Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1787 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 90  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 4:52 am 
Offline
User avatar
Of Counsel
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am
Posts: 37778
Location: OmaGOD!!!
Gender: Male
Four years ago, after the 2004 election, I started this thread called The new direction for the Democratic Party. Obviously a lot has changed since then, and while the right-wing may disagree, I believe that Barack Obama has largely followed the strategy that David Sirota outlined in teh article in the lead post of that thread. More importantly has been Howard Dean's 50 state strategy to win elections at all levels of government and build a presence for teh Democratic Party in even the reddest of districts.

So now, the Republican Party stands at the brink of complete electoral collapse and faces a similar crisis of identity that teh Democrats faced four years ago. It seems that no thinking conservative that I know of has faith in the GOP anymore or the people representing the party at this time.

However, I not only feel that our country needs a strong conservative movement, but I have a deep respect for those who believe and follow truly conservative political philosophy. There's just hardly anyone in the Republican Party's leadership who fits that mold, just a bunch of crooks, warmongers, and religious fanatics.

It may seem to be concern trolling, but this diary was just posted at kos, and I think it's very well written, and invites an excellent discussion about teh future of conservative politics in America. I hope you read it and post your views, especially our more conservative posters.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/8 ... 952/622479

10 Ways to Save the Republican Party
by mikeplugh [Subscribe]
Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 07:59:29 PM MST

I know this is an odd topic for a day less than a month out from our presidential election, especially a month that promises to be as contentious and ugly as any in recent memory. As a devoted and true-believing progressive, my heart is firmly with the same values that bring many of you here. However, like virtually every one of you here, I also love our country and our potential for tremendous good far too much to blind myself in a fit of pure partisanship. One of our greatest strengths as a people, if not our greatest, is our ability to span a diverse geography, cultural divide, and philosophical worldview to remain a United States.

The progressive, or left if you prefer, dysfunction has always been the lack of clarity of vision that has splintered special interests who would otherwise work together for a greater, common good. Additionally, a lack of consideration for the more libertarian leaning views of the Western states, in particular those in the Rocky Mountain and Big Sky regions has made it impossible to make inroads into those communities. As those unfavorable aspects of progressivism have reversed themselves in recent years, in some measure thanks to Kos and Jerome for spelling them out in "Crashing the Gates," our fortunes as a political philosophical movement have also improved.

The GOP and the conservative movement have seen a serious decline in prestige and in the effectiveness of their governance over the last several generations. I believe this decline, and the imbalance in the partisan divide of America, have come as a result of several important factors. As Americans, interested in the best possible governance and a commitment to the equal exploration of various perspectives and opinions, it is also our duty to call for a better Republican party. A party that embodies the best of America to play yang to the progressive ying we provide. To that end, here are my 10 important ways to save the Republican party.

1. Abandon Anti-Intellectualism

The most unattractive aspect of the new Republican era has been the rabid anti-intellectual bent to governance. The ultimate culmination of this point was thought to be the nomination of George W. Bush until Sarah Palin took to the trail this year. We all understand that intellectuals often fail to see the "kitchen table" issues that quote-unquote regular people face from a first hand perspective. The halls of Harvard and Yale and Princeton share both the tremendous gift to our nation of collected brilliance and the stench of elitism and condescension. By overplaying their hand on the negatives associated with these institutions and others like them, the Republicans have played a pseudo-populist game with the electorate that ends with the tossing of the baby with the bath water.

At the highest levels, the elite still run the show from the Business Roundtable, the Harvard Club, and the many think-tanks in Washington. Those people are hidden from public view however, much like "the man behind the curtain," while Bush and Palin and other like them flap their gums in a folksy style that appeals to "small town folks" who inevitably vote against their own interests. That story is not new. The problem is, the polarization has become so extreme as to preclude rational debate from the right. Environmentalism, for example, was a staple of conservatism under people like Theodore Roosevelt, but now is shoved to the side by the extremist anti-intellectuals that run the GOP show.

Attracting brilliant people to your cause in sufficient numbers to build something worthy of admiration requires a commitment to a balanced intellectual pursuit of governance. Driving those people away surrenders the party to mediocrity at best and downright incompetence at worst. David Brooks, who I generally avoid like the plague, hits this point very articulately in a recent piece highlighted by the Huffington Post. He says:

Quote:
[Sarah Palin] represents a fatal cancer to the Republican party. When I first started in journalism, I worked at the National Review for Bill Buckley. And Buckley famously said he'd rather be ruled by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone book than by the Harvard faculty. But he didn't think those were the only two options. He thought it was important to have people on the conservative side who celebrated ideas, who celebrated learning. And his whole life was based on that, and that was also true for a lot of the other conservatives in the Reagan era. Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I'm afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices. I think President Bush has those prejudices.


He goes on to praise Obama's intellect with some very telling personal anecdotes, although he finds room to call him a 'mediocre senator' in his glowing assessment. Worth a look.

2. Marginalize the Neo-Cons

For too long the PNAC crowd and their ilk across the spectrum of hawkish think-tanks in Washington have run the show. They raise the money. They set the agenda. They say who is nominated and who isn't. It will be no small trick to kick the Cheneys aside, and their imperial intentions, but keeping their worldview in the proper perspective will help to steer the conservative agenda back to its fundamental beliefs. Smaller government and an imperial presence around the world do not in any way make good bedfellows. The neo-cons have had their way for several generations now and are single-handedly responsible for the explosion of the military-industrial-complex. In fact, you might argue that the growing surveillance-industrial-complex is also a product of their machinations.

It's hardly possible to be a party of governance from the right without having a wing of hawkish nationalists, but to hand the keys to the car over to them whole-heartedly is insane. We seen the consequences of this move to the far right in Iraq, and the neo-liberal economic philosophy that has married itself to their agenda has wrought untold havoc on the global stage. A coalition of moderates, interested in the reasonable, prudent hand of government needs to step up and say, "Enough." That brings me to point number three.

3. Embrace the libertarians

As the GOP brand sees itself increasingly tarnished, the libertarian wing of American political thought is filling in the gaps. Not every libertarian is a Republican, but the overlap is significant enough to merit attention. When the McCain/Palin ticket was made official, the sloganeering suggested that we'd begun to see a move from East Coast elite governance, and the rise of the West had been realized at long last. Nevermind that John McCain has been in Washington for nearly 30 years, and Sarah Palin is an incompetent dunderhead. The shadow convention held by Ron Paul in Minneapolis drew tens of thousands of supporters, but received almost no media coverage. The strength of his support, and the support for Bob Barr, tells us something.

We've learned that the small government sentiment that dominates Western State politics is real, and is increasingly appealing to a large number of American citizens who distrust government. Who can blame them when Washington has proved time and again to be a train wreck of idiocy, corruption, and partisan ugliness? The vein is their to tap. Finding the populist voice through the libertarian sensibility is a winning proposition for a party slipping further into irrelevance. The past has caught up to the GOP, and the future looks rather bleak. A new brand of populism through libertarianism might just do the trick.

4. Get Younger

One problem with the Republican party is its lack of inspiring, and inspired, youth leadership. Too often the people attracted to the College Republicans and Young Republicans of America are smug, arrogant self-promoters. I can't speak for the people on our side of the philosophical divide, but the people attracted to the right at a young age tend to be a lot like Tucker Carlson. Too cocksure and too condescending for their own good. They fancy themselves elite, which is a real problem when you have no accomplishments to your credit other than your affiliation with the Republican party.

The failure of the Republican youth movement is that it's led by demagogues more interested in furthering their own agendas on the backs of young, wet-behind-the-ears ideologues than they are in building anything resembling real leadership. The purpose of the Young Republican movement is to mobilize voters, train the insiders of the future, and keep liberal professors from dominating the campus conversations. These people are loaded up with a lot of talking point horseshit and set out on a mission to get their nose in wherever they can.

True leadership comes from teaching innovation, open-mindedness, and poise. It comes in humility and a consideration of high-minded ideals. The failure of mentoring in the Republican party is that it far too often resembles indoctrination instead of education. For that failure, the only people it attracts are the perpetually obnoxious.

5. Get More Diverse

You don't get more diverse by putting some brown faces on television. You don't get more diverse by ignoring past failures, hoping they will be conveniently swept under the carpet. The GOP has got to acknowledge its racist fringe and denounce it vehemently. It has to stop playing at diversity as a facelift for a very white party. Diversity is the actual embrace of difference. It's core is listening and respecting different concerns and perspectives. While that may not jive with the dusty old line of ideological positions favored by the Republicans, it is a necessary step to evolving the core of the party. Inclusiveness is not about letting people in, it's about opening the doors and asking for a wider and more robust perspective.

African-Americans don't join the GOP because the party still holds a subtle (and often not-so-subtle) relationship with racism and the modern day remnants of segregation. More than that, the Republicans want to tell African-Americans why they're better than Democrats at addressing their needs. African-Americans don't want someone to tell them anything about their needs, or about how they're best met. The long standing barrier to African-Americans in the political process has been the lack of silence from the establishment rather than it's blind eye. Far too often people in government have tried to tell African-Americans what they should do, what they should care about, and how they should respond to their particular challenges. The GOP has famously talked down to the African-American community, holding them at arms length, all the while decrying the Democratic Party for pulling the wool over their eyes and taking them for granted.

To change this dynamic, the GOP has to listen. They have to integrate, not racially, but intellectually and culturally. That goes doubly for the Latin population across America. The party has got to stop scapegoating immigrants for political purposes. It has to drop the nonsense about English-only as America's official language. There is a more nuanced and appropriate set of conservative positions that would benefit the long term success of the GOP, and especially their brand of governance as it pertains to non-old-white-guys. Listen. Learn. Adopt. Adapt.

6. Stop Attacking the Media

The GOP has loved to marry their anti-intellectualism to a war on the Eastern elite media. This plays well with people who turn on the TV and see a bunch of talking heads sitting in New York talking about "what's important." What's important to the news companies is rarely the same as what's important to people worried about local concerns. The great breadth of America and its cultural concerns are unmanageable to the institutional media, who always fall back on generic concerns set to the backdrop of Times Square. There is room to attack the media for doing a poor job, but the notion that it's a liberal, partisan poor job is pure fiction. Alterman's "What Liberal Media?" is a must read on this topic, although it may be in danger of becoming slightly dated in the near future.

Attacking the media is a futile game. The more you forcefully project that the media is in the tank for the left, the more you skew the issues in a way that fails to serve the American people. Two things happen. First, the media as a collective shrink into the propaganda friendly practice of "objectivity" which is simply the reliance on official press releases and news managers from authoritative sources for content. That only served the authorities. Second, the media gets sick of the game and pushes back. That push back may include a kind of scorched earth mentality that picks on every gaffe, nuance, or awkward moment to show who's the boss. It's all very childish, but the only people that lose are the People.

To regain control of a reasonable, rational, productive national dialogue, the GOP has to make better relations with the press. Be open to questions. Be prepared and happy to answer tough questions in a way that explains the conservative agenda to the nation. Stop using the fallback position of talking points and platitudes to manage the press corps. Give something, and maybe you'll get as well. You catch more flies with sugar, and whatever other cliched expression you want to insert here.

I must say, this applies equally to the Democratic party. Listening to Amy Goodman on Democracy Now!, I am always struck at how successful they are at keeping a progressive point of view, while rationally and reasonably analyzing the topic. The Democrats use press management to cover up their flaws and their dirty little secrets as well. We have to clean this up, and the use of Kos and Democracy Now! among others to preserve a somewhat realistic perspective on the issues is imperative.

7. Marginalize Fox News as a Propaganda Tool

Yes, it's useful. Yes, it works. That's not the point. A government of the people, for the people, and by the people is a government that tells the truth. While I'm not so naive to expect this, it's something you must at least make some pretense at, isn't it? The buzzword "transparency" has lost all value thanks to it's talking point goodness. As a real practice, it's something that the people must forcefully demand of its government, and it's something that the government must show some commitment to.

Fox is so transparently a propaganda medium it has become a parody of itself. The wretched amongst the huckster community in the GOP love the idea that they can frame their hatred and vitriol as reasonable, balanced journalism. A high-minded conservative movement has to question whether or not this is a good strategy going forward. It's fine to put Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Ann Coulter out there to make partisan attacks. People expect that in this day and age. It's the way of the world. What's not acceptable is for the news portion of the broadcasts to be partisan. For the same reason MSNBC decided to remove Olbermann from its election night anchor desk. I don't disagree with that. The tradition of Walter Cronkite served us well, and I think there's reason to still hold that as the standard. Partisan sideshows will attract a brand of viewer, but the network should strive to make the information as factual and reflective of a more general sentiment as possible.

Bill Moyers projects a certain liberal viewpoint and has come under fire from the likes of Bill O'Reilly, but his approach is far superior to Rachel Maddow (who I absolutely love) because he treats the news with the seriousness and the inquisitiveness that it deserves. Amy Goodman, again, does the same. Fox can be a conservative organization, but demand that it treat the news with the seriousness that Moyers and Goodman project on the left. The American people will benefit from a truly "fair and balanced" approach, even if that means you dedicate your editorial work to a conservative viewpoint. Make sure its an informed, articulate, and serious viewpoint.

8. Lead the Religious Right, Instead of Being Led by Them

Don't keep allowing the tail to wag the dog. The religious right has a right to access and to a voice in government. It has the same right as any collection of citizens who share similar beliefs and concerns, and the First Amendment guarantees that right. The problem is, there is a time when government, and particularly politicians, have to recognize that the nation is diverse and that one voice shouldn't be allowed to drive the cart. The Republican party kowtows to the Judeo-Christian right in order to tap their financial resources, their network of communication to citizens, and the organizational mechanisms that get out the vote on polling day.

A government, and by proxy every politician in that government, must be high-minded enough to balance the needs, wants, and demands of particular segments of society with the challenging umbrella of American diversity. Religious Americans have strong beliefs that will undoubtedly guide policy and politics, but at what point do we allow those groups most visible, vocal, and well funded speak for all of us as religious and areligious people alike? The populism of economics doesn't necessarily translate to a populism of religion in terms of government. That's the very foundation of our system of beliefs. The church and the state must be separate.

Republicans hate the idea of a parental government watching over a vast flock of children. They love to promote that as a call against the left, pinning that worldview on us. The irony is, by surrendering control of the party vehicle to the religious right, they've effectively said that a parental God (via the church and its pastor) will lead the vast flock. I trust in some higher power, but I always say that I don't pretend to understand what that higher power is, how it works, or if it's even directly interested in us. I do trust in my fellow citizens to help themselves. Remember that Christian notion? God helps those who help themselves? We help ourselves via good, representative government, of the people, by the people, and for the people. We are doing God's will, if in fact you approach the world from a Judeo-Christian viewpoint.

The Republicans need to take that point of view, which is in tune with the intentions of the Founding Fathers (and Mothers) of our nation. Our way of life is embedded in this point of view, and it's important that We the People run the show for as broad and diverse a community as possible. The religious right have access like the rest of us, and should be kept in perspective as one concerned group of citizens like anyone else.

9. Embrace True Bi-Partisanship

Bi-Partisanship is overrated. That is, it's overrated in most cases. There are important, practical points in our lives that demand bi-partisanship. Climate change is one of those points. The size of our military budget and the expansion of the military-industrial-complex is a bi-partisan issue. The emerging surveillance-industrial-complex is as well. Climate change is apolitical, or at least it should be. Those who would put a market approach to the economy generally seek to do it with everything, including the environment. Owning rivers and forests assures that some private interest will take care of them. That's proven false, and needs to be put into perspective before it's too late. The size of government and the out of control spending in Washington is a conservative issue, yet the military-industrial-complex and its surveillance counterpart are part of the pork favored by the right-wing hawks. Surveillance is a libertarian nightmare, and therefore an enemy to the otherwise right-leaning people filling the rank and file of the GOP base.

I've just scratched the surface on the important issues that transcend partisanship. I could go on and on. We put party ahead of country and people all the time, despite the rhetoric. Democrats need to take this step as well as Republicans, but this diary is about saving the GOP so it appears here....

10. Support Net Neutrality, Universal Broadband/Wireless...

...and invest in our national communication infrastructure. The green economy is one thing, the means of communication that are crucial to participation in our own democracy are another. In my opinion, these are the two most important considerations for American democracy facing us in this 21st century. One is a consideration of survival, while the other is a consideration of better government. The GOP is generally silent on Net Neutrality, largely due to the lobbies at Telecomm companies and corporations that seek to keep whatever advantage they have in the free market. Net Neutrality is disguised as an issue of regulation versus deregulation. That is to say, it's disguised as an issue of government's heavy hand coming in to prevent the strong from exerting their strength. In fact, it's an issue of citizen versus consumer. If we are citizens first and consumers second then it is the government's solemn obligation to protect freedom of speech by keeping the flow of information equally accessible to all. If we are consumers first and citizens second, as the corporate lobbies would have it, net neutrality is unfair and heavy handed. You decide, but I think it's fair to say that polling would be completely one-sided if this issue was accurately framed in this context.

Republicans can show goodwill to the notion that we are all citizens first, interested in the best possible government, and that increasing the access to the process for millions of people is only a good thing. To forge a better society, more enlightened and worldy, we must invest in education and the tools of research and communication that allow both communication from the people and to the people, not to mention between the people. This may fall under the umbrella of bi-partisanship in some respects, but the GOP needs a facelift and I can think of no better way to win back the nation than to put a Republican face on internet access for all.

In the end, these are but a few important considerations for our political opponents. Many of them apply equally to us. For the moment, however, our fortunes are on the rise. The brilliant among our party leadership are ascending alongside Obama and through the people powered politics favored by Kos and the ActBlue crowd. There will come a time when we need to write another chapter in our own philosophical history books echoing this one for the GOP. Political hubris is inevitable. The point is, what we do to reinvent our political selves impact the direction of the nation, and this prescription for the GOP is written by a progressive with love for the United States of America and all its people, from all walks of life.

_________________
Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 5:44 am 
Offline
User avatar
Administrator
 Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:51 pm
Posts: 14534
Location: Mesa,AZ
I didn't read the text, but I guess I can say I agree with all of the bullet points.

_________________
John Adams wrote:
In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 11:03 am 
Offline
User avatar
The Decider
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:38 am
Posts: 5575
Location: Sydney, NSW
Fundamental problem in my view is that free markets and individualism are directly at odds with social conservatism. You can't support "every man for himself" to the extreme and also expect traditional social institutions and values to survive.

And I agree with the bullet points too. Particularly the anti-intellectualism. There is nothing more annoying about the Republican brand right now than this pathetic disdain for the "left-wing intelligentsia". As opposed to what, the right-wing retardatia?

_________________
Jammer91 wrote:
If Soundgarden is perfectly fine with playing together with Tad Doyle on vocals, why the fuck is he wasting his life promoting the single worst album of all time? Holy shit, he has to be the stupidest motherfucker on earth.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 11:17 am 
Offline
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:16 pm
Posts: 1944
Location: Mass.
It's a bit too long to go into it with one reply, but there are some good points mixed in with some points that both parties need to correct.

For example, one of the best things the Republican party can do is stop pandering to the Religious Right, because "values voters" contradicts Conservative philosophy, which is the less government interference, the better. Logically, the Republican party (a Conservative one) should not give a whit about gay marriage, for example. The only "value" I can think of that the Religious Right supports that can co-exist with Conservative values is the pro-life issue....based on the idea of protecting the rights of the unborn.

I also agree that the Republicans have to do a better job at reaching out to younger voters, but this premise -

"Too often the people attracted to the College Republicans and Young Republicans of America are smug, arrogant self-promoters. I can't speak for the people on our side of the philosophical divide, but the people attracted to the right at a young age tend to be a lot like Tucker Carlson. Too cocksure and too condescending for their own good. They fancy themselves elite, which is a real problem when you have no accomplishments to your credit other than your affiliation with the Republican party."

- is nonsense given that younger Democrats/Liberals can be equally smug, self-righteous, condescending pricks themselves. For example, if you don't agree that Global Warming is man-made (perhaps you think that it is a cyclical warming that is exaserbated by man's pollution), then you are chastised as belonging to the "flat-Earth society." If you drive an SUV, you're bound to get dirty looks by environmentally-conscious Liberals. I could go on but this is a problem on both sides.

Then there's the FoxNews deal. MSNBC has become the counter to Fox, so if Fox should go then MSNBC needs to go as well.

There are some good ideas here. To PD - I think an electoral landslide this year is not very realistic.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 11:19 am 
Offline
User avatar
Former PJ Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 3:00 pm
Posts: 19826
Location: Alone in a corridor
What surprises me in that text, is the number of spelling mistakes (its - it's, bloody hell). Was that written by a professional journalist?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 11:25 am 
Offline
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:16 pm
Posts: 1944
Location: Mass.
shades-go-down wrote:
Fundamental problem in my view is that free markets and individualism are directly at odds with social conservatism. You can't support "every man for himself" to the extreme and also expect traditional social institutions and values to survive.


This is true, and I think it's accurate to say that neither extreme is sustainable (every man for himself Conservatism/Libertarianism versus a Liberal welfare state).
Right now I think that we have a decent trade-off when it comes to entitlements and a progressive tax system (that should be simplified, but that is another topic) that can fit into a Conservative mold.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 11:36 am 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 3:09 pm
Posts: 10839
Location: metro west, mass
Gender: Male
Fuck republicans and fuck democrats.

As long as the two-party system is in existence, there will be a massive divide in this country and an open shot at conquering by a small group of dominant men. I'll emphasize this when I get back from work.

_________________
"There are two ways to enslave and conquer a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt." -John Adams


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 1:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Former PJ Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 4:38 am
Posts: 18049
shades-go-down wrote:

And I agree with the bullet points too. Particularly the anti-intellectualism. There is nothing more annoying about the Republican brand right now than this pathetic disdain for the "left-wing intelligentsia". As opposed to what, the right-wing retardatia?



Smart people are terrorists. :idea:

_________________
"A waffle is like a pancake with a syrup trap." -
Mitch Hedberg


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 4:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The Maleficent
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:17 pm
Posts: 13551
Location: is a jerk in wyoming
Gender: Female
I actually expected to see a picture of crickets when I opened this.

_________________
lennytheweedwhacker wrote:
That's it. I'm going to Wyoming.
Alex wrote:
you are the human wyoming


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 4:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:54 am
Posts: 7189
Location: CA
malice wrote:
I actually expected to see a picture of crickets when I opened this.


Would some decorating tips for militia compounds be appropriate?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 4:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Of Counsel
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am
Posts: 37778
Location: OmaGOD!!!
Gender: Male
LeninFlux wrote:
There are some good ideas here. To PD - I think an electoral landslide this year is not very realistic.


Did you read my Senate thread? It's already happening. There were around 40 GOP retirements in teh House this year, and there will be significant pickups there as well. There have already been 3 Dem pickups in special House elections in GOP districts this year. Absent a massive shift on the ground in teh next 3 weeks, Obama is going to win by over 100 electoral votes.

In what sense is that not a landslide?

_________________
Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 4:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Of Counsel
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am
Posts: 37778
Location: OmaGOD!!!
Gender: Male
Angus wrote:
What surprises me in that text, is the number of spelling mistakes (its - it's, bloody hell). Was that written by a professional journalist?

No.

_________________
Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 5:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:34 am
Posts: 12029
punkdavid wrote:
LeninFlux wrote:
There are some good ideas here. To PD - I think an electoral landslide this year is not very realistic.


Did you read my Senate thread? It's already happening. There were around 40 GOP retirements in the House this year, and there will be significant pickups there as well. There have already been 3 Dem pickups in special House elections in GOP districts this year. Absent a massive shift on the ground in the next 3 weeks, Obama is going to win by over 100 electoral votes.

In what sense is that not a landslide?


In his best-case scenario, I can't see McCain getting more than 245.

_________________
durdencommatyler wrote:
I'm a big fan of every invention post I've read.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 5:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Force of Nature
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:05 pm
Posts: 622
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
I read your text at the top. I stopped when I got to the dailykos link. And for the record, our country DOES have a strong conservative movement. They just don't have a viable candidate right now. But then again, neither do the Dems.

_________________
original join date: 29 September 2002
darth_vedder wrote:
I hate Pearl Jam and the goddamn 10 club.

Ledbetterman10 wrote:
This place is a cesspool of douchbagery.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 5:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:34 am
Posts: 12029
TortureFollowsReward wrote:
They just don't have a viable candidate right now. But then again, neither do the Dems.


olo

_________________
durdencommatyler wrote:
I'm a big fan of every invention post I've read.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 5:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Of Counsel
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am
Posts: 37778
Location: OmaGOD!!!
Gender: Male
TortureFollowsReward wrote:
I read your text at the top. I stopped when I got to the dailykos link. And for the record, our country DOES have a strong conservative movement. They just don't have a viable candidate right now. But then again, neither do the Dems.

You should have read past the link. The first point was "anti-intellectualism". Ironic, huh?

_________________
Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 6:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Of Counsel
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am
Posts: 37778
Location: OmaGOD!!!
Gender: Male
punkdavid wrote:
LeninFlux wrote:
There are some good ideas here. To PD - I think an electoral landslide this year is not very realistic.


Did you read my Senate thread? It's already happening. There were around 40 GOP retirements in the House this year, and there will be significant pickups there as well. There have already been 3 Dem pickups in special House elections in GOP districts this year. Absent a massive shift on the ground in the next 3 weeks, Obama is going to win by over 100 electoral votes.

In what sense is that not a landslide?


http://electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Maps/Oct09.html

Democrats Expected to Sweep Close Races in Congress

But the economic storm has sent the doodoo flying not only in the direction of McCain, but also in the direction of NRSC chairman Sen. John Ensign (R-NV). The chairman of the DSCC, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), is now openly talking about getting close to 60 seats in the Senate, which would allow the Democrats to invoke cloture and pass legislation with the Republicans powerless to block it. While Schumer is quite good at counting (not to mention raising money), this is the first time he has dared talk so freely about getting 60 seats. In 2006, Schumer managed to pick up six seats (and control of the Senate) when nobody in his right mind thought that was possible. Among Republican insiders, holding their loss to five seats (New Hampshire, Virginia, Colorado, New Mexico, and Alaska) would be considered a huge victory. Now they are worried about losing Oregon, Minnesota, North Carolina, Mississippi-B, Georgia, and Kentucky as well. They see the handwriting on the wall and it appears to say: "Armageddon." CNN also has a story on the Senate.

Analyst Stu Rothenberg, who is not generally given to great enthusiasm for the Democrats, is now also talking about the possibility of close to 60 Senate seats for the Democrats. Furthermore, he is now predicting the Democrats will pick up at least 20-30 seats in the House, maybe even eclipsing their 31-seat pickup in 2006. He concludes with: "Republicans appear to be heading into a disastrous election that will usher in a very bleak period for the party." Our tally (on top of the page) is now a 247 to 187 breakdown (with 1 tie), but the reality is much worse for the Republicans because many close races that are probably going to go Democratic have not been polled. Our algorithm assumes that in the absence of any polling data, the incumbent party wins. While normally that is true 90% of the time, this year it may not be, especially due to the open seat issue. There are 47 seats in which the 2006 winner is not running. Ten of these were occupied by Democrats and nearly all of them are in overwhelmingly Democratic districts. The other 37 are occupied by Republicans and many of these are in swing districts. Here is the full list.

_________________
Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 6:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:46 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Medford, Oregon
Gender: Male
Angus wrote:
What surprises me in that text, is the number of spelling mistakes (its - it's, bloody hell). Was that written by a professional journalist?


:poke:

There's not apostrophe in its when it's possessive.

_________________
Deep below the dunes I roved
Past the rows, past the rows
Beside the acacias freshly in bloom
I sent men to their doom


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 7:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Force of Nature
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:05 pm
Posts: 622
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
punkdavid wrote:
TortureFollowsReward wrote:
I read your text at the top. I stopped when I got to the dailykos link. And for the record, our country DOES have a strong conservative movement. They just don't have a viable candidate right now. But then again, neither do the Dems.

You should have read past the link. The first point was "anti-intellectualism". Ironic, huh?


If choosing not to read the kos and huffington post makes me "anti-intellectual" in your world, so be it. But I understand this is N&D. These are "news" sites here.

_________________
original join date: 29 September 2002
darth_vedder wrote:
I hate Pearl Jam and the goddamn 10 club.

Ledbetterman10 wrote:
This place is a cesspool of douchbagery.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The new direction for the Republican Party
PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 7:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Administrator
 Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:51 pm
Posts: 14534
Location: Mesa,AZ
punkdavid wrote:
TortureFollowsReward wrote:
I read your text at the top. I stopped when I got to the dailykos link. And for the record, our country DOES have a strong conservative movement. They just don't have a viable candidate right now. But then again, neither do the Dems.

You should have read past the link. The first point was "anti-intellectualism". Ironic, huh?

Not really. Not choosing to read dailykos articles might just be good time management. If you've read a dozen articles from one site and they all turned out to be biased, would it make sense to continue spending your time reading articles from that site? I don't think filtering your information sources based on past experience can be considered anti-intellectualism.

_________________
John Adams wrote:
In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1787 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 90  Next

Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 7:40 pm