Does the IL GOP *want* to be out of power forever?

[glenn1]

I know the Democratic party is *huge* in IL... but that doesn't mean the GOP should be excused for doing things that put it further behind than they already are or things that keep it irrelevant in IL.

It's not the GOP's job to save buyer's remorse Democrats from themselves and their own worst ideas. With one party in complete control you can judge the job they do on the merits, good or bad. Not that it will stop Democrats from blaming Republicans for their failures anyway; California liberals do it routinely and someone on ATPN once blamed a Chicago political debacle on Republicans even though the 50-person Assembly has only 1 Republican.

 

[waggy]

It's not the GOP's job to save buyer's remorse Democrats from themselves and their own worst ideas. With one party in complete control you can judge the job they do on the merits, good or bad. Not that it will stop Democrats from blaming Republicans for their failures anyway; California liberals do it routinely and someone on ATPN once blamed a Chicago political debacle on Republicans even though the 50-person Assembly has only 1 Republican.

someone also blamed chicago's trouble on the last GOP mayor..wich was in 1931

 

[xBiffx]

e we may get another GOP IL gov but to be honest that means jack shit for the state. Chicago is where most the funds go to.

I used to think that. But apparently sending D Governors to jail over and over isn't enough to wake people up. But when you think about it, its a product of Chicago and why wouldn't they continue to like it.

 

[zsdersw]

You do a good job of showing you know nothing. Meh.

To those who know nothing themselves, but I don't care what they think.

Actually, I lived there for 10 years up until two years ago. I still own the house that I lived in there. I know exactly what I am talking about. So, please, again, keep showing how little you know. Its starting to get entertaining. Let the butthurt flow through you.

I know exactly what I'm talking about.

This is a matter of the state GOP doing something that further cements itself as both irrelevant and impotent... and that's something that shouldn't be excused, apologized for, or rationalized. It should be called for what it is: an incredibly stupid move.

 

[brandonb]

Why would the GOP want to save the sinking ship? Let them go down.

 

[zsdersw]

It's not the GOP's job to save buyer's remorse Democrats from themselves and their own worst ideas.

No, but it is the GOP's job to win votes... and going further to the right on social issues is not going to do that.

 

[zsdersw]

Why would the GOP want to save the sinking ship? Let them go down.

Then, as I said, there's no need for a state GOP organization.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

OP: Why are you asking this question in all honesty? This is precisely why our president is not and should not be elected by a popular vote. People get sucked into a warphole of what their area is like. What their way of growing up is like - and they figure that the person should lead us should simply be based on the area with the most people? Or rather - the places that can afford to shit out the most kids in an uneconomic way. Sadly, places like Chicago are 100% fucked. I don't live in IL - but like others said - I'm sure the remaining conservatives hold power in other places.

New York is just as different as Texas which is just as different as California which is just as different as Idaho.

 

[zsdersw]

OP: Why are you asking this question in all honesty?

See post #31.

 

[xBiffx]

OP loves to argue. He loves to troll for an argument even when there isn't one. You can explain to him all you want how this doesn't matter. He will argue endlessly that it does. If that eventually fails, he'll troll for another argument. All the while making himself look like the idiot he is.

Rinse, repeat.

 

[zsdersw]

He loves to troll for an argument even when there isn't one. You can explain to him all you want how this doesn't matter. He will argue endlessly that it does. If that eventually fails, he'll troll for another argument. All the while making himself look like the idiot he is.

Rinse, repeat.

I'm glad you can talk about yourself so honestly.

 

[Mixolydian]

Illinois IS a Red state, but has a very powerful blue dot in the corner.

 

[glenn1]

No, but it is the GOP's job to win votes... and going further to the right on social issues is not going to do that.

You do realize that some people value winning less than maintaining your heart-felt beliefs (even if others think they are ridiculous). I disagree with the IL GOP position here, but I prefer an principled politician I disagree with on some things over a disingenous one who says whatever he thinks he needs to just to get elected. I can still respect honest people I disagree with, whether R or D.

 

[zsdersw]

You do realize that some people value winning less than maintaining your heart-felt beliefs (even if others think they are ridiculous). I disagree with the IL GOP position here, but I prefer an principled politician I disagree with on some things over a disingenous one who says whatever he thinks he needs to just to get elected. I can still respect honest people I disagree with, whether R or D.

Yes, I do realize that... but a leader with no followers is just a guy taking a walk. A politician who votes his heart-felt beliefs and doesn't get elected is just a guy with heart-felt beliefs.

I don't think that the only choices are "stick to your heart-felt beliefs" or "say whatever is needed to get elected".

 

[chucky2]

zsdersw, I understand what you're saying. Please realize though that while the younger generations have more acceptance of gays than the older generations of conservatives, there are still shittons of social conservatives who do not 'believe in gays'. They don't want to hear about them, talk about them, accept them, etc. This part of the GOP base is pretty loyal voting. I don't think the GOP in IL is really losing much here in the short term. Long term, they'll have to change (nationally as well) to remain relevant.

Just my take on things...

Chuck

 

[zsdersw]

zsdersw, I understand what you're saying. Please realize though that while the younger generations have more acceptance of gays than the older generations of conservatives, there are still shittons of social conservatives who do not 'believe in gays'. They don't want to hear about them, talk about them, accept them, etc. This part of the GOP base is pretty loyal voting. I don't think the GOP in IL is really losing much here in the short term. Long term, they'll have to change (nationally as well) to remain relevant.

Just my take on things...

Chuck

I know.

 

[woolfe9998]

Hate to say it, but I agree. It will crumble from the inside before a republcian is voted in. Which sucks, because I love Wrigley Field and the cubs

I would say the same for California, but unlike IL there is Silicon Valley (which means it does have batches of intelligent people [Cough*non-liberal*Cough]). In addition, the location attracts people that have money as well. Considering the state of things there, they better hold the fuck on to them considering how much they are in the crapper debt/tax wise.

CA has elected mostly repubs as governor, Brown notwithstanding. Sure, in SF you won't see a republican mayor. They don't even bother to run. But statewide moderate repubs can be elected.

 

[hal2kilo]

Illinois IS a Red state, but has a very powerful blue dot in the corner.

According to the 2010 Census there are almost 6 million people living in Cook county. Add up the population of all of the rest of the counties.

Majority rule sucks.

 

[jackstar7]

CA has elected mostly repubs as governor, Brown notwithstanding. Sure, in SF you won't see a republican mayor. They don't even bother to run. But statewide moderate repubs can be elected.

Or even guys like Buck McKeon. *shudder*

 

[Matt1970]

CA has elected mostly repubs as governor, Brown notwithstanding. Sure, in SF you won't see a republican mayor. They don't even bother to run. But statewide moderate repubs can be elected.

Arnold Schwarzenegger #38: 2003-2011(Republican)
Gray Davis #37: 1999-2003 (Democrat)
Pete Wilson #36: 1991-1999 (Republican)
George Deukmejian #35: 1983-1991 (Republican)
Edmund G Brown, Jr. #34:1975-1983 (Democrat)
Ronald Reagan #33: 1967-1975 (Republican)
Edmund G. Brown #32: 1959-1967 (Democrat)
Goodwin J. Knight #31: 1953-1959 (Republican)
Earl Warren #30: 1943-1953 (Republican)
Culbert L. Olson #29: 1939-1943 (Democrat)

Looks pretty even to me.

 

[Fern]

-snip-
They might as well disband, if they're not going to wake up and stop doing stuff that costs them elections.

The Democrats need someone to run against. They'd have a problem without a Repub party, otherwise they'd run around vilifying each other. Same if it was the other way around.

Fern

 

[debian0001]

Maybe if the Republicans weren't so retarded with religion they could be progressive.

 

[zinfamous]

Hate to say it, but I agree. It will crumble from the inside before a republcian is voted in. Which sucks, because I love Wrigley Field and the cubs

I would say the same for California, but unlike IL there is Silicon Valley (which means it does have batches of intelligent people [Cough*non-liberal*Cough]). In addition, the location attracts people that have money as well. Considering the state of things there, they better hold the fuck on to them considering how much they are in the crapper debt/tax wise.

lol. you don't read much, do you?

 

[zinfamous]

Maybe if the Republicans weren't so retarded with religion they could be progressive.

it's not just religion. Remember when Fitzgerald--or whateverthefuck his name was that was porking Jerry Ryan and running against Obama--was ousted from his candidacy and the repubs thought their only chance at that point was to toss a bunch of black dudes into a hat and pull out the first one?


yeah, that was hilarious.

 

[marincounty]

Hate to say it, but I agree. It will crumble from the inside before a republcian is voted in. Which sucks, because I love Wrigley Field and the cubs

I would say the same for California, but unlike IL there is Silicon Valley (which means it does have batches of intelligent people [Cough*non-liberal*Cough]). In addition, the location attracts people that have money as well. Considering the state of things there, they better hold the fuck on to them considering how much they are in the crapper debt/tax wise.

Sorry to break it to you, but the Silicon Valley votes overwhelmingly Democratic.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...hnology-talent-gap-threatens-g-o-p-campaigns/

it is hard to find any significant pockets of support for Republican candidates in the nine counties that make up the San Francisco Bay Area.

Instead, Mr. Obama won the nine counties of the Bay Area by margins ranging from 25 percentage points (in Napa County) to 71 percentage points (in the city and county of San Francisco). In Santa Clara County, home to much of the Silicon Valley, the margin was 42 percentage points.

Over all, Mr. Obama won the election by 49 percentage points in the Bay Area, more than double his 22-point margin throughout California.

Although San Francisco, Oakland and Berkeley have long been liberal havens, the rest of the region has not always been so. In 1980, Ronald Reagan won the Bay Area vote over all, along with seven of its nine counties. George H.W. Bush won Napa County in 1988.

Republicans have lost every county in the region by a double-digit margin since then. But Democratic margins have become more and more emphatic. Mr. Obama’s 49-point margin throughout the Bay Area this year was considerably larger than Al Gore’s 34-point win in 2000, for example, or Bill Clinton’s 31-point win in 1992.