Where does the GOP go from here?

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Yes, the libertarian utopia is still effectively unruffled by reality. Well done.

Reality? You guys are celebrating an Obama victory when the Republicans are projected to pick up 65 seats in the house - a bigger gain than in 2010 - the biggest single election gain since 1938. And while they didn't turn the senate, the Republicans are picking up more seats there.

I'm not really sure what you think Obama won here. This isn't even a stay of execution he's winning. He's winning the lamest duck presidency probably in the history of politics. What do you honestly imagine he can get accomplished?

[myMind]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Reality? You guys are celebrating an Obama victory when the Republicans are projected to pick up 65 seats in the house - a bigger gain than in 2010 - the biggest single election gain since 1938. And while they didn't turn the senate, the Republicans are picking up more seats there.

I'm not really sure what you think Obama won here. This isn't even a stay of execution he's winning. He's winning the lamest duck presidency probably in the history of politics. What do you honestly imagine he can get accomplished?

You're attitude is exactly why his first term was so difficult. Focusing more on how to dampen his efforts rather than work together as a nation to put the past behind us and move forward as a secular altruistic nation. When Democrats lose 8 years of power they grow stronger and evolve, for some reason I don't see the GOP ticket in 2016 being all that different from today.

[theAPAOps5]

Originally Posted by razorwire77

They basically have two options as I see it.

A.) Continue to embrace the far right factions of their party and become increasingly less relevant in national elections. Sure they'll dominate local legislatures in the South, Alaska, Kansas etc., but with enormous consequences nationally as the demographic of the country changes.

B.) Stop purging moderates from your party. Move to center-right on social issues. Traditional wedge issue social politics are increasingly ineffective as a means to divide and conquer the electorate. Acknowledge the basic economic truth that taxation and revenue needs to generated in a fair and progressive way to ensure a healthy republic.

Embrace the realistic tenets of Libertarianism (controlling government surveillance/web privacy, ending the economic disasters of foreign interventionism, reducing subsidizing the military expansion of countries like Pakistan, India and Israel and ending the failed war on drugs crusade.)


We'll see what happens.

Oh it would be glorious if they did this. They would win back this moderate, even thought I didn't vote liberal. I voted as well as I could around realist libertarians and people I could embrace.

Unfortunately the Republican Party is like my drunk Grandpa at a family get together. Tired message, bible thumping, and alienating all the moderate grandkids who are now old enough to know to get the hell out of the room and tune him out.

[Dexter]

Originally Posted by SoCalBronco

THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS

Huntsman 2016. LETS GO

[Blart]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Mitt Romney's loss shows one thing and one thing only: a moderate conservative cannot win. The Reagan coalition has to be rebuilt. I think it will. I think Rand Paul is the future of the Republican party at this point.

McCain and Romney were both moderates (at least before and after their primaries) - I could see why Republicans would want to nominate a hard-core conservative.

I just don't see it as a winning strategy. Rand Paul would be annihilated in a general election, pick your gaffe: BP oil spill, civil rights, no abortion for rape victims, etc. It wouldn't be pretty.

This isn't 1980, it's not even 2004. The electorate is much different. Who would Rand Paul attract, aside from white men?

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Reality? You guys are celebrating an Obama victory when the Republicans are projected to pick up 65 seats in the house - a bigger gain than in 2010 - the biggest single election gain since 1938. And while they didn't turn the senate, the Republicans are picking up more seats there.

I'm not really sure what you think Obama won here. This isn't even a stay of execution he's winning. He's winning the lamest duck presidency probably in the history of politics. What do you honestly imagine he can get accomplished?

Celebrating? If I'm doing any celebrating at all, it's simply because Romney doesn't get to go into the WH and replay the Bush disaster. I didn't vote for Obama. My major issues didn't even get discussed in this campaign by either candidate, which is why I went third party. As far as what he can get accomplished, I think the Republicans will have to realize that this was an ass kicking. Whether they take any lessons from it depends on how steeped in their extremism they are. They can't stall for another four years or they risk the American people giving them twice the ass kicking in the next election. Same with the banksters. They aren't going to sit on their money for four more years. This election is going to break up some of the intransigence. Obama won. That's over. The uncertainty should now be dead. Winner or loser, everybody has to pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and get moving. That's what I think is going to happen.

This election effectively killed the Tea Party, BTW.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Dexter

THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS

Huntsman 2016. LETS GO

Hate to say it, but Romney lite has no shot at the White House after losing to Original Romney.

[Rolandftw]

Originally Posted by Taco John

The long road to recovery. They tried to get one last fix with an establishment candidate. They told themselves that it would be enough to carry them over. The hated Obama enough, and had more than enough money. What they forgot is that they need a message. Hating Obama isn't a message. You have to actually believe in something. What does Mitt Romney believe in? Everything.

The next Republican will be formidable. He'll have a clear and inspirational message. He'll speak to the entirety of the Reagan coalition, from libertarian, to blue-dog democrats. And he'll win big.

Reagan coalition? Despite Republican's insistence otherwise, there is really not much in common with either side of the split of the current Republican Party and Reagan.

I'm sure Republicans will do what they seem to be best at: Attempt to make the other party look bad, to increase the odds of the American public voting for them

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Hate to say it, but Romney lite has no shot at the White House after losing to Original Romney.

Honestly, if you think that Romney's problem is that he wasn't conservative enough then you are in for a rude awakening.

The republican party is too far right to win. They need more moderate candidates, not fewer.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

Honestly, if you think that Romney's problem is that he wasn't conservative enough then you are in for a rude awakening.

The republican party is too far right to win. They need more moderate candidates, not fewer.

Demographics reflect this.

Denial of this is just as bad as denial of the Nate Silver polling information.

Is math a sin to you, Taco John?

[Blart]

Republicans don't want a moderate. Americans don't want an extremist.

[bpc]

Have to think personnel freedom and liberty will eventually come back into popularity this time with minorities and female voters leading the way. Nobody cares about gay issues. Safety, economic freedom principles will eventually rule again or the economy will fall in on itself and we'll have much larger issues to deal with. The same people voting to tax upper class citizens will be the ones b****ing/fighting against it when they are in that role.

[Jekyll15Hyde]

Because the right has the tragic flaw of being overly principled to the point where they believe compromise is failure, I think they double down on the ultra-conservative ideas and lose even worse the next time. Then they will wise up to the radical elements in their party finally and try to repair the party in 2020. The question I have is, will it be too late??

[Dexter]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Hate to say it, but Romney lite has no shot at the White House after losing to Original Romney.

Huntsman is far more moderate and honest than Romney. Romney was one of the most in-genuine candidates I've ever seen run. He's also extremely disconnected from the reality of your every day american.

I have no doubt Romney cares about people in within his circle. But unfortunately I'm not sure he gives 2 ****s about others. To me, Huntsman passes that test.

I also really like what I have heard from Chris Christie. He really showed a lot of character over the past week. He seems really really conservative, but it really seems like he cares about everybody.

Oh and Biden is high if he thinks he can be elected President. Unless the republicans nominate someone like Palin, Santorum, or Bachman I can guarantee you I will vote R against a Biden ticket. Biden is ****ing weird.

[SoCalBronco]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Hate to say it, but Romney lite has no shot at the White House after losing to Original Romney.

Huntsman was the only GOPer that could have won in the general election. He's the only one that would have attracted moderates, which Obama won easily, and his more reasonable social positions would have seriously cut into Obama's lead among women. His problem was the primary. He was even more unacceptable to the base than Romney was. Ofcourse, it was the base that brought us guys like Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock. HTF could anyone vote for him over a guy like Dick Lugar who was one of hte nation's greatest assets in foreign affairs?

I warned about this very long ago. Hopefully lessons are learned.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Hate to say it, but Romney lite has no shot at the White House after losing to Original Romney.

Exactly what I was thinking. Dude‘s just like Romney only slightly harder to stomach.

[Dexter]

Originally Posted by SoCalBronco

Huntsman was the only GOPer that could have won in the general election. He's the only one that would have attracted moderates, which Obama won easily, and his more reasonable social positions would have seriously cut into Obama's lead among women. His problem was the primary. He was even more unacceptable to the base than Romney was. Ofcourse, it was the base that brought us guys like Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock. HTF could anyone vote for him over a guy like Dick Lugar who was one of hte nation's greatest assets in foreign affairs?

I warned about this very long ago. Hopefully lessons are learned.

I hope so. While I realize Republicans don't want to concede a lot to Democrats on certain positions, I and a lot of independents along with most Americans hope there is some compromise over the next four years. We elect officials to get **** done, not sit on their hands and bicker over every dumb thing.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by Jekyll15Hyde

Because the right has the tragic flaw of being overly principled to the point where they believe compromise is failure, I think they double down on the ultra-conservative ideas and lose even worse the next time. Then they will wise up to the radical elements in their party finally and try to repair the party in 2020. The question I have is, will it be too late??

Yeah. The party that nominated McCain and Romney was all about puritanical ideology.

[Jekyll15Hyde]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Reality? You guys are celebrating an Obama victory when the Republicans are projected to pick up 65 seats in the house - a bigger gain than in 2010 - the biggest single election gain since 1938. And while they didn't turn the senate, the Republicans are picking up more seats there.

I'm not really sure what you think Obama won here. This isn't even a stay of execution he's winning. He's winning the lamest duck presidency probably in the history of politics. What do you honestly imagine he can get accomplished?

Celebrating Amemdment 64 I see? Here outside the bubble, we know that there were 245 R in the house. They arent getting to 310

If current margins hold, they are projected to get 2 or 3 seats

[Jetland]

Originally Posted by bpc

Have to think personnel freedom and liberty will eventually come back into popularity this time with minorities and female voters leading the way. Nobody cares about gay issues. Safety, economic freedom principles will eventually rule again or the economy will fall in on itself and we'll have much larger issues to deal with. The same people voting to tax upper class citizens will be the ones b****ing/fighting against it when they are in that role.

ugh

[Jekyll15Hyde]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

Yeah. The party that nominated McCain and Romney was all about puritanical ideology.

I am just commenting on the calls the reason that he lost was he wasnt conservative enough. If that becomes the prevailing school of thought, then it is a step backwards. Given how the right thinks about things, I suspect this will be the case.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Blart

McCain and Romney were both moderates (at least before and after their primaries) - I could see why Republicans would want to nominate a hard-core conservative.

I just don't see it as a winning strategy. Rand Paul would be annihilated in a general election, pick your gaffe: BP oil spill, civil rights, no abortion for rape victims, etc. It wouldn't be pretty.

This isn't 1980, it's not even 2004. The electorate is much different. Who would Rand Paul attract, aside from white men?

well geez... If Mother Jones doesn't endorse Rand Paul, what hope does he possily have?

I think you GREATLY underestimate Rand Paul's appeal across every demographic.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Jekyll15Hyde

Celebrating Amemdment 64 I see? Here outside the bubble, we know that there were 245 R in the house. They arent getting to 310

If current margins hold, they are projected to get 2 or 3 seats

i stand corrected. i misread a WSJ article on the subject...

[Taco John]

The 4 liberty candidates who ran all won tonight, if that gives you any idea about the Republican path forward...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Inkana7

The same thing was said in 1996. The surface hasn't changed, but the message is clear. The GOP needs to change their approach, perhaps radically. This election should have been a slam dunk for them if they understood what a 21st-century America looks like at all. Guess what? The US is running out of white males, who seem to be the only group that Republicans think matter.

Ding ding ding! Winner.

The aforementioned demographic shifts are forcing the GOP increasingly into a "catch 22." That is, if they offer policies that appeal to Latinos, African Americans, and other groups, then they lose the mainstays of their voter base, i.e., evangelicals, uneducated/low-info working class white southern males, affluent "I got mine - screw everybody else" types, et al.

Bottom line: The GOP base is comprised of people who fear change and who want to take America back to the 1950s.

Anyone who believes this problem is going to go away in four years is about as naive as it gets.