Posted on 11/05/2014 4:31:54 AM PST by nathanbedford
GOPe strategery: Lie low, don’t make waves, wait for 2016.
Or is that 2018? 2020?
Republicans win in 2016 if they put up a candidate that can excite the base. It doesn’t HAVE to be a perfect conservative. It has to be someone that provides a superior vision and gets everyone motivated to work, donate, campaign and vote. Short list: Walker, Cruz, Pence, Kasich (?).
Obama will go quietly into the night so as not to rock the boat for the hideous Hildabeast of Arkansas.
Bet the house on it!
Exactly.
Move on behalf of AMERICA.
Bring back jobs. Close our borders, and enact real control of our immigration.
America was a great country 25 years ago.
Bring it back.
We can get a glimpse of the GOP’s intentions here in VA. Do they let the Rats continue to profit from fraud and deceit? Or do they insist on integrity?
And remember, Alinsky wasn’t in it for the end game, himself. He just developed a shake down technique a la Frank Nitty. His technique just was not as blatantly illegal as Nitty’s. Think Jesse Jackson. There is no money to shake down if the “goals” are ever actually achieved.
He is conservative enough, he clearly has a backbone, he is photogenic, he does not make mistakes on the stump, he governs as he campaigns. More, he has not been nationally tainted as a radical right-winger as has, unfortunately, Ted Cruz. Walker stands in better odor with independents and has the advantage of running as a governor rather than as a senator and his record is one in which both conservatives and Rinos can find satisfaction.
If I were able to anoint, however, I would dab Ted Cruz's forehead with oil.
Nice job. I particularly liked the quote “...so that they retain support of The Tea Party and Rino wings of the party.”
At some point both sides (and I mean both, not just one side) should realize that the other side might have a point and start working from there.
I don't think Obama would fight very hard to defend ObamaCare except for political reasons. Heck, he has already capitulated to almost every Republican objection on his own through questionable executive orders delaying various provisions of it.
Name a couple of RINO points we should support.
He had Nineteen, on September 27, 2013, who joined him in refusing Harry Reid's cloture vote on the spending bill. This was the vote that McConnell & McCain said would 'lose the Senate in 2014' [wrong Mitch] and what prompted him and the gOpE to declare open war on the Tea Party movement and conservatism.
Sure, Senator Cruz will lose a few of these (Roberts, Portman, Paul(?)) nineteen to the Mitch Establishment. But he also gains another nine possible (Sullivan, Cotton, Gardner, Ernst, Daines, Sasse, Lankford, Rounds, Capito) to make a very formidible 25 or so coalition to challenge for the Majority Leader spot and setting the agenda to roll back what the Dem socialists have inflicted upon the Country.
I would not be opposed to Walker, Cruz, Palin, or even West.
Lukewarm on Rand Paul.
Hell no on Jeb, Christie, Romney.
Bump
I assume you are referring to elected Democrats in your first point. If so, I disagree. I think the Rats have been totally highjacked by far left liberals. They are great company for Obama. The Blue Dogs are extinct. Manchin might be the only semi-moderate Rat left in D.C.
Regarding your second point, Obama goes govern against Rat fortunes, but he has plenty of allies or he wouldn't have gotten this far. There's only so much you can do unilaterally and now that the GOP has a clear mandate, they can cut him off at the knees by refusing funding for his hare brained schemes and I truly hope they do.
After 2010 and last night, I am more convinced than ever that Obama, the persona, was the reason why the Rats won in 2008 and 2012. It had nothing to do with their policies, even though they think it did. That concept heartens me and bodes well for 2016 when the slate will be wiped clean.
Think of an effective presidential candidate as someone who can generate support among voters in three key areas:
1. Executive Leadership
2. Political Philosophy
3. Personality
The problem the Republican Party has faced since 2008 -- and it will come up again in 2016 -- is that there is a different potential candidate who grades out best in each of these areas. And none of them are very strong in more than one. My take right now is that the top contender in each of these areas is:
1. Executive Leadership -- Mitt Romney
2. Political Philosophy -- Ted Cruz
3. Personality -- Chris Christie
The challenge for the GOP is to find someone who is very strong in one area, reasonably acceptable in another, and can diminish his/her weaknesses in the third.
I would also point out that the Democrats have a much easier approach to selecting presidential candidates because in every election it seems like they are willing to completely ignore one of these three elements entirely. Barack Obama was nominated because executive leadership capacity has meant nothing to the Democrats in recent years (and it really shows). Bill Clinton was nominated in 1992 even though nobody knew what his politics were (he had as much direction as a fart in the wind).
Obama is a narcissist, an empty suit who has been advanced beyond his capabilities because of the color of his skin. All his life Obama has been reinforced in the belief that race is the matrix upon which everything should be judged, including his own performance.
I do not expect him to depart from this worldview but I do expect some Democrats to desert as they find the race card no longer trumps.
The Republicans won the seats but the Democrats will still control at a lower level so long as McConnell and Boehner and McCarthy are still in position.
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.