Quotes of the day

posted at 10:41 pm on March 18, 2013 by Allahpundit

A blunt self-critique by the national Republican Party concludes that while the GOP is flourishing in many state capitals, it is “increasingly marginalized” and out of touch at the federal level.

In focus groups, voters who had left the Republican Party said they found the GOP to be “scary,” “narrow-minded,” “out of touch” and the party of “stuffy old men.”…

To grow as a party, the RNC assessment points out, Republican policy makers must realize that economically struggling voters “don’t care if the help comes from the private sector or the government—they just want help.”

The report notes that “instead of connecting with voters’ concerns, we too often sound like bookkeepers.”

***

A new poll for the Hill newspaper finds that “more voters trust the Democratic Party than the Republican Party on budgetary issues . . . even though a strong majority actually prefer Republican fiscal policies.”…

Even Democrats demonstrated that they prefer what are normally considered GOP budget ideas. Only 44 percent of Democrats polled said deficits should be primarily reduced mostly through raising taxes, versus 40 percent who felt it should be done largely by trimming spending.

That’s the good news for the GOP. The bad news was that, when the two competing budget plans had the labels “Republican” and “Democrat” attached to them, there was a clear change in preference. A full 35 percent of respondents backed the Democrat plan in that case, while only 30 percent trusted the GOP more (the rest said they trusted neither party).

***

Ari Fleischer said on Monday that the RNC’s autopsy report is an attempt to “blow a whistle” on the GOP in a bid to make it more inclusive

“We’ve lost that ability to be persuasive with people who don’t agree with us on every issue. And what Republicans need to do I think to have a bright future is to do what the governors have done, which is if someone doesn’t agree with us on every issue – we can still work with them and get things done,” he said. “That’s part of what historically Republicans have done. We need to get back to doing that again.”…

“There is a genuine generational split in the Republican Party on that issue. Many, many young conservatives are for gay rights, are for gay marriage and we openly talk about that, acknowledge that and welcome that,” he said. “That is part of what a big tent should be about. You don’t find that in the Democratic Party.”

***

But while the new RNC document may move past Reagan Republicanism, it marks a different kind of restoration: of the campaigns of President George W. Bush, and in particular to his first campaign, which promised “compassionate conservatism.”

And at its core, the report is a glimpse of the party Karl Rove and George W. Bush, assisted by figures like Fleischer and Gerson, sought to create starting in the late 1990s. This was the party in which George W. Bush was elected, but one whose message shifted dramatically on Sept. 11, 2001. From there, Bush ran almost exclusively as a national security president, and by the time he began pitching elements of Social Security privatization in his second term, the move was a non-sequitur and came with none of the halo of compassion of the earlier Bush years. The Tea Party represented a wing of the party — which included some, but certainly not all, of Bush’s own aides — who saw the ostentatious push for “compassion” as a veneer over policies that ought to, they thought, triumph on the merits; and who believed that the contrast with President Barack Obama meant that the veneer was no longer needed. Romney’s private suggestion of a class war between 53% of makers and 47% of takers in the American economy represented a particularly pure version of that.

Now the Republican National Committee is returning to Bush’s original vision. The question is which policies — and in particular, what vision for solving poverty — will accompany that push.

***

How to get there? Make the national party, and its nominee, less vulnerable to eruptions from the base. The report calls for the primary debate schedule to be cut back to pre-2008 levels, with maybe a dozen televised forums, and more control over who moderates them…

Missouri’s failed Senate candidate Todd Akin, patron saint of gaffes, mused about the female body’s power to nullify rape because he came out of hard-right religious politics and really believed that stuff. The RNC debuted a way to shut that whole thing down. In the report, they call for “inviting as many voters as possible into the Republican Party by discouraging conventions and caucuses for the purpose of allocating delegates to the national convention.” Take away the caucus system and there’s no Ron Paul movement; there’s no stubborn Rick Santorum candidacy for social conservatives to rally behind.

Do that, and maybe the party can be as conservative as it likes in the states without the national candidate having to sweat it.

***

The conventional wisdom among Republican elites about the election congealed seemingly the instant Mitt Romney lost. It was that the party needed to tone down its social-issues talk, embrace comprehensive immigration reform, improve its get-out-the-vote operation, highlight more nonwhite and female spokespersons, shorten the presidential primaries, and take greater control over the primary debates. These recommendations come naturally to Republican elites. Compared to rank-and-file Republicans, they are more likely to favor same-sex marriage and comprehensive immigration reform on principle, and those who are opposed to one or both generally don’t care much about the issues. They don’t, however, tend to have any major problems with the Republican economic agenda and do not believe it needs to be rethought in any serious way. The Republican report reflects this elite conventional wisdom perfectly, just perfectly. That doesn’t mean everything in the report is wrong. I’m inclined to think its suggested reforms of the primary process would be marginally helpful for conservatism. And I have nothing against highlighting Republicans who aren’t white men. The report does not, however, engage in the thorough data-driven analysis of what has gone wrong for Republicans that the party needs.

Take the most explicit policy recommendation the report makes: that Republicans embrace comprehensive immigration reform. The report doesn’t even try to demonstrate that this step would win the party more voters than it loses–which, you might think, is pretty important when political advice is being handed out. It ignores all of the political arguments made by critics of comprehensive reform, let alone the policy arguments.

***

For decades, opposition to the Soviet Union was the glue that held the disparate elements of the movement together. For a brief time, it was believed that the Global War on Terrorism might take its place. That hasn’t happened. And it seems the much-needed soul-searching that occurred after Romney’s loss has resulted in a sort of tacit agreement that an amicable divorce might be preferable to the status quo…

It’s going to be a very interesting couple of years. The 2016 primary won’t just be about selecting a standard bearer, it’ll be about picking which standard to bear.

It’s possible we could see radical change that might even lead to the rise of a third party. That could happen if the GOP nominates a candidate deemed unacceptable by any one wing of the movement. On the other hand, if the GOP selects a more traditional conservative, such as, say, Rubio, the re-ordering might be more subtle. Some elements of the conservative movement might have to accept a demotion, of course, but it’s possible they would reluctantly accede to the demands of modernity.

***

Note, though, how the report doesn’t actually call for the party to change its position. Just being more “tolerant” of other views doesn’t really seem like it’s going to get the party much of anywhere with young voters. If the party’s platform is still hostile to these issues, then that’s exactly what people will focus on.

As for the sections on immigration and women: It seems like even the RNC has forgotten its own 2012 convention. Much of the advice here to be more inclusive of minorities and women was on full display at the convention, for all the good it did them. The report acknowledges that the party must tackle its reputation with ethnic minorities and “champion comprehensive immigration reform,” but this is not a policy paper and the most important question – What that immigration reform should look like – goes unanswered.

This isn’t to downplay the report. That this kind of messaging is coming directly from the Republican National Committee is important. Fundamentally, though, the only component of the report that actually feels new is its ability to mention the existence of gays without immediately retreating into “traditional marriage” talk.

***

[W]hat about those folks who really only vote GOP not because they’re generally conservative but because they have traditional values — as this Twitter exchange shows:

“@MichaelBD: Once the GOP follows Charles Murray’s advice it frees people like me up to vote for Dems on foreign policy, basic competence.”

“@Joncoppage: Not to mention evangelicals concerned about the poor/social justice, increasingly environmental stewardship, etc”

“@MichaelBD: there may be a winning GOP coalition out there, but it isn’t built on Bloomberg voters.”

I like to refer to social conservatives as battered wives, but even battered wives eventually wake up and realize that leaving their man is preferable to what they’re enduring. Well, that or they end up dead…

Are we sure that a) the GOP can be sufficiently liberal enough to compete with honest-to-goodness liberals and b) it will bring in more people than it will lose?

***

The only certainty is that the candidate who comes forward as a cookie-cutter “three-legged-stool” (strong defense, economic conservative, social traditionalist) conservative is going to wind up pleasing no one and running into the same limitations that Mitt Romney did: There are not enough of those voters who follow those prescriptions to win the White House.

So where does this lead the party? I believe it will sort itself out in the primary itself, which becomes more akin to constructing a parliamentary majority (alliances, concessions, truces, compromises of convenience). Rand Paul will go for a libertarian majority, while Marco Rubio will present a pro-life, pro-immigration, domestic reform and internationalist agenda. The candidate who can both win the biggest share of and recruit more supporters to the GOP is the winner, and at the end factions agree to disagree on some items in common cause against an opponent devoted to the domineering welfare state.

This is a very attractive proposition. Fitting the party to a real candidate rather than forcing the candidate to contort himself to fit a static platform makes a lot of sense. For one thing, you’ll get a more genuine party leader. For another, the primary will determine where a substantial coalition can be formed. And most important, this puts a premium on policy…

So 2016 wanna-be’s get going: Shape your own agenda, find and recruit your own coalition, and determine how you are going to fund it. But don’t spend any time trying to be all things to all parts of a coalition that for all intents and purposes no longer exists.

***

***

Click the image to listen.

ml


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 3 4 5

Trouble Ain’t Far Behind – Moore

I bid you all a fond goodnight. It’s been a pleasure, as always. See you soon.

* I’ll listen to the tune, Jamie. I bookmarked it. :)

I agree with you completely and understand your feelings well. Do come around when you can to the QOTD. We’ll just cue up the tunes and leave the politics for the other threads. :)

Goodnight, my friend. :)

thatsafactjack on March 19, 2013 at 1:49 AM

INC on March 19, 2013 at 1:47 AM

Anything that doesn’t include banging two rocks together is High Technology in the eyes of people from Third World hell holes. (:

SparkPlug on March 19, 2013 at 1:51 AM

The brand doesn’t have a problem vis a vis the product, it has a marketing problem with consultant(s) that don’t believe in the product.

If you want to engage the base, you have to use a primary tally system that best reflects the will of each participant and the only way to do that is a ranking ballot.That means if there are 3, 5 or even 10 candidate on the cacus slate or primary ballot, each voter gets to rank their preference. Let’s use 5 candidates as an example:You’d rank your #1 candidate as a 5, 4 for your second, 3 for your 3rd choice and so on. But you don’t have to assign a ranking for someone you don’t like at all, so if Jared Huntsman and DeeDee Scuzzyfava were also on the ballot, you could assign a “0″ to them.

Now when the ballots are tallied up, the person with the most wins – doesn’t matter if it’s winner takes all or proportional. Also no need for an expensive run-off.

So what if we have a scenario where someone mistakenly ranks 2 or more equally? In that case, that tally drops to the lowest average numerator. For example with the above, I mistakenly give two people the same ranking of 4, when it should have been 4 for one and 3 for the other, in that case, the tally drops to the lowest common numerator of “3″. Likewise, if one was to give all 5 a ranking of 5, then the vote value is 1 each.This method ensures that votes are split between two most popular choices while a 3rd so-so runs away with the win, ie Todd Akin.

Do that and you will see improved turnout for the primaries as now everyone can see their vote as actually counting for something. This beats any of the systems we have now, to include the current caucus process.

AH_C on March 19, 2013 at 1:52 AM

Q: Ask yourself, where would we be without Karl Rove?

A: The White House

SparkPlug on March 19, 2013 at 1:48 AM

With all due respect SparkPlug, Karl Rove did not cost the Republicans the Whitehouse, what cost us the Whitehuse was the 7 r 8 million republicans who could not bring themselves to vote for a Mormon.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 1:53 AM

Scrumpy and Jackie. Good stuff.

Rusty Allen on March 19, 2013 at 1:53 AM

Q: Ask yourself, where would we be without Karl Rove?

A: The White House

SparkPlug on March 19, 2013 at 1:48 AM

+10

Anything that doesn’t include banging two rocks together is High Technology in the eyes of people from Third World hell holes. (:

SparkPlug on March 19, 2013 at 1:51 AM

You made me laugh two comments in a row! I pity them, but amnesty is not the answer for them or for us.

INC on March 19, 2013 at 1:54 AM

Very good my friend. Spring has arrived here. Just look forward to every day to see what flavor crap sammich Sacramento or DC is serving up.

arnold ziffel on March 19, 2013 at 1:47 AM

I’m happy to hear things are going well, arnold. Nothing feels quite as good as a fine spring day. Well… wait a minute… most things don’t.

I noticed that even Bill Mahar is whining about liberal taxes and regulation in your state, so it must be as bad as we all think it is. Condolences to you and SWalker. Give Joey a scratch behind the ear for me. And his big hot mamma, too.

jaime on March 19, 2013 at 1:54 AM

what cost us the Whitehuse was the 7 r 8 million republicans who could not bring themselves to vote for a Mormon.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 1:53 AM

Agreed.

John the Libertarian on March 19, 2013 at 1:55 AM

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 1:53 AM

Think of Rove as an archetype.

I didn’t know that it was the religion, but the man some wouldn’t trust—it wasn’t his beliefs, but his political deeds.

INC on March 19, 2013 at 1:56 AM

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 1:53 AM

That never occurred to me. Do you think it’s true?

jaime on March 19, 2013 at 1:56 AM

I personally like her. She’s been a victim of her husband, Obama, Obama again as SOS, but it’s her turn.

BedBug on March 19, 2013 at 12:59 AM

This is insanity, pure.

NO one forced her to be with them.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 1:57 AM

The brand doesn’t have a problem vis a vis the product, it has a marketing problem with consultant(s) that don’t believe in the product.

AH_C on March 19, 2013 at 1:52 AM

With all due respect the problem isn’t marketing either. This is the problem.

To quote perhaps the greatest human military strategist to have ever lived, the Chinese General Sun Tzu, “The enemy you cannot identify, is the enemy you cannot defeat”. This more than anything is what makes Karl Rove and the Republican leadership disastrous for America. They have some kind of mental block that prevents them from identifying the greatest threat to America. They live in complete and total denial with regards to whom the enemy is.

If we were to draw a line scale number it from 0 to 10 based upon the traditional American political ideologies, mark the first line on that scale 0 and call it traditional American Liberal ideological values, and on the line at the other end, 10, mark as traditional American Conservative values the line in the middle number 5, would be the genuinely moderate centrists like Rove and Krauthammer. This is where the genuine pragmatic moderate centrists live. It is where the vast majority of sway-able American voters once lived.

The problem is, that the Democrat party leadership no longer live at 0, they, the Fifth Column Treasonous Media, Academia, and the Judicial System Justices now live at -5. They are not traditional American Liberals, they are straight up full on Marxists. This is what Karl Rove, Dr. Charles Krauthammer, and the vast majority of the Republican Party Leadership are in complete and total denial about.

Like I said above, Karl Rove is a brilliant political strategist, but his tactical strategies are predicated upon the Democrats being Traditional America Liberals. Upon their inhabiting number 5 on the traditional American political ideological scale. However, because they, and the most importantly, the Fifth Column Treasonous Media actually live at -5 on the scale the Overton Window has been deceptively cast as having been dragged 5 full points to the left.

This is why the Republican Party Leadership and individuals like Dr. Charles Krauthammer and Karl Rove consistently attack the TEA Party candidates. With the illusion of the Overton Window having shifted 5 full points to the left the inescapable consequence is that those who would by the traditional American Political ideological scale have fallen between 5 and 10 on the scale are now seen as being far right extremists.

All of Karl Roves political calculations regarding the electability of those candidates he chooses to back are based upon this fallacy. Were this the end of it, I probably would not care about Roves political inclinations. However, since Karl Rove has chosen to do what a great number of those on the conservative side of the isle have been screaming that conservative need to do, something that I completely and totally disagree with, well I have a problem. What is this something? It is to adopt the Marxist principal that the end justifies the means.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 1:58 AM

Scrumpy on March 19, 2013 at 1:42 AM

‘Nite Scrumpy

jaime on March 19, 2013 at 1:58 AM

I don’t know who didn’t vote for him, but don’t beat up on evangelicals. These are from right after the election, but I never saw them contradicted.

Romney received a larger slice of the evangelical vote than any previous Republican presidential candidate. At nearly 80 percent, evangelical support for Romney was as strong—and perhaps even stronger—than the support Romney received from Mormons.

“Evangelicals turned out in record numbers and voted as heavily for Mitt Romney yesterday as they did for George W. Bush in 2004,” said Ralph Reed, chairman of Faith and Freedom Coalition. “That is an astonishing outcome that few would have predicted even a few months ago. But Romney underperformed with younger voters and minorities and that in the end made the difference for Obama.”

INC on March 19, 2013 at 1:59 AM

I personally like her. She’s been a victim of her husband, Obama, Obama again as SOS, but it’s her turn.

BedBug on March 19, 2013 at 12:59 AM

That’s the most stupid thing I’ve read all day. Or pitiful.

Solaratov on March 19, 2013 at 2:02 AM

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 1:53 AM

That never occurred to me. Do you think it’s true?

jaime on March 19, 2013 at 1:56 AM

It’s what the vote tally says. Between 7 and 8 million fewer Republicans voted for Romney than voted for McLame, while nearly 4 million fewer Democrats voted for Obama. Obama only won by 3 million votes, had those 7 or 8 million Republicans who stayed home voted for Romney, then Romney would have won by nearly 5 million votes.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:02 AM

I don’t know who didn’t vote for him, but don’t beat up on evangelicals. These are from right after the election, but I never saw them contradicted.

INC on March 19, 2013 at 1:59 AM

I never said it was the evangelicals, just Republicans who could not bring themselves to vote for the Mormon. Evangelicals are not the only Christians in America.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:04 AM

It’s what the vote tally says. Between 7 and 8 million fewer Republicans voted for Romney than voted for McLame, while nearly 4 million fewer Democrats voted for Obama. Obama only won by 3 million votes, had those 7 or 8 million Republicans who stayed home voted for Romney, then Romney would have won by nearly 5 million votes.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:02 AM

OK, but did they stay home because Romney is Morman?

jaime on March 19, 2013 at 2:04 AM

INC on March 19, 2013 at 1:59 AM

Yeah, I remember seeing these stats. And all I have to refute it is anecdotal. People in my own extended family refused to vote for a Mormon. Speaking of anecdotal, did you know Ohio voters voted for Obama more than once? Hmmm…

John the Libertarian on March 19, 2013 at 2:04 AM

INC on March 19, 2013 at 1:59 AM

Bingo. He did great. Just lost. And the next nominee will have one hell of a time. Unless the electorate wakes up and realizes how dire things are.

Rusty Allen on March 19, 2013 at 2:05 AM

I personally like her. She’s been a victim of her husband, Obama, Obama again as SOS, but it’s her turn.

BedBug on March 19, 2013 at 12:59 AM

This is insanity, pure.

NO one forced her to be with them.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 1:57 AM

I personally like her. She’s been a victim of her husband, Obama, Obama again as SOS, but it’s her turn.

BedBug on March 19, 2013 at 12:59 AM

That’s the most stupid thing I’ve read all day. Or pitiful.

Solaratov on March 19, 2013 at 2:02 AM

I’m just telling you how it’s going to play because this is the narrative.

BedBug on March 19, 2013 at 2:05 AM

It’s what the vote tally says. Between 7 and 8 million fewer Republicans voted for Romney than voted for McLame, while nearly 4 million fewer Democrats voted for Obama. Obama only won by 3 million votes, had those 7 or 8 million Republicans who stayed home voted for Romney, then Romney would have won by nearly 5 million votes.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:02 AM

OK, but did they stay home because Romney is Morman?

jaime on March 19, 2013 at 2:04 AM

Well, that or because they believed he wasn’t a Conservative, which didn’t stop them from voting for McCain.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:06 AM

thatsafactjack on March 19, 2013 at 1:49 AM

‘Nite, Jackie. Sleep well.

jaime on March 19, 2013 at 2:07 AM

I’m just telling you how it’s going to play because this is the narrative.

BedBug on March 19, 2013 at 2:05 AM

Plus, you’re voting for her. You are nuts.

See the link I provided, above, on previous column actually.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 2:09 AM

No. Hillary “What Does It Matter?” Clinton is finished.

John the Libertarian on March 19, 2013 at 2:09 AM

To call Hillary “the strongest woman on Earth” a victim is insanity, pure.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 2:10 AM

Style!

jaime on March 19, 2013 at 2:10 AM

INC on March 19, 2013 at 1:59 AM

Bingo. He did great. Just lost. And the next nominee will have one hell of a time. Unless the electorate wakes up and realizes how dire things are.

Rusty Allen on March 19, 2013 at 2:05 AM

I’m not sure it matters at this point. The Fifth Column Treasonous Media has enough of a grip on the minds of enough of the Conservative/Republican population that it may already be too damned late. Look at the utterly insane hatred that many so called Conservatives or Republicans have for Sarah Palin. That hatred is 99.999% a result of propaganda and indoctrination that the Fifth Column Treasonous Media pounded into the heads of people who just don’t do their own homework.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:11 AM

Just for you, BedBug, a very special gift.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 2:13 AM

I’m just telling you how it’s going to play because this is the narrative.

BedBug on March 19, 2013 at 2:05 AM

Plus, you’re voting for her. You are nuts.

See the link I provided, above, on previous column actually.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 2:09 AM

That’s how people see her. And, never forget NH 2008.
And, my vote? If it’s someone like Bush III, Chris Christie, or Marco Rubio, it’s not going to matter who I vote for.

BedBug on March 19, 2013 at 2:14 AM

The US royalty can’t suffer kids on their lawn.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 2:16 AM

BedBug on March 19, 2013 at 2:14 AM

You called her a “victim” and made other incongruent comments tonight. Either you were kidding or you’re schnapsed, not from alcohol. I don’t care about your or anyone’s vote any more.

The US is cooked. The frogs are dead in the hot water. They just don’t know it yet.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 2:17 AM

BedBug on March 19, 2013 at 2:14 AM

You called her a “victim” and made other incongruent comments tonight. Either you were kidding or you’re schnapsed, not from alcohol. I don’t care about your or anyone’s vote any more.

The US is cooked. The frogs are dead in the hot water. They just don’t know it yet.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 2:17 AM

NH 2008. She cried, she won.
I’m just telling you what the media, the voters who don’t pay attention, and DC at large believe.

BedBug on March 19, 2013 at 2:20 AM

Just for you, BedBug, a very special gift.

Schadenfreude on March 19, 2013 at 2:13 AM

That must be a leftard site. They didn’t have any comment about the contents of the emails.

jaime on March 19, 2013 at 2:20 AM

‘Nite, All

jaime on March 19, 2013 at 2:23 AM

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:04 AM

Sorry to jump the gun. I remember that constant post-election refrain, but I should have asked whom you meant.

INC on March 19, 2013 at 2:25 AM

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:04 AM

Sorry to jump the gun. I remember that constant post-election refrain, but I should have asked whom you meant.

INC on March 19, 2013 at 2:25 AM

No worries… ;)

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:26 AM

Man… I live in SoCal, and am listening to a radio station called 105.7 The Walrus, it broadcasts out of Baja California, but it’s market is San Diego California. Right now they are doing a major Mexican Election get out the vote Propaganda push. Yes.. it’s totally in English… Kind of feeling a little devil on my shoulder trying to suggest that I should register to vote in the Mexican Elections… O_O

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:31 AM

No. Hillary “What Does It Matter?” Clinton is finished.

John the Libertarian on March 19, 2013 at 2:09 AM

I agree..:)

Dire Straits on March 19, 2013 at 2:32 AM

I’d rather have sex with a parking meter than the Hildabeast.

Please deposit 25 cents for 15 minutes.

SparkPlug on March 19, 2013 at 2:33 AM

I’m not sure it matters at this point. The Fifth Column Treasonous Media has enough of a grip on the minds of enough of the Conservative/Republican population that it may already be too damned late. Look at the utterly insane hatred that many so called Conservatives or Republicans have for Sarah Palin. That hatred is 99.999% a result of propaganda and indoctrination that the Fifth Column Treasonous Media pounded into the heads of people who just don’t do their own homework.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:11 AM

this has been a decades long program for the left, and it is not surprising that they’ve done so well given the total uniformity of their msg across institution and across platform.

but beyond that the entrenched machines that rule the big cities and big states. What is the EV base for the left? 240? Something like that. Rs have no margin.

http://www.270towin.com/

tells the tale. barry got 332 EVs. Natch the GOP is panicked…and start slamming the people that voted for them. The autopsy report pretty much ratified the leftist/media brief against the GOP.

So yeah, agitprop is key to the left, but R incompetence doesn’t hurt. Honestly I don’t know where they go now. Having announced their targeted groups they’ll ‘reach out’.

But, don’t forget the machines. Well…and the fraud. Whatever they do will be something of a hail Mary pass. They are counting on another W. Looking for W…so they can win in a squeaker. Well, good luck with that

r keller on March 19, 2013 at 2:34 AM

Dire Straits on March 19, 2013 at 2:32 AM

OK Hillary Clinton is finished. Her memory is FUBARd.

But what about Hillary Rodham? Her memory seems ok.

SparkPlug on March 19, 2013 at 2:36 AM

Whatever they do will be something of a hail Mary pass. They are counting on another W. Looking for W…so they can win in a squeaker. Well, good luck with that

r keller on March 19, 2013 at 2:34 AM

And their hail marry will be intercepted because they are utterly unable to protect their assets. The GOP Leadership betrayed Sarah Palin by not mounting a vigorous and aggressive defense of her. They were more afraid of her, then they were of Obama. They deserve to loose, but unfortunately their loosing also means that America looses.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 2:40 AM

With all due respect SparkPlug, Karl Rove did not cost the Republicans the Whitehouse, what cost us the Whitehuse was the 7 r 8 million republicans who could not bring themselves to vote for a Mormon.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 1:53 AM

Bush drew 62 million and change in 2004 while Romney drew 60 million and change that works out to a difference of 2 million votes not the 7 or 8 million you claim. So where is that numerical value coming from. Most of those 2 million were probably independents not Republicans.

chemman on March 19, 2013 at 2:41 AM

SparkPlug on March 19, 2013 at 2:36 AM

LoLz..:)

Dire Straits on March 19, 2013 at 2:52 AM

The only writer quoted in the original post who actually gets it is Ramesh Ponnuru.

Mitt Romney lost in 2012 because a decisive slice of culturally moderate-to-conservative but economically marginal/struggling white voters either voted for Barack Obama or stayed home.

Basically, there’s a group of working class whites who have been struggling in the Obama economy who want to hear how the GOP will help them survive. That’s the key to the 2016 election.

They aren’t opposed to the GOP’s cultural message — during the comparatively prosperous Bush years, they largely sided with the GOP on cultural issues (although they got turned off by Iraq). It’s that they are now economically vulnerable and that’s foremost in their minds.

Mitt Romney lost not because he was too pro-life or too anti-gay or didn’t do “The Dougie” with enough verve, but because he lacked economic credibility with white (and latino, btw) working class voters. Economic credibility here isn’t “I know how to grow a billion dollar company” but rather “I’m on your side, I feel your pain, and I will fight for you.”

There’s nothing that the RNC can do to fill that gap. In truth, only an actual candidate can.

Some of you don’t want to hear this but the GOP has nominated only one candidate for P or VP with unimpeachable working class authenticity. We could do more to try to emulate their messaging.

Robert_Paulson on March 19, 2013 at 4:08 AM

one candidate for P or VP with unimpeachable working class authenticity

One candidate since 1980, that is.

Robert_Paulson on March 19, 2013 at 4:10 AM

what cost us the Whitehuse was the 7 r 8 m1illion republicans who could not bring themselves to vote for a Mormon.

SWalker on March 19, 2013 at 1:53 AM

…and they gave us the Muslim Brotherhood

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2013 at 5:08 AM

…it’s almost time to hear from the cracked record…cracked head crackhead!

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2013 at 5:18 AM

A new poll for the Hill newspaper finds that “more voters trust the Democratic Party than the Republican Party on budgetary issues . . . even though a strong majority actually prefer Republican fiscal policies.”…

Even Democrats demonstrated that they prefer what are normally considered GOP budget ideas. Only 44 percent of Democrats polled said deficits should be primarily reduced mostly through raising taxes, versus 40 percent who felt it should be done largely by trimming spending.

That’s the good news for the GOP. The bad news was that, when the two competing budget plans had the labels “Republican” and “Democrat” attached to them, there was a clear change in preference. A full 35 percent of respondents backed the Democrat plan in that case, while only 30 percent trusted the GOP more (the rest said they trusted neither party).

Again, this is the major reason for Mitt’s demise—not so much “the messenger” but the ability to create a positive message that would combat the liberal media’s narrative (hammered by Obama’s people during the whole summer), that Romney was the rich white guy who would starve the poor and the elderly. When there was no clear response/message from the Romney campaign during this whole period, the campaign was lost.

Rovin on March 19, 2013 at 6:01 AM

O/T: Here Comes Comes Peter Cottontail. Sequestered. Now, he’s in jail. Obama Holding Easter for Ransom? The Devil You Say. My take.

kingsjester on March 19, 2013 at 6:32 AM

ahhh the mj crew bashing W on the iraq war and praising dear leader….pffft, he’s just following W’s SOFA for cripe sakes…

good morning HA :)

lsm just giddy with all this crapola…geez and the gop elite keep giving them more…

ugh

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 6:39 AM

kingsjester on March 19, 2013 at 6:32 AM

morning KJ
great take
:)

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 6:42 AM

…good again kj…a customer was complaining yesterday…that she had received a letter from the Unemployment Office…that “Due to the Sequester”… her benefits would be decreased by 10%,

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2013 at 6:44 AM

the gop has to reach out to young voters? they’ll be coming soon enough after all this crapola this administration has done hits the fan

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 6:44 AM

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 6:42 AM

Thank you, ma’am!

kingsjester on March 19, 2013 at 6:44 AM

morning KA2 :)

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 6:45 AM

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 6:39 AM

…morning sunshine!…off to work I go!…gotta pay for them Obamaphones!…think they’ll cut them back 10%?

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2013 at 6:47 AM

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2013 at 6:44 AM

Our Petulant President strikes again. Chicago Politics at its finest.
If this garbage continues, the GOP needs to find their ummm…fortitude and begin impeachment.

kingsjester on March 19, 2013 at 6:47 AM

kingsjester on March 19, 2013 at 6:47 AM

amen

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2013 at 6:47 AM

probably increase those 10% don’t want to disenfranchise anyone

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 6:54 AM

the gop has to reach out to young voters? they’ll be coming soon enough after all this crapola this administration has done hits the fan

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 6:44 AM

…in a family of 5…where 4 fingers of the hand voted Republican…the one thumb that went Libertarian on me…came to me this weekend and talked about regretting her vote…”her friends at school influenced her”…but now… they are applying for jobs!
Guess what?

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2013 at 6:54 AM

Some of you don’t want to hear this but the GOP has nominated only one candidate for P or VP with unimpeachable working class authenticity. We could do more to try to emulate their messaging.

Robert_Paulson on March 19, 2013 at 4:08 AM

And we saw how she was, and still is, treated by them.

Cleombrotus on March 19, 2013 at 6:54 AM

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2013 at 6:54 AM

yup, we are hearing a little grumbling this way as well…

own it libs, own it..

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 6:55 AM

A blunt self-critique by the national Republican Party concludes that while the GOP is flourishing in many state capitals, it is “increasingly marginalized” and out of touch at the federal level.

And who’s example does the Republican leadership want to follow? The Republicans that are winning at the state level or the Republicans that are losing at the state level?

They want to follow the Republicans that are losing at the state level.

The Republican establishment wants to do for the nation what they have done for Republicans in California and New York.

It has little to do with the location. It’s about the message.
Democrats look at Texas and tell themselves “We can take Texas.”
Republicans look at California and tell themselves… we can’t win there unless we copy Democrats.

If appeasing worked so well, California and New York would be GOP Utopia.

JellyToast on March 19, 2013 at 6:55 AM

the lsm bashing of W continues…Iraq 10 years later…

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 7:01 AM

kingsjester on March 19, 2013 at 6:32 AM

Good take, KJ. The Bunny has been nothing but a photo op and chance for Barky to push his agenda of the day. Buh-bye bunny!

indypat on March 19, 2013 at 7:10 AM

isikoff placing all the blame on W on the wmd evidence…nevermind bubba and the rest of the dems crying the same exact thing prior to W taking office…

what an idiot

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 7:14 AM

indypat on March 19, 2013 at 7:10 AM

Thank you!

kingsjester on March 19, 2013 at 7:21 AM

The Bunny has been nothing but a photo op and chance for Barky to push his agenda of the day. Buh-bye bunny!

indypat on March 19, 2013 at 7:10 AM

Not true! The occasion is also used by Satan’s broad-beamed racist spouse to further her “lets move” nonsense. They take a few pictures with the common people on the lawn and then go off to a private gathering with the celebs that have shown up.

Happy Nomad on March 19, 2013 at 7:23 AM

isikoff placing all the blame on W on the wmd evidence…nevermind bubba and the rest of the dems crying the same exact thing prior to W taking office…

what an idiot

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 7:14 AM

Whatever the truth, the WMD evidence was a concensus throughout the intelligence community. Not just the US but foreign nations as well. The problem is that there was way too much time discussing the issue and going through the effing UN. Plenty of time for whatever was there to be sent off to some other Western-hating nation. Isikoff is an idiot journalist but I repeat myself.

Happy Nomad on March 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM

They take a few pictures with the common people on the lawn and then go off to a private gathering with the celebs that have shown up.

Happy Nomad on March 19, 2013 at 7:23 AM

yepper…

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM

Come on! Hand out more free stuff. Maybe even buy my fast food and fancy restaurant food with food stamps.

Allow my dog, cat, hamster and sanke to vote. The audacity of anyone requiring an ID is nothing more than racism and bigotry.

Allow anyone that wants to come in the country to enjoy all the benefits and pay not taxes or social security. Give them anythign they want.

Spend all the money you want and make sure no one pays for it. Our kids won’t mind living in mud huts.

Hand out money to anyone I screw and impreganate. The more times I do it the more money you should give them.

When I suceed and become one of the ruling elite allow me to ignore all the rules and laws and make them apply only to peasants and republicans. Make sure that when I do get caught in the gay bar or bathhouse when out embassies being blown up you just ignore it. Same if I get flown around in a private jet and go screw some pre-teen foreign hookers make sure that’s all palmed off as “politics.

I don’t know why you republicans make this so difficult.

acyl72 on March 19, 2013 at 7:29 AM

Happy Nomad on March 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM

joe was saying the same thing but isikoff wouldn’t admit it…yup an idiot

cmsinaz on March 19, 2013 at 7:33 AM

kingsjester on March 19, 2013 at 6:32 AM

\

KJ- You see that while the Bunny is under threat Satan and his wife are hosting ST. Patrick’s Day events today including a party tonight?

This is why none of this sequestration stuff is believable. There hasn’t been enough time for any Secret Service agents to have been actually furloughed (which is why smelly tourists are supposedly banned from their house at 1600 Penn Ave). The Bunny is under threat because that is a huge media deal yet the White House can still have a party for St. Patrick’s Day and the travel budget isn’t being cut? It’s all about making things as inconvenient as possible for the public.

Happy Nomad on March 19, 2013 at 7:50 AM

Comfort and guidance please.

Jackalope on March 19, 2013 at 1:08 AM

Sending prayers.

Fallon on March 19, 2013 at 7:59 AM

acyl72 on March 19, 2013 at 7:29 AM

Plainly spoken.

tom daschle concerned on March 19, 2013 at 8:19 AM

Hey stoopids: you didn’t run on social issues last time and YOU STILL LOST.

I hate the republican party these days. They run further left every cycle, they lose, and then spend the next four years lecturing about how the party has moved too far right. And repeat.

I’d just as soon go ahead an hold the election now. Let’s run Jeb against Hillary so she can go ahead and get her transition team ready.

SAMinVA on March 19, 2013 at 8:36 AM

Anything that doesn’t include banging two rocks together is High Technology in the eyes of people from Third World hell holes. (:

SparkPlug on March 19, 2013 at 1:51 AM

You don’t get out of the country much, do you.

JoseQuinones on March 19, 2013 at 8:38 AM

Happy Nomad on March 19, 2013 at 7:50 AM

No, I didn’t see that. Why am I not surprised?

Our first anti-American President.

kingsjester on March 19, 2013 at 8:42 AM

Seriously You Guys, the QOTD are approaching Tolstoy lengths. Does anyone actually read the whole thing? As O’Reilly says, make it pithy.

Pervygrin on March 19, 2013 at 9:11 AM

An honest media would compare and contrast what the Democrats promised in 2006 vs. what the Democrats have done since 2007.

2006:

Over the past decade, the Republican controlled Congress took our nation in the wrong direction. Too many Americans are paying a heavy price for those wrong choices: record costs for energy, health care and education; jobs shipped overseas; and budgets that heap record debt on our children. For millions, the middle-class dream has been replaced by a middle-class squeeze…

Democrats are proposing a New Direction for America…

With integrity, civility and fiscal discipline, our New Direction for America will use commonsense principles to address the aspirations and fulfill the hopes and dreams of all Americans. That is our promise to the American people….

Our federal budget should be a statement of our national values. One of those values is responsibility. Democrats are committed to ending years of irresponsible budget policies that have produced historic deficits. Instead of piling trillions of dollars of debt onto our children and grandchildren, we will restore “Pay As You Go” budget discipline.

Budget discipline has been abandoned by the Bush Administration and its Republican congressional majorities. Congress under Republican control has turned a projected $5.6 trillion 10-year surplus at the end of the Clinton years into a nearly $3 trillion deficit– including the four worst deficits in the history of America. The nation’s debt ceiling has been raised four times in just five years to more than $8.9 trillion. Nearly half of our nation’s record debt is owned by foreign countries including China and Japan. Without a return to fiscal discipline, the foreign countries that make our computers, our clothing and our toys will soon be making our foreign policy. Deficit spending is not just a fiscal problem – it’s a national security issue as well.

Our New Direction is committed to “Pay As You Go” budgeting – no more deficit spending.

2007:

After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: pay-as-you-go, no new deficit spending. Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.

- New Speaker Nancy Pelosi, 01/04/2007

When the Democrats took majority control on January 3, 2007, they “inherited” the FY 2007 budget with a deficit less than $161 Billion. The Total National Debt at Fiscal Year-end 2007 was $9 Trillion and of that, $5 Trillion was Debt Held by the Public (what Pelosi called a “national security issue”).

In just their first two budgets, Democrat majorities quickly made annual deficits over $1 Trillion their norm, and then they haven’t passed a budget since. In just four years under Speaker Pelosi, the Debt Held by the Public more than doubled, from $5.0 Trillion to more than $10.1 Trillion.

Now, the Debt Held by the Public is nearly $11.9 Trillion, and the Total National Debt is well over $16.7 Trillion. We’re not even halfway through FY 2013… what will those numbers look like at Fiscal Year-end 2013, after Democrats have completed six Fiscal Years with Democrat majority control? And all six of those Democrat-majority fiscal years have been the SIX LARGEST DEFICITS in US History!

Far from keeping their promises of “fiscal discipline” and “no more deficit spending”, Democrats did the exact opposite, setting record deficits and more than doubling the Debt Held by the Public.

An honest media would report on that.

ITguy on March 19, 2013 at 9:15 AM

A new poll for the Hill newspaper finds that “more voters trust the Democratic Party than the Republican Party on budgetary issues . . . even though a strong majority actually prefer Republican fiscal policies.”…

Even Democrats demonstrated that they prefer what are normally considered GOP budget ideas. Only 44 percent of Democrats polled said deficits should be primarily reduced mostly through raising taxes, versus 40 percent who felt it should be done largely by trimming spending.

That’s the good news for the GOP. The bad news was that, when the two competing budget plans had the labels “Republican” and “Democrat” attached to them, there was a clear change in preference. A full 35 percent of respondents backed the Democrat plan in that case, while only 30 percent trusted the GOP more (the rest said they trusted neither party).

If the media reported the truth, the public would no longer trust the Democrats.

ITguy on March 19, 2013 at 9:18 AM

Okay. So, you will be like the other three million GOP voters who stayed home and gave the election to Obama? Worked so well in 2006 as well.

BedBug on March 18, 2013 at 11:24 PM

Maybe you and the others had better start taking conservatives seriously when we say that we want an actual conservative to represent us. And while I did hold my nose and vote for that spineless, gutless coward Romney, I know several friends who didn’t. They went libertarian out of principle. I will be doing the same, or staying home if you keep pushing the same RINO crap. It’s time for you to get in line behind the base.

dominigan on March 19, 2013 at 9:35 AM

OK, but did they stay home because Romney is Morman?

jaime on March 19, 2013 at 2:04 AM

No. They stayed home because Romney flip-flopped and undermined his own message. He said Obama was a nice guy but in over his head. He said that he would get rid of Obamacare, and then said he’d try to save parts of it (and always said that Romneycare was the answer!). He only attacked one front (economics) instead of all fronts. He never did articulate the ideology of liberty and freedom and innovation and individualism and responsibility. He never asked Obama why he hated successful people. He never attacked Obama on his every other week golf outings, or vacations, or how he and his family lived like royalty (and why are the poor supporting that)!

dominigan on March 19, 2013 at 9:42 AM

The only certainty is that the candidate who comes forward as a cookie-cutter “three-legged-stool” (strong defense, economic conservative, social traditionalist) conservative is going to wind up pleasing no one and running into the same limitations that Mitt Romney did: There are not enough of those voters who follow those prescriptions to win the White House.

Funny, but the guy who came up with the three legged stool won two of the biggest landslides in history. Reagan’s stands on the economy, foreign policy and social issues have not been espoused by anyone, much less Romney! Reagan was not an interventionist. Reagan did not believe in crony capitalism and Reagan was a staunch supporter of life. He was the only one, at the time, to come out and say publicly that life began at conception. When he did, there was a gasp from the RINOs, the left and media that could be heard around the world. Reagan hated the “Inside the beltway political class” and most of the Republican party tried to keep him from getting the nomination.

There are not enough of those voters who follow those prescriptions to win the White House.

No, there are millions of voters who follow those prescriptions No candidate for President has espoused those prescriptions in, at least, the last two elections.

fight like a girl on March 19, 2013 at 1:25 PM

Well, to those who say Romney lost the election because he was a Mormon, are you nuts or a Liberal Troll. We are called raciest every time we disagree with the President, we don’t need our own people being bigots. Romney lost because he was a RINO, I have several friends all over the country and they were adamant that they did not vote for Romney in the Primary. Karl Rove needs to retire to a South Sea Island and leave the Party alone. The Rove Cabal has cost us two election in a row, McCain was a RINO and the Party rejected him same as Romney and McCain is NOT a Mormon.

old war horse on March 20, 2013 at 12:51 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5