Republicans Start To Cave

[cheri1122]

It was mostly the billion dollar campaign with a compliant lamestream media that pretty much won him the election. A couple of other things helped: 1, Obama' s campaign was able early on to spend huge amounts of money, particularly in battle ground states to paint Romney as a rich, out of touch, uncaring person, who also hates old people and puppies. Looking at some of the posts on here,some lapped it and bought it hook line and sinker. Romney, after the primary, was restricted from spending money to run ads to counter that. 2) The dems and the liberal media demagogued the 47% comment to death and basically took it out of context from what he was saying. It also played into the narrative that Obama cares more about people. In addition to that was the Obama presidency's increase in food stamps,social security disability recipients, amnesty for illegal aliens by Executive action and other things. The choice was those things or Romney's promise of more jobs for people. They chose Santa over the Grinch.
The Phrase That Lost Romney the Election | RealClearPolitics

Your argument is almost word for word what Rove had to say, but he was wrong. It wasn't Obama's advantage that cost Romney, it was Romney. I didn't see a single Obama ad [don't have a tv] so my assessment of Romney [and all candidates] is from all over the net, and I found only one thing to admire about him: he is a great husband and father.
He's not a great candidate for president, though, and there was a LOT more than the one '47%' [which was absolutely not taken out of context - even he didn't claim that] comment that showed his character. His promise for more jobs would have been funny, if it weren't so hypocritical. Same for his fuss over Obama's "you didn't build that" remark, as Romney made exactly the same point to the athletes at the Olympics he 'saved' [with a bunch of government money, natch.]
Romney knows how to command - it's what he's always done. But he doesn't know how to lead, or to craft agreement between opposing sides, or to handle opposition, either. Watch a vid of him dealing with a heckler, or someone whose questions put him on the defensive - he is over his head when he can't order them to shut up.
In international diplomacy, that aint gonna work.
In national affairs, why do you suppose that more people needed food stamps? That's what lost the election for Romney, right there: vulture capitalism.

 

[EASYTRADER]

Romney lost because Republical turn out was aweful. That's it, less republicans voted this time than voted for Mccain.

So the question is what part of the party didn't come out to vote?

I'll tell you, the Constitutionalists didn't turn out, Romney may be a nice guy, he might have even been a good President, but he is NO conservative. He could not motivate the base.

Republicans don't want to hear how your gonna bring both sides together, that's the same crap Mccain said. I'm not gonna vote for anymore socialist republicans, and about 25% of the party is with me. Untill, the republicans turn back into freedom loving conservtives there gonna loose.

You guys couldv picked almost any candidate other than Romney and stood a better chance. I bet Newt would've won, you nver hear him talking about crossing the aisle. (I supported Cain financially, and RP at the primary)

Think about it, who's gonna root for a football team that sais "we aren't there to win", Really, how would this sound coming from your favorite QB before the big game, "I'm gonna go out there and have the other team really like me, heck I'm even gonna change my play so they like them more"

Romney lost because those of us in the party who pay actually pay attention aren't going to vote for any more RHINO, BTW when they try and cram Jeb Bush down our throats in 4 years we ain't gonna turn out for him either and Hillary will get elected.

 

[mjmsprt40]

I've heard many say the Republicans need to leave the conservative base. I asked, and have not received a satisfactory answer, why we need two Democratic parties? We don't, and the more the Republicans try to look like the Democrats the more they're going to lose.

It's really very simple. McCain won the Republican nomination in '08 by crossover votes. Problem: In the general election, the crossovers went back to their roots and voted Obama. Why have the ersatz when you can have the real thing?

Romney looked like a Democrat to many conservative Republicans, so he didn't get their votes. He had an (R) after his name so he didn't get liberal votes, which went to Obama.

The conservative base is still out there, and getting a little tired of being told that their candidates need to look and sound like Democrats to get elected. If a real conservative candidate does show up--- he might get elected. Won't that be a surprise.

 

[LDB]

No, Romney is not a conservative and was a mediocre choice. That's why Easytrader and others voted for Obama.

 

[LDB]

I'd love to have seen Obama/Gingrich debates. I don't know if the outcome would have been different but the debates would have been killer.

 

[bobwg]

yak yak yak keep hearing people talk about a 3 rd party but no action to actually get one going. party platform etc. Rosanne Barr what a joke when did she announce she was running for Pres? maybe a month before the election, last minute wanna bees like Barr and the others arent gonna cut it

 

[cheri1122]

I've heard many say the Republicans need to leave the conservative base. I asked, and have not received a satisfactory answer, why we need two Democratic parties? We don't, and the more the Republicans try to look like the Democrats the more they're going to lose.

It's really very simple. McCain won the Republican nomination in '08 by crossover votes. Problem: In the general election, the crossovers went back to their roots and voted Obama. Why have the ersatz when you can have the real thing?

Romney looked like a Democrat to many conservative Republicans, so he didn't get their votes. He had an (R) after his name so he didn't get liberal votes, which went to Obama.

The conservative base is still out there, and getting a little tired of being told that their candidates need to look and sound like Democrats to get elected. If a real conservative candidate does show up--- he might get elected. Won't that be a surprise.

Of course it would be a surprise - you explained why just before" "being told that their candidate needs to look and sound like Democrats to get elected."
And you still don't get it, do you? What the hard right conservatives want is not what the majority of American citizens want. End of story.

 

[EASYTRADER]

I didnt vote for Obama.

If Lucifer and Judas are both running for office and I decline to vote for either I bare no guilt if either wins.

That's more socialist republican crap to say "you didn't vote for my liberal, so you voted for th DEM,"

BS - I'm glad I voted for Perot twice and Gary Johnson once, I regret having voted for GWB at all. Well No More, if you moderate republicans want to win another election, you're gonna have to compromise and go conservative cause I ain't voting moderate any more.

The McCain\Romney turn out proves I ain't alone.

 

[cheri1122]

How Allen West blew it - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

Yet another example of shocked Republicans [took West 2 weeks to concede!] who blame it on "staff failure to manage the brand."
Are you kidding me? The candidate is a 'brand' they're responsible for packaging and marketing and selling?
And you can't figure out why you're not winning elections?!

 

[EASYTRADER]

I think Allen West lost a lot of his support when he voted for the NDAA.

What good are low taxs when the military is allowed by law t circumvent the constitution.

 

[RLENT]

If there was any solace to be taken from the results of this election, for me it is surely to be found, at least partially, in the defeat of Allen West ...

 

[mjmsprt40]

Of course it would be a surprise - you explained why just before" "being told that their candidate needs to look and sound like Democrats to get elected."
And you still don't get it, do you? What the hard right conservatives want is not what the majority of American citizens want. End of story.

You still fail to explain why you need two Democratic Parties, one with the familiar (D) and the other with the (R). You fail utterly to explain why people who believe in conservative values don't have any right to expect to have a candidate who expresses their--our-- values. As it is now, the two-party system is largely sham, since the parties are so close to being identical that it's a joke.

 

[davekc]

The problem after this election seems that the republicans have tried to be democrats. Because of changing demographics, hard conservatives aren't going to get what they want no matter who they put up there. That is the challenge and that there is really no answer at this point.
Republican chances I think will come about when things just get bad enough that people will be looking for anything. May be the next election, maybe not.

 

[AMonger]

Well said - and by the same reasoning, a vote for Gary Johnson or some other fringe candidate was wasted no matter where it was cast.

It was the only vote for something other than what we have now: government run amuck, impending financial catastrophe, and the end of freedom. The difference in those areas between Romney and the Obammunist is but a matter of degree, and a small one at that.

 

[Pilgrim]

How Allen West blew it - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

Yet another example of shocked Republicans [took West 2 weeks to concede!] who blame it on "staff failure to manage the brand."
Are you kidding me? The candidate is a 'brand' they're responsible for packaging and marketing and selling?
And you can't figure out why you're not winning elections?!

Funny how the Politico article, along with most others fails to mention that due to the 2010 Census West's district was re-drawn to make it much more democrat leaning. That being the case he ran in a different district, whose lines had also been re-drawn and was not "heavily Republican" as Politico states. Combine that situation with the fact that the Romney campaign made it a point to eschew Tea Party candidates and even conservative commentators (I don't believe he appeared as a guest on Limbaugh's show even once). That being said, he was being true to his core beliefs - those of a moderate. Consequently we find out that a lot of the GOP base stayed home on election day and he becomes another in a list of moderate Republican losers.

However, the Republican brand - not the Rockefeller Republicans - is doing fine. The GOP maintained control of the House and there are 30 Republican governors among the 50 states. In the final analysis the Romney staff simply didn't run a good campaign - it's simple as that.

One final thought: it's a bit ironic listening to the umbrage over West's recount demands after having seen the recounts, stalling tactics, lawsuits, etc in FL by the Democrats in 2000.

 

[muttly]

Your argument is almost word for word what Rove had to say, but he was wrong. It wasn't Obama's advantage that cost Romney, it was Romney. I didn't see a single Obama ad [don't have a tv] so my assessment of Romney [and all candidates] is from all over the net, and I found only one thing to admire about him: he is a great husband and father.
He's not a great candidate for president, though, and there was a LOT more than the one '47%' [which was absolutely not taken out of context - even he didn't claim that] comment that showed his character. His promise for more jobs would have been funny, if it weren't so hypocritical. Same for his fuss over Obama's "you didn't build that" remark, as Romney made exactly the same point to the athletes at the Olympics he 'saved' [with a bunch of government money, natch.]
Romney knows how to command - it's what he's always done. But he doesn't know how to lead, or to craft agreement between opposing sides, or to handle opposition, either. Watch a vid of him dealing with a heckler, or someone whose questions put him on the defensive - he is over his head when he can't order them to shut up.
In international diplomacy, that aint gonna work.
In national affairs, why do you suppose that more people needed food stamps? That's what lost the election for Romney, right there: vulture capitalism.

It is pointless to go round and round explaining Romney. You are set in your view. I get it . You resent his riches and will cling to any morsel of negativity perceived about him to use as a excuse to justify a vote for the Marxist in the whitehouse. Answer me this though:
Obama has been president for almost four years. The economy was out of the recession around when he took office, yet right now, more people are on food stamps than ever before. Splain that one?

 

[mjmsprt40]

Pilgrim mentions re-districting. That's really how John Walsh lost. I live in the newly re-drawn 8th district, it was re-drawn to favor Democrats. Before, it was Republican. There was no way Tammy Duckworth could have won this district the way it used to be drawn. For that matter, there's no way I could have voted for either candidate the way it used to be, because I lived in the 6th congressional district before gerrymandering. I changed districts without having to move.

 

[muttly]

Funny how the Politico article, along with most others fails to mention that due to the 2010 Census West's district was re-drawn to make it much more democrat leaning. That being the case he ran in a different district, whose lines had also been re-drawn and was not "heavily Republican" as Politico states. Combine that situation with the fact that the Romney campaign made it a point to eschew Tea Party candidates and even conservative commentators (I don't believe he appeared as a guest on Limbaugh's show even once). That being said, he was being true to his core beliefs - those of a moderate. Consequently we find out that a lot of the GOP base stayed home on election day and he becomes another in a list of moderate Republican losers.

However, the Republican brand - not the Rockefeller Republicans - is doing fine. The GOP maintained control of the House and there are 30 Republican governors among the 50 states. In the final analysis the Romney staff simply didn't run a good campaign - it's simple as that.

One final thought: it's a bit ironic listening to the umbrage over West's recount demands after having seen the recounts, stalling tactics, lawsuits, etc in FL by the Democrats in 2000.

Allen West was winning that race by something like more than a thousand votes until late at night when there was a huge swing of votes the other way. Not saying he was cheated, but West had every right to have it looked into. Your right about the umbrage. They basically said to West: Concede already!. No protest or help from the likes of Al Sharpton about a minority possibly being cheated out of an election. Oh, and no real condemnation from most of the left about a particularly insensitive ad. that might have hurt West's chances too.
New Allen West Attack Ad Features Him Beating Old and Young Women And Stealing Form Families | Video | TheBlaze.com

 

[xiggi]

Your argument is almost word for word what Rove had to say, but he was wrong. It wasn't Obama's advantage that cost Romney, it was Romney. I didn't see a single Obama ad [don't have a tv] so my assessment of Romney [and all candidates] is from all over the net, and I found only one thing to admire about him: he is a great husband and father.
He's not a great candidate for president, though, and there was a LOT more than the one '47%' [which was absolutely not taken out of context - even he didn't claim that] comment that showed his character. His promise for more jobs would have been funny, if it weren't so hypocritical. Same for his fuss over Obama's "you didn't build that" remark, as Romney made exactly the same point to the athletes at the Olympics he 'saved' [with a bunch of government money, natch.]
Romney knows how to command - it's what he's always done. But he doesn't know how to lead, or to craft agreement between opposing sides, or to handle opposition, either. Watch a vid of him dealing with a heckler, or someone whose questions put him on the defensive - he is over his head when he can't order them to shut up.
In international diplomacy, that aint gonna work.
In national affairs, why do you suppose that more people needed food stamps? That's what lost the election for Romney, right there: vulture capitalism.

Cherri Im not sure where you get your fac5s but it certainly isn't all around the web. Much of it is factually wrong and very biased to the truth. You claim things such as romney isn't a leader and can't work with others which like many things you state history proves to be incorrect. Your posts do tend to hint to the types of places on the web your ideas come from. I have no problem with people voting for who they feel better about but i do think people on both sides need to be more honest with facts.

Sent from my Fisher Price ABC123 via EO Forums

 

[muttly]

I didnt vote for Obama.

If Lucifer and Judas are both running for office and I decline to vote for either I bare no guilt if either wins.

That's more socialist republican crap to say "you didn't vote for my liberal, so you voted for th DEM,"

BS - I'm glad I voted for Perot twice and Gary Johnson once, I regret having voted for GWB at all. Well No More, if you moderate republicans want to win another election, you're gonna have to compromise and go conservative cause I ain't voting moderate any more.

The McCain\Romney turn out proves I ain't alone.

It's a process. The president is only one branch. Conservatives are trying to elect more conservative members in the house and senate to reign in this debt and get the economy booming again.We won't be able to do it with Obama in there. With Romney, at least we would have had someone to at least stabilize things until more and more conservatives were elected. In the mean time they could have held Romney's feet to the fire if he had any bad ideas, until more help i.e. concervatives would have arrived. Too many could haves and would haves, I know. But that was the conservatives plan.