Skip to comments.Gingrich: Boehner needs to claim split mandate
Posted on 11/07/2012 4:57:50 PM PST by GVnana
Tuesdays election results produced two very different mandates and a very troubling question for Republicans including me.
President Obama won a mandate despite 7.9 percent unemployment the weakest economy since the Great Depression high priced gasoline, huge questions about his response to Benghazi, and growing proof of government incompetence in the response to Hurricane Sandy.
Mitt Romney fought a hard and with a well-organized campaign. We should be grateful for their tremendous effort.
But the Obama campaign had a strategy and a structure, and they succeeded.
President Obama can and will claim to have a mandate, although a smaller, narrower one than four years ago.
But Speaker John Boehner can also claim a mandate.
After two years of opposing tax increases, fighting to control spending and investigating waste, corruption and incompetence, House Republicans were rewarded with re-election. That is a real achievement.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
The only mandate the dems won is “gimme my free stuff”.
He won’t because he is a certified wimp.
Newt, Help us hold their feet to the fire.
“a strategy and a structure”?????????????????? You’re a felon!! You’re a tax evader!! You kill people with cancer!! Yeah, that was some strategy!!!!!!
Boehner and Christie should go out on a ‘mandate’ and share a good cry.
Boehner is NOT the ANSWER,......HE’S the PROBLEM!!!!!!!!!!!!
I trust Newt Gingrich. He appears to be ON to something. I wish we could all be gut wrenching honest and look for the answers. Somewhere way back in March the grass roots was trying to get a candidate, and the Republican National Committee seemed at times to sabotage or eliminate candidates. I think one problem was all of the character assasination during the primaries...attacking Rick Perry, then Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee, Sara Palin, Herman Cain. They need to get the 8 top contenders, draw straws or sequester them on an island, and spend 3 days grilling them that they need to stand together. I think by the time Mitt was ready for the campaign trail, he had all kinds of accusations by Republicans.
Second, people like Rush Limbaugh, and Glen Beck, and Sean Hannity maybe should get in the race for President? At least it seems that Neil Boortz or Mark Levin at times for the emos’, and geeks comes across as rude, insensitive and cross their sensitivity screens. My grandkids can’t understand...they are entrenched in PC crap and SOMEHOW we’ve got to get the message to them so they understand without shouting?
Third. My girl, Michelle Bachman I felt got shot out of the waters and never was even given a chance. I’d like there to be a strategy to run a woman and a hispanic for the next attempt. Consult more marketing experts instead of political gurus.
Instead of driving the spike through Obama’s heart after the first debate, Romney adopted a “don’t lose” strategy and never did go on the offensive after that.
Newt is owning up to his failure to figure out the election...and he isn’t engaging in “Blame Romney” crap.
I respect that very much.
Very true. So id Mitch McConnell. Another 4 years of a Do Nothing Congress.
I’m thinking ... Executive Orders. Lots of them.
And not just to spending, but to entire Federal programs and agencies.
Let's not forget that ALL reliable indicators had a Romney win. GALLUP, RASMUSSEN, ETC. all showed Romney ahead.
We need to ask, "why were they so wrong?"
The answers are going to come out.
He has spine made of jelly!
As Levin has said several times, there is no legal requirement that the speaker must be elected to the house !
McConnell is nothing but a fat-faced, dough boy dilettante.
There isn’t anyone who knows the game better than Newt, and on top of that, he is wicked smart. Unfortunately, RMSM such as Coulter, Limbaugh, Levin, Malkin, Hume, and a few others were convinced the onnnnnnllllllyyyyy one who could beat Obama was Romney. I don’t know that Newt could have beaten Obama, but there is no way Obama could have kept up with him, intellectually. It’s a shame, we let a true conservative slip right through our fingers.
Amen and worth repeating!
Let me stop you there, Newt. Obama did not win a mandate, he alledgedly won an election. The whole "mandate" thing has been overused to give anyone winning an election by 4 votes a "mandate". BS!
Boehner can claim what he wants; he's weak, ineffective and is at his best when he is weeping over something trivial.The long and short of it is this - our government, our political system and our system of laws and justice are broken beyond repair. I've been saying for quite some time that we are at a point where the ills of America can no longer be fixed at the ballot box.
We have only two choices - give in completely and become the slaves of the radical socialists, or fight back. And, we fight back by getting the red states to divorce the blue and become our own independent, sovereign nation. A nation built on the Constitution, the rule of law and upon Judeo-Christian principles; just as the Founding Fathers envisioned it.
It is we conservatives who pay for the excesses of the left and, should we conservatives take our entreprenuership, our industriousness and our money to our own country, the radical socialists of the left will be left shell-shocked and fighting for survival.
My friends, enough is enough.
No Balls Boner would need balls to do this. And not cry.
“... needs to claim split mandate”
Actually, Republican Senate leader McConnell already did this. I was shocked when he delivered a decent little speech saying that Obama didn’t have a mandate. McConnell specifically mentioned that the people elected a Republican House.
The Republicans need to do an After Action Review (AAR). They need to be brutally honest and they need to follow some kind of methodology. We used to use the Battlefield Operating Systems. I’m sure something similar could be developed for politics.
What they’ll do instead is listen to a bunch of old guys harrumphing about what worked in 1950.
I think we are missing a larger point. We cannot cede the entire Northeast and Pacific West and remain viable. We were not defeated on economics, we were defeated on the social issues. And, as much as I hate to say it, Obama remains a powerful figure to the weak-mined among us. We have to eschew some positions to (read: opposition to gay marriage) in order to be viable. We can oppose abortion, but we must promise not to affect that liberty. We can’t be moral absolutists, Christian only, or we will remain a minority party. I say all this with a heavy heart. We must embrace freedom fully and leave moralizing to the pulpit. Let the people decide on their own morality.
THAT would be so sweet.
Good advice from Newt, but Boehner has already “assumed the position” by talking tax increases. Meanwhile Reid has seized the high ground by unilaterally changing the filibuster rules and declaring that the people want gridlock broken. My point: Boehner and McConnell get played everytime there is a chance. The GOP needs smarter, more energetic leadership.
I don’t think that was it. I think, if anything, we didn’t offer enough of a vision with enough confidence.
Romney said virtually nothing about either gay marriage or abortion, both of which he actually supported when he was governor, so it doesn’t sound to me as if the liberals could have held that against him. Your thinking was precisely the thinking of the GOP when they selected him: get somebody not known for strong “social positions,” somebody who is not a Christian, and somebody who won’t criticize the cultural status quo or Obama personally. The election was supposed to be about the economy, and Romney was supposed to come across as somebody who was morally neutral and pragmatic and knew how to make money.
And even though, theoretically, the economy was the concern of Americans, Romney did well only on those few occasions when he showed a flash of difference and indicated that he did indeed have values and care about something outside of getting elected. But in general Romney offered no alternative vision and he gave people no rallying point. He rarely opposed Obama and came across as so bland that he never galvanized the base, yet while he himself never said anything that could give the Dems ammunition, they still managed to portray him as somebody who was a bumbling, prissy, woman-hating, white racist meanie.
This, by the way, is not blaming Romney for the loss: the blame goes to the strategy, which was a product of his Massachusetts campaign managers, who obviously decided that the Scott Brown approach was the best, that is, portray him as somebody who was value-free and identical to his Dem opponent, except a little better about finances.
I agree that a preachy type (Santorum) wouldn’t have done well, but maybe it should actually have been someone such as Gingrich himself, who has values that do not come from the all-knowing state (the only kind of “values” one will be allowed in the future) and has the intellectual fire-power and passion to defend them and even project them positively. But the GOP-e was scared of him, and I think until the GOP realizes that the only way they will win will be by offering an entirely different vision of life in the US, through a confident, positive, intelligent spokesman, we’re going to continue to play catch up and we’re going to continue to lose.
I was pretty bummed out about the election all day, but recovering a bit now. I think it is my wife really. She's a more spiritual person, ultimately, than I. :-)
However, the House Republicans' ability to "do ok" as opposed to the disaster that was the Senate, brings up a question. It is true that in a few races, Missouri in particular, our candidate shot themselves, well, maybe not in the foot. The groin would be a more appropriate metaphor. But there were several other Senate races where we had strong candidates running seemingly pretty good campaigns, and we still got klonked. The question is, why did we do ok in the House, and not elsewhere. Vote fraud theories aside, please.
Bingo. He’s already been licking Obama’s hand hoping to appease him. Boehner will fold like a cheap tent.
Boner needs to sit down with obama and Reid and say this:
“We’ll work with you on the debt ceiling. We’ll agree to allow the taxcuts on what you call the ‘WEALTHY’ to expire. And there’s only one thing we ask from you.”
Then he turns to Reid and says “You resign from the senate. If not, we do not negotiate. In fact, we do nothing and sequestration kicks in and everyone gets a tax increase. We’ll all go off the cliff together. Take it or leave it. I’ll be in my office.”