Will Republicans Learn Anything??

Started by Reagan, November 07, 2012, 10:51:30 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Reagan

In spite of the economy Obama spanked mittens...he won electectoral college votes more then anyone predicted and he won the popular vote. The Dems picked up at least 2 more Senate seats and they made a small gain in the house.
The question is what will you learn if anything. Already fox news is spinning this in two ways...one romney was not conservative enough or two he ran a bad campaign.
My theory is America finds your flavor of tea a little too bitter.
Not to mention same sex marriage passed in several states...

Yawn

Tell us what "WE", as Republicans, should now support?  Become Democrat Lite?

WHERE should we stand on the issues.

Reagan

I'm not going to tell YOU anything it's hard for me to get in the head of a republican. After all I believe in science and facts not fantasy.
My question is can your party survive if it doesn't broaden it's base? The Democrats have clearly adapted over the years and seem to be thriving.When you get less then 30% of the Latino vote that's a problem...they are the fastest growing vote in this country. Weather you like that or not.  But lets remember their (dems) growing pain when they lost most of the dixiecrats in the south when they moved away from the same racist policies we see in the teabagger movement.
And I'm making the point that imo teabaggers have harmed the gop as well as the country with their hate for more then half of America.
It's not 47% it's more like 52%. If it was 47% the election results would have been very different.

valjean

#3
What the Republican party needs to learn is that the attitudes of American society have changed, and for the worse in my opinion. The Democratic party today is all about catering to the desires of whoever will vote for them, they don't have any really doctrines that they stick to as a matter of principle. Their central doctrine is to give to people what they want. Healthcare, food stamps, free contraception, student loans, medicare, medicaid, government housing projects, etc. This is all the Democratic party talks about; their selling point to voters is to simply give them what they want, and what people invariably want is something that requires money, and this money comes from the productive class who can already finance their needs.

I am not opposed to a social safety net, but I am opposed to this idea that people can legitimately keep demanding whatever they want and expect to get it without regard for the rights of the people financing these endeavors or regard for basic American principles.

So hearkening back to my primary point; American society has changed insofar as elections are now won based on who is going to promise the people more entitlements at the expense of the so called "rich" and it would seem in this new American society those who constitute the rich are anyone who has a job and can finance their needs without government assistance.

So with this said, the Republican party isn't going to win presidential elections if they try to imitate the Democrats and become Democrat-lite, still promising things to people but less things than the Democrats; they people will invariably keep choosing the party that promises more.

To combat this, the Republican party needs to be invigorated with the spirit of the message that Ron Paul has been pushing. I don't mean agreeing with everything he says, but just adopting his common sense and consistent positions that provide stark contrast between two visions. One vision in the Democrat party which is about control, and one vision which is about authentic freedom. Republicans should be talking about ending the drug war, reducing our prison population which is a disgrace, non-interventionism around the globe, these are relevant issues that people do care about. But sadly, one of the drawbacks of the GOP, considering it is a big tent with varying opinions, is that this party has been dominated by neoconservative foreign policy ideas for the past decade especially which have absolutely poisoned the nation and those in the middle against the party.

Yawn

#4
Like Rush said, "It's hard to compete with Santa Claus


veritas4truth

#5
My question is can your party survive if it doesn't broaden it's base?

The President serves the people of the United States and he won their vote by a thin 1.6%. Do you honestly consider 1.6% to be a mandate?

But if Obama decides to rule as if he won by 40% -- as he did in the electoral vote, assuming he wins Florida -- this country is going to be a disaster. I fully expect to see him proceed down this route. I doubt he suddenly changed last night.

After all I believe in science and facts not fantasy.

It's this kind of divisive language, behavior, and arrogance that Obama and company appear to continue to live by as well. It didn't seem to work well over the last 4 years. Do you believe it will now? For a group that seems to pride themselves on being progressively "open-minded", it might appear open-minded, at least until someone disagrees. I now wonder what the definition of "closed-minded" is.

Capitalism is not a great solution... but it just happens to be the best not-great solution on the planet. Unfortunately capitalism only works well in a society that predominately practices the "golden rule" philosophy -- but along the way our society adopted the rule of "greed" instead. Capitalism eventually implodes under this condition. And unfortunately greed knows no political party line or boundaries.

So the understandable result is to turn to socialism which we're now running into and the pace will only increase. The economic condition for nearly all of us will fall. Don't worry about the top-1% -- they'll be fine. Historically socialist nations have never thrived and eventually they implode as well. Look no further than the UK as a living case study in process.

The problem is the human, moral condition. When a nation's ethics become "subjective", the slide begins and then only escalates. The problem didn't start last night, 4 years ago, or 40 years ago. It's been around since time immemorial. But when the oxymoron known as "subjective ethics" becomes pervasive, the line is crossed and as a nation, we've crossed way over.

Good luck, my fellow Americans.

elmerfudd

Quote from: veritas4truth on November 07, 2012, 03:00:57 PM
My question is can your party survive if it doesn't broaden it's base?

The President serves the people of the United States and he won their vote by a thin 1.6%. Do you honestly consider 1.6% to be a mandate?

But if Obama decides to rule as if he won by 40% -- as he did in the electoral vote, assuming he wins Florida -- this country is going to be a disaster. I fully expect to see him proceed down this route. I doubt he suddenly changed last night.

After all I believe in science and facts not fantasy.

It's this kind of divisive language, behavior, and arrogance that Obama and company appear to continue to live by as well. It didn't seem to work well over the last 4 years. Do you believe it will now? For a group that seems to pride themselves on being progressively "open-minded", it might appear open-minded, at least until someone disagrees. I now wonder what the definition of "closed-minded" is.
Capitalism is not a great solution... but it just happens to be the best not-great solution on the planet. Unfortunately capitalism only works well in a society that predominately practices the "golden rule" philosophy -- but along the way our society adopted the rule of "greed" instead. Capitalism eventually implodes under this condition. And unfortunately greed knows no political party line or boundaries.

So the understandable result is to turn to socialism which we're now running into and the pace will only increase. The economic condition for nearly all of us will fall. Don't worry about the top-1% -- they'll be fine. Historically socialist nations have never thrived and eventually they implode as well. Look no further than the UK as a living case study in process.

The problem is the human, moral condition. When a nation's ethics become "subjective", the slide begins and then only escalates. The problem didn't start last night, 4 years ago, or 40 years ago. It's been around since time immemorial. But when the oxymoron known as "subjective ethics" becomes pervasive, the line is crossed and as a nation, we've crossed way over.

Good luck, my fellow Americans.

Welcome to this forum.  Regarding the paragraph of your post that I enlarged, no group is a better example of divisive language  and arrogance than the far right.  No person is a better example of "party first, America second" thinking than Mitch McConnell.

But you're right about human moral condition.  It fell at the fall and has gotten no better nor worse since. That's why we need laws and checks and balances in government.

veritas4truth

#7
Thanks for the welcome.

no group is a better example of divisive language  and arrogance than the far right

I am confident you genuinely believe this to be true. This is a massive problem and I think it falls along the line of removing the log from our own eye first before casting judgement... The sad thing to me is that you appear to believe that one party is more arrogant and divisive than the other. I know the conservatives have more than their share of complete and utter trash -- but from your statement you do not appear to believe that this exists equally as much on the left. I really don't mean to come off as rude in the least, but in my opinion this is simply blindness. It's hard to see our blind spots when we don't believe they exist.

That's why we need laws and checks and balances in government.

Certainly we need laws, etc. But laws quite often do not dictate human behavior. If they did we would not have murder, rape, fraud, embezzlement.

Laws without moral code are just speed bumps for people to maneuver around and through.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

elmerfudd

Quote from: veritas4truth on November 07, 2012, 03:48:23 PM
Thanks for the welcome.

no group is a better example of divisive language  and arrogance than the far right

I am confident you genuinely believe this to be true. This is a massive problem and I think it falls along the line of removing the log from our own eye first before casting judgement... The sad thing to me is that you appear to believe that one party is more arrogant and divisive than the other. I know the conservatives have more than their share of complete and utter trash -- but from your statement you do not appear to believe that this exists equally as much on the left. I really don't mean to come off as rude in the least, but in my opinion this is simply blindness. It's hard to see our blind spots when we don't believe they exist.

That's why we need laws and checks and balances in government.

Certainly we need laws, etc. But laws quite often do not dictate human behavior. If they did we would not have murder, rape, fraud, embezzlement.

Laws without moral code are just speed bumps for people to maneuver around and through.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

You're welcome.  From where I sit, the R's DO have more of that than the D's do.  As examples I offer Rushbo, Ann Coulter, and others of that ilk.  I offer Mitch McConnell again.  But there is also Boehner, who, because he is NOT like that, is denounced as a RINO. So yes, I am fairly confident that R's are much more close minded than D's, as a group. 

I heard a guy on the radio saying he watched both conventions.  He said the R convention looked like a Klan rally. The D convention looked more like America looks.  He kind of had a point, too.

Solar

Quote from: veritas4truth on November 07, 2012, 03:48:23 PM
Thanks for the welcome.

no group is a better example of divisive language  and arrogance than the far right

I am confident you genuinely believe this to be true. This is a massive problem and I think it falls along the line of removing the log from our own eye first before casting judgement... The sad thing to me is that you appear to believe that one party is more arrogant and divisive than the other. I know the conservatives have more than their share of complete and utter trash -- but from your statement you do not appear to believe that this exists equally as much on the left. I really don't mean to come off as rude in the least, but in my opinion this is simply blindness. It's hard to see our blind spots when we don't believe they exist.

That's why we need laws and checks and balances in government.

Certainly we need laws, etc. But laws quite often do not dictate human behavior. If they did we would not have murder, rape, fraud, embezzlement.

Laws without moral code are just speed bumps for people to maneuver around and through.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.
Oddly enough, he does believe that BS, despite the Dim party's shear existence is based on divisive campaigning.
They need victims for their sole existence, yet fools claim were the divisive party, go figure.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

elmerfudd

Quote from: Solar on November 07, 2012, 04:01:50 PM
Oddly enough, he does believe that BS, despite the Dim party's shear existence is based on divisive campaigning.
They need victims for their sole existence, yet fools claim were the divisive party, go figure.

Read your own stuff. Nothing but condescending, arrogant, divisiveness.

Cryptic Bert

Quote from: elmerfudd on November 07, 2012, 04:03:43 PMNothing but condescending, arrogant, divisiveness.

But you reelected him anyway..

Solar

Quote from: elmerfudd on November 07, 2012, 04:03:43 PM
Read your own stuff. Nothing but condescending, arrogant, divisiveness.
Really? I'll give you one example of how the left works.
The Black family, care to guess which party keeps them on the plantation via welfare and housing and other payouts?
They need victims to stay in power, that's a solid Fact!

They've given deviant behavior a voice by lumping them together under the banner of LGBT, a very small percentage of the population, but a voting block nonetheless.

The leftists party is the party of freaks and misfits, though I give them credit for creating a functioning circus, it was no easy feat.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

veritas4truth

He said the R convention looked like a Klan rally

Wow. Very sad statement. I am conservative and myself and my conservative friends do not remotely -- not even in the same universe do we resemble the trash you spew above.

You seem to easily and comfortably eject racist accusations based upon some "guy on the radio" that you heard. This is frightening behavior. I can only hope you are representative of an exceptionally small minority of Americans.

Reagan

Well the bottom line as my post pointed out is America is changing and the republican party is not. It's not about welfare as some guy above thinks. When 60% of women, 70% of Asians and Latinos vote Democrat..republicans have a problem, we really aren't making more old white guys at the same rate. The teabaggers have ruined your party imo.
People on this forum paint the Democratic party as leftwing but in reality the far left is the base but it doesn't run the party and in fact their are moderates like Clinton was imo and blue dog Dems. In other word it's a bigger tent that represents different people.
As far as accusing Dems of being "divisive" are you kidding? Were you not paying attention during the republican debates...they bashed just about everyone except white older males including, women, hispanics, blacks, gays and on and on.
Have you seen a teabagger rally? A bunch of racist angry, older white people on government entitlements (SS) and socialized medicine (medicare).