Are Republicans throwing the election or are they really this stupid?

[RepublicansRZombies]

I am really struggling with this, just can't figure it out.

Why would they be so overtly selfish, lying bastards with no real plans for fixing the country?

They keep lying and lying even after being proven wrong.

They haven't even run the numbers on their own plans.

No one is that stupid are they?

It's as if Karl Rove isn't even helping them.

If they aren't throwing it, why would they expose themselves like this?

If they are throwing it, why would they expose themselves like this?

Nothing makes sense so I have come to the conclusion that they are just stupid.

Am I right?

[IrishEyes]

1. They are so arrogant.

They think voters are stupid. They honestly believe that they are going to win no matter what they do.

[renate]

2. I think it's more that their supporters are unquestioning

I won't say stupid, that's not fair. We all have a right to decide what we're going to be interested in, and some people aren't interested in politics. Fair enough.

But I think the GOP absolutely depends on their base not questioning them as long as they are pro-gun, pro-God, anti-choice, and anti-gay.

[russspeakeasy]

3. I think, they think, they are doing a good job and will unleash

millions of dollars of ads to take away some Obama votes, or and this is the biggie, they know how to fix voting machines and don't care what the poll numbers show.

[AsahinaKimi]

4. I think many moderate Republicans have left the party...

The right wingers have taken over, and have stormed the castle. The daily dose of stupidity coming from Congressional Republicans as well as those in the Senate... is real.

[randome]

5. They have collective dementia.

The tired, old, white guys who coasted on their momentum find themselves up against Surfin' Obama (also known as The Black Surfer who wields the power politic).

They are sinking from view.

[ArnoldLayne]

6. I have been wondering the samething too.

[global1]

7. I Think They Know That They Are Going To Steal This Election.....

so they don't care. With voter supression/disenfranchisment, rigged voting machines and all the money in the world from all these PACS because of Citizens United - I think they feel that they have this election wrapped up and we will have a President Rmoney.

If that happens - Rmoney will coast because of all the groundwork that President Obama has set up. Things will begin to peak. The job numbers will start going up and the economy will bounce back because of that and Rmoney will sit back and take all the credit. They will be calling him a genius and economic whiz.

That's what I fear will happen. I only hope that the American People aren't that stupid to give this guy a chance. We need to get out the vote and have is so overwhelmingly Obama - that they can't possibly steal this election.

[LongTomH]

19. The Ryan-Romney austerity plan will collapse the economy!

The recovery is actually very delicate; a big dose of austerity will put us back in recession / depression quickly! Problem is, by then it will be too late. If the Repubs steal this, it means they control the voting apparatus as well as the Commies in the old Soviet Union and we're a one-party state.

[riverbendviewgal]

25. this is a possibility

that is why vigilant watching mus be done and get those people to the polls

[get the red out]

8. Not throwing it

I just think they put all their eggs in one basket early on and have struggled to catch up; I think they were counting on ACA being found unconstitutional by SCOTUS, and after they weren't given that gift they had to find other stuff for rMoney to campaign on. They also hadn't counted on the President being on the offensive either, I'm sure.

[randome]

9. After Palin and now Romney, how could you possibly think they know what they are doing?

[IDemo]

10. Several things

They are no longer attempting to appeal to reason in their base, only to fear and anger.
They are counting on millions of dollars worth of Citizens United commercials to sew discontent against Obama, regardless of facts.
They are also counting on voter suppression efforts to keep down minorities and economically distressed folks who likely don't see things their way.
They may be planning on help from an e-voting manipulation (that's a polite way of saying theft) or two.

In any case, I do not think they are actually planning on throwing the election.

[siligut]

30. Concise and level-headed

I believe you covered everything.

[trof]

36. You reap what you sew.

I'm sorry.
I just couldn't resist.
"sow"
But I do agree with your post.

[IDemo]

37. I knew that

Sew, what's the problem with a little Tea grammar now and then?

[On the Road]

11. Most Teabaggers and Fundamentalists are Zealots

who pursue their policies regardless of winning elections. Some may actually believe that a majority of people agree with them.

There are equivalent groups on the Democratic side, but they have very little power in the party. On the Republican side, they dominate.

A candidate with a stronger position in the GOP might have been able to take more independent positions and still keep his party's support. Romney was so universally disliked, and seems to have so few principles of his own, that he adopted as many right-wing positions as he could.

As long as the GOP wins elections or keeps them close, the social dynamic will compel them to keep moving further right until they start suffering catastrophic defeats. At that point the party will start to put winning first and become open to more moderate candidates.

If Obama blows out Romney in November, it could enable Chris Christie to win the next nomination and implement a less extreme platform. If the election is a cliffhanger, it may take another couple of elections cycles. But I suspect this is as far right as the Republican party can go without going the way of the Whigs.

[AverageJoe90]

27. It very well could be a cliffhanger.....

Remember, there's still the issue of vote-stealing and all that.

[surrealAmerican]

12. They can't run the numbers on their own plan ...

... because they know full well the numbers don't work. They are counting on the mathematical illiteracy of their voters.

[SheilaT]

13. It is very, very important to understand

that neither candidates nor political parties deliberately set out to lose an election. Oh, I suppose that's happened once or twice in the entire history of elections, but trust me, as someone who has run for office and lost, you don't plan to lose, no matter how hopeless your particular race is.

And the common wisdom has been for many years now that the two parties are so evenly divided that (theoretically at least) any given presidential election can go either way. In reality, even though our elections are generally close once side or the other almost always has a sufficient lead as to be pretty certain of winning from some weeks or even months before the election.

There are exceptions, of course. The best one is that in 1991 no respectable Democrat was willing to put himself out there against George HW Bush in the aftermath of the first Gulf War. So a relatively unknown governor of a small southern state decided to take him on, and the rest is history.

Now, it would be true that pragmatists in the Republican party would be looking at the way this election year is shaping up and will start making plans for 2016. Discreetly. Pay attention to just how enthusiastically anyone who is remotely a contender for the '16 Republican nomination actually campaigns for the current ticket.

Another common wisdom is that the VP candidate on the losing side is automatically the front runner for the top spot four years down the road. That simply isn't true. Since 1960, one and only one losing VP candidate has gone on to win the presidency at a later date, and only one other losing VP candidate has gotten his party's nomination. Here are links to the lists of candidates for both parties:
Democrats http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Democratic_Party_presidential_tickets
Republicans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Republican_Party_presidential_tickets

[randome]

14. Excellent research.

[treestar]

16. I looked but can't find which losing VP candidate ever later won the presidency since 1960.

Mondale is a losing VP candidate who later got his party's nomination for President.

[SheilaT]

23. Richard Nixon.

[Spirochete]

32. Nixon won as a VP candidate

His loss was as a presidential candidate. (1960)

[SheilaT]

33. I got a little confused.

I think he's the only Presidential candidate to lose in that slot and then go back, get nominated again, and win.

Essentially, losing the election, no matter which place holder you are, is pretty much a guarantee you'll never be either president or vice-president.

That is an important thing to keep in mind as everyone here starts trying to handicap the 2016 campaign, which they've been doing for four years now.

If Romney/Ryan lose, as I sincerely hope they do, Romney will be essentially too old to run again, and Ryan will go on to other things, even if he remains in politics. Most of the Republicans who were originally running this year will be unlikely to run again for various reasons. Plus, no matter who wins in two months, none of us have any idea how the next four years will unfold, so at this point trying to guess who'll be running in four years is a fool's game.

[Spirochete]

34. I agree

I won't speculate on what the GOP field will look like in 2016, either - assuming they lose this year. Maybe by then the corpos will openly run everything, and the president will just be a figurehead, like Norquist wants it.

[Lisa D]

15. They believe they can lie and buy their way to the presidency.

I hope Americans prove them wrong.

[pansypoo53219]

17. in their bubble, where only fux gnews is on.

they think they already won. they are sure they can buy it. they will have enough money. the economy sucks. obama of course will lose. the bubble.

[justiceischeap]

18. I find myself wondering if this election cycle isn't a grand experiment

for the republican party to see how well voter suppression will work for them when it counts with a real candidate.

[Arugula Latte]

20. Well

There are probably competing forces within the party. E.g. the Bushies are waiting to ram Jeb down our throats in '16.

Let's not forget that a huge portion of this country is as stupid as a box of rocks, and they vote, and the Republicans know this.

[Hutzpa]

21. Throwing the election?

not a chance, they're just plain ignorant.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

22. It's the stupidity of arrogance. "We don't need fact-checkers." "We make our own reality." etc. nt

[hifiguy]

24. They are both stupid and nucking futz

add colossal arrogance and an absolute sense of entitlement and you get a multi-decker poison parfait of lunacy.

[randome]

39. With sprinkles?

[polichick]

26. They've been lying for decades - it's just that their crazies have...

...taken over and made it all obvious.

It hasn't hit them yet that their asses are hanging out in the breeze!

[HereSince1628]

28. Brazeness was a hallmark when the Neocon controlled the republican party.

Maybe the Kochs want to make it a tradition?

[HopeHoops]

29. Both

[cr8tvlde]

31. The only issue/position they have left is racism.

Kind of like a bad relationship, nothing much left to talk about, even if it's muzzled and requires a "dog whistle".

[lpbk2713]

35. They figure they have enough dirty tricks in their bag to pull it off.

And yes. By and large they are pretty fuggen stupid.

[fascisthunter]

38. Think of a rich little prick kid who always thinks he can get his way...

... same shit, different age. Dumb and delusional.