Rush Limbaugh Has It Wrong

Logic Times ^ | 11-9-2006 | Dan Hallagan

[Logic Times]

Rush Limbaugh has it wrong. He stated Wednesday that "[c]onservatism did not lose, Republicanism lost last night. Republicanism, being a political party first, rather than an ideological movement, is what lost last night." (here) This statement – a statement echoed by Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and other conservative pundits to whom a nation of shell-shocked conservatives turned for cathartic analysis – fails a simple test. If the electorate was demanding conservatism, then why did strong, principled conservatives lose? Incumbent conservatives such as Rick Santorum, George Allen, J.D. Hayworth and Curt Weldon to name a few. Superb conservative newcomers such as Ken Blackwell and Michael Steele.

The actions of the electorate last Tuesday was an indiscriminate firing of Republicans, not a thoughtful weeding out of RINOs. It is true that Republicanism lost on Tuesday, but it lost in all its forms – and that included the exact form of strong, clear conservatism that the movement desperately needs.

[JSteff]

My job deals with marketing (among other things) and we are leaving out that aspect. The Republicans need to get on 1) Distinct party message 2) Strong message of who they were, who their opponent wasn't. And it needed to be repeated over and over and over.

There was NO distinct party message and the ones I saw through out the campaigns were different from the beginning to the end. The message should have been a strong Conservative message on what they stood for, what they had done specifically for their constituent's, how they were going to support their constituents this time.

They also had a huge uphill battle on the number of repetitions the dems would get from their direct or indirect supporting of their positions from tme MSM.

Repetition is everything in marketing.. sometimes even the morally wrong position, or a even an outright lie, spoken over and over AND SUPPORTED by a perceived believable third partly (MSM)will be taken by the consumers mind and the right thing.

The dems repeated over and over that the war was terrible. The MSM repeated over and over that the war was terrible. Yet the troops reenlist in record numbers. Their reports almost unanimously where that we are winning and doing great things there.

The troops were NOT visible to say it. MSM would not give press to good stories, MSM spiked every good story. You saw no news exposes on the Kurds in north Iraq. You saw now good stories on the Iraqis working on the oil platforms, you saw no stories of the hospitals and schools helping the normal people.

All the press showed was the violence (which all war has, and for that matter all inner cities have). And you saw it over and over. Not kids learning, and babies just born... just the most horrific stuff the MSM could show.

Why did we not see shot after shot of the Kurdish norther area that is prospering and criminals are dealt with like criminals. There is a building boom going on there and much of life is back to above normal that it was under Saddam.

The Repubs should have been showing all of that. Most don't even know that any great thing is happening, even though it is and our troops saw it. Had we taken away the horrible carnage they were presenting Iraq as being then that would have left the dems to fight on the home issues.

Republican Congress people should have been seen everywhere the good stuff if happening over there. Then no matter what the MSM said there would have also been the image of SUCCESS in the voters minds also.

Instead we left a vacuum that was open to be filled. The dems did that ... with the MSM and that was the overriding picture in the voters minds. Car bombs, instead of streets filled with the citizens cars,-- schools in session with happy kids, instead of hoodlums throwing rocks--- babies being born and going home with the happy parents, instead of dead babies hit by car bombs.

Presenting a good picture to overcome a bad picture would have at least offered a fair alternative in voters minds to the MSM river of death ... which is NOT ALL of IRAQ. But the voters saw only one and that was a horror in their minds. The vacuum was filled with horror and what you put into a vacuum expands to be all the contents of that space.

So the citizens end up concentrating on the horror over there first and the message here did not matter as much. Casey presented NO alternative to Santorum. Casey offered NO solid consistent workable alternative. But he was in the party that said over and over that would fix the horror over there.

Bad marketing lost the election for a lot of good people.

[MaxMax]

Voter fraud had a lot to do with close races. Until voter fraud
is investigated and prosecuted, this will keep happening.

Pure Bullshit..

Work hard and think straight. 2008 is not for fraud blame,
it's for ideas/ideals and true conservatism.

There's no room for ignorance and propaganda.
We get enough of that from the media.

Make a difference in the next 2-years.

God Bless America,
MaxMax.

[Pukin Dog]

Were it not for Rush Limbaugh, Republicans would not have been in power in the first place. That was the opinion of Congress when they made him an Honorary Member. You, like most, probably didnt hear the context of his comments and are speaking from ignorance.

[FreePoster]

The excerpt is misleading, but I agree with the basic idea in the full article that conservative dissatisfaction with Bush rubbed off on the swing voters.

Harriett Miers and the guest worker proposal were deep low points dividing Bush (representing the party) from the conservative party base. Bush Sr. had the same problem following the 1990 budget deal ("no new taxes" - oops), and once the party faithful lose faith, and stop promoting and defending their leader, it leaves him, and the party he represents, wide open to the opposition. Those low approval numbers include a lot of conservatives upset over border security, but those numbers get used by the media to discredit the war and the Republican Party. There is just no force in trying to say in early November, "But he's still better than the alternative." It's just too fine a point to make on swing voters. That being said, I don't think there was much choice about opposing Bush on those issues, so it is mainly Bush's fault for creating that rift.

I don't think there has been any substantial division between Bush and conservatives over the war on terror. But his weakness with his party just made him vulnerable to the media assault.

The lesson to be learned is that the Republican president should never flat-out alienate his base.

[taxesareforever]

Republicans got to learn the politics of the Initiatives. Initiatives that are dear to conservatives will bring them out. In states where marriage was on the ballot brought out conservatives. In states that had minimum wage on the ballot brought out liberals. IMHO.

[jonrick46]

I heard a coworker of mine actually say that it's a good thing to take the dominant party out so that they won't get too corrupt. The Iraq effort became symbolic of the need for change. I saw signs in my local area which said, "Vote for Change. Vote Democrat." The actions of the electorate were irrational on many levels. It was the DemonRATs who drove the electorate to a madness that is characteristic of the DemonRAT mind set. It is the DemonRATs who for years have been trying to build a case against the Republicans as the Party of Corruption. It appears as if the Republicans failed to turn back this stigma and underestimated the effect it would make on the electorate. It was a strategy that took the focus off the issues, which the DemonRATs would knew they could not win, and put the argument on the politics of personal destruction. This was a tactic that created the perception of corruption that would stick in the minds of the electorate even if the charges were proved to be false.

[unsycophant]

Or OxyContin.

[The Hollywood Conservative]

Take a good look at that map...

Thats EXACTLY what its going to look like on election night 2008 if we pick the wrong candidate...

[unsycophant]

Rush, since when did you become such a shill for the GOP? (from Alan Keyes's site)

[FreePoster]

When I hear about some of the voter fraud that does get caught, it makes it hard for me to accept close losses.

I'm not looking for excuses for the election, but there is no good reason not to insist on clean voting. The more they get away with it, the more they will do it. And the harder it will be to stop them, because their people will be in charge.

It's a disgrace of the Congress that they didn't give us real voting reform after 2000, but instead did a bunch of photo-opp type BS, bragging about how much money they threw at the problem. And like most such government efforts, they made the problem even worse.

[libertylover76]

Hayworth was an Abramoff caualty, like Burns.

[Maelstorm]

Strong conservatism didn't lose. Allen here in VA did not run as a strong conservative. He is one but he didn't run as one. You would've been hard pressed to even hear the Marriage Amendment which passed by clear majority. The mistake that was made was conservatives thinking everyone already knew they were conservative. They didn't think they had to make the great speeches and articulate their values and they lost because of it and the allowing of the Democrats to set the message with Foley and Iraq. They also lost because of the inability to stand up as conservatives and push a truly conservative agenda. Almost all the legislation that President Bush proposed was best described as Democrat light. At first it looked like "compassionate conservatism" might work but it clearly hasn't because no matter how much a conservative spends on new programs it won't be nearly as much nor nearly as compassionate or heart felt as a Democrat can do it.

[Echo Talon]

Thats EXACTLY what its going to look like on election night 2008 if we pick the wrong candidate...

The only person I can think of with Reagan's "likability" is Rudy(HE isn't a "Conservative" but he has "it") IF he can position himself correctly with States rights issues and such, smooth sailin'

[Echo Talon]

Since he didn't want you to get a tax increase, now enjoy.

[paulat]

Were it not for Rush Limbaugh, Republicans would not have been in power in the first place. That was the opinion of Congress when they made him an Honorary Member. You, like most, probably didnt hear the context of his comments and are speaking from ignorance.

It also explains a lot why Rush is pushing Newt.

[Echo Talon]

I would like to see a review of this election and ALL elections, if there is a rat I would like to know about it.. With the dems so fixated on the voter fraud stuff over the past 6 years it wouldn't surprise me if their was MORE fraud than usual on their side.(The democrats would see this as nothing more than making the election fair, since they believe that the voting machines are rigged)

[libertylover76]

Sorry, it doesn't wash. Rick Santorum was clearly and indisputably one of our most idealogically pure Senators. He lost by 18%!!

No one in Pennsylvania was confused about his conservatism yet he lost by 800,000 votes. That wasn't an endorsement of his opponent's dead father but a rejection of principled conservatism when it was tied to the debacle in Iraq.

[Uriah_lost]

I'd like to see St Louis put under the microscope first, when you get this set up! If the rest of the urban areas in this country are a fraction as corrupt as this town, we could win every election going away, even if we ran nothing but rapists and serial killers! heh

[libertylover76]

Rudy??? Don't make me laugh.

Remember his recent divorce? You might've forgotten who he moved in with when he split from is anchorwoman wife: a gay couple.

That epitomizes the guy. Likeable, forceful, but 100% devoid of middle American values.

[Echo Talon]

I'm Still voting for him in the primaries.