Posted on 09/17/2012 11:15:49 AM PDT by jazusamo
The first time I saw Chris Christie on television, shortly after he became governor of New Jersey, my immediate reaction was, "My Gosh! A Talking Republican!" It was almost like seeing a talking giraffe or a talking salamander.
Technically speaking, Republicans do talk, but talking is definitely not their strong suit. Nor do they seem to have put a lot of thought into what they say or how they say it. The net result is that articulate Democrats can get away with the biggest lies, without any serious rebuttal from most Republicans.
I have not heard any Republican official or candidate even try to answer a standard claim of the Democrats, that "deregulation" is the reason the housing market went haywire and brought down the economy. Therefore, according to the Democrats, Republicans who want to restore a free market are just trying to "go back to the same policies that got us into this mess in the first place."
That sounds very persuasive, if you don't know the facts — and it sounds like pure hogwash if you do.
But facts don't speak for themselves. And if we wait for the Republicans to speak, the whole country can be in big trouble.
The "deregulation" gambit is not new. It was tried out years ago, in California, when some of the most heavy-handed regulation of the electrical utility companies forced them to charge less for electricity than they had to pay to buy it. After this led to their financial collapse, and then to power failures and blackouts that outraged the public, the Democrats' response was that this was all due to — you guessed it — "deregulation."
(Excerpt) Read more at creators.com ...
I would like to comment the Romney message ... it’s sufferes from the same weak sauce syndrome we usually get from RINOs.
Campaigns could always do better. Romney’s message doesn’t need to be complicated, but it does need to be sharper:
1 Obama is a failed President and our economy is doing terribly.
2. Our lousy economy is a direct result of his bad jobkilling policies
3. I, Mitt Romney, will turn the economy and our country around with better policies and ideas
Clearly, there is a lot of real evidence on #1, and the messaging is
fine there. And on #3, I find the Obama campaign insistence on more
‘details’ from Romney (ie find more grist for their attacks) amazing in
that Obama has made his own campaign one about nothing - with a dash of
recycled borken promises thrown in.
Where Romney is weakest is #2. How many ads has Romney cut that point
out the 20 tax hikes in Obamacare, and point out the specific jobs lost
in the medical device industry because of the medical device tax? How
many speeches has Romney given that argue articulately for the
job-killing nature of the Obama policies, with the specifics lined up?
I’ve seen Santorum argue that, I’ve seen Newt argue that ... but Romney?
The bane of the weak moderate Republicans from GHWBush on down has
been their reluctance to ARGUE ideologically and MAKE THE CASE for
conservative policies as superior to liberal ones. This is where #2
comes in; this is why picking Paul Ryan was an exciting pick for
conservatives. “Aha!” we thought, “Someone who can articulate
conservatism!” And so Ryan has. But it hasnt permeated the whole
campaign and the ads are thin, weak, and to this conservative, often
off-key (like the claims about cutting defense spending being bad
because of lost jobs. Gack! That’s porkbarrel talk; we spend on defense
for national security, not as a jobs program.)
Romney needs to sharpen the argument and tie Obama’s egregious
taxing, spending and regulating, his killing of Keystone and his oil
drillign moratorium, etc.
to our 8% unemplyoment and worst recovery
since WWII. Bring sepcifics to bear to show how Obama’s policies have
killed jobs and hurt the economy. He needs a direct and correct rebuttal
to the misleading claims in the Clinton speech and out of the DNC. What
Romney camp fail to notice is that convention bounces disappear if the
arguments behind them are deflated.
It is not enough to say “Things are bad” since Obama has come back
with “Things are bad, but I care and the other guy is a rerun of what
got us in the mess.”
Where is Romney’s response? It’s as if lies
about Romney are left UN-answered and that’s enough. Obama treats voters
as too dumb and Romney as them being too smart.
Romney needs the 1,2,3 puch:
1. Thing are bad. 2. Obama is to blame, here is why. 3. I can fix, here is how.
If Mitt Romney gets 55% of voters to agree to that message, he wins BIG.
Thanks!
” He makes a great point, but I can see the Republicans’ side of this as well. If they attempt to refute the
Demwits’ lies, the Mendacious Stream Media simply screams bloody murder until they shut up again.”
Think back to when Reagan ran. The press loathed Reagan, and were determined to crush him. The problem was that Reagan spoke the truth, and even with a blowhard press attacking him, the people still got a chance to hear Reagan, and he won. We will not win just because the economy is in the tank. People need a reason to vote the SOB Obama out, or we cannot count on them showing up to vote. Romney must take his case to the people, the MSM be damned!
Indeed. I agreed with Romney completely, and the way the leftist media tried to
twist and then criticize his statement is typical behavior for them. They disgust me.
On the other hand, they are quite tough when the subject is Todd Akin or Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann. :)
It took Pelosi, Reid, and Obama to create the mess we’re in - and it wasn’t done only in ’09 and ’10, but in ’07 and ’08 as well, and some of the seeds were planted as far back as the Carter Administration - and some of it was done by Obama acting as a lawyer for community “organizers” in Chicago - long before Obama ran for office.
"f people on welfare can be expected to work, surely people running for high office can put in a little work too — including the work of explaining in plain words what is totally false about the "tax cuts for the rich" argument."
Homerun!
Thank G_d Stinky stinks so bad! Myth is flopping as hard as he can but will still win.
Ham Sandwich - 75% Barack Obama - 15% Roseann Barr - 1% Gary Johnson - 1% Mickey Mouse - 2% Lynson LaRouche- 1% others ---------5%
Romney is a wuss. It’s one thing to have advisors (Reagan) than to need advisors (McCain; Romney).
Things are a bit different now. They covered Reagan’s speeches and attacked him afterward. These days they take clips out of
context and then go into hysterical frenzies about conservatives’ “gaffs” while ignoring all faux pas by the Marxist left.
Well then, Romney had better find himself a Lee Atwater : )
Even GHWB regretted hiring Atwater and declined to attend Lee’s funeral.
” Even GHWB regretted hiring Atwater and declined to attend Lee’s funeral.”
That figures. Every time GHWB put his “silver foot” in his mouth, Atwater had to take it out, and blame the democrats for it.
I agree. He’s a bit more inept than Reagan, just a bit, don’tcha know. He doesn’t have all his “strong-conservative rhetoric” ducks in a row. He’s going to have hell to pay if he takes a sharp left turn if/when he’s elected.
” I agree. He’s a bit more inept than Reagan “
I’ll tell the WORLD..... LOL!
LOL! Be my guest! ;-)
;)
Well of course not....
The whole point is to intimidate then emasculate your opponent so in the end there is no opposition and you win...
Pretty damn obvious and nefarious.
So pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...
Nothing but smoke and mirrors....
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.