Although Republican Mitt Romney lost an easily winnable election in 2012, many conservative commentators and analysts believed that Romney would win no matter what Obama threw at him. These same commentators predicted Donald J. Trump would lose in 2016.<\/p>\n
Romney got only 48 percent of the vote, just two points more than Senator John McCain\u2019s (R-AZ) total in 2008.<\/p>\n
Bombarded with messages from the Obama campaign and the Soros-funded propaganda machine, including the Super PACs he funded, voters found Romney\u2019s private sector experience on Wall Street and wealth more objectionable than Obama\u2019s record as a Marxist president. Romney, acting on the advice of Karl Rove, never uttered the word \u201cMarxist\u201d or \u201csocialist\u201d when talking about Obama. Romney ran a campaign that was designed in part to win the votes of those who went for Obama in 2008. It was a disaster in the making that many prominent conservatives in the media did not see coming.<\/p>\n
Are they repeating these errors as they predict a \u201cRed Wave\u201d this November?<\/strong><\/p>\n Contrary to what Senator Mitch McConnell says, when he implies Trump-backed\u00a0 candidates lack \u201cquality,\u201d the problem is failing to recognize the nature of the \u00a0opposition.<\/p>\n Going back in time, to understand Obama\u2019s victory, we need to remember where the Republicans and their main mouthpiece, Fox News, went wrong, and how they could go wrong again. These people are never held accountable for their faulty predictions.<\/p>\n Fox News pundits, led by Karl Rove, underestimated the aggressive nature of the Obama political machine and its ability to exploit economic, class, and cultural divisions in society for political gain. They also demonstrated no real understanding of how the new progressive infrastructure, financed largely by George Soros, had assumed great importance for the Democratic Party. My group,\u00a0America\u2019s Survival, Inc<\/a>. (ASI) began exposing this infrastructure when we held our October 27, 2011 National Press Club \u201cSoros Files\u201d conference.<\/strong><\/p>\n Mitt Romney and other top Republicans, such as Karl Rove, steered away from any involvement in charges that Obama was a Marxist or socialist with a mysterious past that needed to be investigated. Rove, Former Deputy Chief of Staff and Senior Advisor to President George W. Bush, became famous on Fox News programs as \u201cThe Architect\u201d and \u201cBush\u2019s Brain\u201d for George W. Bush\u2019s two electoral victories. But Rove and his investors were the biggest losers on Election Day 2012 and haven\u2019t learned any lessons.<\/p>\n Rove had raised $330 million for anti-Obama advertising through his Super PAC, American Crossroads, but had been advising Republicans NOT to call Obama a socialist or left-winger. Rove believed that undecided, moderate or left-leaning voters would jump to Obama\u2019s side if that charge were leveled against him. \u201cIf you say he\u2019s a socialist, they\u2019ll go to defend him,\u201d\u00a0Rove said. \u201cIf you call him a \u2018far out left-winger,\u2019 they\u2019ll say, \u2018no, no, he\u2019s not.\u2019\u201d Rove said Romney had to remain \u201cfocused on the facts and adopt a respectful tone\u201d toward Obama.<\/p>\n That meant:<\/p>\n Americans were faced with a Marxist President in the White House and yet the \u201cParty Boss\u201d of the GOP, Karl Rove, wanted to be “respectful” toward Obama and refused to discuss his true nature. It was a recipe for disaster.<\/p>\n Here are the predictions from that time:<\/p>\n Republicans and many conservatives still fail to grasp that Marxism is a means of obtaining power and maintaining power over the people, in the name of the people and \u201cthe struggle.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n The two main aspects of Marxism, mastered by Obama and top Democrats, are:<\/p>\n The late author, Robert Chandler, described how the \u201cNew Marxism\u201d was based on the premise that \u201cthe problem with Karl Marx was that he was not Marxist enough.\u201d While\u00a0Marx focused on workers, there were many others who also were seen to be exploited by the capitalist system, including women, racial minorities, sexual libertines, and many other social and economic victims of so-called \u201cneoliberalism\u201d or the free market philosophy.<\/p>\n The left called for \u201cMarxist renewal and re-emergence\u201d by constantly expanding the \u201cvictims\u201d of capitalism. Hence, homosexuals have now been superseded by transgenders.<\/strong><\/p>\n In 2016, Republicans and conservatives repeated their mistakes.<\/p>\n \u201cAddressing a luncheon of Republican governors and donors in Washington on Feb. 19,\u201d reported the New York Times,\u00a0referring to Rove<\/a>\u00a0in 2016, \u201che warned that Donald J. Trump\u2019s increasingly likely nomination would be catastrophic, dooming the party in November.\u201d<\/p>\n Veteran conservative journalist Fred Barnes wrote a Wall Street Journal article about how the campaign of Donald Trump, was supposedly dividing and weakening the Republican Party — thus guaranteeing a Democratic Party win in November. Matt Walsh at Glenn Beck\u2019s The Blaze commented that Hillary Clinton would be elected president \u201cbecause Republican voters decided to squander the best GOP field in decades by flocking to a cut-rate impostor in an expensive suit\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n Commentators get things wrong, and that doesn\u2019t disqualify them from continuing to hold their jobs and make predictions. But getting elections wrong, without analyzing whether the \u201cprogressives\u201d are still outsmarting the Republicans, is a recipe for another disaster.<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n