Indeed.
It's all Monday morning quarterbacking, but with a some sort of moral guidebook in the culture, it's going to be hard for a Republican to win again.
Romney did better than McCain, but anyone with a pulse could have done that. Until Republicans get a better understanding of popular culture and learn how to communicate their beliefs in a modern fashion, they will lose to the democrats who have mastered the emotional manipulation of the masses.
Instead, Candidate Romney made it about mere symptoms of tyrannical government: the economy and lack of jobs.
When people are free and government is bound, the economy and jobs naturally occur, because they arise out of the optimism, freedom and creativity of free people pursuing their own happiness.
On the other hand, when government officials ignore "the chains of the Constitution" (Jefferson's term), assuuming unconstitutional and coercive power to impose restraints on the liberties of "the People," economic freedom, opportunity, prosperity and plenty fall by the wayside.
The 2012 election is history, but the long term consequences of loss of freedom will punish rising generations for years to come!
I think Steyn (and you) are right. Another way to put it: Romney ran a “talking points” campaign without much depth and explanation. If Lincoln could make serious arguments to untutored farmers, I don’t see why contemporary candidates can’t to our more- (if ill-) schooled voters. Thomas Sowell has also argued for more substance in campaigns.
***”We do very well in off years...***
Mark, we luv ya, but just who do you mean by ‘we’?
If you mean those who want to live in a free, prosperous, Constitutional America, then, no, ‘we’ don’t do well in ‘off years’. Or ‘on’ years for that matter.
If you’re talking about Republicans, then I guess off years are better for them.
The Republican Party is finished, Mark. Whether or not a third party emerges, the GOP had it’s last hurrah with GWB. And it’s not the fault of those who want to preserve the Republic.
Which begs the question: what the hell did Steyn expect when he was pimping Mitt hard by trashing Newt in Dec and Jan?
Indeed.
Mark is reading my posts. We do have two electorates. We win in the off years, because the dumbocrats are only motivated by their savior and haven’t a clue who their congressman and senator are.
They haven’t a clue about how a republic governs and the whole checks and balances thing.
Besides it’s too much work to actually vote two times in a four year span.
The presidential elections are for preserving their freebies and perks.
I saw Spielberg's Lincoln film this weekend and all I can say is that Steyn is right. We're simply being out-hustled by the left in terms of cultural influence. That movie is a brilliantly executed piece of liberal propaganda and we have no answer to it.
we been rolled.....
Does anybody here doubt for a New York minute...that had Mitt Romney won the election with hundreds of precincts 100+ voting for him it would NOT be in the MSM 24/7 and in front of a judge somewhere from now until 2016?
the Pubbies are no where to be found...just crickets...
IMHO...they took the campaign donations and ran....to sit down with the rest of DC and raise our taxes...and continue to authorize stupid, corrupt spending....and continue to prosecute the war on Flyover Country by DC.
It’s only because he was a small shriveled candidate.
Guarantee that would have made more impact than "I've got twelve million jobs up my sleeve."
I told everybody that would listen that Romney would lose because he allowed Dinglebarry to school yard bully him and he would not fight back. Mitt was the best man for the job but folks want a fighter and the Muslim Prez is a dirty lying Chicago machine politican that shucks and jives his way through life with affirmative action and set asides.