-
Anyone Still Believe Me?
May 21, 2013 | 38 comments
-
What Those Who Boycott Israel Really Want
May 14, 2013 | 143 comments
-
Mitt on Marriage
May 8, 2013 | 38 comments
-
The One Constant
May 1, 2013 | 118 comments
-
Trudeaus and Terrorism
April 22, 2013 | 15 comments
Political Hay
We’re Not in 1980 Anymore
Obama didn’t win on turnout alone. Our country has changed.
For months, conservatives have been likening the conditions of the 2012 presidential race to that which saw the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. The American Spectator’s own Jeffrey Lord proclaimed that President Obama could be beaten handily “because the past four years really have been Jimmy Carter’s second term.”
Victor Davis Hanson of National Review Online put it this way:
What does 1980 tell us about 2012? Barack Obama, like Carter, can run neither on his dismal four-year stewardship of the economy nor on his collapsing Middle East policy.
Hanson went on to write:
The winner probably won’t be decided by old video clips, gaffes, or even campaign money, but by turnout and the October debates — depending on whether incumbent Obama comes across as a petulant Carter and challenger Romney appears an upbeat Reagan. As in 1980, voters want a better president — but they first have to be assured he’s on the ballot.
Well, Obama did come across as petulant in the debates while Romney was upbeat. And yet it wasn’t enough. At the end of the day, despite Obama’s dismal economic record and an ineffectual Middle East policy, his well-oiled organization turned out his vote and Romney could not. Romney could not break through in key states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan nor could he put Ohio and Florida back in the Republican column.
And yet Obama didn’t win on turnout alone. He won because America has changed. We’re not in 1980 anymore.
We are a long, long way from a time in which we lived in a 13 channel universe where digital watches, VHS machines, Sony walkmans and microwaves were cutting edge technology with cell phones, CDs and 24-hour ATMs still yet to be invented. There is a whole generation of Americans who cannot fathom life before the Internet.
In that 13 channel universe, Reagan rose to the occasion in his lone debate with President Carter one week before the election. While Romney rose to the occasion the first time he shared the same stage with President Obama, it was a full month before the election. Obama had two more shots to redeem himself and more than made up for his lackluster performance in the first debate. And then along came Sandy which gave Obama an opportunity to look presidential in a way he wasn’t when it came to Benghazi.
When all the votes were counted, Romney’s performance in the first debate was but a footnote in the Twitter-verse. Romney simply peaked too soon. He wounded Obama but didn’t knock him out when he had the chance. In fact, it could be argued Romney let Obama back into the fight. It was a classic case of Romney winning the battle but losing the war.
At the dawn of the '80s, a critical mass of the American population knew what life was like in the Great Depression and WWII, understood the evils of Soviet communism and did not take kindly to American diplomats being held hostage. But when we have an education establishment that is skeptical of the use of American power and weans high school students on Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, should it come as a surprise that many shrug when an American ambassador is murdered? Still, Romney had not one but two chances to expose the folly of the Obama Administration’s insistence the attacks in Benghazi were a result of a YouTube video, not a terrorist attack and twice he failed to do so.
In 1980, Americans would not tolerate rising unemployment. In 2012, not only is high unemployment accepted as a fact of life but receiving food stamps is encouraged. There was also no concept of gay marriage in 1980. In 2012, Obama endorsed gay marriage (albeit sooner than he wanted to on account of the loose lips of Joe Biden). Nor was it conceivable in 1980 that a sitting Commander-in-Chief’s re-election campaign could have put out a commercial featuring a woman likening support for the President to the loss of her virginity. Thirty-two years ago, being wealthy and successful was considered something to aspire to and be proud of. Today, it is a source of bitterness, envy, resentment and, in some quarters, the very epitome of evil.
In the final analysis, it must also be remembered that a significant segment of the electorate was emotionally vested in Barack Obama in a way it never was with Carter — and I’m not just talking about the mainstream media. Obama received a near unanimous vote from African-Americans and a substantial majority of Hispanics as well as people under 30 (especially women). That doesn’t necessarily mean we’ve entered the permanent Democratic majority which Ruy Teixeira and John Judis wrote of a decade ago. It is certainly possible that America could again elect a conservative Republican President. But conservatives must recognize that the American electorate has changed and that 1980 has come and gone, never to return.
About the Author
Aaron Goldstein writes from Boston, Massachusetts.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (216) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Aaron Goldstein
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/07/were-not-in-1980-anymore
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 11.7.12 @ 6:21AM
Whether 1980 returns or not the economy is sill the economy and the rules of economics will rule overall.
When Obamacare starts to run its course, millions will be laid off or reduced to 28 hours a week. We will become a part time nation which will effectively destroy the middle class and enlarge the taker mentality.
As Obama seeks to implement energy justice on the American public electrical rates will continue their upward trend and destroy many a home budget.
In essence, the American public is stupid and continues to vote against their own self interest in the futile hope they will get something for nothing.
By next September the recession will return with a vengeance. The political ruling class will run in circles and point fingers and the Democrats and the media will pull out the same blame game play from their playbooks.
It appears the public has bought into the blame game and the Democrats pulled it off.
Next? Invest in gold and enjoy the ride.
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 8:12AM
You are exactly right! I didn't watch but woke up stunned that Obama was re-elected. But the best part of this is the Democrats will be blame once the country crashes. I've been preparing since 2008 and now I will sit back and watch the destruction.
I pray that every one that supported this reprobate will suffer from his policies.
I work at an Engineering school at one of the countries top universities and many here who voted have no clue about the pending layoffs that are coming. We are dependent upon the defense contractors and military personal who attend our school and have been planning for a huge drop in enrollments. What the liberals at my job don't seem to get is many will lose their jobs because of who they voted for.
Who will Obama blame next over the next two years when the shit really hits the fan.
As sad as I am I knew Romney was republican lite and would never tackle the really tough issues and would have been blame for the imminent economic collapse.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 8:48AM
Gerald,
He will blame the rich Republicans and the masses will do as they have done, slop it up, like the idiots they have become.
But you are exactly correct in what is going to happen. There will be two major events in the next year. War in the middle east and a severe recession starting with large collapses of small businesses and layoffs at this level. Taxes will be raised, and of course, do nothing to stave off any of the coming economic ruin.
Quartermaster| 11.7.12 @ 9:12AM
Rising taxes will compound the problem.
The elctorate is depraved, particularly the so called minorities. They are worse off under Obama, but voted for him anyway. Stupid is as stupid does.
SUBVET| 11.7.12 @ 9:43AM
CONTROL........is the name of the game.
In 2005 I read a book that outlined what will happen as we go forward as a country. It was shocking to read and I thought "no way".
Last night confirmed the book and their agenda. I thought we as a society we would never let this happen......I was wrong.
In the books epilogue it said "Now What" ? Where do we go from here ? Is there hope ? Absolutely there is hope, but this will depend on your periscope and what you are doing with your life.
Times will be difficult for all people, but thoes who have consecrated their hearts to God have nothing to fear. He protects His own.
Hope of the Wicked - Ted Flynn
Roscoe| 11.7.12 @ 12:12PM
Gerald asks: "Who will Obama blame next....". That's an easy one; last name's Bush, first name's George.
TrueBlue | 11.7.12 @ 2:56PM
He'll also blame the Republicans in the House and Senate, even though they have said they're willing to meet in the middle whereas Reid and the Dems admitted they would never work with Romney or the Repubs.
Von Mises Jr| 11.7.12 @ 10:51AM
Well said Bill, except you won't have to wait for September for a recession. The Dow dropped 250 this morning and my gold is rising.
When the Social Security tax goes back up to 6.2% January 1st, those earning $50K AGI pay $1K or $83 per month.
The sun set of the Bush rates turns 10% to 15% up to $17,400 and then to 28% up to $70,700. So if you earn $50K, your taxes are going up $6,738. That is a hell of a way to punish the rich and use your vote for revenge. But nobody ever claimed that liberals are bright.
ObamaCare taxes don't start until 2014, but funding the Medicaid expansion could raise your property taxes by 15-20% starting 2013.
Then the Debt Ceiling could trigger a downgrade that means that borrowing will be very expensive. So Ben will just need to turn up the printing press. He is adding $40B per month to a M2 money supply that Peter Schiff said went from 3T to 9T in the last few years. Bloomberg won't have to worry about New Yorkers buying big sugary drinks. They would need a wheel barrow of money to afford one.
The ride is through the horror house. I'll be playing nickels by the curb with collector silver coins.
RCV| 11.7.12 @ 6:27PM
Fortunately, responsbile Republicans are already working to avoid a crisis on the debt ceiling, like the one they caused last time.
GobBluthe| 11.7.12 @ 12:01PM
The problem is that only once have Democrats been punished for a bad economy. That was Carter in 1980. The norm is actually Dem Policies = Bad Economy = People Hurting = People Using Govt = More Dem Votes. This is why CA, NJ, NY, IL and Detroit arent conservative. If failed liberalism = conservative wins These places would be the most conservative places in the country.
aware| 11.7.12 @ 6:37AM
I tried to tell you the earth had changed under your feet but you won't listen. Remember I said Romney would be the nominee and Obama would be re-elected way back in December.
When you finish licking your wounds learn to hate the State as you hate "liberals", then I will know something positive has occurred. Let the scales fall from your eyes. Conservative, Inc. is doomed to irrelevance. A sign of this is the constant looking back in pointless sentimentality. Like an old man remembering his youth.
Rifleman| 11.7.12 @ 7:05AM
No, conservativism isn't dead. A conservative candidate wasn't nominated. Another "moderate" was, which is what liberals always tell the GOP to choose. The GOP picked up seats in the House & would have p/u a couple of seats in the Senate had we had two better candidates...
Will| 11.7.12 @ 8:50AM
Oh here we go. Do you seriously believe Romney did't win because he was too conservative? Do you if he had promised to institute the Ryan plan in full, stick an extra 300 billion on the defence budget, cut taxes much further, ban gay marriage etc he would have won? Of course not. Just look how Tea Party candidates fared (very badly). See how 4 states supported gay marriage by popular vote. Romney lost women massively, largely because of the GOP's obsession with contraception, homosexuality, abortion et al.
The problem wasn't the candidate or the campaign. The problem is that many Republican policies were far too right-wing for swing voters, and energised the democratic base to boot. If the Republicans want to broaden their appeal beyond ageing white men (aka winning an election) they need to move to the centre, not the extreme right.
Quartermaster| 11.7.12 @ 9:14AM
"...far too right-wing for swing voters...."
You mean too moral for depraved voters. The electorate went for stuff that was diametrically opposed to their best interests.
Will| 11.7.12 @ 9:16AM
Well then, clearly the only alternative is some sort of Leninist takeover by the vanguard of the conservative revolution. If you go on about how the voters were wrong, you won't win. In a democracy, political parties accomodate voters opinions or go bust. That's the lesson that Clinton taught the Democrats.
Seek| 11.7.12 @ 1:03PM
How about more white voters?
Does anyone here have the guts to grasp that this was about race, as much so as in 2008? Forget all that Leninism retrofitted to "conservative" ends -- Grover's been at that ugly gig for 25 years or more and has little or nothing to show for it. We need to reduce the percentage shares of the black and Hispanic votes. And for God's sake, we shouldn;t even think of imitating the Democrats in some Diversity gambit, nominating Marco Rubio for president in 2016.
RCV| 11.7.12 @ 6:29PM
Why don't you ship off to some little racist enclave in the woods of Idaho. YOU don't get to "reduce the percentage shares" of any Americans, buddy.
KennesawJack| 11.7.12 @ 11:21PM
I believe what Seek means is to increase the turnout among white voters, not diminish the value of votes by blacks and hispanics. Don't mean to put words in his mouth, but that's how I took it.
kingratt82| 11.7.12 @ 7:38AM
@aware: You're incorrect to call conservative values "pointless sentimentality" as well as dooming it to "irrelevance." It isn't socialism and big government that built America to the greatness it achieved, it was free-market capitalism and limited, responsible government. It is impossible to be familiar with American history and with America's founding principles and simultaneously deny this.
It is true that the nation is not what it was in 1980, that it changed. But enough of us still hoped that America would not willingly choose to go the way of so many other failed states. However, the ray of hope here is that the House of Reps actually gained some seats, and the House best represents the voting population of America. Romney may have lost the popular vote, but not by much, and judging by the House elections, conservatism isn't dead--we still represent more of the country than the liberals do.
aware| 11.7.12 @ 10:48AM
I called Conservative, Inc. doomed. Learn the difference. While you're at it, name one, just one, occasion when "conservatives" gave us "limited government". I know they talk about it all the time but I just want one example when they did.
Wake the hell up.
Parker| 11.7.12 @ 11:50AM
Oh brother... And the first words out of the mouth of John Boehner were, "We need bipartisanship." Translation, we need to compromise, to get things done. Can you ever hear those words out of the mouth of Harry Reid? Nancy Pelosi? No... Obama? No. Republicans? All the time. If the Republicans wants to earn their stripes they need to vote down any and all spending resolutions, debt ceiling increases and if the government shuts down, so be it.
They don't have the money anyway. It's just a fool's errand to continue the charade of borrowing to pay for welfare programs. When and only when people are made to realize the reality that, "There is no such thing as a free lunch," will this country crawl out of its grave. Shut it down and watch the takers freak out. That's what we are up against. Nothing less.
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 8:19AM
No reality will bite you in your liberal ass. You are an idiot and don't seem to understand that many of us conservatives have been preparing for our economic decline so we won't be hit as hard.
You on the other hand are so dependent upon the goverment that once it crashes you'll have nothing.
As sad as I was now it really gets fun. I can't wait until the market crashes and the layoffs come pouring in. I can't wait until employees hours are reduced to part time to avoid Obamacare. I can't wait unitl gas goes up to $5 a gallon until inflation sets in adn reality smacks the liberals in the face like a brick.
There are times in life where God will let us suffer in our rebellion to teach us a lesson.
Class is now in session. HAHAHA
aware| 11.7.12 @ 10:44AM
See what I mean? You are too stupid to understand I'm way farther to the Right than you can conceive of. Bet you ain't near as far in preparing as I am either.
You neocons are as responsible for the demise of a once great nation as your brothers, the Progressives.
Now YOU go to class and learn the pathology of the State. Then when you hate it as much as you hate "liberals"(whatever the Hell that even means) you won't have to be an unwitting knave of the Statists, both Left AND RIGHT.
Or just double down on what you've been doing and keep wondering what went wrong. "conservatives" set new records of ignorance of political science.
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 12:58PM
If you are on the right then I misread and I apologize. I'm in a flame throwing mood this morning and I knew all along Romney was not the answer and conservatives have screwed us over and over again.
I no longer have any hope with any of our current politicians from either party.
You see I am accountable as a man and will admit if I am incorrect about a poster.
aware| 11.7.12 @ 5:31PM
Your apology is accepted gladly as there are too few genuine gentlemen around. I was mad 4 years ago too. Mad enough to find out the real truth, I suggest you do likewise. Time is short now and accurate info may mean life or death.
There are liars Left and Right, know who they are.
Jack in Wi| 11.7.12 @ 8:21AM
aware and I have been right since the beginning. Romney was just a pale immitation of Obama. I voted for him as the lesser evil but I had to put a couple closepins on my nose to keep down the stink. I read where Sarah Palin said the Bain commercials killed Romney in Ohio. The same is true in Wisconsin. He was a bad candidate who stood for nothing but gettting elected. Why should people vote for an immitation phoney when they had the real master to vote for Obama? I have to say Paul Ryan did nothing for the ticket. He career on a national stage appears to be over.
Will| 11.7.12 @ 8:52AM
So your saying that Romney was too left wing, so people voted for Obama? REALITY ALERT, REALITY ALERT
Jack in Wi| 11.7.12 @ 1:26PM
I just could not stand the sight of Obama for another 4 years. I didn't watch him for the 1st four and won't watch him four the next four. May Romney be the last of the Rockefeller Republicans. I don't mind losing if we stand up for the Truth and sanity. I am over this election already. I feel worse when the Packers lose. I survived a lot of terrible politicians in my long life. God willing I will survive this guy.
aware| 11.7.12 @ 11:07AM
Jack, I tried to constructively criticize and offer what I think is the heart of the problem(love of the Garrison State) and only get labeled a "liberal" for my trouble. But confusion seems to be the natural state of modern conservatism. Name called by dogs who weren't even born in the 70s when I started fighting the Leviathan. This is why in '08 I left "conservatism" for Anachro-Capitalism and haven't looked back.
Too bad evil is the only item in the buffet. A little or a lot, it's still evil. Damned neocons deserve ALL the blame for this debacle and yet here they are blaming everything and everybody else. Damn them for the fools and knaves they are. Deceived and deceiving.
Jack in Wi| 11.7.12 @ 1:28PM
aware: Keep hanging around. I only voted for Romney because Wi. was a swing state. This site needs a lot more of your sanity.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 3:40PM
Yeah, his sanity, an anachro-capitalism? Right. Try spelling it correctly first, Anarcho-capitalism. Well, got news for you are founding fathers were not Anarcho-capitalist, jackass. I will never apologize for being a conservative as my philosophy is certainly more in line with this nations founding than yours. You are a silly little jerk that I am guessing is no older than 35 and still is stuck in adolescence. Am I right?
This a site for conservatives, troll. If you had an once of manhood or balls you would establish your own where you could spout your drivel all day long with Jackboot and the other ten freak ball Anarcho-capitalist in this nation.
aware| 11.7.12 @ 5:13PM
Guess what, they sure as hell weren't neocon Statists that supported a permanent Garrison State and constant meddling world wide, didn't support a fascist economic system with a vast military/industrial complex, or a debt based paper money, and least of all a professional political class.
Like you, "conservative". I wish I was 35 again, sonny. Just double down on what you're doing and continue to blame everybody else, worked like a charm so far, right?
Alej| 11.7.12 @ 6:46AM
God damn every nigger and every goddamned yankee in this fucked up country.
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 8:21AM
Hey bitch I'm black but conservative. You need to blame your own self hating white folks who re-elected this reprobate you dumbass.
Jack in Wi| 11.7.12 @ 8:27AM
I believe that if Romney had wasted just a little of all that money appealing to Blacks on conservative issues like taxes, gay marriage, abortion, Deomocratic mismangement of cities under their control etc he might have gotten some of their votes. Anyway he should have tried. If he could of got the 18% Reagan got in 1980 it would have made a lot of difference.
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 8:33AM
Not a chance. I come from the black community and we are a lost people. So when the suffering really begins in the next two years they can only blame themselves.
KennesawJack| 11.7.12 @ 9:06AM
I don't know what State you live in, but if you're not holding public office, you need to. Sooner or later, Blacks will see enough positive Black role models that the race-baiters will lose their cachet. You sound like you need to be one those role models.
Boar Hunter| 11.7.12 @ 9:59AM
I don't think Gerald needs to run for Office unless his heart calls him to do so. It sounds to me like he already serves as a positive roll model. My prayers for you and your family Gerald. You sound like a good man who is as sick at his heart as I am. This issue is not one of color. Have patience, people are angry and looking for someone to blame. As the majority of Blacks supported Obama's presidency they may provide a convenient target, but they are not responsible for his gaining or retaining office.
Bob Grant| 11.7.12 @ 10:35AM
Although I do not agree with Alej's pejorative outburst, the facts that drive his frustration cannot be denied.
The fact that any, ANY, demographic group votes in lockstep to the degree that African Americans voted for Obama should be cause for deep concern!
I would argue no other voting bloc in the World votes in such a monolithic way.
And like clockwork, the concern trolls are out (Mike Huckabee) talking about how conservatives do such a dismal job "reaching out" to African Americans without, of course, providing specifics about how that should be accomplished.
Should they reach out symbolically? - It was Romney, remember, not obama who appeared in person at the NAACP last summer. WHO really took their vote for granted?
Should they educate them on the benefits of what conservatism would do for the African American Community? - Herman Cain attempted but was called all the predictable names.
The bottom line is African Americans are COMFORTABLE not trusting conservatives and equally COMFORTABLE trusting that government will provide for them. I don't know how that will change.
RCV| 11.7.12 @ 6:33PM
As long as you treat little racists like Alej with such respect, Mr. Grant, the decent people of this country will continue to reject conservative policies.
Bob Grant| 11.7.12 @ 8:44PM
My comments influence people's views on conservative policies?
Wow, I didn't realize I had such pull.
If you read what I wrote you'd realize I gave him no such respect. I was analyzing what's behind his obvious frustration.
I have no idea whether he's racist or not.
PolishKnight| 11.7.12 @ 10:29AM
My wife and I went to sleep at 11:00PM last night and I heard screaming and then loud dancing and thumping from the apartment downstairs where we know that two black women, unwed mothers, lived. I knew it was over and Obama had won. I put in my earplugs and took an ambien and went to sleep and my wife told me in the morning they hooted and hollered and danced until 2AM.
Their children are still growing up fatherless though. How this is "progress" is beyond me. On the other hand, many white women are not that far behind. A neighbor of mine is a pleasant middle class white woman, unmarried, childless, and works in the defense industry. She's worried about layoffs. How is this progress since the 1950's?
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 12:12PM
Gerald why does the black leadership consistently support amnesties for illegal aliens. Blacks are hurt most by this yet all the black leadership is for it and a large majority of the people.
White engineers aren't going to lose their jobs to grade school educated Mexicans that white employers would rather hire.
PolishKnight| 11.7.12 @ 12:35PM
Overall, most leftists whether black or white, are in love with the Democrat party because of what it promises: They'll loot and rob someone else and pass along the goodies to you just as soon as they finish getting rid of pesky Totsky, er, snowball, er Bush, er you know!
So blacks think that any day now, they'll get their affirmative action job or who knows? Get to be president! Fools in Pennsylvania and Ohio, I simply don't understand. Why did they fall in love with a guy who offers them NOTHING?!?! Not even the smug satisfaction of being a leftist. In the left's eyes, they're HICKS. RUBES! FOOLS. And they secretly say so. But the media pumped out marxist blather about stopping outsourcing (not that Obama is going to stab his secret campaign contributors in the back) and lots of "green energy jobs" (windmills from China) and they bought it hook, line, and sinker.
He's gotten what he need out of 'em and now they're in his rear view mirror.
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 1:11PM
I have no clue myself. I can't figure out what drives black people to support policies that hurt them.
My theory was that during the slave trade many of the captured blacks were the most ignorant, docile and submissive ones, as the stronger ones would die rather than become a slave.
Most of the rebellious traits were bred out of us during slavery and we now have a whole group of people that are easily controlled either by handouts or prison.
I am convinced over 90% of black people are brainwashed with no ability to see an issue clearly without injecting race.
But most blacks that I speak to dont seem to really understand the impact of illegal aliens has in their unemployment numbers.
PolishKnight| 11.7.12 @ 1:33PM
Slavery was common around the world including in Europe so most of us are descendants of slaves.
The reason I think the blacks switched to the Democrat party back in the 60's was affirmative action and welfare in addition to the reason why Obama is in the white house: blacks in this country are leftist victim royalty. It doesn't really get them much in the long run. I'm reminded of Eddie Murphy trying to fast talk himself out of an arrest in Trading Places. Sometimes it works but for the most part, the victim lifestyle isn't getting them anywhere.
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 2:20PM
Well I'm trying to wrap my mind around how over 90% of american blacks think alike. There is a common mindset that has to be our DNA. I'm not blaming slavery but trying to describe the type of person that would accept being a slave. I would have been killed on the spot.
I know this sounds crazy but I got that theory by watching a show on how wild foxes were domesticated and the wildness was bred out of them until they were like cats.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 8:38AM
Gerald, this is a damn liberal troll, they pull this crap all the time out here..they have to keep the racism charges alive and make conservatives out to be monsters.
God bless you, Gerald.
CJW| 11.7.12 @ 9:18AM
Gerald
Ignore Alej. I agree with you about the limousine liberals who voted for O so they feel better about themselves.
Immortal 600| 11.7.12 @ 10:56AM
Gerald, God bless you and your family!
Alej| 11.7.12 @ 10:01AM
My personal apologies to you, and to the 3 % or so of your population who probably didn't vote for obama.
I just blew up when I saw a difference of only one million votes and thought of how the Democrats had a guaranteed 13 % of the total already in the bag due to race.
Ethnic partisanship, and the Democrat use of it, has ended the American dream. Differential birthrates and universal suffrage guarantee that.
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 12:15PM
Not to mention the amnesty from the Great Empty Headed One.
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 2:26PM
Apology accepted as I have had racial blowups myself and unfairly labeled white people.
There are more of us black conservatives than you think but damn this is going to take some work.
Things are literally going to have to collapse before black people wake up and see reality.
I don't pander to white people and they should not pander to blacks. Be who your are and be proud of who you are and don't let others define you. I tell white people when they call you racist you come right back at them. Don't cower for fear of being labeled. As I already catch hell in my community but damn I love a good fight!
Immortal 600| 11.7.12 @ 10:54AM
Alej,
I share some of your sentiment but don't put all black people in the same basket. There are a good number of hard working black folks who saw through the Obama smoke screen. My fantasy is the South will rise again, under the Stars and Bars, and whip the Yankees' asses. Only this time let's have our black brothers and sisters who think like we do on our side. If the dummies at the end of the Civil War would have woke up and freed those slaves that loved their homes as much as the white man, the result could have been different. Get the hatred out of your heart for our black brethren. As for as Yankees go, New England can KMA . We'll accept the 30% up there who are conservative to move down south. We'll give them back the stupid liberals that have infested our great southern nation.
Alej| 11.7.12 @ 5:53PM
I have often on this site remarked Sowell, Elder, Thomas, Lloyd and many others as decent, patriotic Americans.
No excusing a public outburst, but I'd just awakened and was in shock. My daughters have suffered, physically, for being white, I was threatened with death in Viet Nam, not by VC but by an alleged "American," and in general have wished the general culture was not what it is.
I'll be nice. Although passivity and retreat in the face of a culture war is what has led to militance on the other side.
Hardcard| 11.7.12 @ 6:51AM
The End.
Joellen| 11.7.12 @ 6:52AM
I did pray for a miracle last night. I did pray that America would come to its senses and acknowledge that we the people must be accountable and responsible for our actions. I did pray that the majority of the people would vote for a different path; a path where we honor tradition, work hard with pride for our achievements and expect our leaders to be of statue that elude dignity, self respect and pride of their country. I did pray that our country would vote for a President, Senate & Congress that would protect its military and thus its people; would promote fiscal responsibility and commit to adhering to the Constitution. I did pray, but GOD has a plan, and now I continue to pray, that I be still and allow HIS plan/will to be. I will never stop believing in the original concept of the United States of America, but I do acknowledge now that the majoritity of the people have kicked it aside. I turn to GOD to either restore America or if it be his will, to turn it to dust. Be strong and courageous my TAS friends, have a strong cup of coffee this morning and and keep in mind St. Paul's "I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race and I have kept firmly the faith". It's still not over - not until we breath that last breath.
Appleby| 11.7.12 @ 6:53AM
There will be war by Christmas and rioting in the streets by spring that will make Occupy Wall Street look like a Sunday school picnic. Once we have dived off the fiscal cliff, and there is no more money for anything, those who seriously believed that there would always be more will resort to their usual answer of destruction and death. The natural condition of humanity is not the USA. It is Eastern Europe -- solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short. Hope you like it.
fmm| 11.7.12 @ 8:44AM
Your last statement has striken me as correct for a long time; the natural condition of humans is that of the caveman. His only interest is in himself and most residents on the planet today are not much more educated. It is easy to be a liberal; just be your inherent caveman. It is hard to be a conservative as it takes much study and effort to understand what makes a civilized world.
Will| 11.7.12 @ 8:57AM
"his only interest is himself". Doesn't that sound a bit like conservatism to you? Liberals are deeply concerned with other people- why else have a big government devoting to lifting people out of poverty, providing services that benefit the whole country, going for greater equality etc. You can say that that is philosophically wrong, or inefficient, or counter-productive or whatever, but it is hardl selfish.
The essence of conservative economics is that people keep more of their own money, rather than letting it be spent on things that benefit the rest of the country. That is selfish. And it can condemn the lives of the poor and the working class to be nasty, brutish and short.
KennesawJack| 11.7.12 @ 9:08AM
Why do I think you believe Stalin, Mao, and Fidel were (are) deeply concerned with other people?
Will| 11.7.12 @ 9:18AM
Yeah, because moderate social democracy/liberalism leads inexorably to communism. That's about as logical as saying that a Romney vote would lead to fascism.
Name me one advanced social democratic country that has fallen to communist takeover. One. Please.
Bob Grant| 11.7.12 @ 9:46AM
You could say Hugo straddles the line between socialism and communism, however, you might not consider Venezuela an "advanced social democracy".
Just read about his past attempts to control prices. In some cases seizing industries via government force.
By the way, Price Controls are headed here as well. Obama might not take over industries via force but has other means at his disposal to "punish" industries.
So, in answering your question, get back to me in a year or two so we can discuss Greece, Spain, Italy, or other European countries on the brink of financial Armageddon. Many of those "social democratic" countries will have no choice but to adopt more radical forms of government, i.e. communism.
You are about to receive one big history, economics lesson in the next few years. Get your notebook ready.
PolishKnight| 11.7.12 @ 10:32AM
Except, Will, the left doesn't have programs lifting people out of poverty and making the world into Sweden. They instead have crony politicians making the problems worse, pocketing the cash, and then blaming Hoover, er, Bush for the mess. The left never solves anything. They like to say they're solving things.
I suppose that doesn't make them selfish so much as fanatical. They want to drink cool aid and go to the comet because "conservative" values of just earning a living, raising a two parent family, not trampling upon your neighbor in an effort to "help" him isn't fun and exciting enough for them.
And remember: The left doesn't want to live with the recipients of their supposed largesse. Most are limosine liberals who want to live among middle and working class whites.
Rockabilly| 11.7.12 @ 10:55AM
NO, liberals like to spend OTHER peoples money for programs that favor them and buy votes. Conservative in their private lives and give far more of THEIR money to charity and good works individually and through their churches. YOU liberals want to take MY money and give it to YOUR political allies like the unions and Planned Parenthood. So don't look down your long nose at conservatives and you can put your government "charity" where the sun don't shine. (an area of the anatomy that holds great fascination for O's gay supporters)
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 12:17PM
So Reagan wasn't trying to buy votes by amnestying illegals?
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 2:31PM
You mistaken charity with control. They aren't lifting people out of anything.
Come to the hood and see generations of families STILL on welfare. You got 50 yr old great gramma, the 35 yr old mi ma ( ebonics for grandma), the 20 yr old momma and little Shanequa who will grow up to follow in their foot steps.
It is selfish in that it only enriches the politicians and administrators who run the programs. The recipients always remain poor.
If liberalsim works THEN WHY DO WE STILL HAVE GHETTOS 50 yrs later?
Rifleman| 11.7.12 @ 7:00AM
It is indeed sad that an almost 100% of blacks will vote Democrat regardless of how poor their conditions are. Many live in slum neighborhoods, in poverty, on AFDC, Food Stamps and in high crime areas & yet never hesitate to vote Democrat.
This is not meant to be a racial slur but just a sad commentary on how the Democratic Party has "hooked" so many on government aid. And sadly too, over half of the electorate still blames Bush- the man who had an average rate of unemployment over 8 years of 5.0%. This proves, with a compliant media, you can demonize your opponent, blame your predecessor and successfully beg for more time...
kingratt82| 11.7.12 @ 7:27AM
There's nothing racist about telling the truth. Ann Coulter said very similar things in her book "Mugged," and Thomas Sowell also said very similar things in "Black Rednecks and White Liberals." An honest view of history reveals that the GOP, not the Democrats, have been consistently fighting for blacks.
It is also sad that they are still blaming Bush for the economy even though they've been in power for 4 years. Four years! Wouldn't it be nice if a responsible man held the presidency? But Obama learned his Saul Alinsky well, and it worked. The mainstream media did nothing to expose who Alinsky really was or what he taught; I honestly think if they had, Romney would have won handily.
Anyway, good comments (IMHO).
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 8:27AM
I think in the long run it's best that Romney didn't win. He would have been blamed for the next four years and he wasn't really going to address the major issues we face.
Now when Obama blames his predecessor he'll be looking in the mirror.
Grzmlyk| 11.7.12 @ 8:47AM
WRONG, Gerald.
I agree that Romney would have been handed a sinking ship of state, and that he'd be blamed for the next four years - funny how the media, which never stopped singing the referain that the last four years were Bush's fault, would stop blaming the last administration the day of Romney's swearing in.
And I agree totally that Romney would have neither the political capital nor the courage of his convictions to do much to change anything.
But if you think our coming demise will be blamed on anybody but Bush, the Tea Party, conservatism, Rush Limbaugh, Christians and Republicans, you haven't learned the lessons of last night's tragedy.
Obama will go down in history as the immaculately-conceived Saint Who Gave America Hope - count on it. Such is the state of this sorry, sorry land.
Reality has NO PLACE in the liberal mind - and, as last night proved, most of America is liberal (Sorry, Emmett Tyrell, but facts are facts).
Obama could walk up to a bystander at one of his speeches and slit his throat with a hunting knife, blood could be spurting everywhere, and it could be caught by myriad TV cameras, and still not a single liberal - including the guy who's bleeding to death - would see anything but a compassionate, caring demigod caring for his disciples.
I hate what this country has become.
Warrior| 11.7.12 @ 10:11AM
Well said and unfortunately tragically accurate. When asked about Benghazi, a significant number of people would respond, "who is he?" When asked what the U-6 represented, the responses were everything from a European soccer league to a submarine.
Grzmlyk| 11.7.12 @ 10:44AM
Yup. Nobody cares about anything in this country anymore except:
1) Getting goodies from government
2) Being told that their greed is compassion
3) Being told that they're the good ones because they celebrate diversity, social justice, global warming, the evil of fossil fuels, the evils of capitalism and anyone who does not believe in demand-side economics.
4) They can do whatever they want with no moral constraints anymore - if it feels good, you have a right to do it; if it looks good, you have a right to have it.
And as long as NPR keeps telling affluent liberals that they're smarter, better, more compassionate and more refined than the cretins who actually understand how the world works, that is all they need.
And, conservatives, the joke's on us, because when it all falls apart - and it will - it will be due to liberalism's nihilistic policies. But it won't matter - guess who'll be blamed?
I say we all line up at the government trough now and start demanding OUR fair share.
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 1:49PM
Well as a black conservative that still serves in the black community I get blamed for everything anyway so I'm used to it. I'm also used to people ignoring the truth and blaming others so who they blame means little to me.
I've been called unlce tom, sell out , house nigger, toby...not to my face of course because I have a short fuse for foolishness. What they say means very little to me and my advice to conservative white folks is be who you are and right will win in the end. Don't pander to any group just let your morals and principles speak for themselves.
I will always stand for what is right in life even if the whole world continues to support what is wrong. I know in the end God will always win and they have mocked Him to their own peril.
I love my Lord, I love my country and I love my fellow conservative brothers and I continue to pray for the ignorant that they awakened from their stupor.
We've only just begun as the more we are hated then the more we will be blessed. God rewards those who continue to do right in the face of evil.
Many posters here don't even know the impact your words have on people like me and it gives me hope that not all is lost....even when it looks like it.
MelvinNC| 11.7.12 @ 8:56AM
You noted in a earlier post that you were a Black Conservative. My question to you is. Why aren't Black Conservatives more vocal.
Many Black Conservatives always seem to grow silent when labeled an Uncle Tom.
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 1:58PM
I can't answer that as I am very vocal. Call me that to my face and we will have a serious problem. You see I'm also a Christian but I still working on that turn the other cheek thing.
It’s still a tribal mentality with blacks. While white people are allowed to be different and have liberal or conservative camps they can run to most conservative blacks are on an island. We are also ostracized by our own families who tend to be liberal.
Give me specific examples of what you are referring too?
Seek| 11.8.12 @ 1:57PM
How about it if the Republicans, for a change, fought for whites? It looks like the blacks haven't been in a very reciprocating mood since we began our "outreach" under Nixon.
Will| 11.7.12 @ 8:57AM
Name me a Republican policy that would actually improve the lives of the black poor
KennesawJack| 11.7.12 @ 9:10AM
Belief in the free market economy, idiot.
Will| 11.7.12 @ 9:19AM
Yeah cos that worked well for Bush's 8 years in power. Virtually none of the huge growth in the economy over 40 years has gone to the bottom 20%. Idiot.
Archie| 11.7.12 @ 10:23AM
And it never will! There is NO 100% solution. It does not exist! There will always be a bottom 20%. So what's your point other than name calling?
Will| 11.7.12 @ 10:29AM
Of course there will always be a bottom 20%. That's the nature of percentages! I'm not saying there's a 100% solution, just that poverty and inequality in the US at the moment is immense, has been getting worse for years, and the Republicans have nothing to say on the matter. Indeed, had Romney won, he would probably have made it worse.
Archie| 11.7.12 @ 11:17AM
Whenever Republicans try to say or do something on the matter, they get shouted down. Because we're racists, we have no feelings, etc. The solution to poverty, of course, is a real education and a belief in pursuit of achievement and self-reliance. But Democrats hate that since it will erode the base they've built up since
the 1950s and 1960s when they went all out to destroy the black family, just as blacks were starting to make headway. Congratulations, you've succeeded.
Warrior| 11.7.12 @ 12:36PM
Archie: You cannot have a rational argument with an irrational ideologue. He is giving you talking points all based on false premises. Our republic, based on the Constitution does give the government any authority or power to help a minority. It is in fact the government and its programs that keep opportunities from reaching the black community. It was the government that passed Jim Crowe, it is the government that provides incentive for people not to work and keep having children without any means to support them. It is the government that forces hospitals to treat patients with no ability to pay. It is the government assisting the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Queda to take over Libya and Egypt and supplying them arms. I could keep going but you get the point.
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 12:20PM
Funny that this is about the 1950's since the one thing that the Republicans have tried their damnedest to eliminate was unions. That was one of the hallmarks of the 50's, high union participation and the most income equality we ever had.
Joellen| 11.7.12 @ 9:19AM
Will - why would you imply a republican policy would only improve the lives of "poor blacks"? Let me fill you and your ilk in Will, the true constitutional Republican policies improve every AMERICAN citizen and if given chance, beyond the shores of America. You see the Constitution is COLOR BLIND. It is you, the liberal democrats and your ilk who continue to flame the tension between the races and that is the only reason we are a divided nation. Sleep on that Will and remember one day you will be accountable for your hatred and the hatred you perpetuate.
Gerald| 11.7.12 @ 2:39PM
Vouchers!!
The death penalty for the black criminals that prey on and murder their own people.
Closing the damn borders and giving those jobs to the youth and those with no college degrees.
You must be one of those silly white liberals who doesn't know any black people.
I was poor you dumbass!!
I CHOOSE TO PURSUE AN EDUCATION AND HAD DAMN NEAR EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO SUCCEED AND I DID. I did not use drugs, I did not drop out of school, I worked hard at every job I had, I did not get my girl pregnant and I married the mother of my children. That's called being an american you dumbass. What damn incentives can you provide to someone who refuses to work or be educated?
Rockabilly| 11.7.12 @ 10:56AM
The problem is that many of them are just fine living at that level as long as they don't have to work.
GobBluthe| 11.7.12 @ 7:02AM
""That doesn't necessarily mean we've entered the permanent Democratic majority which Ruy Teixeira and John Judis wrote of a decade ago.""
Yes, that is exactly what it implies. This is what the Permanent Democratic Majority looks like.
kingratt82| 11.7.12 @ 7:07AM
Excellent, pithy, solemn, sobering insight and analysis of what really happened last night. It still amazes me that A) so many people voted for a man who is hell-bent on destroying America from the inside out, and B) that so few conservatives showed up to vote for Romney. It is said conservatives outnumber liberals 2:1. Where was the other 1/3rd of us last night? How were all of those polls that were skewed in favor of the Democrats accurate--indeed, more accurate than we had hoped?
Goldstein's analysis of the election is accurate in my view, but one still must stand back in sorrowful shock at how many Americans no longer hold to and believe in the ideals, principles, and values upon which the USA was founded. Are we now to become the People's Republic of the United States? We're certainly on the right path. The only ray of hope is that the Republican majority in the House of Representatives actually increased, so while the Senate is lost and the executive branch is a nightmare, it seems that the house of Congress that actually represents America best still believes in the America that was founded. A razor-thin silver lining can also be found in the fact that the true Americans still hold a filibuster-strength minority in the Senate.
Goldstein is right: it isn't 1980 anymore. For the future of American capitalism, free enterprise, and liberty, it's an unfortunate reality.
fmm| 11.7.12 @ 8:52AM
Given the performance of the house the last four years, don't count on them doing anything positive. As long as the system does not hold them accountable for what they do, nothing will change. Self rule always leads to larceny.
PolishKnight| 11.7.12 @ 10:38AM
Reagan compromised on amnesty for illegals and Tip O'Neil ran him over. Kennedy already had massive non-white immigration set up for 2 decades before. Also, H1B visas were in place that would later devastate the white collar white professional population.
Many Reagan republicans either looked the other way or welcomed the development saying that their businesses could save money by hiring illegals or H1B's at cut rates and let the taxpayer foot the bill for medicaid/medicare and welfare when they finally got citizenship. Win win, for them!
And Reagan also didn't take on the feminists and appointed a liberal man-hating feminist to the supreme court. Feminists demanded "equal" pay (via special privileges) and then griped that when men were no longer living up to 1950's breadwinner standards, they became spinsters or unwed mothers. Combined with Nixon's marriage penalty, Reagan and Nixon did more to help kill the two parent family than gay marriage ever could.
Those are the basic problems, gentlemen. Some of the cows are out of the barn but the situation can be saved. Blacks, Hispanics, and women unapologetically demand their interests be represented. If Republicans want white males to show up at the polls, then now is the time to start. If the women under 30 want to vote Obama, great, be prepared though to pay for your own meals and diamonds.
GobBluthe| 11.7.12 @ 7:08AM
The Democrats now appear to have a huge structural advantage in the electoral college. 51% of the vote as a GOP candidate gets you about 280-290 EVs, while 51% of the vote as a Democrat gets you about 330 EVs.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.7.12 @ 7:23AM
Now that the election has concluded, expect all of the lefty trolls who have been in short supply during the last few weeks to return, now that they're no longer needed to stand in lines to vote early in Ohio, Florida, Colorado, etc.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.7.12 @ 7:59AM
See the 744 am post below for illustration.
Purp| 11.7.12 @ 1:17PM
Are you a reverse Troll?
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.7.12 @ 5:02PM
No, but I do sideline as a troll spotter. You came straight to the bait, I see.
BackToBasics| 11.7.12 @ 7:32AM
From the subtitle, "Obama didn't win on turnout alone."
Turnout??
Where are all the votes?
Drudge's totals do not include Florida which is too close to call, but here's what is posted without those 8 million votes:
O - 54,773,837
R - 53,716,689
Here are the Totals in 2008:
O - 69,498,215
Mc - 59,948,240
Add in about 4 million each in Florida and Obam is down by over 10 million and Romney has less votes than Mc Cain did!
Purp| 11.7.12 @ 7:44AM
America Won! The Middle Class Won! The Constitution Won! Gay Rights Won! BIG MONEY lost! You can't buy an election, and that's good news for America.
For all those who are sad, I have to say Romney gave a classy concession speech. As the last political thing he does, it's a good way to end after a loss to President Barack Obama.
GobBluthe| 11.7.12 @ 7:52AM
The constitution certainly doesnt win when a guy who ignores it with endless executive orders and czars wins reelection. As for money, I think you'll find Obama spent more.
Joellen| 11.7.12 @ 8:29AM
The unborn, infirm & elderly lost; the Military lost; small businessess lost; the American Taxpayer lost; non union workers lost; the family unit lost; America has lost for now.
KennesawJack| 11.7.12 @ 9:13AM
Not just "for now", Joellen.
Purp| 11.7.12 @ 1:16PM
The unborn have no rights - they are biological entities until God allows them to be born.
Infirm and elderly lost? Are you sure you know what party you support? Medicare and Medicaid are NOT Republican ideas you know.
The Military lost? Perhaps you should ask wounded warriors which President has taken better care of them? you're clueless....
"Small businesses" like BAIN capital, yeah, and good. But real small business have their champion in the White House.
Taxpayers - wealthy, yes, middle class taxpayers won.
Family unit is a fallacy in your mind. What is a family dear? What you say it is only? Are you the family police now?
America Won! Maybe Amercia lost, but America can now innovate, energize and get back to work.
Warrior| 11.7.12 @ 3:37PM
Until God allows them to be born? You have said a lot of stupid things, but this tops them. So God is responsible for killing the unborn? Let's forget that Obama still wants them killed if "God allows them to be be born." So, if I were to hold a gun to your head, your death would only occur if God let the bullet come out? If you were pushed off of a building, you would only die if God allows gravity to pull you to the earth? With your level of understanding, nobody could be convicted of murder and every action on this planet can be justified using God without there being any free will. Your level of stupidity should be euthanized.
Bob Grant| 11.7.12 @ 4:58PM
Get back to work?
Now that's a good one.
Joellen| 11.7.12 @ 5:50PM
Who says the unborn have no rights - YOU! So Perp, you have made yourself god. Tell me perpgod how do you defend what Obama twice voted for, infanticide - defend that ole defender of death.
And perp, as usual YOU LIE, when it comes to meidcare, & medicade - they have been robbed to support this obamanation that will be in full effect next year.
As for the Military - again YOU LIE. I have many military friends - and they DO NOT support your president - I shook hands with those on duty here at the shore - protecting home owners against thugs from looting; and told them I did all I could to get a new leader for them this Jan - and they ALL thanked me and my friends.
Taxpayers/Bain capital, etc. - tell me about Solandra, and every crony gig the President & his ilk milked the taxpayer to fund, which then went bankrupt.
Family police perp - it wasnt the conservatives who tried to shut down an industry because their religious faith was "offended". The intolerant left rams down our throats what we must accept or else.
But as usual perp, you dont base anything on facts, just your usual distortion of truth. I still believe in AMERICA perp - not your definition but that on which the Founding Fathers based it on. May GOD in heaven save this country - and he will if it be his will.
GobBluthe| 11.7.12 @ 7:49AM
It appears that both candidates may indeed receive fewer votes than did John McCain in 2008. As I write this Romney is 2.5 million short and even Obama is 500k votes short of McCain's 2008 total.
MikeBee| 11.7.12 @ 8:12AM
Aaron,
You are right that it is no longer the 1980s. Even larger than the cultural things you mention, is the fact that the U.S. has changed demographically. It used to be that the descendants of European nations were the majority in this country. The U.S. was built by them, and Capitalism was created by them, enriching this country greatly. They defeated slavery and many of the World's evils. They were kind and decent rulers.
However, starting with the Baby Boomer generation, these European descendants have chosen not to replace themselves in number. Instead, those in the U.S. who have been increasing in number since the 1980s have been the descendants of African nations and of Central American nations. They bring with them a dependency on Government, a willingness to let someone else take care of them.
However, the pendulum will change back again. As the descendants of European nations continue to rank in the numbers of the unemployed, they will lose their hard-fought wealth, and will once again begin to bear children in numbers. The pendulum always swings. Of course, most of us will already be forced to terminate by a government whose healthcare plan is broke before this happens, but happen it will.
fmm| 11.7.12 @ 8:54AM
Time frame? A century or two.
Will| 11.7.12 @ 9:00AM
Sounds a bit racist to me. Oh, and those white guys created slavery long before they defeated it. African Americans (for the most part) did not come voluntarily- their ancestors were kidnapped and forcibly transported accross the sea.
KennesawJack| 11.7.12 @ 9:16AM
Will, allow me to screw up your statement with a few FACTS. Their ancestors were captured by, and handed over to white slave traders by, rival tribesman (who were also BLACK) for profit, much the same way they're delivered to white liberals by the modern-day black slave traders today.
Will| 11.7.12 @ 9:21AM
Supply and demand. They wouldn't have been kidnapped by other black tribes iftheir hadn't been demand from white slavers. Free market in action. As for "they're delivered to white liberals by the modern-day black slave traders" I have literally no idea what you are talking about.
KennesawJack| 11.7.12 @ 12:20PM
Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton come to mind. Both of these professional race-baiters got wealthy by continually telling blacks they couldn't compete with whitey so needed help from Big Brother. They have spent their lives destroying black self-esteem. They deliver their people to white liberal politicians as surely as their ancestors delivered their people to the white slave traders.
cowgirl| 11.7.12 @ 9:31AM
No doubt Will you were educated in public schools, so let me help you with the truth. Fact: Barack Obama's ancestors in Kenya who were black were slave traders. The city of Mombassa in Kenya is major port and was instrumental port in the Black African Slave Trade. Barack Obama's ancenstors were encouraged by the Muslims on the Northern Coast of Africia to start wars among African tribes and not kill anyone, but capture them and sel them as slaves to the Muslims who in turned sold them to the Spanish and Portaguese trades for cotton, gold and rum. The Muslim slave trades in North Africa took for themselves as slaves over 28 million young women and girls for sexual exploitation. More continued in next post
cowgirl| 11.7.12 @ 9:31AM
WHITE CHRISTIAN MALES, namely William Wilberforce, were instrumental in stopping the African slave trade. A WAR WAS FOUGHT IN THE UNITED STATES BY WHITE CHRISTIAN MALES from 1860-1864. One of the issues of this war was slavery. Abraham Lincoln who was a Republican wrote the Emancipation Proclomation and freed the slaves in the States that were at war against the Union. Please be in mind that none of the slaves outside those terroritories were freed until a later date and Lincoln had to threaten the Native American Indians to free their black slaves.
Please be in mind a couple of more things that were probably fed to you in public school. The opening scene in Alex Haley's Roots of Kunta Kinte being captured by white men was false. No white man in their right mind would have step one foot into Africa to capture slaves. 1 - There was no reason to so so since the Muslims in North Africa had persuaded the African Tribes to capture one another and sell their hostages as slaves to the Mulism in North Africa. 2. Alex Haley was sued for plagarism and lost in a court case and 3 Alex Haley's ancestors were not slaves. 4. Slave trading - especially that of young women and girls as well as slave labor still exists in Africa. No one has cared to stop the practice and more people are enslaved today about 28 million that were ever enslaved during the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade.
Will| 11.7.12 @ 9:47AM
1. I simply pointed out that the white guys (including a few of the founding fathers) were slave owners long before they were abolitionists. That is inarguable historical fact.
2. African American slaves came almost exclusively from West Africa. Often local tribes did the actually kidnapping, but it was white slavers who shipped them accross the Atlantic, and white plantation owners who created the demand. Arab slavers worked the East coast of Africa, as you say, but they didn't go near the US.
3. Who mentioned Obama in this? He's mixed race and not descended from slaves, unlike most African Americans.
cowgirl| 11.7.12 @ 9:58AM
You did not simply point out number one in your first statement. In your first statement you clearly stated that you are completely misinformed about the history of slavery.
The richest man ever lived in the history of mankind was a African King Mansa who lived in the 13 century. He owned gold and salt mines. He used black slaves to mine the gold and salt mines. He was more rich than the found fathers ever were and helped fuel slavery in Africa. The Slave Trade still exists in Africa were the bulk of the population is black.
2.. The slave trade in Africa was started by Muslims in North Africa and encouraged by African Tribes. They traded them to the Spanish and Portaguese traders - this is an undisputable fact. Arab slave traders did not have to go near the US because the Spanish and Portaguese trades shipped them to the US. - What part of that statement is over your head.
3. I mentioned Barack Obama. His ancestors were slave traders. He is not descended from slaves he is descended from slave traders. So based on your statement in point number 1 you should dislike him as much as you dislike the founding fathers. Much more so since his ancestors are still slave trading.....
Will| 11.7.12 @ 10:32AM
You mean some black people are still slave trading. The population of Africa is 1 billion. Not all of them are closely related to Barack Obama! Actually most of the slave ships were British, until after the Revolution, when more were American. I'm not saying that slavery is a white phenomenon, of course not. It happens in every culture. But the US has a large African American population because of white plantation owners, white slave traders and white politicians. Black tribal chiefs in West Africa didn't just give slaves to the whites, they sold them.
cowgirl| 11.7.12 @ 11:07AM
Continued ...At one time the black population in America was 20%. The reason for that is that black slaves in America were treated better than they were in their homeland of Africa. Only 8% of the slaves traded in the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade made it to America. The remaining 92% percent went to tea plantations in South America and Cuba - My question to you would be why do you think that the black populations in Cuba and South America are only 2% when they received 92% of the slaves and America at one time had 20% of their population African American and received only 8% of the slaves - Come on - think hard.
Jack in Wi| 11.7.12 @ 10:43AM
The English and Dutch were the big slave traders. That includes a lot of New England shipowners who got rich on the trade. Now their decendents are big liberal loudmonths.
Rockabilly| 11.7.12 @ 11:03AM
The Arabs were the biggest slave traders and many blacks in Africa were slavers. The white man did not invent slavery. And Will, it's not race it's CULTURE. The culture of the black community is one of dependency, illegitimate births, (which is now happily being adopted by young white women) and fast food. Their skin color has nothing to do with it, it is the way they choose to live.
cowgirl| 11.7.12 @ 11:48AM
More fuel and facts to Rockabilly:
In the1950's the African American population was 20%. Now it is 11%. Thirteen percent of all abortions in the United States (53 million since 1973) are performed on black babies (Margaret Sanger - KKK member - is getting her dream come true and Margaret was a democrat), 14% of Blacks in America are unemployed (and this is under America's first black President), 26% of black males between the ages of 18-30 are unemployed, 70% of all black babies are born to unwed mothers with no father in site to help raise them, and 52% of violent crimes committed in the United States are by black males between the ages of 18 and 24, this is why the prison population in American is disporportionately black. Furthermore, the majority of American gang members ( not illegal alien gang members) are black.
95% of Blacks voted for Barack Obama and have voted democrat since the 1960. Their lives in America have gone from bad (slavery) to good (1950's - 1960's) and horrific - now. Want to guess which political party in AMerica is responsible?
Seek| 11.7.12 @ 4:41PM
Your facts are a bit off, madam, most of all, on Margaret Sanger. She was NOT a "member" of the KKK. The reality: Of the literally thousands of speeches she gave over the course of her life -- and she would speak to any group who invited her -- exactly one, back in the 1920s, was to a women's auxiliary group of a Klan chapter in New Jersey. So what? Merely speaking to an organization doesn't imply in any way an endorsement of its goals. I've spoken to groups I don't agree with. I've also written several opinion articles for the Washington Times; that doesn't make me a Moonie.
In any event, Sanger late in life was a good friend of Barry Goldwater, having lived in Arizona for many years. And she endorsed him for president in 1964. Even if Mrs. Sanger was a Democrat, that wouldn't change the rightness or wrongness of her position on birth control.
People like you miss the point. Instead of oozing sympathy for the blacks -- whom I guarantee will never reciprocate all that love -- how about showing some sympathy for the whites? These days, we need it, especially with George Zimmerman's trial coming up.
cowgirl| 11.7.12 @ 7:12PM
I mistyped - no she was not a member of the KKK but spoke at their rallies. She was a socialist who believed in negative eugenics - this is an undisputable fact. She believed in stopping those in poverty from having children because they can't afford to raise them. She has accomplished her goal - 78% of Planned Parenthoods are located in poor neighborhoods. Minority abortions are a financial boon to Margaret Sanger's legacy.
In Sanger's case her speaking to the KKK was a boon to her beliefs - the KKK hated blacks and she wanted their babies to be aborted I would say they had a lot in common.
Not impressed with your braggery that you have spoken to groups and written opinion articles for the Washington Times - Geraldo Riveria is a Fox News Contributer and one of the most uninformed people in the the media business. Not impressed with your credentials.
Sanger was a racist and a democrat. Matter of fact when I hear the word Democrat I think of Bull Connor, George Wallace, Al Gore Senior, Robert "KKK" Byrd - all democrats who supported segregation and were racists to the core. Democrat = Abortion. I am not sure how stating facts about the black community oozes sympathy - I don't process emotions - only facts. George Zimmerman will be a rich man one day - thanks to racism......
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 11:34AM
Sorry MikeBee that replacement garbage has nothing to do with it. We had a population of 150,000,000 at the end of WWII and a baby boom. WE DON"T AND NEVER DID NEED MORE PEOPLE. It is a stupid economic fallacy that we somehow gain by increasing the population.
When the population increases beyond some reasonable level wages usually stagnate - so the investing classes are all for it. The Republicans should have done everything they could to fight the immigration reforms of 1965 and 1986. However to do so would have left labor in such a strong position that management would have had to accommodate them like in Germany and US style management would never go for that. The problem is not too few people but too many disparate groups trying to use their size to take more from the public trough than they put in.
JFGalt| 11.7.12 @ 8:12AM
An individual person can be smart but put them into a crowd and people become stupid.
All the idiots that embraced Mitt Romney could not see that he didn't have what it would take to defeat OBAMA! None of the republicans that could take it to OBAMA! made the cut. Why? Because they weren't supposed to. Time and again, Romney could have taken OBAMA! to task point blank but failed to do so. When he could have exposed the media for its hypocrasy, he failed to do so. When he had the chance to call the president a liar - to his face with the proof in hand - he let it go. For the hatred spewed in this space on Ron Paul - you all know that he would not have let these things slide. He does not fear attacking the hard seemingly impenetrable target AND HE KNOWS HIS STUFF. But no, he was a funny looking old man who talked about things that nobody seemed to understand. A lot of the people here helped marginalize him and you all got what you deserved-Romney. Ron Paul would have taken the fight to OBAMA! and he would have called him directly on his race baiting, his economy smashing plans and all the rest - He was the only one that really understood the ins and outs of most of the issues but Romney had a prettier face and looked more presidential. Well, you got OBAMA! now for 4 more years to complain about except don't count on being allowed to legally do it much longer. You think he cranked out a lot of executive orders before - just wait!
Jack in Wi| 11.7.12 @ 8:37AM
Mr Galt you hit a home run on that one. Romney and Ron Paul were the only 2 Republicans who showed in polling that they could beat Obama. If Romney had any brains he would have reached out to the Paul people in some way. He could of let Ron address the convention, let his people blow off some steam there, and pushed some of their issues, like auditing the Federal Reserve and ending the Afganistan war now. His failure to do these minor things probably cost him the election.
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 11:25AM
Unfortunately Jack, Paul consistently polled better than Romney against Obama. Common sense would also tell you that Paul could steal more of Obama's base since there were plenty of disaffected youth and anti-war Democrats out there. Why didn't the Republican establishment put out the candidate with the best chance of winning?
It was obvious that the Republican establishment and the Israel first lobby would rather have Obama back in than Paul as President. Don't blame us Paulbots for that.
Boar Hunter| 11.7.12 @ 10:18AM
Yes! The fact that Jack supports your position shows that you are devoid of reason.
Ron Paul? Seriously? That's what you bring to the table?
Jack in Wi| 11.7.12 @ 10:48AM
By failing to be reasonable toward the Paul people Romney cost himself at least 5% and the election. The things I suggested would have cost him nothing. He needed every vote he could get. In the end we Paul people are taking over the Republican Party or we are replacing it. You birds have sunk the ship and we will have to re-float it.
Anthony| 11.7.12 @ 8:16AM
Yes Aaron, America has indeed changed. We are now officially an Idiocracy.
CJW| 11.7.12 @ 8:24AM
We are California, which usually sets the trend.
Beautiful landscape, many people who earn lots of money, vote for Dems, and live in expensive areas where they never interact with the "minorities" they profess to love, unless they hire them to do their lawns and clean their houses.
We will be bankrupt like California, and we elect dimwits like Moonbeam Brown ( Obama and Biden), along with the Pelosis, Boxers, Willie Browns and Arnold who live well off the taxpayers.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.7.12 @ 8:37AM
CJW;
When I was home yesterday, I happened to catch The Rockford Files "To Protect and Serve (Part 1)" on ME TV out of Allentown at 11 am. This turned out to be the only bright point of the day, similar to finding a $20 bill on the floor of the airplane as you lean forward to assume the crash position shortly before colliding with the earth.
CJW| 11.7.12 @ 9:41AM
Albert
Rockford was a conservative/libertarian. He wanted to be left alone.Angel was a Dem. Chapman was a Dem busybody.
While the popular vote was 59 mil to 57 mil, showing an evenly divided country, the electoral college system should be looked at. I like the idea of New Hampshire and Nebraska that awards the electoral vote to the winner in that congressional district instead of a winner take all. It may lead to a more representative vote.
In Pa, Republicans won my district, another Rep won the district north of mine, and a Dem won the Pgh city district. Rep usually win the central and northern districts in Pa, and the Dems sweep Philly and the surrounding "white limousine liberal" counties. This is probably the same in other states such as Ohio, Michigan, and California, where the big cities with the Dem voters produce huge margins.
The clown Christe praising O did not help. All he had to do was say "Thank you, Mr. President." Why thank him for doing the job he is supposed to do? Instead he got on his knees, disgusting. The Fox poll said 40% thought Hurrican Sandy was important to their decision, and 15% very important. I guess more important than Benghazi.
It seems the 59 million voters do not care about abortion, deficit, unemployment, and Benghazi. We can blame the MSM for not highlighting Benghazi, but the news was there for anyone to see.
Now what will O do to reduce unemployment, balance the budget, reduce the deficit, and deal with Iran.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 8:31AM
Tell yourself whatever makes you feel better...
Keep people from seeing the truth...just like you did when you were a liberal in Canada.
Grzmlyk| 11.7.12 @ 8:36AM
Not to worry, Aaron: Emmett Tyrell told us in "The Death of Liberalism" that liberalism is dead.
Clearly, Obama's reelection is proof of that.
Hey, if you need something to make your table level, I have about 300,000 never-to-be-sold books you can use.
They all have Emmett's smiling face on the jacket cover.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 8:52AM
Well, your evaluations of the state of this nation and its demographics were correct. I was wrong.
Grzmlyk| 11.7.12 @ 8:57AM
Never in my life have I wanted to be wrong more.
George S| 11.7.12 @ 8:50AM
Ronald Wilson Reagan...
Speed bump on the road to serfdom.
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 12:27PM
Don't you mean Nitrous Oxide button? Reagan didn't slow a damn thing and his amnesty and policies to destroy the middle class like guest workers and NAFTA did more to destroy this country than anybody else.
Who Knows?| 11.7.12 @ 9:23AM
Last night, when I saw Florida NOT going Romney's way, I knew it was over, so I stuck a DVD of "The Big Sleep" with Bogart and Bacall, the 1946 Philip Marlowe detective flick, into the machine, and enjoyed the 66 year old look at American society.
Oh well.
Now I can stop wasting my time listening to Limbaugh. A couple of months ago, after many years of a hiatus, I gave him a listen to see what he was up to.
It should be interesting to listen to him one last time, today, to hear his mea culpa---after all, he was known to hint that Romney would win in a blowout.
GobBluthe| 11.7.12 @ 10:07AM
I dont think he ever said Romney was going to win in a landslide, but Limbaugh is now definitely part of the problem. Starting in 2006, when he cost Jim Talent the election in MO by injecting himself ala Sandra Fluke like in the election and attacked Michael J Fox over stem cell research. In 2010, Limbaugh came up with the so called "Limbaugh Doctrine" (Vote in primaries for the most conservative candidate period). It would replace the "Buckley Doctrine" (Vote for the most conservative candidate who can win). He has been a major advocate of the conservative notion that ideology alone is sufficient not competence. These two ideas have given rise to candidates like Sharon Angle, Todd Akin and Richard Murdock and of course Sarah Palin.
Who Knows?| 11.7.12 @ 10:48AM
I said he HINTED it would be a blowout. On more than one occasion, pretending to speak "under his breath", he'd exude confidence that the election was a slam dunk for Romney, in his opinion, and that he just couldn't SAY it out loud.
As he says---"Don't doubt me on this."
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 12:30PM
Angle was defeated by the Republican establishment who would not "hold their nose" and vote like they expected me to do for Romney. Paul consistently out-polled Romney against Obama yet the establishment maligned him and his message.
Bill8472| 11.7.12 @ 2:22PM
So who killed Sean Regan? Was it Carmen Sternwood in a drug-induced haze, or was it somebody else. Just when I watch that movie and I think I know, I forget.
Maybe it was Dog House Riley.
Derek Leaberry| 11.7.12 @ 9:30AM
Mr. Goldstein is correct. The 1980s America is dead and gone. The economic success of that America encouraged the invasion of tens of millions of Third Worlders and they became essentially the margin of victory for President Obama. The affluence of the 80s is largely taken for granted by the tattooed millions of today who so eagerly voted for Barack Obama. The American culture, already a cesspool in the 80s, continued its decline.
Let us be clear. Most Americans are bad people. But a chastisement is coming. You can run $ 1 trillion deficits forever. A country can't succeed long term when 40 % of its newborns are illegitimate. A nation where a near-majority of its voters are dependent on the government purse can not continue indefinitely. A nation in absolute moral decline must degenerate into squalor and collapse.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 10:11AM
Take a look at the electoral map. No, nearly half of the country and most of its land mass are still patriots. Let us not forget them.
The other half plus 3 to six percent swing are beyond help and believe whatever slop is served up and have been taught to feel entitled, they live in America s largest cities and population centers, east cost and West.
Derek, the other part of this equation is the elite that run this country with the aid of the punch and judy parties, D and R. They are all big government progressives that want to remain in control, the Establishment GOP see this as just another election and welcomes business as usual.
Derek Leaberry| 11.7.12 @ 10:19AM
To revitalize, America needs to collapse and its elites need to be discredited. Perhaps we need people by the millions eating out of trash cans.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 10:36AM
This is exactly what they want.
You must give up on this intelligence of the people baloney, my friend.
This has been the whole plan from the beginning. They will be able to justify full tyranny of the state to restore order and the new world order. Take a look at History. What has followed every single collapse? Reform. Awakening?
No. Fascism.
Derek Leaberry| 11.7.12 @ 11:08AM
The people are not intelligent. They are avaricious as well. Wiser men than I, for instance, Gasset, Mencken, Tocqueville and scores of others, have written along those lines. What may be needed is 476 AD. Christendom replacing the moral degenerate Rome.
Seek| 11.7.12 @ 1:06PM
News flash: Christendom already had replaced paganism in Rome by then. Or perhaps I have a different edition of Gibbon than you.
JP| 11.7.12 @ 9:32AM
"Still, Romney had not one but two chances to expose the folly of the Obama Administration's insistence the attacks in Benghazi were a result of a YouTube video, not a terrorist attack and twice he failed to do so"
Mitt was fighting a battle with one hand tied behind his back. He made a tactical decision not to continue to beat Obama over the head with Benagahzi, as his polling numbers indicated that most Americans didn't care. If he did bring it up, the MSM would pounce and declare that Mitt is politicizing foreign policy. And 51% of Americans would have agreed.
Yes. The electorate had changed indeed.
Fiscal| 11.7.12 @ 9:36AM
Aaron is precisely right. As I have said many times here, Obama would probably win because of structural changes in the electorate. He actually had a bigger win that I thought because he had an absolutely great ground game.
Most of America is fiscally conservative but socially moderate. Here is where Republicans lose the middle -- and getting the middle is the ONLY way to win. Republicans need to get out of the religious/social issues game and stop their attacks on abortion, gay marriage, and immigration reform. Demographics is destiny and Republican supporters are dying off and Democrat supporters are growing.
Those of us who are more libertarian leaning have no one who supports true liberty to vote for. Forcing religion on government just ticks us off and is really just support for more government control of our lives. And yes, more government fiscal programs also forces more government control. We need less government control of our lives in total.
Fiscal| 11.7.12 @ 9:40AM
One other comment... If you want to win, stop watching Fox News that constantly does not tell the truth. You get a really slanted view of the real world even though it may put a warm tingle up your leg. You need to understand the growing group of minorities and women voters in order to develop strategies to gain their trust. You can't do that watching Fox News because you never hear about those kinds of issues there.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 10:02AM
You are why we lose, not the social issues.
You attack conservatives at every turn and you run candidates to throw votes away and assist liberals in winning. You are fuckn liberals hiding behind this horseshit about fiscal conservatism. It is bullshit, you talk little about it and only when it suits your agenda in promoting liberal foreign policy and culture rot which you seem to be obsessed with. Go join the fuck'n liberals who you constantly join hands with and be done with it.
Your own candidate, your god, Ron Paul is pro-life, but we should shut up about it.
Yeah, we lost because we do not want to pay for contraceptives of other people, and we disapprove of pot smoking, right. Yeah, most Americans prefer free birth control and a good joint over a job and a good economy. They voted for this idiot because they buy the class warfare and 'every republican is a racist and not out for the working man' garbage, not because they think we want to take their abortion away or stop them from taking drugs. God, you people are amazing.
Fiscal| 11.7.12 @ 10:24AM
First, I am not a radical Libertarian -- I'm a registered Republican who is just more oriented to liberty on our personal lives -- just like most Americans. Cato has done research on this issue, and it isn't even close. You want us to become a Christian theocracy which is just like what the Muslims want in their countries. I want Americans to be free -- you don't.
As for attacking "conservatives" -- yes, I attack you guys when you are not really being conservative. Promoting wars is NOT conservative. Promoting tax cuts that have proven to not create growth and put us more in debt is NOT conservative. I'm for true conservatism -- not the type of reactionary conservative you see here that can only complain about the country and wants to return to the 1950's. If Republicans don't change, they will become obsolete.
Just watch how fast current Republican lawmakers back immigration reform after this election. If they don't start appealing to minorities and young people, they will continue to lose. I don't want that because Dems are fiscally irresponsible -- and that will ruin this country.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 10:45AM
You are full of crap. The bit about being a conservative is getting old and tired. We do promote wars. Just the fact that you are in favor of tax increase and against tax cuts 'proven to not create growth' is a dead giveaway that you are a troll and have been for sometime. No conservative of any stripe including a libertarian would say such a thing. You are not even a libertarian. Return to the 1950's. Really? Another liberal cliche.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 10:46AM
Oh, thanks for proving and illustrating my overall point.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 10:47AM
We do NOT promote wars..must slow down..man you people really piss me off...
Fiscal| 11.7.12 @ 1:11PM
Really? Building defense as if we are still battling a Soviet Union? We now fight asymmetrical warfare. I wish you guys would learn something about military strategy.
Fiscal| 11.7.12 @ 1:14PM
I'm in favor of balancing the budget. Simpson Bowles had a fairly good solution with mostly cuts and some increases. You need to actually work with the numbers to see you can't balance the budget just by cutting -- especially given the structural increases in the future. (If you don't understand structural increases, you can't possibly understand what's needed.)
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 11:06AM
Immigration "reform" got the GOP into the mess it is in now, yet you rail on about spending more money. Doesn't it make sense to stop digging both holes?
OregonBuzz| 11.7.12 @ 10:38AM
What? MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, ad nauseum? Fox ain't great, but it beats the crap out of everything else.
Fiscal| 11.7.12 @ 1:12PM
Fox is the worst because they are a fact free zone. They base all of their agenda on ideology even when the facts don't agree. The reason you like it is probably that you don't like facts either.
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 11:04AM
Fiscal - one problem with your thinking. How do you "get" the Hispanic vote.
By every measure of achievement, they are only slightly better than the blacks. They will use more welfare than whites on average, flunk out of school more often, and end up in prison more often. Reagan imported an underclass.
How does the underclass ever vote for the Republicans? Give them a new amnesty so we can get even more of them and get their vote up to 35%. Yeah that is a winning strategy.
Maybe the blacks can start voting Republican as a way of stopping the immigration from Mexico since they are the hardest hit? You might think so but the blacks are so full of white hate that they support the illegals thinking they are sticking it to whitey.
Fiscal| 11.7.12 @ 1:19PM
You can get Hispanics and blacks by promoting fairness, education, and a potential future. You can move to a flat tax with no special deductions for capital gains or subsidies -- and no special benefits for the rich. You can get rid of corporate welfare. You can spend some money on repairing our infrastructure. I would even go further. I would give high performing children a guaranteed tuition in college based on financial need. No affirmative action here, only reward based upon performance. I'd do the same for the poor white kid as the poor black or Hispanic kid.
Do you need more suggestions?????
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 8:24PM
I don't need any fairy tales. Have you seen what black and Hispanic leaders call anybody that even hints at ending affirmative action?. You act like these people want real equality. Hell no they want everything handed to them on a platter and the Democrats openly hate whites enough to say they will supply it. The problem is that there are enough stupid guilt tripped whites who think this will all eventually work out for the better that they also vote Democrat.
Things like a flat tax and trying to bring jobs back is all fine and good but the REPUBLICANS DON"T CARE ABOUT THAT. It was their policies starting with Reagan that were designed to favor capital and destroy jobs and wages here in the first place. You think they are going to reverse course and bite the hands of their corporate donors?
Seek| 11.8.12 @ 2:07PM
We've been promoting this for decades. Has it occurred to you that blacks and Hispanics love special favors -- that this is their sine qua non for voting? They want a free lunch, and Democrats are serving the largest portions.
Archie| 11.7.12 @ 10:15AM
I'm wearing my Obama t-shirt today! It's Obama dressed as Chairman Mao. Hat tip to Chris Plante (WMAL) this morning who gave me a much needed laugh.
Simon Templar| 11.7.12 @ 10:32AM
Just like to say one more thing before signing off for good.
Many of you are looking to understand how this happened and that is certainly understandable. As I sympathize with your intentions and shared values, I have to point out something that has become apparent today that is being reported.
We lost in large PART, hear the word part, not total, because we did not show up to vote, particularly the value voters and the evangelicals.
We need to face some stark realities and unpleasant truths about 'ourselves' that many so-called conservatives including evangelicals and libertarians can not be counted on for shit and will continue to stand on the sidelines waiting for the world to collapse and usher in their respective messiahs to clean it up. Nor are they willing to unite with like minded to get the job done. We need to take a good look in the mirror because in large measure we are working against each other and responsible for a great deal of where we are today. There are so few Beitbarts, but plenty of George Wills, Peggy Noonans, and Ron Pauls.
djn1313| 11.7.12 @ 10:53AM
I think you may be right, I don't think many evangelicals and catholics, especially the whites came out to support Romney because the media painted his Mormon faith as evil. Hard to believe these people would rather embrace a leader that allies himself with the muslim enemies trying to kill us. Now we live with obama's reign of destruction for four more years because they stayed home.
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 11:16AM
For the last two years poll after poll showed that only Ron Paul consistently beat Obama. Still you people defamed him and lied about his message. We Paulbots told you over and over that Romney could not beat Obama. Every dirty trick in the book was played in that charade of the primary to get Romney the nomination. Still you would not listen to us.
You wanted us to hold our nose and vote for Romney - next time we will listen to you. The same spiel as for the last 20 years.
The Republican establishment and the Israel first lobby lost this election. Obviously, they would rather have Obama than Paul.
OregonBuzz| 11.7.12 @ 10:35AM
This isn't Kansas either.
Rockabilly| 11.7.12 @ 10:43AM
I am 66 years old and my vote for Romney will be the last I cast in a national election. Even if I live until ninety I will not vote for President again and have grown sick of it. As to those who support Obama I bear nothing but dislike and contempt. I have been watching this country creeping toward a European semi socialistic system with the passages of each far reaching expansion of federal power into every aspect of life making almost a majority of Americans serfs of the federal government. The South where I live, is an exception, but we now have a population more interested in the government being a nanny than a defender of freedom. With the "browning" of America we are and have been adopting the culture of self indulgence, dependency, loose morals, disdain for religion, and the family. The culture I grew up with will be virtually gone at its' core in decades leaving behind a mirror image of what we see in Greece, Spain, and Britain, nations with no drive, no leadership, little innovation and a spoiled hedonistic people. Obama is just the culmination of what has been happening for decades, with a few pauses. Even Bush expanded government with the medicare drug law. As a white Anglo Saxon Catholic my time is fading, I am only sad that my son and grandchildren will have to live in this new world of self indulgence.
Mike Daly | 11.7.12 @ 10:44AM
The problem with this argument is Romney won the popular vote and Obama received no mandate for anything - indeed the talk now is he'll extend the Bush tax cuts because all the economists are telling him he'll bequeath a rececession if he doesn't. Today no one considers Bill Clinton to have been any kind of competent President even though he too won a second term he didn't deserve; people are not as invested in Obama as we might think.
Who Knows?| 11.7.12 @ 11:14AM
Romney didn't win the popular vote, at least according to the "legal" count. Who knows how many fraudulent votes there were.
Change a Romney to an Obama vote, here and there, and pretty soon it LOOKS LIKE Obama has a majority.
djn1313| 11.7.12 @ 11:18AM
Knowing how the demoRATS work, with the early voting allowed they somehow find just enough votes in key states to steal elections by looking at these early votes. crook county/chicago corruption is now nationwide under this administration.
djn1313| 11.7.12 @ 10:48AM
The author is correct. America is no longer the great country it once was because of changing demographics and dumbed down youth. We have become a nation of takers instead of doers. These newer people live to collect welfare and food stamps and to live off the hard work of others. These people embrace EVIL, while trashing everything that is righteous and good.
Obama will now resume his race and class warfare rhetoric unchecked further dividing this nation and leading it to ruin as he outlined in his speeches before taking office in 2008.
America is no longer at the crossroads, it is on the path to destruction.
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 10:55AM
Yes, in 1980 an imbecile came along. He pushed policies that would ultimately destroy the middle class. He first looked them other way while corporations used illegal aliens to break unions then he amnestied those illegals thinking they would vote Republican. However, being low academic achievers and high welfare users, they voted for Democrats. The imbecile also created a campaign for guest workers and free trade to further destroy the tax base but enrich the investing classes.
Yes, it's no longer 1980 and we have an imbecile to thank.
djn1313| 11.7.12 @ 11:01AM
I think you and the current non-leader you re-elected are the real imbeciles. Do you really think he cares about you or this nation? He just watched for Americans die and did nothing. He let a muslim terrorist mow down 13 soldiers and an unborn American at Ft.Hood and did nothing. He supplied weapons to the mexican drug dealers that killed hundreds of innocent people here and in Mexico. If that hasn't sunk into your head, you are truly a hopeless, unproductive creature.
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 11:08AM
He would never have been elected if the imbecile in 1980 hadn't caused all the electoral college votes from California to be forever lost to the GOP.
djn1313| 11.7.12 @ 11:14AM
CA electoral votes forever lost to the GOP? Your argument doesn't make sense.
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 11:18AM
When was the last time the Republican took California? It won't go back until the US or California breaks up.
Seek| 11.8.12 @ 2:06PM
It happened last in 1988. Bush defeated Dukakis in California by about four percentage points. What with explosive growth in nonwhite (including Hispanic) populations, along with a sizable amount of white outmigration to other states, it's not going to happen again in our lifetime.
djn1313| 11.7.12 @ 10:56AM
We will see the flight of capital and intelligence as the wealthy leave this nation if obama continues his class war on wealth and success.
Who Knows?| 11.7.12 @ 11:03AM
It’s not that it’s not the 80’s anymore.
It’s not the 50’s, that’s what’s the matter!
Speaking in conventional terms, that is.
Why, I’ll never forget reading a book by a famous sociologist, Pitirim Sorokin, in 1967. This was when I was just getting beyond my righteous know-it-all attitude, gained by earning an MA in math. Boy, did I ever realize how street DUMB I was, when I tried to understand the leftist boob, John Kenneth Galbraith!
Anyway, the gist of Sorokin that I remember was that the communistic or socialistic systems and the capitalistic ones would tend to merge, over time. And, maybe yesterday’s election is more proof of that, as America seems to have chosen to go the way of cradle to grave socialism a la Europe.
Just googled the man---a Russian émigré who hated communism, known for his social cycle theory:
“Social cycle theories are among the earliest social theories in sociology. Unlike the theory of social evolutionism, which views the evolution of society and human history as progressing in some new, unique direction(s), sociological cycle theory argues that events and stages of society and history are generally repeating themselves in cycles. Such a theory does not necessarily imply that there cannot be any social progress.”
Who Knows?| 11.7.12 @ 11:11AM
Well, we are CERTAINLY going through a social cycle, with a socialist president foisting his world view on us all, as CHOSEN by a majority of us.
Maybe.
Until America has instituted total control of voting, with the need to present picture ID to verify and validate EACH vote, I will never believe in the integrity of the vote.
There must be a one-to-one homomorphism, a little math lingo, so that each vote can be connected to one registered LEGAL voter, and vice versa. Then there’s the possibility for hackers to change votes entered on machines.
Count me old fashioned, but I think there should be a HARD COPY of each ballot, maybe to be counted by a machine that both parties can watch. But, entering your vote using fleeting electrons and not a pen and paper is STUPID, and too easy to steal.
Immortal 600| 11.7.12 @ 11:05AM
Let me make a suggestion. We all know liberalism is a losing philosophy. Unfortunately not that many in the population can see that. The liberals and their allies in the main stream media are going to blame Republicans for all that is wrong with America. They will specifically blame the US House of Representatives that is Republican controlled. My suggestion is for all Republican legislators to stand back and let the Democrats have everything they want. Don't vote yes, just abstain. When the inevitable crash occurs they will have no one to blame but themselves (liberals that is). I have no reservations about a crash occurring. With Obama's reelection, I now have NO doubt. The Republicans should just get out of the way so they don't get blamed. There is nothing they can do now to stop it. It grieves me to say that but I think it's the truth.
djn1313| 11.7.12 @ 11:08AM
The newer and young Americans can be described in one word -- STUPID.
Voters stated they voted for obama because they were concerned about joblessness and higher prices. So what did they do? Voted for four more years of the same. Like I said -- STUPID
djn1313| 11.7.12 @ 11:13AM
The time has come for the conservative states to break away from the corrupt and unproductive welfare states on each coast and the midwest. It is like being chained to a corpse. Ask Germany how it feels being chained to the socialist, unproductive countries in the EU.
Seek| 11.7.12 @ 11:14AM
Finally, a note of realism. Aaron Goldstein, unlike fantastist Red State triumphalists like Jeffrey Lord and Robert Stacy McCain, understand why the changing composition of the electorate (less Caucasian) and the nature of the issues (low inflation, no more Communism, far more Islam) have irrevocably changed our political landscape.
The only way the Republicans can win again, aside from another deep economic slide, is by appealing explicitly to whites and by minimizing contact with those who peddle religiously-driven Culture War rhetoric. Romney did none of the first and went through the motions on the second. It wasn't enough.
Now can people here admit the obvious? Blacks, who again went overwhelmingly for Obama, and in a large turnout, will never be our friends. It's time we stopped pretending we can be theirs. We've been "reaching out" to the blacks for 40 years -- ever since Nixon -- and it has availed us nothing. Write off the blacks, once and for all.
djn1313| 11.7.12 @ 11:22AM
blacks are the most racist of all people -- they prove it by how they vote. The real idiots are the guilt-ridden progressive white traitors that continue to sell out their own race by supporting the most divisive non-leader we ever had. He could have never been elected without the vote of these white fools.
sawdin| 11.7.12 @ 11:37AM
Approximately half of the voting population (and even more of the non-voting population) believes in 'free lunches' and massive redistribution. Unfortunately, that fact means a slow death spiral for America unless our education system and culture drastically change
over the next 1 - 2 generations. Anyone who thinks that will occur, please contact me as I have ocean-front property in Iowa for sale. I wish I was, or could be, an 'optimistic' conservative about America's future, but my understanding of human nature leads me to believe that although we were given a republic, we were unable to keep it as intended.
loulou| 11.7.12 @ 11:46AM
The 47% will increase and then it will be over--if it isn't already.
Mike in N.C.| 11.7.12 @ 12:41PM
No Aaron, we are not still living in the 1980's. Hysterical fits over the United States becoming a communist nation, over gays choosing a perverted lifestyle and trying to foist it off on all of us, over women wantonly and joyfully seeking abortions aren't going to sell to rational people.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.7.12 @ 8:09PM
Certainly, a campaign that posted "Vote Like Your Lady Parts Depend on It" , or posted videos comparing voting for Obama to losing your virginity to him would never create such an impression.
Seek| 11.8.12 @ 2:03PM
Say, what? I've known my share of women who have had an abortion. Not one did so "joyfully."
PolishKnight| 11.7.12 @ 12:42PM
Let's conduct a thought experiment. Reagan won in 1980. That's 32 years ago. Let's go back from 1980 in the Delorean and it takes us back to 1948!!!
America was a different place in 1948 compared to 1980 in ways that many still miss today. Democrats were the party of Jim Crow throwing blacks under the bus to pander to racist whites. Most households, including black households, had a two parent family. In 1980, most families still were two parent but the trend was obvious that feminism and the welfare state had undermined that traditional demographic. In 1948, the left was realizing that to pursue socialism while appearing to fight communism abroad, they'd need to change and did. By 1980, many of the traditional leftist electorate were waking up that it wasn't 1948 anymore.
Now today, we still have some people who haven't woken up. It's no longer 1980. Or 1948. It's a different world or even universe! Wake up!
Bob Grant| 11.7.12 @ 12:50PM
obamaphone lady wins, we lose!
There's your "different world".
billwitten| 11.7.12 @ 1:41PM
The estalishment RINOs in DC and their liberal friends in the electorate refuse to acknowledge that they are the problem and the result will be continuous electoral losses until they either step down and allow conservatives to ascend or the Republican party comes apart at the seams. Either way, I walked away from them after 2008 and I vote Libertarian now. I will stay here until I see concrete actions on the Republican party's part to promote conservative values. I do not mean the neocon internationalist crap they have been spewing, I mean Constitutional Conservativism. A return to sound monetary policy, a sane engagement in foreign affairs (no nation building), a respect for Constitutional principles and a recognition that government is the problem--not the solution. No more EPAs. No more TSAs. No more Departments of Homeland Security. No more big government crap. Pay attention you liberal Republican scumbags. This is the SECOND big message. No more M'can'ts, No more Robamas. No more Nixons. WAKE UP!!
PCPSmokerII| 11.7.12 @ 10:06PM
You realize that YOU are part of the problem, right?
Dimitry_Aleksandrovich| 11.7.12 @ 1:52PM
If the GOP wants to win its simple. Stop being the corporate whore that the GOP currently is and abandon the globalist free trade ideology going after NAFTA, CAFTA and GATT. Right now the GOP is seen as being 1000% in the pockets of the corporations and is vocal about their stance against organized labor be it public or private labor unions. They could at least tone down the anti-union rhetoric and offer real solutions to bringing back American manufacturing jobs even if that means moving away from the purist Adam Smith economics and embracing some government intervention to protect domestic industry. Next I think the Republican Party needs to return to its non-interventionist roots for the American people are tired of war. We have had nearly 12 years of war and only mounting casualties and mounting national debt to show for it. Yes the defense contractors profited and many of them contribute to Republican candidates. However nobody else has profited fromt he endless wars. Obama is to blame for the wars too, I have not forgotten his military intervention in Libya or the covert operations going on right now in Syria that have resulted in the butcher of thousands and will the slaughter will continue unless we change our foreign policy and the way we deal with the rest of the world.
markinla| 11.7.12 @ 8:33PM
German trade unions have members on the boards of directors of companies and work with the companies on keeping costs low and high paying jobs in Germany. In America, this is heresy. In the 70s when the rust belt companies pleaded poverty they asked the unions for give-backs to keep their jobs. The unions asked to see the books. Management refused, probably because they didn't want the hard hit shareholders to see how much management was stealing for themselves. Management in American companies is just as big a problem as the unions.
Commander Kelly | 11.7.12 @ 2:58PM
Not like the '80's but then again similar to the eighties in one respect. See my take "Full Reverse" only here...http://americanconservativeinlondon.blogspot.co.uk/
Alborn| 11.7.12 @ 3:12PM
Any candidate for President that cannot win his own state will not be President of the USA. Once again the R brought a knife to a gunfight. A good person Mitt Romney is. A good candidate for President he is not. My dislike for him as a candidate is not personal unlike my dislike for Obama which is personal. I cannot stand to hear or look the lying traitor.
Jimbobogie| 11.7.12 @ 4:00PM
Speaking as an "outsider", I suggest that there are a couple of other items that have changed since "The Reagan Years".
1. Global Free Trade means that, for even hi-tech manufacturing jobs, we're now competing against Chinese children-and when you have computer problems, "Bob" is NOT based in Silicone Valley, is he? No matter who sits in the White House, the fact is that folks who were 'THE ENEMY" in Reagan's time are now holding the paper on North America AND holding jobs that used to be centred here. Be careful what you wish for...
2. North Americans are not dying as quickly as they used to-here in Canada, (don't get me started on immigration), this is the real drain on health insurance-methinks you're seeing it too, with or without Obamacare.
How can you convince "Job Creators" to keep the $$$ in-house when Economics 101 says "Get the Best Return"? We have a Conservative government up here and they're facing the same problem.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.7.12 @ 8:36PM
I’m not sure that I would categorize China during the Reagan era as an “enemy” in the same sense as the Soviet Union, which Reagan characterized as the Evil Empire. Since Nixon had traveled to China in 1972, their status as part of the International Communist Monolith that they had enjoyed since 1949 shifted, and they covertly worked with the US in order to further the mutual interest of diminishing the influence of their neighbor, the USSR (China and the USSR found themselves each backing opposing sides in the 1979 Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia, with the Russians and the Vietnamese supporting Heng Samrin, and China backing Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge).
Meanwhile, increased economic ties opened up between the US and China, and we deluded ourselves into thinking that access to free markets in export would cause their own totalitarian system of government to collapse. China showed us that such would not be the case in 1989 in Tiananmen Square, which was also the year the Berlin Wall was torn down, and while the collapse of Soviet communism was in large part as a consequence of Reagan’s policies, his terms had ended. While the Chinese embraced the idea of accessing Western capital and markets, increasing their prosperity, they did not otherwise adopt a Western concept of human rights.
Today, they have evolved (in part as a result of our engagement) into a major rival, if not an outright enemy in a thawing new cold war.
billwitten| 11.7.12 @ 4:39PM
The estalishment RINOs in DC and their liberal friends in the electorate refuse to acknowledge that they are the problem and the result will be continuous electoral losses until they either step down and allow conservatives to ascend or the Republican party comes apart at the seams. Either way, I walked away from them after 2008 and I vote Libertarian now. I will stay here until I see concrete actions on the Republican party's part to promote conservative values. I do not mean the neocon internationalist crap they have been spewing, I mean Constitutional Conservativism. A return to sound monetary policy, a sane engagement in foreign affairs (no nation building), a respect for Constitutional principles and a recognition that government is the problem--not the solution. No more EPAs. No more TSAs. No more Departments of Homeland Security. No more big government crap. Pay attention you liberal Republican scumbags. This is the SECOND big message. No more M'can'ts, No more Robamas. No more Nixons. WAKE UP!!
BackToBasics| 11.7.12 @ 5:14PM
As a nation, we are already at the point where the only way to see another Republican president is if we have one or more major catastrophes such as a war, deep economic depression, a plague or starvation, or a civil war.
I believe Obam will grant amnesty to illegal aliens about 1 year before the 2016 elections by executive order if necessary. That will mean we never have another Republican president again barring the catastrophes I mentioned.
A 3rd party IS WORTH trying now even though it too will need catastrophes to elect a president! But now is as good a time any to go the 3rd party route.
BackToBasics| 11.7.12 @ 5:20PM
And a catastrophe of one sort or another will happen in the next few years.
Mary| 11.7.12 @ 7:45PM
The election was stolen. If the Democrats supposedly won by such a big margin, why did they not win the house back? The margins don't add. The fix was in and Obama and his team knew it months ago. They don't know how people voted. The exit polls were contrived to fit their theft. Never before have they matched the vote almost perfectly. We need to go back to the paper ballet where machines can't be rigged.
Jimbobogie| 11.8.12 @ 11:57PM
Sorry Mary, this isn't the Al Gore website... :)
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.7.12 @ 9:36PM
"We are a long, long way from a time in which we lived in a 13 channel universe where digital watches, VHS machines, Sony walkmans and microwaves were cutting edge technology with cell phones, CDs and 24-hour ATMs still yet to be invented."
As an historical note, Mr. Goldstein, during the era you are describing (1980), I was a customer of Wilmington Trust, a multi-branch bank in Delaware that was absorbed by M&T bank in 2010. At that time (1980), they had a network of machines known as the "24 Hour Teller", which would dispense cash any time for a valid account with money on deposit as long as a plastic card with a magnetic strip was placed in it, and a correct Personal Identification Number was punched in to the computerized keyboard attached. These Automated Teller Machines eventually came to be known by an acronym that currently eludes me.
PCPSmokerII| 11.7.12 @ 10:05PM
Depressingly good piece. Mitt ran a good campaign, but the electorate has definitely shifted.
antiboomer| 12.11.12 @ 10:38AM
Mitt is a stiff who should stick to running hedge funds. In what bizzaro universe is a patrician like Mitt Romney the best the GOP can come up with.
antiboomer| 12.11.12 @ 10:35AM
Can't understand why anyone expected anything different. Republicans nominate a person who wouldn't be a cabinet appointee for a real politician like Reagan or Bush and then are shocked when Obama cleans his clock. The only surprise is it wasn't more of a landslide. Clinton would have chewed Romney up without breaking a sweat. The GOP needs to figure out how to motivate the "A" list to run in 2016 or we are going to be facing the spector of Clinton II.