restless and they couldn't take renomination for granted. In other words it got their attention and forced them to stop worrying about what the NYT thought about them quite as much because they now had to worry about what the base thought about them. Worse was the thought the base was thinking about them at all instead of just showing up to punch the ballot from habit.

In short we lost a virtually unwinnable seat, that even had we won with the RINO would have only really voted for our team once (for the leadership position) and more than likely would have Chaffe'd before the first term expired. In exchange we got frightened RINOs from sea to shining sea and a lot more people jumping into primary races. Don't know how you score than as anything other than a win.

Akin and Mourdock were losses since those seats were winnable. Oh well, learn and move on.

Posted by: John Morris at February 13, 2013 04:59 PM (sCRhB)

229 Decaf, I agree we should be putting our focus on 2014. I would do that by keeping gun control in the news for the next 18 months.

Yes, an emotional and a clear cut issue.

Posted by: Decaf at February 13, 2013 05:00 PM (NmvvV)

230 "Whining about an invisible enemy like Teh Establishment doesn't strike me as the behavior of a winner."

We don’t need a lot of Jim DeMint disciples. As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them [the Tea Party].

Posted by: Trent Lott at February 13, 2013 05:00 PM (eHIJJ)

231 Boehner, whatever you think of him, =/= Maine sisters

this is a very wide net of RINOism


lots of glass in the Overton window.

There are degrees of utter failure, I'll give you that.

Posted by: T.Hunter - let it burn at February 13, 2013 05:01 PM (EZl54)

232
polynikes, that's great that KR supported Marco when it was nothing but an uphill climb the looked more like Everest than a hill in Tallahassee.

But KR wasn't the RSCC, and the RSCC was firmly behind Orange Charlie. Gosh, one might even say that KR was...a Tea Party member. He certainly was cutting against the grain.

And while I don't blame Marco for the kind words to KR, it wasn't KR's doing that flipped Orange Charlie out of the party. There was wide spread discontent in the local party groups, on the county level.In straw polls they conducted, Orange Charlie was routinely and soundly whipped time and time again. The RPOF didn't want Charlie, and the RSCC could go pound sand.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie ® at February 13, 2013 05:01 PM (1hM1d)

233 Decaf, the other thing we should start doing is moving all govenor elections to non-Presidential years.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 05:03 PM (gmeXX)

234 JDP @ 221 said, "the "how dare you" bombast he occasionally did against legit questions, though, not a really good strategy."

Agreed. Newt was a flawed candidate in many ways. I'd have supported him in a general had he somehow got through but he wasn't my choice. But I don't deny his skills and we should be trying to learn from him.

Posted by: John Morris at February 13, 2013 05:04 PM (sCRhB)

235 Rove got his candidate of choice in Romney. Romney lost. Why does Rove (or anyone else) think he can do better than the Tea Party? He LOST. He had his chance and he LOST.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at February 13, 2013 05:06 PM (KL49F)

236 228:

This is idiotic. Yes, a republican can win statewide in Delaware. Mike Castle did, over and over again. That "one vote" for leadership is an incredibly important vote (not to mention the fact that he would likely vote with us a lot more than just that once). Also why on earth would he "go chaffee" when he hadn't all the rest of his time as a statewide official. That is a hell of a strawman.

We need a state by state approach. For being federalists we don't seem to understand the concept of different states being different when it comes to candidate selection.

Posted by: BSR at February 13, 2013 05:07 PM (CBCxo)

237 i'll grant the general post-election immigration panic but what else are Boehner and McConnell RINOs on. they're pretty standard conservatives people are upset with because of the impossibility of overriding a Democrat in the WH

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 05:07 PM (60GaT)

238 236 I don't think it idiotic. Its a reasonable argument that you can certainly rebut against. But its not like that one seat cost us a majority. I agree with you there should be a state by state approach. But I also do believe that a message needed to be sent. Now maybe the Tea Party overshot the message, but to simply say it had no effect is wrong IMO. But I do think the message has been sent and both sides should be using the Buckley Rule (for lack of a better rule) here on out.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 05:11 PM (gmeXX)

239 JDP @ 237 said, " because of the impossibility of overriding a Democrat in the WH"

Now who is fatalistic. The House has the absolute power of the purse, in other words to tax and spend. Should they ever discover the courage to use it. Tip knew. Nancy knows. When Boehner figures that secret out they will discover their power. THE issue we say we care about is the out of control Federal Budget. Of the House, Senate and POTUS which one has the power over that subject? Right.

Boehner needs to simply give a short speech and say something like this:

"The President has many powers, he sets foreign policy, wages war, etc. The Senate advises and consents to Supreme Court appointments, Treaties, etc. But to us in the House was given the power to tax and to spend money. If we continue to spend trillions we do not have it is NOT the President's fault. It is not the Senate's fault, heck they won't even discuss opening debate on a budget so it certainly can't be their fault. No, it is ours. No say no more; it ends and it ends today.

We will pass a budget and the Senate is free to debate it and send it back with their changes and we will meet them in conference. But the top line revenue and spending numbers will not be debatable anymore. WE are going to accept our responsibility and stop this madness, we will set a path to solvency.

And the Senate WILL pass a budget and the President WILL sign it. Because we are resolved that there will be no more continuing resolutions.

We shall either pass a budget or give up on this experiment in self government and stick a fork in the country. We have a spending and deficit crisis, if we can't even agree that an actual budget is the first step in solving a spending crisis then there isn't really any point in continuing the farce any more."

Posted by: John Morris at February 13, 2013 05:19 PM (sCRhB)

240 I love how Rove points out the Tea Party failures of O'Donnell, Angle, Akin, etc while ignoring the Establishment's failures of Romney, McCain, Dole, etc. The Establishment has lost The Big One how many times now?

Oh, and I love how Rove calls O'Donnell, Akin, etc failures when he himself played the biggest Self-Fulfilling Prophecy role in causing those two to lose. He bitched and moaned (and threatened to murder Akin) all during the campaign so, if Rove is as powerful as he'd like us to think, he single-handedly made them lose.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at February 13, 2013 05:19 PM (KL49F)

241 John Morris, I like the approach. I know there will be political fall-out including a government shutdown, but that has never bothered me. But I wouldn't simply put the blame on Boehner for this. I doubt he could ever hold the house together. Still I would applaud this approach.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 05:24 PM (gmeXX)

242 Sheila Jackson Lee. That is primative. For real.

Posted by: thunderb at February 13, 2013 05:26 PM (Dnbau)

243 Sigh. I am not a Ron Paul guy. I thought that comment re Chris Kyle was fucking reprehensible.

If you can't see the point I'm making then fuck it. LIB right. Let our children inherit this fucked up mess.

Limited government is the fucking point. Limited POWER. That is where true liberals and conservatives are converging.

But carry on with your inability to see the bigger fucking picture.

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 05:27 PM (tVTLU)

244 "Rove got his candidate of choice in Romney. Romney lost. Why does Rove
(or anyone else) think he can do better than the Tea Party? He LOST. He
had his chance and he LOST."


Yeah, if only Romney would have embraced true conservative idea like Tardisil and finding Muslims under every rock and nine nine nine affairs.

God, it's not like 2011 was that long ago. True Cons made such fools of themselves trying to push a Not-Romney.

Posted by: Shoot Me at February 13, 2013 05:28 PM (qiXMt)

245 239

well i don't mean the House is totally impotent and should be Vichy Democrats. however coming to a budget compromise would mean bridging the massive ideological divide between House Republicans and the Democrats on the issue in some meaningful way. i guess it could happen but right now, not really seeing how.

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 05:31 PM (60GaT)

246 Prescient - there are a lot of people on this board who think anything libertarian is awful. I guess they prefer the regulated government we have. Its much easier to just say Randian and move on.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 05:32 PM (gmeXX)

247 SH:

Reagan was very libertarian. I'm with Reagan. There is no one perfect candidate on every issue. But the principle is the fucking same.

Posted by: Prescient11 at February 13, 2013 05:34 PM (tVTLU)

248 bridging the massive ideological divide

Rested and ready!

Posted by: John McCain at February 13, 2013 05:36 PM (EZl54)

249 Yeah, if only Romney would have embraced true conservative idea like Tardisil and finding Muslims under every rock and nine nine nine affairs. God, it's not like 2011 was that long ago. True Cons made such fools of themselves trying to push a Not-Romney.
--

Not sure what any of this means. I don't think Romney could have embraced true conservative ideas, because I don't think he believes them. And I'm not sure when Tardisal became a true conservative idea.

How did true cons make fools of themselves by pushing Not-Romney. Everything we said came true. There is no doubt that there was not a great non-Romney candidate to elect. Nor could we every prove that Santorum would have done better. Santorum wasn't my first choice, but once it was basically between him and Romney, the choice was easy. When Romney won, I went all in with Romney.

I'm guessing the only thing we may possibly agree on was that we had a lously slate of candidates in 2012. I suspect 2016 will be much better.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 05:37 PM (gmeXX)

250 polynikes

Animal House scene...

which one?

Posted by: tasker at February 13, 2013 05:39 PM (r2PLg)

251 Rove is a pig. Take his chalk boards and stick it up his fat ass!

Posted by: Travis at February 13, 2013 05:41 PM (ychgM)

252 Prescient - I think that commentor obviously missed your larger point, and it is a very good one, one that conservatives should get behind. We have too many laws in this country. When everyone is a criminal, then people start losing respect for the law. This has happened because regulations have made too many crimes. Most people don't know they are committing crimes. We have taken intent out of committing a crime. This is all bad for society. Its unconstitiutional, bad policy, and immoral.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 05:42 PM (gmeXX)

253 polynikes Animal House scene... which one?
Posted by: tasker at February 13, 2013 05:39 PM (r2PLg)

Where they took the girls to the black night club and one of the guys asks Brunella what her major was and she said Primative Cultures and then they cut to the band and lead singer.

Posted by: polynikes at February 13, 2013 05:42 PM (m2CN7)

254 "Reagan was very libertarian"

not really. there's one quote he made recognizing a commonality between conservatives and libertarians on economic matters, but his appeal was pretty distinct.

people just mistake "culture war issues were more on the backburner then" for "Republicans used to be more libertarian." plus the regular impulse for people to fit in popular politicians with their worldview (same with the "Reagan was a moderate" liberal meme)

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 05:43 PM (60GaT)

255 Posted by: Shoot Me at February 13, 2013 05:28 PM (qiXMt)

My point is BOTH sides have put forth losers but Rove acts like it's unique to the Tea Party.

And I agree w/you that most of the True Cons who ran in '11 were idiots. I only liked Perry and could barely stand Gingrich.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at February 13, 2013 05:43 PM (KL49F)

256 Further, I'm much more libertarian when it comes to federal issues. There are way too many things that the federal government is involved in that should be left to the states, particularly related to drugs.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 05:44 PM (gmeXX)

257 Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 05:37 PM (gmeXX)

Romney would have made a great conservative President. Its a shame we will never be able to benefit from a Romney presidency.

Posted by: polynikes at February 13, 2013 05:44 PM (m2CN7)

258 Conservatives need to figure out if they actually want to try and change things or simply be dead right. I'd settle for pointing the country in at least a better direction.

Right now there seems to be an attitude of "Let's field protest candidates that can't actually win, then when everything blows up and we'll be on the right side of history and the electorate will then beg for Christine O'Donnell/Sharon Angle Republicans" It's delusional, what will likely happen if we keep fielding dingbats is one day the US will just be 50 states of California where the real contest will simply be the Democrat primaries.

Everyone loves to trot out the Rubio example for anti-establishment/Tea Party success, but Rubio was a mainstream Republican that was a former Speaker of the House for Florida. He's about as Establishment as you get, and if anything I find his politics on the border to be awfully close to full blown open borders Amnesty. But he'll most likely be our nominee and despite being a consensus Establishment Republican, he'll be a hell of an improvement over what we have now.

I find the perfect is usually the enemy of the good.


Posted by: McAdams at February 13, 2013 05:49 PM (M4J2R)

259 Polynikes - he may have. I'm very sad he lost. I supported him (not in the primary, but once he won). My biggest doubts about him were with respect to judicial appointments. I probably don't think he was as conservative as you do, but he certainly could have surprised me. I wish he had that opportunity. But I did have strong doubts that he could have won. Maybe none of those nominees could have won. One reason I liked Santorum over Romney was I thought his populism was better suited to this election. In the end, I just think we had a lousy choice of candidates. And it doesnt' matter how you would have governed if you can't win.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 05:50 PM (gmeXX)

260 Conservatives need to figure out if they actually want to try and change things or simply be dead right.[i/]

RINO.

Posted by: Mitt Romney, in his cups at February 13, 2013 05:50 PM (6TB1Z)

261 "I find the perfect is usually the enemy of the good."

such wisdom

Posted by: JDP at February 13, 2013 05:50 PM (60GaT)

262 "yes we're purging ourselves to fitness, rather like an anorexic"

More like chemo to remove a cancer.

Posted by: ThomasD at February 13, 2013 05:52 PM (FA+FN)

263 Right now there seems to be an attitude of "Let's field protest candidates that can't actually win

Where did this attitude display itself in 2012?

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 05:53 PM (gmeXX)

264 SH @ 249 said, "I suspect 2016 will be much better."

Why? The party establishment will put up Christie or another RINO and order us to vote for them. Or do you see some towering figure on the horizon ready to ride to the rescue? Unless we can stop the party from setting the rules such that they are but certain to get their way we won't win. And who is even worrying about fixing the nominating process?

Close our primaries. Get more of the early ones out blue states and into purple and red ones. And never allow Party Media type to have any speaking part in our process, most certainly not in a debate. Unless the other team is ok with National Review or AEI hosting a Democratic debate or something in trade, shut em out. So what if they refuse to air our debates, that is an empty threat. If a Republican can't find C-SPAN or Youtube they are useless. And end in end they HAVE to carry them anyway, otherwise the jig is up for em.

Posted by: John Morris at February 13, 2013 05:56 PM (sCRhB)

265 John Morris - Because I'm hoping that Walker, Christie, Jindal, Ryan, Rubio, Paul, Perry (or some combination of those run), and I find them all more impressive than the slate of candidates we had last time. We shall see.

I don't disagree with your final paragraph at all.

Posted by: SH at February 13, 2013 06:01 PM (gmeXX)

266 78
OT, but not really.../

As it stands, my order of voting preference for nominee for prez...

Carson
Walker
Martinez
Rubio
Nikki Haley
R. Paul
Jeb Bush
Christie

No more motherfucking Bush's and that includes Jeb and his idiot son George P.

Posted by: Travis at February 13, 2013 06:22 PM (ychgM)

267 SH @ 265 said, "Because I'm hoping that Walker, Christie, Jindal, Ryan, Rubio, Paul,
Perry (or some combination of those run), and I find them all more
impressive than the slate of candidates we had last time."

I like all of those too except Christie, although support for Rubio is provisional until we see his Amnesty^W Immigration plan. But can any of those muscle past the party machine and take the nomination away from Jeb Bush, Chris Christie or whatever well connected blueblood loser the Party demands we nominate? Remember that the 'next in line' rule doesn't apply to conservatives so Ryan gets nothing from being our Veep nominee last time.

Christie is ok for NJ, he is only really right on one issue, spending, but it is the one most important to NJ and anyway no actual conservative could even get nominated there, forget getting elected.

Posted by: John Morris at February 13, 2013 06:41 PM (sCRhB)

268 263
Right now there seems to be an attitude of "Let's field protest candidates that can't actually win



Where did this attitude display itself in 2012?

It was displayed by the fact that the Primary almost became a brokered Convention when the alternatives were people like Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich, basically joke protest candidates, one of which was a former Freddie Mac lobbyist that married his intern mistress and was on a book tour, the other just came off a 20 point loss in his home state and wanted to make the dangers of birth control among married people a major part of his platform.

I'm all for a bloody primary if it's with "titans" that can win, but instead it was just one long temper tantrum with morons that Romney came out of broke and bruised.

Posted by: McAdams at February 13, 2013 06:58 PM (M4J2R)

269 "And did you hear? Rubio drinks water."

He certainly carries it. Good little apparatchik. Can you feel the Jebmentum?

Posted by: Ken at February 13, 2013 08:19 PM (fFh95)

270 "The evangelicals and professional, working middle class have no choice but to vote for republicans."

Not true. When faced with a Democrat on one side and a Republican shit sandwich on the other, one can choose not to vote for either.

That is exactly what I will do if the Republicans nominate another shit sandwich in 2016.

Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at February 13, 2013 11:29 PM (8J3jn)

271 Awwwwwwwwwwwwwww, Ace: R U having a SAD because Senate Rubio wet himself all over national TV? Don't have a SAAAAAAAAD over that: he wasn't going to win anyway.

(On the other hand, this Gomez guy in Massachuslowly is lookin' pretty good; too bad he chose that state for the final resting place of his national political career. Shoulda gone to Florida, or Texas; at least then we'd get a Republican Senator that knows how to regulate intake.

Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at February 14, 2013 05:05 AM (21TJo)






Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.0698 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0376 seconds, 280 records returned.
Page size 162 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