Realistically, I think all the speechifying against Christie before the election was an attempt to neutralize him as a future threat to the social conservatives.

I'm with Kathleen Parker on this, to the extent that we need to assign responsibility for the loss:

http://tinyurl.com/bwsbsq5

The truth is, Romney was better than the GOP deserved. Party nitwits undermined him, and the self-righteous tried to bring him down. The nitwits are well-enough known at this point — those farthest-right social conservatives who couldn’t find it in their hearts to keep their traps shut. No abortion for rape or incest? Sit down. Legitimate rape? Put on your clown suit and go play in the street.

I've put up with the increasing influence of the social conservatives, because I believed it was necessary to get rid of an utter incompetent like Barack Obama. As a result, for the last two election cycles, I've had to listen to morons who deny evolution like Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann, as well as fools like CHristine O'Donnell and Richard Mourdock instead of Mike Castle and Richard Lugar.

The question is, what is going to change between now and next election cycle?

As far as the Obamacare point, my problem is simple: how does a broke government pay for it, even to the extent that it currently goes? Even with all the tax hikes that were included in the package, Obamacare runs in the deep red for as far as the eye can see. Even Clinton-level taxation wouldn't cover its costs. Perhaps 1970s-level taxation, with a top tax rate of 70%, would -- except back then, money and people were fleeing America as fast as they could run.