Romney wasn’t the problem
To the extent Republicans have a problem with their candidates, it’s not that they’re not conservative enough. Where are today’s Nelson Rockefellers, Arlen Specters or George H.W. Bushes? Happily, they have gone the way of leprosy.
Having vanquished liberal Republicans, the party’s problem now runs more along the lines of moron showoffs, trying to impress tea partiers like Jenny Beth Martin by taking insane positions on rape exceptions for abortion — as 2 million babies are killed every year from pregnancies having nothing to do with rape.
Romney lost because he was running against an incumbent, was beaten up during a long and vicious primary fight, and ran in a year with a very different electorate from 1980. At least one of those won’t be true next time. But we’re not going to win any elections by telling ourselves fairy tales about a candidate who lost because he wasn’t conservative enough, articulate enough or mean enough.
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 »
To be honest I think there are many Senators and Congressmen who are glad he lost.
Now the gravy train continues and they can blame it on the Democrats.
Republicans are famous for stabbing their own voters in the back.
NeoKong on November 22, 2012 at 2:44 PM
Well… yeah, he was part of the problem.
Scribbler on November 22, 2012 at 2:46 PM
Ann is just having trouble getting the taste of ass out of her mouth…
astonerii on November 22, 2012 at 2:48 PM
Not the ENTIRE problem, sure. Demographics were a big part.
But he was part of it. Or if you really want to pick nits, the problem was that he was the best the GOP could come up with.
MelonCollie on November 22, 2012 at 2:49 PM
Gonna be pretty hard seeing as how she spews sh!t from it on a constant basis.
MelonCollie on November 22, 2012 at 2:49 PM
Romneycare was the problem, Ann.
Wethal on November 22, 2012 at 2:49 PM
RINOs are the problem.
The R/Ds destroy the land, for their own good lives.
May they and theirs be damned, eternally. May they suffer immeasurably, and the old media and theirs too.
Schadenfreude on November 22, 2012 at 2:54 PM
And gee Anne your handpicked candidate Christies had NOTHING to do with his loss. She really is turning into a twit.
melle1228 on November 22, 2012 at 2:56 PM
Romney and Ann Coulter are both part of the problem.
FloatingRock on November 22, 2012 at 2:56 PM
Ann, we aren’t listening to you anymore. You have proven yourself to be nothing more than a ditz!
Sparky5253 on November 22, 2012 at 2:57 PM
Ann has for years hated on the political class Romney represents. She’s written books against the rinos for years. She has railed against people like Christie. I think she’s always been part of the class of Republicans she whined about, but used the conservatives to make money and status off of.
Her mask is gone.
portlandon on November 22, 2012 at 3:01 PM
Totally agree with Ann about something. That’s new.
DeathtotheSwiss on November 22, 2012 at 3:02 PM
Yeah- who happened to be the #2 guy in the 1980 primary. Conservative Reagan knew how to bring in the “moderate” wing and cemented a coalition, then also brought in “Reagan Democrats” by clearly drawing the contrasts he needed to between Carter’s failing policies and the winning strategy he would bring to the Oval Office.
Romney (and/or his “handlers”) tried to “engineer” the process within his own party, ticking off the Ron Paul contingent at times, shutting out grassroots/Tea Partiers, and failing to make the “sale” to independents about what a Romney presidency would bring that would make their lives better than Obama’s handouts.
And, Ann? When a long-time “I’m not trying to return to the Reagan years” Massachussetts moderate tries to pass himself off as “severely conservative…”
Once the laughter dies down,
is obviously an example of “methinks Christie’s biggest fan doth protest too much!”
cs89 on November 22, 2012 at 3:09 PM
I’d say his statism generally. And his inability to advocate for free market principles and solutions. He may have been conservative enough. Or not. We were all waiting for him to get elected to see what he’d do. He spent the entire primary trashing everyone else and refusing to make a positive case for himself. Obama came along and defined him with strawman caricatures and his policies as kill granny strawmen. We may have lost with a better candidate. But then again, maybe not (not that I’m trying to argue that any of his primary challengers would or could have been that better candidate). Ann is just trying to save face at this point for her shameless promotion of Romney.
besser tot als rot on November 22, 2012 at 3:10 PM
All true, but not the way she sees it.
Contrary to the claims of the moronic UN, leprosy is alive and flourishing. Look toward India, for just one example.
Romney should have punched Obama the way he punched his adversaries in the primaries.
Chicago style thuggish charlatanry can’t be beaten with silky gloves.
…plus, like Kerry: jet skies, horses, two Cadillacs and elevators…then Disneyland…
Let Obama be Obama.
Schadenfreude on November 22, 2012 at 3:10 PM
Coulter used to be great. Now, she’s been reduced to a babbling idiot. I dohn’t think she’ll ever get over her idiotic shilling for that back-stabbing traitor Christie.
Romney was an awful candidate but that shouldn’t have mattered. This election was Barky versus America. It should not have mattered who was running against Barky. Coulter talks about the strengths of incumbency … LOL. The most ridiculous, inept, retarded failed ineligble Precedent in history and Coulter thinks that that gave him a leg up? Too funny and too pathetic.
Coulter needs to go hang out with her traitorous buddie in Jersey and shut the hell up, already. She did a lot of good for years but now she’s just a babbling fool. Shame, but that’s how it goes.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 22, 2012 at 3:13 PM
My question is whether she’s always been a lying hack just trying to make money, or if she’s genuinely and recently come to the conclusion that big government statism is the solution and that the GOP party elites have the right answers and the grassroots are stupid lemmings that should unquestioningly follow her lead.
besser tot als rot on November 22, 2012 at 3:16 PM
Ann works for Conservative Inc. along with Hannity.
Punchenko on November 22, 2012 at 3:16 PM
He should have done the opposite of what he did. Make a positive case for himself in the primary (rather than trying to do that starting in October) and painted stark contrasts between himself and his opponent in the general. But instead, he contrasted himself from his GOP opponents and held Obama close in a bear hug.
besser tot als rot on November 22, 2012 at 3:20 PM
Please stop. He wasn’t THE problem, only part of it.
kim roy on November 22, 2012 at 3:20 PM
I suspect what happened is that once again we saw a candidate let his political “experts” convince him that the only way he could connect with the American people was to try to be someone he was not. While he was busy trying to fake being someone else, the opponents found it easy to ocnvince the public that he was fake – wow, who could have predicted that?
The shame of it all is that while last time we fielded a medocre candidate anyway, this time we ran one of the most skilled and accomplished individuals ever to run for the office of President. I think the Party let Romney down, not the other way around.
That being said, having the majority of the meadia and popular culture working assiduously 24/7 to make you out to be Monty Burns didn’t help
drunyan8315 on November 22, 2012 at 3:24 PM
He was the part of the problem that could have been remedied with a better candidate. The things that couldn’t have been, like demographics and leftist press, are what they are and whining about such things are even more pointless.
besser tot als rot on November 22, 2012 at 3:25 PM
Think about it. Benghazi should have finished him off, complete with F&F, Solyndra and all the other incompetencies and lies.
In a sane world with a competent press holding elected officials to honesty Obama should not have had the opportunity to even be running.
This is what we’re dealing with. We are trying to make sense of the senseless.
kim roy on November 22, 2012 at 3:25 PM
Give me a break.
besser tot als rot on November 22, 2012 at 3:26 PM
Why don’t we stone the Conservative infidel?
Would that help??
What the hell is the matter with some people?
Clue:
He is not the enemy…the communist is.
Mimzey on November 22, 2012 at 3:28 PM
See my next point. ThePrimordialOrderedPair makes an excellent point which has me thinking that in this world, with the dumbing down, the looters, the me-toos, the corrupt that it shouldn’t even have been close.
We can go around and around about a better candidate, different strategies, etc, etc, etc, but if we don’t deal with the root of the problem, which is a population that is willing to be bribed with goodies and unwilling to think, then no candidate can get through.
kim roy on November 22, 2012 at 3:28 PM
Or. A candidate who held his opponent to account for such failures. How about we focus on what we have some power over – our candidate – rather than things we have no control over – the leftist press?
besser tot als rot on November 22, 2012 at 3:29 PM
The deliberate abandonment of freedom both mindboggling and frightening. In a sane world a 3rd party would have beaten the D’s and R’s like a rug. At the bare minimum after four years of this wanna-be tribal king, Romney should’ve won by a landslide.
People intentionally voted for the welfare-statist Santa Claus in serious numbers. And that’s 100x scarier than the Rebumblicans failing to come up with anyone better than Romney.
MelonCollie on November 22, 2012 at 3:32 PM
Our presidential candidate has the biggest unfiltered platform to reach the masses of anyone on our side. We need someone to show the people that spending will affect them personally, how free market solutions will affect them personally, etc. We cannot count on public schools, or the press to do it. Romney had to do it. And he refused. Or was incapable.
besser tot als rot on November 22, 2012 at 3:33 PM
OK, Romney wasn’t the problem. The problem is that he wasn’t the solution, and yet the Republicans picked him anyway: as they did with GHWB, Dole and, frankly, GWB. How do we fix an institution that consistently picks the wrong people?
Maybe we don’t. Third party and let the ‘pubbies molder, anyone? And to offset the advantage that gives the Democrats, a fourth party for Democrats who are appalled at the irresponsibility of their present party.
PersonFromPorlock on November 22, 2012 at 3:34 PM
Thank you for saying it way better than I did.
kim roy on November 22, 2012 at 3:34 PM
Interesting way to put it.
You remind me of an opinion piece published at Politico in the past few days:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84101.html
FloatingRock on November 22, 2012 at 3:38 PM
We’re seeing the fruits of 40+ years of indoctrination. It may be lost already or may not. I agree that Romney was not a good choice to do this. However, I refuse to blame him for being who he is and being put in that situation. It’s all part of the symptom.
Look what they did with Reagan, a solid politician who was an excellent communicator. They turned him and his legacy into Gordon Gekko. We’re the only ones that appreciate it. We need to fight against that.
I’m probably not explaining myself well. My apologies.
kim roy on November 22, 2012 at 3:39 PM
Exactly.
By some of the comments being posted, it seems the poison pens that the leftists passed around work on the minds of those who choose feelings and image over thought and reason.
I must be immune to it, because it just seems odd to me that people can react in such a Pavlovian way.
Why don’t we just act all OWS and pitch tents outside of Romneys home and heckle him and his family? We could call him names and insult his beliefs.
Do people actually not see that they are being pawns for the left..reacting to Romney like they reacted to Romney?
It just seems odd to me.
Mimzey on November 22, 2012 at 3:39 PM
there’s a lot wrong with the R party and its constituent grouts,
SoCons need to get a life and stop threatening to withhold their votes over nuances of abortion politics and gay marriage.
without them, the R party is hobbled…but they need to recognize that they are just one part of the coalition g
Same with the libertartians…who have done damage. There are more important things that weed….and we have to start somewhere. Leftists are the enemies of all things libertarian
Neocons…yes, please, let’s chill for a while. Strong defense, yes. nation building…never..won’t work…doomed. And defense can suffer some cuts…(although i must say that a strong blue water navy is important)
Norguist…please go away. The data are in. Starving the beast has the paradoxical effect of making it Larger. Raise taxes to close the deficit. This country will suddenly move right several notches. And lets start doing this before the Rs get blamed for the AA- rating that is in our future
Overall…Unmask the Left…they are not for liberty in the way we know it…they believe that central planning a regulating works…they believe that much can be achieved thru macro-economic policies…that in fact appear to be flawed.
r keller on November 22, 2012 at 3:39 PM
And whats 100x scarier than that is how many people fell for the demonization of him and sat out the election.
People that weak of mind are easily manipulated and that doesn’t bode well for the future.
Mimzey on November 22, 2012 at 3:42 PM
What he said..
“Really Ann? You mean Romney’s one debate bests Reagan’s decades of advocacy for conservatism, his battles with the Republican establishment, and his building a conservative movement? Fact is Romney has done nothing for conservatism. I repeat, nothing. No leadership. No grassroots efforts. No major policy initiatives. Nothing. Reagan won two landslides. Romney won nothing. Cherry-picking facts Ann, in some strange cult-like obsession, fools no one. Same with your cheerleading for Chris Christie.”
– Mark Levin
idesign on November 22, 2012 at 3:43 PM
You remind me of Hanover Fist talking about Lincoln Stern.
FloatingRock on November 22, 2012 at 3:47 PM
The question I’ve been asking for five years now: Has Mitt Romney ever said or done anything in his entire life to indicate that he’s one tiny bit more conservative than George Bush?
Once again: nothing but dead air.
Mitt Romney may have had no “problems” — he was by far the least objectional candidate the Democrats could have asked for. But he very, very obviously wasn’t the solution to anything either.
logis on November 22, 2012 at 3:47 PM
Don’t forget the so-called “conservatives” that thought because he wasn’t conservative enough or “messaged” well enough or whatever the complaint ‘o’ the day that it was worth voting for Johnson or staying home.
Not voting against the man who pledged flexibility to Putin, left Seals to die in Benghazi and is a straight out marxist?
It boggles the mind. Now we get to see flexibility, Benghazi get buried and what marxism looks like in the US. Oh yeah, let’s not forget a blind eye to the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood.
But not conservative enough. Or something like that.
kim roy on November 22, 2012 at 3:48 PM
The point that seems to be missed is, it’s not about Ann Coulter and it’s not about Mark Levin…it was about the country.
The communist won because too many gullible people sat it out because Romney wasn’t conservative enough…or he was too rich..or he was a Mormon etc.
For all those people, and the 3rd party purists idiots…you got had by a bunch of effete liberals. They sold you a line of crap and you fell for it.
Mimzey on November 22, 2012 at 3:49 PM
So are crony corporatists posing as free market capitalists.
FloatingRock on November 22, 2012 at 3:49 PM
So. What’s your solution? Give up? If a GOP candidate cannot or will not make the case that free market solutions produce better results than statism, he should get the hell out of the way.
besser tot als rot on November 22, 2012 at 3:49 PM
Explain how you deal with that ROOT problem when even the Republicans, Romney specifically is willing to go along with the bribery scheme?
Big reason I did not like him was that he represented the Happy Tax Collector for the Welfare State side of the equation. That this would keep the direction of the population moving to the left, not be faced with reality which would move many of them to the right.
Sure, he talked about getting people to work, but the way he talked about it was not a freedom argument, but that those new working people would hand over the taxes that big government needs to pay for the big government welfare state we have and make it solvent for years to come. No need to get rid of the gifts. Then he has the NERVE to moan that Obama won because he was willing to hand out gifts!
astonerii on November 22, 2012 at 3:52 PM
You can forgive people for not seeing much difference when that was Romney’s strategy, particularly in the 2nd and 3rd debates.
besser tot als rot on November 22, 2012 at 3:52 PM
This is one reason you cannot be taken seriously. He was not PUT in any position. He freaking volunteered and spent the majority of a hundred million dollars destroying anyone else who was aiming to be in that position themselves.
astonerii on November 22, 2012 at 3:54 PM
Damned skippy!
astonerii on November 22, 2012 at 3:55 PM
It’s funny. I was listening and considering what people like angryed were saying about sitting it out or not caring because Romney was the candidate and he wasn’t a “real” conservative and we’re all tired of the GOP foisting these RINOs on us. That maybe it was better to get the car off the cliff sooner than later and Romney was a slow death rather than a quick one.
Until I saw Obama pledge flexibility to Putin. I knew then that Obama had to go no matter who replaced him. If it was someone somewhat lucid and competent, even better.
Romney was a solution – to replace a politician who would say anything, do anything (which turned out be leaving people to die and letting an ambassador get killed) for political expediency and convenience.
That’s why a lot of the arguments were baffling. Romney loves his country and even if some of his ideas aren’t conservative or problematic to conservatives, he’d never leave people to die or pledge flexibility to Putin. That was enough for me and I will die never understanding how it wasn’t for anyone who remotely claims to be conservative/republican.
kim roy on November 22, 2012 at 3:55 PM
You are the one who cannot be taken seriously. You b!tch and moan about Gingrich, actually believing that he could actually have won.
What I meant, if you could bother with reading comprehension, is put in the position to articulate conservatism to a bunch of moochers and mush heads.
kim roy on November 22, 2012 at 3:58 PM
Actually the primary voters were the ones had by the left. They were able to field two progressives and were allowed a total open field to attack every aspect of conservatism with no push back for an entire election cycle.
astonerii on November 22, 2012 at 3:59 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »