GOP Convention Problems - No one wants to show up!

[Genx87]

Bush is just a symptom of the republican leadership. They have been nothing but horrible since 2002. If the party folds it will because of their change in fundamental policy.

That said we have seen this before and in 8 years it will be the democrats running for the hills as the people pissed off at their votes take it out on the party.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: Xavier43420-30 years from now I will be very interested in researching that theory. I am not certain if he is the worst Pres in history, but his impact when it comes to the future of the Republican Party will be something that I want to spend time looking into.

If I had to bet, I'd bet that it will not have hurt them too much long term. It will hurt for the next few election cycles, but I have full confidence in the Democrats' ability to fumble the ball themselves. Do you really think that the Democrats will be able to address any of the nation's large problems in a substantial manner and that our nation's problems will not continue to worsen? In a couple election cycles Americans will have tired of the Democrats and they'll probably be ready to try Republican leadership again, and the cycle will continue.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: Xavier43420-30 years from now I will be very interested in researching that theory. I am not certain if he is the worst Pres in history, but his impact when it comes to the future of the Republican Party will be something that I want to spend time looking into.

If I had to bet, I'd bet that it will not have hurt them too much long term. It will hurt for the next few election cycles, but I have full confidence in the Democrats' ability to fumble the ball themselves. Do you really think that the Democrats will be able to address any of the nation's large problems in a substantial manner and that our nation's problems will not continue to worsen? In a couple election cycles Americans will have tired of the Democrats and they'll probably be ready to try Republican leadership again, and the cycle will continue.

I am not really sure what you are assuming about my post. I have no theory about the effect he will have. I am just saying that I will be interested in looking back at the history when the time comes. Most likely, I would say that time will mend the wounds like it does most things. I do not think the the republican party is going to fizzle out into nothing or anything ridiculously extreme like that.

To answer your question, I am confident that Democrats have the ability to address many of our nations large problems right now. I don't believe they can efficiently address them all and I do not believe that many of them can be fully addressed within 4 years like many want, but I do believe that now is a good time for them to be in charge for a while. I do not believe that it is best for our country that any single party be in charge for too long. A lot of people have too much pride and side with their party of choice for the greater part of their lives. I believe this is foolish. Each problem and scenario needs to be handled individually and some parties tend to be better at solving certain issues better than others. What seems to typically happen is that if one party is in charge for too long then the problems which revolve around their weak points tend to build up. The people start to notice these problems build up and then demand change. It is a cycle like you said, but to believe that one party is the greater good while the other is the greater evil is down right foolish.

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: OrByte
The dems didnt create the general dislike of anything republican.

The GOP only has itself to blame. I don't feel sorry for any of the party faithful...you all deserve to have your party relegated to minority/powerless status. The hype surrounding the Dem Convention only makes the GOP convention all the more pathetic.

The Dems will win a TON in november...and it will be close to a super majority.

Let's just hope they are as effective as when they were elected into control in 06.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Duwelon
You're way too optimistic about how bad the RNC will be. If you showed half as much optimism for your country you would be a lot better off.

Nobody but McCain has a snowballs chance in hell of getting the nomination on the republican side, why would anyone else show other than to say they were there?

How bad? Pal, I'm just showing the facts. We've got some senate seats up for election but are any of them showing up?

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Why would you include Barack in this post??

He has NOTHING to do with the GOP problems.

Look at the polls Barack is WAY behind where he should be, if anything he is helping the GOP.

If the Dems had nominated a centrist "blue dog" Democrat they would be walking away with the White House.

😕

Way down?

Obama currently has the lead...

Seriously, if Hilary got the nomination or Edwards McCain might have had a chance.

Are you guys really clueless or do you just play clueless on P&N??

Realclearpolitics Presidential poll average Obama +4.8
link

Generic Congressional Vote Democrats +11.8
Generic congressional ballot

So despite ALL the good coverage or Obama. The endless magazine covers: Rolling Stone, NewsWeek, Ebony etc etc etc.
Despite the HUGE media coverage of his trip to Europe, btw 200,000 people came to listen to him in Berlin.
Despite everything going in his favor he is polling 7 points behind his party. 😕

Mike Dukakis had a 18!!!!! point lead in July 1998 link
18!!!!!!!!!!
Then: great economy, popular President, world peace and yet the Democrat led by 18!!!!!
Today: lousy economy, unpopular President, world at war and yet the Democrat leads by 4???

For the record pre-convention Dukakis had a 6 point lead., which is still better than Obama is doing.

You said Barack was behind in the polls, he's not. Who's the stupid one exactly?

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: Xavier43420-30 years from now I will be very interested in researching that theory. I am not certain if he is the worst Pres in history, but his impact when it comes to the future of the Republican Party will be something that I want to spend time looking into.

If I had to bet, I'd bet that it will not have hurt them too much long term. It will hurt for the next few election cycles, but I have full confidence in the Democrats' ability to fumble the ball themselves. Do you really think that the Democrats will be able to address any of the nation's large problems in a substantial manner and that our nation's problems will not continue to worsen? In a couple election cycles Americans will have tired of the Democrats and they'll probably be ready to try Republican leadership again, and the cycle will continue.

I am not really sure what you are assuming about my post. I have no theory about the effect he will have. I am just saying that I will be interested in looking back at the history when the time comes. Most likely, I would say that time will mend the wounds like it does most things. I do not think the the republican party is going to fizzle out into nothing or anything ridiculously extreme like that.

To answer your question, I am confident that Democrats have the ability to address many of our nations large problems right now. I don't believe they can efficiently address them all and I do not believe that many of them can be fully addressed within 4 years like many want, but I do believe that now is a good time for them to be in charge for a while. I do not believe that it is best for our country that any single party be in charge for too long. A lot of people have too much pride and side with their party of choice for the greater part of their lives. I believe this is foolish. Each problem and scenario needs to be handled individually and some parties tend to be better at solving certain issues better than others. What seems to typically happen is that if one party is in charge for too long then the problems which revolve around their weak points tend to build up. The people start to notice these problems build up and then demand change. It is a cycle like you said, but to believe that one party is the greater good while the other is the greater evil is down right foolish.

well said.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Why would you include Barack in this post??

He has NOTHING to do with the GOP problems.

Look at the polls Barack is WAY behind where he should be, if anything he is helping the GOP.

If the Dems had nominated a centrist "blue dog" Democrat they would be walking away with the White House.

😕

Way down?

Obama currently has the lead...

Seriously, if Hilary got the nomination or Edwards McCain might have had a chance.

Are you guys really clueless or do you just play clueless on P&N??

Realclearpolitics Presidential poll average Obama +4.8
link

Generic Congressional Vote Democrats +11.8
Generic congressional ballot

So despite ALL the good coverage or Obama. The endless magazine covers: Rolling Stone, NewsWeek, Ebony etc etc etc.
Despite the HUGE media coverage of his trip to Europe, btw 200,000 people came to listen to him in Berlin.
Despite everything going in his favor he is polling 7 points behind his party. 😕

Mike Dukakis had a 18!!!!! point lead in July 1998 link
18!!!!!!!!!!
Then: great economy, popular President, world peace and yet the Democrat led by 18!!!!!
Today: lousy economy, unpopular President, world at war and yet the Democrat leads by 4???

For the record pre-convention Dukakis had a 6 point lead., which is still better than Obama is doing.

You said Barack was behind in the polls, he's not. Who's the stupid one exactly?

where did he say Barack was behind in the polls?

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Why would you include Barack in this post??

He has NOTHING to do with the GOP problems.

Look at the polls Barack is WAY behind where he should be, if anything he is helping the GOP.

If the Dems had nominated a centrist "blue dog" Democrat they would be walking away with the White House.

😕

Way down?

Obama currently has the lead...

Seriously, if Hilary got the nomination or Edwards McCain might have had a chance.

Are you guys really clueless or do you just play clueless on P&N??

Realclearpolitics Presidential poll average Obama +4.8
link

Generic Congressional Vote Democrats +11.8
Generic congressional ballot

So despite ALL the good coverage or Obama. The endless magazine covers: Rolling Stone, NewsWeek, Ebony etc etc etc.
Despite the HUGE media coverage of his trip to Europe, btw 200,000 people came to listen to him in Berlin.
Despite everything going in his favor he is polling 7 points behind his party. 😕

Mike Dukakis had a 18!!!!! point lead in July 1998 link
18!!!!!!!!!!
Then: great economy, popular President, world peace and yet the Democrat led by 18!!!!!
Today: lousy economy, unpopular President, world at war and yet the Democrat leads by 4???

For the record pre-convention Dukakis had a 6 point lead., which is still better than Obama is doing.

You said Barack was behind in the polls, he's not. Who's the stupid one exactly?

where did he say Barack was behind in the polls?

???

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Why would you include Barack in this post??

He has NOTHING to do with the GOP problems.

Look at the polls Barack is WAY behind where he should be, if anything he is helping the GOP.

If the Dems had nominated a centrist "blue dog" Democrat they would be walking away with the White House.

😕

Way down?

Obama currently has the lead...

Seriously, if Hilary got the nomination or Edwards McCain might have had a chance.

Are you guys really clueless or do you just play clueless on P&N??

Realclearpolitics Presidential poll average Obama +4.8
link

Generic Congressional Vote Democrats +11.8
Generic congressional ballot

So despite ALL the good coverage or Obama. The endless magazine covers: Rolling Stone, NewsWeek, Ebony etc etc etc.
Despite the HUGE media coverage of his trip to Europe, btw 200,000 people came to listen to him in Berlin.
Despite everything going in his favor he is polling 7 points behind his party. 😕

Mike Dukakis had a 18!!!!! point lead in July 1998 link
18!!!!!!!!!!
Then: great economy, popular President, world peace and yet the Democrat led by 18!!!!!
Today: lousy economy, unpopular President, world at war and yet the Democrat leads by 4???

For the record pre-convention Dukakis had a 6 point lead., which is still better than Obama is doing.

You said Barack was behind in the polls, he's not. Who's the stupid one exactly?

Looks like you are since you can't even read what he actually wrote.

Look at the polls Barack is WAY behind where he should be

I'll agree with that, seeing how dismal Bush's approval rating is right now, Obama should be wiping the floor with McCain.

Despite everything going in his favor he is polling 7 points behind his party.

Realclearpolitics Presidential poll average Obama +4.8
link

Generic Congressional Vote Democrats +11.8
Generic congressional ballot

11.8 - 4.8 = 7

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Why would you include Barack in this post??

He has NOTHING to do with the GOP problems.

Look at the polls Barack is WAY behind where he should be, if anything he is helping the GOP.

If the Dems had nominated a centrist "blue dog" Democrat they would be walking away with the White House.

😕

Way down?

Obama currently has the lead...

Seriously, if Hilary got the nomination or Edwards McCain might have had a chance.

Are you guys really clueless or do you just play clueless on P&N??

Realclearpolitics Presidential poll average Obama +4.8
link

Generic Congressional Vote Democrats +11.8
Generic congressional ballot

So despite ALL the good coverage or Obama. The endless magazine covers: Rolling Stone, NewsWeek, Ebony etc etc etc.
Despite the HUGE media coverage of his trip to Europe, btw 200,000 people came to listen to him in Berlin.
Despite everything going in his favor he is polling 7 points behind his party. 😕

Mike Dukakis had a 18!!!!! point lead in July 1998 link
18!!!!!!!!!!
Then: great economy, popular President, world peace and yet the Democrat led by 18!!!!!
Today: lousy economy, unpopular President, world at war and yet the Democrat leads by 4???

For the record pre-convention Dukakis had a 6 point lead., which is still better than Obama is doing.

You said Barack was behind in the polls, he's not. Who's the stupid one exactly?

Looks like you are since you can't even read what he actually wrote.

Look at the polls Barack is WAY behind where he should be

I'll agree with that, seeing how dismal Bush's approval rating is right now, Obama should be wiping the floor with McCain.

Despite everything going in his favor he is polling 7 points behind his party.

Realclearpolitics Presidential poll average Obama +4.8
link

Generic Congressional Vote Democrats +11.8
Generic congressional ballot

11.8 - 4.8 = 7

Oh... Whoops... however why are we even comparing the two?

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: Tab

Is Barack the nail in the coffin for the Republican Party?

I doubt that Obama has had much to do with the Republican Party's current malaise. A better question might be, "Was George Bush, arguably the worst president in the nation's history, the nail in the coffin for the Republican Party"

Obama has nothing to do with the Repub's problems. He's merely a focal point for those want things to get better.

The Repubs brought their problems upon themselves. I don't even belive GWB is the cause of them all, perhaps had he been better he would have restrained the GOP Congresses spending. But he did not.

Perhaps if he had better chosen his advisors there would have been less problems, but he did not.

Overall, IMO, GWB's biggest failure is his inability to use the Preseidency as the "bully pullpit" that it is. That is the single most powrful aspect of the position, and he is a woefully poor communicator.

Yet still, I mostly blame Congress. They pass the budget, the earmarks and control spending. They are responsible for immigration law and border control. They are responsible for Health Care legislation. Etc etc. They've done nothing.

Worse, they've (the Repub Party) had several years to recognize their problems and still lack any leadership or direction. They are disorganized and don't seem to exhibit any clue about how to get their party back together.

Fern

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I am not worried at all about a Barack victory.

Last time the Democrats controlled the White House in congress it was followed by a HUGE Republican victory in the mid terms and tax cuts, welfare reform and a balanced budget pushed by a Republican congress.

Obama gets into the White House the Democrat leadership in the house pushes him to the left, like they did centrist Bill Clinton, and the American people go "WTF" and elect a bunch of Republicans in 2010.

Bill was in office for 8 years, so why do you think Obama will be gone after 4? Of course, the greater problem here is your preference to see more of the same that we've already had for 8 years. But you already know that's a problem and I know you're trying to work on it.

Yeah, but he also accomplished essentially nothing in the last 6 of those years after he ran his own Congress out of town.

If Obama sticks to his Illinois Senate record of being a liberal kook he will be given the boot.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: Tab

Is Barack the nail in the coffin for the Republican Party?

I doubt that Obama has had much to do with the Republican Party's current malaise. A better question might be, "Was George Bush, arguably the worst president in the nation's history, the nail in the coffin for the Republican Party"

Obama has nothing to do with the Repub's problems. He's merely a focal point for those want things to get better.

The Repubs brought their problems upon themselves. I don't even belive GWB is the cause of them all, perhaps had he been better he would have restrained the GOP Congresses spending. But he did not.

Perhaps if he had better chosen his advisors there would have been less problems, but he did not.

Overall, IMO, GWB's biggest failure is his inability to use the Preseidency as the "bully pullpit" that it is. That is the single most powrful aspect of the position, and he is a woefully poor communicator.

Yet still, I mostly blame Congress. They pass the budget, the earmarks and control spending. They are responsible for immigration law and border control. They are responsible for Health Care legislation. Etc etc. They've done nothing.

Worse, they've (the Repub Party) had several years to recognize their problems and still lack any leadership or direction. They are disorganized and don't seem to exhibit any clue about how to get their party back together.

Fern

How many bills did Bush veto... Oh wait... :roll:

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Tab

How many bills did Bush veto... Oh wait... :roll:

thus the problem of single party government?

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: Fern
-snip-

How many bills did Bush veto... Oh wait... :roll:

What's your point?

Fern

 

[Lemon law]

Exactly what our next President can accomplish will be controlled by the make up of the congress after the election of 2008. And unless McCain can articulate a better message of positive change, there are not likely to be enough GOP members left in the house and Senate to really matter.

A new President usually also gets a honeymoon period, and its difficult to conceive of McCain up to the change challenges he will face if elected.

In terms of Obama as a flaming liberal, he is anything but, he will just seems so as compared to McCain who is a card carrying reactionary.

And to a certain extent, the election of 2008 will be a replay of the elections of 2000 and 2004. McCain has little hope of winning any of those States that went blue the last few elections, and if Obama can win quite a few of the States that traditionally went red in the past two elections, McCain will be toast. If McCain can hold all the red States, he has a good chance of winning.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Bush is just a symptom of the republican leadership. They have been nothing but horrible since 2002. If the party folds it will because of their change in fundamental policy.

That said we have seen this before and in 8 years it will be the democrats running for the hills as the people pissed off at their votes take it out on the party.

Republicans' problem is that they weren't to the right enough on anything.

The irony is that the country is going to end up someone way left when being left of center was the problem.

 

[kage69]

I think the mere fact that the Obama and the Dems are going to be following the disaster that has been the 2000-2006 Bush-Repub administration will make them look infinitely better, actually. It's not like they have to follow Lincoln or FDR, they're following one of the worst presidents and Congresses in U.S. history.

Exactly.

The Dems are going to steam roll the GOP come November, and the GOP will largely have themselves to thank for it.

 

[hellokeith]

The "funeral" comment is pretty funny. 🙂

But I would describe it more as an unnecessary let's-get-boozed-up party than anything else. I don't think the convention will change many minds that aren't already changed or get more votes for McCain that will eventually vote for him anyways. The convention may make some state delegation people feel better about supporting McCain, but that is going to happen no matter who is the nominee.

McCain winning or losing to Obama will have little to do with the GOP convention.