Scrap the GOP

[Leader O'Cola]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/op...nes&emc=tha212

starting to see this gaining more traction.

[goDAWGSsicem]

[MarkOU]

Whatever, we need a new everything.

Every 4 years you get a mix of assholes that ALL have been in government some form or another. Part of the same government that has the same problems again and again and again yet for some reason people think voting any of these same people will get a different outcome.

That is the definition of insanity folks and all of you people who take sides, picking left or right, liberal or conservitive, republican or democrat are fucking insane.

[SeeYouNT]

Originally Posted by MarkOU

Whatever, we need a new everything.

Every 4 years you get a mix of assholes that ALL have been in government some form or another. Part of the same government that has the same problems again and again and again yet for some reason people think voting any of these same people will get a different outcome.

That is the definition of insanity folks and all of you people who take sides, picking left or right, liberal or conservitive, republican or democrat are fucking insane.

I blame the media and television.

[NorthCoastSteelersFan]

I read the editorial. The writer wants to see a new Republican Party that's more united...and more liberal. Basically, what he wants is an "opposition" party that does less opposing of the Dems. Ain't gonna happen.

[Leader O'Cola]

Originally Posted by NorthCoastSteelersFan

I read the editorial. The writer wants to see a new Republican Party that's more united...and more liberal. Basically, what he wants is an "opposition" party that does less opposing of the Dems. Ain't gonna happen.

that's what you get out of the article when it concludes with this?

But when all the Republican candidates last year said they would not accept a deal with Democrats that involved even $1 in tax increases in return for $10 in spending cuts, the G.O.P. cut itself off from reality. It became a radical party, not a conservative one. And for the candidates to wrap themselves in a cartoon version of Ronald Reagan — a real conservative who raised taxes, including the gasoline tax, when he discovered his own cuts had gone too far — is fraudulent.

[olympicoscar]

Originally Posted by MarkOU

Whatever, we need a new everything.

Every 4 years you get a mix of assholes that ALL have been in government some form or another. Part of the same government that has the same problems again and again and again yet for some reason people think voting any of these same people will get a different outcome.

That is the definition of insanity folks and all of you people who take sides, picking left or right, liberal or conservitive, republican or democrat are fucking insane.

This isn't true. We always get a lot of new politicians. Happens every election. But their not able to fix our problems.

Just my own thought, but I believe the majority of politicians are there to promote their own agenda and not fix the problem.

[NorthCoastSteelersFan]

Originally Posted by Leader O'Cola

that's what you get out of the article when it concludes with this?

I was going by the totality of the editorial, not its ending.

But I actually agree with some of the writer's points. I'm painfully aware that the kooks and haters have gained way too much influence in my party. I just don't see it ending soon, especially if Obama gets re-elected. If Romney takes the nomination and beats him, perhaps the GOP can cut some of the crap-ola out of its agenda, and try to govern with a little more sense. Maybe...or maybe not.

[BrawlinHawkeye]

Conservatism is the ONLY way to bring this country back to the promise land. Anything else and you're just spinning your wheels.

[JuiceTheGator]

Originally Posted by BrawlinHawkeye

Conservatism is the ONLY way to bring this country back to the promise land. Anything else and you're just spinning your wheels.

That's the bottom line. The only way to choke a stampeding monster is to cut-off its food supply. In this case, that'd be money.

America, especially young Americans, have to find a way to stop the Boomers from flushing their future. (ie. voting 100 years of debt payments into their own pockets via entitlements) Somehow, Gen X, Y and ?? have to decide to overlook the bullshit promises and just vote for less government. Choking that MFer is the only way I see it.

If anyone knows a better way, I'd love to hear it. But in 20 years I've never heard any other way. Cute lil' answers like Mack's "penny plan," balanced budget ammendments and shit have been passed only to quickly get rolled by the assholes in Congress. Cutting the fuck out of the budget hard and fast is probably all that will work IMO. That's why I voted for Ron Paul in the primary.

[potzer25]

How the 2012 Primary Has Revealed a GOP on the Verge of Collapse -- New York Magazine

The GOP is not going anywhere but it does appear that this election could be a seminal event:

Yet the Democratic tussle in 2008, which featured two undisputed heavyweights with few ideological discrepancies between them, may be an exception that proves the rule. Certainly Republican history suggests as much: Think of 1964 and the scrap between the forces aligned with Barry Goldwater and Nelson Rockefeller, or 1976, between backers of Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan. On both occasions, the result was identical: a party disunited, a nominee debilitated, a general election down the crapper.

What that would mean for the GOP would differ wildly depending on which of the two current front-runners, along with the coalition that elevated him to the nomination, is blamed for the debacle. “If Romney is the nominee and he loses in November, I think we’ll see a resurgence of the charismatic populist right,” says Robert Alan Goldberg, a history professor at the University of Utah and author of a biography of Barry Goldwater. “Not only will [the grassroots wing] say that Romney led Republicans down the road to defeat, but that the whole type of conservatism he represents is doomed.”

Goldberg points out that this is what happened in 1976, when the party stuck with Ford over Reagan, was beaten by Carter, and went on to embrace the Gipper’s brand of movement conservatism four years later. So who does Goldberg think might be ascendant in the aftermath of a Romney licking? “Sarah Palin,” he replies. “She’s an outsider, she has no Washington or Wall Street baggage, she’s electric—and she’s waiting, because if Romney doesn’t win, she will be welcomed in.”

But if it’s Santorum who is the standard-bearer and then he suffers an epic loss, a different analogy will be apt: Goldwater in 1964. (And, given the degree of the challenges Santorum would face in attracting female voters, epic it might well be.) As Kearns Goodwin points out, the rejection of the Arizona senator’s ideology and policies led the GOP to turn back in 1968 to Nixon, “a much more moderate figure, despite the incredible corruption of his time in office.” For Republicans after 2012, a similar repudiation of the populist, culture-warrior coalition that is fueling Santorum’s surge would open the door to the many talented party leaders—Daniels, Christie, Bush, Ryan, Bobby Jindal—waiting in the wings for 2016, each offering the possibility of refashioning the GOP into a serious and forward-thinking enterprise.

Only the most mindless of ideologues reject the truism that America would be best served by the presence of two credible governing parties instead of the situation that currently obtains. A Santorum nomination would be seen by many liberals as a scary and retrograde proposition. And no doubt it would make for a wild ride, with enough talk of Satan, abortifacients, and sweater vests to drive any sane man bonkers. But in the long run, it might do a world of good, compelling Republicans to return to their senses—and forge ahead into the 21st century. Which is why all people of common sense and goodwill might consider, in the days ahead, adopting a slogan that may strike them as odd, perverse, or even demented: Go, Rick, go.

[goDAWGSsicem]

New York Times... New York Magazine


Wishful thinking.

[potzer25]

Originally Posted by goDAWGSsicem

New York Times... New York Magazine


Wishful thinking.

Yea...that's insightful. Way to join the club of people that dismiss something just because of the source.

The GOP is currently fighting between the moderates and far-right within the party. If they lose in November to Obama - who was appearing more and more beatable just months ago - they will take a hard look at the direction of the party going forward. Depending on who the nominee ends up being, that tack they tack could be to the right (if Romney) or the middle (if Santorum).

[goDAWGSsicem]

Originally Posted by potzer25

Yea...that's insightful. Way to join the club of people that dismiss something just because of the source.

The GOP is currently fighting between the moderates and far-right within the party. If they lose in November to Obama - who was appearing more and more beatable just months ago - they will take a hard look at the direction of the party going forward. Depending on who the nominee ends up being, that tack they tack could be to the right (if Romney) or the middle (if Santorum).

It's completely ridiculous to think the Republican party will collapse if they don't win the Presidency this year.

Did anyone think that the DNC would collapse when Hillary & Obama were going at it? No, of course not.

...and there is in-fighting between the dividions of the DNC too.

[JuiceTheGator]

Goldwater/Friedman conservatism would win in a landslide. The State machine is very diligent in its destruction of anyone carrying anything close to that platform.

[JuiceTheGator]

Originally Posted by goDAWGSsicem

It's completely ridiculous to think the Republican party will collapse if they don't win the Presidency this year.

Did anyone think that the DNC would collapse when Hillary & Obama were going at it? No, of course not.

...and there is in-fighting between the dividions of the DNC too.

exactly, the left is just jackin' off enjoying a real lefty in the WH.

[JMlion71]

I sincerely believe that there is a market for a 'radical centrist' party in the United States. It's too bad that Ross Perot's Reform Party was never about anything more than the presidential nomination. If a real rival to the system could have been built around ideas like: (1) sensible and 'America-first' economic policy, (2) flushing social issues out of the general debate, (3) implementing public finance for elections, we'd have all been better for it.

[goDAWGSsicem]

... and I dismiss it, because the topic isn't worth the time I've spent on it already. Not simply because of the source, that just gives me a heads up.

[JuiceTheGator]

Originally Posted by JMlion71

I sincerely believe that there is a market for a 'radical centrist' party in the United States. It's too bad that Ross Perot's Reform Party was never about anything more than the presidential nomination. If a real rival to the system could have been built around ideas like: (1) sensible and 'America-first' economic policy, (2) flushing social issues out of the general debate, (3) implementing public finance for elections, we'd have all been better for it.

How is that different than the Tea Party? I thought they were all about gov't spending out of control and avoiding social issues? The MSM quickly squashes this kind of uprising with claims of racism and other fabricated bullshit.

[JMlion71]

Originally Posted by JuiceTheGator

How is that different than the Tea Party? I thought they were all about gov't spending out of control and avoiding social issues? The MSM quickly squashes this kind of uprising with claims of racism and other fabricated bullshit.

Hello, Mr. Juice. I believe that Mr. Perot's campaign was more focused on economic revival, fair trade policies, and taking on parasitic special interest groups. Though to be fair, in 1996, the last time he ran, government debt wasn't as colossal as the hovering asteroid it has become today. As I recall, the tea party movement was originally inspired by the government bailouts of the banks and mortgage firms. Oddly, many of the (saner) people from the Occupy movement share common ground with the tea partiers here - I believe that there is a general perception that the government doesn't deal the finance sector from the top of the deck. Any new party would have to tap into that frustration, as well as the 'offshoring' of the economy taking place. When R Perot debated with Gore over Nafta, I'm afraid Gore won and America lost.