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.
Great article. It's hard to believe it was written by a Republican. He sees the reality his party is facing, even if few here do. My favorite line:
"We’re about to get two years of intense, horrifying stupidity."
This is the reason I wasn't upset by the midterm results. It's a short two reprieve for the right, one in which all their stupidity will be on full out display, and they will have no Democratic Senate to use as a scapegoat when they fail to get anything done. It's going to be fun to watch.
Contain yourself. Not everyone thinks gridlock is a bad thing.
Link froze on me, but I did read most of it. Didn't Scott Walker just win 52-46, and WI is on his 'blue wall' of states that Republicans cannot possibly win.
One point he makes I do agree with--the GOP needs to erase the perception of being a whites-only party, but I think we are doing that. Reince Priebus understands this very well, and is doing a good job of addressing it. Apparently this writer not aware of that. Maybe he needs to do more reading, and less writing.
As I've posted elsewhere the obsession with electoral map is dumb. In 54 of 57 (94.7%) presidential elections the winner of the popular vote also won the electoral vote.
We don't even know who the candidates will be in 2016. Anyone who claims to be able to predict that one party or the other is sure to win just imploded their own credibility.
Link froze on me, but I did read most of it. Didn't Scott Walker just win 52-46, and WI is on his 'blue wall' of states that Republicans cannot possibly win.
One point he makes I do agree with--the GOP needs to erase the perception of being a whites-only party, but I think we are doing that. Reince Priebus understands this very well, and is doing a good job of addressing it. Apparently this writer not aware of that. Maybe he needs to do more reading, and less writing.
As I've posted elsewhere the obsession with electoral map is dumb. In 54 of 57 (94.7%) presidential elections the winner of the popular vote also won the electoral vote.
We don't even know who the candidates will be in 2016. Anyone who claims to be able to predict that one party or the other is sure to win just imploded their own credibility.
If people still think its a "whites only" party, they need to look at Mia Love and Tim Scott.
Great article. It's hard to believe it was written by a Republican. He sees the reality his party is facing, even if few here do. My favorite line:
"We’re about to get two years of intense, horrifying stupidity."
This is the reason I wasn't upset by the midterm results. It's a short two reprieve for the right, one in which all their stupidity will be on full out display, and they will have no Democratic Senate to use as a scapegoat when they fail to get anything done. It's going to be fun to watch.
This isn't news.
The mooches that are too lazy to show up for midterm elections outnumber those of us trying to save the nation from fiscal self-destruction.
They'll be back in 2016 to vote themselves more unearned money from the federal treasury by supporting Democrats and this will likely continue as it has many times in history until there is no more money to print, beg, steal or borrow.
So typical. It was a smear job, and they wanted to get the maximum mileage out of it.
As for the blog article. Very interesting. I have been of two opinions with this election. It seems like only good sport to congratulate the winners, which I have done. However, something seemed kind of hollow about it. And all the folks claiming it was a super mandate seemed over the top. It seemed more like it was a convincing win in a very favorable election year, with low turnout. Most of the seats won were in red states, which had been gerrymandered such that they were not really competitive. 2016 looks to be even more slanted toward the dems, and so they will likely roll things back and then some.
The more important message, that I have seen few on the right admit, is that the GOP model of relentless negativity, of cooking up phony crises, scandals, being anti-science, and holding endless show votes on the ACA, Benghazi,etc. coupled with little interest in doing their actual jobs make them look like complete idiots and phonies. And no matter how much hate they pour on Obama, it only works with their base. Everyone else is disgusted, and it only takes a nanosecond to realize they have no intelligent ideas or policies to replace Obama's. I think the article was a powerful critique, but I will be amazed if any of the posters here acknowledge it.
Smear job???? It exonerated the admin, and Hillary Clinton in particular. How is that a smear job? Anyway the insertion of Benghazi into this debate is a red herring, IMO. Benghazi is an issue that should be debated all on it's own (unfortunately mods closed the thread on it).
I do think the GOP Congress now will have to get past the posturing. They'll have to chart a course of action on immigration, and on Obamacare. I heard Michael Medved make this exact point several days ago. But the 114th Congress has not yet convened. Let's not lambast them too much over their supposed "model" before they've even spent one day in office.
BTW let's not forget too that the 133th GOP House did have some good accomplishments. Total outlays (inflation adjusted) actually went down two years in a row, which in DC is like the sun coming up on the wrong side of the planet. The Murray-Ryan deal was also decent, IMO.
If people still think its a "whites only" party, they need to look at Mia Love and Tim Scott.
True, and as I said, I think the party is doing a good job on that front. And this is where the writer seems to be lacking in awareness.
It is necessarily a slow process. But I think it was the main reason that Romney lost. Romney won the white vote by 59%. Actually I think the perception has lagged behind the progress that the GOP has made, but Priebus is trying to fix that. And I'm confidant that he (and others) will.
Great article. It's hard to believe it was written by a Republican. He sees the reality his party is facing, even if few here do. My favorite line:
"We’re about to get two years of intense, horrifying stupidity."
This is the reason I wasn't upset by the midterm results. It's a short two reprieve for the right, one in which all their stupidity will be on full out display, and they will have no Democratic Senate to use as a scapegoat when they fail to get anything done. It's going to be fun to watch.
Wouldn't that be a reference to the stupidity of both parties? Didn't Obama go into full Emperor mode with this absolute a$$ kicking?
Hasn't he (Obama) been more of a ruler than a President?
The mooches that are too lazy to show up for midterm elections outnumber those of us trying to save the nation from fiscal self-destruction.
They'll be back in 2016 to vote themselves more unearned money from the federal treasury by supporting Democrats and this will likely continue as it has many times in history until there is no more money to print, beg, steal or borrow.
THIS^^^
Except! I don't trust the R's to follow through.
With that said:
Rand Paul 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by xboxmas
If people still think its a "whites only" party, they need to look at Mia Love and Tim Scott.
We ALL understand this race war (wars on anything) is nothing but a blatant hypocrisy! The Republican Party was conceived on the idea of racial equality. Ironic that the party of segregation became the party of their oppressed in less than a decade.
True, and as I said, I think the party is doing a good job on that front. And this is where the writer seems to be lacking in awareness.
It is necessarily a slow process. But I think it was the main reason that Romney lost. Romney won the white vote by 59%. Actually I think the perception has lagged behind the progress that the GOP has made, but Priebus is trying to fix that. And I'm confidant that he (and others) will.
That's true, but that group is stacked behind the red wall. For example, Romney won 89% of white males in Mississippi. 88% of white females in Mississippi. In Washington, Romney lost the white vote (50%-47% for men; 55%-44% for women). Outside the red wall states, the GOP isn't nearly as impressive with whites as the are behind the red wall. Look at Minnesota. Romney won white males 54%-41%, but lost women 56%-43% leading to Romney only winning a plurality of whites in Minnesota 49%-48% thanks to the fact that outside the red wall, white females show stronger support for the Democrats than behind the red wall.
New York state was similar, Romney won white males 55%-43% but lost white women 55%-44% leading to a push for overall white voters 49%-49%.
But the Democrats' success among minority voters is more evenly spread out among the states. They won 96% of the black vote in Mississippi and 96% of the black vote in Ohio (a state that Romney did well among both white males and females but was still below his national average among white females--Romney exceeded his average for whites among men and won white women, but not well enough to skew his overall vote among whites to come out at his national average--winning only 57% of the white vote in Ohio).
Alabama was similar to Mississippi, with only slightly lower percentages among white males and females but 96% of blacks voting for Obama.
In Colorado, a state that's a must-win for the GOP in 2016, Romney won whites (below his national average), but lost 75% of the Hispanic population, which accounts for 14% of the electorate. Romney ended up not only losing Colorado, he lost the total male and female vote in the state.
Virginia is even worse for the GOP. In spite of exceeding his national average for whites among white men and matching it with white women his relative weakness with white women and the strength of the minority vote (30% of the electorate), especially black women (who were 3% more of the electorate than black men and voted for Obama 5% higher than black men) still led to Romney losing the state thanks largely to the fact that he lost the overall female vote (the majority by 6%) in the state by 9 points while winning men by only 4.
All in all, in 2012 the GOP could match their average white vote among men outside the red wall in the swing states (behind the blue wall, Democrats often can win white women and either win white males or keep it very close), but rarely could match it with women. The strong white female support for Democrats, coupled with decisive victories among minority voters spelled doom for Romney in 2012 and will spell doom with the Republican candidate in 2016 especially if the Democratic candidate is Clinton, which will undoubtedly mean you won't gain anything among the white female demographic you decisively need to improve on in order to cancel out the Democrats' success among minority voters. There's just not enough white male votes left for you to get in the swing states still up for grabs and you're not going to flip blue wall states unless you do dramatically better among white women. And on top of all that, in 2016, the minority vote is likely to be a larger percentage of the electorate than it was in 2012, especially in places like Colorado, New Mexico (where minorities are already 40% of the electorate) and Nevada.
Wow, you make it way too complicated with all the blue wall, red wall machinations, Chef. In 54 of 57 presidential elections, the winner of the popular vote also won the electoral vote. So let's just focus on the popular vote.
Romney won 59% of the white vote but lost 80.5% of the non-white vote. If he had won just 27% of the non-white vote, he would have won the election(or at least a 54/57=95% chance of doing so). As you point out the white vote declines by about 2% each 4 year cycle, so the bar will be raised just a bit in 2016.
But the bottom line is that if the GOP can just get to 33% or so of the non-white vote, they will have overwhelming dominance in national elections. And hopefully keep going on to eventually obliterate the absurd situation wherein ideology is a function of skin tone.
Priebus and others in the GOP are working on this, and I am confident that they will succeed.
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.
