8 votes

How to Explain Romney’s Loss to Shocked Conservatives

If Romney loses tonight, there are going to be a lot of shocked Republicans and conservatives. If you’re a reader of the Greek New Testament (and who isn’t?) the appropriate word is “skandalon.” Such a result will be a “scandal” or a “stumbling block” to your friends who were sure that good Ohioans would vote for Mitt Romney and that this Nate Silver guy at the New York Times was cooking the books on the polls, along with the rest of the media.

Conservatives will say, with some good reason that unemployment is unacceptably high. Obama didn’t bring hope or change. And there is no way all those flaky college kids and minority voters could be excited enough to show up to the polls this year. So how did this happen?

Here are some things to remind them:


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Kathleen Gee's picture

This deserves a bump.

The worst GOP candidate in history. Period, end of sentence.

"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid." - Ronald Reagan

Public Relations Consulting


...for the bump.

SteveMT's picture

Can't wait for this outcome.... Why?

1. Only 4 more years versus 8 more years of tyranny become there is hope of Liberty.

2. I want to hear the talking heads, like Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, etc. bemoan the sour grapes of a Romney loss.

Love #2

I'd like nothing more than to see those fat talking heads deflated...especially the overgrown lephrechaun!



I added my 2 cents to the comment section...

that the main reason Mitt Obamney will fail is that he couldn't win over the independents. No shocker there.

robot999's picture



"Government is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex". - Frank Zappa

I hope your right.

I think Romney is going to win.
I don't want him to, but I have that awful feeling.

I think you are right

- but not so much from people actually voting for him but more because it seems Romney has the most money, has control of the voting machines and so can do the most cheating. Also the fact that the vested interests (the big money corporations) want this Republocrat 2-in-1 party system and reckon that the Democrat Party machine can stand a loss better than the Republicans who might well experience "a little local difficulty" if they lose!

The explanation is...

nominate Ron Paul, Justin Amash, or Tom Woods, or prepare for another humiliating loss in 2016.

I don't play, I commission the league.

Excellent article


"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

The explanation is

Romney lost and we are the ones that did it. And the neocons cry like little babies waa waa waa. Who needs another chicken hawk for President? Nominate another neocon chicken hawk in 2016 and he will lose too.

[F]orce can only settle questions of power, not of right. - Clyde N. Wilson


that last paragraph about sums it up.

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*