GOP’s Problem Isn’t Conservative Viewpoints

March 20, 2013 Leave a comment

When Americans hear conservative plans they tend to support them by clear majorities. Especially so when those plans are lined up against liberal proposals. However, when voters hear that Republicans support those conservative plans suddenly voters are turned off. The problem the Republicans face heading into the 2014 and 2016 elections isn’t conservative political positions. The problem they face is that people don’t like and don’t trust the party. Of course, the party is interpreting the 2012 election all wrong. They want to move the party to the left when in reality they need to be rehabing their image while coordinating a response to the left-wing press.

In the last two elections the GOP nominated candidates who weren’t conservative. John McCain has always been more comfortable being the “reasonable” compromiser as he sides with Democrats over conservative Republicans. Mitt Romney ran for Governor of Massachusetts as a progressive Republican and largely governed like one. He was never comfortable articulating conservative positions and when pressed often retreated to his liberal foundation. From the defeat of two moderate to liberal Republicans the GOP has decided the party needs to move even further left. They apparently learned nothing.

The answer to the GOP’s woes isn’t to provide illegals with amnesty, give up on the right to life issue or support homosexual marriage. The answer doesn’t lie in abandoning social policy or the legion of Christian conservative voters who have been responsible for GOP victories for most of the last three decades. The answer lies in sticking with conservative principles because the country remains a center right country. The political end of this problem ought to be easy but with the GOP nothing can ever be easy because the progressives who run the party don’t really like the conservatives. They just use us to further their own power, which they don’t have on any real level in government because moderate to liberal candidates couldn’t beat Obama.

The GOP’s biggest problem is messaging. It isn’t so much the people who deliver the message, Sarah Palin aside, that is the problem. The problem is that our candidates and ideas are under relentless attack from the liberal media. Just look at the sequestration debate last month. The country supported the cuts but the media presented the cuts as catastrophic and they presented the Republicans as mean, evil and hateful. During the second Presidential debate last year Candy Crowley shut down the Benghazi issue and may have won the election for Obama by declaring the President right and Romney wrong. That she was wrong is an after thought, the damage had already been done.

Fair or not there isn’t much we can do about the media. They’re going to present Mitt Romney as Thurston Howell III and John Kerry as a man of the people even though Kerry has double the assets of Romney. What the Republicans need to do is figure out a way around this. It begins by sticking to principles despite the media’s relentless attacks. The reason why people believed Crowley rather than Romney is because Romney wasn’t trustworthy in the first place. Why wasn’t he trustworthy? Because no one believed he was a conservative, no one believed that he truly believed anything he said. Switching positions on homosexual marriage like Sen. Portman just because your kid says he’s gay isn’t the way to go. It suggests that one doesn’t have a base morality or a base belief and thus are subject to whatever will please others.

Despite the party being a mess we have a number of potential 2016 Presidential candidates who seem to have a basic moral core and can articulate their positions without pandering. Rand Paul and Marco Rubio in particular demonstrate these qualities. Even when they disagree, their positions are long standing and as such they clearly aren’t pandering for votes. Those guys and a number of others need to be the face of the party. We need to get rid of the consultants and liberal party leadership that gave us McCain and Romney. Their liberals failed, the answer for the future isn’t to listen to these losers and move left. The answer is to stick with our conservative principles because the country still agrees with us while at the same time rehabing the Party image. We can do this but not if the party moves left.

Filed under Republicans Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Battle For The Soul Of The GOP

December 4, 2012 25 Comments

The GOP nominated a man for President who is only conservative when standing next to President Obama. Not surprisingly Mitt Romney couldn’t get Republicans to the polls to vote for him. He ended up will fewer votes than the loathed and despised John McCain, in Ohio alone he got 100,000 fewer votes. Conservatives never truly warmed up to Romney and fence sitting Republican voters couldn’t get past the fact that Romney is a Mormon. We were told that Romney was the only guy in the primary who could beat Obama. He didn’t even come close because no one believed he was a conservative.

So what has been the GOP establishment response to Romney’s defeat? Rather than take the blame for delivering the party yet another defeat (Ford, Dole, McCain, Romney…) the establishment has more or less suggested ridding the party of conservatives. We’re now told that we should change our position on illegal immigration, homosexual marriage, abortion, taxes and government spending. In other words, we should go back to the founding principles of the Republican Party. We should once again become a northeastern, liberal, big government, overthrow of Christian faith and morality party. That’s what the Party was when it was created in the 1850′s as a replacement for the big government Whigs, who were themselves an offshoot of the big government, Hamiltonian Federalists.

With this in mind it should come as no surprise that the only Republican in Washington with any power is purging his caucus of conservatives. Speaker John Boehner is removing conservatives from key committee chairs. Meanwhile Boehner offered Obama an $800 billion tax increase yesterday, signed onto by Paul Ryan. Obama quickly rejected the proposal, you knew he would. Obama sees an opportunity to destroy the Republican Party forever by blaming them for the fiscal cliff. Destroying the GOP is more important to Obama than suffering middle class Americans, after all the GOP is the enemy. The fact though is that the GOP is in prime position to destroy itself without Obama’s help.

There is a battle for the soul of the Republican Party. It is a battle we are not winning. The last two Presidential losers were handed to us by the progressive establishment which refuses to take the blame for them. In fact, they claim it’s conservatives fault that they lost. We have a House that is full of conservatives but which can’t rid themselves of the establishment puppet Speaker Boehner. We’re going to see an uprising on the right in 2014, it won’t be aimed at Democrats. Instead it will be a primary battle between conservatives and progressive, establishment candidates.

The bigger battle for the soul will take place in 2015 and early 2016 during the Presidential primary. The establishment is already vetting its own candidates, be they Jeb Bush, Chris Christie or some other liberal. Conservatives seem inclined towards Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. There is another conservative though who might be able to bridge the gap between conservatives and the Ron Paul libertarian crazy wing, that’s Sen. Rand Paul. Rand is infinitely more likable and reasonable than his old man, which will appeal to conservatives. His old man alone appeals to libertarians.

We conservatives need to be prepared for this battle. We don’t have the money or the clout that the establishment has. But we need only look back to 1980 when the establishment backed George Bush over Ronald Reagan. We won that primary fight, we can win the 2016 primary fight. But we have to unite behind one candidate. We cannot allow the establishment to split us with three or four conservatives while they all unite behind some dreadful liberal. The battle for the soul of the GOP is on, let’s up we conservatives don’t split ourselves and lose the party.

Filed under Republicans Tagged with , , , , , ,

Foolish GOP Ready To Cave On Amnesty

November 19, 2012 2 Comments

The Republicans seem more eager after the election to support some sort of amnesty for illegals. Led by radio host Sean Hannity who claims his view has evolved as if by magic the day after the election, the GOP seems ready to cave on the issue. The theory is that if only we would allow all these illegals to remain in the United States and provide them with citizenship then we might be able to open the door for them to like Republicans in the future. It’s pretty hard to believe when Democrats are entrenched in poor Hispanic communities and have been for the better part of half a century. The notion that the GOP is suddenly going to recruit in poor Hispanic communities is borderline ridiculous.

In fact there is empirical evidence that amnesty won’t do anything for Republicans but give the Democrats millions of new voters. In 1984 President Reagan received 37% of the Hispanic vote. In 1986 Reagan foolishly signed an amnesty bill that granted citizenship to millions of Mexican immigrants who were here illegally. According to the theory espoused by Hannity and others in the GOP, Hispanics should have fallen in love with the Republican Party and they should all be voting Republican now. After all it was Reagan who granted them amnesty in 1986, surely Republicans saw an increase in Hispanic support.

Unfortunately the theory being pushed is wrong. In 1988, only two years after Reagan’s amnesty, George Bush could only muster 30% of the Hispanic vote. That’s a decrease of 7 points off of Reagan’s pre-amnesty total. In other words, amnesty didn’t make Hispanics fall in love with the Republican Party. Not only did they not fall in love with the GOP, they joined the Democrats. California is now practically off limits to Republicans, largely because of Hispanic voters who were given amnesty by Reagan. The state is a wasteland for the GOP, it hasn’t gone Republican in a Presidential race since 1988. Only the most liberal Republicans like Pete Wilson can get elected statewide and even those guys are largely verboten in California these days.

Amnesty will serve little more than the Democrat Party, which will gain votes via welfare patronage. This isn’t an issue of not liking Hispanic people, this is an issue of law. We have millions of people who are here illegally. They had to break our laws in order to get here and they continue to break our laws by staying here. Such law breaking cannot be rewarded with citizenship or amnesty. To do this makes a complete mockery of our laws. Even worse from a Republican standpoint, amnesty and citizenship for illegals does little more than dig the grave for our own party.

We cannot over react to a 2 point defeat to a bad President when our candidate was dreadful and couldn’t even get his whole party behind him. It’s one thing to reach out to citizens who happen to be Hispanic. We share similar family values, we share a similar work ethic and so on. That’s how we appeal to Hispanics, especially middle class Hispanics. Going along with an expansion of the Democrats party membership by giving people here illegally citizenship is not how we appeal to Hispanics. The empirical data shows this, we lost Hispanic votes after Reagan’s amnesty. There is no doubt we would lose votes again in the future should amnesty be passed. If we want Hispanic votes we have to work for them and that means not handing out freebies from the government and citizenship to law breakers. Unfortunately the GOP establishment never learns its lesson.

Filed under Republicans Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Mitt Romney: Another Moderate Failure

November 9, 2012 4 Comments

President Obama received just under 10 million fewer votes in 2012 as he received in 2008. Turnout across the board was down, including Republican turnout. Romney won independents by 5 points, reversing Obama’s 8 point independent win over McCain. With the exit polls now out we have to ask ourselves a couple of questions. First, why did ten million people decide not to vote rather than vote for Mitt Romney. Second, why did fewer Republicans turn out for Romney than turned out for McCain? The answer lies in the candidate of Mitt Romney, who 10 million people who are unhappy with Obama didn’t trust and who Republicans didn’t much trust either.

The failure of Mitt Romney can be seen in the 10 million voters who once supported Obama but didn’t show up to vote on Tuesday. This is the group of undecided voters who historically break towards the challenger. Instead this group decided they would rather stay home. This of course means that they both were unhappy with Obama but they didn’t trust Romney. There are two reasons for Romney not gaining their trust. First he ran and governed as a liberal Republican, only to run for President as a conservative. He looked to these people like he was power hungry, willing to say anything to get elected. Second, his campaign’s failure to respond to a summer of Bain attacks hurt him more than the polls indicated.

The polls focused on likely voters, it seems many in this group of 10 million decided long ago they weren’t likely voters. Obama set Romney up to appear as an untrustworthy via the Bain ads, the Obama campaign basically confirmed what these 10 million people already suspected. Romney wasn’t trustworthy from the start, Obama exploited that to the fullest extent. Obama could afford to lose 10 million votes and still win, what he could not afford to do was have 10 million switch to Romney. Team Obama made sure that wouldn’t happen by focusing all summer on Romney’s untrustworthy history and campaign.

What’s even more striking is that fewer Republicans came to vote on Tuesday than in 2008. Romney got around the same number of votes as McCain in 2008 but he did so by winning independents. Fewer Republicans came to the polls despite poll after poll showing increased GOP enthusiasm. This shouldn’t be particularly surprising, Romney couldn’t even come up with half the votes of the GOP rank and file during the primary. He ran a bitterly nasty campaign, accusing every other candidate of being a conservative heretic while everyone else knew he was a liberal fraud. Conservatives went through one candidate after another trying to come up with someone, anyone who could beat Romney.

Unfortunately the conservatives were unsuccessful. The bitterness of the primary campaign didn’t go away. While the goal of seeing Obama defeated lured many to vote for Romney, it wasn’t enough for everyone. But let’s be perfectly honest here, one of the reasons he lost was because he’s a Mormon. Between 15-20% of the country has said in poll after poll they won’t vote for a Mormon. To think that didn’t keep home some Republicans and some of the 10 million former Obama voters is wishful thinking. We Christians faced a terrible choice between a practical atheist and a Mormon. More than a few couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a Mormon.

If the GOP is ever to win the White House again we have to nominate an actual conservative. Not one who may have seen the light a couple years ago but a life long conservative with a record to back him up. Yes, we also need to focus on getting a minority on the ticket. But the key is we have to nominate someone who is honest, who has a lifetime of conservative policies. Yes, we also need to nominate a Christian. The last two elections ought to have taught us a lesson. We cannot continue to nominate moderates if we expect to win. Moderates always lose, conservatives always win.

Filed under Republicans Tagged with , , , , , ,

Boehner Must Deliver Partisan Gridlock

November 7, 2012 18 Comments

You aren’t seriously depressed now that our self described “progressive” Republican and johnny come lately conservative has been soundly defeated are you? Mitt Romney, in his nasty primary campaign wherein he accused every other candidate of being a conservative heretic, couldn’t convince Republicans he was a conservative. You expected him to convince the nation he was on the up and up? Going into the first debate it was conventional wisdom that if Obama won it the race was over. Romney won the debate and unfortunately the GOP went mad on the mere thought of defeating Obama. We should have been preparing for the next four years with him as President.

Obama is a lame duck today. The next two months will define his second term. He has no mandate. He got less votes than 2008 and despite Romney’s absolutely pathetic performance Obama still has two less states than 2008. We have in the next six weeks several major issues that are coming up which require Congressional action. The Bush tax cuts expire on January 1st and Obama’s sequestration begins on that date. Sometime in the next six weeks the debt ceiling is going to be hit and Congressional action will be needed to raise it.

It’s now up to weepy John Boehner to hold firm and not give into Obama and the Democrats. The debt ceiling provides the perfect opportunity for Boehner. He should refuse to raise the debt ceiling unless all of the Bush tax cuts are extended for four years. Don’t like that Obama? Tough toenails, the GOP should be prepared to allow the nation to default on its debt and/or force a government shut down. If Boehner plays his cards right, something Romney never did, he can rally support around not raising the debt ceiling based on the fact that we have an almost unreal $16 trillion debt.

Boehner has a real opportunity to get something for the GOP in exchange for a debt ceiling increase. But Boehner needs to be willing to play hardball with Obama. He can’t be afraid to walk away from the negotiating table. He can’t allow fear of the 2014 mid-term elections to scare him away from making a deal advantageous to GOP interests. We’ve just seen an election that two weeks ago appeared to be swinging towards Romney only to watch a hurricane come in and sweep it back to Obama.Voters don’t think long term. By November 2014 few will remember the debt ceiling negotiation of 2012. The few that remember can likely be counted on to vote for their party anyway.

It is now up to John Boehner to protect the country from whatever Obama’s second term agenda is. Our nation has just re-elected a man who refused to defend his first term and refused to tell us what his second term agenda is. It’s absolutely incredible, he could decide he wants just about anything at this point. It’s up to Boehner to block it. The nation voted for partisan gridlock yesterday and we can only hope the Republicans are prepared to deliver partisan gridlock. If John Boehner isn’t up to the task, Eric Cantor is looking over his shoulder. Don’t think for a second that Boehner doesn’t know that and lose a little sleep at night over it. He should, if the Speaker cannot deliver gridlock the rank and file ought to remove him in favor of Cantor.

Filed under Republicans Tagged with , , , , , ,

October 18th Republican Debate Review

October 19, 2011 Leave a comment

Last night CNN hosted a debate with Anderson Cooper Vanderbilt as host. Keep in mind this host has accused Republicans of lying eight times more than Democrats on his CNN show. Not surprisingly as moderator of the debate Cooper encouraged fighting and asked loaded leftist questions. On to the analysis.

Let’s start with Rick Perry who essentially lost any hope he had last night. Perry came out with over the top attacks on Mitt Romney, including accusing him of hiring illegal house help. He brought this up repeatedly, as though his accusation would somehow make everyone forget he’s giving free college education to illegals in Texas. There’s no point in going through all that went wrong for Perry last night. But it should be noted that all of the stunts Perry pulled were straight out of the Democrat Party handbook. He grew up in that party and he clearly hasn’t given it up.

Herman Cain did not have a particularly good night. He failed to properly address concerns with his 999 plan. His plan is revenue neutral and the middle class isn’t going to be paying more in taxes. What he failed to point out last night is that 999 eliminates FICA and Medicare taxes, which total around 9%. Businesses would no longer pay their share of that 9% to employees, which effectively equals the sales tax increase thus prices wouldn’t rise. Cain had to explain that and he didn’t. It was also incredibly troubling to hear he might negotiate with terrorists for the release of Guantanamo Bay terrorists. He backed off his original statement but it was troubling nonetheless.

Mitt Romney was in the middle of a number of heated exchanges. He bested Cain, Perry and Newt last night. It won’t win him the nomination yet but it puts him a step closer. Romney is certainly capable of being President. His problem remains his flip flopping and his Rockefeller Republicanism. He isn’t a conservative, which is why the party will continue to rate him below 30%. Even after a very strong performance last night.

Newt is perhaps the most knowledgable candidate on state. He knows the conservative position and articulates it better than anyone else. His vow to challenge Obama to Lincoln-Douglas style 3 hour debates with no moderator was priceless. One wonders if Newt doesn’t become the next conservative flavor of the month if Cain drops off. He had another strong performance.

Michele Bachmann’s voice is shrill and she continues to repeat the same old lines. Though I’ll give her credit for not mentioning her 28 children this debate. Nevertheless she mentioned her tax attorney job from 20 years ago and the fact that she’ll repeal Obamacare. Bachmann has strong positions, she makes good arguments. But she makes the same arguments over and over again. The problem I have with Bachmann is that she knows everything that’s wrong with the current administration but she tells us little of her vision to replace all that she would get rid of. Until she can offer a vision outside of getting rid of all things Obama, she can’t possibly be a first tier candidate.

Rick Santorum is the only guy up there talking about the family. The family is the #1 enemy of the progressive left and it always has been. So it’s great to see one of these guys talking about it. But Santorum comes off so whiny. He comes off as the neglected underdog who wants to tell you all about how neglected he is. Last night he seemed to support Iran-Contra, which ought to end his chances completely. When you’re polling under 5% you can’t expect to stick around when you support something like Iran-Contra. Santorum loves to mention how he’s won two elections in blue state Pennsylvania. He neglects to mention he lost his last re-election battle in 2006. It’s time for Santorum to end his campaign.

What does one say about Ron Paul? It wouldn’t be a debate without Paul grousing about the Fed. He can’t help but mention it, as though we don’t know his position. It wouldn’t be a debate without him declaring that terrorists aren’t actually terrorists, as he did yet again last night. If Ron Paul were just running an economic campaign, he wouldn’t be so bad. But Paul has a well thought out foreign policy that is contrary to the overwhelming majority of Republicans. He isn’t like Cain, who’s inexperience can be made up for with solid advisers. Paul has thought about these issues for decades and like the far left he takes the blame America position. This is the single biggest issue keeping him from rising to the level of contender.

Win: Romney because he dished it to everyone and didn’t make any mistakes

Place: Newt, with Cain’s fall Newt took advantage and may be the next flavor of the month

Show: Bachmann, she’s shrill and didn’t offer anything new but she at least does a good job saying the same thing over and over again. But let’s face it, no one else did a good enough job to come in third place.

Big  Losers: Perry’s campaign is done after last nights debate. Cain didn’t do as good a job as he should have but he has enough support right now that he has a chance to rebound.

Filed under 2012 election, Republicans Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Conservative Need To Back One Candidate To Ensure Romney’s Defeat

October 17, 2011 Leave a comment

Newt Gingrich spent the better part of the weekend pointing out Mitt Romney’s Rockefeller problem. Rockefeller Republicans have long had a hard time winning the hearts of the conservative base of the party. It’s one reason why Romney hasn’t gained the support of more than 25% of the party. Conservatives view him as a moderate, with good reason. Romneycare doesn’t help him one bit. His 59 point program is long, unwieldy and full of progressive positions. Romney is almost the big government liberal that Obama is, just in a different way.

Romney’s flip flops surely don’t endear him to conservatives. He’s a johnny come lately on abortion, claiming to be pro-life after years of being pro-abortion. He’s for Romneycare but against Obamacare. His rationale is at best weak. For some reason Romney thinks its ok for states to run a big program like Romneycare but it isn’t ok for the Feds to run something similar. Constitutionally speaking Romney is correct but is this really a conservative position? Hardly. Big government isn’t ok so long as its the states trampling on our rights rather than the Federal government.

Romney is being advised by a bunch of radical environmentalists, some of whom have ties to Obama. As Governor Romney was advised by Harvard Prof John Holdren. Together they passed the most stringent CO2 emissions standards in the country in 2005. Romney did in Massachussetts what Obama seeks to have the EPA do to the entire country. Romney was also advised by Douglas Foy. Foy proposed a regional Cap & Trade program, which Romney supported until he decided he was running for Governor. Foy also used the courts to block a nuclear power plant and off shore drilling. All of this while part of the Romney administration.

No wonder conservatives don’t like Mitt Romney. He isn’t a conservative. Newt is right, Romney has a significant Rockefeller problem. It’s a problem that isn’t going to go away. Even if Romney wins the GOP nomination, are conservatives going to enthusiastically support him? Conventional wisdom at this point suggests that Republicans will support any Republican nominated to run against Obama. But the last four times we’ve nominated candidates from the Rockefeller wing of the party they’ve lost because the grass roots of the party didn’t put the work in necessary for victory. (Ford lost in ’76, Bush lost in ’92 once his Rockefeller positions were exposed, Dole lost in ’96 and McCain lost in ’08)

What are conservatives to do at this point? We need to line up behind one of the conservative candidates. Right now people are lining up behind Herman Cain. He’s a fine candidate and he would do very well against Obama. But he isn’t going to win the nomination so long as the conservative vote is split between him and Newt, Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry. It’s time for some of these lower end candidates to back out and endorse Cain so that he will have a better shot against Romney. For as much as we want Obama to lose, we should also want to ensure that our nominee isn’t Mitt Romney.

 

Filed under 2012 election, Republicans Tagged with , , , , , ,

October 11th Republican Debate Review

October 12, 2011 2 Comments

Last night the GOP had another debate on something called the Bloomberg Network. It was hosted by Charlie Rose, who declared he believes in roundtables. (I believe in refrigerators) As such the candidates were seated at a table and questioned by Rose and a couple of leftist reporterettes from the Washington Post.

Let’s start with the big loser: Rick Perry. Perry needed to have a stellar debate and he did anything but. He didn’t stumble over his words this time around but he did nothing to recover from his September tumble. Perry is at best inconsistent, touting all the jobs venture socialism has created in Texas but slamming Obama for Solyndra. Either you’re for venture socialism or you’re not, let’s not play the state-federal game on this one. On healthcare, Perry spent most of his time talking about obscure Texas provisions when he should have been on the offensive against Romneycare. Outside of energy, Perry has little to say.

Romney is steady eddy. He never makes a mistake and answers all of his questions in the way he wants. Unfortunately this usually means skimming over the actual question. He was unable to explain why he has tax cuts specifically targeted for the middle class at a lower threshold level than Obama, he completely glossed over the question. He was only able to name 7 of his 59 points in his grand save America plan. But he doesn’t answer the question is such a fluid way that it isn’t until after the debate that you realize he never answered anything. Like it or not, that goes a long way in elections.

Herman Cain had a solid night. It was clear he is considered a serious challenger and a front runner by the other candidates because they all talked about him. He’s energetic and enthusiastically explains his 999 plan. He fended off Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann’s argument that adding a new sales tax will only embolden leftists with a new revenue stream by saying his plan included a 2/3 majority to raise any of the rates. In other words if Democrats wanted to raise taxes his law would require a 2/3 majority in Congress. Whether this is Constitutional remains to be seen. Nevertheless, he fended off their attacks with ease. Cain is a serious contender.

Michele Bachmann had a solid night. Dressed in to much white, Mrs. Bachmann explained her positions with ease. She went on the offensive when necessary. Her biggest problem though is that there isn’t much substance to her arguments. She’s making them as though she’s on an evening talk show on Fox or CNN and she’s talking about what’s going on in Congress. She’s running for President though. There never seems to be anything other than her same old criticisms of Obama. Yes, we all know she was a tax lawyer 20 years ago and that she has 5 kids and 23 foster kids. At some point she has to move beyond that and her basic talking points. There’s a reason why she’s down in the polls. Those of us who have watched all the debates see the same, boring arguments from her every time. But at least she presents them well.

Newt went on the offensive against the media early in the debate. He even insisted on being allowed to answer a question twice in the first hour of the debate. Then he faded into the background. Has anyone else noticed this seems to happen at every debate? Is it because the leftist media questioners are punishing him for attacking them or does Newt tire easily? Newt is perhaps the best guy up there to present the conservative position but he didn’t do anything last night to boost his candidacy. He isn’t going to make it through January at this point. I wonder who he’ll endorse.

Rick Santorum might as well not have existed in the first hour of the debate. He was hardly asked anything and he never stood out. In the second hour he had a great attack on Cain’s 999 play only to see Cain shoot back with his 2/3 majority requirement to increase taxes. Santorum did have one solid point about families. He’s absolutely right that the bedrock of America is the family. The leftists have for a century tried to tear down the family and replace it with government. It was great to hear someone on stage bring that up. But it isn’t going to win him the nomination.

Jon Huntsman is a bore and belongs in the Democrat Party running as a blue dog. His jokes are lame and his arguments are almost irrelevant. He has as much chance of winning the nomination as Hillary Clinton.

Ron Paul is the same old boring candidate he’s always been. He makes the same arguments and has the same number of supporters he always has. He wins no votes at these debates. His supporters go wild but if he never increases his base he can’t win the nomination much less the White House.

Win: This is a tough one but I’m going with Romney because he’s still the front runner and he didn’t hurt himself.

Place: Herman Cain had a solid night. He’s a serious contender and he showed it with this very solid debate performance.

Show: I’ll begrudgingly go with Bachmann because none of the others stood out. At least she was solid in her presentation.

Big Loser: Rick Perry because he didn’t do anything to stop his fall in the polls. His legion of supporters who think he’s the next Reagan must he wondering what’s happened to their guy.

Filed under 2012 election, Republicans Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Herman Cain Needs To Prepare For Nasty Leftist Onslaught

October 10, 2011 7 Comments

GOP Presidential candidate Herman Cain has surged in the last couple weeks to earn a spot in the top tier of candidates. Watching him speak and debate there isn’t any question why. Cain is charismatic, enthusiastic and optimistic. He doesn’t have a political background but his success in business more than makes up for it. Cain has taken on the Occupy Wall Street protesters calling them jealous and accusing them of playing the victim card.

If Cain wins the GOP nomination the American people will be given the choice between two very clear worldviews. Obama’s view that people are victims who need to rely on the government and Cain’s view that none of us our victims and we must rely on ourselves and our own hard work. Obama’s entire life has been about playing the victim and rallying people to be dependant on government. Herman Cain, the son of a poor laundry lady and a chauffeur who grew up in segregated Georgia, has never played the victim card. He was taught not to rely on government and to rely only on his own hard work. Americans will have a very clear choice of worldviews if Cain gets the nomination.

The problem with Cain is that if he gets the GOP nomination he’s going to be relentlessly attacked by left-wing blacks such as Al Sharpton. Sharpton is already questioning whether Cain is “authentically” black. In the world of Sharpton your race defines what you believe. If a black man doesn’t fall into line with the leftist policies of Sharpton, the Rainbow Coalition or the NAACP then he isn’t “authentic.” Last summer leftists accused Cain of being a minstrel act in black face. Now we have Sharpton accusing Cain of not being authentically black.

It will only get worse from here. White conservatives have already been accused of racism for supporting Herman Cain. Only in the world of liberals could support for a black man for President be construed as racist. Unlike liberal Democrats, conservative Republicans don’t choose candidates based on their race. Conservatives such as myself like Cain because he’s optimistic and we like his conservative economic plan, his social security plan and his social conservative viewpoints. His race isn’t a factor at all, he’s simply doing a better job than the other conservative candidates in the debates. That’s he’s black is irrelevant to us.

The real concern though isn’t that the left will call conservatives racists for wanting a black President. They’ve been calling us racists without evidence for decades, it’s almost irrelevant now. The real concern is for Mr. Cain and his family. When Clarence Thomas was nominated for the Supreme Court the left concocted a ridiculous sex scandal without any evidence. Historically the racist way to discredit a black man is to accuse him of being a sexual predator. With Herman Cain, we’re sadly waiting for the left to accuse him of raping a white woman or engaging in some other immoral conduct. That there won’t be any evidence doesn’t matter. The left will be out to destroy Herman Cain, the truth matters not to these people. It didn’t with Justice Thomas and it surely won’t with Herman Cain.

 Herman Cain is a great candidate for President and I hope he continues to move up the polls. He would make a terrific President. Perhaps it can be said that the attacks the left will come up with against him they would come up with against anyone. But I can’t help but look to the treatment of Justice Thomas and more recently Sarah Palin and wonder what they’ll try to do to Cain. I hope he knows what he’s getting himself into. If he’s prepared for it, he’ll be able to battle back against the nonsense and persevere. He really has a wonderful, positive message that America needs to hear. It stands in stark contract to the negative message of Obama.

Filed under 2012 election, Republicans Tagged with , , , , , ,

Sept. 7th Republican Debate Review

September 8, 2011 2 Comments

Last night the Republicans held a debate at the Reagan Library which was televised by MSNBC. I had a hard time finding MSNBC, as I suspect a lot of Republicans did. My first thought upon seeing the candidates is that MSNBC showed their typical left-wing bias by  placing Mitt Romney and Rick Perry in the middle so that they appeared to be the most important two candidates and the rest looked like hangers on. My suspicion was confirmed as the moderators spent more time on those two than on any other candidate. Here’s how I believe the candidates fared.

All eyes were on Rick Perry. He’s suddenly the front runner, having done nothing more than announce his candidacy. He needed to have a stellar night to keep the momentum. He had his moments but overall I thought he looked unsure of himself. He had a hard time answering questions about climate change, despite the fact that he’s right on the subject. He was ruthlessly attacked for his executive order forcing parents to have their daughters vaccinated with the HPV vaccine. He didn’t have a good response. He was solid on taxes and Obamacare and he did lob a few attacks at Romney. Overall though, he just looked like one of the crowd. I’ll bet he loses a little momentum after last night.

Which brings up Mitt Romney, the man MSNBC wanted Perry to debate with exclusively. This guy is steady eddie, the same attacks were lobbed at him as always, Romneycare, liberal Massachusetts policies and so on. Jon Huntsman even attacked Romney for creating less jobs than Michael Dukakis. None of the attacks matter, Romney is a teflon candidate. He smiles, ignores the attacks and talks about whatever he wants to talk about. Romney didn’t do anything to kill his candidacy and he helped it along by attacking Perry and slowing his momentum.

Herman Cain had perhaps the best debate of the campaign so far. He was solid, knowledgeably and he was the only one who provided a specific plan. Cain’s 999 plan, which would reduce income taxes to 9%, corporate rates to 9% and create a national sales tax of 9% in the very least shows that Cain has some ideas that are conservative and different from the other candidates. He had perhaps the best line of the night “God only commands 10%, the government can live on 9%.” Conservatives will love this line, the lefties at MSNBC I’m sure found it outrageous. Very solid night for Cain though, it will be interesting to see if the polls reflect his great performance.

Michele Bachmann was a poor man’s Herman Cain last night. She looked out of it, she wasn’t feisty like she usually is. She was basically ignored by the MSNBC moderators, I suspect intentionally. Her solid points are Obamacare and jobs. She had a great line about how she will, as President, lead the fight to repeal Obamacare. That was great, but after the first half hour she was either ignored or didn’t have anything interesting to say. Mrs. Bachmann probably peaked to early. I wouldn’t count her out as a VP selection. 

Newt Gingrich is masterful on stage. He doesn’t put up with gotcha questions from the piranha moderators. His answers are coherent and they’re usually right on. He displays a fundamental understanding of how the political process in Washington works and how it can be played. I don’t think he has a shot at the nomination because he has to much baggage. But most Republicans will have loved his performance last night. He adds a lot to these debates.

Rick Santorum was largely forgotten last night. He said a few good things but he was mostly forgettable. It’s time for him to leave like Tim Pawlenty. He doesn’t have a chance and at this point he’s just taking votes away from other conservative candidates.

Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman are polar opposites. They are each running for President in the wrong party. Paul should be running as a Libertarian, Huntsman as a Democrat. Paul was once again all over the place last night. Even when he had the better argument, he’s borderline incoherent. If you don’t understand libertarian thought, you can’t make the connection between what he’s saying and what he means. As for Huntsman, he didn’t do or say anything last night that will earn him any votes. He’s really a non factor in the race.

Something must be said about MSNBC’s racist actions last night. They dragged out some hispanic reporter from Telemundo to ask questions about illegal immigration. The reporter only asked questions about this subject. Does MSNBC really think that the only issues Hispanics are interested in is immigration? The notion that an entire ethnic group can be defined by a single issue is absurd and racist. Of course, if Fox News had pulled this stunt the lefties at MSNBC would be howling racism. When the left-wing network does it, it’s sticking it to Republicans. The double standard is disgusting.

Win: Romney because he was steady and Perry faltered. These two are at the top of the polls, Romney got the better of Perry.

Place: Herman Cain did a terrific job last night and may be the leader amongst conservatives at this point as Bachmann fell back a bit.

Show: Newt. His masterful performance cannot be discounted.

Filed under 2012 election, Republicans Tagged with , , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 143 other followers