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: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
I don’t know if Santorum would have won either. But I am sure he would have done no worse. I think it’s probable Santorum would have won Ohio.
Rocks on November 15, 2012 at 11:21 AM
Rove gives some very good ideas on how to move foward..
Dire Straits on November 15, 2012 at 11:24 AM
You got what you wanted, so I don’t know what your problem is. And talk about pathetic? The lesson you draw is that we just need an actual conservative, yet that moderate outdrew the Tea Party guy in IN, he outdrew conservatives and others presumably to his right in a host of other states…all red ones. That moderate won those states easily, while most of those more conservative candidates LOST. He even outdrew Cruz in Texas.
But you keep telling yourself we just needed Santorum or similar at the national level. Pathetic, indeed.
changer1701 on November 15, 2012 at 11:26 AM
Yup. It’s right up there with “Unemployment would be much higher WITHOUT the stimulus.” Unprovable and accepted on faith.
29Victor on November 15, 2012 at 11:26 AM
1) Ignore Rove, not your base.
2) Win.
29Victor on November 15, 2012 at 11:27 AM
Yeah, let’s try it sometime.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:27 AM
You are a frigging idiot. The electorate was D+6 and Romney won Independents by 5. This was a Democrat turnout election. What do you think got them out to the polls in this economy – Obama’s sparkling personality?
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 11:28 AM
LOL…this dolt is calling ME an idiot? This was a “Democrat turnout election”…when we have rising food and fuel costs, real unemployment in the teens and an overall dismal sense of confidence??? Really????
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:31 AM
Karl,
Notwithstanding all your words,
1. You road a swiftboatvet.com aginst Kerry.
2. You were enabled by those who knew and put the word out that CO2 aka carbon was and still is a plant food together with the work of the Republican Party Conservative base getting out to vote in spite of how liberal son Bush was and is.
Go down to the bridge there in liberal Democrat Austin Texas and watch the bats fly at dusk with the other liberal bats of Austin.
Other than that have a nice day attempting to not look like a fat ass, dumb ass and keep avoding real conservatives the rest of your days here in Texas, which most likely ain’t long as it seems your more at home in D.C. with the waste and fraud crowd.
APACHEWHOKNOWS on November 15, 2012 at 11:31 AM
You are an idiot. Who were the down-ticket conservatives that ran better than Romney? WHO? Write them down:________________________
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 11:33 AM
We did. In Indiana. In Missouri. In Montana. In North Dakota. They all lost…in states Romney won easily. Who’s to blame when conservatives lose, huh? Is it the “moderate”, too, the moderate who got more votes than they did in each of those states?
changer1701 on November 15, 2012 at 11:34 AM
I know liberals who hate Karl Rove and believe he’s the anti-Christ. They paint everyone to the right of them with such a broad, undiscriminating brush that they don’t realize that real conservatives feel the same way about him.
Right Mover on November 15, 2012 at 11:35 AM
LOL, what an idiot. Akin loses, so that means Romney didn’t really lose!!!! Romney did better as a percentage than this or that conservative, so it means that moderate is the way to go!!!!!! And these are the people who are going to be telling everyone how to win next time.
How many of those down-ticket candidates were pimped for 4 friggin’ years as a lead-pipe cinch, the Only Adult In The Room, the one with an organization that is absolutely second-to-none and will humiliate the Chicago Machine, blahblahblah?
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:36 AM
Here is a recommendation that is worth more than Rove’s ‘not worth snot’ recommendations…
http://voices.yahoo.com/sarah-palin-president-2016-11874521.html?cat=75
We need a TRUE Conservative to lead the party.
Palin 2016
ChuckTX on November 15, 2012 at 11:36 AM
We did? Where was the conservative at the top of the ticket?
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:38 AM
Maine Republican Chairman says that hundreds of blacks were bussed into rural Maine towns to vote.
http://www.pressherald.com/politics/Maine-Republican-chairman-questions-black-voters-.html
JA on November 15, 2012 at 11:39 AM
Oh, give it up. “We was robbed” just isn’t going to fly.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:41 AM
As I said, you cannot give me ONE name. NOT ONE.
Do you have amnesia? Do you remember when Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh and every other conservative thought leader called for Akin to quit the race? DO YOU REMEMBER? What, are you going to tell me these are part of the RINO establishment now?
You are a moron. Maybe even a bigger moron than Honda, though the jury’s still out on that one.
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 11:42 AM
I think this is a good idea..
Dire Straits on November 15, 2012 at 11:42 AM
And why wasn’t it a Republican turnout election? Because of Romney.
Winning independents is pointless. Kerry won independents in 2004 and lost. McCain nearly tied independents in 2008 and lost. Romney won independents in 2012 and lost.
You win by getting your base out. Obviously Romney was not up to the task.
Norwegian on November 15, 2012 at 11:43 AM
Rove should go fu*k himself!!!
You can make a case he’s done more damage to the GOP than anything the democrats could have done!
Until Rove and the other mullah’s pick our candidates we’ll keep losing.
This rat Rove needs to go and get a real job. YOU FU*K you cost us this election. Did that $100 million you blew, give it to palin and see what would have happen.
Rove you azz!! I hate your guts!!!
Danielvito on November 15, 2012 at 11:45 AM
Right. Keep ignoring the conservative losses in these red states Romney won handily to continue your desperate spin. ‘Conservatism wins every time it’s tried!!! (Except when it doesn’t, but I’ll ignore those results.)’ As you said, pathetic.
changer1701 on November 15, 2012 at 11:47 AM
So what??? Are you seriously going to tell me that Akin brought down Mighty Mitt?
You might have had a point if this had become some sort of Democrat wave election. It wasn’t. It should’ve been a GOP wave election. It wasn’t.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:47 AM
How about framing economic issues in terms of which party held majority control of Washington, D.C.?
Both Romney and Ryan accepted the Democrat mantra that Obama “inherited” a bad economy.
THAT IS NOT TRUE, and accepting that as truth hurt Republicans.
The truth is that Obama did not begin elected office in Washington, D.C. on January 20, 2009.
The truth is that Obama began elected office in Washington, D.C. on January 3, 2005, and Democrats (including new Speaker Nancy Pelosi, new Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, then-Senators Obama, Biden, Clinton, etc. and others) “inherited” a GOOD economy when they took majority control on January 3, 2007.
The last budget that was passed by a Republican House, Republican Senate, and Republican President was passed in 2006 for Fiscal Year 2007.
That Fiscal Year, the TOTAL (On-Budget + Off-Budget) deficit was UNDER $161 Billion.
Bush and the Republican House and Senate produced a smaller deficit in FY 2007 than Bill Clinton did in either of the years that he had a Democrat majority (Democrat House and Senate, FY 1994 & 1995).
Yet I never heard Romney, Ryan, Rove, or any other Republican with a platform to reach millions talk about that.
They never talked about how Bush and the Republican Congress did better than Clinton and the Democrat Congress.
They never talked about how Bill Clinton took too much credit for what the Republican Congress accomplished in the last 6 years of his 8 year Presidency.
They never talked about how George W. Bush received too much blame for what the Democrat Congress did in the last 2 years of his 8 year Presidency.
They never talked about the average deficit from the 12 years of Republican majorities (FY 1996-2007) versus the average deficits from the past 6 years of Democrat majorities (FY 2008-2013). We are only a month and a half into FY 2013 and the Democrat majority has already created more new debt in those 45 days than was created by the Republican majority in ALL 12 MONTHS of FY 2007.
Before the election, they never talked about the size of the Obama deficits (FY 2009-2012) in terms of the size of the last Republican majority deficit (FY 2007).
Take a look at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist01z1.xls
FY 2007 total (on-budget + off-budget) deficit: -160,701 Million (less than $161 Billion)
FY 2009 total (on-budget + off-budget) deficit: -1,412,688 Million (nearly 1,413 Billion, or 1.413 TRILLION)
FY 2010 total (on-budget + off-budget) deficit: -1,293,489 Million (over 1,293 Billion, or 1.293 TRILLION)
FY 2011 total (on-budget + off-budget) deficit: -1,299,595 Million (nearly 1,300 Billion, or 1.3 TRILLION)
FY 2012 total (on-budget + off-budget) deficit estimate: -1,326,948
Million (nearly 1,327 Billion, or 1.327 TRILLION)
Add that all up, and FY 2009-2012 added -5,332,720 Million (nearly 5,333 Billion, or 5.333 TRILLION) in deficit i.e., new debt.
Compare that to the deficit from the last Republican majority deficit: -160,701 Million (less than $161 Billion)
The amount of deficit/new debt created in the 2009-2012 Fiscal Years is the equivalent of OVER 33 YEARS worth of FY 2007 deficits.
In Obama’s first term, the Democrat majorities added an entire GENERATION’S worth of new debt.
But was that ever discussed in those terms by Romney, Ryan, or Rove?
No.
And I think that has a lot to do with the election results.
Republicans didn’t even really fight on the battle fields where we could win. We let Democrats win the votes of many young people on the battle field of “lady parts”, and never made a clear distinction between the deficit spending of Republicans vs. Democrats.
Pelosi and the Democrats won the 2006 elections by attacking the Republican deficit spending and promising that Democrats would exercise “fiscal discipline” and “no new deficit spending”.
We could have shown how instead of making things better, Democrats made them multiple times WORSE.
You’ve got a lot of people who believe that Bush and Republicans drove the economy into the ditch, when the truth is that the Democrats inherited a GOOD economy and it is the Democrats who drove the economy into the ditch!
If you don’t win the propaganda war, and if you don’t do everything you can to prevent fraud, you aren’t going to win elections.
ITguy on November 15, 2012 at 11:48 AM
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 11:42 AM
Palin never supported Akin, Steelman was her choice. As far as Palin’s endorsements, she did pretty well.
Cruz, Flake, Hatch, and Fischer taking or retaining seats. In the House Gosar and Yoho.
idesign on November 15, 2012 at 11:49 AM
Who are the conservatives that stayed home with an opportunity to dispose of Obama? They are either not conservatives or our numbers are shrinking. The returns for the down-ticket TruCons vis-a-vis Romney speaks for itself.
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 11:49 AM
Desperate spin? I’m not the one sitting here blaming everything from the hurricane to Santa Claus to socialist voters to purists to bused-in blacks in Maine. Romney lost. You take some loser in a state-wide race and try to make a moderate case based on that? Pathetic. But then I guess all we have to do is reflect on Presidents Dole and McCain.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:51 AM
Just two years ago those TrueCons powered a takeover of the House. I can’t for the life of me though remember the last Moderate Wave that engulfed the country.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:53 AM
The Romney Campaign Autopsy is ridiculous.
Cause of Death/Loss has already been determined.
portlandon on November 15, 2012 at 11:55 AM
This number is what is scary..
Dire Straits on November 15, 2012 at 11:55 AM
He hurt Romney and hurt our brand. That’s why the unified spectrum of Republicans from Palin to Coulter told Akin to get out. Everyone in the country knows who Todd Akin is and what he said about rape. I told you I heard Obama commercials all over the country trying to tie Akin to Romney.
Excuse me – this wasn’t a Democrat wave election? What are you smoking? We lost the presidency, lost seats in the Senate when they had about twice as many seats up for grabs, and we lost seats in the House. And, the house was only held in large part because state Republicans covered our asses with partisan redistricting from 2010. Freaking Alan Grayson got elected back into office.
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 11:57 AM
Romney hurt the GOP brand.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 11:59 AM
Senator Angle and Senator O’Donnell would like a word with you.
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 12:00 PM
No, it wasn’t. Obama lost votes.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 12:01 PM
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 12:01 PM
Sure, along with Sens Paul and Rubio. Maybe you could throw in Governor Whitman and Sens Fiorina and Rossi.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 12:02 PM
And, so did all the conservative former or coulda-been legislators. Obama still held onto his job.
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 12:03 PM
My congressman, for one.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 12:04 PM
Red herring. It wasn’t a Dem wave election. It was supposed to be a Moderate Wave. It wasn’t. You got the nominee you wanted. He lost nearly 60% of the moderate vote. He won indies. He still lost.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 12:06 PM
If that was true, you would have seen more votes cast for the Senate candidate than Romney.
That didn’t happen.
Romney caused conservatives to stay home period. In fact, he probably cost us several Senate seats as well.
Norwegian on November 15, 2012 at 12:06 PM
It’s not just one loser in a state-wide race, it’s a whole lot of conservatives in red states Romney won easily. That alone negates the argument that hey, if only we had run an actual conservative, it’d be different. Not necessarily, not when actual conservatives got fewer votes than the “moderate” on the same ticket. That’s the point, and it’s one you continue to ignore in your zeal to play the blame the moderate game. It’s not that simple.
changer1701 on November 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM
The only way running solid conservatives in CA or WA would have helped in 2010 was it would have saved the NRSC from wasting any money there. Why do you think the Tea Party didn’t primary Scott Brown in MA? Because he would have lost by as big of a margin as Romney.
You are delusional. There is no amount of logic that will ever permeate your skull. Yeah buddy, the reason there’s still a Sen. Barbara Boxer because she didn’t have Jim DeMint’s clone running against her in CA. You have all the rationality of a liberal.
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM
They were moderates who are supposed to be all-around more palatable. What do you suggest, running GOP liberals? Maybe drafting Hillary into the GOP for 2016?
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 12:11 PM
Yeah, he cost us those senate seats…when he ran ahead of them in the vote count, in states he won easily.
Conservatives who stayed home once again shot themselves in the foot, all to prove some point. Now they want to blame others for the fact that action even cost candidates more to their liking their seats. That’s not on Romney…he won those states. It’s on you.
changer1701 on November 15, 2012 at 12:12 PM
Because Scott Brown was their candidate in the first place, genius. Which could be one reason the TP was such a non-factor in 2012 as compared to 2010. Apathy and disillusionment.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 12:13 PM
LOL. Hillary Clinton has been globe trotting for four years and Palinbots plan to put Sarah who has been nothing much but a Greta guest up against her? Is Palin planning on running for anything in 2014 and maybe winning? Otherwise it would be a 2016 bloodbath for the Republicans, but there’s an icecubes chance in hell if her getting anywhere near a nomination with acting Governors Walker, Jindal, or others.
Marcus on November 15, 2012 at 12:13 PM
Huh? You ‘bots need to get your stories straight. We’re told that Romney did just fine with the base: they showed up in record numbers, we’re told. Then we’re told that Romney lost because “purists” stayed home. Then we’re told that the election was stolen. Then we’re told you can’t beat Santa Claus and hurricanes.
Meanwhile, 56% of moderates voted for Obama.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 12:15 PM
Maybe you can get Rick Perry to run and he can remember more than 2 federal agencies next time.
ddrintn on November 15, 2012 at 12:16 PM
Heh. I keep wondering if the GOP will double down on their growing distaste for conservatives in the next election. I would laugh my ass off if the GOP actually approached Hillary Clinton in 2016. You know that if they actually managed to nominate Clinton next time around, they’d come back to harangue us about how we’re helping to destroy the country if we don’t pull the lever for her.
Aitch748 on November 15, 2012 at 12:17 PM
You’re almost as delusional as drin-tin-tin. Maybe, just maybe, the increasingly gay-marriage supporting, auto-bailout & tax the rich loving electorate isn’t as conservative as it once was.
The Count on November 15, 2012 at 12:18 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »