Feb 17 2012

How The GOP Lost Their 2012 Mojo

Published by at 8:50 am under 2012 Elections,All General Discussions

The problem the GOP has right now in the 2012 election cycle is they ignored the 2010 insurgent voters. These voters would be out doing their Tea Party rallies if they felt someone in government was finally going in the direction these voters want them to go in. But instead of respecting these voters, the GOP has tried to silence and divert them. And they are paying a huge price for this elitist arrogance.

It’s not that the 2010 insurgent don’t want change when it comes to Obama, its really comes down to believing voting will do nothing in terms of change. Of course people want Obama out – but if the replacement is a slight variant on “more of the same” they won’t see any reason to get out and vote. Forget about getting involved up front as a grass roots force to reckon with.

That’s the problem right now. That is why 2012 is so deflated compared to 2010. And it is the GOP’s fault.

The GOP establishment tore down the Tea Party aligned candidates like Cain, Bachman and Palin, while promoting Robamaney (i.e., “Romney” for those who don’t get the joke). The GOP broke their fiscal pledges last year in the budget show downs, prancing around with empty promises as if they delivered something. The GOP leadership silenced the new members who were voted in during the 2010 cycle by implementing the Super (impotent) Committee. And it is the GOP who keep making fools’ bargains with a Democrat Party that is ruling by illegal means (no budgets means no authority).

The GOP took a wave of anti-government desire and threw away all the energy and political capitol they were handed in 2010.

And people are actually confused about this??? Just shows you how out of touch the DC political elite truly are.

8 responses so far

8 Responses to “How The GOP Lost Their 2012 Mojo”

  1. KauaiBoy says:

    The DC political elite are completely in touch with what they are doing. It is the people who believe we have a 2 party political system vieing to do what’s best for the country that are totally out of touch.

    By dividing the country along such silly issues as abortion and neither side doing anything about illegal immigration, Washington insider trading etc, etc, etc — they allow themselves to be firmly entrenched by presenting a country so messed up that only they can fix it.

    The Republican candidate field is a complete joke and an insult to America. Let alone some of the creepy bastards ever in politics. Rick Santorum — give me a break. Any respectible village idiot should be able to beat obama in 2012 and these guys aren’t even trying.

  2. jan says:

    I’m trying to figure out, AJ, what or how you expected the GOP freshmen in the House to carry out their fiscal pledges. That branch of Congress has actively constructed bill after bill, dealing with cutting back regulations, budgets, and the latest dealing with drilling and endorsing the Keystone pipeline. But, everything is rejected by Reid and the Senate. You can’t get a lot done with only one-third of the power at your disposal, having the WH and the Senate firmly in the control of the democrats.

    Also, the mood of the public is flaky, at best. While they want the economy to improve, the majority are not keen on entitlement reform, which is where two-thirds of our fiscal problems are embedded. The majority also want republicans to work with Obama and the dems to create policies, which, in an election year does not bode well for republicans to be in full-throttle rebellion, having only an impotent one-third of power to implement said rebellion.

    Basically, our circumstances are not good for enacting too many conservative changes at the moment. What the House has done is stall out some of Obama’s grand ideas and plans. And, I give them credit for this.

    Regarding those conservative candidates that you think the ‘establishment’ dissed, Cain and Bachmann (Palin strung her constituency along and then didn’t run — remember?), they ran the primary gauntlet and didn’t make it on their own accord. If they were too weak to get through a primary, how could they have survived the Obama machine?

  3. ivehadit says:

    Yeh, it’s all over. No point in trying anymore.

    And I just love the Tea Party Patriots announcing on national TV that the republican candidates left are losers. The DNC is just beside themselves about that sound bite. And speaking of sound bites, I am positively gleeful over the aspirin between the legs comment. Yeh, it is truly all over. Seriously.

    (Note: there is extreme sarcasm in post.)

  4. Redteam says:

    Time after time, the ‘regular’ Republicans sell out the Tea Partiers. That’s gonna change after this election. They haven’t gone away. They will support Santorum very strongly. The Dims are gonna wonder what hit them this November. The 2010 revolution is alive and well.

  5. Layman1 says:

    Hi RT:

    I’ll back Santorum if he’s the nominee – but a cold one says no way!

    Seriously though, I’m getting sick of all this whining about how the establishment is selling out the insurgents/Tea Partiers/true conservatives/whatever. Elections are about getting votes and winning. That means a candidate has to “sell” himself and his ideas to enough people that they’ll vote for him and send him money to do battle.

    Excuse me AJ, but Cain was not done in by the establishment. Cain did that all to himself. I don’t know what his relationships were with all those women – but he did know them and he had to know it was going to come out one way or another. The fact that he was blindsided tells me he wasn’t prepared and wasn’t a serious candidate. Did the “Establishment” give him amnesia?

    And one last comment/question about Santorum. He voted against right-to-work legislation and was a big fan of pork barrel spending, AKA earmarks. His explanation: as a Senator representing his state he had to do whatever was in the best interest of his state. Put that aside however because as a President he’ll do whatever is in the best interest of the country. OK, I’ll let him have that. But I must ask: Doesn’t the same apply to Romney? He was in a very liberal state trying to do his best to make things work and tried to govern in as conservative manner as possible. Don’t forget at the time his healthcare mandate was a conservative idea put out by the Heritage Foundation and supported by Newt.

    So how is it that Santorum’s actions, in the best interest of his state, are excusable while Romney’s actions, in the best interest of his state, are disqualifiers?

  6. WWS says:

    I just figured out the answer! Really!

    The GOP needs to nominate Obama. Anyone the GOP nominates this year is going to lose – so do it to Obama! My logic is flawless!!!

  7. jan says:


    The question about Santorum being given a break for all his big government moves, because he was doing it for his state, which was somewhat liberal, and what about Romney being in the deepest of blue states — giving him some slack too, is a good one. In fact if you compare Pennsylvania to MA, the latter is far more liberal, and just look how Romney was able to turn it around fiscally, in a matter of his 4 year term. Your comment about HC in MA is spot on too.

    Like you, I will vote for whomever is the nominee. But, I continue to think Romney is better equipped in his public/private experiences for the job of POTUS than anyone else in the field.

  8. Frogg1 says:

    I firmly believe the MoJo is still there. It is just going through a quiet period as things get worked out. It will be back in full force this fall.