Posted on 04/21/2009 1:44:49 PM PDT by americanophile
well, if we had a few billionaires willing to spend some money we could have a conservative cable channel.... or a couple million conservatives giving a few dollars a week might do the trick. conservatives won't do it..... ....... but conservatives don't protest either
As you have laid out, the problems are crystal clear, they are quantitative and they are undeniable. Frankly, I'm more than a little concerned that too few people recognize this, or choose to ignore it or that want to lynch the messenger that brings us the facts. It's not very encouraging for the future relevancy of the GOP and the conservative movement.
“Conservatives have something to build on, Republicans don’t.”
All the more reason for Conservatives to move in. The Republicans have a name, Conservatives have the game.
Conservatives let go of the name, they forfeit the game.
Worst thing we could do would be to go “Third Party” and gift this Nation to the Socialist/Democrats to feast upon.
Nos. 3 and 4 are the biggest, IMHO...
I was always of that mindset too. But, I was pleasantly surprised with the overwhelming success of the "Tea Parties". Frankly, I was stunned.
Now, conservatives will never burn cars or buildings or throw rocks and bottles at police; which is apparently what one must do today to garner the attention of the MSM. But, I think that the TPs success may be a harbinger of a more vocal and energized conservative and libertarian movement.
“The Republicans have a name, Conservatives have the game.
Conservatives let go of the name, they forfeit the game.
Worst thing we could do would be to go “Third Party” and gift this Nation to the Socialist/Democrats to feast upon.”
By the Democrats showing themselves total asses when they get to run the kindergarten.
We are definitely “the other guys.” As someone who grows tired of Coke might switch to Pepsi.
The speaker of the House comes from SF and the President was elected on the basis of hope and change and little else. Obama ran on some conservative issues like tax cuts for 95% of the people, strong defense, fiscal discipline, reducing government, etc. Now that the Dems control the WH and Congress, we will see what the electorate's response is to the biggest expansion of government since the New Deal and increased taxes once the impact of the huge deficits is felt. According to recent Rasmussen polls, 57% of the public believes America is on the wrong track.
Take a look at this poll information The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 34% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-two percent (32%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of +2
Fifty-two percent (52%) now are concerned that the government will end up doing too much in response to the nation’s economic challenges. That’s the highest level of concern since last November’s Presidential Election. Just 31% now worry the government will do too little. Ffty-one percent (51%) have a favorable opinion of last week’s tea parties, but the Political Class strongly disagrees.
Plus, the Dems won the Presidency with an inexperienced black candidate with a foreign name while also collecting very comfortable majorities in both the House and Senate. They have also picked up many gubernatorial seats and hold a majority of the governorships.
The Dems are in charge now. But they are overreaching. Rudy could take the NY governorship if he runs. Deval Patrick in MA enjoys a 33% approval rating. The Dems now own the economy. The tea parties are just the tip of the iceberg if we continue to suffer high unemployment. The Bureau of Labor statistics for March 2009 show a national unemployment rate of 8.5 percent, including 13.3 percent for blacks and 11.4 percent for Hispanics. 13.2 million Americans are unemployed. Despite the economic downturn, the U.S. continues to bring in 138,000 new foreign workers a month. This includes new permanent residents (green cards) and long-term temporary visas and others who are authorized to take a job. This makes no sense.
As for the Reagan Democrats, Reagan first came to office almost 30 years ago. The Reagan Democrats were a much older demographic then and an even older demographic now, with many that have already passed on.
No, they were blue collar whites. And they come in all age groups. If McCain had won 60% of the white vote instead of 55%, he would be President today. If he had received 70% of the Hispanic vote and just 55% of the white vote, he would still have lost.
I don't know exactly how the GOP will come back to the strength in enjoyed in the first half of this decade, but I'm confident that the Reagan Democrats won't be a significant reason why as they are a shrinking demographic - shrinking in number and shrinking as a percentage of the total electorate.
Non-Hispanic whites comprise 66% of the population. 51% of Hispanics describe themselves as white. The size of the Latino voting population should be kept in perspective alongside other subsets of the electorate. An estimated 11.8 million voters were of Latino ancestry, compared with 17 million African Americans, 19.7 million veterans, 23.6 million young people, 45 million conservatives, and 34 million born-again white Christians.
We are an aging population. With one in five being over 65 in 2030, there are plenty of cross-cutting issues that go beyond race and ethnicity. People on fixed incomes don't want higher property taxes. There are plenty of issues, including immigration that can be winning issues for Reps if they use them the right way.
LLS
Return to Reagan’s vision for America or the party dies... your party can’t win elections as it is... if 40% of the staunch base walks, it is over for the party forever... think before you kill it!
LLS
“...CNN and ABC News and the editor of all Newsweek international editions...”
This gives me the background information I need about Fareed. The Republican Party will die, if it chooses a course of compassionate conservatism, or, as Levine put it, soft Statism. People are going to have their fill of statism very soon, and the message the Republican Party needs to put out front and center is one of liberty and conservation of the Constitution, law and order and the moral culture that made this country great. The Republican Party needs to talk about independence and commerce, free trade and the right of free people to determine their destiny, as well as the right of Americans to determine America’s destiny. We don’t need to offer Democrat lite in incremental bites, the gradual destruction of the nation our Founding Fathers gave us. Wake up RINOs! We’re four months into the 0 solution, and 52 percent of America’s wealth is gone. Do you really think gay marriage, abortion, nationalized healthcare, gun control, and the rest of the liberal agenda can be battled by less of the same? The Democrat lite gig is about to get left behind, and in about a year, Americans are going to need a Reagan, not an Arnold or Meghan.
I'm not sure exactly what the "approach" is that I've outlined. All I've said is that the GOP can't continue to discount and ignore the youth vote (there are other demographic problems, but only referenced the youth in this thread). That's not a strategy as it is so much an observation of the evidence and a statement of fact.
The core of the Republican party is aging. That's not going to change in the foreseeable future because we've abandoned the college campuses and have ceded the younger demographic to the Dems.
I offered no advise as to strategy, platform, policy or ideas. I've just stated that the quantitative facts that unless the GOP can reduce the Democrat advantage it enjoys in the only demographics that are growing in the US, the mathematical viability and relevance of the Republican party is certainly threatened, and perhaps existentially so.
yes!
Yes, we are aging in population, but for the first time in 45 years, 4.3 million babies were born in 2008 - with Hispanics accounting for 25% of the births. That's significant. The country has seen a rise in the median age for well over 30 years, but many are projecting that the median age very well could start to decline by the end of the decade.
And, while the older set may be come increasingly disgusted with Obama and his policies, the older set will become an increasingly irrelevant demographic as it shrinks - yes shrinks - in relative size to other demographics. Moreover, as a party, the GOP doesn't have to just plan for combating Obama, but must also plan for a post-Obama era.
I would take you notation of Obama's Approval Index as a sign that the country is still, and probably will continue to be deeply polarized. And while Obama may end up being an extremely polarizing figure, he still maintains a healthy approval rating, although it certainly has declined since he's taken office.
Lastly, in less than 20 months, all of this will be academic as we will have lived through another mid-term election by that time. If the GOP can mount a legitimate come-back and greatly reduce the Dems advantage in the House and weaken the majority in the Senate, all the GOP and conservative hand wringing will have proven to have been premature. If, on the other hand, Obama is successful in doing what only Roosevelt has done in the last 120 years - increasing his majorities in his first mid-term election - then the GOP will have very real, very deep and very troubling legitimate concerns about its future relevance.
I am not incorrect. The country’s more socially liberal today than it was then, but even so Reagan’s message did not primarily address hot-button social issues—it focused way more on economic issues and national security.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.