Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

[aparch]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I haven't updated my scorecard lately with all the sub-factions within the Republican Party: Could the RNC deny Trump the nomination and use this as a chance to throw the whack-jobs off their ship? The Dems have been sliding left for years. The Republicans sliding far right thanks to the help of the Tea-Partiers. Could the RNC establish themselves as a moderate-right party in 2020, steal some conservative Dems to bolster back up their numbers, and let the Trump/Tea-Partiers have their own Far-Right party?

 

[MaizeRage]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I haven't updated my scorecard lately with all the sub-factions within the Republican Party: Could the RNC deny Trump the nomination and use this as a chance to throw the whack-jobs off their ship? The Dems have been sliding left for years. The Republicans sliding far right thanks to the help of the Tea-Partiers. Could the RNC establish themselves as a moderate-right party in 2020, steal some conservative Dems to bolster back up their numbers, and let the Trump/Tea-Partiers have their own Far-Right party?

That's a tough sell because the Dems have moved themselves closer to the middle already while the RNC has been busy being the Party of Crazy the past few years to pick up a large share of those in the middle. Plus, what moderate leadership does the RNC actually have?

 

[rufus]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Nice party.

I guess we should thank Drumpf for finally showing everybody who they really are.

I do appreciate the irony of a crowd chanting "All Lives Matter", who then show complete and utter disregard to any person who does not think exactly like they do, going so far as to physically assault 15 year old girls.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I haven't updated my scorecard lately with all the sub-factions within the Republican Party: Could the RNC deny Trump the nomination and use this as a chance to throw the whack-jobs off their ship? The Dems have been sliding left for years. The Republicans sliding far right thanks to the help of the Tea-Partiers. Could the RNC establish themselves as a moderate-right party in 2020, steal some conservative Dems to bolster back up their numbers, and let the Trump/Tea-Partiers have their own Far-Right party?

There are two problems with that strategy.

First off, the wackobirds are a large proportion of the GOP. I can't imagine them intentionally taking a 50% hit. But even if they did...

Secondly, as you move from the far right to the center the number of people willing to put up with the GOP's economic policies drops to near zero. The GOP has done the seeming impossible, holding the country in thrall to an economic viewpoint that hurts about 95% of their own voters plus the longterm interests of the country. The way they've done it is by appealing to the emotional cultural issues of poor, undereducated whites -- the very people we're theorizing they would try to shed. It isn't a one-for-one trade when they try to move to the center -- they would also have to modify their policies. But in that case what's the point? They exist to service the plutes -- it's been quite literally their sole purpose for at least 50 years. "For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?"

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I haven't updated my scorecard lately with all the sub-factions within the Republican Party: Could the RNC deny Trump the nomination and use this as a chance to throw the whack-jobs off their ship? The Dems have been sliding left for years. The Republicans sliding far right thanks to the help of the Tea-Partiers. Could the RNC establish themselves as a moderate-right party in 2020, steal some conservative Dems to bolster back up their numbers, and let the Trump/Tea-Partiers have their own Far-Right party?

I don't know if I've ever seen either party do "Short term pain for long term gain". The reasons are fairly simple. Tank an election on purpose and you possibly give the opposition party total government control for at least 2 years. A lot can happen in two years.

To split the GOP in two means you have to then go find as many voters currently leaning Dem as you've lost in the other GOP faction to be a viable alternative. Its doubtful that will happen (really you'd need a situation like in Israel where a sitting head of state forms his own party while in office like Sharon did and even that didn't survive past his term) so to do so would pretty much guarantee Dem control. I don't think either the Trumpsters or the RNC stiffs would want that to happen.

 

[aparch]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

That's a tough sell because the Dems have moved themselves closer to the middle already while the RNC has been busy being the Party of Crazy the past few years to pick up a large share of those in the middle. Plus, what moderate leadership does the RNC actually have?

There are two problems with that strategy. ...

I don't know if I've ever seen either party do "Short term pain for long term gain". The reasons are fairly simple. Tank an election on purpose and you possibly give the opposition party total government control for at least 2 years. A lot can happen in two years.

Fair points. Thanks for the insight as I really don't follow politics all that well (but need to more as I try to adult better).

 

[joecct]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

There are two problems with that strategy.

First off, the wackobirds are a large proportion of the GOP. I can't imagine them intentionally taking a 50% hit. But even if they did...

Secondly, as you move from the far right to the center the number of people willing to put up with the GOP's economic policies drops to near zero. The GOP has done the seeming impossible, holding the country in thrall to an economic viewpoint that hurts about 95% of the country plus the longterm interests of the country. The way they've done it is by appealing to the emotional cultural issues of poor, undereducated whites -- the very people we're theorizing they would try to shed. It isn't a one-for-one trade when they try to move to the center -- they would also have to modify their policies. But in that case what's the point? They exist to service the plutes -- it's been quite literally their sole purpose for at least 50 years. "For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?"

The whack jobs, as you call them, are (and I sound like a broken record) the "Mad as hell and I'm not taking it anymore" crowd. The key for the GOP nominee, if it is not tD (we can only hope), is to cultivate that group for it crosses both parties. If the GOP nominates a Washington Insider, the MAH&INTIA group will stay home.

The GOP promises much and delivers little. The 2006 crowd was sent to the wilderness. Ten years after, the remaining generation needs to head off into the sunset.

The trouble is if HRC wins, then we get 2/4/6/8 years of more anger and the voters are too stupid to toss out the idiots and put in moderates (BTW, that goes for your party too).

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I don't know if I've ever seen either party do "Short term pain for long term gain".

“We have lost the South for a generation,” -- President Lyndon B. Johnson as he signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

But that's the only time I can think of. And even there, there were extenuating circumstances. The Democrat-Dixiecrat alliance never worked very well, and by the 60s the rednecks were becoming more trouble than they were worth. What the Democrats did was laudable, but they were rapidly approaching the point where it was inevitable anyway.

LBJ and his boys may also have realized before anybody that the South is the France of politics: better to face them as an enemy than have them as an ally. Or to spin the older Arab proverb, even when the South is in the tent they're so dumb they still pi-ss into it.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

The whack jobs, as you call them

I would hope that everybody calls people who think Obama is a Muslim "wackjobs."

The trouble is if HRC wins, then we get 2/4/6/8 years of more anger and the voters are too stupid to toss out the idiots and put in moderates (BTW, that goes for your party too).

That happens no matter what Democrat is elected. The Echo Chamber hath decreed that everyone with a "D" after their name is the Anti-Christ, and the wackjobs are still lapping it up. The only question is whether they'll ever figure out the call is coming from inside the house; that their real enemy are the Hate Radio jocks who milk the dummies and laugh all the way to the bank.

Politicians go where the votes are. It's Republican voters who have caused this whole mess, and they did so because they believed a bunch of idiots who got rich peddling them Fascism Lite and who are now appalled because Fascism Orange is driving them out of the market.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I haven't updated my scorecard lately with all the sub-factions within the Republican Party: Could the RNC deny Trump the nomination and use this as a chance to throw the whack-jobs off their ship? The Dems have been sliding left for years. The Republicans sliding far right thanks to the help of the Tea-Partiers. Could the RNC establish themselves as a moderate-right party in 2020, steal some conservative Dems to bolster back up their numbers, and let the Trump/Tea-Partiers have their own Far-Right party?

I've been saying that should be the exact strategy the GOP should pursue. Cut out the cancer and reverse the Southern Strategy. Stop wasting resources pandering to the racists and religious blocks. You would take a 20-year hit as you recover, however, it would preserve the core of the party long-term. Like you said, they could reestablish themselves as a center-right party.

Either evolve or die. The GOP is at that fork in the road and have to make a decision this year.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

the way they've done it is by appealing to the emotional cultural issues of poor, undereducated whites

ftfy

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Also, I'll go ahead and re-post this article:

http://www.thenation.com/article/wh...final-unraveling-of-nixons-southern-strategy/

It's worth re-reading.

 

[BassAle]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

The whack jobs, as you call them, are (and I sound like a broken record) the "Mad as hell and I'm not taking it anymore" crowd.

They're mad because they've been told to be angry and that all their problems are the fault of someone else. It's the liberals. Or the immigrants. Or the blacks. They are whack jobs. And you are one too.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Nice party.

I guess we should thank Drumpf for finally showing everybody who they really are.

Where are the cops keeping these two sides apart? It doesn't excuse her being pepper-sprayed or (allegedly) groped, but it sure looks like she went into this crowd of Trump supporters alone and got right up in their faces, which wouldn't be too smart.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

They're mad because they've been told to be angry and that all their problems are the fault of someone else. It's the liberals. Or the immigrants. Or the blacks. They are whack jobs. And you are one too.

joe is fine; he is not an apt target for that sort of attack.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

The whack jobs, as you call them, are (and I sound like a broken record) the "Mad as hell and I'm not taking it anymore" crowd. The key for the GOP nominee, if it is not tD (we can only hope), is to cultivate that group for it crosses both parties. If the GOP nominates a Washington Insider, the MAH&INTIA group will stay home.

The GOP promises much and delivers little. The 2006 crowd was sent to the wilderness. Ten years after, the remaining generation needs to head off into the sunset.

The trouble is if HRC wins, then we get 2/4/6/8 years of more anger and the voters are too stupid to toss out the idiots and put in moderates (BTW, that goes for your party too).

I think you're blending the MAH crowd in with the racists, xenophobes, and Christian Sharia law folks. You can be mad as hell, but over what? What are they mad about? Certainly it can't be because regulations are "too high". Deregulation is what caused the massive financial crisis. It can't be because of the economy. The economy has been growing, slowly, for six years. Jobs have been added every month since 2010. GDP has grown since Obama took office.

So what could you possible be angry about?

Taxes on the rich have gone down because of the Republicans and either have gone up on the middle and lower classes or effectively gone up due to higher fees, sales taxes, and whatever other codeword you want to use for taxes. None of us* have benefited from any of the tax cuts the Republicans have enacted. They all disproportionately favor the wealthy. Historically, this** is what effective rates have done since WWII (I put the graph together based on IRS and other government sources). The income gap has only widened over the last 15 years. Corporations have been paying less and less every year.

If none of that makes you angry, then are you mad at the poor getting healthcare? Are you mad at religious bigotry being removed from our laws so that we look less like a Christian Saudi Arabia than we have in the past?

* - Well, maybe some of us, I have no idea
** - Albeit slightly misleadingly as it doesn't take into account how deductions were taken into account but I believe it takes inflation into account

 

[BassAle]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

joe is fine; he is not an apt target for that sort of attack.

he does have his moments though, like the constant whining about same sex marriage being forced on him by the courts

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

he does have his moments though, like the constant whining about same sex marriage being forced on him by the courts

Yeah, he's wrong about that, but god knows we're all wrong about something. Beliefs tend to be autobiographical, not rational. As long as they're non-violent they don't hurt anybody. In fact their expression is always a chance to jump in and explain why we think they're wrong. Few (if any) people with strong beliefs will be affected, but most people are on the fence about most things, and a good airing out of both sides of those arguments influences people in their beliefs. After all, how did gay rights and before that civil rights and before that women's rights progress except by a million discussions that little by little swayed people to stop treating each other like crap because of their parents' or pastors' prejudices?

The story of bigotry is always the same: "Mommy and Daddy taught me to hate X so if you say that's bigotry then you're attacking my Mommy and Daddy!!!" It takes a certain degree of emotional maturity to realize that Mommy and Daddy were just as full of sh-t as everybody else. Most people eventually get there; some never do. Intelligent and respectful discourse is one way to get those who are capable of it to grow up. In fact the difference between those who are capable of being swayed, even if they are not, and those who never got out of the anal stage and are hopeless, is the very difference between people like joe and the brownshirts who are following Drumpf around looking for somebody to beat up to make Mommy and Daddy proud of them.

 

[geezer]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Are you mad at religious bigotry being removed from our laws so that we look less like a Christian Saudi Arabia than we have in the past?

I think you're getting warm with most of the "Bible as science textbook" evangelicals, but I'd say they're more mad that their religious bigotry isn't being coded into law fast enough, than that it's being removed.

 

[rufus]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

They're mad because they're expected to accept the image of two dudes kissing in a public space is perfectly ok. That they can't even make nasty jokes about what the two of them do behind closed doors.

They're mad because they have to accept that soon, people of color will outnumber white people in this country, and then they'll be the minority. With that, they'll have to accept that they might even have to take orders from a black or Hispanic boss, that those minoroties will increasingly be in positions of authority over them.

Simply put, they're mad that this country no longer looks like it did in 1950, the good old days.