Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Time for Republican Reset?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Time for Republican Reset?

    in our one party corporate democracy, the role of an unelectable ideologically pure party is much the same as the history of third parties in America. Unelectable but influencing, heavily at times, the one party's agenda . . .

    Republican right weeps over Obama's victory – then begins internal civil war

    The clash between diehard conservatives and modernisers will dictate the fate of a party which increasingly seems to appeal only to angry, older white Americans



    At an election night party in Las Vegas, Mitt Romney supporter Alicia Hayes, left, is comforted by her mother, Karen, as they learn of Barack Obama's victory


    The town of Pella, Iowa, looks an almost too perfect vision of smalltown America. Surrounded by a chessboard of prosperous farmland and with a bustling town square, lined with shops bearing the surnames of its first Dutch settlers, Pella feels like a throwback to a different age.

    But beneath its attractive exterior last week one could find some ugly sentiments on election day. "Obama is a Muslim," said Shirley Schutte, 75. Was she sure about that? "I am. I am not sure he even should have been there [in the White House]. He has been a disaster."

    Such a fervent belief is not typical of most Republican voters, whether in Pella or anywhere else in America. But it is not hard to find. One poll in Mississippi even found some 52% of likely Republican voters suspected President Barack Obama was a follower of Islam. Neither has the party leadership done too much to discourage equally outlandish ideas, such as Obama being born in Kenya. From business mogul Donald Trump to top elected officials, Republicans have carefully crafted a message of Obama as a radical "other" hoping to transform America in some dangerous way.

    Yet far from exiling Obama outside the US mainstream, many experts, now including leading conservative figures, believe the Republican party itself is being pushed into the political wilderness. The Republicans increasingly look like the party of angry, older white people. People like Schutte. And that does not work in America any more.

    As Republicans sifted through the wreckage of the Mitt Romney campaign, they saw collapsing popularity among fast-emerging ethnic groups, such as Hispanics, and key social demographics, such as young people. In an economy struggling with 7.9% unemployment, where more than half of voters believed the country was heading in the wrong direction and against an unpopular incumbent, the once fiercely effective Republican party machine only managed to craft a devastating defeat.

    Some say the reason is a simple failure to change in an America that is becoming less white and more socially liberal. "They look a lot more like a political party of the 1950s than a party of the 21st century," said Professor David Cohen, a political scientist at the University of Akron in Ohio. "They are at risk of being irrelevant."

    Some in the party know it. Even though the corpse of the defeated Romney campaign is still warm, a bitter fight has started to break out over its meaning in Republican ranks. On one side are the modernists, who understand that the party cannot afford to be seen as a backwards-looking ghetto for white voters. On the other are the nativists, angry at a crippled and ineffective immigration system, who believe that only a true message of pure conservatism will save the day. It is a battle for the soul of the Republican party and the first shots are being fired. "I think it is going to be a war. I really do," said Larry Haas, a political commentator and former aide in the Clinton White House.

    Last week the Romney campaign in the key swing state of Iowa held a "victory" party in the capital, Des Moines. Right in the American heartland, in the very state that gave birth to Obama's presidential ambitions in 2008, the great and good of the local Republican party gathered in a downtown hotel ballroom to celebrate their side's expected win.

    But shortly after the local TV station announced Obama had won Iowa – in the end by a hefty six percentage points – Fox News said that the White House also would remain in Democratic hands. The mood of the almost entirely white gathering of several hundred rapidly deflated. Some headed to the exits. One woman muttered angrily to her companion: "It is the dumbing down of America."

    This is the side of the Republican party that has dominated its internal politics for four years. It is a party that almost seems to exist in its own vacuum of rightwing thought. Infused with Tea Party radicals, it has backed hardline immigration laws in states such as Arizona that many Hispanics see as racist. It boasted two Senate candidates who made tone-deaf comments about rape that cost them otherwise easy victories. It is still male-dominated, yet finds time to take hardline ideological stances on female contraception and abortion. This is the party that appears implacably hostile to gay Americans even as last week four more states held ballots on gay marriage and all voted in favour. "Does social conservatism continue to be a albatross around the neck of the party?" said Professor Gerard Alexander of the conservative American Enterprise Institute.

    But it is not just social issues. On economics the Republican party plays host to a powerful and vocal wing of libertarians who wish to slash and burn government spending. They cling to a conservative world view that has forced previously extreme stances – such as abolishing the federal Department of Education and returning the dollar to the gold standard – into the heart of Republican thought. Not even the vast amount of cash that Republican big money operators poured into the 2012 race was able to have a major impact. Of the top 10 Senate candidates that political guru Karl Rove's American Crossroads group spent the most on, just one resulted in a Democratic defeat. Casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson backed eight candidates – including Romney – with around $60m over the whole election cycle. None of them won.

    To many observers, the Republicans are turning into a party that cannot win office. It has been dominated by the punditocracy of Fox News and the enormous influence of rightwing media stars such as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. It believes it does not need to change, but must maintain ideological purity and run a true conservative candidate. In Romney it sees the failure of a moderate who did not really believe the conservative values he had to espouse to win his party's nomination.They point out Obama's victory was built on a superior ground game, which turned out its base. They can even say Obama only beat Romney by 50% to 48% – a sliver that only grows large in the undemocratic electoral college.

    Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer has emerged as one of the leading lights of this message. "The answer to Romney's failure is not retreat, not apeing the Democrats' patchwork pandering," he thundered. "No whimpering. No whining. No reinvention when none is needed. Do conservatism, but do it better."

    Limbaugh was more blunt. "I went to bed last night thinking we're outnumbered. I went to bed last night thinking we'd lost the country," he told listeners as Romney went down. But perhaps Fox News host Bill O'Reilly – for many fans the very incarnation of the average white man – was the most blatant: "The white establishment is now the minority … it's not a traditional America any more."

    But many are lining up on the other side of the trenches. Indeed, even Krauthammer acknowledges the party has a serious problem with Hispanic voters, who now make up the fastest-growing part of the electorate and went for Obama by some 70%. These are people such as Texas senator Ted Cruz and Florida senator Marco Rubio, who has already announced his intention to visit Iowa this month, effectively firing the first shot of the 2016 campaign. They also include former Florida governor Jeb Bush, whose last name is still a political handicap but whose Hispanic wife, half-Hispanic children and fluent Spanish are a major asset to dragging Republicans out of their white corner.

    As such figures rise, and perhaps bring with them a greater sensitivity over issues such as immigration, they will strike a blow for the reformers and the party's makeup will come to better represent the wider American public. Yet it might not be that simple. In an economy still struggling with high joblessness and the threat of renewed recession still looming, convincing some of the party's stressed base might not be easy. "The backroom people in the party look at the numbers and know they have a problem. But it is another thing to convince the base," said Professor Shaun Bowler, a political scientist at the University of California at Riverside.

    Neither is it as easy as just shifting the ethnic tone of the party's public image. Many Republican activists say that Hispanics – who often display a strong social conservatism around Roman Catholicism – should find a natural home in the party. However, many also bring with them a profoundly different sense of the role of government. The hostility many in the Republican party express towards government programmes can be just as off-putting to many Hispanic voters as their opposition to abortion and gay marriage might be attractive.

    It is not likely to be an easy process. Some believe Romney came close enough to victory to allow an even fight in the coming Republican civil war and thus ensure a protracted and painful debate that will stretch on for years. What the party really needed, some think, was to have nominated a died-in-the-wool ultra-conservative in 2012 such as Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich who could have led the party to an overwhelming defeat, forcing the reformist wing to triumph. But the selection of Romney denied them that piece of creative destruction, even though the party has now lost the popular vote tally in five of the last six presidential elections. "They are still maybe at the early stages of denial," Bowler said.

    Democrats are largely celebrating the prospect of this fight. The glee among the liberal left has been unrestrained, ranging from serious political pundits, such as MSNBC host Rachel Maddow and film-maker Michael Moore, to the viral popularity of an internet site showing photographs of sad Republicans on election night called "White People Mourning Romney".

    The Democrats, in fact, are licking their lips at the prospect of the next four years. Obama's brilliant strategists have created a highly effective coalition of minorities, younger women voters and urban educated people. They eked out an election win in the most trying of economic circumstances by getting those people to the polls. But some people think the Democrats also have a problem. Obama lost the white vote in America by some 20 points, and perhaps that should not be ignored. "It is not good to lose the white vote by that margin," said Haas. "This election was visionless on both sides, it was just about stitching together enough votes to get to the top."

    The Republicans may be about to have a civil war over their future but the Democrats also have their issues when it comes to the full spectrum of America's broad and diverse electorate. When any political system fights over identity politics rather than actual ideas, no one really wins.

    Republicans to watch in 2016

    CHRIS CHRISTIE
    Though he defines himself as a conservative, the New Jersey governor is seen as a potential moderate with broad appeal. He was positive about Obama's performance during the Hurricane Sandy disaster and an early endorser of Mitt Romney in the nomination process
    MARCO RUBIO
    The Florida senator is regarded as one of the most potentially powerful future party leaders. His Hispanic background could broaden the base of the party and he is also a favourite with the conservative Tea Party movement.
    JEB BUSH
    The former Florida governor seems to tick all sorts of boxes. Popular in a key swing state, he is a moderate conservative who appeals to the party base, has a Hispanic wife and is fluent in Spanish. Only the residual problems of his surname could hamper him, but by 2016 that may not prove to be such an issue.
    JIM DEMINT
    The South Carolina senator is one of the party's most conservative leaders and is widely believed to have an eye on a 2016 run. Closely allied with the Tea Party, he is extremely socially conservative, once advocating not allowing gays or single mothers to teach in public schools.
    RICK SANTORUM
    The former Pennsylvania senator was an obscure figure in the lead-up to the 2012 campaign but won over a huge amount of the base with his spirited and extremely conservative challenge to Romney. He ended with more than enough status to try again in 2016, posing as a social conservative with appeal to the white working class.
    PAUL RYAN
    Romney's running mate performed well enough during the campaign to boost his reputation as one of the party's leading lights. He also appeals to the white working class and social conservatives. A devout Catholic, he does not look like a moderniser.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...-conservatives

  • #2
    Re: Time for Republican Reset?

    Matt Taibbi on the Next Day . . .

    modern Republicans will never be able to spread that message effectively, because they have so much of their own collective identity wrapped up in the belief that they're surrounded by free-loading, job-averse parasites who not only want to smoke weed and have recreational abortions all day long, but want hardworking white Christians like them to pay the tab. Their whole belief system, which is really an endless effort at congratulating themselves for how hard they work compared to everyone else (by the way, the average "illegal," as Rush calls them, does more real work in 24 hours than people like Rush and me do in a year), is inherently insulting to everyone outside the tent . . . .

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Time for Republican Reset?

      yep - its a pretty sad tale...

      in the end, i level the blame, generally - onto the fourth estate - who apparently never sees any problem with the dem/lib/left POV - and who selectively reports only stuff that makes the dems look good, ignores anything that dont and uses every opportunity to make the repubs look bad...

      for instance - nary a news article that doesnt bring up romneys religion, but how often do we hear that harry reid is also mormon?

      and they wonder why foxnews is #1 ?

      its just too bad there arent more journo's like matt, who i may not always agree with, but at least he has the balls to put his career on the line and WRITE THE TRUTH.

      thank the gods for the rolling stone.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Time for Republican Reset?

        Originally posted by lektrode View Post
        yep - its a pretty sad tale...

        in the end, i level the blame, generally - onto the fourth estate - who apparently never sees any problem with the dem/lib/left POV - and who selectively reports only stuff that makes the dems look good, ignores anything that dont and uses every opportunity to make the repubs look bad...

        for instance - nary a news article that doesnt bring up romneys religion, but how often do we hear that harry reid is also mormon?

        and they wonder why foxnews is #1 ?

        its just too bad there arent more journo's like matt, who i may not always agree with, but at least he has the balls to put his career on the line and WRITE THE TRUTH.

        thank the gods for the rolling stone.
        Fox News is #1 because its viewers are only concerned with having their worldview validated, not proven or justified. It isn't a news channel. It is an ultra-conservative propaganda network that seeks to validate its members inanity. It absolutely will not accept any viewpoint that is counter to the conservative one. And it will wildly distort facts to create the news it wants.

        Which is not to say that CNN or the other media groups are any better. Fox News is just the loudest and most crazy.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Time for Republican Reset?

          Originally posted by BadJuju View Post
          Fox News is #1 because its viewers are only concerned with having their worldview validated, not proven or justified. It isn't a news channel. It is an ultra-conservative propaganda network that seeks to validate its members inanity. It absolutely will not accept any viewpoint that is counter to the conservative one. And it will wildly distort facts to create the news it wants.

          Which is not to say that CNN or the other media groups are any better. Fox News is just the loudest and most crazy.
          Fox News is #1 because it has a conservative bent, and not for the reasons you said. CNN and MSNBC are two flavors of a left bend, the former being variably left bent and the latter being extremely bent to the left, and that is why they are weak in membership. There are numerous outlets that serve similar functions, and CNN/MSNBC have to compete with entities like The Daily Show for their news-interested viewership.

          I haven't seen studies of this kind, but anecdotally I will note that Fox News is far less like an echo chamber than CNN and especially MSNBC. On their news segments and shows, Fox regularly shows a talking head saying stuff that appeals to liberals. Even if it's a 4:1 ratio like their new show The Five, they at least attempt to incorporate disparate views. CNN can hardly make that claim as they tend to focus more on a more "matter of fact" type of approach, and their multi-guest panels are as much in agreement as they are in disagreement in numerous segments.

          The three major news networks can be summed up in this example:
          1) CNN will tell you that Papa John's founder and CEO is lying about the cost Obamacare will impart on each pizza he sells (even though they openly admitted they didn't have the numbers necessary to make that conclusion)
          2) Fox News will show some numbers on the screen, potentially from biased sources, but won't make a claim one way or the other except with slightly leading questions like, "Will Obamacare make your pizza more expensive?"
          3) MSNBC will call Papa John's founder and CEO a racist.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Time for Republican Reset?

            +1
            thanks mr ghent!
            couldnt've said it any better.
            and i very seldom watch em - mostly PBS, actually.

            Originally posted by Ghent12 View Post
            Fox News is #1 because it has a conservative bent, and not for the reasons you said. CNN and MSNBC are two flavors of a left bend, the former being variably left bent and the latter being extremely bent to the left, and that is why they are weak in membership. There are numerous outlets that serve similar functions, and CNN/MSNBC have to compete with entities like The Daily Show for their news-interested viewership.

            I haven't seen studies of this kind, but anecdotally I will note that Fox News is far less like an echo chamber than CNN and especially MSNBC. On their news segments and shows, Fox regularly shows a talking head saying stuff that appeals to liberals. Even if it's a 4:1 ratio like their new show The Five, they at least attempt to incorporate disparate views. CNN can hardly make that claim as they tend to focus more on a more "matter of fact" type of approach, and their multi-guest panels are as much in agreement as they are in disagreement in numerous segments.

            The three major news networks can be summed up in this example:
            1) CNN will tell you that Papa John's founder and CEO is lying about the cost Obamacare will impart on each pizza he sells (even though they openly admitted they didn't have the numbers necessary to make that conclusion)
            2) Fox News will show some numbers on the screen, potentially from biased sources, but won't make a claim one way or the other except with slightly leading questions like, "Will Obamacare make your pizza more expensive?"
            3) MSNBC will call Papa John's founder and CEO a racist.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Time for Republican Reset?

              Originally posted by BadJuju View Post
              Fox News is #1 because its viewers are only concerned with having their worldview validated, not proven or justified. It isn't a news channel. It is an ultra-conservative propaganda network that seeks to validate its members inanity. It absolutely will not accept any viewpoint that is counter to the conservative one. And it will wildly distort facts to create the news it wants.

              Which is not to say that CNN or the other media groups are any better. Fox News is just the loudest and most crazy.
              How often do you watch FOX news? The O'Reilly Factor? I don't see or hear anything even remotely like what you describe.
              O'Reilly goes out of his way to allow other opinions and viewpoints from the Left.

              Hannity? Yes, probably so. But I can't watch that idiot for more than five minutes without getting indigestion.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Time for Republican Reset?

                First off, there was no massive 'mandate' in the re-election of Obama. this was no 'blowout'. The difference was a few million votes and that is NOT that big a difference, no matter how it is spun. the electorate is near evenly split at the present, and the President and CONgress better get their collective asses together and start fixing the problems as a TEAM without all the political hackery of the past couple years.

                Moving on to the Republicans, they lost the hispanic vote, the women vote, and the entitlement vote. I have no idea how they capture the latter, but they can alleviate such losses in the future with the former two by giving up on the who abortion insanity position and move towards immigration reform. A Candidate like Rubio could really bring them along on the hispanc side for sure.

                As a reformed Repulican I looked at Mitt Romney and all I saw was "country club". Too polished. I think he could have won if he had actually moved left of Obama on things like the passage of the NDAA, immigration reofrm, bankster bailouts, etc. But of course, as both candidates are beholden to big money, NEITHER wanted to address the REAL issues facingt he country.

                The American Empire experiment is going to have to end. The Entitlement State will HAVE to be cut back. I fully expect that the 2nd Obama term is going ot disappoint a LOT of 'true believers' who believed the 2nd coming of GWB was somehow different.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Time for Republican Reset?

                  Time for a reset of who we are and what we value in the US! We are becoming like a one world system. By design, I don't know but i think this has been in the works for awhile, at least since Clinton 1992 platform.

                  I just arrived in brazil last night after a few days in Brussels. In Europe, They see obama as someone who can bring the world together though they admit we and he needs a class in economic 101. Now we know that obama rigged in a good percentage of entitlement vote like food stamp collectors. So, I ask a colleague what angers him most about their unemeployment system, and it is quite telling. Lose a job in Netherlands and you get a dimenishing pay starting close to base for life.People here are on UE for life and sometimes beat the system by booking money free of taxes while collecting UE. I asked him what about the people that just use the system to avoid work, less anger. In other words cheaters bother him more than sluggards.

                  In US we have many people who have lost hope in themselves, and now hope for support from government. I almost was there once mentally but thankfully snapped out of it. Senior executive friends who can't find jobs for years are now taking antidepressant medicine. More stories of desperation will follow, that are party agnostic. As the US and Europe start to look socially the same with government taxing the );: out of its citizens. I am already feeling the love with prop 30 ( tax the rich, which i am not) and this just happened to be one of my better years for income gain.

                  one other note , we still have itulip posters who like to segregate republicans as white angry Christian voters. I thought this was a Forum where we debate economic ideas that impact us rather than slice and dice our itulip demographics into convenient "Archie bunker" silos so that someone can take cheap shots. Get over it! Look at this play from from the balcony my friend and get off the stage. We have bigger issues to face than slamming each other.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Time for Republican Reset?

                    Originally posted by Raz View Post
                    How often do you watch FOX news? The O'Reilly Factor? I don't see or hear anything even remotely like what you describe.
                    O'Reilly goes out of his way to allow other opinions and viewpoints from the Left.

                    Hannity? Yes, probably so. But I can't watch that idiot for more than five minutes without getting indigestion.
                    The break rooms at work exclusively play Fox News, so I have probably seen over 60 hours of it now within the last month (yes, we break a lot). They endlessly harp on and on about the most vapid, incredulous things. And I cannot remember a single instance of their reporting that was not clouded by conservative propaganda, whether it was reporting on Benghazi or hurricane Sandy. There is always some attack prepared to pepper liberals or the Democratic government. They are always laying the blame squarely upon liberals and proclaiming that conservatives would have done it better.

                    You have to be really ignoring it to think that Fox News isn't incredibly biased. They really grasp for any straw they can, like attacking the president for calling the Benghazi attacks an act of terror as opposed to a terrorist act. Just piddling stuff to rile up their base and to fabricate the image they want.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Time for Republican Reset?

                      Originally posted by BadJuju View Post
                      The break rooms at work exclusively play Fox News, so I have probably seen over 60 hours of it now within the last month (yes, we break a lot). They endlessly harp on and on about the most vapid, incredulous things. And I cannot remember a single instance of their reporting that was not clouded by conservative propaganda, whether it was reporting on Benghazi or hurricane Sandy. There is always some attack prepared to pepper liberals or the Democratic government. They are always laying the blame squarely upon liberals and proclaiming that conservatives would have done it better.

                      You have to be really ignoring it to think that Fox News isn't incredibly biased. They really grasp for any straw they can, like attacking the president for calling the Benghazi attacks an act of terror as opposed to a terrorist act. Just piddling stuff to rile up their base and to fabricate the image they want.
                      I don't like Sheppard Smith so I rarely watch his program. Hannity I don't watch because I fear it would lower my IQ.
                      But I do watch O'Reilly and Gretta most nights and I just don't see the constant, unfair bias that you do, at least not on their programs.

                      NBC sounds like it might be more appealing to you.


                      Last edited by Raz; November 11, 2012, 03:49 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Time for Republican Reset?

                        Originally posted by jpetr48 View Post
                        Time for a reset of who we are and what we value in the US! We are becoming like a one world system. By design, I don't know but i think this has been in the works for awhile, at least since Clinton 1992 platform.

                        I just arrived in brazil last night after a few days in Brussels. In Europe, They see obama as someone who can bring the world together though they admit we and he needs a class in economic 101. Now we know that obama rigged in a good percentage of entitlement vote like food stamp collectors. So, I ask a colleague what angers him most about their unemeployment system, and it is quite telling. Lose a job in Netherlands and you get a dimenishing pay starting close to base for life.People here are on UE for life and sometimes beat the system by booking money free of taxes while collecting UE. I asked him what about the people that just use the system to avoid work, less anger. In other words cheaters bother him more than sluggards.

                        In US we have many people who have lost hope in themselves, and now hope for support from government. I almost was there once mentally but thankfully snapped out of it. Senior executive friends who can't find jobs for years are now taking antidepressant medicine. More stories of desperation will follow, that are party agnostic. As the US and Europe start to look socially the same with government taxing the );: out of its citizens. I am already feeling the love with prop 30 ( tax the rich, which i am not) and this just happened to be one of my better years for income gain.

                        one other note , we still have itulip posters who like to segregate republicans as white angry Christian voters. I thought this was a Forum where we debate economic ideas that impact us rather than slice and dice our itulip demographics into convenient "Archie bunker" silos so that someone can take cheap shots. Get over it! Look at this play from from the balcony my friend and get off the stage. We have bigger issues to face than slamming each other.
                        By income we are probably 5%'rs this year, by savings 2-3%'rs. I certainly no not 'feel' rich, though I know my life is good. OTOH, I always feel like I have a terget on my back by government if I should choose to start up another business in the US, so I just don't bother. There is NO WAY to bridge the gap between entitlements and taxes anymore. You cannot tax the rich enough to do it.

                        What is $250k/yr? If you live in NYC or SF, or DC or a host of other places it is really not all that much when you price in the mortgage on a good house in a good neighborhood. Hell in CA taxes are now 13% I believe on top of Federal Income taxes that are gonna go up. Toss in license fees, property taxes, etc, and a $250k person easily can be well into 55% tax rate. What kind of nation is this where we would take over half a persons working income. And notice I say working, because I can also say I have absolutely zero issue with taxing at a higher rate non-working income for those who make say over $500k/yr. Maybe the Republicans will get smart and give in to a $1M income threshold to shut Obama up finally. who knows....

                        The europeans you mention generally LOVE thier socialism, so of course they love Obama. It's easy to run on his platform of give things away when so many want those free things, but it is exceptionally hard to govern when the money does not exist and you eventually hit the wall of spending. I have personally argued with friends the best course would be to leave Obama in office as the 'wall' will probably come during his 2nd term, and people might finally wake up to the reality of unfunded socialism. Maybe my wish will come true. Certainly he hasn't a clue how an economy runs.

                        The US has been hollowed out by many of those same executives now on anti-depressants who were more than happy to ship jobs overseas while they or their company would increase said executive pay. No one can tell me that there is a lack of people with enough executive experience to run companies without multi-million dollar packages, stock options, golden parachutes etc. It has become quite the club, and they all support each other by being on each others boards, attending the same country clubs, and socializing together. Eu CEO's seem to run their companies just as well at much lower comp packages. I believe in the free market, but corporate pay in the US is not a free market when the shareholdes are given as much choice as voters in a presidential election.

                        The "I got mine..." attitude is in for a rude awakening in the future.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Time for Republican Reset?

                          Originally posted by doom&gloom View Post
                          By income we are probably 5%'rs this year, by savings 2-3%'rs. I certainly no not 'feel' rich, though I know my life is good. OTOH, I always feel like I have a terget on my back by government if I should choose to start up another business in the US, so I just don't bother. There is NO WAY to bridge the gap between entitlements and taxes anymore. You cannot tax the rich enough to do it.

                          What is $250k/yr? If you live in NYC or SF, or DC or a host of other places it is really not all that much when you price in the mortgage on a good house in a good neighborhood. Hell in CA taxes are now 13% I believe on top of Federal Income taxes that are gonna go up. Toss in license fees, property taxes, etc, and a $250k person easily can be well into 55% tax rate. What kind of nation is this where we would take over half a persons working income. And notice I say working, because I can also say I have absolutely zero issue with taxing at a higher rate non-working income for those who make say over $500k/yr. Maybe the Republicans will get smart and give in to a $1M income threshold to shut Obama up finally. who knows....

                          The europeans you mention generally LOVE thier socialism, so of course they love Obama. It's easy to run on his platform of give things away when so many want those free things, but it is exceptionally hard to govern when the money does not exist and you eventually hit the wall of spending. I have personally argued with friends the best course would be to leave Obama in office as the 'wall' will probably come during his 2nd term, and people might finally wake up to the reality of unfunded socialism. Maybe my wish will come true. Certainly he hasn't a clue how an economy runs.

                          The US has been hollowed out by many of those same executives now on anti-depressants who were more than happy to ship jobs overseas while they or their company would increase said executive pay. No one can tell me that there is a lack of people with enough executive experience to run companies without multi-million dollar packages, stock options, golden parachutes etc. It has become quite the club, and they all support each other by being on each others boards, attending the same country clubs, and socializing together. Eu CEO's seem to run their companies just as well at much lower comp packages. I believe in the free market, but corporate pay in the US is not a free market when the shareholdes are given as much choice as voters in a presidential election.

                          The "I got mine..." attitude is in for a rude awakening in the future.
                          +1 to all, and just speaking with one business owner here in brazil, they like Obama but have no idea the us is shafting them in currency war. Their interest rate on mortgage is 10 percent. Great people who have been repressed by their government and are treated like mushrooms. Sounds like their healthcare is coming to US too. Good doctors are driven to wealthy all other doctors are in hospitals with shortage of rooms for patients. Problem is so bad that they are placing patients in what were once were waiting rooms. Procedures take years and he to,d me story of a 55 year old receiving test data from MRI after she passed away.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Time for Republican Reset?

                            Originally posted by doom&gloom View Post
                            Moving on to the Republicans, they lost the hispanic vote, the women vote, and the entitlement vote.
                            Did Republicans really lose the entitlement vote? I keep reading that the so-called red states are actually the ones that receive the most government benefits.

                            http://www.theamericanconservative.c...-percent-live/

                            http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ed-states.html

                            http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/us/even-critics-of-safety-net-increasingly-depend-on-it.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&hp
                            Last edited by jmdpet; November 11, 2012, 08:02 PM. Reason: Formatting

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Time for Republican Reset?

                              Originally posted by doom&gloom View Post
                              Moving on to the Republicans, they lost the hispanic vote, the women vote, and the entitlement vote.
                              Let me introduce data into this discussion, because I find it more useful than conjecture and general analysis:

                              Obama won the following groups:

                              93% of African American voters.
                              74% of Religious, non-Christian voters.
                              73% of Asian/Pacific Islander voters.
                              71% of Hispanic voters.
                              70% of Atheist/Agnostic voters.
                              69% of Jewish voters.
                              62% of Unmarried voters.
                              58% of Female voters.
                              53% of those making under $100,000.
                              52% of 18-50 year old voters.
                              51% of Catholic voters.

                              Romney won the following groups:

                              78% of Mormon voters.
                              59% of White voters.
                              57% of Protestant voters.
                              57% of Married voters.
                              53% of 51+ voters.
                              50% of Male voters.
                              50% of those making $100,000 or more.


                              Look at the numbers above. In the end of the day, Mr. Romney barely took a majority of his big blocs. That is, the 64% the electorate that are white voters, 62% of the electorate that are married, 53% the electorate that are protestant voters, and 49% the electorate that are male voters. Those were his big blocs. The blocs of older folk, Mormons, and wealthier folks are not quite as big. Only Mormons did he win by an overwhelming margin.

                              In the end of the day, if you're going to look at this, the story isn't as simple as Republicans need to reach out to Hispanics and women better, although it would not hurt.

                              The story is, more simply, that Mr. Romney was not a very good candidate.

                              He did not do well convincing even the groups that he carried that he should be president by any substantial margin, with the notable exception of Mormons, who vote overwhelmingly Republican anyways. And he narrowly lost the Catholic vote, which Republicans carried in the past few presidential elections. Hispanics are still a minority of that bloc.

                              Were it Mr. Christie instead of Mr. Romney, and were Mr. Christie to have carried the same percentages of the hispanic and female vote as Mr. Romney, my guess is that this could have turned out differently. Mr. Christie's likability numbers at the Republican convention were 10 points higher among Republicans and the general electorate alike.

                              Mr. Romney was just not very likable and not very trustable. At least that's what the polls show.

                              In the end, I would venture to guess that the vote was the measure of the man, not a sweeping ideological statement. Although, perhaps were his policies different or more specific, he would have put himself over the top. Mr. Romney's worst policy positions were suggesting a hard line with Iran (less than 30% support), suggesting Medicare vouchers (less than 30% support), and suggesting not increasing taxes on upper income earners (less than 40% support). Now he backed off these positions during the general election, but the damage may have been done. Regardless, they were risky policy positions to stake out, considering there is broad public antipathy towards them.

                              But my main point is that were 3-4% more married, white, protestant voters convinced to vote for Mr. Romney, he would have won.

                              But in the end of the day, Obama carried 40%+ of just about every identity group beside Mormons. That means that the electorate at large just really didn't like Mr. Romney as much as Mr. Obama. That's all.

                              Reading too much more into this is a mistake.

                              It's a mistake for liberals and conservatives alike.

                              A Mitt Romney that was less confrontational about Iran, that did not advocate Medicare vouchers, and that advocated a return to 39% tax rates for the top bracket may have won despite the public's perceptions of his low likability and trustworthiness.

                              Another candidate who advocated the same policy positions, but was more likable and trustworthy than Mitt Romney in the public's eye could have won as well.

                              But the combination of unpopular policy and lack of likability/trustworthiness wasn't up to defeating Barack Obama.

                              That's all.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X