GOP Purge Inevitable?

Endless Nameless · 07-11-2012 03:13PM

I'd say they'll just tell GOP representatives to shut up about abortion altogether to stop alienating female voters, especially during election campaigns.

A lot of Romney supporters are blaming Gary Johnson supporters for the loss in Florida so they'll probably preach economic conservatism harder to squeeze out the Libertarian Party.

Either way, I doubt the Democrats will get a third consecutive term in 2016.

Duck Soup · 07-11-2012 03:22PM

Here's one set of statistics the GOP would do well to chew on.

In 2004, Bush won 44% of the Latino vote.

In 2008, McCain won 31% of the Latino vote.

Exit polls this time round suggest that Romney won 27% of the Latino vote.

They tried to squeeze one last win out of the Southern strategy, but unfortunately for them, the new southern strategy isn't dogwhistles to whites, but picking up more Latino votes in places like Florida. They really, really need to do some major policy shifts.

The one thing that struck me even before a vote had been cast was that the Romney campaign's outreach to Hispanics was pretty much non-existant.

FatherTed · 07-11-2012 03:30PM

Duck Soup wrote: »

Here's one set of statistics the GOP would do well to chew on.

In 2004, Bush won 44% of the Latino vote.

In 2008, McCain won 31% of the Latino vote.

Exit polls this time round suggest that Romney won 27% of the Latino vote.

They tried to squeeze one last win out of the Southern strategy, but unfortunately for them, the new southern strategy isn't dogwhistles to whites, but picking up more Latino votes in places like Florida. They really, really need to do some major policy shifts.

The one thing that struck me even before a vote had been cast was that the Romney campaign's outreach to Hispanics was pretty much non-existant.

Also with the Latino vote growing more and more each election cycle, places like Florida will begin to become more blue. It's even predicted by 2020 that Texas will be competitive for the Dems. Point is that the Repubs have a decision to make - stick with their current "conservative" beliefs or come into the 21st century. Gotta love these interviews from a Romney rally:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY0M7IdNl7U

Duck Soup · 07-11-2012 03:33PM

Endless Nameless wrote: »

I'd say they'll just tell GOP representatives to shut up about abortion altogether to stop alienating female voters, especially during election campaigns.

A lot of Romney supporters are blaming Gary Johnson supporters for the loss in Florida so they'll probably preach economic conservatism harder to squeeze out the Libertarian Party.

Either way, I doubt the Democrats will get a third consecutive term in 2016.

There's an unspoken fact that politicians of both parties didn't like to trumpet (but has been fairly widely discussed here on Boards and elsewhere). According to most economists, the US economy will put on 12m jobs in the next 4 years.

With a rising global and domestic recovery, the US economy will add 12m jobs whether Obama is in charge, Romney is in charge, or Gary Busey is in charge. No wonder President Obama was smiling so broadly last night.

Obama will leave as the hero of two terms, not the villain of one term. He will leave the 2016 Democratic candidate an economy in rude good health. That's why Republicans and Democrats both knew the paramount importance of this election. Not because of their sagacity and policy prescriptions, but because they know the times the economic tide rises and falls.

That doesn't make it a lock for Democrats in 2016, but it makes for some damn favourable wind at their back to assist them.

Coriolanus · 07-11-2012 05:00PM

After speaking to a good few Republicans this morning so far, I've kind of come to the conclusion that a lot of them are like Irish Catholics, they don't like their policies, but every time they're asked about it they still claim to be one.
Literally, the amount of people that voted Republican that have told me that they don't agree with immigration, economic, womens issues etc policies of the GOP but readily admit to voting for them anyway, baffles me.

darjeeling · 07-11-2012 05:05PM

Duck Soup wrote: »

They tried to squeeze one last win out of the Southern strategy, but unfortunately for them, the new southern strategy isn't dogwhistles to whites, but picking up more Latino votes in places like Florida. They really, really need to do some major policy shifts.

The surprising thing is that Obama's vote held up or even improved across much of the old South this time. Outside of Utah, it was the eastern coalfields of Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky and West Virginia where Romney got the biggest swings.

Link: http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president

joseph brand · 07-11-2012 05:26PM

sink wrote: »

Logic is not a strength of the hard right. Denying reality is kind of the modus operandi.

Well, he does do well in the bible states and we know logic and religion are like oil and water.

The extremism of the Tea Party won't help the GOP in the future, considering the rise of Atheism in the US, especially among the youth. The Tea Party are like 'believers' on crack.

Through this whole election, I couldn't relate or have an ounce of respect for ANY Republicans, save Ron Paul. Steve Schmidt is another. He talks like he isn't crazy and he tends to make sense, occasionally.

joseph brand · 07-11-2012 05:40PM

Coriolanus wrote: »

After speaking to a good few Republicans this morning so far, I've kind of come to the conclusion that a lot of them are like Irish Catholics, they don't like their policies, but every time they're asked about it they still claim to be one.
Literally, the amount of people that voted Republican that have told me that they don't agree with immigration, economic, womens issues etc policies of the GOP but readily admit to voting for them anyway, baffles me.

I read posts from Republican voters who think they lost because, there weren't enough prayers said. Take a minute to digest that!

The only real platform the GOP were pushing ad nauseum was the "Oh this country's not performing as well as it should!"

A quick look at the reasons would reveal:
1. The GOP tanked the economy, then they slipped out the back door.
2. The GOP did nothing except try to obstruct any policies put forward by Obama, just so that they could blame him, come this election. Well it didn't work.

But the number of filibusters by Republicans has escalated, and they have been far more willing to use the tactic than their opponents. Since 2007, the Senate Historical Office has shown, Democrats have had to end Republican filibusters more than 360 times, a historic record.

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/05/21/opinion/zelizer-congress-polarization/index.html

Memnoch · 07-11-2012 10:05PM

I'm going to shamelessly copy/paste a post from another forum that I think speaks incredibly eloquently about the GOP and those who support it.

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=7309835&postcount=17

Let’s get one thing clear right off the bat, Republicans: You didn’t lose because people didn’t ‘wake up’ in time, or because Black Panthers carjacked all the little white nanas on the way to the polling place. The UN didn’t shut down stations in Republican states, and HAARP didn't make that gust of wind push a tree limb on just your car. ACORN didn't replace your vote with a big piece of paper that just said “Obama” on it, and George Soros didn't do a Jedi mind trick and make all red blooded Ammuuuuricans tick the D box when they meant the R. Don’t be one of those people who complain about bad referees when it’s obvious their team choked. You lost because, quite simply, your candidate was horrible.
This isn’t the end of the world (except for Ted Nugent and his ilk); you can actually get through this. All you need to do is keep some tips in mind for next time.

1. Turn off Fox News. I know it pains you to think of it, but all of media is not in a massive conspiracy, with your beacon of light, Fox News, cutting through the lies. Look at Murdoch’s other media empires – he’s an opportunist. He saw a need for fear-based ‘reporting’ in the US, and he went with it. The over-coiffed people on the couch feeding you a steady diet of misinformation and paranoia? Not helping you. Coulter and O’Reilly are only on Fox because they need to shill their newest book; they have to be there – you don’t. Unplug the tv, get some fresh air.

2. Stop letting the lunatics run the asylum. Remember when ‘conservative’ meant ‘fiscally prudent and laissez-faire regarding social issues’? Yeah, no one else born after 1980 does either. From Ron Regan’s courting of the Religious right, to John McCain’s choice to open the floodgates of insanity in the form of Sarah Palin, intellectuals and moderates no longer run your party – extremists do. And the American public as a whole fear those extremists, and sent a message that they won’t put up with racist homophobe ignoramuses any longer. Good start getting rid of Akin, Murdouch, Walsh,and Brown, but you have more to go. Which brings us to our next point…

3. Quit the ignorance. From Santorum calling the President a ‘snob’ because he wanted all young adults to get an education, to Tea-party led school boards and districts white-washing textbooks to fit what they wished happened, versus what did, your party is likely to sink under the weight of its own stupidity. Stop being afraid of math, science, and numbers. Find your local librarian and ask her how to research primary resources. Don’t just rattle off what Breitbart or WorldNetDaily or Newsbusters or the Heritage Foundation says – look up the full text behind the sound bite. You’ll find yourself shocked by the results.

4. Tell your leaders that the buck stops here. Are you sick of political ads? Well, good luck, because they’ll be back in 1.5 years for the mid-term elections. Want to stop the rhetoric? Tell your senator, rep, council person, everyone, that you won’t vote for them again till they pass comprehensive campaign reform (this goes for all parties, by the way). Corporations are not people. Super PACs are not good. Politicians aren’t supposed to be run by lobbyists. Get the money out. And those who refuse? Get them out in the next election cycle.

And finally, because this will come up again in our nation…
5. Choose a candidate because you like them, not because you hate the other guy. Who happens to be black. Who, the minute he took the oath, magically became the focus of birthers and prominent ferret headwear collector Donald Trump, a massive movement of the Tea Party who just ‘happened’ to spring up to fight him (even though the things they yell about were things Bush did for eight years without a peep), and a Republican led effort to ensure he’d get nothing done (to quote Mitch McConnell : “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”). I’m not going to paint all of you with a racist brush, but I will say this – they did all of this, and still lost, because Americans got sick and tired of your divisiveness. And this goes for the next candidate, who may be disabled. Or gay. Or a woman.

Republicans, you better evolve. Now. Or spend a lot of Tuesday nights, sullenly staring at the tv, making excuses for your party.

I really think this cuts straight to the heart of the matter. I really feel sorry for GOP voters who are so misinformed, deceived and lied to.

Last night proved to me, a perpetual cynic, that truth CAN prevail. But 49% of the electorate still voted for Romney, and that's still pretty scary. But this is how democracy and progress works. We plod forwards, slowly, but we do plod forwards.

Duck Soup · 07-11-2012 11:54PM

Memnoch wrote: »

Last night proved to me, a perpetual cynic, that truth CAN prevail. But 49% of the electorate still voted for Romney, and that's still pretty scary. But this is how democracy and progress works. We plod forwards, slowly, but we do plod forwards.

What last night proved to me is that America has changed and the GOP hasn't. Marijuana was legalized in two states, four others voted for marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples.

Latino and ethnic minority voters were decisive in Florida and elsewhere. Romney lost Latino, African-American and Asian-American constituencies by 40%+ (African-Americans by 80%+).

America is growing more diverse, more secular, more tolerant and less religious. And it's not like they weren't told. Lindsay Graham said "We're not producing enough angry white men any more" and Jeb Bush warned that if they didn't make inroads into the non-white vote, they would stay perpetually in opposition.

But there are two fundamental problems.

Firstly, the only national strategy they have had for 40 years is Nixon's southern strategy, identifying themselves as the party of white Christians and the Democrats by extension as the party of everyone else. That used to be a strength; now it's a weakness.

Secondly, their party activists are now tea-partiers who claim to be solely concerned with fiscal conservatism and small government, but in reality bring with them all the traditional social conservatism. Think of their booing of the gay army serviceman during the primaries.

Moderates can't get through the district and state primary processes to face the electorate; the Akins and Mourdochs that make it through can't get elected. Presidential candidates have to swing so far right in the presidential nominee primaries that they're damaged goods for the general election.

As Andrew Sullivan has said, it turns out that Obama is the real American - tolerant, liberal and inclusive. The anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-science tea-partiers belong to an America that's vanishing with each passing year.

Manic Moran · 08-11-2012 12:47AM

Memnoch wrote: »

I'm going to shamelessly copy/paste a post from another forum that I think speaks incredibly eloquently about the GOP and those who support it.

No issues with points 1, 2, 3 or 5. 4, I think is naive to hope for and I don't agree with all of it anyway.

I'm reading the post-mortem on the only truly conservative site I'm on (a firearms board), the analysis is about 50-50 on double-down vs "for the love of God, stop alienating moderates/independents."

The Republican party really does need a split.

Mjollnir · 08-11-2012 01:00AM

Manic Moran wrote: »

No issues with points 1, 2, 3 or 5. 4, I think is naive to hope for and I don't agree with all of it anyway.

I'm reading the post-mortem on the only truly conservative site I'm on (a firearms board), the analysis is about 50-50 on double-down vs "for the love of God, stop alienating moderates/independents."

The Republican party really does need a split.

Until they throw out they fundamentalists, evangelicals and social conservatives, the GOP will be about as relevant to me as tits on an engine.

Barry Goldwater warned of exactly this same thing.

"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them."
--Said in November 1994, as quoted in John Dean, Conservatives Without Conscience (2006)

THAT, in totality, sums up the stance of the clowns the republicans need to boot.

RGM · 08-11-2012 01:00AM

Manic Moran wrote: »

The Republican party really does need a split.

Despite being locked out of the debates and ignored completely by the media, and without an endorsement from Ron Paul, Gary Johnson still managed over a million votes.

Can't help but wonder if there's life there.

Memnoch · 08-11-2012 01:04AM

Duck Soup wrote: »

What last night proved to me is that America has changed and the GOP hasn't. Marijuana was legalized in two states, four others voted for marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples.

Latino and ethnic minority voters were decisive in Florida and elsewhere. Romney lost Latino, African-American and Asian-American constituencies by 40%+ (African-Americans by 80%+).

America is growing more diverse, more secular, more tolerant and less religious. And it's not like they weren't told. Lindsay Graham said "We're not producing enough angry white men any more" and Jeb Bush warned that if they didn't make inroads into the non-white vote, they would stay perpetually in opposition.

But there are two fundamental problems.

Firstly, the only national strategy they have had for 40 years is Nixon's southern strategy, identifying themselves as the party of white Christians and the Democrats by extension as the party of everyone else. That used to be a strength; now it's a weakness.

Secondly, their party activists are now tea-partiers who claim to be solely concerned with fiscal conservatism and small government, but in reality bring with them all the traditional social conservatism. Think of their booing of the gay army serviceman during the primaries.

Moderates can't get through the district and state primary processes to face the electorate; the Akins and Mourdochs that make it through can't get elected. Presidential candidates have to swing so far right in the presidential nominee primaries that they're damaged goods for the general election.

As Andrew Sullivan has said, it turns out that Obama is the real American - tolerant, liberal and inclusive. The anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-science tea-partiers belong to an America that's vanishing with each passing year.

It's kind of funny and strangely ironic. The thing that the far right were most afraid of, 'their country,' being overrun by non-whites and immigrants, has actually come to pass and was one of the main reasons Obama won the election.

Of course, America has ALWAYS been a country of immigrants. I guess multiculturalism does work after all.

joseph brand · 08-11-2012 02:28AM

The GOP and the Tea Party are analogous to an old man beating back the tide with his cane. The tide being progress.

Here's the 'best' of the Republican party:

Santorum said they'd never have the college elite, the educated, on their side. He almost said ni**er in a speech too.

Bachmann crouched angrily behind a bush at a gay pride rally.

Romney christened his dead father-in-law and believes that when HE dies, he's going to planet Kolob.

Gingrich left his wife when he discovered she had cancer and refused to pay child support. He's on his 3rd wife now I believe.

Todd Akin 'knows' all about legitimate rape and a woman's ability to shut down the reproductive process.

Richard Mourdock believes rape is a gift from god.

Rush Limbaugh thinks women who use the pill are sluts.

Sarah Palin thinks the Iraq/ Afghanistan invasion was 'god's war'.

Christine O'Donnell took a public stance against masturbation, calling it "sinful" and equating it with adultery.

Joe Walsh shamefully attacked veteran amputee Tammy Duckworth and like Gingrich, refused to pay child support.

Fox 'news', Trump and Ted Nugent are hatemongers, revelling in inflammatory rhetoric with phrases like 'The Obama Regime', 'Kenyan' and 'communist'.

Mjollnir · 08-11-2012 02:29AM

Duck Soup wrote: »

What last night proved to me is that America has changed and the GOP hasn't. Marijuana was legalized in two states, four others voted for marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples.

Latino and ethnic minority voters were decisive in Florida and elsewhere. Romney lost Latino, African-American and Asian-American constituencies by 40%+ (African-Americans by 80%+).

America is growing more diverse, more secular, more tolerant and less religious. And it's not like they weren't told. Lindsay Graham said "We're not producing enough angry white men any more" and Jeb Bush warned that if they didn't make inroads into the non-white vote, they would stay perpetually in opposition.

But there are two fundamental problems.

Firstly, the only national strategy they have had for 40 years is Nixon's southern strategy, identifying themselves as the party of white Christians and the Democrats by extension as the party of everyone else. That used to be a strength; now it's a weakness.

Secondly, their party activists are now tea-partiers who claim to be solely concerned with fiscal conservatism and small government, but in reality bring with them all the traditional social conservatism. Think of their booing of the gay army serviceman during the primaries.

Moderates can't get through the district and state primary processes to face the electorate; the Akins and Mourdochs that make it through can't get elected. Presidential candidates have to swing so far right in the presidential nominee primaries that they're damaged goods for the general election.

As Andrew Sullivan has said, it turns out that Obama is the real American - tolerant, liberal and inclusive. The anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-science tea-partiers belong to an America that's vanishing with each passing year.

That's so concise I'm going to borrow it to spread out on the Book of Face.

Well, well written, Duck.

hatrickpatrick · 08-11-2012 03:07AM

I'm always surprised such a split has not occurred long before now. Economic and social conservatism are utterly irreconcilable with eachother, logically speaking. You simply can't have a candidate attacking another party for their "big government" policies when it comes to the economy, while members of your own party are trying to restrict contraception and ban pornography on the internet. It doesn't work, and it makes the party look unbelievably stupid.

Romney must be quietly furious at his Republican counterparts for their constant gaffes regarding rape and pregnancy, for example. Apparently the majority of the women's vote went to Obama, surprise surprise.
The Republicans attack the left for restricting economic freedom, then ask the public to vote for candidates who would restrict personal and civil freedom instead. If I had to choose between the two I sure as hell know which freedom I'd hold on to more dearly.

The Tea Party is a movement which seems to be distinct from all the social BS, and what I would imagine is that sooner or later the Tea Party types will splinter and form a third party. This party would probably be too extreme in terms of economic libertarianism for most people, but it would then breed new movements of more moderate economic conservatism without all the "family values" stuff holding it back. That I could envisage becoming a very powerful force in American politics if it ever emerges.

jank · 08-11-2012 04:07AM

Some on these posts are a little OTT, you would swear that the GOP lost in a Reagan esque 84 landslide.
The GOP still control the house, they still have the vast majority of govenors in the country.

ALL polls say that there is a majority that want smaller government and no tax increases rather than large government and tax increases.

The next few months will be interesting in terms of Obamas promises, will he move to the left and talk about climate change and social justice or actually try and fix the deficit and government spending. If he does the former I don't see the Dems retaking the house for at least another 4 years if that.

Memnoch · 08-11-2012 10:07AM

jank wrote: »

Some on these posts are a little OTT, you would swear that the GOP lost in a Reagan esque 84 landslide.
The GOP still control the house, they still have the vast majority of govenors in the country.

ALL polls say that there is a majority that want smaller government and no tax increases rather than large government and tax increases.

The next few months will be interesting in terms of Obamas promises, will he move to the left and talk about climate change and social justice or actually try and fix the deficit and government spending. If he does the former I don't see the Dems retaking the house for at least another 4 years if that.

Climate change and social justice are not incompatible with fixing the deficit. You're wrong. Actually a majority of people either want tax increases on the rich or on everyone. Can't remember which of the hundred or so articles I've read over the last couple of days or maybe it was on the CNN election coverage but I definitely saw it. I was surprised as well. Overall it was something like 55-60% who favor some kind of tax increase.

Raphael · 08-11-2012 12:55PM

A republican split would be amazing - It would let the extreme side sit out on the far right, let the moderate side move into a comfortable centre right position where they can actually win votes off democrats, and maybe even break the the 2 party gridlock (A situation where both hypothetical right parties working together can pass something, or both hypothetical centre parties either). Might see myself voting CentreRepublican someday if that happens (Disclaimer - I'm Irish, but married to an American citizen, so may end up being IrishAmerican at some point)

Duck Soup · 08-11-2012 02:46PM

jank wrote: »

Some on these posts are a little OTT, you would swear that the GOP lost in a Reagan esque 84 landslide.
The GOP still control the house, they still have the vast majority of govenors in the country.

ALL polls say that there is a majority that want smaller government and no tax increases rather than large government and tax increases.

Flat out factually wrong. 58% of Americans support raising taxes on higher income earners.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57501245/most-americans-say-rich-should-pay-more-taxes-according-to-new-survey/

People love the idea of 'small goverment' when it's put to them in that vague bumper-sticker form. The problem is that when they're asked specifics, it turns out that they want everything cut except the bits that directly benefit them. Old people don't want Medicare cut. Veterans don't want veteran benefits or the military cut. Parents don't want education cut. Nobody wants the police cut and fewer patrols in their neighbourhoods.

Going after Romney isn't going to solve what ails the GOP. It's policies not people that are the issue - the Catch 22 is that hardline people within the party drive the policies.

Tea partiers select 'small government' Grover Norquist-approved candidates who also are hardline social conservatives. Getting government out of people's lives doesn't appear to include getting vaginal probes out of women's bodies if they want an abortion.

The GOP right screams for less spending and then insists on giving the military $2 trillion extra over the next decade that even the military say they don't need. They holler about debt, but advocate tax cuts that independent economists say will explode it. They tell government to get out of the people's lives, but only if you don't have a vagina.

The truth is the Tea Party is old-fashioned social conservatism in a tricorn hat. It's 99.9% white and Christian and it drives the Republican party's agenda and selection of candidates.

While that kind of agenda can win individual local races, it's a recipe for losing Presidential races ad infinitum. You're right, it wasn't a huge margin but it was a huge electoral college margin. Mitt Romney, possibly the whitest man alive, won as big as it is electorally possible amongst white voters. And still it wasn't enough.

The GOP needs to stop with the constant stream of bills about reproductive rights or they'll continue to lose women's votes (Remember all the "Romney is level with women voters" prognostications before the election? Turns out he lost 55% to 43% amongst women voters (the other 2% going to other candidates), unchanged from 2008.

But Romney was right about women voting on economic issues - it's just that cutting after-school and childcare programmes are economic issues if you're a mother. Defunding Panned Parenthood is an economic issue if you want to control reproduction and get preventative screening to remain healthy and working. Job training is an economic issue. Food stamps are an economic issue.

I honestly don't know where the GOP goes from here. It needs to move towards a more women-friendly, ethnic minority friendly centre, but the activists won't allow this. Florida will turn into a safe blue state in the next 10 years from demographic change alone with the current level of support that the GOP gets from Latinos.

Political commentators said before the election that this is the last time you'll be able to build a winning coalition based around white Christian voters. The result proves we've already gone past that tipping point.

Amerika · 08-11-2012 03:38PM

Obama = 60,459,974
Romney = 57,653,982

Odd, doesn’t look like the GOP is pushing up daises, or needs a major retooling, quite yet.

The GOP still has the house, and there is no super-majority in the Senate by the Dems. I think the GOP needs to do what they were voted into office to do.

Brian? · 08-11-2012 03:55PM

Amerika wrote: »

Obama = 60,459,974
Romney = 57,653,982

Odd, doesn’t look like the GOP is pushing up daises, or needs a major retooling, quite yet.

The GOP still has the house, and there is no super-majority in the Senate by the Dems. I think the GOP needs to do what they were voted into office to do.

What were they elected to do?

I for one hope most GOP supporters maintain your head in the sand mentality.

jank · 08-11-2012 03:55PM

Duck Soup wrote: »

Flat out factually wrong. 58% of Americans support raising taxes on higher income earners.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57501245/most-americans-say-rich-should-pay-more-taxes-according-to-new-survey/

.

That is all well and good but as far as I can see 'rich' is not defined.
46% of people do not pay federal income anyway, the top earners who comprise of .3% of the taxpayers pay 20% of total taxes. New taxes are great until of course your the one paying for it. Gallup has a poll saying that the taxes one pays is either fair or too much, work that one out.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1714/taxes.aspx

Mjollnir · 08-11-2012 04:00PM

Amerika wrote: »

Obama = 60,459,974
Romney = 57,653,982

Odd, doesn’t look like the GOP is pushing up daises, or needs a major retooling, quite yet.

The GOP still has the house, and there is no super-majority in the Senate by the Dems. I think the GOP needs to do what they were voted into office to do.

Yes, obstruct, obstruct, obstruct, obstruct, try and ban abortions, obstruct, obstruct, compromise on nothing, obstruct, obstruct, whine, try and ban abortions and obstruct.

Did I miss anything?

vetinari · 08-11-2012 04:01PM

jank, this is quite simple.

The majority are in favor of the rich paying more tax.
In this election, rich was defined as people earning over 250K a year.
The polls have been in favor of raising taxes for people above that amount.

btw

the top earners who comprise of .3% of the taxpayers pay 20% of total taxes.

means that .3% of the people have 20% of the wealth. This level of income inequality is a bad thing.
You would have a more robust economy with less income equality.

Amerika · 08-11-2012 04:23PM

Brian? wrote: »

What were they elected to do?

I for one hope most GOP supporters maintain your head in the sand mentality.

First and foremost… fiscal sanity! Sure the GOP will need to transform a bit to appeal to a mostly clueless and entitlement driven electorate. Fiscally conservative and socially moderate might be the future to win elections. A greater push towards the states controlling social issues might be their best hope, but granted will be tough sell to some of the base.

Mr.Micro · 08-11-2012 04:26PM

Mjollnir wrote: »

Yes, obstruct, obstruct, obstruct, obstruct, try and ban abortions, obstruct, obstruct, compromise on nothing, obstruct, obstruct, whine, try and ban abortions and obstruct.

Did I miss anything?

Indeed, if they had the real interests of the country at heart they would compromise and work out a deal. The GOP got 50% of the vote in the guise of Romney, but in reality are so split down the middle with right wing on one side and ultra right wing on the other side.

Duck Soup · 08-11-2012 04:28PM

Amerika wrote: »

Obama = 60,459,974
Romney = 57,653,982

Odd, doesn’t look like the GOP is pushing up daises, or needs a major retooling, quite yet.

The GOP still has the house, and there is no super-majority in the Senate by the Dems. I think the GOP needs to do what they were voted into office to do.

The point I'm making is that that is the high-water mark for the GOP's traditional white Christian coalition. That's the maximum possible they can get running the whitest of white candidates against an African-American candidate.

Before it would have gotten them the White House. Today, it's gotten them the bum's rush.

But I'm delighted to hear you say that nothing needs to be changed. The next election - possibly with Hillary Clinton making major inroads into the southern vote - will be more ethnically diverse than ever.

If the GOP keeps on keeping on with the same anti-immigrant, anti-choice, anti-gay rhetoric they've traditionally favoured, they're not going to lose by a little the next time. They're going to get shellacked.

Amerika · 08-11-2012 04:30PM

vetinari wrote: »

The majority are in favor of the rich paying more tax.
In this election, rich was defined as people earning over 250K a year.
The polls have been in favor of raising taxes for people above that amount.

Okay, in the grand scheme of things, what will it really accomplish? The amount of taxes generated will be a drop in the bucket compared to this administrations spending. How exactly will taxing the rich fix things? Please, will someone answer this for me.

GOP Purge Inevitable?

Comments