Discussion in 'Politics' started by Thread Manager, Nov 7, 2012.
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]392401[/split]
back to our regularly scheduled program...
so apparently the thunderstorm may postpone the GOP convention.
lol at this
The Republicans deserve to be destroyed.
This is what they will do as a "lesson" from this election:
- continue nuthugging anti-abortionism
- continue nuthugging tax cuts for the rich
- kiss furious Latino ass and fail at it
- continue to demonize libertarians
In other words, prioritize abortion over god damn fiscal sanity. That's what conservatism in America means nowadays.
Toss in their obsession with increasing the defense budget, and we're at a consensus. Though I don't agree with them being destroyed. I want to see them restructure and come back strong, rather than just go away.
I was watching Morning Joe one morning during the election, and Joe made the point that Romney's hard right ideals were more caricatures of conservatism, but not actually true conservatism. You can't say you're fiscally sound when you refuse to cut a deficit reduction deal because you refuse to get rid of tax breaks, while wanting to increase already bloated budgets. I do give it to the Republicans for wanting to talk budget more than the Democrats. However, they're even more stuborn on their golden cows than the Dems. Atleast the Dems are willing to talk Medicare. The Reps are so beholden to Norquist that talking tax hikes is sacrilege.
I dont like the two party system, but a one party system is even worse.
The Republicans need to change their platform. There is nothing wrong with espousing religious views, but they cant harp on them as they do. It turns people off. They should promote financial conservatism and smaller government but they cant just pander to old white people. The 1950s are gone and they aint coming back.
This sort of reminds me of the Republican National Convention, every person got on stage as was talking about the Good Ol' Days(when they had to walk uphill both ways to get to school), it just started to get comical
Well to be fair, the 1950's were awesome.
If you were a white, straight, Protestant male. And that's basically 80% of Republicans.
Minority growth has dramatically increased. I saw an article that said the last 16 years saw more growth in minority populations than the last 60 before it. You guys are right, white males alone will no win anyone an election anymore. It will help of course, but not be the sole deciding factor. The latino, and black vote really helped Obama get relected. At the same time, our politicians should never have been only pandering to one demographic in the first place anyway (talking idealistically where we treat everyone equally). The population shift is going to force Republicans to take a look at their stances on several issues, like women's rights, and immigration, if they want to stay relevant. There are minorities out there that want to vote Republican, they're just not being given much reason to.
The biggest problem for them is the religious right / Tea Party.
They did more damage to them in this election than anything the Democrats could throw at them.
Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock cost them two seats in the senate because they couldn't stop talking about rape and God.
The Republican party will be going through a big transition within the next couple of decades, whether they like it or not.
Once old hardcore white guys finally start dying off.
BTW, apparently the Republican pundits on some Cable News shows are talking up Jeb Bush as a possible Nominee for the party in 2016. Yeah, because that's really going to win over the 53% of voters who said in the National Exit Polls that George W. Bush was to blame for the current economic problems. Good grief.
To be fair to Jeb, he's not much like his brother.
There are certainly worse choices... all of which we saw in 2012.
He's a moderate, and he could give the Republicans Florida and Texas. That alone should make him someone they should seriously consider.
I'm thinking Chris Christie will run and possibly get the nomination for 2016.
I can see Rubio, Brown, and Christie running in 2016.
There's also Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley.
Doubt Jeb will run, but he's actually not a bad choice, all things considered.
Sure, Jeb Bush is not his brother, but don't underestimate the "guilt by association" angle that be used against him he was the Republican nominee. Not to mention, I'm not sure if the current political climate necessarily favors "political dynasty's" i.e. candidates from the same family virtually always in the running. Could change in the course of 4 years, though.
The other possible contenders you mention like Rubio, Christie, Walker, Jindal, etc. would be the far more likely and successful choices.
I think Jeb could get the latino vote up to 40%
Some like David Axelrod would kneecap him before he could even get up to that percentage.
He could then just trot out his latin wife.
On another note
Allen West: It ain't over til it's over
Basically West is calling for a recount. Probably good news, we can have something to laugh at next week when he loses, why get lost in all the shuffle of what happened last night. I wonder what are the odds he gets a job at FOX news
New thread means another new poll! It's a very honest question that many people are asking following the second straight general election loss. The exit poll breakdown suggests that the Republican party has a major problem with diversity. Can the GOP survive with a base that mainly consists of older, white voters? Do you feel the they need to be more inclusive? Do they need to evolve in their ideology? What do you think?
Please be sure to vote!
Add the media to that. People don't want news anymore. They just want gossip about celebrities and psuedo-celebrities.
WHO. GIVES. A. ****?!?!
The only reason they're famous is because they say their famous and people watch them. Used to be you had to actually DO something to earn celebrity status. Now you just have to act like an idiot/jerk/airhead/punchline.
Combine that with the media churning out rampant speculation and calling it news because it's the only way to fill up an unnecessary 24-hour news cycle.
I don't think you understand leverage. It can't exist without loose credit; every capitalist psychopath, scammer, lobbyuest and charlatan can't do this if it is cut off. It's government policy, the egg of the problem. They think they know how manage it. They don't and we are paying for the consequences of its excess.
I am referring to leverage for the most point. I am saying Mitt Romney doesn't really make companies better and sells them off for profit. Most of his hot potatoes were distressed. He buries these companies in debt and leverage and resells it to suckers. The successful ones, were inspite of him.
Read this. Lehman was levered 30:1. These assclowns are doing 200:1.
Where is the regulation Obama promised? What is your solution?
I at least provided one, a simple one.
I know what you are talking about, but I think you are missing what I am talking about. You asked if I equated capitalism with corporatism and I said yes, because our system has far more common with corporatism then capitalism. Corporatism slew capitalism a long time ago, with the birth of the industrial military complex. So when you talk about leverage, you are talking about a symptom, not the disease that is the cause. See I am not even disagreeing with what you are saying, but I think you are missing the bigger picture here.
I have no solutions, if I did, I would be far less cynical. I don't have a lot of faith in Obama, I have less in Romney. I just happen to think Obama is the lesser of two evils and since I am cynic I think life is often a choice between two evils. Your solution will not implemented, there is no political will to implement it, so it will not happen. Too many corporations want to continue with these leverage games and the politicians have no will to change things. I mean, hey, I have a solution to the Middle East conflict, but neither side has the desire to compromise, so it won't happen.
...after last night's loss, do you think the republicans will finally take a look inward? Or will they continue pointing fingers at everyone else for the loss?