Some idiot mowed all his corn and built a big ass caucus room in the middle of the field.

(02-02-2016 11:56 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 11:54 AM)miko33 Wrote:  When the GOP loses FL AND OH, they lose the election. Frank's right on this.

Except he never said a thing about OH initially until I challenged him on his hardline FL stance.


Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

There is a combination of candidates that could almost guarantee both.

Kasich for sure can deliver OH.

(02-02-2016 09:32 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 09:30 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  There is very little to be learned from Iowa as it pertains to Republicans. Iowans vote for whoever panders to them the most, always have. It is why they have such an atrocious record of actually pointing the way for the eventual candidate.

muh ethanol

subsidizing irony that is....

(02-02-2016 09:35 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 09:32 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 09:30 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  There is very little to be learned from Iowa as it pertains to Republicans. Iowans vote for whoever panders to them the most, always have. It is why they have such an atrocious record of actually pointing the way for the eventual candidate.

muh ethanol

It's worse than that. A lot of those folks feel entitled to meet everybody. If you didn't come to their town of 500 rednecks then they won't vote for you because they feel slighted.

I dated a girl from Iowa once and her family made me sick when it came to their discussion on Iowa, politics, etc.

Ted Cruz' idea of going to all 99 counties was brilliant. He pandered to them hardest. Appeal to the Iowan's overinflated sense of self-worth and you win.

I wish you would have stated that before I bet 250/100 on trumpster.....

(02-02-2016 12:19 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The republicans need to get the Reagan democrats back and pick up states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Iowa. The democrats have nothing to offer them. They support bad trade agreements and globalism. That is the opening here. Republicans aren't going to win states like Florida and Virginia by moving to the left. Those that want to go left are voting for the democrats anyway. People vote their pocketbook and Hillary Clinton vs (Insert Establishment type) offers no difference so it comes down to social issues.

I do think the rhetoric on immigration from Republicans matters quite a bit in Florida. It's not an accident that both Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush have won state-wide elections in Florida as Republicans and have pushed immigration reform that isn't just "building a wall" or "deport them all" (even though it goes against the populist strain of the party). If ethanol is a critical local issue for Iowa every 4 years, then immigration is the big one for Florida (only immigration reform has MUCH broader implications on a national level).

As for Reagan Democrats, I take the reverse viewpoint. It actually boggles my mind that the Republicans seem to be hellbent on driving away higher income and well-educated people that BENEFITED from globalism (as that's actually a growing share of the population compared to the white working class) that used to reliably vote for the GOP. The current Democratic electoral college advantage is coming from the higher income college graduates leaving the Republicans (despite the GOP arguably being better for their economic interests) and going to their side. Virginia and Colorado, which have rapidly growing numbers of high income college grads, have gone from reliably red states to swing (or even leaning blue) states because of this phenomenon. North Carolina is heading in the same direction. As a result, concentrating on a dwindling working class share of the population as opposed to going after every single other group that is growing and SHOULD be predisposed to voting Republican (i.e. college graduates and Latinos) has never made sense to me as a long-term political strategy. It can work in certain places with rampant populism, but that's simply not where the country's demographics are heading toward overall.

(02-02-2016 12:43 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:19 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The republicans need to get the Reagan democrats back and pick up states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Iowa. The democrats have nothing to offer them. They support bad trade agreements and globalism. That is the opening here. Republicans aren't going to win states like Florida and Virginia by moving to the left. Those that want to go left are voting for the democrats anyway. People vote their pocketbook and Hillary Clinton vs (Insert Establishment type) offers no difference so it comes down to social issues.

I do think the rhetoric on immigration from Republicans matters quite a bit in Florida. It's not an accident that both Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush have won state-wide elections in Florida as Republicans and have pushed immigration reform that isn't just "building a wall" or "deport them all" (even though it goes against the populist strain of the party). If ethanol is a critical local issue for Iowa every 4 years, then immigration is the big one for Florida (only immigration reform has MUCH broader implications on a national level).

As for Reagan Democrats, I take the reverse viewpoint. It actually boggles my mind that the Republicans seem to be hellbent on driving away higher income and well-educated people that BENEFITED from globalism (as that's actually a growing share of the population compared to the white working class) that used to reliably vote for the GOP. The current Democratic electoral college advantage is coming from the higher income college graduates leaving the Republicans (despite the GOP arguably being better for their economic interests) and going to their side. Virginia and Colorado, which have rapidly growing numbers of high income college grads, have gone from reliably red states to swing (or even leaning blue) states because of this phenomenon. North Carolina is heading in the same direction. As a result, concentrating on a dwindling working class share of the population as opposed to going after every single other group that is growing and SHOULD be predisposed to voting Republican (i.e. college graduates and Latinos) has never made sense to me as a long-term political strategy. It can work in certain places with rampant populism, but that's simply not where the country's demographics are heading toward overall.

Because it takes away American jobs and depresses American wages and everyone knows it. The scam is up. Blue collar whites are ripe for the taken. Trump has proven that. Have a better messenger for some of his themes dropping the bigotry angle and they can win a landslide and the dems can have their minorities, gays and feminists. Trump makes some good points that people can learn from, but as a whole package, he is a joke.

(02-02-2016 12:54 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:43 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:19 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The republicans need to get the Reagan democrats back and pick up states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Iowa. The democrats have nothing to offer them. They support bad trade agreements and globalism. That is the opening here. Republicans aren't going to win states like Florida and Virginia by moving to the left. Those that want to go left are voting for the democrats anyway. People vote their pocketbook and Hillary Clinton vs (Insert Establishment type) offers no difference so it comes down to social issues.

I do think the rhetoric on immigration from Republicans matters quite a bit in Florida. It's not an accident that both Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush have won state-wide elections in Florida as Republicans and have pushed immigration reform that isn't just "building a wall" or "deport them all" (even though it goes against the populist strain of the party). If ethanol is a critical local issue for Iowa every 4 years, then immigration is the big one for Florida (only immigration reform has MUCH broader implications on a national level).

As for Reagan Democrats, I take the reverse viewpoint. It actually boggles my mind that the Republicans seem to be hellbent on driving away higher income and well-educated people that BENEFITED from globalism (as that's actually a growing share of the population compared to the white working class) that used to reliably vote for the GOP. The current Democratic electoral college advantage is coming from the higher income college graduates leaving the Republicans (despite the GOP arguably being better for their economic interests) and going to their side. Virginia and Colorado, which have rapidly growing numbers of high income college grads, have gone from reliably red states to swing (or even leaning blue) states because of this phenomenon. North Carolina is heading in the same direction. As a result, concentrating on a dwindling working class share of the population as opposed to going after every single other group that is growing and SHOULD be predisposed to voting Republican (i.e. college graduates and Latinos) has never made sense to me as a long-term political strategy. It can work in certain places with rampant populism, but that's simply not where the country's demographics are heading toward overall.

Because it takes away American jobs and depresses American wages and everyone knows it. The scam is up. Blue collar whites are ripe for the taken. Trump has proven that. Have a better messenger for some of his themes dropping the bigotry angle and they can win a landslide and the dems can have their minorities, gays and feminists. Trump makes some good points that people can learn from, but as a whole package, he is a joke.

That isn't the danger for the GOP. Sure, blue collar whites might be up for grabs. However, what so many people are missing is that the college-educated whites (who have benefited from globalization as a whole) that the Republicans used to win by huge margins are even more up for grabs because the GOP has shifted toward pandering to the populist tendencies of the blue collar wing. That's why the electoral voting patterns in Virginia, Colorado and North Carolina have shifted so much from even only 10 years ago. Every blue collar white vote that the GOP wins is losing at least one college-educated white vote as a trade-off, and the problem for Republicans is that the latter group is growing compared to the former group, especially in the swing states. Call me crazy, but going after the growing group (especially one that is more educated and has higher incomes, which all translate into being much more likely to vote) in the swing states that you actually need to win seems to be make more sense from a pure political strategy (regardless of how one feels personally about any issues).

(02-02-2016 01:13 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:54 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:43 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:19 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The republicans need to get the Reagan democrats back and pick up states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Iowa. The democrats have nothing to offer them. They support bad trade agreements and globalism. That is the opening here. Republicans aren't going to win states like Florida and Virginia by moving to the left. Those that want to go left are voting for the democrats anyway. People vote their pocketbook and Hillary Clinton vs (Insert Establishment type) offers no difference so it comes down to social issues.

I do think the rhetoric on immigration from Republicans matters quite a bit in Florida. It's not an accident that both Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush have won state-wide elections in Florida as Republicans and have pushed immigration reform that isn't just "building a wall" or "deport them all" (even though it goes against the populist strain of the party). If ethanol is a critical local issue for Iowa every 4 years, then immigration is the big one for Florida (only immigration reform has MUCH broader implications on a national level).

As for Reagan Democrats, I take the reverse viewpoint. It actually boggles my mind that the Republicans seem to be hellbent on driving away higher income and well-educated people that BENEFITED from globalism (as that's actually a growing share of the population compared to the white working class) that used to reliably vote for the GOP. The current Democratic electoral college advantage is coming from the higher income college graduates leaving the Republicans (despite the GOP arguably being better for their economic interests) and going to their side. Virginia and Colorado, which have rapidly growing numbers of high income college grads, have gone from reliably red states to swing (or even leaning blue) states because of this phenomenon. North Carolina is heading in the same direction. As a result, concentrating on a dwindling working class share of the population as opposed to going after every single other group that is growing and SHOULD be predisposed to voting Republican (i.e. college graduates and Latinos) has never made sense to me as a long-term political strategy. It can work in certain places with rampant populism, but that's simply not where the country's demographics are heading toward overall.

Because it takes away American jobs and depresses American wages and everyone knows it. The scam is up. Blue collar whites are ripe for the taken. Trump has proven that. Have a better messenger for some of his themes dropping the bigotry angle and they can win a landslide and the dems can have their minorities, gays and feminists. Trump makes some good points that people can learn from, but as a whole package, he is a joke.

That isn't the danger for the GOP. Sure, blue collar whites might be up for grabs. However, what so many people are missing is that the college-educated whites (who have benefited from globalization as a whole) that the Republicans used to win by huge margins are even more up for grabs because the GOP has shifted toward pandering to the populist tendencies of the blue collar wing. That's why the electoral voting patterns in Virginia, Colorado and North Carolina have shifted so much from even only 10 years ago. Every blue collar white vote that the GOP wins is losing at least one college-educated white vote as a trade-off, and the problem for Republicans is that the latter group is growing compared to the former group, especially in the swing states. Call me crazy, but going after the growing group (especially one that is more educated and has higher incomes, which all translate into being much more likely to vote) in the swing states that you actually need to win seems to be make more sense from a pure political strategy (regardless of how one feels personally about any issues).

Mostly correct, the entire electoral map is shifting. Virginia has become almost unwinnable, though Hillary does very poorly in Colorado (only Christie or Rubio would lose Colorado because they promise to take away their weed).

(02-02-2016 11:54 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 11:45 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 11:41 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  I think Trump is going to collapse and I'm wondering how he is going to take it. Will he come to terms with it or be spiteful....:shrug:

It seems, as many had predicted, that Trump was very popular but that those people wouldn't bother to come out and vote. Do you think this is what happened and if so, do you think Trump's fans will stay home if he doesn't win?

I think he's been a circus that people want to see. Unfortunately for him, they don't really want to vote for him, rather just wanted to see the show.

His numbers will start tumbling in New Hampshire now.

I don't think Trump fans will necessarily stay home, I just think they're going to vote for someone else.

He has the most loyal fans of anybody. He's not going anywhere.

(02-02-2016 01:20 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 11:54 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 11:45 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 11:41 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  I think Trump is going to collapse and I'm wondering how he is going to take it. Will he come to terms with it or be spiteful....:shrug:

It seems, as many had predicted, that Trump was very popular but that those people wouldn't bother to come out and vote. Do you think this is what happened and if so, do you think Trump's fans will stay home if he doesn't win?

I think he's been a circus that people want to see. Unfortunately for him, they don't really want to vote for him, rather just wanted to see the show.

His numbers will start tumbling in New Hampshire now.

I don't think Trump fans will necessarily stay home, I just think they're going to vote for someone else.

He has the most loyal fans of anybody. He's not going anywhere.

You can give it up now too.

(02-02-2016 01:21 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 01:20 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 11:54 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 11:45 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 11:41 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  I think Trump is going to collapse and I'm wondering how he is going to take it. Will he come to terms with it or be spiteful....:shrug:

It seems, as many had predicted, that Trump was very popular but that those people wouldn't bother to come out and vote. Do you think this is what happened and if so, do you think Trump's fans will stay home if he doesn't win?

I think he's been a circus that people want to see. Unfortunately for him, they don't really want to vote for him, rather just wanted to see the show.

His numbers will start tumbling in New Hampshire now.

I don't think Trump fans will necessarily stay home, I just think they're going to vote for someone else.

He has the most loyal fans of anybody. He's not going anywhere.

You can give it up now too.

but he's not wrong....and the fans of the other are no different....

we all know what he's saying....

and he won't give it up....you know that....

(02-02-2016 01:18 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 01:13 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:54 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:43 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:19 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The republicans need to get the Reagan democrats back and pick up states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Iowa. The democrats have nothing to offer them. They support bad trade agreements and globalism. That is the opening here. Republicans aren't going to win states like Florida and Virginia by moving to the left. Those that want to go left are voting for the democrats anyway. People vote their pocketbook and Hillary Clinton vs (Insert Establishment type) offers no difference so it comes down to social issues.

I do think the rhetoric on immigration from Republicans matters quite a bit in Florida. It's not an accident that both Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush have won state-wide elections in Florida as Republicans and have pushed immigration reform that isn't just "building a wall" or "deport them all" (even though it goes against the populist strain of the party). If ethanol is a critical local issue for Iowa every 4 years, then immigration is the big one for Florida (only immigration reform has MUCH broader implications on a national level).

As for Reagan Democrats, I take the reverse viewpoint. It actually boggles my mind that the Republicans seem to be hellbent on driving away higher income and well-educated people that BENEFITED from globalism (as that's actually a growing share of the population compared to the white working class) that used to reliably vote for the GOP. The current Democratic electoral college advantage is coming from the higher income college graduates leaving the Republicans (despite the GOP arguably being better for their economic interests) and going to their side. Virginia and Colorado, which have rapidly growing numbers of high income college grads, have gone from reliably red states to swing (or even leaning blue) states because of this phenomenon. North Carolina is heading in the same direction. As a result, concentrating on a dwindling working class share of the population as opposed to going after every single other group that is growing and SHOULD be predisposed to voting Republican (i.e. college graduates and Latinos) has never made sense to me as a long-term political strategy. It can work in certain places with rampant populism, but that's simply not where the country's demographics are heading toward overall.

Because it takes away American jobs and depresses American wages and everyone knows it. The scam is up. Blue collar whites are ripe for the taken. Trump has proven that. Have a better messenger for some of his themes dropping the bigotry angle and they can win a landslide and the dems can have their minorities, gays and feminists. Trump makes some good points that people can learn from, but as a whole package, he is a joke.

That isn't the danger for the GOP. Sure, blue collar whites might be up for grabs. However, what so many people are missing is that the college-educated whites (who have benefited from globalization as a whole) that the Republicans used to win by huge margins are even more up for grabs because the GOP has shifted toward pandering to the populist tendencies of the blue collar wing. That's why the electoral voting patterns in Virginia, Colorado and North Carolina have shifted so much from even only 10 years ago. Every blue collar white vote that the GOP wins is losing at least one college-educated white vote as a trade-off, and the problem for Republicans is that the latter group is growing compared to the former group, especially in the swing states. Call me crazy, but going after the growing group (especially one that is more educated and has higher incomes, which all translate into being much more likely to vote) in the swing states that you actually need to win seems to be make more sense from a pure political strategy (regardless of how one feels personally about any issues).

Mostly correct, the entire electoral map is shifting. Virginia has become almost unwinnable, though Hillary does very poorly in Colorado (only Christie or Rubio would lose Colorado because they promise to take away their weed).

XACLY! blue is turning red...I call it the 'willie wonka effect'.....one doesn't have to be a genius to figure that out....

that's what scares the smarties.....

The "hold Texas and fight for Ohio and Florida" strategy the Republicans have been using for years now is going to fail. It is one reason that Trump is so appealing.

Trump's appeal to blacks, working class folks, and other groups that are historically left out by the Republicans put a lot of other states into play. He essentially holds the promise of reshaping that dying paradigm.

When Texas goes blue, and it will under the current scheme, the game is up.

The Republican party has got to embrace the populist message. The message of those like Cruz, Rubio, and Bush are dying because they represent a evolutionary dead-end for conservatives.

(02-02-2016 01:43 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The "hold Texas and fight for Ohio and Florida" strategy the Republicans have been using for years now is going to fail. It is one reason that Trump is so appealing.

Trump's appeal to blacks, working class folks, and other groups that are historically left out by the Republicans put a lot of other states into play. He essentially holds the promise of reshaping that dying paradigm.

When Texas goes blue, and it will under the current scheme, the game is up.

The Republican party has got to embrace the populist message. The message of those like Cruz, Rubio, and Bush are dying because they represent a evolutionary dead-end for conservatives.

it's separation of income however one wants to draw it up.....

this shite ain't that hard to figure out....

figuring out the national vs. the states is where it becomes a problem with the electoral college in place....

(02-02-2016 12:43 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:19 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The republicans need to get the Reagan democrats back and pick up states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Iowa. The democrats have nothing to offer them. They support bad trade agreements and globalism. That is the opening here. Republicans aren't going to win states like Florida and Virginia by moving to the left. Those that want to go left are voting for the democrats anyway. People vote their pocketbook and Hillary Clinton vs (Insert Establishment type) offers no difference so it comes down to social issues.

I do think the rhetoric on immigration from Republicans matters quite a bit in Florida. It's not an accident that both Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush have won state-wide elections in Florida as Republicans and have pushed immigration reform that isn't just "building a wall" or "deport them all" (even though it goes against the populist strain of the party). If ethanol is a critical local issue for Iowa every 4 years, then immigration is the big one for Florida (only immigration reform has MUCH broader implications on a national level).

As for Reagan Democrats, I take the reverse viewpoint. It actually boggles my mind that the Republicans seem to be hellbent on driving away higher income and well-educated people that BENEFITED from globalism (as that's actually a growing share of the population compared to the white working class) that used to reliably vote for the GOP. The current Democratic electoral college advantage is coming from the higher income college graduates leaving the Republicans (despite the GOP arguably being better for their economic interests) and going to their side. Virginia and Colorado, which have rapidly growing numbers of high income college grads, have gone from reliably red states to swing (or even leaning blue) states because of this phenomenon. North Carolina is heading in the same direction. As a result, concentrating on a dwindling working class share of the population as opposed to going after every single other group that is growing and SHOULD be predisposed to voting Republican (i.e. college graduates and Latinos) has never made sense to me as a long-term political strategy. It can work in certain places with rampant populism, but that's simply not where the country's demographics are heading toward overall.

Lmao. In other words, they're actually liberals from the Rust Belt states. Gtfo with this shite. All that tells me is that Yankees are too stupid or ignorant to learn economic lessons. You say that they're educated and conservative but the way they vote is anything but. The Dems surely aren't doing the upper middle class any favors either.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

(02-02-2016 01:43 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The "hold Texas and fight for Ohio and Florida" strategy the Republicans have been using for years now is going to fail. It is one reason that Trump is so appealing.

Trump's appeal to blacks, working class folks, and other groups that are historically left out by the Republicans put a lot of other states into play. He essentially holds the promise of reshaping that dying paradigm.

When Texas goes blue, and it will under the current scheme, the game is up.

The Republican party has got to embrace the populist message. The message of those like Cruz, Rubio, and Bush are dying because they represent a evolutionary dead-end for conservatives.

IMHO, the evolutionary dead end for the GOP is the marriage between it and the religious right. I believe more people shift to the Dems because of civil liberty issues more so than fiscal conservatism. Your run of the mill "man on the street" is appalled by the debt and excess spending by the gov't. Start from there, and you can work with that to build credibility for fiscal conservatism. Where the GOP loses is with people putting less emphasis on social conservatism.

IMHO, the overall movement is towards libertarianism. I'm unsure about the strong support for Bernie though - to be honest. I think his support is more because of Clinton than because of his own views.

(02-02-2016 02:02 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:43 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:19 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The republicans need to get the Reagan democrats back and pick up states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Iowa. The democrats have nothing to offer them. They support bad trade agreements and globalism. That is the opening here. Republicans aren't going to win states like Florida and Virginia by moving to the left. Those that want to go left are voting for the democrats anyway. People vote their pocketbook and Hillary Clinton vs (Insert Establishment type) offers no difference so it comes down to social issues.

I do think the rhetoric on immigration from Republicans matters quite a bit in Florida. It's not an accident that both Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush have won state-wide elections in Florida as Republicans and have pushed immigration reform that isn't just "building a wall" or "deport them all" (even though it goes against the populist strain of the party). If ethanol is a critical local issue for Iowa every 4 years, then immigration is the big one for Florida (only immigration reform has MUCH broader implications on a national level).

As for Reagan Democrats, I take the reverse viewpoint. It actually boggles my mind that the Republicans seem to be hellbent on driving away higher income and well-educated people that BENEFITED from globalism (as that's actually a growing share of the population compared to the white working class) that used to reliably vote for the GOP. The current Democratic electoral college advantage is coming from the higher income college graduates leaving the Republicans (despite the GOP arguably being better for their economic interests) and going to their side. Virginia and Colorado, which have rapidly growing numbers of high income college grads, have gone from reliably red states to swing (or even leaning blue) states because of this phenomenon. North Carolina is heading in the same direction. As a result, concentrating on a dwindling working class share of the population as opposed to going after every single other group that is growing and SHOULD be predisposed to voting Republican (i.e. college graduates and Latinos) has never made sense to me as a long-term political strategy. It can work in certain places with rampant populism, but that's simply not where the country's demographics are heading toward overall.

Lmao. In other words, they'd actually liberals from the Rust Belt states. Gtfo with this shite. All that tells me is that Yankees are too stupid or ignorant to learn economic lessons. You say that they're educated and conservative but the way they vote is anything but. The Dems surely aren't doing the upper middle class any favors either.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Kudos for using Yankees in your post. There's hope for conservatives yet.

(02-02-2016 01:43 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  When Texas goes blue, and it will under the current scheme, the game is up.

Ask Wendy Davis how that went.

(02-02-2016 02:09 PM)gsu95 Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 02:02 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:43 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 12:19 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The republicans need to get the Reagan democrats back and pick up states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Iowa. The democrats have nothing to offer them. They support bad trade agreements and globalism. That is the opening here. Republicans aren't going to win states like Florida and Virginia by moving to the left. Those that want to go left are voting for the democrats anyway. People vote their pocketbook and Hillary Clinton vs (Insert Establishment type) offers no difference so it comes down to social issues.

I do think the rhetoric on immigration from Republicans matters quite a bit in Florida. It's not an accident that both Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush have won state-wide elections in Florida as Republicans and have pushed immigration reform that isn't just "building a wall" or "deport them all" (even though it goes against the populist strain of the party). If ethanol is a critical local issue for Iowa every 4 years, then immigration is the big one for Florida (only immigration reform has MUCH broader implications on a national level).

As for Reagan Democrats, I take the reverse viewpoint. It actually boggles my mind that the Republicans seem to be hellbent on driving away higher income and well-educated people that BENEFITED from globalism (as that's actually a growing share of the population compared to the white working class) that used to reliably vote for the GOP. The current Democratic electoral college advantage is coming from the higher income college graduates leaving the Republicans (despite the GOP arguably being better for their economic interests) and going to their side. Virginia and Colorado, which have rapidly growing numbers of high income college grads, have gone from reliably red states to swing (or even leaning blue) states because of this phenomenon. North Carolina is heading in the same direction. As a result, concentrating on a dwindling working class share of the population as opposed to going after every single other group that is growing and SHOULD be predisposed to voting Republican (i.e. college graduates and Latinos) has never made sense to me as a long-term political strategy. It can work in certain places with rampant populism, but that's simply not where the country's demographics are heading toward overall.

Lmao. In other words, they'd actually liberals from the Rust Belt states. Gtfo with this shite. All that tells me is that Yankees are too stupid or ignorant to learn economic lessons. You say that they're educated and conservative but the way they vote is anything but. The Dems surely aren't doing the upper middle class any favors either.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Kudos for using Yankees in your post. There's hope for conservatives yet.

outside of cali, that's where the money lies in it's bed....

that's the irony of the think tankers.....

(02-02-2016 02:06 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(02-02-2016 01:43 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The "hold Texas and fight for Ohio and Florida" strategy the Republicans have been using for years now is going to fail. It is one reason that Trump is so appealing.

Trump's appeal to blacks, working class folks, and other groups that are historically left out by the Republicans put a lot of other states into play. He essentially holds the promise of reshaping that dying paradigm.

When Texas goes blue, and it will under the current scheme, the game is up.

The Republican party has got to embrace the populist message. The message of those like Cruz, Rubio, and Bush are dying because they represent a evolutionary dead-end for conservatives.

IMHO, the evolutionary dead end for the GOP is the marriage between it and the religious right. I believe more people shift to the Dems because of civil liberty issues more so than fiscal conservatism. Your run of the mill "man on the street" is appalled by the debt and excess spending by the gov't. Start from there, and you can work with that to build credibility for fiscal conservatism. Where the GOP loses is with people putting less emphasis on social conservatism.

IMHO, the overall movement is towards libertarianism. I'm unsure about the strong support for Bernie though - to be honest. I think his support is more because of Clinton than because of his own views.

I think that is the easy answer but I honestly believe it is the conservative economic message which drives people away. The social issues only impact certain people and are only drivers within narrow strips of the population.

Economic growth is and always will be what people care about. The populist message of bringing jobs back to America, supporting tariffs, concentrating on the working man, etc is what appeals because it is what most Americans see themselves as, or want to be.

The message from the Ted Cruz or establishment Republican is always the same; shutting down factories is good for America in the long run because of globalism, free trade, expanded markets, and other buzzwords which don't mean anything the the guy who just lost his job or the town where the cement factory just closed down.

There is a populist streak in the American psyche which wants to see America as a nation of factory workers, not drive through workers. The Democrats talking about regulation, etc is off the mark but closer than telling people to eat **** because it is good for them and they will figure that out sooner or later.

The conservative economic policy is the real sacred cow, more so than abortion or gun rights ever will be. That's why we never discuss its failure; no, it has to be that other stuff. It isn't.