GOP prepares comeback: ‘We can’t come off as a bunch of angry white men’

[Mustang]

My first thought when I read that headline was something to the effect of: "But that's what you ARE."

But I decided to reserve judgment until I had read the news article in its entirety (something I strongly suggest conservatives should try to do, at least once).

And what I came away with after reading the article is the feeling that the GOP wants to burnish its image. They truly want to change the public perception of who they are and what they believe. BUT, the don't REALLY want to change who they are and what they believe.

The excerpts in the following article were drawn from different parts of the article. So, if you want to get the full flavor of the article (and the comments made by many of the attendees at the GOP meeting), you should read the entire article.

As a final note, I wonder how all those angry white males in the GOP will react if and when a kinder and gentler GOP message is rolled out when they've become accustomed to the red meat they've been offered for so long.

"You're going to see a very renewed aggressive effort by this party to put on a different face," Bradshaw said on Thursday. "We've got to find a way to take our message to more people and get more votes. It's not a particularly complicated formula. We got beat; we have to change what we're doing."

First, they said Republicans must work on improving their tone when taking their ideas to the American people. For example, when discussing immigration, maybe presidential candidates should avoid phrases like "self-deportation" (Mitt Romney) and "anchor babies" (Michele Bachmann).


Henry Barbour said some in the party can appear "hostile" to certain constituencies with the rhetoric they use. The party must increase communication training for candidates, he said.


"There are certainly too many times when we've had candidates who have come across as hostile, and that's not really helpful when you're trying to win elections," Barbour said.


Robert Bennett, chairman of the Ohio Republican Party, was even more blunt.


"We need to understand that we can't come off as a bunch of angry white men," he said.

Republicans say if that means supporting a moderate candidate who can actually win over a hardline conservative who doesn't stand a chance, so be it. (You may have noticed that among the names that make up The Bobs, there isn't anyone who might be considered a "tea party leader.")


"If we're not nominating candidates that can win in the general election, what business are we in?" Barbour said. "We are in the business of winning elections."


There is one thing, however, that no one—not the committee members, elected officials or even The Bobs—seem interested in addressing, and that's whether core Republican ideas need to change.


Most here said they don't.


GOP prepares comeback: ?We can?t come off as a bunch of angry white men? | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

 

[JoeNormal]

My first thought when I read that was headline was something to the effect of: "But that's what you ARE."

But I decided to reserve judgment until I had read the news article in its entirety (something I strongly suggest conservatives should try to do, at least once).

And what I came away with after reading the article is the feeling that the GOP wants to burnish its image. They truly want to change the public perception of who they are and what they believe. BUT, the don't REALLY want to change who they are and what they believe.

The excerpts in the following article were drawn from different parts of the article. So, if you want to get the full flavor of the article (and the comments made by many of the attendees at the GOP meeting, you should read the entire article.

As a final note, I wonder how all those angry white males in the GOP will react if and when a kinder and gentler GOP message is rolled out when they've become accustomed to the red meat they've been offered for so long.

"You're going to see a very renewed aggressive effort by this party to put on a different face," Bradshaw said on Thursday. "We've got to find a way to take our message to more people and get more votes. It's not a particularly complicated formula. We got beat; we have to change what we're doing."

First, they said Republicans must work on improving their tone when taking their ideas to the American people. For example, when discussing immigration, maybe presidential candidates should avoid phrases like "self-deportation" (Mitt Romney) and "anchor babies" (Michele Bachmann).


Henry Barbour said some in the party can appear "hostile" to certain constituencies with the rhetoric they use. The party must increase communication training for candidates, he said.


"There are certainly too many times when we've had candidates who have come across as hostile, and that's not really helpful when you're trying to win elections," Barbour said.


Robert Bennett, chairman of the Ohio Republican Party, was even more blunt.


"We need to understand that we can't come off as a bunch of angry white men," he said.

Republicans say if that means supporting a moderate candidate who can actually win over a hardline conservative who doesn't stand a chance, so be it. (You may have noticed that among the names that make up The Bobs, there isn't anyone who might be considered a "tea party leader.")


"If we're not nominating candidates that can win in the general election, what business are we in?" Barbour said. "We are in the business of winning elections."


There is one thing, however, that no one—not the committee members, elected officials or even The Bobs—seem interested in addressing, and that's whether core Republican ideas need to change.


Most here said they don't.


GOP prepares comeback: ?We can?t come off as a bunch of angry white men? | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

Sounds like they want to move from a party of no style/no substance to a party of all style/no substance.

 

[Mustang]

My first thought when I read that was headline was something to the effect of: "But that's what you ARE."

But I decided to reserve judgment until I had read the news article in its entirety (something I strongly suggest conservatives should try to do, at least once).

And what I came away with after reading the article is the feeling that the GOP wants to burnish its image. They truly want to change the public perception of who they are and what they believe. BUT, the don't REALLY want to change who they are and what they believe.

The excerpts in the following article were drawn from different parts of the article. So, if you want to get the full flavor of the article (and the comments made by many of the attendees at the GOP meeting, you should read the entire article.

As a final note, I wonder how all those angry white males in the GOP will react if and when a kinder and gentler GOP message is rolled out when they've become accustomed to the red meat they've been offered for so long.

"You're going to see a very renewed aggressive effort by this party to put on a different face," Bradshaw said on Thursday. "We've got to find a way to take our message to more people and get more votes. It's not a particularly complicated formula. We got beat; we have to change what we're doing."

First, they said Republicans must work on improving their tone when taking their ideas to the American people. For example, when discussing immigration, maybe presidential candidates should avoid phrases like "self-deportation" (Mitt Romney) and "anchor babies" (Michele Bachmann).


Henry Barbour said some in the party can appear "hostile" to certain constituencies with the rhetoric they use. The party must increase communication training for candidates, he said.


"There are certainly too many times when we've had candidates who have come across as hostile, and that's not really helpful when you're trying to win elections," Barbour said.


Robert Bennett, chairman of the Ohio Republican Party, was even more blunt.


"We need to understand that we can't come off as a bunch of angry white men," he said.

Republicans say if that means supporting a moderate candidate who can actually win over a hardline conservative who doesn't stand a chance, so be it. (You may have noticed that among the names that make up The Bobs, there isn't anyone who might be considered a "tea party leader.")


"If we're not nominating candidates that can win in the general election, what business are we in?" Barbour said. "We are in the business of winning elections."


There is one thing, however, that no one—not the committee members, elected officials or even The Bobs—seem interested in addressing, and that's whether core Republican ideas need to change.


Most here said they don't.


GOP prepares comeback: ?We can?t come off as a bunch of angry white men? | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

Sounds like they want to move from a party of no style/no substance to a party of all style/no substance.

Well, I think they want to do what Detroit used to do when they rolled out the new car models back in the 70s. Detroit would essentially roll out the same car with few if any improvements other than minor ones. What WAS different was the outward design of the body, grill, lights, etc. It was basically the same chassis, engine, and drive train with a new body.

And it's what ultimately got their clocked cleaned by Japan as they introduced new cars in America that were quality improvements over anything that Detroit was making. They were more reliable, as well.

 

[JoeNormal]

My first thought when I read that was headline was something to the effect of: "But that's what you ARE."

But I decided to reserve judgment until I had read the news article in its entirety (something I strongly suggest conservatives should try to do, at least once).

And what I came away with after reading the article is the feeling that the GOP wants to burnish its image. They truly want to change the public perception of who they are and what they believe. BUT, the don't REALLY want to change who they are and what they believe.

The excerpts in the following article were drawn from different parts of the article. So, if you want to get the full flavor of the article (and the comments made by many of the attendees at the GOP meeting, you should read the entire article.

As a final note, I wonder how all those angry white males in the GOP will react if and when a kinder and gentler GOP message is rolled out when they've become accustomed to the red meat they've been offered for so long.

Sounds like they want to move from a party of no style/no substance to a party of all style/no substance.

Well, I think they want to do what Detroit used to do when they rolled out the new car models back in the 70s. Detroit would essentially roll out the same car with few if any improvements other than minor ones. What WAS different was the outward design of the body, grill, lights, etc. It was basically the same chassis, engine, and drive train with a new body.

And it's what ultimately got their clocked cleaned by Japan as they introduced new cars in America that were quality improvements over anything that Detroit was making. They were more reliable, as well.

Good analogy, exactly right.

 

[rdean]

You wouldn't be able to do these awful things to me if there weren't all those minorities.

 

[PredFan]

Whenever I think of the state of the current GOP, I always think of the Seinfeld episodes where George realizes that every decision he's ever made has been wrong, and that if he does the opposite of what he would normally do, he'll succeed. The GOP just hasn't come to this realization yet.

 

[PredFan]

You wouldn't be able to do these awful things to me if there weren't all those minorities.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jv0uUV2YaI

You are the biggest dope, I've ever witnessed in my 57 years on this planet.

 

[Sallow]

They're gonna be happy white men now?

Cool.

 

[rdean]

You wouldn't be able to do these awful things to me if there weren't all those minorities.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jv0uUV2YaI

You are the biggest dope, I've ever witnessed in my 57 years on this planet.

Just trying to see things from the right wing perspective.

But there ARE all those minorities Blanche, there ARE all those minorities.

 

[Mustang]

They're gonna be happy white men now?

Cool.

Maybe the lobbyist will bring in the call girls on the last day of the conference.

 

[francoHFW]

Too bad the "chucklehead half" (quoting GOP by Luke Russert) won't let them. Hoisted by their own propaganda petard...

 

[Mac1958]

.

Oooooh, Bennett's toast.



.

 

[Wry Catcher]

My first thought when I read that was headline was something to the effect of: "But that's what you ARE."

But I decided to reserve judgment until I had read the news article in its entirety (something I strongly suggest conservatives should try to do, at least once).

And what I came away with after reading the article is the feeling that the GOP wants to burnish its image. They truly want to change the public perception of who they are and what they believe. BUT, the don't REALLY want to change who they are and what they believe.

The excerpts in the following article were drawn from different parts of the article. So, if you want to get the full flavor of the article (and the comments made by many of the attendees at the GOP meeting), you should read the entire article.

As a final note, I wonder how all those angry white males in the GOP will react if and when a kinder and gentler GOP message is rolled out when they've become accustomed to the red meat they've been offered for so long.

"You're going to see a very renewed aggressive effort by this party to put on a different face," Bradshaw said on Thursday. "We've got to find a way to take our message to more people and get more votes. It's not a particularly complicated formula. We got beat; we have to change what we're doing."

First, they said Republicans must work on improving their tone when taking their ideas to the American people. For example, when discussing immigration, maybe presidential candidates should avoid phrases like "self-deportation" (Mitt Romney) and "anchor babies" (Michele Bachmann).


Henry Barbour said some in the party can appear "hostile" to certain constituencies with the rhetoric they use. The party must increase communication training for candidates, he said.


"There are certainly too many times when we've had candidates who have come across as hostile, and that's not really helpful when you're trying to win elections," Barbour said.


Robert Bennett, chairman of the Ohio Republican Party, was even more blunt.


"We need to understand that we can't come off as a bunch of angry white men," he said.

Republicans say if that means supporting a moderate candidate who can actually win over a hardline conservative who doesn't stand a chance, so be it. (You may have noticed that among the names that make up The Bobs, there isn't anyone who might be considered a "tea party leader.")


"If we're not nominating candidates that can win in the general election, what business are we in?" Barbour said. "We are in the business of winning elections."


There is one thing, however, that no one—not the committee members, elected officials or even The Bobs—seem interested in addressing, and that's whether core Republican ideas need to change.


Most here said they don't.


GOP prepares comeback: ?We can?t come off as a bunch of angry white men? | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

Bumped for cause, 'casue the angry white men of the GOP have yet to respond.

 

[Bill Angel]

Well, I think they want to do what Detroit used to do when they rolled out the new car models back in the 70s. Detroit would essentially roll out the same car with few if any improvements other than minor ones. What WAS different was the outward design of the body, grill, lights, etc. It was basically the same chassis, engine, and drive train with a new body.

And it's what ultimately got their clocked cleaned by Japan as they introduced new cars in America that were quality improvements over anything that Detroit was making. They were more reliable, as well.

There is that old saying "you are what you drive". So what kind of cars does one picture Republican's driving?
I figure Republicans have a firm grip on the voters who own the Lamborghini

Lamborghini


And Democrats have a solid grip on drivers of the Smartcar.

Smartcar

But that does leave a lot of middle ground in auto preferences up for grabs.

 

[Sallow]

Well, I think they want to do what Detroit used to do when they rolled out the new car models back in the 70s. Detroit would essentially roll out the same car with few if any improvements other than minor ones. What WAS different was the outward design of the body, grill, lights, etc. It was basically the same chassis, engine, and drive train with a new body.

And it's what ultimately got their clocked cleaned by Japan as they introduced new cars in America that were quality improvements over anything that Detroit was making. They were more reliable, as well.

There is that old saying "you are what you drive". So what kind of cars does one picture Republican's driving?
I figure Republicans have a firm grip on the voters who own the Lamborghini

Lamborghini


And Democrats have a solid grip on drivers of the Smartcar.

Smartcar

But that does leave a lot of middle ground in auto preferences up for grabs.

That Lamborghini sure is sweet. I had the pleasure of driving the Spider. Rocketship on wheels!

 

[gwennie]

My first thought when I read that was headline was something to the effect of: "But that's what you ARE."

But I decided to reserve judgment until I had read the news article in its entirety (something I strongly suggest conservatives should try to do, at least once).

And what I came away with after reading the article is the feeling that the GOP wants to burnish its image. They truly want to change the public perception of who they are and what they believe. BUT, the don't REALLY want to change who they are and what they believe.

The excerpts in the following article were drawn from different parts of the article. So, if you want to get the full flavor of the article (and the comments made by many of the attendees at the GOP meeting), you should read the entire article.

As a final note, I wonder how all those angry white males in the GOP will react if and when a kinder and gentler GOP message is rolled out when they've become accustomed to the red meat they've been offered for so long.

"You're going to see a very renewed aggressive effort by this party to put on a different face," Bradshaw said on Thursday. "We've got to find a way to take our message to more people and get more votes. It's not a particularly complicated formula. We got beat; we have to change what we're doing."

First, they said Republicans must work on improving their tone when taking their ideas to the American people. For example, when discussing immigration, maybe presidential candidates should avoid phrases like "self-deportation" (Mitt Romney) and "anchor babies" (Michele Bachmann).


Henry Barbour said some in the party can appear "hostile" to certain constituencies with the rhetoric they use. The party must increase communication training for candidates, he said.


"There are certainly too many times when we've had candidates who have come across as hostile, and that's not really helpful when you're trying to win elections," Barbour said.


Robert Bennett, chairman of the Ohio Republican Party, was even more blunt.


"We need to understand that we can't come off as a bunch of angry white men," he said.

Republicans say if that means supporting a moderate candidate who can actually win over a hardline conservative who doesn't stand a chance, so be it. (You may have noticed that among the names that make up The Bobs, there isn't anyone who might be considered a "tea party leader.")


"If we're not nominating candidates that can win in the general election, what business are we in?" Barbour said. "We are in the business of winning elections."


There is one thing, however, that no one—not the committee members, elected officials or even The Bobs—seem interested in addressing, and that's whether core Republican ideas need to change.


Most here said they don't.


GOP prepares comeback: ?We can?t come off as a bunch of angry white men? | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

While there have been some isolated incidents of repubs saying incredibly stupid things, the real problem is that the dem party has been successful in labeling the repubs as racist...among other things. Dems have done the same thing, and worse. The liberals have much to gain if they continue to be successful in convincing people that repubs are angry white racists, much of which they know is not at all accurate, but it helps their political cause. If the GOP wastes all their time back-peddling and recanting and making public statements about needing to improve their brand so as to pimp more voters, the worse they look. The real problem is the establishment repubs....they control the party and don't give a fuck about anything except getting re-elected. Same with the establishment dems.....they don't give a fuck about anything except for the next election and trying to destroy anyone who challenges their agenda. Moderate repubs/dems are non-existent. They are forced to align with the crazy extremists of their party...if they don't, they get no funding for elections; if they do they look like retarded three year-olds on crack. If there truly is a moderate candidate, he/she needs to make themselves known.....NOW. But the liberals have no interest in a moderate candidate; they only say they are.

 

[gwennie]

They're gonna be happy white men now?

Cool.

Sorta like the happy racist black people who blindly vote for the black guy because he's black.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

So exactly how is the GOP going to silence the Conservative Entertainment Complex, because it's those guys who make the party look like a bunch of angry, disjointed white men (if not outright loons.)

 

[Stephanie]

So exactly how is the GOP going to silence the Conservative Entertainment Complex, because it's those guys who make the party look like a bunch of angry, disjointed white men (if not outright loons.)

and there sure isn't any "loons" in the Democrat party...
And we thought you all liked angry?

 

[Bill Angel]

Well, I think they want to do what Detroit used to do when they rolled out the new car models back in the 70s. Detroit would essentially roll out the same car with few if any improvements other than minor ones. What WAS different was the outward design of the body, grill, lights, etc. It was basically the same chassis, engine, and drive train with a new body.

And it's what ultimately got their clocked cleaned by Japan as they introduced new cars in America that were quality improvements over anything that Detroit was making. They were more reliable, as well.

There is that old saying "you are what you drive". So what kind of cars does one picture Republican's driving?
I figure Republicans have a firm grip on the voters who own the Lamborghini

Lamborghini


And Democrats have a solid grip on drivers of the Smartcar.

Smartcar

But that does leave a lot of middle ground in auto preferences up for grabs.

That Lamborghini sure is sweet. I had the pleasure of driving the Spider. Rocketship on wheels!

It's a beautifully styled auto. I'll give them credit for that.