The next Republican President hasn't been born yet

[JakeStarkey]

Either the GOP will transform itself to adapt to demographics, or another party will rise up.

We have been a one party nation only from 1789 to 1792 and 1816 to 1828.

We have had decades of very strong party: 1860 to 1884 and 1932 to 1952 for example.

The US will be entering one of those periods in 2017.

Pandering to a fear of non-existent Third Worlder voters does nothing but prolong the healing process.

 

[Correll]

Correll, you have analyzed the politics and demographics wrongly. You want the Hispanics and women to somehow magically adopt your analysis: they won't. It is you and your analysis that are wrong.

America does not accept the white far right social con view of America anymore. That is gone forever for a growing majority of Americans.

I'm not sure what you mean by the "whtie far right social con view of America".

There are plenty of middle class and rich Hispanics that the GOP should have a shot at. But we don't.

There are plenty of socially conservative Hispanics that the GOP should have a shot at. But we don't.

Yes, this change may very well be irreversible.

That is not a good thing.

A nation that was special, is being radical transformed to be crappy.

You make a good point

It is not just the poor who are looking for free stuff from Democrats. It's upper middle class and wealthy blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Asians and Muslims who refuse to vote Republican

Years of demeaning racist rhetoric is catching up with the Republicans

McCain. SUpported amnesty and Dream and lost 2 to 1.

Do you agree that One Party States tend to corruption, incompetence and overreach?

 

[Correll]

Either the GOP will transform itself to adapt to demographics, or another party will rise up.

We have been a one party nation only from 1789 to 1792 and 1816 to 1828.

We have had decades of very strong party: 1860 to 1884 and 1932 to 1952 for example.

The US will be entering one of those periods in 2017.

Pandering to a fear of non-existent Third Worlder voters does nothing but prolong the healing process.

It is possible that at some point some other party will rise up, well down the line.

It will have nothing to do with Traditional America though. Possibly the GReens or some break off fraction of the DEms would be my guess.

It could be an improvement over the period of ONe Party Statehood, but will still be nothing like the nation we love today.

SO, who cares?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Correll, you have analyzed the politics and demographics wrongly. You want the Hispanics and women to somehow magically adopt your analysis: they won't. It is you and your analysis that are wrong.

America does not accept the white far right social con view of America anymore. That is gone forever for a growing majority of Americans.

I'm not sure what you mean by the "whtie far right social con view of America".

There are plenty of middle class and rich Hispanics that the GOP should have a shot at. But we don't.

There are plenty of socially conservative Hispanics that the GOP should have a shot at. But we don't.

Yes, this change may very well be irreversible.

That is not a good thing.

A nation that was special, is being radical transformed to be crappy.

You make a good point

It is not just the poor who are looking for free stuff from Democrats. It's upper middle class and wealthy blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Asians and Muslims who refuse to vote Republican

Years of demeaning racist rhetoric is catching up with the Republicans

McCain. SUpported amnesty and Dream and lost 2 to 1.

Do you agree that One Party States tend to corruption, incompetence and overreach?

In America's past, sure. That is why the opposition morphed into the Whigs and then into the Republicans. If the GOP goes belly up, a new party will rise.

The problem is that the Republican far right refuses to understand the great majority of America outright distrusts if it not even more outright hate it. Those Americans do not see that group of social conservative Christians as true America.

You are sad that your world changes. So I am. So was my Dad. So was my Grandad.

The only consistent things about life are always change and death.

 

[Correll]

Correll, you have analyzed the politics and demographics wrongly. You want the Hispanics and women to somehow magically adopt your analysis: they won't. It is you and your analysis that are wrong.

America does not accept the white far right social con view of America anymore. That is gone forever for a growing majority of Americans.

I'm not sure what you mean by the "whtie far right social con view of America".

There are plenty of middle class and rich Hispanics that the GOP should have a shot at. But we don't.

There are plenty of socially conservative Hispanics that the GOP should have a shot at. But we don't.

Yes, this change may very well be irreversible.

That is not a good thing.

A nation that was special, is being radical transformed to be crappy.

You make a good point

It is not just the poor who are looking for free stuff from Democrats. It's upper middle class and wealthy blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Asians and Muslims who refuse to vote Republican

Years of demeaning racist rhetoric is catching up with the Republicans

McCain. SUpported amnesty and Dream and lost 2 to 1.

Do you agree that One Party States tend to corruption, incompetence and overreach?

In America's past, sure. That is why the opposition morphed into the Whigs and then into the Republicans. If the GOP goes belly up, a new party will rise.

The problem is that the Republican far right refuses to understand the great majority of America outright distrusts if it not even more outright hate it. Those Americans do not see that group of social conservative Christians as true America.

McCain is certainly NOT far right and lost the Hispanics 2 to 1.


Your pet issue with the social conservatives does not seem to be the reason.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Correll, you have analyzed the politics and demographics wrongly. You want the Hispanics and women to somehow magically adopt your analysis: they won't. It is you and your analysis that are wrong.

America does not accept the white far right social con view of America anymore. That is gone forever for a growing majority of Americans.

I'm not sure what you mean by the "whtie far right social con view of America".

There are plenty of middle class and rich Hispanics that the GOP should have a shot at. But we don't.

There are plenty of socially conservative Hispanics that the GOP should have a shot at. But we don't.

Yes, this change may very well be irreversible.

That is not a good thing.

A nation that was special, is being radical transformed to be crappy.

You make a good point

It is not just the poor who are looking for free stuff from Democrats. It's upper middle class and wealthy blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Asians and Muslims who refuse to vote Republican

Years of demeaning racist rhetoric is catching up with the Republicans

McCain. SUpported amnesty and Dream and lost 2 to 1.

Do you agree that One Party States tend to corruption, incompetence and overreach?

In America's past, sure. That is why the opposition morphed into the Whigs and then into the Republicans. If the GOP goes belly up, a new party will rise.

The problem is that the Republican far right refuses to understand the great majority of America outright distrusts if it not even more outright hate it. Those Americans do not see that group of social conservative Christians as true America.

McCain is certainly NOT far right and lost the Hispanics 2 to 1. Your pet issue with the social conservatives does not seem to be the reason.

McCain and Romney lost because the far right scares the bejesus out of the rest of America. Don't you get that. It does not trust you. Look at the plummeting ratings of the the GOP House. You guys scare the **** out of America.

 

[Correll]

I'm not sure what you mean by the "whtie far right social con view of America".

There are plenty of middle class and rich Hispanics that the GOP should have a shot at. But we don't.

There are plenty of socially conservative Hispanics that the GOP should have a shot at. But we don't.

Yes, this change may very well be irreversible.

That is not a good thing.

A nation that was special, is being radical transformed to be crappy.

You make a good point

It is not just the poor who are looking for free stuff from Democrats. It's upper middle class and wealthy blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Asians and Muslims who refuse to vote Republican

Years of demeaning racist rhetoric is catching up with the Republicans

McCain. SUpported amnesty and Dream and lost 2 to 1.

Do you agree that One Party States tend to corruption, incompetence and overreach?

In America's past, sure. That is why the opposition morphed into the Whigs and then into the Republicans. If the GOP goes belly up, a new party will rise.

The problem is that the Republican far right refuses to understand the great majority of America outright distrusts if it not even more outright hate it. Those Americans do not see that group of social conservative Christians as true America.

McCain is certainly NOT far right and lost the Hispanics 2 to 1. Your pet issue with the social conservatives does not seem to be the reason.

McCain and Romney lost because the far right scares the bejesus out of the rest of America. Don't you get that. It does not trust you. Look at the plummeting ratings of the the GOP House. You guys scare the **** out of America.

The nomination of McCain was a nearly complete repudiation of conservatives.

THe GOP is NOT going to be going to the left of McCain.

If we can't win the Hispanics with McCain we never will.

Your pet peeve with social conservatives is not what is driving this.

 

[nuhuh]

The challenge for Republicans is to not surrender the minority and immigrant population to the Democrats

How do Republicans convince them that voting Republican is in their best interests. Current demagoguery does not seem to be working

Republicans have NOT surrendered the minority and immigration population.

You mentioned the "recent hysteria and blocking of immigration reform" in your second post.

McCain supported amnesty and lost the hispanic vote 2 to 1 to Obama.

YOu guys have done an excellent job of branding the GOP in the minds of Hispanics as the "enemy".

You know it. So don't add insult to injury by lying about it now.

Import Third World voters, create defacto One Party State, rule for generations.

Good for the dems, bad for America.

Hispanics don't need the Democrats to see what Repblicans are and are not doing for them

English only laws, blocking DREAM initiatives, the racist rhetoric directed at Hispanic immigrants, where are your papers? Laws, blocking immigration reforms

All coming from the right

McCain supported the Dream Act, and did not run a racist campaign.

And yet, Obama accused him of running a racist campaign and won the hispanic vote by 2 to 1.



Constant racial demagoguery over generations have done their job. YOu have a good lock on the Hispanic vote, that is why you are so happy about the demographic change.

If you really thought that a minor adjustment in policy would be all it would take to put the Hispanic Vote up for grabs you wouldn't have been so gleeful about it in your second post.

I'm getting bored with that nonsense
Show where Obama accused McCain of running a racist campaign

Hispanics are more than capable sizing up their relationship with the GOP. They are turning away in droves

I have posted this before.

Obama: Don’t let other side scare you


"they figure they’re going to win this election is if they make you scared of me,” Obama continued, repeating an attack from earlier in the day. “What they’re saying is ‘Well, we know we’re not very good but you can’t risk electing Obama. You know, he’s new, he doesn’t look like the other presidents on the currency, he’s a got a funny name.’”



McCain did not do that.

Obama lied.


And yes, Obama won the Hispanics by 2 to 1. I'm not denying that you dems have a lock on the Hispanic vote.

It is why I agree with you on the upcoming marginalization of the GOP and the transformation of the US into a defacto One Party State.

You, as a lib, see this as a good thing.

I as a con, see it as a bad thing.

But we agree it is happening.

You need to update your history of the election if you think it wasn't driven by other things than just politics.

"What makes them different, and what has pumped up the Weimar-like rage at McCain-Palin rallies, is the violent escalation in rhetoric, especially (though not exclusively) by Palin. Obama “launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist.” He is “palling around with terrorists” (note the plural noun). Obama is “not a man who sees America the way you and I see America.” Wielding a wildly out-of-context Obama quote, Palin slurs him as an enemy of American troops.

By the time McCain asks the crowd “Who is the real Barack Obama?” it’s no surprise that someone cries out “Terrorist!” The rhetorical conflation of Obama with terrorism is complete. It is stoked further by the repeated invocation of Obama’s middle name by surrogates introducing McCain and Palin at these rallies. This sleight of hand at once synchronizes with the poisonous Obama-is-a-Muslim e-mail blasts and shifts the brand of terrorism from Ayers’s Vietnam-era variety to the radical Islamic threats of today.

That’s a far cry from simply accusing Obama of being a guilty-by-association radical leftist. Obama is being branded as a potential killer and an accessory to past attempts at murder. “Barack Obama’s friend tried to kill my family” was how a McCain press release last week packaged the remembrance of a Weather Underground incident from 1970 — when Obama was 8." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/opinion/12rich.html

 

[JakeStarkey]

Correll, you are entitled to your opinion but not your own facts.

 

[Correll]

Republicans have NOT surrendered the minority and immigration population.

You mentioned the "recent hysteria and blocking of immigration reform" in your second post.

McCain supported amnesty and lost the hispanic vote 2 to 1 to Obama.

YOu guys have done an excellent job of branding the GOP in the minds of Hispanics as the "enemy".

You know it. So don't add insult to injury by lying about it now.

Import Third World voters, create defacto One Party State, rule for generations.

Good for the dems, bad for America.

Hispanics don't need the Democrats to see what Repblicans are and are not doing for them

English only laws, blocking DREAM initiatives, the racist rhetoric directed at Hispanic immigrants, where are your papers? Laws, blocking immigration reforms

All coming from the right

McCain supported the Dream Act, and did not run a racist campaign.

And yet, Obama accused him of running a racist campaign and won the hispanic vote by 2 to 1.



Constant racial demagoguery over generations have done their job. YOu have a good lock on the Hispanic vote, that is why you are so happy about the demographic change.

If you really thought that a minor adjustment in policy would be all it would take to put the Hispanic Vote up for grabs you wouldn't have been so gleeful about it in your second post.

I'm getting bored with that nonsense
Show where Obama accused McCain of running a racist campaign

Hispanics are more than capable sizing up their relationship with the GOP. They are turning away in droves

I have posted this before.

Obama: Don’t let other side scare you


"they figure they’re going to win this election is if they make you scared of me,” Obama continued, repeating an attack from earlier in the day. “What they’re saying is ‘Well, we know we’re not very good but you can’t risk electing Obama. You know, he’s new, he doesn’t look like the other presidents on the currency, he’s a got a funny name.’”



McCain did not do that.

Obama lied.


And yes, Obama won the Hispanics by 2 to 1. I'm not denying that you dems have a lock on the Hispanic vote.

It is why I agree with you on the upcoming marginalization of the GOP and the transformation of the US into a defacto One Party State.

You, as a lib, see this as a good thing.

I as a con, see it as a bad thing.

But we agree it is happening.

You need to update your history of the election if you think it wasn't driven by other things than just politics.

"What makes them different, and what has pumped up the Weimar-like rage at McCain-Palin rallies, is the violent escalation in rhetoric, especially (though not exclusively) by Palin. Obama “launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist.” He is “palling around with terrorists” (note the plural noun). Obama is “not a man who sees America the way you and I see America.” Wielding a wildly out-of-context Obama quote, Palin slurs him as an enemy of American troops.

By the time McCain asks the crowd “Who is the real Barack Obama?” it’s no surprise that someone cries out “Terrorist!” The rhetorical conflation of Obama with terrorism is complete. It is stoked further by the repeated invocation of Obama’s middle name by surrogates introducing McCain and Palin at these rallies. This sleight of hand at once synchronizes with the poisonous Obama-is-a-Muslim e-mail blasts and shifts the brand of terrorism from Ayers’s Vietnam-era variety to the radical Islamic threats of today.

That’s a far cry from simply accusing Obama of being a guilty-by-association radical leftist. Obama is being branded as a potential killer and an accessory to past attempts at murder. “Barack Obama’s friend tried to kill my family” was how a McCain press release last week packaged the remembrance of a Weather Underground incident from 1970 — when Obama was 8." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/opinion/12rich.html

Thank you for your fine example of the type of branding and racial demagoguery I was referring to.

Though a little light on the race aspect.

But still, yes.

Ohh, "Weimar-like rage" Good one! A very subtle Godwin!


Yes, no amount of policy is going to affect this image you libs have crafted.

At this point your One Party State is nearly assured.

Congratulations.

 

[Correll]

Correll, you are entitled to your opinion but not your own facts.

Which fact have I sited that you consider false?

That McCain was a moderate who's nomination was a massive defeat for conservatives?

That McCain did NOT run a racist campaign?

That McCain lost Hispanics by 2 to 1? Despite a long career of screwing Conservatives, and I don't mean in a romantic way?

 

[nuhuh]

Hispanics don't need the Democrats to see what Repblicans are and are not doing for them

English only laws, blocking DREAM initiatives, the racist rhetoric directed at Hispanic immigrants, where are your papers? Laws, blocking immigration reforms

All coming from the right

McCain supported the Dream Act, and did not run a racist campaign.

And yet, Obama accused him of running a racist campaign and won the hispanic vote by 2 to 1.



Constant racial demagoguery over generations have done their job. YOu have a good lock on the Hispanic vote, that is why you are so happy about the demographic change.

If you really thought that a minor adjustment in policy would be all it would take to put the Hispanic Vote up for grabs you wouldn't have been so gleeful about it in your second post.

I'm getting bored with that nonsense
Show where Obama accused McCain of running a racist campaign

Hispanics are more than capable sizing up their relationship with the GOP. They are turning away in droves

I have posted this before.

Obama: Don’t let other side scare you


"they figure they’re going to win this election is if they make you scared of me,” Obama continued, repeating an attack from earlier in the day. “What they’re saying is ‘Well, we know we’re not very good but you can’t risk electing Obama. You know, he’s new, he doesn’t look like the other presidents on the currency, he’s a got a funny name.’”



McCain did not do that.

Obama lied.


And yes, Obama won the Hispanics by 2 to 1. I'm not denying that you dems have a lock on the Hispanic vote.

It is why I agree with you on the upcoming marginalization of the GOP and the transformation of the US into a defacto One Party State.

You, as a lib, see this as a good thing.

I as a con, see it as a bad thing.

But we agree it is happening.

You need to update your history of the election if you think it wasn't driven by other things than just politics.

"What makes them different, and what has pumped up the Weimar-like rage at McCain-Palin rallies, is the violent escalation in rhetoric, especially (though not exclusively) by Palin. Obama “launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist.” He is “palling around with terrorists” (note the plural noun). Obama is “not a man who sees America the way you and I see America.” Wielding a wildly out-of-context Obama quote, Palin slurs him as an enemy of American troops.

By the time McCain asks the crowd “Who is the real Barack Obama?” it’s no surprise that someone cries out “Terrorist!” The rhetorical conflation of Obama with terrorism is complete. It is stoked further by the repeated invocation of Obama’s middle name by surrogates introducing McCain and Palin at these rallies. This sleight of hand at once synchronizes with the poisonous Obama-is-a-Muslim e-mail blasts and shifts the brand of terrorism from Ayers’s Vietnam-era variety to the radical Islamic threats of today.

That’s a far cry from simply accusing Obama of being a guilty-by-association radical leftist. Obama is being branded as a potential killer and an accessory to past attempts at murder. “Barack Obama’s friend tried to kill my family” was how a McCain press release last week packaged the remembrance of a Weather Underground incident from 1970 — when Obama was 8." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/opinion/12rich.html

Thank you for your fine example of the type of branding and racial demagoguery I was referring to.

Though a little light on the race aspect.

But still, yes.

Ohh, "Weimar-like rage" Good one! A very subtle Godwin!


Yes, no amount of policy is going to affect this image you libs have crafted.

At this point your One Party State is nearly assured.

Congratulations.

Somehow I am neither surprised nor disappointed that you still don't get it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Correll, you are entitled to your opinion but not your own facts.

Which fact have I sited that you consider false?

That McCain was a moderate who's nomination was a massive defeat for conservatives?

That McCain did NOT run a racist campaign?

That McCain lost Hispanics by 2 to 1? Despite a long career of screwing Conservatives, and I don't mean in a romantic way?

You are ignoring the fact that most Americans are very scared of our far right.

The far right is doing nothing to change that.

 

[Correll]

McCain supported the Dream Act, and did not run a racist campaign.

And yet, Obama accused him of running a racist campaign and won the hispanic vote by 2 to 1.



Constant racial demagoguery over generations have done their job. YOu have a good lock on the Hispanic vote, that is why you are so happy about the demographic change.

If you really thought that a minor adjustment in policy would be all it would take to put the Hispanic Vote up for grabs you wouldn't have been so gleeful about it in your second post.

I'm getting bored with that nonsense
Show where Obama accused McCain of running a racist campaign

Hispanics are more than capable sizing up their relationship with the GOP. They are turning away in droves

I have posted this before.

Obama: Don’t let other side scare you


"they figure they’re going to win this election is if they make you scared of me,” Obama continued, repeating an attack from earlier in the day. “What they’re saying is ‘Well, we know we’re not very good but you can’t risk electing Obama. You know, he’s new, he doesn’t look like the other presidents on the currency, he’s a got a funny name.’”



McCain did not do that.

Obama lied.


And yes, Obama won the Hispanics by 2 to 1. I'm not denying that you dems have a lock on the Hispanic vote.

It is why I agree with you on the upcoming marginalization of the GOP and the transformation of the US into a defacto One Party State.

You, as a lib, see this as a good thing.

I as a con, see it as a bad thing.

But we agree it is happening.

You need to update your history of the election if you think it wasn't driven by other things than just politics.

"What makes them different, and what has pumped up the Weimar-like rage at McCain-Palin rallies, is the violent escalation in rhetoric, especially (though not exclusively) by Palin. Obama “launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist.” He is “palling around with terrorists” (note the plural noun). Obama is “not a man who sees America the way you and I see America.” Wielding a wildly out-of-context Obama quote, Palin slurs him as an enemy of American troops.

By the time McCain asks the crowd “Who is the real Barack Obama?” it’s no surprise that someone cries out “Terrorist!” The rhetorical conflation of Obama with terrorism is complete. It is stoked further by the repeated invocation of Obama’s middle name by surrogates introducing McCain and Palin at these rallies. This sleight of hand at once synchronizes with the poisonous Obama-is-a-Muslim e-mail blasts and shifts the brand of terrorism from Ayers’s Vietnam-era variety to the radical Islamic threats of today.

That’s a far cry from simply accusing Obama of being a guilty-by-association radical leftist. Obama is being branded as a potential killer and an accessory to past attempts at murder. “Barack Obama’s friend tried to kill my family” was how a McCain press release last week packaged the remembrance of a Weather Underground incident from 1970 — when Obama was 8." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/opinion/12rich.html

Thank you for your fine example of the type of branding and racial demagoguery I was referring to.

Though a little light on the race aspect.

But still, yes.

Ohh, "Weimar-like rage" Good one! A very subtle Godwin!


Yes, no amount of policy is going to affect this image you libs have crafted.

At this point your One Party State is nearly assured.

Congratulations.

Somehow I am neither surprised nor disappointed that you still don't get it.

i got it, Mr "Wemiar like Rage".

It's bullshit propaganda, and it is driving the political process in this country.

You are winning and you will almost certainly get what you want.



What do you hope to have happen once you get your control?

 

[Meathead]

I doubt if I will ever see another Republican President in my lifetime

I don't think even the Democrats would install a junta, even if Sanders wins the presidency.

That, or you have been informed of your impending demise.

I hope for both your sake and the country's, neither of them come to pass.

 

[Correll]

Correll, you are entitled to your opinion but not your own facts.

Which fact have I sited that you consider false?

That McCain was a moderate who's nomination was a massive defeat for conservatives?

That McCain did NOT run a racist campaign?

That McCain lost Hispanics by 2 to 1? Despite a long career of screwing Conservatives, and I don't mean in a romantic way?

You are ignoring the fact that most Americans are very scared of our far right.

The far right is doing nothing to change that.

The Far Right aren't the ones poised for total control, Jake.

The Far Left is.

Why aren't you afraid of them?

 

[nuhuh]

I'm getting bored with that nonsense
Show where Obama accused McCain of running a racist campaign

Hispanics are more than capable sizing up their relationship with the GOP. They are turning away in droves

I have posted this before.

Obama: Don’t let other side scare you


"they figure they’re going to win this election is if they make you scared of me,” Obama continued, repeating an attack from earlier in the day. “What they’re saying is ‘Well, we know we’re not very good but you can’t risk electing Obama. You know, he’s new, he doesn’t look like the other presidents on the currency, he’s a got a funny name.’”



McCain did not do that.

Obama lied.


And yes, Obama won the Hispanics by 2 to 1. I'm not denying that you dems have a lock on the Hispanic vote.

It is why I agree with you on the upcoming marginalization of the GOP and the transformation of the US into a defacto One Party State.

You, as a lib, see this as a good thing.

I as a con, see it as a bad thing.

But we agree it is happening.

You need to update your history of the election if you think it wasn't driven by other things than just politics.

"What makes them different, and what has pumped up the Weimar-like rage at McCain-Palin rallies, is the violent escalation in rhetoric, especially (though not exclusively) by Palin. Obama “launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist.” He is “palling around with terrorists” (note the plural noun). Obama is “not a man who sees America the way you and I see America.” Wielding a wildly out-of-context Obama quote, Palin slurs him as an enemy of American troops.

By the time McCain asks the crowd “Who is the real Barack Obama?” it’s no surprise that someone cries out “Terrorist!” The rhetorical conflation of Obama with terrorism is complete. It is stoked further by the repeated invocation of Obama’s middle name by surrogates introducing McCain and Palin at these rallies. This sleight of hand at once synchronizes with the poisonous Obama-is-a-Muslim e-mail blasts and shifts the brand of terrorism from Ayers’s Vietnam-era variety to the radical Islamic threats of today.

That’s a far cry from simply accusing Obama of being a guilty-by-association radical leftist. Obama is being branded as a potential killer and an accessory to past attempts at murder. “Barack Obama’s friend tried to kill my family” was how a McCain press release last week packaged the remembrance of a Weather Underground incident from 1970 — when Obama was 8." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/opinion/12rich.html

Thank you for your fine example of the type of branding and racial demagoguery I was referring to.

Though a little light on the race aspect.

But still, yes.

Ohh, "Weimar-like rage" Good one! A very subtle Godwin!


Yes, no amount of policy is going to affect this image you libs have crafted.

At this point your One Party State is nearly assured.

Congratulations.

Somehow I am neither surprised nor disappointed that you still don't get it.

i got it, Mr "Wemiar like Rage".

It's bullshit propaganda, and it is driving the political process in this country.

You are winning and you will almost certainly get what you want.



What do you hope to have happen once you get your control?

I didn't write that, the Opinion page of the New York Times did and their reaction was to the over the top campaigning by McCain-Palin that caused them to respond that way. You can accept or reject that analysis, but the number of reasons for minorities deserting the Republican party gets ever smaller and smaller.

 

[Davros]

The next Republican president will be elected in 2016.

 

[Davros]

Correll, you are entitled to your opinion but not your own facts.

Which fact have I sited that you consider false?

That McCain was a moderate who's nomination was a massive defeat for conservatives?

That McCain did NOT run a racist campaign?

That McCain lost Hispanics by 2 to 1? Despite a long career of screwing Conservatives, and I don't mean in a romantic way?

You are ignoring the fact that most Americans are very scared of our far right.

The far right is doing nothing to change that.

The Far Right aren't the ones poised for total control, Jake.

The Far Left is.

Why aren't you afraid of them?

The far right is one election away from near total control, with only a divided Senate standing in their way of imposing their will on America.

The Democrats have no candidate capable of winning in 2016, so I'm hoping you guys come up with somebody decent in your primary, not Cruz or Trump.

 

[Correll]

I have posted this before.

Obama: Don’t let other side scare you


"they figure they’re going to win this election is if they make you scared of me,” Obama continued, repeating an attack from earlier in the day. “What they’re saying is ‘Well, we know we’re not very good but you can’t risk electing Obama. You know, he’s new, he doesn’t look like the other presidents on the currency, he’s a got a funny name.’”



McCain did not do that.

Obama lied.


And yes, Obama won the Hispanics by 2 to 1. I'm not denying that you dems have a lock on the Hispanic vote.

It is why I agree with you on the upcoming marginalization of the GOP and the transformation of the US into a defacto One Party State.

You, as a lib, see this as a good thing.

I as a con, see it as a bad thing.

But we agree it is happening.

You need to update your history of the election if you think it wasn't driven by other things than just politics.

"What makes them different, and what has pumped up the Weimar-like rage at McCain-Palin rallies, is the violent escalation in rhetoric, especially (though not exclusively) by Palin. Obama “launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist.” He is “palling around with terrorists” (note the plural noun). Obama is “not a man who sees America the way you and I see America.” Wielding a wildly out-of-context Obama quote, Palin slurs him as an enemy of American troops.

By the time McCain asks the crowd “Who is the real Barack Obama?” it’s no surprise that someone cries out “Terrorist!” The rhetorical conflation of Obama with terrorism is complete. It is stoked further by the repeated invocation of Obama’s middle name by surrogates introducing McCain and Palin at these rallies. This sleight of hand at once synchronizes with the poisonous Obama-is-a-Muslim e-mail blasts and shifts the brand of terrorism from Ayers’s Vietnam-era variety to the radical Islamic threats of today.

That’s a far cry from simply accusing Obama of being a guilty-by-association radical leftist. Obama is being branded as a potential killer and an accessory to past attempts at murder. “Barack Obama’s friend tried to kill my family” was how a McCain press release last week packaged the remembrance of a Weather Underground incident from 1970 — when Obama was 8." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/opinion/12rich.html

Thank you for your fine example of the type of branding and racial demagoguery I was referring to.

Though a little light on the race aspect.

But still, yes.

Ohh, "Weimar-like rage" Good one! A very subtle Godwin!


Yes, no amount of policy is going to affect this image you libs have crafted.

At this point your One Party State is nearly assured.

Congratulations.

Somehow I am neither surprised nor disappointed that you still don't get it.

i got it, Mr "Wemiar like Rage".

It's bullshit propaganda, and it is driving the political process in this country.

You are winning and you will almost certainly get what you want.



What do you hope to have happen once you get your control?

I didn't write that, the Opinion page of the New York Times did and their reaction was to the over the top campaigning by McCain-Palin that caused them to respond that way. You can accept or reject that analysis, but the number of reasons for minorities deserting the Republican party gets ever smaller and smaller.

Over the top campaigning by McCain?

But Obama falsely accusing McCain of running a racist campaign is cool?


Like I said, thanks for the fine example of the type of branding and racial demagoguery I was referring to.

Heh Heh, "Wemiar like Rage"!