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.
As silly as it sounds, the "cool" factor is a huge deal as far as attracting the youth vote, and if you can't attract a decent number of the younger generation your party will simply fad into irrelevancy. The most common answers to this are as follows.
-Endorse gay marriage
-Compromise on abortion
-Strongly denounce the Tea Party and religious right
If the GOP took this advise though, how would they be any different from the Democrats? Other than on social issues and defense, there is very little difference between the two parties. During the debates, it seemed like at the core of it Romney and Obama agreed more than they disagreed.
As silly as it sounds, the "cool" factor is a huge deal as far as attracting the youth vote, and if you can't attract a decent number of the younger generation your party will simply fad into irrelevancy. The most common answers to this are as follows.
-Endorse gay marriage
-Compromise on abortion
-Strongly denounce the Tea Party and religious right
If the GOP took this advise though, how would they be any different from the Democrats? Other than on social issues and defense, there is very little difference between the two parties. During the debates, it seemed like at the core of it Romney and Obama agreed more than they disagreed.
What must the GOP do to attract young voters?
You'd be different in your tax structure, but more along the lines of Reagan (Look up what he really did fiscally, not what you've been told he did.). In fact, you'd probably do quite well!
And one who tilts toward the libertarian side of the Republican Party’s fusion of social and laissez-faire conservatism. Most voters already favor less punitive immigration policies than the ones angrily advocated by clenched-fist Republicans unwilling to acknowledge that immigrating — risking uncertainty for personal and family betterment — is an entrepreneurial act. The speed with which civil unions and same-sex marriage have become debatable topics and even mainstream policies is astonishing. As is conservatives’ failure to recognize this: They need not endorse such policies, but neither need they despise those, such as young people, who favor them. And it is strange for conservatives to turn a stony face toward any reconsideration of drug policies, particularly concerning marijuana, which confirm conservatism’s warnings about government persistence in the teeth of evidence.
Seriously, I don't think much can or should be done about it on the conservative side. On a personal level, part of the problem is that a great many conservatives don't live up to their beliefs, which makes conservatives seem hypocritical and conservative values seem unrealistic. In the eyes of many young people, hypocrisy is the biggest sin of all. The problem is that totally avoiding hypocrisy means avoiding high ideals of any kind, and that's pretty much what the rising generation has done.
Seriously, I don't think much can or should be done about it on the conservative side. On a personal level, part of the problem is that a great many conservatives don't live up to their beliefs, which makes conservatives seem hypocritical and conservative values seem unrealistic. In the eyes of many young people, hypocrisy is the biggest sin of all. The problem is that totally avoiding hypocrisy means avoiding high ideals of any kind, and that's pretty much what the rising generation has done.
It's impossible for the most part. The Democrats have Hollywood and pop culture backing them. For the most part, they would basically have to comprimise and do a 180 on every social issue and center their entire message on fiscal conservatism. Foiscal conservatism appears to be the only absolute issue that Republicans can make a case on that a number of Democrats might agree with.
If the GOP nominated sensible folks like Gary Johnson instead of raving religious loons and bigots, they'd probably be the majority party for a long time to come.
It's hard to be the party of law and order while seeming to condone illegal immigration, but yes, I think there's room to finesse their immigration position. I favor a limited form of amnesty myself - legal residency but not citizenship for those who entered illegally and meet certain criteria. Some conservatives hate the idea because they want all illegals to go home, period, regardless of circumstances. Most liberals hate the idea because it creates a large bloc of "second class citizens" and violates their sense of egalitarian piety.
However, on the most salient social issues - abortion, marriage, dope, et al - capitulating on these would be evil. Political parties in a republic should do more leading than following, win or lose. If you can't stand for something that matters, what's the point?
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.
