I've also heavily criticized the party in previous posts, leading some (BluePitBull) to question my place within the party. Many criticisms and not a lot of suggestions. So, here is my list, incomplete as it may be, of what I believe the GOP needs to do, change, and become in order to become the party that wins again.
Based on a few sources which I'll name and link here (if possible) as well as heavy opinion, I'll lay out my case.
First of all, Mike Murphy, consultant to many heavy hitters in the GOP, is predicting an "Ice Age" for the Republicans if they don't change things. Why? Because the demographics that kept them in power 20 years ago through the Bush years have changed:
...For years, Republicans won elections because the country was chock-full of white middle-class voters who mostly pulled the GOP lever on Election Day. Today, however, that formula is no longer enough.
...It was a huge shock to the GOP when Barack Obama won Republican Indiana last year. The bigger news was how he did it. Latino voters delivered the state. Exit polls showed that they provided Obama with a margin of more than 58,000 votes in a state he carried by a slim 26,000 votes. That's right, GOP, you've entered a brave new world ruled by Latino Hoosiers, and you're losing.
...In 1980, Latino voters cast about 2% of all votes. Last year it was 9%, and Obama won that Hispanic vote with a crushing 35-point margin. By 2030, the Latino share of the vote is likely to double...Young voters are another huge GOP problem. Obama won voters under 30 by a record 33 points. And the young voters of today, while certainly capable of changing their minds, do become all voters tomorrow...
Rather than face up to all this, too many in the GOP are stuck in a swoon of nostalgia. Most of our party leaders come from bloodred GOP states or safe districts, so they are far more at home in the tribal politics of Republican primaries than in those of the country as a whole. You could say their radio dials are stuck on AM. The result is we hear a lot about going back to "the winning ways of Ronald Reagan." Well, I love Reagan too. But demographics no longer do. In 1980, Reagan beat Jimmy Carter by 10 points. If that contest were held again today, under the current demographics of the electorate per exit polls, the election would be much closer, with Reagan probably winning by about 3 points...
So here is my list, as well as reasons why.
First, I'll start with how to keep the base, and add to it.
- Become fiscally conservative again. The party has lost all credibility with many in the US. The Republican Congress kicked major butt during the Clinton era, balancing the budget. But under Bush, they doubled the US Public Debt, which was projected to have been paid off by now. So while I agree with them crying foul at the Obama stimulus(es) and bail outs, the majority of the country thinks of the word hypocrisy. Become hard line fiscally conservative. Stop talking about "tax cuts." Just keep tax increases off the table. Drop spending, but keep tax rates where they are. Also included in this is scaling back military spending. Not effectiveness, but much of the military spending is redundant & outdated, and not enough is going where it needs to: the men and women serving abroad.
- To keep the conservative Christian crowd, keep the pro-life mantra going. Many evangelicals are one issue voters, especially those over 25. Keep the pro-life issue in the party and you've got them. You'll keep Catholics, too. In this, stay hard line socially conservative.
- To gain the youth, become gay friendly. Most of us have gay friends and family. Most of us are for gay marriage, equality, and the like. We don't see things like the boomers do. Gay marriage is okay. We view the GOP's resistance to this the same as we see the women's suffrage movement, the racial rights movement, and the abolition movement: Old White Guys holding back the minority. If you became gay friendly, but kept being pro-life, you'd still be the socially conservative choice as compared to the Dems.
- To gain the Latino population, become immigrant-friendly. Latinos voted for Obama, plain and simple. Why? Not only was he a Democrat, which historically are better for the immigrant, he spoke to them, not at them. The GOP needs to do the same. Get Latino Republicans to the forefront. I know they exist. Have them put Spanish-speaking ads everywhere. Change the way you look at immigration. Don't do amnesty, but have a graduated plan along the lines of fixing the system now, since it is mind-boggling how difficult and mean it can be to those legally here. Those that are here illegally, make them pay a fine and get in line now. If they don't, and you find them, kick 'em out. If they commit a felony and are convicted before gaining citizenship, kick 'em out. Give them five years to become proficient (not fluent, but proficient) in english before gaining their citizenship. You need to be able to go to the store, pay bills, order pizza, and go to the bank in english.
That's all I have for now. I'll have more later if this post goes well. If anyone wants to add to my list, go right ahead. If anyone would like to (intelligently) debate/discuss those things I did write, you're welcome to. Those that come here to hit and run, calling me "closet" lib, or other such nonsense, will be deleted.
In closing, from Murphy's article linked above:
Saving the GOP is not about diluting conservatism but about modernizing it to reflect the country it inhabits instead of an America that no longer exists.
55 comments:
We can't afford immigrants, James. We can't even afford the one's that are here. Look at Los Angeles. They and the rest of the state are in the hole billions due to the social services being flooded.
As for gay friendly, what the hell do you mean? Marriage? I have never cared about gay marriage much one way or the other, but if the voters don't like it, too bad.
Blue, the problem is that you missed that the whole demographic is changing. We don't have a choice on the immigration front. We have 11 million illegals in the US, and we can't find them. More are on their way, and the ones that are here are having children, which are US citizens. Those children are growing up and becoming voters. By 2020 we will have a lot more Latino voters. Does the GOP want to be remembered by those children as the party that hated their parents?
Also, on gay marriage and "the votes" as you put it, again you missed the demographic change. I'm among the oldest in generation Y. When all of Gen Y hits voting age, we'll be almost as big as the boomers. AND WE SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE, so the votes will be there. My point is, if the GOP wants to make a comeback, they need to get the youth (the same youth that voted for Obama).
Blue, while immigration has had a negative effect on the overall health care issue in California, it's impact on the overall economy in that state has been about neutral.
The biggest problems facing California regarding the budget come down to voter approved spending mandates, effectively tying the hands of legislators trying to deal with this issue, and Prop 13.
You add these to politicians who will spend for any pet project, and you've got a disaster.
Maybe on the gay marriage issue, the GOP, who, sorry James, will never support it, could take the Cheney approach and go back to their old mantra, states rights.
This might be as close as you get in the GOP, letting the individual voters decide.
And yes, I know it will lead to people being married in one state, but not another, and I have no solution for that, or how the GOP could explain this.
They wouldn't need to, Dave. Its already going on. All of New England has legalized it at this point.
But someday they will have to support it. Someday, when those of my generation are the "old guy (or gal)" politicians, gay marriage will be a nationwide law, most likely an amendment much like suffrage was.
Any tangible effect on any aspect of the economy needs to be taken into account, Dave. And I don't know that those facts are all true.
The other social programs HAVE to be taking a big hit.
I have a post up on Mike Murphy's assessment of why the GOP is where it is and what it needs to do to change its minority status.
The country has changed demographically, and for the GOP to ignore this is just folly.
Mr. Murphy is not a hot-headed, far rightie. He is pragmatic and points out the areas in which the GOP must change.
The reason the GOP has become a regional minority party is that it refuses to acknowledge that the country has changed.
Blue, as with all immigration numbers, I guess you can argue them either way. And both sides do, reading the same numbers and coming to differing conclusions.
The problems with Prop 13, the initiative process, and proclivity to overspend, aren't really debatable in California.
On these, facts are facts.
Even old line top Democrats like Treasurer Bill Lockyear are in agreement.
BTW Shaw, that was a good post. Murphy was also on Meet the Press Sunday.
I think though that the GOP is going to live, or die, on the belief that their current ideas are fine, it is just a problem with how they are communicated.
Mike Murphy is smart and pragmatic. I have no idea why the GOP favors someone like Rush over Murphy.
That's funny. Gallup poll today said that 40% of country identifies itself as conservative.
Thanks for your visit and your comments.
"Become fiscally conservative again"
When was the republican party ever fiscally conservative?
Was it during Ike's presidency when he enacted the largest government program ever (highway Transportation)?
Was it during Nixon, who stole the Social Security funds to pay for his war in Vietnam, and then leave America's first trillion dollar debt to Carter.
Was it during Reagan who amassed a 5 trillion dollar debt and led us down the road to be a permanent debtor nation? Whose Vice-President called his economics "Voodoo Economics?"
Was it during Bush (43) who amassed another 5 trillion dollar debt? Who was so against regulation and oversight of our financial institutions, that it led to the financial mess we are in today?
After 60 years, I'm still waiting for the first fiscally conservative Republican President, or leadership.
If that record is fiscally conservative, give me the Democrats who had the first balanced budget in decades. That surplus was blown so fast by Bush, that it never even registered on the national debt graph.
Pro-Life:
Sure, keep the anti-abortion policy, which is against American law and the wishes of the majority of the American people.
If conservatives are against abortion, fine, but to try and force it on Americans who have spoken for over 30 years that they want abortion legal, is not going to win votes, only disregard.
The Rehnquist court could not overturn Row vs Wade, and the current Chief Judge stated that he would not seek to overturn law that is old enough to be considered precedent.
Gay friendly:
Dispose of, or neglect a core social, moral long standing principle of the party, to get votes.
Who will believe that Republicans will fight for the equal rights of Homosexuals?
Hypocrisy is already a deep problem for Republicans. The list of Republicans who state one principle and then act in opposition of those principles, is to long to list here.
We don't need leaders to tell us what our individual morals should be, we need leaders who will act on our behalf, with morality.
Latino population-immigration:
Republicans have spent decades calling for a Wall, deportations, jail, and bigoted images of Latinos, is anyone going to believe that all of a sudden Republicans are immigrant friendly?
Again, forget about a long standing party position, to get votes?
How about speaking to the truth, that America is and always has been a nation of immigrants. We need new blood and ideas to bolster our country. Is immigrants (their ideas like a Jewish Einstein) that have made this country better.
The only true native Americans are Indians, and look what we did to them.
The Republican party needs to be honest with itself, and the American people.
Bush (43) put the nail in the Republican coffin, by not being honest with Americans.
True fiscal responsibility, not hollow words and permanent debt.
Elimination of hate speech, cries of racist and unwillingness to pass laws that ensure equality among minorities, like gays.
A willingness to speak out against the voices within their own party that incite anger and violence.
If Republicans would do what they say, maybe they would not now be rejected by America.
Wow, James. Talk about diverse opinions....Time must be representing the asshat party.
Building highways that connected America and helped give us a better infrastructure, or FDR who really spent alot during the New Deal.....hmmmm.
Bigoted Republicans who want to build walls to keep out those Latinos.....hmmmmm.
Time, you're a joke.
You weren't censored at all, you just didn't make any sense.
You lie again.
You refused to post my reply that proved you were lying about me, that's censorship.
Then you deleted your comment, which was the lie.
Then you sent me an email acknowledging your lie was a lie, but you still wouldn't print my comment defending my self.
You currently have a permanent post attacking a blogger and calling her names. You post it above all your other posts, and it stays there, unlike the rest of your posts.
How childish and mean. Be an adult. If you have a problem with what she wrote, post a comment to her blog, but no, you have to act like an A hole.
You never address an issue, you just name call and lie.
Instead of addressing the issue of a comment I made about the bigot Rush, you made up the lie that I had never listened to Rush. The fact is that I have listened to Rush for 15 years, yet, you still didn't address yourself to the issue of what Rush had said.
You are the one who doesn't make any sense.
So now you don't address yourself to my long comment, you just call me names.
Do you have a High School Degree?
Did you ever learn how to debate or discuss issues?
If your comments about me had any intellect behind them, I might put up with the name calling, as they do not, I respond in kind.
You must have anger management problems. Get Help.
I have anger management problems? You can't even get history straight in your own head, but I'm the one with problems.
I addressed the issue with said individual in a forum where they were allowed to defend themselves. What you say and do are indefensible.
Yeah, I went to high school and beyond. Did you take any civics or history classes would be a better question.
I don't like you and I don't like the way you make things up and redact history and put your own false information in them.
At my blog, I have the right to delete comments as I see necessary whether you like it or not.
Strangely, your comments are the only one's I've deleted that I can remember with the exception of people who post without an ID. Even then, I sometimes let them post.
One thing that guarantees your constant right to your lies and misinformation is your own blog. Otherwise I will take you to task.
"At my blog, I have the right to delete comments as I see necessary whether you like it or not."
Of course you do. Most people do it to get rid of pests like you.
You do it to hide your own lies.
Don't want your readers to know what a liar you are.
Why don't you get back to your obsession of hating people, Shaw now, me soon I'm sure.
Prove yourself to be, not, what I say you are.
That means you'll have to change your ways, and your blog.
Won't happen, haters never change their ways.
I'm the only one whose comments you have deleted. I wonder what people who follow your blog would say I only followed your blog for a couple of weeks and I knew you to delete at least 3 comments. Lie, Lie, Lie.
Time, stop calling me a liar.
James, I understand that I provoked this loser, but he either was misinformed with his facts or being genuinely dishonest. Perhaps I should have used a different tone with him, but he was almost threatening with me in comments I was forced to delete.
It's simple pit, if you don't want to be called a liar, stop lying about me.
I'm not lying, but I am done dealing with you.
You have lied about me, and therefore you are a liar.
You are done dealing with me? Now that you have spread your lies about me and not allowed me (censored) to refute your lies.
I wish you had never dealt with me, and I have to wonder why you did.
I never knew you until you attacked me on Pam's blog.
It didn't shock me, some people are mean to strangers, but they are A holes in my book.
Would you like to explain why out of "the blue sky" you attacked me and lied about me, having never known me before?
I will be happy if you never lie about me again. Hope to never hear from you again, but I don't believe you.
Haters have a hard time giving up their obsession with hate.
But...since you think I'm being paid back for something, I challenge all to go to time's site and take a gander at his copy - paste blog.
To get back on task, James, we always have a choice. We are a sovereign country. We don't need to let all of these people stay here. Most of the Hispanic-Americans around here don't like all of the illegals and don't support them, but have no voice due to a media which is determined to stack the odds for the democrats who use that demographic and exploit it. And you know it.
"Paste and copy blog"
What's that supposed to mean? I'm not allowed to post guest written essays? BS
I write plenty of my own stuff and have YEARS of archives to prove it.
I knew I hadn't heard the last of you lying about me.
What you are is a loud-mouthed little punk with no life experience if your blog indicates anything about you. I gave up on you last post. Call me whatever you want.
Remember that one day, you too will grow up, Time.
What I mean, Pitbull, is that logistically, we can't get rid of all 11 million of them. That's why I proposed making them all pay a fine and get on the grid now, getting in line on a probationary status. If they don't, then we go ahead and send them home if we find them later. But logistically we can't deport 11 million people we can't even find right now, and finding them all would take too much of our already stretched thin police forces.
James, the problem with making them pay a fine should be evident. You don't really think that the current administration would fine these people and risk losing part of their base and special interest groups, do you?
If anything, they would absolve them of that cost and pass it on to the taxpayers, not them.
Yes, we can (blech) move these people back across the border. Explain to me why we couldn't. Logistically we could.
How? We can't even FIND the 11 million. Sending the police force after them would cost us more than it would save us. Many of them have US citizens for small children; what would we do with them? Leave them here as orphans and wards of the state?
I'm not proposing that Obama does that. But it WAS in his campaign. If we make them pay a fine for their crime it isn't amnesty, it's a price for the crime. But logistically there is no way to get rid of them all and keep them out.
Illegals having children in this country really torques me.
We can do whatever we want, trying to tell me that it's logistically impossible when I know that we have the capability to make it work.
Eventually there is going to have to be passports and/or a National ID for everyone. That seems like a good time to me. But, I know for a fact who the illegals are just in my neighborhood because they stick out.
But that doesn't answer my question. What do we do about those US Citizen children Pitbull?
That isn't a problem. Put them out with their parents. If you're trying to imply that we have to keep people here because they illegally cross the border and have kids, then you've lost me. By that logic, women that have children in prison shouldn't be in prison.
Blue, and others, If people want to deport the estimated 11 million people here illegally I would like to here their plan on identifying all of them, and the methods they propose we use for this deportation.
To date, I have not heard any methodology from the more conservative voices as to how this could actually be accomplished.
Excuse me, that's hear, not here.
By that logic, how are you going to fine them? You just expressed the impotence of this administration.
By the way, being born in this country does not make you a citizen, that's a myth. We have a woman that is graduating Cum Laud from a university here and was born here to illegals and is praying for the damn dream act to pass. She has a stay of deportation for a few months.
I'm saying that we tell them to come forward, pay the fine, and get in line for citizenship. If they don't and we DO find them later, we deport them without a second thought because we gave them a chance.
Forgive me, James. But you just said we couldn't find them or there was the discussion of a logistical impossibility.
If we can depot them, they should be hauled out of here.
Not true, Pit. It has always been upheld on precedent that children born here, with a birth certificate from the US are granted citizenship. See United States v. Wong Kim Ark.
I'm saying IF we find them later, and they haven't come forward to pay a fine, get in line, start paying taxes, etc.
IF we find them later, at the hospital, applying for aid, and don't have their papers, kick 'em out.
So, then we are in agreement? That's wonderful!!! Finally.
Next subject.
Exactly. Thats why I said:
Give them ONE chance, right now, for say, six months or so. In the next six months you MUST come forward, pay a fine, get in line for citizenship. Start paying taxes. You commit a felony, you're out of here. You also need to learn english. If you don't, or you don't come forward within that six months and pay the fine, if you keep hiding, then all bets are off if we find you later.
Time, I welcome you to come and face me at anytime. I don't think you would be saying half of what you get away with on here.
Everything I said about what you have written is absolutely true.
YOU are the one that needs to change, not I.
Your redaction/alteration of history is disturbing to say the least. I encourage everyone who wants a lesson in how not to write a blog to go to time's site.
PITSHIT said:
"Time, I welcome you to come and face me at anytime."
I tried to.
You censored (refused to post) my comments from your blog when I proved that what you said about me, was a lie. Then you banned me from your blog.
Then you tried to post a comment on my blog, as if I'm going to let you post comments on my blog after you refused to post my comments on your blog, just to refute your lies.
Then you deleted your own comment which included the lie you said about me.
Not exactly a welcome to come and face you.
It's you who are afraid to face me by deleting my comments that proved you were lying.
You are the child hear, but worse, you are the liar and hiding the evidence of your lies.
Alright, guys. Enough baiting and fighting each other...you're just going back and forth.
The party's stance is on fiscal conservatism. I'm not talking supply side, but Time has a point. The GOP talks about fiscal responsibility but doesn't follow through. We desperately need GOP leaders who will practice what they preach.
Alright. I disagree, but ok, it's your place.
What do you disagree with? That the previous GOP administration wasn't fiscally conservative? They weren't, and that's fact.
The GOP needs govenors, senators, and representatives that are fiscally conservative on the local level first, then move up to Presidential candidate. We need a record of fiscal responsibility before we'll believe that they will be a fiscally responsible President.
No, not that. Forget it. It seems pointless now.
Don't hold back, Pit. This is fun. I like conversations like this. When you aren't ripping someone's head off, I like your opinions (even if I disagree with them)...
Nah, it's over. My next step was physical. I don't mind articulate discussion, but he was pushing a little too hard at the end.
Haha, well you guys' discussion did it again...I leave with a few comments and come back to around 50.
Isn't that the ultimate goal? 50? We do seem to get there more often these days.
Haha yea..nah the ultimate goal is to discuss. Which happened. So did threats and pissing contests, but hey!
We do not all support Gay Marriage. The Generation gap is not that big. Asking Republicans to be more consistent with christian conservatives but then asking them to embrace gay marriage clashes. That's like asking conservative christians to support pro-choice while maintaining their pro-life agenda. You can't ride the fence and be effective. By telling the GOP to support gay marriage you're basically telling them to pander and who needs that inauthenticity? Young folks can (or at least should be able to) spot an agenda a mile away.
Where illegal immigration is concerned and immigration in general, we do have a choice. We cannot find 11 million illegals yet Fedex can track a package worldwide? Simplisitic I know but come on. And if the problem is not being able to track them down or the cost of tracking them down than how do you propose making them pay fines and deporting them? We just need to enforce our current laws is what the problem is. Our system cannot and should not continue to throw money away on the illegals yet it does. Is it any wonder that we are 'out of money'?
On immigration, what I was proposing was getting money from them. Not tracking them down and making them pay a fine, but telling them that they have to come forward to avoid future deportation. They would come forward, pay a fine, and start paying taxes into the system. If they don't, then refuse all aid/entitlements in the future and deport them if they come for a handout. They had their chance.
On gay marriage:
If the Democrats are for gay marriage and abortion, but the Republicans are pro-gay but pro-life, then they will still be the obvious choice for conservative Christians.
PIT SHIT said:
"My next step was physical."
No surprise that your into physical violence. You are aware you just committed a crime, right?
Seems the far right's answer to anything is hate, violence and murder.
You are, PIT SHIT, nothing but a criminal.
Congratulations on another high comment count. To bad it had nothing to do with the post you wrote, but pit shit does not speak to issues, he just spews his lies and hate.
Post a Comment