The GOP establishment invested so much into getting candidates that fit their cookie cutter mold of what a Republican senate candidate should look like and now two of the one size fits all candidates are in real trouble and will likely lose come November.

Tom Tillis the GOP establishment, from day one, was known by NC residents to have "baggage" because of some of the NC legislatures unpopular laws passed this year. As House Speaker Tillis gets the blame for all unpopular NC legislation and the democrats have done a great job in tying him to state laws passed in 2014.

Kansas senator Pat Roberts is clearly unpopular in Kansas and would have lost his primary had the GOP not invested heavily in keeping the incumbent. Now Roberts trails the independent even with the democrat challenger included in the polling.

Both of these races had viable Tea Party or other alternative candidates, but the alternatives did not fit the plan vanilla mold the GOP is now going for, end result these two seats might very well cost the GOP control of the Senate.

More broadly than that has been the GOP's ability to nationalize the race by using Obama and his unpopular policies against democrat challengers. I have yet to see an ad mentioning Obama's amnesty plan and it's near unanimous support by democrats.

Let's worry about this after the midterms. Right now is not the time to be weakening the brand.

(09-17-2014 07:51 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Let's worry about this after the midterms. Right now is not the time to be weakening the brand.

I completely agree!

But a small point on those two elections... we have a libertarian taking 6% in NC and an independent in KS that is so liberal that the Dems are trying to kick their candidate out of the race.

I read somewhere that not a single Dem incumbent had a serious primary challenger. Those of us on the right cannot rely on the media or entertainment stars to provide our candidates with cover. So, maybe we should stop with the friendly fire and get behind the candidate. And, don't even get me started on people that sit home because the "real conservative" wasn't running.

If the GOP doesn't take the Senate I will be totally shocked.

Right now we need unity. The Democrats must go. It's time.

(09-17-2014 08:09 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Right now we need unity. The Democrats must go. It's time.

The problem isn't a weak brand or unity, it's tepid support for candidates that weren't exactly the GOP bases' first choice. In Kansas it's not that the Independent candidate speaks to the voters in Kansas, its that Roberts fails to energize the GOP base so the other guy is the de facto front runner. In NC nothing the Legislature did was wildly popular, but they did do a few things to piss of teachers. Now it's a long line of teachers doing spots for Kay Hagan saying what an SOB Tom Tillis is. Sometimes having statewide name recognition isn't a good thing. Unfortunately the Libertarian candidate may be the difference maker in NC.

We'll see what happens and who turns out. These candidates are milquetoast, but we have a shot in more unlikely places like Michigan, NH, Iowa, and CO.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

(09-17-2014 07:51 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Let's worry about this after the midterms. Right now is not the time to be weakening the brand.

You don't want to see it addressed at any time. You complain any time criicism is leveled against GOP practices. How sincere are you about seeing the GOP succeed?

Now is exactly the time to make sure this crap isn't forgotten, otherwise you end up w/ another McRomney in the general election.

Thom Tillis and the GOP legislature aren't anything close to traditional GOPers. They are TeaParty Republicans and they are finding out that when running statewide that isn't an advantage. Tillis' wants to have it both ways, but few are buying his act. Voters got their eyes opened over the last two years and there is buyers remorse. He still might pull out a win, it will be very close.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(09-18-2014 07:24 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  Thom Tillis and the GOP legislature aren't anything close to traditional GOPers. They are TeaParty Republicans and they are finding out that when running statewide that isn't an advantage. Tillis' wants to have it both ways, but few are buying his act. Voters got their eyes opened over the last two years and there is buyers remorse. He still might pull out a win, it will be very close.

But the TEA Party is traditional republicanism. Republicans are in trouble because:

1) GWB and Cheney and Rummy got us into two wars that were not fought to win, and
2) Hardline positions on abortion and gay rights turn off a lot of voters who would be inclined to vote republican on other issues.

Neither of those is a TEA Party position. Neither of those is a traditional republican position. They are neocon positions, and neocons used to be conservative democrats. But there aren't any conservative democrats left.

The problem now is that so-called mainstream republicans believe that they cannot hold onto their base without holding onto those two positions. That may be correct. If so, the republican party is doomed, because they are in a no-win situation.

(09-18-2014 07:24 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  Thom Tillis and the GOP legislature aren't anything close to traditional GOPers. They are TeaParty Republicans and they are finding out that when running statewide that isn't an advantage. Tillis' wants to have it both ways, but few are buying his act. Voters got their eyes opened over the last two years and there is buyers remorse. He still might pull out a win, it will be very close.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Granted, I know little about NC politics, but it was my understanding in the primary process that the other guy (don't recall his name) was the Tea Party candidate and Tillis was the establishment candidate. At least that is how the local news portrayed it (NE North Carolina is in our "viewing area")

(09-18-2014 07:50 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-18-2014 07:24 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  Thom Tillis and the GOP legislature aren't anything close to traditional GOPers. They are TeaParty Republicans and they are finding out that when running statewide that isn't an advantage. Tillis' wants to have it both ways, but few are buying his act. Voters got their eyes opened over the last two years and there is buyers remorse. He still might pull out a win, it will be very close.

But the TEA Party is traditional republicanism. Republicans are in trouble because:

1) GWB and Cheney and Rummy got us into two wars that were not fought to win, and
2) Hardline positions on abortion and gay rights turn off a lot of voters who would be inclined to vote republican on other issues.

You're not being fully accurate here.

1) True, but Obama hasn't done any different and got re-elected. Moreover, most of these positions open to election right now are not impacted greatly by this issue.
The press made a big deal out of the wars under Bush, but not at all under Obama. The GOP has opposition in the news media that must be addressed.

2) That's simply not true. Abortion is grossly unpopular by many voters in many districts.
What happens with these issues is that token GOP candidates can't articulate sound positions that satisfy their base and don't alienate independents. The press doesn't help here either, but the bigger issue is that the GOP isn't interested in finding candidates who communicate well. Moreover, the big GOP mouthpieces (Rush, Hannity, etc) don't aid TEA Party candidates, and often work against them.

Quote:The problem now is that so-called mainstream republicans believe that they cannot hold onto their base without holding onto those two positions. That may be correct. If so, the republican party is doomed, because they are in a no-win situation.

Yes. So how did that happen? Who's behind the scenes machinations led to this situation?

(09-17-2014 07:43 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  The GOP establishment invested so much into getting candidates that fit their cookie cutter mold of what a Republican senate candidate should look like and now two of the one size fits all candidates are in real trouble and will likely lose come November.

Tom Tillis the GOP establishment, from day one, was known by NC residents to have "baggage" because of some of the NC legislatures unpopular laws passed this year. As House Speaker Tillis gets the blame for all unpopular NC legislation and the democrats have done a great job in tying him to state laws passed in 2014.

Kansas senator Pat Roberts is clearly unpopular in Kansas and would have lost his primary had the GOP not invested heavily in keeping the incumbent. Now Roberts trails the independent even with the democrat challenger included in the polling.

Both of these races had viable Tea Party or other alternative candidates, but the alternatives did not fit the plan vanilla mold the GOP is now going for, end result these two seats might very well cost the GOP control of the Senate.

More broadly than that has been the GOP's ability to nationalize the race by using Obama and his unpopular policies against democrat challengers. I have yet to see an ad mentioning Obama's amnesty plan and it's near unanimous support by democrats.

Since I live here in NC for half the year I follow the Tillis / Hagan campaign pretty close. Hagan constantly beats on Tillis record of giving tax breaks to "yacht and private jet owners" I think Tillis needs to continue to tie Hagan to Obama, the VA scandal, and the economy. I know down here in SE NC Hagan will not stand a chance.

(09-17-2014 08:09 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Right now we need unity. The Democrats must go. It's time.

(09-18-2014 06:10 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(09-17-2014 08:09 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Right now we need unity. The Democrats must go. It's time.

The problem isn't a weak brand or unity, it's tepid support for candidates that weren't exactly the GOP bases' first choice. In Kansas it's not that the Independent candidate speaks to the voters in Kansas, its that Roberts fails to energize the GOP base so the other guy is the de facto front runner. In NC nothing the Legislature did was wildly popular, but they did do a few things to piss of teachers. Now it's a long line of teachers doing spots for Kay Hagan saying what an SOB Tom Tillis is. Sometimes having statewide name recognition isn't a good thing. Unfortunately the Libertarian candidate may be the difference maker in NC.

Same old problem. The libertarians helping the Democrats stay in power by causing issues in the GOP. The libertarians are the DNC's best weapon.

(09-18-2014 08:25 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-18-2014 06:10 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(09-17-2014 08:09 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Right now we need unity. The Democrats must go. It's time.

The problem isn't a weak brand or unity, it's tepid support for candidates that weren't exactly the GOP bases' first choice. In Kansas it's not that the Independent candidate speaks to the voters in Kansas, its that Roberts fails to energize the GOP base so the other guy is the de facto front runner. In NC nothing the Legislature did was wildly popular, but they did do a few things to piss of teachers. Now it's a long line of teachers doing spots for Kay Hagan saying what an SOB Tom Tillis is. Sometimes having statewide name recognition isn't a good thing. Unfortunately the Libertarian candidate may be the difference maker in NC.

Same old problem. The libertarians helping the Democrats stay in power by causing issues in the GOP. The libertarians are the DNC's best weapon.

Uh, you just conceded that the GOP was pushing unelectable candidates over more libertarian ones who would be electable.

So how is that libertarian's fault?

Libertarians aren't the problem. There's corruption in the GOP backrooms.

(09-18-2014 07:58 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(09-18-2014 07:50 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  But the TEA Party is traditional republicanism. Republicans are in trouble because:
1) GWB and Cheney and Rummy got us into two wars that were not fought to win, and
2) Hardline positions on abortion and gay rights turn off a lot of voters who would be inclined to vote republican on other issues.

You're not being fully accurate here.
1) True, but Obama hasn't done any different and got re-elected. Moreover, most of these positions open to election right now are not impacted greatly by this issue.
The press made a big deal out of the wars under Bush, but not at all under Obama. The GOP has opposition in the news media that must be addressed.
2) That's simply not true. Abortion is grossly unpopular by many voters in many districts.
What happens with these issues is that token GOP candidates can't articulate sound positions that satisfy their base and don't alienate independents. The press doesn't help here either, but the bigger issue is that the GOP isn't interested in finding candidates who communicate well. Moreover, the big GOP mouthpieces (Rush, Hannity, etc) don't aid TEA Party candidates, and often work against them.

I was oversimplifying, but I don't think misleadingly so.

Congress swung back to dems in 2006 because of 1) opposition to the war, and 2) a bunch of blue dogs that Rahm Emanuel recruited to run in places were traditional democrats were unelectable. The republicans picked off the blue dogs over Obamacare and retook the house in 2010, but senate inherently turns over more slowly. This trenche ought to be easy to turn because so many of them rode in on Obama's coattails, but republicans just haven't found a message that resonates. That ought to be the goal, get a message that resonates and then enforce the discipline to keep everybody on message. Newt did that in 1994, which remains the most successful republican election of any of our lifetimes. He just didn't keep them on message after taking office--probably because he's an arrogant a-hole to try to work with.

As for abortion, it is pretty clear that it is grossly unpopular with many voters in many districts, and equally clear that it is grossly popular with about an equal number in an equal number of districts. That equal number is about 25% on each extreme, and you can't win an election with 25%. The other 50% would generally allow abortion with varying levels of restrictions. Democrats do better with the 50% in the middle because of many reasons, including (as you noted on the war issue) the fact that a significant majority of the media are in the tank for the left and portray issues to favor their team. Ask yourself this question. If the media are in the tank for democrats, why is it that so many times when they get a republican candidate on, they steer the interview toward abortion? Is that because abortion is a winner for republicans? Of course not.

I actually think some social conservative issues may be winners with minorities. The numbers of Roman Catholics among Hispanics and Fundamentalists among Blacks suggest that there are inroads to be made in both communities. But republicans need to craft an economic message that works with them--something along the lines of Jack Kemp. The real problem that republicans have may trace back to the fact that Jack Kemp and GHWB didn't like each other personally. I always found that strange because I have known both and always thought of both as very likable and intelligent people. And GHWB could have been the perfect guy to advance Kemp's economic message.

What republicans need to understand is the votes they are going to get on abortion are never going democrat and they're not going to get any more by talking about it. So talk about things that will get you votes and focus on them. Do a Debbie Wasserman Schultz and respond to every question by changing the subject to whatever mantra you want to launch that day.

Quote:

Quote:The problem now is that so-called mainstream republicans believe that they cannot hold onto their base without holding onto those two positions. That may be correct. If so, the republican party is doomed, because they are in a no-win situation.

Yes. So how did that happen? Who's behind the scenes machinations led to this situation?

I don't think it was behind the scenes. The republican party did it to itself.

Again, while the GOP focuses purely on elections the Dems focus on affecting our culture which ultimately translates into votes.

(09-18-2014 08:32 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(09-18-2014 08:25 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(09-18-2014 06:10 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(09-17-2014 08:09 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Right now we need unity. The Democrats must go. It's time.

The problem isn't a weak brand or unity, it's tepid support for candidates that weren't exactly the GOP bases' first choice. In Kansas it's not that the Independent candidate speaks to the voters in Kansas, its that Roberts fails to energize the GOP base so the other guy is the de facto front runner. In NC nothing the Legislature did was wildly popular, but they did do a few things to piss of teachers. Now it's a long line of teachers doing spots for Kay Hagan saying what an SOB Tom Tillis is. Sometimes having statewide name recognition isn't a good thing. Unfortunately the Libertarian candidate may be the difference maker in NC.

Same old problem. The libertarians helping the Democrats stay in power by causing issues in the GOP. The libertarians are the DNC's best weapon.

Uh, you just conceded that the GOP was pushing unelectable candidates over more libertarian ones who would be electable.

So how is that libertarian's fault?

Libertarians aren't the problem. There's corruption in the GOP backrooms.

I am inclined to agree with Torch on this one. GOP needs new leadership. The only ones giving them money right now are lobbyists and special interests and that (establishment) is who they are representing. They need to energize the people and that is why individuals like Ted Cruz are doing well. He takes his conservative approach to the people, gets money from the people, and does not need to depend on the RNC.

(09-18-2014 08:44 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-18-2014 07:58 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(09-18-2014 07:50 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  But the TEA Party is traditional republicanism. Republicans are in trouble because:
1) GWB and Cheney and Rummy got us into two wars that were not fought to win, and
2) Hardline positions on abortion and gay rights turn off a lot of voters who would be inclined to vote republican on other issues.

You're not being fully accurate here.
1) True, but Obama hasn't done any different and got re-elected. Moreover, most of these positions open to election right now are not impacted greatly by this issue.
The press made a big deal out of the wars under Bush, but not at all under Obama. The GOP has opposition in the news media that must be addressed.
2) That's simply not true. Abortion is grossly unpopular by many voters in many districts.
What happens with these issues is that token GOP candidates can't articulate sound positions that satisfy their base and don't alienate independents. The press doesn't help here either, but the bigger issue is that the GOP isn't interested in finding candidates who communicate well. Moreover, the big GOP mouthpieces (Rush, Hannity, etc) don't aid TEA Party candidates, and often work against them.

I was oversimplifying, but I don't think misleadingly so.

Congress swung back to dems in 2006 because of 1) opposition to the war, and

I thought it was a bigger picture: the GOP did NOTHING (including addressing the wars) from 2004-2006 except pontificate how they could win 2006.

Their sloth and blatant 2 year run of electioneering got the populace fed up with such antics.

Quote: This trenche ought to be easy to turn because so many of them rode in on Obama's coattails, but republicans just haven't found a message that resonates. That ought to be the goal, get a message that resonates and then enforce the discipline to keep everybody on message.

I agree. Again, I keep insisting that most GOP candidates lack persuasive communication skills. So why do party leaders keep grooming such failures?

Quote:As for abortion, it is pretty clear that it is grossly unpopular with many voters in many districts, and equally clear that it is grossly popular with about an equal number in an equal number of districts. That equal number is about 25% on each extreme, and you can't win an election with 25%. The other 50% would generally allow abortion with varying levels of restrictions. Democrats do better with the 50% in the middle because of many reasons, including (as you noted on the war issue) the fact that a significant majority of the media are in the tank for the left and portray issues to favor their team.

I continue to agree with you that the most effective approach for pro-lifers is to go stepwise, and not insist on all-or-nothing ban on abortion.

Quote: Ask yourself this question. If the media are in the tank for democrats, why is it that so many times when they get a republican candidate on, they steer the interview toward abortion? Is that because abortion is a winner for republicans? Of course not.

I get what you're saying. But there are winning responses to those questions. Why are candidates not prepping themselves with that?

Quote:I actually think some social conservative issues may be winners with minorities. The numbers of Roman Catholics among Hispanics and Fundamentalists among Blacks suggest that there are inroads to be made in both communities. But republicans need to craft an economic message that works with them

Again, I agree. But it needs to start before campaigning. There needs to be some sowing of seeds among these voters, and those who will grow into voters. That's something I was saying Condi Rice could have been doing...but she didn't.

Quote:What republicans need to understand is the votes they are going to get on abortion are never going democrat and they're not going to get any more by talking about it. So talk about things that will get you votes and focus on them. Do a Debbie Wasserman Schultz and respond to every question by changing the subject to whatever mantra you want to launch that day.

Again, I agree. There are potential votes to be won from RC, religious blacks and jewish voters.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:The problem now is that so-called mainstream republicans believe that they cannot hold onto their base without holding onto those two positions. That may be correct. If so, the republican party is doomed, because they are in a no-win situation.

Yes. So how did that happen? Who's behind the scenes machinations led to this situation?

I don't think it was behind the scenes. The republican party did it to itself.

Maybe so, but you don't climb in the big political parties w/o backroom help. And potential winners from the GOP have been thwarted, not helped, by the power brokers.