tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38479691.post1374217757798004942..comments2023-11-05T01:35:10.419-06:00Comments on The Travis Monitor: Post-Election Huddle - What HappenedRandy Samuelsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05422806680210032661noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38479691.post-27607157176320407112008-11-06T11:25:00.000-06:002008-11-06T11:25:00.000-06:00Let me add this point too made on another blog..."...Let me add this point too made on another blog...<BR/><BR/>"The reaction by Democrats to the nomination of Gov. Palin for vice president is instructive. They panicked at the response by focus groups who stated “she is one of us.”<BR/><BR/>Think about that folks. During the Democrat primaries, Hillary made major gains when she changed her persona to being one of the gals who was throwing Boilermakers down in the bar with Joe Sixpack and his friends. She became the populist to Obama’s “hope and change.”<BR/><BR/>Gov. Palin won the vice presidential debate hands down. Oh, she may not have won with the intellectual conservatives. But she won the debate with average Americans. Much like the reaction by the Democrat focus groups.<BR/><BR/>Incidentally, President Reagan was not a favorite amongst the Rockefeller Republicans either."<BR/><BR/>Good points. We have to remember that both the Democrats and the Republicans have a combination of elites and a base.<BR/><BR/>The Democrat elites are all pointy-headed latte-sipping liberals, enamored of the same intellectual rubbish that obama spouts (ie they *agreed* with Obama's "clinging to God and guns"). They want to get rid of God in the public square and hate those bourgoisie McMansion Republicans, etc.<BR/><BR/>But they dont win elections. Only 20% of the electorate in the 2008 election were self-identified liberals. They NEED to down-scale workers, the Joe the Plumbers, the single Moms, the waitresses, and they also need the skittish suburban white collar workers and soccer Moms. This electorate is not liberal. Some in fact are 'conservative Democrats' who vote not for liberal but for the populism of a party thats 'for the little guy'. This is why the Democrats are always bashing the Republicans "tax cuts for the rich", never mind that Bush's tax cut was for every single person paying income tax - the Democrats have to keep the illusion up that they are for the little guy.<BR/><BR/>Palin, with her union-dues paying hubbie, her soccer/hockey Mom persona, and her down-to-earth faith and common-sense statements. Palin was the only person in the 4 debates who mentioned the need for individual responsibility. She's the only one on the ticket whose lifestyle has not been wrapped around politics for most of her life. (Although give McCain credit for his military career). <BR/><BR/>Had McCain realized this *AND* figured out that Obama's radical associations were ALL ABOUT THE FACT THAT HE IS AN ELITIST LEFT-LIBERAL out of touch with the real needs of real working Americans ... they could have run and won with it.<BR/><BR/>It tells me also that Palin was a much better VP pick than Romney. However, that's all about positioning to voters. The more I think about it, the more I believe a Romney/Palin ticket would have won with the right campaign, one that focussed on winning on the economy issue and addressing the real issues for working Americans.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38479691.post-6178263480445103182008-11-06T09:15:00.000-06:002008-11-06T09:15:00.000-06:00The 'no cohesive message' flaw was exposed here as...The 'no cohesive message' flaw was exposed here as well:<BR/>http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/41812<BR/><BR/>In other words, complete the sentence. "Vote for McCain because ..."<BR/><BR/>There wasn't a core central theme like Obama had.<BR/><BR/>55 million people voted for McCain, and that's impressive, but they likely did it for many different reasons.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com