So what happened?

Page 1 of 51234>Last »
November 20th, 2012 at 6:51:25 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Right from the start of the primaries season I thought the GOP had a really weak field of candidates. I mean, I dind't see any of them as a likely president. I felt the same way in 1996 and 1988, except in 88 the Democrats quickly defeated their own best candidates.

So what happened?

Usually the better candidates don't run, or don't run very hard, when the incumbent is up for reelection. This is only antural, as the incumbent has many advantages in every front. But sometimes the incumbent is at a steep disadvantage. Consider Obama. He has a weak recovery that barely deserves the name, he passed a highly unpopular health insurance "reform" law, he threatened the Supreme Court to get a favorable verdict, he has misshandled foreign policy from Iran to Israel to Lybia, among other things.

So why didn't the GOP come up with a better field?

Granted, offhand I can't think of who should have run. About the only person who comes to mind is Giuliani, and he's done for in the national stage. But I also have not been following politics as wel as I used to.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
November 20th, 2012 at 1:30:23 PM permalink
TheCesspit
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 23
Posts: 1929
Mittens was a perfectly adequate candidate. The problem is his party. There's too many who adopt a sneering, reactionary, socially conservative view of the world, and that chases away large sections of the vote who would otherwise vote for the concept of low taxes, low expenditure, small government, reward hard work. Romney might have lost a little ground on the big vs. small business axis, but that wasn't a major focus.

People -tend- to vote emotionally. If you represent a party that appears to disrespect you, you won't vote for it, even if you like the leader and -his- values.

I believe this was a loss by the Republicans, with some smart tactics by Obama's team to make the best use of his strengths to cover his weaknesses. If you see how little the popular vote changed after all those Billions spent... you have to shake your head.
It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die.... it's called Life
November 20th, 2012 at 1:46:22 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: TheCesspit
Mittens was a perfectly adequate candidate.


Where's Sheldon Cooper when we need him? ;)

really, Romney could hardly articulate his positions, he flip-flopped (bringing to mind Kennedy's quip that on abortion Romney is multiple choice), and worst of all he couldn't make the case against keeping Obama in office.

Quote:
The problem is his party.


Oh, there's plenty of blame to go around. but there's nothign really new in the GOP's position that wasn't there 4 and 8 and 12 years ago. Most significantly, nothing that wasn't there 2 years ago when they did well in the mid-term elections.

There are a few differences, to be sure. Most important, the GOP dropped any pretense at immigration reform. That was a wasted chance like few have ever been. Considering they could have attacked Obama for having deported more illegals than W. Bush, for example.

But a decent candidate should have been able to win anyway, or even to steer his aprty ina different direction.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
November 20th, 2012 at 3:53:46 PM permalink
AcesAndEights
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 6
Posts: 351
I've been reading through a bunch of presidential election history - it's amazing to see how many times an incumbent was booted out of office due to a recession, and scarcely any other reason. The fact that the GOP wasn't able to unseat Obama during this tepid "recovery" is pretty damning.

I tend to agree with TheCesspit - the GOP needs to undergo a re-branding. They can move more to the middle on social issues while maintaining their right-wing stance on economic issues and pull in a lot more votes, namely women if they would STOP TALKING ABOUT RAPE.

Also,
Quote: TheCesspit
...who would otherwise vote for the concept of low taxes, low expenditure, small government, ...

I laughed a little bit, and then died inside when I read that. The GOP used to stand for these things...now they're so close to the democrats that the difference is negligible. Only 3rd parties offer a true chance at limited government.
"You think I'm joking." -EvenBob
November 20th, 2012 at 6:10:58 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18136
Quote: AcesAndEights

I tend to agree with TheCesspit - the GOP needs to undergo a re-branding. They can move more to the middle on social issues while maintaining their right-wing stance on economic issues and pull in a lot more votes, namely women if they would STOP TALKING ABOUT RAPE.


So yet another call for the GOP to just be Democrats?

Nobody tells Democrats they should quit trying to rebrand marrige and call for abrotion on demand.

Seriously, what happened is more people are deciding they want free stuff than freedom. The Democrat Party has pandered to every special interest group that it can. Free abortions. Amnesty. "Free health care." All to be paid for by "the rich" who are somehow stealing from you. And just enough race-baiting as needed. (eg: "They will put you in chains," claiming Voter ID is Jim Crow come back.)

And the Obama cult-of-personality is still there. How this guy seems to get people so willing to follow him with nothing but platitudes is amazing to me.

The good news it the GOP did better in state-level races and still has more Hispanics in elected office than the Democrats. As time goes by it gets harder for Democrats to say the GOP is anti-hispanic when people see that. Blacks are a lost cause forever. Women will keep dividing along marital-status lines.
The President is a fink.
November 20th, 2012 at 6:45:54 PM permalink
s2dbaker
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 13
Posts: 241
Quote: AZDuffman
Nobody tells Democrats they should quit trying to rebrand marrige and call for abrtion on demand.

Seriously, what happened is more people are deciding they want free stuff than freedom. The Democrat Party has pandered to every special interest group that it can. Free abortions. Amnesty. "Free health care." All to be paid for by "the rich" who are somehow stealing from you. And just enough race-baiting as needed. (eg: "They will put you in chains," claiming Voter ID is Jim Crow come back.)

And the Obama cult-of-personality is still there. How this guy seems to get people so willing to follow him with nothing but platitudes is amazing to me.

The good news it the GOP did better in state-level races and still has more Hispanics in elected office than the Democrats. As time goes by it gets harder for Democrats to say the GOP is anti-hispanic when people see that. Blacks are a lost cause forever. Women will keep dividing along marital-status lines.
And this is why Republicans will continue to fail, because the above is what they really believe with all of their hearts.

It will eventually change, it has to. The Democrats will fill the void left by the dying off Republicans leading to a Democratic super-majorities with too much power. Too much power leads to corruption and then the Democratic party will split, with half joining what's left of the Republicans to make a new Republican party that's simply anti-corruption. It'll be a far better Republican party in the future but first they must be humiliated repeatedly.
November 20th, 2012 at 7:09:12 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18136
Quote: s2dbaker
And this is why Republicans will continue to fail, because the above is what they really believe with all of their hearts.


Because it is true. If anyone wants to show me where Obama ran on anything but I am open to example. Gone is the Democrat Party of JFK where you were asked what you can do for your country. It is replaces with "Free abortion, free birth control, lets raise taxes on someone else to pay for it!" And if you deny the clut-of-personality thing witness the altered flag with Obama's face where the stars belonged and the polling place that had to cover a mural of him on the wall. Classic cult-of-personality behaviors.

Quote:
It will eventually change, it has to. The Democrats will fill the void left by the dying off Republicans leading to a Democratic super-majorities with too much power. Too much power leads to corruption and then the Democratic party will split, with half joining what's left of the Republicans to make a new Republican party that's simply anti-corruption. It'll be a far better Republican party in the future but first they must be humiliated repeatedly.


There will be a shift. I expect it as Hispanics and Blacks begin to battle over who is the majority-minority. I don't see the repeated humiliations, however. Democrats are already taking the wrong message and moving far left just as they did in 2008. This time it will be harder to blame Bush for all that ails the economy, and the economy has a millstone on its neck.

But the big problem for the Democrats will come when people learn Obamacare is not "free health care." Let the 27 year old who voted Obama twice get the bill for their health care mandate. Sporadic reports said the day after it passed some places had people asking for their "free health care" then and there. Oh, and wait until *everyone's* taxes go up.

The next few years will not be boring.
The President is a fink.
November 20th, 2012 at 7:40:50 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 188
Posts: 18631
Quote: AZDuffman
This time it will be harder to blame Bush for all that ails the economy


No sensible person will blame the economy of the next 4 years on Bush (wherever it goes). But Republicans thought they could get away with blaming Obama as soon as possible, at every turn for the economy of the last 4 -- I don't think they sold too many on that idea, else Romney would likely be running things now.
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
November 21st, 2012 at 9:27:17 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: AcesAndEights
I tend to agree with TheCesspit - the GOP needs to undergo a re-branding. They can move more to the middle on social issues while maintaining their right-wing stance on economic issues and pull in a lot more votes, namely women if they would STOP TALKING ABOUT RAPE.


Sort of.

On same-sex marriage, they shoudl realize what most of America seems to have: homosexuality is harmless in and of itself, and people shouldn't be treated as second-class citizens because of irrelevant differences. On abortion, they should recognize that there can and should be some exceptions. Rape is obvious, but some argued against it being necessary to rpeserve the life of the mother.

And on immigration the Republican position is just wrong.

Quote:
I laughed a little bit, and then died inside when I read that. The GOP used to stand for these things...now they're so close to the democrats that the difference is negligible. Only 3rd parties offer a true chance at limited government.


Oh, prescription drug benefits, saving Medicare, No Child Left Behind, etc etc etc. A Big Government Conservative is every bit as redistributionist and statist as a Big Government Liberal. They just use a different vocabulary when talking about how they'll take your money to grow government some more.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
November 21st, 2012 at 4:45:54 PM permalink
AcesAndEights
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 6
Posts: 351
Quote: AZDuffman
So yet another call for the GOP to just be Democrats?

Notice I said "maintaining their right-wing stance on economic issues."

I'm a half-hearted* libertarian anyway, so I don't really care what the GOP does. I've never been registered with either party (here in WA, you don't have to declare or register with a party and can vote any which way you like). I've probably voted for more Republicans for local offices than Democrats, but I vote 3rd party whenever possible (including the last 2 presidential races), and try to evaluate the individual candidates more than toeing any party lines.

*I say half-hearted because I probably don't agree with a lot of the capital-L Libertarians on a lot of things, and I really don't know enough about the world, economics, history, etc. to make an informed decision about anything. I really need to get my worldview straight before the next presidential election, as I'd like to take an active role in promoting whichever candidate I believe is best, which may be one from the 2 main parties or may not. If it's not, I'd like to raise awareness for 3rd-party candidates.
"You think I'm joking." -EvenBob
Page 1 of 51234>Last »