GOP losing party identification in almost every single major demographic subgroup

[CanOWorms]

It would be an interesting time to initiate a major third-party from disaffected Republicans as they continue to expel the different groups within to become a politically homogeneous party.

A socially liberal, fiscally conservative party would take many from both Democrats and Republicans. Then the political parties would be much more homogeneous. It would be interesting to see how that would work out with our political system.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: Craig234
Craig dropping knowledge on fools

The thing is they don't care. They care about more money in their pockets now. tax cuts to hell. Again anyone who believes in the rapture should step aside from any log term planning.

Thanks, but let's note the rapture crowd is a small fraction of the Republicans.

They're an easy target because their views can be *so* at odds with others, but to only comment on them is to miss a lot of other important flaws in other groups.

The basic problem is that an ideology of lies that takes an ideology which is for the rich and against the interests of most, and makes it sound good, has been sold very well.

This is nothing new, but it really accelerated after the nation shifted away from a more honest discussion to one triggered by, in part, a memo in the Nixon era by Lewis Powell before he was appointed to the Supreme Court, in which he basically called for the creation of right-wing think tank propaganda factories, because the right was constantly losing the public debate, since liberals had all the good causes. Are you for more corporate profits - or for Grandma's health? That in conjunction with the growth of the right-wing base and media created a large political base, as seen with the previously-'unelectable' Reagan - and our nation's policies shifted radically right and caused great harm.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: Lemon law
If the foreign nations quit lending us Money, we are doomed. Because we forgot how to make anything.

We know how to make content. This much I know.

We know how to print money.

At least they still have the subspecies Budmantom belongs to.

How's the kool-aid red dawn?

Wouldn't know, you drank the last of it.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
It would be an interesting time to initiate a major third-party from disaffected Republicans as they continue to expel the different groups within to become a politically homogeneous party.

A socially liberal, fiscally conservative party would take many from both Democrats and Republicans. Then the political parties would be much more homogeneous. It would be interesting to see how that would work out with our political system.

I said long ago that when the Republican leadership decided to make a radical shift to the right, it would either make them lose elections - or harm the country.

At first, it harmed the country, and now, it's making them lose elections.

It's the same sort of issue as if communists became dominant with the Democrats. It'd either make them lose elections - or move the country well to the left.

The Republicans should lose elections because of their move to the right. Thank goodness.

For the time being, it seems their alliance between libertarians and the religious right has fallen apart, but the smell of power can put them back in the same bed again.

What we can expect is for Republicans to do what they do best, to snipe and build support by creating division - to make Pelosi the issue in torture for letting people get away with torture - without mention that the people she let get away with it were Republicans running the country. It's pretty ironic that Republicans could GAIN power by attacking a Democrat for having a very secondary role in not opposing what THEIR leaders did.

Sort of like the Republican-allied Enron problems causing anti-Enron Democrat Gray Davis to get replaced by Enron friend Arnold Schwarzeneggar.

They're masters at getting around the rational - if you hate Enron, don't put their guy in office - and playing on the emotion. "We're mad - so aim the gun at Davis or Pelosi!"

 

[0marTheZealot]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Only because the Republican party is now watered-down and full of spineless wimps. (Oh, and the Leftist media marketing them as "dead" certainly doesn't help. It is not all Rush Limbaugh's fault either.)

If they got back to their FISCAL roots, dropped a lot of the social stuff (for a little while at least), became a little more "green" friendly, and grew some spines, they would get somewhere.

If I were in charge, I would basically write a new "Contract with America" (based more or less on "Libertarian" principles):

1) During the next 4 years, we promise not to touch "hot-topic" social issues like gay rights and abortion in any way (seen as good and bad by both sides).

2) Our own President has said that current deficit/debt levels are unsustainable, therefore...
A) We promise to pass a Balanced-Budget Amendment to the US Constitution, balance the budget, and begin paying off the federal debt such that the US is debt free by 2020. Doing this will require a leaner, meaner, more efficient government. Doing this also means that each and every American will have to make sacrifices for the good of the future health and viability of this country.
B) We will draft a step-by-step plan to eliminate the IRS and tax code as we know it, replacing it with a new "fair consumption" tax approach.

3) While we may disagree with our friends across the aisle that man causes global warming, we do agree that man must be responsible "stewards" of the planet and that environmental sustainability is essential to providing our children and grand children with a better planet on which to live and thrive. This means massive recycling efforts, alternative, natural energy sources, etc.

4) We are committed to completely revamping the US education system as we know it from top to bottom. In its current state, American students are simply not competitive on the world stage. Any and all ideas must be tried in this endeavor, including but not limited to school choice programs, uniforms, new funding strategies, firing of administrators, increasing teacher pay, eliminating teachers' unions, and much more.

5) Complete immigration reform: Increased fines for those who hire illegals, deportation of all illegals currently housed in US prisons, US military used for border patrol, shoot-to-kill authorization when illegal/harmful activity suspected, bigger walls and fences, a National ID system, cease the "born in the USA=citizen" law, replace with a "one or both parents are American citizens=citizen" law, grant citizenship to all illegals in the USA who are not in prison, make English the official US language, and finally create a fair, straightforward system that would allow just about anyone to apply for and obtain US citizenship within 2 years given sufficient demonstration of cultural and language competency and willingness to be a hard-working, productive American.

6) As a bonus to the American people, drugs will be legalized for those over 21 and taxed, bringing the War on Drugs to an end. Actually, why not reconsider the drinking age as well? Bring it down from 21 to 18? And maybe increase the driving age from 16 to 18?

Okay, flame suit on. Tell me what is so bad about the above!

I really like the premise of this post. There really needs to be a new contract with America and this post just about covers most of the major fiscal/political issues in the US today.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Craig234
Look at the history. Democrats JFK/LBJ had close to zero deficits. Republicans Nixon/Ford increased the deficit moderately. Democrat Carter at first reduced the deficit and then it was back about at the start. Then you get to the serious deficits - Republicans Reagan/Bush 41 skyrocketed the deficit. Then look at Democrat Clinton - he did exactly the opposie - and eliminated in 8 years what they created in 12 years. Then Republican GWB skyrocketed the deficit.

Clinton had a GOP Congress to keep him in check, and he rode a speculative bubble which promptly burst. When Reagan was going drunk with spending, I don't remember the Dems in Congress putting up any huge resistence, even though they controlled the House (AND the Senate during the GHWB years).

So, the facts show you wrong - you can't find a singe Democrat in the last 50 years (post-WWII) greatly increasing the deficit. Inf fact they either kept it low, or in Clinton's case, got rid of a huge deficit inherited from Republicans. On the other hand, Republicans since Reagan hace skyrocketed it.

Nope, not a single Democrat - hundreds of them, happily spending away while controlling Congress, the actual source of all appropriations.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: senseamp
I encourage all Moderates and Independents to read FreeRepublic and listen to Rush before deciding if they want to align themselves with the Republican base politically.
Now you can argue that there are far left elements in Democratic party, but the Democrats at least realize they need Moderates to win, and are reaching for the middle. Republican base is uncompromising and is instead working hard to push moderates out.

You are correct, the core Democratic values are not popular with the average American and to get elected, they have nominated candidates with compromised values. Hopefully Obama will continue to receive high approval ratings because those backbench senators and representatives can be very vocal and fracture party solidarity.

The Republican party is on hard times, they had a terrible President with no President in waiting represented in the VP position. They have a poor ex-leader and nobody who is able to excite the base. The election results are highly misleading because I don't think McCain excited the base and many moderate Republicans stayed home, women and blacks rallied around Obama and Hillary (even though she lost, she campaigned hard and Oprah supported him).

It's my opinion that the GOP did reach out to moderates by selecting McCain, many Republicans did not support this decision and at the same time Kerry supporters were hoping to see him as VP; can't get any more moderate than that. Most Americans do not support the expansion of government (at least the moderate middle class) and hate seeing the tax money that is taken from them abused. Obama's spending will come under criticism and hopefully he gets his desired results because he is taking a big risk with his agenda. He is not on the side of most Americans on most issues.

I consider the Republicans to be the natural governing party representing the values of America. The Democrats are merely a way for society to hold the Republicans accountable. That's what happened in 2006 and 2008. Look out when the Republicans have one single leadership representative...

 

[SammyJr]

Originally posted by: Stunt
I consider the Republicans to be the natural governing party representing the values of America.

Maybe the 50+ year olds and the Deep South... the rest has grown quite sick of god, gays, and guns.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: Stunt
I consider the Republicans to be the natural governing party representing the values of America.

Maybe the 50+ year olds and the Deep South... the rest has grown quite sick of god, gays, and guns.

I'm sure the young (and not blissfully-stupid) are quite thrilled with Social Security.
Neither party is consistently representative.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Um, sure. Huge deficits really speak to me as a member of the middle class!

i would say most middle class people are intelligent enough to realize that we are in a world of shit right now and we need to get the fusk out.

That would make sense IF the gov't wasn't in the habit of running deficits most of the time for the past 50 years. The Dems have been the party of 'grow-the-gov't' for many years, and thanks to Dubya's 'leadership', the GOP joined them. Long-term, the country's heading off a fiscal cliff, and the two main parties are just debating how fast we reach oblivion.

This Chart shows you posted - unknowningly, I'm sure - a lie when you give Democrats equal blame.

Look at the history. Democrats JFK/LBJ had close to zero deficits. Republicans Nixon/Ford increased the deficit moderately. Democrat Carter at first reduced the deficit and then it was back about at the start. Then you get to the serious deficits - Republicans Reagan/Bush 41 skyrocketed the deficit. Then look at Democrat Clinton - he did exactly the opposie - and eliminated in 8 years what they created in 12 years. Then Republican GWB skyrocketed the deficit.

So, the facts show you wrong - you can't find a singe Democrat in the last 50 years (post-WWII) greatly increasing the deficit. Inf fact they either kept it low, or in Clinton's case, got rid of a huge deficit inherited from Republicans. On the other hand, Republicans since Reagan hace skyrocketed it.

Yeah, well change is coming.