In response to:

Why Mitt Lost and it Wasn’t Very Close

Account closed Wrote: Nov 07, 2012 7:31 PM
It's over, baby. If it isn't said in the national debates, it won't be heard by those who rely on the MSM. McCain and now Mitt passed up the opportunity to direct voters to a website that would have exposed the truth behind Wall Street, Fannie & Freddie and Bill and the Dems. Eight minutes that could have changed history. Mitt didn't spell out the truth about immigration reform either. 30 million new voters. But he sure was polite. Gun control? Benghazi, Jesus. The Right, with three times the purchasing power of the Left, watches politely as Move-on.org chases advertisers away from Fox News. Now they'll watch politely as Obama moves to destroy that purchasing power through inflation. America's future is now in the hands of the Dems, Big
Account closed Wrote: Nov 07, 2012 7:36 PM
Business and the MSM. And I don't think that will ever change. It's a new world and American overspending paid and will pay for all these inconvenient modifications.

Memorandum to the GOP: When running an election campaign it is often valuable to select a nominee who represents the rank and file of the Party. This is how other Parties do it. Perhaps you might get on board.

Who?

Well let’s start with who not to select.

There was George H.W. Bush, who, while a nice, honorable public servant, won primarily because of the record Reagan established. He lost because the rest of us thought that when he mouthed the words “Read my lips, go to Texas,” he meant “Read my lips, no new taxes.”  

There was Bob Dole,...