Let's start thinking ahead to 2014......

**aerojarod** · 11-07-2012, 04:19 PM

We're going to have to frame out arguments differently somehow. Nobody cares whether something's Constitutional anymore. References to God and Country don't seem to be working for the masses. People want to be reassured that you won't be taking anything from them, or better yet- giving more away.

Maybe there's a better way to say, "You won't be getting any more freebies if we don't fix this economy."

Maybe we can concede that, "Yes, the rich should be paying more. They ARE paying more, and we're going to keep it that way."

How about we state that, "Government has no place telling you who you can love, how you live, or what you do with your body. That being said, we owe it to each other as good neighbors to not take from others what we cannot provide for ourselves."

Just some ideas... we need to reframe our platform to be more populist, yet still conservative.

**Unreconstructed Reb** · 11-07-2012, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by Bailey

I am sorry if the GOP couldn't beat this asshole with everything going for the GOP, I doubt we shall see another Republican President ever again. Sorry people wanting hand outs are not going to vote for the person wanting to take them away. I am kind of glad this happened, when the crash comes it will come on obama's watch.

That's precisely what Bronco Bama wants. Bronco Bama doesn't have to run for re-election and he will be emboldened by this victory and will run roughshod over the congress and the courts in order to accomplish the main goal that he set out to do and told us that he would do back in '08: the fundamental transformation of the country. And what better way than with the crisis of a major crash.

And the spineless, sniveling republican turds in DC aren't trying to stop Bronco Bama and the liberal freight train at all, they're just hanging on to the last car giving a half hearted effort to slow it down. For example, if the DC libs were to say "let's burn down all the buildings in town!" the repub response would be, "well, can we just do a couple a year for the next few years, please? sniff, sniff....."

It's game over.

Start thinking about 2014? Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!

**Rockntractor** · 11-07-2012, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Reb

That's precisely what Bronco Bama wants. Bronco Bama doesn't have to run for re-election and he will be emboldened by this victory and will run roughshod over the congress and the courts in order to accomplish the main goal that he set out to do and told us that he would do back in '08: the fundamental transformation of the country. And what better way than with the crisis of a major crash.

And the spineless, sniveling republican turds in DC aren't trying to stop Bronco Bama and the liberal freight train at all, they're just hanging on to the last car giving a half hearted effort to slow it down. For example, if the DC libs were to say "let's burn down all the buildings in town!" the repub response would be, "well, can we just do a couple a year for the next few years, please? sniff, sniff....."

It's game over.

Start thinking about 2014? Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!

Cloward–Piven strategy overload the system and rebuild from the ruins.

**Lager** · 11-07-2012, 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by Elspeth

I think we lost more to voter fraud than to Gary Johnson.

It's possible we lost more due to the "birthers" as well. Plenty of little scapegoats to find, but we need to focus on the bigger picture, which isn't quite clear yet.

**Zeus** · 11-07-2012, 06:45 PM

Originally Posted by txradioguy

We played the beltway RINO RNC game...got behind the candidate (very late in my case) that all the "experts" said was the only guy who could beat Obama.

And look what it got us.

Ok "experts"...we played your game and lost.

Next time we play by OUR rules and elect OUR candidate.

Oh Please You are better than that to play an old canard. Romney lost because the Unicorns & skittles crowd outnumbered the God & Country crowd. Like Rush said this morning "You can't fight Santa Claus".

**Lager** · 11-07-2012, 06:51 PM

Originally Posted by m00

Except a conservative candidate, or a candidate who ran a good election, or a candidate that didnt seem out-of-touch.

I personally know plenty of liberal democrats that were very unhappy with Obama. These are people who I know at work, or in my family, or close family friends, and they are all doing quite well for themselves. They were begging for the Republican Party to put up someone that was a normal, intelligent, authentic, consistent individual who meant what he said and cared about people, and cared about the country. Note these are qualities of a human being, not qualities of a political stripe. Mitt Romney did not run a campaign that presented him as this person (whether or not he is, I don't know). Romney came across as a phony, pandering, aloof, and completely out-of-touch. Since I've seen "off air" comments where he is not this person, so I'll presume he got some really bad campaign advice. Romney failed not because he was a conservative (he wasn't) but because he ran an awful campaign that alienated pretty much everyone.

To think Obama won because of handouts, while I'm sure is easier than soul-searching, completely misses the point.

You're not describing the campaign Romney actually ran, you're describing the description of the campaign as painted by the media and Obama camp. I think he ran a better campaign than McCain did. Picked a better VP as well. How can you expect to get to know someone's true nature on the TV or in little sound bytes in ads? It's impossible. You admitted you were surprised when you saw Romney in a candid moment, and you were most likely surprised because you began to believe the picture the media was painting of him. When people think they know the truth of some celebrity they've never met in person, beware. The two political people who have come across as the best on stage in recent times, are probably Clinton and Obama. Two narcissists, if ever any existed. They are awfully good at appearing to have some substance. Edwards was considered "thoughtful" and "caring" and "genuine" as well.

In the past, before mass media, the measure of a candidate was taken by the words they wrote or spoke and were written down. Today that's hard to do, because they all speak in the same trite platitudes and cliches.

**m00** · 11-07-2012, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by Lager

You're not describing the campaign Romney actually ran, you're describing the description of the campaign as painted by the media and Obama camp.

I didn't know the Obama camp had access to my personal anecdotes.

I think he ran a better campaign than McCain did.

Maybe. I think it's hard to tell because Obama's public persona is so much different now (he used to be all hope-and-change-y).

Picked a better VP as well.

Agreed.

How can you expect to get to know someone's true nature on the TV or in little sound bytes in ads? It's impossible.

Reagan managed. Clinton managed (people knew he was a pervert who smoked pot and tried to hide it... this helped to popularize him as a "lovable rogue"). Kerry managed, but not to his credit (if he wanted to win, he should have done a better job of hiding his true nature). Chris Christie also manages. Bush too -- love or hate Bush, when you watched Bush on TV you were watching George W Bush. He was a real guy.

You admitted you were surprised when you saw Romney in a candid moment, and you were most likely surprised because you began to believe the picture the media was painting of him.

Dude, the media has a liberal bias, but Romney dug his own grave here. I'm going to go off the top of my head here from memory so these will be slightly paraphrased...

Pandering Phony Mitt:

"Strange things are happening to me down south... I love grits"
"I love Detroit, my wife owns a couple of Cadillacs."
"I love this state, the trees are the right height."
"I'm a huge fan of NASCAR. I have some friends who are NASCAR team owners.

Crazy Mr Burns Mitt:

"Corporations are people"
"I'm not concerned about the very poor"
"Middle income is $250,000 and less"
"I'm also unemployed."

Every-time I heard one of these, in the original context, I /facepalmed.

Today that's hard to do, because they all speak in the same trite platitudes and cliches.

Completely agree here.

**Veritas Aequitas** · 11-08-2012, 05:01 AM

Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Reb

That's precisely what Bronco Bama wants. Bronco Bama doesn't have to run for re-election and he will be emboldened by this victory and will run roughshod over the congress and the courts in order to accomplish the main goal that he set out to do and told us that he would do back in '08: the fundamental transformation of the country. And what better way than with the crisis of a major crash.

And the spineless, sniveling republican turds in DC aren't trying to stop Bronco Bama and the liberal freight train at all, they're just hanging on to the last car giving a half hearted effort to slow it down. For example, if the DC libs were to say "let's burn down all the buildings in town!" the repub response would be, "well, can we just do a couple a year for the next few years, please? sniff, sniff....."

It's game over.

Start thinking about 2014? Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!

I personally would be entertained by watching the idiots who voted for him not knowing his true agenda should this happen. Has the writing ever been on the wall in such big, bold letters that said "THIS GUY HATES AMERICA. THIS GUY KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT CREATING JOBS. THIS GUY IS GOING TO DESTROY OUR COUNTRY AND PROBABLY GET US ALL KILLED".

It was obvious to me in 2007. And these guys voted him in twice, LOL.

**Unreconstructed Reb** · 11-08-2012, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by Veritas Aequitas

I personally would be entertained by watching the idiots who voted for him not knowing his true agenda should this happen. Has the writing ever been on the wall in such big, bold letters that said "THIS GUY HATES AMERICA. THIS GUY KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT CREATING JOBS. THIS GUY IS GOING TO DESTROY OUR COUNTRY AND PROBABLY GET US ALL KILLED".

It was obvious to me in 2007. And these guys voted him in twice, LOL.

I would find it quite entertaining, also, except for the fact that the useful idiots are going to take us down with them. There was a line from Full Metal Jacket that is appropriate in this situation: "It's a huge shit sandwich and we're all gonna have to take a bite."

The red states seriously need to consider severing ties with the Bronco Bama regime if any semblance of the republic is to remain and let the blue states have their communist utopia.

**txradioguy** · 11-08-2012, 11:27 AM

Originally Posted by Zeus

Oh Please You are better than that to play an old canard. Romney lost because the Unicorns & skittles crowd outnumbered the God & Country crowd. Like Rush said this morning "You can't fight Santa Claus".

That's true and I agree with him. (I didn't hear it til this morning).

Maybe I just don't know how to express it right...but it just seems like America bought into the "only Romney can beat Obama" meme pushed by the establishment.

Ok...we did that...and look what it got us.

Next time (hopefully) we'll stick with a true Conservative...someone like Reagan and not get scared off by the so called "experts".

Because like Rush also said...and I'm paraphrasing full throated Conservatism has yet to be tried yet in an election.