How the Left Dupes Conservative Voters

American Thinker ^ | February 19, 2013 | J. R. Dunn

[neverdem]

Too little serious conservative analysis of the 2012 presidential campaign has yet appeared. This is understandable. The results of the election were disheartening to the point of shock. The campaign defied all historical precedent, all commonsense interpretation...

--snip--

In 2006, after two elections spent banging their heads against Bush's early popularity, the Democrats hit on the tactic of running Blue Dogs -- Democrats with a few surface conservative characteristics. One of the most important from an electoral standpoint was a good rating with the NRA, something possessed by a number of candidates, among them James Webb of Virginia. Although the NRA was questioned over this, it refused to modify its policy of endorsing highly-rated candidates and ended up doing exactly what the Democrats hoped: funneling voters toward an entire squadron of Trojan horse candidates. Numerous voters to whom gun rights were dominant voted according to their usual practice for candidates supported by the NRA, despite the fact that this new run of Blue Dogs opposed everything else they might believe. It was a case of missing the forest in favor of a single tree. While the candidate in question might well be a hunter or an avid gun collector, his election accomplished nothing beyond providing numbers and support for a party adamantly opposed to both the NRA and gun owners everywhere...

--snip--

But then appeared Todd Akin, an engineer with a spotty and unimpressive political record. No sooner had Akin announced than a parade of TV ads appeared accusing him of being the "most conservative candidate", far more so than his rivals. The odd thing was that these were paid for by the Democratic Party. Opposing parties do not usually run ads involving one another's primaries. Yet the Democrats spent something on the order of $1.5 to $2 million on...

[neverdem]

It was a similar story when they chose to run the putative pro-life Bob Casey for the US senate in PA. He voted for Obamacare.

[MestaMachine]

As much as I hate to dis my beloved Pennsylvania, (and I DO love it,) bob casey was elected because his name was bob casey...and for no other reason,

[neverdem]

Splitting the Difference on Illegal Immigration (They can stay, but they can't become citizens.)

Party dominance doesn’t last (Salena Zito)

Preserve Gun Rights, Save Black Lives That was supposed to be C-Span, not C-San.

Gun control language 'assaults' good sense Assault magazines and assault bullets make no sense, IMHO.

Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign or military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.

[1010RD]

The article is spot on. This happens in Illinois where they’ll run some veteran as if serving in the military alone means something. They’ll run nominally conservative “family” types who love their family and will sacrifice everything you own and hold dear to support their family once elected.

Conservatives have got to be more sophisiticated. We’re too simple minded when it comes to politics. In politics it’s all an illusion. That’s what the ACU is for.

[Roccus]

How the Left Dupes Conservative Voters

....they put (R) after their candidate's name.

[DH]

How the Left Dupes Conservative Voters

---

True conservative voters cannot be duped. Those who call themselves conservatives but “have an open mind” and are “free thinkers” are easily duped by the media.

They believe that COMPROMISE is the glue that holds the government in place.

True leaders and those who have their morals “set in concrete” never compromise their beliefs and morals away.

Leaders lead and do not compromise.

Compromising is a win-lose, lose-win situation. One side gives some and the other side doesn’t give anything. Guess who gives and who gets? That’s right! The Democrats always get while the Republicans always give.

This has happened so long that I have been calling the Republican party the “go along to get along party” since the end of the Regan era.

Now, look where we are at. We are sitting on the edge of the communist cliff and still thinking that compromise will prevent us from falling off.

[ReignOfError]

If we consider that the biggest factor in Romney's defeat was the large but unknowable number of diehards who refused to vote for the RINO (some estimates put the number being as high as 2 to 3 million), some light begins to dawn. There were throughout 2012 no end of comment threads, tweets, and Facebook postings urging exactly such action, by people operating anonymously who vanished as soon as the election was over. It's more than likely many of these were on somebody's payroll.

[blueunicorn6]

A rather long and tedious article to say that maybe Karl Rove isn’t so bad and that Akin destroyed Romney. Baloney.

[neverdem]

A rather long and tedious article to say that maybe Karl Rove isn’t so bad and that Akin destroyed Romney. Baloney.

Hardly. Get a lot more coffee. Romney got way more votes than Akin.

At least the author attempts to explain parts of what happened.

The GOP has been getting played like a piano. What's your explanation?

[blueunicorn6]

What a pathetic attempt at sophistry. My explanation? Well, part of it is people like you. You seem to like to confuse the issue and attack the writer instead of the argument. You’re pathetic.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks neverdem. No one hates a conservative candidate more than other self-described conservatives who like some other candidate.

[SunkenCiv]

• ...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said. [Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften [immigration, gay marriage] stance]

  ---

• One day after announcing on his radio show that he is "truly considering" running in 2014 for the U.S. Senate seat now held by New Jersey's Frank Lautenberg, Rivera amped up his message today in a television interview and a column on the Fox News Latino website... a moderate Republican who is fiscally conservative but also supports gay marriage and Roe v. Wade... [Geraldo Rivera declares himself a 'moderate Republican' as he eyes U.S. Senate run]

  ---