Quotes of the day

posted at 10:13 pm on November 16, 2012 by Allahpundit

In the countless hours I spent in Romney’s presence during his first White House run (and mostly from a greater distance during his second bid), I saw a man who was preternaturally upbeat, well-meaning, and kind to just about everyone he encountered, friends and strangers alike.

But I also saw a candidate who seemed by nature almost uniquely ill-equipped to appeal to the young and minority voters who ended up playing a key role in his electoral demise.

Members of the press who traveled with Romney in 2007 and early 2008 began slowly to pick up on what would become an established media narrative by the time Romney was the 2012 front-runner: The former Massachusetts governor didn’t just have a difficult time relating to young and minority voters, he often came across as a walking-talking time warp from the 1950s…

After wrapping up the Republican nomination four years later, he toned down the hokey tales from his youth. But instead of making a concerted effort to cut into President Obama’s advantages with key groups, Romney and his chief strategists seemed to bury their heads in the sand, predicating their hopes for victory on an assumption that young voters and minorities would turn out in lesser numbers than they did in 2008.

***

Compassionate conservatism always struck me as a philosophical surrender to liberal assumptions about the role of the government in our lives. A hallmark of Great Society liberalism is the idea that an individual’s worth as a human being is correlated to his support for massive expansions of the entitlement state. Conservatives are not uncompassionate. (Indeed, the data show that conservatives are more charitable with their own money and more generous with their time than liberals are.) But, barring something like a natural disaster, they believe that government is not the best and certainly not the first resort for acting on one’s compassion.

I still believe all of that, probably even more than I did when Bush was in office.

But, as a political matter, it has become clear that he was on to something important

Some sophisticated analysts, such as my National Review colleague Ramesh Ponnuru, always acknowledged the philosophical shortcomings and inconsistencies of compassionate conservatism, but they argued that something like it was necessary nonetheless. The evolving demographics of the country, combined with the profound changes to both the culture and the economy, demanded that the GOP change both its sales pitch and its governing philosophy.

***

What the various interest groups need that Republicans have failed to give them is respect, attention, and love.

Yes, as weird as it sounds in a political context – love. Because frankly, I don’t think most Republicans care much about these groups…

I always found George W. Bush’s term “compassionate conservatism” deeply insulting. It asserts that conservatism isn’t on its own compassionate. But while conservatism sometimes offers tough medicine, the cure it provides is deeply compassionate.

Republicans need to go directly into the black communities and ask, “How has 50 years of an expanding welfare state worked out for you?”

They need to go into the Hispanic communities and say, “If policies that are anti-business prevail, how are you going to make enough money get your kids an education so they can take their place at the highest rungs of society?”

Republicans need to talk to women about why conservative economic policies provide the prosperity that guarantees security for their families, and to support working women by backing efforts to give them the time to be mothers too.

***

[Romney's] vision of a better America than Obama’s was one that rewarded success rather than penalized it and gave running room to entrepreneurs to realize the American dream.

But such a vision isn’t actually inclusive. It speaks to those whose energies will likely make them successes no matter what they do — and says little to people who don’t think of life in such dynamic terms.

Many people crave security and stability rather than risk-taking, and that doesn’t make them any less American. They are the workers rather than the job creators, and all societies need both.

Romney is right that the Obama vision is too centered on government. But his is too centered on the promotion of business and wealth creation at the expense of everything else.

***

“I think President Obama, first of all, just tactically did a better job getting out the vote in his campaign. But number two, he, at least at the margins, was better able to connect with people in this campaign,” Pawlenty said in an interview with C-SPAN’s “Newsmakers” program scheduled to air on Sunday.

“But I don’t think it’s a matter of people looking at the election and saying, ‘I’m going to vote because of gifts,’” he added. “I think they looked at it and said which one of these candidates would they prefer because of leadership considerations and also can understand their needs the best.”

Pressed on whether this meant he disagreed with Romney’s remarks, Pawlenty responded, “You know, I don’t think it’s as simple as saying the president gave out gifts. I just don’t think it’s that simple. There’s a lot more to it than that.”

***

***

Newt Gingrich and Evan Smith discuss Romney’s “gifts” remark in response to Obama’s re-election from KLRU-TV on Vimeo.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3 4

We knew people were stupid going into this election. That’s part of the territory. The candidate and campaign have to take this into consideration.

When you lose a football game you don’t blame the playing field.

SparkPlug on November 16, 2012 at 11:16 PM

I didn’t. I truly didn’t. And even sitting here now, I’ve got to believe that it’s a problem with group thinking, which literally diminishes IQ and problem solving ability. A vast portion of the population is apparently being synchronized into a profoundly stupid herd by things being fed into their ears and eyes. If it’s true, they don’t know about it, and I don’t know how to tell them about it.

I don’t think you can blame Romney for losing the election. He lost because people sat it out or voted for Obama. There’s no excuse for either of those. That would be true if Romney were a chicken salad sandwich.

Axe on November 16, 2012 at 11:28 PM

As for farm living – no idea – never been on one. ;)

kim roy on November 16, 2012 at 11:17 PM

From Greenacres, where I grew up. I think you would like it, you seem to be pretty sharp.

arnold ziffel on November 16, 2012 at 11:28 PM

I am sorry, I just do not think that the whole shining city on the hill speech would have worked in this country today after that meltdown and with the changing demographics. I just do not see it.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:21 PM

You could be right.

I guess I’m just trying to Remember America as it once was, and not the pile it is today.

We HAVE to do something about immigration. It’s just like the Social Security problem. It’s just getting bigger the longer we ignore it.

portlandon on November 16, 2012 at 11:29 PM

ot from drudge obama consults sharpton on fiscal negotiations

Who is John Galt on November 16, 2012 at 11:09 PM

Whadchu talkin ’bout me fer, Willis, ya racist?

Jez ‘cuz I wuz bankrupt and didn’t pay no taxes don’t mean that I don’t know nuthin ’bout fizzle madders and ressin sum reffenews. I’s knows how ta ressin da jack. How’s comes ya dink I’s only hev da ones Freddy’s Fashoon Mart. Mostest peeps pay. Des ain’t stoopid like dat kyke owner from da area my brutha, Jessie, calls ‘Da Himeedown. Des pay. Des ain’t dead.

Nos mo talkin ’bout me ‘hind my back.

Keep hopes alive and resist we much! Peace out!

Resist We Much on November 16, 2012 at 11:30 PM

1. Romney was right.
2. Rs finished much closer than in 2008 with an uninspiring candidate who had a rough primary.
3. Millions of Rs sat on their hands because the left’s negative campaigning worked.
4. The economy will suck from now ’till 2014.
5. The country doesn’t need two parties focused on giving away free stuff.
6. Look to CA-21 for a hint on how to communicate with Hispanics.
7. Suck it up. It got closer this year; ’14 will bring more progress, and ’16 even more. This ain’t a sprint.

FerdtheMoonCat on November 16, 2012 at 11:30 PM

Imagine Reagan in a world where a majority of Americans support same sex marriage…Reagan did not support the Civil Rights Act…can anyone imagine a man running for the White House and winning today if he could not say that he supported the Civil Rights Act? No matter how good his reasons were..it would not happen.

Romney had his drawbacks, big ones, but as a national candidate, he was head and shoulders above the rest who got into the primaries — which is why the base nominated him, even thought they had little affection for him. All in all, he better served the party than the party served him.

bobs1196 on November 16, 2012 at 11:26 PM

I agree. That is why he ran ahead of most of the other Republicans. I live in Indiana and I watched Mourdock throw away that Senate seat. Lugar did not look half bad after that. Hell, in this state Romney won by a larger margin than Pence did.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:33 PM

I listen to Reagan’s speeches back then…

And then I look at the media today.

I mean…

We had 4 Americans die…
And this administration blamed someone who had nothing to do with it…
He is in jail now..

I was 18 back in the Reagan era..

The sh!t I have seen today…

Didn’t happen back then…

Electrongod on November 16, 2012 at 11:27 PM

So true. This America is getting to be a shell of its former self.

Also, The media hated Reagan. I remember Sam Donaldson used to go After Reagan during Q & A and Reagan used to obliterate him. It was magical. Cokie Roberts voice used to raise about 3 octaves when she screeched about Reagan. LOL. But the media today is openly campaigning for Obama. I’ve never seen this as bad as it is today. They don’t even try to hide it anymore. They are so brazen.

portlandon on November 16, 2012 at 11:33 PM

I mean really…do any of us not believe that Obama won by giving people stuff? Even the people who voted for him know that. It is like some strange game we play where no one is supposed to mention an obvious fact.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Nah, I don’t really believe that. Obama won by rallying his base with mostly-empty policy proposals, and his likability (and Mitt’s corresponding un-likability) dampened the opposition to him. Obama’s ‘gifts’ weren’t even really “gifts”, they were more like “symbolic shout-outs.” Romney counted on antipathy for Obama to rally the Republican base while he wooed centrists with soothing messages to convince them to ‘break up with Obama.’ Maybe he should have found policy proposals to rally people around his candidacy instead?

Most of all, I think Romney lost by not placing blame for the economy squarely on Obama. His consistent advertising message was “things are bad right now, the President hasn’t made them better, so we should probably consider firing him”– it should have been more like “things are bad right now, and it is absolutely the President’s fault, we must fire him.”

Mitt ran the only campaign he could have, and he put up a respectable fight. He fared better than any of his primary opponents would have. But at the end of the day, we needed a candidate who could zealously prosecute Obamacare, and by extension big government, as the source of all economic woe in this country, and such a candidate was unwilling or unable to step forward in 2012. That’s why we lost, but its not Romney’s fault.

Lawdawg86 on November 16, 2012 at 11:35 PM

BREAKING ON DRUDGE:

ROCKETS FIRED FROM EGYPT HIT ISRAEL

Heckava job, Barry!

Resist We Much on November 16, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Also, The media hated Reagan. I remember Sam Donaldson used to go After Reagan during Q & A and Reagan used to obliterate him. It was magical. Cokie Roberts voice used to raise about 3 octaves when she screeched about Reagan. LOL. But the media today is openly campaigning for Obama. I’ve never seen this as bad as it is today. They don’t even try to hide it anymore. They are so brazen.

portlandon on November 16, 2012 at 11:33 PM

There was no cable news back then or internet. The media did not have the control of culture that it is today. I think most people back then were mostly concerned with their families and their towns and states. Now, they are so overwhelmed with so much stuff all the time from so many sources that it allows for people to live in their own little echo chambers. There is no reality to half of what they hear anymore.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:36 PM

O/T, but since it is QOTD I have a question. A couple days ago there were posts on the Green Room re Guy Fieri’s restaurant in NYC. For anyone that speaks Italian—Is he being goofy pronouncing his name “Fietti” rather than “Feeairy”? Also he calls Marinara sauce “Mahdinahda.” Important topic that keeps arnold awake.

arnold ziffel on November 16, 2012 at 11:37 PM

BREAKING ON DRUDGE:

ROCKETS FIRED FROM EGYPT HIT ISRAEL

Heckava job, Barry!

Resist We Much on November 16, 2012 at 11:35 PM

That is a goal of Barack Hussein Obama’s agenda.

The satan worshipping reprobate is compelled to aid enemies of Israel.

tom daschle concerned on November 16, 2012 at 11:37 PM

BREAKING ON DRUDGE:

ROCKETS FIRED FROM EGYPT HIT ISRAEL

Heckava job, Barry!

Resist We Much on November 16, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Well, gee. Maybe they will cut off aid now.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:38 PM

Just in case anyone doesn’t know….

“But resist, we much… we must… and we will much… about… that… be committed.”

– Al Sharpton, 9 August 2011

Resist We Much on November 16, 2012 at 11:40 PM

BREAKING ON DRUDGE:

ROCKETS FIRED FROM EGYPT HIT ISRAEL

Heckava job, Barry!

I guess we will see WWIII with yellow back Obama as CiC…

What could go wrong….

Electrongod on November 16, 2012 at 11:40 PM

Lawdawg86 on November 16, 2012 at 11:35 PM

I think it was the free stuff, because that is what people expect anymore. They think presidents are like Daddy.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:40 PM

Obama Consults With MSNBC Host Al Sharpton, and Other ‘Civil Rights Leaders,’ on Fiscal Talks

Can we now call Obama anything but a free market capitalist?

He goes to RACE HUSTLERS for economic advice?

May they all languish in pain and suffering forever and ever, and those who elected them suffer immeasurably for all time in this world and all worlds to come.

tom daschle concerned on November 16, 2012 at 11:42 PM

ROCKETS FIRED FROM EGYPT HIT ISRAEL

Resist We Much on November 16, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Darned Obstructionist House Republicans!
/

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Reagan would have beaten Obama.

SparkPlug on November 16, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Just to get the list in a convenient spot.

President Obama and Vice President Biden met with leaders of civil rights and civic organizations to discuss negotiations over how to avoid the fiscal cliff. The meeting lasted over an hour, and participants spoke to reporters outside the West Wing after they wrapped up.

Per the White House, expected attendees included:

* Peter Berns, The Arc
* Sister Simone Campbell, NETWORK
* Chad Griffin, Human Rights Campaign (HRC)
* Wade Henderson, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR)
* Deepa Iyer National Council of Asian Pacific Americans (NCAPA)
* Ben Jealous, NAACP
* Marc Morial, National Urban League
* Janet Murguia, National Council of La Raza (NCLR)
* Barry Rand, AARP
* Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, MomsRising.org
* Rev. Al Sharpton, National Action Network (NAN)
* Aaron Smith, Young Invincibles
* Rev. Jim Wallis, Sojourners

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-consults-msnbc-host-al-sharpton-and-other-civil-rights-leaders-fiscal-talks_663493.html

Axe on November 16, 2012 at 11:43 PM

ell, gee. Maybe they will cut off aid now.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:38 PM

Nah. Does the government cut off aid when an urban area burns down its own neighbourhood and the Feds have to go in and rebuild it?

Besides, the concerns about turning out the Jewish vote are soooooo 6 November 2012. Passé, I tell you. Passé.

That is a goal of Barack Hussein Obama’s agenda. The satan worshipping reprobate is compelled to aid enemies of Israel.

tom daschle concerned on November 16, 2012 at 11:37 PM

Yeppers.

Resist We Much on November 16, 2012 at 11:44 PM

You could be right.

I guess I’m just trying to Remember America as it once was, and not the pile it is today.

We HAVE to do something about immigration. It’s just like the Social Security problem. It’s just getting bigger the longer we ignore it.

portlandon on November 16, 2012 at 11:29 PM

I absolutely agree.

And I try to remember America that way too. Sometimes I watch old movies just so I can feel like I am home again.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Reagan would have beaten Obama.

SparkPlug on November 16, 2012 at 11:42 PM

War on Women…..

Reagan would have said….

If you spread…..
Take care…

The media today would have attacked..

Electrongod on November 16, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Reagan would have beaten Obama.

SparkPlug on November 16, 2012 at 11:42 PM

I don’t know if Reagan could have beaten Obama in this election.

Let’s settle this. I’ll get the candles — you get the chicken.

Axe on November 16, 2012 at 11:45 PM

* Peter Berns, The Arc
* Sister Simone Campbell, NETWORK
* Chad Griffin, Human Rights Campaign (HRC)
* Wade Henderson, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR)
* Deepa Iyer National Council of Asian Pacific Americans (NCAPA)
* Ben Jealous, NAACP
* Marc Morial, National Urban League
* Janet Murguia, National Council of La Raza (NCLR)
* Barry Rand, AARP
* Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, MomsRising.org
* Rev. Al Sharpton, National Action Network (NAN)
* Aaron Smith, Young Invincibles
* Rev. Jim Wallis, Sojourners

That’s the enemy, right there.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Will tonight’s QOTD break 300 posts?

OmahaConservative on November 16, 2012 at 11:46 PM

BREAKING ON DRUDGE:

ROCKETS FIRED FROM EGYPT HIT ISRAEL

Heckava job, Barry!

Resist We Much on November 16, 2012 at 11:35 PM

A Great Trembling starts….

portlandon on November 16, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Obama is suing eBay today. Where will we sell our Twinkies?

If you ever gave money to Republicans… it’s REVENGE time.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:47 PM

That’s the enemy, right there.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Not to mention the obvious frivolity of Obama meeting on financial matters with people who know essentially nothing about finances.

northdallasthirty on November 16, 2012 at 11:47 PM

OmahaConservative on November 16, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Maybe.

SparkPlug on November 16, 2012 at 11:47 PM

No, he would not have. Barack Obama has been caught in a bold faced lie over this Benghazi stuff..and no one cares. The media does not care. People do not care as long as their get their free stuff. When Reagan was running for office, it actually mattered if a man told the truth or not.

I am sorry, I do not mean this as disrepectful to Reagan, but he would not have beaten Obama.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:26 PM

You may be right, but Reagan would’ve made the press have to cover Benghazi as he would’ve made it front and center, not as an example of Obama’s foreign policy failure, but as an example of government incompetence under his leadership. He would’ve folded that argument into the debt and deficit handling incompetence and the mistaken path that was taken in nationalizing healthcare, with specific examples.

Romney didn’t win that first debate, as much as Obama lost it. Romney’s failure was in not weaving the Benghazi thing into the larger story, which the electorate understood, that Obama was an incompetent. He was afraid to go for the jugular, not wanting to appear small or racist or whatever. That, plus RomneyCare, which stopped him from attacking ObamaCare (the way a Reagan would’ve been able to do) left him neutered to a large degree.

That said, Romney also had to overcome more than a $100 million in negative ads that went unanswered up until the convention, ad buys that Reagan never saw, although the media were in full dudgeon against him, too. Reagan’s approach, however, would’ve done Romney and the nation well had it been employed.

TXUS on November 16, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Reagan would have beaten Obama.

SparkPlug on November 16, 2012 at 11:42 PM

You got every right in the world to your opinion. But I am afraid I can not see that. The Civil Rights stuff would have done him in.

My grandfather only voted for one Republican, and that was Reagan..and that was because Mondale put that woman on the ticket. He was so disgusted by that. I am not sure what he did when Kennedy was running because he had a problem with Catholics too. But I loved him.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:48 PM

I listen to Reagan’s speeches back then…

And then I look at the media today.

I mean…

We had 4 Americans die…
And this administration blamed someone who had nothing to do with it…
He is in jail now..

I was 18 back in the Reagan era..

The sh!t I have seen today…

Didn’t happen back then…

Electrongod on November 16, 2012 at 11:27 PM

1980 Reagan wouldn’t have won. I wonder what a 2012 Reagan would have done.

Apples and oranges to compare Romney to Reagan. Society was different, the media were different. It’s unfair to compare the two unless you want to try to judge how today’s Romney would have done against 1980 Carter. There’s a darn good chance Romney would have won 1980 handily.

People paid attention. They weren’t MTV’d to death. You watch anything today and they feed it out in the smallest bites in order to train short attention spans.

Like another poster said (I’m too lazy to go back and look sorry) people cared whether the truth was told. Now? It’s all a matter of how good the lie is.

kim roy on November 16, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Darned Obstructionist House Republicans!
/

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Don’t give Barry any ideas or….

Old and busted: Iron Dome

New hotness: Eric Cantor

Resist We Much on November 16, 2012 at 11:50 PM

kim roy on November 16, 2012 at 11:17 PM

From Greenacres, where I grew up. I think you would like it, you seem to be pretty sharp.

arnold ziffel on November 16, 2012 at 11:28 PM

She just adores a penthouse view. Darling, she loves you, but give her Park Avenue. :)

Axe on November 16, 2012 at 11:51 PM

I wonder if Obama is going for a quicker destruction now.

Speeding it along.

Israel.

Squeeze all GOP donor companies.

Give more money to Dems.

Go off the cliff.

Scandals, embarrass CEOs, generals, and other leaders of the country.

Or, maybe I’m just imagining things.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:51 PM

From Greenacres, where I grew up. I think you would like it, you seem to be pretty sharp.

arnold ziffel on November 16, 2012 at 11:28 PM

That’s sweet of you to say. It would be an interesting experiment, not afraid of hard work, but never had the opportunity.

It’s probably a heck of a lot harder than it looks.

kim roy on November 16, 2012 at 11:53 PM

You may be right, but Reagan would’ve made the press have to cover Benghazi as he would’ve made it front and center, not as an example of Obama’s foreign policy failure, but as an example of government incompetence under his leadership. He would’ve folded that argument into the debt and deficit handling incompetence and the mistaken path that was taken in nationalizing healthcare, with specific examples.

Romney didn’t win that first debate, as much as Obama lost it. Romney’s failure was in not weaving the Benghazi thing into the larger story, which the electorate understood, that Obama was an incompetent. He was afraid to go for the jugular, not wanting to appear small or racist or whatever. That, plus RomneyCare, which stopped him from attacking ObamaCare (the way a Reagan would’ve been able to do) left him neutered to a large degree.

That said, Romney also had to overcome more than a $100 million in negative ads that went unanswered up until the convention, ad buys that Reagan never saw, although the media were in full dudgeon against him, too. Reagan’s approach, however, would’ve done Romney and the nation well had it been employed.

TXUS on November 16, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Reagan could not have made them cover Benghazi. They would have treated him like a crazy person and just ignored the whole thing until the damn well felt like talking about..if ever. The other day Jake Tapper said that Republicans were making stuff up about Benghazi that had no basis in reality.

Imagine Iran Contra with 24 hour news and the internet. Reagan was a man of his time. He fit in that world perfectly. He really did.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:53 PM

t’s all a matter of how good the lie is.

kim roy on November 16, 2012 at 11:49 PM

+100

Electrongod on November 16, 2012 at 11:53 PM

That, plus RomneyCare, which stopped him from attacking ObamaCare (the way a Reagan would’ve been able to do) left him neutered to a large degree.

That said, Romney also had to overcome more than a $100 million in negative ads that went unanswered up until the convention, ad buys that Reagan never saw, although the media were in full dudgeon against him, too. Reagan’s approach, however, would’ve done Romney and the nation well had it been employed.

TXUS on November 16, 2012 at 11:47 PM

All true.

Reagan would not have had the RomneyCare baggage. The base would have turned out for Reagan. Reagan bypassed the media and spoke directly to the American people. Regan would have let Palin see some daylight at the convention and would never have allowed back stabbing Chrisie bloat up the stage.

SparkPlug on November 16, 2012 at 11:54 PM

Romney also had to overcome more than a $100 million in negative ads that went unanswered up until the convention,

TXUS on November 16, 2012 at 11:47 PM

I don’t buy that excuse at all. That’s just GOP campaign consultant nonsense.

Romney caught up with Obama on the first debate.

Start there, and we will find our answer.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:54 PM

Or, maybe I’m just imagining things.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:51 PM

If you are..you are not alone. The world seems to gone off the deep end.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:55 PM

BREAKING ON DRUDGE:

ROCKETS FIRED FROM EGYPT HIT ISRAEL

Heckava job, Barry!

I, for one, am wondering whether Obama may have authorized, or even requested, the attack from his Muslim Brotherhood bro’s in Egypt.

TXUS on November 16, 2012 at 11:56 PM

Not to mention the obvious frivolity of Obama meeting on financial mattersfennezial madders with people who know essentially nothing about finances fEYEnaanzez.

northdallasthirty on November 16, 2012 at 11:47 PM

FIFY. Don’t any of you ever watch Rev Al’s show? It’s high comedy! On his first day, I thought that I would break every rib AND wet my jeans I was laughing so hard. Seriously, I was rolling on the floor crying with tears and mascara rolling down my face.

You should go look for the youtube of it. Watching him try to keep up with the teleprompter (shyt, I’m starting to laughcry again) was the one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen.

Resist We Much on November 16, 2012 at 11:56 PM

She just adores a penthouse view. Darling, she loves you, but give her Park Avenue. :)

Axe on November 16, 2012 at 11:51 PM

Never watched the show, so these references missed. Hope I didn’t embarrass myself too much. ;)

kim roy on November 16, 2012 at 11:57 PM

That, plus RomneyCare, which stopped him from attacking ObamaCare (the way a Reagan would’ve been able to do) left him neutered to a large degree.

TXUS on November 16, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Neutered!!!

Clinton screwed an intern, and now look at him.

Obama ran the country into the ground and promised a Marxist utopia. Was he neutered????

A good politician doesn’t get neutered.

At the end of the day, Romney was just not a very good politician.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, may be our answer.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:58 PM

I wonder if Obama is going for a quicker destruction now.

Speeding it along.

Israel.

Squeeze all GOP donor companies.

Give more money to Dems.

Go off the cliff.

Scandals, embarrass CEOs, generals, and other leaders of the country.

Or, maybe I’m just imagining things.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:51 PM

You wonder?

LOL!

That is what he was elected to do. Prepare for the worst. Food, ammo, barterable skills and goods. We are entering a dark period.

tom daschle concerned on November 16, 2012 at 11:58 PM

Reagan would have embraced the Tea Party. Mitt was too PC to do that.

SparkPlug on November 16, 2012 at 11:58 PM

I don’t buy that excuse at all. That’s just GOP campaign consultant nonsense.

Romney caught up with Obama on the first debate.

Start there, and we will find our answer.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:54 PM

You’re quoting me out of context, but that’s your choice.

TXUS on November 17, 2012 at 12:01 AM

That, plus RomneyCare, which stopped him from attacking ObamaCare (the way a Reagan would’ve been able to do) left him neutered to a large degree.

TXUS on November 16, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Neutered!!!

Clinton screwed an intern, and now look at him.

Obama ran the country into the ground and promised a Marxist utopia. Was he neutered????

A good politician doesn’t get neutered.

At the end of the day, Romney was just not a very good politician.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, may be our answer.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:58 PM

SparkPlug on November 17, 2012 at 12:01 AM

Reagan would have led the Tea Party

faraway on November 17, 2012 at 12:01 AM

All true.

Reagan would not have had the RomneyCare baggage. The base would have turned out for Reagan. Reagan bypassed the media and spoke directly to the American people. Regan would have let Palin see some daylight at the convention and would never have allowed back stabbing Chrisie bloat up the stage.

SparkPlug on November 16, 2012 at 11:54 PM

I do not think Romneycare hurt Romney at all. And he did go after Obama on Obamacare. I think the thing that hurt us on that was the Supreme Court decision. Once the mandate was upheld people began to change their attitudes toward Obamacare. Besides, people knew what it was, if they did not want it then they should have voted against Obama just for that reason. Back when Reagan was running for office people were not expected to be so damn stupid that you had to spoon feed everything to them.

And you can not bypass the media anymore. It is everywhere all the time. 24 hours a day.TV.internet. There is no escaping it.

And Reagan was running against Jimmy Carter. Obama is not Carter. He is something else entirely and it scares me just to watch him. I did not like Carter, but I dread Obama.Does that make sense?

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:02 AM

Reagan would have led the Tea Party

faraway on November 17, 2012 at 12:01 AM

The Tea Party did not do so well this time around.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:03 AM

Gingrich is awesome, but you idiots on here knew figured he had to be destroyed to pave the way for the (anything but) electable candidate Romney. Gingrich would have won. Why? Because the base would have turned out for him.

AmeriCuda on November 17, 2012 at 12:04 AM

I think it was the free stuff, because that is what people expect anymore. They think presidents are like Daddy.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:40 PM

Mitt was trying to sell a positive vision of conservatism as an antidote to Obama; but he was unwilling to cast Obama’s policies as a poison, and he was selling his conservative view from 20,000-feet up. We need a candidate who can either cast liberal policies as the source of all woe, or who can sell conservatism on the ground-level. Mitt was never going to be able to do the latter; and he was hesitant in directly blaming Obama for the woeful state of the economy. That’s why Mitt lost.

Lawdawg86 on November 17, 2012 at 12:04 AM

I graduated HS c. Reagan.

Half the population wants to be socialist today. They don’t know the word, and they don’t know what it means, but they want to be comfortable and walk over a net, and they don’t mind taking lots of money from rich people, who obviously have more than they need.

In, say, ’87 — it would have been dishonorable to suggest you can take a rich man’s money, even if could lay a valid claim, to most of the population. The Secret of My Success and other silly movies were things to shoot for — now they are examples of “selfishness” and variations of Gordan Gekko themes. The media’s been pounding people into a new shape of a fair fraction of a century. It’s not the same world, or the same country.

If you want a good guess about how he would be handled today, both by the machine and the LSM — think Palin.

Axe on November 17, 2012 at 12:04 AM

You’re quoting me out of context, but that’s your choice.

TXUS on November 17, 2012 at 12:01 AM

Sorry, I just saw a snippet of it from someone else. We’re good.

faraway on November 17, 2012 at 12:04 AM

The loudmouth Christie actually chided Romney for being “divisive” with his “gifts” comment? Jindal did also?

I’m speechless. After the campaign this White House just ran?

Binders full of Big Bird? Punish your enemies? Voting’s the best revenge? If I had a son he’d look like Tray Von? Gonna put y’all back in chains?

If the Washington Post said Obama won because he targeted minority groups it’s fine. If Romney says Obama won by targeting minority groups, it’s racist.

I think we’ve finally realized Orwell’s horror. Truth is fiction. Lies are fact. Good is evil. I don’t think we come back from this.

sartana on November 17, 2012 at 12:05 AM

The Tea Party did not do so well this time around.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:03 AM

RINOs too :)

faraway on November 17, 2012 at 12:06 AM

Romney caught up with Obama on the first debate.
Start there, and we will find our answer.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:54 PM

People ask for examples of where Romney cheesed. When that dipshit ette (second debate) asked about the assault weapons ban, Romney should have been all over Obama’s cracker ass re Fast and Furious. Jeez, she opened the door and Romney closed it.

arnold ziffel on November 17, 2012 at 12:06 AM

Neutered!!!

Clinton screwed an intern, and now look at him.

Obama ran the country into the ground and promised a Marxist utopia. Was he neutered????

A good politician doesn’t get neutered.

At the end of the day, Romney was just not a very good politician.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, may be our answer.

faraway on November 16, 2012 at 11:58 PM

A fawning media can work wonders on one’s reputation or efficacy as a politician. It is a difficult filter, indeed, for someone not of their family.

TXUS on November 17, 2012 at 12:07 AM

I think we’ve finally realized Orwell’s horror. Truth is fiction. Lies are fact. Good is evil. I don’t think we come back from this.

sartana on November 17, 2012 at 12:05 AM

It is very Orwellian, certainly. We may have turned the last corner.

Who is John Galt on November 17, 2012 at 12:07 AM

Reagan would have embraced the Tea Party. Mitt was too PC to do that.

SparkPlug on November 16, 2012 at 11:58 PM

This is all academic anyway…but do you really think that someone who refused to support the Civil Rights Act could win a national election today?

I think that Reagan’s style was something that younger politicians could learn from. His ease with people. His ability to make conservatism look like something nice people could believe in and not just mean rich people…all of that would be useful today.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:07 AM

Never watched the show, so these references missed. Hope I didn’t embarrass myself too much. ;)

kim roy on November 16, 2012 at 11:57 PM

One minute six seconds to enlightenment, if you’ve a mind. :)

Axe on November 17, 2012 at 12:08 AM

A fawning media can work wonders on one’s reputation or efficacy as a politician. It is a difficult filter, indeed, for someone not of their family.

TXUS on November 17, 2012 at 12:07 AM

Yes, this is so true.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:08 AM

Mitt was trying to sell a positive vision of conservatism as an antidote to Obama; but he was unwilling to cast Obama’s policies as a poison, and he was selling his conservative view from 20,000-feet up. We need a candidate who can either cast liberal policies as the source of all woe, or who can sell conservatism on the ground-level. Mitt was never going to be able to do the latter; and he was hesitant in directly blaming Obama for the woeful state of the economy. That’s why Mitt lost.

Lawdawg86 on November 17, 2012 at 12:04 AM

Very good. This is one of many reasons why I like HA, it helps me to express myself better.

arnold ziffel on November 17, 2012 at 12:08 AM

Study: People are getting dumber.

Schadenfreude on November 17, 2012 at 12:08 AM

The Tea Party did not do so well this time around.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:03 AM

RINOs too :)

faraway on November 17, 2012 at 12:06 AM

I was thinking of Indiana where I live. They shoved Lugar out and replaced him with Mourdock…we all know how that ended.

But you have a point.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:10 AM

I do not think Romneycare hurt Romney at all.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:02 AM

Of course you don’t.

Now wouldn’t a rational person at least concede that if Mitt didn’t have his own RomneyCare baggage he would have been able to attack Obama on that point and excite the conservative base?

But you won’t evenadmit that it hurt Romney AT ALL. Not even a smidgen.

It’s easier to blame the electorate who BTW gave US a historic landslide of conservative victories a mere 2 years earlier.

SparkPlug on November 17, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Mitt was trying to sell a positive vision of conservatism as an antidote to Obama; but he was unwilling to cast Obama’s policies as a poison, and he was selling his conservative view from 20,000-feet up. We need a candidate who can either cast liberal policies as the source of all woe, or who can sell conservatism on the ground-level. Mitt was never going to be able to do the latter; and he was hesitant in directly blaming Obama for the woeful state of the economy. That’s why Mitt lost.

Lawdawg86 on November 17, 2012 at 12:04 AM

I think that the fact that most people did not blame Obama had something to do with that..and they still don’t…I do not see how that can be…but there you go. The other day a lady I know started yakking about what Obama inherited and all kinds of stuff. It ended in a big fight with me shouting her down and shutting her up.Not good.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:13 AM

And I try to remember America that way too. Sometimes I watch old movies just so I can feel like I am home again.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Leave it to Beaver
Father Knows Best
Andy Griffith

We’re moving closer to Soylent Green, Escape from New York, and Planet of the Apes.

freedomfirst on November 17, 2012 at 12:13 AM

Johnny Cash: I’ve been everywhere

portlandon on November 17, 2012 at 12:13 AM

Study: People are getting dumber.

Schadenfreude on November 17, 2012 at 12:08 AM

No evidence of my darkest fears please.

la la la la la can’t hear you

Axe on November 17, 2012 at 12:14 AM

Leave it to Beaver
Father Knows Best
Andy Griffith

We’re moving closer to Soylent Green, Escape from New York, and Planet of the Apes.

freedomfirst on November 17, 2012 at 12:13 AM

Don’t forget Logan’s Run…

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:14 AM

There is, of course, no way to be sure, but I very much doubt that Reagan won because of a “winning conservative strategy”. I don’t think his conservatism hurt him, but I don’t think it helped him either. He won, in all likelihood, because under Jimmy Carter inflation was 12-13% and mortgage interest rate were over 14%. Had that been the case in 2012, Romney would almost certainly have won and maybe big. People talk about, oh we need this strategy, oh we need that strategy, but most of what determines whether an incumbent is thrown out is the economy and although the economy was bad enough for Obama to go from a popular vote win of 7% down to 2% (or whatever it ended up being), it was not bad enough (yet) for him to lose.

VorDaj on November 17, 2012 at 12:14 AM

Johnny Cash: I’ve been everywhere

portlandon on November 17, 2012 at 12:13 AM

I love Johnny Cash!

The man in black. And he was a man alright, in the old fashioned sense of the word. Like my Daddy.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:16 AM

After the 2012 shellacking, does anyone here honestly believe that Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, or Rick Santorum should do anything but disappear from the national spotlight?

Lawdawg86 on November 16, 2012 at 10:44 PM

2012 was hardly a shellacking. 50.6% is not a shellacking. In the swing states, it is pretty apparent that fraud was rampant. Was it enough to swing the election? We’ll never know because the Republicans don’t have the huevos to force investigations.

I meant to say 18 year olds could not vote. Excuse me.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 10:57 PM

… and you are still incorrect. 18 year olds were given the vote way before then. I know, I was 18 in 1977 (just missed being able to vote against Carter the first time) but did get to vote in the 1978 mid-terms.

AZfederalist on November 17, 2012 at 12:16 AM

VorDaj on November 17, 2012 at 12:14 AM

You are right.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:17 AM

Don’t forget Logan’s Run…

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:14 AM

I grew up wanting to be a deep sleep operative until I understood the world that Logan’s Run described…Then I wanted to be Logan.

Love dystopian stuff…I just finished Joe Haldeman’s The Forever War.

tom daschle concerned on November 17, 2012 at 12:18 AM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/breaking-the-president-knew-the-truth-about-benghazi/2012/11/16/39aecaf0-3034-11e2-9f50-0308e1e75445_blog.html
says here…’he knew’…..laffs….
barry wrote the book….of course he knew..
fr the “smartest man in the world”….i just dont see much..

going2mars on November 17, 2012 at 12:18 AM

Snake Plissken Escape from L.A. Bangkok Rules

Axe on November 17, 2012 at 12:17 AM

LOL!

tom daschle concerned on November 17, 2012 at 12:20 AM

I meant to say 18 year olds could not vote. Excuse me.

Terrye on November 16, 2012 at 10:57 PM

… and you are still incorrect. 18 year olds were given the vote way before then. I know, I was 18 in 1977 (just missed being able to vote against Carter the first time) but did get to vote in the 1978 mid-terms.

AZfederalist on November 17, 2012 at 12:16 AM

Yes,you are correct. It was 71 when that changed..I later clarified this by saying that 18 then and 18 now is not the same thing.

Back then people left home and did not get to stay on their parent’s insurance. But then again unemployment insurance did not go on forever and we did not have 16% of the population on food stamps.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:21 AM

Love dystopian stuff…I just finished Joe Haldeman’s The Forever War.

tom daschle concerned on November 17, 2012 at 12:18 AM

Maybe I will read that. I have been looking for something different to read.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:23 AM

Study: People are getting dumber.

Schadenfreude on November 17, 2012 at 12:08 AM

How could anyone tell the difference in the Arab world?

VorDaj on November 17, 2012 at 12:25 AM

Study: People are getting dumber.

Schadenfreude on November 17, 2012 at 12:08 AM

Our generals are sure getting dumber. And our Presidents – oh my God!

VorDaj on November 17, 2012 at 12:26 AM

This is incompatible with a light-hearted, Gopher-girl’s life. Move to Louisiana and I shall forbid anyone that wearest the Purple and Gold to hunt you, and you shall be safe and happy. You may even mispronounce words if you’d like.

Axe on November 16, 2012 at 11:05 PM

I liked the one line in “Duck Dynasty”, when faced with the thought of moving into town into a subdivision the old man said, “When you live in a subdivision, they expect you to call 911; where I live, I am 911″ It’s a hokey show, but funny and has some nuggets of rugged individualism that is sorely lacking in our society.

AZfederalist on November 17, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Resist We Much on November 16, 2012 at 11:30 PM

Racist :)

Schadenfreude on November 17, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Love dystopian stuff…I just finished Joe Haldeman’s The Forever War.

tom daschle concerned on November 17, 2012 at 12:18 AM

Maybe I will read that. I have been looking for something different to read.

Terrye on November 17, 2012 at 12:23 AM

As a teen, I read Alas, Babylon! A story about post WWIII USA. Not sure if it might serve as a primer for things to come. Feeling Eeyorish tonight.

freedomfirst on November 17, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Study: People are getting dumber.

Schadenfreude on November 17, 2012 at 12:08 AM

we needed a study to find out ppl are getting dumber..??
didnt last weeks election prove that..!!!
no study needed…

going2mars on November 17, 2012 at 12:31 AM

Logan’s Run is about getting happy with no afterlife, totally lost on me back then though. I remember being logan for a while. The pistols had plumes that ejected from the side. No matter what store I checked or how hard I worked, no pistols with plumes. :( I managed to make an unrelated, giant turret in the front yard with big coke bottles and mom’s end-table, but in retrospect, it wasn’t worth the price.

Luckily, I got to pilot the Millennium Falcon for a while after that.

Axe on November 17, 2012 at 12:33 AM

3. Millions of Rs sat on their hands because the left’s negative campaigning worked.

FerdtheMoonCat on November 16, 2012 at 11:30 PM

Nah, …because they are bigots. They rather have this cretin for 4 more. May they all be destroyed and theirs too.

Schadenfreude on November 17, 2012 at 12:36 AM

Howdy folks!

I found Lanceman Sparky :-)

We all now live in a topsy Turvy world…

Can we ever right it?

It will take some STRONG & Ballsy people to do it…

The world, here, is shot as we know it…

Yeah, I am STILL frigging depressed that there are soooo many frigging stupid people in this country!

As has been said before L.I.B…

Pray for Israel folks, they need it… amen and amen…

Say one for all of us too :-)

Scrumpy on November 17, 2012 at 12:37 AM

going2mars on November 17, 2012 at 12:31 AM

Indeed – already said and affirmed in the comments at the headline thread.

Schadenfreude on November 17, 2012 at 12:37 AM

Hi Scrumpy

Schadenfreude on November 17, 2012 at 12:38 AM

God Bless and I bid thee all a good night!

Scrumpy on November 17, 2012 at 12:39 AM

Racist :)

Schadenfreude on November 17, 2012 at 12:29 AM

It’s not funny that Sharpton has a television show or is consulted on anything by the POTUS, but I can’t help laughing at him. I guess it is because it is absurd that an anti-Semitic, race-mongering, class-warfare-poisoning-injecting, bankrupt tax cheat even has a national television show and meets with the POTUS. It would be like David Duke being given a show on Fox and, as disgusting and vile as Duke is, I don’t think that he has left 8 or 9 dead people in his community-agitating wake.

The man should be shunned; yet, he is celebrated. If anyone wonders whether Reagan could win in a landslide today, you should consider that fact. The culture is a lot different than it was then. Hell, the culture in the US has shockingly declined in just the decade in which I’ve been a citizen.

Resist We Much on November 17, 2012 at 12:39 AM

Cokie Roberts voice used to raise about 3 octaves when she screeched about Reagan. LOL. But the media today is openly campaigning for Obama. I’ve never seen this as bad as it is today. They don’t even try to hide it anymore. They are so brazen.

portlandon on November 16, 2012 at 11:33 PM

And look how ugly, inside and out, Cokie is today. May they all suffocate from eating Obama’s sh*t, not Beluga caviar.

Schadenfreude on November 17, 2012 at 12:40 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4