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.
Nonsense, winning swing voters wins elections. Winning the nation's smallest base (for the math challenged, larger base beats smaller base every time unless smaller captures overwhelming majority of swing voters not part of a base) has cost the GOP 5 of the last 6 popular votes.
Yeppers. And to whomever the poster was further back in this thread who said the Tea Party isn't as much of a factor as everyone says, here's proof that the TP is as strong as ever:
"WASHINGTON — For the past two years, Republican senators facing re-election have very deliberately spent millions of dollars, hired multiple consultants and cast scores of conservative votes with one goal in mind: avoiding the embarrassing primary conflagrations that befell their party in 2010 and 2012 and cost Republicans a chance at taking back the Senate.
It has not worked. Despite their careful efforts, some of the best-known and most influential Republicans in the Senate have been unable to shake threats from the right and have attracted rivals who portray these lawmakers as a central part of the problem in Washington.
In Kentucky, Mitch McConnell, the party’s Senate leader, is fending off a charismatic and wealthy conservative challenger. In South Carolina, Lindsey Graham, one of the Senate’s most reliably conservative voices on foreign policy, is being painted by primary opponents as a veritable clone of President Obama.
In Tennessee, Tea Party activists have vowed to take out Lamar Alexander, the veteran senator, former cabinet officer and two-time presidential candidate. “Senator Alexander has never been a true conservative,” said Ben Cunningham, president of the Nashville Tea Party. “His support for the amnesty bill has caused great problems for us,” he said, referring to the Senate immigration bill. “He is at best a moderate.”
Tea Party candidates have also emerged in races against Democratic incumbents in Alaska — Joe Miller, who beat Senator Lisa Murkowski in her last primary, has resurfaced — Colorado, Louisiana and North Dakota, and for open seats in Georgia, Iowa and South Dakota. Democrats hope they can benefit from a divided Republican electorate."
Yeppers. And to whomever the poster was further back in this thread who said the Tea Party isn't as much of a factor as everyone says, here's proof that the TP is as strong as ever."
LOL-the TP/GOP got trashed in 2012..re-electing the POTUS with the highest unemployment rate for a successful 2nd run in SEVERAL decades, with 14.7% U6, 2% GDP.
The TP can win backwoods, rural, inbred Congressional districts (the higher the illiteracy rate, the easier their path is), but it has caused the national demise of the once respectable GOP..single-handedly.
It'll be tough. The by the time a candidate gets through the tea bagger, bible thumpers in the primary, he or she is so compromised that it's hard for them to win a general election. Also, by this time the educated, intelligent and neutral people in the country get an impression that R stands for REALLY crazy.
It'll be tough. The by the time a candidate gets through the tea bagger, bible thumpers in the primary, he or she is so compromised that it's hard for them to win a general election. Also, by this time the educated, intelligent and neutral people in the country get an impression that R stands for REALLY crazy.
, and that is strictly the fault of the TP. Pre TP, the GOP had a solid reputation amongst independent voters, who decide every single national election.
The TP did more for Barack Obama than David Axelrod ever could. They are solely responsible for his second term.
Make No Mistake: When a nominee advocates self-deportation, R does stand for REALLY crazy. It is up to true Republicans, the kind that existed before the TP jumped onto their bandwagon in an attempt to not appear luny, to retake the reins, and the TP could than run as a 3rd party if they wish. Just like Perot's people, a few cycles, and the trash (aka TP) would be ignored..every bit as much as the Green Party.
It'll be tough if you count the electoral votes of states that have voted Dem since 2000 they add up to around 240 electoral votes. The GOP candidate will have to flip a big traditional Blue state (PA, MI, or WI) and capture 3 of the 4 of Ohio, Florida, Virginia and Colorado. My math may be off because I'm working off memory but needless to say the odds for a GOP presedential win in '16 are not favorable.
, and that is strictly the fault of the TP. Pre TP, the GOP had a solid reputation amongst independent voters, who decide every single national election.
The TP did more for Barack Obama than David Axelrod ever could. They are solely responsible for his second term.
Make No Mistake: When a nominee advocates self-deportation, R does stand for REALLY crazy. It is up to true Republicans, the kind that existed before the TP jumped onto their bandwagon in an attempt to not appear luny, to retake the reins, and the TP could than run as a 3rd party if they wish. Just like Perot's people, a few cycles, and the trash (aka TP) would be ignored..every bit as much as the Green Party.
BS PA, MI and WI have been reliably Blue since what 1988. The Tea Party is irrelevant to why the GOP loses. An argument could be made that the GOP is not conservative enough thus many voters it needs simply sit out.
It'll be tough if you count the electoral votes of states that have voted Dem since 2000 they add up to around 240 electoral votes. The GOP candidate will have to flip a big traditional Blue state (PA, MI, or WI) and capture 3 of the 4 of Ohio, Florida, Virginia and Colorado. My math may be off because I'm working off memory but needless to say the odds for a GOP presedential win in '16 are not favorable.
its hard for a party to win the WH 3 times in a row.......Republicans won the wh in 2000 & 2004 and the democrats won in 2008 ans 2012.
Obama won by less votes and less states in 2012 than 2008......meaning Obama didn;t expand the base which is odd for a President winning re-election.
Americans get tired of a party after 2 election cycles in power and things are not going well......2016 is no lock for the democrats.
its hard for a party to win the WH 3 times in a row.......Republicans won the wh in 2000 & 2004 and the democrats won in 2008 ans 2012.
Obama won by less votes and less states in 2012 than 2008......meaning Obama didn;t expand the base which is odd for a President winning re-election.
Americans get tired of a party after 2 election cycles in power and things are not going well......2016 is no lock for the democrats.
I think the rapidly changing demographics may make history less significant. I also see a distinct possibility that a Republican could win as much as 52 percent of the popular vote, but still not get the 270EV.
Obama won by less votes and less states in 2012 than 2008......meaning Obama didn;t expand the base which is odd for a President winning re-election.
.
2012 was a 100 plus electoral vote BO victory-with all 19 blue states since 1988 intact, plus VA, NM, it was over before it began.
The hard right has its head in the sand.
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.
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.
, and that is strictly the fault of the TP. Pre TP, the GOP had a solid reputation amongst independent voters, who decide every single national election.
