-
Not Just the Media: First Amendment Under Attack
May 22, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Curl is Right: Don’t Dismiss Benghazi
May 22, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Good New Book: ‘Precipice’
May 19, 2013 | 1 comment
-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Erick Erickson offers some helpful advice to Mitt Romney about not taking Evangelical voters for granted. Again, this is not meant to tear down Romney, but to tell him how to avoid making a fatal error.
Again and again I hear people say that Evangelicals or other conservatives will “vote for Romney anyway,” so Romney doesn’t need to reach out to them with a good V-P pick, or whatever. Not to be too blunt, but… that is one of the most idiotic statements in all of politics. How many times do we need to watch elections to know that turnout matters? And how many times do we need to see that people really, really, really will stay home if they aren’t inspired?
Karl Rove famously said that an estimated 4 million Evangelicals who were expected to vote for GW Bush instead stayed home in 2000 when word got out in the final weekend about Bush’s old drunk driving arrest. Obviously, that almost cost Bush the election. This is important stuff. Voters motivated by a strong ideology also often are voters who will help put a pox on both houses by refusing to vote. That’s just political reality. If Romney doesn’t understand that and act accordingly to avoid such a fate, he will lose, and drag us all down with him.
View all comments (45) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/04/23/ericksons-good-advice-for-romn
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Sarah Palin’s Rack
- Hannah and Her Friends
- The Demise of Money and Credit
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
Peter Johnson| 4.23.12 @ 12:12PM
I believe that Governor Romney, if elected, may turn out to be Reaganesque as president.
Nevertheless, Mr. Hillyer is 100% correct that enthusiastic turnout by all likely Republican supporters will be essential to defeating President Obama in November.
Does Mr. Romney need to kowtow to the evangelical voter? No.
Does he need to listen to their views and show them the respect they crave and deserve? Absolutely.
Larry| 4.24.12 @ 9:19AM
Peter, you are expecting a dramatic conversion then, yes? At present, comparisons to Reagan simply strain credulity. Romney's record, political philosophy and ethos differ so dramatically from Reagan's that we find more in common between Romney and Kerry than Romney and Reagan.
Sadly, even if Romney reaches out to Evangelicals he'll do so by merely reading from a script ... not speaking from the heart. Nothing like a political record to predict his politcal choices going forward. Reagan's record qualified him as an authentic conservative ... Romney's? Anything but.
Once again the GOP has expressed utter contempt for its base and conservatism. And once again they are left trying to excite conservatives through the choice of a VP.
Big, stinking deal. VP's are "not worth a bucket of warm piss". We yearned for, indeed, the hour demands an authentic conservative ... we have instead been saddled with another big government Republican who believes far more in his managerial "expertise" than he does in conservative principles.
He is precisely what the hour needs least and among the candidates who sought the nomination one of the least qualified. He now threatens to do to America what he did to Massachusetts.
I will vote for him ... not, however, because he's earned my vote. He hasn't ... nor my respect. He's slightly better than Obama ... and that's not saying much.
What he has achieved is to rekindle a fire among the growing majority of Conservative voters who have realized that there really is no home for conservatives within the GOP.
Jack in Wi.| 4.23.12 @ 12:22PM
Romney gets about as much enthusiasm from the base as McCain. Obma may lose because he is worthless and a down right failure. Romney won't win on his own. He has nothing to offer conservatves, except that he is not Obama. Either way we are screwed, yet again.
Al Adab| 4.23.12 @ 1:35PM
Peter, Jack:
Jack you got this one right. Romney will not and cannot elicit the entuhusiasm necessary to defeat Obama. He is simply another in the long line of accomodationist republicans who have led the party to defeat since Tom Dewey. Conservatives may again "hold their noses" and vote for him, but they will not finance or work up a sweat for him, not because the defeat of Obama is critical to the future of human liberty which it is but because once again the GOP has snubbed the Conservative Movement and frankly Conservatives are tired of it.
Marco2| 4.23.12 @ 12:29PM
Since Rubio, Ryan and a number of others endorsed Romney while both Santo and Newt were still in their walking dead phase, who is left of appeal to the self-proclaimed true conservatives? Santo, Newt and Palin are non-starters. Romney wouldn't touch them with a stick. I can think of Jindal, but he might not be ready for prime time, and Romney's already got Louisiana. So, who might it be?
Chris| 4.23.12 @ 12:50PM
Paul Ryan. The pick for VP is more important then the headliner. Bush picked Chaney; because he needed the brainpower. Cheney was never going to carry the torch for party after eight years. The VP pick is the next candidate.
Dai Alanye | 4.23.12 @ 2:57PM
Figure on it being some RINO dud, and you'll be less disappointed by the actual choice. Possibly.
Vern Crisler| 4.23.12 @ 2:16PM
Now how can Karl Rove know why 4 million "estimated" evangicals stayed home in the 2000 election? Remember, this is the same guy who said Obama won in 2008 because he had a clear and consistent message. Egad!
Dai Alanye | 4.23.12 @ 2:59PM
Bush was an easy 5% ahead prior to the record dump. There was no other obvious factor.
Occam's Tool| 4.23.12 @ 2:26PM
I knew that Bush would win Kentucky anyway. I did not vote for him in 2000 after word got out on his DUI. If I had lived in FL, I would have voted for Bush, but I made a decision that I have since come to regret.
Obama DID win in 2008 because he had a consistent message. He is a scumbag, and an antisemitic asshole like Dimitri here, but also like Dimitri, his message is consistent.
Oldefarte| 4.23.12 @ 2:32PM
Anyone who STAYS AT HOME AND REFUSES TO VOTE OVER IDEOLOGY are the very definition of STUPIDITY [and hopefully we all know what that old Alabama philosopher said about that word, don't we?]. This election is possibly the most important election within my lifetime, and possibly since this country was founded. Make no mistake about it, THIS COUNTRY DOES NOT HAVE FOUR MORE YEARS OF BARACK OBAMA AND HIS ADMINISTRATION left! It's as simple as that, and I could complecate it by defining the numerous reasons why it is thus, but if you are intelligent enough to have taken a breath for the last three years you should know why it is so. Democrats have been minutely and in baby-steps destroying this nation form many years due to their creeping socialism, and this current administration came out of the Democrat-Socialism Closet big time after 11/4/08. McCain should have been elected but due to the STUPIDS of this land, they instead voted for the smiling African American with his cute family and his Harvard law degree etc [while ignoring the more critical aspects of his personae] and the rest is history. I'll repeat......the USA has at best two years left before financial/economic collapse occurs here and there will not resurrection from same once its happens. For the thousandth time........IT'S THE DEMOCRATS, STUPIDS!!!!!
Derek Leaberry| 4.23.12 @ 2:35PM
How much Old Crow have you drank this morning?
Oldefarte| 4.23.12 @ 10:00PM
There won't be enough Old Crow [or any other alcoholic beverages] to deaden the pain of observing the USA becoming Cuba North if this POTUS [non] is re-elected!!!!!
Long Live Peter Green | 4.23.12 @ 3:06PM
These idiotic ramblings of yours are not worthy of comment. You do not help your cause whatsoever. Have a nice day.
Oldefarte| 4.23.12 @ 9:50PM
This goes for all of you: 'ramblings'? You're a GD idiot obviously, or maybe a snot-noser [or both]. You are no doubt the devil-may-care imbiciles that cause the election of the pretender POTUS in 2008. Read today's business headlines pertaining to Europe [ie Spain], and then tell me that this country is not on a similar glidepath with this community organizer professional campaigner at the helm? Are you that stupid? Obviously you are [and are part of the reason why this country is intellectually fading fast from a culture of drugs, stupidity, and political correct dumbarsness. Sad, but typical.....go back to reading comic books, watching Hollywood's GREEN HORNET movies, and working at Mickey Ds, okay? You have a nice day as well WATCHING YOUR COUNTRY SWIRL AROUND THE TOILET BOWL AND DISAPPEAR IN TWO YEARS IF THIS FAKE POTUS IS RE-ELECTED!!!!
Mike| 4.23.12 @ 5:47PM
Every election in my lifetime has been claimed to be, "the most important of our lifetime." I'm sick of the boy who cried wolf.
Oldefarte| 4.23.12 @ 9:53PM
See my above [and try WHAT KNOWN AS READING] and then maybe you'll be knocked off of your horse in discovery of WHY THIS ELECTION ''''''IS'''''' SO, okay????
Darrell Todd Maurina| 4.24.12 @ 10:54AM
Unfortunately, candidates have said "this is the most important election ever" for so long that they begin to sound like the boy who cried "wolf" ... and then the real wolf does show up.
Yes, Barack Obama is dangerous. However, Mitt Romney is sending out seriously dangerous trial balloons about his VP pick and likely plans to "move to the middle" in the general election. He may be a conservative by Massachusetts standards, but he's at best a left-of-center moderate by Republican standards, and he's taking evangelicals for granted. That's a way to lose elections, not win them. Bob Dole might be a good reminder of how that works -- instead of building on the base, he took a jackhammer to the base.
Somebody needs to wake up the Republican Party, and do it soon, before we lose an election we should have won by a landslide with a strong conservative candidate.
Oldefarte| 4.24.12 @ 11:31AM
Try reading the financial section [especially regarding Europe, Spain, Greece, Italy etc; and their similarities to our current situations] of newspapers, and then see if your opinion changes possibly!!!!!!!!
Scott| 4.23.12 @ 2:56PM
I hate the identity politics. Whether it be pandering to hispanics,blacks,evangelicals,whatever. As for Erickson,his anti-Santorum screed and Rick Perry worship made him look like a fool.
Tom| 4.23.12 @ 3:01PM
I have absoltuely no respect for Erickson. He is nothing but a GOP hack.
Oldefarte| 4.24.12 @ 11:43AM
Fine then GTF out here and go blog on the NYT etc instead!!!!!!!
Tom| 4.23.12 @ 3:00PM
I'm sorry Quin, but judging by some of the "conservatives" who inhabit this site, your entry is the height of naivity. These people would vote for anything from a dead cat to Attila the Hun if it had the "R" after its name.
As for me, I wil NEVER vote for the left-wing Mormon cultist; not now, not in November, NEVER!!!
And if it means four more years of Barack Hussein Obama,, then so be it.
Margaret| 4.23.12 @ 3:09PM
Do you think anyone cares?
Tom| 4.23.12 @ 4:45PM
As if your opinion mattered.
Oldefarte| 4.24.12 @ 11:32AM
Hers and other more so than yours ever will!!!!!!!
Long Live Peter Green | 4.23.12 @ 3:17PM
"I'm sorry Quin, but judging by some of the "conservatives" who inhabit this site, your entry is the height of naivity. These people would vote for anything from a dead cat to Attila the Hun if it had the "R" after its name."
Tom, you took the words out of my mouth sir. I will vote, but will consult with God before making a decision. The "R" or "D" after the candidate's name means nothing to me. The write-in vote for POTUS or abstaining for voting for a POTUS are looking very possible right now. I refuse to vote for Mitt Romney, not because of his religious affiliation, but because he will ensure the same old song & dance continues unabated. Self proclaimed conservatives need to align themselves with the solution to our problems. The solution is spelled G-O-D, not G-O-P. Take care Tom & ignore the angry words which will be coming your way for sticking to your principles. You're not alone. May God be with you always!
Sam Green| 4.23.12 @ 3:51PM
Does God talk or email or twitter to you. God wants you to stay home, save gas, and move in with Tom.
Tom| 4.23.12 @ 4:47PM
Better him than a nitwit like you.
Oldefarte| 4.24.12 @ 11:42AM
Go look in a mirror for the definition of a 'nitwit'!!!!
Al Adab| 4.23.12 @ 4:43PM
Actually Peter Green I doubt many will vote for Romney just because he has an R next to his name. The disappointment of Conservatives is beyond comprehension and while some will "hold their nose" and vote for him, many will not. Romney will lose this election just as have so many accomodationist republicans dating back at least to Dewey. Conservatives are quite tired of being abused by the GOP.
Tom| 4.23.12 @ 4:51PM
"Conservatives are quite tired of being abused by the GOP."
Actually REAL Conservatives are quite tired of being abused by the GOP.
Unfortunately some "conservatives" bring to mind what Soviet dictator Nikita Krushschev said about the West over hald a century ago; "We spit in their face, and they call it dew."
Al Adab| 4.23.12 @ 6:08PM
Tom:
I'll grant you that one: REAL Conservatives. Too many use the label for expediency and are anything but. Nixon and Bush 41 come to mind. Sad that Conservatives keep buying it albeit without any rational alternative.
Oldefarte| 4.24.12 @ 11:41AM
Then go join your political partners in crime, the Democrats and GTH in the process, since the Republican Party doesn't want or need traitors like yourself!!!!!!!!!!!
Tom| 4.23.12 @ 4:47PM
Thanks.
Oldefarte| 4.24.12 @ 11:36AM
'G-O-D' does not solve the problems of humans that he created.........He gave them something that you're obviously totally ignorant of, and that is the concept of F-R-E-E W-I-L-L. So use it, along with the possible COMMON SENSE and INTELLIGENCE that he also provided to you and then go vote for CAPITALISTS-REPUBLICANS as opposed to the SOCIALISTS-DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!
Oldefarte| 4.23.12 @ 9:55PM
Forrest Gumb's words concerning STUPIDITY accurately described people like yourself!!!!!!!
Tom| 4.23.12 @ 11:00PM
More mindless nonsense from the Stupid Old Fool.
Oldefarte| 4.24.12 @ 11:38AM
How would you know since your I.Q. equals MINUS [-] 50, and I'm being charitable at that!!!!!!!
JP| 4.23.12 @ 4:08PM
Mitt doesn't have to kowtow to the Evangelicals. But, he shouldn't assume he has them in the bag either. Turnout will decide this election.
Bob Miller| 4.23.12 @ 5:11PM
Are Evangelicals so ignorant about the damage Obama has caused and will cause that Mitt's inattention would keep them home on Election Day?
TexasMom2012| 4.23.12 @ 6:47PM
Good God. I want someone to stop the spending and Romney just came out for Obama's election year pandering to college students by reducing their student loan interest rates... Lord am I ticked. Only hope is that enough more (at least responsible) Republicans get elected to Congress that we can slow down to a trickle the spiraling debt. Because I think we can work with Romney (if he stops dissing his base) but no one could work with Obama 'I won' petulant Prince of pouting: that means I have to take two tequila shots and vote for Romney. Hell, I never even get a say in the primaries because the yerkface Repbulicans structured Texas out of the contest while elevating freaking Iowa and New Hampshire to the fore. I am so frustrated with the party and frankly tired of the entitlement of Rs like Hatch who are entitled to their seat. BS it is the people of Utahs seat. Maybe we can promote an age limit on Senators so they will quit dying in office! Sorry, just very frustrated and I am sure I am not the only one. Last straw was the latest Novelty candidate diss. We are tired of the machine disparaging us, our beliefs and candidates engaged in the process by insiders totally out of touch with middle America. Again, sorry, Rant off.
FeFe| 4.24.12 @ 2:48AM
"This is a valley of ashes - ..." What? We can't hear your concerns over our burn rate. But good-luck repairing your rice bowl, Erick.
Sincerely don't go away mad just go away and coalesce now,
Bionic Romney Machine
Serving "Severe" No Label Seeds Since 2006
martin j smith| 4.24.12 @ 8:29AM
Romney needs to be in touch with many voters if he wants to be elected President. And he must never take any group for granted ever. But he will because of two theories: One the Republican Establishment are stupid or two the Republican Establishment are Stupid and do not want to win the election.
But wait. There is more--A third theory: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Republicans are colluding with the Communists to throw the election like John McCaine did in 2008.
MRD| 4.24.12 @ 11:17AM
Most of the people who think Romney can just count on the votes of the Evangelical base are not part of that base, and like "olde farte" feel free to disdain them, calling them idiots if they do not vote for Romney. This is a mistake on 2 levels. First all of the data show that the committed Republican voter and the Committed Democratic voter break about evenly with a roughly 45-45 split. The remaining 10% are ideologically inconsistent and less knowledgeable about the issues. For example some of these people who are in the Evangelical community will think like this... Well I am pro-life, but I do not think Romney is really pro-life, he is insincere on the issue, and Obama ended the wars in Iraq and is ending the war in Afghanistan so.. maybe Obama is not so bad.. Well Obama is a lot more pro-abortion, I just can't decide.. I don't think I will vote.... I am not saying I think this way, I would vote for anyone short of Stalin over Obama.. but some people do... the idea that one can count on an "anti- the other guy" vote to win a close election is simply foolhardy. Do not mistake your own righteous desire to replace Obama with any non ideologue, with the viewpoint of everyone in the base. Even losing 5% of the base can cost the election. Obama has 100% of his base behind him. Beyond that, it might be helpful to understand the effect this cycle will have on future elections. If the base feels itself thrown under the bus. ( As I know I do..) they might vote for ABO this time, but if the Democrats nominate someone not so overtly leftist, someone like a Bill Clinton, progressively larger amounts of the base may stay home, and thus even a Romney win will be a Pyrrhic victory. You can rant all you want about how stupid one would be to vote for a Democrat or not vote, but this probably reflects more your own disdain for social conservatives than rational political thought. In the real world political parties are formed through coalitions of overlapping interests. One needs to realize people are very passionate about the social and cultural issues. It would be impossible to imagine the Democrats attempting to win without the support of the Gay marriage, pro-abortion, feminist crowd. Even Bill Clinton the master of triangulation did not compromise on any of their issues. The Republicans are constantly trying to win by throwing the social cultural base under the bus.
The track record on this approach has been poor,
Bush 41, (second term) Dole, Bush 43, McCain, all either lost or won narrowly, and none was seen as being particularly socially conservative. Bush 41 won his first term on the good feeling inspired by Reagan and against a remarkably weak challenger. Bush 43 lost the popular vote first time around, second time around won narrowly, but had taken some pretty socially conservative actions, during the first term,such as limiting embryonic stem cell research. He too was running against a remarkably weak candidate in Kerry. Obama while a left wing ideologue is a tough candidate. To the uniformed he does not sound malignant, he has an ally in a totally committed major media, and he is the incumbent president which will allow him to shape the debate in ways that Kerry and Dukakis could not. This election is not going to be a cake walk, and Romney would be wise to pick a VP that was reassuring to "the base" especially the social conservative aspect of the base.