Why I think the Republican party is doomed.

[RandomGuy]

Invariably, Ive always thought myself a conservative....that was until I got here at Spurstalk and was told by the whottt/clanny/Yoni/Xrays of the world that I'm a terrorist loving liberal sociopath and then they provided links to other people to prove it.

I took stock of who I am and realized that if conservatism were a mental-health hospital, then the inmates had taken over the asylum without me noticing.

That more or less, removed me from their inner circle, and could never have cared less.


I'm pretty sure I've apostasized from conservatism. Last week, someone called me a liberal communist sympathizer because I said that if Obama were elected, I wasn't going to pull the "he's not my President" card or call him "that n***** in the White House." So I'm out of the club. I am basically a pro-life moderate now, still slowly trending leftward.

Somewhere back there conservatism changed.


I always considered myself more conservative before as well. That being said, I know my personal ideology has shifted to the left and I'm OK with that. I don't think I can consider myself anything but a liberal now.


I used to consider myself a centrist, and somewhere along the line was called a liberal, and since then I have simply given up and worn the label with pride.

I revel in the fact that I get to f*** with what a lot of "conservatives" believe about "liberals".

Quite frankly I really believe the modern conservative movement has become morally and intellectually bankrupt


Heck yes it is important, I was in the Young Republicans...and am fiscally conservative by nature.....

But the Evangelical - walking with Dinos and speaking in tongues - taking over the Republican party has pushed me as far away from that intellectual nightmare so fast it would make your headspin.

I think the Republican party has been taken over by the Christian version of the Taliban, and until the moderates take it back and put those morons back in their place....I will not be voting for them.

DD

Anybody else sensing a theme here?

This is why Republicans are losing elections. That people like Aggiee Hoopsfan or Wild Cobra might not see it says to me that the Republicans are doomed.

----------------------------

This came out of another thread, and seemed to merit it's own discussion.

If I were a Republican strategist, these statements would be very alarming.

As it is, it provides some anecdotal evidence that there is something of a backlash towards the right from the middle.

If I were a Democratic strategist, I would be looking for a way to capitalize on this.

[timvp]

Eh, it's cyclical. That's part of the reason why I'm voting for Obama. The right needs to crash and burn and reinvent themselves. And really, there's nothing wrong with that. Political parties reinventing themselves is a cycle.

I find it a bit humorous when those on the left tend to think that we are headed into an era where the Democrats will rule the nation for generations as the Republicans die a slow and painful death. By 2012 or 2016, the right will have regained their footing and the left will be in their own crisis.

'Tis just the way things work in the political world.

[DarkReign]

Eh, it's cyclical. That's part of the reason why I'm voting for Obama. The right needs to crash and burn and reinvent themselves. And really, there's nothing wrong with that. Political parties reinventing themselves is a cycle.

I find it a bit humorous when those on the left tend to think that we are headed into an era where the Democrats will rule the nation for generations as the Republicans die a slow and painful death. By 2012 or 2016, the right will have regained their footing and the left will be in their own crisis.

'Tis just the way things work in the political world.

Quite true. I think the Democrats will see their cycle next (as in 4-8 years). They cant have the fringe leadership running their party either. So we will see where The Obama/Pelosi/Reids take us in the next 4-8 years.

Worse or better? Im voting worse, but I think thats more indicative of the horrible financial system we rely upon than the ineptness of our politicians.

:lol at 'Tis

[nkdlunch]

Obama will drink the blood of every single republican and their children.

[TheMadHatter]

Actually the Republican party is somewhat doomed and it's not because of the reasons you mentioned.

Minorities. The Hispanic population in this country alone will exponentially multiply in the next few decades and they as a voting block are solidly Democratic. We already see the effect in CO and NM, both states that Bush won in '04 are now turning blue in large part because of the Hispanic vote.

If the Republicans keep catering to white America and white America alone they will not have the votes to win elections with the way our population is growing.

[Tully365]

Yeah, I think it's naturally a cyclical thing. Reagan learned some lessons watching Nixon, and so did Clinton watching Mondale and Dukakis. Number one: in a democratic society, you have to make yourself look appealing to a certain amount of people in order to get elected. If you refuse to compromise on anything, or consider the feelings of those who don't agree with you on some issues, it's unlikely you will ever be president. Call it the Ralph Nader Syndrome. You can't run on a platform that essentially calls 85% of the people in this country idiots, and hope to be elected in a society where popular opinion counts. As Winston Churchill said: "democracy is the worst form of government-- except for all the other forms of government."

[JoeChalupa]

So is Sarah Palin the new face of the Republican party?

[spurster]

If the GOP is doomed, the Democratic Party won't be too far behind.

I see the doom starting with Bush transforming the budget surpluses he started with into monstrous deficits. We are seeing this year the kind of bust that can happen when people and banks become overloaded with debt. With large deficits as far as the eye can see, our government is heading down the same path. The average voter (and Spurstalk poster perhaps) has been brainwashed to think that he or she will starve (or suffer some other calamity) if current taxes are set to be equal with current government spending. However, we also simultaneously resisting any cut in government programs. For example, we want to keep Social Security, but we resist the obvious and sensible fix, which is higher SS taxes to maintain it. To my mind, our deficit spending amounts to even more taxes that we and our descendants will have to pay in the future, or else a great big bankruptcy.

No politician is winning any election now by promising to (1) just keep the programs we have, and (2) set taxes based on what we spend. Instead, we have politicians in both major parties promising more programs and/or tax cuts even given our current deficit. This is a mindset that can end very badly.

I think Obama's plan does implement more taxes, but aimed at rich people and companies (I know, I know, starvation and chaos will follow). Unfortunately, he has promise still lower taxes to 95% of us to get votes, and SS, current health care, and more universal health care can easily ruin the budget.

[DarrinS]

Since there's not a conservative running, the entire country will move left by default.


Two socialists with slightly different tax and health care plans -- YAY!

[DarkReign]

Since there's not a conservative running, the entire country will move left by default.


Two socialists with slightly different tax and health care plans -- YAY!

I wouldnt call them socialists, but otherwise, this is truth.

[balli]

I agree with the OP. There's something deeper here than a cyclical need for the GOP to reinvent itself. That is, I'm not sure the party is capable of re-inventing itself. The lunatic right-wing base is deeply entrenched in their views, if anything more so now than ever. Which is a shame when looking at the legacy of their poster child in George W. Bush. The republican base has lost all credibility, but instead of asking why and stepping back from the neocon lunacy, as a result they seem to be trending even more right-ward as evidenced by Sarah Palin fever and the said hateful slander being hurled both on this board and in the GOP base as a whole.

So in other words, I don't think the party will survive being torn between the more moderate Goldwater conservatives and the extremely right-wing necon base. The more right wing the base goes (and right now they are off and continuing into the fucking deep end) the more they turn off anybody and everybody who has any sense whatsoever. They are the base of Angel Luvs and BRHornets. Brain-washed zombies and racist uneducated trash. They show no signs of rationality, morality or decency and I'm quite sure they will doom the Republican Party.

I do agree however that the Democrats aren't in great shape either; more or less because they're going to inherit the burning mess of world the GOP gives them, but still, I think it's going to be tough going for the dems. More or less I see fertile ground for a third party awakening; I hope so anyway.

[Wild Cobra]

I wouldnt call them socialists, but otherwise, this is truth.

True. Obama is a marxist and McCain only is a socialist in the traditional charitable way.

[Wild Cobra]

What I've said before is that the GOP is doomed because they lost their conservative ways. Not because of conservatism, but because they are suppose to be more conservatives but they are being infected by some RINO desease.

[Anti.Hero]

blah blah blah

Republicans or whatever new name they come up with will never be doomed. Why? Because most "liberal" policies will run this country into the ground. Otherwise, America would not have been the TOP DOG by being like the rest.


The country is a pendulum. People are turning more liberal because they are comfortable after not having to go through much hardship in the recent years. It'll sway back conservative eventually.

The only way the repubs are doomed is if the real conservatives eventually stand up and say enough of this shit and form a third party or purge the current one.

[balli]

Because most "liberal" policies will run this country into the ground.
There's been a republican president for the past 8 years and republican controlled congress for six of the past 8. And you know what- only 7% of the nation thinks we're headed in the right direction. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/poll-record-high-for-wrong-track-rating/

Your party came in, in 2000, with a peaceful and prosperous world and in 8 short years you're torn it into pieces; so STFU about liberal policies running this country into the ground. The God damn plane has already crashed into the fucking mountain you nitwit.

[ratm1221]

There's been a republican president for the past 8 years and republican controlled congress for six of the past 8. And you know what- only 7% of the nation thinks we're headed in the right direction. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/poll-record-high-for-wrong-track-rating/

Your party came in, in 2000, with a peaceful and prosperous world and in 8 short years you're torn it into pieces; so STFU about liberal policies running this country into the ground. The God damn plane has already crashed into the fucking mountain you nitwit.

Amen.

[Tully365]

If you throw the political labels out and look at the last two presidents... one was, in the words of Alan Greenspan, "obsessed" with eliminating the federal deficit. The other has never been described by anyone of any political slant as being even focused on eliminating deficit spending. In fact, his administration popularized the philosophy that "deficits don't matter." So who was more fiscally conservative? Obviously, Clinton was-- by a mile.

[balli]

It's shame that at a time when we're going to be running a 1.5 fucking trillion dollar budget deficit that people including McCain/Palin would scream "socialist" at the prospect of Obama's moderate tax increase on the upper class. It's a shame at a time like this that they would try to portray fair taxation as unpatriotic. It boggles my mind really. Now I'm pissed- fuck all you neocon, trickle down bitches.

[Wild Cobra]

The only way the repubs are doomed is if the real conservatives eventually stand up and say enough of this shit and form a third party or purge the current one.
This may be true. There is a conservative party out there, but they are too small. I think if conservative republicans split off and joined, things could really happen.

[Anti.Hero]

There's been a republican president for the past 8 years and republican controlled congress for six of the past 8. And you know what- only 7% of the nation thinks we're headed in the right direction. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/poll-record-high-for-wrong-track-rating/

Your party came in, in 2000, with a peaceful and prosperous world and in 8 short years you're torn it into pieces; so STFU about liberal policies running this country into the ground. The God damn plane has already crashed into the fucking mountain you nitwit.

My party? lmao Any real conservative can tell you what a fuck up GWB and all the RINOs have been. Although any non-nitwit should have certainly been able to make great money for 3/4 of it.

Homie there is a big difference between the neocon republicans and the real conservatives.

You will not have to worry about them keeping up with this shit much longer because the real conservatives will take care of them for you. I guarantee it.


YOUR PARTY will just provide the motivation.

This is just a normal cycle of America. Nothing new. :sleep

[balli]

You will not have to worry about them keeping up with this shit much long because the real conservatives will take care of them for you. I guarantee it.


That's exactly the point. It won't happen. There not enough "real conservatives". The base of the republican party is neocon. If the republican party does manage to wrangle power back in a centrist way they'll just turn off the base. There is a huge divide between the base and the goldwater conservatives- both groups need each other to win and both groups are becoming increasingly incompatico. Neither group is "taking care" of the other Instead the party will remain divided, disenfranchised and eventually I'd imagine torn into two non-viable parties; a necon base party and more libertarian/moderate party.

[Anti.Hero]

This may be true. There is a conservative party out there, but they are too small. I think if conservative republicans split off and joined, things could really happen.

I think as time goes on the country might continue to drift away from religion and social conservatism and you will eventually get a party who MUST be fiscal conservative and relaxed on some social issues. A country can only go so far be expanding those who receive benefits and pissing off those who pay taxe.s

[Bigzax]

i was conservative in 93 and i'm conservative now...

we are on our own in this shit.

accept it. embrace it. overcome. pat yourself on the back.

it's the conservative way.

[balli]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95968435

Regardless of what happens to John McCain on Nov. 4 — and, with two weeks to go, it's not promising — there's going to be a new Republican Party come Nov. 5, a post-George W. Bush GOP where long-suppressed (and not so suppressed) resentments are likely to come to the surface. The unknown at this point is which way the party goes in the wake of these resentments.

Colin Powell, hardly an active, partisan Republican, but a Republican nonetheless, had his say on Sunday, on NBC's Meet the Press. In endorsing Barack Obama, the former secretary of state under Bush said he was concerned that the GOP has moved more to the right than he would have liked, that the party has become more narrow-minded, that he fears the effect of two more conservative Supreme Court justices. The move was damning for McCain, though not unexpected.

Another moderate, former Michigan Gov. William Milliken, has also spoken out against the direction of the party, but that is not surprising, either. Milliken, who was his state's longest-serving governor (1969-82) and is now 86 years old, endorsed John Kerry over Bush in 2004. Jim Leach, the liberal Republican who lost his Iowa House seat two years ago, spoke on behalf of Obama at this year's Democratic convention in Denver. There is no lack of party faithful who have expressed unease over McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, and her views about cultural issues, or dismay at the campaign's focus on Bill Ayers — that "washed-up terrorist," in McCain's own words. Lest we forget, there was also the spectacle of Christopher (son of William F.) Buckley declaring for Obama.

At the same time, the party is likely to feel a post-election tug toward the right. Newt Gingrich is ready, willing and available, having offered himself as a sage who will bring the party back to its principles. There are some in the GOP who have privately said that Gingrich, the former House speaker, would be less than heartbroken if McCain went down to defeat, enabling the party to turn to new (read: Newt) leadership for 2012. But he has no shortage of ideas about how to bring the party back to life.

One issue sure to be contentious in a post-Bush GOP is immigration. Bush, McCain and the business community have long worked for an inclusive policy with the goal of more legal avenues of employment. Others in the party, especially in Congress, have a different perspective: They see immigration as a broken system that needs fixing (securing the border) before anything else. And then there are the issues of spending, earmarks and taxes, a consensus on which continues to elude Republicans.

Republicans are also likely to purge their leadership in Congress, certainly in the House. The party seems headed for another double-digit loss of House seats — the first time it has suffered such back-to-back losses since the 1930s. Minority Leader John Boehner and Whip Roy Blunt somehow managed to survive the loss of their majority in 2006 with their leadership posts intact; it's hard to envision a repeat performance.

Let's be honest here: The party was going to be in trouble no matter who the standard-bearer was going to be. The president is unpopular; the war is unpopular. The price of gasoline and food has skyrocketed. Add to that the undeniable fact that Obama — with a flawless campaign, unprecedented fundraising and millions of new voters signed up on his behalf — is proving to be an elusive target.

But it's the turning south of the economy that has put a huge burden on McCain's shoulders. His post-St. Paul convention bounce has been replaced by depressingly large drops in the Dow and, more important, large drops in confidence in the country's economic stability. That's really not McCain's fault. But let's face it: At 72 years of age, he was never the guy to take the party into the future.

Part of it is that McCain was never a right-wing pinup, not with a history of battling conservatives on everything from campaign finance to the Bush tax cuts to overhauling the nation's immigration system. He did move noticeably to the right this year, embracing more of the Bush administration's agenda than he had in the past. But no one outside of the DNC can say with a straight face that he is emblematic of a third Bush term (for better or worse). For all his talk about cutting spending and waste, McCain's proposal to have the government buy up troubled mortgages is anything but conservative and instead will surely add to the debt. The selection of Palin did help his cause with many on the right, but nobody will confuse him with Ronald Reagan — or even Barry Goldwater, his idol and predecessor in the Senate.

But if the McCain-Goldwater comparison is not quite apt, we might compare the state of the GOP today to what happened in 1964, in the aftermath of Goldwater's crushing defeat. Liberal and moderate Republicans who were ignored or pushed aside during that campaign, such as New York's Nelson Rockefeller and Michigan's George Romney, claimed after the LBJ landslide that the party had lost its bearings by moving so far to the right. Ray Bliss, an Ohio Republican known for his nuts-and-bolts approach to politics, was brought in to run the national party. The GOP had a major comeback in the 1966 midterms, picking up 47 House seats, and it won back the White House two years later with Richard Nixon.

To be sure, there were recriminations after Goldwater's defeat in '64, and in retrospect, the Republicans' fall from grace didn't last that long. But one gets the sense that another battle is approaching, win or lose on Nov. 4, and it could get ugly before it turns pretty.

[boutons_]

"Obama is a marxist"

LIAR

[ploto]

The issue for the Republicans is which way they choose to go if defeated. If indeed Palin is the face of the party heading into the future, I think they will be out of power for a longer time. If they choose to focus their efforts on white, affluent, rural people then they will not succeed.

What really has happened is that the party mixed up political ideologies with moral ideologies. To be politically conservative is not the same thing at all as being morally conservative. A political conservative believes in smaller government, controlled spending, and the government keeping its hands off. They believe that the federal government should not be telling the states, companies, or people what to do. Ironically, a true political conservative would never support a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. They would have a problem with the federal government telling a state what it can and can not do with its marriage laws. Actually, a true political conservative would probably be pro-choice because he or she would say it is none of the government's business to control people's decision. But, the political conservatives courted the moral conservatives and declared themselves the self-appointed party of morality. In that process all the principles of political conservatism got messed up in the attempt to stand for conservative, family values.

[DaDakota]

Heck yes it is important, I was in the Young Republicans...and am fiscally conservative by nature.....

But the Evangelical - walking with Dinos and speaking in tongues - taking over the Republican party has pushed me as far away from that intellectual nightmare so fast it would make your headspin.

I think the Republican party has been taken over by the Christian version of the Taliban, and until the moderates take it back and put those morons back in their place....I will not be voting for them.

DD

[byrontx]

I am somewhat with ballijuana on this. The wacko evangelicals being co-opted by neocons have totally screwed up the true conservative movement of less government. The religious right is quite willing to impose as much government as they can on you if it keeps you on the straight and narrow. The neocons are the first to toss the constitution in the name of security. True conservatives have had their movement hijacked by ranting talk radio types and Murdock media. I do not know if they will ever regain control of the Republican party.

[DaDakota]

I am somewhat with ballijuana on this. The wacko evangelicals being co-opted by neocons have totally screwed up the true conservative movement of less government. The religious right is quite willing to impose as much government as they can on you if it keeps you on the straight and narrow. The neocons are the first to toss the constitution in the name of security. True conservatives have had their movement hijacked by ranting talk radio types and Murdock media. I do not know if they will ever regain control of the Republican party.

If not that party will never be in control, most people are not dumb enough to follow that line of thinking.

As much as I like Joel Osteen, I don't want him running my country.

DD

[RandomGuy]

Eh, it's cyclical. That's part of the reason why I'm voting for Obama. The right needs to crash and burn and reinvent themselves. And really, there's nothing wrong with that. Political parties reinventing themselves is a cycle.

I find it a bit humorous when those on the left tend to think that we are headed into an era where the Democrats will rule the nation for generations as the Republicans die a slow and painful death. By 2012 or 2016, the right will have regained their footing and the left will be in their own crisis.

'Tis just the way things work in the political world.

I must confess to a sin: A small exaggeration in the title of the thread.

I don't really think the GOP is forever doomed, but I do think that it will take them a bit longer 2016 to get their act together, for a few factors.

First, there is the much vaunted shift in demographics that will start slowly creeping in around the edges. Perhaps they will reinvent themselves and figure out how not to alienate the hispanic/black vote, but I don't see even a glimmer of how this might be accomplished yet.

Second, I strongly suspect that Obama will end up being a pretty competent president. If this is the case, then he will end up with coattails that will tend to preserve Democratic gains.

Third, Republicans are conservatives. This makes them far less able to just recollect themselves, modify a position here or there, and restate their case.

I do agree that there are cycles in American politics. The pendulum swings one way for a while, then another for a while.

The "Republican revolution" started in about 1996 or so, and ended about 10 years later when they lost control of the house in 2006. It is about to come to a crashing end.

If the current swing lasts for a similar period of time that means it will be about 2018 or so before the Dems will have been in power long enough for the Republicans to finally get their act together. The kicker, though is that demographic shift. In another ten years, the faster Democratic demographic will make it much harder for them.

One complicating factor in this analysis, the X factor, will be what I see as a very probable splintering of the Hispanic vote. It will not be so monolithically Democratic in the future simply due to its growing size, among other reasons.

If the Dems are smart and start cultivating a round of Hispanic leaders in the party, like Richardson, and front one of them in 2016, that splintering won't be as much of a factor. This would mean the Dems will hold on to the White House for 12, if not 16 more years.

[RandomGuy]

I do smell something new in the air though. I truly think that sometime within the next 20 years, we may actually see a viable third party, or even a fourth.

If the radical right keeps alienating right-leaning moderates, they will start shifting to the Democratic side.

This will drag the Dems farther to the right/center, causing the uber-lefties to really stop identifying with the party, and I see a small bit of this happening now.

That would end up with the Republicans being the really right party, the Democrats in the center, and something new on the left, perhaps a green/socialist alliance of some sort along the lines of what ruled germany for a few years.

I see this as a distinct possibility, although not a probability at this point.

[JoeChalupa]

Well republicans...IS SARAH PALIN THE NEW FACE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY?

[101A]

Your party came in, in 2000, with a peaceful ..world

Ignorant and partisan.

The World WAS NOT peaceful; they just hadn't fired their shot yet.

Jesus Christ you people are Spurs fans in your daily lives, too!!!

Pop's the greatest!! One day: Fire Pop! the next - depending on the score of the last game.

You think because polls are showing a, what, around 5 - 10% lead for Barrack Obama, and many in that poll suggesting they COULD STILL change their vote, that the Republicans are doomed, and an era of Kumbay peacefull, every man for his fellow man fucking Utopia is to follow???

Six years ago the Democrats had control of NOTHING; and they got two houses of Congress back in '06 by running against an unpopular war. That war now? Not hardly discussed - because the economy has turned. Reagan inherited a recession from Carter - and 12 years later, Bush 1 was coming out of a recession, and passed the ball to Clinton, who handed Bush 2 a fucking recession - 8 years after we came out of one at the end of Bush 1's term, and now, 8 fucking years later...guess what - another recession - SAY IT ISN'T So!!! It's all the Republican's fault!!!! Bullshit. Each 2 term president is either going to have a recession coming in, or going out of office, or both, it's a fucking cycle. The party in power gets blamed, radicals get elected, and nothing happens because all it takes is 40 Senators to stop damn near anything. NOW the Democrats can possibly REALLY fuck things up!!!! They might have REAL control; and if ANYONE thinks Nancy Pelosi is LESS radical than Dennis Fucking Hastert????? then they simply are in complete left-wing denial. The Dems will pass some kind of new fucking entitlement that WON"T solve the problem it's supposed to, they'll Demagogue the issue - then we'll go back into recession, they'll be domonized, Republicans will win the White House in '16 - but we'll be stuck with another pig of a program, growing out of control that cannot be stopped, ever, by anyone - oh, and one that creates more and more people dependent on Democrats for their existence; ie. constituents.

The recessions? They aren't caused by either party directly; they just are; whoever is in "power" simply gets the blame.

[JoeChalupa]

I guess no republican wants Sarah as the new face of their party? Where is all the enthusiasm at?

Whottt!?!?

[RandomGuy]

and if ANYONE thinks Nancy Pelosi is LESS radical than Dennis Fucking Hastert????? then they simply are in complete left-wing denial.

That is what worries me as a Democrat.

If Pelosi could show some restraint and play towards the middle a bit, so that she is not so easily reviled, and doesn't make the same mistakes that Hastert did in terms of going ideologically overboard, that would be great.

As it is... (sighs)

Republicans have made some pretty obvious mistakes in the last 8 years. The real danger for the Dems is if they make the same mistakes.

Come close to balancing the budget, even if it entails slightly higher taxes, and you will get to claim the "fiscally responsible" mantle from the "borrow and spenders".

Heh, if you had told someone in 1999 that the "tax and spend" Democrats would be seen as more fiscally responsible than the Republicans in 8 years, you would have seen a lot of people do this: :smchode:

I think the next 8-12 years will be the most interesting of my life, aside from the fact that my first son will be old enough to drive in that time frame... EEK.

[JoeChalupa]

Yeah, I don't like Pelosi as she is way too partisan.

[RandomGuy]

I guess no republican wants Sarah as the new face of their party? Where is all the enthusiasm at?

Whottt!?!?

Given another 4 years of intense briefings, she might actually know something about foreign/domestic policy beyond vitriolic rhetoric that demonizes Democrats.

Of course, all the Democrats have to do is show her repeatedly nasty comments over and over in loops in any election she runs in the future.

While it might give some in the GOP a stiffy, it has really hurt them with independents, and REALLY REALLY motivates Democrats to go out and vote.

[DaDakota]

I hate Pelosi.....she is part of the problem...not the solution.

DD

[TheMadHatter]

Great arguments all around guys.

Obviously the GOP will have to become more inclusive if they want a shot at seeing power again. The minority population is going to be a significant voting block and right now the Democrats have a monopoly over them. The Southwest will no longer be Republican strongholds if this continues, we are already seeing NM/CO/NV shifting blue as the demographics of those states change. In other words, the Southern Strategy may have seen its last days.

The best thing for this country would be if a viable 3rd party rose from the ashes. I would accept a party that was fiscally conservative and moderate on social issues (i.e. dont' rock the boat on abortion, gay rights, etc.) over the current Democratic platform.

[TheMadHatter]

Agreed on Pelosi that woman needs to step down.

The Democrats in Congress are exacting their revenge on Republicans after 8 years of submission. It's petty and childish.

[RandomGuy]

Agreed on Pelosi that woman needs to step down.

The Democrats in Congress are exacting their revenge on Republicans after 8 years of submission. It's petty and childish.

Actually the GOP held conress for 10 years, not 8.

They were kinda nasty because the Dems had not been kind to them much before, and the nasty downward spiral of tit for tat continuing is self-defeating for the Dems.

[KenMcCoy]

One complicating factor in this analysis, the X factor, will be what I see as a very probable splintering of the Hispanic vote. It will not be so monolithically Democratic in the future simply due to its growing size, among other reasons.



I see this happening with my fiance's family (hispanic)...

Parents - I guess you could call them lower middle class. Not poor, not well off, just honest working people. Faithful Democrats.

Oldest Brother - The most skilled carpenter/builder I have ever seen. If he stopped partying everytime he got a paycheck and actually applied himself he could be making at least the magical $250K a year. Democrat.

Second Brother - HS graduate/no college. Worked hard and went from being a delivery driver for the company he works for to being the regional distribution manager. Makes a good 6 figures. Republican.

My Fiance - Got good grades in HS and received several college scholarships. No financial help from her parents for college tuition. Voted Democrat when we met while she was in college and has converted to Republican since she began her career(we don't talk politics at home very much so while I may have swayed her a little, I think a lot of it was self realization).

I know this is a small sample size, but I think that it is somewhat representative of most of the hispanic families I have met throughout my life. The children of Hispanic Democrats who are fairly successful in life tend to be more conservative than their parents or siblings who are less succesful. Or at least that is my observation.

[DarkReign]

YOUR PARTY will just provide the motivation.

This is just a normal cycle of America. Nothing new. :sleep

Man, I hope youre right.

[ploto]

II know this is a small sample size, but I think that it is somewhat representative of most of the hispanic families I have met throughout my life. The children of Hispanic Democrats who are fairly successful in life tend to be more conservative than their parents or siblings who are less succesful. Or at least that is my observation.

Many people vote with their pocketbook-- as they make more money, they become more Republican. Then when they get old and need Medicare and Social Security, they suddenly become more Democratic.

[timvp]

The reports of the Republican Party's death are greatly exaggerated.

Consider that the incumbent Republican President has some of the lowest approval ratings of all-time. The economy is in crisis. The current war is not only unpopular, it has virtually been proven to have been unnecessary. Numerous events under the current Republican President have alienated almost every type of minority group in existence in the country -- from blacks to gays to atheists. The Democrats, on the other hand, are as motivated as they have been in the history of the country -- to the point where a lot of their partisan followers are literally foaming at the mouth. The current economic, social, environmental and scientific climates fit perfectly with the Democratic platforms. Republicans right now have literally no leg to stand on when going against a Democrat.

All that said, this race is relatively close. Obama is going to win but it's not going to be anything like Reagan 80 type landslide. In fact, that McCain is even mathematically alive at this point is a minor miracle. With almost a perfect storm set up for the Democrats, Obama is expected to carry no more than 54% of the vote. How is this a great or even good sign for the Democrats? The Republicans in a perfect storm environment would still be able to get more than 54% of the vote.

Now obviously, the growing Hispanic vote helps the Democrats down the line but we can't assume that they are going to be staunch Democrat backers forever. Even from 2000 to 2004, there was a relatively large Hispanic swing from the Democrats to the Republicans. Throughout the years, you can see a definite trend with Hispanic voters heading to the Republican side. Now this election, obviously, we aren't going to see that trend continue but this election is pretty unique so I don't think it'll be a good indicator of what is to come.

The cycle I see happening is a cycle we have seen before. When the financial crisis has been overcome, we should see a rise in the per capita income. Once the economy is flourishing again, the Republicans can come back on the scene offering smaller government, lower taxes and a "return of family values" or some other effective wedge issue. Combine that with the country's insatiable yearning for "change" and I fully expect the Republicans to be back in power in 2016. (Perhaps it could be 2012 but for the sake of the USA, I'm hoping Obama is a great success and not a one term flameout.)

The Republicans could F things up for themselves though if they choose the wrong path. If they don't go back to their conservative roots and instead remain this clusterfvck of seemingly random and self-satisfying ideals, the party very well could be doomed. But I view that as unlikely due not only to the cyclical principals at work but also the nationwide backlash.

[JoeChalupa]

The republican party will never die nor will the democratic party. They all have their ups and downs.

[DarkReign]

The republican party will never die nor will the democratic party. They all have their ups and downs.

You are the worst fence-walker I have ever read.

[JoeChalupa]

You are the worst fence-walker I have ever read.

I call it as I see it. Thanks.

[DarkReign]

I call it as I see it. Thanks.


:lmao I should have added a humorous tone to the statement, because I didnt mean any offense (and I thought youd get it).

But you do ride the fence in an extraordinary fashion. You avoid conflict, IMO (at least on this forum, I do not speak for your real life). Thats good and bad, just like anyone else.

[JoeChalupa]

:lmao I should have added a humorous tone to the statement, because I didnt mean any offense (and I thought youd get it).

But you do ride the fence in an extraordinary fashion. You avoid conflict, IMO (at least on this forum, I do not speak for your real life). Thats good and bad, just like anyone else.

I got it. :lol I just know that neither party or candidate is perfect by any means and yeah, I do try to avoid conflict and be fair and balanced on that fence.

[Wild Cobra]

"Obama is a marxist"

LIAR

Wiki: Marxism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist)

[sabar]

I'm not going to rehash too many points right now, but Ron Paul addresses this issue in his book.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/36/The_Revolution_%E2%80%94_A_Manifesto.jpg

The current GOP are false conservatives, they are neo-conservatives, far right radicals. Ron Paul makes many excellent points on what this nation has become. The federal government has increased to a size and scope that was never imagined under either the constitution or conservative ideology. They can wire tap us, they tell us how to run our schools, they tax us, they regulate everything, etc, etc. How did we give up so many of our liberties to the federal government? Where are the real conservatives?

I don't care if it is a waste to vote libertarian or constitution party. It takes votes away from the GOP and with any luck only the radicals will be left there, at which point they will relax their ground to gain loyalty back or die out for Libertarian/Constitution to take their place.

Both candidates are for huge government. No thanks. I can run my own life without some people in suits 900 miles away telling me what my children should be doing in my local school.

Look at all we have we given up. :depressed
I will not, I cannot elect people that will just give more power to big brother. We have two socialists running for president, neither will balance the budget.

Drop support for the GOP and vote third party, they have betrayed you. The left will win this election and the only way the GOP will go back to its roots is by telling them, "no more authoritarian government". What is truly sad is the so-called conservatives supporting things like torture, bans on gay marriage, wiretapping, and so forth, things that are the TOTAL OPPOSITE of keeping government out of your life and keeping your liberties. I cannot believe people actually support this. They are not conservatives, they are right-wing radical nuts walking the razor's edge of fascism.

[RandomGuy]

I'm not going to rehash too many points right now, but Ron Paul addresses this issue in his book.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/36/The_Revolution_%E2%80%94_A_Manifesto.jpg

The current GOP are false conservatives, they are neo-conservatives, far right radicals. Ron Paul makes many excellent points on what this nation has become. The federal government has increased to a size and scope that was never imagined under either the constitution or conservative ideology. They can wire tap us, they tell us how to run our schools, they tax us, they regulate everything, etc, etc. How did we give up so many of our liberties to the federal government? Where are the real conservatives?

I don't care if it is a waste to vote libertarian or constitution party. It takes votes away from the GOP and with any luck only the radicals will be left there, at which point they will relax their ground to gain loyalty back or die out for Libertarian/Constitution to take their place.

Both candidates are for huge government. No thanks. I can run my own life without some people in suits 900 miles away telling me what my children should be doing in my local school.

Look at all we have we given up. :depressed
I will not, I cannot elect people that will just give more power to big brother. We have two socialists running for president, neither will balance the budget.

Drop support for the GOP and vote third party, they have betrayed you. The left will win this election and the only way the GOP will go back to its roots is by telling them, "no more authoritarian government". What is truly sad is the so-called conservatives supporting things like torture, bans on gay marriage, wiretapping, and so forth, things that are the TOTAL OPPOSITE of keeping government out of your life and keeping your liberties. I cannot believe people actually support this. They are not conservatives, they are right-wing radical nuts walking the razor's edge of fascism.

You would likely simply end up splitting the "conservative" vote, giving the left more power.

As a left-leaning moderate, I say go for it. :toast

[RandomGuy]

I'm not going to rehash too many points right now, but Ron Paul addresses this issue in his book.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/36/The_Revolution_%E2%80%94_A_Manifesto.jpg

The current GOP are false conservatives, they are neo-conservatives, far right radicals. Ron Paul makes many excellent points on what this nation has become. The federal government has increased to a size and scope that was never imagined under either the constitution or conservative ideology. They can wire tap us, they tell us how to run our schools, they tax us, they regulate everything, etc, etc. How did we give up so many of our liberties to the federal government? Where are the real conservatives?

I don't care if it is a waste to vote libertarian or constitution party. It takes votes away from the GOP and with any luck only the radicals will be left there, at which point they will relax their ground to gain loyalty back or die out for Libertarian/Constitution to take their place.

Both candidates are for huge government. No thanks. I can run my own life without some people in suits 900 miles away telling me what my children should be doing in my local school.

Look at all we have we given up. :depressed
I will not, I cannot elect people that will just give more power to big brother. We have two socialists running for president, neither will balance the budget.

Drop support for the GOP and vote third party, they have betrayed you. The left will win this election and the only way the GOP will go back to its roots is by telling them, "no more authoritarian government". What is truly sad is the so-called conservatives supporting things like torture, bans on gay marriage, wiretapping, and so forth, things that are the TOTAL OPPOSITE of keeping government out of your life and keeping your liberties. I cannot believe people actually support this. They are not conservatives, they are right-wing radical nuts walking the razor's edge of fascism.

Wierd, it let me double post. sorry.

[RandomGuy]

Well republicans...IS SARAH PALIN THE NEW FACE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY?

Turns out she was Trump 1.0

Hows this thread for a blast from the past?

Worth reading 8 years on.

[rmt]

Trump is entertaining. Palin's voice and screeching are terrible.

[Chinook]

Parties are just solidified coalitions anyway. In theory, the elements in those coalitions can swap back and forth. A third party isn't sustainable, so that's not really a long-term concern. But will we see the coalitions shift for the first time since the LBJ era?

Populism is a wildcard that could cause more tremors if it moves.

[DMC]

Eh, it's cyclical. That's part of the reason why I'm voting for Obama. The right needs to crash and burn and reinvent themselves. And really, there's nothing wrong with that. Political parties reinventing themselves is a cycle.

I find it a bit humorous when those on the left tend to think that we are headed into an era where the Democrats will rule the nation for generations as the Republicans die a slow and painful death. By 2012 or 2016, the right will have regained their footing and the left will be in their own crisis.

'Tis just the way things work in the political world.

GOAT

[Clipper Nation]

Turns out she was Trump 1.0
No, Palin was the sneak preview of future non-serious wingnuts like Rick "Frothy" Santorum, Herman Cain, Michelle Bachmann, and Ben Carson.

Trump was a serious candidate. Palin was a complete joke that McCain dug up so he could pander to angry Hillary loyalists and the Republicans could claim that they were making history too.

[midnightpulp]

You kind of called it. Trump isn't an establishment Republican. They sicced their chosen ones after him during their primaries and he knocked them out, one-by-one.

Trump is some strange FDR/Reagan/Quasi Libertarian hybrid.

Establishment Republicans will hate:

- His 500-1 trillion "New Deal" infrastructure plan. Obama tried to push a similar plan through, but was blocked by Congress.

- His anti-globalization/protectionist leanings. Republicans love themselves some big transnational corporations that can freely outsource to any country they please.

- His now strong ties to the Rust Belt. Make no mistake, those people aren't Republicans. They were frustrated Democrats fed up with their party and voted Trump in as a fuck you. But if Trump has any sincere interest in somewhat reviving the region, he's going to have play ball with the Unions. This is why the GOP never performed well in the area. It's Union dominated, and as I've said before, Unions and Republicans are mortal enemies.

- I actually think Trump is more a social progressive than a Bible thumper. At least I hope so.

- He might flip on his healthcare plan. Trump has been caught saying numerous times he favors a single payer system. Straight from his online mouthpiece.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/28/trump-pushes-single-payer-healthcare-tax-increase-on-wealthy/

And progressives need to hold him to it. Instead of these silly "Not My President" protests, filled with bored purple-headed college students looking for something to do aside from complaining on facebook, they need to show up at every rally, every speech, in the coming months and hammer him on this. The Huffpos and Voxs need to do the same. Instead of focusing on smear, they need to inform progressives that this man, your president, PROMISED you the thing you've been wanting for decades, so hold him to it.

The GOP is definitely shaking in their loafers, so yeah, they might be doomed after all.

[baseline bum]

You kind of called it. Trump isn't an establishment Republican. They sicced their chosen ones after him during their primaries and he knocked them out, one-by-one.

Trump is some strange FDR/Reagan/Quasi Libertarian hybrid.

Establishment Republicans will hate:

- His 500-1 trillion "New Deal" infrastructure plan. Obama tried to push a similar plan through, but was blocked by Congress.

- His anti-globalization/protectionist leanings. Republicans love themselves some big transnational corporations that can freely outsource to any country they please.

- His now strong ties to the Rust Belt. Make no mistake, those people aren't Republicans. They were frustrated Democrats fed up with their party and voted Trump in as a fuck you. But if Trump has any sincere interest in somewhat reviving the region, he's going to have play ball with the Unions. This is why the GOP never performed well in the area. It's Union dominated, and as I've said before, Unions and Republicans are mortal enemies.

- I actually think Trump is more a social progressive than a Bible thumper. At least I hope so.

- He might flip on his healthcare plan. Trump has been caught saying numerous times he favors a single payer system. Straight from his online mouthpiece.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/28/trump-pushes-single-payer-healthcare-tax-increase-on-wealthy/

And progressives need to hold him to it. Instead of these silly "Not My President" protests, filled with bored purple-headed college students looking for something to do aside from complaining on facebook, they need to show up at every rally, every speech, in the coming months and hammer him on this. The Huffpos and Voxs need to do the same. Instead of focusing on smear, they need to inform progressives that this man, your president, PROMISED you the thing you've been wanting for decades, so hold him to it.

The GOP is definitely shaking in their loafers, so yeah, they might be doomed after all.

My biggest fear with Trump is that he's too lazy to actually govern on what he ran on, and that he'll just hand the reigns to Pence the same way Bush did with Cheney. I don't think it's a ridiculous idea considering this is exactly what Trump promised Kasich when recruiting him to be his VP. Trump could actually end up a decent president if he means any of the shit he said, but I'm skeptical.

[midnightpulp]

My biggest fear with Trump is that he's too lazy to actually govern on what he ran on, and that he'll just hand the reigns to Pence the same way Bush did with Cheney. I don't think it's a ridiculous idea considering this is exactly what Trump promised Kasich when recruiting him to be his VP. Trump could actually end up a decent president if he means any of the shit he said, but I'm skeptical.

Me too. I feel like he wanted to be president because he likes the idea of being president for the status and power it projects rather than actually initiating change.

[101A]

Turns out she was Trump 1.0

Hows this thread for a blast from the past?

Worth reading 8 years on.

I miss Dark Reign.

This from TIMVP was somewhat prophetic, but also didn't grasp the depth of the morass we were into:


The cycle I see happening is a cycle we have seen before. When the financial crisis has been overcome, we should see a rise in the per capita income. Once the economy is flourishing again, the Republicans can come back on the scene offering smaller government, lower taxes and a "return of family values" or some other effective wedge issue. Combine that with the country's insatiable yearning for "change" and I fully expect the Republicans to be back in power in 2016. (Perhaps it could be 2012 but for the sake of the USA, I'm hoping Obama is a great success and not a one term flameout.)

That rise has not happened. Thus: Trump.

[Winehole23]

since 2013, there has been a rise in household income, but ever so slight

[Nbadan]

The GOP is definitely shaking in their loafers, so yeah, they might be doomed after all.

there is some policy common ground...but yeah, I wonder when all these feelings of cooperation will last for the GOP

[RandomGuy]

Trump was a serious candidate.

I wish I could say this is wrong. My first impulse is to say "yeah right", but he won, and that is sort of the best definition of serious, despite the fact that I rather obviously don't think he is anywhere close.

Trump's ideas of policy are anything but serious though, and if you say they are, explain to me how anyone serious/sane would ever "renegotiate" the national debt.

[RandomGuy]

You kind of called it. Trump isn't an establishment Republican. They sicced their chosen ones after him during their primaries and he knocked them out, one-by-one.

Trump is some strange FDR/Reagan/Quasi Libertarian hybrid.

Establishment Republicans will hate:

- His 500-1 trillion "New Deal" infrastructure plan. Obama tried to push a similar plan through, but was blocked by Congress.

- His anti-globalization/protectionist leanings. Republicans love themselves some big transnational corporations that can freely outsource to any country they please.

- His now strong ties to the Rust Belt. Make no mistake, those people aren't Republicans. They were frustrated Democrats fed up with their party and voted Trump in as a fuck you. But if Trump has any sincere interest in somewhat reviving the region, he's going to have play ball with the Unions. This is why the GOP never performed well in the area. It's Union dominated, and as I've said before, Unions and Republicans are mortal enemies.

- I actually think Trump is more a social progressive than a Bible thumper. At least I hope so.

- He might flip on his healthcare plan. Trump has been caught saying numerous times he favors a single payer system. Straight from his online mouthpiece.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/28/trump-pushes-single-payer-healthcare-tax-increase-on-wealthy/

And progressives need to hold him to it. Instead of these silly "Not My President" protests, filled with bored purple-headed college students looking for something to do aside from complaining on facebook, they need to show up at every rally, every speech, in the coming months and hammer him on this. The Huffpos and Voxs need to do the same. Instead of focusing on smear, they need to inform progressives that this man, your president, PROMISED you the thing you've been wanting for decades, so hold him to it.

The GOP is definitely shaking in their loafers, so yeah, they might be doomed after all.

All good points, and well put. Don't find much that I disagree with, and thanks.

[SnakeBoy]

Trump's ideas of policy are anything but serious though, and if you say they are, explain to me how anyone serious/sane would ever "renegotiate" the national debt.

It's kind of like a serious/sane person declaring their victory would cause the ocean to recede.

[angrydude]

I wish I could say this is wrong. My first impulse is to say "yeah right", but he won, and that is sort of the best definition of serious, despite the fact that I rather obviously don't think he is anywhere close.

Trump's ideas of policy are anything but serious though, and if you say they are, explain to me how anyone serious/sane would ever "renegotiate" the national debt.

How does any debt get renegotiated? By telling people you aren't going to pay them. What are they going to do? Declare war? England wouldn't even declare war on Iceland.

And before you say that means you can't get credit in the future, ask any business that TARGETS people after they file for bankruptcy.

[RandomGuy]

How does any debt get renegotiated? By telling people you aren't going to pay them. What are they going to do? Declare war? England wouldn't even declare war on Iceland.

And before you say that means you can't get credit in the future, ask any business that TARGETS people after they file for bankruptcy.

Analogy fail. The United States Government is not a private individual.

The implications of the US government seriously threatening default are so far reaching and systemic I could write a fucking book on it, and still not get to everything.

This is a Very Bad Idea. If you think it is even remotely plausible or desirable, I would highly recommend a few finance/economics classes.

[mavsfan1000]

We're back bitches.

[baseline bum]

Me too. I feel like he wanted to be president because he likes the idea of being president for the status and power it projects rather than actually initiating change.

Well fuck, he's the lazy bastard I predicted who handed the reigns to Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell and played salesman for their agenda, and Trumpers seem to love him for it. I never imagined his presidency would be this level of clusterfuck though.