will the Republican party be relevant in future elections?

appleannie wrote:

FredHayek wrote: The Dems really made hay on the womens issues even though abortion wouldn't have been repealed under Romney. Fear mongering.

Fear mongering? Not really. The worry was not so much Romney himself as what kind of judges he would nominate to the Supreme Court, if given the chance. The anti-choice contingency has been pretty open about their desire to overturn Roe v Wade and their eagerness for Romney to change the dynamics of the Court.

What judges? If Romney had won, the liberal judges would have just waited to retire. It was a complete non-issue that the Dems played up in a very effective manner.

appleannie wrote:

FredHayek wrote: The Dems really made hay on the womens issues even though abortion wouldn't have been repealed under Romney. Fear mongering.

Fear mongering? Not really. The worry was not so much Romney himself as what kind of judges he would nominate to the Supreme Court, if given the chance. The anti-choice contingency has been pretty open about their desire to overturn Roe v Wade and their eagerness for Romney to change the dynamics of the Court.

Disagree. Romney still would have to pick moderate judges for the Supreme Court because of the Senate being controlled by Dems.

Libertarians as the in-between party? That would make elections much more interesting. Fiscal conservatives and social liberals or libertarians.

Nobody that matters wrote:

cydl wrote:

Nobody that matters wrote: The only way the republicans can stay relevant is to take away the social conservative part of the platform. The christian conservatives will still be part of the party because they've got nowhere else to go.

Yep! Hey! We have that party! It's called the Libertarians! :Whistle

Gary Johnson only got up to 3% in a couple of states. If the libertarians got smart, they'd take over the GOP by battling the religious whackjobs. Then they'd actually have a chance to get someone into office rather than sit off to the side being content to exist as a simple protest vote.

I keep hoping for that...

Something the Dog Said wrote:

cydl wrote:

Nobody that matters wrote: The only way the republicans can stay relevant is to take away the social conservative part of the platform. The christian conservatives will still be part of the party because they've got nowhere else to go.

Yep! Hey! We have that party! It's called the Libertarians! :Whistle

One could argue that the Libertarians have more in common with Democrats than Republicans, looking at the gay marriage issue, marijuana legalization, women's right to choose, etc., all intended to get the government out of dictating individuals social issues.

On social issues that is absolutely true. On economic issues they are more in line with the Republicans.

Nobody that matters wrote:

cydl wrote:

Nobody that matters wrote: The only way the republicans can stay relevant is to take away the social conservative part of the platform. The christian conservatives will still be part of the party because they've got nowhere else to go.

Yep! Hey! We have that party! It's called the Libertarians! :Whistle

Gary Johnson only got up to 3% in a couple of states. If the libertarians got smart, they'd take over the GOP by battling the religious whackjobs. Then they'd actually have a chance to get someone into office rather than sit off to the side being content to exist as a simple protest vote.

I was about to point that out... Do you REALLY think you can push for a party that is so marginalized that they only got 3% of the vote? Now, what still amazes me is that you think if you remove the religious/social-conservative component and run on a AynRandroid/"You're on your own" platform you'll pull more people over???? Really?!?!?

One of the main thing that defeated RMoney was the feeling by voters going to the polls thinking that "This twit only cares about the rich getting richer, and doesn't care about the middle class." Libertarianism is more about "I've got mine--screw you" than it is "Get government out of our lives."

But, hey, you guys have been doing exactly what I'd hoped you would keep doing... Maybe I'll get even luckier and you'll keep trying to push this one.

Something the Dog Said wrote: The exit polls are interesting to see what holds for the future:
Female voters - Obama 55 Romney 43
Single unmarried female voters Obama 68 Romney 30
Latino voters Obama 69 Romney 29
African American voters Obama 93 Romney 6
Asian American votes Obama 74 Romney 25
Jewish voters Obama 70 Romney 22
Catholic voters Obama 50 Romney 47
Protestant voters Obama 56 Romney 43
18 - 29 year old voters Obama 60 Romney 37

The only demographics that Obama lost were male voters, older voters and white voters. While older voters are increasing due to the aging of the baby boomers, male voters and particularly white voters are shrinking in number. The other demographics are on the rise.

And the rise in all the demographics, with the exception of women, went to the GOP this election. Obama's support dropped by about 2% across the board everywhere else, which is why this election was closer than the last one. Another drop of 2% four years from now changes the outcome.

The best Obama can do this time is 332 and he might garner only 303. This compared to the 365 that he got 4 years ago. The Republican total increased from 173 to 206 and might go to 235. You keep wanting to say that the results show an increasing margin for the Democrat agenda that flies in the face of all data that we are seeing.

I heard but haven't had it confirmed that Obama lost 10 million voters from 2008 and the GOP lost 3 million. Interesting because I thought Romney had more charisma than McCain.

PrintSmith wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: The exit polls are interesting to see what holds for the future:
Female voters - Obama 55 Romney 43
Single unmarried female voters Obama 68 Romney 30
Latino voters Obama 69 Romney 29
African American voters Obama 93 Romney 6
Asian American votes Obama 74 Romney 25
Jewish voters Obama 70 Romney 22
Catholic voters Obama 50 Romney 47
Protestant voters Obama 56 Romney 43
18 - 29 year old voters Obama 60 Romney 37

The only demographics that Obama lost were male voters, older voters and white voters. While older voters are increasing due to the aging of the baby boomers, male voters and particularly white voters are shrinking in number. The other demographics are on the rise.

And the rise in all the demographics, with the exception of women, went to the GOP this election. Obama's support dropped by about 2% across the board everywhere else, which is why this election was closer than the last one. Another drop of 2% four years from now changes the outcome.

The best Obama can do this time is 332 and he might garner only 303. This compared to the 365 that he got 4 years ago. The Republican total increased from 173 to 206 and might go to 235. You keep wanting to say that the results show an increasing margin for the Democrat agenda that flies in the face of all data that we are seeing.

Really, because of a slight drop in the massive majorities in the demographics makes it a win for Republicans. I don't think so. Can you come up with a scenario where an incumbent dealing with a terrible economy has managed to win as decisively as President Obama? If there was ever a scenario that was set up for Republicans to take back not only the presidency but the Senate, this was it. Yet the Republicans managed to lose badly. And it will get worse for them at their current mindset. Can you imagine what would have happened had not the House GOP managed to obstruct the President's plans that would have improved the economy significantly? The only thing the Republicans had to run on was the economy and they blew it. Yes, there was some slight slippage in a few of the President's constituent demographics, but that was entirely due to the economy. When that gets straightened out, what else will the GOP have? Their continued war on women and minorities to appease older white males? Their continued assault on key social programs like Social Security and Medicare? Face it, the Republicans have nothing.

His "decisive" victory is much less "decisive" than it was 4 years ago Dog. You can ignore that reality all you wish, it won't change its existence.

Something the Dog Said wrote: Yes, there was some slight slippage in a few of the President's constituent demographics, but that was entirely due to the economy. When that gets straightened out, what else will the GOP have?

If that gets straightened out.

Given the president's economic ideas, it remains to be seen if the market recovers in spite of his continued interference or not.