Redistricting is a state level function. The composition of Congress has nothing to do with it.
In reality, the Tea Party is the sole potential salvation for the GOP. The national GOP, that miscreant collection of weak-willed losers, are more interested in staying in power than in doing the heavy lifting of governance. And they aren't very intelligent about retaining (or reclaiming) power, at that.
The GOP is too busy attempting to placate the liberal media and the false portrayal it offers of the "mood" of the electorate to bother attending to the logic of reality and history.
The institutional GOP "leadership" tries to "sanction" the conservatives. All the better to keep a version of Party discipline which is in keeping with their own myopic views on what they need to do to get votes.
But there's nobody tripping over themselves to vote for the national GOP candidates when the national Party has no discernible distinguishing principles.
If the ******* dishonest liberally-biased media claims that "the Hispanic vote" is the be all and end all of getting elections won, then the GOP dutifully "reaches out" to the Hispanic population by caving-in on matters of immigration reform. Does it work? Will THAT help get the "Hispanic vot"e to perform a sea change shift from the Dim Party to the GOP?
Of course not.
All the GOP manages to accomplish is to LOOK like snake oil salesmen to the very constituency they are hoping to woo. And they get what SHOULD be their base to lose faith in what the GOP stands for. The GOP-base voters might as well vote for a Dim since there are fewer and fewer substantive differences between the two national Parties. Or, on election days, the GOP base just stays home, more and more, which effectively concedes the field to the opposition. It turns out that it's not such a great idea to take "counsel" or "advice" from the FakeyStarkeys of the world, and their media stooges.
If the national GOP had a brain in its collective head, they'd study recent history. What led to their ascendancy when they achieved any form of electoral success? Seriously. Did Ronald Reagan pander to the liberals? Or did he TAKE THEM ON? Did he spend lots of time agreeing with them or did he expose the hideous leftist logic behind the Democrat Parody agenda.
So, once again, the question is urgent, pressing and quite real: What led to the GOP ascendancy when they achieved any form of electoral success?
Hint: it was NOT acting like a pale version of the Dim Party.
Do that and you alienate the single largest voting block of the GOP-Social Conservatives.In reality, the Tea Party is the sole potential salvation for the GOP. The national GOP, that miscreant collection of weak-willed losers, are more interested in staying in power than in doing the heavy lifting of governance. And they aren't very intelligent about retaining (or reclaiming) power, at that.
The GOP is too busy attempting to placate the liberal media and the false portrayal it offers of the "mood" of the electorate to bother attending to the logic of reality and history.
The institutional GOP "leadership" tries to "sanction" the conservatives. All the better to keep a version of Party discipline which is in keeping with their own myopic views on what they need to do to get votes.
But there's nobody tripping over themselves to vote for the national GOP candidates when the national Party has no discernible distinguishing principles.
If the ******* dishonest liberally-biased media claims that "the Hispanic vote" is the be all and end all of getting elections won, then the GOP dutifully "reaches out" to the Hispanic population by caving-in on matters of immigration reform. Does it work? Will THAT help get the "Hispanic vot"e to perform a sea change shift from the Dim Party to the GOP?
Of course not.
All the GOP manages to accomplish is to LOOK like snake oil salesmen to the very constituency they are hoping to woo. And they get what SHOULD be their base to lose faith in what the GOP stands for. The GOP-base voters might as well vote for a Dim since there are fewer and fewer substantive differences between the two national Parties. Or, on election days, the GOP base just stays home, more and more, which effectively concedes the field to the opposition. It turns out that it's not such a great idea to take "counsel" or "advice" from the FakeyStarkeys of the world, and their media stooges.
If the national GOP had a brain in its collective head, they'd study recent history. What led to their ascendancy when they achieved any form of electoral success? Seriously. Did Ronald Reagan pander to the liberals? Or did he TAKE THEM ON? Did he spend lots of time agreeing with them or did he expose the hideous leftist logic behind the Democrat Parody agenda.
So, once again, the question is urgent, pressing and quite real: What led to the GOP ascendancy when they achieved any form of electoral success?
Hint: it was NOT acting like a pale version of the Dim Party.
Very true. The GOP should not be a duplicate of the dems but they look more and more like it every year.
I would disagree with the social aspect though and they are the only real divide between the GOP and the Dems at the moment. The GOP needs to abandon that track and get back to the actual values that the party is supposed to stand for. The STATES can take care of the social aspects; the federal government needs to get back to what it was meant to do rather than running our lives.
