Posted on 11/10/2012 6:53:22 AM PST by BobL
And this is the best answer.
I've noticed that the liberal media rarely ask Democrat candidates to articulate their position on gun control. They understand that a truthful answer will only hurt these candidates so they give the issue a pass. Pro-life Republicans need to learn how to play this game as well and answering as above will help take the issue off the table and not drive away voters.
8) Why can't the GOP coach their candidates on how to answer controversial questions? They don't have to use the democratic approach - lie, but there is such a thing as tact.
"Do you think a woman should be forced to endure a pregnancy caused by rape?"
"Oh gee, I never thought about this before. But since the unborn child is innocent, I guess so"I can't conceive of a time when that would be the law of the land.
Is that sooo difficult? Does that compromise his precious socon credentials? If you want to make a better world, first you have to win elections.
Everything Benedict Judas Christie did after being passed over for VP hurt Romney, starting with his key note speech. You cannot convince me he wasn’t trying to sabotage Romney to further his career. I hope he enjoys the ninth ring of hell.
“Everything Benedict Judas Christie did after being passed over for VP hurt Romney, starting with his key note speech. You cannot convince me he wasn’t trying to sabotage Romney to further his career. I hope he enjoys the ninth ring of hell.”
Agree. But if Christie is planning to run as a Republican, he will have a LOT to answer for - we remember Charlie Crist (in Florida) and we CRUSHED HIM. Christie is welcome to try to make his case to the country (which was on very shaky ground even before this stunt - starting with gun control).
If Christie wants to run as a Democrat, he can forget that also - he angered the teachers. Maybe an independent - but how would that work?
I hope you’re correct, but the Republican establishment seems anxious to give Christie a pass. Can they force him down our throats? At this point, who knows. Rubio crushed Crist. Hopefully he will do the same with Obama’s lap dog.
yes, THIS election was winnable, but future ones won’t be. Obama will make citizens (Democratic voters) out of millions of illegal aliens, and register them in swing states, and that will be the end of the story.
“yes, THIS election was winnable, but future ones won’t be. Obama will make citizens (Democratic voters) out of millions of illegal aliens, and register them in swing states, and that will be the end of the story.”
Hopefully we can delay this a bit - but you are right, the threat is certainly there.
The big likely things I see here are:
* The abject failure of ORCA.
* Romney’s decision to take the high road in the last debate rather than taking it to Obama (although the latter might not have worked, either)
* Christie
* Todd Akin
* Campaign strategy based on a misinterpretation of the polls
If one takes the stance that abortion is murder than it is killing someone; I have not problem having people think I believe that, because it is true.
Funny, Roe v. Wade derives the right to abortion from a right to privacy... yet the Fourth Amendment specifically is about privacy (people, their persons, and effects) and the government abrogates this privacy, without warrant, every day: it is after all the express job of the TSA. (This is ignoring the arguments from no-knock raids, secret wiretapping & e-mail interception done without warrant.)
So then, if Roe v. Wade is valid then these other actions must be invalid. {If Roe v. Wade is invalid, it says nothing about these actions.}
First of all it is not us that lost. It was America and founding principles that lost. Everyone and not just those in this country will suffer as a result. I think it is better to be in the group that knows what happened than those who celebrate another four years of 0bammunism.
I think it is crazy to think that the press couldn’t have found something to demonize either Newt, Rick, Herb, Michelle, the other Rick or anyone else for that matter.
Reality doesn’t matter as much as press coverage. Look at Clinton’s career after Monica or Teddy’s career after Chappaquiddick.
Then you have stats out there like more voters even here in Colorado than populations of counties. 0bama won the Mormon vote. 0bama won the Cuban vote. Yeah, right.
I am reminded of the recent Venezuelan election where Chavez would turn out a few hundred, and his Latin male model opponent would have turn out in the hundreds of thousands. Yet when the Ministry of the Interior counted the votes Chavez won somewhere close to 63%.
Actually, here’s another perspective:
http://www.businessinsider.com/nate-silver-and-the-end-of-ex-post-facto-excuses-2012-11
We never really had a chance.
And that doesn’t mean the country’s lost. It more likely means: 1) The party in power almost always win a second term. 2) People vote for incumbents. 3) There were a lot of people for whom Obama was too black to fail.
Romney was not a bad candiate? WTF. He completely alienated the conservative base. He caused civil war on conservative websites like this one.
Romney was the worst candidate that could have come from among the primary contenders. Perry would have been better. Bachmann would have been better. Gingrich or Santorum. It doesn’t matter. Anybody but a rich liberal Masshole governor who supported socialized medicine, gay marriage and abortion.
Romney was the worst candidate the GOP could field, unless they were trying to throw the election to the Democrats.
This loss isn’t about Romney’s faults. It’s about the brats who decided to stay home and not vote for Romney because “it’s my way or no way.” Why is the onus on the candidate to cajole and please and coddle these brats out of their comfortable couches to cast a vote? There was clearly a huge difference between Romney and Obama, who will now be taking this country down treacherous paths Romney never would. In my opinion, these self-important self-absorbed non-voting brats are worse than the Obama voters who were simply looking for free stuff. The bread and circuses ploy is as old as time. It always works on a portion of the population and will always be with us. But there is no excuse for these so-called disaffected Conservatives or holier-than-thou Evangelicals who demand that everything go their way. Their arrogance and self-importance trumped their gratitude and sense of duty to this country and gave a close election to Obama. Now we will have to live with this.
The “Roe v. Wade argument was from Drew68. My argument boiled down to the fact that being legal does not make it right.
When they ram the UN Gun ban down our throats, just like they rammed govt health care, will us pro 2nd Amendment types be be told to “STFU?”
Romney was the worst candidate that could have come from among the primary contenders. Perry would have been better. Bachmann would have been better. Gingrich or Santorum. It doesn’t matter.
"On conservative websites like this one" maybe, but none of them could have done as well as Romney did in the general election. Santorum or Bachmann AND Akin and Murdoch? That would have put us down to 40% or below.
Tongue-tied Perry might have done a little better, if he didn't collapse completely. Gingrich the same or maybe a smidgeon better. Cain, after the scandal, worse than any of them, perhaps.
Some imaginary, non-existent ideal conservative candidate may have been able to win the race, but none of the other real contenders would have made it to 48%.
Right; but it's stupid to simply leave it at "it's legal."
We should destroy every argument legitimizing it that we can, and as you can see, frame it in such a way that keeping hold of it means we gain ground.
When they ram the UN Gun ban down our throats, just like they rammed govt health care, will us pro 2nd Amendment types be be told to “STFU?”
Hm, a very good question.
In my opinion, it would be better to force the [federal] government's hand, making them do something that either delegitimizes them or gives us an advantage: like this.
As if that had nothing to do with the GOP running a Masshole liberal Republican who pushed socialist ideas.
I held my nose and voted for Romney just as I did for Juan McLame. Still, it was made EXTREMELY clear that Romney would flop with the conservative base and that proved true. I agree with you that once the nomination was over, it should have been “Anybody But Obama”. But you can’t MAKE people vote. You have to appealed to them to vote, and Romney being socialist light did not appeal to the conservative base. That is an absolute fact.
The GOP would have done better running a hard conservative who hammered Obama on the economy and attacked him ruthlessly.
The GOP NEVER wins running socialist light, whether he is Romney, McCain or Bob Dole. The only winners the GOP runs is conservatives like Reagan and GW Bush (not conservative, but successfully posed as one in both elections).
For the GOP to win, they MUST run conservatives to energize the base. They may not win with a conservative, but they ALWAYS lose with socialist light.
The question is whether it still works -- whether that solid conservative basis is as large or as sure a winner as it was in the Reagan years.
I wish we'd tried that strategy this time, if only to get an answer, but I'm not sure it would have worked any better than what we got.
One problem is that the candidates are never what Ronald Reagan was. Also, we're not the same people we were back then when so many voters had gone through the Great Depression and World War II and were appalled by the Sixties and Seventies.
The situation is different from what it was in his time as well. A conservative can't campaign against the bad consequences of 50 years of Liberal/Democrat rule, since Republicans were in office in recent years and have to share blame for where we are now.
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.