Posted on 11/12/2012 10:10:37 AM PST by jazusamo
Mitt Romney now joins the long list of the kinds of presidential candidates favored by the Republican establishment— nice, moderate losers, people with no coherently articulated vision, despite how many ad hoc talking points they may have.
The list of Republican presidential candidates like this goes back at least as far as 1948, when Thomas E. Dewey ran against President Harry Truman. Dewey spoke in lofty generalities while Truman spoke in hard-hitting specifics. Since then, there have been many re-runs of this same scenario, featuring losing Republican presidential candidates John McCain, Bob Dole, Gerald Ford and, when he ran for reelection, George H.W. Bush.
Bush 41 first succeeded when he ran for election as if he were another Ronald Reagan ("Read my lips, no new taxes"), but then lost when he ran for reelection as himself— "kinder and gentler," disdainful of "the vision thing" and looking at his watch during a debate, when he should have been counter-attacking against the foolish things being said.
This year, Barack Obama had the hard-hitting specifics— such as ending "tax cuts for the rich" who should pay "their fair share," government "investing" in "the industries of the future" and the like. He had a coherent vision, however warped.
Most of Obama's arguments were rotten, if you bothered to put them under scrutiny. But someone once said that it is amazing how long the rotten can hold together, if you don't handle it roughly.
Any number of conservative commentators, both in the print media and on talk radio, examined and exposed the fraudulence of Obama's "tax cuts for the rich" argument. But did you ever hear Mitt Romney bother to explain the specifics which exposed the flaws in Obama's argument?
(Excerpt) Read more at creators.com ...
It is a shame that most blacks are stuck on stupid when they have in thier company guys like this that shine and have common sense. To have a brain is to be an uncle tom.
To the point, and right on the mark. Thanks for the ping jaz.
—I agree but trying to explain anything that requires compound sentences and an attention span greater that about thirty seconds to most of the TV generation is nearly impossible-—
"You can tax the rich. You can take everything they have. You can't fill the deficit. You can't pay for medicare. We just don't have enough rich people to do it. Apparently, my opponent thinks we're going to find these people on Mars. I wish him luck. They don't exist."
Less than 30 seconds and makes Obama look stupid. Its NOT that hard to do this stuff. It does, however, take some creativity and a willingness to tell the Election Consultants and Elites that you're going to make waves.
Yet, Sowell writes so well — a very easy read.
This isn’t about blacks. It’s about the linguini-spined, limp=-wristed, “don’t hurt me” Republicans who are TERRIFIED of fighting back!!
The theft of this election by Obama is bad enough, but the fact that the GOP-E hasn’t got the cajones to fight back against the thugocracy and corruption of Obama is beyond disgraceful!!
I NEVER want a Republican to represent me again!! I want CONSERVATIVES willing to go mano-a-mano with these crooks; I want people who aren’t afraid to get their hands dirty and aren’t afraid to be late for happy hour at the club to represent me.
I am done with the elitest cowards in the GOP!!!
Precisely. Rinse and repeat. And repeat. Expose the other side’s methods, educate voters. Has any of that been done? I don’t watch TV=, and in my area there weren’t any commercials anyway, but I know that during the debates Romney played a nice guy, played well but played defense. The worst thing is that Obama and his shenanigans, his questionably history, background have not been publicly exposed by our bashful side. Could Romney have lost any worse if he had run what is contemptuously regarded as a “negative campaign”. And if he had, then what difference would it have made in the end? Obamao is such a despicable character despite being portrayed as a saint by the MSM that a negative campaign is the only method of exposing him.
Rush listed some “moderates” who lost last week, here’s a few:
Linda McMahon
Scott Brown
Tommy Thompson
...there were more I missed...
if being “moderate” were the key to winning, why didn’t these win?
No, ronnie, the real shame is that EVERYONE who didn’t vote for Romney, and everyone who was eligible to and didn’t vote, is stuck on stupid!
As the XO on the Russian sub said to his dumbass CO just before they were sunk by their own torpedo, “You fool! You have killed us all!”
Yes, I am calling out every single American who didn’t vote or didn’t vote for Romney, whatever the reason.
You have killed us all!
ah, but that’s so “uncivil”...
And the “better people”, ie, the left, will make disdainful remarks if we did that...
Thanks for the ping
We don’t all have to die, either literally or figuratively.
Many will, both literally and figuratively,
but you can get off the bus driving recklessly on the icy road,
and you will survive if you have your cold weather gear already on.
Of course they will, and I would recommend doubling-down on calling out their silliness once they do that.
Lefties are by their very nature angry people. That can be exploited for quite a bit of gain.
Its like chess. You play your opponent and the board at the same time and the goal is to take your opponent out of their book as fast as possible and put them into yours.
Well he needed the ignorant to reelect him, but they weren’t all black who fall in the category
“It’s like chess.”
Arguing with a liberal is like playing chess with a pigeon.
No matter how well you play chess,
the pigeon just knocks over the pieces,
craps on the board,
utters unintelligible, vaguely obscene sounds,
and struts around like he won.
In arguing with many liberals, I've gotten them to confess they would cast a ballot for none other than Barry Goldwater.
Would you consider that a success?
I have my cold weather gear!
What is profoundly disturbing is that it was so unnecessary!
For the want of a few million voters, a country was lost?
And THAT is the only thing that most 0bama voters care about. They envy the rich. The 0 voters are too stupid, lazy, ignorant, and dishonest to actually make enough money themselves, BUT they don't realize that. They think of themselves as being kept back by those who actually do make a success of life, and to see the successful punished is all they care about. Goes with the entitlement mentality.
Because that is what the lefties tell them and NOBODY is out there showing them another way.
Gingrich said it best in the primary debates where he wants to teach people how to get a job, how to keep a job, then how to own the job.
Well, doesn't that seem like a little bit of "outreach" that can be done? If it does, then why is it not being done?
See, the whole problem with the GOP as a whole is they think they can just put up a billboard or run a TV ad and somehow by magic people are converted to the cause.
Politicians are not Paul of Tarsus. They can't just speak to a crowd and convert them. Politicians and political parties actually have to do some work to convert people.
Perhaps the entitlement mentality is more entrenched than we think.
It's bone deep. Once you give them something, then they think that their worthless existence is justified and they demand even more. You can't buy these losers off like the Republicans want to do. You have to write them off and concentrate on getting the people to vote for you who want to see the losers kicked in the behind and put to work. Something that Mitt obviously failed to do, and maybe is too late to do anyway.
Even on FR there are people who think they're entitled to some sort of means tested benefit form the rest of us. One loser the other day excoriated me for mentioning that and went on to say how EBT cards were an essential part of the economic recovery process. If he's reading this - have another beer good loser buddy. I'm working so you don't have to get off your lazy a$$ and do anything.
The bad news is what will happen once the handouts vanish.
Be Prepared. Be safe.
‘...They envy the rich...’
sadly, I hear this from people who have comfortable lives...own homes, cars, Iphones, large screen TV’s, etc. But, they’re not millionaires and Romney was.....heard comments ‘he’s for the rich’. It’s envy and hypocrisy. Being rich is relative. I’ve asked those who own homes, cars, small biz when they will share their wealth with the homeless who live in a local park. To the homeless, those ‘comfortable’ people are rich. Our country is in a sad state......envy and hypocrisy have overtaken patriotism. And, just my opinion, Romney lost due to massive voter fraud all across the country....and the Republican Party/Romney campaign did not have the courage/instincts (?)to fight the corruption.
Well, you pinged me to this article three times. Guess I should go read it, huh? :)
Yes and no. :
I pinged you twice each to two different Sowell columns. I know everyone denies it’s their fault but I have to deny it was my fault, I even reported it to the powers that be. :-)
Every election the media and the Pubbie moderates say we better play nice. Willard the Bland played nice, and he got beat. Time to tell the truth, and damn the consequences.
You would think the illiterati would at least understand the Aesop fable of the golden goose killed by the farmer for its golden eggs, but alas, they have either never heard of it or can’t fathom it.
I really don’t think they are educable. Imagine if Romney and the GO-PACS had used their billion bucks to just bus them to the polls and slipped them a bottle and a toke.
Does anyone really think anyone can explain economics to these people ? My vote for the highest bidder is as close as their comprehension of capitalism extends.
Understood. I just pinged the South Carolina list on a thread and it showed up as two pings, separated by 42 seconds. That’s nuts. All is forgiven :)
I am mystified that no republican has tried the same approach since.
Gotta conclude that today's GOP disagrees with RR's premise that its the character & industry of the American people that makes America great; the government simply gets in the way.
Nothing to forgive, I’ve noticed it on a couple others with pinglists also. :-)
Been there, done that. It is not as difficult as you think. It has the virtue of simply having never been tried by most people.
"Can't the Government just print some more money?"
"Son, sit down and let me explain Inflation to you ..."
It takes time and is difficult, which is why it isn't done.
BHO most successful T. ever. He has 95% lockstep.
They understand it, but they'd rather not have any chance of getting any of the golden eggs themselves than see anyone else have anything.
disagree completely. Two problems:
Seriously.
It just requires work.
The school loves it. The students get pretty shocked by the time they're done with me. Several have come back to thank me for helping them get through it all.
But it requires work and most people, including most people on this site, aren't willing to actually do the work needed. Most people prefer to throw their hands up in the air or complain.
Others of us are out there actually educating people.
I have personally educated a number of flaming liberals on economic issues and watched their eyes go wide.
One thing I've discovered with the libs -- and in this town you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a dozen of them -- its easier to convince them to go Libertarian than to go Conservative. You can't convert them on the social issues, but you can convert them on the fiscal issues.
” Barack Obama’s boast, on the eve of the election of 2008— “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America”— can now be carried out, without fear of ever having to face the voters again. “
Four years of HELL with a drunken coward as Speaker.
Will there be anything left to save?
Would you consider that a success?
No. One can say anything after the fact. Many do. It requires nothing. In sales I have heard many times sleazy salesmen come in to my customer *after* I've done an order and say, gee I could have done it for 25% less. Hell, they could do it for 75% less if they don't actually have to do it.
I don't tend to talk to 60+ year old liberals. These are Gen-X types. They never had the opportunity to vote for Goldwater.
The thing is, it can be done. People can be swayed. But as in sales, one has to ask for the sale and actually deliver. Otherwise the sleazeball gets in.
The point being that most Obama voters are open to an alternative. The messaging has to be correct to reach them, however. If they'd be willing to vote for a Barry Goldwater, then that opens a lot of possibilities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
