<<< While Palin was magnanimous in her support of Romney, the GOP RINO population was not, with regard to the First Lady of the New Conservative Movement.
From the WJS: Here is what the exit poll found. Mr. Romney's personal
image took a hard hit during the primary campaign and remained weak on election
day. Just 47% of exit-poll respondents viewed him favorably, compared with 53%
for Mr. Obama. Throughout the campaign, Mr. Romney's favorable ratings were
among the lowest recorded for a presidential candidate in the modern era. A
persistent problem was doubt about his empathy with the average voter. By 53%
to 43%, exit-poll respondents said that Mr. Obama was more in touch than Mr.
Romney with people like themselves.
[The WJS article did not mention the fact
that this particular issue was wholly driven by the Marxist Media in support of
B Obama – blog editor].
(A second consideration is this): Mr. Romney was never fully embraced by Republicans
themselves, which may have inhibited the expected strong Republican turnout.
Pew's election-weekend survey found Mr. Romney with fewer strong supporters
(33%) than Mr. Obama (39%). Similarly, a much greater percentage of Obama
supporters (80%) than Romney supporters (60%) told Pew that they were voting
for their candidate . . read the full article at the online Wall Street Journal.
Editor's notes: there can be little doubt that this second consideration was
a major factor. Not only was Romney not
fully accepted, the RINO population within the GOP decided this would be a good
time to formally ignore the tea-party influence and, especially,
Sarah Palin.
Like I always say, go
ahead and try to win an election without giving a place at the table for the
tea-party. This decision may have
serious consequences for the GOP, in the
coming election cycles. Boehner's decision to publicly deny the existence of a tea-party caucus is one of the more disturbing lies told by Gop leadership, since the election. Keep in mind, that the McCain/Palin ticket not only garnered more votes than Romney, but captured a larger voting block within the Mormon constituency as well.
Update: I should have made the note that the RINO's won the nomination process because the favorite sons of the tea-party, Perry, Gingrich, Santorum and Bachmann, all imploded of their own doing. My favorites, Palin, Ryan and Rubio, decided not run for the top spot, and the others made statements and gaffs that took them completely out of contention. Mitt was the only one left standing, and he did his best, as a moderate, to appease the tea-party folks.
In the end, we have Obama because the average Joe-blow on the tea-party streets, did not get off their collective butt and vote. Obama lost 8 million votes over his 2008 totals. We had him right where we wanted him, but "we" were too busy hunting and gathering to make a difference. We have no one to blame but ourselves.
It wasn't Karl Rove's fault, Mitt's fault, or the several polling firms who got it wrong. No, the fault lies with the lazy bastards within the tea-party movement who decided to do something else. Period.
Would Palin's inclusion at the convention, have helped? Would it have energized the base sufficiently to win this election? Probably, and that is the point of this post. But, in the end, we did it to ourselves.
Let's not make it worse by refusing the tea-party its place at the table.
Update: I should have made the note that the RINO's won the nomination process because the favorite sons of the tea-party, Perry, Gingrich, Santorum and Bachmann, all imploded of their own doing. My favorites, Palin, Ryan and Rubio, decided not run for the top spot, and the others made statements and gaffs that took them completely out of contention. Mitt was the only one left standing, and he did his best, as a moderate, to appease the tea-party folks.
In the end, we have Obama because the average Joe-blow on the tea-party streets, did not get off their collective butt and vote. Obama lost 8 million votes over his 2008 totals. We had him right where we wanted him, but "we" were too busy hunting and gathering to make a difference. We have no one to blame but ourselves.
It wasn't Karl Rove's fault, Mitt's fault, or the several polling firms who got it wrong. No, the fault lies with the lazy bastards within the tea-party movement who decided to do something else. Period.
Would Palin's inclusion at the convention, have helped? Would it have energized the base sufficiently to win this election? Probably, and that is the point of this post. But, in the end, we did it to ourselves.
Let's not make it worse by refusing the tea-party its place at the table.
No comments:
Post a Comment