If you are a Repuplican, what are you going to do about it?

[Anonymous]

It's a real shame when people have to resort to electing an alleged criminal as Governor when they had a perfectly nice guy like Cuccinelli willing to do the job.

Do you have any thoughts as to WHY enough people felt more comfortable with McAuliffe than Cuccinelli?

Would you like to start winning elections again? Do you have any insights as to HOW the Republican party might want to revise its current priorities to attract more middle voters? Do you plan to make a big fuss within your party and try get your party back on a winning track?

Seems obvious to me that the problem is the social/religious/sexual/reproduction issues. If you get back on jobs, economy, taxes, defense (national level), that is what people want to hear. Not that sodomy should be illegal.

Thoughts?

[Anonymous]

I would never vote for a guy who insists I have a wand stuck up my cooter. No matter what his positions were on the economy, etc.

[Anonymous]

the cooch wasn't a perfectly nice guy. he had ethical problems in his background, too.

[Anonymous]

The Cooch called gays "soulless" and thinks women and their doctors can't make medical decisions without his oversight. This was a no-brainer.

[Anonymous]

Mr Cooch had a lesson: Virginia is not for gunmen.

[Anonymous]

The Cooch wasn't a nice guy. In a *now* purple state like VA, you can't put a Tea Party favorite up for election. Just the mention of TP is enough to send peopple to the poles to vote against him.

[Anonymous]

Virginia IS a purple state. Has been for decades. McAullife was the least doucey of two big douches.

[Anonymous]

I am a very conservative Republican who is not concerned with the social issues. The Tea Party is a good thing, but the liberals have painted them with a broad brush and made their issues social--when the Tea Party issues are fiscal.

[Anonymous]

Cuccinelli focused on 2 things: Abortion and Obamacare, two issues where federal law has already been passed and there is nothing the state of Virginia can do about it. Wasting time and money ranting about laws already passed at the federal level was a big mistake.

Furthermore, Cuccinelli should have known that Richmond, Alexandria, and Fairfax contain the most people as opposed to the sparsely populated hinterlands of the Shenandoah Valley, foothills, and small towns.

You cannot win an election without taking these 3 big areas into consideration, just as you cannot win Maryland without considering Baltimore, or Des Moines if you are in Iowa.

The people's opinions in these areas cannot be ignored however much you disagree with them.

Cuccinelli lost the election because of himself. It was not because of the Libertarian who was legally on the ballot and could not force anyone to vote for him, it was not because of widespread fraud.

If you want to win Virginia you must win Fairfax, Richmond, and Alexandra, and Norfolk too. The Democrat Party machine knows this very well but the Republicans cannot seem to understand that the people in the urban centers are not very conservative but not left wing nutty either. They are rather moderate and really care most about the clogged road system and who is going to expand the metro and infrastructure to deal with it, as well as ensure there are plenty of good jobs here to raise a family.

it is rather simple and a smart leader would know this.

[Anonymous]

If I were republican, I would keep the gun in my ass

[Anonymous]

I was a Republican (even worked on several Republican campaigns over the years). I have now switched party affiliation because the Republicans have moved too far to the right. If a moderate R is the candidate, I'd probably vote for him/her, however, I would do so with reservation as increasing the Republican caucus seems only to embolden the Tea Party.

With the changing demographics of states like Virginia, Texas and Florida, the Republican party is going to have to make some major changes if it has any chance of survival.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If you want to win Virginia you must win Fairfax, Richmond, and Alexandra, and Norfolk too. The Democrat Party machine knows this very well but the Republicans cannot seem to understand that the people in the urban centers are not very conservative but not left wing nutty either. They are rather moderate and really care most about the clogged road system and who is going to expand the metro and infrastructure to deal with it, as well as ensure there are plenty of good jobs here to raise a family.

it is rather simple and a smart leader would know this.

thank you! so you don't believe that the cities are the minority, then? an acquaintance of mine tried to tell me that the rural conservatives are actually the majority and that the metro areas shouldn't be allowed to force their views on them. Um, hello - citizens of the same state and majorities are numbers based. The metro area citizens outnumber the rural areas. Sorry if you don't like math that isn't in your favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you want to win Virginia you must win Fairfax, Richmond, and Alexandra, and Norfolk too. The Democrat Party machine knows this very well but the Republicans cannot seem to understand that the people in the urban centers are not very conservative but not left wing nutty either. They are rather moderate and really care most about the clogged road system and who is going to expand the metro and infrastructure to deal with it, as well as ensure there are plenty of good jobs here to raise a family.

it is rather simple and a smart leader would know this.

thank you! so you don't believe that the cities are the minority, then? an acquaintance of mine tried to tell me that the rural conservatives are actually the majority and that the metro areas shouldn't be allowed to force their views on them. Um, hello - citizens of the same state and majorities are numbers based. The metro area citizens outnumber the rural areas. Sorry if you don't like math that isn't in your favor.

Put another way, trees don't vote. Land mass =/= enhanced voting power in the US - hasn't for some time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a very conservative Republican who is not concerned with the social issues. The Tea Party is a good thing, but the liberals have painted them with a broad brush and made their issues social--when the Tea Party issues are fiscal.

This is fiscal issue?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/tea-party

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/10/18/tea-party-leader-proposes-class-action-lawsuit-against-homosexuality/

A tea party leader and former Baptist pastor — who believes that AIDS is God’s judgement against LGBT people — this week proposed filing a “class action lawsuit” against “homosexuality.”

At a Tea Party Unity event on Thursday, LGBT activist Peter LaBarbera told group Chairman Rick Scarborough that Fox News should be pushed to cover “these wonderful stories of happy men and women who have left the homosexual lifestyle” like they covered African-American conservatives.

Could have fooled me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a very conservative Republican who is not concerned with the social issues. The Tea Party is a good thing, but the liberals have painted them with a broad brush and made their issues social--when the Tea Party issues are fiscal.

That's really not true. When the tea party candidates advocate on the social issues, and people who identify as tea party rate conservative on social issues and vote on social issues, then the that's what the tea party is, no matter what the marketing message.

If the tea party wants to prove us wrong, it should nominate a pro-gay rights, pro-choice candidate with a centrist policy on gun control. I have yet to see one of those despite the many hundreds of tea party candidates who have run for office.