Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Tea Party Got It Right, Mitt Got It Wrong
FrontPage Magazine ^ | November 7, 2012 | Daniel Greenfield

Posted on 11/07/2012 5:32:07 AM PST by SJackson

In this election the Republican Party ran two wholly inoffensive blue state Republicans on a platform of jobs at a time when the economy was everyone’s chief concern and the incumbent had absolutely failed to fix the economy. And they lost.

The Monday — or Wednesday — morning quarterbacks will have a fine time debating what Mitt Romney should have done differently. The red Republicans will say that he should have been more aggressive and should have hit Obama on Benghazi. The blue Republicans will blame a lack of outreach to Latinos. Some will blame Sandy, others will blame Christie and many will point to voter fraud. And they will all have a point, but the makings of this defeat did not happen in the last two weeks; they happened in the last two years.

Mitt Romney won the primaries because he was electable. But, as it turned out, he really wasn’t electable after all. Not when the chief criteria of electability is having no opinion, no point of view and no reason to run for office except to win. Not when the chief criteria of being a Republican presidential nominee is being able to convince people that you’re hardly a Republican at all.

Romney was a star political athlete who had an excellent training regimen and coaching staff. But to win elections, you have to change people’s minds. It’s not enough to try hard or to fight hard; you have to fight for something besides the chance to round the bases. You have to wake people up to a cause.

The Republican comeback did not begin with innocuous candidates; it began with angry protesters in costumes and Gadsden flags marching outside ObamaCare town halls. The 2010 midterm election triumphs were not the work of a timorous establishment, but of a vigorous grassroots opposition. And once the Tea Party movement started the fire, the Republican establishment acted like the Tea Party had sabotaged their comeback and cut the ties with their own grassroots movement. Separated, the Republican grassroots and the Republican Party both withered on the vine.

The stunning 2010 midterm election victories happened because a conservative opposition loudly and vociferously convinced a majority of Americans that ObamaCare would be harmful to them. And then that fantastic engine of change was packed away and replaced with political consultants who were all focused on seizing the center and offending as few people as possible. But you don’t win political battles by being inoffensive. And you don’t win elections by avoiding conflict.

Is it any wonder that the 2012 election played out the way it did?

The Democrats in the Bush years were about as unlikable a party as could ever be conceived of. They were hostile, hateful and obstructionist. They spewed conspiracy theories at the drop of a hat and behaved in a way that would have convinced any reasonable person not to entrust them with a lawnmower, let alone political power. And not only were they rewarded for that by winning Congress, but they also went on to win the White House.

Why? Because dissatisfied people gravitate to an opposition. They don’t gravitate to a loyal opposition. They aren’t inspired by mild-mannered rhetoric, but by those who appear to channel their anger.

When the Republican Party sold out the Tea Party, it sold out its soul, and the only driving energy that it had. And there was nothing to replace it with. The Republican Party stopped being the opposition and became a position that it was willing to reposition to get closer to the center. Mitt Romney embodied that willingness to say anything to win and it is exactly that willingness to say anything to win that the public distrusts.

The elevation of Mitt Romney was the triumph of inoffensiveness. Romney ran an aggressive campaign, but it was a mechanical exercise, a smooth assault by trained professionals paid to spin talking points in dangerous directions. But, what if the voters really wanted a certain amount of offensiveness?

What if they wanted someone who mirrored their anger at being out of work, at having to look at stacks of unpaid bills and at not knowing where their next paycheck was coming from? What if they wanted someone whose anger and distrust of the government echoed their own?

Romney very successfully made the case that he would be a more credible steward of the economy. It was enough to turn out a sizable portion of the electorate, but not enough of it. He tried to be Reagan confronting Carter, but what was remarkable about Reagan, is that he had moments of anger and passion; electric flashes of feeling that stirred his audience and made them believe that he understood their frustrations. That was the source of Reagan’s moral authority and it was entirely lacking in Romney. And without that anger, there is no compelling reason to vote for an opposition party.

The establishment had its chance with Mitt Romney. The former Massachusetts governor was everything that they could possibly want. Moderate, bipartisan and fairly liberal. With his business background, he could make a perfect case for being able to turn the economy around. They had their perfect candidate and their perfect storm and they blew it.

The Republican Party is not going to win elections by being inoffensive. It is not going to win elections by going so far to the center that it no longer stands for anything. It is not going to win elections by throwing away all the reasons that people might have to vote for it. It is not going to win elections by constantly trying to accommodate what it thinks independent voters want, instead of cultivating and growing its base, and using them as the nucleus for an opposition that will change the minds of those independent voters.

The Republican Party has tried playing Mr. Nice Guy. It may be time to get back to being an opposition movement. And the way to do that is by relearning the lessons of the Tea Party movement. The Democratic Party began winning when it embraced the left, instead of running away from it. If the Republican Party wants to win, then it has to embrace the right and learn to get angry again.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: analysis; brilliant; gop; mittromney; notconservative; notvisionary; romney; romney2012; teaparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-317 next last
To: fabian

I preferred Gingrich to Romney as well. We all know Newt would of pounded President Obama with Benghazi night and day until the election. There would have been no letup through all three debates. On the flip side don’t you think the gender gap might have been even worse with Newt?


101 posted on 11/07/2012 7:03:27 AM PST by dowcaet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: fabian

I preferred Gingrich to Romney as well. We all know Newt would of pounded President Obama with Benghazi night and day until the election. There would have been no letup through all three debates. On the flip side don’t you think the gender gap might have been even worse with Newt?


102 posted on 11/07/2012 7:03:44 AM PST by dowcaet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

Palin actually helped the ticket. From the time she came on the ticket until McCain suspended campaigning to go back to DC and vote for the bailouts, they were leading.

Both McCain and Romney were “moderates” (i.e., liberal RINOs.) And both got swamped. We need a good solid conservative who isn’t afraid to stand up to the Democrats.


103 posted on 11/07/2012 7:04:23 AM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
Let's also remember that the 47% (or the 50.3%) are who they are because Ronald Reagan and George Bush enacted policies that dropped many of them of the tax rolls.

Not everything is the other side's fault.

104 posted on 11/07/2012 7:04:51 AM PST by Eric Pode of Croydon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper

I am not going to sit around letting people blame tea party for these losses. Tea party is what got us the Senate gains 2 years ago and strong House majority that remains intact...

...sorry, but, fair or not, correctly or not, Tea Party as a political marker has been successfully vilified into oblivion...it is poison now in the political landscape, made so by a lefty sycophant media...the politician that stands up and proudly proclaims ‘Tea Party’ will end up a footnote in political history...the premises underlying the movement are sound and everlasting, but another method of delivering that message must be found other than buzz phrases that can be cornered and eviscerated...this will require a lot of analysis and asking tough questions...and making decisions that are going to anger a lot of people...no other way to compete against the demographics we’re confronting, which will, eventually, render this country into a unique socialist state with a lot of internal strife between diverse populations...


105 posted on 11/07/2012 7:08:30 AM PST by IrishBrigade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: dowcaet
We care about Benghazi. Practically no one else does.

Newt could've tattooed "Benghazi" on his forehead, and folks would've said, "who's Ben?"

106 posted on 11/07/2012 7:08:30 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: JeffAtlanta

Pretty much. It turned into being associated w Fox News etc.

We need to move to more libertarian - “LEAVE ME THE F ALONE” candidates and let it fly.

These Akin and mourdock types are like a death wish.


107 posted on 11/07/2012 7:09:06 AM PST by GlockThe Vote (The Obama Adminstration: 2nd wave of attacks on America after 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Good points all. Clearly the GOP model has failed and its adherents seem poised to acknowledge final failure. Time to consider new models and paths to success.

What is of interest and of substantial potential power in a new model is drawn from your statement:

“Fortunately we still hold the House and something like 3/4 of the State legislatures. And those facts will become far more important as the Obama downward spiral continues on toward next summer.”

If somehow the Red States comprising 3/4 of the total could start a State Convention movement, then the process of such a movement could bypass both Senate and the Presidency, and the Supreme Court.

As an example, look at the number of states pushing for Voter ID and having it moved through the courts with subsequent wins or imminent wins.

The same could happen with issues such as gay marriage, tax reform, education, energy etc. all brought under an umbrella of a States Convention process. The breadth of such a process would be too diffuse and difficult for the MSM to fight as they would need to define, caricature and demonize thousands of targets in geographical regions where they are not welcome.

The Founders left us the States Convention route as a last resort to withstand tyranny.

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) could be a vehicle to organize a States Convention movement. The fact that leftist groups hate it is a good sign that its leadership is conservative.

Here’s a couple of leftist orgs and their take on ALEC:

http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed

http://www.prwatch.org/news/2011/07/10887/cmd-special-report-alecs-funding-and-spending

The chief complaint of a States Convention movement arises from fear that leftists can seize control of it and fundamentally change the Constitution. But a States Convention process to power requires 2/3s of state to pass proposals and 3/4s to implement passed proposals into the Constitution. So there is a strong barrier that the left would need to overcome in order to control power from statehouses.

The left has seized *federal* power from urban centers of population to steer a state to its US Senator picks as well as urban mayorships to service union demands, primarily government unions including public teacher groups. This is the source of their strength. Such a network of urban power strongholds was referred by Obama’s handlers in 2008 as the “Urban Archipelago” that can ignore Statehouses because power at the statehouse level is lacking.

But statehouses tied together and unified can trump the Urban Archipelago.

Statehouse power stems from people that inhabit the land outside the urban strongholds, the “Country Class” and this ‘country power’ when mobilized and impassioned yields power in the US House of Representatives as exists now.

In such areas there exists a diffuse republic in the form of distributed districts that lend considerable opportunity to steer state power. The Left has abandoned this route to power because the centralization of federal power has rendered Statehouses weak and ineffectual, but only because they are not organized together.

What is needed is a groundswell of solidarity to empower leaders of a State Convention movement to unite, organize and train cadres of people to effect Statehouse power.

It comes down to solidarity and the ability to organize and maintain it.


108 posted on 11/07/2012 7:09:23 AM PST by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: longfellowsmuse
until we get our moral house in order our fiscal house never will be

Attitudes like this are exactly why the people like Obama keep winning.

Americans would rather vote for the Dems and give up economic freedom than give up personal freedoms.

For perspective, think about how we feel when we hear some cleric wanting to institute Sharia law here in the states. That is the same feeling the moderates, libertarians and fiscal conservatives get when they hear social conservatives talk about moral laws.

109 posted on 11/07/2012 7:10:36 AM PST by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

No they didn’t but when people are offered the choice between pretty liberal and liberal, they will chose the liberal especially the one they’re familiar with.


110 posted on 11/07/2012 7:11:35 AM PST by zerosix (Native sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: greene66

Yep, and Boehner went ahead with raising the debt ceiling when there was plenty of spending that could have been cut.


111 posted on 11/07/2012 7:12:17 AM PST by Son House (Romney Plan: Cap Spending At 20 Percent Of GDP.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: JeffAtlanta
TEA was organized around resistance to the TARP and Obamacare. Even the name, “Taxed Enough Already”. The TEA party ceased being about economics long ago. Fiscal conservatives and libertartians abandoned it.

This.

Absolutely correct.

The point of the tea party was to bring together people from all over the spectrum - even some who otherwise were moderates/liberals - in favor of lower spending and an end to crony capitalism.

It started to die when the so-cons hijacked the name.

It gave up the ghost when forced to support Wall Streeter Mitt for president.

112 posted on 11/07/2012 7:12:23 AM PST by Eric Pode of Croydon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
If the Republican Party wants to win, then it has to embrace the right and learn to get angry again.

Well said, though it falls on deaf ears. What a shame.

FMCDH(BITS)

113 posted on 11/07/2012 7:15:44 AM PST by nothingnew (I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

Rick and Newt would have stood a much better chance against the Narcissist in Chief than Etch A Sketch ever did. We told you in the primaries that he wasn’t electable.


114 posted on 11/07/2012 7:17:51 AM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Homer_J_Simpson

I’m going to be pondering that quote for a long time. What is it from?


115 posted on 11/07/2012 7:18:01 AM PST by expat1000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: JeffAtlanta

The TEA party ceased being about economics long ago. Fiscal conservatives and libertartians abandonned it after it was taken over by Beck, Palin & Hannity...

...excellent point about the message getting lost in the telling...by Beck, especially, who I think should be locked away somewhere for a while...be careful what you say about Palin on this forum, though, the Sarahbots don’t like differing opinions...


116 posted on 11/07/2012 7:18:17 AM PST by IrishBrigade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

The Tea Party was never a real party, just a loose association of people who had three common goals of advocates strict adherence to the United States Constitution, reducing U.S. government spending and taxes, and reduction of the U.S. national debt and federal budget deficit. And because they had too many radically unacceptable fringe elements, they were used by the Democrats to vilify and demonize the Republicans who did run with those sorts of leanings. Too few people stood up to call the Democrats on their lies during the campaign; assuming that the media would even publish them.


117 posted on 11/07/2012 7:20:48 AM PST by Dr_Zinj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
I don’t think people looked at Obama and Romney and said “Romney is too liberal, I will vote for Obama instead”.

They did not think he was too liberal, they liked what Obama was telling them, which in some cases was not liberal. Like for example, telling us for the 1 millionth time, he killed Osama Bin Laden. Not something the liberals wanted done. But to a 20 something who plays video games all day, hey, that was a good thing.

118 posted on 11/07/2012 7:20:49 AM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 11th Commandment

I don’t believe for even a second that Mitt fewer people voted for Mitt.
Our votes were were stolen, mislaid, and not counted. While the dark side manufactured all they needed to overthrow us.


119 posted on 11/07/2012 7:27:15 AM PST by bog trotter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

This loss goes a long ways to showing how the mainstream Republican Party is so far out of step it is with the American people and their values. Yet they still cling to their base of rotting unprincipled moderates and outright liberals. This loss is of absolutely no surprise to me for I knew in my heart that given a choice between liberal-lite and liberal-real the electorate would take the real deal given that choice. Christians will be the biggest losers resulting from 4 more years of the beast in power.


120 posted on 11/07/2012 7:30:15 AM PST by Ron H. (Pray America, we're gonna need it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP

Rick and Newt would have stood a much better chance against the Narcissist in Chief than Etch A Sketch ever did. We told you in the primaries that he wasn’t electable.

...delusions die hard, don’t they...Rick sure did a bang up job agaisnt Bob Casey, didn’t he? And Newt? He fumbled his one chance at glory by making the sleazeball Bill Clinton look like a statesman in personal confrontation...


121 posted on 11/07/2012 7:31:44 AM PST by IrishBrigade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: TBP

Rick and Newt would have stood a much better chance against the Narcissist in Chief than Etch A Sketch ever did. We told you in the primaries that he wasn’t electable.

...delusions die hard, don’t they...Rick sure did a bang up job agaisnt Bob Casey, didn’t he? And Newt? He fumbled his one chance at glory by making the sleazeball Bill Clinton look like a statesman in personal confrontation...


122 posted on 11/07/2012 7:31:46 AM PST by IrishBrigade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Astronaut

Don’t be so down-in-the-mouth. Buck up, man. There is one way out of this: SECESSION. Look at the red-blue map by county. Do you see a new international border there? I sure do. Let’s secede. It’s the only way to keep the shackles off our legs.


123 posted on 11/07/2012 7:41:32 AM PST by Gluteus Maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

A public bookmark for this excellent article. This should be required reading for everyone claiming either conservatism or Republicanism as a political philosophy.

The Republican Party needs to either embrace its base or die. And at this point I really don’t care which option it chooses.


124 posted on 11/07/2012 7:41:39 AM PST by Colonel_Flagg ("Don't be afraid to see what you see." -- Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
yes. with the majority of americans, free shit trumps liberty any day and for the minority of americans that are forced to foot the bill, too bad.
125 posted on 11/07/2012 7:42:20 AM PST by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: IrishBrigade

For the umpteenth time, “moderates” don’t win. Conservatives do. Look at 2010.


126 posted on 11/07/2012 7:43:00 AM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

What we must do is MAKE every single Obama voter OWN the darkness and despair that is coming, and we must make them own it EACH AND EVERY DAY. Since we have lost the opportunity to instill American values in children due to the stranglehold that liberals hold on the school system, the only alternative is to force them to face the ugly results of their now foolish choices and hope that they will learn from the school of hard knocks.

I would make this a persistent and sustained PR campaign, coupled with each of us doing the same at the individual level. Economic collapse that makes 2008-2009 look like a picnic is now inevitable. The fantasy that we can “tax the rich” and avoid any pain for the rest of us, which I think drove much of yesterday’s result, will eventually be exposed for the nonsense that it is. When it is, and when Obama starts taxing everyone else to death, we need to remind the zombies that Obama said he wasn’t going to raise their taxes. It was all going to be easy and painless.

When they end up in personal economic peril as a result, don’t offer to help them. That’s only enabling them. Instead return to a constant drumbeat of “You voted for this. You figure it out.” When things become dire enough, survival instinct might, might cause them to finally grow up and learn how life actually works.

In essence, we should employ the same tactics that the left used against Bush (and amazingly still does): Blame Obama for EVERYTHING. In his case he will actually have earned the blame.

Beat it into their heads 24/7, 365 days a year. Admittedly, without a compliant media it will be tougher for us so we will have to take more personal responsibility, on an individual level, to do it.

We must use the left’s tactics against them because we now have ample evidence that they WORK. At least in the case of what I’m suggesting, we wouldn’t have to sacrifice our principles (”sink to their level”) to do so. We would simply be telling the truth.


127 posted on 11/07/2012 7:45:13 AM PST by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

118 million people voted in 2012, but 130 million voted in 2008. About 12 million sat out. GOP need to find out who they are. I bet they are Ron Paul supporters, and Evangelical Christians. For the Dems it is Reagan Dems who will not support Obama but not willing to vote GOP either.


128 posted on 11/07/2012 7:45:47 AM PST by Fee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Homer_J_Simpson

I have to be totally honest, I’m totally pissed right now. I’m a conservative independent and proud of it. This isn’t the country I fought for in Nam, when my Country called. Living in the South Western corner of PA does not make me a popular voter. However, I’m going to take every advantage I can to stand up and be counted for what I believe in, like it or not. I’ve had it, and I’m thoroughly disgusted with a large segment of my Country Men and Women.


129 posted on 11/07/2012 7:48:16 AM PST by V V Camp Enari 67-68 (Viet Vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Astronaut

We have “raised” a spoiled and selfish child as a nation, who says “thanks old man, for the freedom, the infrastructure and the money, now get out of the way and let the smart kids drive.” We need to do exactly that. Stop pulling the wagon.
The next time the shit hits the fan, no old white guys to clean up the mess. The next time a hurricane wipes out an urban cancer, don’t go clean it up for them. Nothing makes you a conservative faster than having to take care of your own problems.


130 posted on 11/07/2012 7:48:42 AM PST by Hugh the Scot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
The most important lesson that needs to be RAMMED down the throats of the Establishment GOP Moderate wing is that Romney failed to take his own state. He lost HUGE in Massachusetts (61-37%). If the Moderate Republican approach cannot remotely compete in a state where the candidate was actually elected, then clearly it cannot be used as a path to success anywhere else!! The Moderate Path did not pull ANYONE from the Left in MASS, and drove away MANY on the right in every other state. Do you get it now????? We need to win the Independents (30% of registered voters) and the disillusioned who do not vote anymore (40% of eligible voters). THAT is where the majority coalition is to be built, not in trying to out-Dem the Dems.

But sadly, the lesson may just be too late in getting learned. This one was a BIG loss. Either the GOP-led House steps up, or else we are all going to be witnesses to the end of the American Experiment. *sigh*

131 posted on 11/07/2012 7:49:01 AM PST by Teacher317 ('Tis time to fear when tyrants seem to kiss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: radioone
He lost because he received less votes than Obama and McCain.

Ouch. Excellent point, and needs to be repeated. The GOP Moderate Wing has just been shown that they do NOT motivate the base or the Tea Party wing, even when they nominate a decent VP. It's time to drop the pretense that the GOP can out-Dem the Dems. Romney lost his home state by a HUGE 61-37 margin. Clearly, going Moderate pulls NOBODY from the Left, and leaves MANY on the Right sitting it out.

If THIS election result doesn't teach the GOP "leadership" that lesson, then they will never learn it, and it is time to oust them or start a new party. There are no other good alternatives.

132 posted on 11/07/2012 7:53:53 AM PST by Teacher317 ('Tis time to fear when tyrants seem to kiss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

The Tea Party is “inoffensive,” except for fiscally, and has no room for criticism on this and neither does Frontpage Magazine for the Tea Party.

It is difficult to understand where the Frontpage or the Tea Party is coming from on this, since the TPs are secularists themselves and refuse to embrace God the Creator and His laws and refuse to claim our founding Christian heritage. Is it any wonder they(the GOP nor the TP) have no blessings from God to succeed?

Social issues matter.


133 posted on 11/07/2012 8:00:00 AM PST by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

Here’s what’s happening.... people who quote writers from the year 1700 in the year 2012.


134 posted on 11/07/2012 8:12:46 AM PST by bluerose ("Equal opportunity, not equal outcome" ~Paul Ryan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
He tried to be Reagan confronting Carter, but what was remarkable about Reagan, is that he had moments of anger and passion; electric flashes of feeling that stirred his audience and made them believe that he understood their frustrations. That was the source of Reagan’s moral authority and it was entirely lacking in Romney. And without that anger, there is no compelling reason to vote for an opposition party.

BTTT

135 posted on 11/07/2012 8:13:47 AM PST by GOPJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

Yep. All historians know that once the people can vote themselves money from the treasury, read: welfare, the country is doomed. Nothing in our Constitution allows for taxing one person to give their wealth to another. This nation was built on “No taxation without representation!”, yet, we have it. We are doomed and nothing can save us from that fate.


136 posted on 11/07/2012 8:14:12 AM PST by CodeToad (Padme: "So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bigbob
The electorate has changed, in part because of the economic collapse that has left many who would prefer otherwise with no choice but the government.

Bingo! Give the man a prize. The banks screwed virtually everyone while Nero (every President since Reagan and a compromising Congress) was playing the fiddle and chasing after phantoms. The economic collapse creating more welfare/foodstamp/unemployed young people where idealism concerning conservative principles has been starched out. Like Europe (with its endless wars), a large class of people have been created who are now looking to Government and the rhetoric of collectivism as their panacea.

137 posted on 11/07/2012 8:15:27 AM PST by Lent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 11th Commandment

You’re so right, it’s ridiculous to blame Mitt.
Wasted time on contraceptives and the church and the ignorant comments that come out of ignorant conservatives mouths regarding rape.


138 posted on 11/07/2012 8:17:22 AM PST by bluerose ("Equal opportunity, not equal outcome" ~Paul Ryan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: factmart
Conservatism lost big, Look at all the Senators that lost.

Tea party conservative Ted Cruz won the US senate seat vacated by Texas' squishy moderate Kay Bailey Hutchison. So, at least one chalk mark on the plus side.

139 posted on 11/07/2012 8:19:48 AM PST by Constitutionalist Conservative (I'm a constitutionalist, not a libertarian. Huge difference.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Catsrus
Oh well, 4 more years of misery, and being lectured to by a dictator and his dictator wife. What a pretty thought.

What makes you think a dictator will reign for 8 years?

140 posted on 11/07/2012 8:23:45 AM PST by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dowcaet

Yes, Gingrich could HAVE pounded obama night and day on Benghazi, but with the liberal controlled media nobody would have known about it.


141 posted on 11/07/2012 8:24:46 AM PST by bluerose ("Equal opportunity, not equal outcome" ~Paul Ryan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Will88

I think PBS last night pointed out that when you break down the “gender gap” by other factors we see married white women voted for Romney by 55% or more.

The gender gap was caused by a large number of black women who voted in the upper 90th percentile for Obama and single women, especially younger ones such as college-aged.

So you are exactly right.

There really was no gender gap. The Democrats are a coalition party, so they want to break everything down into categories like this even when it is meaningless.


142 posted on 11/07/2012 8:24:52 AM PST by unlearner (You will never come to know that which you do not know until you first know that you do not know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
The Tea Party did well until June 2011, when Obama positioned it between the American people and their free stuff (government checks) during a time of depression. Clinton had done the same thing to Gingrich in January 1996, and it had the same effect. The Republican Revolution from the 1994 election lasted barely a year before Clinton defanged it, and the Tea Party revolution from the 2010 election lasted barely five months before Obama defanged it.

Since then, the Tea Party brand has been poisonous, and the Republican Establishment did the correct thing in running away from it. Look at the Tea Party losses last night! Americans are no longer socially conservative. Americans are walking away from organized religion. Americans like liberty in the abstract, but not when it gets in the way of free stuff. Liberty is too risky for a people who have accepted the role of government taking care of them -- and the yoke that comes with it!

Brutal fact: The moochers and looters now outnumber the producers, and they have the numbers to vote themselves what they perceive as being their fair share of other people's wealth. The moral and ethical basis of America is gone and has been replaced with something foreign.

To get people to accept radical change, they have to believe that their backs are against the wall. Reagan did that in 1980 when we were besieged at home by stagflation and abroad by the Soviets and Iranians. Giuliani did it in New York in 1993, but New York had to reach rock bottom, crash through that bottom, and find a whole new bottom before New Yorkers were willing to give up a century of liberalism. Thanks to government lies (economic statistics), backed with the Mainstream Media promulgating those lies, people didn't believe that radical change of that kind was necessary, especially when the current government promised more and more free stuff.

Only when the current corrupt system collapses, when the dollar is no longer accepted in international trade, when our military is sent packing from its hundreds of outposts in the world, when the nation no longer possesses the wealth from which to distribute free stuff, only then will events reach the point where people will look at radical change and be ready to accept it.

143 posted on 11/07/2012 8:26:16 AM PST by Publius (Will comply with 10-289 for food.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

Tea Party candidates ran against Romney somewhere?

Which states and candidates do you refer to?


144 posted on 11/07/2012 8:35:41 AM PST by Fishtalk (http://patfish.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Son House

I had a female liberal acquaintance—in her mid-20s, constantly complaining about being broke, rooming with a friend, both of them barely scraping by on crap jobs—tell me on Twitter last night that it was more important that she have “reproductive rights” than a job. Seriously.

Romney lost the 18-29 vote by FIVE POINT ONE MILLION. The younger generation, most of it anyway, completely bought into the lies of Romney, the most liberal Republican nominee in decades, being a super-evil right-wing Mormon fanatic fascist that wanted to keep women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, wanted to ban contraception, wanted to legalize rape (!), wanted to keep the poor and women and “brown people” from getting ANY health care, wanted to kill homosexuals. THEY BELIEVE THIS STUFF.

It was a very depressing experience last night for me to realize that these people barely a generation behind me aren’t even the same species. It’s like they live in a different dimension. They’re the kind of people that, as the Obama Americorps firing squad had them lined up against the wall to shoot, would be blaming Bush for making it possible by repealing the assault weapons ban.

}:-)4


145 posted on 11/07/2012 8:36:22 AM PST by Moose4 (...and walk away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
YES YES YES! You are correct and Romney is most electable in an environment when Obama is supposedly most vulnerable.

And people hated the MSM’s definition of Palin. Again, you are correct. This election has nothing to do with your “”like””. It's all about how credibly you can position your offer.

Hispanics - Amnesty!
Blacks - Blacks and free stuff!
Women - Abortion!
...

Besides black, Palin is the only one who can break the main base of Obama, especially if she was allowed to be given a high profile against Obama.

Let Obama hammered a Palin. All conservative women including the conservative democrats of PA will rally behind a battered woman!

As for other free stuff? Have you heard about Palin’s strategy of using the Government share from Oil finds in AK as the direct voucher to the AK people in accordance with their state laws, instead of using the same as funds to other inutil programs of the State?

As for Uterus Palin who didn't abort her son? THIS IS THE BIGGEST FAILURE OF ROMNEY AND THE GANG. Many of your approach here on GOPE’s primary-favorite Akin and Mourdoch’s gaffes are wrong.

Almost all of you, the so-called Pro-life Conservatives, don't even know how to defend your stance. Romney, Ryan and the 2 clowns senator wannabes also failed to explain their Pro-life positions. But the worst is the R&R ticket. Their strategy was to condemn GOPE’s own clowns instead of supporting them. The Dems already have the 40-45% of the women. But you still need to get the votes of the next 20% women not really voting Republicans because of their vajayjay. By not defending Akin and Murdouch, Romney accepted the fate of his team. But what did Romney lose? The socially-conservative democrats of PA and many parts of the swing states. Why? Because Romney just followed the MSM meme about Akin and Mourdouch without fighting back. Pro-lifers are still part of his base, which is the point of the above article. He must have a moral ascendancy of defending most loyal constituents. But to GOP/E wisemen, the strategy is to lie to the people instead of helping the expansion/promotion of the base. What did Romney do? He categorically promised that he would not sign any Anti-Abortion Law? Lame! Who would want that kind of law anyway? But wait! How do you get some votes from the seemingly solid women for Obama. Re-frame Rachel Maddow's attack by making the following points as viral as possible! (and there are many more examples!)

a) UNFPA Funds of Obama Administration funding the 9-month old babies being burned to death in China.
b) Women must have rights to sue abortionists for physical, mental, and psychological harm done to them.

If you can't defend the moral side of pro-abortion for risk of being labelled as Christian loon, at least defend the health aspects of the abortion and rape. In pro-life stance, you don't have to preach. You must show true mercy and care. Even women who went 100 times for abortion would have reconsider the above ideas. Instead of turning the tide in his favor, Romney and the GOP/E followed the MSM narratives on abortion. And how you treated your base? You maligned Palin, a representation of many ordinary conservative republicans, your base. THUS, YOU SEVERELY LOST THE WOMENS VOTE.

In addition, one (1) senate seat could have been saved by GOP/E. Replace Akin by runner-up, a woman candidate. But since Steelman was a Palin pick, that was ruled out.

We won 2010 by not sitting but by fighting. Gosh! You all forgot the passion of winning without fighting with your the easily electable candidate called flip-flopping Romney. Wow! By seeing how good-looking and methodological Romney was, you all forgot your winning lesson in 2010 Election. FIGHTING LIBERALISM IS THE ONLY WAY TO WIN. NOT PANDERING TO THEM AND HAVING A NICEY CHATS WITH THE MSM! GOP even won Wisconsin governorshi in 2010 and Walker even survived recall but funny, VP Ryan was so insignificant in WI. Of course, many of you and all the pundits have discredited Palin for Walker's win in 2010. You've all become revisionists of history, just like the liberals.

Ironically, Palin has an arsenal to become appealing to people if they only knew the truth about Palin.

Free Stuff you say? Let's admit it. Some of us need them too. We have become bought the Rich Republican meme of Bushites. Some of us could be really deserving of some assistance from the Government. But we need money right. SO USE YOUR IMAGINATION WHERE TO GET THE MONEY BESIDES INCOME TAX. Well SARAH PALIN has some controversial ideas that GOP/E especially the AK crony GOP disliked so much: Generate government share in oil and gas exploration and use the same to the people. Hey, guys. Socialism? NOPE. The money is yours. Not from the rich. From the share of the state. And it works well for the actual and original definition of the Republicanism, i.e., Government works for the people not the other way around.

Related to the above, saying that developing oil and gas resources inside America will yield job is not politically savvy anymore. Think something new. Fire old-time strategists of DC and make a concrete dialogue to the people on how to solve economic and social issues. And don't start with your convention platform document whatsoever.

Hispanics you say? We have so many Hispanic women leaders because of TP/Grizzly Mamas/Palin collaboration in 2010. The ones you are worshipping now are fruits of Palin’s labor. She paid that in the last couple of year when some of GOPE remained silent while MSM was accusing Palin as a murderer!
Hispanics are social conservatives. Hardworking Palin, with sufficient machinery to re-introduce herself to Hispanics would win even NM.

What about Obama’s immigration amnesty? You have to make tradeoffs and decide. But definitely, the usual anti-populist NO-TO-AMNESTY/PROTECT-THE-BOARDER as the non-alternative to Obamás offer will yield the same results as Romney's SILENCE TO THE ISSUE! There is the reason for your loss.

GOP ACTUALLY NEEDS A POPULIST CONSERVATIVE ... NOT A LIBERTARIAN CONSERVATIVE (admit it, the libertarians are locked up to their small party!)

Stop the unhealthy discrimination during the convention. That's not the essence of convening.

146 posted on 11/07/2012 8:36:46 AM PST by convertedtoreason ( Nature tells us to take a LIBERTARIAN CONSERVATIVE stance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

“things wouldn’t really change at all over the next four years. And they won’t.”...Wrong grasshoppa! You forget a little thing called Supreme Court appointments.


147 posted on 11/07/2012 8:45:40 AM PST by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Ghost of Philip Marlowe
" We need to learn the Art of Political War, as explained in David Horowitz’s book of that title.

We need to stop trying to get along. WE need to get in THEIR faces.

And we need to attack with the full arsenal of conservative principles.

That includes SOCIAL ISSUES.

The left has been welding the social/cultural issues to political and economic issues since the 1960s, through regulation, legislation, and funding.

If we give up the social issues or try to appeal to the left on the social/cultural issues, we unwittingly give up the entire argument.'

======================================================

YES!!!!!

Full blown beast mode unapologetic fighting pit bull scorched earth conservatism!

148 posted on 11/07/2012 9:02:25 AM PST by Manic_Episode (Some days...it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: beachn4fun

And also Hispanic are more likely to vote for a black candidate. The democrats for now on will be putting a minority on the presidential ticket. They know now that it works.


149 posted on 11/07/2012 9:02:25 AM PST by NJBushcountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NJBushcountry

We ave to in some form or fashion organize so we can demonize the msm.
How we can accomplish that, I have no idea.


150 posted on 11/07/2012 9:07:36 AM PST by V V Camp Enari 67-68 (Viet Vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-317 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson