2012 - Post Election Thoughts

[evilkumquat]

Now that it looks like there won't be any last-minute Republican dirty tricks to steal the national victories, I'm starting to realize one of the best things about an Obama victory: schadenfreude

If the rantings on Twitter by psychopaths like Donald Trump and Victoria Jackson are any indication, we can expect quite a few good laughs in the days to come. Personally, I can't wait for the forthcoming letter to the editor by a certain individual bemoaning the end of days.

I do have some legitimate, non-snarky thoughts about our election system:

I'm happy most of the good guys won, but it's still extremely disappointing that the election was so close, especially when considering that the race was between a man who helped spearhead successful efforts to keep our economy from crashing (despite record-breaking opposition from his political enemies) as well as marginal health care reform and a man who spent his career doing the things that helped almost destroy the economy in the first place, like raiding companies and outsourcing jobs (not to mention paying almost nothing in taxes).

Unless I hear a better argument, I blame the Electoral College system for such close numbers. When every election focuses just on a handful of states, the rest of us are pretty much ignored by the major parties (not including primary season). Who can be motivated to vote when the results are already a foregone conclusion?

But if everything depended upon the popular vote, then the candidates and parties would be forced to contend with ALL of us.

The only reason Romney did this well is because of focused advertising in the swing states and voter apathy everywhere else.

Those of us who aren't hedge fund managers, those of us who worry about how to pay for our health care, those of us who care about whether the least of us are properly fed, clothed and sheltered... we outnumber the oligarchs like Romney and his ilk.

[HoosierHelen]

The 1% such as Trump are the ones who find loosing the hardest to accept. Trump needs to be placed in a highchair with a large bib to catch all his excessive drooling. Then someone needs to hand him a sippy cup full of his own medicine and not let him out of his chair until he finishes consuming it. Should he be capable of accomplishing this (questionable), his face needs to be washed to remove that awful smirk from his mouth, given a proper haircut, his dirty diaper needs changed for sure and then he should be placed on the floor. It would be interesting to see if he is able to crawl before he learns to walk again.

Let's see if he can find his imaginary mountain top again.... We know that if he does, that is where his revolution will begin!

[TheBigB]

The Republican Party has some major decisions to make. If they ever hope to get a lot more independents, they need to LOUDLY separate themselves from the Trumps of the world, and they probably need to spank people like Akin and Mourdock. This "big tent" stuff is not working.

[evilkumquat]

The Republican Party has some major decisions to make. If they ever hope to get a lot more independents, they need to LOUDLY separate themselves from the Trumps of the world, and they probably need to spank people like Akin and Mourdock. This "big tent" stuff is not working.

They can't do it.

They simply cannot.

Pandering is the core political tenet of today's Republican Party.

They pander to the religious nuts. They pander to the racists. They pander to the misogynists. They pander to the rich. They pander to the ignorant.

They pander to celebrities that make them look bad. They pander to the Tea Party that cost them a large number of elections this cycle (if one includes moderate or Republican candidate losses to the nutters during primaries).

Pandering is their sole political campaigning tool.

Vote rigging and suppression is their biggest election tool.

[HomeyG]

They can't do it.

They simply cannot.

Pandering is the core political tenet of today's Republican Party.

They pander to the religious nuts. They pander to the racists. They pander to the misogynists. They pander to the rich. They pander to the ignorant.

They pander to celebrities that make them look bad. They pander to the Tea Party that cost them a large number of elections this cycle (if one includes moderate or Republican candidate losses to the nutters during primaries).

Pandering is their sole political campaigning tool.

Vote rigging and suppression is their biggest election tool.

Not denying that this probably happens just wish you would recognize that the Democrats are just as guilty.

[TheBigB]

Not denying that this probably happens just wish you would recognize that the Democrats are just as guilty.

Of course they are, but I don't think the Dems cost themselves nearly hat many votes by pandering to the fringe - most of the opposition to the Dems are on core issues.

[HomeyG]

Of course they are, but I don't think the Dems cost themselves nearly hat many votes by pandering to the fringe - most of the opposition to the Dems are on core issues.

I was also talking about voter fraud, although I don't think it is widespread. But, one case does come to mind and that would be the Minnesota senatorial race in 2008. At the end of the night Coleman had won by some 700 votes, but after the lawyers got involved and after two or three recounts Franken was declared the winner by 312 votes. A conservative group, Minnesota Majority, looked into the possibility of voter fraud, mostly felons illegally voting, and took their evidence to the prosecutors. Although the prosecutors lacked interest in pursuing these cases they are required to do so by Minnesota law. Latest I heard that 177 individuals have been convicted of voter fraud with more cases pending. As you can see because of the closeness of the race there is the possibility that Franken was illegally elected because of voter fraud and that case was a driving force behind the Voter ID law.

[HomeyG]

Here are my thoughts on why Romney lost and I'll try to take them a step at a time. Let's take it from when he won the nomination. First mistake was not releasing his tax records. Since its apparent there was nothing illegal get them out in the open, as early as possible, then deal with what might appear improper, immoral, etc. People have a tendency to forget over time but keeping them in the dark keeps the speculation going. Second, choice of VP. Ryan may be an up and coming politician but he was just to young and had his own baggage, he tied Romney to Medicare and the budget. Knowing, or at least they should have known, that Ohio was going to be a player a logical choice would have been Portman, he was a seasoned politician and a favorite son. Next would be picking Christie as a main speaker at the Convention. As it is well known, Christie looks out for Christie. Also putting Eastwood at the Podium was not well thought out. I, for one, am not a big fan of actors that gets involved in politics although there are exceptions. Lastly, not going after the President and/or the State Department on the Benghazi attack, especially on security procedures before the attack and the story of the spontaneous demonstration. Challenge the President why he avoids using the word terrorist, Fort Hood is still called "workplace violence".

Would this have swung the election his way, don't know, but it was so close there is that possibility.

[sturmtiger]

I think this was really a major victory for the democratic party and President Obama. We gained 2 senate seats when 6 months ago we were looking to lose our majority. I really feel issues like freedom of choice, immigration, Supreme court nominations had a large role in defining and bringing this win to the Democrats. I would love to say that now that the race is over there would be a new chance at compromise and that the republican party would see that the obstructionism that they have done since 2010 is hurting the country and would start to look for common ground in the house and senate. I do not however hold much hope for that given the tone set by a lot of republicans today. There is so much talk of needing to move more to the right. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell came out today and told the president and democrats that they needed to come over to the republican way of thinking if they were going to get anything from him and the republican senate. I find this unbelievable and shameful. This government was designed to be ruled by compromise. It looks like republicans just don't get it and never will. There is talk by a very few republicans of needing to move more to the middle and open their base to minorities. However they are being squashed already by many right leaning and tea party people. I say good for the Tea Party. Keep up the fine work. Hell you keep doing that and Indiana state legislature might actually be democrat led next time around. If the Tea Party and religious right continue to bully their agenda in the Republican party we will not have to worry about them for very much longer. This election showed as clear as day that the republican party as it is composed is going to be relegated to an also ran party if it even survives as that.

[evilkumquat]

Not denying that this probably happens just wish you would recognize that the Democrats are just as guilty.

When in the hell does the Democratic Party ever pander to its base?

When liberal Democrats complain about anything, our own party leaders call us whiners.

The Democrats NEVER toss their base any real bones. The Republicans bend over backward for the racist, crazy nutjobs on the far right, but liberals get told to "grow up" and "it's not a perfect world" and "concessions must be made."

Democrats are NOT as guilty as Republicans.

[evilkumquat]

I was also talking about voter fraud, although I don't think it is widespread. But, one case does come to mind and that would be the Minnesota senatorial race in 2008. At the end of the night Coleman had won by some 700 votes, but after the lawyers got involved and after two or three recounts Franken was declared the winner by 312 votes. A conservative group, Minnesota Majority, looked into the possibility of voter fraud, mostly felons illegally voting, and took their evidence to the prosecutors. Although the prosecutors lacked interest in pursuing these cases they are required to do so by Minnesota law. Latest I heard that 177 individuals have been convicted of voter fraud with more cases pending. As you can see because of the closeness of the race there is the possibility that Franken was illegally elected because of voter fraud and that case was a driving force behind the Voter ID law.

I'd really like to find where you're getting that data.

From the Star Tribune in Minnesota:

Initial reviews by state and local officials, however, indicate that the problem may be far smaller than the group found in a recent study being championed by the Minnesota Republican Party.
The Ramsey County Attorney's Office said Monday it is investigating about 180 cases out of 500 that were brought forward by Minnesota Majority, which recently completed an 18-month study of state voter and criminal conviction lists. Charges were brought against 28 felons for allegedly voting or registering illegally in 2008. But another 267 reports were found to be "inaccurate" after an initial review, according to Ramsey County Prosecution Division Director Phil Carruthers.
Deputy Hennepin County Attorney Pat Diamond said his office is still looking at 216 allegations flagged by Minnesota Majority, out of 451 that were brought forward by the group. No charges have been brought as a result of the report, though a handful of other individuals have been charged with fraudulent voting.
Both prosecutors said they are using several extra investigators to look at the rest of the reports.
According to a report released two weeks ago by Minnesota Majority, 1,359 names of suspected ineligible felons were forwarded to these two counties for investigation.
But local and state officials say the group's reports are likely inflated and hard to verify because of difficulties determining whether the suspected felon voters had their voting rights restored, if they knew they were ineligible to vote, or if they were actually the people whose names appear on voter rolls.

As to the numbers you quote, "177 individuals have been convicted of voter fraud", the only references I could find were sourcing two Republican authors (one worked for Bush II) in a book they wrote. Surely, THAT many convictions for fraud would be reported in an actual newspaper in Minnesota or somewhere more reliable.

Find me an actual REAL newspaper and not a) a hack conservative blog or b) a hack opinion article in a hack conservative newspaper with these statistics and I might believe your reporting.

[blue adept]

Here are my thoughts on why Romney lost and I'll try to take them a step at a time. Let's take it from when he won the nomination. First mistake was not releasing his tax records. Since its apparent there was nothing illegal get them out in the open, as early as possible, then deal with what might appear improper, immoral, etc. People have a tendency to forget over time but keeping them in the dark keeps the speculation going. Second, choice of VP. Ryan may be an up and coming politician but he was just to young and had his own baggage, he tied Romney to Medicare and the budget. Knowing, or at least they should have known, that Ohio was going to be a player a logical choice would have been Portman, he was a seasoned politician and a favorite son. Next would be picking Christie as a main speaker at the Convention. As it is well known, Christie looks out for Christie. Also putting Eastwood at the Podium was not well thought out. I, for one, am not a big fan of actors that gets involved in politics although there are exceptions. Lastly, not going after the President and/or the State Department on the Benghazi attack, especially on security procedures before the attack and the story of the spontaneous demonstration. Challenge the President why he avoids using the word terrorist, Fort Hood is still called "workplace violence".

Would this have swung the election his way, don't know, but it was so close there is that possibility.

I disagree, the real reason the right lost was women. When you take on issues that affect women, and choose incorrectly, you will lose. The republican party base should have figured that out, but somewhere in misogynist heaven, people like Ryan, Murdock, Akin, got tied to Romney, who is a notorious flip-flopper. That is the true reason of his loss.

[evilkumquat]

I disagree, the real reason the right lost was women. When you take on issues that affect women, and choose incorrectly, you will lose. The republican party base should have figured that out, but somewhere in misogynist heaven, people like Ryan, Murdock, Akin, got tied to Romney, who is a notorious flip-flopper. That is the true reason of his loss.

I half agree with this, Blue.

Yes, the GOP is extremely misogynistic and they lost a lot of support from women, and exit polling indicates Obama had 10% more of the female vote, yet was still a possible percentage point less than what he had in 2008.

The Hispanic vote, however, was well over 40% in Obama's favor and possibly 5% higher than in 2008. The GOP have long held out the belief that their traditional, uh, "values" of social conservatism, anti-abortion, religion, etc., would make a good fit for that particular demographic, yet the Republicans forget that their base is overwhelmingly xenophobic and thus will never truly welcome anyone who isn't white into the party.

Some analysts claim that the extra push from the Hispanic voting block was a significant factor in Obama's victory.

So if the Republicans (as a whole- not necessarily individual members) can stop being racist and sexist, they will greatly increase their political fortunes. Sadly, the base to whom they pander are practically defined by racism and sexism.

[blue adept]

I half agree with this, Blue.

Yes, the GOP is extremely misogynistic and they lost a lot of support from women, and exit polling indicates Obama had 10% more of the female vote, yet was still a possible percentage point less than what he had in 2008.

The Hispanic vote, however, was well over 40% in Obama's favor and possibly 5% higher than in 2008. The GOP have long held out the belief that their traditional, uh, "values" of social conservatism, anti-abortion, religion, etc., would make a good fit for that particular demographic, yet the Republicans forget that their base is overwhelmingly xenophobic and thus will never truly welcome anyone who isn't white into the party.

Some analysts claim that the extra push from the Hispanic voting block was a significant factor in Obama's victory.

So if the Republicans (as a whole- not necessarily individual members) can stop being racist and sexist, they will greatly increase their political fortunes. Sadly, the base to whom they pander are practically defined by racism and sexism.

Agreed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[edeevee]

I think the problems in the Republican party are deeper and more systemic than Homey -or other party members- think. I agree that Mitt should have released his tax returns and that choosing Ryan backfired. But, as an independent, hearing Christie speak at the Republican convention was like a breath of fresh air. I admit, I don't really know much about the guy beyond his convention speech, seeing him on the news during Sandy, and some radio commercials I heard where he tried to woo businesses to move from Illinois to New Jersey, but so far, he seems to be genuinely trying to serve his state. And I like that he's willing to call a turd a turd. If Republicans were smart they'd stop trying to ostracize guys like that and embrace them instead. As for Clint Eastwood -- lol.

I beieve Mitt took the right stance on Benghazi, but not until after her blew off his foot. It was rash and unpresidential to speak while events were still unfolding. That was dumb. Stopping when he did was smart though. I think reasonable people (and by those I mean the vast majority who are not Fox News fans) believe the Benghazi mess is a lot of fuss without much substance. I'll be surprised if it doesn't quickly disappear now that the election is over. And if it doesn't disappear it's likely to look bad for those who are stirring the pot when all of the facts finally come out. Unless there's a lot more to it than what I've seen so far, they're spitting in the wind on that one.

But I don't think any of those are what ultimately lost the election for Mitt. It was his party that blew it. You guys got blindsided Tuesday night. You thought Romney was going to win. Some of you thought he would win in a landslide. But, worse than that, you also thought you would take back the Senate and strengthen your hold on the House. You didn't. You lost seats in both. And you didn't see it coming.

Why? I think there are two main reasons:

1. Republicans are too insulated. You can see that right here on the good ole Fence Post. We used to have a vibrant mix of conservatives, liberals and moderates who regularly participated in discussions but, one by one, most of the conservatives dropped out, preferring to listen instead to the folks on their e-mail loops -- people who think exactly like them. You're never going to have a finger on the pulse of the electorate if you only hear what you want to hear.

2. The Republican party is a party of old white guys. But who they are is not really the problem -- it's their old white guy ideas that brought them down. You still believe that women vote the way their husbands tell them to, that blacks are too lazy to turn out for an election if it's not "historic", that most latinos are illegals who can't vote, that those of middle eastern descent are radical Muslim terrorists who shouldn't even be here -- and you ignore Asians altogether. Open your eyes. It's a different world out there these days.

Last night I heard a lot of talk about the hispanic vote and how it won teh election for the Democrats. Republicans today are scurrying all over the place trying to figure out how to capture that vote next time, but here's a clue: Giving away free tacos won't do it.

Because, just like WHO the candidates are is not really the problem for Republicans, WHO the voters are is not really the problem either. It's WHAT THEY WANT that counts. And on Tuesday they told you -- WE told you -- we don't want your old ideas. We don't think trickle down economics works. We don't want you telling us what we should do with our bodies or in our bedrooms. We don't care how much money giant corporations throw at an election ... you can't buy our vote.

Same old/same old isn't going to cut it, not any more. You guys need to hit the reset button and come up with some new ideas. If you don't, your party is going to die out.

On the flipside -- Democrats need to change too. You need to stop treating conservatives like everything they say is the result of chromosome damage. It's not. Mayors should not be able to tell their constituents what size sodas they can drink. People on Medicaid should not be able to go to the emergency room for a pimple behind their ear or a dry patch on their lip (true stories) while most of the rest of us wait weeks to see if a lump will go away on its own because we haven't met our deductible yet. Pop and candy should not be purchased with food stamps. Maybe government really should be smaller.

These are difficult days but we have the opportunity to come out of this stronger, better. To do that though, we can't dismiss the input of half of our country. Instead of focusing on our differences we need to start by finding out what we agree on -- and build from there.

~my two cents

[sturmtiger]

I half agree with this, Blue.

Yes, the GOP is extremely misogynistic and they lost a lot of support from women, and exit polling indicates Obama had 10% more of the female vote, yet was still a possible percentage point less than what he had in 2008.

The Hispanic vote, however, was well over 40% in Obama's favor and possibly 5% higher than in 2008. The GOP have long held out the belief that their traditional, uh, "values" of social conservatism, anti-abortion, religion, etc., would make a good fit for that particular demographic, yet the Republicans forget that their base is overwhelmingly xenophobic and thus will never truly welcome anyone who isn't white into the party.

Some analysts claim that the extra push from the Hispanic voting block was a significant factor in Obama's victory.

So if the Republicans (as a whole- not necessarily individual members) can stop being racist and sexist, they will greatly increase their political fortunes. Sadly, the base to whom they pander are practically defined by racism and sexism.

I wholeheartedly agree with you on this. Gaining 72% of the hispanic vote, 92% of the black vote, 80% of the minority vote overall. THAT is what won this election. The republican party has one decision to make. Do they continue down the current path of exclusion and extreme right policies or do they join the rest of us in reality and realize that depending on old, rich white guys to win you elections is never going to happen again. Personally With the tea party firmly in control of the republican party I hope they decide that they need to go more conservative and relegate themselves to the weeds in upcoming elections.

[evilkumquat]

I think the problems in the Republican party are deeper and more systemic than Homey -or other party members- think. I agree that Mitt should have released his tax returns and that choosing Ryan backfired. But, as an independent, hearing Christie speak at the Republican convention was like a breath of fresh air. I admit, I don't really know much about the guy beyond his convention speech, seeing him on the news during Sandy, and some radio commercials I heard where he tried to woo businesses to move from Illinois to New Jersey, but so far, he seems to be genuinely trying to serve his state. And I like that he's willing to call a turd a turd. If Republicans were smart they'd stop trying to ostracize guys like that and embrace them instead. As for Clint Eastwood -- lol.

I beieve Mitt took the right stance on Benghazi, but not until after her blew off his foot. It was rash and unpresidential to speak while events were still unfolding. That was dumb. Stopping when he did was smart though. I think reasonable people (and by those I mean the vast majority who are not Fox News fans) believe the Benghazi mess is a lot of fuss without much substance. I'll be surprised if it doesn't quickly disappear now that the election is over. And if it doesn't disappear it's likely to look bad for those who are stirring the pot when all of the facts finally come out. Unless there's a lot more to it than what I've seen so far, they're spitting in the wind on that one.

But I don't think any of those are what ultimately lost the election for Mitt. It was his party that blew it. You guys got blindsided Tuesday night. You thought Romney was going to win. Some of you thought he would win in a landslide. But, worse than that, you also thought you would take back the Senate and strengthen your hold on the House. You didn't. You lost seats in both. And you didn't see it coming.

Why? I think there are two main reasons:

1. Republicans are too insulated. You can see that right here on the good ole Fence Post. We used to have a vibrant mix of conservatives, liberals and moderates who regularly participated in discussions but, one by one, most of the conservatives dropped out, preferring to listen instead to the folks on their e-mail loops -- people who think exactly like them. You're never going to have a finger on the pulse of the electorate if you only hear what you want to hear.

2. The Republican party is a party of old white guys. But who they are is not really the problem -- it's their old white guy ideas that brought them down. You still believe that women vote the way their husbands tell them to, that blacks are too lazy to turn out for an election if it's not "historic", that most latinos are illegals who can't vote, that those of middle eastern descent are radical Muslim terrorists who shouldn't even be here -- and you ignore Asians altogether. Open your eyes. It's a different world out there these days.

Last night I heard a lot of talk about the hispanic vote and how it won teh election for the Democrats. Republicans today are scurrying all over the place trying to figure out how to capture that vote next time, but here's a clue: Giving away free tacos won't do it.

Because, just like WHO the candidates are is not really the problem for Republicans, WHO the voters are is not really the problem either. It's WHAT THEY WANT that counts. And on Tuesday they told you -- WE told you -- we don't want your old ideas. We don't think trickle down economics works. We don't want you telling us what we should do with our bodies or in our bedrooms. We don't care how much money giant corporations throw at an election ... you can't buy our vote.

Same old/same old isn't going to cut it, not any more. You guys need to hit the reset button and come up with some new ideas. If you don't, your party is going to die out.

On the flipside -- Democrats need to change too. You need to stop treating conservatives like everything they say is the result of chromosome damage. It's not. Mayors should not be able to tell their constituents what size sodas they can drink. People on Medicaid should not be able to go to the emergency room for a pimple behind their ear or a dry patch on their lip (true stories) while most of the rest of us wait weeks to see if a lump will go away on its own because we haven't met our deductible yet. Pop and candy should not be purchased with food stamps. Maybe government really should be smaller.

These are difficult days but we have the opportunity to come out of this stronger, better. To do that though, we can't dismiss the input of half of our country. Instead of focusing on our differences we need to start by finding out what we agree on -- and build from there.

~my two cents

VERY good commentary, but my only counter would be the references to Medicaid abuse. Every system gets abused because some people will always take advantage of anything they can. Republicans tend to look at these minor instances of social services fraud and try to turn it into an argument for scrapping the entire system, yet never want to abandon capitalism even though trillions have been lost or stolen through Wall Street shenanigans.

[james_t]

Brian Howey has his thoughts on the election in Indiana:

http://www.kpcnews.com/index.php?opt...ticle&id=47909

The Bennett-Ritz race was interesting. About every area teacher I know - some of them very conservative Republicans - posted stuff on Facebook wanting Bennett out of office.

[evilkumquat]

I was also talking about voter fraud, although I don't think it is widespread. But, one case does come to mind and that would be the Minnesota senatorial race in 2008. At the end of the night Coleman had won by some 700 votes, but after the lawyers got involved and after two or three recounts Franken was declared the winner by 312 votes. A conservative group, Minnesota Majority, looked into the possibility of voter fraud, mostly felons illegally voting, and took their evidence to the prosecutors. Although the prosecutors lacked interest in pursuing these cases they are required to do so by Minnesota law. Latest I heard that 177 individuals have been convicted of voter fraud with more cases pending. As you can see because of the closeness of the race there is the possibility that Franken was illegally elected because of voter fraud and that case was a driving force behind the Voter ID law.

Not to beat a dead horse, Homey, and not to goad you with "why aren't you answering my question?", but I have to ask again where you get this data because this really bothers me.

I prefer to know about those I respect politically, warts and all, and if there's anything that casts Franken's election in a negative light, I'd rather have the data, even if it's something I wouldn't want to hear.

So I spent about an hour trying to find anything on this alleged "stolen election" for Franken, and again, I found nothing that supports what you say other than people who keep repeating the exact same things alleged by the two Republican wonks in their book which, to be fair, was strictly written to smear Franken.

On the other hand, I've found a few Minnesota newspaper articles (sadly some are pay-to-view and I have better things on which to spend my money), but enough of the article is available to show that it's not 177 convictions, but that the number is closer to 30.

In fact, reading the local newspaper articles (or the free excerpts), it sounds like a Republican smear group masquerading as a "vote integrity" squad presented a huge list of names that matched felon names and demanded the authorities investigate. When they did, most of the names were immediately discarded as not the same people or otherwise incorrect, mainly because this smear group simply did a cross check on names of felons against voter lists and declared every name that matched a fraud. So if "John Smith" was a registered voter but the name "John Smith" showed up as a convicted felon, then they added that name to their list, even though they had nothing else to go on but the name. Further, even if they got a match, just because someone was a convicted felon, that doesn't mean he cannot legally vote. Not every state bans felons from voting and once they complete their sentences and probationary period, they often get their voting rights restored.

I would urge you not to take what you read on Fox News (and I only use them as an example because doing my search on Franken's election and alleged voter fraud, that site kept coming up over and over) for granted because you may end up looking foolish if someone calls you out on this data.

Again, I'm not trying to be an ***, but I really want to know the deal with Franken's election.

Incidentally, voter ID would NOT have prevented these alleged crimes because those showing up at the polling center really were who they claimed to be; they may not have had the legal right to vote.

Like when Ann Coulter voted outside her registered precinct a few years ago, or when Indiana's own former Secretary of State was found guilty of vote fraud himself earlier this year after spearheading the Republican voter-suppression legislation, I mean, "voter ID" law.

[blue adept]

I think the problems in the Republican party are deeper and more systemic than Homey -or other party members- think. I agree that Mitt should have released his tax returns and that choosing Ryan backfired. But, as an independent, hearing Christie speak at the Republican convention was like a breath of fresh air. I admit, I don't really know much about the guy beyond his convention speech, seeing him on the news during Sandy, and some radio commercials I heard where he tried to woo businesses to move from Illinois to New Jersey, but so far, he seems to be genuinely trying to serve his state. And I like that he's willing to call a turd a turd. If Republicans were smart they'd stop trying to ostracize guys like that and embrace them instead. As for Clint Eastwood -- lol.

I beieve Mitt took the right stance on Benghazi, but not until after her blew off his foot. It was rash and unpresidential to speak while events were still unfolding. That was dumb. Stopping when he did was smart though. I think reasonable people (and by those I mean the vast majority who are not Fox News fans) believe the Benghazi mess is a lot of fuss without much substance. I'll be surprised if it doesn't quickly disappear now that the election is over. And if it doesn't disappear it's likely to look bad for those who are stirring the pot when all of the facts finally come out. Unless there's a lot more to it than what I've seen so far, they're spitting in the wind on that one.

But I don't think any of those are what ultimately lost the election for Mitt. It was his party that blew it. You guys got blindsided Tuesday night. You thought Romney was going to win. Some of you thought he would win in a landslide. But, worse than that, you also thought you would take back the Senate and strengthen your hold on the House. You didn't. You lost seats in both. And you didn't see it coming.

Why? I think there are two main reasons:

1. Republicans are too insulated. You can see that right here on the good ole Fence Post. We used to have a vibrant mix of conservatives, liberals and moderates who regularly participated in discussions but, one by one, most of the conservatives dropped out, preferring to listen instead to the folks on their e-mail loops -- people who think exactly like them. You're never going to have a finger on the pulse of the electorate if you only hear what you want to hear.

2. The Republican party is a party of old white guys. But who they are is not really the problem -- it's their old white guy ideas that brought them down. You still believe that women vote the way their husbands tell them to, that blacks are too lazy to turn out for an election if it's not "historic", that most latinos are illegals who can't vote, that those of middle eastern descent are radical Muslim terrorists who shouldn't even be here -- and you ignore Asians altogether. Open your eyes. It's a different world out there these days.

Last night I heard a lot of talk about the hispanic vote and how it won teh election for the Democrats. Republicans today are scurrying all over the place trying to figure out how to capture that vote next time, but here's a clue: Giving away free tacos won't do it.

Because, just like WHO the candidates are is not really the problem for Republicans, WHO the voters are is not really the problem either. It's WHAT THEY WANT that counts. And on Tuesday they told you -- WE told you -- we don't want your old ideas. We don't think trickle down economics works. We don't want you telling us what we should do with our bodies or in our bedrooms. We don't care how much money giant corporations throw at an election ... you can't buy our vote.

Same old/same old isn't going to cut it, not any more. You guys need to hit the reset button and come up with some new ideas. If you don't, your party is going to die out.

On the flipside -- Democrats need to change too. You need to stop treating conservatives like everything they say is the result of chromosome damage. It's not. Mayors should not be able to tell their constituents what size sodas they can drink. People on Medicaid should not be able to go to the emergency room for a pimple behind their ear or a dry patch on their lip (true stories) while most of the rest of us wait weeks to see if a lump will go away on its own because we haven't met our deductible yet. Pop and candy should not be purchased with food stamps. Maybe government really should be smaller.

These are difficult days but we have the opportunity to come out of this stronger, better. To do that though, we can't dismiss the input of half of our country. Instead of focusing on our differences we need to start by finding out what we agree on -- and build from there.

~my two cents

Very insightfull E, although i personally detest Christie for similar flaws we share, he does make some good points.