How the Tea Party is Killing the Republican Party

[Some Guy]

The GOP filibustered equal pay for women in the Senate

LINK. NY Times, even! Unbiased source for ya!

rightwinger op ed, genius.

opinion piece...get it... OPINION...from a rightie.

you confuse easily, don't you?

You have trouble making points without insults don't you. My parents taught me not to insult people, so i don't.

The woman who wrote it calls herself a feminist. She's a philosophy professor, holds a PHD. Sounds like someone who'd be on the left wing if anything.

Did you even read it? It makes a strong case for not empowering trial lawyers to conduct witch hunts.

 

[nodoginnafight]

There's no such thing as governing all Americans anymore. The nation has voted to divide. There are those who want more free stuff who are parasites on the backs of those who work. You can't govern leeches unless you promise more free stuff and you can't govern industrious people by promising to remove the fruits of that industry. The two are diametrically opposed with no common interest.

So the "47%" is now up to 53%, huh?

So you're play is to attack and insult what you don't understand.
I get it - white Christian men are used to being able to call all the shots and now they're terrified and lashing out because they find their political power threatened.

As a white Christian man who works for a living and raises his honor student son on his own - I understand. But if you have confidence in your own ability to make yourself valuable and therefor be a valuable, contributing member of society - you need not fear.

And just because someone disagrees with you - it doesn't mean you have to invent a negative personae, attach it to them, and attack. If you are confident in your intellect, you can actually listen and actually respond to what was really said.

 

[nodoginnafight]

The numbers don't lie.
Since 1976 Moderates have made up between 41 to 51% of the electorate
You can't toss that constiuency away with Tea Party antics and expect to win.
It's the ideology, stupid.

 

[Some Guy]

The numbers don't lie.
Since 1976 Moderates have made up between 41 to 51% of the electorate
You can't toss that constiuency away with Tea Party antics and expect to win.
It's the ideology, stupid.

You're not making any sense at all, but i applaud you for your your relentlessness. You'd do well in a dog or cock fight.

 

[NoNukes]

It was all giggles and grins when those funny tri-corner hat wearing, misspelled sign carrying, long form loving zealots were yelling and screaming about Obama.

The GOP and Fox news lifted them up as if they were Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Paul Revere reincarnated. Fox lied and inflated their numbers at rallies. Scotty Rassmussen lied and said 123% of Americans agree with them.

And Republicans giggled over their brandy and cigars. (or in the case of the sourthern GOP, over their Pabst Blue Ribbon and Pall Malls).

Now that they've radicalized your party to the point that you lost the White House, you lost seats in the Senate, and you lost seats in the House of Representatives, the damage is clear. But if you moderate your stances back into line with mainstream America - they'll scream "RINO" and go after you hard in your primary.

See what happens when your number one goal is not to govern well and wisely but to try to beat the hyper-partisan drum with any stick you can find?

Still grinning?

Those tri cornered hats and powdered wigs really bring the Black and Latino voters over to their side.

What planet are you living on?

Planet sarcasm.

 

[martinjlm]

fuck you

Sweet!

First post on the board is a linguistic gem. Well thought out......un-punctuated, so as to deliver that, "I care, but not really" vibe. Awesome!

 

[nodoginnafight]

Even in localized house elections - the GOP lost seats but held their majority in the House not by getting more votes than Democrats. They held onto their seats by re-districting.

House Democratic candidates got 54,301,095 votes while House Republican candidates got 53,822,442. That’s a close election — 48.8%-48.5% –but it’s still a popular vote win for the Democrats.

 

[martinjlm]

A popular movement comes along and the establishment politicians and their brainless minions go gaga!

What a joke.

And - the joke will be in 2014 when the Tea Party puts a lot of pro-big-government pols into the unemployment line. And, if the Libertarians play their cards right, they could swell the ranks immensely by getting their message out to the conservatives who are sick and tired of the GOP establishment.

I will give you credit for your loyalty. Are you a Detroit Lions fan by any chance?

Hey! Hey! Now you just watch it there buster! Don't you go.......rippin'....on the Lions......<damn.....I just outed myself....>


Carry on

 

[Some Guy]

Even in localized house elections - the GOP lost seats but held their majority in the House not by getting more votes than Democrats. They held onto their seats by re-districting.

House Democratic candidates got 54,301,095 votes while House Republican candidates got 53,822,442. That’s a close election — 48.8%-48.5% –but it’s still a popular vote win for the Democrats.

Republicans are the only ones who use dastardly redistricting to win elections. Here's more proof:
Democrats win big with Texas court's redistricting map - The Hill
Expert: Redistricting A Big Factor In Democrats’ Wins In Illinois « CBS Chicago

 

[nodoginnafight]

well if you think redistricting is "dastardly" you are certainly entitled to that opinion. It's not really relevent to the point of the post or the thread, but feel free to wander anywhere you like.

 

[Jackson]

It was all giggles and grins when those funny tri-corner hat wearing, misspelled sign carrying, long form loving zealots were yelling and screaming about Obama.

The GOP and Fox news lifted them up as if they were Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Paul Revere reincarnated. Fox lied and inflated their numbers at rallies. Scotty Rassmussen lied and said 123% of Americans agree with them.

And Republicans giggled over their brandy and cigars. (or in the case of the sourthern GOP, over their Pabst Blue Ribbon and Pall Malls).

Now that they've radicalized your party to the point that you lost the White House, you lost seats in the Senate, and you lost seats in the House of Representatives, the damage is clear. But if you moderate your stances back into line with mainstream America - they'll scream "RINO" and go after you hard in your primary.

See what happens when your number one goal is not to govern well and wisely but to try to beat the hyper-partisan drum with any stick you can find?

Still grinning?

We are hopng that the last cam[paign was a wake up call for Obama and the election a wake up call for the Republicans. Both of them have to retire their partisan ideologies and start a new era of working together for the good of tghe country. Obama has four more years to make a lasting recovery and breing his legacy to a proud and efficient tilt.

The Republicans have to re evaluate their stances on many superfluous issues that brought them down and directly reach out to the Democrat party to overcome political obstacles we've seen in the past. If the Democrats are smart, this is the time for the Clinton approach to governing and they will take advantage of it.

 

[martinjlm]

Teapartiers are one of the best FREE recruiting tools the Left has. Keep it up T-Partiers

Oh...3 MM...I stand corrected.

And how many fewer votes did your Boiking this time around, versus '08?...Like somewhere around 8MM?

What percentage of eligible voters stayed home?

that makes it even MORE of a stunning defeat for Republicorp lol.

What it makes is proof that trying to run as a so-called "moderate", in order to sidle up to a bunch of deluded bigots, who wouldn't ever consider voting for anyone with that (R) by their name out of sheer reactionary impulse in the first place, is a monumental waste of time and effort.

If this election showed anything, it's that the votes to win aren't to be found in the squishy nose-picking middle, but with the voters who are staying home.

I think the point others are trying to make (and that I agree with) is that when you take a moderate Republican (Romney, vintage 2008 and earlier) and twist him into a far-right leaning figure, surrounded by idiots and bigots, voters who reside in the middle, who might be actually looking for reasons to vote R, tend to get turned off by the surrounding messages. I am one of those voters. I have no problem voting R if the situation calls for it. I have no problem voting D if the situation calls for it. But in a race where there really isn't a great difference in quality between the two candidates, the anger spewed by the far, far right can easily turn one off to the party.

 

[martinjlm]

10 million fewer voters showed up at the polls this time around, compared to '08....Including a whopping 8 million fewer for your Boiking.

Amazing how myopic nincompoops like you just brush past that little fact, too.

That would imply that a larger turnout would have meant a larger margin of victory for Obama, if most of the 10M that sat out were 2008 Obama voters.

 

[Oddball]

Only if you *ahem* assume all of those voters would've made the same mistake the second time.

 

[nodoginnafight]

10 million fewer voters showed up at the polls this time around, compared to '08....Including a whopping 8 million fewer for your Boiking.

Amazing how myopic nincompoops like you just brush past that little fact, too.

That would imply that a larger turnout would have meant a larger margin of victory for Obama, if most of the 10M that sat out were 2008 Obama voters.

Really good point - let's look at the numbers.

In 2004 the breakdown on self identification of voters was:
Liberal 21%
Moderate 45%
Conservative 34%

In 2008 that breakdown was:
Liberal 22%
Moderate 44%
Conservative 34%

In 2012 that breakdown was:
Liberal 25%
Moderate 41%
Conservative 35%

So the numbers show that more liberals voted, slightly more conservatives voted and there was actually a decrease in moderates. Those numbers clearly show that moderates actually stayed home in higher numbers than liberals or conservatives.

And since Romney lost moderates by 15 points, the meme that conservatives stayed home because Romney wasn't conservative enough just doesn't hold water. The uncast votes were clearly moderate votes and Obama carried the moderate vote by a wide margin.

Unless you are addicted to "Republican math that makes you feel better," the takeaway is crystal clear - by radicalizing the party platform, the Tea Party is making Republicans unelectable.

 

[Oddball]

No, it's a stupid point.

All of the statistics in the world don't make you a mind reader or supreme distributor of uncast votes.

 

[nodoginnafight]

No, it's a stupid point.

All of the statistics in the world don't make you a mind reader or supreme distributor of uncast votes.

Ahhh the Karl Rove election night meltdown position.

I understand where you are coming from. It's tough to be a minority and you have very little practice at it.

 

[martinjlm]

Only if you *ahem* assume all of those voters would've made the same mistake the second time.

Of course not. But for your "voters didn't turnout" assessment to be true, about 70% would've had to....<ahem>....change their minds. That didn't happen with those who DID vote, so why would that be more likely for those who didn't

 

[JWBooth]

Maybe it didn't start out that way, but the tea party is a bought and paid for adjunct of the GOP no less so than the Young Republicans.

 

[Oddball]

Only if you *ahem* assume all of those voters would've made the same mistake the second time.

Of course not. But for your "voters didn't turnout" assessment to be true, about 70% would've had to....<ahem>....change their minds. That didn't happen with those who DID vote, so why would that be more likely for those who didn't

You don't have positive proof with negative evidence, Corky.