Discussion: The REPUBLICAN Party XIV

[Smashlilman]

I honestly didn't know that. Okay...withdrawn.

Even though I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't truly believe that. You know they believe Hurricane Sandy and the Gays were working together to bring Romney down. LOL

I think Hurricanes are just naturally attracted to gays. So the gays tricked God into sending the Hurricane into New Jersey right before the election to stop Romney's near unstoppable momentum. If it wasn't for that Romney would have won 49 states like Reagan.

 

[SV Fan]

I was right! I knew that if Romney lost, the Republicans would be having an identity crisis. Look at them confused at the rise and fall of the Tea Party and the rejection of the ideas that they thought would help them win (women's rights, immigration reform, and gay rights). They better get to work retooling their party or else they will continue to slip further into oblivion when another Democrat wins in 2016.

I still think the Tea party movement will help them win House races and some State elections but yeah it's rather poisonous in Senate races and Presidential elections

Should be interesting to see what happens in 2014, in general less people vote in midterms so that should help the Republicans but the Democrats stand to lose some Senate seats(that they won in 2008) while I am guessing the Republicans stand to lose a few House seats from their 2010 takeover(although I can't see then losing the house overall)

In terms of the Senate the Democrats have 20 seats up(many which look losable) while the Republicans have 13(which I am guessing unless a Tea Party guy gets put into the slot in a primary, they will win all).

 

[Thundercrack85]

The Republicans are not having an identity crisis.

They aren't saying, "what's wrong with us?" They're saying "what's wrong with America?"

 

[SV Fan]

They aren't saying, "what's wrong with us?" They're saying "what's wrong with America?"

I would say it feels more like they are pointing out who does and doesn't have "American Values", because God died and passed down the task of deciding such things.

http://www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_renewing/

 

[Thundercrack85]

I would say it feels more like they are pointing out who does and doesn't have "American Values", because God assigned them the task of deciding such things.

http://www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_renewing/

See now if I said that, I'd be cited.

Point I think we can all agree on, is that there ain't a lot of introspection going on.

 

[SV Fan]

See now if I said that, I'd be cited.

Point I think we can all agree on, is that there ain't a lot of introspection going on.

Here is a little suggestion to the GOP, stop using these words in any platforms you have:

Values
Family
Patriot
Traditional

because generally when they use those terms it's bound to come of condescending to some group of people who have a different opinion

 

[Smashlilman]

Here is a little suggestion to the GOP, stop using these words in any platforms you have:

Values
Family
Patriot
Traditional

because generally when they use those terms it's bound to come of condescending to some group of people who have a different opinion

Condescension lexicon
Values = not Christian or Christian enough
Family = ****es that have sex out of wedlock
Patriot = You're not American enoguh because you're not one of us
Traditional = not part of White America

 

[Kelly]

I'm doubtful the electorate new much about the GOP platform...

The exit polls showed most felt the #1 problem was the economy, and the majority felt Romney was more equipped to fix it...so, who knows what the electorate knew or didn't know...

The Obama Campaign simply had the better campaign, better ground game....

 

[Fading]

All of the secede talk does bug me, but it should bug the Republican party more. During the Bush years, anyone doing anything remotely anti-American became a pariah. Dixie Chicks, and Michael Moore question Bush, and it's treason. Now, you have someone saying that not only do they not want to help fix the problems, but they just want to quit the US, and take Texas with them (even if it's rhetoric).

It's a pretty un-patriotic thing to say. Imagine the outrage if Bloomberg said he wanted NY to stop being part of the US because a Republican was in office. They wouldn't stop talking about it for the next year.

The reason I even bring this up isn't to poke the Republican party, it's because it disappoints me. It's reading as politics as usual. Perry doesn't represent all Republicans, however Republicans keep letting crazy things like this slide again, and again. They are so beholden to the tea party they can't even ask their far right fringes to dial it back a bit. They will never fix themselves as long as they let their own party say things that would have had them up in arms a decade ago. They need to stop this mantra of "anything to hurt Obama", or 2016 is going to look exactly like 2008, and 2012.


Edit - I wasn't a fan when he said it last time either. I guess I've just grown increasingly weary of all this, "The other party is in charge, their going to take our guns away, and destroy America! Let's all leave!". It was bad enough when it was mainly on relegated to chat boards on the net, but now our politicians are acting like children. I'm just waiting for a meeting to end in, "nuh uh" with someone stamping their foot throwing a tantrum.

 

[Kelly]

All of the secede talk does bug me, but it should bug the Republican party more. During the Bush years, anyone doing anything remotely anti-American became a pariah. Dixie Chicks, and Michael Moore question Bush, and it's treason. Now, you have someone saying that not only do they not want to help fix the problems, but they just want to quit the US, and take Texas with them (even if it's rhetoric).

It's a pretty un-patriotic thing to say. Imagine the outrage if Bloomberg said he wanted NY to stop being part of the US because a Republican was in office. They wouldn't stop talking about it for the next year.

The reason I even bring this up isn't to poke the Republican party, it's because it disappoints me. Perry doesn't represent Republicans, however Republicans keep letting crazy things like this slide again, and again. They are so beholden to the tea party they can't even ask their far right fringes to dial it back a bit. They will never fix themselves as long as they let their own party say things that would have had them up in arms a decade ago. They need to stop this mantra of "anything to hurt Obama", or 2016 is going to look exactly like 2008, and 2012.

Not because Bush said it, he actually said that the Dixie Chicks had the right to say whatever they wanted...it was the country music stations around the country that made them the pariah.

Bush was never one to ***** about what people said about him....he had a thick skin. Even when the anti-war mom's were sitting outside his house in Texas and picketing and interrupting his speeches, he said it was their right to speak out.

As far as those in Texas who want to secede...#1 that was our governor blowing smoke out his ass and #2 any that actually think it is feasible live in the Davis Mountains flying their Texas Flag, decreeing that they live under the Texas Constitution not the US Constitution and we just leave them up there by themselves.

If anything you have a larger amount of people that think that Texas made a mistake when it was annexed, and should have stayed a sovereign country...but, tend to simply say "oh well, we didn't...."

 

[Fading]

Heh, well I didn't say Bush made them pariah's. I just said they were made that. I'm not a Bush fan, but I don't have some revisionist history going on mentally where he gave a state of the union speech asking for their heads or something.

I'm also not blaming Texas. It's just one politician, and his supporters. I don't think all Texans feel that way. I just mean I wish the Republican party would call stuff like this out. If a Democratic Gov. had said this during Bush's term, it would have been a big deal. One of their own says it, and they let it pass.

The problem is, this should be a time of self reflection to improve themselves. By continually ignoring things like the rape comments, or this, and at best simply quietly distancing themselves from it, nothing is learned, or fixed.


Edit - Another way to think of it. Democrats asked Anthony Weiner to resign because he had an affair. Republicans aren't even acknowledging that another Republican said he no longer wants an entire, very red state, to be American.

 

[Paradoxium]

Why?

If the Republicans are eliminated, all those laws they and Democrats created to block out alternatives will be exposed. People will start questioning the legitimacy of the system with a one party rule. And that would be a lot of people. Roughly half the voter base + disillusioned voters + third party voters... who would be ticked.

The Democrats, would have nothing to hold the base together either. Look what happened to the super majority in 2008. They turned on each other. Without an opponent to focus on (Republicans), the gel falls apart.

Maybe then, we would detox the political system.

 

[Kelly]

Heh, well I didn't say Bush made them pariah's. I just said they were made that. I'm not a Bush fan, but I don't have some revisionist history going on mentally where he gave a state of the union speech asking for their heads or something.

I'm also not blaming Texas. It's just one politician, and his supporters. I don't think all Texans feel that way. I just mean I wish the Republican party would call stuff like this out. If a Democratic Gov. had said this during Bush's term, it would have been a big deal. One of their own says it, and they let it pass.

The problem is, this should be a time of self reflection to improve themselves. By continually ignoring things like the rape comments, or this, and at best simply quietly distancing themselves from it, nothing is learned, or fixed.


Edit - Another way to think of it. Democrats asked Anthony Weiner to resign because he had an affair. Republicans aren't even acknowledging that another Republican said he no longer wants an entire, very red state, to be American.

Well, as far as sexual stuff....Republicans have pretty much retired on their own far quicker than some Dems.....so I'm not sure that the Weiner thing is a good example. Plus, that is pretty much apples and oranges. People's radical ideology and sexual promiscuity are two far different things...

But as far as the rest of what you wrote, can't argue that....

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Well, as far as sexual stuff....Republicans have pretty much retired on their own far quicker than some Dems.....so I'm not sure that the Weiner thing is a good example. Plus, that is pretty much apples and oranges. People's radical ideology and sexual promiscuity are two far different things...

I disagree.

These radical comments may be a minority, but they are a vocal minority, and over the past 4 years, the Republican Party has been identified (rightly or wrongly) as the radical platform that people like these Texas politicians and the Tea Party express.

The Democrats aren't identified with Anthony's weiner.

The Republican Party has allowed these extremist sects to get out of control and define the party in the public's eye.

 

[Raiden]

I disagree.

These radical comments may be a minority, but they are a vocal minority, and over the past 4 years, the Republican Party has been identified (rightly or wrongly) as the radical platform that people like these Texas politicians and the Tea Party express.

The Democrats aren't identified with Anthony's weiner.

The Republican Party has allowed these extremist sects to get out of control and define the party in the public's eye.

Exactly. And the fact that they let two candidates with such terribly insensitive remarks regarding rape to run under the GOP platform is a proof that the party has allowed their extremist conservative faction to take over the platform. And I don't think they will grow a pair and start to reject those Teabaggers and move to the middle anytime soon.

 

[Kelly]

I disagree.

These radical comments may be a minority, but they are a vocal minority, and over the past 4 years, the Republican Party has been identified (rightly or wrongly) as the radical platform that people like these Texas politicians and the Tea Party express.

The Democrats aren't identified with Anthony's weiner.

The Republican Party has allowed these extremist sects to get out of control and define the party in the public's eye.

So, Republicans are identified with all that is negative about them, but Democrats aren't....ok, I see......

 

[SV Fan]

So, Republicans are identified with all that is negative about them, but Democrats aren't....ok, I see......

I think the Democrats on a whole are more likely to throw somebody under the bus if they are seen as a cancer on the party

 

[Darthphere]

So, Republicans are identified with all that is negative about them, but Democrats aren't....ok, I see......

Sadly, the Republicans embrace way too many negative aspects of their party hence why they identified by those aspects. If you can cite an example of the Democratic party embracing something negative, please do.

 

[Anita18]

Exactly. And the fact that they let two candidates with such terribly insensitive remarks regarding rape to run under the GOP platform is a proof that the party has allowed their extremist conservative faction to take over the platform. And I don't think they will grow a pair and start to reject those Teabaggers and move to the middle anytime soon.

Didn't some Republicans ask Akin to step aside immediately after the "legitimate rape" comment? I'm not sure if they had another Republican candidate waiting in the wings to take his place, but some obviously wanted to wash their hands of him before he tainted the entire party. IIRC it was Akin who went rogue and refused.

But then Mourdock had to go and say that pregnancy rape is "a gift from God" and then there was Mitt's "binders full of women" and you have to think that it's not just one guy, but an overall view of women in the party.

 

[Kelly]

Democrats embrace the almighty "giveaway" I really hate the Obamaphone YT, and I respect the posters here who are Democrats, so I'm not going to post it, but to many, that is exactly what they see when they think Democrats. Mind you, this was the Republicans decades ago.... the two parties simply switched places.

I happen to think both are a disgrace to our Republic. Just my opinion....

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

This last election was a major repudiation of the GOP as a party--and not just solely in the Presidential race: a number of seats were blown away too, (i.e. Akin, Scott Brown, et al). A message was sent--especially by women. The electorate was definitely informed about the issues; it wasn't strictly about Obama or the Democratic party having run a stronger campaign...the GOP allowed itself to stoop to new levels of pettiness and as a result angered voters.

Everything--from the restrictive voting procedures to comments about rape, birtherism, etc.,--collectively led up to this spanking. The GOP would've lost this election even if Obama wasn't running an effective campaign. They doomed themselves by underestimating and insulting the intelligence of all of us so-called minorities--women, blacks, asians, gays, latinos, etc...who are now the new majority.

It's just that simple.

 

[SV Fan]

They doomed themselves by underestimating and insulting the intelligence of all of us so-called minorities--women, blacks, asians, gays, latinos, etc...who are now the new majority.

For argument sake the Asians got off scott free from the Republican anti rhetoric, grant you I think they could read between the lines about not having American values or understanding America well enough in regard to other minorities.

 

[SentinelMind]

And yet Canada has less debt then America does. And who started the trend of moving away from surpluses towards debt in America? America had surpluses in the 90s. Why didn't the GOP reduce debt when they had control of the senate, Congress and White House from 2002 to 2006? Why should anyone assume the GOP will reduce the debt, when they had the chance to do so in the past and didn't take it? What evidence is there that GOP has learned a lesson from their past mistakes and want to change? How can anyone say they want to reduce the size government and still support massive military spending? Military spending is one of 3 big ticket budget items, if the GOP doesn't want to cut that, they have no hope of dealing with the debt and reducing the size of government.

Besides isn't it a huge contradiction to say there should be less government in people's lives and then say the government said get involved in the personal lives lives of two consenting adults? How is that not contradiction, to say the government has no business in the economy, but should be involved in the bed rooms of the nation?

Massive military spending and social conservationism are big government, no matter how you slice it. You can't be favor of those things and still say you support small government, its a contradiction. That's why Ron Paul supports a smaller government then any other member of the GOP, say what you will about him, his values are more consistent then other Republicans.

I agree most of your criticism of the GOP and their inability to carry out smaller government promises. I think Clinton's "success" with budget is overrated when you consider borrowing from social security fund and not cutting enough to pay the interest on the national debt. Nonetheless, he was better than Bush Jr and other modern day presidents.

I just don't think short term it makes sense to immediately write off social conservatives because they are going to go somewhere. It's better they hold onto local elections even if they can't win Senate or White House anymore.That is because I think long term the Republican Party (in its current incarnation) is going to die anyway. If 60% of Ohio voters wants auto bailouts, no libertarian form of GOP is going to capture the electorate at national level.

I wrote in Ron Paul...I agree military spending should be cut and drugs/marriage should be state issues. I personally don't think describing marriage as a "bedroom issue" is accurate...marriage is a public status contract. If a community can't decide how to define a contract...who can? I don't care what people do in their bedrooms...I'd rather people keep their lives in bedroom as much as possible...but the Social Left wants their alternate lifestyles practiced and celebrated in public domain, classrooms, entertainment, and other mediums of social engineering.

 

[wiegeabo]

Why write in Ron Paul, rather than Gary Johnson? Seeing as how Paul wasn't a write in candidate.

 

[SentinelMind]

Ron Paul is more principled. I agree with Paul's position on social issues...I think Gary Johnson wants social issues mandated at federal level (gay marraige and abortion rights mandated across the board) whereas Paul supports allowing states to decide those issues. I agree with Paul abortion should be treated like a state crime like assault and rape instead of being a federal talking point or something thrust in US Constitution. That fundamental difference between those two candidates made the difference...if you're not going to vote for 2 party system, might as well vote the one you agree with most.