Future of the GOP

That was a quote this morning from Matthew Dowd on ABC. Lindsey Graham said a few weeks back that "we're not producing enough angry white males any more."

Outside of banning contraception in the South, can the GOP make a dent in the constituencies they need (Latinos, young people, Asians, etc.) in order to be competitive in future presidential elections?

I think that the core message of a true GOP - self-reliance, small government, limited (but necessary) government regulation and involvement, strong national defense - these ideas are compelling to me and probably cross cultural lines.

However, the other side of the GOP base - the faith, color, and sexuality based culture of division, the inability to expand the label "American" to anyone outside their in group, the skyrocketing defense budget for projecting power overseas, and the lavishing of favorable laws, tax cuts, and contracts to large multinational corporations will not. If you are a member of the group that is not "Angry white straight male" then it is very difficult to vote Republican.

If the Republicans abandon the evangelicals in their platform, and focus on just economic issues, then they could win national elections; but then the local politics in areas that are still AWM (angry white male) bastions will get more difficult.

The other issue that the Republicans have is that the young, non-white, non-straight members of American society interact every day in person, online, and through the media - and understand that compromise and understanding is the way forward. For the Republican party to continue to stand in the way of compromise - in the case of tax rates, negotiations with foreign powers, gun control laws, immigration, marriage equality - means that the Republicans will continue to represent individuals who are unwilling or unable to reach across the aisle to solve problems.

Ted Nugent, the ball is in your court.

Gay marriage & pot legalization initiatives also passed in several states. First openly gay senator elected. Many heads are exploding in the Bible Belt today.

The results of this election actually make me question the idea that our President's race plays too much in the mind of a southern voter.

If you are a church-going evangelical and watching those commie states approve gay marriage, legalized pot, and in-state college tuition for illegals, you might actually think that the country is headed in the wrong direction.

But if you think the President is a secret Muslim terrorist who is bringing socialism to the country, then you are just a moron.

Either way, racism is just a cop-out.

Maybe in their minds Obama passed his 4 year, "are you a 'Merican enough or not?" audition for president. You know how racists think. They have to get to know a black guy at work or school before they can give their redneck seal of approval.

Don't forget the fact that they hav to stop all the demagoguery and stop championing the Bachmanns and Palins and the Limbaughs.

Wait a minute, let's not go THAT far. Rush is like an endless loop playing in Wingers' heads on a daily basis along with Faux Newz. He had to swallow 10 Oxys & down a fifth of Jack just to give Mitt his endorsement.

Apparently, the future of the GOP lies in getting 100% turnout in rural counties. And in the white South.

Four (!) incumbent Illinois Republicans lost their seats in the House this election. Including my Congressman. My district has had a Republican in charge since at least 1980. I'm not sure that it's ever before elected a Democrat, in truth.

After this election, every single urban/suburban seat in Illinois is now Democratic. Even the Peoria district went Dem, tossing out its Republican incumbent. I don't think of Peoria as urban exactly, but it might be too urban these days for Republicans.

Illinois historically has been a purple state, maybe even slightly reddish -- as long as the Republicans were moderate. Not much tolerance for Fox/Tea Party types. Illinois still would be purple/reddish with a sane Republican Party. But the GOP left Illinois, it's not the party that Illinois once supported. And the voters have figured that out.

This Republican Party is not going to win in the East, the Midwest, the Far West, and anywhere in the U.S. that is urban aside from Texas.

Even rural areas in the South are getting more Latinos. Wooing white people alone is really not a strategy any more. You either target specific groups outside your base or you die.

Team Obama rightly determined that the liberal base on both coasts was going for him no matter what, they then targeted specific groups and regions (auto workers in the upper Midwest) and they kicked butt.

If the GOP continues down its current path of culture warrior, anti-immigrant, no tax increases extremism, then this election is just a taste of what is to come. If they don't reassess and come back toward the center, then this is the last time they win North Carolina. Georgia will start coming into play in 2016. Arizona in 2020. And Texas in 2024 and beyond.

The current Republican party is on a dead-end evolutionary path. These political dinosaurs need to sprout some feathers or fur before the demographic meteor wipes them away for good.

My Congressman lost because of Grover Norquist. His opponent spanked him for taking the tax pledge. The attack resonated in a district where voters want politicians to create legislation and get things done.

One of the single biggest impacts of last night for me was the increased hope that this nation may finally be able to lock that evil ******** in a deep, deep dungeon of obscurity and throw away the key.

Morris, Rove, Norquist. Will anyone miss those names and the bile that they brought to our political discourse?

Just about every election you hear about a party on its death throes. The first time I heard it it was the Republicans in 1974. I have no idea of how they will do it but the Republicans will have their time again. Similarly a conservative friend told me in 2004 that to survive the Democrats had to change (become more conservative).

It would probably help the GOP to drop abortions and gays as issues.

Yeah, they'll lose a key, motivated constituency, but
a) Those people aren't going Democratic
b) Those people aren't winning them elections - Reps are in safe gerrymandered districts anyway

That's true to an extent (and the talk of a permanent Republican majority was downright silly), but whereas the GOP was overstating its strategic victory in 2004, we're talking about fundamental shifts in demographics.

You can change people's minds on the role of government, but you can't change race or gender (well, I guess you can, but the GOP isn't into that).

Once again ... my district does NOT vote for Democratic Congressmen. Not under Clinton, not in the 2006 anti-Katrina wave, not in the '08 Obama love-in. It doesn't happen.

It happened this time. It wasn't that the Dem opponent was any different or better financed than the previous opponents. Or that the incumbent had made a particular blunder or was personally responsible. This was rejection Norquist, rejection Rove, rejection Morris.

The suburbs across the U.S. are moving from purple to blue, as the GOP doubles down on rural.

White people still held all the cards during the Reagan years. They don't know. Fear of the "other" is no longer relevant in the discourse.

I think people have come around to the notion that the government, particularly the federal government, has an important role to play. Katrina, the financial crisis and now Sandy made sure people learned the lesson.

And I guess this marks the end of the backlash to the liberal excesses that hit its peak (or nadir) in 1968.

Yup. You can't run on "crime" or "food stamps" any more. Though Islamophobia probably still works.

I totally agree with the first section, the problem is the math of the second section.

If they abandon evangelical policies then they abandon a large part of their base, can they do it and gain as many or more people by adopting more moderate positions on social issues?

That is the move they need to make, but is not as easy as saying it, the country is moving in one direction socially, but their base is pulling them the other way, I am sure there are many “RINOs” that see this happening, but they do not have the numbers to do anything about it.

I still think Republicans could do much better among Latinos, maybe even win the Latino vote if they could figure out a way to get rid of Immigration as an Issue, by coming to an agreement of some sort, but again I do not think they base will allow that to happen.

I don't know if it's the end. From what I can see, the rural areas are more polarized and partisan than ever before. I stumbled across a group of central Virginia voters, defeating Obama was akin to defeating Stalin. And they seemed to be quite representative of their town, they talked about how entire blocks of neighbors were going to the polls together to end the socialist terror regime, etc.

I don't see those people changing, or at least in primaries permitting the GOP to take a moderate stance. They want GUBMINT dead, except of course the military, their personal benefits, and any goodies that central Virginia gets.

On the other hand, my moderate Republican town fully appreciates that government has a role to play. It wants to see Christie & Obama working together.

It's going to take a very big tent to house those two varieties of Republican.

Yep. A whole lot of immigrants could go for that. It's the crazy that scares them away, the crazy and the anti-immigrant talk.

I haven't gotten around to looking at races in places where I used to live, but this doesn't surprise me that much. The district in West-Central Illinois went to a Democrat all through the Reagan years and beyond (a great guy named Lane Evans). When I was a kid, downstate was solidly Republican (Bob Micheal and Everett Dirksen Republican). It pleases me that the new and devolved GOP isn't going over too well.

It also pleases me that that Tammy Duckworth beat Joe Walsh.

I don't know her, but Judy Biggert managed to lose 58 -42 as a Republican incumbent. 42 as an incumbent? Ouch. And that's in a district that voted twice for W.

I had to google her. Her maiden name was "Borg" and she's married to a guy 26 years younger than she is. And she's no longer a congress critter.

I don't see a huge difference between Democrats and Republicans. They each accomplish about 30 percent of what they preach. The rest is just hot air. They are actually pretty similar in many ways. The real problem in America is energizing a party that is representative of the new century we are in. Old democrats are about as frustrating as many old school republicans when it comes to supporting major reforms in our country.

Many people told me that they had to choose between the two major parties and third parties are a waste. Equally as many people said they disliked both candidates. It will only take a few bright leaders to forge something out of the growing unrest within the population.

So, if I were Democrat, I would watch my step with the majority during the next 4 years. Republicans could re-surface if they slip. The economy will be a challenge.