Jan 29 2012
Romeny Win In FL Guarantees GOP Loses Across Board 2012
Well, well, well. It seems the establishment GOP is so determined not to let the 2012 insurgent voter get a piece of their political pie they will do anything to get Romney elected. Sarah Palin – as one of the Tea Party, libertarian leaders – has not been silent on the mudslinging against Newt Gingrich from the GOP establishment:
How can he say he’s not a part of the establishment? Well, look at the players in the establishment who are fighting so hard against him. They want to crucify him because he has tapped into that average, every day American Tea Party grassroots movement that has said enough is enough of the establishment, that tries to run the show and tweak rules and laws and regulations for their own good and not for our nation’s own good. Well, when both party machines and many in the media are trying to crucify Newt Gingrich for bucking the tide and bucking the establishment that tells you something.
And I say, you know, you got to rage against the machine at this point in order to defend our republic and save what is good and secure and prosperous about our nation. We need somebody who is engaged in sudden and relentless reform and isn’t afraid to shake it up, shake up that establishment. So, if for no other reason, rage against the machine, vote for Newt. Annoy a liberal, vote Newt! Keep this vetting process going. Keep the debate going.
Make sure to go the link and listen to the entire video piece.
Now Herman Cain is coming out supporting Newt – the last insurgent candidate to be pushed out by an arrogant GOP establishment:
Former presidential hopeful Herman Cain threw his support behind Newt Gingrich Saturday night, providing the former House speaker with a late boost just days before Florida’s primary.
Cain, a tea party favorite, endorsed his fellow Georgian at a GOP fundraiser Saturday calling him “a patriot.”
“Speaker Gingrich is not afraid of bold ideas,” Cain said.
So with Sarah and Herman now aligned AGAINST the establishment Romney, we have the situation where the GOP establishment has clearly declared war against the 2010 insurgent voter and the Tea Party.
Which means they will lose elections up and down the card. They have to. Insurgent voters have no choice but to let the Democrats win until the GOP establishment wakes up, gives up or is fired.
Clearly, some think Obama is so scary that voters will do anything to avoid 4 more years. But the Tea Party insurgent voters are actually immune to government since they prefer to fend for themselves. They may determine that 4 more years of idiotic policies from the left is not much different from 4 more years of idiotic policies from the right. We have suffered through 3 decades of this crap, we can probably handle another decade if that is what it takes to start purging one the establishment from the DC Temples of Power.
When you want to shrink government, and the ones in the way of your goals are the very ones addicted to government largesse, it does not matter which side you have to destroy in order to create a fresh start and direction. Call it creative destruction – the democratic way. Mitt & GOP – your about to be Bain’d by 2012 voters.
Why would any 2010 insurgent voter be for Romney, who is a vague version of Obama? Why? Will we flock to Romeny’s cold Big Business to thwart Obama’s cold Big Government? LOL – not likely. How about we let the GOP suffer political losses until they realize they will keep losing until they listen to America? Sounds like a path out of the darkness versus more wandering in it.
Florida looks like it will be a Pyrrhic victory for Romney and the GOP – and the end of their run with moderate, Main Street, middle class voters. They went for the ‘scorch the Tea Party’ path, and the results will not be a surprise. I have watched Obama’s poll numbers get better and better as Romney and the GOP Sithe torched half their base. After this week the political climate will change. And as is typical, the pivot will come in Florida.
And it will be one of those lines that cannot be uncrossed. Romney and the GOP establishment should have remembered Reagan’s 11th commandment.
Like most Conservatives, I am deeply disappointed by the current field. However, Newt is almost certainly the least electable of those still standing. He is erratic, prone to foot in mouth disease, and would provide the perfect bogeyman for the Dems. He would have made a great Chief Innovation Officer/VP, but his destructive campaign has surely dropped him for consideration for the second slot to Romney. Perhaps the next NASA administrator?
Mitt’s not going to win here in Florida.
AJ:
“So with Sarah and Herman now aligned with the establishment Romney, ”
I think you meant to say NOT aligned with or with Sarah and Herman aligned against the establishment
anyhow, I hope most of the country still stays toward Newt, I think they will. mcCain didn’t get the nomination until after several more primaries 4 years ago. Romney took some of the early ones back then.
I’ve stuck with Newt since day one, still sticking.
re: “Insurgent voters have no choice but to let the Democrats win until the GOP establishment wakes up, gives up or is fired. They may determine that 4 more years of idiotic policies from the left is not much different from 4 more years of idiotic policies from the right. We have suffered through 3 decades of this crap, we can probably handle another decade if that is what it takes to start purging one the establishment from the DC Temples of Power.”
If this happens the country will be lost forever. There will be no reversal possible. The Democrats will have:
1) Cemented into place Obama Care which one can not contemplate its effects unless one has spent some time in England. America will have the NHS without their safety valve of a private sector parallel medical system. Servility is the result of National Health Care.
2) Amnesty will have been imposed on the nation which will have instantly done the following: a) swelled the Democrat voter base by a third or even 40%, b) acted as a magnet attracting ten of millions more third worlders to get amnesty next time and become more Democrat voters, and c) using chain immigration bring in tens of millions of more third world “family” members, the cousins and aunts and their cousins and aunts, insuring no conservative will ever be elected again to National office. Doubt it? Just look at California today and see the future. Feminist women and former minorities will rule the USA. No white male will ever be president again let alone a conservative white male.
3) Demographic change will accelerate and insure whites become a minority in their own country which will not result in Kumbaya but guarantee a race war at some point. The center will not hold; America will fracture along ethnic lines. It will be Yugoslavia writ large across the North American continent.
Dan Kurt
Dan
That was the mindset of many when McCain became the nominee — let the democrats run wild, then the republicans will be able to have a stronger, more conservative message in the next election, and vanquish the left.
Well, Obama became president, and look where we are! If he gets re-elected, we’ll just be further along from where we are today. Sometimes, if you don’t at least stabilize the patient, you will end up losing the patient, altogether.
Well Dan,
The GOP should have factored that result into their mindless attempts to hold onto power!
Actually, it means the Democrats continue for a while until the GOP is ready to change or go the way of the Whigs. It as always been their choice of which path.
Holding onto power in DC was never an option on the table.
Jan,
What since 2010 has happened to indicate to the tea party Romney et al will finally get it?
Nothing. So with nothing on the line, why worry about Obama when the GOP is just as bad???
Really, if anyone is still grasping to the idea the GOP is better than Obama after 2010, 2011 and this 2012 primary you have to be kidding.
At this point Santorum needs to step aside and endorse Newt!
Santorum is a fine fellow but his so-con schtick would not win a dozen states against Obama. People have moved on from church and Government peering into our bedrooms and legislating morality.
The leading Christian conservative has endorsed Newt.
Santorum needs to put aside ego and if he cares about his country and conservatism endorse Newt, he has not the money or support to continue much further after Floriduh anyway.
The Tea Party must defeat the Establishment else run third Party. Its come to that!
The marginalizing of the freshman class, of Tea Party began the day they assumed office, and continued with the Rats in both parties locking them out of budgetary decisions with their unconstitutional super committee.
Hows come the repunks won’t hold Reid to account for 1000 + days with no budget or defund parts of Obamacare before its so entrenched it cannot be killed.
Why?
Ask Mitt he prefers Romneycare in every state, even his supporter in Floriduh says so, Bondi will be his HHS appointee guaranteeing Govtcare.
This is the Establishment position! Control of our lives by controlling our healthcare, the Repunks want it the Rats want it, the Tea Party doesn’t want it.
AJ
What since 2010 has happened to indicate to the tea party Romney et al will finally get it?
This is simply my opinion:
Romney doesn’t seem to be a niche candidate — appealing to any one faction of the republican party. He has said, earlier in life, and has demonstrated it in his actions, that he is not an ideologue, but rather a pragmatic.
So, to answer your question, Romney is not attempting to appeal to the tea party, but rather to the country as a whole. IMO, it is time to put intra party politics and differences aside, and take up a pencil, whittling down our deficit, along with our central government.
Mitch Daniels wanted to do this when he was testing the presidential waters out, and had overwhelming criticism from the right, as if he had no social values because he wasn’t putting them on the front burner. But, if you noticed his State of the Union Address response was polite but clear, and spot on, unlike Obama’s.
I don’t think Romney will shake the world, or split the atom like Gingrich rails to do. But, I do think he has the capacity to slow the debt train down and turn it around. I think he will stop Obamacare from being implemented by issuing waivers, and then work to generally reform health care reform though Congress, leaving the details for each state to independently figure out. I think he will deregulate some of the more onerous EPA rulings, sharpen the tax code to encourage investments leading to jobs. And, I also think he will confront China to turn the trade deficit around.
You won’t see as much drama, as a Gingrich Presidency. But, I think there will be a steady withdrawal of the Obama agenda that has been slowing down any meaningful recovery.
Jan,
His enemies on the right outnumber his supporters….
He has no broad coalition. Neither does Newt.
My only problem his how the GOP and Romney are out opposing the 2010 insurgent voter. Without them on the GOP’s side it will always be 2008
“It is really disturbing when your side loses its objectivity and shows signs of deep political denial. It makes them look just like liberals.”
AJ Strata, Jan. 25
jan: I like this statement “but rather a pragmatic. ”
liberally interpreted this means, whichever way the wind blows.
you said:
“I think he will stop Obamacare from being implemented by issuing waivers, and then work to generally reform health care reform though Congress, leaving the details for each state to independently figure out. ”
So, you’re saying he won’t try to repeal it, just do what they did in massachusetts and let all the libs get all the parts they can in each state? “reform health care” is code for keep the national version that is there but ‘reform’ it. It has to be 100% repealed. No matter how many times you attempt to improve a sh*t sandwich, it ain’t gonna taste good. Who is Romney attempting to ‘appeal to’? Enough voters to get him elected, be it liberal, left wing socialists or someone on the right or anywhere in between. He knows he has the lefties, he’s now ‘calling himself conservative’ in an attempt to sway enough to get him elected. But he is not going to get that strong surge, that voted the tea party people in, in ’10. He just doesn’t ‘excite’ anyone. Those people that oppose him are those very vocal tea party people.
I really like parts of Allen West’s speech that is currently being played, I know it was at a Romney rally, but in the part I heard, he never mentioned Romney. I think West is for anybody but Obama.
WWS,
You still think this is about my views on Romney as opposed to what I see happening in the electorate?
LOL!
I heard the same analysis all over the talk shows this morning. The effort to save Mitt from Newt is destroying the GOP base. You think I see things differently than Palin or Cain or the others sick and tired of empty promises from the GOP establishment?
Liberals never use powers of objective reasoning to see the troubles they are heading into. Liberals emote without thought – like the GOP establishment.
I am not proposing a solution to Romney, I am seeing a result. A result I would rather not see happen, but will happen if he wins FL ugly.
RedTeam
I liked your last sentence the best, referring to West — I think West is for anybody but Obama. That is probably the position all of us should take, as difficult as that might be.
As for repealing Romneycare, that is the mantra out there that people like to hear, including myself. But when you get into the thick of it, whoever becomes the R president has to deal with Congress to do anything. The president can issue waivers, just like Obama has done to his pet contituencies and unions, and that is what Romney has said he will do, day one, to every state.. But, after that it is up to the Congress to wrangle over the repeal.
Even if you are able to repeal it, some kind of reform is needed to address the high costs etc. And, beyond Obamacare repeal or reform you have medicare and medicaid problems — entitlements that are the real causes to our skyrocking health care costs.
AJ
I don’t know how right you are in saying: His enemies on the right outnumber his supporters….He has no broad coalition….
I swiped this breakdown from another site of a recent Marist poll:
Just add up the numbers for Romney for “yes & yes with reservations” and they are huge. Now this is only one poll in one state. But, I do think that whoever the nominee is, eventually people who are of the ABO ilk will put differences aside and vote for the GOP candidate.
AJ, it is the big money that has chosen Mitt. It’s never about the politician-it’s always about the money. Follow the money.
Now with that said, many a time the candidate with the lesser amount of money has overcome the one with more money. Think Bush vs. Gore, Clinton vs Bush. There are more.
As I see it, our candidates are getting vetted because if you think this is rotten, just wait until the chicago thugs get their groove on. This will look like a picnic. Evil, imho.
Our candidates have to have the smarts, endurance and money to win now and in November. And we, the electorate have to help get our choice nominated then win in November.
There have always been differing wings within the GOP for as long as I can remember. Whoever wins will be stronger for it and will “clank” when they walk. Suits me just fine…because EITHER of our candidates will be infinitely better that what the democrats have to offer.
Come September, we will all rally behind whomever is the nominee and tell the media and the democrat industrial complex to shut the hell up-we won’t listen one millisecond to their propaganda. We will bat them down at every turn. And then, not to be denied, we will march ourselves to the polls and vote out the most destructive president in the history of America and his minions. Period.
Oh, one more thing, RedTeam,
jan: I like this statement “but rather a pragmatic. ”
liberally interpreted this means, whichever way the wind blows.
I don’t interpret ‘pragmatic’ that way myself. Pragmatic, means to me, the best and wisest way to get something done.” It’s a way that is more unemotional, and deals with “the facts.”
For instance, when we go over-budget on something, I will look more matter-of-factly (pragmatically) what we can eliminate with the least impact to the project or people involved with the project — not just what I may esthetically or emotionally be more attached to.
BTW, should Gingrich pull the nomination out (even though I have made contrary, emotionally-charged statements), I will probably cast a ‘pragmatic’ vote for him, gagging all the way, because the goal is to get Obama out of office.
jan: I guess I kinda lean toward this definition:
prag·mat·ic
? ?[prag-mat-ik] Show IPA
adjective Also, prag·mat·i·cal ( for defs. 1, 2, 5 ) .
1.
of or pertaining to a practical point of view or practical considerations.
From a practical point of view, Mitt (and all politicians) want to go with the point of view that will get them the most votes. I credit very few politicians with the integrity to go with the ‘right’ point of view, only by determining which way the wind is blowing do they make up their mind on which way to go. That is practical considerations.
ivehadit: “It’s never about the politician-it’s always about the money. Follow the money.”
you may be correct. but I think it’s the power trip more than the money, of course in many instances, it’s the same thing. The Republican establishment knows that Mitt will play their game (now that’s about the money) and they see Newt as more unpredictable ( and they can’t abide uncertainty) that’s the need to eliminate Newt so they can keep their money and power.
One of Romney’s biggest problems has been his lack of renouncing MA health care reform. People have stated that most people in MA “hate” it. This “hatred” of health care in MA has not been noted in some of the polls I’ve seen taken on what people think of their health care in MA. Furthermore, my logic asks, if people hate it so much why don’t they appeal it? That was the whole purpose of having this policy being a state-imposed one, so that if it didn’t work out the people could vote it out.
However, in doing research, it seems that most people actually favor the healthcare policy put into place in their state of MA. Some don’t like the mandates, others don’t see any reduction in costs, while still others say that the purpose of the policy was not to reduce costs but to expand coverage for more people — which it has done. MA is #1 in the country for having the most covered people.
Here is an article looking into the question of Has Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts health care law worked?
The conclusion is:
Many of the comments below the article are complimentary of MA health care. One in particular gives Romney the following advice:
I think people should look at both sides of the story, or maybe as Paul Harvy used to put it, “Here’s the rest of the story…” In MA, the majority of the people there seem to like it. As for application as a national health care plan, Romney has said, repeatedly, “No!”