Please discuss.
Note, by "minority" I meant political minority, not ethnic or cultural.
Printable View
Please discuss.
Note, by "minority" I meant political minority, not ethnic or cultural.
If they can work with the new power blocs (like making inroads with latinos) they can reconstruct themselves as a southern/western party.
Move to the left.
The GOP MUST turn back to its roots. It must root out the neo-cons and social conservatives who turned off so many after the last 8 years. They must stop wrapping themselves in the flag and bragging about how patriotic and how much they love it and act as though that is the sole determiner for political qualification.
Instead, they must preach the message of fiscal responsibility, on both a governmental and personal level. They must nominate a person for the next election who can attempt to push back for the young vote. They need someone who is youthful, energetic, and can clearly and forcefully argue for a smaller, more efficient government without turning a discussion into how to "combat the democrats".
However, I do not see anyone amongst the current power members of the party who fits this mold. Until they can find such a person, I believe they will take a backseat to the new Democratic majority.
Romney would probably fall udner that category, but that depends on if Obama is past the culture wars or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by seireikhaan
Romney forsook his ability to do so with this season's campaign. If he had run as the man his background stated he was, in combination with his monetary muscle, I think he would have trounced the rest of the candidates in the primary easily. Instead, he allowed himself to succumb to the neo-con Republican brand. His chance passed.Quote:
Originally Posted by CountArach
I would hope for the third option as there is nothing wrong with the basic premises of conservatism, but I would bet on Reps becoming a permanent minority.
The Dem gains despite the 9% congressional approval rating demonstrates that all of America's problems will be the fault of Republicans long after Republican control is a distant memory.
And to be honest, there just aren't that many people who put their principles over their own self gain. Most Americans would rather have free health care and all sorts of benefits handed out to them at the expense of the people who pay 90% of taxes. The ideals of personal responsibility, individualism, and making your own way have been losing steam since people have started realizing what they stand get free... they just don't realize that all that Barack has promised isn't really free at all.
If they return to their ultra Conservative 'roots', they will keep getting battered in elections. They need to move forward and create new blocks of support and challenge their thinking.
Ditch the Palins embrace the Pauls
There is nothing wrong with the basic premises of conservativism. The problem is that the entire Republican establishment is not conservative, they're Big Church Gov't on social issues and Big Wal Mart/ Wall Street Nanny Gov't on economic issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
I wouldn't have a tenth of the revulsion I have for Republican leadership in our government if it weren't constantly intervene in the bedroom, constantly intervene in the economy FOR big business and AGAINST lower income and middle class working Americans guising itself as "conservativism."
The Republican Party has not stood for less government, it's just stood for less government for the people who most need government protection to remain free and able to access opportunity.
Yup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
They need to embrace social freedom and ditch the evangelical kooks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
I like voting libertarian, but most other people do not seem to. So I don't see this happening. I suppose most people don't see the point of having a government that weighs less than ones wife?
:shrug:
You can hope over to Orange and secedeQuote:
Originally Posted by Yoyoma1910
Last time that happened our two states got separated from the rest of the group, and everything fell apart. It's like the two kids in the buddy system who got left behind by the tiger cage at the zoo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Good sir you forget Arkansas....who am I kiddingQuote:
Originally Posted by Yoyoma1910
I once read they have the largest flea population in the U.S.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
I would love the GOP to be more like Ron Paul.
We need the government as an organizer - not a nanny.
The political parties exist on the bell curve - in order to understand where they need to be they should look to the right side of the bell curve that is un-represented and find out an altered narrative view that will win elections going forward.
Look to youth, intellect and ideas rather than solely old-bag hip shooting. Battles are being waged in the courtroom and yet we aren't cultivating constitutional lawyers to the extent that the democrats are.
Recruit the best and brightest into GOP politics. Focus on the good aspects of tradition through a better set of eyes and come up with a few traditionally inspired radical ideas. Paul Ryan's roadmap is a good pool as an example of something to dip into for a revitalization of the party. Bobby Jindal can help the party reach out to minority votes and get their opinions on tradition inspired initiatives that may harmonize well those functioning initiatives already in the loop.
Sarah Palin can hone her national level political acumen into something formidable and inspiring the next time around. She is a gifted and charismatic woman and should work to prove that those Gibson and Couric interviews were blips in her early days on the national scene. Show the American people that the G.O.P. seeks and rewards innovation while respecting tradition.
And finally encourage bright professionals like Romney to overcome has-beens like McCain and Dole in the freaking primaries. It is a no-brainer that guys who look like they are going to die and are incapable of making a coherent argument due to age are probably not going to take the cake in the long run. Use better judgment in selecting candidates.
Never defer to democratic narratives. It is disgraceful to hear Republicans buy into the genius narrative created by Obama. Reagan had a narrative and it would have never have accepted Obama's. We need a new covenant that rejects what democrats take as a given and posits a totally different world view and linear progression.
I agree with you. But I think the panic you'd get... and it's not without reason I'm sure, is that it's hard to reconcile intellectualism with the pandering to just the opposite that a significant third or more of the GOP base requires in order to hit the polls. That whole crowd Sarah Palin hugely energized-- how do you get them with some soft spoken, intellectual Constitutional law scholar? And having to tell them, like spoiled children, no, you can't use law like just a bludgeon to legalize what you like and criminalize what you don't like, that that's not what conservative principles are about?Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
That's the predicament your party is in, I don't envy it.
Actually.. yea, can't argue with that... :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Koga No Goshi
Ha! It's their abandonment of that, the ideals espoused by Reagan, that's led to their big defeats.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAG
Anyway, I posted this in the final election thread:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122541628923186751.html
CRQuote:
But the risk is that Tuesday's results will cause panic, and exacerbate the reactionary, backward-looking behavior that has already done so much damage to the party.
Republicans love to recollect Ronald Reagan, though they forget why. Reagan's strength was looking to the future -- and framing the issues of the day for Americans. When the focus had been balanced budgets, he made the issue the need for economic growth. When the debate had been détente, Reagan turned it into the need for a strong America. That tradition continued with the Contract with America, welfare reform, government reform, tort reform. George W. Bush tackled education.
Reagan's other great strength was not distinguishing between red and blue America. He offered a set of principles, and invited anyone who broadly subscribed to those principles into his political house. The result was that unlikely coalition of fiscal conservatives, defense hawks and social conservatives. These were the days of Reagan Democrats, of victories in states that now seem unwinnable to the GOP.
The further Republicans have moved away from this playbook, the further its fortunes have declined. The GOP was thrown out in 2006 because it had failed to evolve on the new issues facing Americans -- spiraling health-care costs, dwindling energy supplies, out-of-control entitlements. It spent its last years divvying up pork. As it has hit the electoral rocks, the party has also turned inward, harping on immigrants and gay marriage.
There is nothing wrong with the basic premises of conservativism. The problem is that the entire Republican establishment is not conservative, they're Big Church Gov't on social issues and Big Wal Mart/ Wall Street Nanny Gov't on economic issues.
I wouldn't have a tenth of the revulsion I have for Republican leadership in our government if it weren't constantly intervene in the bedroom, constantly intervene in the economy FOR big business and AGAINST lower income and middle class working Americans guising itself as "conservativism."
The Republican Party has not stood for less government, it's just stood for less government for the people who most need government protection to remain free and able to access opportunity.
A mix of what this guy said, and a ron paul type candidate, i probably wouldn't mind the republicans so much then, infact if the republican party did manage to change that much then i would probably vote for them other democrats (ill have to wait and see with obama but going on thier past) the McCain of 2000 has an appeal for me, as does ron paul, even as a lefty i would vote one of these than a lefty who is jut thier for powers sake...
to reiterate, they have to be like ron paul. I would vote GOP if Ron Paul won the candidacy in '12:yes:
My humble Euro weenie opinion is that the GOP needs to distance itself from the religious extremist nutjobs and warmonger neocons and become the voice of the deep ranks of conservative citizenry, instead of representing the extremist loonies. There are lot good things in conservative values, but these things can be found mostly in moderate conservatism. Extremism, let it be conservative, liberal, religious or any other extremism, hardly ever creates anything good.
I hate to say it - Ron Paul would never win an election. Ever.
I think if he won the republican nomination after the democrats having 8 years like the republicans just did, unfortunatly its winning the republican nomination which is the impossible bit...
For all the republicans fault i think alot of the blame has to goto Obama, though im sure the complete lack of fiscal sense, imperial war mongering and degradation of civil liberties didn't help...
If the Republicans operated on something like the platform most republicans on this board want they would be a half decent party
I think the main problem with this is
But I think the panic you'd get... and it's not without reason I'm sure, is that it's hard to reconcile intellectualism with the pandering to just the opposite that a significant third or more of the GOP base requires in order to hit the polls. That whole crowd Sarah Palin hugely energized-- how do you get them with some soft spoken, intellectual Constitutional law scholar? And having to tell them, like spoiled children, no, you can't use law like just a bludgeon to legalize what you like and criminalize what you don't like, that that's not what conservative principles are about?
There seems to be a huge base essential to conservative electoral success which almost seems anti-intellectual, i thought it was intresting that college educated males went mainly to obama, of the different groups they discussed only white males without a college education went more for mccain than obama (the groups were blacks, hispanics, college education and not college educated)
They should revive the Tory party. A mixture of old-school Toryism and economic liberalism would probably be quite popular on both sides of the water.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
Can't answer because my answer isn't up there. It depends on what the Obama Administration does. If it turns out to be a true bipartisan group that really does try to represent the entire country, not just the 52% that elected them, then the Republicans will have to go back to conservative basics because there will be nothing else for them to run on. If Obama turns out to be a typical partisan politician, they can continue as they have been and will win or lose based on Obama's performance.
What the Republicans need to do, first and foremost, is assure that November 4th, 2008, is the high-water mark for the Democrat Party.
Obama may have a very long honeymoon with the public after winning a victory that was refreshingly easy after the past two razor-close elections. However, Obama will not be up for re-election in 2010. The heavily Democratic Congress will. From experience, Pelosi and Reid will probably be eager to flex their new muscles for two years and ram through a bunch of legislation. The Republicans, having dodged a bullet in the Senate by making sure the Dems didn't get 60, will be able to block the worst bits of legislation but won't have anything remotely resembling a mandate to do so, meaning they are still essentially at the mercy of the Dems.
Mainly, the Republicans need to not lose any more seats in 2010, either holding steady or (preferably) gain a couple. Nothing large, just setting up for later years. They cannot afford to come any closer to Magic 60.
In 2012 (and starting years before), they need to really work hard to mount a serious challenge for the Presidency. By that time, the honeymoon for Obama will almost certainly have waned and the Republicans would do well to mount a legitimate threat. I think the best option for this would be Bobby Jindal, currently the Governor of Louisiana. Jindal, an Indian-American, will blow the "Republicans are only the party of older white men" stereotype out of the water. He has a proven track record as Governor, competantly preparing Louisiana for Hurricane Gustav, which, as you may have noticed, did not catastrophically impact the state. I think Jindal, with a Biden-like figure as his running mate, say George Voinovich, could really make some inroads. Even if Jindal loses, the Republicans need to make a serious dent in the Democratic majority in Congress in 2012.
We're looking at 2014 for the year that Congress is reclaimed. If the Republicans get Jindal in, keep preaching the needs of fiscal conservatism (which will ring true under four years of Obama, Reid, and Pelosi), the best-case scenario is the Republicans knocking Obama out of office in four years for a competant, nontraditional (for them) candidate and then taking Congress in 2014.
That is the path they need to follow. But I think we'll see very early on, maybe within a few months, if this is where they'll head or not.
How the GOP does in the future depends mainly on how the Dems handle their newly acquired power. If they overreach, 2010 will swing more seats to the GOP. Pelosi will probably be the GOP's best friend. If the Dems act responsibly over the next two years, the GOP will have a hard time regaining ground.