Genius. Reinforce the GOP as the party of gay bashers in an America where the majority and growing support gay marriage and on top of that the image of hypocrites when it comes to fiscal responsibility.
One of the downsides to the 2012 election was that the Republicans weren't slaughtered enough. The GOP needs to be brought to its knees so it can reinvent itself as a respectable and competitive party. Right now it's rightfully the party of stupid and that's not good for the health of the United States.
English
-
No no, I enjoy the GOP as the party of stupid. Free victories for the Democrats!
-
Apparently you are unaware of how many stupid people there are in this country.
-
That's what the Tea Party is for! Perhaps the GOP can break away while there is still hope.
-
Competition between viable parties is good. If the Democrats are the one viable party, as they are now, then it's too easy for them to be complacent. Debating genuinely good ideas is healthy for political discourse.
-
True. But I'd much rather see an actual liberal party vs moderates, as opposed to the current set up.
-
Edited by Vgnut: 1/17/2013 7:00:26 AMThe natural evolution of the GOP would be to become a libertarian-esc party that preaches the pros of a decentralized government, liberal philosophy (in the proper sense of the word), forgets all the bigotry, and is for limited government. The Democrats can then be the progressive party for centralized government and the strength of social welfare. That way you get a balance. The worry is, and you have people already endorsing it, is that the Republicans somehow aren't conservative enough and that they need to purge the party of the intellectual moderates (and the bar for moderates is pretty low at this point) who have years of experience in governing and need to be replaced with largely under qualified men that come the time the debt ceiling has to be raised they don't even know what that means. God help Republicans if the likes of Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann run for president again.
-
Edited by M37h3w3: 1/17/2013 7:09:28 AMWhat? No love for Herman Cain? I'm not sure what I liked best about him. His 999 plan or the fact he song the Pokemon theme song in front of other grown men. You did forget being fiscally conservative. Cutting waste and saving money for a rainy day is a fine position to have.
-
Indeed. They need some decent candidates, but this will only continue as the Tea Party leech holds on.
-
It looks like they might have a deeper bench than the Democrats. Though none of those compare to the star power of Hilary Clinton if she were to run. Jeb Bush? I could write the attacks ads right now. Christie? Maybe. Rubio is a complete unknown still. But, as Obama showed, you don't have to be huge for years on the political stage to win the presidency. Colin Powell would have made a formidable foe but he'll be too old. Biden is going to be too old as well.
-
That's clearly not so, as proven by the Republican-controlled House.
-
You mean the same House of Rep where the Democrats actually gained territory, despite the negative campaign in the last two years?
-
It doesn't really matter if they "gained territory". I would only expect them to after the president lied to the country about how the GOP isn't compromising, while he's doing the exact same. And besides that, if you look at it from the Republican standpoint, having a majority in the House gives them full vetoing control while shifting "majority" blame to the Democrats. In four years, if the Republicans only pass what they want to pass, then Obama will have been gridlocked into doing something moderate, as opposed to his far-left tendencies. His lack of accomplishments will set up the Republicans for an easy 2016 win, assuming they run a minority like Condolezza Rice or Marco Rubio. That'll be an insta-win.
-
Edited by Quantum: 1/17/2013 10:30:41 PMLied about the country about the GOP not compromising? That's the biggest joke I've heard all year. That is wrong on so many levels, to the point that Boehner is a great example, when the Democrats took up his offer for a plan, he fillibusted [b]his own bill.[/b] Talk about compromising, the Democrats have actually had to bend over to many GOP demands since they lost the super majority, despite still holding the Senate. I don't think you understand the concept of compromise. Also, haha "far left" tendencies. Are you aware that the Democrats are a center right party, right? Despite being left of the GOP. Finally, to crush your optimism, demographics disagree about the 2016 "easy win". Especially if Hillary Clinton runs. Then the GOP is done for.
-
If both the Senate and Oval Office are controlled by the Democrats, then it sounds to me like the Republicans are the ones who have to offer and accept plans run by the majority. But then, I'm not really surprised that you're so delusional, in terms of how much the Republicans have had to give up. Considering you don't think the Democrats are left enough, and run off of a European-scaled political spectrum, then it would only make sense that you're as extreme as you are (in respect to the American spectrum). The "demographics" mean nothing. If Obama fails like he has in previous years, then it should only be a matter of choice for the Republicans. Instead of an easily bullied Mormon that makes $50k a day, they should run a minority, like Rice or Rubio.
-
I'm sorry, but it has been the Republicans constantly filibustering/blocking everything, get your fact straights. I don't think you understand the American spectrum at all, because the Democrats are far from extreme, in fact, the Tea Party is the extreme party here. Please, console yourself when an ever increasing number of latino voters consistently vote out Republicans in the next 5-10 years. Whoever runs doesn't make that big of a difference, hence why John Kerry in 2004 still got 88% of the black vote. In fact, I don't think you understand the political spectrum at all, the spectrum is still based on the original French system back in the 1790s, no amount of political misinterpretation is going to change that. You do realize that the Democrats have been willing to accept GOP plans on many occasions, but people like Mitch McConnell end up filibustering their own bills when they come forward and accept the deal? And you call me delusional.
-
Not really. The fact that they weren't able to take the Senate and Romney was beaten by Obama so badly is more telling than them managing to retain the House. Losing the House would have meant the GOP was brought to the cusp of death. It would have been surreal.
-
No, it just proves that stupid politicians get elected by stupid people.
-
Because it doesn't agree with your beliefs? Lawl.