I realize that the Republican Party sadly has not been the party of fiscal conservatism, but the Tea Party movement has been trying to change that. Their efforts are the main reason why the Republicans have a House majority now. I believe that the Republican Party and the Tea Party movement need each other to thrive. The Republicans need conservative principles and policies, and the Tea Party would have a very rough go as a third party. Eventually, they may have to break free if establishment Republicans continue their grip on the party. I'm disappointed that John Boehner is still House speaker. It should be Paul Ryan.
The Tea Party's all-or-nothing hard line stance is what's hurting the Republican Party. The problem is similar to what the Dems had in the 70s and 80s... the extremism it takes to win the primary winds up hurting the candidate in the general election. To Tea Partiers, moderate Republicans are bigger enemies than Democrats, and they will do anything in their power to flush them out of the party.
The only way the Republican Party will survive is to ditch their draconian social platform. Fiscal conservatism isn't the problem (as much as the conservative echo chamber is framing this as an election of moochers vs. self-reliant Americans). The big problem is with social issues. All this "legitimate rape" stuff absolutely killed Romney with women. Hard-line immigration stances kill the party with hispanics. If the GOP could run a candidate who is not aggressively pro-life, who is not aggressively anti-gay, who is not at all anti-science, and shows some understand of women's issues (hot tip: birth control pills have more uses than just birth control), they might have a chance. But with the current TP/religious right base, that candidate would never win in the primaries.
Romney was all over the place in this campaign, and his "move to the center" in the last couple weeks of the campaign was blatant pandering. It's not to be respected, and people see right through it. The solution is not to move to the center. Move to the right, especially on fiscal issues.
No, his "move to the right" in the primaries was pandering. His "move to the center" in the last few weeks of the campaign was reversion to his actual views.
Do you really think a truly conservative candidate -- Santorum, say, since Gingrich is also a moderate who was forced to move right during the primaries -- would have been able to win this election?
Everyone walks around like Lou's sh!t doesn't stink, and yeah it has it's share of ups and downs. For every John Madden there is an Ilkka Pikkarainen. For every Brian Rafalski or David Clarkson Signing, there is a McGillis/Malakhov overpayment. We've had some lean drafts over the course of the past 10 yrs, and just recently they appear to have gotten better. Lou gets a lot of credit for the 3 cups and the now 5 SC finals, but it's been a while since he's outsmarted or fleeced anyone in a trade.
"I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. 26 times, I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed." - Michael Jordan
The Devils have the image of a classic team. Teams that have not significantly changed their logos/images in an effort to modernize: Rangers, Red Wings, Canadiens, Blackhawks, Bruins, Flyers, Devils. Every other team has gone through a phase, and most of them have come back to the original look or something close to it (think Isles, Penguins, Sabres, Capitals). I guess the Devils could do a lame modern third jersey that would last 2-3 years in an attempt to boost revenue, but I'd hate to see them do something idiotic that would ruin the branding that makes the Devils seem like a classic team.