[quote]Sifu wrote:
The bible belt Republicans needs to face up to the fact that their part of the country isn’t representative of the bulk of the country and they need to be more flexible at the federal level. [/quote]
This, exactly.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Rule of law it is, no doubt.
Can you expand on the moderate socially portion. [/quote]
Well, I don’t think there’s one set definition for how this would work, but I’d say that we should live in a society that shouldn’t confuse tolerance with acceptance, which means not being ambivalent about some very important aspects of society, even if it means telling someone that their individual choice is wrong, not as good as something else, or otherwise bad for society.
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]atypical1 wrote:
Couple that with the perception that the Reps think that all immigrants legal and illegal are simply a drain on society and only take just manages to piss off a large portion of society. Maybe it’s because of my Mexican heritage but I know how hard Mexicans can work and I know how committed to finding a better life you have to be to cross that dessert. Instead of embracing that work ethic and capitalizing on getting the American dream they seem to focus on keeping the dream only for those of us who were born here.
That might not be what’s being explicitly stated by the party but it’s certainly a perception.
[/quote]
Most if not ALL Republicans have ZERO problem with legal immigrants (hell all of our families were there at some point.) This is not a racial issue as Obama tried to make it while courting La Raza.
It’s fiscal…how do we pay for all the illiegals??
I would rather see a easier road to citizenship, but don’t make it racial it’s not.
It’s who foots the bill.
And a footnote…I was on vacation in Mexico recently, and I was asked for “my papers” around 5 times in 10 days…why does the hispanic population in the U.S fear it so?
[/quote]
Well said, I agree.
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[/quote]
That’s great. That’s not the perception for a lot of people though and perception is reality.
james
[quote]atypical1 wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]atypical1 wrote:
Couple that with the perception that the Reps think that all immigrants legal and illegal are simply a drain on society and only take just manages to piss off a large portion of society. Maybe it’s because of my Mexican heritage but I know how hard Mexicans can work and I know how committed to finding a better life you have to be to cross that dessert. Instead of embracing that work ethic and capitalizing on getting the American dream they seem to focus on keeping the dream only for those of us who were born here.
That might not be what’s being explicitly stated by the party but it’s certainly a perception.
[/quote]
Most if not ALL Republicans have ZERO problem with legal immigrants (hell all of our families were there at some point.) This is not a racial issue as Obama tried to make it while courting La Raza.
It’s fiscal…how do we pay for all the illiegals??
I would rather see a easier road to citizenship, but don’t make it racial it’s not.
It’s who foots the bill.
And a footnote…I was on vacation in Mexico recently, and I was asked for “my papers” around 5 times in 10 days…why does the hispanic population in the U.S fear it so?
[/quote
That’s great. That’s not the perception for a lot of people though and perception is reality.
james[/quote]
But James…who gives people that reality?
Here is a clue, the media and the President.
Show me a Republican who has said he wants to get rid of LEGAL immigrants?
Most if not all GOP discussion on the issue concerns fiscal responsibility…you just repeted verbatim the left’s media spin on it…with a straight face.
/because it’s what you were told by the glowing box.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
You may disagree with the socially liberal on pretty much everything, but, as I said, demographic trends predict that you will almost certainly continue to be disappointed.[/quote]
In the short term yes. But economic, social and societal collapse will bring about rapid and radical change. And not the kind Obama is hoping for. That’s the long view.
Enthusiasm for the Republican Party has to start at the primary level. No more Gingrich, Bachman, Cane, Perry, or Santorum pulling good Republicans to say and do things outside their character. Get the whole party excited about a whole crop of potential leaders during the primary season who are not sound bite heaven.
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]
That’s great. That’s not the perception for a lot of people though and perception is reality.
james[/quote]
But James…who gives people that reality?
Here is a clue, the media and the President.
Show me a Republican who has said he wants to get rid of LEGAL immigrants?
Most if not all GOP discussion on the issue concerns fiscal responsibility…you just repeted verbatim the left’s media spin on it…with a straight face.
/because it’s what you were told by the glowing box.[/quote]
That’s because many Hispanics don’t just care that they made it here legally. They want a helping hand extended to those who aren’t. You can promise that they’ll (legals) not be shipped out all you want, it’s all those friends and relatives they’re concerned about. And yes, racial solidarity, sympathy, empathy, or whatever you want to call it, probably plays a pretty significant role. I seriously doubt legal hispanics are really worried they’ll be put on a train by some republican. It’s the friends, loved ones, and neighbors they’re concerned about.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Totally correct…but the left/media would have the hispanics think that the GOP hate’s ALL of them…because THASSS RAYCESSSSS!!
And it’s just not true.
I want whoever want’s to be here to be able to have that chance…but I damn sure don’t want to pay for those who came here against the law.
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
I want whoever want’s to be here to be able to have that chance…but I damn sure don’t want to pay for those who came here against the law.
[/quote]
Well I don’t know about ‘pay for,’ but they’ll need to be given a reasonable path to citizenship.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
I want whoever want’s to be here to be able to have that chance…but I damn sure don’t want to pay for those who came here against the law.
[/quote]
Well I don’t know about ‘pay for,’ but they’ll need to be given a reasonable path to citizenship. [/quote]
All for it.
/I meant pay for as in taxpayer money.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
That’s because many Hispanics don’t just care that they made it here legally. They want a helping hand extended to those who aren’t. You can promise that they’ll (legals) not be shipped out all you want, it’s all those friends and relatives they’re concerned about. And yes, racial solidarity, sympathy, empathy, or whatever you want to call it, probably plays a pretty significant role. I seriously doubt legal hispanics are really worried they’ll be put on a train by some republican. It’s the friends, loved ones, and neighbors they’re concerned about.
[/quote]
And as a Mormon Romney should have capitalized on the family aspect of his religion. Jesus, Mormons are HUGE on family and I absolutely respect that about his religion. And we are the same way. I go to family gatherings - used to, much of the family has died off - and they were really big affairs. Mitt could have shown that he also cares deeply about family and doesn’t want to separate them. Hell, it’s the official stance of the Mormon Church.
Repubs need to remember that it’s not just about who pays for what people are here illegally cost. That dehumanizes that entire population and that doesn’t win votes.
james
[quote]atypical1 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
That’s because many Hispanics don’t just care that they made it here legally. They want a helping hand extended to those who aren’t. You can promise that they’ll (legals) not be shipped out all you want, it’s all those friends and relatives they’re concerned about. And yes, racial solidarity, sympathy, empathy, or whatever you want to call it, probably plays a pretty significant role. I seriously doubt legal hispanics are really worried they’ll be put on a train by some republican. It’s the friends, loved ones, and neighbors they’re concerned about.
[/quote]
Repubs need to remember that it’s not just about who pays for what people are here illegally cost. That dehumanizes that entire population and that doesn’t win votes.
james
[/quote]
Exactly, that’s why the hispanic vote was 70% for Obama.
Why worry about how to pay for stuff?
When states and cites are going bankrupt all over the country…what a silly notion.
And here in Utah, it may be the official position of the Mormon church not to deport illegals with family here, it is not the position of 90% of Mormons…trust me.
Thinking back, Romney did himself no favors trying to out do Perry and Newt on immigration. Newt especially was onto something when he warned Romney, you don’t threaten to rip people’s family and friends from their homes and neighborhoods, and expect them to vote for you.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
You may disagree with the socially liberal on pretty much everything, but, as I said, demographic trends predict that you will almost certainly continue to be disappointed.[/quote]
In the short term yes. But economic, social and societal collapse will bring about rapid and radical change. And not the kind Obama is hoping for. That’s the long view.[/quote]
The aftermath of a true collapse will be pretty damn unpredictable.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Thinking back, Romney did himself no favors trying to out do Perry and Newt on immigration. Newt especially was onto something when he warned Romney, you don’t threaten to rip people’s family and friends from their homes and neighborhoods, and expect them to vote for you.[/quote]
“And demographics? The Hispanic turnout is not increasing as rapidly as in some projections. But it wasn’t good news for Romney. In Florida the exit poll showed him carrying Cuban-Americans by only 50%-47% and losing non-Cuban Hispanics by 68%-32%. AP showed lost Osceola and Orange Counties–DisneyWorld areas with large numbers of Puerto Ricans by larger margins than John McCain. By way of contrast, Republican Governor Rick Scott in Florida narrowly carried Hispanics in 2010. In Colorado he lost Hispanics 74%-25–worse than McCain 2008–and in Nevada by 69%-24% (although it showed him carrying Asians there 49%-42%, puzzling to me since I think many are heavily Democratic Filipinos: more to learn on this).”
Because a nation of children votes for Santa Clause who brings them treats.
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
Because a nation of children votes for Santa Clause who brings them treats.[/quote]
Yes because the Republicans hand out no treats at all to bankers, defense contracts, etc. What did you do with your stimulus check President Bush sent you by the way? Both sides play Santa Claus, just in different ways. The best thing would be the abolishment of this cheerleader two party system where people don’t vote on issues, but vote on blind faith. How many people voted straight ticket in the entire nation yesterday? I would absolutely love to know this number.
Just a few observations from an European outsider:
GOP lost this election catastrophically.
If the incumbent needs a former president to feature prominently on his campaign trail (and subconsciously refer to the good old days of the 90ies) then something is obviously wrong.
Add to that the poor economic trends and Obama’s lackluster showings in the debates (which were present even in 2008, but then nobody noticed), the GOP candidate should have easily won. Of course, if the republican primary process didn’t rule this out by catering to their core constituency which is becoming increasingly separated from the majority of the population.
Your “moderate” candidate failed to bring out Obama’s lack of substance, instead focusing on his only strength - foreign policy, claiming that he failed there miserably. Compared to GWB, he’s a brilliant commander in chief.
How can you guys allow clowns like Donald Trump to even be associated with your party? Verbal idiocies from moronic congressmen about rape being “God’s will” also should have been dealt with swiftly and publicly.
One has to adapt to new social trends, and the people’s attitude towards them. You cannot Bible thump all you want, but you cannot win over the moderates and independents which were ripe for picking this year by claiming supreme moral authority or even tolerating all that birth certificate / Muslim nonsense.
If the electorate changes, you have to adapt, not insult the electorate. “We lost because the people were lazy, stupid or not good / smart enough to realize our brilliance”. Trust me, European history has taught us that this usually leads to slow and inevitable drift towards extremism where first you have to “protect” the people from themselves, then “take back” the “real” country. Shifting demographics and new social norms are the “real” America not some imaginary crap form political ads with picket fences in small towns that warms the hearts of increasingly old (and white) supporters.
Both these narratives, as far I have seen, were worryingly present in the early republican discourse.
Just one final question: What was wrong with that Jon Huntsman guy? Anything I’ve seen, read or heard from him told me that he could have easily beat Obama if given the chance.
But as I understand he was quickly sidelined in the primaries as being a “lefty”? Instead you had an ignorant pizza tycoon as a serious candidate.
Why is it hard for republicans to realize that Reagan’s success was an aberration, a result of unique economic, social and political factors and focus on an actually centric candidate - not someone that shifts his opinions and is rebuilt from scratch after the primaries.
[quote]loppar wrote:
But as I understand he was quickly sidelined in the primaries as being a “lefty”? Instead you had an ignorant pizza tycoon as a serious candidate.
[/quote]
I liked Huntsman too. His chances were even worse than Ron Paul’s in that primary though.