The RNC Admits It: The More Voters Hear From Republicans, The Worse It Is For The GOP


I’m sure most of you remember the lead up to the 2012 presidential election, particularly the GOP primary.  Talk about a circus.  I’ve never seen a primary where essentially every candidate was at some point a “favorite.”  Partially because almost every candidate was equally as crazy and mostly because Republicans were searching for anyone but Mitt Romney.

Personally, I loved it.  Watching the GOP primary debates was pure comedy for me.  At times I’d watch them thinking to myself, “Are these really the best people the GOP has to offer?”  When I call it a circus, I’m really not joking.  I felt like I was watching a bunch of clowns performing in an actual three-ring circus.

Many within the Republican party quickly denounced the 2012 process, essentially saying that their candidates faced too much exposure – which hurt them nationally.

Think about that for a moment.  Many Republicans really felt that the more exposure their party got on national television, the worse it was for the GOP.  Basically meaning that the more the American people got to know Republicans and their candidates, the more Americans didn’t like them.

The reality was that it wasn’t just the candidates that voters didn’t like, it was the entire conservative ideology.  During the primaries Republicans have to pander to their base of voters, so true conservative ideology was on full display.  And the more the American people heard them talk, the more they realized how ridiculous their policies would be.

Well, it seems the Republican National Committee agrees.  They’ve decided to drastically shorten their primary season, reduce the number of primary debates and even hold their convention earlier in an attempt to limit the beating exposure their candidates receive before the general election period begins.

Basically what the RNC is saying to me is, “Look, we know the more the voters see us on national television trying to pander to conservative voters, the less likely they are to support us in the general election.  So this is our attempt to limit that exposure in hopes of lessening the damage national attention has done to our candidates in the past.”

Let’s also not forget that Republicans have lost the popular election in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections.  As I’m sure most of you are painfully aware that George W. Bush was “elected” president  even though he lost the popular vote.  Some say the electoral vote as well, but that’s a debate for another day.

This seems to be a desperate Republican attempt to end that trend.

Honestly, to drastically limit the exposure your candidates get because you know that the more voters hear from them the worse it is for your party?  That’s just sad.

Sure that’s not what Republicans are saying is behind this, but I think it’s pretty clear that 2012 was an absolute disaster for their candidates.  By the time Mitt Romney won the primary battle he had made so many gaffes and idiotic comments that President Obama didn’t have to do much else but play reruns.

I guess we’ll see how it plays out come 2016.  Will this gamble by the GOP pay off?  Personally, I don’t think it matters.  No matter what they do, Hillary Clinton’s going to wipe the floor with them.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • rossbro

    People ! Get the proper voter identification and V O T E ! We’ve GOT to get rid of these Troglodytes.

    • Robb Thompson

      Although it’s kind of sick to have to think of it this way, if people on public assistance HAD to have ID in order to use it, it would have the effect of making sure they could pass the new draconian rules being passed. I wonder if the R’s have considered that as their pushing having proper ID to use EBT – it seems kind of counter-productive to their goals.

  • Scaramongus

    You know – that while they are intentionally limiting access to the media, they will eventually blame the media for not covering them enough. Then again being a morally and intellectually bankrupt party, there really isn’t anything of substance to cover – and I think the GOP knows that too.

    • Pipercat

      Furthermore, ideologically and ethically bankrupt!

  • Jo Clark

    “…to drastically limit the exposure your candidates get because you know that the more voters hear from them the worse it is for your party?”

    Sure, they won’t say that out loud, but that really is exactly what’s going on here. That was the biggest gathering of pure crazy ever seen in American politics. I remember back in ’08, many folks used to run home from work and catch the news to see what new and crazzzzy thing Palin had said that day. It was pure gold entertainment, and the primary in ’12 was pure gold on steroids.

    I fully expect the crazy to be on full display, no matter how much they limit the exposure. The tea party *will* be heard, gosh darnit!

  • Sunnysmom

    Newsflash to GOP: If you run any of the guys pictured above, you will lose. Actually, you’ll probably lose anyway because the majority of Americans have no intention of going back to the 1800s, which is where you seem hell-bent to take us.

  • ghhshirley

    Remember, we MUST vote in the 2014 mid-terms and vote a straight Democratic ticket at all levels of office.

  • tedmills

    That being said, DO NOT BE COMPLACENT. I’ve seen the Dems do this over and over. We don’t want a narrow victory, we want an absolutely crushing victory.

    • buricco

      This is what continues to damn the Democratic Party. That, and people who rage at the party in power every time, and switch parties every election…

  • Pipercat

    It’s kind of sad really, when you think about it. They tear down everything and everyone around them and now, this looks like the price they’re having to pay.

  • Green_Devil

    We lucked out the last election- that waiter who taped the now-famous Lord Mittens’ “47%” speech to wealthy donors showed, with shocking clarity, what even an allegedly moderate Republican thought of we punters who can’t afford dancing horses or winters in Monaco. And we get fed a continuous diet of racism, homophobia, and sexism from the party that swore it was going to reform itself after 2012, but like an alcoholic on the wagon, just can’t help itself from spouting ignorance and hatred. Anyone catch Sen DroopyDawg McConnell this weekend trying to justify the delay in voting for an extension on unemployment benefits? Fuck the poor people who are suddenly cut adrift in the middle of this brutal weather. The GOP can’t be bothered to bestir itself from its many taxpayer-funded vacation days to vote on this measure. Maybe the Senate needs to push a bill to cut off their pay until the matter is brought to a vote.

  • Libby

    I don’t see any way for the Republicans to hide… limiting debates can’t keep their 1940’s agenda from the people. Every time they open their mouth it is all to clear they are completely out of touch with the majority. I see no way for them to win the White House with these nuts representing them.

  • white trash religious teaparty

    anyone notice how the “party” of small govt/ non paying/ no forcing morality has NOT stepped up to admonish the TEXAS law(s) which kept a dead woman alive — and paying hospital- against FAMILY wishes so it could keep a deformed baby gestating in a long (brain) dead woman??? IDENTICAL to aca telling nuns to pay/provide for contraception -yet NO TEA(shitbag) PARTY complained???? VOTE REPUBLICAN!!!

  • exmotogo

    I saw the link to this on facebook and I thought it was an onion article…

  • Sandy Greer

    I’ll say one thing for the TeaPugs: They vote.
    It’s SO important we vote in 2014, and again, in 2016. Dems cannot afford to sit elections out.

  • Gary Menten

    Instead of trying to limit candidate’s exposure, why not try putting forward sensible candidates? Yes, yes, I know…it’s much easier to do the former than the latter. Silly me.

  • Marc Whinery

    Trump is the best thing that could happen to them. When he doesn’t win the primaries, the eventual winner can claim everything that someone remembers up to the nomination was Trump. Nobody is listening to anyone else. It’s the Trump rope a dope, taking all the heat in the primaries so nobody will remember what the candidate says by the general election.