Posted on 11/15/2012 6:53:41 AM PST by SeekAndFind
In an article published in 2001, Jude Wanniski, the author of The Way the World Works, noted that since 1896, only Republican presidential candidates running on “pro-growth” platforms have won. Republicans advocating “austerity” have invariably lost. With the defeat of Mitt Romney, the election of 2012 continued this pattern, with one addition. Republican presidential candidates offering clueless confusion also lose.
Democracies tend to evolve two political parties, a party of economic growth and a party of income redistribution. If a credible plan for economic growth is offered, the people will vote for it, provided that it does not involve crushing the poorest and weakest members of society. If not, they will vote for income redistribution, in an effort to assure that everyone survives so that they can enjoy the fruits of economic growth, if and when political leaders emerge who understand how to produce it.
If the American electorate decides that income redistribution is the best that is available during an election season, they will vote Democrat. The Democrats long ago nailed down the redistribution (a.k.a., “fairness”) position. This leaves the Republicans the choice between being pro-growth (while also being non-threatening), or losing. In 2012, Mitt Romney and many, many other Republican candidates collapsed into clueless confusion and lost.
Mitt Romney became the Republican nominee because Herman Cain, the only true pro-growth candidate in the primary race that was actually competent to do the job of president, self-destructed over personal issues. However, once Romney had sewed up the nomination, supply-siders started projecting their hopes onto him, and ignoring what he was actually saying and doing.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
I wonder what points he would bring up...
“self-destructed over personal issues.”
*sigh*. This is a tired meme. Where did all these women go when he announced he was no longer running?
This election was not about Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. This election was about the nation and liberty. The nation lost.
I wonder how this ideal “pro growth” candidate would get his “pro growth” message to the electorate? Through the media? Riiiight. And what percentage of the electorate would even understand the concept of growth based economics? For this article to be accurate, the media would be neutral and informative and the electorate intelligent. Good luck with that.
We're not going to vote for a Mormon, or anybody else that belongs to a cult. We're also not going to vote for any more liberals. We had enough of that with Bush. This isn't rocket science.
Rest in Peace America, Welcome to Amerikkka.
Just like Senator Menendez of New Jersey. Oh wait, he's a Democrat. Sorry, my bad.
Romney did not deserve to lose the election.
The election was lost because single females were not pro growth. They wanted their birth control pills so a baby wouldn’t grow.
“We’re not going to vote for a Mormon, or anybody else that belongs to a cult. We’re also not going to vote for any more liberals. We had enough of that with Bush. This isn’t rocket science.”
Indeed, it’s simple.
We watched America fall, and many here self-righteously assisted.
Hussein is obviously the lesser of two evils. /s
“Romney did not deserve to lose the election.”
True. But he didn’t deserve to win the GOP primaries.
I’m as sick as anyone over the election and I firmly believe that fraud may have carried the day for the commie kenyan, but one fact is hard to dispute: Mitt Romney failed to carry his native state of Michigan, or his adopted state of Massachusetts and Paul Ryan failed to carry Wisconsin. The “native son” angle, as well as, perceived favoritism to be gained, should have counted for a significant number of votes in these states.
Did you not vote for Mitt Romney because he was a Mormon?
Just who did deserve to win the Primaries, they all sucked.
Sadly there is more to it than that:
The race was a race between America and the rest of the world.
The GOP has sadly, taken the side of the rest of the world.
Dems while a complete mess, have been overall, fighting for the good guys.
THAT is why democrats won, and why it is now critical to wrest control away from the “everywhere but America” wing of the GOP.
They seek destruction only.
Time to be FOR America. FOR jobs. And FOR growth.
In America.
>We’re not going to vote for a Mormon
And why not? What does his religion have to do with him taking the seat away from an avowed socialist and enemy of the United States of America?
I didn't need to not vote for him because of his membership in that vile cult. His liberalism was enough.
He didn’t lose the election.
ubama’s machine stacked the deck
fu forbes mag
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.