That's Nick in a nutshell. Personally, I hope he repents and is saved. If God is unwilling that any be lost, who am I to disagree?
toldailytopic: What adjustments will the Republican party need to make if they are to
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
That's Nick in a nutshell. Personally, I hope he repents and is saved. If God is unwilling that any be lost, who am I to disagree?
GuySmiley
Well-known member
Republicans need to become conservatives. Currently the Republican party is just a 'lite' version of the Democrats. Democrats overspend, republicans promise to overspend not-as-much. Democrats support immorality, republicans will support it less.
The republicans have lost their base while trying to court the middle.
The republicans have lost their base while trying to court the middle.
The problem is that if the "base" is a minority, then the tighter you hold to the base, the more you alienate the majority.
And you can't gerrymander an entire state, which is why the Senate and the WH is trending democrat. A few creative republicans have suggested dividing electoral votes up into districts and gerrymandering those.
But it seems to be unpopular, given that it also greatly reduces the political clout of a state.
So probably not. Eventually, a party has to accommodate the middle, or it will disappear.
And you can't gerrymander an entire state, which is why the Senate and the WH is trending democrat. A few creative republicans have suggested dividing electoral votes up into districts and gerrymandering those.
But it seems to be unpopular, given that it also greatly reduces the political clout of a state.
So probably not. Eventually, a party has to accommodate the middle, or it will disappear.
1. They must learn to stop lying to themselves. Reality doesn't always (or often) accommodate ideology, and the fact that, e.g. you don't like large regulatory agencies like the EPA or policies like carbon taxes does not mean that global warming is a government conspiracy. Figure out what the facts are, and then look for the best ways to address them. And I would love to see conservative ideals applied to the problems of climate change in ways that don't involve sheer denial. Maybe, with the help of Republicans, we could find ways of dealing with the problem that don't impinge on our freedom nearly as much. This is just one example, and there are many more, but I think you get the idea.
2. They must stop playing the victim. No one likes someone who only wants to tell you about how victimized they are, but it's especially obnoxious when it comes from people in very privileged positions. After the 2012 elections stunned the GOP, Bill O'Reilley went on the air to say this:
Racial resentment, especially the resentment of white men over the rise in political power of other groups telegraphs to those groups a hostile sentiment that the GOP frankly can't afford unless they want to hang all of their future hopes on gerrymandering and voter disenfranchisement.
3. Break the power of Grover Norquist's anti-tax pledge and make a serious effort to raise enough money to fund necessary functions of the government. You can still be for small government and limited taxes without being opposed to every reasonable proposal to generate revenue from people and organizations that can afford to pay, and every program no matter how beneficial. The GOP has managed to convince a small but loud group of middle-class and poor people that tax cuts are in their best interests, but most people are becoming aware that the tax cut agenda will benefit incumbent wealth the most and the poor hardly at all, and that they are used as a ratchet to justify greater and greater cuts to social programs.
4. Learn the meaning of compromise. Not everything has to be a crisis.
2. They must stop playing the victim. No one likes someone who only wants to tell you about how victimized they are, but it's especially obnoxious when it comes from people in very privileged positions. After the 2012 elections stunned the GOP, Bill O'Reilley went on the air to say this:
| It's a changing country. The demographics are changing. It's not a traditional America any more. And there are 50% of the voting public who want stuff. They want things. And who is going to give them things? President Obama. He knows it and he ran on it. And, whereby twenty years ago, President Obama would have been roundly defeated by an establishment candidate like Mitt Romney. The white establishment is now the minority. And the voters, many of them, feel that the economic system is stacked against them and they want stuff. You are going to see a tremendous Hispanic vote for President Obama, overwhelming black vote for President Obama. And women will probably break President Obama’s way. People feel that they are entitled to things and which candidate, between the two, is going to give them things? |
Racial resentment, especially the resentment of white men over the rise in political power of other groups telegraphs to those groups a hostile sentiment that the GOP frankly can't afford unless they want to hang all of their future hopes on gerrymandering and voter disenfranchisement.
3. Break the power of Grover Norquist's anti-tax pledge and make a serious effort to raise enough money to fund necessary functions of the government. You can still be for small government and limited taxes without being opposed to every reasonable proposal to generate revenue from people and organizations that can afford to pay, and every program no matter how beneficial. The GOP has managed to convince a small but loud group of middle-class and poor people that tax cuts are in their best interests, but most people are becoming aware that the tax cut agenda will benefit incumbent wealth the most and the poor hardly at all, and that they are used as a ratchet to justify greater and greater cuts to social programs.
4. Learn the meaning of compromise. Not everything has to be a crisis.
That doesn't follow. The EPA is a bad idea because it is a governmental power that takes a lot of money but does not offer the same value of service in return. Carbon taxes are a bad idea because the income tax is the only tax, and all other taxes are inefficient or unfair. Global warming isn't a gov't conspiracy any more than the sugar market is. Do you consider the subsidized sugar market a gov't conspiracy?
I don't think there are any conservatives that deny the climate changes. This is a huge problem in your thinking.
You seem to think that anthropologic global warming is real. It isn't. It is just a scare tactic by liberals who want to play the victim to gain power. "Impinge on our freedom nearly as much"?!?! The slippery slope is valid here, and no amount of easier solutions will satisfy the liberal because total loss of freedom is the only solution they will eventually accept. Sure, they'll compromise with you as long as you keep going their way, therefore compromise would be a stupid thing to do.
There, you see. Stay away from listening to establishment republicans like O'Reilley because they are just democrate-lite. The only solution to this problem is to appeal to the freedom loving person inside all of us, which means uncompromising conservative.
A better idea would be to make gov't so much smaller that taxes can be cut while not going into debt? Saying we need to raise taxes to pay for stupid things is just a liberal power grab.
Crises? Oh, like climate change... wait that's a liberal crisis. Like TARP... oh, wait, that was George Bush stabbing conservatives in the back. Like health care... wait, was that conservative?
Compromise with those policies? If it causes a crisis to stop someone from hurting someone else, that's a proper crisis to have.
Buzzword
New member
This post encompasses the mindset which has gotten the Republicans where they are now.
Huh? The republicans aren't doing anything I mention in my post. This makes no sense.
My thoughts exactly.
zippy2006
New member
What? Wishing for the stuff they haven't been doing for the last 15 years got us where we are today? You make no sense either.
Charity
New member
to ...Stop destroying powerful stars that get in their un respected deceitful way!
Move back to the right.
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
What he said.
In other words, "get a bigger hammer so that it won't hurt when you hit yourself on the head with it."
So ever since President Obama gave them a second drubbing, despite a supposedly disqualifying unemployment rate, GOP elites have admitted that America isn't producing enough angry old white guys for them to win national elections, that they can't be the party of no or the Tea Party party or the stupid party. That's progress! The problem is figuring out what needs...
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2135136,00.html#ixzz2UyDBV69c
So ever since President Obama gave them a second drubbing, despite a supposedly disqualifying unemployment rate, GOP elites have admitted that America isn't producing enough angry old white guys for them to win national elections, that they can't be the party of no or the Tea Party party or the stupid party. That's progress! The problem is figuring out what needs...
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2135136,00.html#ixzz2UyDBV69c
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
My prediction: They won't make any adjustments beyond lip service and they won't be successful in 2016.
I said the same thing about the democrats after 1968. Politicians will do amazing things, if elections are at stake. Sometimes, they will even go to such extremes as to reform their party.
Not common, and not without a great deal of agonizing, but they sometimes will do it.
Not common, and not without a great deal of agonizing, but they sometimes will do it.
If the liberals have not discredited themselves in the eyes of the majority of voters, then there is nothing the Republicans can do to make things better for them.
However, regarding conservatives if they happen to take over the executive and legislative branches in the next election, they had better be honest and transparent.
However, regarding conservatives if they happen to take over the executive and legislative branches in the next election, they had better be honest and transparent.
I don't think the voters are that happy with the democrats. If a party that was anything close to the center was to challenge them, I think that party would win. But no such party exists at this time.
I don't know why. No one's ever had to do it before.
What ever happened to the idealist concept that imperfect people should strive to perfect their behaviors ... and for the masses to expect it of them and hold them accountable?
Have you just given up Barbarian?
Christian Liberty
Well-known member
Which Taft? Robert or William Howard?
I don't see how Eisenhower was a "Centrist" at all, but maybe that's just because I'm so far (Economically, anyhow) to the right. But the man had a freaking top marginal rate of ninety-one percent, and his only difference from the democrats is that he wanted to run social democracy more efficiently. How is that "Centrist?"
I don't ultimately disagree with you that you can't get all the way to 0%. But we can get way closer than we are right now, and anything to move in that direction is a good thing, IMO.
I seriously doubt very many people want your particular brand of "Far-right." Granted, the people don't want what I want either, and I freely acknowledge that, but I'm not pretending I agree with the majority. The majority, unfortunately, supports socialism...