Posted on 11/10/2012 6:53:22 AM PST by BobL
“2. I believe would have actually helped Romney if it hit in the right area. It hit in an area that was largely irrelevant to the GOP.”
I won’t respond to all of them, but if it didn’t hurt Romney, why did Romney’s campaign do everything they could to stop Christie - and why did Rush go after Christie the way he did? This one hurt.
Better yet, when the question about such rape comes up respond with: "Why do you want to kill someone for something that their parent did? Your position makes as much sense as throwing you in prison for 20 years because your mother cheated on her taxes."
“Actually, Republicans need to STFU altogether about abortion. Abortion is to Republicans what gun control is to Democrats; a net vote loser. Pro-life accolades bring nobody new to the party. They only drive people away. “
I wouldn’t go that far...because I’m convinced that the issue has brought out millions of voters for Republicans (through the years) that otherwise would have stayed home.
But yes, short answers - maybe even give a pass on forcible rape (along with life of mother). But trying to drop it completely will leave the Republicans with a base to work from.
In 2008 we got to find out who Obama was. In 2012 we got to find out who the American people are.
This is about the electorate.
Very good summation. That is what many of us find most disheartening and depressing about this election. We have labored under the illusion of two key points:
1. The country basically has a center-right political alignment, and
2. In the end, we can trust the intelligence and judgment of the average American voter.
Both assumptions were proved false by the last election. From here on, we cannot assume either is true, and if we do, we do so at our political peril.
Say what you will about Romney, but in the end he was not a bad candidate. He embodied many of the things we believe in, self-reliance, hard work, love of God and family, personal achievement, helping ones neighbor through personal (not government) charity, and American exceptionalism. The electorate rejected that in favor of a "man" who believes in none of that, except perhaps love of family. We at least now can see what a challenge we face, and it is daunting, to say the least.
“Why do you want to kill someone for something that their parent did? Your position makes as much sense as throwing you in prison for 20 years because your mother cheated on her taxes.”
NO!! That would also get thrown in our faces. The media would say something like “Joe Shark thinks that abortion is no different than killing someone.”
At least that’s my take on how it would get twisted.
Then say goodbye to female voters (and winning elections).
I do think at least it has made abortions fewer, I think today there is a stigma associated with abortion that wasn’t there before....perhaps instead of trying to address social issues in the political realm, it’s more effective to direct those efforts outside of it, through social sanctioning.
However, one thing the Democrats want to do is to prohibit even allowing social sanctioning, by limiting free speech. But that can be framed more as a liberty issue than a social issue, which is a win for our side.
Candidates need to understand that Roe v. Wade is the Law of the Land (and is highly unlikely to get overturned) and this should be their answer.
Some of us just can't accept infantcide.
As far as “law of the land” goes, technically the actions of the NAZIs in pre WWII Germany were perfectly legal. Many cooperated because it was the politically expedient thing to do.
Your comment helps me understand the mindset of those who cooperated with the NAZIs.
“1. The country basically has a center-right political alignment, and
2. In the end, we can trust the intelligence and judgment of the average American voter.”
I do agree that Romney was a strong candidate, I was just noting that his tactics at the end (sitting on a tiny lead), and some really bad luck (hurricane and Senate candidates) cost it for him. McCain, on the other hand, was simply PATHETIC.
As to your points above: Yes, the country is slowly drifting left, given our immigration policies and inability to integrate those people. But if the country was already there, the election would have been a lost-cause from the start.
Regarding the American people - you’re right. No politician should EVER trust the American people, as a whole, to sift through the noise. The Democrats never do, but Republicans, time after time, figure that constant attacks are just brushed off. And they are for you and me, and the people surrounding Romney - but they ARE NOT for the 20% of Americans that decide elections.
Branding, and the MSM. Romney wasn’t the perfect candidate. But no one will be. Look Romney was soft on abortion and it still didn’t matter. We are still being branded as sexist old white guys.
We have got to fix our brand or at least contradict the way it’s being potrayed and we need to do that effectively. And we haven’t.
We need a powerful movement headed by someone like Deniis Prager and we need our own news channel. Fox sure isn’t it. Hell, I even hate O’Reilly and Hannity and I agree with them! But I just can’t stomach them and the wife can’t either.
“Then say goodbye to female voters (and winning elections). “
Reagan won two landslides when abortion was a much bigger issue, and he did fine with women.
NO!! That would also get thrown in our faces. The media would say something like “Joe Shark thinks that abortion is no different than killing someone.”
Abortion is killing someone!
Another good answer. Would that our candidates were as politically astute as FReepers, at least on this particular issue.
Well, that's special. In case you've been asleep for the last few days, we now have the most pro-abortion president in the history of the republic. Scalia is 77 years old. Kennedy is 78. Not only will abortion remain legal but now we're going to have to pay for it. Two solidly pro-life Senatorial candidates were leading in the polls until they opened their fat mouths.
So you can go on demanding that every Republican candidate kiss the feet of Operation Rescue and then look stupefied when their opponents win elections.
Then say goodbye to female voters (and winning elections).
A lot of women, particularly among those who regret having had an abortion, are pro life. Pro abortion women who have had about seven or eight, such as Woopie Goldberg (in her own words) tend to blur the datum.
That was 32 years ago, a mere 6 years after R v. W. Reagan won landslides when white males were the majority of voters and he won by appealing to formerly democrat white male blue-collar factory workers. Demographics have changed significantly since then.
And even more women want abortion to remain legal. And women vote more than men. So where does that leave us? With losing candidates, that's where.
Actually, Republicans need to STFU altogether about abortion
Agree.
Response should be “ its the law of the land” and that’s all I’ll comment on it.
If pressed on personal opinion answer
It’s not mine to decide.
When the voting population wants it to change I will represent their desire.
Stick to that, and don’t fall into the “ act of god” exceptions etc.....
required
“Abortion is killing someone!”
Of course, but saying exactly what you think doesn’t always win - and if you don’t win, how do your fix it. I have no doubt that there are many, many, Republican candidates that have some pretty nasty thoughts regarding blacks and Hispanics, yet they know to keep them to themselves, if they want to win. All we’re doing is saying the same here - keep the thoughts that will cost you election, but you don’t have to compromise principles to do so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.