Posted on 12/09/2014 5:55:26 AM PST by Kaslin
As we start the intricate process of picking who the two major party nominees will be for president in 2016, the country will begin the process of getting over Obama. My sense is that pretty much everyone, including Michele, is sick of him, and so getting over him personally will be easy.
Not so getting over his ideology.
It looks increasingly clear that some Democrats will try to make the case that Obama was a poor president with the right ideas while others will make the case that his ideas were too radical for white folks and he was a poor president.
That we all agree that Obama was a poor president however only obscures the fact that his ideas are even more radical, destructive and anti-American than even his most ardent, non-crazy detractors would portray.
The silver lining for America is that had Obama been a bit more competent as chief executive the country might be more inclined to embrace his ideology. But we are still a results-oriented culture: You win or lose; live or die in America.
As Gen. George Patton said with more truth than common sense “Americans love a winner. Americans will not tolerate a loser. Americans despise cowards. Americans play to win all of the time.”
We do indeed.
That’s why we embrace the horse race aspect of the daily stock market stories, the polling in political campaigns, fantasy football and baseball stats. That’s why we admire men like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet.
These men, they staked something and they won.
Hardly anyone remembers that Gen. George McClellan ran and lost against Lincoln for president in 1864 after losing fight after fight to Confederates as commander of the Army of the Potomac.
That’s because McClellan was a loser. He picked the wrong side.
The whys and wherefores do not matter.
Americans cast losers out, to an eternal purgatory, denying them the presence of our historical gods except in the role of demon.
So today the country—and the Democrats—must pick between a system that still admires results or we risk becoming a country—or a party-- where you get by on your skin color, or your gender, or being the momentary political Justin Bieber, a fleeting pain in the butt, difficult to describe, devoid of substance, who is famous for being famous but does nothing in the end.
For Obama the stakes in 2016 then are important.
The Democrats will either choose to walk away from him ideologically – thereby endorsing GOP criticisms of him, that he’s too political, too radical, too selfish and too ideological to be president—or they will embrace all that he stood for and hope to rehabilitate him later as the man who set them on the road to the promised land.
For the country the stakes in 2016 then are important.
We must choose either to walk away from radical, progressive ideology—thereby endorsing GOP criticisms that it’s too political, too radical, too selfish and too ideological for our country—or we will end up embracing all the Obama stood for while we rehabilitate him as the man who set us on the road to the promised land.
There are lessons here for the GOP as well.
More than anything else politically, we admire a winner.
There is no award for second place in American history.
So, the Republican Party must give us a winner in 2016, without regard to the old guard or the new one.
It’s either salvation or damnation—for the country and for Democrats and for you too.
Hope the Republican E read this.
The Marxists and the Marxist wannabees have been at this for well over 100 years. Nothing will change. They will still try to push their poppycock agenda out there. To them it means only one thing...POWER!
In Case John didn't notice the old guard are all losers. That's why we are in the mess we're in. The cowards won't fight.
Of course, this writing brings to mind the Czech Republic’s estimation of our political situation:
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”
More importantly, the Republican Party had better start acting like winners in 2014 or they're done.
“Hope the Republican E read this.”
If this is the case, the nominee for the GOP needs to be Scott Walker. Not only will Republicans take Wisconsin, but they can also take Michigan, take Ohio back and Minnesota and Pennsylvania.
Then Add Cruz to the ticket as VP.
At that point there will be nothing the Rats can do.
Is that a noise I hear???? (whig...whig...whig...)
Actually I think this is what the big money donors believe also. Based on that assumption look for them to back either Jeb or Mitt for the GOP nomination and when it comes down to it I venture to guess they will settle on Mitt. They want to win and they will only back a center right (moderate candidate) as the average American voter is center right. This is not good news for conservatives.
The GOPe doesn’t care if they lose as long as the Democrats implement the Big Government they want. Who cares if you’re the number two party when trillions of dollars are available for graft and corruption?
Flip that ticket and it’s a winner.
Truthfully, conservatives must realize that their political opponents are two groups: not just the Democrats, but the ultra-business RINOs who are effectively Whigs.
American distaste with “Republicans” basically means that the average American does not like these Whigs pretending to be Republicans. The Republican party is slowly becoming the conservative party again, but it needs to purge the Whigs and their deep-pocket allies.
Interesting take.
Who won and who lost again? It's clear, the GOP lost, because it is lead by losers.
“Flip that ticket and it’s a winner.”
Nope. Go with Walker at the top. Reason being, we saw what a Senator can do as President. Obama is a fustercluck to say the least. Especially at a time when we need leadership.
Governors provide that leadership, so for this reason, we put a governor at the top of the ticket and use that as our basis for taking back the White House in 2016. Let’s say Democrats put up Hillary. Ok, what leadership experience does she have?
That’s the key for 2016. Cruz as VP gives the GOP a strong Senate President. It also gives Cruz 8 years to further establish himself for 2024, when he will be 55? Plus it will also give Cruz the donor base that he won’t have in 2016.
It’s a winning ticket which could give us the White House for the next 16 years. It will bring out the base in huge numbers and with our already holding the House and Senate, not only will we hold our senate seats, but there would be the possibility to take even more.
"Center right" is a euphemism for "unprincipled traitorous SOB."
There’s something far worse than a loser:
A winner who completely squanders their mandate, betrays the country and their oath, and acts like a loser.
Cruz must be at the top. The top of the ticket needs to be the communicator of conservative ideals to the American people. Walker has amnesty and life issues that he has to clean up and even though he’s shown he can win, Ted Cruz is the current face of American conservatism.
While governance is important, of course, recent events in national elections show that such experience is not vital to getting elected. 2016 is going to be an election about ideas. They need to be articulated in a clear, concise and unafraid fashion. Nobody, and I mean nobody, on the political scene does that better than Ted Cruz.
He needs to lead the ticket. Full stop.
“Democrats will try to make the case that Obama was a poor president with the right ideas while others will make the case that his ideas were too radical for white folks...”
Absolutely right on the money.
Leninism lasted many, many years after Lenin passed from the scene.
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.