This is not a "Sit-It-Out-And-Pout" election. This is a "Get-Obama-Out" election.

[JG55]

[h=3]"Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S." (And, of Late, the Dumbest)[/h]

Gallup has some news that should be reassuring -- Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.

Political ideology in the U.S. held steady in 2011, with 40% of Americans continuing to describe their views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal.

It "should be reassuring" if only many of those online that pass themselves off as "conservative" weren't currently demonstrating to all and sundry that, like too much perfectionism, too much conservatism is a mistake.

Yes, nothing is damaging the "Conservative Brand" lately more than the rolling stupidity that is lumping itself around the failure of the Republicans to come up with a viable candidate that is more "Conservative" than Mitt Romney. This "failure", which was predictable as long as four years ago, is causing many online 'conservatives to drop into premature political menopause with whining, hot flashes of anger, and the grinding of dull, old, axes. They are pissed, it would seem, because nobody other than Romney can carry the fight to Obama in the coming election. The more demented among them are declaring, shades of McCain/2008, that they will take their retracted balls and go home on election day rather than vote against Obama.

These people are deeply stupefied and confused. Ideology will do that to you. They seem to think, to actually believe, that this coming election is about only voting if you can vote for a candidate you like. Let me disabuse these kids of this silly notion right away. The election of 2012 ain't a conservative popularity contest. It's a war to, first, last, and always, destroy any possibility of a second term for Barack Hussain Obama.

This is not a "Vote-For" election. This is a "Vote-Against" election. This is not a "Sit-It-Out-And-Pout" election. This is a "Get-Obama-Out" election. That is what it is about and that is all it is about.

If people can't understand, at this point, that very simple concept their minds are much too simple to be conservatives and they might as well go off and sit at the kiddy table and write in "Vermin Supreme" with a blunt pink crayon.

If true conservatives want to have a truly conservative candidate in a truly conservative party they will have to commit to the long march. You know, "the long march" like the one the left took through out political, academic, religious, and media institutions. The one they spent decades on. The long hard road to political supremacy. The one that takes work and money.

That's the one thing I don't see erstwhile conservatives actually doing from election to election. Instead they run their lives and their businesses off on the side and they show up every three years or so to watch the little red hens of politics take the nomination away from their conservative flavor of the week.

The way the Republican party is set up in the primary system means that to even have a shot at winning it you have to be running for it years and years and years before the actual elections. That's what Romney's been doing. That's the game and he's got the pieces in place to win it. You may not like it, but, hey, change it or play it.

But if you're beat because your "choices" are late to the party like Perry, or not really in it to win it like Mitt, don't start blaming Romney the little red hen.

It's just not dignified to hold your breath, stamp your feet, and threaten to take your retracted balls and go home.

So suck it up and remember this: This is not a "Sit-It-Out-And-Pout" election. This is a "Get-Obama-Out" election.

Go now, my conservative friends, and sin no more.

"Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S." (And, of Late, the Dumbest) @ AMERICAN DIGEST

[JG55]

[DaveTN]

Just once I’d like to have someone run for President that I could support and be excited to vote for, instead of voting to keep the other guy out.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I don't recall any recent second-term prez elections that were not either "armageddon will happen if we don't get the idiot out of office" or "armageddon will happen if we don't keep the current idiot because the other idiot is even worse" elections.

Maybe it is even more worser this time, but it turns into a "boy cries wolf" situation when every time they have to say, "But this time we really mean it."

[hornett22]

voting for the lesser of two evils has got us nothing but trouble for years. I will not do it. I'm tired of waiting for this country to turn around. I'm not voting for a pinko socialist from New England.

I lived there for 6 years. I know what there Republicans are all about.

[wjh2657]

Removing the Socialist and replacing him with a Fasciist makes me sick. All of the Neo-Cons and Progressives that the Republican party is running are just as bad if not worse than the Democrats' "New Dealer". I am not seeing a sensible or sane choice being made available this election. It is sickening to see that this is the best that we can do.

[BryanP]

When Ron Paul actually starts to look like a reasonable choice, things have really gotten bad. If the GOP would stop picking candidates from the Island of Misfit Toys maybe we'd have a shot. As it is, I fully expect that whoever the GOP nominates will take Tennessee, but President Obama will get a second term.

[Seabeejason]

I think Ron Paul is a reasonable choice myself. He is the best candidate that has ran in years. The man is truthful and definitely isn't corrupt. Which is a hell of a lot more than I can say about Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. Mitt & Newt are just as liberal as Obama. When Mitt Romney has to look at Ron Paul to answer a question about the constitution there is definitely something wrong.

[Guest bkelm18]

I think Ron Paul is a reasonable choice myself. He is the best candidate that has ran in years. The man is truthful and definitely isn't corrupt.

Which is why he'll never win.

[TMF]

I have no dog in this fight. I'm just voting to get Obama out. I don't think this is what our forefathers had in mind.

[hornett22]

Which is why he'll never win.

He'll never win because not enough people will apply common sense at the voting booth.

No more complicated than that.

[Guest bkelm18]

He'll never win because not enough people will apply common sense at the voting booth.

No more complicated than that.

Oh I'm quite certain there are many more reasons than that. I've got plenty of common sense and I don't plan on voting for him.

[hornett22]

well at least you're voting.

[Guest FroggyOne2]

The Rothchild's are behind it all!

[kieefer]

I have no dog in this fight. I'm just voting to get Obama out. I don't think this is what our forefathers had in mind.

I don't think so either.

Hopefully more people have awaken to what tyranny looks like and we can start to turn things around. Maybe not so much this time but the goal should be to stop BHO and go from there.

We need to start looking for real patriots to replace all the commies currently residing in local and state governments then maybe in the future we will have better choices.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Articles: Mitt Romney: The Last Republican President?

There now appears to be an inevitability surrounding Mitt Romney and the Republican nomination for president. Are the American people prepared to sit through another term of George H.W. Bush? The chances are that Romney would be the last Republican president, as the Party may fly apart under his rule. The country would then have to face another round of the Left-dominated Democratic Party in charge and the inevitable collapse that would bring about.

...

Yet the current governing class and in particular the Republican establishment is treating this election cycle as if it were no different from any other during the past sixty years. Their reaction to the Tea Party movement is indicative of this mindset, as they choose to denigrate and dismiss this grassroots uprising as just another passing crusade by conservative ideologues. They fail to understand that the appeal of Ron Paul is that he is willing to stick it to the ruling class. The primary concern of the establishment, either Republican or Democrat, is to retain power through the control of the purse strings, and to put off any difficult decisions while "compromising" with the opposition.

The campaign strategy of Mitt Romney mirrors that of all the past moderate nominees chosen by the Party. The formula: speak the language of the conservative majority in the Party, claim only a moderate can get elected, divide the vote among the conservatives running for the nomination, mobilize the media to destroy any real conservative challenger, and overwhelm these same challengers with money from the deep-pocket establishment contributors.

....

This is the last hurrah of the Republican establishment. The conservatives and libertarians will vote for Romney in November, but only because he is not Barack Obama. There will be no enthusiasm, which will hurt the down ballot contests for the U.S. Senate, the House and state governorships. Despite the factors weighing against Obama in this upcoming election, it will be a much closer contest that it should be; perhaps a razor thin victory for Romney.

If Romney were to lose the election, there will be a grass-roots revolt against the Republican Party which will spell its demise. If he wins and the nation, through the mis-directed policies of Romney and the Republicans in the Congress, continues on its current path of compromising and nibbling around the edges of the nation's problems, then Romney will be the last Republican president and the specter of the Democrats re-assuming power will be a reality.

[Oh Shoot]

Articles: Mitt Romney: The Last Republican President?

Yeah, GOP is gonna nominate the man who lost to the man who lost to Obama in '08. Sure makes me feel all optimistic and all about both the election, and the future.

Then again, that's about where the electorate is, just slightly right of center. Prob is the center is way left of where it used to be.

- OS

Edited January 18, 2012 by OhShoot

[Guest lostpass]

Anyone but Obama isn't going to cut it. Call him a socialist (he isn't) call him big government (he isn't) or call him a seekrit muslim (he isn't) and you get to have BHO for another four years.

In the last campaign that could've worked if the loathing for Pres Bush weren't at all time highs. People know BHO now so the fear doesn't play as well. You've got to convince people that the other option is better. That is a hard trick, which is why incumbents tend to get re elected. The fear thing doesn't work so well.

If I were in charge of republican campaign I'd throw the congress under the bus. I wouldn't attack BHO for being too liberal because that is a hard argument to make. I'd attack his leadership. I'd admit that BHO wants more jobs, I'd admit that BHO wants better health care, I'd admit that BHO is a good guy that you might like to drink a beer with. Then I'd go all crazy. He wants all the right things but he's not enough of a leader to get anything done. I point to the bailouts and say that helped the rich. I'd paint BHO as the friend of the bankers, as a prima donna who isn't willing to get in there and fight for the little guy with congress. Then I would hit leadership over and over. People will say "but congress" and I'd say "it's a hard job, you're supposed to get things done, dammit" Cause people just know they hate congress.

I think the GOP options are going to run on the "I'm not Obama platform" which is great and all. Apple used the "It's not Windows" message for a while and almost got 10% of the home computer market. The same tho time, it isn't enough to say "X sucks" you've got to say why your option is better.

Sadly, I don't see how Mitt is going to make that argument. Or Newt.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Yeah, GOP is gonna nominate the man who lost to the man who lost to Obama in '08. Sure makes me feel all optimistic and all about both the election, and the future.

Then again, that's about where the electorate is, just slightly right of center. Prob is the center is way left of where it used to be.

Good points. I'm confused over the whole shebang.

Romney is most likely to the right of Nixon, Ford, or Dole, who were all "mainstream republicans" in their time. Some say that Romney is not as "idealistically conservative" as the great hero Reagan. Sometimes Reagan looks just slightly to the right of Nixon, Ford, or Dole. Maybe I remember it wrong. Reagan never showed me much except speechifying a good line once in awhile. Talk is cheap.

Perhaps the center is actually farther-right than it was in decades past?

There may be a decent chance that a Romney presidency could be a G.W. Bush redux. Romney gives appearance of being smarter than GWB but smart doesn't equal wisdom.

Both parties seem more corporatist than anything else. Dunno if the corporatism is worse than in the past. It was also pretty bad in the past. Whats good for General Bullmoose is good for the USA.

Regardless whether right or left, both parties have managed to get us in an untenable position, and more of the same doesn't seem likely to help.

Anyone but Obama isn't going to cut it. Call him a socialist (he isn't) call him big government (he isn't) or call him a seekrit muslim (he isn't) and you get to have BHO for another four years.

In the last campaign that could've worked if the loathing for Pres Bush weren't at all time highs. People know BHO now so the fear doesn't play as well. You've got to convince people that the other option is better. That is a hard trick, which is why incumbents tend to get re elected. The fear thing doesn't work so well.

If I were in charge of republican campaign I'd throw the congress under the bus. I wouldn't attack BHO for being too liberal because that is a hard argument to make. I'd attack his leadership. I'd admit that BHO wants more jobs, I'd admit that BHO wants better health care, I'd admit that BHO is a good guy that you might like to drink a beer with. Then I'd go all crazy. He wants all the right things but he's not enough of a leader to get anything done. I point to the bailouts and say that helped the rich. I'd paint BHO as the friend of the bankers, as a prima donna who isn't willing to get in there and fight for the little guy with congress. Then I would hit leadership over and over. People will say "but congress" and I'd say "it's a hard job, you're supposed to get things done, dammit" Cause people just know they hate congress.

I think the GOP options are going to run on the "I'm not Obama platform" which is great and all. Apple used the "It's not Windows" message for a while and almost got 10% of the home computer market. The same tho time, it isn't enough to say "X sucks" you've got to say why your option is better.

Sadly, I don't see how Mitt is going to make that argument. Or Newt.

Dunno. I think Obama is coporatist socialist and big govenment. I think he is an atheist, but got no beef with atheism except for the hypocrisy of pretending otherwise. Am pretty sure that Obama has an infantile unexamined grudge against the USA and he doesn't have our best interests at heart.

Your analysis of a "winning strategy" might be OK, but IMO it would be dishonest to campaign against congress for not getting anything done. The problem is that they are doing too dam much and its almost always wrong. Maybe R's could win by blaming congress for not getting anything done, but then they would have to go in there and do even more stupid stuff to pretend they are "getting something done".

If the GOP wins with the likes of Romney or Gingrich or Santorum, or if Obama wins another term, things won't substantially change and we will see an increasing and possibly dangerous nihilstic populism unite the disenchanted among both the right and left, resulting in who knows what in future years? An increasing desire to throw ALL the bums out, but replace them with what?

Found a new theme song today. Not safe for office or children--

Edited January 18, 2012 by Lester Weevils

[TMF]

Anyone but Obama isn't going to cut it. Call him a socialist (he isn't)

What actually defines a socialist? I don't think it's a card you carry in your pocket or an institution you secretly or overtly subscribe to. His efforts on health care alone and his views on how it is an "entitlement" is well into socialist territory. Once "socialist" is no longer a dirty word (like it isn't in Europe) people like Obama will label themselves as such, but for now, just because he says he isn't doesn't mean he isn't. The proof is in his actions, not his words.

[Guest FroggyOne2]

There are many that think that they O man is a left wing commie muslim.. just sayin.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Whether you are personally for or against Romney's views they show he is far from being Republican. He is nothing more than a Democrat from 30 years ago.

His state has very harsh gun laws, has government run healthcare, he has also supported and personally donated to Planned Parenthood. He has instituted an assault weapon ban as well as supported the Brady Bill. He supported stem cell research. He suported the TARP and continues to do so. Those items alone should scream Democrat to any of us yet he wears a ® next to his name. And it is that ® that people are going to vote for, not his positions.

He also swaps his position depending on who the audience is. To me that makes him a liar. He was pro choice until he felt pro life would garner more votes. He can't decide if he is pro union or not and often forgets.

It is also very telling when Jimmy Carter enodrsed Romney.

*************************************************

The Republican party has morphed into what was once its foe in an attempt to gain control. The Democrats and Republicans are all wanting the same thing, control. Why else would a senator spend $55 million dollars for a position that pays less than $200,000 a year and would take 275 years to break even. It is because of control. The ruling class, be it Democrat or Republican, wants to control and they will try to do anything they can to maintain that control. They have passed laws to criminalize anything that threatens that control. Now those same rulers are fighting amongst themselves for control before the inevitable happens. They double speak and flat out lie so they can hopefully be in a place of power when our society turns into a socialistic dictatorship.

Where the true change is going to come from is not the president but from congress and the senate. Unfortunately those institutions are also riddled with those who are more worried about controlling us than representing us. They haven't been our representatives, or at least haven't listened to us, for decades. We voice our opinions and they ignore them thinking they know what we want or know what is best for us.

We are doomed and have been for a very long time. History does repeat itself and unfortunately we forgot how this story ended before. Ever since they began buying votes with our own money this course of action was set in motion.

We are again going to be stuck voting for what we feel are the lesser or two evils. I am tired of settling.

Dolomite

[Guest Lester Weevils]

There are many that think that they O man is a left wing commie muslim.. just sayin.

The theme would be "suspicion of deception" regardless whether it would be muslim masquerading as christian, atheist masquerading as christian, christian masquerading as buddhist, extremist masquerading as moderate, whatever.

Suspicion is not fact. Sometimes shopping for a car there is "something not quite right" with the salesman or the deal even if you can't quite put your finger on what's wrong. Sometimes it is over-active imagination and sometimes it ain't.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

There are many that think that they O man is a left wing commie muslim.. just sayin.

I would fall into that category.

[mav]

I do not think Obama is a Muslim or Christian. The only god Obama worships is Obama, imho.