Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Fast Gunn · 11-17-2012, 09:29 AM

You would think that the GOP would at least be considerate enough to allow Mitt Romney some quiet time to lick his wounds after his devastating loss.

However, the party with no heart shows the world exactly how ruthless it can be.

I am sure the next candidate considering taking a run at 2016 may have second thoughts about the venture now.

. . . Persona non Grata?

Ten days after failing to sail into the White House, Mitt Romney is already being tossed overboard by his party. The former Massachusetts governor — who attracted $1 billion in funding and 59 million votes in his bid to unseat President Obama — has rapidly become persona non grata to a shellshocked Republican Party, which appears eager to map out its future without its 2012 nominee.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...=nl_pmpolitics

CuteOldGuy · 11-17-2012, 10:13 AM

It's not Romney's fault. All the Republicans insisted that he be the nominee because he was "electable". He wasn't. Now it's Romney's fault he wasn't elected. Truth is, he was never "electable" in the first place. Republicans are stupid.

Whirlaway · 11-17-2012, 10:16 AM

In hindsight, I think your right on Romney's "electability"

The conservative base didn't show up for him..............but some of the blame can be placed on Romney. He refused to attack Obama hard on key issues......

Quote:

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It's not Romney's fault. All the Republicans insisted that he be the nominee because he was "electable". He wasn't. Now it's Romney's fault he wasn't elected. Truth is, he was never "electable" in the first place. Republicans are stupid.

Fast Gunn · 11-17-2012, 10:32 AM

Running for President of the USA is an extremely arduous task that is not for the faint of heart.

It's like before the election people forget that someone has to lose in order for someone to win.

You would think that the party who loses would at least console their candidate instead of throwing him under the bus.

That is one hell of a thank you after two years of sweat and toil.

. . . The GOP is losing constituency and if they don't examine their soul and mend their wicked ways, they will disappear from the political scene all together!

CuteOldGuy · 11-17-2012, 10:51 AM

Yeah. Tell that to Michael Dukakis.

i'va biggen · 11-17-2012, 11:07 AM

Well hell you don't think it is the parties stuffy policies do you.No it is Mitts fault.

CuteOldGuy · 11-17-2012, 11:09 AM

No. The Republicans nominated the wrong person. They wanted somebody "electable". They blew it.

Whirlaway · 11-17-2012, 11:11 AM

Timely to remember Ronaldus Magnus on this subject...........in his own words.......

I believe the answer is: Yes, it is possible to create a political entity that will reflect the views of the great, hitherto [unacknowledged], conservative majority. . .

This will mean compromise. But not a compromise of basic principle. What will emerge will be something new: something open and vital and dynamic, something the great conservative majority will recognize as its own, because at the heart of this undertaking is principled politics. . .

Let us lay to rest, once and for all, the myth of a small group of ideological purists trying to capture a majority. Replace it with the reality of a majority trying to assert its rights against the tyranny of powerful academics, fashionable left-revolutionaries, some economic illiterates who happen to hold elective office and the social engineers who dominate the dialogue and set the format in political and social affairs. If there is any ideological fanaticism in American political life, it is to be found among the enemies of freedom on the left or right — those who would sacrifice principle to theory, those who worship only the god of political, social and economic abstractions, ignoring the realities of everyday life. They are not conservatives.

Our first job is to get this message across to those who share most of our principles. If we allow ourselves to be portrayed as ideological shock troops without correcting this error we are doing ourselves and our cause a disservice. Wherever and whenever we can, we should gently but firmly correct our political and media friends who have been perpetuating the myth of conservatism as a narrow ideology. Whatever the word may have meant in the past, today conservatism means principles evolving from experience and a belief in change when necessary, but not just for the sake of change.

Our candidates must be willing to communicate with every level of society, because the principles we espouse are universal and cut across traditional lines. In every Congressional district there should be a search made for young men and women who share these principles and they should be brought into positions of leadership in the local Republican Party groups. We can find attractive, articulate candidates if we look, and when we find them, we will begin to change the sorry state of affairs that has led to a Democratic-controlled Congress for more than 40 years. I need not remind you that you can have the soundest principles in the world, but if you don’t have candidates who can communicate those principles, candidates who are articulate as well as principled, you are going to lose election after election. I refuse to believe that the good Lord divided this world into Republicans who defend basic values and Democrats who win elections. We have to find tough, bright young men and women who are sick and tired of cliches and the pomposity and the mind-numbing economic idiocy of the liberals in Washington.

Still true......I believe the Hispanic population is conservative on social and economic issues......Read his entire 1977 CPAC speech here...

http://reagan2020.us/speeches/The_Ne...ican_Party.asp

Guest040616 · 11-17-2012, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It's not Romney's fault. All the Republicans insisted that he be the nominee because he was "electable". He wasn't. Now it's Romney's fault he wasn't elected. Truth is, he was never "electable" in the first place. Republicans are stupid.

Spoken by the StupidOldFart who clings to the theory of supporting no one who has a snowball's chance in hell of winning so that he can always make the claim on a hooker board that he did not vote for the winner.

CuteOldGuy · 11-17-2012, 11:21 AM

Why do I have to choose one of the two candidates chosen for me, BigTurd, when neither one represents the values or issues I believe are important? You're the Obamaton who is satisfied with allowing the big money and corporate interests choosing your candidate, who will always represent the big money and corporate interests. There was no choice. I refuse to play that game. Elect one or the other, and nothing ever changes. You're the brainwashed fool who thinks there was a real choice in the last several elections.

Hmmm . . . Do I want tyranny or fascism? Yeah. Good choice there.

Guest040616 · 11-17-2012, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Why do I have to choose one of the two candidates chosen for me, BigTurd, when neither one represents the values or issues I believe are important? You're the Obamaton who is satisfied with allowing the big money and corporate interests choosing your candidate, who will always represent the big money and corporate interests. There was no choice. I refuse to play that game. Elect one or the other, and nothing ever changes. You're the brainwashed fool who thinks there was a real choice in the last several elections.

Hmmm . . . Do I want tyranny or fascism? Yeah. Good choice there.

StupidOldNoBalls!

CJ7 · 11-17-2012, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

In hindsight, I think your right on Romney's "electability"

The conservative base didn't show up for him..............but some of the blame can be placed on Romney. He refused to attack Obama hard on key issues......

lol ... hindsight ?

you should have paid attention to Coulter before the morons nominated Willard .. she called it perfectly. As for the conservatives not showing up, they did show ... it was the independent voters who decided the election, and every swing state but 1 voted for Obie ... now lets address key issues ... you and the rabid rightwing fringe groups didnt address key issues either, you were too busy throwing your support to bullshit conspiracy brain farts ... the moderates were and are sick of the dipshits crying WOLF WOLF 24/7 365, and made a choice to distance themselves from the simplistic child-like smear tactics that flooded the poitical arena .. the dems freaking LOVED it .. couple that with the dems runninng a better campaign, and VIOLA ... youre still trying to smear the POTUS at every turn, and they are in the WH for a second term ..

carry on ..

TexTushHog · 11-17-2012, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It's not Romney's fault. All the Republicans insisted that he be the nominee because he was "electable". He wasn't. Now it's Romney's fault he wasn't elected. Truth is, he was never "electable" in the first place. Republicans are stupid.

But he was nevertheless their impost electable candidate that could win in the primaries.

CuteOldGuy · 11-17-2012, 03:18 PM

Only because the state-controlled media promoted that myth, along with the people who own the Republican Party.

WTF · 11-17-2012, 03:43 PM

I tried to tell you Tea Pots that Mitt was the 2012 version of 2004 John Kerry.

But your main problem is math. Not the population problem you have though that is a huge looming problem but this constant 'cut taxes' crap as if that is the solution to a national debt problem. That math does not add up. How can you not be for raising taxes on the wealthy. They are not in a recession! That is a huge math problem that the majority of the remaining 98% understand.