We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Thursday, November 8. 2012
California Passes Prop 30, Raises Taxes
Reform Denied - On election night, Californians stand by high taxes and untrammeled union power
Despite the hoo-hah, fewer people voted in 2012 than in 2008
Major Regulations for Health Reform Coming Soon
The brutal truth for the GOP and the conservatives: The electorate has shifted
Hope Over Experience - A divided country gives Obama a second chance.
Michael Barone: Wrong, but Still Smart
Dick Morris: I Was 'Wrong,' Blames Voter Models
Bozell: A Dreadful Media Campaign
How Romney Lost And three lessons for conservatives going forward.
In Boston, stunned Romney supporters struggle to explain defeat
Redstate: Status Quo Ante
Karl Rove may be a big loser tonight, but his brand of politics is here to stay.
Puerto Rico votes for statehood:
"I like to be in America, everything free in America..."
Reeling conservatives face ‘recalibration’ at their core - Republicans reassess makeup, tactics, war image
Tracked: Nov 08, 22:30
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
More Romney analyses that just tickle the ears of the GOP.
It's really not that hard:
1. Romney wasn't a conservative, so he did nothing to motivate the conservative base. Quite the opposite, he willfully alienated many libertarians (currently referred to as conservatives). Belmont club points out he had 2M fewer votes than McCain. That was a difference that cost him (popular vote anyway).
2. Media portrayed him as conservative by bringing up issues like contraceptives. Romney stumbles b/c they aren't his issues, aren't even relevant at all, and he can't answer w/o alienating someone.
Gross lack of communication skills has been rampant among GOP candidates since Reagan. That bears repeating...GOP CANDIDATES DON'T KNOW HOW TO COMMUNICATE.
3. Immigration has been good to the Dems, they have played that demographic well. As far as long term strategies go, this has been a big problem for GOP. They were complicit in their own demise, and it will be very hard to overcome those numbers.
I totally agree with your points. It is important for Republicans to remember that even though they lost the election they still had 57.2 million voters that wanted Romney. Do not make the mistake of believing the pundits who will tell you the secret to success is to become more like the Democrats. Don't embrace amnesty and the dream act. Don't embrace higher taxes and higher spending. And don't "compromise" with the Democrats; FIGHT THEM! When the demorcats say compromise they mean concede. Do not give up. Investigate the hell out of Obama's administration they have broken laws and the media is not doing their job of watching out for us. Do not increase the debt limit. Yes this will shut down government, please shut down government!! To the Republicans in congress; grow some balls!!!
Practically all of my friends who are not declared conservatives have posted on Facebook and Twitter that they are giggling with glee at Republican retrospectives and lamentations over the results of the election. Some people find it more entertaining than watching their favorite TV shows.
This country has a political disease.
DrTorch/GWTW: Ditto. Remember the three areas progressives want to control: media, education and entertainment...the latter being the easiest way to sell the former two to the most under-educated.
I agree - communication is the key. Don't talk all Yale\Harvard, but, in terms the citizen can understand.
They do know that Gov'ment is intrusive - they do understand, but make it more personal - "Obamacare maybe a good idea, but are you prepared for more Government intrusion into your medical past, present, and future, let alone the REAL costs?"
And, frankly, FIGHT! The Mules look at it as a war; no holds barred, only path to victory is to subjugate your opponent. The Right never fights that way; the recent one was Regean, and he used mirth and humor to batter his foes, with homespun wit and information. Hard to counter a man who hammers you with facts and wit, when the audience also laughs at you...
Romney was far more likeable than McCain - only things he had going for him was his war service and Sarah. We need another Washington....
... and this (FINALLY) may be the swansong for the GOP establishment. Time for the Geriatric Pachyderms to load up their trunks, head on out, and allow some fresh, young blood to take over - their time as come and gone...
What you/we need to understand--to really grock is the level to which the single women's network of dirty girls ran the election, runs our universities, and intends to run our medical system. They stop at nothing to get their way . . . the MEN in the Republican party need to make a unanimous in the back room decision about strategies to confront these gals on a one to one basis--each event, each issue ---BE NOT AFRAID just because they are female!
Republican women need to shut up about abortion! NEVER AGAIN bring this topic to the table !!! If you don't believe in abortion -- don't have one. UNBORN fetuses did not cause you to loose this election -- YOU DID !!
You could be right that the abortion issue brought more people over to Obama's side. However your conclusion is still wrong. Abortion is the killing of babies pure and simple. I realize it has been going on since before recorded history but it was killing little babies way back then too. Some issues are morally correct and politically troubling. Slavery was one of those issues and the Republicans (Lincoln) fought to end it and the Democrats fought to keep it. Would you have advised Republicans back then; if you don't want a slave then don't own one and never bring this topic to the table again?
Romney lost because he refused to get dirty. He ignored the Benghazi issue, he didn't talk much about the criminal actions Obama let slip by (including no prosecution of Corzine), he didn't discuss the non-Union workers who got hosed by Obama when the government saved GM, etc.
Oh, and what about Obama ignoring flooded Nashville, tornado-ravaged Joplin, etc.? Where was his compassion then?
I am tired of Republican candidates trying to appear 'above it all' when what the Democrats do is go as dirty as possible. Rip them apart. Bring up every failure and tie it to the democrat candidate every day, every hour.
I was incredibly surprised there was no last minute surprised pulled out by someone the Friday before the election. Obama knew he didn't need it; Romney decided he wanted to run a nice guy campaign.
That is why he failed.
My suggestion for next time: pick a candidate purposefully because that person is female, hispanic, black, asian, whatever. But make sure both the Presidential candidate and the VP are NOT white guys. This plays right into the idea that Republicans are all about rich white men. I don't care what people say about 'choosing the best person.' It doesn't work anymore.
Look at the democrat playbook and copy it.
I was for Ron Paul in the primaries, and I think he could have won. the young people loved him! His libertarian ideas would have flummoxed the media. I voted for Romney, donated to his campaign, but I loved Ron Paul's policies. He had genuine, new political ideas. But the Repuclican poo-bahs ran him out of town.
I can only hope that his son picks up the banner. The problem for these libertarians is that they could win a general electrion, but they can't win the Republicvan primary.
Now I have to give politics a rest for a while. The thought of four more years of Obama literally makes me feel like I've been kicked in the stomach.
"The problem for these libertarians is that they could win a general electrion, but they can't win the Republicvan primary."
Paul could have polished up his communication skills too, I get that. But his position and ideas generated much enthusiasm and support across generations.
Robert Stacy McCain seemed puzzled that Americans would want four more years of economic stagnation and many pundits express their frustration that voters have re-elected a president whose policies have been detrimental to the economic recovery. But when it comes to winning election, it's still the economy, stupid! What has been lost on many is, "whose economy?"
Conservative reporters have pointed out that one in three Americans receive government benefits. No doubt, some of these are Medicare and Social Security beneficiaries who were satisfied with Romney's promise that nothing would change for those currently 55 years of age or older. But a significant portion of this third of our population consists of able bodied, working age people whose "economy" consists not of working for a living, but electing government officials who will take the earnings of real workers and redistribute it to non-workers. For them, the economy under Obama was great - and he promised even more of the same.
But the "one-third of Americans receiving government benefits" number misses another even more significant portion of our population whose "economy" differs from that of the nation as a whole and is benefitted by the policies of Obama - those who work directly or indirectly for the government, especially those whose pay checks and pensions are guaranteed or protected by the government, e.g. teachers, members of large unions, government workers, etc. While the economy for the shrinking private sector that actually produces the goods and services that make up the real economy that provides the tax dollars to support these other parasites is suffering, the personal "economy" of these government dependents is doing quite well, albeit at the expense of the private sector.
Here is the "pretty" and "cleaned up" summary of the Republican that just got marijuan legalized in WA state. Read it and weep.
Now that you have read the 'cleaned up' and 'pretty' version here is more background on the "rest of the story".
Here is one brother pulling up the other brother--or maybe it's just old family doing old family things. Please read the last paragraph. Along the way you will also find mentioned a Rob Mckenna. Shortly after this article came out Mr. McKenna defended Christine Gregoire (D) when the elections was proven to be totally corrupted, Mr. McKenna then pulled out no stops to make sure the D's were found innocent. Just this week he ran for Governor and lost--please tell me what kind of "decent" Republicans these guys have shown themselves to be? Read it and weep:
I think one reason the Republicans failed in this election is their refusal to discuss "social issues." This may have been defensive on Romney's part due to his religion, but any future candidates must face the fact that we can't solve our economic problems without solving our social problems. Take the decline of marriage: nearly or actually half of all births in the US now are out of wedlock. Often there are multiple births by multiple fathers.
The left began attacking the only biologically sound marriage arrangement decades ago by redefining a "family" as basically any group of people that chooses to live together. This has been a disaster. Even the New York Times acknowledged in an article this year that as much as 40% of poverty in the US is due to single parenthood - that means largely women as heads of households.
The Democrats provide incentives for this through direct financial support that enables groups of related women to live together without working. Indirect support is provided by their allies in the media who invent "alternative lifestyles" and push their acceptance. Conservatives are exercised by the advance of genderless marriage, but it is only an additional nail in the coffin.
A family headed by a mother and a father is the acknowledged best environment for raising children. Within such a family children learn trust, how to related to others, and to accept limits. Fathers are particularly important in the process to both boys and girls. Rather than claiming a God-driven reason to support the "traditional family," why can't we point out that undermining the nuclear family (for lack of a better word) is bad social policy and has consequences that will iterate through generations? Rather than reaching out in this way, conservatives have made themselves the targets of humorists and others by using religious language.
I hope that Republicans do not decide that the way to win elections is to become a carbon copy of the Democrats. First of all they would not be convincing and second of all we know appeasement doesn't work. Churchill spent many years in the political wilderness and that is what Republicans must do. They must find candidates who can better articulate conservative principles and how they apply to life and work.