20 year low for GOP
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-20-year-low-for-the-gop/2013/03/21/7e880c20-929c-11e2-9cfd-36d6c9b5d7ad_graphic.html
The Republicans have reached a 20 year low of 33% favourability. Why do people this this has happened, what does it mean and what should they do about it?
The Republicans have reached a 20 year low of 33% favourability. Why do people this this has happened, what does it mean and what should they do about it?
Scroll to see replies
The Republicans have lurched to the right and when you lurch one side of the political spectrum you only speak to a small section of the population.
The Republicans speak to white, male, wealthy Christians that are suspicious of gays, immigrants, women and people on low incomes or on welfare.
The rest of the population, not just traditional die hard Democrats, see the Republicans as 'not speaking for them'.
The Republicans speak to white, male, wealthy Christians that are suspicious of gays, immigrants, women and people on low incomes or on welfare.
The rest of the population, not just traditional die hard Democrats, see the Republicans as 'not speaking for them'.
The American populace is becoming less evangelical, white and rural (the traditional base of Republicans) and more secular, Hispanic and urban (groups that tend to favour the Democrats). In addition to demographics, the American people are becoming more open minded with regards to gay marriage and climate change, issues the Republicans have been against, and are frustrated by Republican rhetoric and lack of progress in Washington.
The Republicans can win another election- they just need to rethink policies like immigration to attract the huge and growing Hispanic community. After all, Hispanics are traditionally Catholic with many evangelical converts, and so tend to be conservative with social issues- and so could be the Republicans perfect new audience, if the Republicans reform their hostility to immigration.
The Republicans can win another election- they just need to rethink policies like immigration to attract the huge and growing Hispanic community. After all, Hispanics are traditionally Catholic with many evangelical converts, and so tend to be conservative with social issues- and so could be the Republicans perfect new audience, if the Republicans reform their hostility to immigration.
The Republicans are currently being carried to the right - a move they must avoid at all costs. This happened to George McGovern in 1972 when, after winning the primaries (surprisingly), he was destroyed by his overly leftist supporters who scared those occupying the middle ground away to the utterly despicable Nixon. In 2012 the same thing happened to the Republicans as history always repeats itself.
Ten years ago it was thought that the democrat party was finished and they were destined to be a minority party forever. Now people think the republicans are in trouble. I'm not sure why people think the party is in trouble. They still control the House of Representatives. The republicans also have a republican governor in place in 60 percent of all states and governors have more power than presidents.
If the republicans want to have a republican president we are going to have to stop nominating extremely far left candidates like Romney and McCain and nominate a true conservative. When McCain and Romney were running for president voters were very confused because their policies were almost the same as obama's on every issue. If the American people are in a where they have to choose between a real Democrat and a fake Republican, they will pick the real Democrat every single time.
If the Republicans run Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, or Ted Cruz for President they will easily beat Hillary Clinton
If the republicans want to have a republican president we are going to have to stop nominating extremely far left candidates like Romney and McCain and nominate a true conservative. When McCain and Romney were running for president voters were very confused because their policies were almost the same as obama's on every issue. If the American people are in a where they have to choose between a real Democrat and a fake Republican, they will pick the real Democrat every single time.
If the Republicans run Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, or Ted Cruz for President they will easily beat Hillary Clinton
Original post by Made in the USA
Ten years ago it was thought that the democrat party was finished and they were destined to be a minority party forever. Now people think the republicans are in trouble. I'm not sure why people think the party is in trouble. They still control the House of Representatives. The republicans also have a republican governor in place in 60 percent of all states and governors have more power than presidents.
If the republicans want to have a republican president we are going to have to stop nominating extremely far left candidates like Romney and McCain and nominate a true conservative. When McCain and Romney were running for president voters were very confused because their policies were almost the same as obama's on every issue. If the American people are in a where they have to choose between a real Democrat and a fake Republican, they will pick the real Democrat every single time.
If the Republicans run Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, or Ted Cruz for President they will easily beat Hillary Clinton
If the republicans want to have a republican president we are going to have to stop nominating extremely far left candidates like Romney and McCain and nominate a true conservative. When McCain and Romney were running for president voters were very confused because their policies were almost the same as obama's on every issue. If the American people are in a where they have to choose between a real Democrat and a fake Republican, they will pick the real Democrat every single time.
If the Republicans run Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, or Ted Cruz for President they will easily beat Hillary Clinton
Only idiots would've thought that when they won the most vote in the previous presedential elections. But hey, continue living in your bubble that, it's the same bubble that made you thought Romney was going to defeat Obama, the same bubble that makes you think that Romney and McCain are 'far left candidates', same bubble that makes you think that any of the names you mentioned will easily defeat #HilClint2016.
Ted Cruz easily beat Hilary Clinton, damnnnnnn
However they still control a majority in the house (despite over 50% of voters choosing a democrat) and continue to filibuster anything they don't like in the senate. Luckily rich donors, lobbyists and big corporations keep filling their pockets so it doesn't matter what the people think.
Shows you how people come to the conclusion the "land of the free" has become corrupted by money when the people's opinion no longer seem to matter.
Shows you how people come to the conclusion the "land of the free" has become corrupted by money when the people's opinion no longer seem to matter.
- Lurch to the right
- Extremist views
- Centre of controversy
- Radically changing voting population makes the GOP look like a party for rich, white, religious, pro-getting raped by a gorilla and keeping the baby, anti-abortion, obstructionist and extremist individuals.
Understandably party cohesion is weak in the states, but as a party they seriously need to modernise and accept that some of their views are out of touch with the majority of the population. The later they accept this, the more damage this will do to their chances of winning Federal elections.
- Extremist views
- Centre of controversy
- Radically changing voting population makes the GOP look like a party for rich, white, religious, pro-getting raped by a gorilla and keeping the baby, anti-abortion, obstructionist and extremist individuals.
Understandably party cohesion is weak in the states, but as a party they seriously need to modernise and accept that some of their views are out of touch with the majority of the population. The later they accept this, the more damage this will do to their chances of winning Federal elections.
Original post by S1L3NTPR3Y
However they still control a majority in the house (despite over 50% of voters choosing a democrat) and continue to filibuster anything they don't like in the senate. Luckily rich donors, lobbyists and big corporations keep filling their pockets so it doesn't matter what the people think.
Shows you how people come to the conclusion the "land of the free" has become corrupted by money when the people's opinion no longer seem to matter.
Shows you how people come to the conclusion the "land of the free" has become corrupted by money when the people's opinion no longer seem to matter.
This. As well as the continued use of Gerrymandering or 'redistricting.' This puts Republican or Democrat voters into a mostly Republican or Democrat district, this means that Representatives continue to get elected regardless of the parties popularity.
As others have said, the GOP is now further out of touch with its voters than ever before. Voters are less like the traditional Republican voter who is Evangelist, Rural and White. GOP voters are now more pragmatic and progressive and the GOP is not keeping up with this as shown with the last bunch of Presidential 'Contenders' EG Romney, Santorum, Bachmann and Gingrich. It's hardly surprising that the GOP can't keep up with the Democrats who have a huge database of people's voting preferences and do massive amounts of research.
But in the end, it doesn't really matter, the Republicans will just throw money at an election and will come back into the White House eventually anyway.
The Republicans have failed to reach the ever changing American demographic.
A list of people that they haven't reached:
-Racial minorities (97% of African-americans and 71% of Hispanics voted for Obama)
-Women (many lost on the grounds of bodily rights. Binders full of women, anybody?)
-Non-Christians (Constant spewing from FOX about 'wars on Christmas' are enough to sicken anybody)
-Young people (Better educated than predecessors, Republican anti-science ideals don't seem to be working)
-The Working class (Obama care and minimum-wage increase trumps GOP)
-Progressives (I needn't explain this one)
The GOP are still trying to crawl backwards into the ocean. They can't seem to admit that they won't win an election by appealing solely to middle-class, White Americans anymore. I'd like to see them change tact for 2016. Step one: Ditch the Tea party nutters.
A list of people that they haven't reached:
-Racial minorities (97% of African-americans and 71% of Hispanics voted for Obama)
-Women (many lost on the grounds of bodily rights. Binders full of women, anybody?)
-Non-Christians (Constant spewing from FOX about 'wars on Christmas' are enough to sicken anybody)
-Young people (Better educated than predecessors, Republican anti-science ideals don't seem to be working)
-The Working class (Obama care and minimum-wage increase trumps GOP)
-Progressives (I needn't explain this one)
The GOP are still trying to crawl backwards into the ocean. They can't seem to admit that they won't win an election by appealing solely to middle-class, White Americans anymore. I'd like to see them change tact for 2016. Step one: Ditch the Tea party nutters.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Pedd
The Republicans have failed to reach the ever changing American demographic.
A list of people that they haven't reached:
-Racial minorities (97% of African-americans and 71% of Hispanics voted for Obama)
-Women (many lost on the grounds of bodily rights. Binders full of women, anybody?)
-Non-Christians (Constant spewing from FOX about 'wars on Christmas' are enough to sicken anybody)
-Young people (Better educated than predecessors, Republican anti-science ideals don't seem to be working)
-The Working class (Obama care and minimum-wage increase trumps GOP)
-Progressives (I needn't explain this one)
The GOP are still trying to crawl backwards into the ocean. They can't seem to admit that they won't win an election by appealing solely to middle-class, White Americans anymore. I'd like to see them change tact for 2016. Step one: Ditch the Tea party nutters.
A list of people that they haven't reached:
-Racial minorities (97% of African-americans and 71% of Hispanics voted for Obama)
-Women (many lost on the grounds of bodily rights. Binders full of women, anybody?)
-Non-Christians (Constant spewing from FOX about 'wars on Christmas' are enough to sicken anybody)
-Young people (Better educated than predecessors, Republican anti-science ideals don't seem to be working)
-The Working class (Obama care and minimum-wage increase trumps GOP)
-Progressives (I needn't explain this one)
The GOP are still trying to crawl backwards into the ocean. They can't seem to admit that they won't win an election by appealing solely to middle-class, White Americans anymore. I'd like to see them change tact for 2016. Step one: Ditch the Tea party nutters.
I still have no clue why the binders full of women comment was offensive. This clueless out of touch party happens to have governors in power in 3/5ths of the states. Sounds to me like the democrats are in more trouble than the republicans
Original post by Made in the USA
I still have no clue why the binders full of women comment was offensive. This clueless out of touch party happens to have governors in power in 3/5ths of the states. Sounds to me like the democrats are in more trouble than the republicans
I didn't find it offensive, I found it funny! I just had to use the gaffe when referencing the Republicans and women.
I would say the contrary. The Democrats had a 332 electoral vote win in 2012 following a lackluster, at best, run. It took them 4 years to cut unemployment below 8%, with many other ideas being either blocked or mangled in the name of compromise - not exactly a fantastic term.
The Republicans even had a great (on paper) candidate. Romney was a rich, white, all-American politician. In Massachusetts, he even had a hand in creating a preliminary version of 'Obama care' in his health reforms.
Previous years under these circumstances would have bagged the Republicans a victory. Yet, they couldn't seem to score in an open goal. All they can do for now is evolve, lest they spend the next decade filibustering.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by heyhey922
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-20-year-low-for-the-gop/2013/03/21/7e880c20-929c-11e2-9cfd-36d6c9b5d7ad_graphic.html
The Republicans have reached a 20 year low of 33% favourability. Why do people this this has happened, what does it mean and what should they do about it?
The Republicans have reached a 20 year low of 33% favourability. Why do people this this has happened, what does it mean and what should they do about it?
The Republicans are suffering primarily because they are making the classic mistake of attempting to appeal to their party members and not the moderate floaters who decide elections, when these moderate floaters see the Tea Party infecting the Republicans with mindless rhetoric this becomes an instant turn-off.
If the Republicans want to win then they need to drop these Tea Party candidates who are social embarrassments. Sadly, the Tories have the same problem behind the scenes in the UK.
Original post by Pedd
I didn't find it offensive, I found it funny! I just had to use the gaffe when referencing the Republicans and women.
I would say the contrary. The Democrats had a 332 electoral vote win in 2012 following a lackluster, at best, run. It took them 4 years to cut unemployment below 8%, with many other ideas being either blocked or mangled in the name of compromise - not exactly a fantastic term.
The Republicans even had a great (on paper) candidate. Romney was a rich, white, all-American politician. In Massachusetts, he even had a hand in creating a preliminary version of 'Obama care' in his health reforms.
Previous years under these circumstances would have bagged the Republicans a victory. Yet, they couldn't seem to score in an open goal. All they can do for now is evolve, lest they spend the next decade filibustering.
I would say the contrary. The Democrats had a 332 electoral vote win in 2012 following a lackluster, at best, run. It took them 4 years to cut unemployment below 8%, with many other ideas being either blocked or mangled in the name of compromise - not exactly a fantastic term.
The Republicans even had a great (on paper) candidate. Romney was a rich, white, all-American politician. In Massachusetts, he even had a hand in creating a preliminary version of 'Obama care' in his health reforms.
Previous years under these circumstances would have bagged the Republicans a victory. Yet, they couldn't seem to score in an open goal. All they can do for now is evolve, lest they spend the next decade filibustering.
That filibuster worked though
Polls show a 50 point shift in public opinion polls when Americans are asked if the government should be able to assassinate an American citizen with a drone. Rand Paul was brilliant and got the US population on his side and the White House LOST that confrontation
Mission accomplished.
Original post by Made in the USA
That filibuster worked though
Polls show a 50 point shift in public opinion polls when Americans are asked if the government should be able to assassinate an American citizen with a drone. Rand Paul was brilliant and got the US population on his side and the White House LOST that confrontation
Mission accomplished.
Polls show a 50 point shift in public opinion polls when Americans are asked if the government should be able to assassinate an American citizen with a drone. Rand Paul was brilliant and got the US population on his side and the White House LOST that confrontation
Mission accomplished.
I'll agree with Rand Paul's filibuster, that's how it's supposed to be done!
Sadly, you must admit that rarely does the Republican's filibustering have such purpose. Most of the time, it's political sabotage.
Original post by Made in the USA
Sounds to me like the democrats are in more trouble than the republicans
Democrats have lost the popular vote for president once in nearly a quarter of a century. If that's what counts as being in trouble then yes the democrats are in a a lot of trouble.
Original post by Made in the USA
If the Republicans run Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, or Ted Cruz for President they will easily beat Hillary Clinton
The polls say otherwise but I assume you still have the same screw the polls mentality.
(edited 11 years ago)
Well, with their previous candidates such as Romney, Cain, Bachmann etc. It is hard to see why the Rep's shouldn't suffer a major drop in public opinion.
I mean, the platform they ran on can be described simply as hostile and stupidity at an epic proportion.
The only hope they have left is to tone down the rhetoric and present themselves as marginally sane. Then they might get back up to 40% approval rate.
I mean, the platform they ran on can be described simply as hostile and stupidity at an epic proportion.
The only hope they have left is to tone down the rhetoric and present themselves as marginally sane. Then they might get back up to 40% approval rate.
Original post by heyhey922
Democrats have lost the popular vote for president once in nearly a quarter of a century. If that's what counts as being in trouble then yes the democrats are in a a lot of trouble.
The polls say otherwise but I assume you still have the same screw the polls mentality.
The polls say otherwise but I assume you still have the same screw the polls mentality.
That's because they keep running republicans who are extremely left wing. Dole McCain and Romney were not conservatives
The GOP is failing to evolve with the times. The Obama campaign utilities social media far more effectively, though this is just the tip of the iceberg as to how outdated the party really is.
Previously when times were good in the USA, the main focus was on social policy. The GOP made people feel good about themselves, and their message of 'The American Dream' whilst upholding the Bible was heard and taken seriously.
However currently social and foreign policy has taken a backseat for economic policy - how can the GOP be taken sincerely by the average American voter when living standards are dropping, and the candidate put forward is as nepotistic as Romney? Do people really care about which government the US is ruling by a proxy dictatorship of, or gun laws, when they are getting poorer?
Lastly, as American becomes increasingly multi-cultural the racist anti-immigration babble that is continually spouted drives voters away.
Previously when times were good in the USA, the main focus was on social policy. The GOP made people feel good about themselves, and their message of 'The American Dream' whilst upholding the Bible was heard and taken seriously.
However currently social and foreign policy has taken a backseat for economic policy - how can the GOP be taken sincerely by the average American voter when living standards are dropping, and the candidate put forward is as nepotistic as Romney? Do people really care about which government the US is ruling by a proxy dictatorship of, or gun laws, when they are getting poorer?
Lastly, as American becomes increasingly multi-cultural the racist anti-immigration babble that is continually spouted drives voters away.
Original post by heyhey922
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-20-year-low-for-the-gop/2013/03/21/7e880c20-929c-11e2-9cfd-36d6c9b5d7ad_graphic.html
The Republicans have reached a 20 year low of 33% favourability. Why do people this this has happened, what does it mean and what should they do about it?
The Republicans have reached a 20 year low of 33% favourability. Why do people this this has happened, what does it mean and what should they do about it?
A major factor is that low skilled immigrants from Mexico and their descendants are natural democrats. If the US had the same demographics as it had in 2000, then Romney would have won
There is a long essay by Tino Sanandaji on the subject. In short, the Republicans are screwed because of these demographic changes. Maybe in the short term they could at least boost their appeal by dropping socially conservative positions on abortion and gay marriage. There are also lessons for European politicians.
The long run political consequences of immigration-driven-demographic transformation are the same on both Europe and the U.S. Low-income minorities vote for the left in every western country I am aware of.
...
First, it is not in the material self-interests of poor people to vote for the party of low taxes and limited government.
Second, people don’t only vote based on self-interests, they vote based on group-interest. Many middle-class minorities from low-income ethnic groups vote for the left because of group solidarity...
Other than moving to the left of the left, there is little the right can do about this. “Reaching out” will not make people vote against their material self-interest. No-one has figured out how to make low-skilled immigrants to the modern economy so economically successful that they start voting for the right. Libertarian theory predicts that low-skill immigrants eventually become high-income libertarians. Against that theory we have empirical experience over decades in every country i am aware of that they don't.
...
First, it is not in the material self-interests of poor people to vote for the party of low taxes and limited government.
Second, people don’t only vote based on self-interests, they vote based on group-interest. Many middle-class minorities from low-income ethnic groups vote for the left because of group solidarity...
Other than moving to the left of the left, there is little the right can do about this. “Reaching out” will not make people vote against their material self-interest. No-one has figured out how to make low-skilled immigrants to the modern economy so economically successful that they start voting for the right. Libertarian theory predicts that low-skill immigrants eventually become high-income libertarians. Against that theory we have empirical experience over decades in every country i am aware of that they don't.
(edited 11 years ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Low 2:2 in second year, can i get a 2:1 in third?
- High 2;2 in second year? Can i make it to a 2:1 or 1st in third year?
- Overall uni grade
- Getting grade 7
- Masturbation vs sex for women
- How to earn money and live independently
- LNAT Rejection
- A Level Edexcel Economics B Paper 2
- 2.1 in Second year how to get a 1st overall
- Edinburgh University low student satisfaction
- Carmel College transportation
- Would I get rejected.
- Living on £20 on Bangor, Gwynedd area
- A-level predicted grades
- How much should i have saved?
- Is 42k ( excl bonus ) a good entry level salary?
- Foundation year at good Uni with A level grade CDD
- Sheffield Hallam/Bradford transfer to medicine and University of Sheffield
- Is UCL full of rich kids?
- Clearing
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
