In looking back over this past political season, it's clear, to me, that there were so many things that were done plain wrong by the GOP. In essence, the Democrats basically walked all over them, owning them except for a few rare instances. The debates had clear winners, but the rest just went south from there.
I have a list of five things the Republicans did that, if they had done something else, would have, in my opinion, completely changed the outcome,
#5: Deciding not to challenge the election results. If there are enough election anomalies in certain key voting counties, then something must be going on. This is especially true when more people vote than are registered.
I know some have raised the point that people who register at the polls would throw it off, but, with modern technology in place, that anomaly doesn't occur.
There is also, and this is a strong point, the truly bizarre case of 100% votes going one way and 0% the other. Except for educational purposes, it is next to impossible to get 100%. Consider the best baseball batter you know of. It's a rare case for their batting avergage to be over 0.300, or 30%, yet that is the case with the best batters. Even slugging percentage (the actual connection of bat to ball) isn't close to 100%. Even with political percentages, the spread of those elections is often near, or at least close to, 40%/60%, so why do none of the Republicans want to question? If they wanted to say "Look at us, we're still here and we won't go away," then why not put the Democrats to task? That's basically, in my mind, saying "Okay, we give up. You can do whatever you want and we won't stop you." This cannot stand. If the Republicans are to re-surge, then they must make sure they are known not as the party of "forward," but as the party of "upward."
#4: Failing to take advantage of Benghazi, and I don't mean militarily. By the beginning of Nov. 2012, the entire scandal behind the Benghazi issue was coming out in fullness....And the Republicans didn't take advantage.
The only times I heard anyone on the Republican ticket mention the attack in Libya was in the second debate, the Candy Crowley sided debate. Yet there were no commercials stating how Obama basically screwed over the entire Benghazi situation, maybe even, using the Constitutional definition, portraying Obama as a criminal and a traitor. What's more, there's very little going on now except having Obama come to the defense of any who are testifying on his behalf.
Still, General Patreas made a very bold move. Since nobody can touch him politically, now, he did that which needed to be done. But the Republican Party should have not only led the way, but made such a big deal out of something hardly anyone knew about that it would've put a huge buffer in favor of the Republicans.
#3: There was no comprehensible economic proposals and titles. One of the many issues with the Entitled Generation, one that I am grateful I'm older than, is that they have no concept of true ownership. They're raised by parents who firmly believe that any form of punishment is wrong. These are the ones that managed, somehow, to get on the shows SuperNanny and Nanny 911, the ones who have no grasp of how to discipline their children. This creates, in that generation, a sense that they have everything they can possibly want given to them.
They are given things from their parents, from an education system that believes the F-grade is a bad idea and, now, even from the government. This is why there was such a scuffle with the free contraceptive issue, and why there were many who were gathering up free cell phones and free food stamps.
Still, the truth must come up, one that the Republicans totally missed. Every free thing given out must be paid for by somebody. Can you imagine what would happen if all those free phones were shown, with as up-to-date data as possible, how much they really cost? That, and running the individual budget would show what would really happen if these folks had to run their own cell phone usage and other usage "given" by the government.
And then they're shown where their real free cell phones come from. They're shown, in reality, what their parents earn and what they have to pay, and shown how much they pay in taxes. And this is where the "free things" come from. If the Entitled Generation were shown these things, how long do you think it'd be before they start putting things back, paying for things themselves, and then learning the one truth about paying for things with your own money, the concept of true ownership.
Then, maybe, they would've turned to the Republicans who helped them to feel better and helped them really learn something truly valuable, but, again, the party didn't do this at all.
#2: Going soft on the ad campaign. Granted, there were campaigns on both sides for the big seat, but there was a definite difference. Perhaps the best known case is that, from the Obama side, of a husband whose wife passed away while working at Bain Financial, one of the many companies managed by. While the commercial insinuated (meaning "not right out said") that her death was the result of Mitt Romney, the facts came out that his wife went to work there more than six years afterwards among other falsehoods that were either stated or insinuated.
And yet there wasn't a counteracting commercial, one that had Obama breaking in, from time to time, telling the husband what to say to make Mr. Romney look bad. In fact, with a complete series of attack ads coming from Obama and the Democrats, there were very few attacks the other way, either insinuating the claims made by the Democrats or coming back stronger than before. In fact, it was rather pathetic to see.
#1: Believing, right from the start, that the election was in the bag. This assumption was based on the fact that Obama's acceptance rating has been the lowest of any president on record, so it seemed only natural.
But, like a cornered animal, the fact that his rating seemed so low made him an even more dangerous opponent.. He came into the fight ready to actually draw blood right away.
This should've been first hinted at during "Super Tuesday," when, at a press conference, he was asked what he'd say to Mr. Romney. He said, with a wide grin that seemed familiar to a cat about to get another mouse, "I'd tell him good luck."
Yet, at least to me, many of the Republicans thought they could just waltz in, not worrying about policies or plans or even the strategy for the party. They ignored the hints that Obama and the Democrats were ready to fight like hell to keep hold of the prizes they captured four years previous, even if they had to cheat to get there.
This is why this particular wrong direction is #1. The other four are, in fact, part of this. #5. If the Obamacrats did cheat, then the truth must be known. It doesn't matter that it may amount to nothing, but this one is definitely the case. #4. If Obama is not brought up on his part in the Benghazi catasrtophe, then it is a blight on the Republicans if they don't take advantage of it. #3. If someone does not show someone that they are going the wrong way, then whose fault is it when they end up there? #2. Many people don't care enough to do thinking of their own. They want to have someone else tell them what to think or what to believe, so, if they were to be told they have to believe Obama vs. Mr. Romney, they would tend to believe Obama.
Therefore, in my opinion, if the Democrats tell the voters that they will take care of them while the Republicans will take their money and destroy their lives, and the Republicans appear too soft or too lazy to really care about showing some effort to fight for the rights of these same people, then the entire effort is a waste.
So, please, don't let it be a waste.