Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said he’d use his speech to the Republican National Committee in Charlotte, N.C.,  tonight to “refute Barack Obama’s liberal vision” and urge his party to “recalibrate the compass of conservatism.” Though he didn’t have much to say about Obama specifically, he did have plenty to say about the GOP and the direction he thinks it needs to take to win elections again.

Some of that tough medicine for the GOP came in the form of an entreaty to “stop being the stupid party” and making statements that damage the GOP brand.

Jindal had plenty of critics following along with his speech, but his remarks were targeted strictly to the Republicans he was addressing.




It would be difficult not to see Jindal’s speech tonight as an early hint at a run for president in 2016.


If Rep. Paul Ryan is another name on that list, was Jindal’s complaint about an obsession with numbers being a losing game an early shot across the bow?

Does anyone really believe that Jindal isn’t thinking of running in 2016?

  • Kim_S

    Unfortunately, the stupid party ship has done sailed. Please, FTLOGoodness can we get someone intelligent to represent us? Is that too much to ask?

  • Silenttype78

    Denis Donovan @denisgaltymorr

    “GOP promises a different face to come. Good luck hiding the party’s elitism, racism & homophobia.”

    Meh…the democrats have had much success hiding their history of hate,racism,and bigotry…
    Time to blow the lid off of the lib-prog lies regarding their own history!

    Correct lib-progs everytime they start in about “Southern Strategy”. This myth MUST be busted!!!

  • peteee363

    wow, he has more great quotes the romney ever did, and this was just one night!

  • George Washington Mclintock

    Rubio and Jindal both putting forth plans for the future direction of conservatism. Can only help. I like what Jindal had to say very, very much indeed, and it sounds like he’s learned about the liberal media.

    • Brian Roastbeef

      I like Jindal. Rubio is slowly losing me. His support for Panetta’s weakening of our military via women in combat is the latest blow.

  • nc

    Crazy idea: If one of our own speaks up about our principles with great clarity, can we give high fives and not look to pick him apart?

    Great job, Gov! Keep it up!

  • NeoKong

    Step one.
    Stop letting Democrats control key voting precincts without challenge or oversight and step two is stop letting Democrats participate in GOP debates and primaries.
    It is an abomination to let left wing shills like David Gregory and George Stephanopulos moderate GOP debates.

    • Lady 12

      Step two: stop worrying about appearances and start putting out a clear, detailed reason why he should be elected. The whole softening Romney thing up didn’t help him much. We’re electing a president, not a teddy bear.

    • $30158943

      Maybe the GOP should start with getting rid of Jindal and others like him then.

      1. Jindal permits Louisiana schools to teach creationism. Thanks to Jindal’s educational voucher system in Louisiana, students will be attending private or parochial schools on the taxpayer’s dime. But those schools don’t necessarily meet the standards of the state’s public schools, and may teach students creationism instead of standard science curricula.

      2. He allows state employees to be fired for being gay. During his first few months as governor, Jindal decided not to renew an anti-discrimination executive order protecting LGBT employees who work for the state. Jindal has also said that same sex marriage opens up a path for courts to overturn the Second Amendment.

      3. He has signed bills to intimidate women seeking abortions. Jindal comparedwomen who have gotten abortions to criminals. But that unpalatable sentiment also came with a policy change — he signed a bill that requires all abortion clinics to post intimidating messages in their waiting rooms, and establishes a website that points women to crisis pregnancy centers instead of abortion-providing facilities. Jindal also signed a measure creating a 24-hour waiting period between a woman’s mandatory ultrasound and the date of her abortion.

      4. He seeks to dramatically cut taxes for the wealthy, increase taxes for everyone else. Jindal’s latest tax proposal would raise taxes for 80 percent of Louisianians. The poorest 20 percent — with an average income of $12,000 — would face substantial tax increases, while those in the top one percent would on average get a tax cut of $25,423.

      5. He refuses to provide health care for Louisiana’s poorest. Louisiana has the third highest uninsured rate in the country. Twenty percent of residents lack insurance of any kind. But as one of the governors vehemently opposed to Obamacare, Jindal turned down the Medicaid expansion offered under the law, ignoring the fact that it would drastically lower the numbers of uninsured and ultimately save the state money on emergency care.

      • Ronald

        Good points.

        • AgntOrngVctm


      • WVS

        This may shock you, but something on the order of half the people in this country still hold moral values that include opposition to abortion, a traditional definition of marriage, and/or personal responsibility. And when some idiot like Akin comes out and misrepresents us, we cringe, but we don’t just drop those values. We don’t, ahem, “evolve.” I know we aren’t really on the upswing as a voting bloc, but eight years of Obama combined with a young, passionate, relatable candidate might fire us up enough to take an election. It’s not time to capitulate to a one-party, progressive, morally relativistic government just yet, any more than Democrats should’ve thrown in the towel after Bush’s second win.

        As for hiking taxes on lower incomes, I can’t check that without a source, but I trust the GOP establishment to force him away from something that stupid if he does decide to run. But then, that’s the establishment that thought Mitt Romney could beat an incumbent, the media, and his own record all at once…

      • Dee M.

        And your point is………?

      • GaryTheBrave

        Point 1) Creationism may be a theory, but so is evolution. It has not been proven. Private schools often provide superior education over state-run schools. Smaller class size is just one reason. If that wasn’t true then why is Obama sending his alleged daughters to Sidwell Friends?

        Point 2) How many gay employees have been fired? Every governor, just as every president, has the right to dismiss the predecessors’ EO’s. They are not law. If it is so important then the legislature should pass a law. The governor cannot ignore law. Neither can the President (PLEASE tell Obama).

        Point 3) Anyone who states that someone “said” something without a direct quote or source I dismiss immediately. It is all about context. Same with “intimidating” messages. What do they say? As for a website that directs women to crisis pregnancy centers most taxpayers would welcome the idea that their tax dollars are not paying for abortions but, instead, may help a pregnant women to give birth to a healthy baby that a loving couple would adopt. Finally, since liberals want a waiting period to buy a gun, what is wrong with a waiting period before an abortion?

        Point 4) How long have you been this greedy? YOUR president says we all need skin in the game. Since poor people are the largest consumers of government services it is only fair they pay for it. In the meantime, keeping taxes low for wealthier individuals makes Louisiana an attractive locale for businesses to grow. Look at California for what happens when a state gouges the wealthy.

        Point 5) How does Jindal deny health CARE to the poor? There are free clinics and emergency rooms that do take care of the poor who cannot pay. Big Pharma always advertises that if someone cannot pay for their medicines the manufacturers can help. The Medicaid expansion comes with strings attached such as mandated health exchanges, etc. Considering that Obamacare/Tax reduces the coverage from Medicare by $1,377,000,000 EVERY WEEK, and considering the large percentage of retirees living in Louisiana, he probably was looking at the impact to his state in that program. Please remember that health care is NOT health coverage.

        • Judy B

          Great factual response.

        • $30158943

          You are an idiot if you think evolution is just a theory. It is scientifically proven. Any thing else you have to say is thus discredited.

          • Comrade Jones

            Yes comrade, because proof consists of non-existent experimental data and large doses of presuppositional dogmatism! The same uniformitarianism that has stunted geolological study for centuries because after all, catastrophes do nothing for historical geophysical analysis! The same academic orthodoxy that dragged genetics down on its insistence that information theory couldn’t be right, and that most DNA was junk… and that the number of chromosomes was indicitive of evolutionary advancement.. because…evolution. oh and failing/firing/ousting anyone that holds a different opinion on a historical matter that has literally no effect on the execution of experimental reasearch. Or calling genetic entropy, the future executioner of all life, an increase in complexity! How fucking stu- great! Good thing that magi- uh, science proves things, otherwise this might be considered compeletly irrelevant to everyone not in a (very useful) metaphysics course!

          • Comrade Jones

            Yes comrade, because proof consists of non-existent experimental data and large doses of presuppositional dogmatism! The same uniformitarianism that has stunted geolological study for centuries because after all, catastrophes do nothing for historical geophysical analysis! The same academic orthodoxy that dragged genetics down on its insistence that information theory couldn’t be right, and that most DNA was junk… and that the number of chromosomes was indicitive of evolutionary advancement.. because…evolution. oh and failing/firing/ousting anyone that holds a different opinion on a historical matter that has literally no effect on the execution of experimental reasearch. Or calling genetic entropy, the future executioner of all life, an increase in complexity! How fucking stu- great! Good thing that magi- uh, science proves things, otherwise this might be considered compeletly irrelevant to everyone not in a (very useful) metaphysics course!

          • Teresa Davis McCormick

            Actually you are wrong, sir. There are plenty of scientist who support intelligent design. The facts to prove either way are just not there.

          • Teresa Davis McCormick

            Actually you are wrong, sir. There are plenty of scientist who support intelligent design. The facts to prove either way are just not there.

          • GaryTheBrave

            All the scientific journals call evolution a theory. All theories are unproven. Once proved it becomes a scientific law. Everything thing I wrote is absolutely and unarguably valid.

            Theory of evolution.
            Law of gravity.

            See the difference?

          • $30158943

            “unarguably valid”? Don’t you wish, but its not the simple (except maybe to a simpleton). You are misusing the terminology. Laws describe, and theories explain; it is not a hierarchy.

            If you think that “evolution is just a theory”, a guess, a hunch, and not a fact, not proven. You’ve been misled. Keep reading, and in less than two minutes from now you’ll know that you’ve been misinformed. We’re not going to try and change your mind about evolution. We just want to point out that “it’s just a theory” is not a valid argument.

            The Theory of Evolution is a theory, but guess what? When scientists use the word theory, it has a different meaning to normal
            everyday use.1 That’s right, it all comes down to the multiple meanings of the word theory. If you said to a scientist that you didn’t believe in evolution because it was “just a theory”, they’d probably be a bit puzzled.

            In everyday use, theory means a guess or a hunch, something that maybe needs proof. In science, a theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It’s a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations.2 It ties together all the facts about something, providing an explanation that fits all the observations and can be used to make predictions. In science, theory is the ultimate goal, the explanation. It’s as close to proven as anything in
            science can be.

            Some people think that in science, you have a theory, and once it’s proven, it becomes a law. That’s not how it works. In science, we collect facts, or observations, we use laws to describe them, and a
            theory to explain them. You don’t promote a theory to a law by proving it. A theory never becomes a law.

            This bears repeating. A theory never becomes a law. In
            fact, if there was a hierarchy of science, theories would be higher than laws.

            There is nothing higher, or better, than a theory. Laws describe things, theories explain them. An example will help you to understand this. There’s a law of gravity, which is the description of gravity. It basically says that if you let go of something it’ll fall. It doesn’t say why. Then there’s the theory of gravity, which is an attempt to explain why. Actually, Newton’s Theory of Gravity did a pretty good job, but Einstein’s Theory of Relativity does a better job of explaining it. These explanations are called theories, and will always be theories. They can’t be changed into laws, because laws are different things. Laws describe, and theories explain.

            Just because it’s called a theory of gravity, doesn’t mean that
            it’s just a guess. It’s been tested. All our observations are supported by it, as well as its predictions that we’ve tested. Also, gravity is real! You can observe it for yourself. Just because it’s real doesn’t mean that the explanation is a law. The explanation, in scientific terms, is called a theory.

            Evolution is the same. There’s the fact of evolution. Evolution
            (genetic change over generations)3 happens, just like gravity does. Don’t take my word for it.4 Ask your science teacher, or google it. But that’s not the issue we are addressing here. The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is our best explanation for the fact of evolution. It has been tested and scrutinised for over 150 years, and is supported by all the relevant observations.

            Next time someone tries to tell you that evolution is just a theory,
            as a way of dismissing it, as if it’s just something someone guessed at, remember that they’re using the non-scientific meaning of the word. If that person is a teacher, or minister, or some other figure of authority, they should know better. In fact, they probably do, and are trying to mislead you.5

            1 Theory: A set of statements or principles
            devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been
            repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions
            about natural phenomena. American Heritage

            2 Scientific theories are explanations of
            natural phenomena built up logically from testable observations and
            hypotheses. Teaching
            About Evolution and the Nature of Science – National Academy Press

            3 A standard, scientific definition of evolution
            is: In fact, evolution can be precisely defined as any change in the
            frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next.
            Biology – Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, W H Freeman

            4 Evolutionists have been clear about this
            distinction between fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we
            have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the
            mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually
            emphasized the difference between his two great and separate accomplishments:
            establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a theory – natural selection –
            to explain the mechanism of evolution. Evolution
            as Fact and Theory – Stephen Jay Gould

            5 The Cobb County School Board required a sticker
            with the following text to be placed on all biology textbooks: This textbook
            contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the
            origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind,
            studied carefully, and critically considered. Decision of the
            Court Striking Down the Cobb County Evolution Disclaimer

          • GaryTheBrave

            You are a bore!!!!! And a effing liar. But then you are a lib so I repeat myself.

          • $30158943

            GaryTheNotSoBrave That is certainly as educated response as I would have predicted. What happened to your science tutorial? I was so enjoying your learned instruction. Please provide a list of nonfactual statements in my response, starting with the footnotes. I expect the same in return or I guess you end up the fool and the liar.

        • $30158943

          You are an idiot if you think evolution is just a theory. It is scientifically proven. Any thing else you have to say is thus discredited.

      • Judy B

        1. Creation should be taught in all schools, evolution is an erroneous theory, Creation is truth.

        2. Anti-discrimination laws are code for “special rights” for certain classes of people, & are unconstitutional.

        3. Abortion always results in the murder of an innocent human being; therefore it is a crime, morally speaking. The law is wrong.

        4. How many times must it be explained, the wealthy are the job creators…the more money they have, the more jobs they create.

        • $30158943

          Read a science book.

          • Teresa Davis McCormick

            which one and written by whom. The picture is just not complete and can’t be answered by one specific scientist. Ben Stein made an excellent documentary you should check out. it’s called “expelled:no intelligence allowed”

          • $30158943

            Is Ben Stein a scientist? He is a game show host.

          • Teresa Davis McCormick

            You must be pretty young to only remember Mr. Stein from a game show. By the way if you ever watched that game show, the premise was people would come on the show and try to answer random questions and their opponent was always Ben Stein. The Questions were quite hard and Ben won most of the time.

            From any source on the internet. You just have to Google it. Benjamin Jeremy “Ben” Stein is an American actor, writer, lawyer, and commentator on political and economic issues. He attained early success as a speechwriter for American presidents Nixon and Ford.

          • $30158943

            He is not a scientist and he a lousy actor and commentator and certainly not an authority on abortion.

          • Shelby is a Patriot

            Oh? Who has the authority on abortion? Or the authority on who has the authority on abortion? Lulz

          • $30158943

            If you bothered to read the thread [I know that is a lot of work for you] you would know that I was stating that Stein is not a scientific authority on anything as McCormick was suggesting. So get a clue or butt out!

          • Shelby is a Patriot

            Oh, I didn’t realize you had to be a “scientific authority” *snort* to have an opinion on evolution, abortion, etc. My mistake. Yeah, I know what you said, doofus, and then I asked a simple question which you clearly couldn’t comprehend (I know that is a lot of work for you).

          • $30158943

            snort? are you a pig? You don’t need to be a scientific authority to have an opinion, but you do need to be a scientist to have a scientific opinion which is what we were discussing.

          • Shelby is a Patriot

            No, not necessarily you do not. Ben Stein is not a Scientist, but that does not mean he can’t have a scientific opinion.

          • $30158943

            OK then. I am not a neuroscientist or a pschychiatrist, but in my opinion you have a brain disorder that has rendered you unerringly stupid. You are not a Patriot but a Parrot. Thanks, that was fun!

          • Shelby is a Patriot

            Hey, you know what they say about opinions…
            As for your diagnosis of me, at least I don’t go around bashing people and saying they can’t think for themselves just because they don’t hold my same beliefs. One day, that high-almighty attitude you seem to have, in which you flaunt around your supposed intelligence and get on conservative sites to let everyone know that you’re right and they’re wrong, is going to give you a rude awakening. Probably in the form of a 20 trillion dollar national debt by 2016.
            Enjoy! And yes, this was fun!
            Thanks for playing, Arthur!

          • GaryTheBrave

            And your scientific authority, Mitch? Where is your PHd in biology? From what University? When did you graduate? We need to vet you before you are allowed to comment again about science(tm).

            Just using your standards on you.

          • $30158943

            Based on your last comment that completely misunderstood scientific laws and theory I can confirm that you are not an authority on anything other than sticking your foot in your mouth.

          • GaryTheBrave

            You are a fool. Twitchy Admin, please kick this fool off the board. Let him come back as his previous incarnation of George_W_Tush.

          • $30158943

            Sucks to be you then. Schooled by a fool so you run to the administrator because you’ve been spanked. Boo hoo!

          • Teresa Davis McCormick

            my point was, he’s smarter than you. In fact Einstein, Hawking, and a lot of brilliant people believe in God.

          • $30158943

            Even if true, all completely fallacious arguments in favor of abortion.

          • GaryTheBrave

            He is an economist. I believe he has a PHd.

          • Teresa Davis McCormick

            which one and written by whom. The picture is just not complete and can’t be answered by one specific scientist. Ben Stein made an excellent documentary you should check out. it’s called “expelled:no intelligence allowed”

        • $30158943

          Read a science book.

        • Ronald

          I am reasonably wealth, but I’ve never created jobs just for the sake of it. I only hire people if I absolutely have to. If I did, the rest of my staff would be idle. Only when everyone I already employ (25 at the moment) is working at full capacity do I seek out new employees. Give me more money if you want, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to just go out and hire people if they have no work to do.

          Also, I disagree that creation should be taught in schools. I am a firm believer in the separation between church and state. Creationism is religion, and it should be taught in churches, but not public schools.

          • GaryTheBrave

            The problem with public schools today is that they prohibit a student who accepts Creationism from using that knowledge in the pursuit of their studies. As a matter of fact, teachers have failed students who mention God just one time during a discussion on the subject. The public school system attempts to force students to deny their religious beliefs.

      • BeautifulAmerica

        Great reasons to Support JINDAL!

        • $30158943

          If you are a christian fundamentalist with no ability to think for yourself, I guess so.

  • GTFOBigGovt

    While I agree with him entirely, as long as we’ve voted for this behemoth govt, SOMEONE has to be obsessed with the bookkeeping. Nice outsider position for him, though. Props. The hard part starts with “what are you cutting” a la Ryan’s experience. Somehow, Ryan’s “let Congress decide” wasn’t heard.

    They ALL better get a Giuliani or other skilled trial attorney to train them on how to SPEAK EFFECTIVELY IN PUBLIC and stick to their POINTS, FFS, after watching that clusterf*on TV yesterday. Not these has been political operatives. So egotistical, all they had to do was watch Obama & Axelrod lie for 4 years to understand the technique, tho.

    ETA: Actually Michelle Malkin could fill that role :)

  • Garth Haycock

    The RNC would be wise to listen to Gov. Jindal. They need to quit acting like Democrats and get back to being smart.

  • aPLWBinAK

    J @jademeyers_

    You stupid if u think Bobby Jindal is “for you”………words of wisdom from a genius who thinks ‘u’ is a word.

    • Judy B

      “U” just texting shorthand, very commonly used as is “R” for are…

  • http://extremesplash.wordpress.com/ Ben Bollman

    Jindal actually does sound very Reaganesque, he was conservative but conveyed the message so that everyday people could understand it. The problem is that like last time there are going to be too many good conservatives running against the establishment aka Christie. We can’t let the establishment get the nomination again or we will lose.

  • ac287149

    The Republican establishment is stupid…my backside. They are trying to be Democrats and are aligned with globalist ideology. We get to the same destination with both the Republicans and the Democrats, just the Republicans get there slower.

    • Jake_Was_Here

      The Democrats are driving us right at a brick wall with the pedal to the floor, the Republicans want to put on the brakes… but nobody wants to bother with actually turning the fucking steering wheel.

      • ac287149

        … while we are the wild-eyed, screaming passengers hanging on for dear life even though we know how to steer. But the rule is for us citizens to go to the back of the bus and let our betters be better at running things. GOP thinks this way, too. They are all, including the president, 17th century French aristocrats and monarchs ruling by Divine Right and amassing great personal influence at our expense.

        As the Democrats have moved Left and closer than ever to Marxism in America, you’ll notice that the GOP spends more time making it look like a great idea for Republicanism to move Left into former Democrat territory. The Republican Establishment has been filled with Progressives since Theodore Roosevelt. For 100 years, they have continued move towards “Progressive” and away from Conservative. The Republican Establishment grows government and its intrusion into our lives (Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Homeland Security, anyone). It reads the same script with the same attitude as the Democrats and Marxists when they refer to voting Conservatives or people who speak publicly about Conservative thought and policy. Why in the world have the GOP permited the government to declare that Conservative and faithful Constitutional thought is enemy of the State? Why did they permit the DHS to amass, just in one year, 4 billion rounds of hollow-point bullets (the ones that open up to destroy internal organs and tissue)? DHS is domestic, not military. The GOP gave in at every turn on debt and the ceiling and on deliberately targeting one group of Americans with taxation. We have all this North American unification crap under Republican administrations, beginning with NAFTA. You wonder why Republicans can’t agree on building a wall across the border, even for national security? Why have the Republicans presented terrible, weak presidential candidates for us to choose from in the face of what become very Marxocrat candidates that can’t be beaten by the only GOP candidates we have to work with… at least since Gerald Ford, with the exception of Reagan? Why did the GOP permit the government to designate as Terrorists military veterans, people challenging abortion and involuntary euthanasia, people supporting the Constitution, people challenging the legality of arbitrary, confiscatory taxation, and people supporting the 2nd Amendment?

        If you look closely at what we have always assumed was “fear” and “stupidity”, it always turns out to help the Democrat agenda. It works for the GOP if we say they are weak in the face of Democrat intimidation; it always works in favor of Democrat policy. When the Republicans get to control the tiller of the ship, we still get to the same place as the Democrats, but slower.

  • $23629333

    Did Bobby Jindal say what the GOP should do about the Demedia?* I’m not convinced that Republicans are more prone to saying “stupid” things. I am convinced that – when a Republican does say something stupid, or something which can be twisted into something stupid – the Demedia will ensure that everyone knows about it. When a Democrat says something stupid – a la the POTUS and the VP – there is little, if any, mention of it.

    When will the GOP have a serious discussion about how to deal with the Demedia?

    (* short for Democratic media)

    • Kleverabevera

      You hit the nail on the head.

    • Netmilsmom

      You are absolutely correct. When a GOP person is covered as if he is Forrest Gump and the opposition is Jesus Christ, no man can overcome that.

    • marketfog

      It’s not that Republicans say stupid things, they do stupid things.

    • V the K

      Exactly. Republicans get more grief for saying stupid things about rape than Democrats get for committing actual rape.

      • AgntOrngVctm

        Well you’re part of the problem there V. When an unsuccessful married couple go to the doctor to find out how to conceive, the doctor tells them to eliminate stress. Akins said that and you, Jindal, Rush, Romney. Levin, Boehner, everybody, calls him stupid. What you all have done is establish a de facto religious test for nominees. Christians need not apply. God will not bless that, and you are all making matters worse. It’s not so much a stupid party as it is a party filled with Godlessness. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.”

    • $21367552

      If the Demedia is going the way of the Dinosaur then why are you so worried about what it is saying?

    • GaryTheBrave

      (* short for Democratic media)

      Darn, I thought it was short for “demented media.”

  • ember

    I’d like to know more about Jindal and his policies. I’m tired of having to chose the best of the worst with the GOP.

    • ac287149

      He’s been a very good Governor. I, too would like to see a fresh voice in the GOP. They always give you a choice of best of two evils.

  • BigDogJunction

    As always… most interesting is the commentary of the left. They always expose their hypocrisy, then are blind to having it pointed out to them.

    When you strip down the liberal/progressive arguments, they follow a very simple and juvenile mantra…

    Deflect, Dismiss, Belittle, Ignore

    • nc

      It’s the Alinsky’s Way!

  • http://twitter.com/smilinatitall Alexander Ivan

    Jindal, Rubio, Paul. I like it. Instead of Boehner being the weak face of the GOP, these guys offer a strong one. Now, perhaps when attacked, we’ll bite back and bloody noses instead of rolling over.

  • MrCrashHappy

    Romney didn’t lose because Obama turned out his base, Romney lost because he didn’t turn out his own. What’s the obsession with being “nice guys” when there’s no evidence the opposite approach ever damaged a Democrat candidate? If Romney had clearly articulated the differences between himself and Obama, he would have done much better than his tactic of letting himself be defined by his adversary. Jindal isn’t a wimp and he makes liberals bleed from there eyes, much like Sarahcuda.

    • GaryTheBrave

      There are two things that I noticed of the Romney campaign. 1) He didn’t allow any reference to Bush-era policies or successes. He could and should have compared the Republican Congress and the growth of our economy then pointed out how it started to decline once the Democrats took control. 2) He rarely, if ever, campaigned with local or Congressional candidates. He built very short coattails so, even had he won, he likely would have had an adversarial Senate.

    • Judy B

      Did Romney lose? Perhaps you should check out the 1982 Consent Decree & all the well documented voter fraud.

  • Crazyinjun

    Start out by cramming the changes they want to gun laws down their throats.

  • lillymckim

    Bobby Jindal wil never get my vote.

    • GaryTheBrave

      That’s fine. You only have one vote (or would you care to admit something). 😉

  • Electradivine

    You guys need help period

  • Jerilyn Westwall

    There is nothing “Stupid” about the Republican Party Mr. Jindal; except to elevate into leadership those that adopt the false Liberals premis; advance liberal labels and Democratic ‘spin’ into their stump speeches.

  • BeeKaaay

    How to have the RINOpublican party stop being the stupid party.

    1) Kick out all Marxists out of the RINOpublican party’s positions of power.

    That’s it.

    It is very simple.