Search This Blog

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Why the Republicans lost

Congratulations to the President.

We predicted Romney would have enough support galvanized to make the difference in the battleground states and we were mistaken.

Though not a big surprise by any stretch... If deviant characters like Richard Nixon and George W. Bush could win re-election, why not Obama...

But even though we made clear in our last post we were not fond of the President's policies, in no way have we ever expressed that we were fond of Romney's either.   One is Wall Street's whore.. The other IS Wall St...  So its kinda like choosing which to bite into-- a rotten apple or a rancid orange?

But that's how the system is set up.. completely control the process so that as few true choices for voters emerge during an election cycle and by the time its all over, convince people they are voting A or B when its really A1 v A2.

So why did the Republicans lose? 
We think it can be traced back to 12 months ago when the various Republican nominees were throwing their hats into the collective 'ring'; each campaigning to their base trying to outdo the others as to who was going to cut the most from what they call entitlements (or what we call means of survival) and who could promise the greatest tax cuts to multinational corporations and the top 1%.

And that was the entirety of the Republican primaries-- who would as President slash the most from Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment assistance and Food Stamps and give the juiciest financial breaks to the well-to-do while expanding the military budget..

And through this process, every nominee running was utterly repugnant and a candidate like Mitt Romney who is really in truth a moderate Republican who successfully governed the liberal state of Massachusetts had to essentially lie & pretend he was this horrible fiscally conservative monster.  

And when his core supporters still didn't believe he was a convert to their cutthroat way of fiscal thinking, he wasted his VP choice on a hardcore fiscal conservative Tea Party lackey to shore up the party's base.
So when Romney stated during the campaign he had no interest in anyone making less than $30k a year and his infamous '47 percent' comment, who knows if he Truly believed it.. But Romney was giving his base some 'red meat'; re-affirming a party position that every prospective Republican nominee held.

And if they don't change this Horrible ideology, the Republicans will lose in 2016 as well.

Its not about courting more minorities as some conservative pundits have now suggested because people can easily see through weak-minded attempts to attract them based on their race or ethnicity.  Its about understanding that the working poor and those on disability or struggling to survive are people too... 

And they Matter..  

And they do vote..

And they like the middle class and wealthy have issues which are important to them which require a sincere audience and genuine redress...
The modern Democrat party pretty much ignores the poor as well, but they can live on the reputation and historical precedent that the party did in fact at one time work to make their lives better.  

The modern Democratic Party of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama is a far, far cry from the days of FDR and LBJ but to the average person, they don't realize this and so vote accordingly... Besides, what are they do to-- vote for a Republican who promises to destroy them if elected?

And what is the Republicans' historical track record of helping the downtrodden and working man (and woman)?  And please don't scrape the bottom of the barrel by bringing up Abraham Lincoln and that 'Emancipation' canard as some Reps like to do.

When Bush 43 ran for office in 2000, he used a term to describe his goal if he was to become President.. it was called 'Compassionate Conservatism', and whether it was really thus, or a bunch of empty words like 'Mission Accomplished' is debatable..

But if the Republican Party ever wishes to take the White House in 2016, they better start learning what the term is supposed to mean and have candidates willing to genuinely implement it because these next four years are going to be Brutal...

And by 2016, the American people are going to need lots of TLC