The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Gun Dog Broker
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 53

Thread: This was my guy for POTUS...too bad he was shot down by the establishment.

  1. #1
    Senior Member Uncle Bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    4,293

    Default This was my guy for POTUS...too bad he was shot down by the establishment.

    But he is still writing 'common sense' articles. Here's another that tells it like it is.

    UB

    Gingrich: Why Rove and Stevens are plain wrong




    By: Newt Gingrich
    2/20/2013




    I am writing this newsletter in a very direct, no baloney, effort to get across how much trouble we Republicans are in and how real the internal party fight is going to be.

    I strongly support RNC Chairman Reince Priebus’ effort to think through the lessons of 2012 and develop a better path for the Republican Party.

    However there are going to be some very powerful opponents to any serious rethinking of Republican doctrines and strategies.

    It is appalling how little some Republican consultants have learned from the 2012 defeat.

    It is even more disturbing how arrogant their plans for the future are.

    Of course these consultants have made an amazing amount of money asserting an expertise they clearly don’t have.

    They have existed in a system in which the candidate was supposed to focus on raising money and the smart consultant would design the strategy, spend the money and do the thinking.

    This is a terrible system.

    Watch the movie “Lincoln.” This was a politician who thought long and deeply.

    Read Craig Shirley’s histories of the 1976 and 1980 campaigns (or watch the documentary Callista and I made, “Ronald Reagan: Rendezvous with Destiny”). Reagan knew what he believed, why he was running, and what he wanted to accomplish.

    Republicans need to drop the consultant-centric model and go back to a system in which candidates have to think and consultants are adviser and implementers but understand that the elected official is the one who has to represent the voters and make the key decisions.

    I feel compelled to write this because of Karl Rove’s recent assertions and my very unsettling round table with Stuart Stevens on ABC’s This Week this past Sunday.

    First, Rove.

    I am unalterably opposed to a bunch of billionaires financing a boss to pick candidates in 50 states. This is the opposite of the Republican tradition of freedom and grassroots small town conservatism.

    RELATED: Dear Karl, Hey, sorry we compared you to Himmler. Sincerely, Tea Party


    No one person is smart enough nor do they have the moral right to buy nominations across the country.

    That is the system of Tammany Hall and the Chicago machine. It should be repugnant to every conservative and every Republican.

    There is a second practical thing wrong with Rove’s proposal.

    He was simply wrong last year. He was wrong about the Presidential race (watch a video of his blow up on Fox election night about Fox News calling Ohio for President Obama). He was also wrong about Senate races.

    While Rove would like to argue his “national nomination machine” will protect Republicans from candidates like those who failed in Missouri and Indiana, that isn’t the bigger story.

    Republicans lost winnable senate races in Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Florida. So in seven of the nine losing races, the Rove model has no candidate-based explanation for failure. Our problems are deeper and more complex than candidates.

    Handing millions to Washington based consultants to destroy the candidates they dislike and nominate the candidates they do like is an invitation to cronyism, favoritism and corruption.

    Stuart Stevens represents a very different problem. Based on our time together on This Week on ABC last Sunday, it seems he is indifferent to the facts and has no sense of responsibility for a presidential campaign that he dominated.

    Jonathan Karl did a great job drawing out some amazing opinions.

    On the disastrous Romney collapse among Latino voters (it was worse, by the way, with Asian Americans), Stuart responded as though the campaign were irrelevant. Here’s the transcript:

    “STEVENS: Let me say something, Republican Party had a problem with Hispanic voters before this primary. I don’t think it got better during the primary certainly. And I think that –
    “KARL: I mean, it got worse.
    “STEVENS: That’s regrettable. But if you look at the numbers, it didn’t get significantly worse.”
    That analysis is simply false.

    The Romney campaign decision to savage first Governor Perry and then me on immigration destroyed any chance to build a Latino-Asian appeal.

    The Romney formula of self-deportation (which must have seemed clever when invented) led to a collapse of acceptability.

    The most powerful Obama ad in Spanish language media was Romney talking about self deportation.

    The fact that Stevens can’t acknowledge any of this tells you how hard it will be for some in the consultant class to learn anything about winning in the 21st century.

    Stevens did underscore the Republican challenge in attracting Latinos when he said:

    “The greatest appeal that the Obama campaign had for Hispanic voters turned out to be ObamaCare. And they ran a tremendous amount of their advertising appealing to Hispanic voters. It was the only place in their advertising where they talked about ObamaCare, was into…the Hispanic community, because an extraordinary percentage of Hispanic voters are uninsured. And that was smart politics. They did it well. The party was also known as the party that was against ObamaCare and that hurt us. There’s not one solution here for the problems that Republicans have with Hispanic voters “
    His observation is correct but he fails to draw the right conclusion.
    Latinos worry about getting health insurance and health care. A Republican candidate who had a better health idea could have had great appeal.

    A Republican candidate who was merely anti-Obamacare (and therefore seen as anti-healthcare) would lose that contest. But wasn’t it Stevens’ job as chief consultant to design that before the campaign, not to explain its failure afterwards?

    The depth of Republican obsolescence on communications technology was highlighted in this comment:

    “STEVENS: Really made — if I had tweeted in this campaign this whole discussion we’ve been having about the second amendment would probably be replaced one about the first amendment and whether it should apply to tweeting.”
    Cute but insulting. Republicans will not understand why we are losing younger Americans so badly until we realize how many of our consultants don’t have a clue and don’t intend to change.

    Finally, Stevens said something profound but I don’t think he understood how profound it was:

    “Listen, I don’t think — it would be a great mistake if we felt that technology in itself is going to save the Republican Party. Technology is something to a large degree you can go out and purchase and if we think there’s an off the shelf solution that you can go out and purchase for the Republican Party it’s wrong.

    “You know, we’ve had a lot of chance now since the campaign to spend time with the Obama folks and sometimes they had better technology, some cases we have better technology. We don’t have 140 character problem in the Republican Party. We have a larger problem that we have to look at and be patient about it. And trying to think that there’s one solution like this, I just don’t think…”
    I went on to agree with him but I don’t think he understood my agreement. In effect I was repudiating the entire structure, budget and culture of the campaign he dominated:

    “GINGRICH: I think the way Stuart just said it is exactly right. The technology problem is a culture problem. I mean the Democrats had 54 data analysts and were hiring Ph.Ds in advanced math because they were using the most advanced decision processes in the country. They were bringing in behavioral scientists. They were trying to figure out how you talk to 311 million people and do so in a way that you can survive 8 percent unemployment and get re-elected and it worked.

    “Now, I think it’s actually — he’s right in a sense it’s a cultural problem. None of our consultants would have imagined hiring 54 people in the decision area, none of them would have imagined having 24 people [who] did nothing full time except e-mails and then blind tested the best e-mails to see which ones worked. I mean, this — they are a Super Bowl team that we ought to respect deeply. And we are currently a midlevel college team floundering around and I agree. It’s not just — you can’t just go out and buy this, this is a fundamental rethinking of how you relate to the American people.”
    As Reagan biographer Craig Shirley told me, “Commercial radio was a new technology in the early 1930′s and Reagan adapted to it. Talking movies were a new technology in the late 30′s and Reagan adapted to it. Network television was a new technology in the early 1950′s and Reagan adapted to it. If Reagan were alive today, he’d be tweeting.”

    Our “Lessons to be Learned” project at Gingrich Productions will begin releasing reports on the scale of change we need in the next few weeks.
    We will continue to report throughout the spring and summer.

    By this fall we will have online courses on 21st century self government and politics.

    The debate over Rove-Stevens versus the new 21st century model may be the most important intra-Republican debate since the emergence of Reagan and Kemp to challenge the old order in the 1970s.
    When the one you love becomes a memory, that memory becomes a treasure.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Henlee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    595

    Default

    Oh boy, At least they know they have a problem. Politically I describe myself as a Geroge Bush Democrat. As in George Bush made me start voting for democrats. There is no doubt as the conservatives pushed out centrist thinking republicans, that the republicans would lose votes and ultimitaly elections. That is what happens when you push voters out of your voting block. I know as being a centrist there is no need for me in the republican party. I have not seen a conservative plan to pick up voters that will have traction. immigrants amd females? The dems are going to do it better. Healthcare? What are the republicans going to do if the country does not fall apart next year? They should have put in their own plan in the early 2000's if they wanted to avoid Obamacare. The only saving grace that the republicans have going into the midterms is that Obama tried to ban guns. I will be voting republican for the first time in ten years because of it. Hopefully they will not misinterpet it as a success of their policies and not the failure of the democrats.

  3. #3
    Senior Member huntinman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Henlee View Post
    Oh boy, At least they know they have a problem. Politically I describe myself as a Geroge Bush Democrat. As in George Bush made me start voting for democrats. There is no doubt as the conservatives pushed out centrist thinking republicans, that the republicans would lose votes and ultimitaly elections. That is what happens when you push voters out of your voting block. I know as being a centrist there is no need for me in the republican party. I have not seen a conservative plan to pick up voters that will have traction. immigrants amd females? The dems are going to do it better. Healthcare? What are the republicans going to do if the country does not fall apart next year? They should have put in their own plan in the early 2000's if they wanted to avoid Obamacare. The only saving grace that the republicans have going into the midterms is that Obama tried to ban guns. I will be voting republican for the first time in ten years because of it. Hopefully they will not misinterpet it as a success of their policies and not the failure of the democrats.

    You think GW was a conservative?
    Bill Davis

  4. #4
    Senior Member BonMallari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    LV/CenTex/Idaho
    Posts
    12,051

    Default

    Good ole Newt conveniently forgets to mention that he took 20 MILLION in contributions from Las Vegas billionaire Sheldon Adelson

    The Tea Party also villified Rove by putting out a picture of him in a Nazi uniform and then tried to blame it on the publisher....

    You cant put the entire blame on Rove and his Super Pac because they want to eliminate the R Party from running poor unqualified candidates like Christine O'Donnell,Sharron Angle,and Todd Akin...those were all winnable elections..I saw the Angle election up close here in the state of Nevada, she was the least known and least popular of three R candidates, but come primary day the Dems came out and backed her and she won with a whopping 36% of the vote..We could have ousted Harry Reid had the Tea Party not pushed so hard for Angle, she was an absolute kook, and had no business running for a US Senate seat
    All my Exes live in Texas

    Quote Originally Posted by lanse brown View Post
    A few things that I learned still ring true. "Lanse when you get a gift, say thank you and walk away. When you get a screwing walk away. You are going to get a lot more screwings than gifts"

  5. #5
    Senior Member Ken Bora's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Burlington, Vermont
    Posts
    11,070

    Default

    I am kinda sorta offended by Rove. (the architect?) who the heck has that for a nickname?
    anyways, I say him on Hannity last eve. It is, in my humble mind, Rover and a select few, in a room with cigars and snifters choose who gets to run then I in turn get to choose from by voting. Isnt that kinda, again in my humble mind, just the same as what folk like Kim Jong-Il and Hugo Chaves do?????? "You may Vote.... this is your candidate" ???????
    I am kinda sorta offended by Rove.
    I was going to start a thread about this.
    Good Job Bill!
    "So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory." ~ Aldo Leopold

    "The Greatest Obstacle to Discovery is not Ignorance -- It is the Illusion of Knowledge" ~ Daniel Boorstin

  6. #6
    Senior Member huntinman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,196

    Default

    I don't have much use for him either. Seems to think he and his crowd know what's better for us than we do. How is that any different from Obama and his nanny state crowd?
    Bill Davis

  7. #7
    Senior Member zeus3925's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    West Twin Cities Metro, MN
    Posts
    1,878

    Default

    The more GOPpers push out the moderates, more of them will gravitate to the Dems. The big disaster of the GOPs during the past primary season was caused by the politicians pandering to the right extremists of the party. Then it shifted left to appeal to a more moderate electorate. It gave the distinct impression that the party was duplicitous or it was hunting for its navel on the wrong side of its body.
    Last edited by zeus3925; 02-21-2013 at 08:51 AM.
    Sarge

    I don't want to feed an ugly dog!

  8. #8
    Senior Member huntinman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zeus3925 View Post
    The more GOPpers push out the moderates, more of them will gravitate to the Dems. The big disaster of the GOPs during the past primary season was caused by the politicians pandering to the right extremists of the party. Then it shifted left to appeal to a more moderate electorate. It gave the distinct impression that the party was duplicitous or it was hunting for its navel on the wrong side of its body.
    Have to disagree Sarge... The R's are trying to be lib lite. You can't out-lib a lib. The voters might as well go with the real deal and vote for the full blooded Lib.

    We need more conservatism, not less. Look what this "moderation" has produced for the country.
    Bill Davis

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Pac NW
    Posts
    4,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zeus3925 View Post
    The more GOPpers push out the moderates, more of them will gravitate to the Dems. The big disaster of the GOPs during the past primary season was caused by the politicians pandering to the right extremists of the party. Then it shifted left to appeal to a more moderate electorate. It gave the distinct impression that the party was duplicitous or it was hunting for its navel on the wrong side of its body.
    In your left wing MN loon mind, what is a GOP moderate? & to cement that please provide examples of elected officials that meet your standard .
    __________________________

    Marvin S

    Everyone's friend is No One's friend

    Someday your life will flash before your eyes. It's your responsibility to make sure it's worth watching!

  10. #10
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,186

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zeus3925 View Post
    The more GOPpers push out the moderates, more of them will gravitate to the Dems. The big disaster of the GOPs during the past primary season was caused by the politicians pandering to the right extremists of the party. Then it shifted left to appeal to a more moderate electorate. It gave the distinct impression that the party was duplicitous or it was hunting for its navel on the wrong side of its body.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marvin S View Post
    In your left wing MN loon mind, what is a GOP moderate? & to cement that please provide examples of elected officials that meet your standard .
    There is NOTHING the Republicans can do to reach the low information voters.

    That's the PC name, what they are is useful idiots and Obama knows it!

    These are the people convulsing over sequestration, a bill Obama authored and passed.
    It is about federal $$$.
    No effect on local Police and Fire and Teachers.

    Obama knows that, but tells the useful idiots we will collapse if HIS proposal comes to pass.
    And they lap it up!
    Stan b & Elvis

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •