Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Catalyst

Future of the GOP?

31 posts in this topic

i like the way a couple of things the dems may be for is the tent pole reason young people do vote dem. in a way it proves my point of going with the crowd.

 

at some point, the gop will be so small it will turn into the atlernative and for rebellion purposes kids will go rep to be "different". lol

 

and of course if we were to go up to people on the street, for either party and ask WHY they voted for whom they voted for. we probably would have a tsunami of face palms.

 

but that won't happen because its to revealing. but would be a good docu on Front Line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Hillary runs she'll beat whoever the GOP nominates handily. Only one who has a shot against her is Chris Christie, but I have my doubts as to whether he could win the nomination against a more conservative candidate. The tea partiers basically run the GOP primaries/caucuses so it'll be tough if someone like Ted Cruz runs for Christie to overcome the advantage he'll have.

 

That said, a Hillary vs. Cruz matchup would likely be the biggest democratic landslide since 1964. Nowhere near THAT big, granted, but she'd top 400 EV's for sure. If the GOP knows what's good for itself (lol) they'll nominate Christie, who has cross-party and independent appeal as well as puts New Jersey in play.

I definitely believe this. My mom is one of the most irrationally conservative people I know and even she said she'd vote for Hillary if she were running.

 

I do like Christie though as far as republican candidates go. Unless he started doing and saying exceptionally stupid poo to pander to the far right, I would give him a fair shot to earn my vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Hillary runs she'll beat whoever the GOP nominates handily. Only one who has a shot against her is Chris Christie, but I have my doubts as to whether he could win the nomination against a more conservative candidate. The tea partiers basically run the GOP primaries/caucuses so it'll be tough if someone like Ted Cruz runs for Christie to overcome the advantage he'll have.

 

That said, a Hillary vs. Cruz matchup would likely be the biggest democratic landslide since 1964. Nowhere near THAT big, granted, but she'd top 400 EV's for sure. If the GOP knows what's good for itself (lol) they'll nominate Christie, who has cross-party and independent appeal as well as puts New Jersey in play.

 

 

If the tea party really did control the primaries, there is no way in hell Romney would have won.  Tea Party support of Romney was grudging at best.   They had enough influence to cause him to move to the right, although that sort of thing happened in both parties before the tea party existed.  But they didn't have enough control to get someone they really wanted. 

 

I don't know much about Cruz but I doubt either he or Christie will get the nomination.  Right now, Rubio is probably the leading candidate but its early and we don't know if he would be able to handle the spotlight.  If he can though, he would provide a formidable challenge to Clinton.  He would likely win all the states Romney did, plus a likely win in Florida, once again making Ohio and perhaps Virginia the keys.   

 

Ironically, the republican who might make the best president is going to have problems because of his last name.  I am referring to Jeb Bush, who is more like his dad than his brother.  But his last name will significantly damage his chances of winning the general election and probably the primaries as well.   

 

But as I said, its very early, and who knows what might happen over the next three years that could influence the election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love Cruz's social media prowess

 

504x665xcruz-obama-jobs.jpg.pagespeed.ic

 

Funny stuff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's 18-30 voter grew up during the Clinton years or the Bush years. They remember fondly the 90's and its economic prosperity and remember the 2000's as a dismal time marked by 9/11, the botched response to Katrina, Iraq/Afghanistan, and of course the recession.

 

Like their grandparents most of them have experienced tough times due to the recession and as a result understand why social wellfare is necessary; this is also why the conservative economic platform is such a tough sell to today's youth. Many of them also grew up in broken homes with only one parent or with parents who had divorced and/or re-married. As a result they're much less attached to the 'traditional' view of family values that the religious right love so much. They're also less religious than their parents and grandparents, a result of the increased influence of science and technology on day-to-day life, and as a result aren't swayed by the same arguments the GOP have used to attract voters in the south for decades.

 

On foreign policy, they remember the blunders of the Bush era and as a result have a strong libertarian streak when it comes to defense issues. They're tired of wars, tired of the U.S. getting into everyone else's business and being sucked into conflicts and issues that we should have nothing to do with.

 

 

This

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt anyone here is qualified to argue st. department procedures and policies against the three men that testified before a congressional comittee yesterday. Nordstrom reported that according to all procedures and policies involving foriegn diplomatic properties, that only the head of the department could order the stand down that lead to the dessertion of our wounded and dead. Which would be Hillary. which she denied any knowledge or involvement under oath of law. And today this thread is arguing that she should be the next commander in chief. what a world we live in. Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt anyone here is qualified to argue st. department procedures and policies against the three men that testified before a congressional comittee yesterday. Nordstrom reported that according to all procedures and policies involving foriegn diplomatic properties, that only the head of the department could order the stand down that lead to the dessertion of our wounded and dead. Which would be Hillary. which she denied any knowledge or involvement under oath of law. And today this thread is arguing that she should be the next commander in chief. what a world we live in. Just saying.

I don't see anyone here saying she should be the next president, just that she is a strong contender to be the next president, which is true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the thing about young voters is they are more apt to go with the crowd or whatever is most popular at the moment.

 

whereas old voters are more apt to...what, make a well thought out decision? ha. hahaha.

 

with the way things like benghazi and solyndra caught on in the republican party, it would appear as though all you need to do to sway them is a poorly written chain letter and an angry rush limbaugh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well thought out OP.

 

Here is the deal with the Republicans, Obama has played a Jedi mind trick on these guys and they don't even realize it.  It is going to hurt them in the Senate and even more so in Presidential politics for a while.

 

The entire 2008 Republican campaign strategy was designed to drum up fear about Obama.  He is a socialist, marxist, Islamic, anti colonial, terrorist, that had a deep seeded hatred for white people and wanted to destroy America.

 

Right wing propaganda machines like the Heritage Foundation, CATO Institute, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, etc  helped to really drive that narrative.  Republican followers have convinced themselves that these are the only institutions that tell them the truth and the entire rest of the world including the Congressional Budget Office, every academic study, the mainstream media, fact checkers, etc are ALL just liberal, left wing nuts.  So they only accept reality within the filter of Fox News, Limbaugh, Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity, etc.  And they now live in the bubble that these guys have created.

 

Obama won.  Obama has been none of those things and has actually proposed legislation that is more down the middle and conceded or offered things that Republicans have wanted for years.  Chaining social security to CPI, cuts to medicare, reducing future spending on certain programs, a health coverage overhaul that was a Republican idea from the 90's, etc.

 

Well, the Republican media and the leaders in Congress who made a ton of money and power pushing irrational fears, could not now come out and say, "You know what.  We may have been a little overzealous in our caricature of Obama".  The money was too good.  The polling was too good.

 

So when Obama came out and tried to legislate from the middle, it forced the republican media and leadership to pivot even harder to the right.  The power of the Tea Party in primaries forced them even further still to the right.  The people winning Republican primary elections were the people playing into these fears with promises to stop the evil Obama, and the people losing were the ones telling them they were being irrational.  The people making money on radio, books, and TV were the people playing into those fears.

 

Watch this reaction during this primary town hall when a moderate Republican Bob Inglis (who opposed Obamacare) told his Republican constituents in SC that they should not be afraid of Obama and should turn Glenn Beck off and notice the amount of people who walked out on him.  Also please excuse the title of the youtube clip but it was the best clip I could find.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I honestly think Boehner wanted to get the grand bargain done on the debt reduction and would have given in on tax increases for entitlement cuts, but the Tea Party held him hostage and threatened his Speakership.

 

Some republicans did actually compromise on tax increases (enough to pass them), and got very little in the way of quid pro quo from the Democrats. IMO, Obama missed a golden opportunity to reach out, by offering some spending compromises, but flush with his election victory, he felt it unneccessary.  He will get nothing out of republicans in the future, and they will control the house for the rest of his term. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites