I could copy n' paste this same thing I said after 2008, but the GOP has to simply figure out a way to appeal to a wider net than the stereotypical "old crusty bible-waving men" crowd. They need - need - to get Generation Y and Hispanics into the mix to remain viable or they'll continue to see once solid-red states get gobbled up by blue, one by one. Their current image is one of Palin, Bachmann, Perry, Santorum, and Huckabee, as well as some congressman spouting off about rape, pregancies and God's will, and ready to bomb away in the Mideast at a moment's notice. I understand the broadbrush isn't entirely fair what with most MSM being ideologically against you. But there is some truth in the stereotype that's been building.

I'll say it once and I'll say it again, GOP. Less focus on who shouldn't be marrying who, long-form birth certificates, pontifications on rape, feeling insulted at "Happy Holidays," and so on; and more true championing limited government.

Obama didn't win this election as much as Romney lost it. No incumbent has won reelection with an unemployment rate this high, not to mention a staggering debt. Some people even on this message board said long ago that Romney was the GOP's John Kerry: A flat, empty suit with slick d0uchey hair and too many platform shifts. And credit the Dems for painting him as an out-of-touch 1%-er. Doesn't matter if Kerry, Gore, the Kennedy family, etc, are filthy rich aristocrats.

I'm glad I voted for neither. The rigidly inept Tea Party right vs. the 'Occupy' entitlement left.

Not really sure what to take away from this election. I truly didn't think with the economy the way it was that Obama would win, even given how bad a candidate Romney was. What's clear is we are a very divided nation which, sadly, was Obama's chief strategy in this election.

Looks like the turnout will be around D +6, less than '08 but it doesn't matter. I didn't believe you'd get that big a D advantage this time but they did so Obama won.

What's funny is that I'll wake up in a few hours with the same government I woke up with yesterday. I would hope that Obama would moderate and that the republicans in the House would as well and they'd try and get something meaningful done. But I think that's highly unlikely.

(11-07-2012 12:08 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  I would hope that Obama would moderate and that the republicans in the House would as well and they'd try and get something meaningful done. But I think that's highly unlikely.

Completely agree

Issues are Issues are Issues. To make changes outside your beliefs makes no sense to me unless you are tied to the party apparatchik and your purpose is to secure power. Let America drift and blow in the wind the way she wants. It is what it is accept it move on.

20-25% of the country wants a Christian theocracy, 20-25% of this country wants socialism/communism. 50-60% of us want neither, but neither party is going to nominate someone who agrees with us, because someone who doesn't want socialism or theocracy cannot get through either party's primaries.

Quote:They need - need - to get Generation Y and Hispanics into the mix to remain viable or they'll continue to see once solid-red states get gobbled up by blue, one by one.

And when they do, the Marco Rubios, Ted Cruzes, Mitt Romenys (By the way you do remember that he's the son of an immigrant, RIGHT?), Allen Wests, Condi Rices, and Mia Loves of the world get LAMBASTED by the Democratic media for being Uncle Toms, and they're allowed to get away with it.

Quote:I'll say it once and I'll say it again, GOP. Less focus on who shouldn't be marrying who, long-form birth certificates, pontifications on rape, feeling insulted at "Happy Holidays," and so on; and more true championing limited government.

THEY DON'T FOCUS On that Motown.. the media 'claims' they do.. and the Voters just buy into it, instead of asking them to explain what they DO mean. We are becoming a country of the "voters who just don't care about more than the soundbite".

(11-07-2012 12:10 AM)tyler90wm Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 12:08 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  I would hope that Obama would moderate and that the republicans in the House would as well and they'd try and get something meaningful done. But I think that's highly unlikely.

Completely agree

It's really depressing when you realize that both parties would rather sh*t on the country than make the other party look good. And boards like this only perpetuate this. I mean for f*cks sake, look at Chris Christie actually going across the aisle and complimenting Obama in how he handled a crisis and how it was responded to here. Those voting for Romney refused to believe it could be sincere and trashed him for it.

I want unemployment under 7%, then harsh cuts and tax raises to pay off the debt. But I had to settle with Obama.

(11-07-2012 12:16 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  THEY DON'T FOCUS On that Motown.. the media 'claims' they do.. and the Voters just buy into it, instead of asking them to explain what they DO mean. We are becoming a country of the "voters who just don't care about more than the soundbite".

I somewhat agree with you in that I understand the MSM will magnify such soundbites and run with them. But I don't see much of an effort being made by the GOP establishment to welcome more Paul/Johnson type of ideas into the fray. In fact, I find it's more of a shun. They are marginalizing the wrong people.

The economy isn't as bad as you think. Go out and make money.

(11-07-2012 12:27 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 12:16 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  THEY DON'T FOCUS On that Motown.. the media 'claims' they do.. and the Voters just buy into it, instead of asking them to explain what they DO mean. We are becoming a country of the "voters who just don't care about more than the soundbite".

I somewhat agree with you in that I understand the MSM will magnify such soundbites and run with them. But I don't see much of an effort being made by the GOP establishment to welcome more Paul/Johnson type of ideas into the fray. In fact, I find it's more of a shun. They are marginalizing the wrong people.

This argument doesn't jive with the republican parties official platform. They might be careful about when/where they make these statements, but these issues are a core set of their party beliefs currently.

And the media includes Limbaugh and the outrage machine on the right. They're hurting your party more than MSNBC.

The take away is that both parties agree a lot more than they disagree. Sure, the words may be different but by their actions they are largely the same. I haven't been enamored with any of the GOP candidates for senate, house or the presidency, but I used to think that voting for the GOP candidate was the lesser of the 2 evils. Now it is clear that voting to "minimize harm" is not a viable solution anymore. It's time to start voting to break the paradigm. Vote for liberty. Vote for those people that will allow us to utilize our free will. The guy with the BO/GWB merged avatar has it right. There really are no differences between the parties.

(11-07-2012 12:31 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 12:27 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 12:16 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  THEY DON'T FOCUS On that Motown.. the media 'claims' they do.. and the Voters just buy into it, instead of asking them to explain what they DO mean. We are becoming a country of the "voters who just don't care about more than the soundbite".

I somewhat agree with you in that I understand the MSM will magnify such soundbites and run with them. But I don't see much of an effort being made by the GOP establishment to welcome more Paul/Johnson type of ideas into the fray. In fact, I find it's more of a shun. They are marginalizing the wrong people.

This argument doesn't jive with the republican parties official platform. They might be careful about when/where they make these statements, but these issues are a core set of their party beliefs currently.

And the media includes Limbaugh and the outrage machine on the right. They're hurting your party more than MSNBC.

My party? I'm independent, and I didn't vote for Romney.

Indeed, I typically lean GOP on fiscal matters (not that they usually practice what they preach), Democrat on social issues and, typically, foreign policy.

If the GOP adopted more of a Ron Paul/Gary Johnson flavor, then sure, I'd more firmly entrench myself with the GOP.

I have seen that Romney did pretty well with independents in this election (certainly much, much better than Republicans in the past). So, in some sense, Romney accomplished his purpose: he got the middle to vote for him.

The problem in this election is that 6% more voters self-identified as Democrats than Republicans. Last election, 7% more voters self-identified as Democrats than Republicans. Look at all the reasons why Republican voters should have been excited and Democratic voters should have been depressed. How the heck can the electorate end up with nearly identical party identification? Why were there not more Republicans voting and fewer Democrats? Even though the independents flocked to the Republicans, it is nearly impossible to overcome that difference in the size of the base.

This is a serious long-term problem for the Republicans. They are going to have to win independents at some crazy proportion (maybe even 80/20) to win if the Democrats can keep and add to their base of voters. For some reason, the young are still voting, Hispanics are not joining the religious right, and urban areas are putting up with hours long lines to vote without giving up. Appealing to the middle probably is not going to be good enough in the long haul (not enough true undecideds left), I don't think a more conservative candidate would have better motivated other conservative voters. The Republicans need to go headhunting for a new voter block to put under their umbrella or, at least, tear a Democratic one apart.

Rice, I made this arguement in another thread.. There AREN'T as many Independent voters as the two parties and the media would have you believe. Any poll or source that says they're counting Independent voters.. are either lying to you , or they got lied to by whomever they spoke to.

If that were the case, and Libertarians TRULY identified themselves as Independents.. the EV might not have changed, but the popular vote should have been WAY more in Romney's favor this election.

Again, every polling source said Romney was higher than Obama with Independents anywhere on a scale from +7 to +12.. you CANNOT have those kind of numbers and that large of a number of voters and lose the election.. it's fundamentally mathematically impossible if there are that many independents.

Quote:The Republicans need to go headhunting for a new voter block to put under their umbrella or, at least, tear a Democratic one apart.

They can't.. or they're called RACISTS!!!

Don't worry. The Democrats will make more Republicans. They always do.

Have seen Obama compromise on very few things these last four years. Do not expect to see it much in the next four years. Unfortunately it's going to be an interesting few years.

(11-07-2012 03:22 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Have seen Obama compromise on very few things these last four years. Do not expect to see it much in the next four years. Unfortunately it's going to be an interesting few years.

He's going to be in office when Obamacare kicks in. He can't run from that. It's going to be interesting.

(11-07-2012 12:01 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  I could copy n' paste this same thing I said after 2008, but the GOP has to simply figure out a way to appeal to a wider net than the stereotypical "old crusty bible-waving men" crowd. They need - need - to get Generation Y and Hispanics into the mix to remain viable or they'll continue to see once solid-red states get gobbled up by blue, one by one. Their current image is one of Palin, Bachmann, Perry, Santorum, and Huckabee, as well as some congressman spouting off about rape, pregancies and God's will, and ready to bomb away in the Mideast at a moment's notice. I understand the broadbrush isn't entirely fair what with most MSM being ideologically against you. But there is some truth in the stereotype that's been building.

I'll say it once and I'll say it again, GOP. Less focus on who shouldn't be marrying who, long-form birth certificates, pontifications on rape, feeling insulted at "Happy Holidays," and so on; and more true championing limited government.

Obama didn't win this election as much as Romney lost it. No incumbent has won reelection with an unemployment rate this high, not to mention a staggering debt. Some people even on this message board said long ago that Romney was the GOP's John Kerry: A flat, empty suit with slick d0uchey hair and too many platform shifts. And credit the Dems for painting him as an out-of-touch 1%-er. Doesn't matter if Kerry, Gore, the Kennedy family, etc, are filthy rich aristocrats.

I'm glad I voted for neither. The rigidly inept Tea Party right vs. the 'Occupy' entitlement left.

I disagree. The GOP moderate failed as the Dem extremist moved centrist.

The GOP members need to communicate. They don't do that, and so they allow the stereotype of ""old crusty bible-waving men".

Every time a GOP candidate communicates effectively, the polling numbers soar off the chart. Palin communicated well w/ her style. Romney communicated well in the first debate. Romney gave it up and "played it safe" afterward.

Romney gave up the Benghazi high ground, and didn't pursue the advantage he had by being right.

The bigger question is why is this charade put on.

For the first time, I'm ashamed of the country as a whole. Obama's reelection ensures that the entitlement class will only grow, making it nearly impossible win an election without appeasing them. The entitlement class is to the democrats today what the mob was to Roman Emperors long ago.
What do we have to look forward to as Americans? Higher taxes, increased entitlement spending, declining healthcare, and a weaker military.
Small businesses will continue to suffer, unemployment will at best remain where it is now, and energy prices will continue to rise. By the end of the next four years it will be very difficult to stand on your own two feet, government assistance will be virtually a necessity.
Israel should be very scared; Iran, Afghanistan, and the Muslim Brotherhood should be emboldened. China will be jumping at the bit to fill the power-void and sphere of influence vacated by the US.

What empirical evidence is there to support peoples opinions that the economy is getting better? If people still say they are worse off than 4 years ago, why vote for more of the same? As bad as the economic situation is, how can a sizable block of the population vote on seemingly less important social issues that weren't on the 'political chopping-block'?

(11-07-2012 07:40 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  For the first time, I'm ashamed of the country as a whole. Obama's reelection ensures that the entitlement class will only grow, making it nearly impossible win an election without appeasing them. The entitlement class is to the democrats today what the mob was to Roman Emperors long ago.
What do we have to look forward to as Americans? Higher taxes, increased entitlement spending, declining healthcare, and a weaker military.
Small businesses will continue to suffer, unemployment will at best remain where it is now, and energy prices will continue to rise. By the end of the next four years it will be very difficult to stand on your own two feet, government assistance will be virtually a necessity.
Israel should be very scared; Iran, Afghanistan, and the Muslim Brotherhood should be emboldened. China will be jumping at the bit to fill the power-void and sphere of influence vacated by the US.

What empirical evidence is there to support peoples opinions that the economy is getting better? If people still say they are worse off than 4 years ago, why vote for more of the same? As bad as the economic situation is, how can a sizable block of the population vote on seemingly less important social issues that weren't on the 'political chopping-block'?

because they are weak minded and lazy.