Lets say the polls were really all rigged as were the election boxes, and the country was set up so there are so many freeloaders that it was impossible to win the election (two popular frustration narratives here), well then it would be better than this if we had a great nominee who we were proud of who lost for those reasons.
If things get worse under O and his popularity dives (our best hope now) I still cant say ‘If Romney won things would be great because....”
Don’t get me wrong, I have no doubt there was voter fraud. That’s the Dems stock & trade. But that was just one of many things that added up to the fiasco. I think we got about the minimum we could get, however. I was ringing the bell for over 6 years with this guy, so the ultimate conclusion was what I predicted.
Had he “gotten” the votes, I don’t expect that the outcome with him as President would’ve been significantly altered. In the short term, the stock market would’ve jumped, unemployment would’ve eased, but for the long term, it’s questionable. The things that would need to be done run counter to his instincts as a liberal.
It would’ve been more of the same-old we’ve seen since Eisenhower, no dismantling of the Democrat-Socialist welfare state bureaucratic complex, but merely “managing” it. There hasn’t been any bonafide trimming since Harding/Coolidge. Willard is more like Hoover, a liberal 1910s Progressive who largely was in ideological opposition to his two excellent Conservative predecessors. For that matter, so was Dubya. Both left a mess and a template to allow their Dem successors to expand government beyond all proportion (in Dubya’s case, the bailout).
Willard, too, had no credibility on healthcare, as it was he who also provided yet another template for Zero to push his monster. How could anyone truly see him dismantling something for which he served as the inspiration for ? Ultimately, because no really sweeping changes, so absolutely necessary at this point, would’ve been made under him, whatever economic turnaround would be brief indeed before the coming economic calamity. He would’ve cost us Congress by 2014 (had we won the Senate, as we should’ve) and probably, too, would’ve lost to whomever the Dem nominee would be in 2016 (be it Hillary, Andrew Cuomo or Martin O’Malley).
Sadly, we’re left with the likes of the ballless Boehner, whom I have no faith in to play hardball with Zero. Too bad we can’t take a lesson from Democrats on Congressional leadership. Dingy Harry may be worthless as a human being, but that little bastard is a vicious, ruthless and relentless. Pelosi was no shrinking violet, either, when she served under Dubya during her first term as Speaker. I don’t want kind-hearted marshmallows, we need a Lee Atwater type. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead. The Democrats are so used to us folding like cheap suits, they wouldn’t know what to do with a Republican who actually fought back. Too bad the establishment would never allow a fighter, that might cause them embarrassment while making their rounds on the chablis & brie party circuit in DC.