Posted on 05/29/2013 2:33:51 PM PDT by The Old Hoosier
...If anything, Bachmann’s exit means that the conservative movement is about to be better-funded, because conservative small-donors won’t be spending over $10 million to re-elect her to a completely safe House seat every two years...
(Excerpt) Read more at conservativeintel.com ...
I sent Michelle Bachmann some significant money to help her beat the lefties and the media. If Frodo here thinks that money will go to the RNC he’s out of his ever loving mind.
I don't have any problem with what she says. Her electorate, on the other hand, has a problem with how she says it. Given that winning votes is central to the job of a politician, I'd say conservatives need a better spokesperson - one who, like Reagan, is able to win over voters who are not conservative true believers.
Bachmann never has and never will, weld the power of Governor Palin, who leads the conservative movement.
Back in the day, the standard for lousy parenting in presidential politics was set by Patti Davis (nee Reagan) doing a Playboy spread to flaunt her impressive tatas. Then Palin trumped it when her daughter had a kid out of wedlock. This stuff is embarrassing, especially given that we're supposed to be the temperance party, sex-wise.
Akin was Bachmann's man yet no one here seems to no it, when Akin ran into trouble Bachmann ran out on him, she didn't help him and she didn't withdraw her endorsement, she merely disappeared and went silent.
I would be proud to have pro-life activist and abstinence speaker Bristol Palin as my daughter, she definitely had very good parenting, that why the baby is alive.
Shrinking margins? It’s called redistricting. This attack is patently absurd.
She CAN and DOES sell conservatism. She actually did quite well in the presidential primaries until Perry entered and took the lead. Then, she fell apart.
The left targeted her as the #1 target nationally because she is a major threat. Why else would they target her? Once they took down Palin, they turned their guns on Bachmann. They figured they could use the same template of lies, deception and 24/7 media assault. Somehow you think those efforts have no effect. Look how effective the ‘heartless rich guy’ had on Romney last year. To any honest observer, Romney was miles better prepared to be an effective president, but the weight of the left’s media/entertainment/political machine did their thing. They do it because it works. In my job, I observe media outlets, and watch the local ‘alternative’ media throughout the country bring up Bachmann day in and day out with ridiculous and false attacks. With her out of the way, they’ll turn those same guns on others.
It’s the same as we are starting to see with Cruz. It’s what we saw with Allen West, Palin, etc. The list goes on and on. Bachmann isn’t the problem here, and I have no clue where you are getting it. She’s highly effective, she’s right on the issues, and she’s a leader among conservatives.
You'll get no argument from me on her keeping her kid. I'm a natalist - better a kid out of wedlock than no kid at all. However, abstinence being the watchword of the GOP as regards teen sex, the optics are not good. Our leaders are supposed to set an example.
Well “they” can’t be very frightened now. She’s gone. Or soon to be.
A 17 year old girl has sex with her high school sweetheart once, and it results in pregnancy, and the girl proceeds to make probably the best teen sex recovery that we have ever seen.
The girl was under incredible pressure and yet proceeded to do everything right ever since that night’s mistake in early 2008, she is an impressive young woman and has been of great value to conservatism.
Watching how Bristol handled herself was one of the measures that I was using to judge her mother and father, watching that teen daughter was the telescope that was going to help me see into the Palins, my conclusion was that Bristol must have had incredible parenting to have not fallen apart or gone down a troubled or rebellious path.
Bristol of the last 5 years has helped me have even more trust and faith in the Palins.
“If Reagan had simply parroted National Review talking points, there is no way he would have won two presidential elections in landslides.”
National Review was a vastly better publication in Reagan’s era and wasn’t filled with GOP establishment talking points.
That came when the adults left and the mini-cons took possession of it. It hasn’t been worth reading in years.
+1
it’s called ego...
Very well stated. Thank you for taking the time to lay it out there. Your argument is correct as we’ve seen it with many who bucked the tired sad gopE. Not sure what ZE’s angle is, but it’s grossly inaccurate and trite.
Bringing Reagan into the discussion as a test point is a non-starter. Back then we didn’t have obamacare hanging over our heads for one thing. Michelle Bachmann was out there with facts and figures before the rest of them bothered to take the time to learn about this evil life sucking bill. Just who is selling conservatism these days? Who has the ‘Reagan democrats’, the ever elusive moderates ear? NO ONE!
The only noise the average person hears is that Congress is a mess. This administration has thrown so much crap at the wall that anyone who isn’t paying someone of a measure of attention, has no clue of the depth of trouble we are in.
I encourage people to go look at those threads from the campaign, the same little bunch of bottom feeders with their heads stuck up Grover Al Norquist’s ass will be there.
Nothing but bottom feeding scum.
Name one now in office.
The Kapo Republicans spend all their time screeching about the need to moderate the GOP while the democrats goose step into full on fascism unabated.
I think its entirely legitimate to question these “moderates” about why that is. Why aren’t they going after the neo fascist democrats? We’re facing a political enemy whose ranks are entirely comprised of extremists who seek our political and likely physical extermination, yet these moderates can only attack our side.
Maybe they think they have an answer but I see a replay of the Vichy French.
Ted Cruz. Liberals fear him, but they don't laugh at him. Because he's disciplined enough not to make unforced errors. The weird thing about Allen West and Michelle Bachmann is that their former professions involved highly-controlled environments where emotions were repressed, whereas their time in politics resembled one long primal scream. Whereas Cruz, who's spent time in the courtroom as a Federal prosecutor, understands that the art of persuasion sometimes involves not saying anything that comes to mind.
I think his children would beg to disagree.
Actually, Ron Reagan has spoken about his parents' remoteness:
Perhaps his background in journalism has allowed him to speak with more objectivity than his siblings about his parents' remoteness from everyone but each other. The distance between Ronald Reagan and his four children provided ample fodder for opponents who accused him of not practicing the family values he preached. The Reagans resembled a modern American family much more than the idealized one Reagan conveyed in his speeches and TV spots about a shining America. Like many families, divorce and geography divided the Reagans; unlike most, their conflicts played out before a national audience.I think it's part of the nature of great men that they are inattentive parents - affairs of state are all-consuming, and I'd rather have a full-time leader like Reagan than a part-timer like Romney who has this great family but seems to treat politics as a hobby. Ultimately, it was Romney's dilettantism that did him in - he refused to give the art of politics his full attention and his political ambitions paid the price. Romney's repeated and disastrous gaffes reveal a consummately arrogant man who did not spend enough time personally going over his own weaknesses as a candidate. Despite lacking Romney's innate intelligence, Reagan had a response for every question and this was because Reagan ran through every possible scenario. That workaholism helped Reagan become president but was incompatible with the kind of family life Romney had. And that is why Reagan is one of the greats whereas Romney is merely an also-ran in presidential politics.
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.