A comeback for limited-government conservatism
But as tempting as it will be for analysts to pin the GOP’s 2012 defeat on an embrace of small-government extremism, the results from last night don’t actually bear this out.
According to exit polls as described by Politico, “53 percent of those surveyed said the government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals — a figure that’s risen 10 points since the 2008 election. Comparatively, 41 percent of voters said they believe government should be doing more.”
When House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan unveiled his first budget proposing sweeping reforms to Medicare and Medicaid in 2011, Democrats celebrated because they thought it would destroy the GOP. …
And yet, the Romney-Ryan ticket obliterated Obama among voters over age 65, winning the group by a 12-point margin. …
If Romney lost the election because the electorate was rebelling against small-government extremism, it should be reflected in his numbers among independents. Yet that group of voters broke for Romney by a five-point margin, according to exit polls.
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 Next »
Doesn’t matter. Golden rule: Those with the gold (and the reins) set the rules and the path.
Difficultas_Est_Imperium on November 8, 2012 at 10:33 AM
LOL. What limited government conservatism?
Dante on November 8, 2012 at 10:36 AM
Minorities voted their anti-white tendencies and the young are just ignorant and inexperienced.
It’s interesting that Romney won the “adult” vote and Obama won the inexperienced youth vote.
Charlemagne on November 8, 2012 at 10:41 AM
Our founders’ grand experiment is ended. The America of our birth no longer exists. The people have chosen to put chains around their own necks.
Limited government will return someday. However, that day will not come for a long, long time.
Man will return to his natural state – despotism – and endure a long, dark period of misery before another America is possible.
single stack on November 8, 2012 at 10:42 AM
Many of you aren’t actual small government conservatives, your big government Republicans. Why do I say that? Because you love government when Republicans are in power. You love to tell others, here and abroad, how to live their lives via the force of government. Until you embrace true small government values and liberty you will continue to lose.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 10:43 AM
Examples?
Work to restore federalism and keep liberty alive via the states.
Charlemagne on November 8, 2012 at 10:47 AM
The experiment ended in the nineteenth century. This is exactly the same America we’ve had since birth.
Dante on November 8, 2012 at 10:48 AM
Seriously dude, we heard that sh!t after ’08 as well. They really do think we’re a bunch of Charlie Browns. LOOK EVERYONE, THE GOP HAS NEW FOOTBALL TO KICK!!!!
abobo on November 8, 2012 at 10:52 AM
Straight up true.
tommyhawk on November 8, 2012 at 10:53 AM
W, unfortunately.
cool breeze on November 8, 2012 at 10:53 AM
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) passed overwhelmingly with GOP support, Patriot Act 1&2, continual foreign interventions,
consistent opposition from GOP law makers regarding gay marriage just to name a few. Additionally, GOP lawmakers, along with their Dims, vote continuously to raise the debt ceiling.
When the GOP starts supporting the ultimate minority – the individual -against government tyranny then, and only then, will they start to make head way into a more diverse voter block.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 10:54 AM
Kind of O/T, but I think this needs to be stated over and over.
The demographics and general philosophy of this nation have changed so much so that I do not believe conservatives and libertarians have any recourse in re-establishing our constitutional republic through federal elections. I believe that the only option left to our side is through an application of the 10th Amendment with a check on federal power by a gov of a powerful state.
Lets take one issue as an example: federal environmental regulations via the EPA. We spend our time and money pushing candidates at the federal level who will manage, defund, or abolish these bureaucracies with little chance of ever seeing this occur. If a conservative president and congress ever went forward with these measures they would more than likely be done politically due to the media and the national electorate. Key term national.
Now, if a governor of a large state simply made a statement that they did not recognize federal authority in regards to its state energy regulation and actually took physical measures to remove the infrastructure of said federal bureaucracy how would the federal government respond? Yes, they could physically try and reinstate them and risk an actual confrontation, but that would be a very big gamble. It is important that the state asserting its right have an electorate that would support these measures.
I believe this measure would open up the flood gates for governors of all states to start applying their sovereign state rights. This may be liberal social issues is some states and fiscal and regulatory issues in other states. The bottom line is the perceived authority of the federal government will have been checked.
I believe the best state to challenge federal authority would be the state of Texas. It is a large state that has a populace that is passionate about its state especially given the fact that it was its own sovereign country prior to joining the union.
We will never right the ship by going head to head in federal elections. This last election proved that even more. The tool, the 10th amendment, is available we just need to find the right governor, issue, and time to apply it.
Meat Fighter on November 8, 2012 at 10:54 AM
I’ll concede some of this but what you forget is the Republican revolt in 2006 which helped hand Congress to the Nancy Pelosi. That was mostly about spending. As far as telling others how to live, I guess you’re talking about abortion and gay marriage yet it’s the Democrats who are demanding insurance companies pay for birth control (and pass on the costs to others) and it is the Democrats who want to take public money and give it to Planned Parenthood. As for gay marriage it is the Democrats who want the government to validate or license the relationship.
rhombus on November 8, 2012 at 10:59 AM
Bingo
Meat Fighter on November 8, 2012 at 11:00 AM
I don’t know how young you are but it’s not that way for me.
I remember when the mantra of Democrats was:
Today it’s:
This is NOT the America I was born into.
HotAirian on November 8, 2012 at 11:00 AM
On the national level we cannot pander the latino vote. They will not vote conservative just because he is a hispanic. See the Ted Cruz election yesterday. They voted for the “old white guy” over Ted Cruz.
We need to bring back the notion of liberty. More discussion by our candidates on liberty, our constitution, more quotes from founding fathers followed by context in todays tyranical federal government. Ridicule of the left’s positions is important. Mocking them by pointing out the soft tyranny that comes from their policies. This is key with the young voter block who is misinformed and votes on “coolness.” Shatter that perception and it will be game changing.
Meat Fighter on November 8, 2012 at 11:05 AM
These guys cannot read polls anymore.
Seriously. Take Above:
How do we not know that means legal hemp dealerships, ghey mirage churches and Planned Parenthood?
Do. Not. Accept. The. Words. Of. Pundits. Anymore.
They. Need. You. To. Keep. Their. Careers.
.
budfox on November 8, 2012 at 11:05 AM
I’m not talking about abortion, that is a matter of rights for the child. Did I say that Democrats are small government? Of course they love government as well – even more so – but the GOP has to acknowledge that they need to actually support liberty. No one says you have to like what others do – nor do you have to like what others say – but we damn well should completely support their personal rights and freedoms. As for gay marriage, while I don’t agree with it, free and independent adults should have the right to do as they wish. I don’t want liberals telling me how to live my life, and we shouldn’t tell liberals how to live theirs as long as they aren’t violating someone elses rights.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 11:06 AM
x100
affenhauer on November 8, 2012 at 11:06 AM
Sorry, Obama and the Democrats invalidated any whining from the left about the Patriot Act and illegal wars.
rhombus on November 8, 2012 at 11:07 AM
If Mitt Romney really believes in America–and I think he does–he will get together with Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Dennis Miller, et al. and hammer out a solidly conservative platform for a third party.
They could have it done in time for the 2014 House and Senate races; most certainly they can do it by 2016.
Mr. Romney, are you truly conservative? If you would do this, thereby making it clear that you have committed yourself to solidly conservative ideology, I would vote for you again. If you cannot, then stand down and support the person who would lead such a party.
It is time for a third party. A party that has as its leaders strong people who will not capitulate to the leftists whose goal is to destroy America.
Leaders without egos; who can withstand the assault of a media who will attempt to crucify their reputations.
Leaders who will stand up to a ideologically corrupt Supreme Court; passing laws over and over again until the SC understands that the people want a moral society built upon the rule of law: the Constitution of the United State as the framers intended it, not some postmodern fantasia of shifting “fairness.”
Leaders who care not one whit about a body of nations infiltrated by third world dictators and Godless superpowers that think they can dictate to the sovereign United States of America and its citizens how to conduct our affairs.
Where are you leaders who can lead from the front? Who can make America what she needs to be, for her citizens and for the world.
(Faux libertarians need not apply.)
davidk on November 8, 2012 at 11:07 AM
We won’t win anything ever again, and even if we did it’s over. The left has grown the Leviathan to such a size that it can never be cut down to size. How did it happen?
We lost the schools. And that happened over the course of the last 40+ years. Several generations of children have been taught to HATE the America and all it stands for. I have been screaming for years that we must take back the schools but it is now too late. Goodbye, America. 236 years was a good run. But darkness must now descend, and for how long no one knows.
I am sick to death.
Rixon on November 8, 2012 at 11:09 AM
Excellent points. What are the issues very important to the young that always take us away that message? It seems obvious to me.
rhombus on November 8, 2012 at 11:09 AM
As much as I want to believe this article is true, I call BS.
People may tell pollsters they want smaller government, but then they go and vote for socialist “free stuff”.
Its not like anyone didn’t know what Obama stood for at this point.
cool breeze on November 8, 2012 at 11:10 AM
Great point meat fighter. By actually supporting individual rights, respecting the choices free and independent individuals make, we take something away from the progressives. Stop passing these horrible laws in the name of “security.” Don’t tie it to civil rights, tie it to Constitutional rights. Make the progressive out to be the true tyrants they are.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 11:10 AM
How about real libertarians?
rhombus on November 8, 2012 at 11:11 AM
And leaders who recognize this.
davidk on November 8, 2012 at 11:11 AM
Agree.
davidk on November 8, 2012 at 11:12 AM
.
WTF is up with the Eeyore sounding EMO Republican crowd here?
Do you guys curl up into a ball and weep without pity every time life hands you a setback?
Or are you just reveling in the drama of holding the moral high ground while being a noble loser looking dashing in your browncoat and preparing to smuggle a load of illicit beagles?
Time to start preparing for the next opportunity, not caterwauling over the past. I have some neighbors that obviously need some education, it may take me a while, and quite a few beers, but I’m sure I can convince them of the merits of small government.
LincolntheHun on November 8, 2012 at 11:12 AM
You make a good point. Who is ready to give up the mortgage deduction? How about unemployment insurance? The child deduction?
rhombus on November 8, 2012 at 11:12 AM
Since 2006, haven’t most of these “security” laws been passed or re-passed by Democrats?
rhombus on November 8, 2012 at 11:15 AM
Me. I’m paid-off in two more years.
affenhauer on November 8, 2012 at 11:17 AM
Sure. If they can support the Constitution as the founders intended.
I think this allows for a more libertarian society: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/
davidk on November 8, 2012 at 11:20 AM
Go back and look at who voted for the NDAA, who promoted SOPA/PIPA, and the PAtriot Act 2. These are very bi-partisan. When the RNC controlled house, along with the DNC controlled senate pass a bill that gives the executive power the ability to indefinitely detain US citizens on US soil – this voting away our 5th and 4th Amendment rights – there should be people and politicians in the street. But guess what, Ryan voted for it and Romney supported it. If we really respected liberty and Constitutional rights we would using legislation such as this against the Dems as proof that they are tyrants.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 11:21 AM
You ever call me an emo again and I’ll reach through the computer and b1tch slap you.
abobo on November 8, 2012 at 11:23 AM
Just ignore him…he obviously doesn’t understand liberty or freedom.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 11:25 AM
The federal income tax is way too burdensome. I am not nearly smart enough to even understand these things, but it seems to me that the income tax should be replaced with a natiobal sales tax. Or the income tax should be a simple flat rate with not deductions at all. Everybody pays the exact same rate, rich or poor. (Redundancy for emphasis.)
The deductions and all the write-offs and unemployment insurance and welfare should be done at the state level.
davidk on November 8, 2012 at 11:26 AM
What does “emo” mean?
davidk on November 8, 2012 at 11:27 AM
Of course, natiobal = national.
davidk on November 8, 2012 at 11:28 AM
Understand that both parties are guilty but it’s usually only one party who whines about this stuff the loudest and then does it anyway.
Shall we also stand up and oppose disaster relief as too expensive? Should we let people freeze in Staten Island? Should we decline to rescue ambassadors because the jet fuel and ammo are too expensive? Should we just let terrorists get on airplanes? Should we cut food stamps to the elderly and let them starve? And the list goes on…
Unfortunately negative campaigning does work and it’s all too easy to demagog the good things you and I both support. We have to keep educating people. In the last election, Obama trolled for the moron vote. Perhaps we need to do the same thing with the intent to educate. Clearly these people way outnumber readers of WSJ op-eds.
rhombus on November 8, 2012 at 11:31 AM
A flat rate, say 10% or 12% for all. No deductions. It could be framed as equality – real equality – every person that works pays the same percentage. If you make more, you pay more, thus it is equal. The government shouldn’t be targeting one individual over the other based on how much they make.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 11:31 AM
You’re absolutely right. Most uninformed people are just pawns to the social pop culture narrative. Changing that narrative by definining key words over and over is key. I do this with the word choice when discussing abortion or gay marriage. My first disclaimer is that I think they should be decided at the state level. I then show them how much choice the left really belives in by stepping through my average day……”from the moment I wake up whether it is the type of light bulb I turn on or the amount of water I flush in my toilet I am controleld by a heavy handed central government.” By the end of the day in the example they are glossy eyed and a light bulb has gone off.
Consitutional rights
Individual liberty
States rights
Meat Fighter on November 8, 2012 at 11:31 AM
.
See this? This is my concerned face.
And you have not idea how to appeal to the common man. Calling Dems tyrants, even if true, is a waste. Dems dont’ care, and Independents don’t respond to it. Might fire up the Ron Paul/ Liberterian crowd, but will not win an election.
LincolntheHun on November 8, 2012 at 11:33 AM
A free immoral democratically elected representative government society cannot be either limited nor fiscally conservative.
astonerii on November 8, 2012 at 11:35 AM
Supporting liberty – and thus protecting the rights of individuals – is not whining nor it it negative. Supporting our Constitution is not negative. Pointing the fact that one should not support a proposed law because it takes my “inalienable” rights away is not negative campaigning. The fact that you claim it is “whining” is proof you don’t under stand liberty.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 11:36 AM
Marijuana, abortion, same sex marriage.
Apply those issues to the paradigm of states rights and individual liberty. I for one am a guy of faith and against abortion, but even I can understand that I have a better chance of limiting them by stating that Roe v Wade is bad law and each states should decide the morality of their respective states. Reaching out to young people and telling them that can choose to live in a state that fits their definition of society. the fact that most young people think abortion will become illegal over night if Roe v. wade is overturned speaks volumes about how our candidates debate the issues without providing the contextual backdrop.
Meat Fighter on November 8, 2012 at 11:38 AM
Guess what’s not winning election..the same old Republican BS that has not substance – you want proof just look at Tuesday. So let me give you a little advice, repackaging the same old tired dance and song in a minority won’t fool anyone.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 11:39 AM
I agree especially the immoral component, but we have no alternative as conservatives than to reaffirm our federlist foundation with states’ rights. I can run circles around most people I meet with regards to abortion and same sex marriage. it doesn’t matter. they are uninformed or don’t care they will hang their vote on those two issues. It’s time we take them off the table by re-affirming the 10th amendment.
Meat Fighter on November 8, 2012 at 11:43 AM
I would submit that it is not negative when you box your opponent into a narrative, then provide an alternative vision laid. The uses social pop culture to ridicule conservatives and IT WORKS with a large portion of the electorate. We have to do the same. Ridicuale and laugh at SPECIFIC politicians and how they want to control young people, how stupid they think young people are etc then provide the alternative narrative of liberty and states rights.
Meat Fighter on November 8, 2012 at 11:48 AM
Probably the only real path left. The national Republican party will trip over itself looking for big government solutions for their electoral woes.
NotCoach on November 8, 2012 at 11:49 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »