Republican "Pledge to America"

23-09-2010 01:54AM #1

The November 2010 elections draw rapidly near, and now the Republican party has issued its "Pledge to America" in an attempt to regain control of both the House and Senate of the US Congress.

This is the same strategy they successfully used to gain control of Congress during the mid-Clinton Era as led by Newt Gingrich called the "Contract with America."

If the Republicans once again gain control of Congress, what is to prevent them from leading America down the same path as before, which resulted in two prolonged wars, the largest federal deficit in the history of the US, the largest bank failures in US history (Washington Mutual, et al), the SEC 2004 deregulation of investment banking that led to the failures of Goldman Sachs, etc., and how this contributed to, and how they failed to mitigate, the greatest recession since the Great Depression while the Republicans were in control?

Source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-09-23-GOP23_ST_N.htm

Denerick · 23-09-2010 10:17AM

Its so funny as to make you cry. I think I once heard that 80% of the Federal budget goes on the major entitlements (Social security, medicare etc.) and the military. Nobody in their right mind runs on a programme of slashing that. In other words, if you want a functioning central government, you are essentially arguing passionately about cutting the size of the federal government by about 5-10%. While radical, its hardly going to do much damage to the deficit. Republicans are essentially dishonest. New taxes are the only solution to America's deficit problem.

rightwingdub · 23-09-2010 10:38PM

I actually predict the Democrats will narrowly hold onto the House and Comfortably retain control of the senate, the lunatics in the Tea Party have done the Republicans a lot of damage amongst moderate voters, its time to dump the teabaggers into the asheap of history and for the Republican party to become the pragmatic party amongst moderate voters.

Where are the moderate Republicans?

Manic Moran · 24-09-2010 04:49AM

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

If the Republicans once again gain control of Congress, what is to prevent them from leading America down the same path as before, which resulted in two prolonged wars, the largest federal deficit in the history of the US, the largest bank failures in US history (Washington Mutual, et al), the SEC 2004 deregulation of investment banking that led to the failures of Goldman Sachs, etc., and how this contributed to, and how they failed to mitigate, the greatest recession since the Great Depression while the Republicans were in control?

Easy. The exact same thing that prevents the Democrats from doing the same thing. Absolutely nothing.

NTM

Overheal · 24-09-2010 03:55PM

Jon Stewart (and really, what must be his legion of back-stage tv and internet surfing writers and minions) discovered Contract 2.0 is being pitched to the american people - word for word - exactly as Contract 1.0 was.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-23-2010/postcards-from-the-pledge

25-09-2010 07:32AM

There was a fundamental difference that you missed Overheal between GOP Contract 1.0 and Contract 2.0. The dress code of the GOP presenters of Contract 2.0 was more lax with open collars and fewer ties.

Denerick · 25-09-2010 01:11PM

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

There was a fundamental difference that you missed Overheal between GOP Contract 1.0 and Contract 2.0. The dress code of the GOP presenters of Contract 2.0 was more lax with open collars and fewer ties.

I love the way millionaire, ivy league educated Republicans love to pretend to be 'one of the folks'. In any other nation on the earth these charlatans would be roundly ridiculed for the way they patronise blue collar Americans and openly insult their intelligence with such pathetic PR stunts.

rightwingdub · 25-09-2010 02:32PM

Denerick wrote: »

I love the way millionaire, ivy league educated Republicans love to pretend to be 'one of the folks'. In other nation on the earth these charlatans would be roundly ridiculed for the way they patronise blue collar Americans and openly insult their intelligence with such pathetic PR stunts.

There are plenty of Ivy league educated democrats as well, also blue collar white Americans overwhelmingly still vote Republican over Democrat.

KerranJast · 25-09-2010 02:34PM

Overheal wrote: »

Jon Stewart (and really, what must be his legion of back-stage tv and internet surfing writers and minions) discovered Contract 2.0 is being pitched to the american people - word for word - exactly as Contract 1.0 was.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-23-2010/postcards-from-the-pledge

The twin Boehner bit was genius

Denerick · 25-09-2010 03:06PM

rightwingdub wrote: »

There are plenty of Ivy league educated democrats as well, also blue collar white Americans overwhelmingly still vote Republican over Democrat.

The point is that these ivy league educated Republicans pander to 'da people', without any kind of shame, double standard or hypocrisy. I really wish Americans had a better sense of the ironic.

And the only reason Republicans win the blue collar vote is because they consistently play up to blue collar prejudices. Terms like 'States Rights' and 'lower taxation' are synonomous with 'lie down nígger, lie down'. This has been going on since at least Goldwater in 1964, now that they have a bona fide black man in the White House...

25-09-2010 06:15PM

Denerick wrote: »

The point is that these ivy league educated Republicans pander to 'da people', without any kind of shame, double standard or hypocrisy. I really wish Americans had a better sense of the ironic.

Bill O'Reilly on Fox attempts to spin this too, but forgets to mention that he graduated from Harvard.

rightwingdub · 25-09-2010 07:23PM

Denerick wrote: »

The point is that these ivy league educated Republicans pander to 'da people', without any kind of shame, double standard or hypocrisy. I really wish Americans had a better sense of the ironic.

And the only reason Republicans win the blue collar vote is because they consistently play up to blue collar prejudices. Terms like 'States Rights' and 'lower taxation' are synonomous with 'lie down nígger, lie down'. This has been going on since at least Goldwater in 1964, now that they have a bona fide black man in the White House...

I would consider myself a moderate Republican and am quite disturbed by the fact that the GOP seem to have become a southern dominated party with sections of the mid west. The GOP need to reconnect with the great lake state as well as the North Eastern states and the best way to achieve that is to promote more moderate candidates who are prepared to be bi-partisan with Obama, Scott Brown springs to mind.

The Reps need to have a restrained foreign policy, pragmatism over illegal immigration to appeal to hispanic voters, they should have compromised with Obama over healthcare, end the war on drugs, the party of Eisenhower is becoming dominated by Tea bag extremists and I for one am disgusted:mad::mad:

The Republicans need to have a moderate candidate in 2012 and need to promote moderate candidates in the North East, great lake states, Mid west and California.

Memnoch · 25-09-2010 07:44PM

rightwingdub wrote: »

I would consider myself a moderate Republican and am quite disturbed by the fact that the GOP seem to have become a southern dominated party with sections of the mid west. The GOP need to reconnect with the great lake state as well as the North Eastern states and the best way to achieve that is to promote more moderate candidates who are prepared to be bi-partisan with Obama, Scott Brown springs to mind.

The Reps need to have a restrained foreign policy, pragmatism over illegal immigration to appeal to hispanic voters, they should have compromised with Obama over healthcare, end the war on drugs, the party of Eisenhower is becoming dominated by Tea bag extremists and I for one am disgusted:mad::mad:

The Republicans need to have a moderate candidate in 2012 and need to promote moderate candidates in the North East, great lake states, Mid west and California.

Well it's kind of hard for the GOP to be centrist when their publicity charge is lead by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter et all.

I mean these psychotic self-serving nutjobs pander to every despicable extremist and divisive ideology that is FOTM with the hardcore right wing base in the US right now. If Republican candidates try to take a centrist or moderate stance on the issues they get lashed out of it.

Look at John McCain who had to completely sell his soul to tea party craziness in order to get back on the ticket. I've never been so sad to see an honourable man so reduced.

Lockstep · 25-09-2010 07:46PM

rightwingdub wrote: »

Blue collar white Americans overwhelmingly still vote Republican over Democrat.

Any evidence for this at all?
Especially the 'overwhelmingly' part, given that industrial states (New York, Michigan) are Democratic strongholds.

Of course, working class rural voters are Republican supporters, but Democrats still retain support among urban, blue collar workers (although they backed Clinton over Obama in the primaries)

Denerick · 25-09-2010 07:58PM

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Any evidence for this at all?
Especially the 'overwhelmingly' part, given that industrial states (New York, Michigan) are Democratic strongholds.

Of course, working class rural voters are Republican supporters, but Democrats still retain support among urban, blue collar workers (although they backed Clinton over Obama in the primaries)

The Democrats haven't won the white blue collar vote since Jimmy Carter (I could be wrong on this, too lazy to check, but I think it is the case)

The black blue collar vote is overwhelmingly Democratic, so in states like New York, California and Michigan major black population centers like Harlem, Detroit and Oakland pour out votes for Democratic candidates in large numbers, scewing somewhat the general blue collar voting demographic but overall serving to highlight the extent to which the white and black blue collar class lack any real class consciousness.

Anyways, as every political pollster and demographer knows, the blue collar is irrelevant these days and is not a large enough voting base on which to win an election. The most important constituency in America is the suburban, white collar middle class, that fluctuate their support between Democrats and the Republicans. The tea partiers are essentially a lower middle class, small business owning/self employed movement, which is an important constituency in its own right in America.

Lockstep · 25-09-2010 08:16PM

Denerick wrote: »

The Democrats haven't won the white blue collar vote since Jimmy Carter (I could be wrong on this, too lazy to check, but I think it is the case)

The black blue collar vote is overwhelmingly Democratic, so in states like New York, California and Michigan major black population centers like Harlem, Detroit and Oakland pour out votes for Democratic candidates in large numbers, scewing somewhat the general blue collar voting demographic but overall serving to highlight the extent to which the white and black blue collar class lack any real class consciousness.

Anyways, as every political pollster and demographer knows, the blue collar is irrelevant these days and is not a large enough voting base on which to win an election. The most important constituency in America is the suburban, white collar middle class, that fluctuate their support between Democrats and the Republicans. The tea partiers are essentially a lower middle class, small business owning/self employed movement, which is an important constituency in its own right in America.

If I remember that fact rightly, it's not blue collar whites specifically but that white males (overall) haven't supported a Democrat since Carter.

Tea Partiers are usually not lower-middle class. Turns out they're typically white, male middle aged, wealthy and well-educated. source

Denerick · 25-09-2010 08:19PM

Thanks, you're right as it happens. Democrats win the white female vote but lose the white male vote. This seems to be inconsistent with what happens in continental Europe (Females tend to vote conservatively, males tend to vote for progressive or left wing parties)

Lockstep · 25-09-2010 08:38PM

Yeah, you're absolutely right. Democrats have relied on women, unions, urbanites and minorities to get in, whereas Republicans get the white male vote, rural voters and business.
It'd be interesting to see how the white male vote breaks down.

Europe's role is a mystery there. NEver thought about it before but it sounds about right. Possibly the massive role in unions on the continent? Continental Christian Democrats have substantial Christian trade unions which form the left-wing of the parties.

Denerick · 25-09-2010 10:02PM

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Yeah, you're absolutely right. Democrats have relied on women, unions, urbanites and minorities to get in, whereas Republicans get the white male vote, rural voters and business.
It'd be interesting to see how the white male vote breaks down.

Europe's role is a mystery there. NEver thought about it before but it sounds about right. Possibly the massive role in unions on the continent? Continental Christian Democrats have substantial Christian trade unions which form the left-wing of the parties.

I think the gender divide was more distinct in the 60s and 70s. As you say the greater role of trade unions back then definately impacted on the political decisions of men. In a more conservative time the woman was effectively the moral head of the household, raising the child as a christian, attending church, ensuring order and stability in the household - hence the natural affiliation with the center right. I'm not sure if it plays as big a role anymore.

metrovelvet · 26-09-2010 09:50AM

Democrats alienated the white ethnic vote and the working class vote when Clinton turned the democratic part from being an underdog party [unions, labour rights, etc] to being one defined by gender politics. So the white ethics, IRish, Italians [who were mostly Republican anyway], Catholics, and traditional family values type of people moved away from voting democrat.

I have heard them described as "pre Clinton democrats.'

Hillary attracts a certain kind of women voter but not all of them. Its not something I understand tbh. I think she is a misandrist who uses her husband. Her husband was a total womaniser who eventually exploited and harrassed a young intern. And Hillary stood by him. It doesn't say to me that she is particularly interested the rights of women, but the rights of her own career. The reason I say she is a misandrist is because by standing by her husband, she says to the world 'well what do you expect? He's a man after all.'

I was surprised Obama won, not because he is half black but because he is so elite, unlike McCain who was more down to earth and working class. I thought Obama's aristocratic arrogant patina would work against him.

metrovelvet · 26-09-2010 09:51AM

Denerick wrote: »

I love the way millionaire, ivy league educated Republicans love to pretend to be 'one of the folks'. In any other nation on the earth these charlatans would be roundly ridiculed for the way they patronise blue collar Americans and openly insult their intelligence with such pathetic PR stunts.

Obama is an ivy league millionaire. And a Christian. OMG talk about patronising. Wow. How can you miss that?

Funglegunk · 26-09-2010 10:42AM

metrovelvet wrote: »

I was surprised Obama won, not because he is half black but because he is so elite, unlike McCain who was more down to earth and working class.

Please explain why you think McCain was more working class than Obama?

metrovelvet · 26-09-2010 11:14AM

Anyone who goes to an Ivy league college and then an Vvy league professional school is not working class.

McCain was a soldier.

Lockstep · 26-09-2010 12:20PM

metrovelvet wrote: »

Democrats alienated the white ethnic vote and the working class vote when Clinton turned the democratic part from being an underdog party [unions, labour rights, etc] to being one defined by gender politics. So the white ethics, IRish, Italians [who were mostly Republican anyway], Catholics, and traditional family values type of people moved away from voting democrat.

The Irish, Catholics and Italians were traditionally hardcore Democrat (never 'mostly Republican') ever since the 19th century when the Republicans were supported by groups like teetotallers and rabidly anti-Irish groups like the Know Nothing Movement.
Nowadays, Irish/Italian areas like Massachusetts, Illinois and New York remain Democratic strongholds, although the white-Catholic vote is roughly 50/50 between Democrat and Republican (whereas the Latino-Catholic vote is something like 90% Democrat)

Lockstep · 26-09-2010 12:24PM

metrovelvet wrote: »

Anyone who goes to an Ivy league college and then an Vvy league professional school is not working class.

McCain was a soldier.

Being a soldier does not make you working class (the Kennedys being a great example) McCain's family were naval officers and he went to a private school, becoming an officer himself.

An extremely poor example.

metrovelvet · 26-09-2010 12:57PM

McCain is another Bob Dole. The republicans need another Reagan.

Denerick · 26-09-2010 01:23PM

metrovelvet wrote: »

Obama is an ivy league millionaire. And a Christian. OMG talk about patronising. Wow. How can you miss that?

Don't OMG me :rolleyes:

Obama doesn't claim to be anything other than an Ivy league millionaire. He doesn't turn up in sawmills wearing slacks and pretending to be 'one of you guys, y'all'. Republicans consistently insult the intelligence of blue collar Americans.

metrovelvet · 26-09-2010 01:38PM

Denerick wrote: »

Don't OMG me :rolleyes:

Obama doesn't claim to be anything other than an Ivy league millionaire. He doesn't turn up in sawmills wearing slacks and pretending to be 'one of you guys, y'all'. Republicans consistently insult the intelligence of blue collar Americans.

What Republicans do that?

y'all? Are you indicating something about the south? What are you talking about?

Obama wouldn't dane to wear 'slacks'. No American wears slacks. We wear pants. I think you meant overalls? To go with the plaid flannel checked shirt and chewing tobacco you left out of your stereotype.

Denerick · 26-09-2010 02:29PM

What Republicans do that? Maybe the same Republicans who turned up in the middle of Virginian to churn out the same spiel they did in 1994 (That time in suits in front of the capitol - of course this time every single one of them spends their evenings hanging about sawmills chewing tobacco and grabbing a beer with teamsters in between going home to give their wife a good walloping)

Exile 1798 · 26-09-2010 03:01PM

metrovelvet wrote: »

Democrats alienated the white ethnic vote and the working class vote when Clinton turned the democratic part from being an underdog party [unions, labour rights, etc] to being one defined by gender politics. So the white ethics, IRish, Italians [who were mostly Republican anyway], Catholics, and traditional family values type of people moved away from voting democrat.

I have heard them described as "pre Clinton democrats.'

Nonsense.

Historically these groups where heavily Democratic because of their economic class (they were New Dealers) and the fact that they were regarded as suspect by the Republican Party as well as WASP America due to their Religion.

These groups are no longer overwhelmingly Democratic because they have risen from the underclass to being largely Middle Class. At the same time anti-Catholism waned in the Republican Party and America generally to the point where it's not an issue. That is not to say that these groups are now Republican - they're not. They are split pretty evenly and tend to swing. Nothing to do with "gender politics" of the Democrats or any such crap. :rolleyes:

Exile 1798 · 26-09-2010 03:21PM

metrovelvet wrote: »

What Republicans do that?

Fred Thompson with his bogus red truck.

But my favourite would have to be the big one, George W Bush. He bough a fake ranch shortly before announcing his candidacy in 1999 and sold it immediately upon leaving the Presidency. In the mean time there were lots of profiles of him wearing a cowboy and clearing brush. Just why that brush had to be cleared is still a mystery. The whole thing was absurd and yet it was overlooked by the media swallowed and whole by the Republican plebs.

While Denerick is sometimes too excitable he's right, many Americans have no sense of the ridicules. David Cameron gets mocked in the UK when he tries not to pronounce like the Etonian he is. Yet Bush, the Connecticut rich boy, is allowed to get away with his Texan rancher act for long 9 years.

Republican "Pledge to America"

Comments