Not everybody is weeping and wailing

In the past two days, I’ve fired off a flurry of posts about what Constitutionalists (my current favorite word for what we are) can do to win in 2014 and beyond.  Those posts were a wasted effort, of course, if our loss on Tuesday was so devastating that there’s no rearguard capable of re-grouping.  The numbers, however, are not that bad.  Two of my favorite political thinkers suggest that the Dems haven’t yet created that permanent new coalition they dream of: Gay Patriot and Pondering Penguin.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • vinny

    We need are in the minority: there is no need to dispute this. Minorities can wield a great deal of power if they are united and vociferous.  They must also become ruthless. Our country, how we saw ourselves in it, and what we believed it to be was destroyed this Tuesday. We need to fight this new beast and it is about survival.  It’s time to change tactics. Use the behemoth to our own advantage.

  • lee

    I had another thought about “courting the Hispanic vote.”

    Most of us conservatives have a problem with our government NOT cracking down on illegal immigration. We have a problem with illegal immigration. But we never articulate very well–and our candidates most certainly don’t–what our problem with illegal immigration is. No one every really talks about WHAT the problem is.

    From my perspective, there are two-point-five issues with illegal immigration. One is that there are a number of illegal aliens who come here to broaden their criminal base, or to escape the law back in their home country. They are criminals. Not jaywalkers–hardened criminals. Remember the guy who had murdered that father and son in San Francisco a few years back–that wasn’t his first murder!!!

    The second problem I have with illegal IMMGRATION is that it breeds criminality. Criminals exploit the illegal aliens. At the most disturbing end of the exploitation spectrum: most of the sex slaves are smuggled in illegally–from AROUND the world. (ANd yes, illegal immigration is not JUST about Hispanics!) There are other workers who are treated little better than slaves who are illegal aliens, who are smuggled here specifically to be exploited, or get here and are then exploited: sweatshops, agriculture, etc. Making it HARDER to get and stay here ILLEGALLY protects immigrants, and reduces this exploitation and makes it easier to find and prosecute.

    The “point-five” thing I have a problem with is the DAMNED PROGRESSIVES: They want to give ALL sorts of rights to ALL SORTS of immigrants. In the REST of the world, in ALL other countries, one can’t vote until one is a CITIZEN. Why should we give non-citizens the vote here? (I know, I know, the Dems just want to broaden their base, and pump up their numbers at the ballot box.) That is less of an issue with illegal immigration and more of an issue with the @#*(& left.

    I know that LEGAL immigration is a great thing, and it is what has helped make our country great. We need to revise our LEGAL immigration policy to make it a little easier to LEGALLY immigrate.

    Amnesty? To a certain extent, sure! There are illegal aliens who have come here and been the dream illegal alien that the Democrats like to hold up as the paradigm of illegal aliens (“Oh, look! He went to med school and became a DOCTOR! Oooooh!”) There are also illegal aliens who have come here and just been an average joe, scraping by. But there have been a hell of a lot who have come here and, well, who do all sorts of other illegal stuff and NEED TO BE DEPORTED.

    Illegal aliens who have been exploited should be given a chance to stay, too. (That one is a very diffiult problem to address. On the one hand, you don’t want to make someone who has suffered, suffer more. On the other hand, if people know that there is a good chance that being smuggled will result in deportation, they will less likely try to be smuggled in, and hopefully, it can start closing down the smugglers.)

    Something that bothers me about the talk about illegal immigration is that it always gets turned into an “Hispanic issue.” Admittedly, there are a LOT of illegal immigrants from Central America. But not ALL illegal immigrants are Hispanic–there are plenty from Asia and the former Soviet Union. And even some from Europe. And while some of those European ones might be Irish coming here to wait tables, there are some scary-ass ones from former Iron Curtain countries who are spreading the criminal joy, making the Mafia look like cream puffs.

    When I lived in California, I knew LEGAL Mexican immigrants who went through all the right hoops to get and stay here, who did NOT have relatives who were illegal aliens, who still had a conniption over the “let’s crack down on illegal aliens” talk. And I never really understood exactly why. I’m third generation descended from Irish immigrants. I say, let’s deport all the illegal Irish! (And that number is not that small. ) Even the bartenders and waitresses, but ESPECIALLY and pals of Whitey. (If you get my drift.

    What we need to do is CHANGE THE DIALOGUE about illegal immigration into what the problems REALLY ARE! And that comes back to my earlier post on how do we EFFECTIVELY communicate our message?

    Can the Kochs buy the New York Times? Or CBS?

  • LCP

    For starters, we need to do ourselves the favor of listening to what the Left says and take them at their word.  Obama told us he wanted to “fundamentally transform” the United States BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.  They MEAN THAT.  That’s not just puffery.  The left is at war with us; they have no rules except victory; we lose – by definition – if we play by their rules.

    We have to know why we’re conservatives (or constitutionalists) and we have to do the work required to LIVE LIKE CONSTITUTIONALISTS.  Remove your kids from government-run schools.  Remove the corrupt media from your home – all of it.  Commit to your principles and DO NOT COMPROMISE.  Advocate for freedom and Constitutionalism by finding a way to POSITIVELY PERSUADE people you meet.  This year, resolve to hand out 200 copies of the Federalist Papers (you can get them free from Heritage).

    Volunteer at the Pacific Legal Foundation or the Institute for Justice.  DO NOT ARGUE WITH THE LEFT FROM THE PREMISE THAT THE LEFT IS MORALLY SUPERIOR.  DO NOT LET THE LEFT INTIMIDATE YOU BY CALLING YOU A RACIST.  They’ve so badly cheapened that term it has no power, except that which you let it have.  Use the left’s own logic agains tthem to call them RACISTS and see how they like the truth in the mirror.  This year, I put a HUGE “Juntos con Romney” bumper sticker on my car specifically so I could tweak Leftists in my neighborhood.  One day I was verbally assaulted by the parent on my kid’s soccer team (she’s from South America) who told me that Romney had no business appealing Spanish speaking people.  “Most Spanish-speaking people I know came to America to escape from corrupt communist hell imposed on them by people who looked just like them.  You shouldn’t presume that they should change their minds and surrender their hard-earned freedom just because Obama has brown skin.” I replied. In Spanish.

    I will know that you think the very existence of our rights are threatened when we all start acting like it.  If you REALLY thought your freedoms were threatened, would you have sat on the couch and watched Oregon crush USC last weekend (as fun as I imagine that was (heh))?  NO.  You’d be reading De Tocqueville to your kids.  You’d be electing a Tea Party candidate to the school board (even though you don’t send your kids to government run schools.)… You’d be agitating for charter schools, you’d be doing one million other things to save our country from the coming Hell.

  • Oldflyer

    As I have said on other threads, we should not go off the cliff (no pun).  What we need to do is get behind the GOP candidates and not sit on our thumbs on election day so that the Dems have a free run.
    Think about it:
    What can we do to get Latinos?  Give them the country?  Make Spanish the official language?  Come on
    What can we do to get Blacks?   Nothing
    What can we do to get young women?  Give them all free contraceptives and abortions?  That was their issue was it not?
    What can we do to combat media bias?  Tune them out.  Newsweek is dead.  The NYT is dying.  MSNBC hangs on by its fingernails.  Kill them all through neglect.  Invest in, and support media, that will report the issues fairly and honestly.
    What can we do to turn our schools into education institutions rather than propaganda mills?  Get involved locally.
    What can we do to fight Union power?  Do it locally. Follow the Wisconsin model.  If the unions were not able to run roughshod in their intimidate the vote, er I mean get out, the vote efforts the Dems would be hamstrung.
    But, I say again.  The most important action is to support the Republican candidate who wins the nomination.  I have never heard of the Left staying home because the Dimocrat candidate is not pure enough.  That is purely a Republican malady.

  • Bookworm

    OldFlyer, one of the problems with the Republicans is that we live in our heads.  We intellectualize.  We sneer at the Left for being emotional, but emotions are what grab people and make them act.  Intellectuals sit around and debate; emotionally charged people go out and do something.  Often, they do something stupid, but they’re actors.  Intellectual people strive for purity, even when the perfect is the enemy of the good.

    The balancing act for conservatives is to reach people emotionally without abandoning intellectual integrity.  I’m not sure how to do that, because I live in my head more than most people, but it still strikes me as the way to go.

  • Oldflyer

    Book, I guess I am not conservative.  I am not intellectual, and I do get emotional.  I do try to think rationally on serious subjects.s.
    One problem with your analysis is revealed in  historical accounts of the ultimate costs of appeals to emotion.  The French Revolution; Nazi ascendancy; even Communist Russia.  In all of these the mass appeal was not to intellect, but to emotion.  None of them turned out well.  Our Founders did appeal to intellect.  If their principles do not resonate with the country at this time, then we are in a world of trouble.
    But, I guess I did not get my point across adequately in my previous post.  I do not believe it was the lack of appeal to the enumerated constituencies that lost this election.  They are Romney’s 47%; no not in the way the media interpreted, but the number people who have moved past founding principles, don’t care about them, and will not respond to appeals on their basis.  Conservatives have no business wasting time on them.  They need to educate their fellows conservatives and libertarians on the reality of two party elections.  You get your touche out and vote for the best candidate on the ballot; or you live with the misery of your failure.  That is my basic message.

  • Mike Devx

    I’ll comment every so often from my self-imposed refusal to be a part of the onrushing too-quick post-mortem.  (Yes, everyone with any say wants to get their opinions out there FIRST.  Usual short-term crap, blind to the long-term.)

    What I want to add right now: When you are considering what to do about the disastrous decline in GOP voting, in an election when we *thought* GOP enthusiasm was going to blow the roof off, consider those people who chose not to vote.

    I think they fall into two categories:
    1. Oh, I just can’t be bothered to vote today, or I’m too busy, or whatever.  These people just sort of ended up not voting.
    2. Those who deliberately, consciously debated it, and decided that, from here on out, it is of no further use to vote for the GOP.  They are DONE with the game.

    Regardless of which of the hundreds of criticisms and suggestions for improving the vote/the GOP/conservatism that you agree with, when addressing the failure of millions to vote, and the desire to convince them to vote again in 2014 and 2016, take into account that they do fall into at least those two widely separate camps.

    I voted.  But as I’ve siad, I understand Group #2 very well, and I am moved closer to their camp every election.  I remain solid in my convictions and I know my own philosophy and where I stand.  I’m willing to compromise and be part of a GOP coalition, but not at the expense of my philosophy nor my convictions.   The GOP must earn my vote.  To merely be a lesser evil than the Democrats will not be good enough.

    I was quite happy with Romney in the end.  Mistakes?  Sure.  What troubles me is, though I remember he spoke of things that were in my conservative wheelhouse often enough, I CAN’T REMEMBER ANY OF THE WORDS OF A SINGLE ONE OF THEM.  That tells me something about his effectiveness…

  • b.

    There does need to be a polishing of core conservative messages down from essay-size to sentence-size.  Okay, two short sentences. that are easy to remember.

    For instance… Romney tried to say over and over “I know how to create jobs” and “we can’t punish job creators” etc. That’s too polite and has lost too much (emotion) in translation.

    Per the situation in Greece, how about “if you raise taxes on the rich, they will find a way to hide their money.”

    With that statement, you haven’t beaten the rich with a stick or called them fat cats, but you have reached out and grabbed a low-information voter with the idea that we can’t let the rich hide their money from us.

    I am at-home, I have time on my hands, and I sure wish I could help the conservative cause to boil their messages down, down, down.

    Consider how gay marriage proponents came up with questions like,

    “how does my marriage hurt your marriage?”

    “how can you be against marriage equality?”

    You have to hand it to them — coming up with the phrase “marriage equality.”  Who can be against “equality”?  No one, as stated.

    Consider how , in the coming budget battles, Dems are all on-message that we need to “balance spending cuts with new sources of revenue.”  Leaving aside the question of 60-40, 90-10, 50-50…

    Hmm.  Where have I heard “balance” before?  I remember:  fighting for better math instruction in the public schools, we parents were always told teachers would take a “balanced approach” to include both memorization and discovery.  What that meant was, teachers could adjust the balance to suit their worldview or simply their work rules.

    More headlines.  More sound bites.  Less essays. 

  • Mike Devx

    Nah, I’ll just weeo and wail.  Or as I put it, be a cynic.

    We are, by all accounts, headed for a “Fiscal Cliff” at the start of the next year.  What it really is is Austerity in a form no one likes.  But it’s still Austerity, and everyone is disgusted by its approach.  Yet we advocate a similar Austerity for Greece, for Italy, for Spain.  But not for us.  Why not?

    I could be wrong – the Fiscal Cliff might be significantly different than a responsible Austerity program.  If so, I don’t see it yet, and please – show me!  I’m interested, highly interested, and I will read your arguments.

    But back to cynic mode (a period of weeping and wailing without offering constructive solution).  I believe the national government (President, both Houses) *will* in fact do *something* and then claim that they averted this Fiscal Cliff that is looming in January or February.  But take a look at their so-called solution, whatever it may turn out to be, and ask yourself:  In what significant way does it SOLVE the problems?  Or does it merely kick the can down the road a few mor months, a year, two years?  We criticize the EU, Greece, Spain, Italy, for doing precisely that – and then we are to accept that our own government in a few short months will have also done precisely that?

  • Ymarsakar

    I was Not Kidding when I said that Obama was only the symptom of a larger, greater, more evil and corrupt disease in America. If you can’t even get rid of him, ask yourself why and then remember what I said about the Left’s power base. Without breaking the Left’s back, their power base, you nor anyone else can do a single thing to stop the Left’s advance towards Evil and Utopia.

    I was also not kidding when I said that Civil War was inevitable in the United States, whether he got re elected fair and square or not.

    The world will soon know what an American Civil War really looks like, when they said that America was meddling in their affairs too much. I predict we will see a cleansing of internal domestic US affairs to such a high degree that everyone in the world will, briefly, get to do whatever they want. And if the Light of Goodness should win in the US in the end, everyone will come to realize what a real American Imperium feels like. And if the good guys lose, the world will still what a real American Imperium feels like, except the boot is going to be on their throats 24/7.

  • Ymarsakar

    To those that said or thought that what I was saying was extreme or exaggerating things to promote violence in the US, for the last half decade or so. You got what you wanted. You will truly see and understand what Real Violence and Death is all about soon enough. And the best thing is, I won’t have to lift a single finger.

     Whether that is Good or Bad, remains to be seen. We’ll see what everyone thinks after it all ends. Assuming they’re still around and not stapled to a cross along the road.

  • Mike Devx

    I’ve been thinking about voter fraud today.  Vote fraud is a fear of mine.  If it ever occurs in a widespread scale, our entire election system will be thrown into doubt and we would face a severe national crisis due to the perceived illegitimacy of the vote.  Once the vote could no longer trusted, we would be in deep trouble.

    My first nightmare thought was a “What If”:  What if GOP enthusiasm *was* actually through the roof on Nov 6th, but millions of GOP votes simply were made to disappear?  Would we have any means of detecting this kind of fraud?  I think the answer to that question is, yes, we can detect that.  I think it would be extremely difficult to make votes disappear.  We can check the physical signatures of people at all precincts, and just count the total against the total number of reported votes, right?  If we can do that, then the only way to execute that kind of fraud is to hope that no one cross-checks on this obvious of a level.

    I also had a remembrance of the 2008 primary between Clinton and Obama in Indiana, where Lake County – right next door to Chicago! – refused to report its results throughout the night.  Waiting… waiting… only at the end to come out with astounding numbers that pushed Obama over the top, and with 120% of the people of the county voting.  I don’t remember ever getting an acceptable explanation for that event.

    That comes to mind because I was watching the county by country results closely this Nov 6 evening in Florida and Ohio.  

    In Florida, Miami-Dade county and Broward county both were significantly under-reporting results as the evening wore on.  Those two counties reached 20% and 40% reporting, respectively – and then froze for hours.  Even after the Panhandle was done reporting fully, those two counties were still frozen at 20% and 40% reporting. What if Democrat operatives were in control, and they were simply waiting to find out how much of a “vote” they had to “deliver” to win the state for Obama?

    The same is true of Ohio.  The rest of the state was nearly completely done reporting.  Yet the Cleveland and Toledo counties, heavily democratic, froze early and did not advance.  Cuyahoga, Lorraine, and Lucas counties were frozen at low percentages reporting.  I can’t remember the first two, but Lucas county (Toledo) was stuck at 10% until very late in the evening – after 11 pm.  The same question comes to mind: What if they held back because they had the means of reporting whatever numbers would be needed to be reported to gift the victory?

    We all know about the Pennsylvania vote:  Philadelphia precincts that apparently voted 99% for Obama.  Such unanimity is, ahem, rare, shall we say.  Many of these districts were those where court-appointed Republican poll-watchers were forcibly ejected by Democrats running the polling stations.  They were ejected for four hours until court orders forced them to be allowed re-entry.  If you understand voting patterns in Pennsylvania, it is not much of a stretch to say that it is Philadelphia for the Democrats, and the rest of the state for Republicans.  So again the question persists.

    Well, this blog comment of mine is already too long, so I’ll stop early.  But I’m leading to a question:  Is it possible to come up with a scheme that can reliably detect voter fraud when and where it occurs?  Maybe not 100% reliable, but reliable enough to discourage either Party from perpetrating it?  If we can identify voter fraud where it occurs, we can investigate it and try to nail the perpetrators.

    More later, but my thoughts on such a system rely on this thought: For all the people I know, EVERY ONE OF THEM is perfectly happy and even proud to tell you who they voted for, and that is true for both sides.  The vote must remain anonymous itself, but if you can get about 75% of the people to tell you who they voted for – and I think you could – could you construct a statistical model and pump the data through it, to identify voter fraud?  I will leave it, for now, at that broad a question.