Romney's loss creates Republican leadership vacuum

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

  • -18

    skipbeat

    The media should leave Romney alone. The media have maligned Romney character.

  • 12

    mitoguitarman

    It seems to be a moral vacuum before he was gone.

  • 0

    mitoguitarman

    Seemed...

  • 3

    paulinusa

    Tea Party Express,Tea Party Patriots and Club for Growth soon to be forgotten and heading for oblivion.

  • -5

    YuriOtani

    paul I doubt that very much as Romney was a centralist.

  • 7

    GW

    The repubs need to modernize they are just too primitive & they need to take off their blinkers & take a look around, the face of the US is changing over time, they are totally blind to reality

  • 1

    paulinusa

    Yuri: Believe me, none of those mentioned above were true supporters of Romney. They are the hard line of the far right and will eventually be ignored by the majority of American people and perhaps even the Republican party.

  • -8

    sailwind

    As much as I enjoy reading Democrat talking points being disguised as some sort of an actual unbiased news article, I do have a few quibbles with this one. I seem to recall that the Democrats never had some sort of leadership vacuum in their party when Al Gore lost to Bush, or that they suffered the same vacuum thing 4 years later when Kerry lost to Bush. I also don't remember the Republicans having some sort of leadership vacuum happen after McCain lost to Obama. Apparently this is now some sort of new thing that happens when the Nominee of the respective party is defeated in National election.

    Just nothing but in the tank reporting for Obama and Democrats, that kinda actually insult my common sense. Who would ever actually want to keep as the face of your party the guy that just lost the election?

  • 7

    SushiSake3

    "His loss and immediate withdrawal from politics, while welcomed by most, has created a leadership vacuum within his party."

    Heh, what leadership? The GOP hasn't had any real leadership since Reagan was overdosing on jelly beans. :-)

    The GOP's leaderless wandering through the political wilderness continues....

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    I think conservatives should do The Right Thing and nominate The Shining Christian Conservative On The Hill, Rick Santorum.

  • -9

    realdoll

    It's hard to beat "santa clause" as Rush Limbaugh says. Obama was Santa, and Romney was more of a realist and said we'd have to sacrafice. People didn't want to hear about sacrafice and voted against Mr Whitie... classic example of Master becoming the Slave in his own home.

    I actually think JFK would have lost to Obama, remember the speech where he said "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country"? Obama would have beat him hands down. We're a country of freeloaders. I was once a conservative Republican, now I'm a liberal Democrat. Can't beat em, join them.

  • -8

    realdoll

    SushiSake3, Rick Santorum is a religious nut case. The republicans biggest problem is that they have been hijacked by the religious right. Women want their abortions and free birth control, that's all most care about and that's how they vote and it destroyed Romney.

  • 0

    globalwatcher

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2187569/Writers-warn-new-American-CIVIL-WAR-staged-Tea-Party-militia-2016.html

    Tea Party Express,Tea Party Patriots and Club for Growth soon to be forgotten and heading for oblivion.

    I would not be too comfortable as you have stated. TeaPublicans will probably come back harder for the 2016 election. Please read what I read. It is very unfortunate we have to deal with these groups.

  • -5

    sailwind

    The GOP's leaderless wandering through the political wilderness continues..

    Not based on anything resembling reality. The Republicans did not lose the House or took a real hard loss in the Senate either the election at the national level was status quo with only slight adjustments in the overall number of seats in congress between the parties.

    In fact, the GOP increased the numbers of Governors in the nation adding North Carolina and now have a total of 30 out of fifty states with a Republican Chief Executive at the helm keeping the trend that started in 2008 on a continous upward trajectory.

    The "Political wilderness" is now dominated by Republicans at the state level and the depth of "bench" is deep and from there is were the next national leaders will come from. Christie, JIndal, Martinez et all.

    But if you believe the "Media" the party is in complete disarray and falling apart.

  • 1

    Jimizo

    It's time for the GOP to distance themselves from the crackpots ( they've lost 5 out of the last 6 elections on the popular vote and just been soundly beaten by a vulnerable president ). The changing demographics are telling them this, but the voices rattling around in their heads ( Gog and Magog? Satan? The Holy Spirit? ) will probably consign them to another reactionary bobble head and a third defeat.

  • -5

    realdoll

    Changing demographics is "politically correct" for the whites are getting outnumbered and the minorities and white women are teaming up to get "revenge" on the white man out of jealousy and envy.

  • 1

    Serrano

    "His loss and immediate withdrawal from politics, while welcomed by most,"

    Cripes, who wrote this?

    Sushi - Rick Santorum, eh? What about Sarah Palin? You forgot about her already? lol

  • 0

    cracaphat

    The vacuum was there regardless of the challenger to Obama.The repub quality was as bad as in Japan,hence they couldn't beat Obama.And the witching and moaning about whites being the minority is weak.Remember it wasn't your country in the first place.

  • 8

    Jimizo

    @Serrano Sarah Palin. Is it possible to fill a vacuum with a complete void?

  • 1

    yabits

    I seem to recall that the Democrats never had some sort of leadership vacuum in their party when Al Gore lost to Bush...Apparently this is now some sort of new thing that happens when the Nominee of the respective party is defeated in National election.

    Those who are more versed on presidential election history know better. In 1988,. the Democrats suffered a leadership vacuum through their campaign, dubbed by the media as "the Seven Dwarfs," and their subsequent loss to George H.W. Bush and Dan Quayle. The Democrats learned some lessons and got behind Bill Clinton as their standard bearer.

    As for Gore's loss, it's hard to say there's a vacuum when the candidate wins the popular vote by several hundred thousand. Equally important was the Democrats' selection of Howard Dean as party chairman, who instituted the "50-state strategy" -- conceding nothing anywhere to the Republicans.

    The 2012 Republican candidates matched or fell below the stature of the 1988 Democrats. Herman Cain? Michele Bachmann? Rick Perry? Newt Gingrich? Tim Pawlenty? With every mention of their names, that giant sucking sound gets louder. You know it's getting bad when someone like Donald Trump is touted as a leader.

    What the Republicans are suffering today is far worse than a leadership vacuum; it's a policy vacuum. Few if any of their platform positions attract a majority of any subset of Americans other than angry, white males over the age of 40.

  • 3

    yabits

    Changing demographics is "politically correct" for the whites are getting outnumbered and the minorities and white women are teaming up to get "revenge" on the white man out of jealousy and envy.

    There you go: Spoken like a true Republican.

  • 0

    HerveEisa

    What a lame article. The GOP fell victim to their own trickery. RNC (flipside of DNC) foisted up their boy Mr Pliable who failed to energize the core of Republicans from the get-go. Until a person who actually represents the will of the people is permitted to become the candidate, they will continue to lose to the national neo-socialists.

  • 0

    yabits

    In fact, the GOP increased the numbers of Governors in the nation adding North Carolina and now have a total of 30 out of fifty states with a Republican Chief Executive

    LOL! Only 13 governor's seats were up in this year's election, and the Democrats held onto nominally red states like Montana, West Virginia, and Missouri. (States that voted for Romney over Obama.)

    on a continous upward trajectory

    We'll see what happens to that trajectory when much-despised Republican governors in Florida and Michigan face Democratic challengers. Although Walker in Wisconsin won his recall attempt, I don't he'll survive a general election in 2014.

  • -4

    Serrano

    @Jimizo - Sure! We've got complete void in the White House now, albeit a charismatic complete void.

  • 1

    GW

    Sailwind,

    Come on man, whichever party loses they have a leadership vacuum afterwards, pretty normal stuff!

  • 0

    GW

    Changing demographics is "politically correct" for the whites are getting outnumbered and the minorities and white women are teaming up to get "revenge" on the white man out of jealousy and envy

    Realdoll.

    Nah just simple statement of facts, AND nothing to get scared about(& I am an old white dude!) just stating the obvious, just wasnt obvious to the repubs or perhaps they just dont want to accept the current/future US of A!!!

  • 0

    globalwatcher

    JimizoDec. 02, 2012 - 12:58PM JST

    @Serrano Sarah Palin. Is it possible to fill a vacuum with a complete void?

    SerranoDec. 02, 2012 - 01:13PM JST

    @Jimizo - Sure! We've got complete void in the White House now, albeit a charismatic complete void

    Belly laughs, your comments remind me that I need a new vacuum cleaner for Christmas:)

  • -1

    sailwind

    Those who are more versed on presidential election history know better. In 1988,. the Democrats suffered a leadership vacuum through their campaign, dubbed by the media as "the Seven Dwarfs," and their subsequent loss to George H.W. Bush and Dan Quayle.

    This makes no sense at all. Are you saying the Democrats didn't nominate a leader in 1988 to run against Bush the elder???? And of course the Democrats suffered a "leadership vacuum" before they settled on who was going to get the job as the top guy in the end, they're called primaries Yabits, you might have heard of the process.

    Equally important was the Democrats' selection of Howard Dean as party chairman, who instituted the "50-state strategy" -- conceding nothing anywhere to the Republicans.

    Yes, he did such a good job at it that George Bush was re-elected a second term.

  • 0

    sailwind

    Few if any of their platform positions attract a majority of any subset of Americans other than angry, white males over the age of 40.

    Again doesn't square with at all with reality. You don't win the Governorships in over thirty States all across the U.S in all regions in each state with their own unique mix of diverse local populations and traditional ethnic influences, if your platform is limited to and can only attract "angry white males".

  • -1

    yabits

    Are you saying the Democrats didn't nominate a leader in 1988 to run against Bush the elder?

    That's right. They didn't. The person who ran against Bush 41 was no leader, which is why the tank picture was so devastatingly effective.

    And of course the Democrats suffered a "leadership vacuum" before they settled on who was going to get the job as the top guy in the end, they're called primaries

    The Republicans suffered it this year too, with their own crop of midgets.

    Yes, he did such a good job at it that George Bush was re-elected a second term.

    Dean did a terrific job getting the Democrats to be very competitive in states (like Montana) that they had disregarded in the past. The writing was already on the wall: In early 2004, Ruy Teixiera and John Judis published The Emerging Democratic Majority which foretold the eventual rise of the new politically progressive era we are now seeing take place. Had Kerry been able to excite the electorate to turn out the way Barack Obama has, Bush never would have had a second term.

    As for demonizing opponents, as you so laughingly and ludicrously pointed out in another post with feigned innocence, nobody could hold a candle to the conservatives who "swift-boated" a naval officer who, in combat in one of the most dangerous assignments in Vietnam, was awarded Bronze and Silver Stars, as well as the Purple Heart.

  • -1

    yabits

    You don't win the Governorships in over thirty States all across the U.S in all regions in each state with their own unique mix of diverse local populations and traditional ethnic influences, if your platform is limited to and can only attract "angry white males".

    State governors are an example that helps make my point. Those running for governor can distance themselves from their party's national platform. If they didn't, then what happened to the Republican men running for the US Senate in Missouri and Indiana -- both red states -- would happen to anyone running for governor too. However, they are free to ignore issues like abortion and Social Security to focus on local matters.

    Governing at the state level -- even governing well -- rarely translates to success at the national level once the national party's platform is taken on. That's why I assert that the Republicans have as much of a policy vacuum as a leadership one.

  • -3

    sailwind

    Dean did a terrific job getting the Democrats to be very competitive in states (like Montana) that they had disregarded in the past.

    Dean didn't have to do much work in at all in Montana, Yabits,

    While Big Sky Country has been Republican at the presidential level for quite some time, at the state and local levels it has a strong Democratic streak extending back to the Progressive era. The western mountains are heavily unionized (Montana is one of the Mountain West states without a right-to-work law), and Democrats with a populist streak, like Gov. Brian Schweitzer, are popular in the state.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/senate/mt/montanasenaterehbergvstester-1826.html

    The writing was already on the wall: In early 2004, Ruy Teixiera and John Judis published The Emerging Democratic Majority which foretold the eventual rise of the new politically progressive era we are now seeing take place.

    Not very good at foretelling I'd have to say. They missed the whole Tea Party movement and push back to this new progressive era. They also missed Wisconsin and Scott Walker, who by the way gained his Republican Majority back this past election in the Wisconsin legislature.

    who "swift-boated" a naval officer who, in combat in one of the most dangerous assignments in Vietnam, was awarded Bronze and Silver Stars, as well as the Purple Heart.

    The same John Kerry who "swift-boated" those very same combat ribbons by throwing them across the fence at a statue of John Marshall while being a part of anti-war protest and being one of leaders of the Vietnam Anti-War movement when he returned back to the states? He already had a problem Yabits with former Swift Boat Vietnam Vets long before any "swift boating" by his own actions and choices after he returned from Vietnam back to States.

  • -1

    smithinjapan

    Sorry to my US Republican friends, but anyone who thinks that Romney's loss is the reason why the party is suffering IS the actual reason why the party is suffering. Look at the morons who were in the run for the position to begin with? They refuse to change their ways, and so instead do what they always do and look for something to blame for it instead. Mitt was never qualified to begin with, had no ideas, and is not meant to lead, but it's a shame he's being used as a scapegoat instead of an example of why the GOP needs to change.

  • -3

    skipbeat

    Some people may be in denial that the liberal press, mainstream media, reported negative on Romney and the Republicans. The liberal press reported positive on Obama and the Democrats. The liberal press did a very good job in helping electing Obama and the Democrats. Who have the blessing of the mainstream media wins.

  • -1

    skipbeat

    JimizoDec. 02, 2012 - 12:28PM JST : It's time for the GOP to distance themselves from the crackpots ( they've lost 5 out of the last 6 elections on the popular vote and just been soundly beaten by a vulnerable president ). The changing demographics are telling them this, but the voices rattling around in their heads ( Gog and Magog? Satan? The Holy Spirit? ) will probably consign them to another reactionary bobble head and a third defeat.

    Conservatives in the country is shrinking. The majority of the people believes in a socialist government and a liberal government. It wouldn't have matter if anybody besides Romney was running. The landscape changed from conservatives beliefs to liberal beliefs.

  • -5

    sailwind

    Those running for governor can distance themselves from their party's national platform. If they didn't, then what >happened to the Republican men running for the US Senate in Missouri and Indiana -- both red states -- would happen to anyone running for governor too.

    Doesn't really make sense. Anybody can distance themselves from their party's platform, they really can't distance themselves from the party "national brand" and what it pretty much stands for. What happened to the Republican Senate candidates in Missouri and Indiana is that they said some very dumb things in regards to their thoughts on abortion. I'd posit anybody running for Governor in any state that would utter a pretty dumb statement whether it be on abortion or Social Security or even on the price of eggs if it was foolish enough during a campaign couldn't distance themselves from it either and the exact thing would happen to them also. The opposing party and rival candidate would have field day with it.

  • 1

    yabits

    Dean didn't have to do much work in at all in Montana, Yabits,

    Dean's 50-state strategy became the backbone of Barack Obama's first bid for the White House. The success speaks for itself.

    They missed the whole Tea Party movement and push back to this new progressive era.

    Oh, everyone knows that the reactionaries will react in some way, and that they'll ultimately share the same success as King Canute.

    He already had a problem Yabits with former Swift Boat Vietnam Vets long before any "swift boating" by his own actions

    Kerry's actions after he was honorably discharged came out of his conscience and were supported by many thousands of his fellow veterans. What the Swift Boat vets did was not question Kerry's actions after Vietnam, but to besmirch and disparage his actions while in battle. He was already an elected Senator, but those character assassins didn't come out of the woodwork until Kerry's run for president. Nevertheless, it shoots holes in your claim that Republicans are novices when it comes to the politics of personal destruction. They are masters of it, and will deploy the tactic at every opportunity.

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    sailwind: "The same John Kerry who "swift-boated" those very same combat ribbons by throwing them across the fence at a statue of John Marshall while being a part of anti-war protest and being one of leaders of the Vietnam Anti-War movement when he returned back to the states?"

    He is, as such, a man of conviction -- someone who believes in following morality instead of toeing the party line. If the flag you stand under means nothing, there's no good reason why you can't put it under your feet and make a stand.

  • -2

    skipbeat

    smithinjapanDec. 02, 2012 - 02:44PM JST : Sorry to my US Republican friends, but anyone who thinks that Romney's loss is the reason why the party is suffering IS the actual reason why the party is suffering. Look at the morons who were in the run for the position to begin with? They refuse to change their ways, and so instead do what they always do and look for something to blame for it instead. Mitt was never qualified to begin with, had no ideas, and is not meant to lead, but it's a shame he's being used as a scapegoat instead of an example of why the GOP needs to change.

    The country became a liberal country and the Republicans failed to recognized that.

    Obama did a great job in his first term as President blaming Bush and the Republicans and reminding people that. The exit polls shows about half the people still blame Bush for the economy.

    Exit polls 2012: Voters blame George W. Bush@ http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83422.html

    If the Republicans change their beliefs then they are no longer consider conservatives. They would have to joined the Democrat Party.

    The Democrats will always win on abortion and contraceptives in debates.

    Romney was not a conservative. Romney was a moderate who have the same beliefs as Obama. Romney failed in geography and did not show politically correctness when he went overseas.

  • -2

    smithinjapan

    skipbeat: "The country became a liberal country and the Republicans failed to recognized that."

    I hope you keep that denial and blame-game going -- it'll ensure another Democratic victory in 2016. Until you guys address the real facts you're going to continue to fail.

    Here's a suggestion: when you wake up tomorrow with the intent of finger pointing at everyone, start with the mirror. You only have yourself to blame for your current position.

  • -1

    sailwind

    Dean's 50-state strategy became the backbone of Barack Obama's first bid for the White House. The success speaks for itself.

    Can't be taken as a serious statement at all, ignores the fact that Bush was an extremely unpopular President and was the country was already ripe for a Democrat to win in 2008 no matter who they would have nominated. Additionally the economy tanking just before the election was pure icing on the cake for the Democrats.

  • -1

    smithinjapan

    skipbeat: "Romney was not a conservative. Romney was a moderate who have the same beliefs as Obama."

    No, Romney was a man who said one thing one day and another thing the next -- he has no convictions, and certainly no moral ground to stand on based on his hypocrisy alone.

    As to the party changing, it won't make them 'liberal' (a word you people clearly don't understand), it would make them practical. Instead of trying to politick to the 1% the GOP needs to actually try and understand the laws of the land and if needed change them accordingly. Trying to appeal to Hispanics by saying your going to tighten immigration laws and kick out their parents is simply not going to get you any Hispanic votes, regardless of how you hold the taco for the photo op (hope you notice the intentional generalization in that). Asking women to vote for you while telling them you're going to strip them of their rights isn't going to win any votes. Telling blacks they're a lost cause and you're going to focus on other groups instead is not going to win you other votes.

    Id est, change the thinking, not simply the schemes.

  • -3

    bass4funk

    @jim

    It's time for the GOP to distance themselves from the crackpots ( they've lost 5 out of the last 6 elections on the popular vote and just been soundly beaten by a vulnerable president ). The changing demographics are telling them this, but the voices rattling around in their heads ( Gog and Magog? Satan? The Holy Spirit? ) will probably consign them to another reactionary bobble head and a third defeat.

    I think it's bait more complicated than that. Yes, the demographics are changing due to large part of the influx of immigrants entering into America, namely from Mexico. The GOP hasn't really done a good job at pulling in minorities. Personally, I didn't agree with Romney's stance on immigration and when he made the comment that illegals should "self- deport" I knew that would come back to bite him. There is NO reason as to why most Mexicans vote Democratic. As I have many times, they have nothing in common with Democrats or with liberal policies. They are Not natural Democrats. Republicans do need a strong leader there are a few people out there that would be great in my opinion, might have to wait another year or two, but there is hope and I'm very confident and positive that a strong leader will emerge.

  • 2

    SushiSake3

    "If the Republicans change their beliefs then they are no longer consider conservatives. They would have to joined the Democrat Party."

    Lol!! I've been thinking this for a while now. The only way Republicans will win again is if they become Democrats. 

    Hahahahahahahahahahahhaha......that's funny. :-)

  • 2

    SushiSake3

    Bass - "The GOP hasn't really done a good job at pulling in minorities."

    They never have and never will unless they change their core beliefs.

    Good luck with that! :-)

  • -2

    skipbeat

    smithinjapanDec. 02, 2012 - 03:16PM JST : I hope you keep that denial and blame-game going -- it'll ensure another Democratic victory in 2016. Until you guys address the real facts you're going to continue to fail.

    How is saying that the country is liberal today and the Republicans missed that is a denial and a blame game? What's wrong with the country being a liberal nation? It seems you are offended by it. Because the country is a liberal nation even though the demographics have changed, the Republicans can not relate to the majority of the people. Therefore, they say stupid things and get mocked for.

    The Republicans should show compassion, have empathy, and help everyone. The Democrats does all that. As long as the mainstream supports a Democrat the Republicans are still going to have a tough job overcoming it. It doesn't help having SNL, TV talk shows, and news reporter mocking Republicans every chance they get.

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    Bass - "Republicans do need a strong leader there are a few people out there that would be great in my opinion, might have to wait another year or two, but there is hope and I'm very confident and positive that a strong leader will emerge."

    I agree. The GOP needs Rick Santorum. :-)))

  • -1

    bass4funk

    The GOP's leaderless wandering through the political wilderness continues....

    I say that everyday about the last 4 years as well. :-)

    Lol!! I've been thinking this for a while now. The only way Republicans will win again is if they become Democrats.

    Thank God, that'll never happen.

  • 0

    Jimizo

    @skipbeat Your use of words like 'socialist' to describe Obama is part of the problem. Look at postwar Republican Presidents and the tax rates under Eisenhower and Nixon ( who incidentally would probably be viewed as loony left by you nowadays for his environment policies ). The shift to the right and entanglement with dangerous, vote-losing nutcases like the Tea party and evangelicals is the problem. A sane, inclusive republican candidate who doesn't pander to crackpots or the elite will stand a chance in 2016. If you continue with this irrational siege mentality keeping the 'socialists' at bay, you'll continue to be irrelevant.

  • 1

    Farmboy

    Heh, what leadership? The GOP hasn't had any real leadership since Reagan was overdosing on jelly beans. :-)

    See, that's it exactly - Reagan promoted and contributed to the jellybean industry, but with Bush speaking against brocolli during his reign, dissing the American brocolli farmer (oh the horror), the Republicans began to embrace their "party of No" status. All their arguments were about why something or someone else was wrong or bad, and not about positive actions they would take to make things better. At this point, they are chanting, "Obama is a socialist Kenyan," and thinking that will somehow bring in supporters. Well, it did, sort of, but thise aren't the supporters that will do them any good. People want real ideas, not negative mumbo-jumbo. Republicans need to rediscover Goldwater, stop insulting education, and embrace their inner brocolli, if they ever want to return to the Whitehouse.

  • -1

    skipbeat

    smithinjapanDec. 02, 2012 - 03:23PM JST : No, Romney was a man who said one thing one day and another thing the next -- he has no convictions, and certainly no moral ground to stand on based on his hypocrisy alone.

    Romney flip-flopped. Romney was a moderate and not a true conservative. Many conservatives knows that.

    Instead of trying to politick to the 1% the GOP needs to actually try and understand the laws of the land and if needed change them accordingly. Trying to appeal to Hispanics by saying your going to tighten immigration laws and kick out their parents is simply not going to get you any Hispanic votes, regardless of how you hold the taco for the photo op (hope you notice the intentional generalization in that).

    Both Democrats and Republicans in Congress are part of the 1%. They write laws that they and their family and friends (lobbyists and special interests groups) will benefit from it.

    Obama won the Hispanics vote when he give the Dreamers amnesty prior to the election. Romney flip-flopped on it. It wouldn't have matter what Romney says. It's common sense that Obama was the guy who will help the HIspanic people and they know that.

  • -2

    bass4funk

    @sushi

    They never have and never will unless they change their core beliefs.

    Good luck with that! :-)

    They don't and shouldn't give up on their basic principles of small government and to be fiscally discipline. Never say never, Obama got reelected, right?

  • 0

    Jimizo

    @Bass A 'confident and strong leader'. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you believe Romney had those qualities?

  • -1

    skipbeat

    JimizoDec. 02, 2012 - 03:46PM JST : @skipbeat Your use of words like 'socialist' to describe Obama is part of the problem.

    What's wrong with being a socialist country? Many people believe the government should do more for the people when it comes to healthcare, education, and level the playing field.

  • 0

    Vast Right-Wing Conspirator

    Neither abortion nor birth control should be political issues. They should be private matters- dealt with privately and paid for privately. No need for the government to be involved at all.

  • -1

    skipbeat

    Vast Right-Wing ConspiratorDec. 02, 2012 - 04:09PM JST : Neither abortion nor birth control should be political issues. They should be private matters- dealt with privately and paid for privately. No need for the government to be involved at all.

    Planned Parenthood is funded by tax dollars. PP is there for those who can not pay for abortion and contraceptives.

  • -1

    Vast Right-Wing Conspirator

    It shouldn't be. Private funding isbest, then they can stay out of the poltical arena. There are myriad charities that will help those in need.

  • -2

    skipbeat

    Planned Parenthood contributed to Obama election campaign funds. PP is for women rights.

  • -2

    bass4funk

    @Jim

    A 'confident and strong leader'. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you believe Romney had those qualities?

    I still do, he wasn't perfect and there were things he could have a bit better in articulating certain points, but I think his message was not conveyed as well as it could have been, not to mention the smear campaign that the Dems shelled out $600 million to discredit Romney which helped out very well.

  • -1

    Vast Right-Wing Conspirator

    I'm for womens rights, too. That isnt a political issue. I thought the progressives wanted the govt to stay OUT of peoples' private matters regarding sex and relationships?

    So, stay out of them.

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    Smith - "Trying to appeal to Hispanics by saying your going to tighten immigration laws and kick out their parents is simply not going to get you any Hispanic votes, regardless of how you hold the taco for the photo op (hope you notice the intentional generalization in that). Asking women to vote for you while telling them you're going to strip them of their rights isn't going to win any votes. Telling blacks they're a lost cause and you're going to focus on other groups instead is not going to win you other votes."

    I think that's one of the most insightful post-election comments ever.

    The "problem" is, however, it's not insightful.

    It's bloody obvious. Clear as day.

    Simple straightforward common sense.

    And yet the Repubs still managed to miss it.

    No wonder they lost.

  • 1

    yabits

    There is NO reason as to why most Mexicans vote Democratic...They are Not natural Democrats.

    That would explain why their country has had so many problems over the decades.

    We can expect and hope, as the democratic impulse takes hold, that it will be transferred back to their homeland as well. Mexico is actually starting to do quite well for itself.

  • -4

    bass4funk

    @Vast

    thought the progressives wanted the govt to stay OUT of peoples' private matters regarding sex and relationships? So, stay out of them.

    Funny, how liberals rant and rave at how they want everyone to especially conservatives to stay out of their lives, but when it comes to liberals butting out of conservative lives, they feel like they have the absolute God given right to interfere, so, so typical.

  • -6

    bass4funk

    @yabits

    That would explain why their country has had so many problems over the decades.

    We can expect and hope, as the democratic impulse takes hold, that it will be transferred back to their homeland as well. Mexico is actually starting to do quite well for itself.

    Sorry, but I know for a fact, most Hispanics don't have ANYTHING in common with the Democratic Party, except for healthcare issues. But Hispanics are entrepreneurial, they are mostly against abortion, they are against gay marriage. The main reason as to why they don't usually vote for the GOP is that they haven't done the best of jobs recruiting Hispanics, I never liked the GOP stance when it comes to immigration for the most part. But once the GOP can make themselves better attractive to the Hispanics and are more open to immigration reform and with a promise not to round up and deport everyone, that democratic impulse will fade very, very quickly.

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    Bass - "They don't and shouldn't give up on their basic principles of small government and to be fiscally discipline."

    Heh, we all remember that right throughout the 8 terrible bUsh years, all we got was big government and incredible fiscal recklessness.

    Today's GOP is the same pig with different lipstick.

    Thank God Americans weren't fooled.

    Well, actually, you were, but that's beside the point. :-)

  • -1

    sailwind

    Heh, we all remember that right throughout the 8 terrible bUsh years, all we got was big government and incredible fiscal recklessness.

    There some sort of difference in that now with Obama in charge?

  • 2

    Laguna

    Lots of good comments here.

    It's important to remember that a political party represents a coalition of very diverse constituencies. Under the Democratic umbrella, for example, the unionists share little with the gay rights crowd; similarly, social conservatives share little in common with economic conservatives. The Gephardt loss to Papa Bush in '88, the Democrat's third straight presidential defeat, was enough to force their diverse camp to play nice with each other and moderate their demands. Twelve straight years of nothing is sufficient to teach that a little is a lot better than zero.

    The GOP does not seem to have experienced yet that epiphany. Its constituencies have too little in common and are unwilling to compromise, even with each other. That the Republican Party is leaderless is the very result of this: its leading members are terrified of saying anything for fear of internecine sniping: The very act of placating one group will inevitably enrage another, and these groups have long memories and will not hesitate to exact revenge.  Shelley Moore Capito is presently poster girl for this phenomenon, but there will be others - many, many others. Until this ends, the GOP will be unable to either nominate a satisfactory candidate nor successfully see the candidacy through.

    A final related point is that a candidate wins, ultimately, by addressing issues that American's find important. A candidate can no more win by simply running on being "liberal" or "conservative" than be being, say Romney. These two labels are loose and too often foolishly used; a "conservative" prescription for health insurance reform suddenly, magically becomes "socialist" once implemented by a Democratic president, for example. The GOP needs to return to its tradition of proposing detailed, compelling solutions to what America needs from the well of its philosophy and experience. Environmental change, for example, is non-refutable to a majority of Americans; rather than denying or ignoring the issue, the GOP needs to express a clear policy of how it would address it from a conservative stand.

    It took the Democrats 12 years to figure this out back in the '80s; looks like its the GOP's turn now. Their chances in 2016 don't look good based on their response to their recent defeat. Perhaps by 2020 they'll have gotten their act together to act as a legitimate, competitive political party - I hope that they do.

  • 0

    Vast Right-Wing Conspirator

    The difference is that the current President has added to the national debt TWICE as fast as the previous one. Funny, I remember Pres. Obama calling the raising of the debt ceiling a "failure of leadership" when he was a Senator. Somehow, it has changed now that he is in power.

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    Seriously, the key problem with the GOP was that they were the only ones who thought they had a serious party and serious candidates.

    The bunch of circus clowns they ran in the primaries....seriously, if I was an American, I would have been straight out insulted that such a crop of losers could have been propped up by any party.

    And yet, Bass, Sail, Serrano, etc. and millions of other conservatives looked at these people and actually thought they were serious candidates for president. 

    Right there is a huge problem. 

    Dems and Global Liberals were writing off the conservative nominees more than a year ago.  That wasn't "elitism" or "snobbishness" - it was slap-in-the-face obvious those candidates weren't fit to be Walmart night cleaners let alone president.

    So, note to conservatives: you need to up-educate your base. 

    Why? 

    Because under-educated voters will continue to pick under-educated candidates. And if you do that, you will continue to lose.

    Like elects like.

    The GOP completely missed that one too.

    And Bass, conservatives will have to at least pretend they have changed their attitudes and values. As Smith wrote so succinctly, insulting voters will not make them vote for you. If conservatives stick to their core values, it's a near certainty they will never win again.

    Sorry about that. And sorry your party had to lose not one but two straight elections to learn this lesson the hard way.

    I just hope - for your sake at least - that enough folks on your team realize this. 

    Because if they haven't, you're going to lose again in 2016.

    Serious advice to conservatives - again, up-educate the base. 

    And while you're at it, ditch the religion. It's not helping and never has. Throughout history, religion has been one of the most destructive and divisive forces in society. Especially Christianity.

    When you've got millions of good people of other religions, having your candidates pushing prayer, praise and worship of the Christian god isn't very smart. 

    It's a recipe for the GOP disaster that just unfolded on election night. 

    Sorry about that.....

  • -1

    sailwind

    So, note to conservatives: you need to up-educate your base.

    Note to Sushi and every other liberal on J.T. education starts with not paying attention to a biased in the tank Obama Media telling you the Republican party is dying and on its last legs, and folks just being good parrots and squawking the " Media fed-party line".

    FACTS that your not being told and is not being reported at all:

    • A hat-tip is in order to a Gay activist from the left leaning HUFFPO to illustrate the reality outside of the Media filter on the current and very healthy state of the Republican party after this election.

    But the media have largely ignored the Republican gains on the state level. And these gains can't be overstated. Republicans are the dominant party in the states. According to the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC), a national organization whose mission is to elect down-ballot, state-level Republican office holders, the Republican Party holds a majority of state legislatures, governorships, lieutenant governorships and secretaries of state and claims half the nation's attorneys general. After the November elections the Republican Party now controls 24 state legislatures, and Republican governors lead 29 states. This one party's dominance is significant on multiple levels.

    Eventually, the gains at the state level will influence the federal elections. State leadership positions are the training ground for national positions. Of the last five presidents, only George H. W. Bush did not hold state office before ascending to the presidency. Indeed, the RSLC promotes the fact that it is building a "farm team" of America's future leaders.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jackie-gardina/overlooked-republican-victoriesb2201008.html

  • 1

    SushiSake3

    Sail, that's lovely, really, but the GOP still lost.

    And in politics, winning is the only thing that matters.

    And I also have to point out that you completely missed my point about education. You can go on about "biased media" all you like but it does nothing to disguise the fact that conservatives picked a bunch of unelectable losers to represent them.

    And the fact that someone as educated, polished and experienced as Jon Huntsman was passed over for a raving religious extremist like Michelle Bachmann is illustrative of my point - and incredibly telling.

    Anyone with more than a handful of functioning braincells would have - and did - spot long ago that she was unelectable. And yet conservatives in ther thousands backed her.

    That's your problem, not "biased media."

    The sooner you folk realize that and stop heaping the blame on completely the wrong targets, the sooner the GOP will become a credible political force again.

    Good luck with that.

    And - totally predictably - she went down along with all the rest.

  • 2

    yabits

    Sorry, but I know for a fact, most Hispanics don't have ANYTHING in common with the Democratic Party, except for healthcare issues.

    Ah, so most Hispanics don't have anything in common with people like Cesar Chavez, Henry Cisneros, Bill Richardson, Sonia Sotomayor, Nydia Velazquez, and a whole host of other leaders of their community. Got it.

  • -1

    Vast Right-Wing Conspirator

    SS3

    The real losers were the American people, who spent a year and millions of dollars to see....... nothing change. Same president, same congress.

    Both parties have their fringe elements. Does anyone seriously think Joe Biden would be a credible, or even acceptable, president?

    The GOP ran an educated, polished, experienced, and successful candidate. And he lost. They need to broaden their appeal and do a better job of muzzling their nutcases. They need to stop having philosophical discussions in public, and instead stick to message.

  • 0

    yabits

    not paying attention to a biased in the tank Obama Media telling you the Republican party is dying and on its last legs

    Nobody in the media, and certainly not the article above, is saying the Republican Party is dying. It's clear that you are the one spinning things that way. I realize you are frustrated that all news outlets don't "report" the way Fox News does, but a leadership vacuum is usually a temporary thing.

    As for state governments, those tend to fluctuate quite regularly. I don't put much stock in the pickup of North Carolina as any kind of trend.

  • 1

    Laguna

    After the November elections the Republican Party now controls 24 state legislatures, and Republican governors lead 29 states.+

    That is my point, Sail: the GOP is not bankrupt of ideas; it has a very important role to play. The problem with the GOP is that they are not able to transfer this success to the national stage (other than through gerrymandering, which is why they retained control of the House despite losing the popular vote).

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    skipbeat: " It doesn't help having SNL, TV talk shows, and news reporter mocking Republicans every chance they get."

    They mock stupidity, and the GOP provides it. Stop blaming the news reporters for showing it and start fixing the stupidity so you don't get mocked. You've proven yourself quite a mocker on this thread alone, for example. Is that JT's fault? My fault? Is it a 'Liberal smear campaign'? No, it's your own comments and inability to address the actual problems.

  • -2

    Serrano

    sith: Mitt was never qualified to begin with"

    But Obama is? lol

  • 0

    zurcronium

    FIrst off, Obama won this last election dramatically. The democrats won seats in the Senate and won the popular vote for the House-gerrymandering kept the democrats from winning the house back.

    This last election cycle was the last chance for the republicans to take back the USA for its rich puppet masters. The Koch family for example. No amount of money could convince the country that the top .1% cares about anything other than their own greedy selfish selves (with a few exceptions of course like Buffet, a rich person unaffected by sheer greed).

    The republican party may not survive this incredible beating at the national level. Several red states are going to move to swing status, such as Arizona and Texas, due to demographic shifts in those states. 2016 is for HIllary to take if she pleases. The angry white right wing radicals who were convinced that their hatred of Obama was enough to win the election are going the way of horse and buggy. It is over. Rubio or Jindal will get no traction nationally with the republicans, in fact they could lead the south back to the democrats if they take control of the party. Obama did much better than expected in the south in November, the middle class there is finally getting to see that the republicans just want to make them poorer so they can make the rich even more rich.

    The country as a whole is tending to vote progressive now and as a result the tea party republicans are being left out in the cold. Angry racism is not a winning policy, like it was in 2010.

  • 0

    sailwind

    And the fact that someone as educated, polished and experienced as Jon Huntsman was passed over for a raving religious extremist like Michelle Bachmann is illustrative of my point - and incredibly telling. Anyone with more than a handful of functioning braincells would have - and did - spot long ago that she was unelectable. And yet conservatives in ther thousands backed her.

    Sorry, this makes no sense. Jon Huntsman didn't win a single primary and Michelle Bachmann never won a primary and she dropped out after the first Iowa caucus . She was never favored over Huntsman at all, they both were never really in the game or credible to begin and pretty obvious that both were considered unelectable and her "thousands of Conservative votes" was a paltry 6,046 and a pathetic 5th place showing.

    The sooner you folk realize that and stop heaping the blame on completely the wrong targets, the sooner the GOP will become a credible political force again.

    This also makes no sense, even after presenting you the facts to help "educate" your knowledge outside of the MSM. Any political party that controls 29 Governorships,24 state legislatures spread through every region of the country with the notable exception of the Northeast though Governor Christie and New Hampshire being notable exceptions there also cannot be called anything else but a credible political force in the nation. It defies logic and common sense do not call it that in light of the actual facts and political reality at the local and State level, not to mention maintaining control of the house with a comfortable majority. The 2012 election did not produce a Republican President and that is also not unheard of when running against an incumbent President.

    As a matter of fact for your educational purposes, it is quite actually quite rare in American politics that the incumbent President is defeated in a re-election campaign. Only two Presidents since WW2 have been tossed out after a first term. Bush the Elder and Jimmy Carter. President Ford does not really count as he was never elected in the first place though technically he did have the advantages of being an incumbent but his situation was pretty unique.

    Defeating an incumbent President is a daunting task to begin no matter if the Democrats are throwing up the challenger or the Republicans and for Romney to fall short is not that way out there or any sort of mark of a Party in disarray. It's pretty much following the normal historical pattern with the American electorate.

  • -1

    Serrano

    "Obama won this last election dramatically"

    Yes, he won the popular vote by more than 3 percentage points, lol.

  • 1

    SushiSake3

    Smithinjaoan at Dec. 02, 2012 - 09:03PM JST

    Real good post. You're on the ball tonight. :-)

  • 1

    SushiSake3

    Sailwind - "Sorry, this makes no sense. .......This also makes no sense,...."

    It seems a lot of things don't make sense to you tonight. The election whumping the GOP received on  election night didnt make sense to many conservatives either, possibly for the same reason - a telling inability to grasp that your party has been corrupted by under-educated extremists, and that blaming anything else is fruitless.

    Sail - "Any political party that controls 29 Governorships,24 state legislatures spread through every region of the country with the notable exception of the Northeast though Governor Christie and New Hampshire being notable exceptions there also cannot be called anything else but a credible political force in the nation."

    Lovely, but they still lost, even with the gerrymandering.

    And you can bet the crippled GOP will lose again in 2016 unless they fix the education level of their voters.

    Sailwind - "As a matter of fact for your educational purposes, it is quite actually quite rare in American politics that the incumbent President is defeated in a re-election campaign. Only two Presidents since WW2 have been tossed out after a first term. Bush the Elder and Jimmy Carter. President Ford does not really count as he was never elected in the first place though technically he did have the advantages of being an incumbent but his situation was pretty unique."

    There you go again! Wildly off track, wandering blindly through the jungle on a journey to nowhere.

    You can blame history, electoral precedent, "biased media" or Big Bird until you're blue in the face.

    The education level of conservatives in general - unless corrected, and fast - will ensure they keep on picking uneducated losers who mouth off ridiculous comments aka Todd Akin and the other guy.  In the GOP primary debates, the only sane individual involved was the moderator. All the others were unelectable. 

    And if conservatives stay true to their largely corrupt conservative ideals, you'll bury yourself even deeper.

    Sail, you're doing yourself a huge disservice by sidetracking from the real problems afflicting your shattered party.

    It's attitudes and thoughts like yours that are a big part of the conservative problem. 

    Sorry about that

  • -1

    SushiSake3

    And one more - the GOP Is all for cutting funding for education. Have you ever wondered why?

    The few smart elites in the party know full well that a dumbed down conservative base will continue to vote for dumbed down conservative policies and ideals.

    A smart electorate - as seems to increasingly be the case - will simply reject conservative principles outright. 

    Sorry about that.

    PS: saying that makes me an elitist snob or something like that....

  • -2

    bass4funk

    @Sushi

    Heh, we all remember that right throughout the 8 terrible bUsh years, all we got was big government and incredible fiscal recklessness.

    I never said, Bush was a fiscally conservative Republican.

    Today's GOP is the same pig with different lipstick.

    So what do you call the donkey party that straps on red clown shoes?

    Thank God Americans weren't fooled.

    Actually, they will be fooled once they wake up and realize that Obama can NEVER keep up with the bogus promises he fed the American people.

    Well, actually, you were, but that's beside the point. :-)

    I totally agree for once!!! ;-)

  • -3

    bass4funk

    @yabits

    Ah, so most Hispanics don't have anything in common with people like Cesar Chavez, Henry Cisneros, Bill Richardson, Sonia Sotomayor, Nydia Velazquez, and a whole host of other leaders of their community. Got it.

    I said, MOST, not ALL. I grew up in a mostly Hispanic community, the majority don't share any values that the Democrats prescribe too. I employed them, lived with them, most of them are as liberal as Lindsey Lohan is sober. it I'm glad you got it.

  • 0

    bass4funk

    @smith

    They mock stupidity, and the GOP provides it.

    I love this. Since I worked for so many years in the media, I can tell you without a doubt, the media is 110% totally bias, so it has nothing to do with blatant stupidity, the Dems provide that as well as the pundits on the Barack channel, my former employer and yet, the liberal media will never call out on the constant vitriol, lies and smearing they engage in, but they are quick to point out the flubs the GOP makes.

    Stop blaming the news reporters for showing it and start fixing the stupidity so you don't get mocked.

    You can't when a corporation is in the tank for a president or the majority of the journalists are left to far left leaning. Scratch that!

    You've proven yourself quite a mocker on this thread alone, for example. Is that JT's fault? My fault? Is it a 'Liberal smear campaign'?

    I would say to a large degree, YEP!

  • 1

    Vast Right-Wing Conspirator

    I think we have to look at things pragmatically. There really isn't a lot of distance between the "centrists" of both parties. The election wasn't a drubbing, a whipping, shattering, or any other adjective other than underwhelming.

    It all boils down to the fact that more and more Americans want to vote themselves benefits that they don't want to pay for. They want European levels of government care while paying American levels of tax. It doesn't work. All it does is force the burden of paying onto the next generation, which to me is immoral.

  • 0

    lucabrasi

    @bass

    But once the GOP can make themselves better attractive to the Hispanics and are more open to immigration reform and with a promise not to round up and deport everyone, that democratic impulse will fade very, very quickly.

    But then they wouldn't be Republicans any more. They might as well start increasing funding for public education, health and welfare, whilst cutting the military budget. Then they could legalise marijuana, promote gay marriage and push for f workers' rights, tax the wealthy properly and start giving a flying f*** about the environment.

    Heck, everybody'd voting for them then....

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    Smith - "You've proven yourself quite a mocker on this thread alone, for example. Is that JT's fault? My fault? Is it a 'Liberal smear campaign'?"

    Bass - "I would say to a large degree, YEP!"

    One more reason your team got smashed

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    I agree it must be a tough, not to mention confusing time for conservatives.

    Their dreams of winning the presidency are rubble. 

    Their candidate is AWOL.

    GOP gov Chris Christie is the most popular person in the nation and he vocally supported the president. 

    And their chances of winning in 2016 have already been flushed down the toilet.

  • -2

    hidingout

    The few smart elites in the party know full well that a dumbed down conservative base will continue to vote for dumbed down conservative policies and ideals. A smart electorate - as seems to increasingly be the case - will simply reject conservative principles outright. PS: saying that makes me an elitist snob or something like that....

    Yeah, or something like that ..... I'll refrain from offering my take on what that might be and save the mods the trouble of deleting my post.

    Oh to be as smart as the folks who vote for welfare checks and catchy slogans like "yes we can".

  • -4

    smithinjapan

    Serrano: "Yes, he won the popular vote by more than 3 percentage points, lol."

    And who lost, sarge?

    hidingout: "Oh to be as smart as the folks who vote for welfare checks and catchy slogans like "yes we can".

    So you are flagrantly happy to include yourself in a group of people who can't do anything, and aspire to nothing. Way to go!

    Bass4Funk: "You've proven yourself quite a mocker on this thread alone, for example. Is that JT's fault? My fault? Is it a 'Liberal smear campaign'?"

    And yet interestingly enough you have on previous threads said that FOX is not bias. Now, if that is not cutting your own head off while you are speaking I don't know what is. My guess is you won't directly reply on that fact because it is proof of your hypocrisy.

  • -1

    bass4funk

    @luca

    But then they wouldn't be Republicans any more. They might as well start increasing funding for public education, health and welfare, whilst cutting the military budget. Then they could legalise marijuana, promote gay marriage and push for f workers' rights, tax the wealthy properly and start giving a flying f*** about the environment.

    Heck, everybody'd voting for them then....

    Lol

    Do you know how much money was spent on public education, conservatives tried it in the past and how did that change anything? CA, the abyss state of the US ranks 37 Legalize marijuana, up to individual states, and 25th in science and Math, yet we still pay these teachers enormous salaries and for WHAT?!!! Why promote gay marriage if it is something that the majority of Republicans don't believe in, the majority of Americans don't believe in it. Most Blacks and Hispanics don't either. As for workers rights, they do. It's called, self-reliance a word that liberals don't know how comprehend. Taxing me, who has a lot of money is never the answer. What you liberals fail to understand is one word "growth" if you don't have viable growth in the economy, you are just wasting your time.taxing the affluent isn't even going to pay for 1/3 of our debt. But spending is the key?? Spending my kids future into oblivion? Yes, we do give a fig about as well, difference is, conservatives are not going to waste tax payers on failed government projects like Solendra, if its private funds that are being used, Conservatives don't have a problem with it.

    @sushi

    Smith - "You've proven yourself quite a mocker on this thread alone, for example. Is that JT's fault? My fault? Is it a 'Liberal smear campaign'?"

    "I would say to a large degree, YEP!"

    One more reason your team got smashed

    Sorry, I was meaning that the Dems are a joke, that was what I was agreeing with you on.

  • -1

    smithinjapan

    bass: "Sorry, I was meaning that the Dems are a joke, that was what I was agreeing with you on."

    No, it's one more reason you got smashed. Not that hard to understand, but then you do claim to have worked in the media and that FOX is not biased.

    Now, while you struggle to come to terms with why you lost this election you have one thing you need to look at first before you can hope to win the next election: YOURSELF. Stop blaming others for your own inabilities to perform. Once you do that, you can work on options to win.

  • -1

    smithinjapan

    SushiSake: "Real good post. You're on the ball tonight. :-)"

    Hadn't started drinking yet at at that point. It takes about 8 500 ml cans of beer to dummy myself down to Republican arguments. I'll be there soon enough. :) Imagine the world when they wake up and are embarrassed about their moronic mistakes and promises to do better.

  • -1

    bass4funk

    @smith

    And yet interestingly enough you have on previous threads said that FOX is not bias. Now, if that is not cutting your own head off while you are speaking I don't know what is. My guess is you won't directly reply on that fact because it is proof of your hypocrisy.

    Fox is no more bias than Msnbc is fair. If you think so, it's irrelevant, I worked a long time in the business and in particular for NBC. I know who the bias network and its NOT Fox that's for sure. Do they make mistakes, every network does. But at least FOX has both sides speaking and you hear multiple opinions, whereas NBC, you'll hardly see conservatives on that network to challenge liberals and their policies, they are verboten.

    There I answered your question.

  • -3

    bass4funk

    @smith

    No, it's one more reason you got smashed. Not that hard to understand, but then you do claim to have worked in the media and that FOX is not biased.

    Yup!

    Now, while you struggle to come to terms with why you lost this election you have one thing you need to look at first before you can hope to win the next election: YOURSELF. Stop blaming others for your own inabilities to perform. Once you do that, you can work on options to win.

    You libs are so full of yourself, it stinks with disgust! Stop blaming others??? This rhetoric talk coming from the group that blames Bush constantly and gives Obama a pass for the last 4 years of disastrous failures??! You guys practically invented the word "hypocrisy"

  • -2

    smithinjapan

    bass: "You libs are so full of yourself, it stinks with disgust! Stop blaming others???"

    Yes. Stop blaming others. Realize the problem is you. Deal with how you can change it, and change it. If you refuse, kiss 2016 good-bye. Then try not to blame THAT failure on everyone but yourself.

  • -1

    smithinjapan

    bass: "Fox is no more bias than Msnbc is fair. If you think so, it's irrelevant, I worked a long time in the business and in particular for NBC. I know who the bias network and its NOT Fox that's for sure. "

    This is what always makes me laugh about you -- the denial. How anyone could think GOP headquarters --- err.... FOX -- is not bias means simply brain damage or downright stupidity.

  • -1

    smithinjapan

    Bass: You claim to have worked in the biz but cannot see the forest for the trees. I'd say that's very, very sad reporting.

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    Most amusing about this thread is that the few GOP supporters who have removed their heads from the sand have come on here and done the exact same thing that lost the election for Romney -- they won't address the issues and instead blame their own inadequacies on everything but the cause. I guess in some universe that's a win.

  • -1

    bass4funk

    @smith

    Yes. Stop blaming others. Realize the problem is you. Deal with how you can change it, and change it. If you refuse, kiss 2016 good-bye. Then try not to blame THAT failure on everyone but yourself.

    Sure thing, once you liberals stop making excuses for your anointed President. Practice what you guys never preach.

    This is what always makes me laugh about you -- the denial. How anyone could think GOP headquarters --- err.... FOX -- is not bias means simply brain damage or downright stupidity.

    Smith, name me some serious conservatives that work for msnbc , how any of their nightly shows and news shows do they give a conservative point of view? Like I said, spent 12 years in the liberal abyss of a hellhole that was NBC, don't even try. Lol

    You claim to have worked in the biz but cannot see the forest for the trees. I'd say that's very, very sad reporting. Nice try, but I spent 12 years in purgatory and coming from CA, we have more than enough Red Woods.

  • 0

    JanesBlonde

    I think the days of the GOP being a major political force are well and truly over.

    They have become, and are generally seen as, in large part due the Tea party, an irrelevant bumper stick logan charting right wing anti-party with no real policies .... except cut taxes and lets remove as much government regulation as possible. Fox News, continues to reinforce this view on a daily basis. They really do live in an ever decreasing bubble, they just can't see it. Just look at fool Grover Norquist.

    Americans finally woke up and realised that after 4 years of pan and slowly clawing the economy back on track, they weren't going to just hand it back to the same party that got them in the s**t in the first place. I mean imagine, more wars in the middle east paid for with Chinese credit (The same old boys making money selling those arms and $15 hamburgers to the US armed forces), another financial crisis thanks to endless financial deregulation.

    Leadership? The GOP has not had trust worthy leadership since Reagan and despite all of the leading players claiming to "Reaganites" todays GOP is a completely different party from when he was running it. Today it is clearly a minority party representing the views of an ever decreasing minority.

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    Bass: "Sure thing, once you liberals stop making excuses for your anointed President."

    Who won, bud? (ouch! that dagger's gotta hurt!). Why should I make excuses for Romney to help the milk and cookies kick in before nap time?

    As for news industries, you know full well FOX is a right-wing, moronic news station. You know it for a FACT, but claim they are 'center' or some foolishness like that.

    I'll be honest, you claiming such of FOX and then saying you have it on good grounds because you once worked in the field... well... it doesn't help your argument.

  • -4

    bass4funk

    @smith

    Who won, bud? (ouch! that dagger's gotta hurt!). Why should I make excuses for Romney to help the milk and cookies kick in before nap time?

    Hey, you rep what you sow, by all means, the people voted for 4 more years of stagnant failure. Personally, I hope the Rebups give Obama what he wants, let taxes go up for ALL Americans, when the unemployment raises again and it will. It won't affect me too much, because I can do something less affluent and poor people cannot do and that is move, I can always move and make sure Obama doesn't get my money. What do you think is going to happen when the 1% will have to pay higher taxes? A big portion of them will bail and since we are the ones that make and keep the economy going, when a lot of us stop doing that that's when the s*** will really hit the fan. So I am just sitting back and enjoying the ride and watch Obama and the Dems dig a giant crater. :-)

    As for news industries, you know full well FOX is a right-wing, moronic news station. You know it for a FACT, but claim they are 'center' or some foolishness like that.

    First of all Fox is NOT a right-wing news network. Do they lean a tilt more than the other networks, well yes, but you have one network that gives a voice to conservatives and traditionalists, before FOX there were NONE. How is that far, so we have to hear the liberal side of politics? Screw what conservatives and traditionalists think? So you are basically advocating a one thought, one mind, one party system, right? If you don't like FOX, you can watch the other networks who shut out conservative voices and viewpoints. Watch those networks, that should be more to your liking.

    I'll be honest, you claiming such of FOX and then saying you have it on good grounds because you once worked in the field... well... it doesn't help your argument.

    That's your personal opinion.

  • -5

    realdoll

    Romney lost due to reverse racism (racism against whites). Most of the 93% of blacks don't know what Obama stood for except raising taxes on the rich which will accomplish nothing. They seen the election in black and white, Obama i black, Romney is white.

  • 0

    JDB829

    Reverse racism? I always thought racism was racism !

  • 2

    yabits

    Smith, name me some serious conservatives that work for msnbc

    That's fairly easy: Joe Scarborough -- former Republican congressman from Florida -- has his own show (Morning Joe) and invites plenty of conservative on. It's by far the best morning news and commentary show out there.

    Former RNC Chairman Micheal Steele works for MSNBC, and I see him all the time, as well as other conservatives.

  • -1

    sailwind

    The election whumping the GOP received on election night didnt make sense to many conservatives either, possibly for the same reason - a telling inability to grasp that your party has been corrupted by under-educated extremists, and that blaming anything else is fruitless.

    This again makes no sense and a disconnect from reality, an election thumping is what happened to the Democrats in the 2010 mid-term elections or as President Obama called it at the time a "shellacking". The 2012 election didn't change hardly anything at the National level and has kept everything pretty much status quo.

    I would think a person who claims to be so highly educated and derides and stereotypes all Conservatives as "un-educated" could at least grasp that much and I wouldn't have to provide a practical educational learning example as to what an electoral thumping actually resembles.

  • 0

    sailwind

    they won't address the issues and instead blame their own inadequacies on everything but the cause.

    Doesn't square with reality again. If the cause that Republicans and Conservative embrace as their general philosphy of less Government, lower taxes and free markets was inadequate and so toxic to the voters they would never be elected to any public office ever.

  • 0

    skipbeat

    smithinjapanDec. 02, 2012 - 09:03PM JST : They mock stupidity, and the GOP provides it. Stop blaming the news reporters for showing it and start fixing the stupidity so you don't get mocked. You've proven yourself quite a mocker on this thread alone, for example. Is that JT's fault? My fault? Is it a 'Liberal smear campaign'? No, it's your own comments and inability to address the actual problems.

    Just on JT to give my two cents and balance the views on JT. The media comment was not a personal attack toward you or JT.

    The media is a big influences on society. The media controls the message. Why do you think some countries only have a state media? The mainstream media is biased favoring Obama/Democrats over Romney/Republicans. Not sure why you are offended by that. The media can choose whoever they want to support. It is an observation and assessment of the elections 2012. You don't have to agreed with it. JT is not consider mainstream media.

    I did state why the Republicans lost overall and what they need to do but you have issues with them.

  • 0

    sailwind

    Now, while you struggle to come to terms with why you lost this election you have one thing you need to look at first before you can hope to win the next election: YOURSELF.

    Not seeing how this really will help win the next election. Looking at the core message of less Government, lower taxes and free market solutions can more than hold its own in any policy debate. Prime example would be the first debate between Governor Romney and President Obama. No one could argue and be taken seriously that Romney did not make quite the compelling case for that core message in comparision with Obama's big Government philosphy, when Romney was finally seen by Americans outside of the Media filter and the constant negative narratives they were pushing about him.

    The message isn't the problem. The messaging medium that it has to try and get through without being filtered is the problem. This has to be understood and it has to be overcome. Republicans in the future will have to understand that Media and those that influence the popular culture are never going to be on their side ever and finally really adjust to that hard reality and find ways to really effectively combat it. It will take creative ways for the Republicans to overcome this massive roadblock but it is imperative that they find a way to be successful in the future.

  • 2

    Serrano

    I wonder how big the federal deficit will be after Obama's second term.

  • -3

    yabits

    Looking at the core message of less Government, lower taxes and free market solutions can more than hold its own in any policy debate.

    This brings up my point about what Republicans ultimately suffer from is a policy and philosophy vacuum. The "core messages" of "less Government," etc. are increasingly being understood by increasing numbers of Americans as the phony and self-destructive policies they are.

    For example, we all witnessed in 2008 that as soon as the banks, investment houses, and insurance companies (like AIG) were headed into a deep abyss, the Bush administration instantly abandoned the "core messages" and immediately adopted a Keynesian response to the situation by bailing out the key players. Therefore, they fully acknowledge that their core message, when the rubber has to meet the road, is mere lip-service.

    Secondly, what does "less Government" really mean? That when an individual has to go up against a large corporation, that there will be no one in her corner to fight for her? That, even if the decision goes her way, that there will be no entity powerful enough to enforce it? Does less government mean that millions upon millions of the working poor have to be without health care, or that millions of middle-income people remain one step away from bankruptcy when an insurance company cuts them off?

    This is why, during Romney's campaign, he and his sidekick were notably silent when it came to specific cuts they were going to make -- outside of the laughable reference to PBS.

    Face it, a government that rushes into save big banks and allows millions of their innocent victims to suffer without trying to put rules into place to ease their burdens might be the kind of government some Republicans desire, but it won't be so for most people as long as the middle-class is under such stress. I compare the Republican philosophy to that of the Amway corporation -- one where only very few people at the top prosper, and the vast majority receive little or nothing for their efforts.

  • 0

    yabits

    Romney wants every American to be in the top 1%. Those who haven't seen it, ought to check out "The Real Mitt Romney." Really good for a laugh...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxch-yi14BE

  • -1

    skipbeat

    smithinjapanDec. 03, 2012 - 01:10AM JST : Most amusing about this thread is that the few GOP supporters who have removed their heads from the sand have come on here and done the exact same thing that lost the election for Romney -- they won't address the issues and instead blame their own inadequacies on everything but the cause. I guess in some universe that's a win.

    Why don't you state those issues? You don't like the issues that are brought up because you get offended by it. You called it blaming. There is a difference between blaming and analyzing.

  • -2

    bass4funk

    @yabits

    I met Joe 12 years ago, I'll tell you this. Joe who is a very nice guy by the way would be considered at BEST, a moderate or less than that, but a serious true red-blooded conservative, absolutely NOT. I think he's at msnbc to take a pay check, but there are times when he will say things that a traditional and real conservative would never say. The only real conservative they HAD was Pat Buchanan and they fired him, so you have Michael Steele, "one" that's it. Regular everyday conservative pundits on msnbc, ZERO!

  • 0

    sailwind

    This brings up my point about what Republicans ultimately suffer from is a policy and philosophy vacuum. The "core messages" of "less Government," etc. are increasingly being understood by increasing numbers of Americans as the phony and self-destructive policies they are.

    Doesn't square at all with the election results. Romney's total votes increased over McCain's haul this election. Obama's vote total on the other hand, dropped about 5.5 million votes behind his 2008 total to 64,005,851 this year. I'd say ever increasing numbers of Americans understood the core Obama big GOV message quite well and then voted accordingly as to which message and policy and philosophy they are now wanting to be pursued since they were able to compared them in the voting both.

    Obama held enough of his coalition and popularty to prevail but the hard facts are his coalition actually shrunk from 2008, Yabits.

  • 0

    yabits

    The only real conservative they HAD was Pat Buchanan and they fired him, so you have Michael Steele, "one" that's it. Regular everyday conservative pundits on msnbc, ZERO!

    No, in addition to Steele and Scarborough, MSNBC has S.E. Cupp and Steve Schmidt (who ran McCain's campaign). You might want to keep spinning around yourself to qualify each as not being a "real conservative," but that is all you are doing. None of those names mentioned are liberals or progressives. I also see John Fluerey (name might be wrong) all the time on Hardball.

    So there, you claimed MSNBC didn't have any. They have more conservative voices than Fox has liberal/progressive ones.

    As for firing Buchanan, it wasn't because of his conservatism. They fired Olbermann and Cenk Uyger too.

  • 0

    yabits

    Romney's total votes increased over McCain's haul this election.

    Only by around a half-million. And that is in an election where the Republicans went all out for years with the defeat of Obama as their primary objective. An increase of a half-million in a pool of over 150 million registered voters only shows how the Republican message has not resonated.

    I'd say ever increasing numbers of Americans understood the core Obama big GOV message quite well and then voted accordingly

    The 5.5 million that did not vote for Obama this time around, didn't even show up to the polls. Claiming or inferring that those millions support the Republican message would be dishonest at best. Of course, on such fraudulent inferences do many Republicans stake their claims.

  • 0

    yabits

    Obama held enough of his coalition and popularty to prevail but the hard facts are his coalition actually shrunk from 2008, Yabits.

    Let's also not forget what the unemployment numbers were in the months leading up to election day. It is telling that the Republicans could not turn this to their advantage beyond a gain of only a half-million votes nationwide.

    That, after four years of Barack Obama, should tell you something. If there was truly a strong conservative base in this country, it should have picked up far more than what they did.

  • -1

    bass4funk

    @yabits

    No, in addition to Steele and Scarborough, MSNBC has S.E. Cupp and Steve Schmidt (who ran McCain's campaign). You might want to keep spinning around yourself to qualify each as not being a "real conservative," but that is all you are doing. None of those names mentioned are liberals or progressives. I also see John Fluerey (name might be wrong) all the time on Hardball.

    Schmidt is NOT a regular host on msn, sorry, nor is S.E. Cupp. I don't need to spin, funny, you talk as if YOU know what goes on with that network, I don't remember you on the payroll. I am talking about regular conservatives that give an alternative POV of view and the answer is Null. Sure, there are a few tokens that come on to make the network appear as if they allow conservative and traditionalists give their POV, but mostly, "NO."

    So there, you claimed MSNBC didn't have any.

    As a regular employee. NO, they do not.

    They have more conservative voices than Fox has liberal/progressive ones.

    Shepard Smith, Geraldo, Kirsten Powers, Bob Beckel, Juan Williams, Greta Van Sustern, Alan Colms, judge Napolitano(Libertarian) John Stossel (Libertarian) Dr. Lamount Hill (quite progressive) There are a lot more, so again, yabits, nice try.

    As for firing Buchanan, it wasn't because of his conservatism.

    Sorry, but I have the inside politics as to what happened and yes, mostly, because he was becoming a liability. I still have friends working there at msnbc and you wouldn't believe the stories that I constantly hear.

    They fired Olbermann and Cenk Uyger too.

    That was a good thing, when Griffin took control of msnbc, the network received hundreds of complaints about how tacky Olbermann was becoming. He resonated with younger viewers, but with older people, they thought the man had no class and as part of the NEW msnbc restructuring, they fired Olbermann. He was warned numerous of times, but there was no change in his behavior, and it only got worse once he went to Current TV and he ultimately got fired from there as well. Olbermann was his own worst enemy, good that the loud mouth is gone. He should've stayed in sports, I think he did well this past Olympics, his coverage of the women's Gymnastics team was done very well. As for Chunk, he was just horrible, smart guy,cut not good for Television.

  • 1

    sailwind

    Let's also not forget what the unemployment numbers were in the months leading up to election day. It is telling that the Republicans could not turn this to their advantage beyond a gain of only a half-million votes nationwide.

    Again doesn't square with the actual election . Obama's total vote count for re-election and carried States was less than in 2004. Reality says that if you loose more votes and less states that you carried in your re-election bid that your policies aren't gaining in popularity rather that hey're actually backtracking.

    Also for the less than stellar Republican gain, when your re-election strategy is to destroy Romney in the publics eye with the ever helpful assistance of an in the tank Media that highlighted Romney’s wealth and his offshore bank accounts, job-exporting to China and his just ruthless greedy capitalist leadership at Bain Capital, a bad singing voice, mistreatment of his dog, unpublished tax returns, murder-by-cancer of a steelworkers wife, stuffing women into binders, just a general heartlessness and cluelessness, bullying some kid 50 some odd years ago, insulting the Brits, Palestinians ah... what the heck just insulting the entire rest of the world and wearing weird underwear during religious ceremonies.

    Shows that going negative and going negative early sure does work after all.

  • 0

    sailwind

    Let's also not forget what the unemployment numbers were in the months leading up to election day.

    Yabits,

    Almost forgot but this brings up an excellent point about media bias and the role they played leading up to the election regarding squelching any stories about unemployment and the pain folks were going through. I do not remember a single story highlighting anyone who was unemployed or who had been hurt by Obama's economic policies. Usually you can count on the Media highlighting stories of plant closures or folks losing their jobs or at least a story of how hard it is to find a job......This election, nada, nothing, zip. Bad optics and all for Obama's reelection campaign. The Media sure did a bang up job in highlighting Romney's past with companies that ended up going under though and having to put people out of work.

  • 0

    yabits

    Schmidt is NOT a regular host on msn, sorry, nor is S.E. Cupp.

    Cupp currently co-hosts the weekday show The Cycle on MSNBC. You are wrong again. Schmidt may not be a regular host, but he appears regularly as a panelist and commentator.

    I am aware of the names of Smith and van Susteren, but there is nothing in their political positions to indicate they are liberals. Cross the "libertarians" off the list -- about all they have in common with liberals are the first five letters. Colmes hasn't appeared in years and Powers and Hill aren't on Fox's current "On-Air Personalities" list.

    Schmidt appears far more often on MSNBC than does Beckel -- yes one moderate Democrat there -- on Fox. Juan Williams' liberal stances are well-known, and he might be the liberal who appears most often. On the other hand, conservatives appear on a near daily basis on Hardball. And no liberal has the prominence on Fox that Scarborough has on MSNBC. He has the same relationship to the right as Bob Beckel has to the left.

  • 0

    yabits

    Also for the less than stellar Republican gain, when your re-election strategy is to destroy Romney in the publics eye with the ever helpful assistance of an in the tank Media that highlighted Romney’s wealth and his offshore bank accounts, job-exporting to China...blah, blah, blah...

    Why should it have worked on Republican voters, if the nation was predominantly in support of Republican ideas? Reagan was excoriated and lambasted far worse and far earlier -- often from his own party -- and it didn't work when it came to taking on a Democratic incumbent who was in the midst of some terrible economic conditions.

    It just goes to show how losers can find an excuse for anything.

  • 0

    yabits

    I do not remember a single story highlighting anyone who was unemployed or who had been hurt by Obama's economic policies.

    There was certainly nothing holding back good old reliable Republican Fox News from doing so.

    Problem is, many of Obama's proposals were helping to bring down the rate of unemployment and economic indicators showed the economy in a slow recovery. Besides, everybody with any intelligence knows that the horrible conditions were not set in motion by President Obama.

    Americans generally are a fair-minded people. They weren't going to blame the Great Depression on FDR, and they aren't putting the blame for the crash of 2008 and its aftermath on Obama. Only those who aren't fair-minded seek to do so.

  • 1

    sailwind

    Reagan was excoriated and lambasted far worse and far earlier -- often from his own party -- and it didn't work when it came to taking on a Democratic incumbent who was in the midst of some terrible economic conditions.

    Different time, different era, different issues and an entirely different set of circumstances than this election. Inflation, Iranian Hostage Crises, Cold War, Carter weakened after being challenged by Ted Kennedy in the primaries. In short pretty much zip in common with the 2012 election other than the economy being bad.

    Besides, everybody with any intelligence knows that the horrible conditions were not set in motion by President Obama.

    Doesn't change the fact that people were and are still hurting under Obama, policies that were his and his alone and not tied to Bush whatsoever Yabits as in Solyndra going bankrupt from his green initatives. Nothing reported on how his shovel ready jobs never materialized. Media completely ignored his economic failures Yabits and there are plenty of them to report on.

    Only those who aren't fair-minded seek to do so.

    You describe the Media perfectly with that description on their coverage here.

  • -1

    bass4funk

    Cupp currently co-hosts the weekday show The Cycle on MSNBC. You are wrong again. Schmidt may not be a regular host, but he appears regularly as a panelist and commentator.

    I am aware of the names of Smith and van Susteren, but there is nothing in their political positions to indicate they are liberals. Cross the "libertarians" off the list -- about all they have in common with liberals are the first five letters. Colmes hasn't appeared in years and Powers and Hill aren't on Fox's current "On-Air Personalities" list.

    Schmidt appears far more often on MSNBC than does Beckel -- yes one moderate Democrat there -- on Fox. Juan Williams' liberal stances are well-known, and he might be the liberal who appears most often. On the other hand, conservatives appear on a near daily basis on Hardball. And no liberal has the prominence on Fox that Scarborough has on MSNBC. He has the same relationship to the right as Bob Beckel has to the left.

  • -2

    bass4funk

    @yabits

    Cupp currently co-hosts the weekday show The Cycle on MSNBC. You are wrong again. Schmidt may not be a regular host, but he appears regularly as a panelist and commentator.

    That is ONE and that's it...

    I am aware of the names of Smith and van Susteren, but there is nothing in their political positions to indicate they are liberals.

    Sorry, I did my internship with FOX 10 years ago, I met Shep and the other big wigs. Shep and Greta are NOT even close to being Conservative, but nice try.

    Cross the "libertarians" off the list -- about all they have in common with liberals are the first five letters. Colmes hasn't appeared in years and Powers and Hill aren't on Fox's current "On-Air Personalities" list.

    Colms has his own radio show, so basically, he's on FOX radio everyday.

    Schmidt appears far more often on MSNBC than does Beckel

    False again, Beckel has a show called "The Five" he's on it everyday.

    -- yes one moderate Democrat there -- on Fox. Juan Williams' liberal stances are well-known, and he might be the liberal who appears most often.

    The reason why Juan is often on FOX is because he's not a lunatic raging liberal. From time to time he does make a bit of sense.

    On the other hand, conservatives appear on a near daily basis on Hardball.

    Yes, Hardball that mostly sums it up.

    And no liberal has the prominence on Fox that Scarborough has on MSNBC.

    Geraldo and Greta both liberals and have their own shows.

    He has the same relationship to the right as Bob Beckel has to the left.

    NOT true again. Scarborough is NOT a real conservative, but for $6 million, I'd take a paycheck too and would try my best.

    I am aware of the names of Smith and van Susteren, but there is nothing in their political positions to indicate they are liberals.

  • 1

    yabits

    Sorry, I did my internship with FOX 10 years ago, I met Shep and the other big wigs. Shep and Greta are NOT even close to being Conservative, but nice try.

    So the political leanings of those two can only be gleaned from a personal relationship and not through anything that can be demonstrated through the public record. That's hardly what I would call proving liberalism.

  • 1

    yabits

    Different time, different era, different issues and an entirely different set of circumstances than this election. Inflation, Iranian Hostage Crises, Cold War, Carter weakened after being challenged by Ted Kennedy in the primaries. In short pretty much zip in common with the 2012 election other than the economy being bad.

    Yesterday's "inflation" problem is today's precarious financial situation. Yesterday's problems with Iran still continue. Problems still exist. Yes, the Democratic Party was fully aligned behind President Obama, but that wouldn't explain a Republican loss if the nation predominantly bought into the basic Republican message. After four years of a president they despise, and continuing tough economic conditions, the Republicans could only pick up a half-million more votes nationally. That really speaks for itself.

    Solyndra? The Republican-led House conducted a year-long investigation with thousands of pages of documents and dozens of witnesses and came up with....nothing The whole thing was a ploy, and you bought into it. (Do you sell Amway too?) As one Republican from Ohio admitted: "Ultimately, we’ll stop it on Election Day, hopefully. And bringing attention to these things helps the voters and citizens of the country make the kind of decision that I hope helps them as they evaluate who they are going to vote for in November.”

    Media completely ignored his economic failures

    Gee, how did you learn about them? Or maybe what you call "failures" were just a small part of a much bigger picture than you'd be willing to admit:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/opinion/sunday/how-the-stimulus-fell-short.html?pagewanted=all

  • -2

    Serrano

    Well, if yabits' 10:45am post with that link to that really lame YouTube video "The Real Mitt Romney" still stands, it's only fair for me to post a link to this much better YouTube video - "Reagan warned us about Obama"- www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3hY1eagq88

  • -1

    bass4funk

    @yabits

    So the political leanings of those two can only be gleaned from a personal relationship and not through anything that can be demonstrated through the public record. That's hardly what I would call proving liberalism.

    That's ok, if you don't think so. You are entitled to your own opinion. My daughter believes Santa will come down our Chimney. So I'm not the one to try to convince anyone of anything.

  • 0

    gelendestrasse

    Creates? That implies there wasn't a leadership problem left over from the W years, doesn't it?

    I have to agree that I don't like most of Obama's policies....santa coming down the chimney indeed! But it was, in many respects, the republican's election to lose. With ideas on immigration that are right out of the 1930s and a candidate that could be cast as an "evil 1%er" (which is a hoot given how wealthy Obama is) it was all downhill from there....

  • 1

    serendipitous

    Keep the vacuum going GOP! You're doing the planet a favour!

  • -1

    Wolfpack

    Romney's loss creates Republican leadership vacuum

    Romney's loss in the election means that he has missed his chance to lead his party. Obviously, Rep. Boehner as the highest ranking Republican remains the leader of his party. This is a pretty dumb article from the AP - though they write so many it isn't out of the ordinary for them. They have an agenda and they are plying that agenda.

    The biggest vacuum in Washington today is between Obama's tiny ears. This guy thinks that Mao, Engels, and Jeremiah Wright are geniuses. Obama wouldn't recognize an original thought if it were to hit him over the head like an anvil.

  • 0

    yabits

    The New Republic's Timothy Noah has some interesting reporting on the purges going on within the conservative/GOP circles. In the next few posts are some examples...

    John Boehner's back-bencher purge: House Speaker John Boehner stripped four Republican members of sought-after assignments to two prominent committees (Budget and Financial Services), then warned the rest of the GOP caucus that "there may be more folks that will be targeted ... we're watching all your votes." Boehner insists the four (Walter Jones of North Carolina, David Schweikert of Arizona, Tim Huelskamp of Kansas and Justin Amash of Michigan) weren't purged for being too conservative, but rather for not being "team players." One thing they had in common, though, was a vote against last year's debt-ceiling deal.

    Boehner's (and Paul Ryan's) Ryan-Plan purge: The budget plan Boehner presented to the White House -- which contained $800 billion in tax increases over ten years and $1.4 trillion in spending cuts, including cuts to Social Security and Medicare -- constituted, among other things, the first formal Republican acknowledgment that Paul Ryan's House-passed budget plan is dead. Ryan himself has not been purged, however. He is participating in fiscal-cliff negotiations. Indeed, while some House conservatives say the Ryan plan will live to fight another day, there are tentative signs that Ryan himself is done with the budget proposal that brought him to national prominence. He still maintains pride of authorship, however. Amash and Huelskamp, it's been suggested, were removed from the Budget committee at least partly on Ryan's recommendation; they both voted against the Ryan plan this year.

  • 0

    yabits

    More GOP/conservative purges:

    Conservatives' Boehner Purge: Purging dissidents and proposing a tax increase -- even one lacking, as Boehner's does, the tiniest detail about how revenues will be raised -- has not endeared Boehner to the party's conservative wing. GOP performance artist Sarah Palin said, "Right now the GOP establishment is more concerned about the opinion of the media and the Georgetown cocktail circuit than they are 'we the people' who hired them." FreedomWorks, a Koch-funded, Tea-Party-affiliated nonprofit, is also angry at Boehner, and has called on him to reinstate the four dissenters. Another right-wing group called Americans For Majority Action has begun a campaign to dump Boehner as speaker next month; 16 abstentions would do the trick. The leading (but not, at this moment, very plausible) alternative appears to be Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, who heads the Republican Study Committee and opposes a tax increase.

    (Palin as GOP "performance artist" -- LOL!!)

    FreedomWorks's Dick Armey Purge: Dick Armey, a former House majority leader, has been paid $8 million to vacate his high-profile position as chairman of FreedomWorks. Apparently Armey and FreedomWorks president Matt Kibbe can't stand each other. The final straw came when Armey refused to sign off on a book contract Kibbe struck with HarperCollins. The book's research and promotion relied on FreedomWorks staff, putting FreedomWorks's tax-exempt status, Armey felt, in jeopardy. (Attention IRS: Kibbe went ahead with the deal anyway.) Sources at FreedomWorks complained to Politico that they spent so much time promoting Kibbe's book that they didn't have enough time to mobilize conservatives for the election. An $8 million golden parachute is pretty eye-catching for an organization that claims to work at the grass roots; as of 2010, Politico reports, Armey's salary was a cool half-million. But if the intent was shut Armey up by shoving money down his throat, it didn't work. "What bothered me most ... was that [Kibbe] was asking me to lie, and it was a lie that I thought brought the organization in harm's way," Armey told Politico.

  • -1

    T-Mack

    Romney's word's are a vacuum...and he invite's trouble for his stupid remark's...He is lost and need's God help!!!....... Look to the God you profess!!!

  • 0

    yabits

    Even more purges in the conservative ranks: (The kind of stuff you'll never hear Fox report.)

    Fox News's Karl Rove Purge: Fox News chairman Roger Ailes hath decreed that henceforth producers will need special permission before they can book Karl Rove or Dick Morris. The stated reason is that Ailes wants some fresher faces now that the election is over. But Rove and Morris made notably faulty election predictions on Fox, and Rove reportedly angered Ailes when he challenged Fox's number-crunchers for calling the election for Obama.

    Bill Kristol's Grover Norquist Purge: In a Weekly Standard piece urging conservatives to support a "modified version" of Obama's tax plan, Kristol called Norquist "our modern-day Angelo" from Measure For Measure. This was tantamount to calling Norquist a hypocrite, because in Measure For Measure Angelo, when granted temporary rule over Vienna, insists on strictly enforcing a law that makes sex outside marriage a capital offense ... while at the same time propositioning the condemned man's sister (to whom Angelo is not married). If she screws him, Angelo says, he'll commute her brother's sentence! Kristol may have meant only to suggest that Norquist was rigid and unforgiving in enforcing his Taxpayer Protection Pledge (more like Shylock demanding his pound of flesh in The Merchant of Venice, though given the anti-Semitism typically attributed to that play Shylock is not an allusion to be made lightly, particularly in a neoconservative magazine). The evidence that Kristol meant only that Norquist is too unforgiving is the absence of any direct argument in Kristol's piece that Norquist is a hypocrite. But Kristol does point out (without mentioning Norquist) that it's not remotely logical to favor a payroll-tax increase, as congressional Republicans did last year, and then insist that that isn't a tax increase. Norquist, as it happens, rather cravenly endorsed this hypocritical formulation at the time.

Login to leave a comment

OR
  • 海外営業事務

    海外営業事務
    株式会社セドナエンタープライズ、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥220,000 ~ ¥400,000 / Month Negotiable
  • African Speaking Sales manager

    African Speaking Sales manager
    JPC TRADE CO.,LTD. (株式会社JPC)、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥200,000 ~ ¥450,000 / Month Negotiable Basic Salary + Incentives
  • Recruitment / HR Generalist

    Recruitment / HR Generalist
    Temple University, Japan Campus - テンプル大学ジャパンキャンパス、Tokyo
    Salary: Commensurate with experience plus transportation from/to TUJ
  • Program Assistant

    Program Assistant
    Temple University, Japan Campus - テンプル大学ジャパンキャンパス、Tokyo
    Salary: Commensurate with experience plus transportation from/to TUJ
  • Portuguese Speaking Sales Manager

    Portuguese Speaking Sales Manager
    Autocom Japan (オートコムジャパン株式会社)、Kanagawa
    Salary: ¥270,000 ~ ¥800,000 / Month Commission Based

More in World

View all

View all