Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Pat Buchanan :: Townhall.com Columnist
Glimmers of Hope for the GOP
by Pat Buchanan
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


For conservatives fretful over the future of the party to which they have given allegiance, "How Barack Obama Won: A State by State Guide to the Historic 2008 Election" reads like something out of Edgar Allan Poe.

Co-authored by NBC's Chuck Todd, it is a grim tale of what happened to the GOP in 2008, and what the future may hold.

Yet, on second and third reads, one discerns, as did Gen. Wolfe's scouts 250 years ago, a narrow path leading up the cliff to the Plains of Abraham -- and perhaps victory in 2012. First, the bad news:

Obama raised the national share of the black vote to 13 percent, then swept it 95 percent to 4 percent. The GOP share of the Hispanic vote, now 9 percent of the electorate, fell from George W. Bush's 40 percent against John Kerry to 32 percent. Young voters ages 18 to 29 went for Obama 66 percent to 31 percent. And Obama ran stronger among white voters with a college education than did either Al Gore or Kerry.

Put starkly, the voting groups growing in numbers -- Hispanics, Asians, African-Americans, folks with college degrees, the young -- are all trending Democratic, while the voters most loyal to the GOP -- white folks and religious conservatives -- are declining as a share of the U.S. electorate. And demography is destiny.

Other grim news: As noted here recently, 18 states and Washington, D.C., with 247 electoral votes -- all New England save New Hampshire; New York and New Jersey; the mid-Atlantic states, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland; Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota; the three Pacific Coast states plus Hawaii -- have all gone Democratic in all of the last five presidential elections. And John McCain lost every one of them by double digits.

In this Slough of Despond, where is the hope?

Despite all of the above, John McCain, two weeks after the GOP convention, thanks to the surge in energy and enthusiasm Sarah Palin brought to the ticket, was running ahead of Obama.

It was the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the crash and the panic that ensued, which McCain mishandled, that lost him all the ground he never made up. Had the crash not occurred, the election might have been much closer than seven points, which in itself is no blowout.

Second, an astonishing 75 percent of voters thought the country was headed in the wrong direction. Obama won these voters 62 percent to 36 percent. But if the country is seen as headed in the wrong direction in 2012, it will be Obama's albatross.

Third, only 27 percent of voters approved of Bush's performance as of Election Day; 71 percent disapproved. Only Harry Truman had a lower rating, 22 percent, and Democrats were also wiped out in Washington in 1952.

Here is Todd's dramatic point: "With the single exception of Missouri, which barely went for McCain, Obama won every state where Bush's approval rating was below 35 percent in the exit polls, and he lost every state where Bush's approval was above 35 percent."

Obama rode Bush's coattails to victory. Had Bush been at 35 percent or 40 percent, McCain might have won. But, in 2012, Obama will not have Bush to kick around anymore.

On candidates' qualities, the situation looks even rosier for the GOP. In 2008, no less than 34 percent of the electorate said that the most important consideration in a candidate was that he be for "change."

Obama was the "change candidate." He patented the brand, and he carried this third of the nation 89 percent to 9 percent.

But in 2012, Obama cannot be the candidate of change. That title will belong to his challenger, the Republican nominee. Obama will be the incumbent, the candidate of continuity.

The second most critical consideration of voters in choosing a president was "values." No less than 30 percent of the electorate said this was their primary consideration in voting for McCain or Obama.

Among values voters, fully 30 percent of the electorate, McCain won 65 percent to 32 percent, or by two to one.

What these numbers demonstrate is that liberals and neocons instructing the GOP to dump the social, moral and cultural issues are counseling Republicide. When African-Americans, who gave McCain 4 percent of their votes in California, gave Proposition 8, prohibiting gay marriage, 70 percent of their votes, why would the GOP give up one of its trump cards -- not only in Middle America but among minorities?

A conservative who could have sharpened the social, moral and cultural differences might, from the exit polls, have done far better.

McCain's diffidence on life, affirmative action and gay rights, his embrace of amnesty and NAFTA, all help explain the enthusiasm gap. Twice as many voters were excited about the prospects of an Obama presidency as were about a McCain presidency.

Lastly, on Election Day, only 7 percent thought the U.S. economy was doing well, while 93 percent rated it as not so good, or poor. The GOP will not have to wear those concrete boots in 2012.

The tide is still running strong against the GOP. But there may be one or two more White Houses in the Grand Old Party yet.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Pat Buchanan is a founding editor of The American Conservative magazine, and the author of many books including State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Pat Buchanan's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
It’s hard to imagine...
how anyone can gain an once of insight from the question “Do you believe the country is headed in the right direction?”

This is the kind of question that can be interpreted 100 different ways, and most polls ask this not because they want a real answer but because they can spin the answer to mean anything they want it to mean.

In the case of Bush, it was particularly confusing. The Dems were going to give a negative reply because a Republican was in charge, and Republicans were distraught because they disagreed with Bush on almost everything but foreign policy.

I was a Republican, but I thought the country was headed in the wrong direction because of Bush’s push for amnesty for illegal aliens and the way he was expanding entitlements and spending like a drunken sailor.

Of course, these polls never ask for the details, so anyone looking at my answers would have said, “She disagrees with Bush’s stand on Iraq.” This, of course, was not true. In fact, Iraq was about the only thing I DID agree on where Bush was concerned.

This is why you should never pay attention to polls. They're never about gauging public opinion. They're always about manipulating those who are undecided.

"No Big Tent"

"All of us don't need to have a big tent."
"All of us don't need to build a big tent."

None of us needs to play Identity Politics and hang shutters, drapes, lighting and buy the paint for a new, cobbled together house in a new neighborhood.

"The GOP did not move to the RIGHT. It moved to the LEFT."

The GOP didn't move away from us; it moved left and went to LEFT, which is a neighborhood that tries to make us "go along to get along" with them. And, what kind of lunacy is that? If you are going to look for a car. Do you take the $5 car from the GOP ar or do you let the LEFT give one worth $100? You see, no one can outspend Obama.

So, where to now? Home.

There is a strong and solid foundation, which lies vacant in a neighbor that celebrated Reagan. He didn't win the LARGEST ELECTORAL COLLEGE VICTORY IN HISTORY by acting like either of the current parties. Rebuild that house on the old foundation with a focus on the Constitution, Conservatism, Capitalism, Slash Tax Rates Across The Board, a Strong Foreign Policy (with no Apology Tours), Faith and America ...

And, TEACH EVERY MINUTE OF EVERY DAY. Few Republicans actually even know what Conservatism and the Constitution mean. The GOP has continued to allow the MSM and comedic clowns to define what Conservatism and a strong reliance on the Constitution is so they ridiculed us and labeled us "radical right-wing extremists."

Build it and they will come, especially when this share-the wealth community organizer watches his bs economy blow up and "his new friends around the world" teach him a lesson. Trust me, all of "The Forgotten Men and Women" will have had it with watching their money be taken from them and distributed to the loafabouts.

And, Megan McCain can go back to her Democratic Party.

Bush Era Is Over
Two recommendations for conservative Republicans who want to elect a president who will bring the country back to an even keel:

1. Do not nominate a Bush. These Yale WASPs are in the direct line of Nelson Rockefeller and represent no real change from liberal Democrats. Jeb Bush apparently is a nice guy but after two failed Bush presidencies we should have learned our lesson. Jeb should be relegated to writing his memoirs and admonished not to even consider a run for the presidency. The Bush era should be declared over for once and forever.

2. Ignore McCain. He is the greatest disaster to the GOP since Bob Dole. Aside from his heroic war record McCain's compass point spun all over the dial. He thought the media loved him and they deserted him, as most of us conservatives knew it would do.

If we conservatives cannot find a real conservative Republican leader with rock-hard principles we deserve to lose.




pay your debts Mr bUchanan
I understand that you still owe the Republivcan Pearty hundreds of thousands of ollars that was supposed to be spent on your presodential campaigns. Please return forthwith, unless of course your sister took there dollars with her when she left. RSVP

But who will the Republicans turn to?
Who is the national spokesman, what is the platform? Ticking off the reasons McCain lost makes little difference if no attempt is made to change them. I heard Rush today saying good riddance to Specter, that Republicans need to get back to their roots of tax cuts, abortion and immigration. But if Hispanics are turning to the Democrats in increasing numbers, then how do you win them back on the immigration issue?

We've seen this before
When Reagan swept the nation the Dems were pronounced dead, when Obama squeaked by with ACORN's help and an uninspiring questionable Republican we are far from dead.
We can't let the media set the agenda. We can't listen to those who say the era of Reagan is over. When is "It's morning in America again" ever over.

Ms Kelly
Excellent analysis of the meaning of polls, ie, they usually mean NOTHING.

agree with Pat B. once again
re:
"Had the crash not occurred, the election might have been much closer than seven points, which in itself is no blowout...
only 27 percent of voters approved of Bush's performance as of Election Day; 71 percent disapproved. Only Harry Truman had a lower rating...

Obama rode Bush's coattails to victory."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

It is ESSENTIAL that Republicans and conservatives NOT repeat some of the Dubya mistakes that dragged them down recently-- mainly spending and growing guvment like liberals!

Notwithstanding that caveat, Republicans won 5 of 6 elections after Carter, several by blowouts... only Slick Willie's second term was a solid win for the left-- until Glowbama-- and Slick Willie was dancing like a center-right pol (the era of big govt. is OVER). Slick had claimed a mandate in '92, but gadfly Perot botched up those results, and with a Libertarian/right message at that.

It was NOT the traditional Republican message that the electorate repudiated in 2008... it was Dubya's neoCON adventure in Iraq, followed by the economic collapse, which the LEFT in Congress (Dodd, Barney "I want your Frank," Schumer, etc.) had engendered with demands for sub-prime mortgage lending.

The ObaMessiah/Glowbama will likely learn to regret it if he overplays the big guvment stratagem. The tea parties are a sincere rejection in the making. His negatives are HIGHER than Dubya's were after 3 months-- and back then, many had thought that Dubya was illegitimately elected.

the albatross of Presidente Jorge

I voted for Dubya 2x as the presumed lesser evil (a Hobson's Choice, really), but he sure stunk up the place.

He spent $ and grew guvment (Rx Care for Seniors) like a drunken sailor Crat.

He let the neoCONS (whose real motive was to take out Iraq for Israel) snooker him into a profligate war against the wrong Islamics.
Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11, and secular Saddam and zealot Osama were opponents on different pages.

Worst of all, like various other CINO/RINO's, he effectively embraced ILLEGAL aliens via neglecting to secure the border and failing to enforce existing laws... now we are stuck with 20 million soon-to-be-democrat voters... the left and the Chosen One cannot wait to enfranchise them (they need not be citizens to vote either).

Talk was cheap about defending America, when the REAL threat was allowed to flood across the border and permeate social pathologies (crime, drugs, gangs, identity fraud, illegitimacies, tax and welfare fraud, barrio blight, school decimation) like the Black Death.

Finally, he effectively gave us the ObaMessiah, because "change" REALLY meant a repudiation of the failed Presidente Jorge Bush... America did not really intend to embrace more big guvment, but that is what is being foisted upon us.

I don't see it
You can take that whole crew, currently out on the magical listening tour and throw them under the bus. I don't hear the message coming from them or the pages of TH that will lead to a conservative victory.

Here's the message and the man who should be leading this parade. Here's a link:

http://demint.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=JimsJo urnal.Detail&Blog_ID=caf04b56-f811-de51-31ca-e2f175867d3b

That is the message I want to hear if either party is interested in my vote.

Citizenship and Voting
I fully agree with Joel-De Oppresso Liber's post Citizenship and Voting.

It might be of interest to some Patriots; that I am an immigrant who was honored to get my citizenship in the early 70's; am not of the Judeo-Christian,Islamic faiths; but firmly believe in my own religion which also is against abortion etc. I belong a non-white minority and extremely proud to be a Conservative and do not denigrate any religion. Go Conservatives -- 2010, 2012 and onwards. Let us save this country from Totalitarian Corrupt Polito-Cratic control.

(Polito-Cratic I define as a Cabal of Politicians and Bureaucrats who want to incite Class-Warfare)

dispelling a myth about ...

...why Amnesty John McCain lost

Some bray that Amnesty John McCain lost in large part because he got only 1/3 of the Hispanic vote, allegedly because Republicans and conservatives had been seen as tough on amnesty and ILLEGAL aliens generally.

Some math--> Hispanics to date have constituted 9% of the vote (though amnestia would explode that all too soon--to the benefit of the left). Amnesty John got 3 of that 9-- he would have gotten only 4 if he had stayed at quisling Dubya levels.

MUCH more to the point, Amnesty John LOST too much of the still 75% white vote, partly because he had CLEARLY favored amnesty. Even he himself ruefully admitted, "I got America's message" (too late, however).

Almost 50% of LEGAL Hispanic-Americans in Az. voted for tough new anti-ILLEGAL alien laws in 2006, including clamping down on miscreant employers and social service decimation.

When given a choice, Americans prefer enforcement and attritive repatriation BY FAR to any paths to amnesty. This is NOT xenophobia-- it is righteous angst about socio-economic reality---> amnesty makes us the welfare department for Latin America's poor and ignorant at IMMENSE expense.

Today's America instead truly needs EDUCATED, SKILLED, LEGAL immigrants-- just as sensible nations require-- and our policy does officially.

ILLEGAL aliens are for the most part simply HUGE net drains on resources all-in---> $1.4 million per family over a lifetime, and amnesty for 12 million would mean 100 million new poor and largely ignorant over the next 20 years per Heritage.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/bg1936.cfm
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/wm1076.cfm

How many losses does it take for the GOP
to get it? What a farce! A listening tour w/ Jeb Bush and John McCain!! Certainly no family is more responsible for the GOP demise than the Bushes. Jeb even had the gall to invoke Reagan as a negative. The reality is that the GOP needs to divorce itself from the Bush legacy, not that of Reagan.

The GOP will return
This stuff goes in cycles. Republicans will gain house, senate and governor seats in 2010 and 2012. Obama will win again in 2012, and in 2016 the house and senate will be majority republican and the GOP will win the White House. Joel, don't be silly. You can't cut people off from the outside world. This is America, not North Korea or Cuba.

Kathy
I'm with Jerseyvet. If our Republican reps won't or can't do something about the slanted media, the party will continue to sink. Obama would not have won if not for the media love fest. A true conservative has to run, not be afraid of the media and educate the public as to what conservatism really is or it's true, we will deserve to lose again.

kgregt
Uh, Bush just followed Reagan to a T, but this time, had a Republican Congress to back him up for 6 years. It's high time we get this Reagan mythology out of our heads and realize that Reagan stayed Democrat when he switched to the Republican party. Every budget he proposed was no different than the Democrat Congress. Every regulation he proposed was enacted (he didn't deregulate anything, just took credit for Carter's). He expanded government services and took our debt where it never was before. Sound familiar? Yes, that's exactly how GWB behaved.

Now we have Obama doing it as well, just speeding up the process. The only fundamental difference between Reagan and Obama is the pace at which they're running us off the financial cliff. It's a shame folks like Ron Paul and B.J. Lawson are virtually ignored by the GOP, that's how you counter Obama, not proposing a different brand of empire building and big spending.

agree with Joel here, but...
re:
"Only True Citizens should have the right to vote. Voting should be earned, not passed out to everyone and his dog. It is immoral for someone that pays no taxes to have the same vote I do. They can vote for me to pay higher taxes to pay for their share of the govt services, most of which are unConstitutional."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

...unfortunately, who votes is determined at the state level and it does not require citizenship, though IT SHOULD... people in Mexifornia speak of buses loading up ILLEGALS where they work ILLEGALLY (like in Pelosi's vineyards), handing them voting instructions in Spanish, and carting them to the polls where they show their fake I.D.'s.

The reason that the left will rapidly press VERY HARD for amnestia is that they KNOW that they will get 95%+ of that vote... Middle America opposes this by about 70%-- we must stand up against it once again, as when we killed Kennedy-McCain scamnesty and the Dream Act (free college for ILLEGAL ALIENS).

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/erbe/2009/4/16/poll-immigration -amnesty-is-unpopular-outside-the-beltway-pols-remain-cluel ess.html

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/november-10-2008/pol l-reveals-no-mandate-amnesty.html

http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_res earchd74c

This is delusion
I am amused by all of the GOP writers who say the same thing: "Well, if things don't go well, it's be Obama's problem in 2012; he won't be able to blame Bush."

Are you guys all high, or something?

First of all, how can Obama blame Bush for a $500 billion deficit, propose to raise it to $10 trillion (can you say TWENTY TIMES WHAT HE 'INHERITED'???) and get away with it?

Because the American public only pays attention to what he SAYS, not what he DOES. (See Sowell's column today.)

He says, "This much we know - no God condones the taking of innocent life" - and then signs orders paying for more abortions in foreign countries. Did you see any dip in popularity from that one?

He takes over GM and kicks out the CEO. Fallout? None. He refuses to let banks pay back TARP money, thus keeping them under his thumb. Outrage? Nope.

Now he's ignoring commercial and bankruptcy law to defraud senior secured creditors out of the money they are rightfully owed, so that banks HE controls and special interest groups beholden to HIM get paid back first.

Hue and cry? I'm still waiting, Pat.

If things are good in 2012, he will take all the credit. If things are bad, it will all be someone else's fault. AND proof that he needs more power and more control.

And he will get it, because the American people have become lobotomized, and will fall for it, hook, line and sinker.

I like Ron Paul, BUT...
...a mere congressman NEVER gets traction running for POTUS, and Ron Paul was too intellectual for the masses.

Example-- he would (correctly) say that we should eliminate the I.R.S. (a typical bureaucratic quagmire with tax rules benefiting the influential), but then get cut off before he could explain a viable alternative.

Ron Paul came across as shrill and alarmist.
He was RIGHT that we were squandering $ in Iraq, but again, he did not get heard-- though supposedly 80% now think Iraq was a mistake.

The neoCONS then snookering Dubya (Wolfy, Perle, Feith Abrams, Bolton, Wurmser) engendered Iraq to get those permanent bases for Israel, which is REALLY WHY it has already cost $1 TRILLION.

Was Reagan a Bush lookalike?
It was nice to read Buchanan's optimistic view of the possibilities for the GOP. The only aspect I question is the notion that in 2012 the 'change' issue will be in our favor.
If Obama continues to press his radical agenda, it will be difficult to paint him as opposed to change.
As far as kregt's assertion that Reagan was a Bush lookalike, consider that under Reagan the percentage of national income going to the government DECLINED from about 21% to 19%. The last time something like that happended was in the 1920's. And that was with a Democratic Congress. That percentage rose to over 25% under Bush, Clinton and Bush and God only knows what it will rise to under Obama.
As far as Mr. Less-Than-1%-of-the-Vote Ron Paul goes, sorry, I don't see him as the hope for the future.

RNC, RIP


Jeb “Pudge” Bush, Mitt “Multiple Personalities” Romney, & Bobby “The Quota Prince” Jindal? If this is the Republican Parties solution for the future they just as well fold their Big Tent and slink off into the shadows.

We Voted Flush, Not Change
Speaking for centrist, rule-of-law Independents who voted for Obama (who I think pending lawsuits will show is our first African President), I say don't despair, Pat Buchanan. We voted that way because the two establishment political parties have become criminal racketeering organizations dedicated to the traitorous globalist plan to sell out our country. We used to go to the polls to proudly exercise our right to vote. Since 1988 (read my lips, "New World Order") however, we go to flush the political toilet to substitute the other party fecal matter. We vote flush, not change, to keep the political criminals off balance.

We strongly suggest to the Republicans that instead of marching out halfwitted, globalist sellouts like Jeb Bushamnesty, Johnny McAmnesty, and Lindsay "Leetle Beegit" Grahamnesty, you do indeed nominate someone like Reagan--that is, if you want to win. Try someone who believes we have a Constitution and follows it, instead of some crook who does things "because I can," and you will be surprised at how successful you can be.

the MSM and the ObaMessiah

It is truly STUNNING how the MSM is in the tank for the ObaMessiah. A simple example-- they dwell on his supposed unbridled popularity with the public.

The reality? His favorable ratings are about the same as Dubya's at the same point (and many back then thought that he was illegitimate!), but his disapproval rating (29%) is HIGHER!

That tingle might be running up the legs of the leftist media (TIME- Joe Klein, NYT, NBC, CBS, ABC, Wash. Post) but Middle America is already beset with angst about the spending and growth of guvment.

I am sick that the UAW is being propped up with HUGE taxpayer dollars because unions own the Crats... that is like giving the addict his drugs rather than having an intervention (bankruptcy) and insist on treatment-- adjustment to what non-UAW workers at Toyota and Honda earn right here in America... and they line up for those jobs to make 1/2 as much!

Character vs Personalilty
The x-factor in this prophetic equation is personality. The GOP leader will need a "winning personality." Bush had it, and Sarah has it. But the be all and end all in our elections seems to be the voter's wallet. You add $ issues and "charisma"--Obama has a monopoly on the latter, but not on the former.

Fate rules, not our speculations or calculations. Just ask "the Clinton Machine."

Every day he wants to be reelected.
Every act and word are calculated. He has chrome plated the UAW. Their pension fund holds controlling interest in Chrysler. So there are the Union votes and money. Jobs will come back. The war will be history and the economy will smooth out. He should be ahead on all fronts barring an unknown happening.

Like it or no, we have eight more years of Nancy.

I am union and proud of it.
Talk about out of touch, most union members are conservatives, it's their leadership that is liberal. You guys have to stop all this union bashing and embrace this political power. Most members want unions to negotiate their contracts and protect their rights as workers. We get angry when unions protect lazy unproductive workers. They give all hard working members a bad name. Remember management gave in to all the crazy demands made by the unions. To quote Nancy Reagan they could have just said no!!

Ron Paul
My thoughts on Ron Paul,he wants us to stop being the worlds police force. Governments were set up to work for the people of that nation. The UN is suppose to allow governments to communicate with each other not to be a world government. We have always had a world economy except we called it trade. He wants the market to set the price because of demand. It seems that all businessmen what a market system with little government intervention until they screw up then they go running to the big bad government to bail them out. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

but the reality is...
re:
"I am union and proud of it.
Talk about out of touch, most union members are conservatives, it's their leadership that is liberal."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

...that your union $ millions go to finance the Crats.

And frankly, what once was a good thing went WAY too far... the Greeks wisely said: nothing in excess.

UAW members have destroyed the domestic car industry by killing the Golden Goose... it is on taxpayer life support. GM and Toyota sold the SAME # of cars last year, but GM hemorrhaged losses while Toyota made record profits.

The difference? GM paid TWICE as much for labor-- the numbers simply won't work. The UAW worker gets $150k/year counting benefits... they line up for jobs here at Toyota and Honda for HALF as much.

There is almost $2,000 in the price of every GM car JUST FOR retired worker benefits.

Mike from NY - THANK YOU!!
It's about time someone said what you did. The vast majority of union workers are hardworking people. Reagan understood their core values and that's one of the reasons he got their votes in such large numbers.

In a political climate where both parties are pi$$ing away our money, and the only difference is who the recipient of the largesse is, it's no wonder unions workers will swing for Democrats again. They are being lied to, of course. But it's the Republican's fault for going off message, big time.

What Lost the Election
I have six adult children and they were typical I think of the young people who were disgusted with GWB over the torture and rendition of people. In addition the rounding up and holding people without trial on suspcion only trumped any moral argument that the administration had. The fact that McCain didn't denounce this publicly and firmly left him with the legacy of the Busch presidency. I was unable to sell the larger (maybe not larger questions) to my siblings. Pat your summary of the issues that lost the election missed the one overwhelming point.
V. Van Walleghem vicvw@kc.rr.com

perspicacious post
re:

Character vs Personalilty
The x-factor in this prophetic equation is personality. The GOP leader will need a "winning personality." Bush had it, and Sarah has it. But the be all and end all in our elections seems to be the voter's wallet. You add $ issues and "charisma"--Obama has a monopoly on the latter, but not on the former.

Fate rules, not our speculations or calculations. Just ask "the Clinton Machine."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

It is true that likability is important to candidates... it helped the Glowbama get voters to ignore his most-hard-left voting record for his soothing Pied Piper message of change.

Yet he was behind the feckless, colorless Amnesty John 2 weeks after the RINO convention... then the economy tanked (caused by the left demanding sub-prime mortgages)... people DO vote their pocketbooks. Hence, we got stuck with the ObaMessiah.

Money, Media & Deception
Obama had lots of money and an Obama-loving media to help him win. Take this away and Obama would have lost because underneath his "change" mantra was deception. Obama was, is, and will continue to be a Socialist. If American voters really knew the truth, Obama would not have ever won.

The "change" that voters thought they were getting was a change American-style - within the guiding principles that the country had been founded upon. I don't believe these people ever imagined that someone would want to undo the country. But, then again, no one thought that 9/11 would happen and it did.

The reality is that we now have a man as President (and people in Congress) who want to undo America. They are using all sorts of deceptive means to push us towards Socialism and then ultimately Communism. This sounds farfetched, but it's true.

We have to stop them. Like it or not, the best hope right now is a conservatively strong Republican party that is overwhelmingly backed by the American people.

oracle
People don't buy American cars because they are crap. Between my kids and myself we own four cars. A 1997 Honda, great car never a problem, and three Chrysler products. The Chrysler are always in the shop. We do not engineer cars as well as the Japanese. You want to talk about excess how about CEO making hundreds of millions and then knocking workers because they want their share. Sorry pal nothing gets done unless the worker does it. If a person starts, builds, and owns a company and they want to pay themselves well, God bless them. Most of these greedy clowns step into these jobs create nothing and just worry about themselves. Its called ME, ME, and more ME.

reply to wix
I opposed the GITMO detainee stuff also (people should learn what the Israeli intel forces surreptitiously did with OUR detainees elsewhere!), but there is little evidence that voters were losing sleep over it.

HOWEVER, it was certainly a small part of the bitter taste left by Dubya-- who deserves blame for teeing it up for the left.

Did you notice that Dubya and Cheney are now estranged? Daddy Bush's guys (Baker and Scocroft) finally convinced Dubya that Cheney and the neoCON/Zionist cabal of advisers (Wolfy, Perle, Bolton, Abrams, feith, Wurmser) had snookered him into Iraq for Israel (the PNAC/AIPAC agenda), thus dooming his presidency.

http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/spheresInfluence.h tml
http://www.codoh.info/zionweb/zionpgiraq.html

Reagan is over
He's been out of office for over 20 years not to mention that he's dead. Here's the deal: Obama delivered a message that people wanted to hear. People felt beaten up, disenfranchised from the 'American dream,' and were just generally disgusted (and deservedly so) with the lying, self-agrandizing, and general stupidity, callousness and out-of-touch policies practiced by the Republican party. Bush, Cheney, Alberto Gonzalez, Rumsfeld, Palin, etc... The Repubs did not come across well to a huge number of people, whereas Obama did. What could a person in an inner-city make of Sarah Palin with her small-town ideas of government, her lack of knowledge and curiosity (just like Bush) no post-graduate education? Her appeal was limited to white, church-going, middle-aged, small-town people with limited education. You might think Hispanics, Blacks or people who live in major cities aren't important to the party, or to your life, but guess what? They voted in droves,many for the first time, because they felt the message the Dems broadcast was for them. The Repubs are trying to recapture a world, and a time in America that has already come and is long gone. Little victories like Prop 8 in CA, are a minor setback -- you can bet that within a few years at the most, gays will be able to marry and enjoy the same rights as a hetero couple. That's just one example. Change has come to America but the Repubs want to bury their head and pretend it's 1950. If they want a win, they need to address the issues in America as they are today and put Reagan in the past history of this country where he belongs. He's no more relevant today than Millard Fillmore is.

2012
There are growing signs that the economy is improving--housing and the market are all improving. Most are now predicting that the recession will be over by late summer this year or early 2010 at the latest. If this holds to be true, Obama wins in a landslide in 2012. And he won't have Bush to kick around anymore? What planet does Pat live on? Recall the 1988 election of George Bush? Carter had been out of office for almost eight years and they were still running ads against Carter--pictures of gas lines, etc with a song playing in the background of "I remember you, you're the one that made me feel so blue...yes you."

Expect to see ads on the state of the economy in 2008 in 2012 as well as ads on Iraq. Expect the Dems to run anti-Bush ads for years until they no longer work and in 2012 they still will.


Pat
"When African-Americans, who gave McCain 4 percent of their votes in California, gave Proposition 8, prohibiting gay marriage, 70 percent of their votes, why would the GOP give up one of its trump cards -- not only in Middle America but among minorities?"

Because when they come out to vote for these "value" propositions, they still vote against the GOP. In 2004, George Bush did worse in every state that had one of these anti-gay marriage questions on the ballot than he did in 2000. The reason, increased turn out among blacks who voted for the anti-gay marriage proposition and then turned around and voted against Bush.

"A conservative who could have sharpened the social, moral and cultural differences might, from the exit polls, have done far better."

Doubtful as the most important issue that voters were focused on was the economy and with Bush as 22%, no Republican was going to do well. Reagan would have lost in 2008.


"The GOP will not have to wear those concrete boots in 2012."

Yes it will. Just as it did in 1936 and 1940 or the Dems in 1984 and 1988. The poor economy will be at least good for 2012 if not far beyond.

"But there may be one or two more White Houses in the Grand Old Party yet."

True. Unlike what Karl Rowe thought, there are no permanent majorities in the US.

The real fight might be ...
... how Hillary gets the nomination away from 0bama in 2012. That will probably be her last chance; she will be too old for anything beyond that.

reply to: Mike
You are braying the union talking points about that bad old management... most HR costs at the big 3 are centered in labor, not management.

If big 3 cars are sorry, who caused that? What about labor rules that queered efficiency and quality control?

I admire hard work, but NOT getting paid $150k for a H.S. degree because of union blackmail... and union rules worked against hard work.

I suspect that you have never studied WHY businesses succeed or fail-- I teach it in college, following 25 years at senior levels with major banks.

Unions have devolved into major net negative influences.

Terry
Blacks aren't important. They are a small part of the electorate and are getting smaller every year. They sold out to the Democratic Party years ago voting at or near 90% every election for the Democratic Party since at least Nixon if not since LBJ. They are a lost cause and here I disagree with Kemp, after decades of reaching out to them, it is time for the GOP to write them off and stop pandering with the likes of Colin Powell and other slimey creatures.

The key to the GOP future is Hispanics who actually don't fully sell out to the Democratic Party--of course, the GOP has problems with them too.

The GOP lost this time because of the economy--that simple. If the economy had been as good as it was in 2004, the president would be John McCain now. In 2012, Obama is likely to be re-elected as the economy will have improved (mostly is spite of what Obama has done not because of it)and he will get the credit for it. But as is the nature of things, business cycles change, the Democrats will have their own foreign affairs misadventures, their own corruption scandals and when they happens, they'll be outside again. As I said, there are no permanent majorities.

And with things like school choice and the like which the Democrats oppose, the GOP has much to offer the inner cities, but their message falls of deaf ears, so there comes a point when you say, why bother?

SLIM GLIMMER

.....Tips for the GOP: ...if you want to win elections don't run MR. MAGOO against the ENERGIZER BUNNY ...

.....CHANGE THE MEDIA LABELS FROM:

.....REPUBLICANS are the party of the rich to REPUBLICANS are the party of freedom ...

.....DEMOCRATS are the party of the little people to DEMOCRATS are the Party of BIG GOVERNMENT control ...

.....STOP TRYING TO BE DEMOCRAT LITE ...MINORITIES HAVE MORALS TOO ...STAND ON PRINCIPLE AND GET THEM TO FOLLOW ...

.....AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST ...TELL JEB BUSH TO GET LOST .....COLOSSUS

Terry
"If they want a win, they need to address the issues in America as they are today and put Reagan in the past history of this country where he belongs. He's no more relevant today than Millard Fillmore is."

True. Because Reagan won the debate. When Reagan entered office the top rate was 70% and even if Obama gets his way it will only be 39%. When Reagan entered office, the Soviet Union and her clients were on the march everywhere--Angola, Central America, Afghanistan. Today the Soviet Union is no more a just a few hold over states left that embrace that ideology.

Invoking Reagan's name over and over as many here do is mindless. It was a different time and a time when the US faced different issues, so in this you are correct.

Quit analyzing.
Exit poll after exit poll showed that Obama was elected because:

1. He looked nice.

2. He spoke well.

3. His wife and family were nice.

4. He gave inspiring speeches.

5. He was black.

It probably does not matter much anymore what a candidate stands for; what matters is the image he projects.

If we hope to retake the White House, we need a candidate that will capture the imagination of voters, just as Obama did.

wix
"The fact that McCain didn't denounce this publicly and firmly left him with the legacy of the Busch presidency."

McCain did in the Senate and many here on TH attacked him over it. What killed McCain was the economy--simple as that.

mostly agree w/Akagi at 10:18
...mainly that Hispanics WILL unfortunately be key going forward. To date they are but 9% of voters, but they vote 2:1 for the left.

What many do not realize is that amnesty will mean effectively a new black voter group which votes 90%+ in lock step with the left... most ILLEGAL Hispanics are ignorant and poor with no upward mobility-- natural big guvment entitlement voters. Obama and the left KNOW this!

RINOS have been committing death by a thousand cuts by trying to cater to them because of so-called "conservative social values"... check out their rates of social pathologies--> illegitimacy's, dropouts, crime, gangs, barrio blight, clinging to Spanish-- not exactly Republican turf.

SAVE THE PARTY
GET RID OF SNOW AND COLLINS.LIBERAL REPUBS ARE NOTHING BUT DEMS IN SHEEPSKIN CLOTHING.

QPARKER
YOU LEAD.

oracle
Only 9%, but much larger in key states and in key counties in key states--like Clark County, Nevada. Rural Nevada like say Nye or Lincoln or Elko County are mostly white and conservative (heavily Mormon and Catholic), but they make up only about 200,000 of Nevada's 2.6 million. Most of people in Nevada live in Clark and it is heavily Hispanic (25% or so). Winning Clark big as Obama did as well as Washoe (which has a large number of Hispanics too)gives you Nevada and its 5 (maybe 6 soon) electors.

Look at the states with large Hispanic populations, California, New Mexico, Arizona (made it even close in McCain's home state), Colo., Texas, Nevada, Florida, VA, a growing number in NC and Georgia. McCain didn't lsoe because of the Hispanic vote, he lost because of the white vote, but if the Hispanics went in greater numbers to Kerry in 2004, Kerry would have won. Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado gives Kerry 19 more electors and giving him the election 270-267.

As for clinging to Spanish, well since close to 90% of second generation Hispanics speak English well, not so sure what you mean here. Being bilingual is something to be praised.

does not make any sence
The thing I find most remarkable is that all of the progressive liberal Democratic states, like California, New York, New Jersey, all of New England, Michigan, ect, are shedding jobs and population in mass. Most of these states are going to loss House seats in the next House realignment. All of these states are losing major companies and thousands of quality jobs to the supposedly illiterate and uneducated Republican states like Texas and North Carolina. New Jersey, where I work, and Pennsylvania, where I live, are losing population every day to the southern and southwestern states. So why is this not making any sense?

So how can these liberal states be the future of our country when they cannot hold on to jobs and a real tax base?

about spoken language
re:
As for clinging to Spanish, well since close to 90% of second generation Hispanics speak English well, not so sure what you mean here. Being bilingual is something to be praised.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Being bilingual is fine, as long as English is the primary language used here... and the stats on second generation Hispanics mostly speaking English are looking backward, i.e., that was the case when LEGAL Hispanic immigrants came.

There is increasing evidence that ILLEGALS are clinging more to Spanish, partly due to bilingual education, and partly due to the PC ilk saying it is OK... the congressman who fathered bilingual education said it was the worst mistake of his political/public career, because bilingual ed becomes a crutch holding back Hispanic kids. Arizona voted in 2006 to repeal bilingual ed because of the cost and negative results.

Grasping at Straws
Poor Mr. Buchanan. When he says,

"Obama was the "change candidate." He patented the brand, and he carried this third of the nation 89 percent to 9 percent.

But in 2012, Obama cannot be the candidate of change. That title will belong to his challenger, the Republican nominee. Obama will be the incumbent, the candidate of continuity,"

he makes the common and unfortunate GOP error of confusing "change" for change's sake with change FROM STUPID REPUBLICAN POLICIES.

Obama will indeed be the incumbent in 2012 and will indeed represent continuity; but it will be a continuity that will have corrected all the un-American garbage accumulated over the previous GOP years. If Obama succeeds--and I agree it's too early to tell, but his path appears excellently judged at this point--folks won't want the "change" offered by the GOP. Trust me on that.


Oracle
"Being bilingual is fine, as long as English is the primary language used here."

Here? When? Should two native speakers of say Spanish or Urdu as far as that go speak English to each other at home? Pretty odd. Think say Americans living in Japan--say a couple--speak Japanese at home?

Since you are better at your native language, don't you think it more wise to conduct your business in your native language over one you aren't as fluent in?

Illegals aren't immigrants and have no plans to reside in the US permanently and thus there is no reason to expect them to be fluent or even have a command of English...no different from the American ex-pats in say Japan. How many are fluent in Japanese? Some are, but most aren't.

Bilingual education is a two-edge sword. On the one hand it does no doubt retard English development and many people are thrown into these classes just because they have Spanish names and don't even speak a word of Spanish, but on the other hand, you can't just throw a kid into an English-only class and expect him or her to do well. How well would you do if I threw you into a junior high class in Tahu, Taiwan, how well do you think you'd do without being able to speak Mandarin or Taiwanese?

Taiwan understand this. They have a bilingual elementry school in Taipei for the children of the "New Taiwanese" and for exchange students that attend the Taiwan service academies (e.g. the Chinese Military Academy), they go for 6 months of Mandarian training at the Mandarian Training Center at Taiwan Normal University.


Over the cliff
Hopefully in 2012 the GOP movers and shakers will not follow another "McCain" over the cliff again. But then our party, in spite of the merits of its core positions, has shown remarkable naivety among some of its leaders.

Oracle
I'm back from a day of working. Always the academic. I have a BS in marketing and management. I worked a union job got involved with union activities. I started my own business worked it for many years and had all the sleepless nights that come with the responsibilities. I made a nice living I know how to sell myself and my product. I know how to say no when I had to. The problem with the car industry is and was poor management and marketing. You my friend equate salary to education. Sorry friend it doesn,t work that way. I know plenty of plumbers, electricians, tapers who make a ton of money. They work long hard hours. Why is it that anyone who works with their hands are over paid. Stop listening to all the propaganda and allow yourself and your students to make up your own minds. Oh by the way it's illegal for unions to use dues money for political donations. Union members donate all political money.

where the stats for Ron Paul?
Once agian all the young poeple and old who voted for Ron Paul is left off the map. Teh Republirats lost becuase they ran McLame. Period! End of story. Now the repulirats are gatheirng under Jeb Bushes wing to decalre that they have to run after the socialiost cheese if they wisdh to win any more! At the same time a true Principled Republican is arising giving true leadership, and that person is RON PAUL and only Ron Paul.

Keep Pale Palin et al! I will ever again vote for a Republi-RAT! RON PAUL OR BUST 2012~
Screw the Bushed party!

Focus on Money &Security to Win
the next election. People vote with their wallet and they want to feel secure. This buzzing of NYC by AF1 tells absolutely everything you need to know. Obama flushed $330,000 down the toilet. The fact that it's your money - just doesn't occur to him. And he seems to have no clue about 911 - how else would you explain it?

craigers .. I can't put my finger on it
but something tells me that you might actually hate Ron Paul.

Joel...Ron Paul?
Joel-- Did Paul actually say we are to blame
for "9/11"? If so, he can kiss a camel's *ss!
During the debates...I was impressed w/Romney
and Paul(Paul gave some very flaky answers to
international matters).But Iam shocked to think
that Paul said that!And I don't shock easy!
Folks, If Israel attacks Iran all bets are
off! There may not be a 2012! Iam not a
doomist but I know Bible prophecy.At least a
2012 as we are thinking in our minds(normalcy).
Elvis

terry-NJ
You talk about "Lack of Post-graduate training" as a prerequisite to the US Presidency>> HOW SO??
I don't know for sure that Mr Ob has a degree of any kind in that I don't know anyone who is privy to the pertinent records, do you??
Actually, I'm *sorta * Kidding that what's done is done and he is what he is.. But I, personally, would have preferred a TAD more hands on EXECUTIVE experience..What Say U???

inflation
inflation will hit in about 2 years so Obama will have a huge ball and chain to carry around in 2012

The GOP's Credibility Gap
is awfully hard to overcome with a press that is consistently 89% Democrat in NYC which is 80% Democrat. They will never regain credibility with the American People without a major gimmick like a 2nd Contract with America. Hey, GOP, get a clue: we already have a Contract with America that you never followed in the first place known as the US Constitution. The American People see through the bullshiit in DC and are more and more declaring themselves independent. These are the voters who if given a viable 3rd Party to vote for and with increasing disgust will more and more over time vote 3rd Party and start a new political paradigm. When these two parties have completely destroyed the American dollar and our American economy and Americans are starving in the streets, rioting, fighting lawlessness, and foreclosing left and right, do any of you fools think for a minute that the American People will keep ANY of them in power??? The days for both of these criminal parties are numbered. God will have His Judgment on this nation and both of these criminal cartel parties in DC that continue to MOCK our Constitution.

GOP Supports Public Schools
WHY???????????????? Is it Constitutional for the Federal government to be in the public school business??? HELL NO! It's not in the Constitution. If ANY of you fools read this, you might have sense enough to abandon these 2 arrogant parties that make it up as they go along in DC, regardless of the US Constitution, andthen wonder why we have so many problems.

Is the Fed in the Constitution???
Absolutely NOT and Our Founding Fathers along with Ron Paul and the Constitution Party have been warning you all about these criminals for sometime now, but you al laughed at him as he told you the truth because he was not the globalist CFR candidate handpicked by the globaslist banksters on Wall Street and their globalist buddies in the NYC media.

Obama in 2012
If the economy improves Obama will win in 2012 because he will take credit for it and no argument to the contrary will be effective.

If the economy stagnates into 2012 I think Obama will not be able to blame Bush and it will be possible for his oponent to blame the stagnation on Obama's policies.

The wild card will be war or a terroist attack. Obama, as any president, could benefit or weaken depending upon how the public reacts to his handling of the situation. They may be outraged as with Carter, or rally behind the leader with Bush.

Any analysis more complex than this is wasted time. Lets face it. Readers of this post may understand and be influenced by more complete and sophisticated analysis, but the majority of voting Americans don't understand and don't have the time or inclination to learn.

reply to: Mike
re:
"The problem with the car industry is and was poor management and marketing. You my friend equate salary to education. Sorry friend it doesn,t work that way. I know plenty of plumbers, electricians, tapers who make a ton of money."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Actually, the correlation between degrees/education and income is VERY HIGH on average, which is not to say that certain skill sets are not valued highly, such as plumbing, partly due to a lack of glamor.

http://www.getrichslowly.org/blog/2008/01/10/the-value-of-a -college-education/

You never really addressed my main issue about unions--> that they tend to cripple their industries. Consider that unions have been in steady decline in numbers and percentage since the 1950's, partly because they get voted down out of fear of jobs losses.

The ONLY area where unions have grown is among guvment workers--> teachers, postal, and bureaucrats-- and how are those services working out for you?! Those costs can be foisted off onto the taxpayer because competition does not keep them honest. Now, state and local workers make 40% more than private workers:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/workplace/2009-04-09-compensa tion_N.htm

about the decline of unions
... which once represented 1/3 of eligible workers, but now less than 10%, and many of those are now white color guvment workers (teachers, postal, bureaucrats) who can pass off their costs to taxpayers without the check and balance of competition.

http://www.heritage.org/research/labor/wm1202.cfm/

http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/archives/2009/01/will_the _declin.html

excerpt:

Unions strongly supported President Obama during the presidential race, and naturally they expect some pay back...

As various arguments hostile to unions became more common during the past half-century, public opinion shifted against unions. Unions are considered too selfish, sometimes corrupt, as with the well-publicized troubles of the teamsters union, and they areNO LONGER CONSIDERED NECESSARY to protect employee interests.

Given this radical shift in public opinion, and the fundamental economic and social forces that contributed to the decline of unions, it is unlikely that the new Congress and new President would push for radical pro-union legislation, despite the impressive victory in the past election of the Democratic Party, and the strong financial and other support the larger unions gave to this party.

Hope for GOP?
"Glimmers of hope" that depend on POTUS Barack Obama "blowing it" is not much of a glimmer. The ONLY remedy is if the POTUS blows it with the economy -- that is bailouts and stimulus package. Then, again, maybe all hope is not lost for the GOP!! OsiSpeaks[dot]com
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.