A Conservative Sellout Is Not the Solution

Many of you reading this probably felt a kick in the gut when the election results came in. Filled with optimism by Republican pollsters predicting a landslide victory, the outcome came as an even bigger shock.

Losing is never fun or easy and can lead to a temporary state of shell shock in which bad decisions get made. Some in the Republican establishment are now operating in that state of shock and proposing to dismantle every conservative position in the hopes of appearing more moderate in the next election. That is a futile and destructive course of action.

The Republican Party ran two moderates, whose liberal credentials were acknowledged by the media, and lost two presidential elections. Neither Senator McCain nor Governor Romney would have been described as extreme until they ran for president. The same fate will meet any Republican candidate, no matter how moderate or centrist.

Running a candidate who signs off on tax hikes, amnesty for illegal aliens, gay marriage and abortion will not win an election against a Democrat who already stands for all those things. Abandoning fiscal and social conservatism will leave the Republican Party with nothing to offer to the public except its moderate willingness to abandon its principles for other principles that poll better.

To understand why a sellout is not the solution, all we have to do is compare how the Democrats and the Republicans approached the 2012 elections.

The Democrats turned to their base, offering special favors to narrow constituencies, from a unilateral DREAM Act to gay marriage to mandatory abortion coverage. These positions were all extreme and some of them were unpopular, but they brought out the affected groups in large numbers.

The Republican Party neglected its base and rushed to the center in pursuit of the voters that it didn’t have. Romney made an effective case for being the one to fix the economy, but only in generalities, while Obama successfully made the case to groups within his base that he was going to take care of their special interests. While Romney won the macro argument, Obama took the micro and in a low turnout election used it to win.

In response, the Republican establishment seeks to run even further to the center, even though it’s a center defined wholly by the ascendancy of the left, which pulls the center to the left every time it asserts new extremist positions. The only outcome of this strategy is to give the left more uncontested victories while encouraging voters who might have come out for the Republican Party to stay home once again.

The Republican Party has two choices. It can chase after the center, with amnesty and tax cuts in hand, or it can move to the right in order to redefine where the center is. The second way is the path that Reagan and Gingrich took. The first way is what cost Republicans a second election against Obama.

Let’s strip away ideology for a moment and ask the simple question that every voter going to the polls asked. That question was not, as the pollsters put it, “Who do I trust more on the economy?” or “Who showed more leadership based on last night’s debate?” but “Who is going to look out for my economic interests?”

Minority voters voted with their food stamps and race cards. They voted for affirmative action and government jobs. These were votes based on economic interest. Considering the catastrophic toll of the Obama years on the African-American income, it was a shortsighted vote, but Madoff’s clients also thought that they were acting in their own economic interest. And something for nothing looks even more tempting in a bad economy.

But they weren’t the only ones voting with their wallets. The Julia vote came out for free birth control. The gay vote was there for partner benefits. And there were plenty of non-minorities also looking to protect their government benefits, their union jobs and the other touchstones of their economic life. They came out for Obama, not because they had any remaining enthusiasm for him, but because his extremist campaign had given him credibility as a man who would defend his base. A man who would stand up for them.

The Romney campaign was unable to bring out as large a base that was as deeply committed to its own besieged economic interests. Small business owners flocked to Romney and his rallies revealed a depth of passion for free enterprise, but there just weren’t enough people who felt the same way. There weren’t enough workers who felt that Romney would bring back manufacturing, not enough small business owners who really believed that the end of the red tape parade had come and not enough of the unemployed who thought that it was in their economic best interest to vote for Romney. There just weren’t enough voters with that same sense of personal investment in Romney’s agenda that there were in Obama’s agenda.

It’s easy to dismiss them as fools, but that cathartic reaction does not accomplish anything. As any good businessman knows, to rack up sales, you need more than just a good product, you also need good marketing. Cursing the customer because the sales aren’t there accomplishes nothing and is defeatist. The only way to move a product is to convince customers that they need this product and that they can’t live without it.

This is where conservatives are now. We have a great product and lousy marketing. And we have three choices.

We can make our product more like the one sold by our competitors in the hopes of winning over their customers, even though it makes our product indistinguishable from theirs.

We can increase our customer loyalty program and our sales to the people who already buy our product.

Or we can try to move into territories that don’t buy what either side is selling because they don’t see how it serves their economic interests.

Those last two options are not mutually exclusive. However pursuing the first option cuts us off from the second option and makes the third option trickier because moderation is not a selling point to people who already believe that both parties are the same bunch of crooks with no principles. All it does is confirm their thesis.

A political party has to stand for something besides winning elections. There has to be a reason for people to come out and support it and being non-threatening and unprincipled is not a reason; it is an election strategy thought up by consultants who understand chess better than they understand people.

In a tough economic climate, victories go to the candidate that can make a compelling case for the economic interests of the individual, rather than the national economic interest. That is a hard fact of human nature, which is survival oriented, and in this election Democrats understood it and Republicans did not.

The Republican Party does not have an image problem; it has a constituency problem. The GOP can either find a constituency and stand by it, or it can cheat on its constituency at every turn by running for the center. The Democrats won by standing by their constituency. Maybe it’s time that the Republican Party considered following their example.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Mary Sue

    3 million or so Republicans didn't stay home because Romney was too right wing, I know that for sure.

    • Fabio Juliano

      Right you are. I didn't stay home, but I stood in line for an hour and a half to cast a write-in ballot for Rick Santorum. That was because of Romney said in his 1994 debate with Ted Kennedy.


        Voting for Santorum, Johnson, etc. – anyone other than Romney – meant voting for Obama. That's who you voted for – Obama. To spite Romney and those of us who nominated him, you voted for Obama. Remember that, when you lose your job and/or your health insurance, and don't come looking for sympathy, because you deserve none.

        • 4_Constitution

          That's exactly right. I voted for Romney too and the 3 million who didn't vote for Romney voted to destroy the Republic they claim to love.

          • johnnywoods

            I voted for Romney because I despise Obummer and wanted him out. I would have voted for a billygoat as long as he opposed Obummer.

    • umustbkidding

      Romney isn't right wing by any standard. No right winger would have made Romney Care. I don't care if it's the feds, the state you live in or your local government. NO government entity has the right to take our freedoms away. Unless you're so blind that you don't notice that it's your freedom that you're loosing.

  • Looking4Sanity

    The GOP wouldn't have seen millions of its base stay home on election day if it had not sanctioned Romney stealing the GOP Primary race. Here in VA, our choices were stripped from us by a Party technicality. Our only choices were Ron Paul or Mitt Romney. I personally contacted both the Governor's office and the State Attorney General's office about this issue.

    I was told by the Governor's office that Governor McDonnell "couldn't do anything about it".

    Attorney General Cuccinelli's office was even more petulant. "We WON'T do anything about it".

    Both these men are leading Republicans in the State. It is preposterous to think they have no influence in Party politics in their own State!

    I have also heard anecdotal evidence that this occurred in many other States as well. Do the GOP Party elites really believe that this is going to be acceptable to their base? If so, they will wither and die on the vine just as Rush Limbaugh predicted they would if Romney failed to win election. It's time for the "elite" idiots to take a seat and let the base run the show for a few cycles. Otherwise we should start digging an elephant sized grave.

    • A 22 Year Old Man

      Totally agree. Romney was losing the primaries for months. It certainly feels like he was forced on us. I call shenanigans.

      • Demetrius M

        I think as time goes by, those of us right of center need to pressure (yet again) the leadership of the GOP.
        Their lack of support to TEA oriented candidates is disgusting and if this continues into 2016, I suppose I won't be voting at all. Why waste my time when NONE of the candidates are even tolerable in my eyes? I hate contemplating the thought of not voting, but if a manufactured election is what we get, why bother?

      • Jim_C

        Romney was never "losing the primaries for months;" he was content to bide his time as each goofy new Flavor of the Week lost its savor. He was the only candidate who was seriously dedicated to running for president, and his success in the primaries had everything to do with that.

        • Looking4Sanity

          Yes. He was SO dedicated that he gamed the system and rigged the game by stealing our God given Right of choice! It was declared ILLEGAL to write in a candidate for the GOP Primary! Now, try telling me the fish doesn't stink from the head down!

          • 4_Constitution

            I remember Obama saying a year ago that he wanted to run against Romney. And what happened here in VA regarding the primary was unforgivable.

            I think there were 13 states that only had Romney and Paul listed?

          • 4_Constitution

            And get rid of Michael Steele as head of the GOP.

          • brentonjoe

            WOW, that shows again how much you know about your own party.
            It seems to me that Priebus is the head………………..

          • Looking4Sanity

            No one likes a stalker, BJ.

          • 4_Constitution

            BJ…Ha, that's a great nickname for him since he plays over there with all the queers.

          • brentonjoe

            No answer? Blushing?

          • http://twitter.com/surfcitysocal2 @surfcitysocal2

            Let's not forget that at the convention, Romney and his cronies, with the rules change, virtually eliminated any possibility of any grassroots candidate getting traction in the future. Romney undercut and undermined conservatives at every turn, despite his ridiculous claim of being "severely" conservative. I have no doubt, that had he won, he would have betrayed conservatives.

          • 4_Constitution

            I think the Ron Paul people had something to do with both the rules change and for us losing.

            They sucked their thumbs and didn't vote for Romney who could have had us on a balanced budget in 8 years.

          • Looking4Sanity

            During the primaries (especially towards the end) it was widely speculated that Romney and Paul were in cahoots with one another. You could actually see it in the last couple of debates. So much of this kind of crap just falls through the cracks or gets swept under the rug. No one can remember it all and they just keep flinging it at us every day until eventually we lose track of the lies due to the sheer volume of them.

            The skids are greased and we're all on the downhill slide.

      • johnnywoods

        I am still P.O.ed about not getting to vote for Cain.

    • http://twitter.com/surfcitysocal2 @surfcitysocal2

      Robert Stacy McCain, a conservative writer/reporter and Santorum supporter, pointed out that in the midst of the primary battles, Romney's wins and delegate counts were inflated, so as to lend credence to the big, fat "electability" lie. At the same time, the GOP establishment refused to acknowledge the fact that the states Romney was winning so "decisively" were the same states that Obama would win anyway in the general–which was exactly what happened. The Republican party had its head up its behind and was determined to foist the annointed down our throats whether we liked it or not. 4-Constitution is right, Obama wanted to run against Romney because they had his number. And big surprise..with the results, the GOP establishment is now saying we need to moderate the message. Boehner can't wait to cave. They haven't learned their lesson. Contrary to what Demetrius says, the Republican party is too far gone. Appealing to the leadership won't make a difference. Hello, Whig party. (I was a Bachmann supporter, by the way.)

      • 4_Constitution

        Would it even help to email Boehner?

        • Looking4Sanity

          Boner is a RINO plain and simple. He'd sell his own mother if it would benefit him personally. This is how it always happens when governments collapse. The ones in power start hoarding and manipulating things to their personal benefit, all the while hiding the truth from their constituents as long as possible. They instinctively know that if the truth came out that their lives wouldn't be worth a wooden nickel.


      That's paranoid nonsense. Newt Gingrich's campaign staff missed a deadline to get on the ballot in VA – it was their incompetence, not any skullduggery, that left you with the choice of Paul or Romney. If write-ins weren't allowed, too bad – if a candidate's organization is so poor it misses vital filing deadlines, it's too poor to beat Obama.

      Second, even if you didn't like what happened, you had an obligation to vote for Romney over Obama. I'm really fed up with sulking malcontents who are still re-fighting the primary because they didn't like Romney instead of helping us figure out how to win in 2016. Those of you who stayed home must share the blame for Obama's victory. You haven't "made a point" or "taught any of us a lesson", you simply helped elect the worst president of modern times (and maybe all time) get elected. You need to grow up and stop throwing temper tantrums just because your guy didn't win the primary.

      Also, even if your guy (whoever he was) had won the primary, he would have lost to Obama. Like it or not, Romney was the strongest candidate Republicans had this year. Santorum and Gingrich had too many negatives – they would have fallen prey to the Democratic attack machine for sure since even Romney lost to it.

      • Looking4Sanity

        Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

        Keep your insipid head in the sand and your fat butt in the air. It will make a great target for the corrupt bureaucrats you trust so blindly.

        Also…I don't need an idiot such as you to tell me what my "obligations" are. Of all the different varieties of fools on this planet, I think I hate your kind the most.

    • Asher

      There was a bad taste in people's mouth, the way the Establishment GOP handled this situation…There should be younger candidates sought to run for these elections with a flare for getting things done! Romney is a good businessman with know how, but he just didn't take Obama on in the last months of the campaign, especially on Benghazi. Conservative values are not out of style, even for Hispanics and blacks, (the big difference is buying off the populace.) How do you compete with Santa Clause… Where are the values and integrity..work ethics, and Capitalism that made this country Great?

      • Looking4Sanity

        “There should be younger candidates sought to run for these elections with a flare for getting things done!”Exactly how young did you have in mind? You realize, of course, that there is a minimum age requirement for the office established in the Constitution at the time of its original ratification. Romney's ability to get things done was never in question by anyone. His polling numbers on that specific issue were far above Obama's (two to one, in fact) just weeks before the elections.One of Romney's mistakes was in assuming people would be informed and intelligent when it came to Benghazi. It was based on that assumption that he didn't press the issue. It was all about placating the “independents and undecideds” by appearing like “Mr. Nice Guy”. It was actually a very smart move…except for that fatal miscalculation. So, in a way, you COULD say he was “out of touch with the average American”. He gave them credit for far more intelligence than they actually possessed.

  • Gamaliel

    santorum was the candidate you want and he lost to Santorum. All you need to do to know who lost the elections is to ask people why they voted for Obama. The people I spoke with were angry at Republicans for cutting and for eliminating jobs. For example Gov Christie fired teachers so all the teachers vote against him. Nevermind that they could have all kept their jobs if they had accepted lower salaries and nevermind that there was no money to pay them. Obama promised to hire teachers. Nevermind that he has to borrow and print money in order to do so they'll vote for him.
    The Republicans spend very little time warning about the consequence of borrowing and printing,perhaps because voters don't like the bearer of bad news. I think they should have done it anyway. He should have told the Latinos that there will be no jobs in America if the economy collapses I think Romney if he wanted to be positive should have said to the American people "I have a vision of an America where those who are on food stamps today are rich tomorrow". He should have taken advantage of the plutocrat label that Obama was trying to pin on him.

    • Jim_C

      Hey, I voted for Santorum in my state's primary! I wanted that kooky dude up there, not Romney!

    • Asher

      The electorate are an example of the lack of values and morality by the people in this country today….Abortion, homosexuality, stealing, drugs, violence, and lawlessness do not make a society prosperous, or stable!

  • southwood

    Perceptive article. But there is something else, a consequence of a conservative party moving to the left and that is that there would never be a decisive vote in their favour again. That is what has happened here in Britain. After the stunning Tony Blair New Labour landslide victories in the 1997 and 2001, the Conservative Party who were already moving somewhat to the left, moved gradually to a position where there is virtually no difference between them and the Labour Party, in order to woo voters . On the EU, diversity, multi culturalism and SSM, for example, there are only some slight marginal variations, so unremarkable that people in the UK now say there's no difference between the two main parties. Sure, the Labour Party lost the last election but only narrowly, and that was because of the ineptitude of Prime Minister Brown. People just sort of protest voted against Labour. There were no great differences in policy although many conservative voters still deluded themselves that there might be. The election resulted in the Conservatives needing the co-operation of the third UK party, the Liberal Democrats, to form a coalition. The Lib. Dems. ( and another small party ) could just as easily formed one with the Labour Party. They too are virtually indistinguishable from the Conservatives and Labour. So, if Labour wins the next election, as seems likely, they will probably have a small majority, and will form another coalition with the Lib. Dems. True conservatives (small "c") have in large part given up on the political process in the UK. We are left without any real alternative party. UKIP are really not making enough electoral progress and are often portrayed as extremists, even fascists. We are now overwhelmed by political correctness, creeping Islamisation and 75% of UK laws are made by the EU which takes a net excess of contributions EVERY year from the UK.

    Take a tip, America, don't do what the UK Conservative Party did. Don't sell out. The GOP may regain power by doing that but it will be at way too high a cost.

    • boon doggle

      They sold, and they still lost. In that may lie their salvation. Unless they want to hire the likes of Anita Dunn to help them get back into power. Who is she? She's one of Barry's, who pledged eternal love for chairman mao, and next appeared helping call me dave drag his sorry axx over the line in the last UK election. You can package up a dodgy product, and ramp up the advertising, or you can look for the fundamental flaws, and fix them, and let the product sell itself. Or you can chuck the whole thing in the junk bin and start again. We all know what the MSM like, including a race that appears to go right to the line to keep the ad revenue rolling in. That's a dangerous game, unless you have another way of guaranteeing the result. Barry was home and hosed long before the deluded Mitster hit the last. Leaving everything in a heap on the field isn't good enough. Nor is immaculate conception, it would seem. So look out for same old same old next time round the track, with Hilary showing Condi a clean pair of heals, with a little help from her friends. As has been noted, the Repub's are one election cycle off the pace, with no ability to change the nature of the game.

    • http://twitter.com/surfcitysocal2 @surfcitysocal2

      Thanks, southwood for a great post. The outlook in Britain doesn't look good. I doubt Republicans will listen to your wise words, however.

      • southwood

        Thanks. It's dire here in the UK. But it looks as if the once great USA is imploding too. The last great bastion of freedom among the nations going down. I can hardly believe it. Yep, the Republicans will probably start moving to the left.


      Thanks for the warning. I've long considered the fate of Britain's Tory Party a cautionary tale for us conservatives here in the U.S.

  • The Truth

    As it has been said before, the fringe attacks the center, not the extremes. The Republicans lost because they promised the same slide into a surveillance superstate with a lousy healthcare plan and loss of sovereignty, more high fuel prices and new war, and they promised it with a meaner face and a tirade openly ridiculing 47% of the public. That was just their “centrism” talking. They also discarded Robert’s Rules of Order, heated on the delegate count, promised to abandon Ohio, and broke the fingers and hips of one of the Republican chairmen because real voting occurred. That was the extremism. Mr. Greenfield’s Ziocon fringe is merrily advising the Republicans to avoid the “center” and avoid the values of the founding: limited government, low taxation, minimal wars, and a strong commonwealth burgeoning with civic freedom. He wants a party more like Likud and less like Kadima, even as Likud is combining itself with more extremist fringe parties. The problem is, this is the United States, not Israel. We don’t want it.

  • HiPlainsDrifter

    If Democrats can win a majority of voters, buy offering food stamps and obama phones, while
    at the same time responsible for high unemployment, high fuel/food prices, no growth, murder
    in Benghazi, and general malaise, then the psychological problems of voters, run too deep and wide to fix
    in gentle prodding way.
    The coming uncivil war will determined if we are to be the United States of food stamps or paychecks….

  • BLJ

    I think Romney (and the Republicans in general) needed to make the election about Obama's character. Go after his shady past and associations. Ask him directly about why no one has ever seen his college transcripts.

    In other words play dirty just like the Dems always do. Give them a taste of their own medicine. My guess is they gag on it.

    This being said, I have no doubt that this election was stolen. With either lax or no voting laws it was easy pickings for the jackals who call themselves Democrats.

    • Jim_C

      Please, BLJ–go after Obama's character? Like it hadn't been done? We didn't hear about Wright and Ayers? We didn't hear about his drug use (from his autobiog)? We didn't hear about ACORN? We didn't endure the dumbest people this country has ever produced going after his birth certificate?

      The college transcript thing: what would be the worst thing they would find? That he got a "C" in Women's Studies at Columbia? Dude made it through Harvard Law despite not having a daddy who went there, too. At any rate, if I were him, I'd never release them–they make too many of the right people crazy!

      It didn't work, man. And the reason it didn't work? It was a load of crap!

      Also, don't be coy about playing dirty and politics. You think Karl Rove got to where he is because he's the king of the ice cream social?

      • BLJ

        If you think Obama has ever been properly vetted than can I sell you the Brooklyn Bridge? The MSM has covered up for this creep ever since he came on the scene. And hear I thought you were an intelligent person.

        • Jim_C

          So the Clinton political machine, the Republican political machine, the FBI and the Secret Service have all been somehow magically put off their duty? How does that work? He's not that good-looking!

      • southwood

        Jim, you are wrong. The birthers are right. If your president is ineligible for the job then he is an imposter of the first order and should be impeached. And what BLJ is suggesting is not playing dirty; it's playing FAIR, but going for the knock out. No need to play dirty. Anyway, the Dems have got that down to a fine art, with plenty of help from the MSM and the inane clowns like Cher. The failure of Romney on Benghazi exposed his ineptitude, or at least, that of his advisors.

  • clarespark

    Many of these comments are bitter that a true conservative was not chosen by the Republican Party. Do you really think that there are enough of you? Why pursue the culture wars when you already have the First Amendment? Why make social issues more important than fiscal ones? I wrote about the futility of the culture wars and their wrong-headedness here: http://clarespark.com/2010/01/02/jottings-on-the-…. Last night O'Reilly hoped that "the Hispanic vote" will bring more conservatives into the American polity, blaming "secularists" for all our ills. Do you not see the cynicism of this position?

  • http://americankafir.com/ waltjr

    Our country is at a point of being not only fiscally bankrupt but morally as well. I agree McCain and Romney are NOT conservative and those who control the Established Republican Party inside the Washington DC Beltway are NOT TRUE conservatives either, they sell our country short by trying to be centrist.

    I seriously believe our Constitution needs to be amended, we need term limits for the House and Senate, this will help put a stop to what I call the "Professional Politician" and force those who run to truly represent the people and not their own greedy individual pocketbook and ideals…

  • Dwee

    I know very socially conservative people truly believe this, and are sincere. But you are wrong and I will explain why. People who want to lead the country from a moral, religious standpoint, are — religious people. Morals are a personal RIGHT, not any of the government's business. Just like we don't want Democrats telling us what foods we can eat, or what fuels we can burn (responsibly), a woman doesn't want anyone, ESPECIALLY a man, telling her what to do with her body. Islam is so creepy because of that very reason.

    THAT mindset lost the women's vote, and will continue to. Women in this country are free! Freedom of what to do with her own body, and while a baby is sucking off her blood stream, it IS a part of her body. Just as absurd as it would be if some culture told guys with tumors they could not have them removed because tumors are alive and they believe all life is precious. I voted for Romney, I think Obumba is a very sick man who will stop at nothing to get revenge for his mistress Michele, but I did not like all the social issues being brought in. It is NONE of your business! This is just one example of how the Republicans have lost touch with American society. Sure, it's gotten toooo liberal, but that is because the culture has become so screwed up by the pathetic education system, the welfare laws, etc. The Repubs need to go libertarian socially, and conservative fiscally, then they will surpass the Dems who are liberal socially (which still means far too many nanny state laws!, and liberal fiscally as well.) Take your morality to church or synagogue. Good for you. But keep your nose out of my morals, I'm a big girl, I can decide who I want to sleep with and when, and I can get an abortion if I screw up and get pregnant, pardon the pun. LIBERTARIAN REPUBLICAN, that's the way to take back our FREEDOM from those brainwashed by the sick hate the others cult of Obumba.

    • amused

      That's right "morals" ARE a personal right, and morals are a matter of opinion , just ask any fundamentalist of any religion . YOU TAKE YOUR MORALITY TO CHURCH , AND KEEP IT THERE .
      We abide laws made by and tested by the Supreme Court . Deal with them . And go from thre , there are far too many politicians wrapping themselves in" morality " , only to be found sorely lacking in morality AND ethics .. The Campagn and the basis of the Republican party centered on the very thing they stated the day after Obama was first elected , before he took office and before anyone knew what he would do . UNSEAT HIM , Make him FAIL ….that was and is your battlecry , and it failed miserably because it was based in paranoia and hatred .,…good luck with that in 2016 .

    • carolinmd

      I agree with most of your reasoning, and Libertarian Republican makes sense too. My only problem with your reasoning is comparing a tumor to baby as both cell structures have the ability to grow.
      No matter how big the tumor grows, when it is removed you wil see an unpleasant mass of misguided, uselss cell development. When the cells of the baby continue to grow the wil continue to enlarge the form of the DN A planted at the time of conception. When it's growth is complete, the result is a human being, which is the same as it was at conception.
      I've held both a removed tumor, and a preborn baby. The tumor was repusive, the baby broke my heart.

    • kibitzer

      Fair enough, Dwee; as far as it goes. But you are missing a crucial point – and especially crucial if you are truly, as it would appear, a libertarian Republican. And that is that the issue of abortion should never have become a federal issue in the first place – is beyond the terms of the Constitution for the federal government to be involved in (seethe 10th Amendment) – and you would do well to join with your libertarian mates, and constitutionalists, in getting Roe vs. Wade repealed; so that the federal government doesn't continue to grow like the tumor that you referred to.

      Taking on issues at the State level may be more time-consuming. But that's the nature – and the ultimate strength – of s federal form of government. Ask the Democrats. That's why they hate it so.

  • Jean

    The barn door is closed and bolted from the inside. We can round up the cows, but the barn is going to burn down.

    • amused

      the cows have not only got out of the barn , but off the farm and out of the county , those barn doors should've been closed in 2004 . Yea burn the barn , you don't need one anymore .

  • amused

    Hopefully a lesson was taken , and folks here on FPM are not a true reflection of how the Republican Party will regain credibility . I suspect not though , since the denial is still flourishing . This of course willput you on the same road to another defeat in 2016 ….oh wait ,Obama will have destroyed the whole country by then right ? just like he was supposed to have accomplished that dastardly deed by 2012 .But not to worry , we got 16 buisiness days to the edge and bigger fish to fry , like two of America's Great Generals tripping ovr their dorks , and the possibility that one of the thousands of juicy e-mails might actually contain the " stand down order " resulting from a "cat fight ' between the paramors ! So far the investgation of this serious matter [ sarc -off ] is about the only thing our elected PUBLIC SERVANTS are doing in a BIPARTISAN MANNER . Democrats are just as pissed about a possible breach of security and behavior unbecoming an Officer[s] of the US Military [ Patreus' peccadillo goes back before his appt .as CIA director , to when he was still a General in the US Armed Forces .

  • amused

    BTW , since it is now coming out that some democrats and republicans knew of Patreus' peccadillos, when the proverbial shiiit hits the fan , there will be bi-partisan splatter . I'm sure each had their own agendas in failing to reveal this .

    • BLJ

      Keep reaching there my friend. Obama is responsible for those 4 deaths in Benghazi anyway you try to slice it.

      • amused

        Maybe so ….just like Reagan was responsible for the 265 marines in the lebanese Embassy . Did Either will it ? NO , did either want it ? NO . Reagan screwed up big time and so did Obama if it is proven that he gave the order if there was any to stand down .This defines obama only with the haters likeyourself , who if there was no Benghhazi would no doubt have a hundred othr "reasons " to be critical . As a President Obama ,as well as Bush ,as well as Clinton , as with any sitting President , THEY are responsible for any loss of American lives lost on their watch . Are you trying to sell the idea that Obanma caused this on purpose ? Because if you are , then you're a bigger arsehole than I figured you to be .

        • BLJ

          Don't even try to compare Lebanon to Benghazi. A tool like you could care less about anyone in the military. You are so willfully ignorant it makes me sick.

          I wish I could meet you face to face. Just saying you know.

  • amused

    And even Clarespark is not speakinhg babble again , atleast in her first few sentences . As long as you don't visit the website . :)))

  • southwood

    OH, of course Romney was a true conservative Tea Party evangelical Christian. That's why he lost. True conservatives, Tea Partiers and evangelical Christians ALL supported him without reservation. Sure they did.

    • amused

      UH…Mormonism is NOT christianity , Romney therefore could not be considered evangelical in any sense of the word ] Evangelicals gave their vote ONLY as the only alternative they saw against their evil nemesis Obama , Tea Party is not Conservative , Romney was not a Conservative , in fact after 18 months I STILL don't know what Romney was /is . Do this next election and you'll reap the same results .

      • southwood

        I know Mormonism is not Christianity. That is presumably why many evangelicals refused to vote for him. Did you not catch the sarcasm in my statement. If the TP ain't conservative, what, pray tell, are they ? Romney was/is not a conservative. I agree. I don't think Romney himself knows what he is. The last sentence in you comment I totally concur with. BTW I am in the UK but I follow the American scene a lot. I could see Obama winning since months ago, probably since I saw the choice of candidates for the Republican nomination. In the days just before the election an opinion poll in the Telegraph here showed 79% of Brits who believed Obama would win. It was pathetic to see the comments of American conservative wishfully thinking Romney would win. Pathetic as in sad.

  • http://twitter.com/surfcitysocal2 @surfcitysocal2

    Let's not forget Romney's Achilles heel, Romneycare, a big government program with a mandate that he championed that presumed government could do a better, more efficient job regarding health care than the voters…and that the U.S. taxpayer in every other state is subsidizing Romney's baby.

  • burt

    Conservatives did NOT stay home!!!
    "Up to 10 percent of the ballots cast at a polling station in Pennsylvania reverted to a default, which gave Barack Obama a vote NO MATTER WHO the voter had selected, according to a poll watcher who was a witness to the proceedings.
    "The incident took place in the state where officials claimed Obama got a total of 19,605 votes in 59 voting divisions to zero for Mitt Romney and not far from the 100 precincts in Ohio where Obama got 99 percent of the vote, a feat not even achieved by third-world dictators, according to Market Daily News.

  • amused

    If that were Romney's ONLY achilles heel , he would have won the election .

  • clarespark

    I see many comments above that are sharply critical of each other. This is not unusual. We have always been a fragmented polity, notwithstanding the superpatriots. I wrote about them here: http://clarespark.com/2012/11/13/orwell-superpatr…. "Orwell, superpatriots, and the election." Political language matters.

  • cynthiacurran




    I need your help. Please sign this petition here in order to make it visible.

    There is already a petition on outlawing insulting of prophets, which means insulting of the pedophile Muhammad. All other prophets are being insulted full swing.

  • http://ampatriot.blogspot.com/ C.R.

    The Republican a party has already destroyed itself–its been taken over by Marxist Democrats–,i.e., RINO’s; the republic is dead–and its never coming back–the best good people can do now is to work to hold the Marxists back, to slow them down!

  • Ghostwriter

    I have no idea what to do.

    • umustbkidding

      We need a 3rd party. That's what we do. We must start now. There is no changing the Republican party – soft socialists and Democrats are hard core communists.

  • umustbkidding

    Republicans lost because of 145% of the people in some districts in both Florida and Ohio voted for Zero. Along with 99% of the vote in some districts Philadelphia went for Zero. Then our local paper was saying that in Macungie PA it's been documented that about 5 – 10% of the Republican vote went into default status according to the software that was in the voting machines. The default vote was Zero himself. Even when the voter tried to recast their vote.

    Massive voter fraud. This doesn't surprise me but what is surprising me is the deafening silence from the Republican party.

    So if the Republicans don't want to win races what is the point voting for them?

  • umustbkidding

    If the press isn't brought up on criminal charges of collusion there is no hope of ever turning this around. They must be held accountable or there is no stopping them from just making things up like they are now.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Hold them accountable. Don't give them your money. Not directly or indirectly. Don't buy them, watch their networks or visit their sites.

  • geojenna

    We will never win another election, provided we even have another election, because no one will acknowledge the truth concerning our loss. The true is much to terrible, much too harsh, much too unbelievable for us to admit. The illegals are voting. . . . . They are brought into polling stations by the bussloads and told how to vote. The Ohio Secretary of State tried to correct our voter rolls and was sued by Holder. The American Experiment is over. The electorate has found they can vote themselves benfits.

  • geojenna

    We will never win another election, provided we even have another election, because no one will acknowledge the truth concerning our loss. The true is much to terrible, much too harsh, much too unbelievable for us to admit. The illegals are voting. . . . . They are brought into polling stations by the bussloads and told how to vote. The Ohio Secretary of State tried to correct our voter rolls and was sued by Holder. The American Experiment is over. The electorate has found they can vote themselves benefits.

  • watsa46

    As long as conservative DO NOT adopt extreme positions they have a chance. But it may be very difficult against a party that will give everything to the dependents to keep power.

  • Fritz

    I think the first order of business should be for someone to challenge John Boehner for speaker of the house. I'm not in favor of the circular firing squad but you could not find a better example of a spineless "wet noodle" of a failure in terms of advancing the conservative platform that his party was elected on in 2010. There were multiple opportunities to halt or even turn around the growth of government but he kept caving at almost every opportunity falling on the old crutch of "Divided Government".
    With regard to reaching out to the assorted ethnic groups the Republicans, especially the conservative ones, should take a few lessons form the Conservative Party of Canada. There are certain inherent small "C" conservative values that branch across cultural, religious, and ethnic lines and the C.P of C has been very successful at connecting with such people and getting them involved, and no it did not involve caving on principle. This was an effort that started over a decade ago under the leadership of Preston Manning in the days of the Reform Party, not only to combat the usual slurs but to expand the base. It's all very well and good to trot out prominent members of visible minorities for key note addresses at the convention but how about involvement at the constituency level? You need to walk before you run as they say.

  • Asher

    Obama did not win the election because of his wonderful policies, he won it because he bought off the useful idiots, those who don't work, illegals and minorities…Just buy them off and they will vote for you and keep you in office. He has re-distributed the wealth of hard working Americans, even sending tax payer dollars over seas to help other countries, and creating jobs in China and elswhere…How pathetic!

  • bbfmail

    Why is no one questioning the how Obama managed to win inspite of legitimate polls showing over and over that Romney was ahead? How about voter fraud? Out of the question? Really?

    Evidence of Rampant Fraud in Obama Election

    There were many factors that hurt Mitt Romney and favored Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential election. The Democrats portrayed Romney in the worst light possible; as a wealthy, out of touch millionaire who wanted to return women to the 1800′s. The left wing media predictably did everything it could to perpetuate that false caricature. Obama’s race was an advantage; voters of all persuasions, particularly minorities, still cannot get over the allure of the first black president. The 47% of Americans on welfare were predisposed to vote for the food stamp president over Romney, wanting the free goodies to keep on giving, despite the long-term unsustainability.

    In spite of those odds, polls indicated that Romney was going to win the election. The economy is close to Great Depression era conditions, and unemployment is almost as high as when Obama entered office. Economic conditions became so dire after Obama took office it prompted the rise of an entire new movement, the Tea Party. Presidents rarely win reelection when the economy is in the tank.

    So how did Romney lose a race that numerous reputable polls and pundits predicted would be an easy win, based on historical patterns? The most realistic explanation is voter fraud in a few swing states. According to the Columbus Dispatch, one out of every five registered voters in Ohio is ineligible to vote. In at least two counties in Ohio, the number of registered voters exceeded the number of eligible adults who are of voting age. In northwestern Ohio’s Wood County, there are 109 registered voters for every 100 people eligible to vote. An additional 31 of Ohio’s 88 counties have voter registration rates over 90%, which most voting experts regard as suspicious. Obama miraculously won 100% of the vote in 21 districts in Cleveland, and received over 99% of the vote where GOP inspectors were illegally removed.

    Continue Reading on clashdaily.com …

  • http://kibitzer-truthseeker.blogspot.com kibitzer

    A good overview by Daniel; but There’s a curious assumption here. The assumption that Romney DIDN’T win the election.

    Have any of you commenting here been keeping an eye at ALL on all the reports of the massive electoral fraud that went on??? The Democrats have this sort of thing down to a T; and additionally knew that they had to consolidate their revolution against the well-anticipated reaction – had to pull all the stops out to ‘win’ this one for their socialist messiah. Why do you think they championed early voting (and quietly got so much of it accomplished); and fought viciously against photo ID laws (cynically claiming ‘suppression of voters’ – an old Saul Alinsky ‘community organizing’ trick); and got voting machines into their control; and so forth and so on??? They pulled off a big one. If all the dead voters and multiple voters (Obama did not win one state that had photo ID laws) and non-citizen voters and hacked machines were all subtracted from the vote – especially in the swing states – it could well have been a different story (plus all the military votes that they successfully delayed). The Republicans just weren’t up to the job of keeping the polls clean. Probably because they have engaged in all this sort of thing as well; and just got their blowback, and in spades.

    A pox on both their houses. It’s time for systemic change. We’ve demonstrated pretty well how low we can go. Now – hopefully having learned our lessons – let’s demonstrate how high we can.

    But it will require us to lift our consciousnesses rather higher than they are, collectively, now. Are you up to it, America?? A positive future awaits your positive answer. On the other hand…I guarantee you: it CAN get quite a bit lower than it is now. Can you say, a total police state???……complete with armed drones, and…and…and…………..