Republicans Want Party To Be Like Palin
 

Good Lord Please say it isn't so.

A new Rasmussen poll further demonstrates that the GOP could be in for a long stretch in the wilderness: A majority of GOP voters now say that the party should be more like Sarah Palin.

The numbers: 55% of Republicans say the party should be like Palin, compared to 24% who say they should be like John McCain.

As I've previously noted, poll data like this could indicate that the Republican Party is getting ready to relive the classic cycle of ruling parties who get turned out of power in a landslide: With the party base itself shrunk down, the people who are still around are the most hard-line members, and are really the least fit people to fix the situation.

Hmmm...the Palin Party. lol

That'd be interesting to watch.

Its like a self-inflicted death spiral that can only further alienate the Independent swing voters who are key to electoral success.

Crunch the numbers....most polls put about 40% of the voters as self-identified Republican or "leaning Republican" (the number is at an all time high for Dem/leaning Dem -over 50%).

Of that 40% of the US electorate who are Republican, just over half say the party should be like Palin. So...about 20% of the total electorate are Palinists. That is not a winning number!

If I were a Republican, I would be seriously concerned by this recent Gallup poll:

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/...fggoe6m5_q.png

The...map shows party strength by state for 2008, ranging from states that can be considered solidly Democratic (a Democratic advantage in party identification of 10 percentage points or more) to those that can be considered solidly Republican (a Republican advantage in party identification of 10 percentage points or more). States in which the partisan advantage is less than 5 points in either direction are considered "competitive."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/114016/St...filiation.aspx

But as for me, in the words H.L. Mencken, "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican. "

I said this earlier last year. Republicans need to change. Maybe the majority of Republicans want the party to be more like Palin, but no Democrats will accept a Palin-like president and that will take away independents as well.

Interesting Statistics


Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law,

St. Paul, Minnesota, points out facts of 2008 Presidential election:


Number of States won by:

Democrats: 19

Republicans: 29


Square miles of land won by:

Democrats: 580,000
Republicans: 2,427,000


Population of counties won by:

Democrats: 127 million
Republicans: 143 million


Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:
Democrats: 13.2
Republicans: 2.1


Professor Olson adds:

"In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won by Republicans

was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.


Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in
government-owned tenements and living off various forms of

government welfare.



Professor Olson believes the United States is now somewhere

between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's

definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's

population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.



If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal
invaders called illegal's and they vote, then we can say goodbye to

the USA in fewer than five years

Thats funny...the electoral map I have seen has Obama winning 28 state and McCain winning 22. I would like see where he got the D-19, R-29 number.

And with the largest percentage win (52%) since Reagan' second term (and more than Reagan's first term)

There are also currently 28 Democrats and 22 Republicans serving as governors.

BTW, square miles dont vote.

And Congress doesnt have to provide a path to citizenship to change the face of the electorate....it will happen either way within the next 40-50 years....The white face of American will no longer by the majority.

Thank God for the electoral college eh?

Actually, I would like to see a Constitutional amendment to change the electoral college system so that a state's electoral votes can be divided and more representative...rather than winner take all (except for Maine and Nebraska)

Screw that.

Interesting concept, I wonder if that would get more of the "minority party" to vote in a stat that has a vast majority party?

Like Texas, which has a handful of very blue counties in a sea of red.

Watch this space. You just predicted the fate of my own party.

The righty blogs seem to believe that the R party has lost its way by not being Conservative enough. Unfortunately only a third of them think this means they should push for less spending, and two-thirds of them think this means a return to moral/culture war issues.

I think that this is a losing idea, and I predict that, barring terror attack, the Rs will have to face an even bigger election loss before they find any traction. I believe the Terri Schaivo bumblefuck had more of an effect on the 2006 and 2008 elections than people think.

I just dont get how some Republicans can believe that this is the way to restore the party's national credibility:

Joe the Plumber advises GOP-ers

WTF are they thinking? Palin and the Plumber (aka war correspondent and now political consultant/strategist)?

http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/i...R1964/ajoe.jpg

The Republican Party deep thinker and spokesmodel in authentic Mexican black velvet

Who wouldnt want that hanging on their wall!

I couldn't agree more.

After this huge financial mess caused by greedy people on Wall Street, I think they will turn even more to the democratic party, especially if this administration stands up to those Wall Street pirates.

All the republican party wants to do is cut taxes even more for corporations/rich people and capital gains taxes. It simply doesn't work.

They have forgotten the true meaning of the word conservative which was originally about being fiscally conservative. They have turned it into a war against the American people, if you don't buy into to their particular brand of religion, or morals, or ethics, etc. And they have been such beacons of moral superiority... :headshake

Numerous factions are vying to manipulate the Republican party. You can bet the wacko extremists are using Limbaugh to promote their new party agenda. However McConnell is the party leader. Either he will define the new Republican party or first be deposed.

Just because one faction got their new political agenda published does not mean that is the party agenda. It will take at least one year to see where the party intends to go. Currently we only have people shooting sky rockets to see how the crowd oooohs and aaaahs.

Palin ... Joe ... you are making this up, right? :lol2:

The day we erase the lines of states it the day that will happen. It is obvious you don't care for the issues of states rights, because if you did you would consider that population statistics do not trump borders. The purpose of the Republic and the electoral college was to prevent that very thing. Democratic voting is just that, a winner take all majority rules. That is a dangerous thing because one day the tables may be turned and you might be on the other end of that pointed stick.

In fact, I think it would be very supportive of states rights.

It would allow a state to chose whether all its electoral votes should go to the winner of that state's overall popular vote or to allocate the electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in each congressional district which is how Maine and Nebraska do it now and I havent heard complaints from either party in those states.

In fact, if you want to look at it in a partisan manner, it would probably benefit the Republicans more - giving them electoral votes in large states (CA, NY, PA, MI, etc) that are traditionally Democratic....and you could include FL and OH this year.

But I should have said that I would like to see such an amendment introduced and debated. I cant say for certain that I would support it until hearing more on pros and cons.

No, winner takes all is majority rule. Mob rule is not a good thing. Sounds just like Congress.

Are you suggesting that the presidential electoral process in Maine and Nebraska is by mob rule?

No, I am suggesting that those states with winner take all are a flawed means to an end.

Yep. This also happens to small parties. The Libertarians, for example.

Rog, been there done that! Watched the "purists" take over, walked away. Watched the "purists" walk away for "purity" reasons. Laughed.

Just because the 3rd parties are FUNNIER, doesn't make them BETTER.

Yes, it was a lesson hard learned.

John McCain is an honorable man but I did not and would not vote for him. Why? I'm a conservative. He's not.

Palin is often mocked for interviews that she's done during the election. When I have seen her on TV it's understandable. Those that watch think that she's the dumbest ass on planet earth, except for W. ;)

Glenn Beck has had her on his radio program long before, during and after the election. She's a conservative. Not a Rino, a conservative.

This perception of being a complete idiot will probably follow her with most viewers. Those of us that have heard her speak without her McCain handlers like what we heard and her record is consistent.

This past election I did not vote because "my guy" McCain didn't deserve to get my vote. Many conservatives that I've spoken to either held their nose and voted for him or didn't vote at all.

Those 24% should just slide on over to the Democratic party. The coming cycles will not garner huge support and more importantly more money for campaigns. That money will most likely come from conservatives for a real, honest to goodness conservative. Sarah Palin is one.

Those Rinos in office now are seeing the tide change and acting or speaking like they are not Dems. They know where the money is. The same as those hard lefty groups and their incredible ability to raise money to get Obama elected.

The thing I don't understand about conservatives - what are they conserving?

Ammo.

Might need it in the future. :D

15th century values.

The ability to protect us from becoming a quasi-socialist country. Other than that, not much.

This is a very interesting time for the Republicans. The Neo-conservatives have destroyed the parties credibility. Which faction has values which appeal across the center of the electorate? The religious right are always organized but that is their only appeal. The libertarian wing is inconsistant on the social issues which have broader appeal than the free market message especially in a down-turn. The money crowd had their run and managed to smear the free marketers in their recent crime wave. Right now, their best shot may be the moderates. People will tire of the Pelosi crowd, so there is an opportunity a few years out.

That ended in 1932.

The money crowd ARE the free marketers.

The dems won nothing. The GOP has managed to smear itself with its own shit to the point where nobody but the hard core religious nuts will go anywhere near them...and they are still hooting and throwing poop as if there was nothing wrong, as if they hadn't been trounced in an election. They are, in fact, still jabbering about running Palin in 2012, despite the fact that she basically sank McCain.

So now it's a race to the bottom. On one hand, you have the congressional dems, acting like they did in the old days, the days before Newt Gingrich handed them their collective arses, and on the other hand, you have the GOP reassuring themselves that they don't need to change a thing.

But here's the deal...everyone in the middle already knew what Pelosi was, and they still voted against McCain/Palin, and they still threw the GOP out of congress by the truckload.

The GOP had better unfuck themselves. And they'd better do it fast. 2010 will be here before you know it.

They are still touting her and doing damage control.


This won't help.

That leaves plenty more time for the Dems to fuck it up.

Which is the GOP's only hope because they apparently have nothing to add to the conversation. This rooting against America bit by party partisans gets very old.

See above. The Dems don't have an image problem with most of the electorate, truth notwithstanding.

And the GOP refuses to take advantage of what weaknesses the dems ARE showing, because they're too busy living in denial over the last election.

On top of that, I think the republican partisans seriously underestimate how much America as a whole hates GWB...and since they cannot seem to separate themselves from his memory, and make no effort to try, they will lose against the wimpiest collection of Dems in living memory.

You got it right. It is about Bush Hate. Nothing more, nothing less. They are blinded by their hate like whites hating blacks in the 30's or Nazi's hating Jews in the 40's.

There is no comparison between hating Bush and hating Blacks or Jews. The very implication is offensive, unless you also believe that the people who hate Bush also hate all white people or all people from CT.

Since this is patently bullshit, your analogy is utterly worthless.

Fact: I have nothing against fake Texans or people from rich families on the East coast (in general), but I do hate Bush. I'm proud to hate Bush. My whole family hates Bush. It brings us together, you know?

And none of us are "blinded" by hate. We hate Bush because of what we saw him do...we don't hate what he did because he did it. And we don't vote GOP, because the GOP still thinks we want Bush's policies. The very same policies that made us hate him in the first place.

Most Americans dont hate Buish.

They simply lost confidence is his policies and practices as they saw how it impacted them personally and the country as a whole.

And the Republican party is the embodiment of those policies....so rigid in its ideology, particularly among the social conservative base that dominates the party at the grass roots, that it is not very welcoming to the vast majority of Americans who are in the center politically.

Based upon the above quote, you are certainly filled with enough of it as the bitterness is leaking out.

I think the party is monetarily dominated by those right wing extremists, not the grassroots.

Hey that is your opinion. I don't give a shit if you find it an utterly worthless analogy. It is a fact. People hate Bush that much. You think Bush is a Fake Texan? Please. Who says you get to make that judgement? You are as blinded by the hate the rest of the haters are. No big deal, just admit it. Much of the GOP distanced themselves from Bush long before the election of recent. This is about perception.

Keep on believing that, sunshine. What was his approval rating at the end? Or even during his last 3 years? And all those people jeering at the inauguration - the first public event which Bush had no control over - were just taking the Mickey.

Yes, I believe I made that quite clear. I think the part where I said "I hate Bush" might have been a dead giveaway.

That dog won't hunt over here pal.

Approval ratings are a judgement of competence and confidence.

Hate is an irrational emotion.

IMHO I would call bull shit on that as well. The electorate drank the Koolaid and equated the GOP with Bush. Come on now, it is not rocket science. They equated the extremist views that were exploited by Daily Kos and Huffington. Obama made promises he can never keep, imagine that, and now I will be one to hold his feet to the fire. Obama made promises that the poor folk sucked up to like a starving child in Darfur. Where's the beef? I'll give you a year and we will begin to list the excuses as to why we still have few of the things promised by the Demoncrats, Congressional and Presidential.

Ratings are polls and have little statistical significance.

Sure they do. But comparing that hate to the people who hate based on race or religion is laughable.


The fact that he's from Conneticutt.


No, I hate him with my eyes wide open. In fact, that's WHY I hate him.


What, the hate? Did. The blindness? No blindness is required.


You haven't spent much time listening to the new RNC chair, have you? Steele?

HAR! Tell it to McGovern.

Polls are a fairly reliable (within a few percentage points) and statistically valid snapshot of public opinion at any given time.

Which dog, chum?

Politics is religion in the US.




Big fucking deal. And most blacks in the US are not from Africa. Most Americans can claim that they were born in another state than the one they currently reside in, it does not make them not from that state. I was born in Ill. Now I live in GA, should I say that I am not from here, even though I have lived here for over 10 years? You get to make that judgement? I don't think so.




Bush hate. Thanks for proving my point.




More Bush hate.




Fuck the RNC.

Bull shit. Never studied stats did ya. The freaking Z would need to be so big. Go ahead, hit me.

So we polled via telephone, 1000 voters.

The questions are so easily picked apart.

They are so easily directed to get results.

So what about all the people without telephones, they get left out?

So what time of day?

How many people hung up on you?

What demongraphic did you capture?

How many blacks, whites, mexicans?

How many housewifes who were so freaking bored at home they wanted to spend time talking to you?

I love polls because I always say something different every time they calll just to screw them up. How many other people do that? Who can prove it?

Polls are the weakest form of statistical measure.

Bill Clinton.
:p