U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-02-2012, 06:30 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,677 posts, read 16,457,812 times
Reputation: 7274

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
But until the Republicans can show that they can lead, not just oppose, they are in for a long losing streak ahead. Right now, they are acting just like the Democrats did in 1972, and Obama is not Nixon. Carter's election was a given, considering the damage Nixon did to his party.

The Democrats will still be as strong as they are now in 2016. The Republicans only have 2 years to get their act together. That's a pretty tall order, considering their shrinking base, but it could happen. There is always someone out in the wings who can seize the public's imagination.
Very good post, and the comparison is valid, as Carter's narrow 1976 win was largely due to how weak his party was than. It was very similar to 2012 in reverse, the Dems held all the cards coming in as the damage Nixon had done was still fresh. The GOP this year had tons of cards; 7.9% unemp, 14.7% U6, 2% known than GDP, 1.6 trill deficit, and they took it a step further than Carter. They managed to get squashed from an electoral standpoint.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-02-2012, 08:47 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
19,379 posts, read 13,045,292 times
Reputation: 14092
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn View Post
Very good post, and the comparison is valid, as Carter's narrow 1976 win was largely due to how weak his party was than. It was very similar to 2012 in reverse, the Dems held all the cards coming in as the damage Nixon had done was still fresh. The GOP this year had tons of cards; 7.9% unemp, 14.7% U6, 2% known than GDP, 1.6 trill deficit, and they took it a step further than Carter. They managed to get squashed from an electoral standpoint.
Yup. Carter's election was another time when the voters wanted a fresh face because they were sick and tired of Washington.
With the resignation of Spiro Agnew just before Nixon's resignation, the Republicans were left completely rudderless. Jerry Ford was a good and honest man, but he took the V.P. appointment out of loyalty to his party much more than any desire to become President.

He was never happy as President, either, and he just didn't want the job that much when he ran for the same reasons he accepted the Vice Presidency. But to this day, I believe he would have done a better job than Carter; I voted for him back then, and then for Reagan.

Carter was as insular as GW Bush, but weaker in both the command of his party and in his personality. Nixon handed the Democrats one, but the party back then was like the Republicans are now; they didn't know what to do, or who to listen to, and they were very divided as to who they wanted as a leader. It took 12 more years for them to get their act together.

And even then, it took another 8 years to build the inter-party discipline that the Republicans had. Without Howard Dean, that discipline would have never happened. Dean saw what was needed, and set about putting it together, both as an organizer and a party philosopher. While he didn't get far as a candidate, his ideas took root and grew.

I don't see any Republican equivalent to Howard Dean now. I don't think guys like him come along very often. And guys like Obama, who understood everything Dean did and took it all much further, are as rare. A person such as Obama showing up just when the voters craved a fresh face, with a full groundwork firmly in place behind him, is ever more rare still.

Bill Clinton was able to win by the force of his personality. Obama won both times by the strength of his planning and his resolve to do the best for the nation. I knew he would get beat up after 2008; for a long time, I doubted he would want to run again for a second term. I'm glad he did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 07:22 AM
 
Location: Charlotte NC
11,360 posts, read 8,888,979 times
Reputation: 4965
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike0618 View Post
If it takes over 8 yrs to recover from the so called super damage done by bush... Biggest con job ever was done by obama... Dems look for the hook in your mouth because you have been hooked deep!

If a president cant recover the country in 8 yrs it is not because of the previous president... ITS BECAUSE OF HIM!
nah... the biggest con job is thinking W didn't do that much damage to begin with and thinking Obama would stop everything W started on day 1.

Can't pick up and leave these countries we are fighting in because the money is too good...
Can't pimp slap the banks because they run the country..

etc..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 09:08 AM
 
Location: Sonoran Desert
27,898 posts, read 37,916,030 times
Reputation: 17436
Don't count the Republicans out. They will be back when they find their roots, when they start listening to Rush and not to the Dems about what they should do. The Democrats have the votes of the atheists, the moochers, the lazy, the welfare queens, the sexual deviates, and the illegal aliens. There is no way the Republicans will win by trying to get those votes. They need to appeal the moral majority, the sensible, the hard-working producers in the country and they will find themselves back on top just like in 2010. No more phoney conservatives like Romney!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 09:48 AM
 
Location: Charlotte NC
11,360 posts, read 8,888,979 times
Reputation: 4965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa View Post
Don't count the Republicans out. They will be back when they find their roots, when they start listening to Rush and not to the Dems about what they should do. The Democrats have the votes of the atheists, the moochers, the lazy, the welfare queens, the sexual deviates, and the illegal aliens. There is no way the Republicans will win by trying to get those votes. They need to appeal the moral majority, the sensible, the hard-working producers in the country and they will find themselves back on top just like in 2010. No more phoney conservatives like Romney!
lol... when they do the exact opposite of what you suggested they will have a chance to win. When you demonize the other side and call their voters a bunch of ignorant names how the heck do you expect to gain votes? Do you really think ultra conservatives stayed home because they thought Obama was better then Romney?

Every group you listed is already part of the GOP except for the illegal aliens.

...and I can't understand why the GOP thinks people who came here illegally and keep a low profile would waltz into a voting station.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 09:59 AM
 
Location: NJ
18,677 posts, read 16,457,812 times
Reputation: 7274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa View Post
Don't count the Republicans out. They will be back when they find their roots, when they start listening to Rush and not to the Dems about what they should do. The Democrats have the votes of the atheists, the moochers, the lazy, the welfare queens, the sexual deviates, and the illegal aliens. There is no way the Republicans will win by trying to get those votes. They need to appeal the moral majority, the sensible, the hard-working producers in the country and they will find themselves back on top just like in 2010. No more phoney conservatives like Romney!

You are funny. That was your intent, right? Newsflash: You must be math challenged, Independents decide elections, not Dems nor Repubs. Those two offset each other.

Independents hate both the MSNBC's and Fox/Rush news outlets, by and large, as they hate propoganda.

The longer the GOP delays before going back to appealing to independents, the longer they lose when running for POTUS.

Mitt won evangelicals and the white vote by the same % as Reagan 1984. Reagan by running a more moderate campaign and governing that way (9 tax increases during his 8 years despite all the conservative hype-aka Revenue Enhancements per Ronnie), won the independent vote, by a sizeable margin. Add in Latinos were less than a third of their present 10% voting block.

Had he lost that block, Carter and Mondale win in 1980 and 1984.

PS, For every 2 voters in an off year, there is a THIRD in a POTUS election year. Changes the demographics to a far more diverse, representative of 2012 America voting block in years with a POTUS race. Comparing 2010 to 2012, 2016, 2020, etc is a red herring. (40% turnout in 2010, around 60% every POTUS election).

Last edited by bobtn; 12-04-2012 at 10:25 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 10:25 AM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,367 posts, read 8,278,836 times
Reputation: 5906
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn View Post
You are funny. That was your intent, right? Newsflash: You must be math challenged, Independents decide elections, not Dems nor Repubs. Those two offset each other.

Independents hate both the MSNBC's and Fox/Rush news outlets, by and large, as they hate propoganda.

The longer the GOP delays before going back to appealing to independents, the longer they lose when running for POTUS.

Mitt won evangelicals and the white vote by the same % as Reagan 1984. Reagan by running a more moderate campaign and governing that way (9 tax increases during his 8 years despite all the conservative hype-aka Revenue Enhancements per Ronnie), won the independent vote, by a sizeable margin. Add in Latinos were less than a third of their present 10% voting block.

Had he lost that block, Carter and Mondale win in 1980 and 1984.

PS, For every 2 voters in an off year, there is a THIRD in a POTUS election year. Changes the demographics to a far more diverse, representative of 2012 America voting block in years with a POTUS race. Comparing 2010 to 2012, 2016, 2020, etc is a red herring.
Yep, and even in office, Reagan never gave more than lip service to the social conservatives anyway. Except they and the neo-cons have since become sold on their own rhetoric and the right wing media that makes a buck off 'em, so now they've gotten kinda "uppity" within the GOP. Obama also did a smart thing by labeling Limbaugh early-on as the ''leader'' of the Republican Party. So the more ''vocal'' and nutty we can 'help' the RWNJ's get, the harder the GOP has to work not to be ''mis-underestimated''!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 10:36 AM
 
Location: NJ
18,677 posts, read 16,457,812 times
Reputation: 7274
Quote:
Originally Posted by mateo45 View Post
. Except they and the neo-cons have since become sold on their own rhetoric and the right wing media that makes a buck off 'em, so now they've gotten kinda "uppity" within the GOP.
But they got shellacked. You mean Beck, Hannity, Rush all lied! Oh, heavens!!

Surely, they will try to repeal women's right to vote. What other avenue is left for them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 10:39 AM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,482 posts, read 8,517,210 times
Reputation: 2525
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringTheContent View Post
Since we have to have a presidential election in 2016, what party will take on the Democrats?
I ask since the Democratic party is the only party left at this point in the USA.
My feeling is that if a new party does not step forward to replace the former Republican party then President Obama should be allowed to stay on for a third term.
So I ask you, if there is in fact a new party ready to step up to the plate in 2016, knowing that they will not be the Republican party, who will they be... Or, are we ready to accept the fact that Mr. Obama should stay on until at least 2020? I think he should, based on the amount of damage that has been done. What do you think?
None there will be no america left
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Charlotte NC
11,360 posts, read 8,888,979 times
Reputation: 4965
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
Yup. Carter's election was another time when the voters wanted a fresh face because they were sick and tired of Washington.
With the resignation of Spiro Agnew just before Nixon's resignation, the Republicans were left completely rudderless. Jerry Ford was a good and honest man, but he took the V.P. appointment out of loyalty to his party much more than any desire to become President.

He was never happy as President, either, and he just didn't want the job that much when he ran for the same reasons he accepted the Vice Presidency. But to this day, I believe he would have done a better job than Carter; I voted for him back then, and then for Reagan.

Carter was as insular as GW Bush, but weaker in both the command of his party and in his personality. Nixon handed the Democrats one, but the party back then was like the Republicans are now; they didn't know what to do, or who to listen to, and they were very divided as to who they wanted as a leader. It took 12 more years for them to get their act together.

And even then, it took another 8 years to build the inter-party discipline that the Republicans had. Without Howard Dean, that discipline would have never happened. Dean saw what was needed, and set about putting it together, both as an organizer and a party philosopher. While he didn't get far as a candidate, his ideas took root and grew.

I don't see any Republican equivalent to Howard Dean now. I don't think guys like him come along very often. And guys like Obama, who understood everything Dean did and took it all much further, are as rare. A person such as Obama showing up just when the voters craved a fresh face, with a full groundwork firmly in place behind him, is ever more rare still.

Bill Clinton was able to win by the force of his personality. Obama won both times by the strength of his planning and his resolve to do the best for the nation. I knew he would get beat up after 2008; for a long time, I doubted he would want to run again for a second term. I'm glad he did.
In 2004 a coworker and good friend (who is a GOP Rush loving idiot, lol) said he was going home to see a guy named Obama give a speech at the DNC. This is the first time I had ever hear of him and a white guy who isn't a fan of the DNC was excited to hear him speak and predicted he would be the best chance for the country having a black president.

I went home and watched the speech and dammit... I was standing and clapping like a parent at a school play and I said to myself "self, this guy can be POTUS on day"

The closest thing the GOP has is Rubio... and he gave a damn good speech at the RNC but guess what blew him out of the news. An empty chair and Clint. Whoever set that stupid thing up should be banned by the GOP.

I'm not a fan of the GOP but I think our country works best when we have some balance, whether it's real or imagined. The GOP has to stop putting unrealistic expectations on wingnuts like Rick Perry or that zombie Fred Thompson and get behind Rubio...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top