[sanjuro]

This is not my usual stab at sarcasm and humor, but a real concern about having a real two party system.

Watching the coverage of the election, I actually focused more on the Republicans. Mostly I didn't care about the Democratic message of day since they already had my vote, but I was hoping to see a trainwreck, which between Palin, Ashley Todd,

, there was plenty of laughs and outrage.

I think the serious politics watchers know that Republican party is in serious trouble with no solutions in sight. The reason why I even thought about how they can improve themselves is this segment from the Rachel Maddow Show. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#27583614, which top conservatives are meeting to discuss the future. I saw four pasty-faced white men trying to decide how they will regain power in America.

Whether they find a strategy which works or not, ultimately I believe Obama won, not because he ran a great campaign, but his platforms and his person is what Americans wanted.

My suggestions to the Republican party:

1. Find people who I can respect. White people who did not serve in the military, who made bank without helping another soul, who had everything given them on a silver platter, and whose interaction with minorities consists of taking their order at the country club, is not someone who I respect.

John Murtha is a perfect example of a conservative who I like quite a bit.

2. Get out and meet the people. It is hard to lead the people when Cheney has more interaction with populace. And I don't mean just the base of your party, but the other 60% that elected Obama.

3. Drop the derisive tactics. I heard one line about Karl Rove, about how his derisive tactics work great to win elections but fails when it comes to governing.

I understand to become President, you need to beat up on the other guy. But I will always believe that the Iraqi War served two purposes: one was oil, but the other was ensure reelection for Bush.

I can easily see Rove dream up this maneuver in 2003 when he saw Bush's numbers dropping.

Imagine after all the sniping done by McCain and particularly Palin, who unlike McCain, has nothing to offer the country, they had actually won? How were going to heal the divide between the liberals and the conversatives, the blue states and the red? By winking and saying "You Betcha?"

4. Try to pick issues that general populace are interested in. Two of the planks of the Republican party is stopping abortion and limiting gun control. Majority of Americans are against both things. If you want to make your party about these kinds of issues, you can keep expecting to lose.

I am becoming more moderate as I get older. I actually shocked my friends with some of my voting selections this year. But I am not going to vote for idiots and scumbags because they will lower my taxes or defend my freedoms.

 

[reflux]

Great thread topic. I read a brief article last night on Newsweek where they asked a few college students about the current state of the Republican party.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/167815/page/2

I believe the party is stuck at a fork in the road and lacks the leadership to put the party back on track. A party that once stood for fiscal responsibility and individualism, now stands as a clusterf**k of conservative, destructive, and immoral policies. My solutions is simple(ha): attempt to compromise and progress in policy with the neocons who have driven the party into isolation.

 

[sanjuro]

Great thread topic. I read a brief article last night on Newsweek where they asked a few college students about the current state of the Republican party.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/167815/page/2

I believe the party is stuck at a fork in the road and lacks the leadership to put the party back on track. A party that once stood for fiscal responsibility and individualism, now stands as a clusterf**k of conservative, destructive, and immoral policies. My solutions is simple(ha): attempt to compromise and progress in policy with the neocons who have driven the party into isolation.

I am not against the idea of small government. But lower taxes, no gun control and legislating over women's bodies and increasing federal surveillance is a direct conflict.

 

[reflux]

I am not against the idea of small government. But lower taxes, no gun control and legislating over women's bodies and increasing federal surveillance is a direct conflict.

There is a massive double standard in the current government and administration. People look at me like I'm taking crazy pills when I attempt to explain it...the current train of thought supports personal freedoms, but only if you agree with them.

There is a great opportunity for government to improve and positively impact the lives of its citizens, all the while remaining "small." The key is to support science, research, free markets, etc via taxes, policy, and efficient regulation. The fed government is too large, inefficient, and slow to setup bureaucracy throughout society and expect great things to happen.

 

[Transcend]

Get rid of the knuckle dragging religious zealots who have invaded the party, and return to the Republican values of old: small government, the return and enforcement of inalienable rights and civil liberties, limited government spending, the separation of church and state.

I believe that these are values that all American's can support, or at the very least respect and not despise.

 

[SkaredShtles]

Get rid of the knuckle dragging religious zealots who have invaded the party, and return to the Republican values of old: small government, the return and enforcement of inalienable rights and civil liberties, limited government spending, the separation of church and state.

I believe that these are values that all American's can support, or at the very least respect and not despise.

In other words... more Libertarian.

 

[BadDNA]

In other words... more Libertarian.

Just what I was thinking.

 

[Cant Climb]

They need a chucrch going (not zealot) button down practical business like canidate.
Someone who doesn't even have a whiff of hidden agenda.

Not another know-it-all big mouth fake....

 

[Samirol]

If Ron Paul's run was proof of anything, it is proof that the Republican Party will be moving to government is bad and taxes are bad. I don't see why anyone would want to hire someone for a position that they think is bad. You don't hire vegans to be butchers, or Ron Paul to be the head of the FDA.

 

[BurlyShirley]

The republican party simply needs a little bit of pragmatism... just the kind that McCain brought to the table. The problem is that "conservatives" as we've seen from "conservativeforums.com" are not interested in that in the slightest.
Edit: And appeasing those types can only be achieved by appointing "Palin" types to positions of leadership...which alienates everyone else. I think the whole thing is due for a massive fracture.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Look, here is the problem with the republican party/America:

From everyone's favorite new forum.

The people chose Barabas over Jesus, but I believe it is for a reason.

When Bill Clinton won the white house for 8 years, God did it so that people would wake up to the reality of a democratic president, so that when the time was right, we voted for a strong leader just before 9/11. I believe this was all apart of God's plan because if Bob Doll had won the white house in '96, everyone would've hated him for being a liberal Republican and would have voted Al Gore into the white house in 2000, putting the U.S. in grave danger when 9/11 came since Al Gore is a very weak leader.

And because Obama won, it will be so that Americans realize once and for all who the Democrats really are and turn back toward the path of righteousness because I believe that God has a plan for our nation in the years ahead.

No matter what happens, have faith.

I mean, WTF? Where do you even begin to address that?

 

[Defenestrated]

You simply reply, "Jesus was a socialist".

 

[Secret Squirrel]

Look, here is the problem with the republican party/America:

From everyone's favorite new forum.



I mean, WTF? Where do you even begin to address that?

From the proper side of a .45. That's where...

 

[sanjuro]

I see conservatives still don't get it:

http://weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=15783&R=13CD422F0A

Republicans have a big problem. Nope, it's not figuring out how to rebuild their party after consecutive defeats in national elections (that's easy). Nor is it finding new leaders in Congress (also easy) or latching onto fresh ideas that might improve the Republican brand (easiest of all). The problem is simpler--but also more difficult--than those. It's the tricky business of dealing with President Barack Obama.

They think Obama is the problem. Better look into the mirror.

 

[Defenestrated]

I think alienating the religious zealots and hate/fear mongers would be a good place to start.

 

[SkaredShtles]

I think alienating the religious zealots and hate/fear mongers would be a good place to start.

 

[DirtMcGirk]

4. Try to pick issues that general populace are interested in. Two of the planks of the Republican party is stopping abortion and limiting gun control. Majority of Americans are against both things. If you want to make your party about these kinds of issues, you can keep expecting to lose.

This is the only plank on which I disagree with you, well, sort of.

I am a moderate. I am a registered Republican just for the fact that someone once threw me $10 to change parties to vote in the primary.

I am pro-choice.
I am pro-gun
I am anti the current war.

I think for there to be true candidate as you want, they're going to need to adopt the idea of "if I am not hurting you then you stay out of my business." I think you could actually sway a lot of Republicans off of the abortion issue (because even they know that some folk ought not breed) if you could back down on the gun control issue.

My firearms are a personal choice. I do not trust the government, nor do I trust my neighbor nor anyone else. The majority of my guns are not for hunting food, they are for self defense and the protection of my liberties. As what I consider to be a "Patriot" I believe that I should always have the means by which to over throw the tyranny of the few in defense of liberties of the many.

The Second Amendment was worded the way it stands, and punctuated as it is, for a purpose. If you look at the governments of other nations, they fear their people, not the people fearing the government. Those most prone to revolt or separate saw thinks like Ruby Ridge and Waco and got very, very scared. Now that the government is listening to your calls, reading your mail, watching your video and library uses, the gov has control. I am a responsible citizen, but I also know that sooner or later the quote of "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." by TJ still must hold true.

I see a revolution, and I think this country needs one. The union is broken in a lot of ways, and frankly its always been my view that we'd be better off as a series of smaller nations under which people of certain stances can reside.

So if you can come to terms with leaving my guns alone, you've got my support 100%. Most Americans do not favor more gun control, they favor the right to choose.

 

[sanjuro]

So if you can come to terms with leaving my guns alone, you've got my support 100%. Most Americans do not favor more gun control, they favor the right to choose.

You might be right about that. My own personal belief it is should be a local issue. Gun control for Montana should be much different than NYC.

However, picking battles like trying to fight gun control in Washington DC is not very productive, although their previous gun laws were unconstitutional.

I think working for better gun control in the murder capitals is a more purposeful tactic than "taking my gun from my dead fingers" approach.

 

[JohnE]

It is time for a viable third party to arise...Libertarians have too big a rep as harboring nut jobs.

 

[Samirol]

In the real world, your guns cannot secure your liberties. If a fascist government takes over the United States, it won't be through brute force or military power, it will be through economic power. If you don't comply, you won't have a job, you won't be able to pay the rent, and if you do try some last stand move, you will be taken out as a crazy lunatic, only killing your brothers, and not harming your owners.

Guns cannot protect you from when the government assumes total control, because then you will need the government to survive, unless you want to live out in a wilderness compound in Montana.

In the modern era of tanks and helicopters, handguns do not secure liberties, court battles and legislation do. Women didn't get the right to vote by going on shooting sprees, black people did not get more civil rights by shooting up the KKK, they got it through debate and persuasion. The government has too much firepower for any revolt to be successful, and it has failsafes in place, like voting, for when people want change. Then instead of getting the fundamental problems fixed, it is done just enough so enough people quiet down. Loving guns is fine, but pretending that it is protecting your liberties is a manchild fantasy.

Even if you kill a few people, you will not affect the gears of the machine, you will only kill your neighbor. He will just be doing his job, to get money, to support his family, and to be secure. The tree will not be refreshed with the blood of patriots because the war is economic, and all the weapons belong to the super rich.

 

[ire]

Even if you kill a few people, you will not affect the gears of the machine, you will only kill your neighbor. He will just be doing his job, to get money, to support his family, and to be secure. The tree will not be refreshed with the blood of patriots because the war is economic, and all the weapons belong to the super rich.

I mostly agree with you, but if the disparity between the average American and the rich continues to widen then I could see revolution.

 

[Samirol]

I mostly agree with you, but if the disparity between the average American and the rich continues to widen then I could see revolution.

People don't care enough about those below them, because those that they perceive to be poorer than them didn't work as hard as they did, therefore they are lazy. The Gini coefficient for the U.S is 45, to put that into perspective, Mexico is 46.1. The Gini coefficient measures distribution of income, and lower is better. Sweden is the most equal with 23 and Namibia is the least equal with 70.7.

I don't believe a revolution is possible in the U.S, because our voting and court systems are designed to transplant physical battles and make them legal ones. Change cannot come through the barrel of a gun, because the military and the economic powerhouses can crush rebellions easily and change just enough to pacify the public.

 

[dante]

Actually, I think that it could all be summed up even easier than that: Just go back to what GWB *said* in the 2000 election, and actually DO those things.

Be fiscally responsible
Humble foreign policy
No nation building
Respective of the rights of others
"Big tent" party, including those who disagree with you on social issues (see Giuliani, Romney (pre-epiphany), Whitman, Ridge, Log Cabin Republicans, etc)
Actually *be* a compassionate conservative
etc.

The only problem is that if a Republican got up and said all of those things again on the campaign trail, they'd get laughed out of race. GWB has pretty much destroyed the party and it's going to take deeds, not words to rebuild it.

 

[reflux]

This is definitely NOT the right path back to respectability.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iRxZox4GFoIweckPDP1oRhKBlHOwD94CCDU00

 

[Defenestrated]

What does a national security force have to do with Marxism?

 

[Samirol]

What does a national security force have to do with Marxism?

Hitler Youth, since Hitler was a socialist you know

 

[reflux]

Hitler Youth, since Hitler was a socialist you know

No no no, he was a left-leaning Marxist Lenin.

 

[Defenestrated]

America, where you can be a government official who doesn't know the difference between Marxism and Totalitarianism.

 

[Samirol]

No no no, he was a left-leaning Marxist Lenin.

as opposed to the right-leaning Marxist-Leninists?

If Hitler was alive today, he would be a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist-Prachanda Pathist

America, where you can be a government official who doesn't know the difference between Marxism and Totalitarianism.

Hell, just simplify it to doesn't know anything about Marxism or Totalitarianism

 

[dante]

This is definitely NOT the right path back to respectability.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iRxZox4GFoIweckPDP1oRhKBlHOwD94CCDU00

the republicans biggest problem is, what happens if Obama *isn't* the anti-christ that some of them are predicting? as in, what happens if he pursues a moderate agenda, and ensures that he has public backing and support before doing anything earth-shattering (ie, health care reform)? until the republicans can run "for" something, instead of just against everything the democrats propose, they're not going anywhere...

 

[Samirol]

the republicans biggest problem is, what happens if Obama *isn't* the anti-christ that some of them are predicting?

They have a backup plan...

chubby intern

 

[Toshi]

wonkette is helping promote the new idea that will help the republican party get its just deserts: http://ideas.rebuildtheparty.com/

Truck Nutz for all!
Give all Red Blooded Americans a pair of Truck Nuts for their F150's!

457 comments | by hotlaska | created about 6 hours ago

 

[ohio]

wonkette is helping promote the new idea that will help the republican party get its just deserts: http://ideas.rebuildtheparty.com/

I really enjoyed voting for that. Totally worth signing up for a Republican website.

 

[Defenestrated]

http://ideas.rebuildtheparty.com/pages/general/suggestions/69014