- The American media has now clearly fallen into two camps. The one is Fox, which although less biased than the rest, is clearly the Republican official news network. All other major news sources support the DNC, and generally go far further than Fox in biased coverage of news. News media in America is in a nutshell, utterly corrupt. Had all media including Fox, been neutral, Obama would have lost. Benghazi, Fast and Furious, to name just two, would've unseated him. Even accurate coverage of the economy would have done the same. On the other hand, Romney would never have been the Republican nominee without Fox (and Drudge) shamelessly shilling for him. Romney was the Fox darling.
- Hurricane Sandy intervened and gave Obama a sliver of a chance to appear Presidential and above the fray ... and Chris Christie made sure that Obama came off in the best possible light. Romney was ahead by 5 points prior to Sandy ... but the storm and Christie embrace gave Obama a new shine and the Romney camp, being ever cautious, failed to regain the headlines. Christie is done as a GOP super star.
- The Romney team ran a mediocre campaign. Romney was losing the race until the first debate, where he simply showed up as we had seen him in the primaries, but where Obama failed to show up. It was in fact, Obama's failing, more than Romney's skill, that gave the lead to Romney and changed the campaign. But, following that lead the Romney camp went back to it's defensive posture, and above all ... treating the corrupt media with deference. Romney was ruthless in his dealings with Newt ... but far more tepid in his attacks on Obama. Sure, there were attack ads, but they were nothing in comparison to what he and his surrogates dished out in the primaries. The GOP and RNC need a major flushing.
- Benghazi was successfully taken off the front pages, not by Sandy, but by the corrupt media and by the Romney team. Benghazi was more of a gift to Romney, than Sandy was to Obama. Yet, the Romney team depended almost entirely on Fox beating the Benghazi drum, and after Sandy, Benghazi disappeared. On the other hand, Obama pivoted off of Sandy to re-do his image, and with Christie's help, to win.
- Pat Caddell puts it best ... American politics has 3 players ... The Corrupt Party (DNC); The Stupid Party (GOP); and the Corrupt Media (MSM). Republicans will remain losers until they realize that the Corrupt Media must be made an issue, must be treated as the enemy, and must be attacked with the same force as that applied to Democrats. The Corrupt Media is, after all, become just a branch of the DNC and it must be ever on the defensive. The Romney team behaved as if the media were neutral ... after all, it's hard to criticize the very people you hobnob with around Washington and New York.
- America has changed. I recognize the new America though, as I've lived in her for decades now ... in Saskatchewan. For decades, politics in my province was driven by unionism and the quest for free stuff. And that, is the new America. In my province, the socialists understood that they had to maintain a well paid bureaucracy, and a large population dependent on government. This formula worked for decades, but as we are seeing now in Europe, and as happened in my province, socialists eventually run out of money.
- When Obama hinted that voting was a form of revenge, Republicans mocked him. Clearly though, a vast American constituency was rallied by the President's call ... it was the call to class warfare, and they showed up in droves.
- American socialists are making their move, but it's too late ... they've already run out of other people's money. Sugar Daddy Government has a huge voting constituency in the USA ... but Sugar Daddy is all sugared out. Expect a tumultuous next 4 years internationally and in America. I expect Obama's approval rating to plunge once again, for class war to heat up, and for the wages of socialism to begin to bite as the fiscal stability of the United States becomes ever more untenable. From there though, it's all just the fog of war.
- As a footnote ... my province saw the light ... kicked out the socialists ... and became one of the most robust economies anywhere in the world. People are optimistic and more positive than I've ever seen them. And my Premier, a conservative, is one of the most popular politicians in Canada. But my province is tiny compared to America ...a flee, compared to the monstrous groaning sloth just south of the border.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Post Mortem
Election losses and victories are the result of oft complex and diverse elements coming together to create a stew:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
my province saw the light ... kicked out the socialists
No it didn't. It just swapped in some new socialists. Brad Wall loves big government.
Shorter you: WAHAHHHHHHHH!! WAHHHHHH!!!!! Media bias!!! Socialists!!! WAHHHHHHH!
Also...Fox is the LEAST biased?!?
Ease up on the pipe buddy.
I'm serious: This is by far the most retarded summary of the situation that I've ever read. Does this seem insightful to you? Do you actually look at this garbage and think "Yep, I've nailed it. I've captured the political zeitgeist"?
Wow, way to attack the person and not his ideas!! Seriously, if he's wrong then show us where. Present some facts or rational arguments to counter his assertions. If you can't do that then you expose yourself as a blowhard who's only contribution to anything is to spew venom, ignore the argument and pat yourself on the back for using fancy words like "zeitgeist".
And before you bother, we all know what the word means, however not all of us need to use such words as cover for the lack of an argument.
Ha ha ... love it when the anons come trolling with nothing but name calling ... always a sign of intellectual vacuum and/or that I've hit at least one target dead on.
Wall? ... socialist? ... cough ... blink. I suggest some political science 101. He's slowly and surely dialing Sugar Daddy back.
the surprising thing to me is that Romney received 2 000 000 votes less than Mccain,Obama's total was down about 9 million,but that was to be expected what with the economy and all. 08 was supposed to be the bottom of the barrel for the republicans -Bush ,Iraq etc, Mccain was towing a lot of baggage and he was rather short on the charisma thing.One would have expected the Mccain voters to vote for Romney, the real story here may be the lack of republican support for Romney.
That's one of the interesting questions that will take a bit of time to answer. I think that McCain got a huge Sarah Palin bump in turnout. It is also possible that the same folks who turned out for Palin disliked Romney to the point of staying home ... after all, it was tough to stomach the Drudge/Fox shilling for Romney. Romney was the RNC establishment man ... and conservatives have by and large been shut out of that establishment.
CITATION NEEDED
Ha ha ... that's rich. If you want to make a statement like you did ... how about you start with the citation. But just to tease you, how about the forcing of Health Regions to meet budgetary restraints with directors wages tied to meeting those goals. Or, how about allocating massive portions of revenues to debt payment ... or the freezing of bureaucratic expansion through attrition; and most recently the freezing of Liquor Board expansion and allowing private stores to expand into growing communities. We could mention the dismantling of the Human Rights Commissions as well. In sum, the Sask Government's portion of GDP is shrinking rapidly under Wall ... while the province roars ahead with population and GDP growth.
Meanwhile, in reality: Under Brad Wall’s leadership, Saskatchewan’s annual
program spending growth (9.9%) outpaced economic
growth (6.9%) and was nearly three times the combined
rate of inflation and population growth (3.4%). As a result,
the size of Saskatchewan’s government (total spending as
a percentage of GDP) increased from 16.9% in 2007/08
to 18.3% in 2010/11.
http://www.fraserinstitute.org/uploadedFiles/fraser-ca/Content/research-news/research/articles/fiscal-performance-of-canadas-premiers-ffdec11.pdf
And then there was all that foreign investment he destroyed.
You sure like to talk a lot about how squishy moderates have wrecked stuff. But you're not that different. You're really easy to sucker in with the right rhetoric.
A massive portion of Sask's budget increase goes to the rebuilding of delapidated infrastructure left over from the socialists. There hundreds of millions yet to go. The entire highway system is being rebuilt, as well as massive healthcare infrastructure which is massively lacking. Perhaps you need dig beneath the numbers a bit. And, to top it off Wall is making massive debt payments. I find it strange that one would find the rebuilding of a provinces highway system, starting with those routs that carry the most commerce, a socialist notion. Furthermore, the endeavor to somehow even begin to meet the long term geriatric care needs of the province, which was left in the worst shape of any province, is in itself a massive budgetary drain. I'm not sure what you consider "small-gov" ... a gravel road system?
The Fraser Institute report is incredibly simplistic and misleading. In the purest sense, if you spend more, so the logic goes, you "grow" gov. But Wall is spending greatly on repairing and expanding the infrastructure of the province, especially the transportation system which was woefully neglected by the socialists in lieu of social spending (go figure eh). The highway system that Wall took over was dilapidated and there are many more years and hundreds of millions to go before the system can handle, least of all keep up with, the economic boom. As well, the healthcare facility infrastructure was sadly underdeveloped under the socialists. For example, long-term geriatric facilities can't handle a fraction of the need, so massive sums must be spent building that. As a result, a large percentage of budgetary expansion has been plowed into the private sector (construction), not into the bureaucracy. Of course, Fraser doesn't mention as well, the massive debt reduction underway.
I'm curious though, if under Las' definition of "conservative", does one revert to gravel roads?
Program spending =/= roads
I get it you have a problem with facts. You'll rationalize any actions by your partisan heroes.
$ 2.5 Billion in infrastructure over the next 3 years ... that, is where the lion's share is going. The socialists left the place a mess, and it must be rebuilt in order to handle not only the economic boom, but the population boom. For example, most of the provinces bridges are well past their life spans (pardon the pun). Again, what do you expect? Gravel roads ... collapsing bridges ... decaying hospitals ... nurses with the lowest wages in Canada? I'm glad though, that you can take a paragraph from a Fraser Institute report and make vast generalizations.
I must ask though, do you live in Sask?
Post a Comment