How will republicans respond to this loss?

[Anonymous]

PP again, friom a conservative opinion writer today:

"Before Republicans conclude that they had an insufficiently conservative candidate, they should consider what happened in the Senate — a near wipeout. If the party goes hard right, selecting candidates even less appealing to women, minorities and an increasingly secularized society, it is hard to see how they will improve their standing."

- Jennifer Rubin, Washington Post "Right Turn" column
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They have alienated every normal Republican. DH and I are independents that lean Republican and we voted Obama. I didn't even mind Romney--it is the machine and nut jobs in the party that I can't stomach.

It is time for them to stop catering to the freaks. I think they ill go even more conservative freaky and it is the death of them. Lee Atwater caused the demise of the party and all of he Evangelical freaks.

Dear fellow independent, I saw little 'freakiness' in this campaign. There were a few wingnuts who everyone acknowledged were ... wingnuts. Do you seriously expect an election without a few wingnuts on each side? Enjoy your stuttering economy and higher taxes; feel free to pay mine.

[Anonymous]

Surprisingly, I have seen a couple Republicans on morning news shows say that this election proves they have got to stop running in the face of women and minority votes and start trying to appeal to them, because they're never going to win races without them. It was a nice moment of clarity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have alienated every normal Republican. DH and I are independents that lean Republican and we voted Obama. I didn't even mind Romney--it is the machine and nut jobs in the party that I can't stomach.

It is time for them to stop catering to the freaks. I think they ill go even more conservative freaky and it is the death of them. Lee Atwater caused the demise of the party and all of he Evangelical freaks.

Dear fellow independent, I saw little 'freakiness' in this campaign. There were a few wingnuts who everyone acknowledged were ... wingnuts. Do you seriously expect an election without a few wingnuts on each side? Enjoy your stuttering economy and higher taxes; feel free to pay mine.

A few? Did you see how they ruled the republican primary? What viable candidate got close without adopting the wingnut agenda across the board??? Gingrich Santorum, Bachmann, Cain, and Romney. They ruined Romney by forcing him so far to the right that he couldn't capture the middle after he was nominated.

So what happened to the moderates? Huntsman, Pawlenty. What about no shows like Christie and Jeb Bush? Even an iconoclast with strong tea party appeal like Paul never had a chance. Insufficiently wingnut. Perry? Nope, he got killed and he was a perfect fit except for immigration. Ok maybe he also blew the debates too but even he would have faced an uphill battle because the party today is hostile to any moderate positions on immigration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have alienated every normal Republican. DH and I are independents that lean Republican and we voted Obama. I didn't even mind Romney--it is the machine and nut jobs in the party that I can't stomach.

It is time for them to stop catering to the freaks. I think they ill go even more conservative freaky and it is the death of them. Lee Atwater caused the demise of the party and all of he Evangelical freaks.

Dear fellow independent, I saw little 'freakiness' in this campaign. There were a few wingnuts who everyone acknowledged were ... wingnuts. Do you seriously expect an election without a few wingnuts on each side? Enjoy your stuttering economy and higher taxes; feel free to pay mine.

The Republican Party is replete with them. I could have tolerated a moderate Romney-- but he would have catered to the extreme to secure another 4 years. His first term would have been spent undoing social issues that should just be tabled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have alienated every normal Republican. DH and I are independents that lean Republican and we voted Obama. I didn't even mind Romney--it is the machine and nut jobs in the party that I can't stomach.

It is time for them to stop catering to the freaks. I think they ill go even more conservative freaky and it is the death of them. Lee Atwater caused the demise of the party and all of he Evangelical freaks.

Dear fellow independent, I saw little 'freakiness' in this campaign. There were a few wingnuts who everyone acknowledged were ... wingnuts. Do you seriously expect an election without a few wingnuts on each side? Enjoy your stuttering economy and higher taxes; feel free to pay mine.

The Republican Party is replete with them. I could have tolerated a moderate Romney-- but he would have catered to the extreme to secure another 4 years. His first term would have been spent undoing social issues that should just be tabled.

I felt the exact opposite. I felt his first term would have been spent on the economy and he wouldn't have TOUCHED social issues until his lame duck term.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:Lawsuits.

Seriously????

[Anonymous]

Gonna sit back.... Watch the economy implode...and blame it all on Obama.

[Anonymous]

Gonna sit back.... Watch the economy implode...and blame it all on Obama.

[Anonymous]

Listen to Rush today, that is the way the republicans will go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They will blame the candidate. I have argued on this board that Romney was the logical outcome of the primary process.

They HAD to have someone who would toe the line on every conservative litmus test. AND they needed someone who could be electable. What does that leave, who can survive that process? Only someone who is so full of contradictions that he looks flawed and weak.

Look at the fucking debates and the total freaks hey turned out. Romney was the only semi-normal candidate. Bachmann, Perry, Santorum, Gingrich, Cain??!!?,! WTF has happened in the last 20 years to this party???

There are two factors that determine a party's votes: how broad your appeal, and how motivated are your people to actually show up on election day. (Remember that a fraction of the population actually votes.)

The problem is that for the Republican party, these two factors compete with each other. Every attack brings the hard core conservatives out to the polls, but it drives off hispanics.

The Republicans have been trying to motivate the base. It more or less works now, but in the long run it will fail.

Gee, you make it sound like this wasn't one of the closest votes in history. Obama barely squeaked out a majority of the popular vote, and managed to do so only because the democratic base was much more motivated to vote than the Republican. This is hardly evidence that the Republicans are out of touch with the American electorate as a whole.

Umm it drives off women and independents and moderate Republicans too...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gonna sit back.... Watch the economy implode...and blame it all on Obama.

Pulling our money out of the market and stopping all discretionary spending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope that the Rs will respond by getting off the sex/morality police band wagon. Mend fences with women. When your part contains the vaginal wanders and legitimate rapists of the election, you have a serious problem.

Rs should focus on their (purported) strengths. Tax fairness, balanced budgets, strong defense, capitalism, anti-welfare. Appeal to people's selfishness.

I'[m not asking them to be pro abortion. Just leave the abortion status quo alone. If they do that they are NOT gonna lose their red states. All they need is the NRA for red states. But they MIGHT pick up some battleground states if they don't go around pissing people off. Women are 50% of the people. Don't antagonize them. Throw them a bone (Like Obama did - free birth control?) instead of telling them they are sluts and whores for wanting to be on the pill while you bang prostitues in Brazil and have you staff say you are hiking the Appalachian Trail.

It's the women, stupid.

Women don't all think the same way, stupid.

[Anonymous]

Gee, you make it sound like this wasn't one of the closest votes in history. Obama barely squeaked out a majority of the popular vote, and managed to do so only because the democratic base was much more motivated to vote than the Republican. This is hardly evidence that the Republicans are out of touch with the American electorate as a whole.

Are you kidding me? This is revisionist history, and not a particularly intelligent effort. All we've been hearing about for the past year has been how incredibly motivated the GOP was to make Obama a 1 term president - it was Mitch McConnell's stated purpose, in fact. The polls were underestimating Republican voters, they woudldcome out in droves, all the independents would swing Romney's way, there would be a groundswell of silent majority voters, blah, blah, blah.

And, with all that, Romney still lost by 126 electoral votes. As it turned out, Obama could have lost Ohio, Virginia and Florida and STILL won. It's not Romney's fault, either - moderate Mass. governor Mitt Romney would have won this in a walk - probably carried more electoral votes than Obama actually did. But he had to move so far to the right to win the primary, he couldn't walk it back far enough to win the general.

A significant portion of th GOP - and unfortunately for you, it is the portion that is necessary to win the primary - is incredibly out of touch with the electorate as a whole on significant issues such as immigration, gay rights, and equal pay. If they want to be competitive in national races in the future, they will have to moderate at least some of those positions - immigration seems the easiest, though why anyone would oppose equal pay for equal work is beyond me. But the vocal core base that decides, in large part, the primaries WON'T moderate those positions. So, what do you do?

That's not a rhetorical question - I really don't know. I hope you're all as puzzled as I am, however, because if you don't figure it out there's not going to be any more red on that presidential map for a long time.

[Anonymous]

Pulling our money out of the market and stopping all discretionary spending.

Go ahead. Just think how much money you would've lost if you would have done that for years ago.