The Beginning of the End

From RedState, By: Erick Erickson, August 28th – Today marks the beginning of the end of Campaign 2012.  This week, here in Tampa, Republicans will go through a well scripted event designed to make Mitt Romney their nominee.  Democrats will reciprocate next week in Charlotte, NC.

The GOP’s convention almost became unscripted with a heavy handed move designed to ensure a coronation and shut out the grassroots from nomination fights.  According to press reports, the Romney campaign is in retreat on this issue and the grassroots have won.  They should not get complacent.

Regardless of that hiccup, the energy in Tampa is much different from 2008.

In 2008, the crowd had a lot of energy for Sarah Palin, but little for John McCain.  Privately, the crowd would whisper that the odds were against them.  Here in Tampa, the crowd is struggling with a feeling of victory.  They think they can win.

Both sides think they can win, but privately, in real and honest assessments, even the base is capable of a reality check.  The reality check in Tampa is that momentum is with the GOP.  The Democrats, unable to run against the economy, intend to make the election about the female uterus, not an economic recovery.  At 8.3% unemployment, people are much more interested in putting food on their tables than over killing kids.

The mood in Tampa is upbeat and not just in public.

This is the beginning of the end.  We are now in the homestretch for Campaign 2012.  Thank God it is almost over.

12 responses

  1. Hmmmm…not exactly an unbiased, deep analysis of the current state of the presidential race. Erick Erickson (his parents had an obvious sense of humor) is obviously a yellow-dog Republican and “Red State” is obviously a philosophically-compatible source. If Erick has a long-lost fraternal twin, he should contact Sean Hannity for a possible match.

    The reality of the situation in Tampa is that the mafia known as the Mittens Romney Campaign has arrived in town with Tommy guns blazing, mowing down enemies as well as allies. The friendly-fire casualties include the Tea Party and the Ron Paul Campaign which represents a significant number of highly-motivated conservative and libertarian voters.

    The Mitt Romney Campaign’s hostile takeover of the Republican Party is reminscent of the standard MO (method of operation) of Bain Capital in its scorched-earth business acquisitions practices which left many a potential ally bleeding and mortally wounded also.

    The Republican Party, now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bain Capital, has let loose the 800-lb gorilla in the proverbial china shop and is smacking down anyone who dares to challenge its hegemony of the Republican National Convention in Tampa.

    Rather than attempt to unite the party and present a broad front against the Democrats in November, the Republican Gestapo is only duplicating the heavy-handed national police state policies that have emanated from atop Mount Olympus in Washington, D.C. ever since 9-11…which is exactly the type of despicable and un-democratic behavior that led to the creation of the Tea Party in the first place.

    The Ron Paul Movement is supported in large part by Libertarians, the base word of which is “Liberty”, and whose adherents practice “freedom, liberty, and voluntary association without violent coercion.”. When you run the Republican Party in such a manner that Stalin and his jackboots would be proud, don’t expect the millions of Libertarians to support your christened “Caspar Milquetoast” presidential candidate and his vice presidential selection, “Mini-Me”. And “no”, beating the war drums to attack Iran while having someone else’s kids do the fighting overseas does not make you a good, smart, or strong leader.

    Mr. Erickson and I are in agreement on one thing…”This is the beginning of the end.” We just disagree on whose end it will be.

    The-lesser-of-two-evils, straight-ticket-voting Republicans will scream in protest, “But, Obama will have 4 more years!” Yes, but Libertarians don’t compromise their high standards and trade one blue dictator for one red dictator.

    We’ll be voting for Constitution Party candidate Gary Johnson. Check out his speech at the recent Paul Fest in Tampa…

    1. Senator_Blutarsky

      The Republicans have been a “top-down” instead of “grassroots-up” party ever since Reagan rode the nomination horse on an anti-Trilateralist anti-globalist platform, getting MIAs back, jumpstarting the economy, restoring global military strength after the fiasco of ‘Nam & the Ayatollah, eliminating federal agencies etc…………..then the back room boys FORCED their one-world Bonesman , Bush as VP.

      And to make sure, there was a convenient hit attempt, and Ronnie dutifully turned over the the reigns of power to GHWB. He was trotted out to make all his sound-bite clever speeches and give bumper sticker slogan material, but he was a mere after thought in the true machinations of power.

      The Republican Party died in 1981. The last vestiges of the Taft-Goldwater true conservatives were ousted and the globalist Rockefeller crowd took complete control.

      Moving forward, puppet Romney is the new poster boy. The 5th grade 80IQ and emotional level voters think he will make some difference, but the likelyhood that he could win is small. And Paul Ryan added enough fizzle to last about 2 days, since he is as shallow a RINO & neocon as Romney.

      Enjoy the election. I suspect it is the last one the semblance of a nation will ever have. I will vote for Gary Johnson. How can I vote for a hardcore gun-banning, healthcare statist bankster puppet who fully endorses the police state and every globalist policy of any significance.

      There is no blood on my hands, 1972 to date.

      “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” – Ephesians 5:11

    2. Senator_Blutarsky

      From John Tate, Ron Paul’s campaign manager, on convention shenanigans yesterday:

      “Properly elected Ron Paul delegates were stripped from us. And when a motion was made to amend the Credential Committee’s report, it was ignored. Morton Blackwell, a longtime conservative activist and RNC Rules Committee expert, found himself indefinitely detained — along with the rest of the Virginia delegation.

      The RNC bus driver responsible for transporting delegates somehow ‘got lost’ for well over an hour until a critical Rules Committee meeting adjourned. [The new rules adopted by that committee] are designed to make the Republican Party a top-down organization and strip power away from state parties and grassroots activists of every stripe. All efforts to vote down these onerous rules were ignored . . . ”

      Still believe in the god of democracy? Still believe that your vote “counts”? Still believe these same GOP hacks when they tell you that it is your “duty” to vote in order to sanctify their behavior?

      Banana Republic is not just a clothing store……..

  2. Senator_Blutarsky

    My my my……………the truth comes out about John Roberts vote FOR Obamacare

    As Breitbart News suggested last week, it appears Chief Justice John Roberts did, in fact, switch his vote on the Obamacare decision under pressure from President Barack Obama, the Democrats, and the mainstream media. John Fund at National Review has more details today–including evidence about a bizarre address by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), chair of the Judiciary Committee, that singled out Roberts himself:
    Indeed, Senator Patrick Leahy (Vt., D.) , the chair of the Judiciary Committee, suddenly took to the floor on May 14 and directly addressed Roberts, urging him in harshly partisan tones to uphold Obamacare and maintain “the proper role of the judicial branch.”

    Stewart Baker, a partner at the Washington law firm Steptoe & Johnson, writes at the Volokh Conspiracy that he found the whole campaign against Roberts weird and unusual, given that the justices’ conference vote on Obamacare had been held six weeks earlier. Why “would the chair of the Judiciary Committee risk the appearance of trying to harshly strongarm the Court when his remarks wouldn’t make the slightest difference?” he asks. “The Leahy speech reads like it was written for an audience of one. It offers flattery and it offers threats, all of them personalized to appeal to Chief Justice Roberts alone.”

    Fund adds that the White House likely benefited from leaks at the Court, and almost certainly knew of Roberts’s switch–just as it almost certainly knew of the initial vote to throw out the individual mandate in March:

    The week before the Supreme Court announced its decision, the White House was clearly hinting to many in the media and on Capitol Hill that they expected a 5–4 opinion that would hinge on the taxing-power issue. Did someone leak? Sunday on Face the Nation, Jan Crawford of CBS News said that two reliable sources told her that Roberts originally voted, in late March, with the four conservative justices to invalidate the individual mandate. According to Crawford, Roberts suddenly changed sides some six weeks later and then resisted “a month-long desperate campaign by the conservative justices to bring him back to the fold.”

    I’ve learned from my own sources that after voting to invalidate the mandate, the chief did express some skepticism about joining the four conservatives in throwing out the whole law. At the justices’ conference, there was discussion about accepting the Obama administration’s argument, which was that, if the individual mandate was removed, the provisions governing community rating and guaranteed issue of insurance would have to go too but that the rest of the law might stand. The chief justice was equivocal, though, in his views on that point.

    The more the public learns about Roberts’s decision, the more people are likely to hate it. Fund notes that even David Brooks of the New York Times agrees that Roberts “had to get to a certain result, and he was going to find a way by hook or by crook.” It’s a conclusion that aptly expresses how Obamacare was conceived, how it was passed, and now how it has been upheld by one of the worst decisions in recent years.

    But I guess I will keep getting emails telling me how much better it would be for Romney to appoint Supremes…………how has that worked out for ya ?

    Thankfully, we wont have to listen to the ‘conservative’ hucksters tell us lies like this anymore-

    I cant wait to see “Bert Atkinson” respond to this……….

  3. Like Erick and I said, “The beginning of the end”…to-wit:

    “Republicans celebrated the nomination of Mitt Romney as their presidential candidate tonight with funny hats and a determination to defeat President Obama, but their Tampa party was marred by a new poll that found Romney to be the least popular major-party nominee since 1984.

    Tonight’s nomination brought Romney into the home stretch of the long race to the White House and was a moment to be savored by the candidate and his party. Delegates danced in the aisles at the Tampa Bay Forum between speeches and cheered predictions that Romney was the next president of the United States.

    But a new ABC News/Washington Post poll released this evening found that Romney has the lowest personal popularity of any major-party nominee in nearly 30 years.

    More than half of all respondents, 51 percent, rate Romney “unfavorably,” while only 40 percent rate him “favorably,” a broader concept than simple likeability, which reflects a sense that the candidate understands the problems of average Americans, according to the poll.

    No candidate has ever won the general election with such low favorability numbers.”

    Full Article…

    Hmmmm…I wonder how Romney’s poll numbers would look if Willard’s Republican National Committee hadn’t defecated on the Tea Party and the Ron Paul Campaign?

    Start practicing early…”Hail to the Kenyan!”

  4. you guys! is it possible to be correct but not right?

    1. Senator_Blutarsky

      Please enlighten me- ? Elaborate just a tad…………give me some kind of hint

    2. simple question. should be a simple answer yes or no

      1. Sure Stan…like when you’re a student in school and you mark an answer on the test the way the teacher wants it to be…even though the teacher is wrong…the answer is “correct”, but that doesn’t make it “right”.

        Now that I answered your riddle, do I get to try to snatch the pebble from your hand?

  5. no pebbles here, just wanted to know if you or I could be correct and not right at the same time, seems as tho it could happen. Sooo, what is it actually that makes it not right to be correct?

  6. Using my earlier analogy, being right is better than being correct.

    Philosophical semantics aside, I obviously feel the Republican Party has been hijacked by the Willard Romney faction resulting in the alienation of a significant number of potential voters in November. The poll I referenced in an earlier posting above would seem to underscore my opinion, to-wit:

    “But a new ABC News/Washington Post poll released this evening found that Romney has the lowest personal popularity of any major-party nominee in nearly 30 years.

    More than half of all respondents, 51 percent, rate Romney ‘unfavorably,’ while only 40 percent rate him ‘favorably,’ a broader concept than simple likeability, which reflects a sense that the candidate understands the problems of average Americans, according to the poll.

    No candidate has ever won the general election with such low favorability numbers.”

    Full Article…

    It is assumed that you disagree with my opinion and with the results of the above-referenced poll. But, who is “right” and who is “correct” is a red herring diversion of Freudian dimensions.

    I predict that Obummer will be re-elected primarily due to the pre-determination of the real powers-that-be in this country who do not leave such strategic decisions to the whims of the lowly field hands who cast ballots in rigged elections with the smug misperception that they have a real say in the matter.

    Do you really think it to be merely accidental that so many deceased “voters”, convicted felons, and illegal aliens are allowed to remain on the voter rolls and that if their numbers were tallied nationwide, it would be numbered in the millions? Do you really think it coincidental that the “highly-educated scholars” on the U.S. Supreme Court do not possess the average common sense to know a voter’s intent when a “chad” is hanging to a ballot by a mere thread?

    Here is a brief snip about those who fail to question their “betters”…

    “But how does this work inside their heads? It’s an interesting process. Gullible Mind people do believe it is possible for a government (or institution) to lie; but they believe that governments, institutions and doctors choose NOT to lie even when it would serve their own self interests to do so.

    Follow this carefully, because this is the fascinating part. These Gullible Mind people effectively believe that even though a government official could lie about something, they would never actually do so. And why wouldn’t they? Because, ultimately, the Gullible Mind crowd believes that governments, institutions and mainstream media outlets operate from a sort of honor code. So even if it were in the interests of our own government to lie to us, it would never happen because that would violate this imaginary honor code.

    Where does this honor code exist? Where is it written down? Nowhere, of course. It is imaginary. But to The Gullible Mind, it seems real. Interestingly, even though this “honor code” only exists in the imagination of The Gullible Mind person, they project this honor code onto sources of authority, imagining that they abide by it.”

    Perchance the Republican Party’s collosal bungling of Willard’s presidential campaign is but convenient window dressing for the preconceived outcome.

    As far as who is “right” or wrong…come the first week in November…whether the Kenyan or Willard wins…it will not be the “correct” answer for this once-Republic.

  7. thanks for the treatise, you have described beliefs about truth and right and wrong and correctness is only in the eyes of the beholder and what they chose to believe. There was a line in second hand lions movie when one uncle told his nephew that what was true (correct) didn’t matter, that there were things in life worth believing in because they were right. My point being that right and correctness are two ends of a spectrum of decision making tools and our current political parties use which ever is most expedient to their goals. Basicly, agreeing with your treatise that the usefull fools will believe anything if it is given to them slowly and doesn’t taste too bad.

%d bloggers like this: