-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 3 comments
-
DeMint Supports Defense
May 14, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Update on Tom Perez
May 14, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Tiger Woods Sinks Lower
May 12, 2013 | 20 comments
-
I Ask Anurima Bhargava for a Date
May 10, 2013 | 8 comments
The Spectacle Blog
A week ago I warned that people on the right were underestimating the grave damage from Mitt Romney’s remarks on the “47 percent.”
I guarantee that the numbers for Romney will be worse in the next few days. Dead solid guarantee.
Romney desperately needs to reset his campaign. Paul Ryan’s speech to the Values Voters Summit was the sort of thing Romney’s whole campaign needs to do: be focused, build an actual argument, explain WHY conservative ideas are better.
Now comes definitive evidence that I was right.
On a national scale, 54 percent of registered voters viewed Romney’s comments unfavorably, while only 33 percent saw them in a favorable light, according to aWashington Post/ABC News poll released Wednesday. Fifty-seven percent of independents had a negative reaction.
This is the main reason why Romney is tanking in the polls all across the country, even as actual events and news provide what should be horrible omens for the Obama campaign.
On the other hand, Barack Obama’s way has been tried, and it failed. Just last week alone, its failures were shown in stark relief. Last Monday, the Congressional Budget Office confirmed yet another trillion-dollar deficit under Obama. On Tuesday, Moody’s threatened to downgrade the national government’s bond rating yet again, and the Kaiser Foundation showed that health insurance premiums rose last year to nearly $16,000 per family. On Wednesday, the Census Bureau reported that poverty, now afflicting 46.2 million Americans, is at a 50-year high. On Thursday, producer prices were reported to rise by the largest monthly amount in three years, and the weekly jobless claims rose to their highest levels since July; while on Friday, new numbersshowed that industrial production shrank by the largest amount in three years.
And, of course, gasoline prices now are almost precisely double what they were when Obama took office.
So…. WHAT SHOULD ROMNEY DO?!?!?
A not fully complete answer, but a good
place to start, is this: It’s the culture,
stupid.
At the Weekly Standard today, Frank Cannon and Jeffrey Bell make the case.
Bad as the economy was, Reagan showed no desire to restrict himself to that issue. He ran a full-bore insurgent campaign, critiquing Carter’s every vulnerability and calling for new conservative policies across the board.
Now comes news that the issue of abortion actually would cut seriously in Romney’s favor if he only would make the case.
“This survey shows that a few straightforward, specific facts about President Obama and abortion shock the collective conscience of swing voters in battleground states,” said pollster Kellyanne Conway. “His support for taxpayer-funded abortion, opposition to Born-Alive Infant protections and ‘intimidation through regulation’ foisted upon religious organizations draws the ire of between one-half and two-thirds of the voters surveyed,” she said.
This is exactly what I asserted yesterday in my blog post on the “Sleeper Issue”:
The SBA List has a moving video online featuring a beautiful woman who, as an infant, was the intended victim of an abortion, but survived.
It mentions Barack Obama’s sick, inhuman fight in Illinois against a version of the Infants Born Alive Protection Act, which would mandate assistance for such infants rather than a second attempt to kill them.
But abortion is far from the only possible avenue for Romney to gain ground. He should be:
1) opening a multi-front offensive against the Obama-Holder Justice Department, on issues ranging from a) Fast and Furious to b) race-based court fights to c) its work against voter ID to d) the Black Panther voter-intimidation case… and much more;
2) going full-bore against the Obama assault on religious freedom, not just with the HHS mandate, but with the Hosanna-Tabor case and others;
3) using the ObamaCare medical device tax as an issue to come down culturally as well as economically on the side of the actual consumers of health care and to undercut Obama’s reputation for compassion;
4) using the international assaults on our embassies not so much as a foreign policy debate but as a clarion call to the need to reassert national pride.
And that’s just a start. But it could be a powerful start. And time’s-a-wasting. Cultural issues (I haven’t even mentioned guns yet; that’s another good one!) do move voters. Without cultural issues (mainly gay marriage at the time, but also the battles over judges, which could be another good issue for this year too), George W. Bush would not have won in 2004. Without cultural issues (revolving door prisons in Massachusetts; Dukakis’ bloodless response to the idea of his wife being raped, etc.), the elder Bush might not have overcome a double-digit deficit in 1988. And so on. Cultural issues hit people viscerally. And polls show that conservatives are on the more popular side of almost all of the most salient cultural issues of the day.
Get with it, Romney team. The public may be somewhat ignorant (i.e., may not follow issues and thus may not know information that all of us activists know), but the public isn’t dumb. It can absorb economic arguments and ALSO take in cultural arguments at the same time.
Or does anyone not think that hunters in Ohio and Wisconsin and in the Blue Ridge in Virginia will fail to respond to effective reminders of how anti-2nd Amendment was the position of the Obama administration in the Heller case? Can anybody doubt that suburban moms won’t respond negatively to news that the Obama Education Department is moving to undermine school discipline by requiring a quota system for suspensions and expulsions rather than basing punishment on the actual incidence of violations?
It really is the culture, stupid.
View all comments (46) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/09/26/get-past-47-percent-its-the
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Self-Righteous Republic
- Nuts to Nutter
- 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
ADVERTISEMENT
mike 3/505| 9.26.12 @ 4:50PM
He did exactly what you said (the culture stupid) & then you excoriated him for it! His 47 percent comment was exactly that. Instead of jumpin' in with him...which would have helped with Independents, you joined the rest of the RINOS in piling on him...no wonder the Independents are believing the leftist interpretation. I will tell you...the BASE understood exactly what he meant. Mr Hillyer, you are not helping. If Romney loses this, it won't be from Liberal/Democrat efforts, it will be because of the likes of you, Kristal et al.
Regards,
Mike
rightasrain| 9.27.12 @ 9:22AM
Great comment, Mike. In an election year where the future direction of our country literally depends on a Romney win, what exactly was the point of Quin's, Kristol's, Noonan's, Ponnaru's et al. attacks on the 47% remark? This is a death match and one would think our side would support or shut up. There's plenty of time for smug "I told you sos" later. As another commenter wrote, sometimes an ounce of loyalty is worth a pound of cleverness. Only our side gleefully makes mincemeat of its own.
Jack in Wi| 9.26.12 @ 5:06PM
Great comments Quin. I have stated all along abortion, homosexual marriiage and the other issues you mentioned would all be great issues against Obama. The trouble is Romney is incapable of using them. More likely he does not want to use them.
kingsmill| 9.26.12 @ 5:31PM
A 100% contradiction of Quin's "Dump Akin" idiocy.
Sorry Field Marshal Quin, I find it tough to accept the sincerity of your call to engage the culture war, when you are inclined to leave wounded warriors on the field of battle. Should Mitt trip up responding to a lame stream media viper, on a delicate abortion or homosexual marriage question, you would be the first to sound the retreat.
Trinacria| 9.26.12 @ 5:42PM
There's a differnce between leaving wounded warriors on the field of battle and walking away from a dumbass with a self-inflicted head wound...
kingsmill| 9.26.12 @ 5:56PM
The same justification used by the me-too wets within the Republican party who bailed on Goldwater in 1964.
Trinacria| 9.26.12 @ 7:40PM
Really? You're going to invoke Goldwater in '64 to support your argument?
If you don't see the difference between Mr. Goldwater and Mr. Akin, well...I suppose there's nothing left to discuss.
Me? I'm not big on the "he's a buffoon, but he's our buffoon" argument. It rather defeats the point of having any principle to begin with.
Quartermaster| 9.26.12 @ 7:50PM
If the analogy didn't hold you might have had a cogent argument. As it stands, Goldwater did exactly the same type of thing Akin did.
The shame of it is that people like you are more than happy to knuckle under to the loony left simply because some one says something a bit loony. But, you are correct about one thing. There is nothing to talk about with you, so it would be best if you would slink off to your corner and sulk for awhile.
Trinacria| 9.26.12 @ 8:05PM
So, to be clear - standing on principle and refusing to be represented by an individual who is so patently stupid that he would categorize rape as either legitimate or illigitimate is knuckling under to the loony left simply because "he's said something loony"?
I suppose it rather begs the question: just where do you draw the line? Or is there a line for you? Does the fact that a candidate happens to be a member of your party grant them immunity from all charges of ineptitude? If so, permit me to congratulate you; you've just become a liberal.
kingsmill| 9.26.12 @ 8:57PM
You're about as principled as Harry Reid. Your acceptance of the Leftist characterization of Akin's (yes dopey, but not evil) comment says it all.
I'm quite sure you would have wet yourself over similar Leftist characterizations of Reagan's comments, such as "trees cause more pollution than cars" and "ketchup is a vegetable". No Akin isn't Reagan, but your reactive mentality is a constant with wets.
Trinacria| 9.26.12 @ 11:29PM
"Ketchup is a vegetable" = "legitimate rape".
Yeah, sounds about the same to me.
C'mon, sport; I'm all too happy to engage in a battle of wits, but I really must insist that you arm yourself (otherwise the whole business is rather unsporting).
By the way, I didn't say Mr. Akin is evil; I said he is ignorant. Profoundly so. Perhaps you're content to accept profound ignorance from your representative; ironically, that makes you far more like the liberals whose views you wrongly assumed I accepted than me.
kingsmill| 9.27.12 @ 8:31AM
Chief, A battle of the wits? You mirror a leftist meme, and wait on the applause? That passes for wit with Joy and Whoopi.
Your League of Women Voters flapdoodle that only allows you to vote for mythical enlightened solons is the sort of goo-goo liberalism that I recall from those dear Boston Yankees (of my salad days) who worked tirelessly to expunge any trace of conservatism from the GOP.
Oldefarte| 9.27.12 @ 1:21PM
Apparently it would be a "battle of wits" with a GD DIMWIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Trinacria| 9.27.12 @ 4:22PM
That's "Mr. GD DIMWIT" to you, sir.
Pardon me if I'm a bit short today; the sun here outside my lovely Tuscan villa is downright unbearable today (it turns out being a GD DIMWIT doesn't suck...and apparently it pays rather handsomely).
Oldefarte| 9.27.12 @ 1:18PM
I'll answer that ludicrous question. If Akin loses Missouri to McCaskill, that will become one less [and a very critical one at that] state's vote in the senate that would be needed to pass/legislate a POTUS Romney's economic revision plans, and quite possibly render same with the legislative wherewithall to accompolish the needed changes. So you type geniuses would rather stand tall with your non-compromising peniuses in your hands accordingly while your country and the resto fous GTH in a handbasket, right? DA!!!!!!!!!!
Trinacria| 9.27.12 @ 2:32PM
The selective application of principle, otherwise known as moral relativism, is the cornerstone of leftist ideology. If you wish to adopt the practice in pursuit of the "greater good", knock yourself out. Soon you'll discover that there's always some greater good that can be invoked in order to justify compromised principles.
So what if my President has a hankerin' for hummers from interns in the oval office; he's doing a hell of a job on the economy. Yeah, sure, my congressman loves to tweet pics of his junk to co-eds, but if his opponent wins my taxes might go up. OK, OK, so the AG looked the other way while the guns that killed US citizens were sold to Mexican criminals; I can't let that eclipse the fact that he's protecting my homey's from voter discrimination.
Sound ludicrous? You're right, but then on what principled grounds do you criticize such absurd compromises when that's precisely what you've done?
By the way, my non-compromising penis says to tell your sister hello.
Occam's Tool| 9.27.12 @ 11:00AM
My view: Akin said a stupid thing, BUT:
He's right on abortion.
He's right on the Middle East.
He's right on taxing and spending.
He's right on National Defense.
He's right on our horribly damaged Culture.
The only perfect person is a perfect idiot. I'm donatin' to Akin. I want him to win. This ain't beanbag. His opponent is a cretinous scumbag worthy of spitting on.
Marston| 9.27.12 @ 12:18AM
Yes, but Romney is "our" dumba... Oh. Wait...
Trinacria| 9.27.12 @ 4:08PM
Nope; didn't say Romney was a dumbass, nor that he was so profoundly stupid that he would suggest that there's such a thing as legitimate rape. I also didn't say that I would have to compromise my principles to support him.
He was a "6" in a field of candidates that were "4's" and "5's"; don't love him, don't hate him, but don't find him reprehensible (therefore, I don't have to compromise my principles to support him).
Nuance. Ain't it beautiful? Oh. Wait...
Trinacria| 9.26.12 @ 5:39PM
"On a national scale, 54 percent of registered voters viewed Romney’s comments unfavorably, while only 33 percent saw them in a favorable light, according to aWashington Post/ABC News poll released Wednesday."
Quin,
You're conflating two concepts that aren't necessarily related. Reacting unfavorably to a comment is not necessarily a good surrogate for how an individual will vote.
I reacted unfavorably to his comments (and I actually agree with the spirit of most of them), but my reaction was based on the fact that I knew they would be exploited by Obama and the media - not because I think his remarks make him a less desirable candidate.
To further illustrate the point, my 72-year old mother happens to be among the 47% who no longer pay federal income taxes. She, too, reacted unfavorably - not because she was offended (she's smart enough to knww Romney wasn't speaking about folks like her), but because she thought it was a strategic error. I can assure you with the highest degree of confidence that it will not make her the least bit less likely to pull the lever for Mr. Romney.
Sure, it might have an effect on a few mopes who actually cling to the absurd notion that any candidate should or actually does "care" about them. On balance, however, it won't tip the scales one way or the other.
C. Vernon Crisler | 9.26.12 @ 5:46PM
Remember, a lot of us were warning all of you Republicans during the primaries that Mitt was a disaster for conservatism. But no, you had to have him; couldn't tie your shoelaces if Mitt wasn't the nominee.
Of course, now that you have him, and find out that he's not the guy you had hoped for ("behold, it was Leah") you have no one to blame but yourselves.
The fact is Romney is a bland moderate, and if he wins this presidency, it won't be because he was a great candidate, or because he listened to some conservative criticism and changed his strategy. It will be because Obama lost it.
If the American people are stupid enough to put Obama back into office, it tells us that we should raise that 47 % up to 51 %.
Trinacria| 9.26.12 @ 7:54PM
CVC,
I doubt that there are many of us who had any illusions about Mitt's conservative bona fides. We surveyed the landscape, assessed the available alternatives, and made an informed decision to invoke Buckley's Corollary and support the candidate with the strongest chance of unseating the unmitigated national disaster that currently occupies the White House.
I challenge you to find anyone among his supporters who believed that Mr. Romney would be the next Ronald Reagan. Regrettably, the next Ronald Reagan wasn't in the field - so we looked around the bar and picked the reasonably attractive girl with no personality over the train wreck with a case of halitosis that could knock a buzzard off a shit wagon.
It's just that simple...
C. Vernon Crisler | 9.27.12 @ 10:21AM
IOW, you picked a loser.....
Trinacria| 9.27.12 @ 2:38PM
Perhaps, but at least I chose wisely, as my choice was based on the available candidate with the strongest chance to win.
But please, by all means, share your sage wisdom with us; who among the stellar field of conservative geniuses in the race would have been a stronger candidate? We're on the edge of our seats...
Oldefarte| 9.27.12 @ 1:25PM
Who GAS whether or not he's the next RR? Thats not the GD point! Consider this: If the BLACK JESUS returns to 1600, your country will become Cuba or Mexico in two years time! Crunch on those apples for awhile, and then see if Romney's not being the next RR matters to you!!!!!!!!!!
Trinacria| 9.27.12 @ 3:50PM
You didn't read the post; did you? That was precisely my point, Senor Flatulence. We dont need RR; we just need somebody better than BO.
Do try to keep up, won't you?
lsudolemite| 9.26.12 @ 6:20PM
The next time a GOP moderate goes on offense over a controversial issue will be the first. The only mystery is why anyone is surprised Romney is following the RINO POTUS campaign playbook to the letter.
JD| 9.26.12 @ 6:39PM
Romney's comments were bad because he suggested that those in the 47% would not vote for him, when in fact many will.
Of course, the comments were made four months ago in private, but secretly recorded, edited, and released in a politically-timed way. This was certainly unethical.
Surprisingly, my liberal coworkers broached the issue at a lunch recently by saying that THEY didn't see Romney's comments as a big scandal. "He said the 47% probably won't vote for him, and he's right", they said.
But as to citing poll results on the comments - Quin, you shouldn't have bothered. The merits of the comments have little bearing on that. The media spin ensures that the result of any such poll can be determined by simply asking "what party does the speaker belong to?"
Quartermaster| 9.26.12 @ 7:54PM
The polls are skewed and Quin is acting as if they aren't. I'm not high on Mittens (he certainly is anything but "severely conservative"), but the loony left loathes anyone with an "R" behind their name, even if they are a flaming lib, and there have been a few.
Quin, you need to quit being a Pollyanna. It doesn't become you and makes you look utterly silly.
Occam's Tool| 9.27.12 @ 11:03AM
I also don't believe the polls---they are polling based on 2008 turnout. Folks---my neighbors, who had an Obama sign up on their lawn in 2008, have a bare lawn this time around. There's NO enthusiasm. Lots of dhimmis are staying home on this one. We uns are gonna win this one.
Certif| 9.26.12 @ 7:18PM
Mr. Hillier you "warned us" of the grave danger of his remarks to show us how smart you are. By joining the MSM bandwagon in trashing Romney, you reveal yourself to be a large part of the problem. You self-righteous, establishment GOP types, in your zeal to show us how smart you are, are helping the Obama campaign in a way they could never have hoped for. Do me a favor, if you can't write something in support of republicans, then don't write anything at all. I've written-off the Weekly Standard because of Kristol and you're next.
C Bowen | 9.26.12 @ 8:17PM
Was having Paul Ryan "come out" for gays in the military part of your plan, Quin?
Face it, this campaign team is a joke.
Occam's Tool| 9.27.12 @ 11:03AM
Why do you care about gays in the military, Bowen? You believe we should be on our knees to terrorist scum!
Oldefarte| 9.27.12 @ 1:10PM
No doubt he believes that we should be on our knees to homosexual scum as well?????
C Bowen | 9.27.12 @ 1:49PM
No, oldefarte, I am disgusted with Cheney wing of the party pushing for gays in the military, gay marriage, gay adoption, gay IVF--you know, the hippies that you support.
C Bowen | 9.27.12 @ 1:48PM
No man wants gays or women in the military.
It was the hippies like Rumsfeld and Cheney who were happy to send women into a war to make Iraq safe for Islam.
Nice use of the exclamation point, but that doesn't make any sense.
Oldefarte| 9.26.12 @ 8:58PM
No no no, it's still the economy and yes, the American people are still apparently stupid [as they were on 11/4/08]. If this country dies and/or turns into Cuba or Mexico in the next several years after re-electing Obama, none of that really matters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
JeffP| 9.26.12 @ 10:23PM
So 54% of Americans either don't want to know or (worse) don't care that the entire income tax burden is paid by only half the taxpayers? We have a problem more serious than "messaging."
This poll suggests that over half of the American people buy-in to the central tenet of socialism: the proper economic role of government is not to protect wealth, it is to re-distribute wealth.
If the results are accurate, the message doesn't matter; the voters aren't listening to Romney or conservatives.
Sjccoach| 9.26.12 @ 10:55PM
Once again the inside the beltway NRO CINO has an attack of the vapors. You believe the MSM polls because you are delusional. A Washington Post Poll is real only to people inside the beltway. Go lay down in a corner and stop writing until the election is over.
Martin kzovich| 9.27.12 @ 5:53AM
first off you rely on polls. That does nothing for me.
What Romney needs to do is first to address those that do not want to be in 47% but are there due to Obama's policies and then address the parasites by saying a vote for Obama will gaurentee that you will have to pick food from garbage because there will be no money to pay for your free beez
Indy| 9.27.12 @ 8:01AM
Quin
Why don't you do something different? How about listening to the full tape put out by MJones, did you hear Romney speak about The Fed? If not, shame on you, not one so-called journalist has written anything or cut the clip to highlight Romney talking about Ben devaluing the dollar and how dangerous QE is as a policy. So, please listen to the full tape and then write a piece, we need people in the foxhole fighting v. complaining.
You could also write a piece on how much college tuition has increased under BHO, he says he is working to make college more affordable which is a lie, it goes up, the more Pell Grant $ you throw out to students, the higher tuition goes, the more we see fancy buildings on campus and the more silly majors we see and courses such as OWS? Give me a break!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! College students are in the 47%, their healthcare and tuition are increasing because of O's policies, help get the word out and maybe you will catch the attention of some voters.
Indy| 9.27.12 @ 8:03AM
More of this please, highlight the number of coal plants shutting down and tie that in to not just lost jobs but higher utility costs for everyone especially the poor and middle class
http://www.therightscoop.com/n.....r-on-coal/
Occam's Tool| 9.27.12 @ 11:05AM
Obama is going to lose the Virginias this year, for example. W Viginia is simple. Ohio isn't going to go for him, either.
The MSM is gonna wake up with egg on their faces November 7th.
MRD| 9.27.12 @ 11:43AM
Quin is exactly right. First the polls are skewed a bit but do not delude yourself over this, The RCP average has been within 1% of the acutal electoral popular vote for the last 4 Presidential cycles, and Intrade ( were people are playing for real money and know about skewed polls) has it 75/25 Obama. Team Romney needs to recognize this. Conservatism rightly understood is about the culture in its broadest sense. For conservative economic policies to work and even appeal , The public needs to embrace conservative ideals about work, freedom, natural rights coming not from the state but from God, etc. These work themselves out in specific policies. The assault on the basic nature of American freedom was what drove the Tea Party movement in 2010. Team Romneys focus on bad economic numbers is why we see no Tea Party activism. While cultural conservatism was better defended by Santorum, and Newt and even Ron Paul ( with a Libertarian edge) Romney was at times able to move in this direction. It is frankly not his "thing" but it is what would win. An economic referendum will lose, most people can not sort out how much Bush is to blame. Frankly Bush is to blame for lighting the fuse ( His deficits were nothing to sneeze at and we need to recognize getting rid of Saddam did not do much to get rid of Jihadism) Sure Obama is a socialist fanatic who has gleefully thrown gas on the campfire bush started, but most people do not get this. Romney needs to broaden the attack now.
Zeppo| 9.27.12 @ 12:26PM
If only Mitt were listening to you and Quin instead of his "extraordinarily successful" team of political pros.
Freedomist | 9.30.12 @ 1:12AM
1. Most voters are not influenced by a candidate's position on abortion.
2. Any damage by the 47% comment was not from the substance of the comment, but from Romney's thoughtlessness about the implications of his comment. Many people who pay no income tax don't want or need government assistance. And many people who do pay income tax don't want to pay income tax. Michele Bachmann's campaign faltered after she repeatedly suggested people who pay no income tax should pay some. His comment was not intended for public consumption, so I think the damage will be minimal and fade with time.