Post 2012 Changes

You can’t lose the way Republicans did in the Senate and give away possibly the most winnable Presidential election in 40 years without changing a few things.  Ben Howe at RedState has some great suggestions:

The overriding problem that we as a party have is that we have two distinct camps. The Tea Party wing and the Establishment wing. Whether or not the names are fair, they basically summarize what people have come to know as the competing interests in the party. Unfortunately, both miss the most crucial part of winning elections: messaging.

Our rhetoric must change. It must stop only preaching to the choir. What our messaging must do is inform and educate. Not only the portion of the electorate that we currently aren’t winning, but our own base as well. Too often I’ve heard the angry tones deriding the welfare recipient for being a taker instead of a producer. And while I agree with the sentiment that entitlements are bankrupting our country, the problem isn’t solved by simply adjusting the numbers. We can’t fix things by addressing the fiscal problems associated with entitlements until we’ve changed the minds of the people that are entitled.

But instead of working together on this messaging, we’re at each other’s throats pointing fingers and declaring that one side is the problem. The principled vs the strategic. The conservative vs the moderate. The Tea Party vs the Establishment. Both sides are wrong and both sides are right. We must be strategic and we must be principled. But we must also be intelligent. We must also be compassionate. We must also be empathetic and we must also be clever.

Without those additional qualities we are doomed to continue failing to win while retaining our principles, or sacrificing our principles to achieve our victories.

I spent the last four years fighting. That much will remain the same but added to that list, and I hope for the Republican Party as well, will be working to craft our message so that it appeals to the people that don’t vote for us yet. Honesty and principles must prevail. If not then what’s the point of fighting? The cost of winning can’t be so high that we lose ourselves. But our ability to explain how & why others should agree with us must improve.

94 Comments

  1. JohnGalt
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 10:46 am | Permalink | Reply

    We need someone that knows how to run a political machine. Not more latinos. Please. Romney thought he could recreate the wheel, make a new wheel to power his campaign. He was wrong. Obama was smart enough, to know was too stupid to make his own political machine, and instead relied on others that had done before many many times. The enthusisam was there. Romney’s ineffective, rose-colored glasses campaign LOST IT. I thought Romney would have been a great president, but gosh, now that it is apparent how BAD his campaign was…..

    We need the good old white guys that have done this many many times before and we need them now. That’s who Bush used. His daddys friends. So he won against the odds. Not ready for prime time players Ryan and RUBIO, not so much.

    What you are seeing is people dropping out. Of the political system because its broken with BS political correctness(exhibit A: low white turnout). Now they’re dropping out of the economic system. exhibit B stock market participation. Its a systemic change. Until common sense and rule of law and fair predictible outcomes are ensured again, trust is lost.

    THE FEDERAL RESERVE IS OUT OF CONTROL AS IS WASHINGTON.

    We’re all going to be crying for Ron Paul one day. And I’m a full-fledged Romney supporter. But there are people dropping out. Who is John Galt.

    • Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I said on another thread that the base believing Fox and Rush and Hannity and Beck was the problem. I have little or no hope that this will in anyway affect anyone, but FWIW here’s David Frum:

      • ET4
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 3:32 pm | Permalink

        What a load of crap. David Frum has been looking out for the Republicans as much as Jimmy Carter has the past years. Uninformed voters aren’t the failure of Fox; they’re the failure of the media in general (and also of the people for not putting in any effort to try to be informed). Do you think such anecdotes of ignorance are only present at Tea Party rallies? Just look at Breitbart’s fringe site for hundreds of example of liberal voters spewing nonsense so completely divorced from reality and espousing views so far to the left that they would put communist propaganda from the Cold War to shame. Is that MSNBC’s problem? Only insofar as they’re part of the rest of the media.

        Andrew, I know you consider yourself a reasonable person. I’ve seen your comments stating you browse sites like these to avoid living in a bubble, and you chided someone for their simplistic models about liberals. But you have implied in your comment here and elsewhere that you believe in the caricature of the typical Republican voter as a mindless zombie, and that this phenomenon is only largely existent on the Right, which manifested itself by Romney losing. If this is what you have internalized, I suggest you work on bursting that bubble a little harder.

        To put principal blame on Fox News, whatever qualms you may have with it (and to be sure there are a lot), for the loss of the election is intellectually laziness mixed with confirmation bias. Fox News is the only thing challenging MSNBC and the sea of liberal news outlets, cultural influences and academic institutions. At the moment, it is the thread by which we hang on to any power in this country. And you are suggesting we get rid of it.

        Greeks bearing gifts.

      • Ron
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 3:53 pm | Permalink

        It’s not a load of crap. A lot of blue-collar white voters stayed home. The reason for this was the anger ginned up by people like Limbaugh. Why Romney made so unacceptable to so many within our own ranks? Look at the conservative websites–places like Redstate or Freerepublic. You will see there some of the hostility still felt toward Romney by many who called themselves conservatives.

    • NAVYBLUE
      Posted November 11, 2012 at 12:01 am | Permalink | Reply

      No more east coast moderate Republicans or anyone in the House or Senate. Conservative Governors only. name me ONE moderate Republicam that was elected/reelected as President.

      Ford Failed
      Dole Failed
      Bush Sr Failed
      Mc Cain Failed
      Romney Failed

      Ronald Maximus Regan Winner, winner, winner !!!!!!!

      Conservatism is THE message that is good for America. That is the ONLY message that defeats the party of Free STUFF.

      Immigration is NOT why we lost. Abortion is NOT why we lost. Go to Manhattan Institute and read the report by Ms McDonald, a statistics expert.

      As history has shown the party of FREE STUFF enslaved the Indians (reservations/govt “assistance”), then the blacks (welfare, food stamps, HUD housing, EBT cards, Obamphones etc) and now their next victim are the Hispanics.

      I am 64. Read your political history. Read Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Heritage Institute, Manhattan institute, the Federalist papers.

      Call or write your congressmen Only they can write appropriation bills. I am writing my Republican Nevada congressman that if he votes for any bill that eliminates the Bush tax cuts, approve/funds ANY part of Obamacare, more EPA regulations, more national monuments, increases the debt limit, approves ANY tax increases or acts in any way against the interests of the American people I will run against him in (2) years,

      I will tell him if he violates any of these tenants that I will run against him, I will sign a legal document that i will leave after (6) years, I will only accept 53% of a congressman’s salary (to represent the 53% who pull the wagon versus the 47% who ride in the FREE STUFF wagon) and I will NEVER vote for a increase of any tax that comes up for FINAL vote and if I run I will not accept any individual donation over $53.00 and will NOT accept any donation from a PAC, business, corporation or lobbyist.

      Semper Fi Marines on your birthday

      NAVYBLUE

  2. Teapartypaul
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 10:48 am | Permalink | Reply

    Well said

  3. Prescient11
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 10:49 am | Permalink | Reply

    I hope someone here needs to look hard at Allen West’s recall efforts and exactly how f’d up the whole system is, he’s now ahead in palm beach county….

    And as far as our candidate, I would be fine with a Rubio-Tom Cotton ticket. Look this guy up.

    Tom Cotton Tom Cotton Tom Cotton Tom Cotton Tom Cotton Tom Cotton – a true American hero. You want to get the voters back, bring this fucking guy to the table as VP and ready to take over once Rubio is done.

  4. mdc
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 10:57 am | Permalink | Reply

    AGREE!

    I have to confess my paranoia as to how the Democrats won this election—I hope that I am wrong…

    • Ron
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 4:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I think you ARE wrong. It’s the means some use to gloss over what is now emerging as a fact–we did it to ourselves. White CONSERVATIVES stayed home. Why, if not because they were turned off by what they were told over and over about Romney–before he won the primaries? By then it was too late when Limbaugh and others tried to reverse themselves. The damage was done. All Obama did was repeat what Newt said and what too many idiots in our own ranks believed.

  5. JohnGalt
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 10:59 am | Permalink | Reply

    Democrats as a demographic are doomed. Blacks aren’t growing becaue they kill their babies, as well as other bad behavioral things. Liberal women are turning off men left and right. Liberal women are all on birth control, don’t get married and they have abortions. Liberals are moochers that live off producers. liberals work at foundations. conservatives start businesses with their god given ideas. I repeat. Liberals are doomed.

    KISS. Keep it simple stupid. Insist on merit society. Rule of law. Life liberty pursuit of property. PERIOD.

    If that fails? Guns, bullets, and wine.

    • David Weed
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:27 am | Permalink | Reply

      JohnGalt, YOU are the reason the GOP got spanked this election. YOU are the reason the GOP is “grand” no more. Liberals aren’t doomed, JohnGalt. Progressives just kicked your close-minded butt this election. And it’s because of YOU.

      It’s not “Liberal” women who spurned the Republican party, JohnGalt. It was WOMEN. They looked at the available candidates, and saw YOU in the Republican brand, and voted the other way.

      Keith’s initial post is spot-on. Selling fiscal conservatism to the American Electorate is not going to be hard. Selling YOUR brand of hatred? Impossible. And every time the GOP puts up an Akin or a Mourdoch, or an Allen West, your entire brand suffers. Oh, you’ll win the House while redistricting favors you, but when you lose that advantage, and if you continue to put up hate-filled candidates, you’ll continue to lose more statewide and national elections. 2-3 months ago, control of the Senate was a pretty good bet for Republicans. But once the more extreme candidates on your side start talking (and when they speak, they sound an awful lot like YOU) your whole party suffers.

      So keep talking, JohnGalt. Your Tea Party needs to be relegated to the sidelines, as you’re not fit to govern. What you’re missing is that whenever a candidate of EITHER party is elected, that they represent ALL of their constituents. Even the ones that didn’t vote for them. They’re supposed to consider ALL points of view. You seem incapable of any flexibility at all. It’s why you’ll ultimately lose.

      And it’s “Life, liberty and the pursuit of HAPPINESS.” It’s written on a fairly important document. You should actually try reading it.

      • Jake
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

        Actually, the original phrase as written by Locke was “Life, liberty, property”.

      • Ron
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 4:59 pm | Permalink

        This is silly. You misunderstand what the Tea Party is. It’s a grassroots movement from the American people, not an actual political party. It’s not adept yet at backing the right candidates in some places, but it’s had some real success as well–Pat Toomey and Marcp Rubio come to mind. But it’s still in the learning process. And they are important in terms of holding establishment feet to the fire. Fear of the movement has pushed some moderates rightward. I’d say that’s a good thing. It’s always healthy when a congressman or senator has more fear of displeasing his constituents back home than greed for back room deals. The American people don’t want more spending or more growth of government.

      • C'ville
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 8:02 pm | Permalink

        David Weed – you are not being accurate. Romney won white women by 12 points – 56-44. He lost minority women by a lot as he did other minorities, due to their apparent belief in how the economy and entitlements, not their womanhood. Can’t beat Santa Claus, as the vast majority of the minority vote seems to think.

      • Miss. Plonky
        Posted November 10, 2012 at 5:26 am | Permalink

        YOU are mad.

      • NAVYBLUE
        Posted November 11, 2012 at 12:12 am | Permalink

        Read my post above and then go back to be with the Kos kiddies. SINGLE women with children voted for FREE STUFF SUGAR DADDY. VAGINA women voted for SUGAR DADDY.

        Go to Manhattan Institute and read Dr McDonald’s report. She has forgotten more about statistics than metrosexual liberal/progressive “men” will learn in their lifetime. She has been doing this for a lifetime.

        NAVYBLUE

    • Angelina Joseph
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:51 am | Permalink | Reply

      Why didn’t the 9 million progressives didn’t vote this time?

    • Ron
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 3:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

      This was a status quo election, not a victory for liberals. They now will own the mess they will continue to create. The pendulum is still swinging. Meanwhile the social experiment in Europe is nearing collapse. Reality has a way of intruding on fantasies.

  6. Big Mac
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:02 am | Permalink | Reply

    my fear is after 4 more years there will be nothing to salvage. We are in serious peril.

    • Ron
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 4:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Disagree. We will be rejuvenated once we’re done licking our wounds. We’re in exactly the situation the Democrats were in once Kerry lost. It was just before the Obama came on the scene and engineered the big reversal. We’ll do the same. It’s not the apocalypse.

  7. John
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:06 am | Permalink | Reply

    I know we can’t tell Fox News what to do and who to hire as “contributors” but I sure hope they ditch the “Angry White” lineup they have now in the evening. I’m not talking about the hosts (O’Reily, Hannity) since it takes special skills to do that job and they do it well, I’m talking about the Rove, Morris, Gingrich, Gulliani, Colter, etc. lineup of guests/contirbutors on those shows. Replace them with a new generation of conservatives, preferably a diverse group, who can articulate modern conservative principles without coming across as angry and so out of touch/backward looking. Like it or not Fox News is the conservative movement’s most viable media outreach tool to independents (they say they have a lot of independent viewers). But for this election at least it was an echo chamber of “Angry White Guys”.

    • JohnGalt
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:11 am | Permalink | Reply

      people aren’t engaged. We are. most people arent. Pandering wont help. In tennis, if you play your opponents game you will lost every time.

    • Ron
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 5:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Some of the pundits are useless–Morris comes to mind. But Rove is an important player, having engineered Bush’s success in 2004. And Giulianni is an important presence, a party leader with universal name recognition and respect. The charge of “angry white guys” is a leftie complaint, not something we should ascribe to. First of all, we’ve got good reason to be angry. We’re in a culture war, a fight for survival, so anger is to be expected. Second of all, we have plenty of women participating–Coulter, Palin, Bachmann come to mind. Fox News is not the problem–unless you think annoying the hell out of the left is a problem.

    • C'ville
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 8:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

      GOP did win independents pretty handily?

  8. scott smith
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:08 am | Permalink | Reply

    Good points. I began my business on July 1 with a view of not ridiculing those on entitlements, but partnering with them to help them learn a skill and how to market that skill. We are not, nor shoukd we, end the entitlement system. We should work to reduce the need until it withers away out of lack of need. To people that can see no way of escaping poverty our candidates sound scary. I’m sorry but that is the reality. We are stuck with a system that is too expensive. We as citizens loyal to this great nation have work to do to reform it by getting people a means to escape poverty. If you are interested I would love to provide anpost for you. Tjis is not an ad for my company, there is no cost or anything. Just gotta educate people about a conservative approach to ending entitlement addiction. THAT is what beat us folks.

    • JohnGalt
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:12 am | Permalink | Reply

      They tried that in the 60’s

    • ClearView
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:48 am | Permalink | Reply

      Good plan, if there are jobs. Unfortunately jobs went away due to increased regulations and a lower-educated / skilled workforce.

    • Ron
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 5:26 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I very much agree with this. Many fear a loss of the safety net in a world growing increasingly complex, with many left behind. But there’s a reasonable concern that liberals push their programs in order to buy elections.

  9. stuckinmass
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:11 am | Permalink | Reply

    I posted this in the other thread..

    I think there is a big political realignment coming.
    The baby boomers are aging. They will be consuming more and more of the federal expenditures for Soc sec, medicare, etc.
    Younger people will be squeezed paying higher taxes, yet their priorities (schools, infrastructure) will increasingly be short-changed. They will want to fight back. Our parties may become divided more along those issues in the coming decades rather than the current paradigms (Our current red-blue divide isn’t that old, Nixon laid the groundwork, Reagan brought the vision, and Clinton cemented the red-blue divide as it stands now)

  10. John
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:23 am | Permalink | Reply

    From CNBC this morning concerning the “Fiscal Cliff”…

    “Obama, who defeated Republican challenger Mitt Romney on Tuesday in a race in which the two candidates offered different visions for jump-starting the sluggish economy, is not expected to put forward a new or specific plan.
    Instead, he is expected to urge Congress to tackle the fiscal cliff and try to cut the massive U.S. budget deficit.”

    My God…what a pathetic leader. He won the election and still won’t put forth a plan – nothing, just defers to congress to tackle the hard stuff. What a CLULESS LOOSER who has/is outsourcing his entire presidency. It is beyond belief Romney lost to this guy.

    • TPK
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:34 am | Permalink | Reply

      If only it were true. Deferring to Congress is what a President is SUPPOSED to do with regard to the budget, or at least it was when we still had a Constitution.

      • Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

        Actually the budget process is SUPPOSED to originate in the US House of Representatives. The President is not, by constitution, supposed to present a budget to Congress. Congress many years ago abdicated their budgetary power to the executive branch thinking being able to blame the president would be good for them (democrats started this) politically. The idea of the framers was the POTUS was not to be a central powerful figure. The President by design is supposed to be a fairly weak position. He/She is not supposed to be the one proposing budgets and telling congress how to spend. Congress is to craft a budget, pass it and present it to the President for his signature or veto.

        So Obama is abdicating this power BACK to the Republican House…and they should latch onto this like a scared cat and not let go. They should proposed a TRUE plan of action to get us back from the cliff, fix the budget and the country and then shove down the Senate and POTUS’ throats the way Obamacare was. Win the war of words in the media talking about the CUTS and REVENUE INCREASES they are open to but the President and DEMOCRAT senate refuse to go along with. TAKE IT AND RUN WITH IT PAUL RYAN….show AMERICA what they lost when they pulled the wrong lever

    • David Weed
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:39 am | Permalink | Reply

      President Obama is not “deferring” to Congress, John. He’ll be working WITH Congress. It’s the way it’s done. Does it really make him either a CLULESS LOOSER, or a clueless loser?

      • AJ
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:39 pm | Permalink

        loser*

  11. Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:27 am | Permalink | Reply

    First, I would point out that we fought the election solely on the economic argument. Amazingly, it failed, despite a splendid articulation by a noble and talented candidate. But in focusing solely on the economy, it now appears we lost millions of our own base voters. I suggest we must squarely face the other issues that should have been dealt with, including abortion, SCOTUS and original intent, gun rights, secularism in the schools, and so forth. But as we saw in the sad cases of Akin and Mourdoch, intelligence in presentation is critical. For example, most Americans reject abortion in 95% of the cases. Instead of plunging into the trap set by liberal reporters, we ought have pummeled Obama’s votes for infanticide in the Illinois state legislature as well as pointed out that the issue was not before the Senate in any event, but the High Court. Our candidates must pass a minimum I.Q. test for nomination!

    Second, I refer you to Dr. Krauthammer’s splendid article today, outlining a winning strategy that does not compromise our basic principles. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-the-way-forward/2012/11/08/6592e302-29d8-11e2-96b6-8e6a7524553f_story.html

    What is important now is to realize that it is not simply that there are more Democrats in the country than Republicans, but that the Republicans did not vote in the same numbers as did the Democrats. We need to get our base, as did Obama — and we must reach out to Latinos and others without compromising our basic principles in the process.

  12. allthingsgeography1
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:27 am | Permalink | Reply

    I don’t know what your political party needs to succeed. I’m not a Republican, but a healthy political system should at least have the two parties (if not more) in competition. Honestly, in situations like this, the issue is pretty simple…the Republican Party didn’t speak adequately to the needs of voters. Even if those same voters are dissatisfied with the Democrats (as evidenced by the lost votes on Obama’s side compared to 4yrs ago), the message on the Republican side was weak. This of course has happened to Democrats before as well, especially during periods of successive defeats (see Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis). But when they found someone who spoke well to voters needs and concerns, they bounced back (Bill Clinton). Republicans have no suffered two defeats and unless Obama’s Presidency basically implodes like Bush’s at the end of 2008, I don’t see any reason why the Obama Coalition won’t hold together for a new favorable Democratic candidate and defeat a third Republican in 2016. I’m not a Republican, so I’m not in the best position to figure out the messaging issue, but it’s clear lots of people simply said “Whatever” and stayed home and let the nation stay the course. If you want to win, you have to do what the Dems did in the early-90s…figure out concretely what people’s concerns are and come up with fresh, conservative ideas to solve those problems. The nation is changing not only demographically, but economically and socially. You must change or face irrelevance. Both political parties face this wall at some point, so I’m confident the Democratic Party won’t be dominant forever just as the Republicans won’t be either. The establishment need to sit down and figure stuff out. And while they shouldn’t forget about their base supporters, like the Tea Party, they are far far from even a strong minority of the electorate and so must be treated accordingly. Bases can be a good foundation, but they shouldn’t be leading the charge.

    • David Weed
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:40 am | Permalink | Reply

      Agreed, allthings. This country NEEDS two strong, reasonable parties. And I’m a Democrat!

    • Jake
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 3:58 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Well, let’s put it like this. If we’re right about what Obama’s policies will do, particularly in terms of regulation and economic squelching, then he -will- have imploded by 2016 and we’ll basically be able to run a sandwich or John McCain and win.

      • allthingsgeography1
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 4:07 pm | Permalink

        And if you’re all wrong, the next Democrat on the high ticket will crush your Republican opposition like an ant. Depending on your opponent to flounder is a risky tactic. You hope for that, but you have a plan to build the party and give increasing leadership and roles for potential candidates so that you can be strong in 4yrs. 4yrs is an eternity in politics and a lot of things can happen. You want the chance to win regardless of what’s happening in the political environment.

  13. ClearView
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:34 am | Permalink | Reply

    Couple items to ponder: “Honesty and principals” mean nothing to the takers who are now the largest voting block. And that block includes those who service them from over sized bureaucracies.

    The “new power voting block” is very comfortable with having their life exposed on social media and not at all understanding, or ashamed of their own ignorance.

    Your parents, like mine, and me when thinking these examples could be my offspring, would die in embarrassment. Today is a badge of honor.

    Instead, they vote to allow legal use of marijuana without even the slightest thought about the employment implications. Why should they? They can “game” the system and are rewarded with enough to maintain a subsistence life. Speaking of gaming the system, take 30 minutes and read through this blog:

    http://www.topix.com/forum/city/somerset-ky/T5EUG2N300PCDF5VK/p26

    And pay particular attention to the posts by BeHereNow.

    This is the “new normal” and you are not going to change it at the ballot box. Sadly, I chose to not try and fight it anymore. I’m tired of the endless distraction of political campaigns. It is despairing to live in a beautiful urban region in a deeply blue state and what the degeneration of the people. Voting Republican isn’t enough today and conditions are beyond the tipping point.

    We have choices and mine is to move away.

  14. JohnGalt
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:41 am | Permalink | Reply

    I realize you guys are trying to find solutions, but this is just horrible. Why is everyone focusing on Latinos? They are not that big a %. Most of them have one foot back in their home countries too. Even the Wall Street Journal is on the latino band wagon. The hispanics of today are not the Cubans of yesterday. Even the Cubans of today are not the Cubans of yesterday. You’ll just get more and more whites dropping out.

    Its not the color of your skin, it’s the content of your character.

    Goodbye.

    • MikeN
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The WSJ editorial page has been calling for opening the border with Mexico for decades.

  15. David Weed
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:41 am | Permalink | Reply

    This first guy is an idiot. Both parties have their share.

  16. Eric
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:43 am | Permalink | Reply

    I’ve been examining the political process in Canada to see what we might learn from them. In Canada, the conservatives do very, very poorly among newly arrived immigrants (those there less than 5 years). The types of people want welfare. There’s not much that Republicans can do to win their votes. A lot of Hispanics fall into this category. Among those here 5-20 years, the conservatives in Canada do a little better but still not too well. Among those there more than 20 years, they do equally as well as with any native Canadians.

    We can learn from this as this has happened in the past in the USA. Recent immigrants voted Democratic in the early 1900s. Over the years they are less Democratic. When they are a new immigrant they are very poor and dependent on the government. When they move up in society and move out to the suburbs, then the welfare state becomes more of a burden on them, and they tend to vote like the rest of society. In other words…assimilation.

    In Canada, the conservatives were dying as a party. They were routed over and over and over again for a long time. They re-tooled their approach. They went into minority communities and forged relationships with them. They started sponsoring things that these communities care about. They recruited minority candidates in those communities. They still weren’t able to win over the immigrants there less than 20 years, but the older immigrants came on board. They were able to drop the “racist” label that the leftists in Canada accused them of. They still are called racists, but it doesn’t stick as well.

    Republicans can learn from this. Do whatever it takes to get rid of the ‘racist’ label! We’ll still not win a majority of minorities, especially those who are new immigrants. Go into minority communities and recruit candidates. Sponsor events in those communities. Organize rallies for causes they care about. Go into the strongholds and fight them there. Those who still want a welfare state we’ll never be able to win over, but we’ll win over those who don’t want a welfare state who just won’t vote Republican because Republicans are seen as racist.

    Do whatever it takes to drop the racist schtick and Republicans will be a natural majority party. A serious concerted effort needs to be made. Here’s a link about it if you want more information:
    http://www.punditsguide.ca/2011/09/who-really-won-the-%E2%80%9Cethnic%E2%80%9D-vote-in-the-may-election/

    • Derclaw86
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:56 am | Permalink | Reply

      You made a very good point.

    • Prescient11
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:00 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Republicans are the party of emancipation. Republicans are the party of civil rights.

      Democrats are the party of slavery. Democrats are the party of Jim Crowe.

      The rest is media lies.

    • Eric
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I just want to make the point that even if Republicans cave on everything, they still aren’t going to win the votes of minorities. Not going to happen. They’ll win some votes if they can just get rid of the ‘racist’ label. People who agree with us on the issues but think that we are racists will vote Republican if they believe that Republicans aren’t racists. We don’t have to suddenly change all of our positions.

      Over time the Hispanic population will gradually become more Republican as they assimilate. We can do better with them if we stop threatening to deport them, stop advocating English only policies, and bring them into leadership positions. The conservatives in Canada have made a concerted attempt to win over the immigrant populations in the big cities there and have done better. We can copy their tactics and succeed too. The situation is not as dire as people would lead you to believe among Hispanics.

      The bigger problem that we face is that a lot of Americans have abandoned the Republican Party and blame Bush for everything. That’s why we lost Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Virginia. The bigger problem we have is coming up with new ideas and distancing ourselves from anything with the name ‘Bush’ on it.

    • Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:16 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I couldn’t agree more. I notice a resistance to taking the message to the aforementioned communities. I agreed with Limbaugh the last couple of days on 99% of what he was saying. Much like football you rarely lose because of one thing, it’s usually the accumulation of several things.

      It’s becoming apparent now that many base Republicans did not vote. The numbers nationally and statewise bear that out. We probably would’ve won if not for that omission. However this loss did expose weaknesses that needed to be exposed for the long term that a victory Tuesday would’ve just delayed for another two or maybe four years and are better to deal with now so the load wouldn’t have been as great later.

      Limbaugh was basically asking “What more can we do? If showing them Allan West, Clarence Thomas, Susanna Martinez, Marco Rubio, etc isn’t enough then we can’t worry about it.” What my point though is that many minorities DON’T know of non-white conservatives. The approach almost seems to be well it’s their job to find out about them.

      I disagree. I guarantee you that in my city if I go to anywhere in the predominately Hispanic parts of my city, 97% of them will have no clue who Susanna Martinez is and probably 60-70% wouldn’t know Marco Rubio. The GOP needs to from now on set up shop in all minority areas and aggresively court these groups letting them know about these things and promoting the parties’ ideas in general, a permanent campaign if you will.

      We don’t need to change our principles, we don’t need to agree to amnesty, we don’t need to drop the social issues we need to approach these communities. For those who say it won’t work how will we know if we don’t try? What else will the GOP spend its’ money on? More ads?

      • Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

        true but do you think anyone had a clue who barack obama was in the general joe blow crowd or even the everyday democrat party until he announced for President? You cant expect anyone to have name value, you have to build it and quick. Rubio is already out in Iowa working it. My prediction…he won’t get the Pres nod in 2012 he will get the VP slot.

    • Eric
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

      We know that it WILL work because it’s worked in other countries where it has been tried.

      I do disagree that many Republicans just stayed home and that’s why we lost. The fact is that there are more Democrats than Republicans out there. This didn’t use to be the case pre-2008. Many Republicans just abandoned the party near the end of Bush’s 2nd term. Remember that McCain was leading Obama in the polls until that collapse in the fall of 2008. At that point, many Republicans just left the party and they haven’t come back. Many voted for Obama in 2008. Many just didn’t vote at all in 2012.

      To win them back we have to show that the Republicans are NOT the party of Bush. If we don’t, we’ll have to win a huge majority of independents in order to win. D+6 is here to stay unless we get a new message.

      • Prescient11
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

        D+6 is absolutley untrue. Just look at 2010. Demographics have not changed. Only suppressed white turnout.

        A lot of people just stayed home this time around. Pretty scary given what we face.

      • Eric
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

        The demographics haven’t changed racially that’s true. But a lot of former white Republicans are now white Democrats. That’s why it’s D+6. People blame Bush and Republicans for starting the recession.

      • Prescient11
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

        Eric, I agree with that. I think that was somewhat of a large factor as well. Well in 4 more years, the blame bush excuse should be gone as the joblessness assuredly will continue under this incompetent.

    • Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      We have seen this in America too…but Republicans have forgotten it and moved away from it by selling their souls to the religious right to win elections.

      Immigrants come to this country looking for opportunity. The problem is they dont come here with much, they are usually poor and often times uneducated. So they look to the Democrats because they think democracy. they lean toward the welfar, the free healthcare, free education, etc to get what they have up and running. As they make more money and become more successful the democrats come a calling demanding more of their money back for services rendered…they dislike this and look for different leadership.

      We need to appeal to this…GOP has to get away from hardcore relgiiousa nd social BS and focus more on investing in immigrants, minorities and others. Spend a little to help those who are looking for a shot not a life of entitlement. Then when they get on their feet they are ready to repay that support.

      Democrats dont want these peopel to succeed or get on their feet they want them dependent on the government like a heroin dealer gives a little taste to get them hooked for life. If democrats were truly out for the best interest of minorites and african americans. Then why…with more than 50 linear years of congressional control and 32 years of Presidential control since 1960 are African Americans basically in the same economic, educational, etc position as they were when they started. Yet the so called minority leaders have enriched themselves on their backs and risen to power?

      To be fair same can be said for poor white trash, rednecks and southerners. If white GOPS wanted to build them then why are those areas still the main users of welfare and the lowest educated among us.

      • C'ville
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 8:14 pm | Permalink

        Shane – percentage wise, whites aren’t even close to minorities in use of the sixty or so welfare programs. Something like 50 percent of Latinos are on at least one program.

  17. Derclaw86
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 11:51 am | Permalink | Reply

    The problem is that we are not reaching single people. Dems performed 20 points better among singles than among married persons. This marriage gap holds for BOTH men and women and it has persisted for at least the last 3 presidential elections. In addition, married persons have dramatically declined as a percentage of the electorate from 66% in ’08 to 60% in ’12. Pew research did a demographic study that shows more Americans are now rejecting marriage in ever increasing numbers. This is especially true among younger people. Pew also did another study that found that for the first time in our history, Protestants are now less than 50% of our population. In addition, our country is becoming more secularized as more people are defining themselves as “non-religious”. I strongly disagree with above comment above that says “Liberals are doomed” because they are all having abortions. Let’s not forget that single people are also having children in record numbers and are becoming an increasingly important demographic. As I have often stated, I have nothing against white,married evangelicals. I share and live by many of their core values. However, we need to reconsider our “family values” type of message as it is offending a growing portion of the electorate. Finally, since over 50% of Hispanic adults are now single and over 70% of Blacks are also single, our willingness to confront our stance towards single people will also give insight into these minority groups, as well.

    • Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Reference my post above a similar type outreach needs to be made for younger voters (Though I think the issues of single women and younger voters are covered by the minority community outreach as Romney did quite well with white single women and younger voters. The issue was with minorities in these two categories).

  18. stuckinmass
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Elizabeth Warren is off to a great start. Gave an awkward press conference yesterday with the MA governor. When asked about defense spending, she deferred to the governor to answer. Huh??

    http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/20048149/2012/11/08/warren-leaves-awkward-first-impression-as-senator-elect#.UJ0JhyGSjcU.facebook

  19. TTK
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:12 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Mike Huckabee / Chuck Noriss 2016.

    • FabianNightmare
      Posted November 10, 2012 at 8:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

      LOL ! If we are dreaming, how about Chuck Norris / Judge Andrew Napolitano 2016 !!

  20. Prescient11
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Permalink | Reply

    This is an excellent analysis. Republicans NEED TO REACH OUT TO REPUBLICANS. All this shit about 10% of the voters is garbage.

    How about reaching out to the 75% and winning them first. Posted on ace of spades.

    Case in Point:

    2004: Hispanics 10 percent of elec….Blacks 11 percent…Bush little over 40 percent of Hispanic Vote…Bush over 62 million votes…(DEMOGRAPHICS NOT!!)

    2008: Hispanics 10 percent of elect….Blacks 13 percent….Whites out in record numbers for Obama….Obama 70 million Votes…McCain 59 million votes with about 36-37 percent Hispanic for McCain

    2012: Hispanics 10 percent of elect…Blacks 13 percent..White voters stay home…conservatives abandon Romney…Obama just over 59 million voters and Romney 57.4 million..with just over 30 percent Hispanis Vote…

    Shifting Demographics…NOT!! Hispanic percentage is the same since 2004. JUST THE CANDIDATES support is different. Hispanic percentage remains the same in all three elections. Bush was a Social Conservative/Fiscal Conservative (many Hispanics are Social Conservatives and Bush came from Texas) Romney was not viewed socially conservative, was from the Northeast and had nothing to prove he was not liberal and Hispanics did not trust him.

    Blacks: 13 percent of 129 million voters in 2008
    Blacks: 13 percent of just over 116 million in 2012- Increase NO decrease i number total….White plummet….WHITES SHIFTED THE RACE not HISPANICS AND NOT BLACKS!

    So lets take McCain’s 59 million plus this year…Guess what the Black 13 percent drops back to under 12 percent back to historical

    So lets take Bushes 62 million…Blacks would have dropped below historical numbers!!

    This is such BS ladies and gentlemen…in a shrinking total vote the biggest drop was the Conservative White Voter….that is why Obama lost over 10 million voters….in fact fewer black and hispanic voters came for Obama as well…if they were 10 percent and 13 percent with 129 million and the same for 116 million do the math!!!

    This election was pathetic….for all this hype just over 116 voted….over 121 million in 2004 and 129 million in 2008. This tells the whole story. Both candidates STUNK!

    Obama dropped way much more and that is pathetic.

    As for this 39/33 split Dem….BS….with 116 million yes…put McCains support from the GOP from 2008 at 59 million vs Obama’s 59 million in 2012 where is the PLUS 6? It would be EVEN!!

    No we are not more Liberal or Democrat. All this is CRAP!

    The bottom lines are what matter. The Polls were not right. The polls never gaged the true conservative support for Romney at all. In other words, you want to know Conservative Support Poll those that voted for Bush in 2004…not the crap from 2008 or 2012 and do it with a true conservative on the GOP ticket!

    Bottom line no the Hispanics did not change the vote or the single white bimbo female or the black. It was the conservatives that stayed home in 2004 is that did Romney in. Obama plummeted in 2012 over 10 million..Bush went up by millions in 2004. Endgame. GOP wants to win NOMINATE A CONSERVATIVE for God’s Sake. Demographics is RUBBISH…every voting block for Obama plummeted in 2012 including College Kids….gee!

    So when you hear that times have changed shove that 10 percent Hispanic vote from 2004 that is the same today…and they will say see we need more Hispanics like Bush…then say…NO WE NEED THE EVANGELICALS AND WHITES that supported Bush in 2004(yes it is good he appealed to more Hispanics as well by 10 percent but that is not what won Bush over Kerry)..and guess what Single White Females overwhelmingly supported Kerry as did College Kids!

    Amazing how 72 percent of the electorate means little but the 10 percent means everything. Never once do they talk about RINOS being on top of the ticket!

    • Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:22 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Despite my posts above the first part of my first post agrees with your sentiments. We should always outreach BUT why wouldn’t the GOP fully maximize their base as well?? It is beyond me.

      • Prescient11
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

        Tom Cotton Tom Cotton Tom Cotton Tom Cotton Tom Cotton Tom Cotton.

        Look this guy up. My view would be a Rubio-Cotton ticket.

        WE MUST PICK OUR CANDIDATES, NOT THE FUCKED UP RINO ESTABLISHMENT. Decent, mainstream candidates. That is all that is needed. And these idiots need to understand and be schooled on all the social issues “traps” that are set by the MSM.

    • FabianNightmare
      Posted November 10, 2012 at 8:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Good post, and I agree with most of it. The main tactic of the marxist/progressive ideologues is divide and conquer. Divide the people into race, ethnicity, gender, wealth, etc.. Make the argument “us” vs. “them”, hence the 1%, war on women , speaking out against minority politicians is “racist”, etc. The Axlerods and Jarret’s of the world understand completely that our republic is a “creedal” institution, which at its core requires that divergent races
      and ethnicities put the “creed” of the republic (constitution and tradition) above one’s natural individual pride in race and ethnicity, hence One Nation.
      The leftists would push balkanization to win elections.

  21. Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I can honestly say I have learned a lot of things from this election, good and bad.

    1) George W. Bush has scarred the Republican Party far more than we ever liked to realize. Personally, I believe the blame of the American people is not fairly placed but it is placed none the less. We have to overcome this through getting away from being the War party and the big spending hypocrit party.

    2) “Women are stupid”…this was a quote that a moderate, non voting group of co-workers used Wednesday morning. They went on…Republicans have tried in vain to give women the benefit of the doubt. That they are important decision makers, they are intelligent and use their brains to rationalize good decisions on national security, the economy, healthcare, domestic policy, etc….No, women are exactly what the Democrats played to…Vaginally Centered. Now I must stipulate these women, as I sat and listened very quietly, said not ALL women. But that you are seeing the again 60’s hippies reaching the golden years, their kids are in the 40 and of course are teaching their kids that sexual “rights” are everything. So their advice was if the Republicans want to win, they have to play to the idiots in the room and wink at those women who are smart enough to see what the game is.
    A) That means republicans must abolish the words abortion and birth control from their vocabulary. When asked about abortion..you say simply I am not personally a fan of abortion but it is the constitutional law of the land and that is the way it will stay. When asked about birth control, you say simply my personal beliefs are to be against birth control but they are legal, widely available and paid for under Obamacare and that is the way they will remain. PERIOD.

    3) Republicans will NEVER EVER NEVER win the black vote. Period. It won’t happen. Nothing they say, do, try, etc will ever appeal to more than low single digits. That is until there is a massive cultural change across our country and more blacks move out of the lower entitlement class and into the middle and upper classes.

    4) Hispanics are the fastest growing minority group that votes. And no one on either side of the aisle have any clue what so ever makes them tick and why they vote the way they do. It’s not jobs because republicans make sure they have plenty. It’s not amnesty because one of the worst showings among Hispanics for the GOP was right after the Reagan amnesty bill in the 80s. So whichever party taps that vein and figures out what makes them tick will lead for many many years to come.

    5) Romney was a good candidate, not great. He was middle of the road, not a bomb thrower. But he was a manager not a leader. He was not willing to shake things up propose massive change or even put forth change within his own campaign and party structure…see GOTV failures out the wazzoo. He also could not articulate what he was for and why. We made the SAME mistake the Democrats and Kerry made in 04…we ASSUMED we didn’t need a plan we just needed to be not be Obama. We were wrong so very very wrong. The American people were not up for change this year and I think mainly because NO ONE offered any. You cant take what isn’t offered. We need a new Reagan. Reagan was conservative in the classic sense not the hardcore right wing sense. But he stood for something, stuck to it and most importantly could tell you why he was for it and why it mattered to you. Republicans have not put a candidate up like that since 1984. Bush Sr and Jr got lucky. We have to have someone who can appeal to the base, the moderates, the independents, democrats, the non voters, etc. Someone with a vision, a plan, morals and ideals and that can talk about them to anyone, any time.

    6) Republicans have to at least give the impression they are ready to deal. That is how it worked in the 90s when Gingrich forced Clinton to work on welfare and the budget…in the end the republicans were popular in their own party for shrinking government and getting the budget balanced. The OUTGOING democrat president got credit for it all and left on a high note…then we beat his running mate for the office. We cannot be the party of no. We cannot be the party that waits to lead from behind.
    A) this also means that republicans have to be ready to deal on taxes and military cuts for the ultimate return of entitlement cuts and balanced budgets. You come to the table with a plan to allow for the raising of XYZ taxes and ABC cuts to military spending BUT before any cent of that happens we get 123 cuts to entitlement programs and a guarantee of a balanced budget not in 20 years but within the term of Barack Obama.

    • Kevin Paradine
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      1. Sadly I agree. He made some huge mistakes as President. The handling of Iraq pre and post invasion, Katrina, and not bailing out Lehman. He should have ordered Paulson and Bernanke to save Lehman. He had the authority. It would have at least punted the financial crisis into Obama’s administration.

      2. Women are not stupid! They vote in their own perceived self-interest. it’s the job of the Republican party to make that self-interest congruent with it. Mouthing off about social issues is a great way to not get anywhere with them.

      3. Republicans will win the black vote when blacks are convinced it is in their self-interest to vote for the Republican party. As long as we provide shelter for racists, it’ll never happen. If you question whether we provide said shelter, look around a bit. It’s much less of a problem than 30 or 40 years ago, but it’s still hiding in dark corners. Ask a black Republican, maybe you’ll believe their honest answer about latent racism. We must expel these elements from the party very publicly.

      4. Hispanics aren’t one constituency. You have different types of people all called Hispanic with differing motivations. Conflating Cubans with Puerto Ricans with Mexicans with Peruvians…you’ll get nowhere fast, that way. Then, inside each group of expatriates are people from differing backgrounds. Class differences amongst Cubans are notable. Mexico is a very diverse country also. We must understand and embrace all of the Latin peoples to encourage them to join our coalition.

      5. Romney was milquetoast. A big nothing burger.

      6. Agree.

      • Posted November 9, 2012 at 3:51 pm | Permalink

        2) when you believe the only important issue out there is birth control or abortion. Or you cannot see through obvious insulting pandering by the democrats to you….you are stupid.
        the same way that right wingers are stupid when they buy the BS line that their religious freedom is under attack. Or buy the garbage about Obama not being a citizen. pR BELIEVE that there is any way a president can “ban abortion”. You are stupid.

        Women make up 54% of the electorate…when you are the majority of the country voting and what you are voting on are absolute non-sensical non-truths…you are stupid.

        This all boils down to what someone said in another post…the GOP role needs to be about messaging and EDUATION…of the elecotate and our own candidates. But the Tea Party also has to realize that simply hijacking the system to install your own, unwinnable candidate….is not a WIN. Todd Akin was NEVER going to win Missouri, even if he had not made that statement. He was the ONE candidate in the primary running that was polling only about 2 points ahead of McCaskill instead of double digits liek the other two. She still would have beaten him by the same margin our democrat governor and state wide office office holders won by. the Tea party bought her ads he was the only consetrvative, bought his nutball stance of abortion and had no clue who they were voting for.

        The Tea Party WAS a great idea when it was small government grass roots people wanting to reduce the size and scope of government. It has been taken over by right wing religious zealots who singularly care only about banning gays, banning abortion and banning contraception.

        We had Game 7 of the World Series on the line, bases loaded, tie ballgame and we walked off the field for forefeited the championship to Obama and the Democrats. McCain got SMASHED….ROMNEY gave the game away.

      • Kevin Paradine
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

        Keep believing women are stupid and we will fail again in 2016. People vote in their perceived self-interest. Figuring out what that perception is, and turning it to your benefit is the essence of politics. You should listen to Bill Clinton, he’ll school you on this.

      • allthingsgeography1
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 4:03 pm | Permalink

        ” If you question whether we provide said shelter, look around a bit. It’s much less of a problem than 30 or 40 years ago, but it’s still hiding in dark corners. Ask a black Republican, maybe you’ll believe their honest answer about latent racism. ”

        Black Democrat here…but sadly, what you say is true. And yes, I’ve known black folks I care about refer to Black Republicans as “Uncle Toms” even though I know of respectable black Republicans (former Congressman J.C. Watts for example…I always enjoyed his perspectives on the issues when he used to be a guest commentator on CNN…and of course Colin Powell). This disgust of Republicans by blacks is simply because of the perceived racism. Not be a child who directly saw the civil rights movement, I’m less ambivalent towards Republicans and have voted Republican here and there seeing their benefit in government at certain points, even if I vote Dem at other parts of the ticket. My choice not to be a Republican is based more on genuine political difference, not racism or racism. But, I know my history and I know that if African-Americans want a place in the party, the perception of racial elements must be purged publicly as you state. If it is and Republicans go into the black community and fight for things on multiple fronts, even in the face of skepticism and not just do window dressing and showing off a few black people the party happens to have to show it likes diversity, its diversity will actually grow. Believe it or not, there is more conservatism in the black community than people realize…economic and very prominently social. There are votes for the taking, but work has to be done to get them. Black demographics are still growing, but just slower and their vote will be important as the white population’s share of the total population continues to fall over the coming decades.

      • Kevin Paradine
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

        In my line of work (Army contractor, deploying and operating closely with units) I run into a lot of black people from the gamut of our country – from California to the NYC area people that I am most familiar with. I know the conservatism of which you speak. I also know that we could get the votes if we could stop scaring people or making them hate us. We’ll get demagogued regardless of the reality. It is how well that screed matches up with the reality that will determine its effectiveness. Right now, we are easily pigeonholed, regardless of the forward steps over the years. We can do much, much better.

        I’m not sure that black demographics will change much in relation to the population as a whole, seems that the black population is decreasing right along with the white population when you get down to it. That said, I don’t see how leaving 13% of the population on the table somehow is a winner for the Republican Party. We won’t ever get 90%, but 40% could be doable.

  22. Prescient11
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:30 pm | Permalink | Reply

    As to 4), hispanics are 10% of the voting population in 2004. And 10% in 2012.

    Yes, we definitely need better outreach. That will happen in time.

    Blacks love ghettos apparently, because nothing has changed to help them and they blindly vote democrat every time. We need outreach there as well, but I am astonished that the party of Lincoln and civil rights cannot dent that slavish support to the demorat party.

    WHAT DO DEMOCRATS DO FOR BLACKS. NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!

    If anything it is worse for them. One of these days that will sink in.

  23. Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I agree with the Ben Howe’s. In fact, that is one of the main reasons why I started my blog last month. It bothers me that the party that emphasizes freedom, protecting the sanctity of life, and providing economic opportunity for everyone is perceived as being hateful and uncaring. I am also tired of people on both sides screaming at each other without ever listening. We have real disagreements, and we should have vigorous debates about our policy differences. When we resort to name-calling and ad hominem attacks, however, we don’t accomplish anything other than making ourselves feel better (and likely alienating some of the very people we need to persuade). Being respectful doesn’t mean that you can’t take a strong stand, and looking for areas of agreement doesn’t demonstrate weakness. I would also add that internal divisions in the party don’t do us any good. I want as many people in the party as possible, and we can’t have that and have ideological purity at the same time. A moderate (or even liberal) vote for Republican candidates is one more for us and one fewer for the Democratic candidates.

  24. Angelina Joseph
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

    “That means republicans must abolish the words abortion and birth control from their vocabulary. When asked about abortion..you say simply I am not personally a fan of abortion but it is the constitutional law of the land and that is the way it will stay. When asked about birth control, you say simply my personal beliefs are to be against birth control but they are legal, widely available and paid for under Obamacare and that is the way they will remain. PERIOD.”

    Agree 100 %

    • MikeN
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

      That’s what cost you the election to begin with, was Mitt ROmney’s staying away from social issues.

    • Prescient11
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The problem is that they will not that go. They will ask about what kind of supreme court justice you would appoint.

      One needs to develop more than a rank, name, serial number argument.

      It is simple. Divorce policy from personal. I am prolife, but I believe the states should decide such an important issue, not the unelected judiciary. We need to take power from government and give it back to the people. End of story.

  25. housebroken dad
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I believe everyone is overreacting. Way overreacting. The posters here, the pundits that write the articles, John Boehner. Everyone. Look, two years ago, R’s won 63 seats in the house and made gains in the senate. Did Dems think or believe they had to change their entire ideology? No. Why are we thinking we need to do this? O won by a much closer margin than 4 years ago signifying that many voters were displeased by his performance. Why they didn’t turn around and vote for Romney has to be a trust issue. The most telling exit poll result was the answer to the question of who do you blame for the current economic mess. Overwhelming majority answered Bush, not Obama. And he received 95% of those votes. That was the key. Obama had more people vote for him that answered Bush to that question than Romney did from people who answered Obama.
    Everything is cyclical. Back in 1981, Democrat was a dirty word and it took quite a few years to erase that stigma. Right now, you could say the same thing for the word Republican. At the national level anyway. It’s all about trust. And we are losing the trust game when you send out candidates who can’t even talk about abortion without offending women. Akin and Mourdock’s comments had a trickle down effect (and upwards to Romney) towards the other senate candidates and that’s why we lost N Dakota and Montana and probably Mass. Heck, we are lucky the Dem candidate had ethics issues in Nevada or we would have lost that one too.
    Conservatives here know in four years the economy won’t be any better off and we’ll be up over 20 trillion in debt. The Bush blame will have subsided although I’m sure Dems will still run on that issue. Trust is going to be the numero uno in 2016.

    • Kevin Paradine
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Permalink | Reply

      You’re in a bubble. We lost, badly. We only won in 2010 because the Democrats didn’t show up. Some of us see clearly that in the future, things are just going to get worse and very few 2010s are in our future.

  26. Kevin Paradine
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Permalink | Reply

    http://lethoperise.com/2012/11/07/grieving-and-hope-after-the-election/

    All those saying to double down on social conservative intolerance – need to read that.

    • Derclaw86
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

      This is an excellent article. I would strongly encourage anyone who is a conservative, Christian, or both to read it. Again, thanks for the excellent post!

    • Angelina Joseph
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Great article !

  27. Derclaw86
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Another helpful solution would be to reform our primary system. The following changes should be made:

    (1) Get rid of caucuses. They exist supposedly for party building efforts. However, all they really do is make it more difficult for people to vote. As a result, only the most ideological persons tend to show up and participate. This causes our candidates to spout narrow ideological base messages instead of developing a message that can resonate with a growing number of voters. By making it difficult for non-ideological people to participate, it hurts our ability to numerically expand our party and our base.

    (2) Get rid of the early, single state primaries. I know the IA caucus, the NH primary, followed by the SC primary are all quaint traditions in our politics. However, the purpose of primaries should be to begin the process of developing a viable coalition that can ultimately win over the country. It should not be used as an ideological litmus test, as the current system does. In 2008, Rudy Giuliani was well known, respected, and well financed. He had broad appeal, especially in the Northeast, where the GOP is often shut-out. However, he refused to play the single state game (avoided IA,NH, and SC altogether) and his campaign foundered as a result. In 2012, Rick Santorum was a nobody. He was kicked out of his Senate seat in 2006 by a large margin. He had no money or organization and his appeal was extremely narrow and limited (to the anti-abortion crowd). Yet, he became a political factor by energizing a few thousand evangelicals in western Iowa and winning that state’s caucus. Over the next few months he was allowed to drive the GOP primary debate into all sorts of divisive social issues. This from a guy who couldn’t even win his own state’s Senate seat. Instead, we should have a national or regional primary system. This way candidates have to demonstrate their ability to organize and win over large, diverse groups of people, across many states, instead of having to stimulate or appease only the ideological base elements.

    (3) Limit debate participation to only the top four candidates according to national polls. This should be a process where serious candidates, with wide national appeal, can discuss relevant national issues. It should not be like the current process where fringe candidates crowd the stage and make goofy and inflammatory remarks in order to get attention. Having fewer people will cause the candidates to shape their remarks with the goal of selling, presenting, and defending their ideas, instead of trying to come up with the best empty one-liner.

    (4) Create a balance between proportional delegate allotment and winner-take-all. Both processes have their strengths and weaknesses. In 2008, John McCain was able to win the SC and MO primaries with all their delegates because other candidates split up the conservative vote. He probably would have been handily defeated by a single conservative opponent. Thus, he was handsomely rewarded even though he won only a minority of those state’s primary votes. Proportional allotment would address this. In 2012, Rick Santorum was able to agonizingly prolong the GOP primary because he was still winning delegates even though Mitt Romney was starting to blow him out in the bigger state primaries. Instead, proportional allocation is changed to winner-take-all if a candiate wins 50% plus one of the state’s primary votes. This discourages obvious losers from needlessly dragging out the process and allows the winner to focus on beating the Dems. Some states already do this. We also need to get rid of state conventions, super delegates, caucuses, and any other process for awarding delegates beyond the primary. Primary voters should be the only people that decide our delegates.

    Hopefully, with these reforms, the GOP primary can be a place where candidates build themselves up, rather than tear each other apart, for the amusement of the Dems. It will allow serious national candidates to compete, instead being a circus for narrow minded crack-pots. It will reward those with the broadest, national appeal, instead of those with most intense, narrow ideological appeal. Finally, instead of being destructive, our primary can be a constructive process for building up the winning campaign of the next President of the United States.

    • Kevin Paradine
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Agree entirely. Don’t know if the RNC or state parties will agree to diluting their influence so willingly, though.

    • MikeN
      Posted November 10, 2012 at 7:50 am | Permalink | Reply

      Santorum stayed alive because he was winning state primaries, and Romney was sometimes coming in third. If Giuliani was so strong in the NorthEast, then why didn’t he contest New Hampshire? A Republican who can’t win New Hampshire probably shouldn’t be running.

      • MikeN
        Posted November 10, 2012 at 7:51 am | Permalink

        And also, if you can’t get voters in South Carolina, how do you plan to get similar voters to turn out for you in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc?

  28. MikeN
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:28 pm | Permalink | Reply

    People are freaking out over a few percentage points of Hispanics. Simply put, the number is higher because Democrats turnout game was excellent, and Republicans was bad, so the Hispanic number is lowered for Republicans based on this. Romney probably did as well with Hispanics as McCain if you account for lowered turnout.

    • Kevin Paradine
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 1:45 pm | Permalink | Reply

      No, people are freaking out because theoretically, the white vote could have worked out for Romney and didn’t, because of the poor turnout. The continuing demo changes will result in there being insufficient whites to throw a Republican candidate over the top in 2016 and beyond, even if we got the turnout we wanted for Romney.

      You are predicating your assumptions on the past. It’s over, you can’t win an election in this country anymore with just whites.

  29. PJBRIEN
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 2:22 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I have a thought – why don’t all the social liberals (“but I’m a fiscal conservative – really”) masquerading as conservatives give up the ship and jump to the other side. This way we won’t have to put up with your pathetic whining about those mean conservatives who won’t bend over every time the Sandra Fluke’s of the world demand something new (and free) to stick in one of her orifices.

    I know a lot of single liberal women and they’d rather be dead than vote for a Republican. It is as much cultural (Republicans are just not cool) as it is political.

    Focus on getting the R’s to the polls in the short term and the financial wreck we’re heading into will wake up the rest of the morons soon enough.

  30. Mike
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 2:52 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I have 3 suggestions:
    We need a rush limbaugh type show in SPANISH!
    Marco Rubio is running. You don’t go to Iowa on November 17th if you’re not running. We should all support him early and often.
    We need to make the issue of school choice and vouchers the central issue of the next presidential campaign. Everyone hates the public school system as currently constructed. Watch Waiting for Superman. The Democrats are screwed on this issue because of the teachers unions. While addressing this issue the republicans can not come accross as enemies of the public schools or teachers. Don’t blame teachers or the teachers union but rather blame the failed system and offer a concrete plan to fix it. That’s how we win hearts and minds.

  31. jvnvch
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 3:27 pm | Permalink | Reply

    For what it’s worth, in hindsight I can see all the things that led to Romney’s defeat, and it’s clear to me most of them were out of his control, unfortunately. I knew there were demographic changes that would work to his disadvantage, but Romney could do nothing about those, obviously. I knew the Bush legacy was a heavy burden, but there was nothing Romney could do about that, also obviously. I knew most of the press were solidly against the Romney candidacy, but he could do nothing about that either, obviously. I think Romney could have overcome all those burdens, but then he had more burdens added by political idiots in his own party, such as Akin and Mourdock saying incredibly stupid and indefensible things that apparently frightened young women and others into voting Democratic. Even despite all that, I think Romney still could have won. Both Rasmussen Reports and Gallup had Romney ahead in their national tracking polls by four to five points very late in October, but then Sandy hit, President Obama got his photo ops with Christie, Christie slobbered praise all over the president, and that was the straw that broke the camel’s back. I think against all odds, Romney all but had the election won, and events at the end which were entirely out of his control snatched the victory away.

    • JGS
      Posted November 9, 2012 at 6:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

      +1 — let’s not overreact to this and change our policies to become more like the Democratic Party.

      • jvnvch
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 10:00 pm | Permalink

        I probably shouldn’t be making any more political predictions, but I truly believe the 2014 election will result in a huge win for the Republicans, if they maintain their principles. I say that partly based on history, but also because I think these next two years are going to be extremely rough, and it will be tough for the Democrats to pull the wool over so many eyes next time. I don’t know about the 2016 presidential election. The Democrats clearly have a growing demographic advantage that comes to the fore in presidential election years.

  32. ShockandAwe
    Posted November 9, 2012 at 3:36 pm | Permalink | Reply

    And then we get to today when after weeks of defending the CIA’s response in Libya against this pathetic Obama administration, suddenly Petraeus resigns because of an affair after 37 years of marriage. This sounds like something straight out of John Grisham’s The Firm!!! I am telling you and I am not a conspiracy kook, but I put NOTHING PAST THESE CHICAGO CRONIES Axelrod, Plouffe and Jarrett. You think I’m kidding??? You dissent too much against this administration inside or outside and you are disgraced, smeared and ruined. I still say something happened between Debates 2 and 3 that caused Romney to pull his punches. The more people push Benghazi, the uglier this is going to get.

    • MikeN
      Posted November 10, 2012 at 7:53 am | Permalink | Reply

      Look, the story in Benghazi is something like CIA was smuggling weapons to Syria via Jihadist groups, and this was more important than the ambassador or consulate. They told the Seals to stand down and they didn’t and got themselves killed in the process.

  33. Angelina Joseph
    Posted November 10, 2012 at 8:34 am | Permalink | Reply

    Chicago Thugs + Union Thugs + Freebies Takers + Liberal women + 80? % minorities + MSM (did i miss anything else) AGAINST Romney/Ryan. Considering that, we did pretty good closing the gap. There is hope. God save our country!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: