A dyspeptic election
Indeed, there is no evidence whatsoever—either in the vote totals or in the exit poll—that the country had much confidence in either candidate, or either party, to handle the problems that confront us. If a single question on the exit poll captured the country’s lack of enthusiasm for both candidates, it was, “Who would better handle the economy?” Only 48 percent chose Obama. One would think that would sink the president’s reelection chances, but of the 49 percent who chose Romney, only 94 percent voted for him, with the rest backing Obama or a third-party candidate. The same thing happened with the deficit: Slightly more voters picked Romney (49 percent) than Obama (47 percent) to handle that issue, but Romney won only 95 percent of voters who trusted him more. That is Election 2012 in a nutshell: Voters did not trust Obama to handle the tough issues, but even less did they trust Romney to represent them in the Oval Office.
It is not hard to see how the nation’s deep disgruntlement could produce a major upheaval in two or four years’ time. It comes down to two questions. First, will the problems that plague the body politic continue? Nobody is optimistic about robust economic growth in the near or medium term, which in turn -suggests the continuation of trillion-dollar deficits. Second, will a candidate emerge who can relate to voters and convince them that he or she offers a real course correction, which 52 percent of 2012 voters said was needed? Clearly, neither Romney nor Obama managed to make that case, but that does not mean no future candidate could channel public frustration into a peaceful revolution, one that would remorselessly sack the powers that be.
In the meantime, conservatives who are navel-gazing need to think beyond electoral groups. That -analysis is inherently favorable to the Democratic party, which for generations has been the undisputed master of us-versus-them identity politics. And it misses the much bigger point: The country was not persuaded that the Republican nominee had their interests at heart.
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
Maybe the gilled one , Betasbest, Dry Danish, New ABrutus, clsdeven, Brad k-y or one of the other insistent Rmoney folks can explain all this. The rest of us just aren’t smart enough to understand why Rmoney was the wrong guy for the job.
Bmore on November 25, 2012 at 7:50 PM
Who was the right guy(or gal)?
thebrokenrattle on November 25, 2012 at 7:53 PM
Galt2009 on November 25, 2012 at 7:56 PM
Meanwhile Drudge is linking to Alex Jones the dirt bag and no one pays any attention that Drudge has gone full on truther!
Kaptain Amerika on November 25, 2012 at 8:03 PM
Easy. The electorate was too much like you.
Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 8:08 PM
That is not really a bad thing though. Having moral character. Not being easily pulled into a deep cult of personality. Not becoming a sycophantic worshiper are all good things. Knowing the past of the person being put in front of you and being able to accurately depict the actions and accomplishments that he is likely to bring about if chosen for a position is a good thing.
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 8:13 PM
Could the electorate Bmore stupid?
Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 8:14 PM
Drudge is a 911 truther? Really??
What are you basing that on??
Mimzey on November 25, 2012 at 8:15 PM
As Bill Whittle said, Romney did not believe in conservatism. How can he sell it? he cannot, could not and worse, refused to even try.
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 8:17 PM
Lol! Low hanging fruit. Works every time its tried.
dyspeptic.
Bmore on November 25, 2012 at 8:25 PM
That’s not what Whittle said. It was up to Romney to set out his program, which he did. It was up to us to extol Romney’s many strengths and virtues. I did my part. It was up to people like you to accept the will of the majority of The Party. You never did.
Any Independent coming to this site to find out what Romney was all about, wouldn’t have voted for him.
Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 8:28 PM
It was not the precise language… Here is the precise language he used.
“Mitt Romney didn’t believe his own message”
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 8:32 PM
That’s not true, Jay. Thanks to the rule changes at the national convention in Tampa the powers that be in the GOP can make up and change the rules in the middle of the future presidential primaries. That means that no candidate which truly challenges the establishment can possibly win.
Your Party, Jay Cost, is an oligarchy now.
A true Tea Party candidate, (as apposed to the fake one promoted by the establishment), can’t win. Any Tea Party organizations that want to retain a scrap of credibility will need to undo those rule changes or else it is impossible for the Tea Party to change the Republican Party and it will be a lost cause that will have to be abandoned.
FloatingRock on November 25, 2012 at 8:40 PM
Anyone claiming to be “Independent”, “Moderate”, “Centrist”, etc. are either cowards, morons, or both.
Either you have a brain and a spine and you value real individual liberty over perceived statist “security” — in which case you’re a conservative/libertarian — or vice versa — in which case you’re a liberal/leftist. Period.
It’s really that simple …
ShainS on November 25, 2012 at 8:42 PM
No it’s not, you are an idiot.
FloatingRock on November 25, 2012 at 8:47 PM
Romney sought to be the leader of the GOP and the nation but when Boehner and McConnell pretty much have stood for nothing for the past two years (with wimps Saxby Chambliss and Lindsey Graham already acting ready to fold) it becomes ever more difficult to campaign successfully.
viking01 on November 25, 2012 at 8:53 PM
Not when the majority of the party votes for immoral, statist generational thieves who promise to destroy my future in order to pay off their cronies and buy votes from statist special interests that profit from the destruction of my freedom and liberty.
FloatingRock on November 25, 2012 at 8:55 PM
BTW, ShainS called me a coward and moron first even if not by name. I was just hitting back.
FloatingRock on November 25, 2012 at 8:57 PM
Actually it is just that simple.
The problem is that you are probably conflating Republican/Democrat to Conservative/Liberal.
You either are conservative or progressive. Conservative is a pretty narrow band of ideology. Progressive is anything outside that band.
Where the problem comes in is that Republican does not = conservative.
Democrat does = progressive.
In the end, all the progressive stunts the Republican party pulls, destroys any clarity of who fits into the Republican party. It had a good selling record after Reagan and increased under Contract with America. It has been been thrown away though.
Now it needs to either die and make room for something better, or get with the program and put its best conservative action forward. It was what, 40 years in the wilderness for the house of representatives last time. Do you really want to give it up that long again?
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 8:59 PM
It isn’t just the dyspeptic election it is the ipecac outcome.
viking01 on November 25, 2012 at 8:59 PM
Damned skippy!
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 9:00 PM
Thieves are exactly what the country has running things because it didn’t elect Romney/Ryan. Class envy Rmoney morons. Could the electorate Bmore stupid?
Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 9:04 PM
Romney lost on his own merits. We were told he would win without us, and he still lost with at least me voting for him. So, can you be any more sycophantic? I hardly think so.
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 9:08 PM
Winning friends and influencing people again I see.
thebrokenrattle on November 25, 2012 at 9:09 PM
Hmmm, after re-reading his comment I notice that it’s more accurate than my initial estimation. I believe I may have jumped to conclusions and stopped reading after the word “conservative/” and didn’t notice the word libertarian after the slash. His statement was more accurate than I mistakenly thought. However, libertarians are moderate, IMO, and so actually moderates do believe in freedom and liberty.
FloatingRock on November 25, 2012 at 9:15 PM
The country lost a lot more than Romney lost. Four years from now the hole will be that much bigger. The GOP will need to be careful not to nominate someone as successful or the nominee will again have to deal with moronic Rmoney class envy. Mitt would have been a great President. His many successes in life were a positive thing for me.
Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 9:20 PM
If we can get constitutional amendments through that prevents the federal government from making payments to people, such as Medicare/medicaid, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, makes taxes flat, either sales tax on all consumption or flat income tax on all earnings with no rebates, prebates or other picking of winners and losers, I would be more amenable to the libertarian side of things.
it is just simply suicide to argue for more freedom to self destruct while those who self destruct are going to be taking money from other people through force.
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 9:21 PM
Like some of you Romney supporters have any room to talk. You guys were the ones smearing and calling me names, not the other way around. The only rare exception I’ve ever made are when somebody else called me names first.
FloatingRock on November 25, 2012 at 9:22 PM
Thieves are also exactly what the country had running things back during the Bush years when the GOP was in charge of Congress, and generational thieves are exactly what we would have gotten, according to their own words, had Romney/Ryan won.
Both parties are generational thieves who are destroying this country. They are only holding on by their political fingernails by printing money like it grows on trees and enslaving future generations to their profligate spending.
FloatingRock on November 25, 2012 at 9:29 PM
But Romney lost that for America. The buck stops here. The man in charge. That there is conservative. The volunteer for the position of Nominee of the Republican party for the President of the United States of America is ultimately the person to blame for a failure to obtain said position.
Not the non voters. Not the voters for the other guy. Romney said he could beat Obama. He took responsibility for the outcome.
Sandy! Christie! Gifts! MSM! It is everyone but Romney’s fault. Romney was a bad choice. Was known to be a bad choice long before he won the nomination.
The facts are that everything that could have happened that would have made it easier for Romney to win did happen. He still fell short of the goal. The only thing that could have been done to get Romney elected was a forgone conclusion to never happen. Have Romney sell conservatism and himself appear to believe it.
He could not even argue against personal health insurance mandates for god’s sake! Instead his initial reaction was, I like mandates!
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 9:29 PM
I think you are correct (in this rare instance).
Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 9:46 PM
LOL. “The Party”. If Romney had so many strengths and virtues, why was it up to “us” to extol them? They should’ve been apparent. You have to be one of the most abject sycophants I’ve ever seen. I’ve never encountered an O-bot that’s so slavish.
ddrintn on November 25, 2012 at 9:53 PM
Funny thing happened on the way to the election. I added 39 voters to the Romney column. Georgia went for Romney. Remind me again Betabests what state do you vote in again. Lol! P.S. You are so cute when irritable. ; ) Of course it was stupid of me to think the American electorate would rid the land of the stain. I had it, 0 no more than 18 states, 45%. Silly me I acted stupidly to think well of the US public. Won’t happen again. Chris Christie next time?
Bmore on November 25, 2012 at 9:53 PM
Sure you did. Hey guys, vote for Rmoney. The rest of your comment is incoherent.
Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 10:00 PM
-1
per lb!
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 10:00 PM
No, it is what Bill Whittle said. Either you didn’t listen to his speech or you missed the point to an astonishing degree. He couldn’t have been clearer.
Dongemaharu on November 25, 2012 at 10:02 PM
Thanks for being fair minded.
FloatingRock on November 25, 2012 at 10:05 PM
Because 90% of the media was doing everything they could to destroy him. And because no sensible person extols their own virtues any more than necessary. That kind of message is always a lot more powerful when made by someone other than the candidate. Do I have to explain everything to you?
Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 10:08 PM
This is why I consider libertarians moderate because they do not wish to use government force to control other people, as do people on the far left and right. I think that the more force a political movement wishes to employ to control their neighbor, the further from the center they get.
FloatingRock on November 25, 2012 at 10:16 PM
His virtues include hiring and working with a known Malthusian who wrote a book about killing the human race where he advocated for putting birth control in the water. Forced sterilization of men and women. A man Romney chose to work with for another Malthusian dream, cutting mankind off from energy production to thrive with.
Sorry, but he did need to be rehabilitated. That had to come from him. Not outside sources.
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 10:19 PM
Links please?
Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 10:23 PM
Sorry Betasbest, what state are you calling it in from again. Lol!
Bmore on November 25, 2012 at 10:24 PM
http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/
http://moonbattery.com/?p=3227
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 10:26 PM
Come on Betasbest! Don’t you want to take this oppurtunity to brag on how well Romney did in your state? Don’t ya Coherent one? Lol!
Bmore on November 25, 2012 at 10:32 PM
Run Away!
Bmore on November 25, 2012 at 10:43 PM
Regarding your links Stoner
Pretty thin Stoner. Romney’s position on CO2 evolved as did a lot of people after Climategate.
Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 10:47 PM
A politician changed his stance on something after there was a Hugh-Jass scandal on the subject? Gee, how amazing.
MelonCollie on November 25, 2012 at 11:05 PM
Poor, poor Betabests, no state to call his own. Lol!
Bmore on November 25, 2012 at 11:38 PM
Sorry, should read, Betasbest. ; )
Bmore on November 25, 2012 at 11:39 PM
Not thin at all. Romney found the advice of someone who detests humans enough to want to wipe them out to close to extinction levels beneficial. It goes to character and a moral compass. Romney in general is a great guy. But he is very much a disturbing personality when it comes to being a conservative.
astonerii on November 26, 2012 at 8:50 AM