Internal GOP study finds party in disrepair...?

[kidkaos2]

Originally Posted by Jaggy001

I have been reading your posts and you do a very good job of defending the Republican party and pointing out inconsistencies in the Democratic position.

The problem is that you are not identifying the reason the Republicans have an electoral problem and you are not talking about how to fix that.

I did a long post about that in another thread. In my view the essentials of the problem are twofold:
1. Allowing too much Democrat propaganda to go by unconfronted. I have a feeling that Republican strategist hear something completely absurd said about Republicans and assume that its absurdity will mean nobody pays attention to it. And they may be right for any one given accusation. But something untrue said 1,000 times eventually starts to sink in when you never counter it.
2. Republicans need to do a better job of communicating the idea that providing opportunity helps everyone. We need to make it crystal clear to the unemployed person that we don't advocate removing regulations on a corporation so they can make money while you're barely scraping by. We want to remove regulation so the business can expand and give you a good job. We're not against ever more education spending because we're against education. We're against it because it prevents taking a hard look at the money we are spending and doing serious reforms to make sure the system itself works well. Expanding a broken system isn't going to help. Fixing the system is going to help. We aren't against Obamacare because we don't want people to have medical care. We're against Obamacare because we think it's going to do more harm that good, and we want to reform the problems with insurance instead of simply putting more people on an insurance system that isn't working right to begin with. We're not against giving aid to poor people. We're against giving them a simple monthly check that does nothing but enable them to stay poor. We want to give them job opportunities, not just a few dollars a month. Stuff like that. The problem isn't that we are racist greedy rich people. The problem is that we've let that narrative take hold. That's the popular perception of Republicans and we haven't done anything to change that perception.

There are constituencies in this country that the GOP is simply not going to win over. But, by the same token, there are constituencies that can be won over and particularly the 20% or so of Americans who occupy the center ground and who, traditionally, decide elections. And it is the behavior of the GOP that is the turn-off here.

I agree with that. But where I disagree is that the problem behavior is that we don't support enough entitlements, which is what many people have been saying. We don't need to win people over by supporting more special laws to appeal to different demographics. We need to change our behavior by targeting those demographics and showing how they aren't just blacks or women or hispanics. They are Americans, and things that help America help Americans. A colorblind mentality is what we should have. That's the way to equality. The Democrat way of pandering to each different demographic is the way of keeping America permanently divided. That may give each different demographic some short term benefit, but it isn't the way to help America face the future. And there's no better proof of that than how 50 years of overwhelming support for Democrats among blacks hasn't helped the black community. Blacks are just as smart and just as capable as whites. The message to them should be that they can achieve things, they can have a good life, there is education for them, there are nice houses for them, they are every bit as American and entitled to the American dream as whites are. The message to them should not be the Democrat message that people want to bring back slavery and Jim Crow and hang them from trees. That's damaging, not helpful. That's exploiting them. That's playing on fear and resentment.

Romney was not a strong candidate for a number of reasons. But middle America could have lived with him. But it was the rest of the baggage the GOP brought with it that lost the election. The attacks on women, the risk to Medicare that Paul Ryan brought with him, the pandering to the right wing of the GOP.

We cannot afford not to pander to the right wing. There are more votes among social conservatives than we have a hope of wooing away from the left right now. The religious nutcases are a necessary evil at the moment. Dropping them would not win Republicans more votes than the GOP would lose. I agree with the Big Tent philosophy of trying to incorporate new people and new ideas without jettisoning the old. Yet. The day will come when we can say gays are going to get married whether you like it or not. But we can't afford to alienate those people yet. Right now what we can do is say "opposing gay marriage is not who we are". Later we can say "we support gay marriage". We don't have a big enough base without the social conservatives to alienate them. The Democrats are already pursuing this - they've got unions supporting them and environmentalists supporting them at the same time even when the environmentalists and unions are against each other. That's what we need to do too. Widen our base, not change it.

This was not an election that Obama won. This was an election that the GOP lost. And the reason you lost it was a perceived lurch to the right and especially on social issues. You need to get out of the bedroom and focus on fiscal conservatism is you want to fix your electoral problem.

We didn't get into the bedroom. That perception is another narrative driven by Democrats. There never was a sudden War on Women. There was an opinion saying that government shouldn't be mandating free contraceptives. Democrats changed that into "conservatives want to ban contraceptives". We don't. We just want them to have the same copay that all other medicine has. And the same religious exemption that they've had throughout history. That's not a War on Women, that's simply freedom. So that's more of what I said above, where Republicans aren't responding effectively to Democrat attacks. Democrats were the ones telling people what they should and shouldn't do with all their mandates, but Republicans let those Democrats get away with portraying themselves as being the ones supporting freedom. Mandating a Catholic to buy birth control for someone is violating the civil rights of that Catholic. It's the opposite of freedom. Nobody's saying a woman can't get birth control, just saying it isn't the government's place to order someone to buy it when that person doesn't want to. As far as the homosexual part of it, I already addressed that - I consider that element of the party distasteful but necessary right now.

Edit .... Oh, and another thing ... stop obstructing Congress. Start working with the President. Do you know how much your partisanship pisses off middle America?

And again, that's Democrat narrative. They introduce no buget for 4 years, refuse to even negotiate on one with Republicans, then go on the news and say Republicans are obstructing getting a budget done. And when Bush was president (senior, not junior) and the Democrats were the one who threatened to shut down government unless the President agreed to their terms, where was the "obstructive partisan" talk then? Nowhere. It wasn't Republicans who said "elections have consequences, I won" it was Obama. Obama got all the debt ceiling increase he wanted and the Republicans got only 20% of the spending cuts they were asking for. The biggest reform to healthcare in American history was done without a single Republican vote and without a single Republican writing one word of the legislation. That's bipartisanship? I don't think so. Republicans gave Obama the tax cut expiration he wanted and he said we'd talk about budget cuts in a few months. A few months later, instead of having the talks he said he would, he's going around the country making speeches about how this horrible sequester (that he proposed and threatened to veto attempts to get around) was all the Republicans' fault. In speeches Democrats refer to "spending cuts" purely to programs they wanted to cut in the first place. They accept no cuts to anything they don't want to cut. So we'll be glad to compromise. But we're not going to abandon all our principles. The "compromise" that's asked for is always 100% Republican compromise. The Democrats offer nothing. The problem here is a sympathetic mass media apart from Fox News and the extra-large microphone the President has compared to any other politician. All the talk is Republican compromise, Republican compromise, Republican compromise with no mention of the fact that Democrats aren't offering anything in compromise themselves.

[mateo45]

The notion that Republican failures are largely just a matter of superior "propaganda" by lib-ruls is preposterous on the face of it. But even if that were so, the Right Wing carries so much toxic PR and negative baggage on their own, that they might as well be double-agents working for the Dems!

[Mr. Mon]

Originally Posted by kidkaos2

I
We cannot afford not to pander to the right wing. There are more votes among social conservatives than we have a hope of wooing away from the left right now. The religious nutcases are a necessary evil at the moment. Dropping them would not win Republicans more votes than the GOP would lose. I agree with the Big Tent philosophy of trying to incorporate new people and new ideas without jettisoning the old. Yet. The day will come when we can say gays are going to get married whether you like it or not. But we can't afford to alienate those people yet. Right now what we can do is say "opposing gay marriage is not who we are". Later we can say "we support gay marriage". We don't have a big enough base without the social conservatives to alienate them. The Democrats are already pursuing this - they've got unions supporting them and environmentalists supporting them at the same time even when the environmentalists and unions are against each other. That's what we need to do too. Widen our base, not change it.

So it really is party uber alles. This is nothing more than supporting a political party just like you do a football team. You're admitting that your party is full of bigots, religious fundamentalists, and misogynists, but you need them in order to garner votes so it's okay. You've admitted that your party's platform and candidates are so out of synch with the middle of America that you have to pander to some of the worst elements of human nature to win elections. I applaud your honesty, but wow.... Just wow.

We didn't get into the bedroom. That perception is another narrative driven by Democrats.
There never was a sudden War on Women. There was an opinion saying that government shouldn't be mandating free contraceptives. Democrats changed that into "conservatives want to ban contraceptives". We don't. We just want them to have the same copay that all other medicine has. And the same religious exemption that they've had throughout history. That's not a War on Women, that's simply freedom.

So are transvaginal ultrasound wands now to be referred to as "Freedom sticks?"

As far as the homosexual part of it, I already addressed that - I consider that element of the party distasteful but necessary right now.

Again, wow.

The biggest reform to healthcare in American history was done without a single Republican vote and without a single Republican writing one word of the legislation. That's bipartisanship?

We don't have a public option in the ACA because of Republican demands. Heck, we have a individual mandate because of Republican policy.

I don't think so. Republicans gave Obama the tax cut expiration he wanted and he said we'd talk about budget cuts in a few months. A few months later, instead of having the talks he said he would, he's going around the country making speeches about how this horrible sequester (that he proposed and threatened to veto attempts to get around) was all the Republicans' fault. In speeches Democrats refer to "spending cuts" purely to programs they wanted to cut in the first place. They accept no cuts to anything they don't want to cut. So we'll be glad to compromise. But we're not going to abandon all our principles. The "compromise" that's asked for is always 100% Republican compromise. The Democrats offer nothing. The problem here is a sympathetic mass media apart from Fox News and the extra-large microphone the President has compared to any other politician. All the talk is Republican compromise, Republican compromise, Republican compromise with no mention of the fact that Democrats aren't offering anything in compromise themselves.

The sequester does have consequences. Give it a few months. It won't be as devastating as Obama has been saying, but it will sting.

I'd never claim that the Democratic Party isn't full of duplicitous jerks who are prone to identity politics and are also beholden to special interests, but your post has summarized almost everything that's wrong with the current Republican Party. It's all about power and conscience be damned they'll do what it takes to pursue a very narrow agenda by reaching out not to the middle of America, but the most extreme of its citizens.

Party Uber Alles!

[Iamme73]

conservatives hate millions of Americans. This is coming across to most Americans. conservatives view millions of Americans as takers as moochers and they say it everyday.

conservatives have zero ideas that people actually support.

The problem for conservatives is that the largest government programs are by far the most popular government programs. Social security, medicare, defense, and medicaid are all wildly popular. Big government is wildly popular based on objective reality.

This is why conservatives lie and speak in vague generalities about which programs they want to cut, because time and time again voters don't want those programs cut.

The conservative party wants to destroy those programs, ban abortion, ban affordable access to contraceptives, control the sexual behavior of women, punish immoral poor people, deny millions of people medical care, raise the taxes of the poorest Americans, teach pro American history, have pro American media, ignore racism, sexism, poverty, etc and so on.

The conservative party has very ugly ideas for the vast majority of Americans because they hate most Americans.

I know it sounds like a nightmare. I sounds like conservatives are hateful evil people. I don't know what's in their hearts, but it is time that more Americans started really paying attention to what conservatives say about Americans and their political ideas.

They are wrong and out there.

[MTAtech]

Originally Posted by Jaggy001

But we are talking about the Republicans and not the Democrats. Until the GOP are willing to confront why they lost the last election rather than pointing fingers and saying "but ... but ... they are worse" then they will continue to lose.

The problem with the GOP is their policies and their message is faulty only in that it accurately reflects their policies.

Those policies are protection of the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. This was most evident a few years ago when the GOP held up extension of unemployment insurance until the Bush tax-cuts were extended.

In the past, the GOP was able to put up a smoke screen and get the middle class to vote against their interests by inserting wedge issues into the mix. It can now longer do that, since most of America is now in favor of gays and wants some sort of regulation of guns.

The only rational response would be for the GOP to move back towards the center, instead of courting the ultra-conservatives who make up a fringe of the electorate. But they won't, they'll blame their losses on people like Romney being not conservative enough.

[tonyff67]

Originally Posted by logline

Tony, you and I are both white. We are privileged in multiple ways you don't ever see. No one silently or secretly takes our race into consideration when we apply for a loan, a job or approach someone in a dark alley.

The difference between us is that I recognize how privileged we are. You don't.

To complain about your whiteness is idiotic to the 10th degree. No one is saying it's bad to be white except you. The fact that you interpretted the study that way means you have no clue about what the GOP is saying. They are saying that the GOP is almost exclusively white and excludes many people of color. Need proof? Take a look at some random crowd shots of the biggest gathering of Republicans (the RNC). This crowd does not represent America:




I rest my case!

The GOP doesn't exclude them, people of color choose not to support them. I wasn't defending the GOP anyway. I'm just stating "white" is being used as a negative trait. I'm sure you've heard someone say"your too white". That's meant to be deragatory.

Being White has never been an advantage, in my experience. I will give just a few example, but I have Plenty more if you want them.

I grew up in Philadelphia. My father worked for the city. He studied everyday for a year to get a promotion. He did well and was promoted. 6 months later a judge decided there werent enough minorities in that position. They demoted all the white guys and promoted minorities, some didn't even pass the promotional test. A few minorities turned the promotion down, because they felt it was wrong what the city was doing. I thought that was pretty upstanding. I don't now if I would have turned it down. 3 years later my father retested and got position.

My parent couldn't afford for me to go to college. I tried getting grants, but was told they only have minority scholarships.
I tested for a job at Rohm & Haas chemical company. I scored 12 out of 400 hundred applicants. I was told I would be hired within 4 months. After a year, my father in law, who worked for the company, was told by personnel that they had to hire 1 minority and 1 woman for every one white male, and that my hiring may Never happen.
I had enough. I packed my belongings, which took 10 minutes, I moved to Fl.

The city of Tampa, under Pam Iorio, had a "minority only scholarship" program, and that was actually the name of the program. The program sent minorities through the police academy and fire academy for free. Theses classes cost the individual thousands of dollars. Worst part was, besides the discrimination, ex profession athletes were being put through this class. Some of these guys were making hundreds of thousands of dollars previously, but some poor white boy couldn't get any help.

I have Plenty more, just let me know if you'd like to hear them.
Just for the record I have No annomosity towards the people these programs assist. Hell, i even married a Hispanic woman. I am pretty pissed at the gov't for having such discriminatory programs.

Being white has never been an advantage for me. If it has been for you, then great, I'd Love to hear about those experiences, Or are basing your opinion on what the media tells you?
You were probably better off than me growing up or didn't grow up in an urban area.
Financial status has way more to do with privilege than skin color. An upper middle class black kid, is going to have a bigger advantage in life, than a lower middle class white kid.

I try to treat everyone with respect, but when my skin color becomes a metaphor for being "evil POS", I find it very frustrating.

My original post was suppossed to just make a quick point and be done with it. I didn't mean to get this far off topic.

[EugeneOnegin]

Originally Posted by kidkaos2

No, I'm not implying that. You're just being absurd.

So according to you, nothing a politician says influences how people vote? Is that what you're implying?

You wrote: What black person is going to vote Republican when the Vice President of the United States declares that Republicans want to put black people back in chains?

The implied answer to your rhetorical question is that very few are going to vote Republican because of this claim (and presumably others like it). Logically, if very few black people would be willing to vote Republican because of these claims, it follows that most black people can't think for themselves or make their own decisions, otherwise they would vote independently.

You are arguing that black people overwhelmingly vote Democrat because they believe Democrat propaganda. They don't vote for Republicans because Democrats lie to them. So then why do white people not overwhelmingly vote Democrat? White people can see through this Democrat propaganda and make their own independent voting decisions but black people can't?

[Goober13]

Originally Posted by tonyff67

I love how being "white" has a negative Connotation. I'm tired of being considered some kind of low life because I'm white. I should be able to be just as proud to be white, as a black person is to be black, or a Hispanic person is of being Hispanic. Funny, how using Black skin as a negative trait would be considered racist, but white skin portrayed as a negative trait is perfectly acceptable.

Just needed to rant!

Being white is not a negative. Being a conservative or racist white person is. Being any color is not a negative. But the Republican Party is using good old fashioned racist fears on white people to get the vote of naive, racist, or fearful whites, so that they can get in office, drain the government resources, privatize everything by creating a plutocracy, and putting all the government money in their pocket.

And a majority of white VOTERS are Republican. And there are more male white Republicans than female, and more single white women who are progressive. I am black, and have many friends of all races. Every white person isn't a Republican, but those who are, are voting for a party that is jeopardizing this country.

[dreamofmonterey]

Great thread OP

GOP continues to be clueless on womens issues. They prove this anytime they wheel out Meghan McSame or palin in a Superman t-shirt. LOL.

The GOP has utter contempt for American citizens. Romney attending Easthampton NY for fundraising is a case in point.

They are completely out of touch with reality in this country. Perhaps they should just move to Maui and start a new serfdom. Problem is, no one will want to live there once they establish residence.

[tonyff67]

Originally Posted by Goober13

Being white is not a negative. Being a conservative or racist white person is

You realize this generalization is pretty bigoted!
So, because I believe I should pay less in a taxes, I'm a racist? I don't even know how to respond to that.


Sorry, but just because someone is white and conservative doesn't make them a racist.

I think if your black and democrat, you hate white people. You see how stupid that sounds?