• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

The GOP is too old, too white, and too insular

A

Anonymous

Guest
Republicans want to end perception as 'stuffy old men'


Posted by
CNN Political Unit

Washington (CNN) – The beleaguered Republican Party put into writing Monday what many of its top strategists and leaders have been saying since last year's election losses: The GOP is too old, too white, and too insular to win national contests.

In a months-in-the-making report - which tops out at 100 pages and includes hundreds of recommended fixes - the Republican National Committee acknowledges its messaging problems, identifies structural setbacks to the primary calendar and spells out how to target specific demographic groups that voted overwhelmingly for Democrats in 2012.

"It all goes back to what our moms used to tell us: It's not just what we say; it's how we say it," Priebus said at a press conference Monday. "The promise of opportunity will be our message, and a spirit of optimism will infuse everything that we do."

The report was initiated by the RNC soon after last November's vote, which saw Republicans lose the presidency as well as seats in the U.S. House. Mitt Romney, the party's White House hopeful, lost among every demographic bloc except white men, a fact that helped spur collective soul searching among the party's leaders.

"Public perception of the Party is at record lows," the report states. "Young voters are increasingly rolling their eyes at what the Party represents, and many minorities wrongly think that Republicans do not like them or want them in the country. When someone rolls their eyes at us, they are not likely to open their ears to us."

Romney won only 27% of Latino voters - a lower percentage than the last two GOP presidential candidates. Many pointed to Romney's hardline stance on immigration, including his endorsement of a policy of "self-deportation," as a reason.

In Monday's report, that policy was specifically shunned as a turnoff for voters who could potentially vote Republican.

"If Hispanic Americans perceive that a GOP nominee or candidate does not want them in the United States (i.e. self-deportation), they will not pay attention to our next sentence," it states. In one of its few policy recommendations, the report counsels Republicans to "embrace and champion" comprehensive immigration reform.

And in order to attract young voters, the party recommends a "change in tone," particularly on social issues.

"In every session with young voters, social issues were at the forefront of the discussion; many see them as the civil rights issues of our time. We must be a party that is welcoming and inclusive for all voters," it states, adding later that it's imperative that young people not regard the GOP as "totally intolerant of alternative points of view."


"Our policies are sound, but I think that in many ways the way that we communicate can be a real problem," Priebus said at the report's release.

He continued, "Decent people can disagree on issues. I don't agree with my wife on 100% of the issues, but it doesn't mean we don't have a good marriage. I think that we have to be a welcoming party. I think that we have to have a party that says, 'If you want to support our party and you want to walk through that door, I don't need to agree with you on every single issue.'"

"Republican Party is, indeed, a big tent," said Ari Fleischer, a CNN contributor who was one of the report's authors, on Monday. "We need to make sure that's a big tent, and not just rhetoric."

"Take the issue of gay marriage, for example, and gay rights. There is a genuine generational split in the Republican Party on that issue. Many, many young conservatives are for gay rights, are for gay marriage. And we openly talk about that and acknowledge that and we welcome that. That's part of what a big tent should be about," Fleischer said on CNN's "Starting Point."

They are finally admitting what I have been saying all along... At least that's one step in fixing their problem...
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
For those of you who have wondered why the old man keeps posting the same tired crap over and over and over again, here's your answer.

Look-at-Me1_zps0548ed80.jpg
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
And too liberal.

Indeed. Yet Mr. Libertarian wants to see the pubs look and act more like donks? Why? First off because despite his protestations to the contrary, he's liberal to the core. Secondly because he thinks winning and being in the majority is everything (it's not), and thirdly, in order to win he's quite comfortable with someone selling their soul as he did long ago to true government leadership.

As a national brand I'm convinced that conservatives are toast on a national level. IMHO, the best the pub party can do is dump the RINO's at the top and concentrate on implementing conservative polices via the Congress and at the state and local levels.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Chuck Todd: ‘Democrats wish they had the diversity’ of Republicans


NBC Chief White House Correspondent Chuck Todd on Thursday suggested that Democrats “wish they had the diversity” that the GOP was showcasing at this year’s Republican National Convention.

“By the way, Democrats wish they had the diversity of speakers and deep bench to show America,” Todd asserted. “When you think about the Democrats finding — they wanted a keynote speaker that was Hispanic and they had to dig inside a red state to find an Hispanic mayor, where last night [New Mexico Gov.] Susana Martinez [spoke]. Before that, we had [Nevada Gov.] Brian Sandoval, [Florida Sen.] Marco Rubio, [Texas Senate candidate] Ted Cruz.”

“One thing the Republican Party has is a lot of elected officials to help deal with this issue of going against the grain on the fact that they’re mostly a white —

when you look outside of DC,.. the GOP diversity is obvious..

All this has Democrats thinking wistfully about taking back the House of Representatives, holding the Senate, ending gridlock and driving a new surge of progressive reform.

Well, sober up.

The 2014 midterm election is more likely to be a debacle for Democrats than Republicans. It will take a true political miracle for Democrats to take back the House. Republicans need to win a net of six Senate seats to take the Senate – with six Democratic seats up in red states, and seven in swing states. Four sitting Democratic Senators are retiring compared to only two Republicans, both from safe red states.

Unless the economy enjoys a remarkable growth spurt early next year, Democrats will run on a “recovery” that has failed to bring down unemployment dramatically or lift wages. The prospects for many in the rising American electorate will remain bleak.

But relying on Republican extremism is a hope and a prayer. If Democrats have a shot in 2014, they need a plan.

Voters have one key question: Who can make this economy work for me and my family?

now all we have to do is put up "fresh" new conservatives and we can change DC as well...

isn't it comically ironic how some on the far left, complain about the GOP being old and white, yet complain even more about the Tea Party who has presented fresh new candidates that break that tradition?
 

Mike

Well-known member
The Dems absolutely want the Repubs to go left and be liberals.

Not hard to figure out at all.

What they need to do is go farther right and MORE Conservative.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
last November's vote, which saw Republicans lose the presidency as well as seats in the U.S. House


so what were the reasons/excuses for the record Repub. gains, in the house, in 2010?


Did they become more white, in the 2 years between? Or, were there that many more illegals and legal minorities that entered the Country?

Maybe illegals, and those that vote illegally/fraudsters, knew they wouldn't be stopped.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
so what were the reasons/excuses for the record Repub. gains, in the house, in 2010?


.


Gerrymandering by the Rep's was that reason..


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering


n the process of setting electoral districts, gerrymandering is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries to create partisan advantaged districts. The resulting district is known as a gerrymander (/ˈɡɛrimændər/, alt. /ˈdʒɛriˌmændər/); however, that word can also refer to the process. When used to allege that a given party is gaining disproportionate power, the term gerrymandering has negative connotations.
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
hypocritexposer said:
so what were the reasons/excuses for the record Repub. gains, in the house, in 2010?


.


Gerrymandering by the Rep's was that reason..


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering


n the process of setting electoral districts, gerrymandering is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries to create partisan advantaged districts. The resulting district is known as a gerrymander (/ˈɡɛrimændər/, alt. /ˈdʒɛriˌmændər/); however, that word can also refer to the process. When used to allege that a given party is gaining disproportionate power, the term gerrymandering has negative connotations.

Congressional elections are held every two years. Are you telling us that pubs have an advantage because they gerrymand districts and donks don't?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Gerrymandering? How about it being legal to vote 7 times for 1 candidate? :roll:

http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/article/20121104/NEWS02/311040019/Al-Benn-s-Alabama-One-person-seven-votes-Chilton-County-voting-different
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Maryland3rd.jpg


The district's odd shape is attributed to gerrymandering in order to favor Democratic candidates following the 2000 Census. In 2012 the district was found to be the third least compact congressional district in the United States. However, the district was heavily Democratic even before then; a Republican hasn't held it since 1927. DONK



United_States_House_of_Representatives%2C_Maryland_District_2_map.png


America's 2nd least compact congressional district, Maryland's 2nd congressional district. DONK


NC12_109.gif


North Carolina's 12th congressional district. Some say tied with the next one as the most gerrymandered in America. DONK


IL04_109.gif


Illinois 4th congressional district. It was featured by The Economist as one of the most strangely drawn and gerrymandered congressional districts in the country and has been nicknamed "earmuffs" due to its shape. It was created to contain two majority Hispanic parts of Chicago. DONK

:roll: :roll: :roll:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
So, yes, gerrymandering gave the GOP an advantage. But that’s not the question before us. The question is whether Democrats would’ve controlled the U.S. House if the 2010 gerrymandering had never happened.

Now let’s assume the Democrats would’ve won every single one of those vulnerable seats mentioned by the Brennan Center. The GOP would still have a majority in the House of 223 to 212.

The Monkey Cage blog — devoted to voter behavior and run by John Sides, an assistant professor of political science at George Washington University — conducted the ultimate test. It used 2012 voting totals and applied them to the old districts before they were redrawn.

Under 2010 district lines, Democrats would’ve picked up only seven seats, not enough to take the House.

Eric McGhee, part of the Monkey Cage team, writes: “Even under the most generous assumptions, redistricting explains less than half the gap between vote share and seat share this election cycle.”



You might be wondering why, if not gerrymandering, Republicans won control even if they received more than a million fewer votes.

Both the New Yorker’s Hertzberg and the Center for Voting and Democracy say that gerrymandering played a role but so did the inefficient distribution of Democratic votes. Democrats are often concentrated in urban areas, where they win by a lot of votes in a few districts, while Republicans are more spread over rural areas where they don’t get as many overall votes but command more districts.

McGhee says another factor is that incumbents tend to win and the House already had a majority of Republicans so the odds favor them to win again.


The verdict #1

Republicans would’ve controlled the U.S. House even without redrawing districts in 2010.

http://blogs.rgj.com/factchecker/2013/01/19/election-claims-about-gerrymandering-zero-votes/
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
I'm sure the idea was something she picked up from the Huffington Post or some other objective source and just ran with it. If it works for flounder, why not kola?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Whitewing said:
I'm sure the idea was something she picked up from the Huffington Post or some other objective source and just ran with it. If it works for flounder, why not kola?


She probably watches Madcow and MSNBC, where 85% of their "news" is opinion.

:lol:
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Whitewing said:
I'm sure the idea was something she picked up from the Huffington Post or some other objective source and just ran with it. If it works for flounder, why not kola?


She probably watches Madcow and MSNBC, where 85% of their "news" is opinion.

:lol:

Well, and that's the point, isn't it. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts. If you're not sure about the accuracy of something, then don't say it, or qualify the comment.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Head of the Republican Party Excoriates the Republican Party

Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, presented a report yesterday on why the Republicans got whipped last November and what they have to do to fix the situation. The report was uncompromising and extremely critical. Priebus fully endorsed it, although it will set off a civil war within the party.

When releasing the report, Priebus said: "There's no one reason we lost. Our message was weak; our ground game was insufficient; we weren't inclusive; we were behind in both data and digital; and our primary and debate process needed improvement." In other words, the nomination process needs fixing, the data bases have to be improved, and more boots are need on the ground to get voters to the polls. What he didn't say is even more interesting than what he said. There was no suggestion that maybe the core problem is that the voters don't like what the GOP has to sell.

The report has many specific recommendations. Some of the major ones are discussed below.

Change the nomination process. The report argues for shortening the presidential nomination process by holding the Republican National Convention in June or July instead of late summer. It also argues for fewer debates and giving the party more control over the debates, including letting it pick the moderators. It also suggests having regional primaries, with multiple neighboring states voting on the same day. This is probably the least controversial proposal, but it has a number of consequences, some good for the party and some bad. An early convention means that federal campaign funds would be released earlier--unless the nominee chooses to turn down federal funding. An early nomination does not necessarily lead to victory, as John Kerry, who was nominated in July 2004, discovered. Regional primaries greatly favor wealthy candidates, since having to campaign in a dozen states at once means you need a huge ad budget. if the goal is to avoid nominating the next Romney, this isn't the way to do it. Unspoken here is the fact that a long primary season--with Republicans saying the kinds of things they need to say to get the nomination--is a bad thing because it is precisely these things that repel general election voters. The quicker the primaries are over, the quicker the nominee stops throwing red meat to the base and the quicker he can target independents.

Support gay rights. The report doesn't come out and say point blank that Republicans should support gay marriage, but it is no secret that younger Republican voters, consultants, and even elected officials want to get rid of this issue, which greatly favors the Democrats now. A Washington Post poll released yesterday shows that 58% of Americans now support same-sex marriage, with the greatest support among young people. The point here is not that the gay voting block is so large, but that the Republicans are seen by many voters as intolerant. Changing that perception will be very difficult, however, as many evangelicals and many conservatives consider homosexuality fundamentally immoral and unacceptable. This is definitely going to be a fiery issue and it won't go away quickly.

Pass an immigration bill. Priebus understands the demographics of America very well. In 2016, it is expected that over 30% of the electorate will consist of blacks, Asian-Americans, and Latinos. The latter two groups care about immigration a lot and see the Republicans as the enemy. The whole issue is a millstone around the party's neck. But the only way to get rid of it once and for all is to have Republicans overwhelmingly support a bill that allows illegal immigrants to become citizens in due course. Many Republicans call this amnesty and are violently opposed to it. However, if the Democrats push an immigration reform bill through the Senate and it is killed by the GOP-led House, many of the legal immigrants who are now citizens (and voters) will summarize this as: "Republicans hate us." The worst of all possible worlds for the Republicans is for a Democratic bill to barely pass the House, with most Republicans voting against it. When the immigrants eventually become citizens, they are not likely to forget who was on which side, nor will their citizen relatives. The only way to defuse the situation is for the Republican Party to wholeheartedly endorse citizenship for the 12 million illegal aliens already in the country and then try to take credit for it. But Rush Limbaugh will make sure that won't happen.

Reach out to minorities. The report advocates spending $10 million on staff to go into minority communities and tell them what Republicans believe in. But the problem is that many of them already know what Republicans want: lower taxes for the rich and less government assistance for the poor, and they don't like it. With Asian Americans, the Republicans have a different problem. Asian Americans have been incredibly successful. About 40% of the students at Caltech and 30% of the students at M.I.T. are Asian Americans. The Asian-American community is not so interested in government programs that help the poor, but it is appalled by the Republicans' rejection of science. Unlike Rick Santorum and many "young earthers" they don't see the Flintstones series as documentaries: people didn't ride dinosaurs. Whether the topic is female reproductive biology, climate change, or evolution, Republicans are seen as antiscience, and that is a fatal position with a demographic group that is wildly successful in science and engineering.

Get out of the bubble. Many Republicans were shocked that Romney lost, as all their pundits and pollsters were predicting his victory, despite the clear consensus of the reality community that Obama would win. This site predicted Obama would lose Florida and get 303 electoral votes. He won Florida and got 332. Nate Silver of the New York Times did even better: he called every state correctly. In contrast, nearly every Republican pundit got it wrong, with Dick Morris being the worst of all, predicting a Romney landslide of 325 electoral votes. The report tells Republicans to get out of their comfort zone and listen to people whose conclusions they may not like, but who may be right.

Stop being the party of the rich. For better or worse, the report concludes that many voters see the Republican Party as being concerned only with helping the rich. Having a candidate worth $250 million as the nominee certainly didn't help, but regional primaries are only going to make the situation worse, with very wealthy candidates flooding the airwaves early on and drowning out less well-heeled contenders. But it is hard to change the image when in reality, the one thing Republicans are adamantly against is higher taxes on the rich, something a large majority of the country wants. Here, as in some other areas, the problem is not the messaging. People know what Republicans stand for. They just don't like it.

While part of the report addresses technical issues, like when the convention should be and the Republicans' need for better databases, the bottom line is that tea party adherents and conservatives in general should tone it down considerably so the GOP can win elections. The trouble is many of these people see themselves as part of a movement whose mission is in direct contradiction to what the report says, such as never allowing gays to marry and never granting illegal aliens amnesty. Their goal is not electing Republicans; it is achieving specific policy goals. To them, a Republican like Sen. Rob Portman (RINO-OH), who now supports same-sex marriage because his son is gay, is no better than a Democrat and should be defeated. Quite a few speakers at last week's CPAC conference, including Sarah Palin, made this abundantly clear. In the weeks ahead, expect talk radio and conservative news media in general, to go after the report with pitchforks. For example, at redstate.com, a front-page article says there is nothing wrong with the Republicans' policies. What is needed is to replace Speaker John Boehner and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell with real conservatives. It is not clear how many of the report's recommendations will ultimately be followed, but a battle about them is a certainty.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
More cut and paste freom the king of cut and paste,,,,the one who can't make decision unless it come from a cut and paste,,,,one has to wonder how he has time to runb and operate a ranch, when he spends so much time looking for things to cut and paste to this as well as 3 other sites that i am aware of,,,.maybe he is not so much of a catteman as he is a web surfer,,,,,liar as well
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Quite the source you quote there OT:

Unlike Rick Santorum and many "young earthers" they don't see the Flintstones series as documentaries: people didn't ride dinosaurs.

Of course, no pub ever said such a thing. But we're supposed to take the advice of someone who writes that kind of crap. :roll:

On the otherhand, let me quote a real liberal politican:

In a discussion regarding a planned military buildup on the Pacific island, Johnson expressed some concerns about the plans to Adm. Robert Willard, head of the U.S. Pacific fleet.


"My fear is that the whole island will become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize," Johnson said. Willard paused and replied, "We don't anticipate that."


OT, why don't you just accept the fact that pubs becoming more like donks is not the solution to anything? No, in fact, the United States of America, as you and I knew it growing up, is farked.....forever. The re-election of that idiot you helped put in office is proof that the country is farked. There's no going back. No conservative will ever be elected president of the United States from here going forward. The numbers are against it.

IMHO, the best the pubs, conservative pubs, can hope to do from here forward is to influence policy at the senate, congressional, state, and local levels.
 
Top