FROM A VERY POLITICALLY ASTUTE, INTELLIGENT, LONG-TIME REPUBLICAN ON WHY SHE IS LEAVING THE PARTY (even if Trump gets elected):

Because of people like Paul Ryan, Mike Lee, Mitt Romney, John Thune, etc. all the so-called Republican elites who have never endorsed Donald Trump or who are now fecklessly running away from him.

Because of people like Hugh Hewitt and Condi Rice who have called for him to step down.

Because of the never ending #NeverTrump movement led by so called Republicans and Conservatives.

Because George H. W. Bush has stated he will vote for Hillary.

These are not people I want to be associated with. This is not a Republican Party I want to be a part of.

I’m surprised you even have to ask why.

Inside the Obama campaign

If we'd known about this, we would have known Romney would lose:

Hey, Look at How the Obama Machine Crushed the Romney Campaign

"The most effective email subject line of the 2012 US presidential campaign began with one word: Hey. That’s the finding of the massive Obama campaign operation known as “The Cave.” That and many other startling findings are detailed in a report on how the Obama campaign went about re-electing a president who boasted a record of failure and divisiveness.

The Cave was to US politics what the Hubble Space Telescope would have been to Neanderthals: An advancement so profound that it verges on magic.

It was also a very non-traditional approach to politics, in that it was less consultant driven than it was data and ability driven."

DOWNLOAD THE DOCUMENT HERE.

READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE HERE.

Now they tell us

AFP - No one wanted to be president less than Mitt Romney, his son said in an interview out Sunday that raises new questions about the candidacy of the losing Republican nominee.

In an interview with the Boston Globe examining what went wrong with the Romney campaign, his eldest son Tagg explains that his father had been a reluctant candidate from the start.

Romney didn't want to run for president, son says

So who the hell's bright idea was it, then? (And why would Mitt Romney let anyone else push him into something he didn't want to do?)

I resent the fact that there is a group of people in the Republican Party who are not only manipulating and distorting the process of Republicans selecting their representatives, but who are forcing and coercing people who have no interest in doing so into running! By what right? And, for what reason?

If there EVER was a reason for TARRING AND FEATHERING politicians, this is it!

(Not to mention the illegal alien who is using this country to fulfill his Marxist wet dreams.)

Money down the drain

Oh. So THIS is what happened on November 6, 2012.

The saga of Mitt and Ann

THE TROUBLE WITH MITT
by Daniel Greenfield:

Back when the establishment turned Romney into its choice, I said that they should have their shot, but that they should pay a political price for their failure if it blows up in their face. Ann Coulter isn't willing to pay that price. Instead she's gone back to her old routine. And Coulter's routine is a simple one.

1. Take a shot at an easy liberal target

2. Say something shocking about the left or minorities

3. Push liberal Republican apologetics

Items 1 and 2 establish Coulter's street cred for item 3 which is the real agenda. Using that same 1, 2 and 3 routine, Coulter has been able to sell anything, including RomneyCare as a conservative principle.

Now after taking a shot at Maxine Waters, a hard target if there ever was one, Coulter goes straight to selling Romney as more conservative than Reagan. Or more libertarian which is at least an easier sell.

But first Coulter throws out one of her specialties. Misleading facts.

The only Republican to defeat a sitting president in the last century was Ronald Reagan in 1980, when he beat Jimmy Carter, the second-worst president in U.S. history

Now this looks impressive. It makes it seem as if many Republicans tried to unseat Democratic presidents and failed.

One problem. Clinton was the only two-term Democratic president since FDR and his presidency unto death. The modern Republican Party, since its transformation into a conservative populist party, had only tried to unseat two Democratic presidents. It got one and utterly blew its attempt to unseat the other by running Bob Dole.

Now Obama was not an easy target, but neither is there some sort of track record of it being impossible for a Republican candidate to unseat a Democrat in the White House. But it helps to be a populist candidate, which Reagan was and Romney wasn't.

Reagan picked a pro-choice, anti-supply side Republican as his running mate. He lavishly praised FDR in his acceptance speech at the national convention, leading The New York Times to title an editorial about him “Franklin Delano Reagan.”

Meanwhile, Romney promised to institute major reforms to Medicare, repeal Obamacare and impose a 20 percent across-the-board tax cut. He said he’d issue a 50-state waiver to Obamacare on his first day in office. He chose a pro-life, fiscal conservative as his running mate and never praised FDR.

The only way Coulter can make Romney seem ultra-conservative is to tear down Reagan. But attempting to judge Reagan by 2012 standards doesn't work.

But let's look at why Reagan had to run the way he did and Romney had to run the way he did.

Reagan could run more liberal than he was, because he had established credibility on conservative ideas. No one doubted his bona fides after all these years. He could make compromises while people would still believe that he had the right agenda at heart.

Romney had to run more conservative than he was because he had no such credibility. And this is a major problem for politicians in general. It's how we ended up with our own version of John Kerry.

A Republican candidate may need to be able to run to the center in a national election while having right of center policies. Just the way that Obama runs a little to the right while holding a far left wing agenda. But candidates with no ideological cred cannot do this. People assume that they're selling out, rather than utilizing a strategy, and they're generally right.

The good news for masochists is that you can look forward to Ann Coulter doing this same full-court press for Chris Christie in a year or two as Mr. Conservative.

"The idea that Romney failed to present a clear contrast with Obama or was too “nice” is also nonsense." 

 Now Coulter almost has a point here. That is if you don't count foreign policy, where Romney spent an entire debate agreeing with Obama, or social policy which he avoided talking about.

But on business, Romney established a clear line of difference with Obama. It was so effective that many Democratic businessmen became the Romney Democrats. Unfortunately Romney failed to extend this difference into any other area and all his Romney Democrats were mostly small and big businessmen. The Reagan Democrats either stayed home or voted for Obama.

The problem wasn't that Romney was too nice. The problem was that Romney did not know anything outside his narrow sphere of business. He failed to challenge Obama on Benghazi because he really did not understand the issues. That was why he also favored a more aggressive policy in Syria. Or why he couldn't set himself apart from Obama on foreign policy.

The same went for any issue outside business and the economy. And that seems palatable enough because the economy was the big issue. But that just highlights the differences between Reagan and Romney.

Reagan could extend conservative philosophy across a range of areas. Romney could only champion free enterprise and it wasn't enough.

Conservatives love Reagan less because of policy than because of the way he was able to advocate conservative ideas as mainstream ones. Romney had trouble doing this.

To the extent Republicans have a problem with their candidates, it’s not that they’re not conservative enough. Where are today’s Nelson Rockefellers, Arlen Specters or George H.W. Bushes? Happily, they have gone the way of leprosy.

Having vanquished liberal Republicans, the party’s problem now runs more along the lines of moron showoffs, trying to impress tea partiers

Really? Liberal Republicans no longer exist?

Has Jeb Bush gone the way of leprosy? Has Lindsey Graham? Have Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, John McCain all vanished?

In CoulterWorld, the Republican Party's elected officials are now all conservatives and the only problem is that obnoxious Tea Party morons insist on asking them to be conservatives, even though they totally are. Like Mitt Romney and Chris Christie.

Friday Afternoon Roundup: Rumors of Ceasefires

The day the music died

I usually "hat tip" the source if I find things through other sites, but I waited too long and lost it. (Sorry to whomever.) But this really echoes the way I feel (and probably echoes the way a lot of you feel, too) and so I just had to post it.

This is not just the normal dissatisfaction with "my guy" losing the election the way some liberals I know are trying force-feed everyone into believing. This goes way deeper into areas that they have no conception exist because they look at this country as a giant nipple to suck off of -- just like in the movie "The Matrix." This scares conservatives because we KNOW it can't last. (Where in history has it ever lasted?). It makes them cackle like we were trying to take away their toys and they thwarted us. They think they "won" and go merrily on their way, chortling down the road.

"By  By Miss American Pie" wanted to achieve the "tone" of our feelings which can be frustratingly elusive, but it did find it. Horror? Yes. But also, for me, sadness.

THE RE-ELECTION OF BARACK OBAMA by MacPundit

       Bye Bye Miss American Pie The day the music died … Twelve days long have passed since the re-election of Barack Obama. Since then I have started to write down my thoughts about the election at least four separate times. This makes five. I didn’t finish the others and instead of finishing this one…
   

 
 

On the bright side...

On the bright side, Barack Obama now inherits the problems created by Barack Obama, including Obamacare.  We’ll know a lot about how he’s going to approach those challenges by what happens in the next two months.  Will he be a doctrinaire Socialist Marxist progressive, or will he tack a few degrees right in order to save himself from the ignominy of being known as the president who presided over America’s suicide?

If he proposes that the Bush-era tax rates stay as-is before they expire January 1, we’ll know that he understands a little something about the nature of capitalism, and there will be cause for optimism.  If he lets them expire—well, fasten your seat belts, assume crash position, and brush up on your Greek.

Mitt's Loss Leaves Us With a Lesson

PATRIOTS: Compilation of News and Blog Reports of Political Violence in the 2012 Elections

ALIPAC Activists

Please help us scan the web for news, blog, and activist reports of political violence so that we can assess the security situation nationally and make sure that the public and ALIPAC activists have accurate warnings fast.

So far the 2012 Elections have become the most contentious and threatening elections Ive ever witnessed since I first became politically involved in 1992.

Please post the title and link to a copy on ALIPAC of any reports of violence, threats of violence, vandalism, assaults, intimidation, riots, civil unrest, threats of assassination and political murder involving the 2012 elections. Remember that with the help of millions of illegal aliens, the people making these threats could run America from now on.

MODERATORS PLEASE MONITOR THIS STICKY POST FOR ACTIVIST POSTS OF ARTICLES AND ADD TO THE LIST BELOW IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER..

Please post a link back to this compilation list beneath each article cited below.

READ MORE

Beware the 'lesser-of-two-evils' trap

Wow. It’s one week before Election Day, the re-election of Obama is unthinkable, and the election is extremely close – every vote counts.

Against this backdrop, I am still seeing lots of articles and blog postings from self-described conservatives, Christians, constitutionalists, independents and patriots fervently proclaiming they will not vote for either Barack Obama or Mitt Romney, because they refuse to choose “the lesser of two evils.”

“The lesser of two evils is still evil,” they intone, as though those magical words encapsulate some transcendent logic.

Ironically, most of these people revere America’s Founding Fathers, quote them and refer to them often – indeed they see themselves as following in the founders’ footsteps, or at least adhering to their principles.

But in this they are profoundly deluded. For in reality, the Founding Fathers, by drafting, ratifying and implementing the Constitution of the United States, engaged in the most monumental example in American history of deliberately choosing the lesser of two evils.

READ MORE

HUGH HEWITT'S 100 REASONS TO VOTE AGAINST PRESIDENT OBAMA / FOR MITT ROMNEY

From Hugh Hewitt

Know someone who is wavering?  Send them to the 100 Reasons to Vote for Romney or Against Obama, or ship them the book The Brief Against Obama: The Rise, Fall and Epic Fail of the Hope and Change Presidency today:

Part One:

1-50

Part Two:

51-100

Some fact-checks on the final debate:

OBAMA: Repeatedly claimed that ending expensive wars meant the U.S. now has money to spend at home.

FACT: There is no such peace dividend because the wars were financed largely by borrowing.

------------------------------------------------------------

ROMNEY: Said that when he was Massachusetts governor, high-school students who graduated in the top quarter "got a four-year, tuition-free ride at any Massachusetts public institution of higher learning."

OBAMA: "That happened before you came into office." (an outright LIE on the spot, heatedly and convincingly repeated)

ROMNEY: "That was actually mine, actually, Mr. President. You got that fact wrong."

FACT: Romney was right: The John and Abigail Adams scholarship program began in 2004 when he was governor.

-------------------------------------------------------------

ROMNEY: "I said that we would provide guarantees, and that was what was able to allow these (auto) companies to go through bankruptcy, to come out of bankruptcy. Under no circumstance would I do anything other than to help this industry get on its feet. And the idea that has been suggested that I would liquidate the industry. Of course not. That's the height of silliness. I have never said I would liquidate the industry."

OBAMA: "Gov. Romney, you keep on trying to airbrush history here. You were very clear that you would not provide government assistance to the U.S. auto companies, even if they went through bankruptcy. You said that they could get it in the private marketplace. That wasn't true. They would have gone through a liquidation."

THE FACTS: It's true that Romney didn't preach liquidation of GM and Chrysler and that he saw his approach as a way to save the auto companies. Opposing a government bailout, Romney instead favored private loans to finance the automakers' restructuring in bankruptcy court.

----------------------------------------------------------

OBAMA: "What I would not have had done was left 10,000 troops in Iraq that would tie us down. And that certainly would not help us in the Middle East."

THE FACTS: Obama was suggesting that he had never favored keeping U.S. troops in Iraq beyond the December 2011 withdrawal deadline that the Bush administration had negotiated with the Iraqi government. Actually, the Obama administration tried for many months to win Iraqi agreement to keeping several thousand American troops there beyond 2011 to continue training and advising the Iraqi armed forces. The talks broke down over a disagreement on legal immunity for U.S. troops.

The strategy behind the Obama-Iran story leaks?

Why is the White House denying this story in the New York Times today?

Here is one possible strategy:

Other than Benghazi, Iran is the biggest foreign policy topic right now and would have normally been one of Romney's attack points in Monday night's debate on Foreign Policy. However, leaking this story (front page of the New York Times--U.S. Officials Say Iran Has Agreed to Nuclear Talks) means that it has been neutralized already.

How?

The Obama administration may think this will stop Romney from talking about it, but if Romney does go ahead and talk about Obama's lack of progress in dealing with Iran, then Obama can suddenly admit that, well, yes, the story is actually true...and that neutralizes Romney's criticism!

Brilliant?

Joe Klein stumbles on the truth about Obama

TIME|Swampland:

Did the President send out his body double to this debate? Because if that were the actual Barack Obama out there, I’m not sure he could communicate well enough to be an effective President in a time of trouble, to say nothing of winning a second term.

Obama’s Debate Strategy: Unilateral Disarmament?

A BAD night for Obama!

National Review Online:

Obama looked tired, in the Nixonian mode, and he sounded like a petulant 1980 Jimmy Carter...

American Thinker:

Obama appears to ahve [sic]been overmatched and outclassed...

How the liberal mind got twisted

Legal Insurrection:

The always excellent Jonathan V. Last at The Weekly Standard has a remarkable piece about the corrupting influence of abortion on the left’s mindset—how elevating it to primacy status in the political arena has thoroughly distorted the thinking of otherwise smart people, forcing them to adopt positions that would be simply ludicrous if they weren’t so horrifying.

Late-term Abortions of the Liberal Mind

The real truth about Mitt Romney's taxes

Democrats, Media Get Punk'd: Romney Releases Tax Returns

Sea of Love?

Nah. It's the sea of pious leftist bilge now.

Are Republicans fooling themselves?

Stanley Kurtz thinks so...

And so does John Hinderacker and Andrew McCarthy!

I'm worried...and you should be too.

Why Romney Will Defeat Obama

The New American:

The contest between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama for the presidency will end with a decisive, and possibly even a landslide, victory for Romney in November.

NEWSWEEK: OBAMA MUST GO

Why does Paul Ryan scare the president so much? Because Obama has broken his promises, and it’s clear that the GOP ticket’s path to prosperity is our only hope.

READ MORE