Who will emerge as the leader of the opposition?

posted at 12:01 pm on January 10, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Hugh Hewitt asks a question today that my editor at The Fiscal Times asked me earlier this week, although in slightly different contexts.  Normally after a national-election loss, the banner-carrier would remain as the nominal head of the opposition — even in the US non-parliamentary system.  The media certainly went to John McCain after 2008′s loss, and for a while to John Kerry after the 2004 election, although by that time they had begun to see Hillary Clinton as the future of the Democratic Party.  All of the above had political offices from which to lead, however, regardless of whether they felt inclined to do so.  Mitt Romney has disappeared entirely back into private life, and the only opposition leaders at the moment in place seem to be having difficulty assuming the role:

When President first was elected John Boehner and Mitch McConnell could not actually serve as leaders of the opposition in the traditional American sense of the term because neither man had the ability to even slow down the president and the Democrats.  (Thank goodness the Democrats did so on their own or we’d be burdened with global warming craziness as well as Obamacare.)

After the 2010 elections, some balance returned to D.C. when the House passed into the control of the GOP, but the race to lead the GOP in the presidential election quickly overshadowed all else, and Boehner/McConnell and their teams were excused from opposition duties quickly though the clashes on budget, taxes and debt limit provided background to the presidential campaign.

The two years ahead thrust new roles on both men and their teams.  They can block the president’s more absurd fancies, but they also have to participate in governing to some extent because our system requires the House’s consent to do anything.

The Speaker’s and Leader’s staffs, however, don’t show any obvious signs of understanding the new media order or the relentlessness of the president’s program.  The president or Vice President Biden uses every day to push their agenda forward and belittle or divide the GOP.  Every day.  Yesterday the Obama machine, supported by its permanent allies in the Manhattan-Beltway media elite, acted to get the focus off the Hagel and Lew nominations and the Holder hold-over and they used Joe Biden and his “executive order” on guns to do so.  Today will see a different part of the carnival throwing up different aspects of stories or new story lines altogether.

Yesterday, as the day before and the day before that, there was no sign of any GOP leader anywhere, on the nominations, on the “executive order” on guns, on the key nominations.  No appearances.  No statements.  Just crickets.

In part, as I argue in my column for TFT today, that’s structural — the result of a bad election cycle and of a failed strategy on Boehner’s part.  Neither men have found the kind of resonance within the GOP to provide the kind of national opposition leadership Hugh seeks.  Plus, the necessity of having to negotiate from a position of relative weakness (thanks to those election results) will make it impossible for them to do so, even if they had the necessary qualities.

The next “opposition leader” has to come from outside the established leader positions, and has to be a relatively new voice to have the kind of credibility that the anti-establishment grassroots demands:

In order to be effective in 2014 and in 2016, the Republican Party needs to find a new voice and direction.  Those won’t come from the current class of establishment GOP figures in Washington, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell.  This isn’t meant as a criticism as much as a nod to reality.  As establishment figures in the 2012 failures, neither will have the kind of influence on Republican activists needed to clarify the mission and the message.  Also, neither operates on a clear philosophical basis, which would be difficult for any Congressional leader to do on an extended basis.  Newt Gingrich and Nancy Pelosi were exceptions to the rule; most Congressional leaders have to compromise and cut deals too often to provide that kind of leadership to the national party.

Who will rise within the GOP to provide unity of purpose and direction and return Republicans to a competitive position?  There are five Republicans to watch for their potential to lead, and what their success might mean for the direction of the GOP in the next two cycles.

I list five potential candidates that will assert themselves in 2013 as the leader of the Republican Party, at least in the rhetorical and ideological sense, if not offical.  All five hold office and have significant platforms, and each would take the GOP in different directions if successful.  The one with the best chance to unite the party’s various factions, though, is the most talented of the Class of 2010:

Marco Rubio – Of 2013’s potential leaders, none bridges the gap between the Tea Party and traditional Republican values better than Senator Rubio.  He was easily the most talented of the class of 2010, both politically and rhetorically.  His speech at the Republican convention last year was both the emotional and political high point of the week for the GOP.  Of the five Republicans to watch, Rubio has the talent to provide the most unity in the short term.  He has offered broad support for a strong military, social conservatism, and significant fiscal reform without alienating other factions in the party.  His leadership would also allow for a public image of the Republican Party that moves away in some degree from the perception of a party of old, white men – and could lift Ted Cruz and Susana Martinez, among others, to higher profiles to bolster the shift.  Furthermore, Rubio has the pole position in this leadership change, thanks to his efforts in the last two years in outreach and media strategy.

We’ll see if other candidates arise that might eclipse these five, or if some of them turn out to be less inclined to exert leadership over the fractious GOP.  I’d bet on Rubio to emerge as the go-to Republican this year, though.


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

Christie – no

Everybody else – yes

gophergirl on January 10, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Ted Cruz.

therightwinger on January 10, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Former VP candidates get little love in the Republican Party …

ShainS on January 10, 2013 at 12:04 PM

mouth agape. combover. loser.

renalin on January 10, 2013 at 12:04 PM

I don’t know who will emerge as the leader of the opposition, but I know who won’t: anyone whose approach involves dropping one or more of the three branches of conservatism.

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2013 at 12:08 PM

Christie – no

Everybody else – yes

gophergirl on January 10, 2013 at 12:04 PM

christie – yes
hunstman – yes
wingnuts – no! no more bachmans or santorums or perrys please! I am tired of the humiliations!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:09 PM

True opposition!? Gonna have to come from outside DC I’m thinkin’.

hawkeye54 on January 10, 2013 at 12:10 PM

gophergirl on January 10, 2013 at 12:04 PM

I’m with you..:)

Dire Straits on January 10, 2013 at 12:10 PM

I don’t know who will emerge as the leader of the opposition, but I know who won’t: anyone whose approach involves dropping one or more of the three branches of conservatism.

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2013 at 12:08 PM

is the neocons still a branch? can we forget about them already?

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:11 PM

Rick Perry FTW.

Perry needs to start RIGHT NOW organizing his fellow Republican Governors as a serious opposition party to The Washington Party. They need to unite on resistance to Obamacare, further EPA strangulation of energy and other business, tax increases, and the national debt. Most of them have balanced budgets and some even have surpluses now – who is possibly better at talking about how to rein in spending and grow revenues through economic growth?

We need to STOP looking for leadership in Washington. Republicans now control a majority of the states. That is where our real leaders are. It’s where our next President is.

rockmom on January 10, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Rubio and Jindal are great choices. The other 3 are either jokes or not helpful at times (Paul) at this point. Perry?! He is D-O-N-E on a national stage. Christie is dead to me. He needs to stay in NJ.

My next 3 would be Ted Cruz, Paul Ryan and Susana Martinez. Honorable mentions to Nikki Haley and Scott Walker.

cdog0613 on January 10, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Sorry, Rubio is too intent on pandering to the undocumented vote than he is in uniting the party. He openly attacks social conservatives as part of the problem. How anybody think this suit with a good story is a uniter and party leader is beyond my understanding. Case-in-point: His little talk about “underresourced” urban areas (i.e. the ghetto). Between that and amnesty and whatever else is is clear that he just wants to appeal to the worthless parasites of this nation who only want “stuff.” I want a leader not somebody who can sway enough moochers and takers by bribes.

First problem in finding a leader IMO is the establishment GOP who are rushing to the Rubio’s position of give the bastards free stuff just like the left. Hardly the bedrock ideology to build a party on. And BTW, I thought Rubio’s speech at the convention was good but not best in show.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Rand Paul – The son of longtime libertarian gadfly Ron Paul brings his father’s significant following with him, which has not exactly lined up with the GOP as a whole. Republicans hope that Rand can bridge the gap between Ron Paul’s libertarian, non-interventionist faction and the more traditional Republican agenda. The size of the Paul movement makes Rand a player no matter what; if he can keep his credibility with his father’s supporters and build support within traditional GOP grassroots activists, Paul fils could end up wielding the kind of influence on national politics of which Paul pere could only dream. Rand’s emergence as the party leader would signal a return to traditional paleo-conservative foreign policy and drastic reform of federal entitlement programs, a combination that could prove explosive depending on the direction of Congressional action in both areas over the next year.

From the tone, I take it Ed isn’t a huge fan. But it’s a fair enough write-up.

aryeung on January 10, 2013 at 12:13 PM

I look for Rand Paul to step up in a big way. I separate him from his Father in that he doesn’t have his Father’s baggage.

Vince on January 10, 2013 at 12:14 PM

Who will emerge as the leader of the opposition?

This question foolishly assumes that there is an opposition, rather than a Kabuki Theatrical production masquerading as an opposition.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 12:14 PM

Mitt Romney has disappeared entirely back into private life

Thank God.

Even his kid admitted that he didn’t want the job.

Tim_CA on January 10, 2013 at 12:14 PM

In point of fact, the GOP isn’t so much the Democrats’ opposition as it is their complement. It remains to be seen if a real opposition is possible when the two ‘sides’ have got the political process locked up by mutual agreement.

PersonFromPorlock on January 10, 2013 at 12:15 PM

True opposition!? Gonna have to come from outside DC I’m thinkin’.

hawkeye54 on January 10, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Cain? /

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:15 PM

If Team Barry were trying for something Clintonesque for a second term, then yeah, Rubio would waltz to the top.

But they’re not. The overreach has commenced, and they’re ready to go ape$hit for several months.

That will stretch into a year and shape the mid-terms.

By that point, people will be freaking the F out over Obamacare.

Trust me on that.

I’ve had some very long talks with health brokers and reps lately, and if they’re half right, we’re on the road to mass chaos.

So it will be Rand. Thank God.

budfox on January 10, 2013 at 12:15 PM

Rubio will never become leader of anything unless he ditches that crappy combover.

steebo77 on January 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM

wingnuts – no! no more bachmans or santorums or perrys please! I am tired of the humiliations!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:09 PM

STFD and STFU, the question was directed at Republicans and Conservative of which you are neither.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM

is the neocons still a branch? can we forget about them already?

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:11 PM

Conservatives don’t generally care for GWB’s brand of foreign policy. Reagan’s “Peace through Strengh” national security conservatism is the approach needed. However, most of those crowing about “neocons” also tend to react to social conservatism like Dracula to a cross, so trying to find common ground is already a losing proposition.

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM

I look for Rand Paul to step up in a big way. I separate him from his Father in that he doesn’t have his Father’s baggage.

Vince on January 10, 2013 at 12:14 PM

he is also my favorite, really!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Missing name here: Scott Walker. He took on Big Labor and won.

nobar on January 10, 2013 at 12:17 PM

True opposition!? Gonna have to come from outside DC I’m thinkin’.

hawkeye54 on January 10, 2013 at 12:10 PM

IMO, it may initially be regional outside DC. Some potential great leaders do not have a national reputation. But rudder orders by a group of committed conservatives is far preferable to tapping some squishy moderate who talks in terms of amnesty, more free stuff, and aversion to stand up for the First and Second Amendments in order not to offends the worthless parasites, moochers, single issue voters (same-sex, abortion, etc.) and the other dregs of society.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:17 PM

STFD and STFU, the question was directed at Republicans and Conservative of which you are neither.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM

ah! and you will be the police of who is the “true conservative”? get lost!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:17 PM

CRICKETS from supposed Conservatives on Obama threatening to use an EXO to bypass Congress.

And no on the squish Rubio.

He is HORRIBLE on Amnesty.

PappyD61 on January 10, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Ted Cruz.

therightwinger on January 10, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Yup

jake-the-goose on January 10, 2013 at 12:18 PM

the necessity of having to negotiate from a position of relative weakness (thanks to those election results) will make it impossible for them to do so, even if they had the necessary qualities.

Sooooo friggin tired of this lame excuse.

Go run and hide, Ed…you don’t have the stomach for the fight.

(write another gun story or something – stick with your strengths)

Tim_CA on January 10, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Ted Cruz will not back down.

If making deals with commie Democrats is what you think will save our freedom and the Constitution. Then Ted Cruz is not your man.

If you want the truth and desire to win Ted Cruz is the only path.

Fight.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 10, 2013 at 12:18 PM

But let’s see who has the gonads to take on Obama……so far?…….who?

PappyD61 on January 10, 2013 at 12:19 PM

Can we please stop taking Rubio seriously as a policy or political heavyweight? He is as fluffy as air.

Illinidiva on January 10, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Conservatives don’t generally care for GWB’s brand of foreign policy. Reagan’s “Peace through Strengh” national security conservatism is the approach needed. However, most of those crowing about “neocons” also tend to react to social conservatism like Dracula to a cross, so trying to find common ground is already a losing proposition.

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM

a good portion of the group that does not like neocons is libertarian and also does not like social conservatives. but that does help on the fact that neocon policies, after the iraq debacle, are now very unpopular even among republicans.

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:21 PM

I look for Rand Paul to step up in a big way. I separate him from his Father in that he doesn’t have his Father’s baggage.

Vince on January 10, 2013 at 12:14 PM

I don’t make that separation because it hasn’t been proven that his ideas are any more sane. Which is the real problem. Does not the rat-eared wonder and/or Hillary Clinton point out the folly of backing a largely inexperienced individual with a few years in the Senate? Seriously, what has Rand Paul accomplished to be elevated to party leadership. Same could be said of Rubio BTW but he’s been more vocal in his tendency to pander to moochers instead of worry about conservative principles.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:21 PM

Rubio and Jindal are great choices. The other 3 are either jokes or not helpful at times (Paul) at this point. Perry?! He is D-O-N-E on a national stage. Christie is dead to me. He needs to stay in NJ.

My next 3 would be Ted Cruz, Paul Ryan and Susana Martinez. Honorable mentions to Nikki Haley and Scott Walker.

cdog0613 on January 10, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Perry is not done. I am not suggesting he run for President again, I am suggesting that as the senior Republican Governor and the one with the most to say about pretty much all of the issues we will be fighting in the next four years, he is the logical leader of the opposition. Forget about his drug-induced disasters in the 2012 debates. They are not relevant to what he can stand for in the next 4 years if he wants to.

But of course he should be flanked by other strong Governors like Bob McDonnell, Nikki Haley, Brian Sabdoval, Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, and Susana Martinez. Maybe even let Chris Chrstie into the mix if he sticks to talking about education reform.

rockmom on January 10, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Missing name here: Scott Walker. He took on Big Labor and won.

nobar on January 10, 2013 at 12:17 PM

so did christie! but he had a love affair with obama on the jersey shore, so now all obama haters cant stand him… grow up!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Missing name here: Scott Walker. He took on Big Labor and won.

nobar on January 10, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Good point..:)

Dire Straits on January 10, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Can we please stop taking Rubio seriously as a policy or political heavyweight? He is as fluffy as air.

Illinidiva on January 10, 2013 at 12:20 PM

I say we give it a few months. Let’s see how some of these potential leaders vote on issues involving debt reduction and the Dems attempt to ban private gun ownership.

That being said, Rubio is nothing more than a fitter version of the fat slobbering Chris Christie. Not going to get my support as the nominal leader of the GOP.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:24 PM

The Democrat Party is lie based.

All of it easy to fact check and counter.

There are millions of U.S. at work day after day building the facts to over throw the lie cult.

example
http://www.wattsupwiththat.com

The AGW / United Nations based fraud has come undone.

Ted Cruz can with backing put the lie to all the rest of the commie Democrat party lie based tax and spend fraud cult.

Just do it.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 10, 2013 at 12:25 PM

Anybody but lib losers like Christie and Huntsman.

Norwegian on January 10, 2013 at 12:25 PM

rockmom on January 10, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Agree..We are talking about leading the opposition in the near future not 2016..:)

Dire Straits on January 10, 2013 at 12:26 PM

Anybody but lib losers like Christie and Huntsman.

Norwegian on January 10, 2013 at 12:25 PM

fine, rand paul is ok with you?

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM

I’m wondering, Who will emerge as opposition to the new GOP sanctioned opposition leader?

Fallon on January 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM

gophergirl on January 10, 2013 at 12:04 PM

I’m with you..:)

Dire Straits on January 10, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Rubio’s OK? Both of you think Amnesty! is the answer?

sauldalinsky on January 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Ted Cruz.

therightwinger on January 10, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Yes! Can you imagine a Rubio/Cruz ticket? WhooooHoooooo!

petefrt on January 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM

ah! and you will be the police of who is the “true conservative”? get lost!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Stick it up your ass, you have made your position crystal clear, you don’t even come close to being a conservative by anyone’s standards.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM

so did christie! but he had a love affair with obama on the jersey shore, so now all obama haters cant stand him… grow up!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Because it exposed Christie’s true nature. Undermining Romney a week before the election purposefully for Christie’s future political benefit suggests that he is just an egotistical careerist jerk. He can join Huntsman and Crist in the smarmy moderate self absorbed careerist who have pretended to be Republicans category.

Illinidiva on January 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Watch your parking meters. And if Dylan had seen Katherine Webb, he would have watched her, too.

cbenoistd on January 10, 2013 at 12:28 PM

so did christie! but he had a love affair with obama on the jersey shore, so now all obama haters cant stand him… grow up!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Protip: there’s no quicker way to out oneself as a Moby than to lament “Obama haters’.

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2013 at 12:28 PM

Been in the conservative Republican movement here in Texas for 30 years.

Rick Perry can not be trusted with carrying out a true conservative agenda. He gets side tracked by re-election money to easy.

Man has a deep caracter flaw and is unable to fix himself.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 10, 2013 at 12:29 PM

I am tired of the humiliations!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Then you probably should stop standing in front of the mirror naked.

LoganSix on January 10, 2013 at 12:30 PM

Protip: there’s no quicker way to out oneself as a Moby than to lament “Obama haters’.

Kataklysmic on January 10, 2013 at 12:28 PM

Nice catch. :)

totherightofthem on January 10, 2013 at 12:30 PM

Can’t see anyone outside the beltway making enough noise in 2013 to be a serious player. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz seem to be best positioned.

And hell no to Cornelius Huntsman the3rd!

can_con on January 10, 2013 at 12:30 PM

There is only one reason for the GOP to exist right now: shrinking the size of the Federal behemoth, growing our economy, and defusing the debt bomb.

Christie: not a nationally viable candidate, no matter what Democrats the chattering class says. Won’t shrink government. Not ideologically conservative.

Rubio: the Hispanic George W. Bush. Won’t shrink the size of government. Will betray conservatives once in power. Will be GOP’s point man on amnesty immigration reform.

Perry: ideologically conservative, and a true small government guy, but no longer nationally viable. Again, no longer nationally viable.

Jindal: not nationally viable, sorry. Will be pilloried as a religious nut by the media. More of a RHINO than most people think.

That leaves Rand Paul. He’s nationally viable, a true libertarian (tho not necessarily conservative), and understands economics. Fearless and articulate without coming across like a bombastic ass (here me, Gov. Christie?). It remains to be seen what his true foreign policy positions are, and whether conservatives will be comfortable with them.

Ed, with all due respect, can you please stop asserting that Boehner’s inaction on the Sandy relief bill imperiled his speakership? It did not. It might have saved it.

Mr. Arkadin on January 10, 2013 at 12:31 PM

Stick it up your ass, you have made your position crystal clear, you don’t even come close to being a conservative by anyone’s standards.

SWalker on January 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM

fine, I am a liberation leaning moderate. not good enough for your “true conservative” minority party?

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:32 PM

I’m rooting for Rubio. I really hope he steps it up these next couple of years. He’s smaart and a great communicator and the GOP hasn’t had one of those in ages.

terryannonline on January 10, 2013 at 12:32 PM

It cracks me up every time an article comes out wanting to
know WHO will be lead the opposition……

from 2009 to 2012 there was only ONE person who
actually LED any opposition to this administration.

Over to you Bluegill……

One caveat. Scott Walker led oppostion to the Dems
and Unions in his state. So kudos to him.

ToddPA on January 10, 2013 at 12:33 PM

from 2009 to 2012 there was only ONE person who
actually LED any opposition to this administration.

Over to you Bluegill……

ToddPA on January 10, 2013 at 12:33 PM

Now you’ve done it. . ..

totherightofthem on January 10, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Ted Cruz, Justin Amash are two.

Paul Ryan is tainted by The Purge and has soiled his future chances as promotions.

MNHawk on January 10, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Rubio’s OK? Both of you think Amnesty! is the answer?

sauldalinsky on January 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM

No..But do you want to continue to let the Dems “club” us in elections with this issue..We have to find an answer..Amnesty is not it..But we have to find a solution..:)

Dire Straits on January 10, 2013 at 12:35 PM

I say we give it a few months. Let’s see how some of these potential leaders vote on issues involving debt reduction and the Dems attempt to ban private gun ownership.

That being said, Rubio is nothing more than a fitter version of the fat slobbering Chris Christie. Not going to get my support as the nominal leader of the GOP.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Just putting it another way. Was Obama considered a go-to opposition figure in Congress in 2005? Rubio wants to be President, has ten positions on every issue, and isn’t going to do anything controversial or antagonistic over the next four years that hurts his brand. I’m fine with the Republicans nominating him in 2016. Presidential elections have become little more than popularity contests, and Rubio is the ultimate American Idol candidate. However, let’s stop pretending that we’re going to nominate him for his intellectual brainpower rather than the fact that he is Latino and gives pretty speeches.

Illinidiva on January 10, 2013 at 12:35 PM

Because it exposed Christie’s true nature. Undermining Romney a week before the election purposefully for Christie’s future political benefit suggests that he is just an egotistical careerist jerk. He can join Huntsman and Crist in the smarmy moderate self absorbed careerist who have pretended to be Republicans category.

Illinidiva on January 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM

you dont get it do you? the majority of the electorate hates partisans that put party ahead of their elected duty!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:35 PM

“Rubio:…. Won’t shrink the size of government.”

What the hell do you base this on? On the other hand, the concerns about amnesty are reasonable, but, unfortunately I think that is the way the wind is blowing.

cdog0613 on January 10, 2013 at 12:36 PM

fine, I am a liberation libertarian leaning moderate. not good enough for your “true conservative” minority party?

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:32 PM

fixed

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:36 PM

fine, I am a liberation leaning moderate.

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Whatever the hell that is.

Bishop on January 10, 2013 at 12:36 PM

fine, I am a liberation leaning moderate. not good enough for your “true conservative” minority party?

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Umm.. what is a “liberation leaning moderate”? Do you mean libertarian? And if you’re truly a libertarian, then why did you vote for a big government liberal twice?

Illinidiva on January 10, 2013 at 12:37 PM

you dont get it do you? the majority of the electorate hates partisans that put party ahead of their elected duty!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:35 PM

Which is giving the piglets everything they ask for. Yes, we know what get’s you, the typical American of 2013′s, vote.

MNHawk on January 10, 2013 at 12:37 PM

Who will emerge as the leader of the opposition?

What about Sarah Palin? [pause for certain heads to explode]

I am not her biggest fan and don’t want to see her run for President but as a kingmaker/party leader in the background she might an influential role in uniting conservatives with stupid people who think Rubio or Paul would be able to bring about a winning coalition of social/fiscal conservatives and moderate squishes and establishment Republicans.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:37 PM

And hell no to Cornelius Huntsman the3rd!

can_con on January 10, 2013 at 12:30 PM

why everybody hates huntsman so much?

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:38 PM

If you want to get a message out to the entire general public while debating any subject, Sarah Palin is the co-chair of any platform. Even the liberal media can not ignore her presence.

It’s about getting the message out—something the RNC and the entire party has a serious problem doing imo.

Rovin on January 10, 2013 at 12:39 PM

she might an influential role in uniting conservatives with stupid people who think Rubio or Paul would be able to bring about a winning coalition of social/fiscal conservatives and moderate squishes and establishment Republicans.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:37 PM

Well it’s a cinch that you’re not a uniter.

Vince on January 10, 2013 at 12:40 PM

is the neocons still a branch? can we forget about them already?

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:11 PM

The three branches are fiscal, social and foreign policies. You’re silly.

thebrokenrattle on January 10, 2013 at 12:40 PM

This is really the silver lining to this loss. Save Christie, I have yet to say one name mentioned that wouldn’t be a significant upgrade from Romney.

Romney is a good man and would have been a monumental improvement from Obama, but the days of this country needing a manager are over – we need an interventionist.

The Count on January 10, 2013 at 12:41 PM

Umm.. what is a “liberation leaning moderate”? Do you mean libertarian? And if you’re truly a libertarian, then why did you vote for a big government liberal twice?

Illinidiva on January 10, 2013 at 12:37 PM

who I voted for? I voted for romney(wasted vote in my state by the way)

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:41 PM

fine, I am a liberation leaning moderate.

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Whatever the hell that is.

Bishop on January 10, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Why, he’s a “Leaner”

In other words, and effing Horseshoe.

ToddPA on January 10, 2013 at 12:41 PM

you dont get it do you? the majority of the electorate hates partisans that put party ahead of their elected duty!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:35 PM

Participating in the Obama campaign photo op in Jersey a week before the election was knifing Romney in the back for Christie’s personal gain, not doing his job as governor.

Illinidiva on January 10, 2013 at 12:41 PM

The three branches are fiscal, social and foreign policies. You’re silly.

thebrokenrattle on January 10, 2013 at 12:40 PM

what foreign policies? neocon policies or “non-interventionist” policies?

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:42 PM

who I voted for? I voted for romney(wasted vote in my state by the way)

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:41 PM

And yet you rail against all us “Obama haters.”

Illinidiva on January 10, 2013 at 12:42 PM

And hell no to Cornelius Huntsman the3rd!

can_con on January 10, 2013 at 12:30 PM

why everybody hates huntsman so much?

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:38 PM

If you have to ask, you’re dumber that we thought….

ToddPA on January 10, 2013 at 12:43 PM

you dont get it do you? the majority of the electorate hates partisans that put party ahead of their elected duty!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:35 PM

Yeah. That really explains how Barack Obama-the most hyperpartison, duty shirking public official EVAH-got reelected, beating out Mitt Romney who scored the independent vote by double digits over the incumbent. Please. You can’t really be saying this with a straight face.

totherightofthem on January 10, 2013 at 12:43 PM

If you have to ask, you’re dumber that than we thought….

ToddPA on January 10, 2013 at 12:43 PM

ToddPA on January 10, 2013 at 12:44 PM

Opposition?

LOL

Dante on January 10, 2013 at 12:45 PM

FIRST, you’re assuming the GOP is the opposition. The GOP cannot elect a president (and party identification is going down, not up – anyone who thinks non-aligned and independent voters are going to flock to the GOP because one of the “fabulous five” are anointed as titular leaders must be living in a new weed-legal state). The GOP can’t even nominate a presidential candidate (sure, Romney would have been far better than Obama, not the point – you have to win the election).

SECOND, it’s the same old game all over again, picking a favorite from among those offered up by the same old same old. Bad polling question: “Which of these GOP members holding current office, from our list that we came up with, do you like best?” Then they’re touted as the “front runner” and the rest of you get thee behind me devil. Meaningless.

Maybe this will be fun for the next 2+ years but, for me, it’s the same worn-out soap opera. People are as tired of the GOP as they are of hula hoops and beehives.

IndieDogg on January 10, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Rubio is the ultimate American Idol candidate. However, let’s stop pretending that we’re going to nominate him for his intellectual brainpower rather than the fact that he is Latino and gives pretty speeches.

Illinidiva on January 10, 2013 at 12:35 PM

I’m not convinced that we are going to nominate him. However, you hit on an important point. He’s positioning himself for the job at the expense of all else. That isn’t the actions of a potential leader it is what a potential candidate does. Part of the reason why he doesn’t get my support.

And in the broader sense…. Where are all these so-called leaders out there responding to things like Biden’s claims they can effect curtailment to the Second Amendment outside the legislative process? To be fair nothing concrete has been suggested on the Dems plans to end private ownership of guns but the same crowd was also silent about the fiscal cliff and a whole slew of other issues. All Rubio really has come out for is universal amnesty for illegals. He says this in veiled terms like “paths to citizenship for those already here” as if those here illegally have an entitlement to stay and be rewarded.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Yes! Can you imagine a Rubio/Cruz ticket? WhooooHoooooo!

petefrt on January 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Let’s allow Rubio a chance to develop an Executive Resume – the man is NOT READY to be POTUS – not by a long shot !!!!

jake-the-goose on January 10, 2013 at 12:47 PM

And yet you rail against all us “Obama haters.”

Illinidiva on January 10, 2013 at 12:42 PM

well, yeah! it allways turned me off the over the top criticism of obama. glad the OOTD is over.
anyway, time to move on, the guy won twice and you cannot crucify popular gopers just because they take some photo ops with obama.

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:47 PM

What I want to see is a Republican Party that actually OPPOSES Obama and his transformation of America into a Marxist Obamatopia.

So far there has been so little of this that if they were charged with this as a crime there would be insufficient evidence to convict.

Rand Paul: I like him. Won’t be put into leadership because of the RINO establishment.

Rubio: Panders too much to the Illegal Amigos. There should be NO talk of reforming anything with respect to immigration until the border sieve is closed.

Ted Cruz: Possible.

Niki Haley, Bobby Jindal, Rick Perry: Need to form a triumvirate leading their states to actively THWART Imperial Regime edicts and orders as an example to other states.

wildcat72 on January 10, 2013 at 12:47 PM

Opposition?

LOL

Dante on January 10, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Says the worthless parasite who calls the military chumps, supports curtailment of the Second Amendment, and supported Obama for a second term.

Sorry, the GOP needs to pick its leaders without the input from ignorant filthy cowards like you and those of your ilk.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:47 PM

Whatever the hell that is.

Bishop on January 10, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Think “anti air misile”.

VegasRick on January 10, 2013 at 12:48 PM

well, yeah! it allways turned me off the over the top criticism of obama. glad the OOTD is over.
anyway, time to move on, the guy won twice and you cannot crucify popular gopers just because they take some photo ops with obama.

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:47 PM

100 years from now the name Obama will be as reviled as that of Hitler or Stalin.

I wouldn’t agree to have MY picture taken with him. Actually, I’d never agree to meet or even talk with him.

wildcat72 on January 10, 2013 at 12:48 PM

you cannot crucify popular gopers just because they take some photo ops with obama.

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:47 PM

oh…..I can.

Feel free to try and stop me….lol.

Tim_CA on January 10, 2013 at 12:49 PM

well, yeah! it allways turned me off the over the top criticism of obama. glad the OOTD is over.
anyway, time to move on, the guy won twice and you cannot crucify popular gopers just because they take some photo ops with obama.

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:47 PM

Okay, You filthy Obama loving idiot. Tell us what about the rat-eared wonder or his corrupt administration received “over-the-top” and unfair criticism. Point out where conservatives and non-moochers got it wrong. This is your opportunity to provide a teaching moment to all of us who think all of you cowards and traitors are tearing this country apart.

The floor is yours, you ignorant moron.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:50 PM

100 years from now the name Obama will be as reviled as that of Hitler or Stalin.

I wouldn’t agree to have MY picture taken with him. Actually, I’d never agree to meet or even talk with him.

wildcat72 on January 10, 2013 at 12:48 PM

That won’t happen unless public schools are outlawed/academia is re-taken by conservatives. Highly unlikely.

nobar on January 10, 2013 at 12:52 PM

Yeah. That really explains how Barack Obama-the most hyperpartison, duty shirking public official EVAH-got reelected, beating out Mitt Romney who scored the independent vote by double digits over the incumbent. Please. You can’t really be saying this with a straight face.

totherightofthem on January 10, 2013 at 12:43 PM

1) wining independant vote is meaningless if more “independant” voters end up saying they are dems and thats what happened.
2) I still remenber the rethoric of a couple of years ago calling obama a “marxist” or even a “hidden muslim”. all BS! the guy belongs in the center right of the dem party. its very hard to consider him a hyperpartisan, he is not!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:52 PM

christie – yes
hunstman – yes
wingnuts – no! no more bachmans or santorums or perrys please! I am tired of the humiliations!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:09 PM

How about no more RINOs. How’s that worked out for Republicans?

Maybe Al Gore…he should be perfect for you.

cajunpatriot on January 10, 2013 at 12:53 PM

why everybody hates huntsman so much?
nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:38 PM

To me, he is the only guy who manages to out smug teh one.

Look to whomever the media is trying to build up (christie..cough) and those are the ones to strike off the list. That takes care of Rubio too.

can_con on January 10, 2013 at 12:56 PM

Okay, You filthy Obama loving idiot. Tell us what about the rat-eared wonder or his corrupt administration received “over-the-top” and unfair criticism. Point out where conservatives and non-moochers got it wrong. This is your opportunity to provide a teaching moment to all of us who think all of you cowards and traitors are tearing this country apart.

The floor is yours, you ignorant moron.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:50 PM

obama is not: “kenyan born”, marxist, socialist, hidden muslim or muslim lover. he is at most, a socialist light politician as most of the dems are. he is also a cronyist like most of DC.
happy?

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:56 PM

How about no more RINOs. How’s that worked out for Republicans?

Maybe Al Gore…he should be perfect for you.

cajunpatriot on January 10, 2013 at 12:53 PM

we would have the internet on our side! lol!

nathor on January 10, 2013 at 12:57 PM

Mitt Romney has disappeared entirely back into private life,

As I predicted. A man who contributed nothing to the conservative intellectual storehouse — the antithesis of Ronald Reagan, who spent years in the wilderness fashioning and refining the moral and economic arguments for freedom and conservatism. Romney had nothing much to say before, nothing to say during, and now as we see nothing to say after.

But he never really wanted to be president anyway, right?

rrpjr on January 10, 2013 at 12:57 PM

Says the worthless parasite who calls the military chumps, supports curtailment of the Second Amendment, and supported Obama for a second term.

Sorry, the GOP needs to pick its leaders without the input from ignorant filthy cowards like you and those of your ilk.

Happy Nomad on January 10, 2013 at 12:47 PM

You’re off your meds if you think I support curtailment of the Second Amendment or support Obama at all. Also, I have never called the military chumps.

Dante on January 10, 2013 at 12:57 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3