“It should have been a landslide if Romney had run as a true conservative”
“The battle to take over the Republican Party begins today and the failed Republican leadership should resign,” said Richard Viguerie, a top activist and chairman of ConservativeHQ.com.
He said the lesson on Romney’s loss to President Obama on Tuesday is that the GOP must “never again” nominate a “a big government established conservative for president.”
Jenny Beth Martin of Tea Party Patriots said Romney failed to make the kind of strong case for conservatism that would have won the election.
She described Romney as a “weak, moderate candidate hand-picked by the country club elite Republican establishment.”
“They didn’t see a clear distinction so they went with what they know,” she said of voters.
“It should have been a landslide if Romney had run as a true conservative,” said Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center.
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 … 8 Next »
Exactly!
JellyToast on November 8, 2012 at 9:43 AM
Oh c’mon.
Patrick Ishmael on November 8, 2012 at 9:43 AM
this bullshit need to stop
runner on November 8, 2012 at 9:44 AM
(needs)
runner on November 8, 2012 at 9:44 AM
I’ll say it again for the third headline thread in a row: Sarah Palin.
ShainS on November 8, 2012 at 9:44 AM
Didn’t run so get over it.
wargamer6 on November 8, 2012 at 9:45 AM
Does running as a true conservative involve talking about legitimate rape?
RINO on November 8, 2012 at 9:45 AM
The GOP needs to embrace liberty, that is how we would have won. But as it stands, the status quo is anti-constitutional actions such as the NDAA, and approval of TSA anti-constitutional actions, and the list goes on. If you want to bring people over we need to support the ultimate minority – the individual.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 9:45 AM
Can I get a Amen?
Amen!
WisRich on November 8, 2012 at 9:47 AM
I’m getting tired of this ‘true conservative’ shtick. The reality is only 15-20% of the electorate cares for the purity test. The same 15%-20% will vote for a republican regardless.
justinok on November 8, 2012 at 9:47 AM
Sarah Palin wouldn’t have gotten 40% of the vote. A nation too stupid to support Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan is going to get exactly what it deserves.
Basilsbest on November 8, 2012 at 9:47 AM
STOP IT Barry won because half of America loves free shit! The GOP lost nationally by 2.6 mil votes and the media wanted him reelected. Throw in a willingness to reward lawbreakers (illegal, yes they are illegal aliens) and there you go.
The answer is to stop the media. When you are out and you see them reporting; Don’t let them get away with distorting the truth!
Use the left’s tactics, get in their faces and interrupt live reports. This fight is not done!
reddevil on November 8, 2012 at 9:48 AM
These people are idiots. This does not help our cause.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 9:48 AM
The word “conservative” no longer means what people think it means, just like liberal has been switched around into some strange perverse form. Many people my age look at it the same way they look at people in the 50′s “old, out of touch, backwards”.
Our “educators” have tainted the word to mean some sort of skinflint old man who hates anything that is different than his beliefs. We all know better, but that is how the electorate sees it.
We need to take the word back, back to its true “laissez faire” social and economic meanings.
Gatsu on November 8, 2012 at 9:49 AM
Romney had no problem turning out conservatives in large numbers. These people are idiots. Our problem is that the demographic scales have finally tipped. We have a very serious problem that I’m afraid is permanent. I’m not sure how a Conservative candidate can every win again in a national election in this country.
Zetterson on November 8, 2012 at 9:49 AM
There were some fundamental issues with Romney that we ultimately had to swallow that are related to this outlook, so I’m inclined to agree. Romneycare the most prominent of them – completely neutralized any meaningful discussion about health care.
We tie our hands like this every time, it seems.
JeffWeimer on November 8, 2012 at 9:49 AM
Goodness, I used to identify with the Tea Party. Not sure about these days.
Are you KIDDING ME?! These two men couldn’t have been ANY MORE different. The debates showed that! The rhetoric from both campaigns showed that.
Again, YGTBFKM.
Romney took on the Third Rail of Politics, for Pete’s Sake.
I’m so tired of these people. I consider myself a Tea Party conservative, but by golly most of them have no idea how politics even works. They understand principle, not politics.
blatantblue on November 8, 2012 at 9:49 AM
I need to quit obsessing about politics, it just ain’t healthy…
OmahaConservative on November 8, 2012 at 9:50 AM
When I post here and talk about wimpy establishment GOP’ers vs. “RabidCons,” these are the types of people I’m talking about.
It always comes down to: Oh you just weren’t conservative enough
blatantblue on November 8, 2012 at 9:51 AM
Bing, Bing, Bing! And the really scary thing is that instead of regrouping and figuring out how to deal with a hostile media- we are all going to take four years to pull apart each other and split the “tent” we have built..
melle1228 on November 8, 2012 at 9:51 AM
I’ll look past the snark.
The Tea Party is focused on fiscal issues. They would not of talked about rape. Or as Whoopi considers “Rape Rape”
WisRich on November 8, 2012 at 9:51 AM
I wish I could believe that, but the Moochers are now over 50% of the electorate, and by the time the next round of elections rolls around, they’ll also be over 50% of the total populace.
Steve Eggleston on November 8, 2012 at 9:51 AM
I’ve had it up to here with these nitwits who continue to insist on that; had Romney won, they’d be yelling that he won because he ran as a conservative who abandoned his progressive stance. These yahoos are unable to read the demographics and trends, and unable to think of anything useful or propose anything tangible, just throw out some nebulous crap. I do not want to see another Aiken or Murdock on a Republican ticket again.
runner on November 8, 2012 at 9:52 AM
Well if he had run as a clear conservative and lost it would have been obvious that the country rejected conservatism. Same as if he had won. It would be clear. Now it is muddled and we will never know.
txmomof6 on November 8, 2012 at 9:53 AM
You really believe that? I don’t care about their rhetoric but the end state would be the same. Our debt would continue to grow, the federal government and it’s power would continue to grow, we’d continue to see money taken from the middle-class and handed over to third-world regimes, we’d still have the NDAA and the TSA, and our individual liberty would continue to shrink.
MoreLiberty on November 8, 2012 at 9:54 AM
These freakshows are just as bad as the David Frums, IMO.
“Voters didn’t see a distinction.”
Get the f*** outta hea!
One campaign was entirely positive, one was entirely negative. Start with that simple fact and you see this whole notion of “failed distinction” is entirely bunk.
I’m so tired of the Tea Party leadership at this point. They’re so clueless.
The TP was so much better when it didn’t have a million splinter orgs.
blatantblue on November 8, 2012 at 9:54 AM
Yeah, Santorum would have buried Obama. Oh yeah and Newt would have been just devastating…
PUT DOWN THE TRUCON BONG!
rhombus on November 8, 2012 at 9:54 AM
I find I am horrible today. I have no sympathy. Obama asked contractors to not give 60 days notice that they are laying off people until after the election. Lo and Behold Boeing announced today that they are getting rid of 30%(200,000k) of their defense division. Guess what a lot of them are union workers and voted for Obama.
melle1228 on November 8, 2012 at 9:54 AM
People want their Obamaphones. This isn’t about Romney.
The Count on November 8, 2012 at 9:55 AM
Eh, I don’t think so. No explanations make sense to me actually. I thought Obama was so horrible that that was reason alone for conservatives to turn out. I guess I was wrong. I was a crawl-over-flaming-broken-glass voter. I’m puzzled there weren’t more of us.
juliesa on November 8, 2012 at 9:55 AM
Yep. Richard Mourdock was a Tea Party guy, a “true conservative”. How’d that work out, in a state Romney won easily? Were Mia Love and Allen West not conservative enough…does that explain why they lost?
Romney presented a much better contrast with Obama than McCain ever did. The evidence for that is how the Left savaged him for being “extreme”….that doesn’t happen, or doesn’t have the same effect, if what these tea partiers say is true.
changer1701 on November 8, 2012 at 9:55 AM
I do. I look at both of their personal lives, histories, and achievements. I look at both of their governing records.
I also harken back to the time when Reagan was running for the Presidency. He was a moderate governor who passed some of the largest abortion and tax bills in Cali at the time. He came up to be the greatest conservative president we have ever seen. It isn’t too far fetched to think it could have happened again.
blatantblue on November 8, 2012 at 9:56 AM
Bingo! The original Tea Party message was fiscal conservativism and smaller government. That message was co-opted by other splinter groups.
rhombus on November 8, 2012 at 9:56 AM
That statement is a lil broad. I think we would have won, if we had run on all three legs of the conservative stool and we didnt. We simply refused to show up for the culture-war part of this election. We basicly waged a single-issue campaign on the economy and it doomed us.
Valkyriepundit on November 8, 2012 at 9:56 AM
I agree that I want smarter candidates, but the people who are yelling that we should get rid of all our conservative principles because we might lose are just as irritating.
Single women are the majority for the first time. And like someone said, single women like FREE CRAP! That has nothing to do with social issues and everything to do with fiscal issues and you are never going to out liberal a liberal- but go ahead. And BTW, even if we miraculously changed all our social issue with all candidates unless we learn to deal with a hostile press we will still be deemed estremist, misogynistic, racist, homophobic etc because that is an election tactic.
melle1228 on November 8, 2012 at 9:57 AM
Mitt Romney did run as a conservative. He may have done it too late in the campaign, but stop saying he was some moderate milquetoast candidate. Yes, he talked about working with Dems if elected, but what Presidential candidate doesn’t pay lip service to that? And yes, he was somewhat moderate on taxes, but unfortunately that was due more to the Dems’ successful effort in demagoguing the tax cut issue than Mitt’s ideology.
The other problem I have with this charge is that who the hell else could we have run out of the field of candidates we had? Rick Perry was a disaster at the debates. Newt had so much personal baggage, he would’ve lost both single AND married women. Rick Santorum was a national Todd Achin’ waiting to happen. Herman Cain didn’t know d-ck about foreign policy and had a bunch of golddigging skanks lining up to accusing him of molestation. Michelle Bachmann was a joke of a candidate from day one. And I won’t even dignify Jon Huntsman’s candidacy with an analysis.
Mitt was it. And all things considered, he ran a really good campaign. He selected a great running mate. He ran on big ideas, including reforming Medicare which took some serious stones. He gave a great performance at the first debate. And he was very good on the campaign trail after the convention.
Ultimately what lost him this race IMO is that he didn’t go after Obama’s record hard enough(aside from that first debate), he allowed way too many unanswered negative campaign ads to define him for swing voters during the summer, and he failed to get out enough of the base to the polls(why exactly is the $64,000 question).
Doughboy on November 8, 2012 at 9:57 AM
People listed the economy as their single biggest concern.
changer1701 on November 8, 2012 at 9:58 AM
Thank you. He wasn’t a perfect candidate, and the campaign wasn’t perfect either, but people need to stop acting like there wasn’t a whole myriad of other influences going on in this thing.
blatantblue on November 8, 2012 at 9:58 AM
Maybe we should just run Snoop
DoggLion./ducks
Ward Cleaver on November 8, 2012 at 9:58 AM
Whatever you feel about conservative vs. “moderate” candidates – you can’t argue the fact that the ENTIRE GOP LEADERSHIP SHOULD RESIGN.
These are the same idiots who are responsible for collapsing the economy in 2007. They KNEW that Freddie and Fannie were problems years before – but they didn’t show the intestinal fortitude to take on the Dims. They continue to demonstrate that they don’t have the balls to deal with the Dims. As a result – we are in a death spiral in this nation towards socialism.
53% of the people who voted still blame Bush for the economy – that’s an exit poll figure folks. Cornyn, McConnell, Boehner – with them in charge all the public sees is GW Bush and they are reminded of what led us to these dire straights we are in now. We will not win another election – nor will advance ANY conservative or moderate cause until these old, tired Ayatollahs have been put to pasture and new blood takes over.
HondaV65 on November 8, 2012 at 9:59 AM
I have exactly the opposite opinion. Did you want to hear more about the War on Women? Akin? Murdock? Or less? Why didn’t the GOP win more young unmarried women? Did we not talk about abortion enough for them?
rhombus on November 8, 2012 at 9:59 AM
This is obviously a preemptive PR strike by someone who has a low opinion of her audience’s intelligence.
But there is a point to be made that hammering on the U3 rate is not enough, and using a bit of your personal biography to apply it to the challenge of the times (like John Kerry) isn’t going to put you over the top, either.
The fact is, nobody under 40 remembers the 1970s. When you guys talk about the consequences of liberal economics, I can assure you that my generation considers that just another dubious talking point in a long list by both parties.
We’re going to have to learn the hard way. I can promise you that things will look different in 2016.
HitNRun on November 8, 2012 at 9:59 AM
Some election data.
Conservatives made up 35% of the electorate. Romney won them 82%-17%.
Liberals made up 25% of the electorate. Obama won them 86-11%
Moderates made up 41% of the electorate. Obama won them 56-41%.
So according to this guy, the solution is to tell Liberals & Moderates (collectively two-thirds of voters) that the GOP does not want their votes. Whaaaaaaat?
AngusMc on November 8, 2012 at 10:00 AM
You are 100% right. The down-ticket results speak for themselves. Look at the Senate races in FL, MO, IN. You can discount IN and particular MO for foot-in-mouth syndrome, but look at Connie Mack in FL. Romney lost by 1, Mack lost by 13!!
The Count on November 8, 2012 at 10:01 AM
I don’t think so. Not ragging on Palin, but at least with Mitt, we had unimpeachable cred in terms of education and experience. This is the first area of attack by the ‘elite’ media on any GOP candidate–the school they went to, the company they keep. Mitt’s intelligence was unquestionable as was his command of the economic and FP issues.
It’s why all they had to attack him on was his ‘income bracket’.
But alas, ol Mitt was not a true political fighter in his gut, succumbing to the wiles of Obama’s media. He would not, could not go scorched earth. It’s an old school way of thinking by the GOP that doing so will turn off indies and incur the wrath of the press.
If you’re gonna go down–go down fighting. Funk the rest.
RepubChica on November 8, 2012 at 10:01 AM
Guess denial is more than a river in Egypt.
1. RomneyCare
2. Flip Flopps on virtually every issue.
3. “I’ve always described my views as … PROGRESSIVE”
I rest my case.
Conservative? Not unless you’re stoned would you ever think Willard was a conservative.
HondaV65 on November 8, 2012 at 10:02 AM
I doubt it. Obama won because he made a conservative, hard-working, family man out to be a greedy, blood-sucking, boogeyman. If we ever want to win an election again, what we really need are candidates who are willing to fight, not stay silent during non-stop character assassinations.
Smoothies on November 8, 2012 at 10:03 AM
Honda is here to ruin the thread with his hyperventilating, as per the usual
blatantblue on November 8, 2012 at 10:03 AM
And Snottie Brown lost too. And he was a moderate – and he an incumbency advantage.
So trucons weren’t the only ones losing Tuesday. Spare us please.
HondaV65 on November 8, 2012 at 10:03 AM
We didn’t talk about it at all, and we ceded the narrative to the media and the Dems. When their are single women who think that Romney was going to ban tampons then it isn’t social issues; it is the candidates inability to get the message out as well as the competing message. Simply put Obama and the Dems fought for the simple minded vote much better. Unless the Repubs learn to deal with the hostile media and articulate their positions better, we don’t have a damn chance and we could change on gay marriage etc. until the cows come home. Hell we haven’t even won the narrative with black people about who actually voted for the Civil Rights Acts.
melle1228 on November 8, 2012 at 10:04 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 … 8 Next »