[jeffkrol]

Mitchell for the day..............

–What have the Republicans learned?

In sum, the Republicans learned they should have insulated Romney, prevented a hurricane, not let Christie talk and to define differences. Hmmm . . . sounds a bit superficial.

What do I hope the Republicans really learned?

I hope they learned that when you encourage such candidates as Bachmann, Paul, Gingrich, Santorum, Perry and Cain, people will begin to believe you are a party of mean, nutty extremists — and Americans don’t like mean people, nutty people or extreme people — at least not to be President.

I hope they learned that when you give serious attention to birthers and to celebrity grouches like Donald Trump and Clint Eastwood, people will be even more disposed to dislike you and to doubt your sanity.

I hope they learned that a majority of voters believes in the availability of abortion during the first trimester, or in cases of rape or to save a mother’s life. Despite all those massively magnified photos of microscopic fetuses, the majority of people believe there are private personal, social and health issues into which the federal government should not stick its nose. We do value our privacy.

I hope they learned that women are an important voting constituency, who hate when strange men disrespect them or force life decisions on them.

I hope they learned that screaming idiots, of the Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh ilk, actually can have a negative effect, particularly on people capable of rational thought.

I hope they learned that a candidate should have his own beliefs, and that the voters do not trust someone who will say anything and repeatedly change positions to please his current audience and the most extreme segments of the party.

I hope they learned we each make our own religious decisions, and do not want the majority forcing their religious beliefs on us.

I hope they learned that Americans do not want religious fundamentalism ala the Taliban, and that our ancestors came here to avoid that dictatorship of church.

I hope they have learned that Americans basically are decent people, who still believe in “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

I hope they have learned Americans care about fairness and protecting the underdog, and that we do not want to be ruled by the richest 1%, and we want everyone to have decent food, housing, education and health care.

I hope they learned people want their leaders who will care about them and protect them.

[kenafein]

Nope. They still think Obama is a Muslim Robin Hood. Only they think Robin Hood is the bad guy and they're not entitled to the poor aristocrats cash. They still think that a person's value is based on how much money they have/make, and they think asking the elites to pay the same tax rate they do is robbery. Oh and Obama only won because he promised handouts to the lazy poor. Now you are all caught up on my wife's Facebook.

[GeneV]

Really the biggest lesson is that you can no longer campaign on a negative and not expect lots of negative in return. "He's not doing a good enough job" is not enough by itself.

[GeneV]

Here is one Republican that is in the process of learning. Republicans should balance principle and results - The Washington Post

[wildman]

What have the Republicans learned?

Perhaps that there are a lot of people out there who think (hope?) that a truly humane civil society is more than merely the sum of the economic relationships within that society?

[Medium FormatPro]

people want their leaders who will care about them and protect them.

Protect and care? What's that?

Protect from 9/11, protect from Katrina, protect from near economic collapse - banking, Wall St., and having one about one half of america lose their entire retirement. That's the new definition of protection in america.

Then there's the stats to add onto the top of it… No other country in the world has as many people in their 70's still working. It's not that they want to work, it's that they need to work. Quite sad

[Jasvox]

Hopefully they have learned that if you nominate a saggy tit from a group of comedian fodder, you wont win a national election. I hate to say it now, but I sure hope by 2016, both parities can come up with a few quality candidates for leader of the USA. The ultra right and ultra left nonsense from the past should be seen as learning opportunities about what not to do.

I dream.

Jason

[kswier]

I hope that they learned that they cannot spend four years obstructing every bill that comes through congress to try and manufacture the appearance that the president is a super liberal partisan hack and unable to get anything done (when in face he is quite moderate and willing ot compromise...just not willing to drop all democrat ideals). This is the number one reason I voted for Obama. I did not want to validate this strategy, and I never want to see it used again.

The second lesson I hoped they learned is that the Republican party should be an inclusive party instead of an exclusive party. When you alianate gay people, minorities, and women, it is a bit hard to win an ellection.

[Parallax]

They really have no reason to have learned any of that. There were only 3 million votes separating them. If only 1.5 million people had voted the other way it would have swung the election. That's roughly the population of Philadelphia or Phoenix. That's not nearly enough to suggest their tactics or message was wrong. You don't put a horse out to pasture just because it lost by a nose.

[kenafein]

I hope that they learned that they cannot spend four years obstructing every bill that comes through congress to try and manufacture the appearance that the president is a super liberal partisan hack and unable to get anything done (when in face he is quite moderate and willing ot compromise...just not willing to drop all democrat ideals).

I don't know, it worked pretty well for them. They took a joke candidate and he did pretty well. If they'd nominated a half way decent candidate they'd have won. He might still have won if it weren't for some serious gaffes. I think the venerable members of the party are looking for 2016. While special interests paid out their noses to save a few percent in taxes, I think the party's plan is to take it all at the next election(they even jettisoned some of the tea-trash). That way the American people associate the down cycle with the Democrats and can take advantage of the eventual upturn in the economy. They'll get to look like the heroes for "fixing" the mess they made in the first place.

[cardinal43]

If only 1.5 million people had voted the other way it would have swung the election.

That's like saying if a frog had wings, he wouldn't bump his butt everytime he jumped. I believe the fact that 1.5 million people voted the way they did is because they thought Obama was a better choice, for whatever reason. If the right had run a better non-flip/flop candidate, they might, just might have won. But then again maybe not, who knows. What we do know is that the Republicans seemed to go out of their way to alienate women, gays, and minorities.

[Parallax]

That's like saying if a frog had wings, he wouldn't bump his butt everytime he jumped. I believe the fact that 1.5 million people voted the way they did is because they thought Obama was a better choice, for whatever reason. If the right had run a better non-flip/flop candidate, they might, just might have won. But then again maybe not, who knows. What we do know is that the Republicans seemed to go out of their way to alienate women, gays, and minorities.

I agree with all of that, Tom. The point was that it wasn't a runaway. Romney received 48% of the popular vote, Clinton only received 43% in 1992, but that wasn't seen as a mandate for the Democrats to change their whole platform.

If the right had run a better non-flip/flop candidate, they might, just might have won.

Right, and if your Aunt had testicles she'd be your Uncle.

[cardinal43]

Right, and if your Aunt had testicles she'd be your Uncle.

Oh, then you've seen my aunt. The family always wondered about her/him.

[GeneV]

I agree with all of that, Tom. The point was that it wasn't a runaway. Romney received 48% of the popular vote, Clinton only received 43% in 1992, but that wasn't seen as a mandate for the Democrats to change their whole platform.
Right, and if your Aunt had testicles she'd be your Uncle.

Jim, I don't know what qualifies as a "runaway" but this popular vote is a pretty solid victory these days, and it really was a runaway (IMHO) in the electoral college, where it counts. The last two times a Republican won, it was with barely the minimum in the Electoral College, and one time was with a loss in the popular vote. The trend extended to congress as well. Three out of the last four elections have gone to the Dems. It is fine with me if the Republicans don't think there is something to learn from that, but I think there really is a message there.

[boriscleto]

Oh, then you've seen my aunt. The family always wondered about her/him.

So this is a portrait of your Aunt?