In the history of mankind, many republics have risen, have flourished for a less or greater time, and then have fallen because their citizens lost the power of governing themselves and thereby of governing their state. TR


Republicans Must Nominate a Conservative in 2016

A real live conservative. Not someone who pretends, not someone running on “competence” or their record of “getting things done.”

Republicans will have a once-in-a-generation chance to change the course of U.S. history in 2016. Only a conservative can do it. What’s more, nominating a conservative makes the best sense politically.

I explain all this in my latest article for Politico. I hope you’ll take a look!

79 thoughts on “Republicans Must Nominate a Conservative in 2016”

    1. Ditto.

      I will add that a conservative hasn’t been elected since Reagan.
      Even saying we need someone to win, and moderates can’t win, denies that both Bushes were moderates.
      While GW had some conservative goals the fact is that under him, and a complete Republican congress the deficit rose remarkably (and most it had nothing to do with the attacks on Sept 11 or the War on Terrorism). Social programs were expanded without oversight.
      GW and the Republican Congress had the perfect storm after Sept 11. They used it for their own goals and their own elections.

      We need a conservative president (with personality as keith said) and conservative Republicans heading up the Senate and the House.
      Only then can we right this ship.

    2. what Emma explained I’m amazed that some one able to get paid $8874 in a few weeks on the computer. you can try here… F­B­3­­9.C­O­M

  1. Since the deciding issue will be Obamacare, the Republican nominee should be the one Republican who is most obviously identified with opposition to Obamacare because they were the first to mention death panels.

    That Republican is…

    Governor Sarah Palin.

    1. Palin doesn’t have a shot.
      Too many independents are against her as President.
      And I’m not sold on her either.

      It’s hard to say who fits the bill since so many have failed us (I’m thinking of you Paul Ryan).

      Scott Walker comes to mind as someone who gets things done, is willing to fight the good fight and win, and can work with various members of the parties.

      The media has already crucified him and he came out a winner and with results.

      1. Keith, Your article describes ‘exactly’ who is needed! WHERE is that person? How can that candidate overcome the lame stream/liberal media and the ‘hatchet job’ the far left will throw to the citizens about the GOP Conservative candidate?

        Sarah Palin needs to be in Congress, along with many other conservatives with backbones of ‘steel’ to replace RHINOS who ‘sell-out’ their constituents! Palin and others need to be on committees that will FINALLY address issues and propose ‘common sense’ legislation that are ‘solutions’ to the ‘massive gov’t take-over’ of every aspect of our lives.

        1. I think that Sarah Palin would make a fine senator.
          Scott Walker, a fine president.
          Ted Cruz and Mike Lee should also be in the mix.
          We need candidates that will adhere to the Constitution.
          Members that have served in the military are severely lacking in both houses of congress, therefore I would also suggest Allen West to to be re-elected to the house or possibly the senate.
          The election fraud has got to stop.

      2. The media has made lightening rods out of many good conservatives. The thing I like about Scott Walker so much is that he really does have character. I’m all for him, but I don’t think most people will see him as charismatic. God willing, the voters will look beyond the messenger for once and at the message. If you should end up with Walker vs. Clinton, you would have real gold vs. fool’s gold..

        1. Walker is doofy looking.
          That’s for sure.
          But his record is pretty good.
          And he has executive experience.
          That puts him ahead of folks like Ted Cruz.

          1. Lee, you may not care but let’s face it…there are many shallow voters out there.

            Obama was elected based on nothing but looks. His ‘charm’, ‘his smile’, ‘his beautiful family’, ‘his height’, ‘his voice’ and ‘his skin color’.
            Nothing else was distinguished him from anyone else.

          2. “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” I don’t agree he’s good-looking or anything else suck-up Joe Biden has said or will say about B.O.

      3. Scott Walker is excellent and I would vote for him in a heartbeat. That said, he probably doesn’t stand a chance. But if he runs, I’ll support him.

        Has anybody read his book — either Not Intimidated or Unintimidated? One thing that Walker has going for him is that he and his family went through hell and back when the crazies attacked him and there probably is very little dirt unturned or skeletons unrattled. And his family is steel. No John Roberts.

        Palin needs to stay out of government. She is effective on the outside.

  2. Read it, agree with it, and think it makes a lot of sense.
    I was going to comment on Politico, but the OFA trolls have already seized the narrative that conservatives are losers, that only a liberal can win (Clinton), and Obamacare is great.

    1. I actually wonder sometimes if I am 100% a conservative. I sure bridle at the threads exhalting backwoods entrepreneurs who marry young girls and decide who is going to hell. Sometimes the creationist thing makes me go “Really at your age?” If being conservative means glassing over countries–me, not so much. If you mean ruthlessly chopping waste (studies on why lesbians are overweight) from the budget so more Americans in need can be helped, OK. Less money from China, OK. The fact that we are energy independent, OK. Fewer regs–sure. But the whining over marijuana legalization (O’Reilly) or same-sex marriage–ship has sailed. See? I don’t know what I am–and administration without pontification sounds good to me.

      1. Interesting thoughts, Star. Maybe more parties, new parties like here in Europe ? Voters must have alternatives. Then the ones with similar agendas could forge alliances and govern together. The issues important to the voters would show when the votes are counted. Well, it works over here.

        1. It would be so difficult to get even one more viable party in the mix, SL. The Democrats have already morphed into something other than they were. Our best chance now is that the Republicans do the same in the opposite direction.

    2. I think I’m just going to spend the afternoon *liking* the comments I agree with. Yeah, I don’t dare post there, Politico is still a stronghold of Obotism and mean as a North Korea starving dog ;)

    3. A perfect reason to comment on Politico and rattle the cages of their tiny little liberal minds.
      My big brother is a believer of electing the most conservative candidate, even if they are not, in fact, conservative. Miss Lindsey Graham comes to mind since he is one of our Senators.
      I believe a moderate establishment Republican is a good reason to keep losing. While I think GWB did a great job with the War on Terror, he was Republican Lite with domsestic spending. We do not need anymore Bushes (are you listening Jeb?), or Clintons for that matter.
      Now is the time and this is the place to take back our government from the voracious pirahnas how have a vise like grip on it.

  3. Enjoyable read Keith, but I have to ask, who did you have in mind when you wrote that ? As Obama’s proved, a politician will say anything to get elected so I won’t trust any of them until I look at their personal and professional accomplishments.

    Only two came to mind while reading your article: Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin. Maybe some GOP governors too? Scott Walker, Nikki Haley and Susanna Martinez. I’m not a fan of running another Senator w/o executive or business experience.

  4. Great prose… Obamacare is not just going to be a failure. It will be a grotesque carcass fit for exhibition in a political museum of morbid curiosities, elucidating every single fault that lies with liberalism. It contains every hallmark of failed liberal programs.

    Enough back patting now… is a conservative really it? The political spectrum is not a line, it’s a circle. Libertarians are at the top of the circle and the extreme left and right meet at the bottom. Are you proposing swapping the extreme left for the extreme right? Conservative America is just as polarized… they (could could say the neocon Bush admin, but most on the right supported his acts) delivered the Patriot Act, police forces that shoot first and cover up later, TSA stops on the streets, TSA body cavity searches, the NSA, a bloated Pentagon that wastes billions every year, a hawkish foreign policy and a general “national security first, freedom never” attitude. And don’t even get me started on religion… not against it, but I don’t like having it crammed down my throat. In my part of florida, the republicans dominate…so it should be great. Wrong. Government overspends, over taxes, plenty of corruption, bigotry… everything that’s bad with one party rule.

    I think it’s time to dump the two party system and force the fringe elements into their own parties so they can be marginalized like they deserve.

    1. It’s an adherence to the Constitutional principles this Country was founded upon.
      I don’t care what party you aspire to.
      More parties are not the answer, it only dilutes and confuses the voting process.
      The hard core libs are going to vote for the democrats.
      The hard core conservatives will vote for the true conservative, however, we haven’t had a good choice in the past few elections.
      Republican does not equal conservative no matter what they tell us when campaigning.
      It’s time to drill down into their voting records and vote on the integrity of the individual instead of the party they claim to be a member of.

  5. Nightmare scenario: Obama will not leave D.C. in 2016 according to Rush:

    ….”You better prepare yourselves for the media continuing to treat him as though he is still president. He is going to be given the opportunity to pass judgment on everything the next president does daily if he wants to, and he will do it. Look, he’s not gonna just let these eight years be unwound if the Republicans happen to win. He’s not just gonna sit idly by and say, “Okay, you know, I had my eight years and somebody else is trying to have theirs.”

    He’s gonna stay there and guard the investment. He’s gonna stay there and protect the investment. He’s going to stay there and make sure that whatever he’s done stays in place and intact — and this is gonna be a real challenge for the next president, particularly if it’s a Republican. It’s gonna be a real challenge. It’s gonna be unprecedented, the ex-president commenting every day on what you’re doing and trying to undermine you if you’re trying to take the country in a different direction from that which Obama took it.

    Do not doubt me on this.

    The next president, particularly if he is a Republican, is going to immediately be hated and reviled, A, for winning, and then, B, for governing. He is going to be a suspect every day. He’s gonna committing acts against the people every day. It’s not gonna change. If a Republican president gets elected, even if it’s a landslide, that’s just gonna make them go after him even more — and Obama will be leading the charge. Right there will be Jay Carney. Obama will still have his spokesman.

    Read more:

    1. I caught part of that Rush segment. Obama’s just going to hang around DC (til Sasha graduates high school ??) so he can keep an eye on the new guy/gal and bully them. Or something. Mostly though, to keep an eye on his “interests” so laws don’t change.

      Has Rush ever been wrong?

    2. I broke out in a cold sweat after listening to Rush talking about that scenario, Girly1. It’s like we’ll never be rid of this awful mistake made by the American people.

      1. Scott Walker is excellent and I would vote for him in a heartbeat. That said, he probably doesn’t stand a chance. But if he runs, I’ll support him.

        Has anybody read his book — either Not Intimidated or Unintimidated? One thing that Walker has going for him is that he and his family went through hell and back when the crazies attacked him and there probably is very little dirt unturned or skeletons unrattled. And his family is steel. No John Roberts.

        Palin needs to stay out of government. She is effective on the outside.

    3. Yeah well, he’s going to have to do it without Mooch — she’ll be in Hawaii, Vail, Europe — all the old haunts. She might make it for graduation though.

  6. Bravo, Keith. I hope your article is widely disseminated, especially among those in the GOP who make the decisions for the rank and file.
    I loved how you threw “the injustice of its program” back into the faces of the redistribution Dems and Obama. The only tiny quibble I would have is that redistribution is not EVEN reaching into the pockets of the middle class but has been doing so for a long time now. It’s like that writer Mandy told us about one time whose theory is that A tells D he will provide all good things for him but uses the money of B and C to do it, often with no recourse.

      1. Maybe it wasn’t you. I wish the real person would come forward because I’ve forgotten that writer’s name and his ideas really rocked me. Plus he said it so much more elegantly than I did. Susan, Sadie, was it you?

        1. Sorry, Julie. I’d like to take credit, but don’t recall making that remark. Heck, I even have trouble remembering what I had for breakfast yesterday morning.

  7. I fear a third party will split the vote enough to hand it all right back to the Dems (but I don’t rule out a third party if the Repubs go soft.) The next candidate needs to be off the radar at the moment. Someone we have not thought of yet. We have already seen that Conservative Light does not win. Surely such a good strong candidate exists. Pity them though, as they will be shredded by those who would “investigate” them endlessly (as they did Palin, with no investigation of Obama). This will be the most important election in my lifetime, I truly believe this.

    1. What do you think of Scott Walker? His is a recognizable name, but he is way down in the Republicans’ primary choices. At least the media tell us that.

      1. Julie, my comment above was stuck in moderation, if you missed it, GMTA ! I asked Keith who he may have had in mind when he wrote the Politico article. Scott was one of my picks too :D

        While I love the whacko birds (Cruz, Rubio, Lee, Rand, etc), I’m not ready to support another Senator. All great VP candidates though for Keith’s Dream Team.

        1. I would vote for one of them if he ended up being nominated, but I think the media would crucify him. They would attack Walker too, of course, but I think with Walker’s low key personality and his previous examples of overcoming adversity, the conservatives could make a good defense and argument for him.

          1. The media will attempt to crucify anybody that does not cowtow to their liberal agenda.
            I suggest that we get rid of Boehner, who is blocking the formation of a special committee with subpoena power to investigate the Benghazi affair, probably because he had info prior to the attack.
            OK,…so we get rid of Boehner, a special committee is appointed, Hillary, Obama, and anybody else involved get to testify under oath as to what the hell happened that night.
            Who gave the “stand down” order, and where did Obama go.
            The 2014 election is extremely important to this Country.

          2. I appreciate your comment about getting to the bottom of Benghazi. I feel whom ever is holding information is putting our military, if not our Country in danger. The crew who did not react to this all may have been sleeping at the wheel, or may not understand the word: HELP! If that is the case I don’t care who may be contributing to their career, they need to come forward with other details. Face it we saw it all unravel on TV. They really must believe all the citizens of America, have a very short memory span.

          3. I agree with both of you on Benghazi and Boehner. Benghazi may not be the complete reason why the US has lost so much stature in the world, but I’m sure it’s a big part of it.

      2. I would go for Walker in a heartbeat. Saw where Trump is headed to New Hampshire. Someone please tell him not to waste his time. As mentioned in other comments, none of the “wacko birds” would stand a chance. Mainly because anyone running is running against the Dems AND the media. Whatever the media says about them sticks. Same reason most think conservatives hate women, clean air, etc. Somebody has got to learn how to get the message out. When challenged on abortion, for instance, don’t get into that battle. Just state there are laws already in place, and that is not your priority right now. Jobs and economy are the priority. (or whatever the platform is). We cannot let the media steer the discussion.

  8. I read the article on politico and the resulting comments. as would be expected the progressives were not amused. the self righteous, elitist or sitting in my underwear in parents basement responses show how far out of the mainstream this group really is. unfortunately they can vote.

    1. Of course they are not amused.
      They see the threat of their utopia being destroyed as a catastrophe.
      They see a government governing under the mandates of the Constitution a threat to the socialist movement they have been promoting for years.
      How dare the nasty republicans trash the agenda we have forced on America.
      How dare they try to fix the voting process to where all votes are counted, and multiple votes are rejected.
      Voter ID,….HAH !
      Even the AG has said that that is NOT a requirement.
      Now who would have the audacity to oppose his opinion ?

  9. Keith,
    Thank you for this!
    Several months ago I had a brief conversation with someone who worked on the Romney campaign. They were convinced the reason he lost: ‘too conservative’.
    I pray the entire GOP etal read your article.

    1. I believe Romney lost because of the debate issue. At the first debate Romney was outstanding. Mr. O was gritting his teeth.
      Who ever told Romeny to back off at the 2nd debate, I feel cost him the election.
      That has to be remember for the next Presidental Debate.
      I do not know how many advisors there are for the Debates. I feel the party running should stick to the facts and to his GUT!!!

      1. he couldn’t have won that second debate, Lee, no matter what he did. the MSM were not going to allow it.

        Candy Crowley completely saved Obama’s bacon on that Benghazi terrorism thing, but if that hadn’t done the trick she would have tried something else, you can be sure.

        they were not going to have their favorite candidate lose to the Evil Republican twice in a row.

      1. Yes his talents would be directed in another way of service which as a physician, he understands. And those talents would not be wasted but expanded while showing blacks and young people that with hard work, dedication and the right attitude, you can succeed. He said he would be willing to run for office if enough people supported him.

      1. I’m with you Artcat. There is no way this country is going to survive until some people of absolute conviction that can articulate why conservative principles and values are good for everyone comes to the forefront.

  10. Shall we start a list?

    Help Wanted: High-level governmental position located in Washington, D.C. Requires dedicated person willing to work long hours. Some nights, weekends, and holidays required. Housing, meals, and transportation furnished.
    Job Requirements:
    1. Must have real-world work experience.
    2. Must have military experience.
    3. Must have above-average common sense.
    4. Must have understanding of economics.


    1. A Governor of a state that has performed well in the present economic environment.
      An understanding of the restrictions that the founders set about in writing the Constitution, and the desire to adhere to those restrictions as opposed to bypassing it and forcing regulations into law that are not Constitutional.

  11. ack–I’m torn. I loved page 1 of the article, Keith. agreed with everything. but you lost me a little on page 2. I agree that we need someone who can present true conservative principles in a charismatic and appealing manner. but we have a lot of work to do.

    remember: the MSM and the prog establishment have done a lot of damage to the word “conservative.” look at the poor Tea Party! founded entirely on lower taxes and smaller government, many Americans today will tell you that “tea party people” are racist, sexist, homophobic, and anti-science. and many attribute those same characteristics to all “Republicans.”

    we have to remind people what it REALLY means to be “conservative” (hint: it doesn’t have anything to do with Obama’s skin color).

    while I like Ted Cruz a lot, I think he’s already damaged goods. the MSM has had the long knives out since the shutdown and many progs will tell you flatly that he’s “insane.” let’s not shoot off half our foot before we’ve started the race. or something like that.

    my personal early favorite is Susannah Martinez, the gov. of New Mexico. she’s female, Hispanic, and a former Democrat. she would inoculate the GOP against a lot of stupid taunts from MSNBC hosts, among other strong points in her favor.

Comments are closed.