Internal GOP Study: You're Doing It Wrong

[AZGrizFan]

Count me among those who've "jumped ship" in recent years.

[kalm]

Count me among those who've "jumped ship" in recent years.

It started sinking when I was getting ready to board.

[houndawg]

As long as the racist ideologues in control of the GOP remain in power the GOP will remain a party of and for rich white male bitter enders.

Which, ironically, is what the report is basically saying, and yet they're getting flamesprayed for it.

They're getting flamesprayed by other Republicans who, like John St. Wronge, are so insulated from America by themselves that they can't see what is crystal clear to the rest of the country and instead try to pass off the election loss as the fault of their candidates not being conservative enough, or, in JSO's opinion, too ugly.

Wake up John.

The minute the conks drop their racist agenda there will be more conk latinos voting than donk ones. Apparently the conks would rather remain "pure" and in the minority.

[houndawg]

"Right" is relative.

If there's no higher power it doesn't even exist. There IS no right or wrong. But the point is that a political party should do what it sees as right. If all you're going to do is study what positions you should take to get the most votes then take them accordingly there's no point in having a political party. That's not leadership.

A political party should establish a set of principles then make the case for those principles. It should not, for instance, go from opposing a "path to citizenship" for people who came into this country illegally to favoring one in order to get more of the Hispanic vote.

That's what the republicans are doing right now. Hate, fear, and exclusion aren't selling like they have been. JSO seems to think that if they try letting a better-looking conk sell them that we'll keep buying. I disagree; I think that we're suffering from hate fatigue caused by decades of ceaseless conk scare tactics.

[AZGrizFan]

Which, ironically, is what the report is basically saying, and yet they're getting flamesprayed for it.

They're getting flamesprayed by other Republicans who, like John St. Wronge, are so insulated from America by themselves that they can't see what is crystal clear to the rest of the country and instead try to pass off the election loss as the fault of their candidates not being conservative enough, or, in JSO's opinion, too ugly.

Wake up John.

The minute the conks drop their racist agenda there will be more conk latinos voting than donk ones. Apparently the conks would rather remain "pure" and in the minority.

And yet, when Republicans themselves commission this study to find out WHAT they're doing wrong, they're laughed at and lambasted by the likes of you and analjelly for it. They did it. They NEEDED to do it. And they got the right answer (albeit it might be tough for some of the more hardliners to actually HEAR). Better late than never, I say. I disagree almost across the board with the republican stance on most moral issues. The day that moral issues take a very distant back seat to the fiscal needs of keeping this country afloat is the day I call myself a republican again. Until that time, notsomuch.

[Ivytalk]

Which, ironically, is what the report is basically saying, and yet they're getting flamesprayed for it.

They're getting flamesprayed by other Republicans who, like John St. Wronge, are so insulated from America by themselves that they can't see what is crystal clear to the rest of the country and instead try to pass off the election loss as the fault of their candidates not being conservative enough, or, in JSO's opinion, too ugly.

Wake up John.

The minute the conks drop their racist agenda there will be more conk latinos voting than donk ones. Apparently the conks would rather remain "pure" and in the minority.

Good old houndawg, spouting feel good platitudes from that racial nirvana called southern Illinois.

[Skjellyfetti]

And yet, when Republicans themselves commission this study to find out WHAT they're doing wrong, they're laughed at and lambasted by the likes of you and analjelly for it. They did it. They NEEDED to do it. And they got the right answer (albeit it might be tough for some of the more hardliners to actually HEAR).

Huh?

I'm not lambasting them at all for it. I've been saying this stuff is going to be long-term issues for Republicans for a long time -- pretty sure I've been hammering that since I first started posting on AGS in 2008.

Other Republicans have been saying similar things about their party for a long time now as well -- David Frum immediately comes to mind and he was routinely blasted by Conks on here as a RINO (I don't know if you did, but I definitely remember Baldy dismissing his criticisms).


I'm glad they did the study and I hope they follow its suggestions (I doubt they will, though). Their social conservative dogma is what has kept me from voting Republican. If they follow their suggestions, I could see myself voting Republican more often in the future.

[AZGrizFan]

And yet, when Republicans themselves commission this study to find out WHAT they're doing wrong, they're laughed at and lambasted by the likes of you and analjelly for it. They did it. They NEEDED to do it. And they got the right answer (albeit it might be tough for some of the more hardliners to actually HEAR).

Huh?

I'm not lambasting them at all for it. I've been saying this stuff is going to be long-term issues for Republicans for a long time -- pretty sure I've been hammering that since I first started posting on AGS. Other Republicans have been saying similar things about their party for a long time now as well -- David Frum immediately comes to mind and he was routinely blasted by Conks on here as a RINO (I don't know if you did, but I definitely remember Baldy dismissing his criticisms).


I'm glad they did the study and I hope they follow its suggestions (I doubt they will, though). Their social conservative dogma is what has kept me from voting Republican. If they follow their suggestions, I could see myself voting Republican more often in the future.

Your thread title says otherwise.

[Skjellyfetti]

I think you're missing the point.

It's not the study or the conclusions I'm lambasting -- I agree with them.

I'm lambasting the stubborn conservatives that have ignored these issues, denied their validity, or dismissed critics as "RINOS", etc.

[AZGrizFan]

I think you're missing the point.

It's not the study or the conclusions I'm lambasting -- I agree with them.

I'm lambasting the stubborn conservatives that have ignored these issues, denied their validity, or dismissed critics as "RINOS", etc.

No different than the hardline donks who do the same on the far left.

[kalm]

I think you're missing the point.

It's not the study or the conclusions I'm lambasting -- I agree with them.

I'm lambasting the stubborn conservatives that have ignored these issues, denied their validity, or dismissed critics as "RINOS", etc.

No different than the hardline donks who do the same on the far left.

Waitaminute...how do you get to the left of an islamosociofascisti like Obama?

[houndawg]

They're getting flamesprayed by other Republicans who, like John St. Wronge, are so insulated from America by themselves that they can't see what is crystal clear to the rest of the country and instead try to pass off the election loss as the fault of their candidates not being conservative enough, or, in JSO's opinion, too ugly.

Wake up John.

The minute the conks drop their racist agenda there will be more conk latinos voting than donk ones. Apparently the conks would rather remain "pure" and in the minority.

And yet, when Republicans themselves commission this study to find out WHAT they're doing wrong, they're laughed at and lambasted by the likes of you and analjelly for it. They did it. They NEEDED to do it. And they got the right answer (albeit it might be tough for some of the more hardliners to actually HEAR). Better late than never, I say. I disagree almost across the board with the republican stance on most moral issues. The day that moral issues take a very distant back seat to the fiscal needs of keeping this country afloat is the day I call myself a republican again. Until that time, notsomuch.

No. I'm laughing at them because they need this study to tell them what to the rest of the country is plain as day.

Big difference.

They could get me to take them a lot more seriously if they were, say, as worried about the 1st and 4th amendments as they were about the 2nd

[JohnStOnge]

They're getting flamesprayed by other Republicans who, like John St. Wronge, are so insulated from America by themselves that they can't see what is crystal clear to the rest of the country and instead try to pass off the election loss as the fault of their candidates not being conservative enough, or, in JSO's opinion, too ugly.

Wake up John.

The minute the conks drop their racist agenda there will be more conk latinos voting than donk ones. Apparently the conks would rather remain "pure" and in the minority.

First of all, I'm not a Republican. I am a Libertarian. As far as Candidates go, it's not just a matter of being "ugly." If you don't think that the image and impression a candidate creates is VERY important independent of any political position he or she might take, you are kidding yourself. And the Republicans have not had a good candidate in those terms since Ronald Reagan.

Otherwise, the country is close to evenly divided. Again: The popular vote was 51 - 47% in the 2012 Presidential election and got slightly more votes in the House elections (49 to 48%). Just two years earlier the Republicans got more votes in the House elections (52 to 45%). The Democrats have generally held the edge over the past 100 years or so. But there isn't this big overwhelming edge for either party. It's close.

When you decide to change your approach to gain votes from one group, you need to realize that you stand the chance of losing votes from another group.

And the fact that Republicans had problems in 2012 with turnout among demographic groups that normally favor them is obvious. REALLY obvious.

Sure, the long term demographic trends do not look good for Republicans. But when there's a long standing reality whereby your Party gets the White vote while the other Party gets the minority vote and you have an election where the number of White voters is down that's an obvious problem. And if you're putting all your focus on trying to get more of the minority vote instead of of asking yourself why White turnout was down you are making a mistake.

There is no way, no how, that +90% of Blacks weren't going to vote for the Democrat in this election. Hispanics? Who can say? But pandering to Hispanics could make things a lot worse for the Republican candidate than it already was in terms of White enthusiasm.

[JohnStOnge]

The minute the conks drop their racist agenda ...

What do you consider to be "racist" about the Republican Party agenda?

[AZGrizFan]

And yet, when Republicans themselves commission this study to find out WHAT they're doing wrong, they're laughed at and lambasted by the likes of you and analjelly for it. They did it. They NEEDED to do it. And they got the right answer (albeit it might be tough for some of the more hardliners to actually HEAR). Better late than never, I say. I disagree almost across the board with the republican stance on most moral issues. The day that moral issues take a very distant back seat to the fiscal needs of keeping this country afloat is the day I call myself a republican again. Until that time, notsomuch.

No. I'm laughing at them because they need this study to tell them what to the rest of the country is plain as day.

Big difference.

They could get me to take them a lot more seriously if they were, say, as worried about the 1st and 4th amendments as they were about the 2nd

As opposed to their counterparts on the uber-left who STILL haven't commissioned THEIR study to find out what to the rest of the country is plain as day.

[kalm]

No. I'm laughing at them because they need this study to tell them what to the rest of the country is plain as day.

Big difference.

They could get me to take them a lot more seriously if they were, say, as worried about the 1st and 4th amendments as they were about the 2nd

As opposed to their counterparts on the uber-left who STILL haven't commissioned THEIR study to find out what to the rest of the country is plain as day.

People like Alan Grayson and Denny Kucinich are irrelevant while echoing the majority opinion on most of the big issues.

Über left....

[CAA Flagship]

[CAA Flagship]

[CAA Flagship]