Posted on 11/08/2012 11:34:11 AM PST by Kevmo
The Battle To Takeover The GOP Begins Today
By Richard A. Viguerie | 11/7/12
Despite our efforts and the efforts of millions of other conservatives, who went all-in for the Romney candidacy, Election Day 2012 was a disaster – Barack Obama was re-elected President, Republicans lost seats in the House and failed to gain a majority in the Senate.
However, out of that disaster comes some good news: conservatives are saying “Never again” are we going to nominate a big government establishment Republican for President.
What’s more, we won’t have to – conservatives now have a deep bench of potential presidential candidates.
We have elected a new generation of conservative leaders who are capable of taking over the GOP to become the Party of small government constitutional conservatism.
Last night’s election of small government constitutional conservatives -- Ted Cruz, Jeff Flake and Deb Fisher to the Senate, the election of conservative Mike Pence as Governor of Indiana, the election of Trey Radel and other “boat rockers” to the House -- portend that yesterday’s defeats will spell the end of big government Republicanism.
They join such small government constitutional conservative leaders as Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, Senators Jim DeMint, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Marco Rubio and Pat Toomey, Virginia’s Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and the 50-odd Members of the House, such as Justin Amash, who stood for conservative principles and voted against the debt ceiling deal.
Establishment Republicans ever anxious to hold on to power, and the establishment media, are going to blame “the Tea Party” and “radical” conservatives who voted for principled small government constitutional conservative candidates in Republican primaries for the election disaster of 2012.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Governor Romney won the nomination by spending tens of millions of dollars knee-capping his conservative opponents in the primaries and then handed the election to Obama because he and his campaign team spent most of the campaign mired in the establishment Republican folly of trying to win by standing for nothing.
The “stand for nothing” strategy didn’t work for President Ford’s 1976 campaign, it didn’t work for President George H.W. Bush’s re-election and it certainly didn’t work for Bob Dole and John McCain.
Republicans never, ever, win the presidency unless they nationalize the election by campaigning on a conservative agenda.
While Obama and the Democrats threw down the gauntlet on the social issues -- such as same-sex marriage and abortion -- Republicans ran away from such issues as same-sex marriage, religious freedom and Obama’s war on the Catholic Church. You couldn’t find any mention of the Constitution or the conservative social agenda in a Romney ad or in a Rove-run Super PAC ad or an ad run by the national GOP.
The establishment Republicans who held the reins and the checkbooks chose to run negative ads against Obama and campaign almost solely on Romney’s biography and economic policies, while skipping the social issues and the concerns of Tea Partiers and small government constitutional conservatives.
In choosing to ignore the larger conservative agenda, Romney chose not to follow the path that led Republicans to win seven of the previous eleven presidential elections.
In the Senate, two good and decent men – Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock – were defeated not because they were pro-life, but because they were inept campaigners.
Tommy Thompson, George Allen, Connie Mack and other establishment-backed candidates -- who ran as establishment Republicans -- all went down to defeat in the general election after being boosted past principled small government conservatives in the primaries by Mitch McConnell and the Washington GOP establishment.
The leaders who forced those kinds of candidates on us -- and manipulated the GOP rules to force the Party to change from a grassroots-driven Party to a Party driven from the top-down by Washington insiders -- should resign.
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House John Boehner, NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions and other Republican leaders behind the epic election failure of 2012 should be replaced with leaders more in tune with the grassroots of the conservative base of the Party.
Likewise, in any logical universe, establishment Republican consultants such as Karl Rove, Ed Gillespie, Romney campaign senior advisor Stewart Stevens and pollster Neil Newhouse would never be hired to run or consult on a national campaign again -- and no one would give a dime to their ineffective Super PACs, such as American Crossroads.
Mitt Romney's loss was the death rattle of the establishment GOP. Far from signaling a rejection of the Tea Party or grassroots conservatives, the disaster of 2012 signals the beginning of the battle to takeover the Republican Party and the opportunity to establish the GOP as the Party of small government constitutional conservatism.
Romney hates guns and wouldn't need a UN treaty; he'd do it domestically.
He would do nothing to face China economically-his friends make too much money on China.
On domestic policy, he would not do anything different.
The childish "troll-boy" comment makes you look like you're not old enough to have whiskers, nevermind grey (gray) ones.
Don’t they already. Would there be any more so called vote fraud with direct election of the President than we have now.
Why do so many red states have one or two Donk Senators or at best a RINO squish, but true conservatives in the House?
Broad-based vs. local voting.
Nice try, troll boy.
Both Iowa and New Hampshire went Democrat. Until the first primaries are moved, nothing changes.
On ALL points : Romney would not have tried "Fast And Furious" in an abortive attempt to ban guns.
Of course he'd face China economically: he would not try for US economic dominance over them, unfortunately, but he would try for the economic equivalent of detente as opposed to Obama's surrender or Clinton's literal treason in giving them the guidance system for ICBMs through Loral, reassigning responsibility for oversight of the transfer to Commerce instead of Defense.
On Domestic Policy, he would not have pushed for massive tax increases, he would have supported small business, and would not have continued the war on coal or restricting oil recovery and exploration on Federal lands.
And aside from all that, the difference on nukes is both necessary and sufficient to override ALL other factors.
You are lying through your foul teeth.
Troll.
please read my post 23 on this thread
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.