In response to:

In 2016, GOP Needs a Candidate Voters Believe In

hmcdonald Wrote: Nov 18, 2012 8:11 AM
Mitt Romney was an excellent candidate. His 5 point agenda was an outstanding road map to an economic and policy recovery. Republicans lost for 2 reasons: 1. The 'get out the vote' effort at the grass roots level was poorly carried out. Each one of us who failed to persuade an indecisive voter of the merits of our candidate contributed to that poorly carried out effort. 2. Evangelicals, economic conservatives and Senior stayed home, preferring to be governed by the most atheistic, liberal and anti-senior administration in US history. It is destructive folly to blame the candidate or the party for our own failures or for the stubbornness of those who chose to allow evil to overcome the good.
anti-neocon Wrote: Nov 18, 2012 9:09 AM
romney was a PATHETIC canddiate. that's why republicans couldn't motive people leave the house to vote.
darrelJ Wrote: Nov 18, 2012 8:32 AM
If Romney was such an excellent candidate, the evangelicals, economic conservatives, and seniors would not have stayed home. Face it, the only good candidate the Republicans had was treated like a step child and as a result, they paid the price of defeat.............again.

In the wake of Mitt Romney's loss, many Republicans say the GOP must make far-reaching changes to be competitive in future elections. White voters are a smaller and smaller part of the electorate, they point out, while Latinos and other minorities are growing as a percentage of the voting public. Unless the Republican Party reinvents itself to appeal to those voters, the argument goes, the GOP can get used to being out of power.

There's something to that. The electorate is changing, and the Republican Party needs to keep up with the times. But the more fundamental answer to the...