Finally, my thoughts on last Tuesday’s national election

Sure it would have been more fun to win, but the next four years will be awful for our country financially, and they will always have Obama’s name on them. His presidency will be remembered as eight of America’s worst years. I know it’s unkind, but I’m ok with that.

So I kind of suspected it wasn’t going to end well. I knew when I booked a flight to Oklahoma about September that there wasn’t going to be a reason to hang around and hold my breath. Sure you get hopeful, but for so many, the tipping point has already come as to all the free stuff they want from the government, and Obama gives them that. I also think there were a lot of voters who thought as I often do: divided government is much better than one side getting too much power. You have to watch politics much more carefully to know the Senate was going to stay Dem. But the average voter could figure out the House would stay Republican, and didn’t want to give into a Republican president.

In hindsight Republicans should have known sooner that the results would be so hard to swallow. I really think FOX News let us down with all that Karl Rove/Dick Morris landslide baloney (that was my nice “b” word). I don’t watch much television in the first place, but wow. Done with them. Might reconsider if the network apologizes for getting it so wrong.

On election day I knew for certain Obama would win when I saw the RNC/Romney campaign touting internal polling numbers. Any campaign flaunting internals is admitting defeat. That night I told folks it was over when PA was called very early for Obama. By the time WI was called a few minutes later, I left the watch party I was attending. I’m not one to wallow in misery.

What went wrong? Well, I have to think a primary where the candidates beat each other senseless for months didn’t help. But in the end, it was the candidate who lost. The base took too long to coalesce, and without a resounding base, the conversions don’t take place among the independents as no one is proselytizing. It came down to independent voters content to look at the devil they know for four more years.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus never properly absorbed the Tea Party nationally like he did in WI, but he came close. Heck, in the end even Red State’s Erick Erickson was welcoming Priebus – the literal personification of the establishment – with open arms at his conference. But the delay to combine forces was costly.

So yeah. In some ways I blame the Tea Party. Although I will remind everyone that the Tea Party is not one group but dozens and dozens of small businesses raising money to fund their own delusions of influence. In my opinion conservative gets to stick around as one philosophy included in the Republican party, but the Tea Party gurus need to be done with their sense of self importance and habit of self promotion.

The base did not believe in Romney until the first debate because of all the negative (collective) Tea Party influence. By then, it was too late.

Add to the Tea Party interference some excellent Dem strategy in key states, and also the debacle of a Republican ground game, and Republicans lose.

Wisconsin was supposed to have an excellent ground game sealed into place because of the June Walker recall. It flopped. Nationally Romney’s campaign was supposed to have something called project ORCA; it became the new Fail Whale.

There’s one thing to losing a race to a worthy opponent. It’s entirely more dissatisfying to lose from tripping on one’s own untied shoelaces.

As to voting blocks: For all the trouble I give men sometimes, the spouse reminded me a couple of nights ago that if it had been up to men, we’d be looking at President Romney. Also, it became obvious that Catholics don’t have control over their pew sitters as 50% voted for Obama despite the Church’s request they do otherwise. White Catholics voted Romney, but Hispanic Catholics went to Obama at 75%.

Republicans lost on the issue of immigration. No, I’m not in the mood to debate it right now. Yes, WASP is the new minority. No, it’s not going to be easy. Yes, if Republicans ever want to win again, they need to find a policy that gives Hispanic illegals every single thing they want with a pretty bow tying an extra great big entitlement check to it.

Would that be worth it, though? Or is there another way to establish a majority block of voters without giving in on every single issue. And before we get started: Abortion is not a voting issue. Gay marriage is not a voting issue. Age is not a voting issue. Education is not a voting issue.

The Republican rebuild of a platform for a majority is a freaking mess I can’t even begin to get my head around right now. Good thing I have a basement workroom to clean out today. ;)

Let’s end with a little fun:

My least favorite moment in the campaign was the Sandra Fluke fiasco. So much stupid from both sides on that one.

My very favorite moment: That smoky exhale Mark Block made in the Herman Cain video. I don’t care about the personality of the manager or the candidate. That in-your-face act rocked my little housewife world. I’m grinning now just thinking about it.

Comments

  1. “..but for so many, the tipping point has already come as to all the free stuff they want from the government, and Obama gives them that.”

    Who’s they?

  2. “So many”

  3. I can’t believe that you are trying to push the people want free things meme of all people. that is a line i would expect to see at Fred’s if anyone actually looked over there.

    For instance OK, which is about as red of a state as you can get gets back $1.36 for every dollar they send in. If your theme holds true they should be a solidly blue. Mississippi gets back $2.02 for every dollar they send in, not sure if they were in the Obama column or not….

    Illinois, seems to be one of the makers as they only get back .75 for every dollar they send to the federal government. Im sure they voted solidly romney/ryan ……..

  4. There’s and Air Force base and an Army base in Oklahoma, but you want to call that return of tax dollars from the federal government “free” stuff and use the number to prove an argument you can not complete.

    Grip up. Fight smarter.

  5. so no military bases in IL? http://militarybases.com/illinois/

    Of course poverty is at a 10 year high in OK, so all of those people who voted would have voted Obama right? http://stateimpact.npr.org/oklahoma/tag/poverty/

    Yet still 67% rmoney/rayn http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/results

  6. Interesting that you bring up the Republican Primary…

    The problem was that your primary concentrated on all sorts of issues that the rest of the country didn’t care about. They “beat each other up” over who was more pro-life, who was more anti-gay, and who was less Gardasil-y.

    And exactly how many of those issues mattered in the General Election? Zero… Zilch… nada.

    The field of “accepted” candidates was a joke. You had a homophobe Congresswoman who has less experience than anyone. You had a former Speaker who seemed to be running for President of the Moon. You had a Pizza Man.

    Then there was Huntsman, and Johnson. Both of whom had a lot of credibility on issues that actually mattered in the General election (Huntsman for Foreign Policy and Johnson on the economy) and the Party elite did everything they could to bury them.

    So this notion that somehow you beat each other up too much in the Primary doesn’t exist. Romney’s problems were well known before the primary… nothing new about him was exposed during the primary… and he still lost.

  7. The whole “maker/taker” state statistics are a perfect example that figures don’t lie but liars figure. The reality is that urban areas tend to be net “payers” because they are centers of population (with high concentration of wealthy and “1%ers”), while rural areas tend to be net “receivers.” Also, as for states in the West, it’s important to point out that the federal government owns lots of the land, which denies those states a proper tax base. Alaska is a perfect example. If they were their own country, they would be self-sufficient (like Norway) by virtue of their vast natural resources. However, most of those lands are owned by the federal government. Instead, the show up as one of the “moocher” states, which couldn’t be further from the truth.

  8. Jeff – as you show, it muddies your argument.

    Nick – dude, do you really really want your Drinking Right privileges revoked. All that “your” talk isn’t gonna sit well. But my point was there was considerable bruising during the primary that delayed the base from embracing the eventual primary winner.

    KPOM – don’t Alaskans actually get a reverse tax payment for living there?

  9. Randy in Richmond says:

    KPOM
    Alaska’s citizens get a royalty payment based on oil revenues. That was a topic of discussion when Palin was running. My memory is it’s several thousands of dollars per person-not family.

  10. The other HUGE mistake that Republicans made was with idea of “job creators”… and that was long before the 47%, which obviously only made it worse.

    The problem with “job creators” is that it feeds right into devisive fight between “workers” (a favorite union/left phrase) and now job creators. When the Republicans took ownership of a phrase, they in some ways accepted the separation, which is a huge mistake.

    It allowed Democrats to further create a divide to exploit, and allowed many people to be seen as kept down by those the Republicans want to prop up. When you have high unemployment, more people feel down than up, and so that plays into Democratic hands. Add in Romney’s 47% line, and Conservative talk radio in their echo chamber of moochers and takers and it was a recipe for disaster.

    Of course, in order for Republican to successfully change this, they have to fight against Corporatism and Crony Capitalism themselves, which they are loathe to do…

    They also have to accept that many in the 47% are their constituents. They are the veterans, the elderly, and others. Instead of explaining how they want to increase opportunity for all by lowering regulation so that anyone can be a creator, they instead were cast into a role of saying some people make jobs, and some people work jobs.

    Horrible… horrible idea.

  11. Randy is correct in Alaska the socialistic government there takes from the private industry and redistributes it to the people of Alaska, it works so well it propelled their governor to national prominence!

  12. Ok, Jeff. That’s kind of awesome. Alaska: America’s Banana Republic.

  13. Randy in Richmond says:

    Jeff
    Once Alaska claims ownership of the oil companies, you may have something there.

  14. so taking proits from rex tillerson isnt socialism in Alaska, it would only count if they took over the oil companies.

    In the other 49 if they raise taxes 3% on the upper1%. making them still way below historic levels, that would be socialism?

  15. Jeff – they don’t take profits from ExxonMobil, they charge them a fee to drill on federal/state land. It’s not ExxonMobil’s land, but they get the profits, nice.

  16. Apparently, “they” = urban people to Paul Ryan:

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/267481-rep-ryan-gop-ticket-didnt-lose-election-on-budget-issues-medicare

    This man is so full of shit. Hey, go back to Janesville and focus on winning your own hometown next time, Paul.

    Sorry, as you were.

  17. Could it be that you guys are finally getting it?

    “Jeff – they don’t take profits from ExxonMobil, they charge them a fee to drill on federal/state land.”

    Thats why I love Cindy’s blog there is an ounce of sanity here. That is exactly what happens when we raise taxes or make companies pay taxes, they are being charged a fee to participate in things in society that are not the property of everyone.

    That is why its so disgusting that people like the widow hendricks or tom petri get free passes from paying taxes, they suck our services and pay nothing in return.

    Those are the takers who want free things!

  18. Jeff – well, your message had gotten so convoluted, I am not sure we are even close to being on the same page. Income (revenue) tax v. federal land access fees is not a level playing field.