Future of Republican Party

[piercehawkeye45]

Coming up to the election, there were two completely different worldviews and it is clear which side succeeded. At least to me, and I'm sure most people here, it was clear what happened: Republicans tried to force a radical narrative and stuck to with it even when there was zero substance behind that narrative. While it did have some power, that radical narrative obviously wasn't influential enough to win an election that Republicans should have won.

Looking at demographics, it is clear that the Republicans are fighting a losing battle. Assuming Obama comes out on top of the popular vote (seems like it), Democrats have won majority 5 out of the past 6 elections and this trend will only continue if nothing changes. From the Republican primary, it is also clear that the GOP is split between moderate and "tea party" factions. Romney, a weaker candidate in general, was forced to appeal to the radical side of the GOP to get financing and a united GOP, moving him too far to the right to get enough independent voters to win the election.

Republicans have an upcoming choice in the four years: admit that your narrative is rejected by the majority of Americans and move to the center or double down and hold off the inevitable for another decade or so. I welcome a more moderate GOP since I do not want Democratic solely in control, and there are positive signs already that many Republicans will move in that direction. It will not be a clean shift, a "civil war" may break out, but I think it will be extremely interesting to see the political landscape around 2016.

I agree with many others here that a Clinton versus Huntsman 2016 would be ideal. However, a lot can change in four years.





Some interesting articles explaining why Republicans lost:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...n_party_s.html

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...eaders/264855/


Newt Gingrich admitting that the GOP needs to move in a different direction:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...p_ref=politics

[xoxoxoBruce]

I think there's a lot of truth here.

Cheer up. The guy we just re-elected is a moderate Republican.

I know how stupid that sounds. Barack Obama is the head of the Democratic Party. For five years, conservative politicians and media told you he was a raving socialist. In the heat of the campaign, when you’re trying to beat the guy, it’s hard to let go of that image of him, just as it’s hard for Democrats to see past the caricatures of Mitt Romney. But now that the campaign is over and you’re staring at a second Obama term, the falsity of the propaganda may come as a relief. By and large, Obama’s instincts are the instincts of a moderate Republican. His policies are the policies of a moderate Republican. He stands where the GOP used to stand and will someday stand again.

more

[BigV]

limbaugh:

a moderate is just a liberal that doesn't have the guts to call himself a liberal

[Adak]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I think there's a lot of truth here.

Claiming that "Obama is a moderate Republican".

more

Not even close. Obama supported cap and trade, nationalized health care, and closing down every coal fired power plant in the country. He's restricted oil and gas drilling on federal lands, and has actually taken over one of our biggest corporations, and arranged to sell it to the Union.

He sues states that try to pass voterID law. He won't support e-verify laws to reduce the influx of illegal immigrants, or give us decent border protection.

Obama: "Under my plan, electric rates would necessarily skyrocket".

THAT is NO Republican!

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Adak

Not even close. Obama supported cap and trade,

Invented by Republicans.

nationalized health care,

Didn't happen, and what he did do was invented by Republicans.

and closing down every coal fired power plant in the country.

Didn't happen.

[Trilby]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Invented by Republicans.Didn't happen, and what he did do was invented by Republicans.Didn't happen.

yeah, but it's still fun to make things up.

What do you expect from a Kenyan born Muslim? And why do you hate America Happy Monkey? WHY?

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

I agree with many others here that a Clinton versus Huntsman 2016 would be ideal.

Personally, I'm betting on a contest between Hillary vs. Chris Christie.

[BigV]

Boehner: (a paraphrase, but a very close one)

"the american people have made clear that there is no mandate for raising taxes"

"instead of discussing what taxes we can raise, the president needs to come to us with a plan we can accept that discusses what reforms we can undertake to reduce the deficit."

Boehner does not talk like a man who is willing to compromise, just as he did not compromise before. Whether or not this is a good negotiating strategy in other circumstances is debatable. In the context of the "fiscal cliff"

The president, personally and politically, has little to lose, having won his last election ever, unlike Rep Boehner. His impetus to politick is far less than his motivation to get things done for the good of the nation. Honestly, I don't see much evidence on Boehner's part of a desire to do the nation's business. I see him as consistently obstructionist--not helpful, certainly not to the nation.

[BigV]

also

"fewer loopholes and lower rates for all"

and

"it won't be solved by a lame duck congress"

?!?

omg, he's disabled the brakes , locked the wheel and has both feet on the gas. guess where we're headed. jfc.

[SamIam]

Yeah, I dont understand why the most recent media reports concerning Boehner's post election statements have headlines like "Boehner Willing to Compromise." Yet when you read beyond the headline or stick around long enough to hear more than a few sound bites, Boehner's rhetoric remains unchanged, and he is still sprouting the same "won't give an inch," tea party inspired demands and threats.

I was bemused to read the following from ABC News under the heading “John Boehner Welcomes Big Deficit Deal, Pledges to Work with President Obama”

~snip~"It would be an agreement that begins to pave the way for the long-term growth that is essential if we want to lift the cloud of debt hanging over our country," Boehner said. "It involves making real changes to the financial structure of entitlement programs, and reforming our tax code to curb special-interest loopholes and deductions. By working together and creating a fairer, simpler, cleaner tax code, we can give our country a stronger, healthier economy."

~snip~Boehner said he told the president that the Republican majority in the House "stands ready to work" with him "to do what's best" for the country. Still, the speaker was clear that new revenue must be a "byproduct of a growing economy," and he emphasized that "to garner Republican support for new revenues, the president must be willing to reduce spending and shore up the entitlement programs that are the primary drivers of our debt."

Sure, Boehner will compromise as long as the compromise is all coming from the other side. He still demands tax cuts for the "small businessmen" in the uppermost income brackets and he still insists that Americans with the lowest incomes be the ones on whose backs the budget is balanced. Otherwise the Republican majority in the House "stands ready" to continue to just vote "no" to any and everything. It's "what's best for the country," after all.

If that's Boehner's idea of compromise, I wonder what he does when he is in an actively oppositional mode? Call upon the newly equipped navy to help the Red States to invade the Blue ones?

[Adak]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Invented by Republicans.Didn't happen, and what he did do was invented by Republicans.Didn't happen.

Nationalized health care has a very long history, going back to at least Lenin and the Bolshevik Revolution, and probably long before that.

Thankfully, Obama's support of cap and trade (which he referred to as "my plan"), was so toxic to the economy, that nobody would support it.

Not even Democrats!

[Happy Monkey]

Nationalized health care hasn't happened in the US. Obamacare is pretty much all based on Republican proposals.

Cap and trade was invented by Republicans.

[Trilby]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Nationalized health care hasn't happened in the US. Obamacare is pretty much all based on Republican proposals.

Cap and trade was invented by Republicans.

Quit with the facts, already!

We like to make stuff UP. It's way more FUN.


It's like the History Channel 2! Aliens did it!

[Adak]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Nationalized health care hasn't happened in the US. Obamacare is pretty much all based on Republican proposals.

Cap and trade was invented by Republicans.

You've had enough booze today, Monkey.

[DanaC]

Adak, I thought you said you would be in favour of a national health system, as long as it was done right?