The lessons of defeat for the GOP
The media’s postelection narrative is that Democrats won because of a demographic shift. There is some truth to that, but a more accurate description is that Democrats won in a smaller turnout by getting out more of their vote.
Turnout dropped by 7.9 million voters, falling to 123.6 million this year from 131.5 million in 2008. This is the first decline in a presidential election in 16 years. Only 51.3% of the voting-age population went to the polls. …
Strategically, Republicans will need to frame economic issues to better resonate with middle-class families. Mr. Romney had solid views on jobs, spending, deficits, health care and energy. But even among the 59% of voters for whom the economy was their top concern, he prevailed by only four points (51% to 47%). …
The GOP must reduce the destructiveness of the presidential primaries. In the first place, activists can withhold support from candidates who make reckless assaults on competitors, which happened too often this time. Also, the Republican National Committee should limit the number of debates and, by showing wisdom in picking debate moderators, limit the media’s ability to depict the party as a fringe group.
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 Next »
Quit having establishment, elitist snobs pick our candidates?
pain train on November 15, 2012 at 10:32 AM
Stop listening to your advice.
ChuckTX on November 15, 2012 at 10:34 AM
If Karl had balls.
roy_batty on November 15, 2012 at 10:34 AM
Lesson: Cheat better than Democrats.
The Rogue Tomato on November 15, 2012 at 10:35 AM
GOP consultant class is a con game.
the_nile on November 15, 2012 at 10:38 AM
Lesson: come up with someone different and better.
If you can’t do that, everything else is moot.
MelonCollie on November 15, 2012 at 10:40 AM
Kinda rich coming from him, isn’t it?
http://www.businessinsider.com/karl-rove-warns-against-ru-2011-8
beatcanvas on November 15, 2012 at 10:40 AM
I don’t care if Rove is right or wrong: he is a ready-made Democrat talking-point, with a poor track record.
Go. Away.
drunyan8315 on November 15, 2012 at 10:41 AM
I had only one thought when I saw “Karl Rove” linked in the headlines:
Shut up, Karl.
After reading the article, I have to wonder about “destructiveness” of the Republican primaries when your establishment darling carpet bombed Newt in Florida.
Which, of course, leads me to reaffirm: Shut up, Karl.
makattak on November 15, 2012 at 10:41 AM
The lesson learned is NEVER LISTEN TO KARL ROVE.
Rixon on November 15, 2012 at 10:41 AM
Mitt was robbed!!!! *sob*
That sounds just like Dems in 2004. And ironic too, since they were so sure that Rove had paid for votes in Ohio. That’s the ONLY reason Bush won that year, dontcha know. And those idiotic voters in Jesusland.
Wait a sec. The base turned out in record numbers!!!! Or so I was told here. The ‘bots have trouble now getting their stories straight.
IIRC, it was that famed Death Star that got the “reckless assault” ball rolling.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 10:43 AM
Gee, I don’t know Karl…..how’s about we try these formulas:
1. quit having 8,000 debates with 15 candidates that start a year
before any Primaries.
2. do not nave ANY debates with Librul Jackazzes as moderators.
MKAY???
ToddPA on November 15, 2012 at 10:43 AM
Let’s just understand that we have a lot of dumb voters who are stupid enough to vote for someone who is as inept as Obama. Children in public schools today are not disciplined. They are not taught economics, history, or other subjects ……………….. No child is left behind, which really means is that no child is taught to excel.
SC.Charlie on November 15, 2012 at 10:44 AM
Yeah but it was your boy Willard who made most of those wreckless assaults.
HondaV65 on November 15, 2012 at 10:45 AM
Yep, but in Iowa before that.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 10:45 AM
The biggest lessons are the following.
Do not nominate a progressive to do a conservative’s job.
Do a better job of making certain your poll workers get to stay and observe the votes, especially in democrat heavy areas.
Be specific on the changes you plan to implement as president, make it large part of your campaign, get the down ticket candidates on this agenda.
astonerii on November 15, 2012 at 10:45 AM
I look forward to the day that Sarah Palin clubs Rove like a halibut, and that day is coming.
NoNails on November 15, 2012 at 10:46 AM
Clearly, we need to run an “actual” conservative. Like we did in Indiana. /
changer1701 on November 15, 2012 at 10:46 AM
Who knew…
d1carter on November 15, 2012 at 10:46 AM
That would include 56% of moderates…who were supposed to be something like Romney’s base.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 10:47 AM
That’s exactly right. At this point, Karl Rove is a liability – not an asset. His name associated with the GOP causes more Dims to get off their asses and vote.
HondaV65 on November 15, 2012 at 10:47 AM
Bill Whittle just gave a great speech about where to go from here and a little about Mitt Romney and openly owning conservatism. The whole speech is great, but his take on Romney, in particular(27:00 – 34:00), is really interesting. Check it out. More insightful than Rove.
Dongemaharu on November 15, 2012 at 10:47 AM
Nahhhhh, we need more moderate juggernauts, like we had in WI and MA. And at the top of the ticket.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 10:48 AM
F off, Karl. You p-ssed away 100 mil and have nothing to show for it. That’s a Porkulus-level kind of failure. You allowed Bush to become the scapegoat for all of Obama’s shortcomings. And you looked like a whiny little b-tch on national TV complaining about outstanding votes in O-I-H-O when Florida had already just effectively handed the election to Obama.
Go away. We’re better off without you. We sure as hell were in 2010 when we rolled the Dems simply by mobilizing the grassroots.
Doughboy on November 15, 2012 at 10:49 AM
Hey, everyone remember around mid-October when HondaV65324 and his worthless strategic advice was nowhere to be found? Me too.
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 10:51 AM
Has anyone compiled a list of all the voting irregularities that occurred during this election, yet? I just love the stories coming out of Philadelphia where in some precincts in which not one vote was cast for Romney and the turnout was incredibly high ………… or, should I just say too damn high to believe.
SC.Charlie on November 15, 2012 at 10:51 AM
What the hell? We were assured by none other than McCain’s pollster himself that there would be little if no drop in voters. What happened to “There was no missing voters!”?
Rove is right, this is the first decline in voters since 1996. What he fails to mention is those are the only 2 times in the past century voting has declined from the previous election.
Rocks on November 15, 2012 at 10:52 AM
L.i.B.
http://soaktherich.us/
davidk on November 15, 2012 at 10:54 AM
Destructive? To whom? The chosen candidate? Are people themselves supposed to have no saying whatsoever anymore?
Less debates? Would Romney have crushed Obama in that first debate without all that experience he got after the primary debates? I don’t think so.
Rocks on November 15, 2012 at 10:56 AM
We lost? They called Ohio already?
forest on November 15, 2012 at 10:58 AM
I like the idea of eliminating liberal debate moderators in the GOP primaries? Why is that even a question?
Also: how about letting Texas go first in primaries? That’s the ticket. No, seriously. The primary system really needs to be changed. Enough already. Why do we keep letting the left tell us how to pick our candidates?
pecan pie on November 15, 2012 at 10:58 AM
The legacy media did a great job in suppressing the vote for a wealthy MA governor who was a heartless businessman…btw did you hear that Mitt was Mormon and built a house with a car elevator in it..?
d1carter on November 15, 2012 at 10:59 AM
Wasn’t that back when Mitt was going to win in a landslide and anyone who didn’t share that conviction was a Moby/troll/O-bot/OWSer?
Anyway, Andrew McCarthy at NRO as usual gets it right:
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:00 AM
I’ll say. Somebody oughta remind the racist jackwits on the Ron Paul thread of that era.
MelonCollie on November 15, 2012 at 11:04 AM
Yeah, libs won in blue states, while conservatives lost in…red ones. That moderate “juggernaut” at the top of the ticket did better than the conservatives down the ticket in these red states.
But clearly, if Santorum had captured the nod, we’d be talking about one-term Obama…/
changer1701 on November 15, 2012 at 11:04 AM
Karl Rove has done quite a bit to damage the “Republican brand.”
Joseph Russo III on November 15, 2012 at 11:05 AM
Rove did the best he could with the least flawed candidate.
There’s not a lot you can do about a bunch of black racists reelecting the architect of their misery because he’s the first black president. Not a whole lot you can do about him pandering to Latinos with DREAM by executive fiat or gays with his marriage flip-flop 5 months out from the election. Not a whole lot you can do about women who think freebies for their vaginas supersede kitchen table issues. Not a whole lot you can do about idiots persuaded to vote for him because of an 11th hour hurricane photo-op with Christie.
If Santorum won the nomination, we’d be talking about Speaker Pelosi now. He would have fit their Akin-Mourdock template like a glove – especially on the heels of his pontificating about of ills of birth control.
If Newt had won the nomination, his character would have been savaged more easily and worse than the committed family man that Romney is.
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 11:07 AM
Is sitting at home along with the rest of the electoral losers. In spite of being The Only One Who Can Beat Obama ™ for what, 4 years in a row? And the only thing you can take from it is that Akin lost? LOL Talk about pathetic.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:08 AM
I suppose next time everyone has to kneel to Iowa and New Hamshire. Again.
My advice would be Texas and Oklahoma.
Marcus on November 15, 2012 at 11:08 AM
Yeah, I don’t remember him around here telling us otherwise. Do you?
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 11:08 AM
That Karl Rove is a two-faced, anti-Conservative Judas whose influence within the party should be forever diminished.
To Rove, conservatives and the Tea Party are the real enemy, not leftists hellbent on destroying our nation.
Nobody should ever listen to another word this self-promoting, anti-conservative backstabber has to say about anything.
“Architect” my a**.
Right Mover on November 15, 2012 at 11:10 AM
Huh? He wasn’t telling you that Romney’s going to lose? Maybe you just had your fingers in your ears going “lalalalalalalalalalalala I don’t heeeeeeeaaarrrrrr youuuuuuuu troll!!!”
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:11 AM
I’ve been thinking about the non vote. In late October everyone is hearing how Mitt is going to win in a landslide. Dick Morris and all of his compatriots are telling us it’s in the bag.
How many people, feeling uneasy about Mitt, stayed home, assuming their vote wasn’t necessary? Mitt was going to win anyway.
RINOs are people too on November 15, 2012 at 11:13 AM
If Mitt couldn’t win it, NObody could have!!! That’s the same thing we hear after any moderate predictably gets his ass handed to him.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:13 AM
Rove got what he wanted: A Romney loss, and a chance for him to shove another Bush down our throats in four years.
Right Mover on November 15, 2012 at 11:15 AM
Every single OFA radio commercial I heard here in Northern VA (and in Vegas when I was in NV early last month) was of Akin and Mourdock’s remarks and how Romney is the same kind of candidate. Both those candidates lost in their red states while Romney won going away, but keep telling yourself it had no effect in purplish states that, oh by the way, all went to Obama.
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 11:15 AM
I suspect the focus on Democratic constituencies is because the GOP leadership had been drooling at the prospect of jettisoning the middle class in the hope that it could create their own “captive” voting blocs away from previous Democrats – probably because a lot of the GOP leadership wishes they were Democrats.
Doomberg on November 15, 2012 at 11:16 AM
Love, West, Akin, Mourdock, Allen, Mack, Mandel, Smith
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 11:18 AM
Northern VA and Vegas. And of course Mitt was cruising to victory in those areas before Akin et al showed up.
There’s always a conservative to blame whenever a moderate loses. Always. Why, didn’t ya hear? Newt Gingrich was the reason Dole lost in ’96. It’s conservatives’ fault and the fault of communist voters. And fraud. And the hurricane.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:20 AM
Yeah, Mr Electable sure had himself some massive coattails.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:21 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »