Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (40) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: Tuni Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 445503  
Subject: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/28/2012 12:33 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 46
"Rachel Maddow spent a segment on her Monday MSNBC show contrasting the differences between what she called Beltway media coverage and local news coverage of the Republican Party.

On the national stage, Maddow said, it sounds as though Republicans are engaged in what she called a "course correction," walking back the party's rhetoric on some issues including immigration and contraception rights.

But where Republicans are really in control of government, as in Kansas for example, Maddow said the party is taking steps to "crack down on immigrants who want to go to college." She also said that the Republican leadership in Indiana is moving to add a constitutional ban on gay marriage to the state constitution—in a state where gay marriage is already illegal. In Ohio, Maddow said, one of the first things the state government did after the November election was hold a hearing on defunding Planned Parenthood.

"All over the country if you look at state newspapers and state news bureaus right now covering what it is that Republicans are planning to do where they have governing authority in the states, the contrast between that reporting about what Republicans are doing, and the Beltway discussion about what Republicans theoretically ought to maybe be doing, it's like reading news from two totally different universes," Maddow said. "It's totally disconnected.""

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/rachel-maddow-repub...
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Adenovir Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413820 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/28/2012 10:55 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
Maddow added that Republicans at the state level are still "waging wars" on issues like immigration, abortion, and gay marriage, even though members of the party seem to be saying otherwise on a national level. Speaking of the differences between Republican messages, Maddow said, "Somebody should tell the Beltway, or maybe it's funnier if we don't."

The fiscal conservatives in the party need to get a divorce from the religious right. It's hurting their brand. If they stay together for the kids (read: fetuses), it'll probably kill the mother (read: party).

Adenovir

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AdvocatusDiaboli Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413824 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/29/2012 6:00 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
The fiscal conservatives in the party need to get a divorce from the religious right. It's hurting their brand. If they stay together for the kids (read: fetuses), it'll probably kill the mother (read: party).

So let's suppose the GOP abandons the "religious value" BS (gays, sex, abortion) and consequently goes from 48% to 35%.
Which constituency are they going to get their votes from to replace the ones they lost?

The GOP has used "god, guns and gays" to attract a substantial part of the middle class/working class.
How are they going to appeal to those? With their economic policies?
"Vote for us so we can take away your health insurance and Social Security so we can cut taxes for the plutocracy"?

The idea that the GOP could abandon the religious right is pure fantasy.
The GOP is kind of locked into a problematic position.
It has committed itself to a strategy that is difficult to abandon, but which puts it at a demographic disadvantage with the young and with non-white populations.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: rinjr715 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413830 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/29/2012 9:22 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
A lot of this local bullcrap is due to tea party wackjobs, not real Republicans. We need to drive these tea party wackjobs back into the holes in the ground they came from. If we fail to do so, they will keep costing us elections till we do.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413831 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/29/2012 10:05 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
Which constituency are they going to get their votes from to replace the ones they lost?

But that right there is the fiction. Who are those religious fundies (who want government out of our lives, and in the bedrooms and doctor's offices with us...figure that one out!) going to vote for? The Republicans can ignore them entirely and still get their vote because the alternative is to vote for the "libruls". And they won't do that. They will come out and vote against the librul, no matter what. So the Republicans can ignore them just as they ignored Arizona this election (Romney never came here...didn't need to, and he knew it).

It's almost like when a kid says they are going to hold their breath until you give them the treat. You can say "go ahead"...the kid will be breathing again within 30 seconds or so, and won't get the treat, and will have no choice in the matter. The kid may be more p|ssed, and threaten to hold their breath again, but in the end it makes no difference if the parent doesn't yield.

The Republican leadership can (and should) take control again (right now the spoiled brats are running the house), and slap the brats down. The brats have no choice...they WILL stay with the party. There's nowhere else for them to go.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: rmhj Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413837 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/29/2012 10:44 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
1pg: The Republican leadership can (and should) take control again (right now the spoiled brats are running the house), and slap the brats down. The brats have no choice...they WILL stay with the party. There's nowhere else for them to go.

That's what the GOP leadership is trying to do, but in many cases they're outnumbered. While the old-guard leadership has significant advantages, the GOP is still (nominally) a democracy and the tea-partiers/crazies have been taking over a lot of the state and local parties.

And while the old guard has money, the religious crazies can be good at getting out money (when necessary) and bodies on the ground -- and both are necessary to compete in elections.

rj

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AdvocatusDiaboli Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413845 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/29/2012 10:57 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The Republicans can ignore them entirely and still get their vote because the alternative is to vote for the "libruls".

If they ignore them, they will lose a lot of their votes simply due to non-participation in the election.
And secondly, if they ignore them and stop speaking their language of bigoted hatred, a lot of those people will start paying attention to OTHER political issues.

The reason why "values" voter are so tuned in to "values" is that these "values" get so much airtime.
If the GOP stops talking about this BS all the time, what will happen?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413847 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/29/2012 11:09 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If they ignore them, they will lose a lot of their votes simply due to non-participation in the election.

I don't think so. All the Republicans would have to do is say "better get out and vote for us or THAT LIBRUL THERE will win!". That would do it for most of the goobers.

And secondly, if they ignore them and stop speaking their language of bigoted hatred, a lot of those people will start paying attention to OTHER political issues.

That might be the price they pay for having a hope in hell of ever winning the White House again. As has been discussed both here and in the media, the current GOP is no longer "grand". They have not kept pace and demographics are going to slaughter them going forward. They can't talk "self-deportation" and expect to win enough of the Hispanic vote to carry an election (and without the Hispanic vote, you will not carry future elections - heck, some are saying that Texas is about to go blue because of it). Ditto with women...alienate them (which the Republicans have been making of point of doing for a while now), and you're gonna lose. They need to stop that, tell the brats to shut-up, and begin courting women and non-whites, or they're done everywhere except the House from 2016 onward.

1poorguy

Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413857 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/29/2012 11:40 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 10
They need to stop that, tell the brats to shut-up, and begin courting women and non-whites, or they're done everywhere except the House from 2016 onward.

The problem with this approach is that it presumes that there is a "they" that is separate from "the brats" that could be a better base for getting to 50%+1 of the vote. I don't think that's the case.

I don't believe they exit polled for "values voters" in 2012, but let's take "white born-again" as a rough proxy. That group constituted abuot 26% of the electorate, and went about 78% for Romney. In other words, more than 20 points of Romney's 47% total popular vote came from white born-again voters. That's a massive amount of the GOP support. It's still likely the case that the "brats" in the GOP are the single largest faction within the party.

Albaby

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413864 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/29/2012 12:00 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
A lot of this local bullcrap is due to tea party wackjobs, not real Republicans.

So the current GOP makeup is what, 49.9% TP wackjobs, 49.9% religious fanatics, and .2% real Republicans?

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: crassfool Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413868 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/29/2012 12:21 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 7
rinjr715 says

A lot of this local bullcrap is due to tea party wackjobs, not real Republicans. We need to drive these tea party wackjobs back into the holes in the ground they came from. If we fail to do so, they will keep costing us elections till we do.

Those good folks were charmed out of their holes back around Reagan's time as Governor of California. They were called Southern Democrats then, and seducing them away from the Democrats was called the Southern Strategy.

Apparently the old-line GOP thought they could get these voters cheap, just by throwing them a racist bone here and there and embracing gun rights. The joke was on them, though, and the Southerners immediately began an all-out campaign to take over the GOP. They've pretty much done it by now.

Drive them out? They're all you've got. They are your brothers and sisters. Without the tea party wackjobs, the GOP is yesterday's toast.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: feedmeNOWhuman Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413893 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/29/2012 2:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 61
A lot of this local bullcrap is due to tea party wackjobs, not real Republicans. We need to drive these tea party wackjobs back into the holes in the ground they came from. If we fail to do so, they will keep costing us elections till we do.



Your platform would allow a 9-year-old girl, raped by her father, to die rather than perform a life-saving abortion. A married woman with an ectopic (tubal) pregnancy would be denied a life-saving abortion even though there is no hope of a normal delivery. "LET THEM DIE!!" is the GOP platform. Don't talk to me driving out the wackjobs. Wackjob is norm for the GOP these days.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413916 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/29/2012 6:22 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
A lot of this local bullcrap is due to tea party wackjobs, not real Republicans.

============
So the current GOP makeup is what, 49.9% TP wackjobs, 49.9% religious fanatics, and .2% real Republicans?



there's got to be some major overlap between the first two.

.... and the 0.2 might be high.


[** based on reading the MF Boards which might well not be a fair sample

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jwiest Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413958 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 9:43 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
A lot of this local bullcrap is due to tea party wackjobs, not real Republicans.

I've been waiting for this day, when Republicans turn inwards and start calling each other RINOs. It's build into the conservative-authoritarian mindset to be watching each other for ideological purity.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: rmhj Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413960 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 9:58 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
jwiest: I've been waiting for this day, when Republicans turn inwards and start calling each other RINOs.

That's called primary season, isn't it?

IMO, the most effective video I saw against Romney was a compilation clip of all his primary competitors describing him.

rj

Print the post Back To Top
Author: goofnoff Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413973 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 12:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Wackjob is norm for the GOP these days.


bullseye

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413986 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 2:22 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
The problem with this approach is that it presumes that there is a "they" that is separate from "the brats" that could be a better base for getting to 50%+1 of the vote. I don't think that's the case.

Well, the brats are hopeless. Maybe 20% (I seem to recall reading that number, but stand to be corrected if you have a better one). Not only are they not enough of a base, but they alienate everyone else. All the women-folk left, the Latinos won't have anything to do with them, moderates like me (and I seem to read about more of them leaving all the time)...the leadership is cutting off their noses to spite their faces. Heck...remember when Boehner actually negotiated a deal with Obama a few years ago, and the brats threw a hissy fit. Boehner should have ignored them and consolidated the more reasonable voices, but he didn't. He caved. How he ever got the legislation that has led us to the "fiscal cliff" I will never know, because they sure are throwing a fit about that now. (Maybe they thought Obama would be gone and it would be easy to negate this?)

Are the cretins the largest faction now? I thought they were still a minority. Or is it that everyone else has fled? The party has no chance if it can't get back a lot of those alienated voters, IMO. And as the party stands now, it can't.

1poorguy

Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 413997 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 4:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Are the cretins the largest faction now? I thought they were still a minority. Or is it that everyone else has fled? The party has no chance if it can't get back a lot of those alienated voters, IMO. And as the party stands now, it can't.

It really depends upon what you mean by "cretins."

The entire GOP is anti-tax. Seriously, the whole party. All but 13 of the 289 Republicans in Congress (House and Senate) have signed the Grover Norquist anti-tax pledge. Similarly, the entire GOP is anti-abortion. Sure, there are a few pro-choice Republicans - but a tiny minority. So really, if you think that the GOP leadership is at all likely to seriously tamp down on members who are strenously against taxes or abortion....well, that's not very likely to happen. The faction that's more likely to get pushback is the Tancredo/Arpaio nativist branch.

There might come a time when the GOP considers major changes to its policies, but the election of 2012 is not going to prompt those - and probably shouldn't. They certainly lost the election, but not by any real significant margins - within a point on the House popular vote, only had one seat switch in the Senate that wasn't likely to (Indiana), and within four points against an incumbent in the Presidency. They had high expectations, so their loss is all the more disappointing for them relative to those high hopes, but it was a pretty ordinary loss otherwise. Odds are they will continue to control the House, a majority of state legislatures, and the majority of Governoships after the 2014 election as well.

All of which is to say that the GOP would have to pick up a heck of a lot of disaffected Democratic voters (not just indies, who generally went for Romney anyway) to make up for abandoning that huge part of their core base. It's hard to see how that's a good move for them, at this point.

Albaby

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414003 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 5:12 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
(not just indies, who generally went for Romney anyway)

They did? I can't find solid post-election numbers, but I am finding lots of articles from before the election saying that Obama was leading among independents.

And I'm not sure I agree with you about "ordinary loss". Obama carried all of the "swing" states. All of them. Seems like a fairly strong repudiation of right-wing policies if all the swing (i.e. "evenly split") states went in the same direction.

Obama was totally beatable this time. Weak economy (perceived...it's actually been improving, but most people don't seem to think so). Dissatisfaction with O-care (for lack of a public option, mostly). Various broken promises (which plague most incumbents). Etc. And he still won. Pretty handily.

I do agree with you about 2014 (legislatures, governorships), and I wouldn't be at all surprised if it kept on in 2016. However, I think the GOP has already lost the WH and Senate in 2016 before they even start. Whether or not they try to yank their party back towards center (and attract independents and "disaffected" Dems). If they go the way they are, they alienate pretty much everyone who isn't a white gun-toting Bible-thumping reactionary. If they try to affect significant change they won't attract enough non-core people before 2016 to win. Even when their core doesn't abandon them (like those cretins are going to vote for evil socialist liberal Democrats?). But they might have a shot by 2020 if they do. Otherwise, I think they're done in 2020 also (demographics will be working against them even more by then, Texas may very well be "blue", etc).

I know most signed that stupid tax pledge. Many are reportedly abandoning that (if I can believe NPR). Those that don't further marginalize themselves as more folks realize that deficit reduction without more taxes is a fantasy.

Like I said, they've already lost the WH and Senate in 2016. They need to think further ahead, and restructure their platform so they can be ready for 2020 (or they'll lose that too). Self-deportation and "be happy you're pregnant, now get me a beer" isn't going to fly anymore. Not in a minority majority nation, which is what we have now.

1poorguy

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414006 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 5:37 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
They did? I can't find solid post-election numbers, but I am finding lots of articles from before the election saying that Obama was leading among independents.

And I'm not sure I agree with you about "ordinary loss". Obama carried all of the "swing" states. All of them. Seems like a fairly strong repudiation of right-wing policies if all the swing (i.e. "evenly split") states went in the same direction.


Romney won self-described independents by five points (50-45):

http://elections.msnbc.msn.com/ns/politics/2012/all/presiden...

It's not a repudiation of right-wing policies if you only lose the close states. By definition, those are close states - the states you would expect to lose most of if you end up losing the election by a few points (Romney won NC, so he didn't lose all the swing states). There's no doubt that Romney lost the election - but he lost it by less than four points in the national vote, which is neither trivial nor a huge margin. The results in the 'swing states' are utterly consistent with a modest - but non-trivial - loss. Romney still got slightly more than 47% of the national vote - that's a very large number of people that supported right-wing policies (at least indirectly).

I do agree with you about 2014 (legislatures, governorships), and I wouldn't be at all surprised if it kept on in 2016. However, I think the GOP has already lost the WH and Senate in 2016 before they even start.

They very well may win back the Senate in 2014, and it's way too soon to predict who wins in 2016. Again, I think you overstate the margin of victory in 2012. Although Obama had serious problems as a candidate, there are also serious advantages that come with incumbency - and by all accounts, there was a massive discrepancy between the election day GOTV operations of the masterful Obama campaign and the abysmal Romney one. The outcome in House elections was essentially tied (the Democrats had about a point more in actual votes, but there were a few more Republicans running unopposed).

The GOP definitely lost the election - but it was a relatively modest loss. It's certainly not enough to conclude that they need to re-think the entire fundamental philosophy of the party, rather than maybe have a nominee who doesn't have to run against a popular incumbent and who doesn't come across as a d!ck on immigration issues.

Albaby

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414008 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 6:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
It's certainly not enough to conclude that they need to re-think the entire fundamental philosophy of the party, rather than maybe have a nominee who doesn't have to run against a popular incumbent and who doesn't come across as a d!ck on immigration issues.

Yes, he did do that. But his party didn't help him at all. "Legitimate rape"? "Gift from God" (rape babies). "Self-deportation". Add to that being on the wrong side of historical issues (or what will become historical issues) such as gay marriage/DOMA, gays in the military, etc. They are just ticking-off everyone right and left. Except the angry white guys with guns, who are by no means a majority anymore. I'm amazed they took that many independents (I wonder why? I don't know a single independent who went for Romney...not one...and I'm in Arizona!)

IMO, and apparently some analysts who do it for a living, the Republicans must rethink their positions because of the shifting face of America. "Gay" is no longer a dirty word, and the lifestyle is accepted (or at least people aren't willing to remove rights over it). Hispanics are the largest single ethnic group in many places now, and this continues to grow. Women have always had a slight majority, and they like their birth control and they don't like old white guys telling them about rape and pregnancy. The Republicans have to get on board this bandwagon or it will run them over. Don't get me wrong, I actually hope they DON'T get on the bandwagon. I'm sick of that party and would like to see a new one rise up that represents moderates (such as I consider myself). But others (like Frum) don't want to see that, they want their party to get with the program. Because that's the only chance it has. The tactics and policies of the past are a losing proposition now. Eventually it will probably even start eroding their position in the House (though I suspect that will take several election cycles before we see it).

1poorguy

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Goofyhoofy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414010 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 6:48 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
The GOP definitely lost the election - but it was a relatively modest loss. It's certainly not enough to conclude that they need to re-think the entire fundamental philosophy of the party, rather than maybe have a nominee who doesn't have to run against a popular incumbent and who doesn't come across as a d!ck on immigration issues.

Which is why if Obama really wants to change things he will continue to LOUDLY offer compromise to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff, and won't give in as he did so often in Term 1. Should the Reoublicans continue to protect the Top 2% at the expense of the country, you might have a different Congressional election in 2014.

But I fear he won't have the cojones; he hasn't showed them once so far.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: CountUpp Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414012 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 7:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
GH: But I fear he won't have the cojones; he hasn't showed them once so far.

I thought cojones was on the proscribed list. Not so?

Count Upp

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MDGluon Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414015 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 8:33 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
here might come a time when the GOP considers major changes to its policies, but the election of 2012 is not going to prompt those

It will strongly depend on the 2014 mid-term elections and the 2016 Presidential one.

If the Democrats motivate and get their, I suspect actually larger, base out and add more Senators and House Representatives and they then win the 2016 Presidential election (A high probability)....well then they have little choice.

The Republicans can hang on in the House for at least one more mid-term, maybe, due to the 2010 gerrymandering and often lower interest yet the mid-terms can very dangerous, especially in the House.

The House elections can swing quite quickly with emotion driving things, witness the rise of the Astro Turf Teabag Groups which depended on a lot of money from Koch industries and to be honest.....pure hate, bogtry, and flat out ignorance. It worked yet created a party that both cannot and will not function in govenring our nation in any sensible way.

Not sure the Republicans can duplicate that again, or should since to push any further to the right would seem insane...but stranger things have happened.

And progressive groups have not been idle this time; the odds are even that the next mid-terms will see a large turnout and a sudden swing the other way. Most people are getting tired of the hysteria of the New McCarthyites.

Of so I hope.

md

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414022 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 11/30/2012 11:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
Yes, he did do that. But his party didn't help him at all. "Legitimate rape"? "Gift from God" (rape babies). "Self-deportation". Add to that being on the wrong side of historical issues (or what will become historical issues) such as gay marriage/DOMA, gays in the military, etc. They are just ticking-off everyone right and left. Except the angry white guys with guns, who are by no means a majority anymore. I'm amazed they took that many independents (I wonder why? I don't know a single independent who went for Romney...not one...and I'm in Arizona!)

Well, most of us mostly know people who agree with us - or at least, those are the people we talk about politics with. If you tend towards Democratic policies, chances are that most people you talk politics will as well.

Certainly his party (and the primary process) didn't help him very much - and I think the GOP will look to moderate the very edges of its abortion plank, or at least not talk about it much (example - Democrats on gay marriage in the 1990's). But part of what you're describing is also the power of incumbency - the ability of the President to put issues that he wants onto the national radar screen simply by acting on them. The quasi-DREAM act prosecutorial restraint was pure political genius, for example. It delivered a valuable policy to an important constituency on a wedge issue and annoyed the GOP so much that they kept it in the national media a few extra news cycles complaining about it. It highlighted immigration at a time when nothing in Congress, or even in the national dialog about the economy, was likely to do so. Same thing with contraception coverage as part of health care, gays in the military and DOMA - things that the President wanted to be put front and center.

But others (like Frum) don't want to see that, they want their party to get with the program. Because that's the only chance it has. The tactics and policies of the past are a losing proposition now.

Why? Because the GOP has to console itself with controlling the House and most of the nation's state legislatures and governorships? Or because it lost an election by three and a half points?

I think people overestimate the degree to which demographics is destiny. Catholics used to be a solid Democratic vote....until they weren't. Old people used to be a solid Democratic vote...until they weren't any more. The huge question for the next few decades is whether Latinos will behave like black voters (with strong bloc voting) or like Irish, Italian, German, or a host of other immigrant blocs that gradually just became "white" voters. But even then, it may require little more than modulation on a few issues to let the GOP continue to be successful (eq. Bush43's sizable Latino vote, despite his conservative positions).

Part of this is just wishful thinking, IMHO. Remember, in an election with very successful Democratic turnout and an incumbent running heavily against the House, the GOP ran even with the Democrats in the House popular vote. I think progressives are talking about the nation having fundamentally rejected Republicans and conservative ideas because they want to believe that the country has shifted strongly to the left. Taking back Senate seats in states like Maine (carried by Gore, Kerrey, and Obama) and Massachusetts (ditto) doth not a sea change indicate.

Albaby

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: AdvocatusDiaboli Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414024 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 12:46 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Albaby,

I am curious where you stand on the issue of "epistemic closure", I am sure you have read about it.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: rmhj Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414025 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 1:01 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Part of this is just wishful thinking, IMHO. Remember, in an election with very successful Democratic turnout and an incumbent running heavily against the House, the GOP ran even with the Democrats in the House popular vote.

Is this true? ISTR that measuring by total Dem votes vs. total Rep votes for the house, Dems won by something on the order of 1M votes.

rj

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414027 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 2:52 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I think progressives are talking about the nation having fundamentally rejected Republicans and conservative ideas because they want to believe that the country has shifted strongly to the left.

Perhaps some do. I would not say we (as a nation) have shifted "strongly to the left". Just that the GOP has gone too far right. They're annoying large blocs of voters. Women, minorities, even old people (which is probably why they lost Florida this time).

And most of the people I know voted Romney. Except for a few liberals, two former Republicans (like me), and a Libertarian.

1poorguy

Print the post Back To Top
Author: discurro Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414030 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 9:34 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Perhaps some do. I would not say we (as a nation) have shifted "strongly to the left". Just that the GOP has gone too far right.

I think our political leadership has ALL shifted significantly to the right. Obama's policies are to the right of Nixon most of the time. Nixon was a crook, but he was more liberal than most of the democrats today. While the whole country (with a few exceptions) has shifted to the right, the politicians shifted faster than the populace so the democrats at right middle have caught up to more of the people.

I would welcome our country shifting "strongly to the left", but I am not overly confident about it. I suspect with this last election, there will be general shift slightly to the left in the politicians, and if the left can win another election or two, the pendulum may really start to move to the left more strongly. Then the politicians will run so quickly, the republicans may catch up to the middle again like they did in the late 60's and early 70s.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414057 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 5:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Albaby,

Maybe you've already seen this. I just stumbled on it. A conservative telling conservatives why they lost, and why they will continue to lose. More or less what I was trying to say. This may have already been posted...I sometimes lose track (in which case, apologies in advance!). It's long. But IMO he nailed this election. As an aside, he apparently is also realizing that Keynesian economics seems to work.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/revenge-of-t...

So here we are, post-election 2012. All the stupidity and closed-mindedness that right-wingers have displayed over the last 10 years has come back to haunt them. It is now widely understood that the nation may be center-left after all, not center-right as conservatives thought. Overwhelming losses by Republicans to all the nation’s nonwhite voters have created a Democratic coalition that will govern the nation for the foreseeable future.

Tellingly, a key reason for Obama’s victory, according to exit polls, is none other than George W. Bush, whom 60 percent of voters primarily blame for the nation’s economic woes—an extraordinary fact when he has been out of office for four years.

<snip>

If Republicans can’t bring blacks into their coalition, they are finished at the presidential level, given the rapid rise of the Latino population. Perhaps after 2016, they may be willing to put my strategy into operation.


Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414059 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 5:26 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 8
I am curious where you stand on the issue of "epistemic closure", I am sure you have read about it.

I think it's a problem for GOP thought leaders. If you don't regularly encounter people who disagree with you, you can form an exaggerated opinion of the strength of your own arguments and the degree to which other people share your arguments. Plus, if you never hear reasoned critiques of your arguments, you won't know how certain types of positions will be received outside of your core circle of fellow-believers.

I think that's what happened to Akin. He hadn't encountered enough people telling him that abortion in circumstances involving rape is a really tough issue - so he thought about it only in terms of core beliefs no one ever challenged him on.

Albaby

Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414065 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 5:51 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Is this true? ISTR that measuring by total Dem votes vs. total Rep votes for the house, Dems won by something on the order of 1M votes.

Even a million votes is still less than one percent - which is still basically even. But since the GOP had a few more races that were unopposed than the Democrats, and there were a few more "double Democrat" races in California than double GOP, the national support was probably even closer to 50/50.

Whether the Democrats or the Republicans got a few hundred thousand more votes than the other, it's not enough of a margin to suggest that either was "repudiated" in this election.

Albaby

Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414066 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 5:52 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
And most of the people I know voted Romney. Except for a few liberals, two former Republicans (like me), and a Libertarian.

And none of the folks you know who voted Romney were independents?

Albaby

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414069 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 5:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
And none of the folks you know who voted Romney were independents?

Nope. Staunch Republicans. (At least among the ones whom I know their vote...I don't know how everyone I know voted, though I can guess in several cases.) Most got angry whenever we tried to discuss politics, so I mostly didn't do it. I mean angry. Even strident.

Not sure why.

(One still gets angry if you question anything right-wing that he says, even though he lost already.)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414070 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 5:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I saw the article, 1pg - but I didn't find it very persuasive, from a political analysis standpoint. Again, his statement that:

Overwhelming losses by Republicans to all the nation’s nonwhite voters have created a Democratic coalition that will govern the nation for the foreseeable future.

....just doesn't jibe with the fact that the GOP controls the House and most of the state legislatures and governorships. Losing by less than four points to a popular incumbent is not an "overwhelming" loss. It's a loss, to be sure - but hardly a vindication for those who have argued for a wholesale rearrangement of the GOP. Similar screeds could have been written about Democrats after the 2004 election - how the party needed to find a way to reach values voters and recapture the elderly, else they'd be forever trailing the permanent Republican majority.

Albaby

Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414073 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 6:12 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Nope. Staunch Republicans.

Do you know any independents?

Albaby

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PosFCF Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414074 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 6:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 11
albaby

..... Losing by less than four points to a popular incumbent is not an "overwhelming" loss.

I think you have to take this election in context. The Republicans did everything they could think of to stymy the economy so that it would be as bad as possible on election day. They had massive contributions from those freed up by the Citizens United decisions and massive gerrymandering and still Obama won by 4 points.

I think the underlying groundswell is much stronger than the margin of victory would make it appear. I hope so, for citizens taking an active participation in voter drives and donations and helping folks get to the polls is about all the average guy has left to fight with to try to take back his country from the big money interests. [BTW, I am not trying to indicate that the Democrats don't owe the big money interests too, just trying to frame the context under which Obama surprised many with his victory, and his victories in all the battleground states].

Poz

Print the post Back To Top
Author: albaby1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414075 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 6:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I think you have to take this election in context. The Republicans did everything they could think of to stymy the economy so that it would be as bad as possible on election day. They had massive contributions from those freed up by the Citizens United decisions and massive gerrymandering and still Obama won by 4 points.

But you can also look at the other side. The Republicans had a nominee that was savaged in an extended campaign, was pushed far from the center of the electorate, was (by all accounts) not especially captivating on the trail, and ultimately was outfundraised by the Democrats (Citizens United notwithstanding) - and had an unusually bad election day GOTV campaign...while the Democrats had the not inconsiderable advantages that come from a popular incumbent. And still Obama won by less than four points, and the House vote was (essentially) even - and gerrymandering isn't really relevant to the popular votes nationally.

Again, it's certainly a loss by the GOP. They had some bad candidates, some weak candidates, and some big missteps. But it's not a "sea change" type of loss.

[BTW, I am not trying to indicate that the Democrats don't owe the big money interests too, just trying to frame the context under which Obama surprised many with his victory, and his victories in all the battleground states].

He didn't win all the battleground states - he lost North Carolina, and Indiana went from being a battleground state last election to being solidly red. And while some might have deluded themselves into thinking that Obama was unlikely to win, it's hardly surprising when a popular incumbent wins re-election. And running almost even in the popular vote (either way) for the House isn't much of a groundswell for Democrats - they won the House popular vote by 13 million (10.5 points) in 2008. Or for the GOP, which won the 2010 House popular vote by six million votes (almost 7 points). Those were a groundswells - and both have been reversed to bring the House vote back to a basic tie.

Albaby

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414086 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/1/2012 10:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Not many. I know one for sure, who left the gop like me. Mom voted Obama this time, but is still registered Republican. The libertarian went Obama this time because he wanted to be sure Republicans lost. Lots of angry Republicans, and a few Dems.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MDGluon Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 414117 of 445503
Subject: Re: Are they trying to self-sabotage? Date: 12/2/2012 12:40 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I think that's what happened to Akin. He hadn't encountered enough people telling him that abortion in circumstances involving rape is a really tough issue - so he thought about it only in terms of core beliefs no one ever challenged him on.

Albaby


True, yet there are other factors I think we should also examine and throw into the mixing pot such as well as epistemic closure:


1. He may be a authoritarian personality who is quite willing to follow his tribes leaders/memes/bias regardless of the real world data:

http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAuthoritarians...

2. Which leads to his leaders are probably his church, his holy book, and his culture which both wants to intrude and wants to control others (especially women); many religions follow this path to control members.

3. Another set of his "great leaders" are the people who are the mouthpieces and controller of his political party who also say and think similar things to what he blurted out...remember his "ideas" on this came both from outside and inside his party. He was rejected only after he blurted out, parrot like, the ugly memes; these memes have been around for a long time, I remember hearing such drivel as I grew up (remember the meme, only bad unmarried girls get pregnant, unmarried pregnant girls are all sluts?).

3. He is incurious, a trait of all too many politicians (today heavily Republican), and both did not care to understand the subject/concern/problem and would not, once corrected, change his stance (a sign of a rigid frozen social/mental view?).

4. He follows a conservative meme that the victim was responsible since bad things do not happen to good people; therefor people who have bad things happen to them are bad and deserved it. This idea is rampant today in the Republican party and infects followers even down to the base; having to interact with the Republican base on a regular basis here in Idaho I see this all the time. (I believe this is also a meme driven by Christian Evangelical religion)

5. He is an ignorant a$$hat; a all too common personality and has risen to public prominence in the Republican party....something that the Republican party overall should be concerned with since he does not seem to be an outlier personality but a norm.

All politician to one degree or another subscribe to epistemic closure just to keep on track and achieve their goals, a survival trait as it were. Yet it seems that the Republican party has drifted very far into denial becoming the party of No, Bigots, Ignorance, and deep seated hatred.

I highly rec reading the book/website I listed above and also the book "Moral Politics" to gain a different view.

md (yep have read Ann Coulter, Hannity, and such to balance my view)

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (40) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement