Maybe we should take a page (we Republicans) out of the Democrat’s playbook and support candidates that can win elections, not just a candidate who can win a debate at the local Republican club.
Unfortunately for Republicans, they sometimes get hung up on political “purity”, instead of picking the best candidate that can win. Look what happened in 2012 in the presidential primaries and in the general election. The country was in really bad shape due to the policies of Obama, and it should have been a victory for the “good guys”, but we lost. Many Conservatives didn’t go out and vote because our candidate, Mitt Romney, wasn’t “pure” enough by their standards. By their obstinacy, look what we got, four more years of that walking and talking disaster called, Barack Hussein Obama. It seems Romney, according to the “purists”, wasn’t “conservative enough”. That goes against the strategy put forth by Ronald Reagan who offered the “80% solution”, whereby a Republican should support a candidate if he/she is “right” on 80% of the issues as compared to his opponent who was way down on the percentage list. In other words, don’t cut off your nose to spite your face.
We are never going to find a person (candidate) who we will agree with 100% of the time, so it behooves us to get behind the candidate who agrees with most of our views, and most importantly, who can win an election. That’s the key, who can win an election.
In the past, we had the opportunity to gain Senate seats in Nevada, Delaware, Missouri, and Indiana, but we nominated flawed candidates, who made some outrageous statements, who were then vilified by their opponents and, in addition, those statements were used against other Republican candidates in other states. We lost those seats and a couple of others, as a result. We can’t or should not let that ever happen again.
Yes, challenge others in your party, without making it a political bloodbath, like what happened in 2012,, but if you lose, don’t skulk and whine, swallow your pride and get behind your/their victorious opponent so that he/she might carry the banner of the party into office. To do otherwise, it would be like shooting yourself in the foot, and as I said before, remember 2012.
So, in conclusion, get behind a candidate, who might not be “pure” but is at least part of the 80% solution, so that we can win the next election(s) and avoid the disaster that our country faces now, the person that resides in the White House.
Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann
4 comments:
Look what happens when dogma trumps common sense, we get loonies like Obama, Reid, Pelosi, DeBlasio, and Elijah Cummings running our country. For all you Conservatives or vTea Party people who didn't vote for Romney, look where we are now? Don't you realize that we would have a booming economy now instead of a less than 1% growth rate if Romney was elected? Obama has been an unmitigated disaster. Make sure you vote out the Socialists and the anarchists. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face this November.
With all the scandals going on with the Obama Administration, they seem to be afflicted with E.D. (Electile Dysfunction)as they wait for the disaster, for them, in November.
Don't hold your breath. There are too many hot heads who never follow good advise, so there will be those who don't know what 80% means, Libertarians, identified as pseudo Republicans.
It wasn't conservatives not voting for Romney that caused his loss. Rather, it was Obama's clever tactic of class warfare. He painted Romney as a rich guy who had no sympathy for the plain folks. Romney did not help himself by his statements that 47% of the folks will vote for Obama not matter what since they were, in effect, lazy and dependent on government handouts. Obama captured 52% of the female vote, 60% of those between 18-29, and 52% of those between 30-44. Further, Obama and his cronies waged a dirty campaign. Romney, on the other hand, was too much of a gentleman.
Post a Comment