FSTDT Forums
Community => Politics and Government => Topic started by: wrongfrog on November 08, 2012, 05:51:47 pm
-
There's been a lot of talk lately about where the Republican Party is headed after this election. I've seen some talk on the forums about this topic even, but I thought it deserved its own thread.
I've heard many people point out that they have to start modifying their social policies to adjust to the growing acceptance of LGBT individuals in the country, as well as their immigration policies, which is the main reason Hispanics don't like them. They also need to start speaking out against idiots like Akin and Mourdock more, if they want to not push away women.
Personally, I don't know if they can do this. I see the Republican Party tearing itself apart soon, and maybe the rise of a third party. I can see the Libertarian Party taking center stage soon, maybe after the 2016 election. I'm not a fan of Libertarians for their economic views, but they are becoming increasingly popular.
I see maybe a split in the Republican Party soon, which could either change it for the better, or send it hurling into oblivion.
This thread is for everyone to discuss their predictions for the future of the GOP. I'm really interested to see what most of you think!
-
I don't want the Republican party split. Maybe give up a few antiquated philosophies, but I wouldn't wish for split.
-
My personal opinion is that the GOP will simply lose all relevance and fade from simply being completely backwards and unattractive to most voters.
-
I won't vote for them until they move more to the center and eject the Randian "fuck the poor" and fundie "American Taliban" elements.
I'd like to see them get back to how the Republican party was before the 60s and they started courting the social conservatives and racists. Worst thing that ever happened to the party.
Get back to being the fiscal conservative, personal liberty party instead of the "run up the deficit and give tax breaks to millionaires" and "let's legislate morality" party. Distance themselves from the Pat Robertson/Rush Limbaugh/Anne Coulter whackjobs.
Unfortunately, I don't think that will happen without a split. I've heard they're falling into the same trap they did back in 2008, blaming their loss on running a candidate who "isn't conservative enough."
-
I won't vote for them until they move more to the center and eject the Randian "fuck the poor" and fundie "American Taliban" elements.
I'd like to see them get back to how the Republican party was before the 60s and they started courting the social conservatives and racists. Worst thing that ever happened to the party.
Get back to being the fiscal conservative, personal liberty party instead of the "run up the deficit and give tax breaks to millionaires" and "let's legislate morality" party. Distance themselves from the Pat Robertson/Rush Limbaugh/Anne Coulter whackjobs.
Unfortunately, I don't think that will happen without a split. I've heard they're falling into the same trap they did back in 2008, blaming their loss on running a candidate who "isn't conservative enough."
The Tea Party area of the GOP definitely won't go down without a fight, it just depends on who wins. If TPers aren't able to take control of the party, they'll probably end up leaving and joining the Constitution Party so they can both be obscure crazies together.
-
I won't vote for them until they move more to the center and eject the Randian "fuck the poor" and fundie "American Taliban" elements.
I'd like to see them get back to how the Republican party was before the 60s and they started courting the social conservatives and racists. Worst thing that ever happened to the party.
Get back to being the fiscal conservative, personal liberty party instead of the "run up the deficit and give tax breaks to millionaires" and "let's legislate morality" party. Distance themselves from the Pat Robertson/Rush Limbaugh/Anne Coulter whackjobs.
Unfortunately, I don't think that will happen without a split. I've heard they're falling into the same trap they did back in 2008, blaming their loss on running a candidate who "isn't conservative enough."
"Isn't Conservative Enough" is a nebolous, self-affirming prophecy. Essentially, self sealing doom.
-
I doubt the party will split.
America is too dependent on the two party system and anyone with any kind of sense knows that people vote either republican or democrat because that is all they know. There are a lot of hard core republicans who vote republican every time and yet have no actual idea about the policies of the party itself. They always vote republican because the alternative is for them to vote democrat which is too repugnant for them. The concept of 3rd parties never even enters their minds.
Hence anyone within the republican party with even a little political sense, will do everything in their power to keep the republican name because they know that is what people vote for. You may end up with two groups within the republican party tugging in opposite directions but neither will ever abandon the republican name and will join together if that name is ever in jeopardy.
Additionally, the republicans will never fade into irrelevance because there will always be a huge number of people who will always vote republican regardless of principle and philosophy. They seem to be brought up believing that voting republican is the only option and in turn perpetuate this cycle on their own kids. I think the attack adverts are largely to blame for this self repeating system. Remember, despite Obama beating Romney comfortably on the electoral college, he still only barely beat him on popular vote. That means that despite all the downright insane stuff the republicans did and said over the last year or so and their efforts to alienate just about everyone who isn't a rich white male, almost 50% of the country still voted for them.
-
My guess is we won't see a true collapse of the Republican party until we have another national civil-rights shakeup like the one in the 60's that threw them into disarray in the first place. The problem is that social conservatives are both always on the wrong side of history, but the easiest voters to court. Just tell them that you believe in their god and in oppressing whatever the evil demographic of the day is, and you've suddenly got millions of voters staunchly at your side without actually having to do anything.
We kind of saw this with the Tea Party, where a sizable chunk broke away because one of those uppity blacks got in the White House. However, they tried to break away as a third party, which doesn't work, so most of them remained embedded in the Republican party. The party ideology swap in the 60's-80's happened because the previously-conservative Democrats became disenfranchised by the passage of civil rights, and opportunistic Republicans courted their votes because, as stated before, they're large in number and easy to manipulate.
So, unfortunately, I think we're always going to have that segment of the population longing for someone to take them back to the time when white male Christians got preferential treatment simply by being white male Christians, and it just depends on who is willing to sacrifice their integrity for the sake of courting their votes.
-
The republican party isn't going anywhere. The question is are they going to try to be more moderate, maybe a touch more inclusive? Or are they going to try to double down on the bat shit insane conservatism one more time? The 2015 GOP primaries will be interesting. My prediction is a very broad field, running from hard core Reaganite rigidness to center right. But right now I think it's too early to tell which direction they'll take.
-
I think the future of the party relies on its base. The trick is going to be discarding long-standing bigotry in order to avoid provoking women and minorities to vote. And that's going to come down to the stupidity of their base. Are they so stupid Big Brother can tell them they've always been at war with Eastasia, and they happily tear down the signs they made proclaiming the opposite? Probably. These people are breathtakingly stupid.
-
Oh, they'll double down, which rookie suggests as an option. They are, to re-phrase Lt. Fred, spectacularly dumb. But the real indication of the party's future is clear in photos of political gatherings of any sort. Republicans: white folks, middle-aged or older, middle class. Democrats: young, old, in-between, whites, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, poor, middle class, wealthy.
-
Its taken over 40 years, but the Southern Strategy is finally backfiring on the Republicans.
They built this monster long ago, and it's wonderful to see it destroy them.
-
I'd take libertarians over republicans any day...
-
Oh, they'll double down, which rookie suggests as an option. They are, to re-phrase Lt. Fred, spectacularly dumb.
The more I look at them, the more I think we'll see that doubling down during the midterms. I have a sneaky feeling that the congressional candidates fielded during the midterm is going to deplete our strategic supplies of both popcorn and memes.
-
My guess is we won't see a true collapse of the Republican party until we have another national civil-rights shakeup like the one in the 60's that threw them into disarray in the first place. The problem is that social conservatives are both always on the wrong side of history, but the easiest voters to court. Just tell them that you believe in their god and in oppressing whatever the evil demographic of the day is, and you've suddenly got millions of voters staunchly at your side without actually having to do anything.
We kind of saw this with the Tea Party, where a sizable chunk broke away because one of those uppity blacks got in the White House. However, they tried to break away as a third party, which doesn't work, so most of them remained embedded in the Republican party. The party ideology swap in the 60's-80's happened because the previously-conservative Democrats became disenfranchised by the passage of civil rights, and opportunistic Republicans courted their votes because, as stated before, they're large in number and easy to manipulate.
So, unfortunately, I think we're always going to have that segment of the population longing for someone to take them back to the time when white male Christians got preferential treatment simply by being white male Christians, and it just depends on who is willing to sacrifice their integrity for the sake of courting their votes.
Well gay rights and drug legalization is heating up, as well as a stronger push towards Universal healthcare. By your theory, they are due to die from their vote pandering.
-
Well gay rights and drug legalization is heating up, as well as a stronger push towards Universal healthcare. By your theory, they are due to die from their vote pandering.
Change, yes. Die, no. Not until something is ready to take it's place.
-
Well gay rights and drug legalization is heating up, as well as a stronger push towards Universal healthcare. By your theory, they are due to die from their vote pandering.
Change, yes. Die, no. Not until something is ready to take it's place.
(http://i50.tinypic.com/xnsxtx.png)
Please.
(I just want to see Owl vs. Donkey political cartoons ok)
-
Oh, they'll double down, which rookie suggests as an option. They are, to re-phrase Lt. Fred, spectacularly dumb.
The more I look at them, the more I think we'll see that doubling down during the midterms. I have a sneaky feeling that the congressional candidates fielded during the midterm is going to deplete our strategic supplies of both popcorn and memes.
The problem is that the Republicans stand to do well in the midterms for three reasons.
1. The President's party virtually always loses seats in the midterm (there have been, I believe, three exceptions since the Civil War).
2. The Democrats are more vulnerable in the Senate. The class of Senators that are up for election in 2014 are those that were elected during the 2008 election cycle, in which the Democrats did very well. This means that there are more Democratic seats (20) than Republican seats (13). What's more, while incumbency is a huge advantage, it is weaker in the Senate than the House, and its protective effects are not at full strength until a member of Congress has won reelection once. This means both that the large number of Republicans who came into the House in 2010 will be far harder to unseat, as most won reelection this year; and that there will be more vulnerable Democratic Senators than Republicans. Of the Senate 33 seats that will be open, 10 belong to Democrats who have not yet completed a full term (as opposed to only two for Republicans). Of those ten, two are in solidly conservative states (Alaska and West Virginia) and four more are in states that were considered to be swing states in 2012 (Colorado, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Virginia). There are five other Democratic Senators from red or swing states whose terms will expire following the 2014 elections (Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana, and South Dakota). The only Republican up for election in a state that is not solidly Republican is Susan Collins of Maine, who is quite popular.
3. Voter turnout is lower in midterm elections. Lower turnout almost always benefits the Republicans anyway, but this is especially true now. Low turnout means that a relatively small but highly motivated minority like the Tea Party can have disproportionate influence.
This isn't to say that the Republican Party isn't in trouble. Failing to expand their base beyond white men will put them into a position where they cannot win Presidential elections as Arizona, Nevada, and eventually even Texas will move safely into the Democratic column due to their growing Hispanic populations. However, I think that it is a bit too soon to start putting nails in their coffin right now. Don't forget, after their defeat in 2008, which was far more complete than the one they suffered last Tuesday, people began having this conversation, only for the rise of the Tea Party to lead to an enormous victory for them in 2010.
-
33% mid term election turnout is unforgivable.
-
Veras, that was good, but you forgot one little thing. For a legislative seat, you don't have to convince a majority of Americans of your views. Just enough in your state. Which means running crazy right in Arizona and other such states. Reaching the wing nuts of your party in your state or even congressional district gives you a lot less scrutiny (outside of major gaffes).
-
Several conservative commentators have suggested that the best way for the Republicans to expand their base is to go after the Latinos. Their thinking is that if they adopt a more moderate stance on immigration, they'll eliminate the one thing that keeps Latinos voting Democrat, then win over the Latinos with the usual family values stuff.
Of course, the Tea Party will fight tooth and nail. I think we may end up with a period of Democratic dominance during the interim, followed by a Republican comeback as conservative Latinos turn Republican. If the Tea Party is still in charge come 2016, then I predict the Democrats will hold the White House - which would, incidentally, be the first time one Democrat handed the White House to another since James fucking Buchanan (this doesn't count Presidents who died in office).
-
Veras while that is true you're forgetting the Republican party is fighting a war on two fronts. First front is their traditional one with the Dems and the other is the Tea Party that is vowing to go after the Republican party itself.I have a feeling that the voters aren't going to want such crazy in Congress after the last two years.
Ironbite-all the Dems have to do is run a platform of "LOOK AT WHAT THEY DID" and the mid-term election shouldn't be that bloody.
-
We can all agree that the GOP, as they stood Tuesday night, is just about done. The midterms may see some twitching from it, but that'll be the last time the Republican Party as we see it now will be taken seriously by enough people to stand. If they wish to continue to attract either social or fiscal conservatives there's a few things that I can see they'll need to do.
As Meshakhad pointed out, you gotta do something to, well, if not attract Hispanics, you certainly want to stop scaring them. Pretty simple to say, right? Just stop treating everyone brown as if they just crossed the border last week with 15 kilos strapped to their backs. You want to go after illegal immigrants with a hard on? Knock yourselves out. Just get better at differentiating between legal and illegal immigrants.
Second, you gotta have a system for dealing with those Todd Akin type verbal oopsies. Sometimes circling the wagons isn't the best answer. For something like that, cut him loose. Very publicly withdraw his funding and run the everloving hell out of someone else. Have your high profile people come out and say that shit isn't OK and it's not going to be put up with. Yeah, it sucks for you to do that. But how many Senate seats did you loose because of that? How much did Sarah Palin's inability to answer a question without a script hurt?
Third, you gotta distance yourself from the extremes in media. Sometimes you have to remind people Rush, Coulter, Hannity, Levin, Beck, and other Fox talking heads doesn't speak for the Republican Party. News flash, Fox (and republicans, you pay attention too). The majority of people know you're lying. A majority of people see through the fear mongering. Now, what with the First Amendment and all, I understand you really can't shut them up, as much as everyone reading this would enjoy the quiet. But you can do enough other things, like strongly suggest candidates stop going on the shows or coming out against them. A statement that says hate is not a conservative value (I know, I know) might go far enough for it to be worth a second look.
Fourth, it appears the GOP is under complete control of their special interests, namely big business, big Pentagon contractors, and the religious right. I'm going to talk about them backwards. The country is becoming more secular by the hour. You had two states legalize marijuana (at least one of them for recreational use) and a couple for same sex marriage. And by popular vote. While that's sinking in, let me put this forward. Women don't want the government to pay for abortions or birth control. They do, however, want birth control and abortions to be there when they need them. The Pentagon has always been a monkey on your back. I'm really not sure how to get around that problem, but it is a problem that needs to be addressed. And big business, well, I understand you gotta dance with the guys who brung ya. But you're going too far. It's OK to be pro big business. It's not OK for us to see their mouths moving as you talk. Pretend like you believe it's the right thing as opposed to appeasing the money. I remember the DNC dealing with that same issue in the late 70s-mid 80's. It's how you got two terms of Reagen and Bush Sr. for an impressive 12 year run. Guess what you're seeing right now. Give up? The shoe on the other foot.
Last, get your extreme element under control. I would have thought that'd be a gimme, but it looks like it's not. You can't say your party's primary goal is to make Obama a one term president. Yeah, Obama should have done a better job with Pelosi, but that's not an excuse. If the Tea Party is going to be a part of the republicans, then somebody needs to get them in a room and explain how to act on camera and with press releases. If they aren't, cut them the hell off. Seriously, if you want to be a real party, figure out how to marginalize your extremes. They're making you look like a joke.
That's about all I have for now. These are the biggest problems I could see. There are others, but they need to figure out how to address this stuff in a hurry if they want to field a real candidate in 2016.
-
Second, you gotta have a system for dealing with those Todd Akin type verbal oopsies. Sometimes circling the wagons isn't the best answer. For something like that, cut him loose. Very publicly withdraw his funding and run the everloving hell out of someone else. Have your high profile people come out and say that shit isn't OK and it's not going to be put up with. Yeah, it sucks for you to do that. But how many Senate seats did you loose because of that? How much did Sarah Palin's inability to answer a question without a script hurt?
This is one of the biggest issues for me. I'm getting sick of the Republican Party not calling out assholes like Akin or Mourdock when they act up. No, don't just ignore them. Don't just take away some funding. Especially don't let your presidential fucking candidate endorse them in spite of controversial remarks about rape. Take a STAND against these people. Publicly say that they do not reflect the views of the party. Assure people that you will not prop up candidates with an infant's understanding of female biology. Your silence just as bad as if you were to defend them, which Fox News did, and they need to fucking stop it as well.
Oh, and while we're at it, don't mistake solidarity in your party for stubbornness and extreme partisanship. You really dropped the ball with Christie this year, what with conservatives accusing him of being a traitor left and right for doing his job. You can't let that shit slide if you want people to take you seriously.
-
Veras, that was good, but you forgot one little thing. For a legislative seat, you don't have to convince a majority of Americans of your views. Just enough in your state. Which means running crazy right in Arizona and other such states. Reaching the wing nuts of your party in your state or even congressional district gives you a lot less scrutiny (outside of major gaffes).
Right, but that also plays into my third point. You have less scrutiny as much because fewer people are paying attention. The electorate in midterm elections consists largely of activists, and say what you want about the Tea Party, but they have infused the Republican Party with activism.
Veras while that is true you're forgetting the Republican party is fighting a war on two fronts. First front is their traditional one with the Dems and the other is the Tea Party that is vowing to go after the Republican party itself.I have a feeling that the voters aren't going to want such crazy in Congress after the last two years.
Ironbite-all the Dems have to do is run a platform of "LOOK AT WHAT THEY DID" and the mid-term election shouldn't be that bloody.
I didn't forget that at all. It certainly hurt them this time around, and there are certain Republican Senators who may be vulnerable because of the Tea Party in 2014. Hell, there has been talk about a Tea Party primary challenge to Mitch McConnell in Kentucky. And I have no doubt that the public doesn't want crazy in Congress, but the majority of the 2010 Tea Party House Republicans were reelected, so obviously they can stomach it. Even worse, the midterm electorate is not representative of the American public as a whole. Older people, wealthier people, and white people all vote at much higher rates in non-presidential election years relative to other demographics, and all three tend to favor Republicans.
Undoubtedly, there will be a few races where Tea Party lunatics are so outrageous that they cost the Republicans a seat. It happened in 2010 with Christine O'Donnell and Sharron Angle and in 2012 with Mourdock and Akin. However, the bump in turnout that the Tea Party provides will probably make up for those losses.
Also, unless something dramatic happens (of the magnitude of the 1995/1996 government shutdowns), the midterm elections will not be a referendum on what Congressional Republicans have done. It will be about Obama, and the economic recovery.
I'm not saying that 2014 will necessarily be a bloodbath like 2010 was. I'm just pointing out that there are a number of factors indicating that the Republicans will be in a strategically advantageous position. The political climate of that election has two years to develop, and the results of the election will have a lot to do with what happens between now and then, especially with the economy and the deficit. And I did say that, barring change, the Republicans will be in trouble in national elections down the road. The 2014 mid-terms are not a national election, nor are they far enough down the road.
If you're suggesting that there will be widespread three-way races (Democrat vs. mainstream Republican, vs. Tea Party Republican), as was the case with the 2010 Florida Senate election, then, yes, that could severely hurt the Republicans, but I don't see that as being particularly likely. It's also worth noting that the Tea Party candidate won in that particular case, so not even a split like that guarantees a problem.
-
In regards to the midterm elections, I'd say it would be a good idea to contact those organizations that encourage people to vote in the presidential elections to also put the same amount of effort into getting people aware of the midterms. They're just as, if not even more important than the presidential election, so we need to get people aware of the implications of these elections.
-
In regards to the midterm elections, I'd say it would be a good idea to contact those organizations that encourage people to vote in the presidential elections to also put the same amount of effort into getting people aware of the midterms. They're just as, if not even more important than the presidential election, so we need to get people aware of the implications of these elections.
Yup, and as it gets easier to vote by absentee (mailed ballot), in more states, just a decent effort at a social media campaign would suffice. The same grassroots orgs and pro orgs that got out the vote for Obama need to do this for the midterms - Make Sure Congress Moves Forward....meh....somebody with better slogan birthin' skills than me will come up with it.
-
Terming for congress! No sense.
Like Obamacare? Get to voting! Eh.
Not to care is unforgivable. Vote to show you care!
-
Well, I plan to get involved in the mid-term elections. Having someone in Congress who, upon running into you, will not only recognize you, but actually give you a hug, is quite valuable.
-
Well gay rights and drug legalization is heating up, as well as a stronger push towards Universal healthcare. By your theory, they are due to die from their vote pandering.
Change, yes. Die, no. Not until something is ready to take it's place.
(http://i50.tinypic.com/xnsxtx.png)
Please.
(I just want to see Owl vs. Donkey political cartoons ok)
Incidentally
“If Republicans do not do better in the Hispanic community, in a few short years Republicans will no longer be the majority party in our state. If that happens, no Republican will ever again win the White House," he said. "New York and California are for the foreseeable future unalterably Democrat. If Texas turns bright blue, the Electoral College math is simple. We won’t be talking about Ohio, we won’t be talking about Florida or Virginia, because it won’t matter. If Texas is bright blue, you can’t get to two-seventy electoral votes. The Republican Party would cease to exist. We would become like the Whig Party."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/12/ted-cruz-latino-vote_n_2117193.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009
-
I hope that the Republican Party goes the way of the dodo so that I can establish my own Lemon Party as the new dominant political force running against the Democrats. LGBT rights, universal healthcare, and free speech for all!
-
I hope that the Republican Party goes the way of the dodo so that I can establish my own Lemon Party as the new dominant political force running against the Democrats. LGBT rights, universal healthcare, and free speech for all!
I would establish the FOR SCIENCE!!! Party that is all about the potential and research of science.
Also party at the Mars Base.