Notes from the collapse
posted at 10:35 am on November 5, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
This morning, after having absorbed the substantial victory of Barack Obama, I noticed a couple of interesting items in the data. Barack Obama certainly won this race, but he won it with just a little more votes than George Bush won in his re-election bid, and the turnout models came up short.
In 2004, Bush beat John Kerry by winning 62.04 million votes. In 2008, Obama won 62.443 million, a gain of only 400,000. In 2004, Kerry garnered 59.028 million votes; John McCain only got 55.386 million. That means this election saw 3.24 million fewer votes than four years ago. Far from being more energized, the nation appeared to be more apathetic.
Using these numbers, we can see that Barack Obama succeeded in turning out his base much more effectively than McCain did his. How do we know that it’s a base turnout rather than a tsunami of opinion to Democrats? For one thing, Dems didn’t pick up a boatload of new seats in the House, and they may underperform expectations yet in the Senate. They did gain some strength with independents, but only gaining between 11-20 seats in the House tells us that they found votes in districts they already control, more than finding converts.
There’s nothing wrong with that; George Bush won two elections doing the same thing. He only gained 3 million votes over John Kerry’s 2004 performance. It does reflect a certain brittleness about Obama’s support that may not be evident in the flush of his Electoral College victory. That doesn’t mean he can’t broaden his appeal after winning office, but it does mean that he primarily won among friendlies and not through appeals to bipartisanship.
John McCain and the GOP didn’t get their turnout in this race. They lost almost seven million voters from 2004, a rather stunning number. We’ll be chewing on this for a while, but that’s more than 10% of the Bush vote that got lost in this election. Did they stay home, or did significant numbers of them defect to Obama? I’m guessing the former. The GOP demoralized their base by acting like Democrats for too many years, and the winds of “change” proved too dispiriting this time around.
Is it his fault? I don’t think it’s his fault as much as the historical trend. Republicans faced two strong headwinds in this race: history and their own fecklessness as a party. History tells us that the White House almost always changes party after two terms with one, and Bush is a particularly disliked incumbent. The Republican Party lost its soul when it launched its K Street Project, and the spendfest of 2001-6 only made that more clear.
If the GOP wants to win 60 million votes in future national elections, it has to stand for something other than being Democrat Lite. The Republican Party needs clarity, purpose, and most importantly, an end to the hypocrisy of talking smaller government while porking up their districts. When given only a choice between real Democrats and fake Democrats, Americans will choose the former, which we found out in 2006.
Update: I wrote “latter” when I meant “former”; I don’t think that defections account for Obama’s victory.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next »
Mitt Romney IS everything wrong with the Republican party. The guy is only 90% ideal so lets toss him out in favor of the guy who’s 40% ideal but more beligerent. After all, he said some liberal sounding things 14 years ago to try to beat Ted Kennedy in Massachusetts. I prefer someone who says and does liberal things while Senator of red state Arizone like John McCain! /s
thecountofincognito on November 5, 2008 at 11:47 AM
Good analysis, Ed.
I agree with the “Let’s look forward” sentiments expressed by other posters.
But let’s also get ready for a possibly staggering level of disappointment and disillusion (for Obama supporters) which is just over the horizon.
The first to be enlightened will be Obama himself, and his enlightenment will begin the first time he sits down with Bush and the transition teams.
The money simply isn’t there to do even half of what he has promised during his campaign. Good heavens, just during the past few days, even several MSM outlets (including CBS News, I believe) have pointed out that Obama’s numbers for cutting here and raising there and spending yet somewhere else simply don’t add up.
And regardless of his pronouncements on foreign policy, he knows nothing about conditions on the ground in Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan. His first foreign-policy briefing won’t just bring him down to earth; it may leave him staggering in shock.
Here’s an imaginary conversation for you:
“Okay, Mr. President-elect, here’s the morning briefing I received earlier today. We got trouble all over. I’ve been living with these problems every day of my life for the past 7 years. January 21, this will be on your desk. What are your recommendations?”
In these precarious times, I obviously wish Obama well. But like Lincoln and all other presidents, he will certainly find that the times will control him more than he will control the times.
Owen Glendower on November 5, 2008 at 11:47 AM
And for everyone who makes this claim that the election was ‘against’ Obama …. I was voting for McCain.
You can spin this to make your point, but it’s BS. And your BS won’t change my mind, or alter the facts.
wise_man on November 5, 2008 at 11:48 AM
Dave Rywall on November 5, 2008 at 11:40 AM
Maybe some countries need to learn how to stand on their own two feet instead of living on our backs while criticizing everything we do.
thecountofincognito on November 5, 2008 at 11:48 AM
Because he had nobody else to pick that was a waman, with some executive experience and able to excite the base. McCain tried to get both the female vote and the base vote with Palin. He got only some of the base.
Teyrre I didn’t know you are a snooker fan.:)) Anyway, the base and the PUMA’s are myths.
And I true think that Hillary is not going to try for POTUS again. If Obama is going to be an effective president he can easaly win reelection in 2012 and if he is going to be a desaster, which is more likely, nobody is going to forgive Clinton’s support for his election. Especially the very important independent adn moderate voting block.
clemycali on November 5, 2008 at 11:49 AM
sounded like an endorsement. get em, nuge!! Goatherd’s son’s biggest endorsement = McLoser
anti-boomer on November 5, 2008 at 11:49 AM
wise_man on November 5, 2008 at 11:48 AM
That’s not what you said before the election, when people would accuse you of being a McCain cheerleader…hmmm.
thecountofincognito on November 5, 2008 at 11:49 AM
Dave:
Well look at this way, now that Obama has won he is going to renegotiate NAFTA so that you Canucks do not continue to steal our jobs and flood our markets with cheap crap. Hadn’t you heard?
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 11:49 AM
N>>>o, it needs to teach everyone about capitalism, the realities of foreign policy, and personal responsibility. The very labeling of some Americans as “minorities” is part of the problem.
Count to 10 on November 5, 2008 at 11:30 AM>>>
Absolutely. When Obama and Ayers spent CAC money to teach Black Chicago students to hate America rather than teaching them to read – they raped those kids and called it a favor.
We mustn’t do the same. The communists have targeted our educational system far too long. 2% of those voting for Obama did so because they believed he was qualified for the job. That is a damning statement on our educational system.
The most vital elements of a democratic society are 1) a populace capable of performing Bloom’s taxonomy all the way up through critical analysis (none of the lower skills can be missing for critical analysis to be anything but crap), and 2) a public armed with all the accurate and relevant information necessary for critical analysis.
Idiots and liars are a threat to our national security. Period. We need to actively engage the public in THINKING – having the facts and analyzing them. And that means documenting what communism has wrought everywhere it’s been tried, and why. Why people lose the will to live and succeed when their society is built on the idea that everybody should be guaranteed the same result no matter what choices they make in their life. If I get the same result no matter what I do, then why should I do what is hard rather than screw my life away?
People can and must understand the culture of death – what causes people to believe their life doesn’t matter. In socialism/communism, it really doesn’t. Where there is voter fraud, it really doesn’t. Where lies abound, it doesn’t. We’re all just helpless victims waiting to see what somebody else decides will happen to us. It’s useless to try for the good, useless to fight the bad.
And to be truthful, that’s the feeling I fight every day. What difference does it make if I find out the truth, when some LA Times editor can laugh in my face and lie to the idiotic masses?
The courts have just told us that it’s nobody’s business if an illegal alien becomes president. IOW, this isn’t my country. Never was, never will be. It’s not mine to lose, therefore I can’t claim to be harmed if this nation dies. The courts just told me that this is not my country. That needs to be screamed from the rooftops. If politically-appointed AG’s and attorneys overlook blatant criminal activity, I have no recourse. None. How can this be America? This is identical to the worst examples of government that kill a person’s will to live.
justincase on November 5, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Maybe some countries need to learn how to stand on their own two feet instead of living on our backs while criticizing everything we do.
thecountofincognito on November 5, 2008 at 11:48 AM
———-
What a charmingly simple view of the world you have
Dave Rywall on November 5, 2008 at 11:50 AM
“McConnell, a soft-spoken Washington insider from Kentucky with a canny understanding of Senate tactics, is an unlikely pick to be the GOP’s Stonewall Jackson. Yet by virtue of surviving a tight reelection for a fifth term and having no real challenger to his position as Senate minority leader, McConnell is positioned to be both the ultimate dealmaker and the Republican firewall against a leftward tilt in American government. ”
From the politico.
We still have immediate leaders to rally around and get behind.
hawkdriver on November 5, 2008 at 11:50 AM
If it’s Palin 2012, then will the GOP charge her rent on the clothes until then? Or will they pony up another 150 grand when the time comes?
Dave Rywall on November 5, 2008 at 11:51 AM
I understand. I stand by President Bush. I’m disappointed that he was so passive during the campaign, but not disgusted. I know history will judge President Bush as a great president. Compared to history’s judgment, my comments are petty little nitpicking. Maybe that’s why I am so willing to criticize the man. His place in history is secure as far as I’m concerned.
jeff_from_mpls on November 5, 2008 at 11:51 AM
God man, we’re warming up your country so you can grow more corn. What else do you want from us?
hawkdriver on November 5, 2008 at 11:51 AM
D. Rywell, I’m afraid you’re going to be very disappointed when the European-style socialist ennui takes over here and you no longer have a market for your goods. But, hey, misery loves company, right?
Dee2008 on November 5, 2008 at 11:51 AM
nuge em
I was thinking the sme thing last night as he crawled away with his tail between his legs.
thomasaur on November 5, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Give Abe Lincoln the treatment that Sarah Palin got for two months, and he’d be an embarrassment and national joke as well. The thing is, keeping Palin on ice for long didn’t help.
ddrintn on November 5, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Sarah Palin is a better human being than Dave Rywall.
jeff_from_mpls on November 5, 2008 at 11:52 AM
McCain ran a terrible campaign with his mister nice guy attitude. He held back, while Liberals and the MSM stuck it to him. McCain the maverick hurt his own party many times trying to work with Democrats. But Democrats did not reach across the aisle as Republicans have done. As a conservative I never liked McCain, but we had no other choice. Democrats stick together like union brother’s and never criticize each other no matter what the person has done. McCain never had strong conservative support and was lambasted daily by conservative radio talk show host like Rush for months. Maybe the Rev.Wright will now be right about what he said about America…
Scorp3j on November 5, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Nuge:
What was he supposed to say? That Obama was the anti Christ? McCain would not have said anything if people had not been calling Obama a terrorist, he was in an impossible position. He was just trying to tamp it down. As if that matters anyway. How many times did Obama say that he respected McCain and his service? lots. How many times did Obama say that McCain was right about something? Often enough that they turned into an ad. But neither of those things effected the election. People are just being petty.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 11:52 AM
hawkdriver on November 5, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Canada is corny enough. Shhh…don’t let them in on the fact that they are only above us in geographical terms.
thecountofincognito on November 5, 2008 at 11:53 AM
Depends on how well we get all the illegal campaign contributions through the internet and from foreigners like Dear Leader did. I want her looking good.
hawkdriver on November 5, 2008 at 11:53 AM
I agree that demographics killed the GOP in 2008. I thought that wouldn’t happen until 2016 or so. I was overly optimistic on that.
We need a racial dialogue among white people in this country (who still make up over 65% of the US population). If black people have “black pride,” there must be some kind of response from white people.
If we don’t have this dialogue, the forces of ethnic chauvinism will take it over for us. We need to recognize that white people are a dwindling majority, soon to be under 50%, and many, many people of color have contempt and hatred for white people.
Secondly, a few weeks after the new president takes office, we need to start a campaign against affirmative action. “Now that a black man is president, racism is dead. It’s time to return to the American value of equality.
I am skeptical that Hispanics, blacks, or Muslims in large numbers will join the GOP under any circumstances. The three-legged stool is fiscal conservatism, social conservatism, and a strong military that defends US national interests. People of color are only in favor of one of those legs: social conservatism. They don’t want a strong military. They don’t want the US to be the sole superpower policing the world. They don’t want any fiscal restraint. They want government support programs for their pet causes. I guess I disagree with Michael Steele and Thomas Sowell that this is a debate that can be won.
Ultimately, what we are doing now is fighting a rearguard action to protect the Constitution and Americans from getting gored too hard by the new lords of America–people of color and white liberal college professors.
indythinker on November 5, 2008 at 11:53 AM
Bogus. You don’t know what the turnout would have been if she had not been on the ticket. She is the future of the Republican Party.
If she was such a drag, explain to me how she had last week 18,000 in Jefferson City going nuts, Biden had 3000 in Blue Springs, and McCain had 1000 in Springfield.
It was all about McCain, so much so that he did nothing to prep her, and did joint campaigns for weeks because he could not draw anything close to her numbers or enthusiasm.
Hard head. Very hard head.
Starlink on November 5, 2008 at 11:54 AM
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 11:52 AM
You don’t have to say Obama is the anti-Christ. The truth is enough. McCain wasn’t even willing to do that.
thecountofincognito on November 5, 2008 at 11:54 AM
In my opinion the party didn’t ran away from president Bush soon enough. People were sick about Bush and the epic stock market meltdown (that could have been prevented with a more apt administration) sank McCain/Palin ticket. And the late hour endorsment of vp Cheney wasn’t helpfull either.
clemycali on November 5, 2008 at 11:54 AM
ddrintn:
Actually a lot of people did consider Lincoln a joke. They called him a baboon, a clodhopper, a freak. They made fun of his speaking style, the way he governed, everything about him.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 11:54 AM
hmm, so Paultards are OK with increase Defense Spending, invading Central American countries without a document with magic words ‘declaration’ and ‘war’ at the top and installing Democratic Govts.(greneda, central america, etc.). Supplying the Northern Alliance with weapons to defeat the Soviets with in Afghanistan. Defying France, bombing Lybia in attempt to Kill Ghadafi…..to name a few things????
You people are delusional and uniformed about basic history and specifically what it is that Ron Paul actually stands for which is a far-left, anti-american stance on Foreign Policy. A la Murray Rothbard who beleived the US, not the USSR, was the real “Evil Empire” of the world.
Obama BORROWED rhetoric from Ron Paul for crying out loud.
geez, aside from Obama being vetted we were doubly screwed by the media not ‘vetting’ Ron Paul for us. There is so much there to work with
jp on November 5, 2008 at 11:55 AM
One of the best post here today CB—–leading by example.
Go forth and lurk no more!
Rovin on November 5, 2008 at 11:55 AM
WTF is a “necessary” war?
jeff_from_mpls on November 5, 2008 at 11:55 AM
I’m with Ed and with Newt Gingrich on this. This is a Republicans in general performance problem, and zero candidates from the Republican party could have won at this juncture. Be happy that McCain was willing to take one for the team rather than put a rising star in the “L” column.
The ratings for Congress on our side are low, the ratings for President are low.
The key failure to me is in party leadership losing total touch with the base and pursuing strategems of trying to run Democrat issues off the table by becoming Fauxdems.
Tark on November 5, 2008 at 11:55 AM
Time to study history: FDR, Truman.
RushBaby on November 5, 2008 at 11:56 AM
I’d be happy if she just wore those jeans she had on the other day.
Matticus Finch on November 5, 2008 at 11:56 AM
I used to think that we need to stay in Iraq until the job is done, even though I always opposed going in in the first place. As the saying goes, “We broke it, so we now have to pay for it.” But this essay, published by the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank, sort of changed my mind. The essay takes a realist stance toward our current strategy in Iraq and suggests that both the Iraqis and the US would actually be better off if our troops left right now.
Anyway, regardless of how Iraq turns out, we need to learn our lesson and not be so reckless in deploying troops to distant parts of the world.
MedSchoolCatholic on November 5, 2008 at 11:56 AM
Face it…we are not reproducing at a sustainable rate anymore, haven’t been for decades. The demographics of the America that elected Reagan have disappeared. Hispanics and Asian immigrants are now reproducing at over twice the rate of whites and blacks…so maybe we have passed the tipping point or will shortly. But getting Hispanics and Asian immigrants on board with Conservative principles through pandering? To what end?
Trying to pander to “minorities” isn’t going to separate us from the Left…it just makes us seem more like them…indistinguishable…just politicians vying for power.
Perhaps looking at essential values held by Hispanics and Asian immigrants and how they meld into the basics of Conservatism may be the answer. Find this and we have a point from which to grow the Party. But, trying to lower or wholesale change our basic principles to accommodate minorities in order to buy their vote?
We have to look at what is held sacred in minority communities to counter-balance the demographic loss already in progress of what used to make up the Conservative base just a short couple decades ago.
Most legal immigrants are still flocking to our shores not because they love socialism and one-party rule…but because they are offered economic opportunities and freedoms impossible in their own countries of origin. If they see the Left as taking away that economic growth from their pockets or limiting their freedoms…socialism…we can make inroads into those communities to build the Party without pandering…and re-establish a common-sense base as well among traditional Conservatives.
Just spoke to a foreign graduate student friend who lives in the neighborhood…he is astonished that “we” have suddenly embraced socialism.
Told him we have not all embraced it, just that a slim majority apparently has.
He said if he knew what the real difference between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and Conservatives, in this country really was, he’d maybe understand better. But, he did add, that in his country having a Bobby Jindal nationally prominent would be an impossibility. I’ll work on him, and his family…and his friends.
From the ground up…so long as Conservative leaders are willing to get back to the basics…and soon.
coldwarrior on November 5, 2008 at 11:56 AM
jeff_from_mpls on November 5, 2008 at 11:55 AM
A war where you are attacked first. I guess if you don’t fight back its not actually a war, just a slaughter.
thecountofincognito on November 5, 2008 at 11:57 AM
Please. The Bush caricature is media made.
hawkdriver on November 5, 2008 at 11:58 AM
clemycali:
I don’t agree with that. Bush did not deserve to be abandoned by his own party. That made me respect them less.
And what was Bush to do about the epic stock market crash? He had gone to Congress on more than a dozen occasions to try and get more oversight authority and was blocked every time. Members of his own party in the Congress did not do enough to back him in 2003 when he tried to move control of Fannie Mae to the Treasury Department. No, Bush and McCain both tried to intervene in this situation and no one took them seriously until it was too late.
Blaming Bush is too easy. People do it too often. He has become a political scapegoat.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 11:58 AM
I served my country in combat, asshat. I EARNED my right, yours was purchased by someone else.
And I voted for Baldwin, so I do have every right to complain about President Obama.
leetpriest on November 5, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Thanks Ed, excellent analysis. I must say encouraging as well, since we can all hold hope that if we find and nominate the right candidate who embodies conservative values and articulates them well, the VOTES will follow. The base is still out there…we just need to re-energize them.
The One can be defeated in four years…
jbtripp on November 5, 2008 at 11:59 AM
I know that war is self-defense. I’m asking the question to eggheads who think there’s a calculus for computing when a war is “necessary” or “unnecessary.” It’s the creepy attempt to think war is something to be worked out on paper that disgusts me. The armchair quarterbacks who sit on their asses and second-guess the President of the United States. I know it’s an ego boost, but it makes the jackass look so small.
jeff_from_mpls on November 5, 2008 at 12:00 PM
on Foreign Policy rhetoric, related to middle east where the Industrialized World has a huge amount of national interest at stake, Paul and Obama mirrored each other. It was Paul who first said that Iran was not to be feared by us because they were ‘tiny’. Obama copied his line, both are idiots.
It was Rev. Wright who on the Sunday after 9/11 blamed 9/11 and the Global Jihad on America instead of the Jihadist. Ron Paul agrees, and both hate Israel and think the Jews control the US Govt. for Crying out freaking loud here.
just because Paul can talk about limited govt. Idealism to the point of Utopianism, it does not give him a pass on this stuff.
jp on November 5, 2008 at 12:01 PM
The interesting thing about Cheney, he really is not an elitist. He is a self made man who grew up poor and went to a state university. He did everything people say a guy should do, work hard and succeed and yet he has been vilified for it.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 12:01 PM
thank you for the analysis of Bush the bipartisan. correct. fuhrerprinzip may have won/lost this election. but, it is not all that American. It leads to dictatorships. We want a solid party for a change not a mongrel mill, pumping out RINOs. However, Arnold, though RINOish, was one of the best spokesmen of the campaign for conservative values. Don’t give me leaders, or conservatives or RINOs. Just give me something. Recruit, recruit, recruit! Effect the change that is attainable. Promote younger candidates in a big way.
anti-boomer on November 5, 2008 at 12:01 PM
jeff_from_mpls on November 5, 2008 at 12:00 PM
OK, understood.
thecountofincognito on November 5, 2008 at 12:01 PM
Of course, you’re right. I had in mind the Father Abraham of blessed memory; not the real, living politician that was an embarrassment and albatross to so many during his actual career. ;)
ddrintn on November 5, 2008 at 12:02 PM
Cut the talk about “4 years.”
We can take power back in 2 years.
jeff_from_mpls on November 5, 2008 at 12:02 PM
portlandon on November 5, 2008 at 12:02 PM
I must disagree. Emphatically.
If you insist on thinking in terms of racial groupings, you are always going to loose to the democrats: identity pandering is their only principle, and they have been doing it for some 150 years.
If the Republicans are going to win, it will be by shaking people out of the confines of group identities, not stealing them from the dems.
Count to 10 on November 5, 2008 at 12:03 PM
I’m from Kentucky and I can tell you that I’m not all too enthusiastic about Mitch being the party leader. This is the same Mitch that allowed the addition of needless pork to the bailout, then voted for it.
If you guys want to back a Kentucky senator, let’s put the party in the hands of Bunning.
leetpriest on November 5, 2008 at 12:03 PM
After a quick read of the blogs, I see that many of our fellow conservatives have decided to do the usual thing, take the high ground, and graciously extend their congratulations and support to Obama. I, for one, am not prepared to do that. I have never seen my husband look so grim as he did this morning as he headed off to try to save his college’s financial future in the wake of a devastating defeat for private philanthropy.
Deciding not to hate Obama sounds noble, but aside from the general principle that hating another person diminishes oneself, I think it is misplaced. I hate the hi-jackers who attacked my country on 9/11 and the thugs who tortured John McCain and his fellow POWs for years. That hatred is well-placed. So, too, this morning I find myself hating the man who hi-jacked the election by voter fraud and illegal campaign contributions and who is about to torture my country until its citizens submit to his vision of big government and class warfare. The only difference is that unlike the liberals with Reagan derangement syndrome and Bush derangement syndrome, I will not be able to express my disdain for this creep publicly.
For myself, and my family, the question will be whether we continue to try to fight for the good of this country or retreat to a safe haven (red state) and lead small, selfish lives as so many in this country already do.
Y-not on November 5, 2008 at 12:03 PM
jbtripp:
I don’t think it is just finding the right candidate. Look at Reagan, he had tried for years, but he did not succeed on the national stage until the time was right. It might be that this year the time would not have been right for anyone.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Terrye, I don’t make a scapegoat from Bush but lets face it:McCain had to distance himself as much as he could and what its call the base and diffrent pundits called him names from evan trying this. And Bush has its own part of the blame. His last 4 years were not quite good.
By the way:where is our prophet Manly?
clemycali on November 5, 2008 at 12:04 PM
Ok. How did Obama just win the white house?
The answer is George W. Bush. No, I am not going to tell you that Bush is a devil and deserves to be shot. On the contrary, I believe that the president is a great man. Still, however, Obama was elected to become president because of Bush. How you ask? Because for eight years……the MEDIA fed the American people Lies about this great man. Not that he has no faults. We all have faults. Even Ronald Reagan had faults (immigration for example). Our president was belittled, put down, disparaged, and demeaned by the Main Street Media (MSM) for over 7 ½ years. All because their pastor boy, Gore, lost the white house.
I believe that in the MSM’s eyes, Obama can, and will, do no wrong. It is up to us, as Conservatives (some will call us Republicans) to treat the next president as Bush was treated.
For all of you, who think we need to take the high road on this one, remember: the good man ends last.
It is our duty as Americans to get this country back to her conservative roots.
2010 is next.
Yitzchokm on November 5, 2008 at 12:05 PM
“unnecessary war” = a war the Left politicized for Political Gain soley thanks to their allies in MSM, and emotional people are suckers to then buy into.
the Iraq War was a Retributive War, we are much better off Saddam hussein is not currently in power. He Violated repeated the Cease Fire Agreement he signed, each time a case to resume Hostilities, he was a State Sponsor of Terrorism(including Al-Qaeda), he tried to assassinate a US POTUS, he fired at our planes……in 1998 we passed unamously the “Regime Change in Iraq” policy the the second Iraq War or really the Continuation of it was fought under.
Had bush bowed down to Saddam, the Left/MSM would’ve criticized him for it and being ‘weak’ in the face of 9/11 to these Rouge Terror Sponsor Regimes. Which is what they did to Bush I in 1992 for letting Saddam say in power as a Terrorist Sponsor State.
jp on November 5, 2008 at 12:06 PM
I saw this coming
All the Palin blamer can take solice in the fact that the media continues to hound, minimilize and astroturf issues in order to effect her political demise. Hmm, took em a whole morning. Think they had this in their hip pocket ready to go.
Lets eat some more of our own for 2012. Can’t wait!
hawkdriver on November 5, 2008 at 12:06 PM
Yeah, the foreign interventions you cited are still criticized by us. But, despite everything, Reagan was still much better than Bush, who has been a disaster. Reagan was not perfect, but no politician is. We don’t believe in political Messiahs (that’s why we’re conservative).
MedSchoolCatholic on November 5, 2008 at 12:06 PM
Pence from Indiana is smart, conservative and he absolutely trounces anyone who runs against him. But we need Congressmen too. I do think that his young man has a future.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 12:06 PM
Good post!
hawkdriver on November 5, 2008 at 12:07 PM
Rush is about to tear into McCain.
Valiant on November 5, 2008 at 12:07 PM
Y-not:
My man was looking pretty damn grim too. His concern? Taxes and the EPA, he runs a salvage yard. He is worried.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 12:08 PM
Of course conservatism lost, what a gasbag
clnurnberg on November 5, 2008 at 12:08 PM
MedSchoolCatholic on November 5, 2008 at 12:06 PM
Oh come on, isn’t there at least ONE political messiah you kinda, sorta believe in? I’m just taking a wild guess here but I think his initials are RP and they call him Dr. No.
thecountofincognito on November 5, 2008 at 12:08 PM
I think it’s pretty easy. Republicans used to stand for small government and actually backed that claim up by shrinking the government and not growing it. Now they are the earmark kings and more interested in funding their pet projects over the other guy’s. We need to get back to the point where Republicans actually keep government small and out of peoples lives.
dpierson on November 5, 2008 at 12:08 PM
This is why we blog. What is better about Bunning?
hawkdriver on November 5, 2008 at 12:09 PM
Thanks. I’ll get to reading it. I just hope we can take this stance without dissing the troops over there.
manwithblackhat on November 5, 2008 at 12:09 PM
Valiant:
I am sure Rush is. That is Rush for you. Where was he when we needed him? Why didn’t he run? Why didn’t he back someone else right up front? no, it was just piss and moan and make money.
I am tired of the Rushes and the Hannitys.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 12:09 PM
Iraq did attack us in various ways, when Thomas Jefferson fought the Barbary Wars he took them cutting down the US Flag as an ‘act of war’ at the time. That is how feminized we’ve come on this stuff.
Waiting to be hit by a Nuke before reacting is insane and woudl be a new thing. the whole Cuban Missle crisis was on the basis of so called ‘pre-emption’.
jp on November 5, 2008 at 12:10 PM
I am not ready to accept Obama either or to be happy about his election. Do I hate him?No. I don’t like him, I think he is going to be an epic failure and an embarrasment for the country more than it is now Jimmy Carter. So I don’t understand why we should take the higher ground and be gracious to him?
But I am afraid is going to be necessary to steal them from the dems. And quickly.
clemycali on November 5, 2008 at 12:10 PM
Jeff, my dogs are better human beings than DRywall.
Just think, though, DRywall, once your Messiah takes over, Hot Air will be one of the first targets. Where ya gonna go then? SDA? Kate would kick your a$$ with one hand tied behind her back. Hell, Kate’s dogs would kick your ass with their jaws tied shut.
either orr on November 5, 2008 at 12:10 PM
This sounds a little silly, coming as it does from the party of inherited millions and Kept Men.
philwynk on November 5, 2008 at 12:10 PM
Me too Terrye.
Rush is all about Rush. He slammed McCain then praised him and is slamming him again today.
clnurnberg on November 5, 2008 at 12:11 PM
Ed,
Good post. Now we just need a leader….Gov palin
unseen on November 5, 2008 at 12:11 PM
Blunt from Missouri is interesting too. He is young, only 38 and says he does not want to run for the Governor’s office again.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 12:12 PM
Philwynk, DRywall is a leftist Canuck, a pariah in his own country, for cryin’ out loud. He votes for inherently corrupt politicians all the time and thinks we should do the same.
either orr on November 5, 2008 at 12:12 PM
worshiping a Political Ideology(Rothbardian Anarchism), which in this case is extremely Utopian not unlike Marxism, is a political messiah. People turn different things into Idols, whether its a person or an ideology
jp on November 5, 2008 at 12:13 PM
What is new here? Nothing. He has been at war with McCain since the beginning of the race. And now he is hitting a dead horse. What did Rush to engage the base to volunteer for McCain or to contribute financially? Nada, 0. And now he is upset.
clemycali on November 5, 2008 at 12:13 PM
clnurnberg:
And Rush has enough money and enough clout that if had wanted to support someone early on he could have. If Oprah could support Obama, Rush could support someone other than himself.
Or he could take a pay cut and run for office.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 12:13 PM
Why would Rush run? Why are you tired of him and Hannity. This would have been far worse without any source to galvanize the base. I’m listening and what Rush is giving is a rebuild pep-talk and he is not slamming McCain, he’s slammimg Obama.
hawkdriver on November 5, 2008 at 12:14 PM
For once I agree with Terrye. Fuk Rush, he has turned into another do nothing gasbag. I have listed to him since 89 and even stalked him at an airport to get a picture with him while in college so I am no newcomer to the guy.
Rush had to the opportunity to be our version of Soros, but instead he just reads from Drudge Report everyday and talks about what a crack team he has. He even totally ripped offed Savage’s “Trickle Up Poverty” line, the VERY next day after Savage used it. The guy is caught up in his own hype, but has accomplished nothing.
What does he care, he will simply fly off in his Gulfstream V while America crumbles behind him.
ClassicCon on November 5, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Yeah, big brother is coming. I’d recommend that your hubby rename his salvage yard to something like “Green Works” or “Eco Yard.” He can probably get a nice government subsidy that way.
I felt so helpless this morning — that has really added to my anger and dismay.
I haven’t had the stomach to look at the returns in detail, but the last I saw of the returns, it certainly looks like ACORN flipped some states. I really don’t know how we will be able to reverse thing. The voter fraud, campaign contributions, and media complicity seem to just be accepted.
Y-not on November 5, 2008 at 12:15 PM
clemycali:
I am not so sure Rush is upset. I think that some of these pundits like this. Hillary Clinton was the best thing that ever happened to Rush Limbaugh. Gave him all sorts of material.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Is there a reason yall are ignoring the preeminence of Jindal? Leader or not we should make our intentions known that we prefer to rally around a younger generation of conservatives that aren’t tainted by the 60’s.
Rally to Jindal, Palin, and the un-discovered ones, Maulkin!
anti-boomer on November 5, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Yes but that doesn’t explain why you and others support the US inserting itself into every conflict around the world. This made sense during the Cold War when U.S.-backed and Russian-backed proxies were planted all over the world like a chess board. It makes a lot less sense now especially when half the time the US sides with Muslim terrorists as it does in Bosnia, Kosovo and Azerbaijan.
aengus on November 5, 2008 at 12:16 PM
Y-not:
I am hoping he can slip under the radar. Not a happy man, not at all.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 12:16 PM
Sorry, you are wrong and that tells me you are not old enough to comment on the subject. Rush started making waves during papa Bush’s term, with things like the house post office scandal.
ClassicCon on November 5, 2008 at 12:17 PM
I’ll be very interested to learn if in fact a good portion of the GOP Base sat home and if so, which wing the sitters came from. I’m a social moderate, but I affiliate with the GOP because of fiscal conservatism, national defense, and a distrust that activist judges will always rule in ways I like. In that respect I tolerate listening to my own team refer to people like me as “squishes” and “pro-aborts”, etc. becuase of the greater good. In return, I damn well expect every part of my team to drag themselves to the ballot box when we face the stark choice of seeing a woefully inexperienced socialist elected with an unrestrained howling mass of leftists in charge of Congress vs. an honorable, experienced man who periodically offends us.
If the moderate wing of the base sat home then I’m going to be royally ticked that they abandoned a guy with independent appeal and a tolerance for all wings of the party in favor of someone who has no tolerance for any but the far left. If the ultra-pure “don’t call me a Republican – I’m a CONSERVATIVE” we-need-to-make-everyone-suffer-so-they-become-true-believers wing of the base sat home then I’m going to be royally ticked that they behaved unforgiveably selfishly.
It’s not like we weren’t warned what was at stake with this election. We’re still dealing with the harm that 4 years of Carter and 8 years of Clinton wrought with our judicial system.
Jill1066 on November 5, 2008 at 12:17 PM
ya, Savage is another pariah, unfairly shunned. rush also took credit for stopping the dubai ports and amnesty, was savage for sure.
anti-boomer on November 5, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Michelle Obama said there will be an “Oprah Bedroom” in the White House.
marklmail on November 5, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Your dogs ba11$ are better human beings than him.
Y-not on November 5, 2008 at 12:19 PM
aengus:
I don’t support getting into conflicts everywhere, but when Saddam violated the cease fire, tried to kill a president and shot at our planes while he was using a humanitarian aid program as his personal slush fund..that was a special case. The situation with Saddam was long, complicated, insoluble and went on for many years before Bush became President.
Terrye on November 5, 2008 at 12:19 PM
The self-analysis here is missing the critical element of national education. The voting population now contains two generations of public school graduates who cannot cogently express any sound ideas from the nation’s founding aside from “no taxation without representation.” The left controls not only education at all levels, but popular media and news reporting as well. That’s the only way the ridiculous notions of the left gain credence — by enforced monopolies on the public mind.
If conservatism is going to accomplish anything besides momentary slowing of the slide toward World Socialism (a slide that is very, very nearly complete at this point), we must — MUST — control the education of our children. And not just ours — THEIRS. We can’t just retreat and home-school; we have to commandeer teachers’ colleges and universities producing curricula. Without it, we’re just sticking our fingers in a crumbling dike.
philwynk on November 5, 2008 at 12:19 PM
No, Ron Paul is not a political Messiah. Anyone who puts too much faith in a political leader doesn’t understand that human nature is fundamentally flawed and is thinking like a liberal.
Also, I’m not sure if I agree with the paleocons on all things. For instance, I’m not sure if I agree with the paleocons on their protectionist stance toward free trade. I’ll need to develop a better understanding of global economics before I decide on whether to embrace their ideas.
MedSchoolCatholic on November 5, 2008 at 12:19 PM
The minute Saddam Hussein intentionally dumped 40,000,000 barrels of oil into the gulf and lit just about every oil well in Kuwait on fire, all while retreating in one of the most humiliating military defeats in all of human history, it was obvious to rational people that he could not be allowed to remain in control of one of the most strategically important areas of the world. There were many, many, many other reasons why Iraq had to be taken down, but this display of Saddam’s scorched Earth policy was quite enough on its own.
progressoverpeace on November 5, 2008 at 12:20 PM
There will be no more “elections”. Well, there will be some but they will be like the ones under all totalitarian regimes where 99% of the population “votes” in favor of whatever the regime wants.
Nahanni on November 5, 2008 at 12:20 PM
Well, we now have the best president that money can buy, along with the best congress money can buy. Thank you anonymous Obama donors from around the globe! We really appreciate how you helped our nation.
/spits
Kevin in Washington State on November 5, 2008 at 12:20 PM
uh, would u like a dirty bomb shoved down your chimney? neither would I. Google yellowcake there’s a story from CBS as of June or July talking about the causus belli, which is popularly but incorrectly labeled a lie. Bush didn’t lie. The war was more than justified by 550 metric tons of yellowcake in Iraq. We had to stop any potential for weapons transfer to saudi terrorists. end of story.
anti-boomer on November 5, 2008 at 12:22 PM
Don’t be dumb. I voted for McCain. I also wanted to keep Obama out.
And it’s the idiotic claim by McCain haters that McCain was running his campaign as ‘I’m not Obama’ and of course that was BS. McCain ran to get elected and he made his case why people should vote for him in every speech and at the debates. That is what I said. and that is what I was talking about.
wise_man on November 5, 2008 at 12:22 PM
anti-boomer,
I don’t really think that Jindal is going to be the face of the party. He has a little problem beleiving in creationism and signing a law that makes it object of study at school. For Louisiana I don’t think is a big problem but nationally that hust reinsure all the stereotypes about the social conservatives:stupid people that believe only the Bible. MSM is going to rip him apart.
I do think that Palin, with a little more schooling, or Pawlenty re better suited to be the new leaders of the GOP.
Teyrre,
if the dems don’t reinact the Fairness Doctrine, Rush is going to have a good time during Obama presidency. He knows it very well and I suspect he wanted this all the way.
clemycali on November 5, 2008 at 12:23 PM
I worked the polls in Arizona yesterday. The precinct I was assigned to is near my home and conservative.
On election morning, I arrived to see the biggest voting line I ever saw standing at 5:30 AM (Polls open at 6 AM). That initial herd was pushed through in around 90 – 120 minutes. After 9 – 9:30 we no longer had any significant lines, but a steady flow of folks.
This particular precinct is in the suburbs. A lot of folks live there, but no one works there. So we were expecting a bubble of folks around lunchtime and a line to form and grow after 3 – 3:30 PM. Other poll workers who had worked at the polls before were also expecting the same and telling me to get ready … when …
the bubble or the lines never materialized ….. nada, zilch, nothing …. and the flow turned to a trickle.
When we closed the polls … there was no line, and only two or three of the 40+ voting booths in use.
At the end of the day … my best guess, is maybe … just maybe … there was a 50% turnout in that precinct.
AZ_Redneck on November 5, 2008 at 12:23 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next »