Future of the GOP

let's be clear however that removing such categorizations does not remove racism. nor is the presence of such categorizations mean that it's necessarily racist.

 

I love this "categorization is bigotry" logic because essentially, the Lilly Ledbetter Act is sexist, marriage equality is homophobic and the DREAM Act is racist.

 

missionary is the only approved GOP position.
and the fact that two men can't participate in sex while engaged in this position should tell you that the GOP does not approve of man on man action. at least not in the open. such things ought only to be done behind locked bathroom doors at airports. tap tap.

 

Well, I can tell you're definitely not gay from this statement

 

Easier said than done, of course, especially with House Republicans. If nothing else, holding extreme position helps with fundraising. Just look at Michele Bachmann - every time she says something controversial, the money flows in. And I'm convinced Akin and Mourdoch would have won had they been running for House, since they rape statements only made them more popular with their core supporters. God, Guns and Gays are still winning issues for most Republicans.

Though I do agree that they have little to lose by dropping the War on Drugs. It's not 1990 any more - "law and order" doesn't work as a campaign message.

 

I'm sorry folks, but bigotry and homophobia is too ingrained in the rural right. You're never going to convince these people to change. They're conservatives, not progressives. By definition, they want to keep things the way they are (or go backwards).

If congress passes immigration change, a lot of these GOP representatives in far right areas loose their job.

 

It's not just immigration. I think this article makes a very compeling case that embracing immigration won't make a big difference for the GOP in its appeal to the current generation of Latinos:

http://www.slate.com/articles/busin...tion_doesn_t_explain_romney_s_crushing.2.html

There just isn't much in the GOP agenda in general that appeals to middle and working class voters. In fact, ethnicity probably has more to do with white working class voters sticking with the GOP even when they don't represent their economic interests. There is an inherent bias that looks at middle and working class women, Asians, Blacks and Hispanics abandoning the GOP in droves and thinks it must have to do with "special interest" issues like abortion or immigration while it is white male working and middle class voters who seem to have a irrational attachment to the GOP.

 

I think civil unions are something most moderates would accept as a reasonable alternative to marriage equality. many conservatives look at marriage (be it right or wrong) as a biblical concept, and that's why they don't want same sex couples marrying. but I don't think they would necessarily be against same sex couples enjoying the same social and economic benefits that marriage provides.

 

You are applying a logical fallacy incorrectly. I was not showing equivalence. Republicans are clearly worse in this category. This does NOT mean Democrats are somehow better.

It is a contradiction.... They view their own voters based on clearly objectivfying labels and clearly they are viewed this was in real time. Media is the worst in this regard. Your simply wrong and there is no false equivalencies. Being on slightly higher ground as far as difference is fine, but feeling like you "gain" something based on the suffering of it, does not mean you care one bit about it.

Nothing will change unless the language and elitist ideology regresses. Unfortunately, many democrats are very cynical and elitist.

This is as simple as your own poor efforts at abstraction and cynicism.

 

I don't think I even want to try to visualize the mechanics as to how I might be mistaken on this issue.

 

This is not a fallacy. You are essentially defending racism based on one party seeming better than another. There is no equality in two parties who embrace racist categorizations. They are both wrong.

The Democratic party has a lot of rich and racist people. Sorry. It happens.

Your cynicism is terrible. It's also quite prevalent on this thread. You can keep relying on sarcasm and wit if you want. Ultimately, you provide nothing in terms of what this thread is asking. You easily respond in trollish sentences, but you prefer not to even anticipate how the GOP could change. You really do not want it to.​

 

The definition of racism is "a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race"

That "and" is significant. It means to be racist, you must distinguish individuals by their race AND believe that because of their race they're somehow less of a person (or incapable of a task, or unintelligent etcetera).

Just distinguishing individuals based on race and cultural identity isn't racism.

 

Of course the Democrats have racists among them. The difference is that racism is built into the GOP platform. For a lot of republicans, their desire to keep immigrants out of the US partially stems from racism.

 

Eek.

There were 3 incarnations of the Klan. The first one was in the wake of the Civil War, and had nothing to do with Catholics. The 2nd one was more generally a nativist movement; there's a reason the US started restricting immigration in the 1920s. Yeah, that iteration was mostly anti-Catholic.

I wonder how effective that threat will be going forward, given that the guy who beat Lugar lost, and the other crazy right wing candidates who OG'd what should have been Republican pickups.

 

Again, look at the thread.

It's not about how Republicans are perceived or acting currently. The format of this thread is based on how the party can change. I am simply pointing out things that Republicans can take advantage of without sacrificing basic tenets.

Relax.

Sorry American democrats are only a basic step better at talking about social and racial issues than Republicans when it comes to legislation.

 

Think about one of the dudes having his knees near his ears.

 

How well will the GOP's economic message resonate with middle and working class whites if the GOPs take steps to embrace Latinos? I just think the GOPs will lose more votes than they'll gain.

I'm wondering which state's Republicans want to be the next to lose a winnable race by nominating a teabagger. I see your point, hopefully you see mine.

 

Aaaahhhh!!! Now I'm blind! - in my mind's eye!!

 

I believe her district was gerrymandered to be more blue than before.

 

I posted this elsewhere but it's probably more appropriate here...

The question the GOP is facing is what can they do to combat not only the changing demographics and changing social mores in the country but also the fact that twice now within living memory the strong form of their economic policies have brought the country disaster (three times if you count Volcker having to save Ronnie's ass)? I mean, with Bush's military failures and Obama being the one to nail OBL, the GOP is losing even their traditional edge on "defense" and simply promising to stuff the Pentagon with more money than even that bloated palace of pork asks for won't fly as it goes against their supposed (but not actual) fiscal conservatism.

The two places where they've had an undisputed advantage is their ability to frame almost any issue into a morality tale that even the dimmest bulbs can understand and their capture of the traditional sacred symbols of "America" (the flag, three cornered hats, etc) and of "Christianity". Dems have been stuck playing the role of colorless technocrats and rational eggheads but if they ever get the hang of framing moral arguments in ways the American people can understand, that might be the end of the GOP as a national party.

The sad thing for Reeps is that instead of replacing the Southern Strategy, the GOP is more likely to double down. Instead of dropping the hatred against Spanish speaking immigrants and blacks and being more inclusive, they'll simply start looking for more ways to disenfranchise black and Latino voters.

And it's not like the GOP can just suddenly tell its old rural evangelical white guy base that it is embracing gays, blacks and immigrants on a large scale. You can drop bad economic or foreign policies relatively quickly but changing your social and religious stripes takes a lot longer and by the time the GOP goes through that process starting right now (assuming they even try), it may be too late for them. It will take at least two generations before Latinos forget (if they ever do) the hatred, bigotry and offensive legislation the GOP spewed at them for so long.

Finally, it's not like the GOP can go back to being "Eisenhower Republicans". For all the leftover-from-the-60s media blather about the Dems being leftists and communists, the GOP's problems started when the Dems seized the center right and pushed the GOP to far right margins and, barring the Dems nationalizing industry and forming workers councils, I'm not sure how the Reeps can escape the corner in which they now find themselves trapped.