The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (9 comments)

  1. the difference is that Obama had a base that he could further mine to increase turnout but the GOP basically only has one demographic in their base and not a whole lot more to “mine”.

    This should not have been rocket science for the GOP.

    The polls were showing non-white demographics and women in increasing numbers but the GOP then chose to view these indications as a Poll “conspiracy” …

    when you are this dumb and self-delusional, you deserve to lose.

    Newt Gingrich is saying “we need to figure out what happened” like he just got run over by a bus and thinks the tag number he missed is what is relevant.. not the bus.

    1. Newt is part of the problem. As long as people like him are considered viable candidates the GOP will keep losing.

  2. Max Planck

    This is an example of one of the several stages of denial that AEI “fellows” are going through.

    The “fellows” will convince themselves that the American people could not have POSSIBLY re-elected the President on merits alone, so they come up with this.

    Running a well managed campaign is necessary to win. So is money. But so do issues.

    Mr. Thiessen, is, quite characteristically, mired in Roveland.

    1. the most amazing thing was not that some of the GOP folks were arguing different turn-out models against other GOP looking at alternative measurements.


      The whole DANG community was so hyped on their own beliefs that they chose the only path that supported their beliefs.

      Now these are folks who say they know how to run the country – but they not only rely on bogus data – they do it in lock-step … as an entire Party – movement.

      We need people who think like this in charge of the country like we need a hole in the head.

  3. Max Planck

    According to The Hill, Paul Ryan is now claiming he didn’t lose on the budget or Medicare- he just didn’t expect such a high urban turnout, as if those people weren’t American voters.

    1. re: ” such a high urban turnout”

      you mean all the efforts the GOP made at suppressing the vote – Ryan did not notice?

      listening to these guys weave their “plausible” stories and just simply deny things they don’t want to believe makes me wonder what they would have done if they had gotten elected.

      there is something going on with these guys – and it’s not a good thing… the word “lying” is no longer in their vocabulary. They’ve become an extension of FAUX news.

  4. Whatever:
    Looking back at the “election”, it just occurred to me that o’bama HAD TO WIN. Why? Because the Elite NEED to control the country. They OWN o’bama because he’s a FRAUD, they “have the goods on him” and he knows that if he doesn’t cooperate they’ll let those good go public. romney didn’t have enough “bad stuff” on him to be blackmailed into cooperation.
    But why would o’bama deal with the Elite, knowing that they think they OWN him? He’s ARROGANT! He thinks he’s the Messiah and has it all under control. He has folks such as Soros “behind” him.
    Then, why did THEY CHOOSE romney to be the “opponent”? Well, romney is just a o’bama-light. Romney is a RINO. They hardly disagreed on much. Since they didn’t disagree on much, or maybe I ought to say that they both were disinterested in the right things, they wouldn’t discuss them in the “debates” so the lemmings wouldn’t be provoked to actually THINK!

    1. @Stevor – are you talking about the GOP?

      what would you have done differently to oppose Obama?

  5. Let us stop this nonsense. Getting ‘better people’ to run the campaign will make no difference as long as the GOP picks amoral (or immoral) men without principles as their candidates. The best thing that Obama had going for him was Romney. It is as simple as that.

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:


Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Refine Content