Is there a future for the GOP?

[Greenman]

Wishful thinking, the cornerstone of liberal politics. The problem with your line of reasoning is that around half the country disagrees with you. I know it's only stupid people, but until you fellows find a way to disenfranchise all those stupid people that refuse to agree with you, it's going to be a two party system.

 

[Moonbeam]

Wishful thinking, the cornerstone of liberal politics.

Why do you say this? Neuroscience says that it's conservatives that construct an alternate universe that corresponds to their beliefs, not liberals. Most likely you are projecting here. The whole reason the Republicans are in a state of apparent collapse is because they have bought so deeply into their own fantasy reality that they are confidently pushing it and it's so obviously delusional that's scaring the shit out of normal people. The more deluded they become the more folk see they are being taken off a cliff.

 

[Abraxas]

I wouldn't count the Republicans out just yet, but it is clear that if demographic trends continue at their current pace, they are in serious trouble, even if a few like Greenman here won't look at the data. White males are the only demographic group the Republicans have a strong tendency to win and white males are increasingly becoming a minority. The Republicans need to drag someone into the fold, which I'm sure they will sooner or later but in the near future I would expect them to start losing progressively more severely. You can only manipulate vote totals through suppression and gerrymandering for so long before there are just to many voters on the other side to repress.

 

[nehalem256]

I wouldn't count the Republicans out just yet, but it is clear that if demographic trends continue at their current pace, they are in serious trouble, even if a few like Greenman here won't look at the data. White males are the only demographic group the Republicans have a strong tendency to win and white males are increasingly becoming a minority. The Republicans need to drag someone into the fold, which I'm sure they will sooner or later but in the near future I would expect them to start losing progressively more severely. You can only manipulate vote totals through suppression and gerrymandering for so long before there are just to many voters on the other side to repress.

In February, 64 percent of unmarried women said they would vote for Obama over Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee, according to a Democracy Corps survey analyzed by Democratic pollsters. Only 31 percent picked the GOP candidate. The gap — 33 points — was 10 points bigger than in it was in January.

Now look at what married women say: 56 percent said they would vote for Romney, and only 37 percent for Obama, with virtually no change from January to February.

And married women. If they can do a little pandering to men to expand it to all men instead of just white then men and married women seems like a pretty strong coalition to me.

 

[berzerker60]

And honestly, even if the Democrats were to go on a long-term winning streak it wouldn't matter. The country has already committed every penny of future wealth to current entitlements and then some, so there's nothing left for you to promise new gimmes to your constituents going forward. You keep on acting like the next stop is universal healthcare when you won't even have the money to pay for the lavish pensions you've promised, Social Security checks for baby boomers, the sinkhole that is Obamacare and Medicaid, and all the other goodies you've already promised everyone. All the California municipality defaults are just the sneak preview for what's to come for the great welfare state.

This is stupid.
1) The whole premise of buying votes is dumb, that's not the point of social programs.
2) Universal health care would replace Obamacare, Medicare, Medicaid, and possibly Bush's unfunded prescription drug benefit, while very likely lowering the nation's spending on medical care, and by increasing the health of workers, help economic productivity.
3) Pensions sometimes are a problem, and will be painful going forward. They're the other side of paying government workers shitty salaries and freezing them whenever politics swings one way, though - you still need to attract capable teachers somehow.
4) The spending is hardly a Democratic thing. Subtract the Bush tax cuts and Iraq and we're much, much better off economically even if you assume the same housing bubble and recession. Also, the absurd amount our nation spends on the military, which Romney wants to increase dramatically and even faster.

 

[Phokus]

This is the same shit we have heard for years yet, and pun intended, the GOP cleaned house less than 2 years ago. You guys are kidding yourselves.

We're talking long term demographic changes. If you don't think the country is changing, you are basically a drooling retard. Not only are the old racist whites that are the base of the GOP going to die some day, hispanics will keep on growing.

 

[Abraxas]

And married women. If they can do a little pandering to men to expand it to all men instead of just white then men and married women seems like a pretty strong coalition to me.

How will getting the people they are already getting help them as demographics change increasingly unfavorably to their political goals?

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

I'm talking about long term demographic changes, not anything shorter term like the next 5 years or so. The moves the GOP is making now could seriously hinder their ability to ever court the Hispanic vote in a meaningful way.

 

[EagleKeeper]

If the Dems are able to have a semi-permanent control; no serious challenges, they will find a way to shoot themselves in the foot and turn the population against them.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

The dangerous marriage the GOP made with the hardcore Christians and Tea Party activists will come to an end to bring moderates and Independents back into the fold.

I like to call this my party coming back to their senses. Look, I don't begrudge people thier religions, success, etc. but when you begin to use that as a reason to fling shit on everyone elses' faces it becomes a huge problem. Then when you add to that the fact that the Repubs seem determined to run off any real conservatives and become the Fourth Reich, leading the charge to Imperialist Facism, it makes you seriously question your allegience and the choices you are making.

 

[nehalem256]

How will getting the people they are already getting help them as demographics change increasingly unfavorably to their political goals?

Hmm, pretty sure that men will remain ~50% of the electorate. They simply need to start pandering to men to win black and especially hispanic men. Or even better they could start calling Democrats on their blatant pandering to women.

 

[nehalem256]

I'm talking about long term demographic changes, not anything shorter term like the next 5 years or so. The moves the GOP is making now could seriously hinder their ability to ever court the Hispanic vote in a meaningful way.

Well its hard to court people that are basically committing treason by giving aid and comfort to foreign invaders.

 

[Jhhnn]

And married women. If they can do a little pandering to men to expand it to all men instead of just white then men and married women seems like a pretty strong coalition to me.

The percentage of people who are married is steadily declining in this country, meaning that the demographic you cite will likely be less influential in future elections.

http://stateofourunions.org/2009/si-marriage.php

The charts say it all.

 

[Jhhnn]

Well its hard to court people that are basically committing treason by giving aid and comfort to foreign invaders.

You're 100% Native American?

 

[nehalem256]

The percentage of people who are married is steadily declining in this country, meaning that the demographic you cite will likely be less influential in future elections.

http://stateofourunions.org/2009/si-marriage.php

The charts say it all.

Hence why men + married women. For obvious reasons this would seem likely to be a majority of the electorate.

 

[nehalem256]

You're 100% Native American?

Yes, I was born in Kansas. Hard to get more native american than that.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Yes, I was born in Kansas. Hard to get more native american than that.

http://www.ehow.com/how_8176593_become-federal-government-native-american.html


There is a link on how to become a native american. Most interesting is the #4 requirement:

Determine whether your tribe has a quantum blood minimum and whether you meet that minimum requirement. Some tribes require that a person must be a minimum percentage of Native American in order to become an enrolled member.


Somehow, I doubt you have done this.

 

[Genx87]

We heard this after the 06 and 08 elections. Yet the republicans won a landslide in 2010. Until we break the two party system the republicans will always be around.

 

[shadow9d9]

Wishful thinking, the cornerstone of liberal politics. The problem with your line of reasoning is that around half the country disagrees with you. I know it's only stupid people, but until you fellows find a way to disenfranchise all those stupid people that refuse to agree with you, it's going to be a two party system.

There is no "liberal" faction in america right now. Do you mean the moderate/right democrats?

 

[Pens1566]

Demographics changes suggest not.

 

[nehalem256]

There is no "liberal" faction in america right now. Do you mean the moderate/right democrats?

Right because

Supporting gay marriage is not a liberal policy
Supporting unencumbered abortion rights is not a liberal policy
Supporting bailouts for single mother is not a liberal policy

need I go on?

 

[diesbudt]

There is no "liberal" faction in america right now. Do you mean the moderate/right democrats?

Democrats are not moderates.

Moderates are ones that are between republican and democratic ideals. Most people are one way or another, and I think teh reasoning is, people can't comprehend it is ok to think a different way (conservative/liberal) for each different topic that comes up.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Democrats are not moderates.

Moderates are ones that are between republican and democratic ideals. Most people are one way or another, and I think teh reasoning is, people can't comprehend it is ok to think a different way (conservative/liberal) for each different topic that comes up.

Great post. The problem in America right now is people don't think for themselves. They just eschew the ideaology that one side or the other feeds them. In social matters I would be considered liberal, probably because I am under 50 and not a huge Bible-banger. In fiscal matters, I tend to side with conservatives but I also recognize they have failed us and tend to spend like drunken sailors when given the national checkbook.

The problem right now is people in this country just toe the party line because they either no longer can, or choose not to, think for themselves anymore for some reason. Instead, they allow a focus group of policy makers to make up their minds for them despite the often overwhelming evidence that contradicts their idiotic ideaology.

 

[Greenman]

Why do you say this? Neuroscience says that it's conservatives that construct an alternate universe that corresponds to their beliefs, not liberals. Most likely you are projecting here. The whole reason the Republicans are in a state of apparent collapse is because they have bought so deeply into their own fantasy reality that they are confidently pushing it and it's so obviously delusional that's scaring the shit out of normal people. The more deluded they become the more folk see they are being taken off a cliff.

Your thesis is that everyone that disagrees with you politically is delusional. It's an interesting position for an intellectual coward, in that you don't ever have to debate a point. I live in the real world, where even those I disagree with sometimes have points of view I hadn't considered, so the "I'm far to superior to argue with you" approach doesn't work for me.
When you grow up moonie, you'll discover that you're not all knowing, you'll find that many other people are capable of rational thought and that they often have reasonable ideas, even though you don't agree with them.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Your thesis is that everyone that disagrees with you politically is delusional. It's an interesting position for an intellectual coward, in that you don't ever have to debate a point. I live in the real world, where even those I disagree with sometimes have points of view I hadn't considered, so the "I'm far to superior to argue with you" approach doesn't work for me.
When you grow up moonie, you'll discover that you're not all knowing, you'll find that many other people are capable of rational thought and that they often have reasonable ideas, even though you don't agree with them.

I think his alternate universe statement is referring to the connection between the right and religious beliefs. He isn't attacking anyone with that statement, it is a neuroscientific theory that holds some weight. Do I completely agree with it? No. Do I believe the Bible should run this country? Absolutely not. I think the Bible is a great guide for philosophy and being a good person, but I also see the parts that seem to be driven by man's ideals more than what a loving and compassionate God would consider the right thing to do.

A good example is Soddom. Most people believe that Soddom was destroyed due to their sexual liberalities and their embracing of the gay lifestyle, when if fact they were destroyed because of their selfishness in the face of their excess of success. Despite living a life of plenty and leisure, they refused to care for their fellow man who had less and had more problems and so God struck them down.